Category Archives: Freedom

Homeland Security Assessment

Posted on by

To be completely transparent about the Homeland Security Assessment titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” which I first saw at Kevin’s place. I didn’t see what the big deal was about it. The left has been saying I was a threat to humanity since I purchased my first gun, a SKS, back in December ’93 right after President Clinton (and her husband) were elected. I live in Idaho, so of course I’m considered a sexist, racist, bigot who would get violent now that we have a president who is of (one quarter) African descent. Never mind I would have cheered until I was hoarse if were Condoleezza Rice who had been elected President.


The “assessment” looked perfectly reasonable to me. What’s the big deal? It’s politics as usual. I’ve read enough garbage DHS reports and draft reports and given feedback on reports that never made it to the public that I don’t have any illusions about their ability to think their way out of a paper bag let alone be able to connect with reality.


But some people figured it was a forged document. I looked at it and didn’t see anything which indicate forged to me. Sure, the best lie is one that you want to believe. But the left wants to believe that too. They could just be lying to themselves. [shrug] Whatever. It’s kind of amusing. The irony is a bit funny.


I haven’t been paying all that much attention to what people have been saying about it. I’ve been very busy working on domination of the galaxy and planning to make a couple thousand pounds of explosives and gathering up a couple hundred people with guns for next weekend. Why should I care about what DHS says? It doesn’t really apply to me doesn’t? Surely they couldn’t have been thinking of me when they wrote it.


I did get an email from CCRKBA on the topic which I think is worth sharing. The came out with a news release with a line that made me smile:



“It’s ironic,” Gottlieb concluded, “that President Obama’s friend, William Ayers, is a leftwing terrorist bomber, but nothing in this report suggests monitoring his activities.”

Quote of the day–Russell Long

Posted on by

Tax reform means don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree.


Senator Russell Long
[I’m pretty sure I’m the guy behind the tree. Not including sales tax, gas taxes, ammo and gun taxes, vehicle licenses, etc. we paid over $55K in taxes last year.–Joe] 

Quote of the day–Sean Flynn

Posted on by

“Freedom from fear” and “freedom from want”, two of Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms, are insidious positive rights. They are provably incompatible with liberty.


Give the government the enough power to assuage James’s fear and I will fear that government.


Give the government the economic power to sate the wants of the laziest among us, and I guarantee that someone else’s wants will not be met. The economy will never reach the desired equilibrium and the thermodynamic losses of the effort will impoverish all.


Sean Flynn
April 13, 2009
In the comments to this post.
[There is something about the vocabulary and the way Sean puts words together that makes it nearly instantly recognizable to me. Any one of those paragraphs would have been enough for me to guess that it was Sean writing them. So succinct and yet not leaving out anything important. What is just as interesting to me is that he talks just like that too.–Joe]

Crazy mixed up world

Posted on by

The world is kinda messed up right now. Economic conditions are scary. We have a socialist government in D.C. that is apparently working toward the destruction of the capitalism and our freedom. It’s hard to understand what is really going on. Barb and I have spent a lot of time on the issues and this weekend she got me a card, “Just because it is so appropriate.”



The front.

The inside.

What did James say that pissed you off so much?

Posted on by

“What did James say that pissed you off so much?”

That was what Kevin asked me in email after reading my comment on James Kelly’s blog.

My response to Kevin, with some minor enhancements, follows.

There is his steadfast refusal to answer Just One Question. Oh, he answered–using numbers that were easily demonstrated as wrong. And when that was pointed out he just ignored it.

Then James said, “…the right to own a gun as a relatively meaningless, one-dimensional freedom, and thus interpret the banning of handguns as merely a minor disappointment to the minority of people concerned…”

I wonder how many people with a Glasgow Smile or similar wounds

regard not having the means to defend themselves “a minor disappointment”.

The battles at Lexington and Concord which resulted in our revolutionary war were fought because the arms of the colonists were about to be taken away from them. Surely they did not consider it a “minor disappointment” they were about to lose their guns. And what of the colonies that refused to sign the constitution unless the right to keep and bear arms was a specific enumerated right guaranteed by the constitution? Would it have been a “minor disappointment” had it not been there?

