When the human race has once acquired a supersitition nothing short of death is ever likely to remove it.
Mark Twain
[How many things does this apply to? Liberalism, gun control, fanatical religions, the list is practically endless.–Joe
Update: Case in point. Via Say Uncle.]
Instead of identifying politicians by name or party, we ought to do so by ideology – which is uncomfortably akin to classifying strains of dysentery by patient I admit.
Will Brown
Comment to a post by Kevin Baker on November 26, 2008
[The take over of the health care industry by the Federal government reminded me of this.–Joe]
As I have said many times before. It’s A Security Theater.
Here is proof:
A passenger on a Detroit-bound Northwest Airlines flight tried to detonate an explosive device that was strapped to his leg and later told investigators that he was trying to blow up the plane and had affiliations with al Qaeda, according to a senior U.S. official.
The passenger was identified by authorities as Abdul Mudallad, a 23-year-old Nigerian national, according to Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican who is the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee.
The device was technologically advanced and potentially devastating, Mr. King said. “This was not a firecracker,” he said.
And what is the response? As expected, more stuff that cannot possibly help but will further restrict our freedom and make air travel more of a hassle:
The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement that airline passengers should expect to see additional screening measures put in place on both domestic and international flights.
Update: After the shoe bomber we had to take off our shoes when going through security and the security experts told us that we should just be glad that he didn’t try to blow up the plane with a bomb hidden in his underwear. I think you should be able to extrapolate the “additional screening measures” we can soon expect to see without my assistance.
The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.
A government of laws and not of men.
John Adams
(1735-1826)
Second President of the United States
The Life and Works of John Adams (1851)
[And by necessity the same applies to the defenders of the tyrant and the thugs who enforce the orders of the tyrant. And to do this the people of the nation need the tools to accomplish this task.–Joe]
It’s the immortal truth of Con Law: conservative decisions are provisional while liberal decisions are eternal.
Blue
December 20, 2009
Comment to Justice Ginsburg: Supreme Court may eventually overrule Heller.
[Certainly that is the way the liberals like to think of it and the conservatives fear it is. I’m not so sure that is reality however. Heller, the (soon to be) McDonald victories and many others in the pipeline will make it difficult for liberals to undermine the right to keep and bear arms for a long, long time.–Joe]
The irony of tyrants is correct.
On Bill of Rights Day the city of Sacramento claims, and joins a lawsuit to prevent, the Second Amendment from applying to them.
They are going to lose. 100% guaranteed. It might even be a 9-0 vote but the chutzpah of their effort is amazing.
What next? Announcing segregated water fountains on Martin Luther King’s Birthday?
That sounds like something Jim would say. Except he would give excruciating detail about the method of execution.
Sean Flynn
December 16, 2009
In response to my suggestion that the U.S. Constitution should require any government employee who votes for or enforces a law or regulation that is later found to be unconstitutional is to be charged with and convicted for the crime of treason.
[Sean and I both like Jim.–Joe]
Just as the Fourteenth Amendment extended protection of the enumerated rights of the first eight amendments to violations by state governments, so too did it extend federal protection of the pre-existing unenumerated rights “retained by the people.”
Randy Barnett
Regarding the Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
[Via a lead from Kevin.
What Barnett says may be the true intent of the 14th Amendment but these days when someone questions whether something the Federal Government does is constitutional or not they look at you like you are nuts and ask, “Are you serious?“
This is Bill of Rights Day. Celebrate what you have left while you can.–Joe]
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.
Thomas Jefferson
[I was because this is true that the global warming hoax mongers were suppressing reason and opinions.–Joe]
The TSA document I mentioned yesterday has raised quite a stir (via an IM from son James). They want to make it illegal to post the document.
This reminds me of a story about a psychology professor who asked his students to write down on a slip of paper and put in an box short phrases marketers had used that made the students one to buy a product. He then drew them out of the box to discuss them. The first one out of the box was “Under 17 not admitted without parent or guardian.”
