By Tom Rhodes, 6/27/2012
The SCOTUS has found that a state cannot enforce federal law if the federal government refuses to enforce that law. The logic of this is absurd. Suppose speeding on federal highways was a federal crime, if the federal government decided not to enforce that law it means that states and local police would be in violation of the constitution and could not ticket or arrest speeders on federal highways.
Justice Antonin Scalia summed up the absurdity in his dissent writing, "to say, as the Court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforcing applications of the Immigration Act that the President declines to enforce boggles the mind."
This logic should scare us all, suppose a President decided not to enforce air traffic laws, and stopped manning airport control towers. The states would be prohibited from doing so themselves, doesn't that sound just dandy. A president could stop all Pell Grants by just refusing to spend the money congress allocated by law.
This ruling seems to be an end to the rule of law in the USA. We now have an elected despot, with the power to pick and chooses what laws to enforce, and deny the states the ability to enforce laws the feds don't want enforced. The will of the people as expressed by their duly elected representatives is no longer the law of the land, the law of the land is what a president decides. This is just a sign that we are nearing the end of our republic.
On the other hand, if we elected Gary Johnson as President, based on this ruling, he could end the FED, all government welfare, and reduce government spending drastically with the stroke of a pen. Maybe this is not such a bad thing, let's elect a libertarian and see what happens. Imagine a balanced budget just because the president refused to spend the money regardless of the will of congress and laws. Imagine zero welfare checks sent to anybody, just because the president chooses not to, based on this SCOTUS ruling states would not be allowed to do welfare either.
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
The Fast and Furious Death of Newspapers
By Tom Rhodes 6/27/2012
Fast and Furious are the last dying struggles of newspapers suffering from self inflicted wounds. Across the nation we see the downsizing and death of newspapers. They have lost and continue to lose their audience and influence. The steady decline of newspapers is not because people don't want in-depth reporting, want ads, or the comics. It's because the newspapers have abandoned their historic past of bringing all the news that's fit to print, to being outlets for the press releases of the government and big business.
The decline in influence and the no longer blind trust of the old guard press has been a long time coming. I remember when I first noticed the blatantly obvious bias in the media. It was the reporting in the newspaper and evening news that didn't match what I saw live from broadcasts of General Swartzkoff during the Gulf War. The reporting on what Swartzkoff said was different that what was actually said. To mitigate that, the press took to editing actual quotes and tapes to fit their bias. Unfortunately with the new media, it is easy to expose the press as biased liars; like the exposure of NBC's repeated and purposefully editing quotes and tapes to dramatically change the meaning of what actually was said or happened. NBC and MSNBC as a news source cannot be trusted to tell the unbiased truth, their diminishing influence reflects this simple fact. In general, the old guard press because of its own actions is losing influence and credibility.
Newspapers would have retained their circulation and power had they displayed skepticism of authority (the government), published, and pursued truth. Instead for decades they have presented one-sided narrative promoting statism and denigrating the values most Americans hold. Like the Gutenberg press dramatically decreased costs and brought newspapers and books to the masses and diminished the power of the Church and State, the digital age has made it so cost effective that anybody who wants can report on what they see. Publishing news is no longer limited to those with the money to afford a press or broadcast facilities. The old guard press, specifically newspapers, are no longer gatekeepers to the news. Virtually everyone carries the ability to video actual events and share them with their neighbors and the world. No longer are the actions of the city council whitewashed and cleaned up by their friends in the press, as the actual truth is now broadcast for all to see. The self evident bias of the news as reported by the old guard has resulted in their death. Their monopoly on the news is dead.
Hillary Clinton said we have too much free press and there should be "gate keepers" to the news. She longs for the days when the press and government were buddy-buddy and determined what the masses were told. Technology, Matt Drudge, and YouTube killed that.
Fast and Furious is the most prominent recent example, and why the main stream media is no longer trusted by the people, and why it is losing its audience and influence. The main stream media tried to ignore Fast and Furious, but the people and non-traditional media exposed it. It's been in the news for years, but when a US House of Representatives Committee votes to hold a cabinet member in contempt, an event that is huge, rare, and important, the old guard press now have to explain to their readers and viewers why they didn't think it was news worthy. Let's face it, in all of US history you can count on your fingers the number of times Congress has held in contempt a member of the president's cabinet. The facts, and truth of Fast and Furious, including the death a of Federal Border Patrol Agent with guns that the BATF and DOJ purposefully allowed to be sold to straw purchasers acting on behave of Mexican drug lords, should have been main stream news for years. The failure of the press to cover this and the DOJ cover-up, confirms to the public that the press is in support of liberal politicians, and is not an unbiased purveyor of truth whose duty is to hold the government accountable.
The old guard press insists that it, not mere everyday people, is the only proper purveyor of "news". Of course all who get their news from the old guard press have been completely ignorant of the deadly scandal, Fast and Furious (kudos to CBS for being the only old guard press to even attempt to cover Fast and Furious, but this is an exception not the norm). Blogs, and news aggregators like Drudge, have proven to be better reports of facts and details of extraordinary events like Fast and Furious than the old guard press.
The old guard press is aghast at the fact that people actually pay attention and believes the "new media". They shouldn't be, as new media has proven over the past 20 years to be better at exposing the misdeeds of government and politicians than the main stream press. The best photos and coverage of the damage to Tampa Bay area caused by Tropical Storm Debby have come from citizen journalists. The old guard press vilifies bloggers, and citizen journalists, but fails to report the truth, and actively works with government to determine what they think the people should be allowed to know. Thus the "new media" is growing and newspapers are dying. Clinton was impeached because "new media" not the old guard press, exposed his philandering ways. Clinton was not impeached because he cheated on his wife screwing around with an intern in the Oval Office; he was impeached for lying to Congress after he was caught and exposed by the new media. If not for the "new media" he would have never been caught. Matt Drudge destroyed the monopoly control the old guard media and the government had on "the news".
The old guard press, specifically news papers, are unconscious of their leftist bias to important events. Fast and Furious is the perfect example, but the bias is in a lot of other stories the press chooses to cover or not cover. Violent racist attacks are now becoming common place in our big cities, the old guard press not only chooses not to cover this, but to deny the obvious facts. Large groups of blacks in our big cities are attacking other races for no other reason than their race. If groups of Asians or whites were doing the same it would be wall to wall coverage every day on every news cast. Even when their own white reporters were drug out of their car and beat by a gang of blacks, an old school newspaper, refused to cover it; and the old school press wonders why they are losing audience and influence. Hundreds of thousands of times every year regular citizens legally and successfully use guns to defend themselves; this is rarely newsworthy to the old guard press. This bias not only in what is covered but how it is covered is blatant, but even when the readers of old guard newspapers say that they no longer read or trust the it because of its bias, the old guard media dismiss it, as the ravings of unenlightened rubes.
Like the good book says "the truth shall set you free", and the main stream press has been exposed and demonstrated that they can no longer be trusted to be the purveyor of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The old school press has lost its monopoly on news, and the trust of the people. Because we have Freedom of the Press, the Drudge Report, YouTube, a zillion blogs, are proof that in a free society it is the people, not the government nor the "press", who determine "all the news that's fit to print."
Because we still have a nominally free society, the people can and do get to choose what press they purchase, read, watch, listen, and believe. The people have spoken loudly and clearly; the result is the slow death of old school newspapers and the loss of influence of the old school media due to self inflicted wounds. Old guard media blaming the new media and society for the loss of readership and influence is like a man who gets caught cheating and lying to his wife blaming his Facebook and her because of what she saw on his mistresses FaceBook page rather than her trusting him to filter the information she sees. Like the cheating spouse who has been caught the consequences to old guard main stream press are the same, and even if forgiven and not divorced; the liar and cheat may be listened to but his word will always be suspect and have to be verified, because he has proven to be untrustworthy. Only the elimination of bias, true scrutiny of the government, and honest reporting for a long time can return the reputation of the main stream media, it will however never again be taken at its word without independent verification by the we the people.
Fast and Furious are the last dying struggles of newspapers suffering from self inflicted wounds. Across the nation we see the downsizing and death of newspapers. They have lost and continue to lose their audience and influence. The steady decline of newspapers is not because people don't want in-depth reporting, want ads, or the comics. It's because the newspapers have abandoned their historic past of bringing all the news that's fit to print, to being outlets for the press releases of the government and big business.
The decline in influence and the no longer blind trust of the old guard press has been a long time coming. I remember when I first noticed the blatantly obvious bias in the media. It was the reporting in the newspaper and evening news that didn't match what I saw live from broadcasts of General Swartzkoff during the Gulf War. The reporting on what Swartzkoff said was different that what was actually said. To mitigate that, the press took to editing actual quotes and tapes to fit their bias. Unfortunately with the new media, it is easy to expose the press as biased liars; like the exposure of NBC's repeated and purposefully editing quotes and tapes to dramatically change the meaning of what actually was said or happened. NBC and MSNBC as a news source cannot be trusted to tell the unbiased truth, their diminishing influence reflects this simple fact. In general, the old guard press because of its own actions is losing influence and credibility.
Newspapers would have retained their circulation and power had they displayed skepticism of authority (the government), published, and pursued truth. Instead for decades they have presented one-sided narrative promoting statism and denigrating the values most Americans hold. Like the Gutenberg press dramatically decreased costs and brought newspapers and books to the masses and diminished the power of the Church and State, the digital age has made it so cost effective that anybody who wants can report on what they see. Publishing news is no longer limited to those with the money to afford a press or broadcast facilities. The old guard press, specifically newspapers, are no longer gatekeepers to the news. Virtually everyone carries the ability to video actual events and share them with their neighbors and the world. No longer are the actions of the city council whitewashed and cleaned up by their friends in the press, as the actual truth is now broadcast for all to see. The self evident bias of the news as reported by the old guard has resulted in their death. Their monopoly on the news is dead.