How many of those people involved in 2 million instances per year when someone in the U.S. uses a firearm in a defensive situation would regard it as a “minor disappointment” had they been forced by their government to face their attacker unarmed?

How many of those millions of men, women and children standing naked at the top of the ditches they had just been forced to dig–just prior to having a bullet rip through their neck regarded not having a gun in hand “a minor disappointment”?

The above irritated me. But what really pissed me off was I realized his “personal philosophy”, even completely disregarding the gun issue, is justification for genocide. And he is hypocritical about it. He believes people have a right to life but not the right to have tools to defend their lives.

His “cornerstone of personal freedom” is freedom from fear. If he is afraid of the blacks/Jews/homosexuals/whoever who live next door he apparently believes it is completely justified to bring the full force of government down upon them in a preemptive strike. Prevention of crimes not yet committed by infringement of a basic right is justified if someone is afraid. And it doesn’t have to be a fear based on immediate threat of severe injury or death. Just the mere existence of something, someone, sometime used in a criminal manner. It’s the very epitome of a victimless crime which must be punished. A crime where the “perpetrator” is not even aware of the existence of the “victim”. A crime where even the thought of injury to an innocent life need not be proved or hinted at. A crime where the true intent of the “perpetrator” is to protect innocent life and property is thought to be crazy because they want the tools available to protect innocent life should they ever need it. All because someone is afraid of something they have no experience with. And they call us paranoid.

The Germans didn’t begin implementation of the “Final Solution” until after the U.S. got into the war. They were afraid the Jews, who “controlled the U.S. as well as the banks, the U.S. media, etc.” would punish them for the mistreatment (but there were no mass killings yet) they had received up to that point. So they started killing them to eliminate the problem. They were just implementing James Kelly’s “cornerstone of personal freedom”–freedom from fear.

What he doesn’t understand is there cannot be a “right” which is given or implemented through the force of government. Rights are which those things which preexist government and can only be protected or infringed by government. He is an advocate for infringement and calls it freedom.

His “cornerstone of personal freedom” is the basis for the deaths of tens of millions of people and he doesn’t see the logical inconsistency or the impossibility of that being a functional basis for a civil society.

The QOTD is aimed at James Kelly.

Quote of the day–Fitzroy

Posted on by

False, dangerous, misguided . . . and justified. Liberalism in a nutshell.


Fitzroy
October 6, 2008
False But Justified
[Others, and rightly so, quoted this when it first came out. I’ve been saving it for “the proper occasion”. Today is that day. My next post will explain.–Joe]

A Night at the Opera

Posted on by

While at Hood Canal in WA State this weekend, my father in-law, who collects movies, treated me to the classic Marx Brothers film, A Night at the Opera from 1935.  It was supposed to be funny I guess, but I found it entirely unfunny yet instructive.


It’s a story about two talented, young, attractive and altogether wonderful singers who aren’t getting noticed because they’re not “famous” enough for the big operators who book a famous (and less talented) singer.  The Marx brothers “correct” the situation by employing fraud, physical force including assault and battery, trespassing and property destruction.  In the end, the two wonderful yet undiscovered singers are given a chance to prove themselves in front of a large audience as the result of the aforementioned crimes, and all is well and good.


It’s a perfect depiction of the mindset among today’s political Left.


Altogether lacking in the film was any imagination, respect for the successful, or respect for human rights.  The movie goes along with the apparent beliefs of that other more infamous Marx, and of the current Left, assuming that if one person is rich it means that someone else must be made poor.  If someone acquires a dollar, someone else must lose a dollar.  For one person to acquire a job, another must lose a job, and those who are successful must necessarily have stepped on some toes, etc.


The movie was an ugly, hateful stinker in that regard, and as such it received high praise from the critics.


In a free society, the young and talented singers might have gotten together with a few admirers, booked a small venue, and started the sometimes long and always difficult process of proving themselves to willing listeners.  The Marx Brothers, being talented musicians themselves, might have given the two youngsters a few tips and helped them along, to their mutual benefit.  In fact, the more wealth and success in a society, the more the opportunity.