They don’t want people to post it and they don’t want you to have it. What do you think that is going to accomplish?
Yeah, I thought so too.
Get it here if you don’t already have a copy.
In testifying and speaking in public, I frequently exposed the misleading references Rachel Carson had cited in her book, presenting her statements from Silent Spring and then reading the truth from the actual publications she was purporting to characterize. This revealed to the audiences just how untruthful and misleading the allegations of Silent Spring really were.
Now, nearly 30 years later, the controversy is still boiling about how truthful Rachel Carson was. I recently learned that a movie honoring Rachel Carson and Silent Spring is being made for television. Because I believe such a movie would further misinform the public, the media, and our legislators, I decided to type up my original rough notes from 1962-1963 and make them available. Here they are, page by page, starting with her dedication.
Dr. J. Gordon Edwards
The Lies of Rachel Carson
[H/T to David for the link.
I remember reading Silent Spring in about 1970. It made quite an impression on me as it did millions of other people. I think the copy of the book I read is still on the bookshelf of my parents house.
Reading Edwards notes I realize her half-truths were the same type of propaganda that the anti-gun people propagate today. What she did was not carelessness, ignorance, or a series of honest mistakes. She pulled tidbits out of references that clearly did not support her conclusions or the impression her book portrayed. She had to be doing that deliberately. The same is true of many of the anti-gun writings. When you check their references you find the source concludes something completely different or (as in the case of Michael A. Bellesiles) does not even exist.
The global warming hoax (H/T to Phil for the link), the ecology hoaxes, the anti-gun material and many others all come from the political left. Why is that? Is their desire for control over people so great they will do nearly anything? Sure we have lots of examples of leftists (Stalin, Pol Pot, China, and Nazi Germany for example) where they will do horrible things to consolidate and keep power political power. But even on a much smaller scale it seems to result in the same sort of thing–total lack of ethics, morality, and respect for human life.
I sometimes can’t help but think that “if it saves just one life” then people advocating leftists political beliefs should be imprisoned or exiled. But that would be using the very same warped ethical behavior as they do.–Joe]
This is addressed to Pete Sessions, but it serves as an open letter to the Party. I don’t for a minute expect it to go anywhere, or make a difference if it did, and I could think of several ways to make it better after the fact, but someone has to say it.
Pete,
“The Obama/Pelosi agenda has been proven to be a failure…”
That’s true, but what exactly is the Republican agenda? Remember Bush’s prescription drug entitlement, TARP, and the fact that McCain supported TARP and the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) hoax? I sure do.
It is well and good to point out the Democrats’ mental problems and their anti American mindset, but I’m looking for some distinction between Dems and Republicans other than the message I’m getting now, which is, “Give us money—we’re not as corrupt as those other guys.”
In my lifetime the distinction has been, More Socialism Faster, verses More Socialism Slower. No thanks. I want to see your plan for;A) Dismantling socialist programs in the U.S. (going back to the Wilson Administration and un-doing the damage). This would involve the elimination of multiple government “departments” and laying off thousands of federal government workers (if they’re worth something, they’ll thrive in the private sector. If they’re not, they shouldn’t have been hired in the first place) so as to allow the markets to do what they do best—excel, by weeding out the poor performers and elevating the best performers.
B) Holding accountable those who have promoted or supported socialism (government intervention in the markets for the purpose of social engeneering, i.e. economic stagnation and the erosion of property rights) of any kind within the halls of government. That would include, but not be limited to, charges of fraud and/or racketeering and/or misappropriation of public funds against the perpetrators of the AGW hoax.
C) Restoring compliance with, and faith in, the U.S. constitution.
D) Cutting tax rates across the board to a small fraction of their current levels, thereby moving boldly forward in restoring capitalism and the liberty and prosperity that comes along with it.