Hillary Clinton said we have too much free press and there should be "gate keepers" to the news. She longs for the days when the press and government were buddy-buddy and determined what the masses were told. Technology, Matt Drudge, and YouTube killed that.
Fast and Furious is the most prominent recent example, and why the main stream media is no longer trusted by the people, and why it is losing its audience and influence. The main stream media tried to ignore Fast and Furious, but the people and non-traditional media exposed it. It's been in the news for years, but when a US House of Representatives Committee votes to hold a cabinet member in contempt, an event that is huge, rare, and important, the old guard press now have to explain to their readers and viewers why they didn't think it was news worthy. Let's face it, in all of US history you can count on your fingers the number of times Congress has held in contempt a member of the president's cabinet. The facts, and truth of Fast and Furious, including the death a of Federal Border Patrol Agent with guns that the BATF and DOJ purposefully allowed to be sold to straw purchasers acting on behave of Mexican drug lords, should have been main stream news for years. The failure of the press to cover this and the DOJ cover-up, confirms to the public that the press is in support of liberal politicians, and is not an unbiased purveyor of truth whose duty is to hold the government accountable.
The old guard press insists that it, not mere everyday people, is the only proper purveyor of "news". Of course all who get their news from the old guard press have been completely ignorant of the deadly scandal, Fast and Furious (kudos to CBS for being the only old guard press to even attempt to cover Fast and Furious, but this is an exception not the norm). Blogs, and news aggregators like Drudge, have proven to be better reports of facts and details of extraordinary events like Fast and Furious than the old guard press.
The old guard press is aghast at the fact that people actually pay attention and believes the "new media". They shouldn't be, as new media has proven over the past 20 years to be better at exposing the misdeeds of government and politicians than the main stream press. The best photos and coverage of the damage to Tampa Bay area caused by Tropical Storm Debby have come from citizen journalists. The old guard press vilifies bloggers, and citizen journalists, but fails to report the truth, and actively works with government to determine what they think the people should be allowed to know. Thus the "new media" is growing and newspapers are dying. Clinton was impeached because "new media" not the old guard press, exposed his philandering ways. Clinton was not impeached because he cheated on his wife screwing around with an intern in the Oval Office; he was impeached for lying to Congress after he was caught and exposed by the new media. If not for the "new media" he would have never been caught. Matt Drudge destroyed the monopoly control the old guard media and the government had on "the news".
The old guard press, specifically news papers, are unconscious of their leftist bias to important events. Fast and Furious is the perfect example, but the bias is in a lot of other stories the press chooses to cover or not cover. Violent racist attacks are now becoming common place in our big cities, the old guard press not only chooses not to cover this, but to deny the obvious facts. Large groups of blacks in our big cities are attacking other races for no other reason than their race. If groups of Asians or whites were doing the same it would be wall to wall coverage every day on every news cast. Even when their own white reporters were drug out of their car and beat by a gang of blacks, an old school newspaper, refused to cover it; and the old school press wonders why they are losing audience and influence. Hundreds of thousands of times every year regular citizens legally and successfully use guns to defend themselves; this is rarely newsworthy to the old guard press. This bias not only in what is covered but how it is covered is blatant, but even when the readers of old guard newspapers say that they no longer read or trust the it because of its bias, the old guard media dismiss it, as the ravings of unenlightened rubes.
Like the good book says "the truth shall set you free", and the main stream press has been exposed and demonstrated that they can no longer be trusted to be the purveyor of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The old school press has lost its monopoly on news, and the trust of the people. Because we have Freedom of the Press, the Drudge Report, YouTube, a zillion blogs, are proof that in a free society it is the people, not the government nor the "press", who determine "all the news that's fit to print."
Because we still have a nominally free society, the people can and do get to choose what press they purchase, read, watch, listen, and believe. The people have spoken loudly and clearly; the result is the slow death of old school newspapers and the loss of influence of the old school media due to self inflicted wounds. Old guard media blaming the new media and society for the loss of readership and influence is like a man who gets caught cheating and lying to his wife blaming his Facebook and her because of what she saw on his mistresses FaceBook page rather than her trusting him to filter the information she sees. Like the cheating spouse who has been caught the consequences to old guard main stream press are the same, and even if forgiven and not divorced; the liar and cheat may be listened to but his word will always be suspect and have to be verified, because he has proven to be untrustworthy. Only the elimination of bias, true scrutiny of the government, and honest reporting for a long time can return the reputation of the main stream media, it will however never again be taken at its word without independent verification by the we the people.
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Where There's Smoke . . .
By Tom Rhodes, 6/20/2012
Ever see the Fast & Furious movies? If so you know that where there's smoke, there's wheel spinning. Today Obama started spinning his wheels making a lot of smoke. He exerted "executive privilege" denying congress access to Justice Department documents on Fast and Furious. This begs the question, as US Sen. Grassley asks:
"How can the president assert executive privilege if there was no White House involvement? How can the president exert executive privilege over documents he's supposedly never seen? Is something very big being hidden to go to this extreme?"
It does answer some questions. The Obama White House was involved and knew of gun running to Mexico by ATF. There can be no other logical conclusion. Obama and his administration are spinning their wheels trying to get away in a cloud of smoke from their illegal actions. The other question it answers is Does Obama have any principles? Clearly No. Listen to his views on executive privilege.
This may be Obama's Waterloo, errr... Watergate. Unlike Nixon's criminal cover-up didn't get anybody killed, Obama's Fast and Furious cover-up includes the death of a US border Patrol agent, and hundreds of guns in the hands of criminals.
By Tom Rhodes, 6/20/2012
Ever see the Fast & Furious movies? If so you know that where there's smoke, there's wheel spinning. Today Obama started spinning his wheels making a lot of smoke. He exerted "executive privilege" denying congress access to Justice Department documents on Fast and Furious. This begs the question, as US Sen. Grassley asks:
"How can the president assert executive privilege if there was no White House involvement? How can the president exert executive privilege over documents he's supposedly never seen? Is something very big being hidden to go to this extreme?"
It does answer some questions. The Obama White House was involved and knew of gun running to Mexico by ATF. There can be no other logical conclusion. Obama and his administration are spinning their wheels trying to get away in a cloud of smoke from their illegal actions. The other question it answers is Does Obama have any principles? Clearly No. Listen to his views on executive privilege.
This may be Obama's Waterloo, errr... Watergate. Unlike Nixon's criminal cover-up didn't get anybody killed, Obama's Fast and Furious cover-up includes the death of a US border Patrol agent, and hundreds of guns in the hands of criminals.
Monday, June 18, 2012
Read My Lips, Obama Style
By Tom Rhodes, 6/18/2012
Obama Said: "Take a tally. Look at what I promised during the campaign. There's not a single thing that I've said that I would do that I have not either done or tried to do. And if I haven't gotten it done yet, I'm still trying to do it."
OK, let's look.
Bush 41 lost relection on one broken promise; "Read my Lips, No New Taxes", based on Obama's string of broken promises no rational American could or would vote for him. Of course there is a real choice, and Mitt isn't that choice. Look at Libertarian Gary Johnson, and his record.
Obama Said: "Take a tally. Look at what I promised during the campaign. There's not a single thing that I've said that I would do that I have not either done or tried to do. And if I haven't gotten it done yet, I'm still trying to do it."
OK, let's look.
"Lobbyists won't work in my White House" (spoken on his Iowa bus tour on Dec. 15, 2007).
"We've got a philosophical difference, which we've debated repeatedly, and that is that Sen. Clinton believes the only way to achieve universal health care is to force everybody to purchase it" (spoken during the Democratic Party presidential debate on Feb. 21, 2008).
"These negotiations will be on C-SPAN, and so the public will be part of the conversation and will see the decisions that are being made" (spoken on Jan. 20, 2008, and seven other times).
"We need tougher border security, and a renewed focus on busting up gangs and traffickers crossing our border. . That begins at home, with comprehensive immigration reform. That means securing our border and passing tough employer enforcement laws" (spoken in Miami on May 23, 2008).
"The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing I'd do" (spoken on the campaign trail in 2008).
"Today I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office" (spoken at the opening of Fiscal Responsibility Summit on Feb. 23, 2009).
"We will launch a sweeping effort to root out waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary spending in our government, and every American will be able to see how and where we spend taxpayer dollars by going to a new website called recovery.gov" (spoken in a speech on Jan. 28, 2009).
"There is no doubt that we've been living beyond our means and we're going to have to make some adjustments. Now, what I've done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut" (spoken during the third presidential debate on Oct. 15, 2008.
"We are going to ban all earmarks" (spoken at a press conference on Jan. 6, 2009).
"Instead of allowing lobbyists to slip big corporate tax breaks into bills during the dead of night, we will make sure every single tax break and earmark is available to every American online" (spoken on campaign trail in June 2007).
"Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase - not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes" (spoken in September 2008 at a town-hall meeting in Dover).
"[I] will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year. This will eliminate taxes for 7 million seniors - saving them an average of $1,400 a year - and will also mean that 27 million seniors will not need to file an income tax return at all" (from Barack Obama presidential campaign fact sheet in 2008).
"[My plan] will not help speculators who took risky bets on a rising market and bought homes not to live in but to sell" (spoken to an audience in Phoenix on Feb. 18, 2009).
"The detention facilities at Guantánamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than one year from the date of this order" (presidential executive order on Jan. 22, 2009).
"Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe the United States has to be frank with the Chinese about such failings and will press them to respect human rights" (On a fact sheet distributed by the Obama campaign during the 2008 campaign).
"I will make sure that we renegotiate [NAFTA]" (spoken on Feb. 23, 2008).