For a realistic depiction of what it takes to “make it” in a free society, check out Will Smith in the movie, “The Pursuit of Happyness”.  Aside from the brilliant acting and the captivating story, it’s based on the real experience of Chris Gardner, who happens to be a pretty interesting guy himself when you see him on live TV.  I often find reality far more interesting than fiction.


Update:  For another amazing true story, check out the movie, “Broken Trail”.  Other than Robert Duvall, the actors are either fairly obscure or unknown.  I like that in a movie.  For example I can’t get past that fact that Ferris Bueller commands a regiment in the Civil War.  It’s too much for me, and I can’t get into the story.  Broken Trail is great in that respect.  It includes everything you’d expect from a good western, and more– Bravery, cowardice, strength and weakness, grit, determination, lust, true love, disappointment, and a fair amount of gun play.  As I recall I actually teared up (though I didn’t let on, and you didn’t read this.  Must have been something stuck in my eye) at the final stagecoach scene.  You know what I mean if you’ve seen it.

Quote of the day–Martin Sieff

Posted on by

She hit it off with Nixon from the word go. Beneath her lovable grandmother veneer of course she was as tough, uncompromising, hard-headed, mean, selfish, and vicious as he was. He liked that.


Martin Sieff
Referring to Nixon’s meeting with Golda Meir in the ’60s.
The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Middle East, page 127.
[I finished listening to this book on my recent trip to/from Idaho. Good book. He rips both presidents and advisers to both political parties for their naiveté and unrealistic view of the Middle East. It’s kind of depression to think that he might be right, the things we value the most such as religious tolerance and electing political leaders cannot work in Arab nations. He claims we have to accept dictatorial rulers for those countries to have stability. The people are not currently capable of handling representative democracies. It just a question of whether it’s going to be benevolent or murderous dictators.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Mark Wilson

Posted on by

As to guns in private hands detering invasions. The Japanese disagreed with you. During WWII, the Japanese were considering a raid on the Northwest US, in order to force the US to divert resources to defend this area. They decided against it precisely because they knew how well armed and trained the citizens were. This is not theory or conjecture, the minutes of the meetings were captured when Japan surrendered. During WWII, civilian patrols were quite influential in protecting British shores against sabuetors.


Mark Wilson
3/31/98
From http://www.intellectualcapital.com/issues/98/0326/iccon.asp
[This link now appears to be dead but if you do a search for some of the phrases you can still find the text on the web.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Breda

Posted on by

We’re Americans. We bow to no one.


Breda
April 3, 2009
The Bow
[I’m sure others have said this before but this occasion to elaborate on it struck me as particularly appropriate. It’s part of the public servant/ruler thing. The United States does not have “rulers”. It has public servants. Public officials are delegated their powers by the consent of the people. The constitution does not grant rights, it guarantees them. It grants limited, enumerated, powers to the government. The people are the highest authority in the land. We do not bow to authority figures anymore than you would bow to your next door neighbor.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Lyn Nofziger

Posted on by

One of the things that bothers me most is the growing belief in the country that security is more important than freedom. It ain’t.


Lyn Nofziger
[I have nothing to add.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Kimberly Frederick

Posted on by

I know that all of you as conscientious citizens want to protect our people. We need to band together and demand that the government protect us. We must demand that all chairs, even couches and sofas, are required to have safety belts, and that everyone be required to use them. If someone is caught not using their safety belt they should be required to pay a $1000 fine and with a three strike rule attached that on your third strike not wearing a safety belts that the perpetrator goes to jail. Repeated offenders should be taken to jail, because by not wearing their seatbelts they are endangering themselves, and as a community it is our responsibility to protect and care for each other.


Kimberly Frederick
We Must Protect Our Citizens
March 13, 2009
[Daughter Kim got an A on this piece of satire. I read the notes the prof wrote on the paper so I know he knew it was satire. I’m a little bit afraid some dimwit in government (but I repeat myself) will take the idea and run with it as a campaign issue. But I figure that if I put it up on the web with it clearly labeled as satire then we have a chance of embarrassing whoever might try something like that.–Joe]

Political Profiling

Posted on by

The story from Missouri has been out for some time.  I want to say I’m glad the report was distributed, because it shows us the bigoted, upside-down views a lot of people have, and that they’re eager to act on them.  We knew it already, but we now have a better idea of what to expect.


