"Please, let the joyous B. Obama be wiped out— he is constructing for me many swindles."
Google it. It's bizarre
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Friday, June 25, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Empire
Both the Left and the Right have always found an enemy in Empire, since the beginning.
Vote Whig.
No, but seriously, people who currently define themselves as rightwing invariably feel that they are the modern extension of a continuum of liberty and freedom-loving that the Founders organized against Empire (or despotism, or statism, or tyranny, or whatever,) and that has continued against the principles of Empire, such as the Republican party rejecting slavery, and Ronald Reagan promoting free market solutions to the problems that the people are faced with.
The average person who prefers the Left's definition of Empire (or greed, or hate, or intolerance, or unfairness, or however they see it,) usually chooses to focus on the power that gets overly concentrated when people (whose parents and grandparents became wealthy in the vibrant market that liberty provided for everyone,) but then choose to turn their back on freedom and betray the principles of Capitalism, and do everything they can do to centralize power in the elite politicians and agencies they've made friends with. The fact that people on the left actually think that only Republicans do this, and that if Democrats do it, it must be for a "good reason" is simply evidence that Empire has been more successful in its propaganda in demonizing the Right than it has been in demonizing the Left.
Both Left and Right, in turn, still have those that believe they can reveal the actual demon that is Empire, or whatever you want to call it, and the true believers on either side are still pretty sure that it resides on the other side, rather than below them both. Looking at all humanity as a whole, it is the ones who actually do promote real Empire that either believe themselves, or at least would like everyone else to believe that they are rather above, than below the rest.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
Could someone remind Julian Sanchez which side of the political spectrum suffers the worst from epistemic closure?
http://ping.fm/dyzp0
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Monday, June 14, 2010
AR15 Open Carry Patriot Answers Lady's Questions
Open-carry patriots make me smile. (This also makes me feel a little guilty I don't have the, uh, gumption to stand up for my rights, and make a point like they do.) Ssomething tells me that James Madison, even though he didn't invent the common law right to bear arms, would be pretty darn proud that Americans like "Chris" still exercise this freedom so publicly.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
All forms of economy will have their ups and downs, and even their recessions and perhaps even depressions from time to time. Even if the U.S. had had a true capitalist economy, which it hasn't had, but even if it did, there would still have been low spots, (which, of course, anti-capitalists would have called its "failing") So, the question that remains is, "Which form of economy is right for America?" And based on her founding principles of freedom and liberty, and the true meanings of "equality" and "unalienable rights," as defined by the founders of the nation... well, it's a free-market... (with well defined, and limited Federal interference, and where States are left to regulate only within their own borders, and then only to the extent that their citizenships allow them to, individually...) that is the only morally acceptable form of economy under the U.S. Constitution. (And we haven't had it.)
I would argue that the greatest "failures" that have occurred in American Capitalism, and the ones that have caused the deepest and most widespread suffering, or the most universal denial of opportunities, have happened when the people have allowed their system to stray from the principles of freedom and liberty, and attempts to regulate 'equality of outcome' or in other words to 'rig the game' are always done in the most well-intentioned, 'Robin Hood' type of way, and yet are never held accountable when they have INEVITABLY not only back-fired, but even at times ON PURPOSE, actually created a solution that was 180 degrees the opposite of what had been promised by its proponents, (and always exceedingly over budget.)
As it turns out, these proponents have typically been people who, in action, if not in intention, have sought power over their peers, and have gained it, and have redefined what is meant by the word "unfair."
I would even be willing to let them have the word. I could then concede that Capitalism is "unfair," but it is however the least UNJUST of all systems that mankind has been able to put into practice, and the most durable, and the one that has demonstrated the most sustained average growth, leaving the poor of today living better than the poor, and at times better than the rich, of yesterday. (And yes, there most certainly ARE rich and poor in Socialism and Communism, but their attempts at "fairness" usually lock the privileged even more assuredly into their privileges, and the impoverished more assuredly into their poverty )
How is it possibly more just for a Hugo Chavez, and his ilk, to live like they do, and to be the deciders of who gets to live like them, while the rest of their potentially wealthy, but in reality squalid country doesn't, than for the market itself to (on average) leave the supposedly "most deserving" types of questions to the entire collective (if you will) of everyone else living and working in that market? No kingmakers, no dictators, but everyone together, none of whose interests carry more weight than the other, to define what's "fair" and what isn't.
What is even more unfair, though, is to let the word Capitalism get redefined as if having anything to do with the types of crony, back-room, cartel, secret combination types of process that the true liberty and self-determination of a free market abhor.
If there is a more just system, it won't be a backwards step from free-market towards the involuntary confiscation of property and the denial of natural liberty that socialism offers, but a move forward, based on the immortal rights and the peace that Providence offers humanity, not the kind of rights and peace that men pretend to provide themselves.
"So, how do you know when you've become a grown up?" and I almost answer, "when you realize you only get to make the important choices once, but you still say you'd never change a thing, if they ask if you've got any regrets, even though it still ripps you up inside whenever you let yourself remember the stupid and mean things you know you've done, especially that have hurt other people, and now that you're an adult, you stop doing those things that make you look back and realize, I have absolutely no idea what I could have been thinking when I did that, because now there is nothing left that I could possibly do to make restitution."
So, how do you know when you've become a grown up?
"Sometimes, I think you just never know."
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Monday, June 7, 2010
Friday, June 4, 2010
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Bill O'Reilly's Talking Points Commentary was, as usual, insightful and fair; today it was particularly poignant. http://ping.fm/1y4Tg
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
This should be old news, but could someone remind Julian Sanchez which side it was that suffers from epistemic closure? http://bit.ly/auDJ1J