Bush 41 lost relection on one broken promise; "Read my Lips, No New Taxes", based on Obama's string of broken promises no rational American could or would vote for him. Of course there is a real choice, and Mitt isn't that choice. Look at Libertarian Gary Johnson, and his record.
Sunday, June 17, 2012
Obama Orders 4 Times as Many Troops to Die as Bush!
By Tom Rhodes, 6/16/2012
Under Obama in Afganistan we ar sending our sons and daughters to die more than 4 times faster than under Bush.
-- Under Obama 1379 dead in afganistan over 3.5 years averaging about 400/yr
-- Under Bush 630 dead over 7.25 years averaging about 87/yr
US military fatalities in Afghanistan by year:
2001 -- 12
2002 -- 49
2003 -- 48
2004 -- 52
2005 -- 99
2006 -- 98
2007 -- 117
2008 -- 155
2009 -- 317
2010 -- 499
2011 -- 418
2012 -- 145
Total - 2009
From icasualties.org
Afghanistan is the war that Obama wanted and escalated. It was in 2008 that he argued that it was the central front in the war against Islamic terrorists. It was Obama's policy to add US troops to Afghanistan, and that escalation has been a total failure.
Under Obama in Afganistan we ar sending our sons and daughters to die more than 4 times faster than under Bush.
-- Under Obama 1379 dead in afganistan over 3.5 years averaging about 400/yr
-- Under Bush 630 dead over 7.25 years averaging about 87/yr
US military fatalities in Afghanistan by year:
2001 -- 12
2002 -- 49
2003 -- 48
2004 -- 52
2005 -- 99
2006 -- 98
2007 -- 117
2008 -- 155
2009 -- 317
2010 -- 499
2011 -- 418
2012 -- 145
Total - 2009
From icasualties.org
Afghanistan is the war that Obama wanted and escalated. It was in 2008 that he argued that it was the central front in the war against Islamic terrorists. It was Obama's policy to add US troops to Afghanistan, and that escalation has been a total failure.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Obamacare, Inspired by Loki
By Tom Rhodes, 6/14/2012
Free and open markets over time always produce the lowest prices for the best goods. From Computers to TVs; from Cars to Car Insurance, competition drives prices down and quality up. The undeniable truth is that he who pays determines what is purchased. Once individuals are no longer responsible and don’t pay for something, they lose the choice in that purchase; the choice of quantity, quality, style, etc. are all determined by the payer. A child may ask for, beg, cry, and demand a certain toy, or pair of shoes but it is ultimately the parent who makes the choice determines the purchase. This applies to our health care too.
Prove it to yourself, look at the cost of auto insurance in New Hampshire, and the wide variety of auto insurance available there. It is cheaper, and you have far more choices in the type and levels of insurance you can purchase than almost any other state in the country. Why??? Because it is not required, you do not have to have auto insurance in New Hampshire, to own and operate a car on the highways and byways of New Hampshire. Auto insurance in New Hampshire has true competition; it is a product that the people are free to purchase or not from a variety of sources. This is a model that can and does work for all insurance sales. Same goes for Homeowners insurance, and any other product and service. When a product or service is required by government regulation it always costs more for inferior quality.
Our current policy of having third parties pay for insurance and health care has caused out of control growth and decrease in choices for health care consumers. The big companies who form “groups” pay for and determine coverage, not the health care consumer. Most people are left with either what their employer offers or nothing. Corporatism, is not free enterprise and open markets. Our current system of employer paying had reduced not expanded health care choices, and once reduced to government not employer paying (single payer) it will get worse, because the person who pays determines the quality, quantity, and value of any product or service.
When you look at car insurance, you see lots and lots of choices, lots of companies selling a huge variety of services. This is because they have to deal with and take care of each individual, not a single HR rep who determines the service for thousands of employees. Because individuals can and do shop around and compare prices, service, quality, and then determine the level of service they can afford or are willing to pay for, they get the best product for the least. Once we accept the idea that government pays for health care, individual choice in what’s covered is gone. If you’re a single male why should you have to pay for coverage of pregnancy, etc. If you want your insurance to be real insurance and only cover true catastrophic health care events, and pay for your own check-ups, and routine care with a high $3000 deductable that should be your choice. But when you don’t pay for your insurance directly, that choice is determined by the guy who pays.
If we really wanted to address health care costs we’d do two things. 1) End third party paying of insurance and/or health care. This means that company’s don’t purchase your insurance, you purchase your insurance. Companies could then increase your pay by what they pay in insurance, and you could shop and compare and buy the insurance that you want not what your employer wants. 2) End the AMA and government monopoly on licensing health care providers. This licensing artificially keeps the supply of healthcare services low thus results in artificially high prices.
We know this model works in health care, Laser eye surgery to eliminate the need of glasses, has advanced dramatically and the cost has plummeted. This is because it is not covered by most insurance and is sold directly to individuals by the service provider who must compete with others in quality, comfort, and price. The results is clear, more people have more access to this health care service for lower cost and have a better service. The same can be said of plastic surgery etc. This should be the model for all health care not just “elective” health care.
Our current system big corporations and/or government decide what we get. As it has everywhere else in the world that it has been implemented, this will result in rationing, corruption, higher costs for poorer services. Once the government pays for health care, bureaucrats will decide who get’s paid how much, which will result in the smartest and brightest exiting the business and put their drive and talent to something that they not the government controls. Once the government pays for health care, bureaucrats will decide how long we wait for specific procedures, or even if some live saving procedures are available at all, or to whom. We will find that if your over a certain age, the decision isn’t between you, your family, and your doctor over exactly what efforts, and how much if any efforts are made to keep you alive, it will be the decision of unelected bureaucrats, who will weigh the value of your life to the cost of maintaining it. After a certain age you will be allowed die. It may be as subtle as simply “delaying” treatment or as overt as saying after age 65 the government’s health care your are not eligible for kidney dialysis.
We haven’t had a free market for medical services for a long time, we have a system with limited competition because of FDA and other government regulations. This non-free market system also has artificially stimulated demand because of tax laws that promote third party paying of both health care and health insurance.
Even with our limited free market for medical services, when completion is allowed pricing goes down. Look at the health insurance for schools in Wisconsin, where once school systems were allowed to shop for insurance instead of purchasing from a “sole provider” they were able to eliminate huge deficits and save millions. When allowed, free markets produce better service, lower costs, and more innovation than government controlled industries. This simple fact is not something those on the left, so-called progressives, hate to recognize, and they attack using emotional straw man arguments, because the facts support free markets not government control.
The entire theory behind the Obamacare mandate, and the entire Obamacare law is that “We The People” cannot take care of ourselves, and that they leftists as superior beings know better than the masses, and that “We the People” should be thankful for their benevolent control of our actions, and accept that they not “the People” can and should determine how we live our lives. The attitude of the left towards health care reflects their belief that “We the People” would be better off and happier if we’d just give them control. The left act and sound more like Loki in the Avengers movie and the actions are clearly against the ideas which founded this country as expressed in The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, and the accompanying Federalist Papers.
“It’s the unspoken truth of humanity that you crave subjugation. The bright lure of freedom diminishes your life’s joy in a mad scramble for power. For identity. You were made to be ruled.” ~ Loki
This reflects the expressed beliefs of the left, specifically Obama. Like Loki, Obama and the left really don’t care about “We the People” they just want power. Obama doesn’t want individuals to achieve as much as they can, he wants to determine at what point “you’ve made enough money.” Obama hates self reliant individuals, but isn’t surprised that “they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion”, but wants all the people to just accept what he and others on the left have decided is in our best interest. He would treat those who stand up to him the way Loki treated the elder who stood against him in the Avengers. Obama actually believes that “We the People” want the government to take care of us and rule us. He doesn’t believe “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
He believes that he, the ruling elite, can and should determine what makes each individual happy, that he and the ruling elite, can and should determine what services and products you must purchase or are allowed to purchase. That he and the ruling elite, can and should determine what we eat, what we drive, where we live, how we use our private property, and even if we should be allowed to accumulate property. Obamacare is a reflection of Loki (Obama) not a reflection of the will of “We the People.” I’ll bet when Obama looks in the mirror he sees this:
Free and open markets over time always produce the lowest prices for the best goods. From Computers to TVs; from Cars to Car Insurance, competition drives prices down and quality up. The undeniable truth is that he who pays determines what is purchased. Once individuals are no longer responsible and don’t pay for something, they lose the choice in that purchase; the choice of quantity, quality, style, etc. are all determined by the payer. A child may ask for, beg, cry, and demand a certain toy, or pair of shoes but it is ultimately the parent who makes the choice determines the purchase. This applies to our health care too.
Prove it to yourself, look at the cost of auto insurance in New Hampshire, and the wide variety of auto insurance available there. It is cheaper, and you have far more choices in the type and levels of insurance you can purchase than almost any other state in the country. Why??? Because it is not required, you do not have to have auto insurance in New Hampshire, to own and operate a car on the highways and byways of New Hampshire. Auto insurance in New Hampshire has true competition; it is a product that the people are free to purchase or not from a variety of sources. This is a model that can and does work for all insurance sales. Same goes for Homeowners insurance, and any other product and service. When a product or service is required by government regulation it always costs more for inferior quality.
Our current policy of having third parties pay for insurance and health care has caused out of control growth and decrease in choices for health care consumers. The big companies who form “groups” pay for and determine coverage, not the health care consumer. Most people are left with either what their employer offers or nothing. Corporatism, is not free enterprise and open markets. Our current system of employer paying had reduced not expanded health care choices, and once reduced to government not employer paying (single payer) it will get worse, because the person who pays determines the quality, quantity, and value of any product or service.
