Every Dragon Was Slain by Progressive Democrats

I know. A pretty bizarre headline up there. But no less bizarre than what was offered by our Vice President last week. As we begin yet another week in the political mess that has become Washington DC, I find myself wondering what exactly is going to happen come Tuesday. This is no normal week, readers. With the election we will once again watch to see which way the political winds blow in America. Remember when John Kerry ran against Bush and so many were saying that Kerry was such a sad candidate and how that showed that the reign of Democrats in American politics was as good as dead? I remember it well, the calls that the Democratic party is dead. “Rejoice,” they said. I did not. A mere two years later the Democrats swept through and captured power of Congress. Two more years passed and a Democratic sweep in the White House and Congress bred calls that the GOP was dead. “Rejoice,” they said. I did not. And now a mere two years later and we are on the eve of what appears to be another flip flop in the landscape of DC. That got me thinking, when I suddenly ran across this bizarre statement from Joe Biden that runs completely counter to my conclusion on the reasoning behind the DC roller coaster.

Good old Joe was out doing some stumping at the Helmsley Park Lane Hotel on Central Park South at a fundraiser for Democratic Representative Tim Bishop of New York last week ($1000 a plate to hear Joe dispense his wisdom!). Captain Foot in Mouth was discussing how the US needed to keep up with China and India in terms of spending on infrastructure and education, a notion that I completely disagree with merely because what we spend should have nothing to do with China and India’s investment strategy. But then he dropped this particular little nugget of wisdom, which almost made my head explode:

“Every single great idea that has marked the 21st century, the 20th century and the 19th century has required government vision and government incentive”

What?!?!?!?!?!? Did I hear that right? You bet I did. He said exactly what you thought he did. EVERY. SINGLE. GREAT. IDEA. I was blown away at the notion that he was presenting. So I sat down and I started thinking to myself on whether there was an inkling of truth to what the Vice President was saying. I tried to think about what great ideas DID NOT require government vision and government incentive. I thought of a few, although I freely admit that these were off the top of my head so I haven’t researched them to ensure I am correct (I have no need to do so, I am sure all of you will be chomping at the bit to tell me where I am wrong). I came up with a sort of top ten list of things that government vision and incentive were not required for. Here goes:

10. Electric Freezer / Air Conditioning – Could we live through global warming without it?

9. Flushing Toilet – Thank you Mr. Crapper. Could our marriages survive without it?

8. Assembly Line – Revolutionized the means of production

7. Telephone – I include in this the future invention of the smart phone. Changed the world, and the way we track our teenagers.

6. Light Bulb – Although the wax candle people aren’t too happy with this one.

5. Electric Generation – Allow me to clarify that electricity always existed. The great idea was to harness it and use it for good.

4. Personal Computer – IBM did big blue with some government assistance. But the personal computer we can thank Bill and Steve for.

3. Penicillin – Saving sailors since 1928.

2. Combustion Engine – Little has had such an impact on our ability to travel. Horses thank us for this.

1. Airplane – Born right here in North Carolina, enabling frivolous travel for all.

Let’s be honest, I could have made an extensive list of inventions and another extensive list of ideas that government had nothing to do with. What made my top ten is irrelevant. Now had Joe gone with, “Every great idea around finding new and exciting ways of killing people required government vision and incentive,” I could have gone along with him. After all, no one knows how to come up with the most effective means of eliminating the human body’s ability to function like the US government. And of course the personal computer would have been useless without Al Gore’s generous contribution of the internet.

What is scary about what Joe said is that he actually believes it. That is the mindset of the progressive politician. They really believe that without government, all the great ideas of the world would never have happened. They have to believe that in order to believe that continuing to grow government is a good thing. More important, they have to get you to believe it. They have to make you believe that without government there to provide the vision and incentive, all of the great things that make your life better wouldn’t have happened. It allows them, subsequently to claim that those nasty tea party people who want to make government smaller are really simply trying to take away government’s ability to provide you with the next great idea that will make your life better.

As most of you would probably guess, my statement would look a little different from Joe’s. I would instead posit that every single great idea that changed our world for the better came despite government intrusion and attempts to control. This isn’t me trying to make an argument about the free market or make the case for eliminating government altogether. I merely believe that the private markets, individual entrepreneurs, free-thinking men and women, are the catalyst for great ideas and inventions. NECESSITY is the mother of invention, not government.

But I am completely open to discussion on this matter. What do all of you think? Is government the provider of vision and incentive behind all of the great ideas in the last 200+ years? 50% of the great ideas? None of them? What can you add to the list of things government had no hand in? What can you add to the list of ideas and inventions that would not have happened without government vision and incentive?