The socialist/Progressive movement has been gaining ground in this country for over 100 years, and all that time the Republican Party has been there, either in idleness, in complacency, or themselves actively leading us down this rat hole. I have had enough. Do not ask me to take you seriously until you’ve demonstrated some seriousness of your own, plus some clarity, specificity and bold action with regard to the above points.Sincerely,
Lyle
I’m not supporting any squishy, cowardly Republicans and neither should you. There is no time for playing games.
The phrase “we (I) (you) simply must -” designates something that need not be done. “That goes without saying” is a red warning. “Of course” means you had best check it yourself. These small-change clichés and others like them when read correctly, are reliable channel markers.
Lazarus Long
A character of Robert Heinlein in his book Time Enough For Love
[Challenging assumptions is sometimes surprisingly easy. It will make you stand out from others as being brilliant, crazy, or both. For practice apply it to global warming, health care “reform”, and gun control. Then expand the application of these tests to other political imperatives and even everyday life.
The appropriateness of Heinlein’s wisdom is probably endless.–Joe]
One should forgive one’s enemies, but not before they are hanged.
Heinrich Heine
1797 – 1856
I made a sarcastic comment at Snowflakes in Hell and Bitter came back with this comment:
Joe, you’ve hit upon the next biggest factor making me question kids. Seriously, I don’t know that I want to bring kids into the picture if they are going to live in a mostly government-controlled world. I realize that this country has survived many other changes in the past, and many other generations have survived well enough. But if we’re headed toward the government taking over even larger chunks of the economy, I’m not sure I’d be bringing kids into a better life than I enjoyed. And that just doesn’t seem right.
I understand her point but there is more than one way to view the problem.
Another way to view it is that sort of attitude is creating the problem. See the movie Idiocracy (wonderful premise, good start, but a poor movie overall) for an extreme view of this type of thing taken to the limit.
By tweaking the premise in Idiocracy just a bit one can hypothesis that high reproduction rates by those that believe government should provide “everything for free” will likely result in a cultural, if not genetic, disposition toward more dependency on and expectation of government control of the economy and personal lives. Low reproduction rates by those that believe in and desire freedom will exacerbate the problem. A slightly modified version of this argument is what Barb successfully used on me to convince me to have a third child. That is why we sometimes call Xenia our gift to the world.
But what of the individual? If freedom loving people are but a small minority of the population won’t their lives be miserable? Not necessarily.
It depends on what the outcome is during their lifetime. If it is George Orwell’s 1984 then I would agree with that point. But governments have a history of collapsing. Especially socialist and totalitarian governments. Food shortages, riots, and the break down of infrastructure favor intelligent and freedom loving people. My model of the world is that, ultimately, stupidity is self-correcting. And massive government intervention in the free market and free society is self correcting because it is so stupid. Those people demanding that government supply their every need and want will have higher death rates than those that are self-motivated and value freedom. It may be that within our or our children’s lifetimes the freedom loving minority will become the majority essentially overnight because of the much higher death rates among the anti-freedom people as society collapses. Even if they do not become the majority in actual numbers they may have the majority of power. This is analogous to the U.S. being the world’s sole super-power with just a small minority of the planets population. And that power came about for the same reason that I hypothesize it could happen again in a different context–because freedom creates prosperity and prosperity enables power.
If that comes about then those freedom loving people will be in a position to take over the world. It will be with an anti-freedom lesson extremely fresh in their minds that they form the next governments and economic systems.
I don’t know what will happen. We have never had a situation like this before. In the past there was always someplace new to live. The east coast of North America then migration to California and “The Oregon Territories” provided freedom for millions in the last 300 years. But the “New World” is now occupied by parasites that crave security more than freedom and ensure everyone will receive neither. Where can we move next and escape our oppressors? Antarctica, the ocean floor, and space all appear to be such harsh environments that economic prosperity would be difficult or impossible. This may mean we can do no more than wait for the parasites to starve, riot, and burn themselves out.
I don’t know if freedom has a chance of surviving and rising from the ashes and mankind will finally learn the lesson of why freedom is essential. But I do know that if we do not have children and raise them to value freedom then freedom will most likely be extinguished.