The people you need to look out for are the several Left-wing groups.  It’s been a long-standing MO of theirs to accuse their opposition of doing what they themselves are already doing, or what they’re planning.

Central Committee in action

Posted on by

Now that we are all socialists our legislators have dropped all pretenses of being something other than the Central Committee. Via reader Rob I discovered the Senate reviewing how college football picks No. 1.

Enumerated powers? What’s that?

Australia–police state in training

Posted on by

We all know about the mass destruction of guns in Australia but the oppression didn’t stop there and it doesn’t generally make the news here. My Australian friend emailed these tidbits to me:



http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=131675


Tracks where you go, measuring your speed between two points.


Emphasis on the tracks where you go part.


And:



http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,28348,25229239-5014239,00.html


AUSTRALIA’S third largest internet service provider (ISP) has pulled out of the Government’s web filtering trials, saying the plan is “no longer just about stopping child porn”.


The Government’s plan involves a nation-wide filter that stops “unwanted material” from appearing on Australian user’s computer screens.


iiNet says the ambiguity of “unwanted material” is what caused it to pull out of the trials.


Ambiguity of “unwanted material”? Like Tiananmen square? Between the speed cameras and this, I’m not so sure I would be happy living there anymore…


Update: Comment spam is coming in at the rate of about one every two minutes. I’m turning off comments to this post. If you want to post a comment send it via email to me (blog AT JoeHuffman DOT org) with the name you want associated with it and I’ll post it for you.

Mandatory volunteerism

Posted on by

Nicely done:





Via email from daughter Xenia.

Quote of the day–Austrian

Posted on by

Let me just tell you, Congressional/Executive Branch Scumbag, Esq., if you do this… if you take this turn… I won’t even think twice. I will move my firm to Switzerland, or to London before the year is out. Those employees who do not follow me, I will have to fire. The corporate taxes I pay will no longer be yours. Instead, they will go to something useful, like a nice tunnel through a mountain for high speed trains that actually work. Further, I will dedicate a substantial portion of my personal time, effort and capital to frustrating your every attempt to collect personal taxes on me thereafter- given your draconian anti-expatriation laws. But that’s not all. My job is to make money for my clients, in whatever way I can. I will short your flagging financial firms mercilessly and remorselessly. I will buy QGRI puts to bet against any firm that took bailout money. I will buy credit default swaps on every firm you put your greasy paws on, because I know your fingerprints are laced with poison. For every boneheaded centralist move you make, I will be there, profiting from your lunacy. I will never again take a client who pays taxes in the United States. I will not permit any capital or profit to be diverted to any such. I will do this because in the same way you believe it your divine right to punish “greed,” I consider it my duty to punish the stupidity and arrogance that is central planning, and because I believe in economic freedom. I will divert as many of your resources to my new home and its relative economic freedoms as I can. I will promote free markets in this way, and I will never look back. You will have made it clear that you are my enemy, and I do not forget such declarations.


I take no pleasure in this fight. I did not ask for it. I only asked for liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Deny me these at your peril. In the end, I can only hope I’m not alone.


Austrian
March 22, 2009
Wait a second… you want to blame ME for the financial crisis?
Via Ry.
[It seems to me there are hundreds or thousands of ways one can legally declare war against the enemies of freedom. Look around and find yours.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Clayton Cramer

Posted on by

Abandon all hopes of utopia – there are people involved.


Clayton Cramer
http://thinkexist.com/quotes/clayton_cramer/
[Dystopia, on the other hand, is well within our grasp and I fear we are approaching it at warp speed.–Joe]

Who cares?

Posted on by

It’s just a law. Rulers don’t need to obey the law. Just their subjects.


Never mind they aren’t rulers. They are public servants. And when they don’t obey the law it becomes obvious they wish to change the relationship between servant and master.


Had the troops put on a reflective vest over their civilian clothes and directed traffic as civilians I wouldn’t have a problem with it. But they didn’t do that.


It sounds like some officers are taking it seriously but don’t expect most government officials to care in the slightest. They might need those troops for controlling the serfs someday.

Good stuff

Posted on by

There wasn’t any new material for me in this essay but it was a great collection and presentation of the problem: Dismantling the Killer Elite.