Which brings me back to the DC roller coaster. I have always wondered why the country is so back and forth on the political winds of the two parties. After all, it wouldn’t make sense to think that the individual voters actually completely change their values, principles, and beliefs every couple of years. So why do we see the back and forth? I came to a single conclusion that I cannot imagine there being a refutation for:

Government is so bad at what it does that the American public consistently is unhappy with its performance. Each change of the political wind is a time of hope. A hope that this time the people we send to DC will finally make government work for us the way we imagine it can. When they fail, we give up hope on that group and go with the other alternative, hoping that this time the people we send will do better than the group we sent from that party last time. When they fail to make government work, we start the cycle all over again. The roller coaster of Republican/Democrat popularity is really nothing more than the recurring cycle of Hope/Disappointment in the performance of government.

Perhaps a better statement from a politician would be the astute observation that no party in American political history has ever done a good enough job running the country that Americans actually wanted them to keep doing the job for an extended period of time. How sad is that…..

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Well… Government had no hand in creating SUFA!

  2. Hmmmmm…the dragons went extinct……perhaps…………………………………………..

    • Not according to George R.R. Martin. Daenerys has three of them, newly hatched.

      • TexasChem says:

        Didn’t know you read sci-fi/fantasy USW.

        Patrick Rothfuss has a book out called “The Name of the Wind”

        Ranks in my top 3 and I am anxiously awaiting the second book in the series.

      • I am sure his new book will be out soon…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

    • Yes, I remember when dragons and humans lived together, working in harmony to
      survive in a hostile world. Then came government, that determined dragons did not meet safety or emission standards.

  3. Ray Hawkins says:

    @USW – the rest of his quote (which you didn’t include) is:

    “In the middle of the Civil War you had a guy named Lincoln paying people $16,000 for every 40 miles of track they laid across the continental United States. … No private enterprise would have done that for another 35 years.”

    Now – as gaffe-worthy as Joe is – it would be nice for him to expand on how he defines “every single great idea” – but ask yourself this – would the Transcontinental have been built w/o government incentive and vision? If you think the answer is “Yes” – then why wasn’t it?

    • Ray

      Northern Pacific Railroad. Privately built.

      Eastern railroads. Privately built.

      The transcontinental would have been built without the govt. There is no doubt.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        @JAC – tsk tsk sir – let’s try this one more time……

        Was the Northern Pacific built w/o government vision or incentive? Me thinks not – where did the land come from? Who chartered the NPRC? Who pushed JP Morgan to help rescue the railroad? Which was more effective/efficient at setting down track – the Northern Pacific or the First Transcontinental?

        Hope this Monday treats you well!

        • It would not have been built as quickly without government. Because we would not have crushed the Native Americans and driven them from their land so fast. We would have had to wait a LOT longer, if it happened at all, if the free market was the approach taken to expansion of the country.

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            @Jon – so under the free market system we’d have just taken longer for white settlers to remove the Natives due to lack of firepower and numbers and/or for the spread of disease into indigenous populations? Brilliant!

            • I cannot say for certain. Ideally, a co-existence would have developed, and the Natives and Settlers would have developed an understanding of each other and adopted the good parts of both. I would like to think that is how things would happen now if America were free and we found new territory.

              Based on the mindset of many people back then, I cannot say that is what would have happened. The government made things way worse, but I cannot legitimately claim that the government caused the whole thing, and that without them there would have been no atrocities committed. All I am saying is that government definitely committed atrocities and did them in a far more damaging and horrible way than would have been done without them.

            • Ray,

              There is no doubt that without government the railways would not have expanded as fast nor would all the government railways go bankrupt.

              You only tell third of the story.

              The graft, corrupt process where “privileged” government workers and their lackeys would redirect lines towards their own land, and as Jon pointed out, the blatant disregard for the Natives.

              Yes, the slower expansion would have meant a far better treatment of the natives because without the US Army, the Free men would have to cooperate with the Natives instead of slaughtering them

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @Black Flag – the reality is that Free Men still killed Native Americans w/o government influence or prompt.

              • Ray,

                Sorry to burst your bubble, but that is simply not true.

                Historical documents prove that the slaughter of the Indian occurred by government forces, known as the Army.

                Again, from sources:
                Excluding the Indian wars of the mid to late 19th century which were lopsided affairs conducted by the United States government, we find that the allegedly inherent violence of the West was not noticeably any greater than that of points east.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                Black Flag – sorry sir – allow me to burst your bubble – there is ample evidence from both perspectives (and even within my own family history which covers German, Irish and Icelandic settlers as well as portions of the Southern Ojibwa) that the U.S. military did not hold a monopoly on the killing or removal of Native Americans in areas covering Minnesota, the Dakotas and Montana.

              • Ray,

                Your sources, please.

                I have no source that says the mass destruction of the Native population was committed by NON-Army forces.

              • Common Man says:

                Ray;

                I know I’m coming in late, but you need to investigate your Native American History. The Military was in fact key in devistating the various tribes located in most of the America’s. As a matter of history the early settlers chose to trade and live in peace with the Native Americans. It is a fact that some rebel’s killed some Natives, but no more than rival tribes; and the events were minor compared to the devistation the military forces did.

                The Apache, Sioux, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Ojibwa, Dakota, Iroquois, etc, etc were all slaughtered by Military forces.