When you look at car insurance, you see lots and lots of choices, lots of companies selling a huge variety of services. This is because they have to deal with and take care of each individual, not a single HR rep who determines the service for thousands of employees. Because individuals can and do shop around and compare prices, service, quality, and then determine the level of service they can afford or are willing to pay for, they get the best product for the least. Once we accept the idea that government pays for health care, individual choice in what’s covered is gone. If you’re a single male why should you have to pay for coverage of pregnancy, etc. If you want your insurance to be real insurance and only cover true catastrophic health care events, and pay for your own check-ups, and routine care with a high $3000 deductable that should be your choice. But when you don’t pay for your insurance directly, that choice is determined by the guy who pays.
If we really wanted to address health care costs we’d do two things. 1) End third party paying of insurance and/or health care. This means that company’s don’t purchase your insurance, you purchase your insurance. Companies could then increase your pay by what they pay in insurance, and you could shop and compare and buy the insurance that you want not what your employer wants. 2) End the AMA and government monopoly on licensing health care providers. This licensing artificially keeps the supply of healthcare services low thus results in artificially high prices.
We know this model works in health care, Laser eye surgery to eliminate the need of glasses, has advanced dramatically and the cost has plummeted. This is because it is not covered by most insurance and is sold directly to individuals by the service provider who must compete with others in quality, comfort, and price. The results is clear, more people have more access to this health care service for lower cost and have a better service. The same can be said of plastic surgery etc. This should be the model for all health care not just “elective” health care.
Our current system big corporations and/or government decide what we get. As it has everywhere else in the world that it has been implemented, this will result in rationing, corruption, higher costs for poorer services. Once the government pays for health care, bureaucrats will decide who get’s paid how much, which will result in the smartest and brightest exiting the business and put their drive and talent to something that they not the government controls. Once the government pays for health care, bureaucrats will decide how long we wait for specific procedures, or even if some live saving procedures are available at all, or to whom. We will find that if your over a certain age, the decision isn’t between you, your family, and your doctor over exactly what efforts, and how much if any efforts are made to keep you alive, it will be the decision of unelected bureaucrats, who will weigh the value of your life to the cost of maintaining it. After a certain age you will be allowed die. It may be as subtle as simply “delaying” treatment or as overt as saying after age 65 the government’s health care your are not eligible for kidney dialysis.
We haven’t had a free market for medical services for a long time, we have a system with limited competition because of FDA and other government regulations. This non-free market system also has artificially stimulated demand because of tax laws that promote third party paying of both health care and health insurance.
Even with our limited free market for medical services, when completion is allowed pricing goes down. Look at the health insurance for schools in Wisconsin, where once school systems were allowed to shop for insurance instead of purchasing from a “sole provider” they were able to eliminate huge deficits and save millions. When allowed, free markets produce better service, lower costs, and more innovation than government controlled industries. This simple fact is not something those on the left, so-called progressives, hate to recognize, and they attack using emotional straw man arguments, because the facts support free markets not government control.
The entire theory behind the Obamacare mandate, and the entire Obamacare law is that “We The People” cannot take care of ourselves, and that they leftists as superior beings know better than the masses, and that “We the People” should be thankful for their benevolent control of our actions, and accept that they not “the People” can and should determine how we live our lives. The attitude of the left towards health care reflects their belief that “We the People” would be better off and happier if we’d just give them control. The left act and sound more like Loki in the Avengers movie and the actions are clearly against the ideas which founded this country as expressed in The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, and the accompanying Federalist Papers.
“It’s the unspoken truth of humanity that you crave subjugation. The bright lure of freedom diminishes your life’s joy in a mad scramble for power. For identity. You were made to be ruled.” ~ Loki
This reflects the expressed beliefs of the left, specifically Obama. Like Loki, Obama and the left really don’t care about “We the People” they just want power. Obama doesn’t want individuals to achieve as much as they can, he wants to determine at what point “you’ve made enough money.” Obama hates self reliant individuals, but isn’t surprised that “they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion”, but wants all the people to just accept what he and others on the left have decided is in our best interest. He would treat those who stand up to him the way Loki treated the elder who stood against him in the Avengers. Obama actually believes that “We the People” want the government to take care of us and rule us. He doesn’t believe “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
He believes that he, the ruling elite, can and should determine what makes each individual happy, that he and the ruling elite, can and should determine what services and products you must purchase or are allowed to purchase. That he and the ruling elite, can and should determine what we eat, what we drive, where we live, how we use our private property, and even if we should be allowed to accumulate property. Obamacare is a reflection of Loki (Obama) not a reflection of the will of “We the People.” I’ll bet when Obama looks in the mirror he sees this:
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Florida District 1 Makes A Statement
press release
Press Release
District 1 Makes A Statement
The Congressional incumbent from the First District sent mail out to voters across the district in an effort to get himself on the ballot by petition, but could not get 2300 of them to do so. Instead he was forced to pay the filing fee (a little over $10,000) to get his sixth shot at the job of U.S. Representative.
I find it incredible Mr. Miller could not convince even a fraction of the hundreds of thousands of Republicans in this District to return a petition, while the Fretts For Congress team obtained petitions with a relatively small team and less than one half of one percent of the voting base.
Jeff Miller either thought getting petitions from his constituents was not important, or that it would be easy. Either way he was wrong, and now his campaign has a lot to pay. It seems to me District One made a statement.
But it is not likely that this turn of events will bother him much. He has tons of campaign money stored up, and likely access to an endless supply of reserves from his party establishment.
Complacency like this shows why Mr. Miller needs to go, and be replaced by someone who will work for the support of his constituents.
I would ask myself, if Mr. Miller was too busy to obtain support from even this small sample of his constituency, what else is he too busy to do?”
Calen Fretts
Fretts For Congress (FL –01)
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
Press Release
District 1 Makes A Statement
The Congressional incumbent from the First District sent mail out to voters across the district in an effort to get himself on the ballot by petition, but could not get 2300 of them to do so. Instead he was forced to pay the filing fee (a little over $10,000) to get his sixth shot at the job of U.S. Representative.
I find it incredible Mr. Miller could not convince even a fraction of the hundreds of thousands of Republicans in this District to return a petition, while the Fretts For Congress team obtained petitions with a relatively small team and less than one half of one percent of the voting base.
Jeff Miller either thought getting petitions from his constituents was not important, or that it would be easy. Either way he was wrong, and now his campaign has a lot to pay. It seems to me District One made a statement.
But it is not likely that this turn of events will bother him much. He has tons of campaign money stored up, and likely access to an endless supply of reserves from his party establishment.
Complacency like this shows why Mr. Miller needs to go, and be replaced by someone who will work for the support of his constituents.
I would ask myself, if Mr. Miller was too busy to obtain support from even this small sample of his constituency, what else is he too busy to do?”
Calen Fretts
Fretts For Congress (FL –01)
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
Obama, Out of Touch with America and its Values
By Tom Rhodes, 6/13/2012
There is a American Middle Class value that Obama and liberals don't understand. It is fundamental idea of the middle class which those on the left have total contempt. The lack of understanding, and total contempt for the financial foundation of the middle class explains exactly why Obama and his administration is completely out of touch with the vast majority of Americans, the middle class; This is a libertarian value can best be summed up in the simple advice every middle class kid received from our parents, grandparents, etc. "Don't spend more than you earn, and always try to save some of what you earn." This is the entire basis and totally sums up Dave Ramsey and the empire he's created by simply offering this sage old advice over and over again.
Dave Ramsey, is a modern day version of Ben Franklin, and a purveyor of traditional middle class values. Virtually all his advice can be found in the writings of Franklin. What advice he gives, and what he writes is a rehash of Ben Franklin's The Way To Wealth, and is still viable today.
Ben Franklin believed that success was a consequent of hard work, diligence, and study. A self-made man, his own beginnings were unassuming, but he advanced through entrepreneurship and lifelong learning. He was always honest about who he was and how he came by his success. Like Obama, Ben Franklin started with humble beginnings and rose to greatness in American Politics. Unlike Obama his wisdom as withstood the test of time. The American middle class, who mostly lives in the suburbs not cities, has seen the failure of urban communitarian thinking and is going back to this simple advice that can be dated back to Ben Franklin and before. Over the past few years while the debt of our government has been exponentially climbing, the total private debt of the people has been declining. In effect the people are ignoring Obama, and following the advice of Dave Ramsey which is the advice of Ben Franklin, or grandparents and parents.
Ben Franklin said all of the below; these quotes reflect the Values of most Americans, and specifically the middle class; Obama's actions and words do not reflect the Values of most Americans and clearly are contrary to the wisdom of Ben Franklin:
"The second vice is lying, the first is running in debt"
"He that lives upon hope will die fasting"
"A penny saved is a penny earned"
"If you know how to spend less than you get, you have the philosopher's stone"
"If you would know the value of money, go try to borrow some; for he that goes a-borrowing goes a-sorrowing"
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest"
"Rather go to bed without dinner than to rise in debt"
"When you run in debt; you give to another power over your liberty"
"Disdain the chain, preserve your freedom; and maintain your independency: be industrious and free; be frugal and free"
"Early to bed, and early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise"
"Diligence is the mother of good luck"
"God helps them that help themselves"
"Sloth, like rust, consumes faster than labor wears, while the used key is always bright"
"Lost time is never found again"
"He that riseth late, must trot all day, and shall scarce overtake his business at night"
"Drive thy business, let not that drive thee"
"Industry need not wish"
"There are no gains, without pains"
"Plough deep, while sluggards sleep, and you shall have corn to sell and to keep"
"Have you somewhat to do tomorrow, do it today"
"Be ashamed to catch yourself idle"
"At the working man's house hunger looks in, but dares not enter"
"For industry pays debts, while despair encreaseth them"
"By diligence and patience the mouse ate in two the cable"
"Little strokes fell great oaks"
"Employ thy time well if thou meanest to gain leisure"
"A life of leisure and a life of laziness are two things. Do you imagine that sloth will afford you more comfort than labor?"