It boils down to “Are you an optimist or a pessimist?” The pessimist is more often right because they can easily fulfill their expectations. The optimist may be wrong more often but progress, prosperity, and happiness are always the products of optimists and never that of pessimists.
Which are you?
I received an email with a link to LibertyStickers.com. There are so many good ones it’s hard to choose but here are some of my favorites.
Note to family–I don’t put bumper stickers on my vehicles so don’t buy me any of these as a Christmas gift.
In quasi alphabetic order except for the first one which is so Kevin will be more likely to notice it.
500 rounds of 9mm is cheaper, faster and also allows for a few entertainment kneecappings.
Phil
November 23, 2009
RNS Quote of the Day: 11/23/09
[If it were only that easy to solve the problems in Washington Phil would need several semi-trucks to haul all the donated ammo to D.C. with him.–Joe]
Statists in office are tragically ill personalities. They are control freaks on steroids. Without the delusion that the people are stupid, officials have no personal sense of purpose. Without official recognition of our sovereignty over them, officials have no sense of purpose. Officials are not smarter than the electorate, they’re meaner and more cold-blooded than we are, but not smarter. They are not better informed than we are: they ignore liberty truths and are informed of nothing by comparison. The truth is that officials have only that authority which we grant them. We retain all supreme authority in this country, and it is this which they ignore against the interests of the United States herself. Without crisis, manufactured by them or not, there is no sense of purpose for them. The truth is that they are truly unneeded for so many programs.
John Longenecker
November 22, 2009
Safer Streets 101: Saying No to socialism and gun control.
[I’m reminded of something closely related which I said a couple years ago.–Joe]
SlaughterHouse’s illegitimacy has long been all but- universally understood. It deserves to be acknowledged by this Court. Because SlaughterHouse rests on language not actually in the Constitution, contradicts the Fourteenth Amendment’s original textual meaning, defies the Framers’ intent, and supplies a nonsensical definition for Section One’s key protection of civil rights, overruling this error and its progeny remains imperative. No valid reliance interests flow from the wrongful deprivation of constitutional liberties. The reliance interest to be fulfilled remains Americans’ expectation that the constitutional amendment their ancestors ratified to protect their rights from state infringement be given its full effect.
Alan Gura
November 16, 2009
On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Seventh Circuit
McDonald, et al. v. Chicago
PETITIONERS’ BRIEF, page 8
[In 1873 the SlaughterHouse cases gutted (pun intended) the 14th Amendment shortly after it was passed. This miscarriage of intent has been a thorn in the side of civil rights activists ever since. Hence, the McDonald case appeals to both conservatives and liberals for different reasons. Expect an overwhelming victory at the Supreme court for this reason.
The slaughter houses north of New Oreans were responsible for terrible pollution and disease and a solution was required. But the solution was inappropriate and should have been struck down. But just like some disgusting violent criminal who gets off because of an improperly worded search warrent or other technicality would be an outrage so it was with the Slaughterhouse case. The decision went the wrong way and, in essence, the 14th Amendment was nullified.
This sort of thing is why it is very important to have good “poster children” for the cases you take to the Supreme court. Alan Gura, The Second Amendment Foundation and company have put a lot of effort into finding the ideal “poster children” for this case. I’ve been promised an interview with one of the plaintiffs (they read this blog) and have been lazy in following up on that. I have all of next week off and plan to get it done sometime before I go back to work.–Joe]
It’s not what I preferred but it’s better than nothing:
Last week, the A.C.L.U. said it dropped its suit after the T.S.A. clarified its policies in late September. The agency told screeners that, while they were encouraged to refer any suspected criminal activity or illegal contraband discovered in a checkpoint search to law enforcement officials, their job was to screen for weapons and verify passenger identities. “Traveling with large amounts of currency is not illegal,” the T.S.A. added in an internal directive on Oct. 29.
I first wrote about it here.