                The settlers did not have the numbers to aggressively battle tribes the magnitude of those I mentioned above.

                CM

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                Black Flag – sources? My family history sir. I thought that much was clear. To insist that individual settlers never displaced or killed or injured a Native American is utterly absurd.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @Common Man – I know the military was key and dominant – but the very simple point I am making is that they didn’t hold a monopoly on it. Hard to believe I know – but some settlers actually saw the Native Americans as savages and displaced them from their land – it was indeed on a much lower scale.

        • Ray

          First, to my knowledge Morgan was not involved in the Northern. Maybe so, but has never been a big name among the players.

          The Northern was a Private brainchild. But so was the Union/Central. They simply had the clout to get Congress to fund the project.

          Land was granted but it was private money. That and the tough northern route made it less efficient if you are using track per time as your measure. But what if we use $/mile of track or Return $/mile of track?

          So why was land granted? Because ALL the land was in Federal ownership.

          There was a Govt vision to all this Ray, and I am surprised you didn’t get it. By helping build the railroads the Govt was pushing settlement of the west and facilitating the elimination of the Native Americans.

          The Govt’s involvement in the western railroad expansion is the first major example of where our founding principles were forfeit. The stage had been set earlier, but this established the precedent on a large scale. This is the birth place of the Corporatism and Fascism that we now live with.

          The answer to your first question is YES, the railroads would have been built without Government vision and financing. In fact, the Govt could have and should have charged the Railroad companies for the land. They could have at least recovered the original purchase price.

          The Federal funding of railroads was a tremendous waste of taxpayer dollars for the private gain of wealthy investors. It is not something that should be viewed as a “triumph” of govt.

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            @JAC – you’re off a bit on this sir…..

            I do get the “government vision” – my acknowledgment of the benefit of the Transcontinental RR’s does not ignore the inherent but NOT sourcing effect on Native American termination, annihilation and displacement. Let’s recognize also that that effort began long before the 1862 and 1864 Pacific RR Acts – it was only initially formalized in the Indian Appropriations Act in 1851. My question to you would have been – so what is the redress? Do I take this to the logical extreme and state that our founding as a Nation is corrupt and immoral because it required from the earliest stages the removal of or taking advantage of Native Americans such that everything that follows is equally corrupt and immoral?

            Also please refer to: http://www.aar.org/~/media/aar/backgroundpapers/railroadlandgrantspaidinfull.ashx

        • Ray

          I must apologize for getting us off track.

          My answer still stands on whether the railroads would have been built without Govt involvement.

          However, my example was in error. I reacted with the Northern Pacific when I was actually thinking of the Great Northern. The latter actually competed with the NP for services and the NP would build spurs into areas just to try and keep the GN out.

          The GN was built with private money and no land grants.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Northern_Railway_%28U.S.%29

          Sorry for the confusion.

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            @JAC – forgive my perceived paranoia or potential confusion – recollection is that this Great Northern Railroad is often cited by Ayn Rand fans as evidence that private industry can do well w/o the government involvement & intervention.

            HOWEVER

            My recollection is also that the Great Northern was not always known as the Great Northern – was it not originally established via Federal Land grant as the Minnesota and Northwest Railroad?

            Thanks,

            Ray

            • Ray

              It is believed that Rand used this rail as an example for the one in her book. I don’t know for sure and that is not why I raised the example.

              But don’t you find it funny that whenever anyone talks about the need for Govt to be involved in massive infrastructure they ALWAYS forget to mention the Great Northern, or the hundreds of smaller lines in the east that were also built with private money.

              I do not know how the prior rail line was created. As I stated below, it is not relevant to the question you raised. The starting point for all three rail lines we have discussed is the Mississippi River, in essence.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                JAC – this line is bouncing all over the place.

                Would private money have eventually built the RR? Sure. Was the GN built w/o Government involvement (and thus a “best” example of what can be done w/o Gov)? To me, you’re using a debatable example – it seems there is evidence to suggest that one of the major cost vectors (land acquisition) was indeed accomplished with Government assistance.

              • Ray

                Your own reference above states that land grants were stopped in 1871.

                Hill formed the Great Northern after this.

                But as I said, what happened before is not relevant to the question you raised.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @JAC – this is getting silly – especially since I am increasingly certain you’re aware of the difficulties that happened in completing the GN – the granting of land to build the RR need not immediately precede the construction of the RR.

        • Ray

          Here is a great discussion about the various railroads and Govt’s role.

          http://mises.org/daily/2317

          I urge everyone to read this that thinks they understand free market capitalism as the system we have been living under.

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            @JAC – the StP&P which James Hill “empire built” from was built from land grants was it not? Don’t believe everything you read on Mises please – I think there is some history here which is being intentionally ignored. And let’s not paint with too wide a brush on all railroads – many of these failed/succeeded for a variety of reasons – each susceptible to the harm of influence and politics.