"Trouble springs from idleness, and grievous toil from needless ease."
"Industry gives comfort, and plenty, and respect: fly pleasures, and they'll follow you"
"Keep the shop, and thy shop will keep thee"
"He that by the plough would thrive, Himself must either hold or drive."
"Want of care does us more damage than want of knowledge"
"In the affairs of this world men are saved not by faith, but by the want of it"
"Learning is to the studious, and riches to the careful, as well as power to the bold, and Heaven to the virtuous"
"Beware of little expenses; a small leak will sink a great ship"
"Buy what thou hast no need of, and before long thou shalt sell thy necessaries"
"Many estates are spent in the getting, Since women for tea forsook spinning and knitting, And men for punch forsook hewing and splitting."
"Think of saving as well as of getting: the Indies have not made Spain rich, because her outgoes are greater than her incomes"
"Women and wine, game and deceit, Make the wealth small, and the wants great."
"Wise men learn by others' harms, fools scarcely by their own"
"A ploughman on his legs is higher than a gentleman on his knees"
"When the well's dry, they know the worth of water"
"Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy"
"But what madness must it be to run in debt for these superfluities!"
"The borrower is a slave to the lender, and the debtor to the creditor"
This one is worth repeating, as it describes the current occupier of the White House
"The second vice is lying, the first is running in debt"
Since our government and we as a nation quit following these values and advice; it now takes $80 to buy what a single dollar used to buy; we are being dictated what products and services we must purchase; we are being told that the government should determine if you've made enough money; and our children will not have a better life than we did. The people of this country are again recognizing that the sage old advice we choose to ignore had value, and is the path to wealth and/or happiness. In Wisconsin, despite the best efforts of the left, Scott Walker showed that following Franklin's advice can and will work. The people of Wisconsin no longer have a budget in debt, have more not less employment, and have shown that even in a Democrat stronghold, logic, reason, and the self-evident truth of what Franklin preached are what Americans want. It is also a clear indication that Obama is totally out of touch with America and its values.
There is a American Middle Class value that Obama and liberals don't understand. It is fundamental idea of the middle class which those on the left have total contempt. The lack of understanding, and total contempt for the financial foundation of the middle class explains exactly why Obama and his administration is completely out of touch with the vast majority of Americans, the middle class; This is a libertarian value can best be summed up in the simple advice every middle class kid received from our parents, grandparents, etc. "Don't spend more than you earn, and always try to save some of what you earn." This is the entire basis and totally sums up Dave Ramsey and the empire he's created by simply offering this sage old advice over and over again.
Dave Ramsey, is a modern day version of Ben Franklin, and a purveyor of traditional middle class values. Virtually all his advice can be found in the writings of Franklin. What advice he gives, and what he writes is a rehash of Ben Franklin's The Way To Wealth, and is still viable today.
Ben Franklin believed that success was a consequent of hard work, diligence, and study. A self-made man, his own beginnings were unassuming, but he advanced through entrepreneurship and lifelong learning. He was always honest about who he was and how he came by his success. Like Obama, Ben Franklin started with humble beginnings and rose to greatness in American Politics. Unlike Obama his wisdom as withstood the test of time. The American middle class, who mostly lives in the suburbs not cities, has seen the failure of urban communitarian thinking and is going back to this simple advice that can be dated back to Ben Franklin and before. Over the past few years while the debt of our government has been exponentially climbing, the total private debt of the people has been declining. In effect the people are ignoring Obama, and following the advice of Dave Ramsey which is the advice of Ben Franklin, or grandparents and parents.
Ben Franklin said all of the below; these quotes reflect the Values of most Americans, and specifically the middle class; Obama's actions and words do not reflect the Values of most Americans and clearly are contrary to the wisdom of Ben Franklin:
This one is worth repeating, as it describes the current occupier of the White House
Since our government and we as a nation quit following these values and advice; it now takes $80 to buy what a single dollar used to buy; we are being dictated what products and services we must purchase; we are being told that the government should determine if you've made enough money; and our children will not have a better life than we did. The people of this country are again recognizing that the sage old advice we choose to ignore had value, and is the path to wealth and/or happiness. In Wisconsin, despite the best efforts of the left, Scott Walker showed that following Franklin's advice can and will work. The people of Wisconsin no longer have a budget in debt, have more not less employment, and have shown that even in a Democrat stronghold, logic, reason, and the self-evident truth of what Franklin preached are what Americans want. It is also a clear indication that Obama is totally out of touch with America and its values.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Legendary Columnist, Thomas Sowell, Finally Agrees with Me.
By Tom Rhodes, 6/12/2012
Thomas Sowell explains why the "president seeks scapegoats for all his failed policies" noting that Obama's actions clearly make him a Fascist. In his column, Is Obama a socialist or a fascist? Thomas Sowell notes the fact that Fascism was associated and considered a leftist position until Hitler and Mussolini gave it a bad name in the 30's. and the left without justification successfully shifted fascism to be considered from the right.
Sowell a far more learned and better columnist than I in a few short paragraphs clearly sums up several of my previous articles.
At least it is good to know that he's come around to my way of thinking. Here are a few articles from the past where I've pointed out Obama's Marxist/Fascist actions.
Ask a question Get Arrested
More evidence Obama is a Fascist
Democrats are pushing for Fascism, but don't call it that
Similarities between 1930's Germany and the USA today
Yet Again It looks like 1930's Germany
The Sleeping Giant
Is the US Govt. A Fascist State?
Yet again, more evidence Obama is a Marxist.
Please note the satire in my thinking Thomas Sowell has finally come around to my way of thinking. I've been reading his columns for as long as I can remember, and they have obviously influenced my writing and been inspirational. Thomas Sowell is a true broker of wisdom in our age, and his writings are worth your time, even if you don't agree with him.
Thomas Sowell explains why the "president seeks scapegoats for all his failed policies" noting that Obama's actions clearly make him a Fascist. In his column, Is Obama a socialist or a fascist? Thomas Sowell notes the fact that Fascism was associated and considered a leftist position until Hitler and Mussolini gave it a bad name in the 30's. and the left without justification successfully shifted fascism to be considered from the right.
Sowell a far more learned and better columnist than I in a few short paragraphs clearly sums up several of my previous articles.
What socialism, fascism and other ideologies of the left have in common is an assumption that some very wise people - like themselves - need to take decisions out of the hands of lesser people, like the rest of us, and impose those decisions by government fiat.
The left's vision is not only a vision of the world, but also a vision of themselves as superior beings pursuing superior ends. In the United States, however, this vision conflicts with a Constitution that begins, "We the People ..."
That is why the left has for more than a century been trying to get the Constitution's limitations on government loosened or evaded by judges' new interpretations, based on notions of "a living Constitution" that will take decisions out of the hands of "We the People," and transfer those decisions to our betters.
At least it is good to know that he's come around to my way of thinking. Here are a few articles from the past where I've pointed out Obama's Marxist/Fascist actions.
Ask a question Get Arrested
More evidence Obama is a Fascist
Democrats are pushing for Fascism, but don't call it that
Similarities between 1930's Germany and the USA today
Yet Again It looks like 1930's Germany
The Sleeping Giant
Is the US Govt. A Fascist State?
Yet again, more evidence Obama is a Marxist.
Please note the satire in my thinking Thomas Sowell has finally come around to my way of thinking. I've been reading his columns for as long as I can remember, and they have obviously influenced my writing and been inspirational. Thomas Sowell is a true broker of wisdom in our age, and his writings are worth your time, even if you don't agree with him.
Monday, June 11, 2012
End Public Education Before it Ruins Our Children's Lives
Edited by Tom Rhodes, 6/11/2012
This is the LPF's platform position addressing education.
It's nice to see that college professors agree with the Libertarian position on education. Professor Jack Chambless had this to say in his Orlando Sentinel Guest Editorial
Is it time to think about home schooling your child?
By Jack A. Chambless, June 10, 2012
For the past 21 years I have taught economics to more than 14,000 college students here in Central Florida.
During that time I have made a concerted effort to glean information from my Valencia students as to their educational background preceding their arrival in college.
Drawing from a sample size this large multiplied by two decades multiplied by hundreds of thousands of test answers has put me in a good position to offer the following advice to any reader of this paper with children in Florida's K-12 public schools.
Get them out now before you ruin their life.
While this may seem to be a bit harsh, let's look at the facts.
First, my best students every year are in order - Chinese, Eastern European, Indian and home-schooled Americans, and it is not even close when comparing this group to American public-school kids.
Since it is highly unlikely that any of you plan to move to Beijing, Warsaw or Bangalore, you might want to look at the facts concerning public vs. home-schooled American students.
(In Florida, more than 60,000 students in about 42,000 families study in home education programs, which meet the requirement for regular school attendance and were protected under state law in 1985.)
All of us have seen or heard about the annual disaster that is called FCAT results. Thanks to government officials in Washington, D.C. and Tallahassee, kids in government-run schools are failing miserably in a wide range of subjects while teachers face bureaucratic nightmares that strip them of their status as professionals and relegate them to servants of standardized testing.
It is also a fact of public education that incidents of bullying, teacher-student sexual misconduct, abusive behavior by teachers and incessant protection of poor teachers by education unions have put students in public schools in the unenviable position of dealing with issues that no learning environment should impose on them.
Moreover, the public education system in Florida and other states is one of the worst forms of monopoly power.
Everywhere in our lives as citizens we have free consumer choice as to where we shop for food, clothes, cellphones and more. However, if you are economically disadvantaged you rarely have this choice in education.