            • Ray

              It has been my long understanding, per other documentation, that the GN was not granted land by the Fed. Govt. I believe Hill purchased the land. Whether there were grants involved in the StP&P that he purchased, I don’t know. But it is not relevant to your question. The issue here was the westward expansion.

              The fact he purchased the land would make sense as he was opposed to the Federal subsidy of NP and UP/CP and he was their competitor. Thus he was opposed by the powers in Washington who were invested in the others.

              Burlington Northern later acquired the GN and BNRC did have land grants. But I believe they got these through acquisition of other rail lines and new grants to expand spurs. BNRC used the grants to grab lands in areas where no rail line would ever be built.

              You seem to be trying to change the argument. I am giving you information to support my answer to your ORIGINAL question. Would the rail road have been built without Govt involvement?

              The answer is YES. But I am guessing it would have come after the GN as that rail line was the most efficient route. Once the populations expanded to justify the others they would have been constructed.

              You then suggest that the Govt built railroads were more effective/efficient. I have provided you evidence that this is FALSE. The one privately funded Transcontinental line was much more effective and efficient.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @JAC – you’re using my statements erroneously – I did not suggest nor state that GOV RR’s were more effective/efficient (maybe they were or were not – I’ve not studied that angle) – I was suggesting that minimally the First Transcontinental appears to have been “BUILT” more effectively and efficiently.

              • Ray

                “I was suggesting that minimally the First Transcontinental appears to have been “BUILT” more effectively and efficiently.”

                This is not true.

                You can only get this answer by adding the word “First”.

                Because the inefficient Govt line was the First you have limited the choice in evaluation to only the one option.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @JAC – but we know that the First Transcontinental was NOT the first built. Nice sidestep try but it didn’t work.

              • Ray

                Your response makes absolutely no sense.

                Your arguments usually make good sense but your defense of the UP/CP or the NP as “more efficient” than the GN is absurd. It defies all the history written on the subject.

                And furthermore, it still doesn’t address your initial question.

                I am beginning to think you have sucked me into some circular argument for which no reasonable answer will suffice.

                Please go back to your original question/position.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                It isn’t a circular argument JAC – per my other response (once again)

                Would the Transcontinental have been built w/o government incentive and vision? If you think the answer is “Yes” – then why wasn’t it?

                (1) Yes – I suppose it would have or could have. Period. But it wasn’t. It may have been built 10, 25, 50 years later in a much more deliberate process. You offered the GN as evidence that a Trans-C RR has been built absent government incentive and vision. I have challenged you on that based on the underlying dispute regarding at least the origin and incentive for the RR that preceded what became the GN – I’m not sure why you cannot see or accept that. You’ve tried to rabbit trail the discussion into philosophical sidebars on Westward expansion and the travesties committed against Native Americans – I didn’t create that circle JAC – you did. While more subjective – the notion of vision is easily arguable as well – folks like James Hill steered clear of the RR’s until it made financial sense for them (post land grants I may add, ahem) to jump in and clean off the carcass. The vision either existed long before Hill or he and others not in Government were not the sole proprietors of it.

                I’ll stop here before I’m dismissed with a wave of the hand as being argumentative.

    • Ray,

      How many railroads have went bankrupt, especially in the early years? It was not profitable at that time. Would a transcontinental have been built by private companies? I think so, but more likely it would have evolved by natural growth of state and local railroads.

      P.S., is Microsoft a government company? I keep getting confused on why everyone hates them.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        LOI – are arguing that the First Transcontinental was not critical to the economic development of the United States in the late 19th and early 20th century?

        Not sure what you mean about Microsoft.

        • TexasChem says:

          Ray stated:“In the middle of the Civil War you had a guy named Lincoln paying people $16,000 for every 40 miles of track they laid across the continental United States. … No private enterprise would have done that for another 35 years.”

          TC: ROFLMFAO

          Lincoln was in bed with the Railroad Lobbyists.In fact he once was a Railroad lobbyist!

        • Ray,

          Am I “arguing that the First Transcontinental was not critical to the economic development of the United States in the late 19th and early 20th century?”

          No, and the it may be that such projects are a proper role of government, to spur growth. I was answering, in MHO, it would have happened without government, but been done where
          the cost to benefit was in line where it would be sustainable, without loss. Consider Amtrack and most railroads today, that loose money even with government subsidies.

          Microsoft is a good example of the free market. Guess Joe forgot about them….

        • Ray,

          Please explain why economic growth is a worthy and reasoned justification to kill, loot and steal?

          Who cares if Free Men build infrastructure slowly? Who cares if the economic activity is “slower” without government killing and stealing?

          Why is a “fast” economy worthy of such evil, Ray?

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            @Black Flag – I never suggested or stated it was worthy or reasoned, merely that it was reality.

            Also, I care not if Free Men build slowly. But what of the “free men” who killed, looted and stole independent of the government? Are the benefactors of that same guilty of the same crime BF?

            • Ray,

              killed, looted and stole independent of the government

              Who are these “men” you speak of?

              The “True History of the Settling of the West” completely dispels the notion of lawlessness.

              There was no government law, but plenty of local “law”. The people worked out their own problems quite adequately – robbery and murder was essentially non-existent.

            • Ray,

              Followup on the “Lawless” West

              More recently, we find Lethal Imagination: Violence and Brutality in American History, edited by Michael Bellesiles (the now infamous author of Arming America) which contains a number of essays by authors further examining the disappointing reality that the West was actually quite a bit more boring than the movies led us to believe.

              Indeed, taken together, this body of research leaves us with a West that hardly lives up to the reputation of the Wild West.

              As with Dodge City, the excitement in the Old West in general has been much overstated.

              All the big cattle towns of Kansas combined saw a total of 45 murders during the period of 1870-1885. (That’s 3 a year…BF)

              Dodge City alone saw 15 people die violently from 1876–1885—an average of 1.5 per year. D

              eadwood, South Dakota and Tombstone, Arizona (home of the O.K. Corral), during their worst years of violence saw four and five murders respectively.

              Vigilante violence appears to not have been much worse.

              According to Dykstra and Richard M. Brown, while the Kansas code gave mayors the power to call a vigilante group from all the men in the town who ranged in ages from 18–50, it seems, at least in Kansas, that it was rarely done.

              In a span of 38 years, Kansas had only 19 vigilante movements that accounted for 18 deaths.

              In addition, between 1876 and 1886, no one was lynched or hanged illegally in Dodge City.

    • TexasChem says:

      @-Ray,

      Something your miserable public Education did not teach you.History has indeed been written by the victor.I laugh every time I have heard Obama praise Abraham Lincoln!I laugh every time I hear anyone praise him actually.

      Abraham Lincoln was America’s first dictator!

      YES, that is correct! He is revered as the supposed “Greatest President of America History” when he infact should be remembered as the absolute WORST!

      * He was a consummate politician who spoke out of both sides of his mouth, saying one thing to one audience and the opposite to another.

      * He was adamantly opposed to racial equality, actually using the words “superior and inferior” to describe the “appropriate” relation between the white and black races.

      * He opposed giving blacks the right to vote, to serve on juries, or to intermarry with whites.

      * He supported the legal rights of slave owners and pledged his support of a constitutional amendment that would have prohibited the federal government from ever interfering with Southern slavery.

      * He was a mercantilist and a political tool of corrupt Northern business interests.

      * He was a railroad industry lobbyist who championed corporate welfare.

      * He once represented a slave owner in a case in which he sought to recover his runaway slaves. Lincoln lost the case and the slaves gained their freedom.

      * He advocated sending all blacks back to Africa, Central America, or Haiti – anywhere but the U.S.

      * He proposed strengthening the Fugitive Slave Law.

      * He opposed the extension of slavery into the territories so that “free white people” would not have to associate with blacks or compete with them for jobs.

      * He opposed black citizenship in Illinois and supported the state’s constitution which prohibited the emigration of black people into the state.

      * He was the head of the Illinois Colonization Society, which advocated the use of state tax dollars to deport the small number of free blacks that resided within the state.

      * He nullified the early emancipation of slaves in Missouri and Georgia early in the war.

      * He sent troops to New York City to put down a draft riot by shooting hundreds of people in the streets.

      * He was an enemy of free-market capitalism.

      * He started a war over TAX COLLECTION that ended up killing 620,000 Americans and wounding and maiming even more.

      * He conjured up the spectacular lie that no such thing as state sovereignty ever existed to “justify” his invasion and conquest of the Southern states.

      * He refused to meet with Confederate peace commissioners before the war to work out a peaceful compromise.

      * He provoked the upper South – Virginia, North Carolina, Arkansas and Tennessee – to secede by launching a military invasion of their sister states.

      * He supported economic interventionism through protectionist tariffs, corporate welfare, and central banking that would plunder one section of the country (the South) for the benefit of his Northern political supporters.

      * He started a war without the consent of Congress; illegally declared martial law; illegally blockaded Southern ports; illegally suspended habeas corpus and arrested tens of thousands of political opponents; illegally orchestrated the secession of West Virginia; shut down hundreds of opposition newspapers and imprisoned their editors and owners; deported the most outspoken member of the Democratic Party opposition, Congressman Clement L. Vallandigham of Ohio; confiscated private property, including firearms; ignored the Ninth and Tenth Amendments; tolerated the arrest of ministers who refused to publicly pray for him; arrested duly elected members of the Maryland legislature as well as Congressman Henry May of Baltimore; and supported a law that indemnified federal officials from all of these illegal acts.

      * He orchestrated the rigging of Northern elections.

      * Introduced the slavery of conscription and income taxation.

      * Censored all telegraph communication.

      * Waged war on civilians by having his armies bomb Southern cities and destroy or steal crops, livestock and private property throughout the South.

      * Created an enormous political patronage system that survives today.