Poorer families in Florida are instead given the school district that their children are forced to attend. Rather than give poor parents choices so that competitive pressure is imposed on public education, we have lower-income families - mostly minorities - who are condemned to 13 years of inferior education just because they live in the wrong zip code.
Everywhere in America where vouchers or other forms of school choice exists, we see competition forcing the unionized public schools to adapt, or lose students.
This used to be the case in Florida, but those options are now lower than in past years and the victims show up in my classes woefully unprepared for challenging college course work.
It is routine that students from Florida's worst high schools make failing grades in college. These kids have been lied to by a system that tells them that a diploma from an "F" school will not impact them in college.
Meanwhile, the more than 2 million home-schooled kids around America (my two sons included) routinely appear in America's colleges with an education that prepares them for virtually anything.
The home-education movement has unleashed the forces of capitalism in such a way that anyone can find dozens of types of curricula for any grade level to help educate their kids in areas where one might not be an expert.
Home-school conventions like the one coming at the end of this month in Orlando offer thousands of options and professional speakers who can help guide willing parents through their child's formative years.
The home-schooled kids who show up in my classes usually arrive at the age of 16 or 17, score in the high 90's on their exams and then go off to places like Harvard, Penn and other world-class universities.
Jack A. Chambless is an economics professor at Valencia College.
It is obvious that the government is not the solution to education, even college professors now recognize that as fact. When without any college education, parents can and routinely do better prepare their children for college than so called professional educators in the government schools, it is obvious that liberty and freedom of choice, even in education, is the solution.
This is the LPF's platform position addressing education.
IX. EDUCATION
1. Education is a parental responsibility and best handled at the most local level.
2. Because parents are best situated to decide what is in their own children's best interests, we support all measures that enhance the educational choices available, such as charter schools, vouchers or tax credits for private school tuition, and home schooling.
3. Compulsory attendance and truancy laws should be repealed. Students cannot be forced to learn, and teachers should not be forced to act as juvenile delinquency officers.
4. All individuals, regardless of age, are entitled to the protections of the constitutions of the United States and Florida. Random drug tests, locker searches without probable cause, censorship of student publications, or any similar actions violate those rights.
It's nice to see that college professors agree with the Libertarian position on education. Professor Jack Chambless had this to say in his Orlando Sentinel Guest Editorial
Is it time to think about home schooling your child?
By Jack A. Chambless, June 10, 2012
For the past 21 years I have taught economics to more than 14,000 college students here in Central Florida.
During that time I have made a concerted effort to glean information from my Valencia students as to their educational background preceding their arrival in college.
Drawing from a sample size this large multiplied by two decades multiplied by hundreds of thousands of test answers has put me in a good position to offer the following advice to any reader of this paper with children in Florida's K-12 public schools.
Get them out now before you ruin their life.
While this may seem to be a bit harsh, let's look at the facts.
First, my best students every year are in order - Chinese, Eastern European, Indian and home-schooled Americans, and it is not even close when comparing this group to American public-school kids.
Since it is highly unlikely that any of you plan to move to Beijing, Warsaw or Bangalore, you might want to look at the facts concerning public vs. home-schooled American students.
(In Florida, more than 60,000 students in about 42,000 families study in home education programs, which meet the requirement for regular school attendance and were protected under state law in 1985.)
All of us have seen or heard about the annual disaster that is called FCAT results. Thanks to government officials in Washington, D.C. and Tallahassee, kids in government-run schools are failing miserably in a wide range of subjects while teachers face bureaucratic nightmares that strip them of their status as professionals and relegate them to servants of standardized testing.
It is also a fact of public education that incidents of bullying, teacher-student sexual misconduct, abusive behavior by teachers and incessant protection of poor teachers by education unions have put students in public schools in the unenviable position of dealing with issues that no learning environment should impose on them.
Moreover, the public education system in Florida and other states is one of the worst forms of monopoly power.
Everywhere in our lives as citizens we have free consumer choice as to where we shop for food, clothes, cellphones and more. However, if you are economically disadvantaged you rarely have this choice in education.
Poorer families in Florida are instead given the school district that their children are forced to attend. Rather than give poor parents choices so that competitive pressure is imposed on public education, we have lower-income families - mostly minorities - who are condemned to 13 years of inferior education just because they live in the wrong zip code.
Everywhere in America where vouchers or other forms of school choice exists, we see competition forcing the unionized public schools to adapt, or lose students.
This used to be the case in Florida, but those options are now lower than in past years and the victims show up in my classes woefully unprepared for challenging college course work.
It is routine that students from Florida's worst high schools make failing grades in college. These kids have been lied to by a system that tells them that a diploma from an "F" school will not impact them in college.
Meanwhile, the more than 2 million home-schooled kids around America (my two sons included) routinely appear in America's colleges with an education that prepares them for virtually anything.
The home-education movement has unleashed the forces of capitalism in such a way that anyone can find dozens of types of curricula for any grade level to help educate their kids in areas where one might not be an expert.
Home-school conventions like the one coming at the end of this month in Orlando offer thousands of options and professional speakers who can help guide willing parents through their child's formative years.
The home-schooled kids who show up in my classes usually arrive at the age of 16 or 17, score in the high 90's on their exams and then go off to places like Harvard, Penn and other world-class universities.
Jack A. Chambless is an economics professor at Valencia College.
It is obvious that the government is not the solution to education, even college professors now recognize that as fact. When without any college education, parents can and routinely do better prepare their children for college than so called professional educators in the government schools, it is obvious that liberty and freedom of choice, even in education, is the solution.
"If you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear"
By Tom Rhodes 6/11/2012
The standard response by government and do-gooders of all types to people who express outrage at: Red Light Cameras, FBI bugging without warrant, FBI putting GPS tracker on your car, indefinite detention, cops asking to search your car, etc. is "If you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear." Now in Indiana that is exactly what the legislature has said to the police.
It is clear that the "public servant" has nothing to fear so long as they are not intruding on the private property of others illegally. If a cop does a no-knock entry into the wrong house, he is committing a armed felony, breaking and entering and the people have the right of self defense, even if it means the cop gets shot dead. But if they are not doing anything wrong, cops have nothing to fear.
It is now being found that citizens have the right to film cops and other public servants when they are doing their jobs in public places. They tend to get feisty and uptight when mere citizens film them violating citizens rights. But of course if they aren't doing anything wrong they have nothing to fear from citizen journalists and youtube.
It is good that, at least in Indiana, a police breaking the law is exactly the same as that of any armed criminal. That is called equality under the law, and applying the rule of law equally to everybody, including those in government, is the hallmark of a free people and the difference between a free country and tyranny.
The sad fact is that because of the blue line, and the deference prosecutors and the courts pay to fellow government employees. Cops can and do get to break the law without the same consequences as the mere public. "Professional Courtesy" is paid from cops to each other, cops can and do get away with speeding, DUI, and a variety of other crimes without notice, as their comrades in the "public service." The vast majority of internal investigations result in officers being cleard of wrong doing, even when they shoot innocent people raiding the wrong house. Since the reality is that most in the public have no recourse against the criminal actions of the government, Indiana's law protecting the rights of individuals from the government is necessary and proper. Unfortunately, if the armed criminal illegally invading your home is cop, your only true recourse is immediate self defense, as the government has proven to be unwilling and unable to protect individuals from the illegal actions of the police. At least in Indiana the people fought for and have chased off the governments infringement upon the oldest right of all men, self defense.
Hopefully this will result in individual officers thinking twice about no-knock raids, double checking to make sure they have the right place, and limit such actions to legitimate circumstances. As they are no longer immune from people exercising their natural, pre-existing, right to self defense. The hope is that all public servants, including armed police, remember their actions and authority is limited, and that they realize that their power is granted by the people, and the people retain power for themselves, including the right to shoot armed government agents when those armed government agents are unlawfully using their power.
To Sergeant Joseph Hubbard and any other "public servant" worried about having their actions recorded, or being shot if they "accidently" raid the wrong house, don't worry "If you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear."
The standard response by government and do-gooders of all types to people who express outrage at: Red Light Cameras, FBI bugging without warrant, FBI putting GPS tracker on your car, indefinite detention, cops asking to search your car, etc. is "If you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear." Now in Indiana that is exactly what the legislature has said to the police.
Every time police Sergeant Joseph Hubbard stops a speeder or serves a search warrant, he says he worries suspects assume they can open fire -- without breaking the law.
Hubbard, a 17-year veteran of the police department in Jeffersonville, Indiana, says his apprehension stems from a state law approved this year that allows residents to use deadly force in response to the "unlawful intrusion" by a "public servant" to protect themselves and others, or their property.
It is clear that the "public servant" has nothing to fear so long as they are not intruding on the private property of others illegally. If a cop does a no-knock entry into the wrong house, he is committing a armed felony, breaking and entering and the people have the right of self defense, even if it means the cop gets shot dead. But if they are not doing anything wrong, cops have nothing to fear.
It is now being found that citizens have the right to film cops and other public servants when they are doing their jobs in public places. They tend to get feisty and uptight when mere citizens film them violating citizens rights. But of course if they aren't doing anything wrong they have nothing to fear from citizen journalists and youtube.
It is good that, at least in Indiana, a police breaking the law is exactly the same as that of any armed criminal. That is called equality under the law, and applying the rule of law equally to everybody, including those in government, is the hallmark of a free people and the difference between a free country and tyranny.