      * Allowed the unjust mass execution of Sioux Indians in Minnesota.

      * Destroyed the system of federalism and states’ rights that was created by the founding fathers, thereby destroying the voluntary union.

      * Promoted generals for their willingness to use troops as cannon fodder.

      * Created an internal revenue bureaucracy that has never diminished in size and power.

      Research these facts if you don’t believe me.

      for further reading check out this great article from Lewrockwell’s blog
      http://www.lewrockwell.com/jarvis/jarvis87.html

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        @TexasChem – someone piss in your sports drink this morning or are you cutting too many carbs? 😉

        (1) First off – not sure how you conclude my public education was so miserable – I think I had a rather decent public education considering it was accumulated in several schools across several states over several years. My folks could never afford private school for the kids and I think we turned out ok. I’ve spent 100K + of my own money since public school to constantly improve upon the base that big, evil shitty government gave me. How miserable that I’d contribute economically to such when I didn’t need to eh?

        (2) You are deeply confused if you interpret my question as somehow supportive of everything and all things Abraham Lincoln. I could care less what Obama thinks of him – I also read works such as Doris Kearns Goodwin and consider such works informative rather than doctrine building.

        (3) Liberally quoting from an intellectual hypocrite like Lew Rockwell doesn’t win you any points TexasChem – it merely underscores your self-imposed ideological silo. I guess in Lew’s world we’d still be packing the stagecoach for the cross-country trip to transport goods and people while I pack my donkey for the daily commute to the office, but all that aside Article I Section 8 clearly supported this effort as right and legitimate – all three branches of the government supported it and America grew from it. Neither of us are required to like Lincoln to assess the RR objectively. Make sense?

        • Ray

          You are not assessing the RR objectively, in my view.

          See the link I left you above to the Mises Inst.

        • I do not believe Article I Section 8 was written to give the federal government the authority to cause the deaths of over 600,000 Americans.

          • Oh and yes ketosis is hell… 🙂

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            @TexasChem – huh? I never suggested Article I Section 8 was legitimate for Civil War – where the hell did that come from? Emailing a loaf of bread your way bro’!

            • Dropping the hammer, dropping the hammer… here it comes Ray!

              The building of the railroad was motivated in part to bind California to the Union during the American Civil War.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                @TexasChem – must have been some real optimistic folks back then considering when the RR was built and when the Civil War ended.

    • Ray,

      Correct that I did not include the entire speech he made, which included that quote following what he said. But I am unsure at how that changes the argument that I proposed. I see it as Joe doing little other than adding an example to back up a ludicrous assertion. I do not know the history of the railroads the way that others may so I am in no position to argue whether what Joe said here is accurate or not. I can accept it as true, meaning it would have happened but would have take longer, perhaps even more than 35 years. However the idea for the locomotive itself was not government, nor was the idea of a transcontinental rail line. All that government did in this instance was make it happen. So of the three great ideas needed for a transcontinental line, government was responsible for providing incentive for one of them. Heck, Joe was only 33% correct in his own example.

      The point is that Joe claimed that every single great idea spanning 3 specific centuries required government vision and incentive. That is what he said. We can debate the railroads all day, but it won’t change what he said or meant. And it won’t change what I feel are the implications inherent to that mindset, namely the underlying tone that without government vision and incentive, we wouldn’t have gotten all the great ideas and inventions.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        @USW – Joe Biden is a complete idiot – still stunned no one questioned Obama’s judgment in picking him as VEEP. To be honest I just wanted to spice up an otherwise dull posting (Joe Biden said something stupid – really? Shocking. Now move right along!)

  4. Ray Hawkins says:

    So did two comedians really outdraw the Father, Son and Holy Ghost (aka Glenn Beck)?

  5. Give credit where it’s due, every one of our wars were started or enabled, and mishandled by a government. Thanks for the reminder, Joe.

  6. Common Man says:

    Here is another famous saying that is an appropriate response: “Stupid is as stupid does”

    Tom Hanks as Forrest Gump in the movie “Forrest Gump”

    CM

  7. David Brooks: Downfall of Dems driven by delusions of grandeur
    (I read this in Ark. Dem-Gazt, titled, No doubts for Dems)

    When times get tough, it’s really important to believe in yourself. This is something the Democrats have done splendidly this year.

    The polls have been terrible, and the party may be heading for a historic defeat, but Democrats have done a magnificent job of maintaining their own self-esteem. This is vital, because even if the public doesn’t approve of you, it is important to approve of yourself.

    In fact, I would go so far as to say that Democrats have become role models. They have offered us lessons on how we, too, may continue to love ourselves, even in trying circumstances.

    >> Lesson one. Think happy thoughts. Never allow yourself to dwell on downer, depressing ones.

    Over the past year, many Democrats have resolutely paid attention to those things that make them feel good, and they have carefully filtered out those negative things that make them feel sad.

    >> Lesson two. Always remember, many great geniuses were unappreciated in their lifetimes.

    Democrats are lagging this year because the country appears incapable of appreciating the grandeur of their accomplishments.

    >> Lesson three. Always remember: You are the hero of your own children’s adventure story.

    http://www.omaha.com/article/20101101/NEWS0802/711019996

    I did a lot of editing, so you may want to read the whole editorial. What struck me on the piece, he can spin reality, and come up with a reason to excuse, or even praise an elected official that is not responsive to those who elect them. These eletest talk down to to us, the citizens and voters who appoint them to their job. Don’t tell me I don’t understand! You need to fricken listen, I do not like what you are doing. And it’s not because I don’t understand, it’s because I don’t agree with you. And, by the way, you’re fired.

    • I hereby proclaim to the folks here at SUFA that by NOT dismissing BlackFlags views of government and philosophy as bullshit I was forced into researching material/people myself and I have officially come to the conclusion that we here in America are indeed a fascist state with its citizens mind and thought process coerced upon a pre-determined course with a media “Propoganda” the likes of which have not been seen since Nazi Germany!Odd thing is I can not formulate a root purpose for those in control of the media to do what they do.Well, I do have a hypothesis based upon what I have learned but its difficult to believe.

      After being “unplugged” from the media for the last two years and doing my own research into history and who has been calling the shots at our nations citizens expense, my version of reality has been debunked by myself.*TC takes a deep bow*I can admit this.However, BF needs to stop defending Islamic idealogy for the simple fact that it is just as negative and wrong as 95% of the Christian denominations and sects.

      The citizens of the world are still just serfs serving thier royal masters.These royal masters have been creative enough to make you think you are a free man with free will but you are not.If you look at the minor restrictions that are becoming major upon society you can not help but see this as true.I believe the Democrats were allowed their brief control in government as a pretense to put the Republicans back into power and nothing more.You can see government expanding its control over the citizen through legislation each and every single year.They are mind-screwing the citizen into believing it is for their own good and develop Propoganda upon a huge scale with their “think tanks”.

      • TC,

        I dismiss BlackFlags views of government and philosophy as admirable, but unrealistic in today’s world. It might be possible for Canada to
        thrive with no government, but only because big brother living next door would not allow foreign incursions. As for the US, there are people out there that wish to do us harm. How we organize ourselves to
        counter those threats can be debated, but uniting ourselves to meet possible threats is required at this time.

        • LOI,

          Why do you believe that a successful organization of People requires the use of violence on non-violent people?

          Do you believe it is impossible to organize people without the threat of violence on them?

          • “Please explain why economic growth is a worthy and reasoned justification to kill, loot and steal?”

            Most men who loot, steal and kill will throw in the occasional rape, you know, when it’s convenient.

            As to your successful organization organization of people, I think it could be done, just not here and now. I also offered Canada as an example of where it could be done now, and why.

            I repeat my earlier insult, you are admirable, but unrealistic. Also prone to drag us, the loyal SUFA’s off topic.:lol:

            • LOI,

              Unrealistic?

              Yet, over and over again, it has been shown to be successful.

              What is unrealistic is to believe that government will survive as a force in human affairs. Violence remains profitable – though over time, decreasingly so.

              As government power to wipe out humanity grows, its power to manipulate humanity shrinks.

              We will overcome government or it will wipe out the human race.

              • Flagster,

                Where is your example of a successful organization of non-violent people?

                If it has been shown to be successful, over and over again,
                where is it now?

              • LOI

                Look in the mirror!

                How many people did you have to beat up to get your goods and services?

                How many beat you up?

                99.5% of your life is voluntary and cooperative without the need to attack non-violent people

              • “How many people did you have to beat up to get your goods and services?”

                nor shall
                (any person)be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,
                Or no comment:lol:

      • Texaschem

        BF needs to stop defending Islamic idealogy for the simple fact that it is just as negative and wrong as 95% of the Christian denominations and sects

        Tex, I do not *defend* religious institutions – a quick read of my posts will show my feelings about institutions.

        I defend people – I do not change my defense of People simply because these People may be assign part of their lives to a myth. They are still People.

        *TC takes a deep bow*

        It was hard work, wasn’t it?

        It was tough, too.

        A lot of things one holds to be true makes a big mess on the floor when it all tumbles down.

        • Odd thing is we all have to decide which team were going to play on when it comes down to the nitty gritty.

          Not enough common people are in the know and aware of any manipulations to change an outcome that is pre-determined.

          I believe I may just have to red shirt for the team that I believe will win.

  8. And Joe Biden’s government is moving yet again……Education funds from the gov withheld from Texas. Why??? Because we have fortified our own border and are beginning to make a difference much to Janet Napolitano’s chagrin. Texas gets the money..when they withdraw from the border.

    Gov Perry….laughed. So, thanks Joe….your progressive democratic design for the future……deny funds until they fall into lock step. We do not need you or your pragmatism, Mr. Biden. So, in the immmortalwords…….take your vision, your ideology, and your goevernment interference and “SHOVE IT” where the sun doesn’t shine.