The sad fact is that because of the blue line, and the deference prosecutors and the courts pay to fellow government employees. Cops can and do get to break the law without the same consequences as the mere public. "Professional Courtesy" is paid from cops to each other, cops can and do get away with speeding, DUI, and a variety of other crimes without notice, as their comrades in the "public service." The vast majority of internal investigations result in officers being cleard of wrong doing, even when they shoot innocent people raiding the wrong house. Since the reality is that most in the public have no recourse against the criminal actions of the government, Indiana's law protecting the rights of individuals from the government is necessary and proper. Unfortunately, if the armed criminal illegally invading your home is cop, your only true recourse is immediate self defense, as the government has proven to be unwilling and unable to protect individuals from the illegal actions of the police. At least in Indiana the people fought for and have chased off the governments infringement upon the oldest right of all men, self defense.
Hopefully this will result in individual officers thinking twice about no-knock raids, double checking to make sure they have the right place, and limit such actions to legitimate circumstances. As they are no longer immune from people exercising their natural, pre-existing, right to self defense. The hope is that all public servants, including armed police, remember their actions and authority is limited, and that they realize that their power is granted by the people, and the people retain power for themselves, including the right to shoot armed government agents when those armed government agents are unlawfully using their power.
To Sergeant Joseph Hubbard and any other "public servant" worried about having their actions recorded, or being shot if they "accidently" raid the wrong house, don't worry "If you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear."
Saturday, June 9, 2012
Government Regulations Keep Improved Auto Safety Device Off Market
By Tom Rhodes, 6/8/2012
New cars cannot be equipped with the latest high tech mirror. A side mirror that eliminates the dangerous "blind spot" for drivers has received a U.S. patent. Drexel University mathematics professor Dr. R. Andrew Hicks, invented a subtly curved mirror that dramatically increases the field of view with minimal distortion. Because of too much government regulations, this new advance cannot be installed onto the driver’s side of new cars, thus forcing car manufacturers to use old out of date technology.
This is just another example of too much government and why we need less government and more freedom.
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
You Lie! – Wilson’s Outburst was the Truth, Obama was lying.
By Tom Rhodes 6/4/12
Sept. 9, 2009 Obama Said, “And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.” This was so outrageous that it resulted in the famous outburst by Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., “You lie!”
Wilson was soundly chastised by the press then. Now that it has been proven that Obama did lie, and that federal conscience laws are to be eliminated or ignored, and abortion is to be funded by federal dollars will we see an apology by the press to Joe Wilson and chastisement of President Obama for lying?
Pennsylvania is receiving $160million in Federal dollars to set up a new “high-risk” insurance program under a provision of the federal health-care legislation enacted in March. This Obama administration approved program will cover any abortion that is legal in Pennsylvania.
Feb. 18, 2011, Obama canceled President Bush’s executive order guaranteeing doctors, nurses and other health professionals would not have to violate their beliefs. Now the Obama administration is requiring churches and Christian nonprofit institutions, to provide free contraceptives with health insurance and pay for abortifacients.
Why won’t the press recognize and call out Obama for his direct lie to the people? Why would you trust or vote for Obama when he made one thing perfectly clear, he is a liar and will say anything to get more power?
Sept. 9, 2009 Obama Said, “And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.” This was so outrageous that it resulted in the famous outburst by Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., “You lie!”
Wilson was soundly chastised by the press then. Now that it has been proven that Obama did lie, and that federal conscience laws are to be eliminated or ignored, and abortion is to be funded by federal dollars will we see an apology by the press to Joe Wilson and chastisement of President Obama for lying?
Pennsylvania is receiving $160million in Federal dollars to set up a new “high-risk” insurance program under a provision of the federal health-care legislation enacted in March. This Obama administration approved program will cover any abortion that is legal in Pennsylvania.
Feb. 18, 2011, Obama canceled President Bush’s executive order guaranteeing doctors, nurses and other health professionals would not have to violate their beliefs. Now the Obama administration is requiring churches and Christian nonprofit institutions, to provide free contraceptives with health insurance and pay for abortifacients.
Why won’t the press recognize and call out Obama for his direct lie to the people? Why would you trust or vote for Obama when he made one thing perfectly clear, he is a liar and will say anything to get more power?
Monday, June 4, 2012
Politically Incorrect Brain Farts
By Tom Rhodes, 06/04/2012
White House Chief of Staff Jim Messina and Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy on Health Care,Nancy-Ann DeParle, met with big-pharmaceutical companies and told them that if they didn't support Obamacare, Mr. Obama would demand a 15 percent rebate [kickback] on Medicare drugs and push to remove the tax deduction for direct consumer advertising. This was reported in the Washing Times, which noted that capitulating with Obama's administration on Obamacare saves big-pharmaceutical companies about $100BILLION over 10 years. Why is government extortion of business legal in the USA, but Walmart is penalized and demonized when they payoff Mexican officials to build stores across the border?
Why is our society letting the 2-4% of deviants force the 96-98% of society which conforms to eons old traditional ethics, re-arrange their beliefs on behalf of those deviants?
Why are we surprised our government is dysfunctional when our society has given a small group of fallible people trillions of other people's money and the power to dictate its redistribution?
The Federal Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch mandates a two year ban on any kind of direct involvement with a previous employer, client or co-worker. Why has the rule of law, and our ethics been negated for people like Craig Becker, former lawyer for the Service employees International Union (SEIU) who, who by recess appointment, served as a member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and now serves as general counsel to the AFL-CIO?
By what rational standard considering our founding documents as framed by our forefathers can controlling what and how much people eat and drink to be a function of government?
Why in the NBA is the under-representation of black coaches is a problem, but under-representation of white players not?
Suggested reading: David Harsanyi's Nanny State: How Fast Food Fascists, Teetotaling Do-Gooders, Priggish Moralists, and other Boneheaded Bureaucrats are Turning America into a Nation of Children
Why is it not racist for the City of LA to ban new fast food restaurants in South LA because poor minorities are too stupid to make their own food choices?
Why are mind altering substances created from fermented grains and fruit legal, but those smoked or ingested from leaves or flowers not?
The Great Society promised better for inner city poor, delivered the "projects". Obamacare promised cheaper health care and keeping your plan if you wanted, delivered increased costs and loss of insurance choices. Nixon's war on drugs promised a better society, delivered death by swat team and massive incarceration. Why do American voters keep buying political rhetoric of the two major parties accepting their promises of heaven but delivery of hell?
Earning something is not the same as winning something. Most cultures don't understand or even recognize the difference and their languages reflect this lack of fundamental understanding. Much of the hatred for the USA in other parts of the world is reflected in this fundamental misunderstanding. In English the verb earn has several meanings all similar:
1. to gain or get in return for one's labor or service: i.e. to earn one's living.
2. to merit as compensation, as for service; deserve: i.e.to receive more than one has earned.
3. to acquire through merit: i.e.to earn a reputation for honesty.
4. to gain as due return or profit: i.e. Savings accounts earn interest.
5. to bring about or cause deservedly: i.e. His fair dealing earned our confidence.
Winning something however may or may not be associated with service or effort or what is justly due. You can win a race by superior effort, but you can also win a lottery by luck, or you can win a position by the favor of another. Winning something implies some luck, or other outside influence over what someone gains, whereas earning something only implies gaining through merit or what is justly due. This subtle difference is important. The wealth, power, freedom, and liberty Americans have was earned, not won. Societies that don't comprehend or understand the difference hate the USA because they don't believe that what the USA has is merited. This is why Marxism and its derivative socialism, fail, it is based on redistribution of winnings, ignoring the fact that in a free society people gain based on what they individually merit. Why have we allowed statists to confuse winning and earning in our society?
Overall violent crime is way down and near historic lows while at the same time gun ownership is at near historic highs. While correlation does not equal causation, why does most of the mainstream press insist on equating more guns to more crime, when the evidence points to the opposite and no evidence supports the emotional but irrational idea that less guns would make us safer?
White House Chief of Staff Jim Messina and Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy on Health Care,Nancy-Ann DeParle, met with big-pharmaceutical companies and told them that if they didn't support Obamacare, Mr. Obama would demand a 15 percent rebate [kickback] on Medicare drugs and push to remove the tax deduction for direct consumer advertising. This was reported in the Washing Times, which noted that capitulating with Obama's administration on Obamacare saves big-pharmaceutical companies about $100BILLION over 10 years. Why is government extortion of business legal in the USA, but Walmart is penalized and demonized when they payoff Mexican officials to build stores across the border?
Why is our society letting the 2-4% of deviants force the 96-98% of society which conforms to eons old traditional ethics, re-arrange their beliefs on behalf of those deviants?
Why are we surprised our government is dysfunctional when our society has given a small group of fallible people trillions of other people's money and the power to dictate its redistribution?
The Federal Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch mandates a two year ban on any kind of direct involvement with a previous employer, client or co-worker. Why has the rule of law, and our ethics been negated for people like Craig Becker, former lawyer for the Service employees International Union (SEIU) who, who by recess appointment, served as a member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and now serves as general counsel to the AFL-CIO?
By what rational standard considering our founding documents as framed by our forefathers can controlling what and how much people eat and drink to be a function of government?
Why in the NBA is the under-representation of black coaches is a problem, but under-representation of white players not?
Suggested reading: David Harsanyi's Nanny State: How Fast Food Fascists, Teetotaling Do-Gooders, Priggish Moralists, and other Boneheaded Bureaucrats are Turning America into a Nation of Children
Why is it not racist for the City of LA to ban new fast food restaurants in South LA because poor minorities are too stupid to make their own food choices?
Why are mind altering substances created from fermented grains and fruit legal, but those smoked or ingested from leaves or flowers not?
The Great Society promised better for inner city poor, delivered the "projects". Obamacare promised cheaper health care and keeping your plan if you wanted, delivered increased costs and loss of insurance choices. Nixon's war on drugs promised a better society, delivered death by swat team and massive incarceration. Why do American voters keep buying political rhetoric of the two major parties accepting their promises of heaven but delivery of hell?
Earning something is not the same as winning something. Most cultures don't understand or even recognize the difference and their languages reflect this lack of fundamental understanding. Much of the hatred for the USA in other parts of the world is reflected in this fundamental misunderstanding. In English the verb earn has several meanings all similar:
1. to gain or get in return for one's labor or service: i.e. to earn one's living.
2. to merit as compensation, as for service; deserve: i.e.to receive more than one has earned.
3. to acquire through merit: i.e.to earn a reputation for honesty.
4. to gain as due return or profit: i.e. Savings accounts earn interest.
5. to bring about or cause deservedly: i.e. His fair dealing earned our confidence.
Winning something however may or may not be associated with service or effort or what is justly due. You can win a race by superior effort, but you can also win a lottery by luck, or you can win a position by the favor of another. Winning something implies some luck, or other outside influence over what someone gains, whereas earning something only implies gaining through merit or what is justly due. This subtle difference is important. The wealth, power, freedom, and liberty Americans have was earned, not won. Societies that don't comprehend or understand the difference hate the USA because they don't believe that what the USA has is merited. This is why Marxism and its derivative socialism, fail, it is based on redistribution of winnings, ignoring the fact that in a free society people gain based on what they individually merit. Why have we allowed statists to confuse winning and earning in our society?
Overall violent crime is way down and near historic lows while at the same time gun ownership is at near historic highs. While correlation does not equal causation, why does most of the mainstream press insist on equating more guns to more crime, when the evidence points to the opposite and no evidence supports the emotional but irrational idea that less guns would make us safer?
Saturday, June 2, 2012
Statists Hate Freedom - For Your Own Good
By Tom Rhodes, 6/2/2012
The reason statists (leftists, socialists, democrats, most republicans, liberals, progressives, etc.)simply hate freedom and liberty is that to be a free person one must accept personal responsibility. Statists believe that others are too stupid to make their own life decisions and live with the consequences. They believe this because they fear that they may make a mistake (bad choice) on day and don’t want to have to pay for their own bad decisions and assume everybody else has the same fear. Everybody makes mistakes, but why should you have to pay for my mistakes? When you ask the government to pay for your mistakes, you then give the government the right to dictate your behavior.
You cannot be both free and unaccountable for you actions. This is why lefties of all stripes don’t understand libertarians. Especially when a libertarian yells, “Get the government out of XXXXXX!!!” no matter what big government program XXXXXX is referring. They assume that because they aren't willing live with the consequences of not having the government provide for XXXXXX when they screw up, that nobody will be accept the consequences.
Consider Healthcare, the libertarian position is that the government shouldn’t be involved in it, and that charity is not the job of government. The most often heard response from scaredycat statists is some lame cry saying something like “When you get hurt you’ll be the first person crying for the government to pay your medical bill.” They are projecting their fear of the responsibility associated with freedom onto freedom lovers.
Let’s start with an easy example. Bikers across the country routinely protest and work at ending helmet laws. Abate and similar groups have been successful in getting rid of mandatory helmet laws in many states. Bikers aren’t against helmets, but against the government telling them what kind of protection they must wear. They do understand that they have no right to expect someone else to pick up the costs if they bash their head in an accident. Look at the way the law was crafted in Florida. In Florida if you are over 21 years old and have PIP insurance you do not have to wear a motorcycle helmet. You are however not free to ride helmetless if you do not have insurance, and are not yet old enough to make mature decisions about your own well being. Some of the biggest proof that bikers value freedom and do not expect others to pay for their life choices is the huge number of events held every year to pay the medical bills of fallen bikers. Google the phrase - help raise money for fallen biker - and you will be amazed at the pages of links you get. Bikers want and insist on their freedom, and are more than willing to live with the consequences of their decision to exercise that freedom.
The cost of my health problems should be borne by me not you. If you become a fat pig because you insist on 64oz sugary drinks and supersizing every lunch you eat, don’t expect me to pay for your diabetes drugs, cholesterol medicine, artificial knee’s and heart transplant to keep you alive. Because you choose to eat like a fat pig does not obligate those who choose to live a healthy to help pay your extra health care costs. If you smoke and get lung cancer, don’t expect me to help with those costs.
The problem is that statists believe that nobody should ever have to be responsible for making bad choices, thus society should bear the costs of stupidity. If as a society we must bear the costs of the stupid decisions others make we must accept tyranny. This kind of thinking that nobody should suffer from bad decisions gets us laws that dictate what size sugary drink you are allowed to sell or purchase. It gets us to a place where the rule of law is no longer valid, and the nanny state has the right to determine who wins/loses in a bankruptcy like GM, where the union and its members as well as the GM management were not allowed to suffer the consequences of the decisions they made, and all of society had to bear the costs of stupid decisions. We get bail outs of banks “too big to fail” and tens of thousands of laws to protect from stupid.
FREEDOM
No Knee Pads, No Helmets, No Breaks,
No Overprotective Soccer Moms
We survived riding without helmets, playing with BB guns, throwing rocks, and running with sissors. Today, the above kid would get a ticket, and mom may be charged with abuse. Yep, doing stupid things has risks, and as the saying goes you can’t fix stupid. The nanny state, with cradle to grave care for everybody is a path to tyranny. The resultant laws now dictate what we can or can’t eat and have virtually killed the job being a kid.
Life is all about risks and decisions. Freedom gives you the chance to enjoy all the benefits of you decisions but is a two way street and you also must accept the consequences if you fail to choose wisely. Statists, hate freedom because with it comes responsibility. This is a scene they never want people to see/experience.
What they are willing to do is sacrifice everybody’s freedom for their security. Remember when you surrender your freedom to government, the government won’t stop at taking care of you when you choose poorly, it will make your choices for you. The government will be your master, you will be its slave, fed and sheltered and whipped . . . . for your own good.
The reason statists (leftists, socialists, democrats, most republicans, liberals, progressives, etc.)simply hate freedom and liberty is that to be a free person one must accept personal responsibility. Statists believe that others are too stupid to make their own life decisions and live with the consequences. They believe this because they fear that they may make a mistake (bad choice) on day and don’t want to have to pay for their own bad decisions and assume everybody else has the same fear. Everybody makes mistakes, but why should you have to pay for my mistakes? When you ask the government to pay for your mistakes, you then give the government the right to dictate your behavior.
You cannot be both free and unaccountable for you actions. This is why lefties of all stripes don’t understand libertarians. Especially when a libertarian yells, “Get the government out of XXXXXX!!!” no matter what big government program XXXXXX is referring. They assume that because they aren't willing live with the consequences of not having the government provide for XXXXXX when they screw up, that nobody will be accept the consequences.
Consider Healthcare, the libertarian position is that the government shouldn’t be involved in it, and that charity is not the job of government. The most often heard response from scaredycat statists is some lame cry saying something like “When you get hurt you’ll be the first person crying for the government to pay your medical bill.” They are projecting their fear of the responsibility associated with freedom onto freedom lovers.
Let’s start with an easy example. Bikers across the country routinely protest and work at ending helmet laws. Abate and similar groups have been successful in getting rid of mandatory helmet laws in many states. Bikers aren’t against helmets, but against the government telling them what kind of protection they must wear. They do understand that they have no right to expect someone else to pick up the costs if they bash their head in an accident. Look at the way the law was crafted in Florida. In Florida if you are over 21 years old and have PIP insurance you do not have to wear a motorcycle helmet. You are however not free to ride helmetless if you do not have insurance, and are not yet old enough to make mature decisions about your own well being. Some of the biggest proof that bikers value freedom and do not expect others to pay for their life choices is the huge number of events held every year to pay the medical bills of fallen bikers. Google the phrase - help raise money for fallen biker - and you will be amazed at the pages of links you get. Bikers want and insist on their freedom, and are more than willing to live with the consequences of their decision to exercise that freedom.
The cost of my health problems should be borne by me not you. If you become a fat pig because you insist on 64oz sugary drinks and supersizing every lunch you eat, don’t expect me to pay for your diabetes drugs, cholesterol medicine, artificial knee’s and heart transplant to keep you alive. Because you choose to eat like a fat pig does not obligate those who choose to live a healthy to help pay your extra health care costs. If you smoke and get lung cancer, don’t expect me to help with those costs.
The problem is that statists believe that nobody should ever have to be responsible for making bad choices, thus society should bear the costs of stupidity. If as a society we must bear the costs of the stupid decisions others make we must accept tyranny. This kind of thinking that nobody should suffer from bad decisions gets us laws that dictate what size sugary drink you are allowed to sell or purchase. It gets us to a place where the rule of law is no longer valid, and the nanny state has the right to determine who wins/loses in a bankruptcy like GM, where the union and its members as well as the GM management were not allowed to suffer the consequences of the decisions they made, and all of society had to bear the costs of stupid decisions. We get bail outs of banks “too big to fail” and tens of thousands of laws to protect from stupid.
FREEDOM
No Knee Pads, No Helmets, No Breaks,
No Overprotective Soccer Moms
We survived riding without helmets, playing with BB guns, throwing rocks, and running with sissors. Today, the above kid would get a ticket, and mom may be charged with abuse. Yep, doing stupid things has risks, and as the saying goes you can’t fix stupid. The nanny state, with cradle to grave care for everybody is a path to tyranny. The resultant laws now dictate what we can or can’t eat and have virtually killed the job being a kid.
Life is all about risks and decisions. Freedom gives you the chance to enjoy all the benefits of you decisions but is a two way street and you also must accept the consequences if you fail to choose wisely. Statists, hate freedom because with it comes responsibility. This is a scene they never want people to see/experience.
What they are willing to do is sacrifice everybody’s freedom for their security. Remember when you surrender your freedom to government, the government won’t stop at taking care of you when you choose poorly, it will make your choices for you. The government will be your master, you will be its slave, fed and sheltered and whipped . . . . for your own good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