    • Im’ not quite sure where you are going with this? Could you be a bit more clear?…NOT!!

      • Not sure where I was going either, Terry. I watched an interview this morning on a local TV channel 8 and caught a headline along the lines of ” stay tuned for latest Biden gaffe concerning Federal education funds being withheld from Texas because of its “not listening to Washington on its border issues”. Biden’s comment was…maybe Texas should listen.

        From this I extrapolated, on my own, that the education funds are being “held up” because we are proceeding on our own track on immigration and border enforcement without government help. That is all….thought it a little pertinent concerning the Biden comments mentioned above but if it is a rabbit trail…sorry.

        • I actually understood quite well…a rather poor attempt at humor…

        • Print This Post Email This Post
          4:39 pm CST – September 09, 2010
          Posted under Quotes
          .U.S. Dept. of Education Denies Texas Teachers, Students, Schools
          Cong. Doggett (D-Austin) initiative strips $830 million from Classrooms

          Texas Insider Report: WASHINGTON, D.C. – “It is unfathomable why Texas Democrats would unanimously support the politically charged Doggett Amendment, which unfairly hamstrings the efforts of educators statewide & sends critical Texas taxpayer dollars that should be used in Texas classrooms to schools in California & New York.”

          – U.S. Senator John Cornyn of Texas
          “As Texas children & teachers work their way into the school year, it’s unacceptable that they won’t have access to the full range of federal resources available to them,” Sen. Cornyn said.

          The Obama Administration’s U.S. Department of Education today announced it has denied an application from Texas Education Commissioner Robert Scott for $830 million from the Ed Jobs Fund.

          Background:

          In the coming days Sens. Cornyn & Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) will introduce legislation stripping the Doggett Amendment language and Texas-related provisions from the Education Jobs fund.

          On August 6, members of the Texas Republican Congressional Delegation joined Sens. John Cornyn and Hutchison in writing to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, urging her to remove language from the state bailout bill that would penalize Texas and bar the State from accessing important federal education dollars that every other state will be able to access to support their schools & teachers.

          http://www.texasinsider.org/?p=33861

  9. Here is a different take on why the winds have changed. It is focused on Mr. Obama’s success/failure and how that is affecting voter action.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-kuttner/post_1183_b_776752.html

    I personally think this assessment is equally bogus. The situation is much more complex than anyone wants to admit. And of course, this guy is selling a particular view point and needs this rational to be true or his view point will fail.

    • Equally bogus agreed. Things are far more complex than anyone wants to admit or even understands, me included. I only feel and believe that we are in and/or entering a significant change in the way things were and the way things will be. Some good, some not so much. The transformation will be painful, but necessary.

  10. Wow! Phones are ringing off the hook today and it’s only 10:00am here! Enough with the robocalls!

  11. Ray

    Transcontinental appears to have been “BUILT” more effectively and efficiently

    I’m interested in what you are using as a measure to determine “effective” and “efficient”?

    Cost? Time? Number of dead Indians?

  12. France? Greece? No, it’s Indiana!

    99 weeks of unemployment on the line, 99 weeks of unemployment, take one down, pass it around, we need more unemployment on the ground!

    Look out PeterB!

    http://www.theindychannel.com/news/25539273/detail.html

  13. I love this definition of government, it fits perfectly for LOI

    “Government” as “an institution of theft, predation, rape, destruction, and mass murder, the absence of which, it is said, would lead to disorder.”

    • What’s your opinion of what is happening in Haiti right now-is it that they have a corrupt government or that they don’t really have one?

      • V.H.

        The sudden removal of government is like the sudden removal of a knife in your body – it is likely, without adequate aid and help, you’ll bleed to death.

        This does not mean the knife in your body is a “good”.

        People have been brainwashed into relying on the State for a lot of things – and a sudden absence of the State will also create massive scarcity of those things.

        It does not mean those things could not be provided by Free Men – but there is a time required, it cannot be done instantly, though the loss of government CAN happen instantly.

        The removal of the State must be gradual – allowing for substitution of Free Men for those things the State had absconded.

        • BF,
          Do you believe that your methodology of ignoring government, doing nothing for or against it, is the best path to removing government gradually? If so, can you give a brief summary of the mechanics of how that works? I have long believed in teh gradual removal of government, since massive sweeping changes have all sorts of nasty side effects, some are worse than the disease itself, and they often, if not always, end up derailing the original purpose of the change. If your method can acheive this better than other methods, you may have me rethinking my position on a few things.

          • Jon,

            Do you believe that your methodology of ignoring government, doing nothing for or against it, is the best path to removing government gradually?

            Yes.

            Attacking it gives government energy.

            Using it gives government energy.

            You fight it, it grows. You use it, it grows.

            Doing nothing to it or for it, it starves.

            It requires you to do “something”.

            When you stop doing that “something”, it becomes completely redundant and pointless.

            If so, can you give a brief summary of the mechanics of how that works?

            With election time, numerous articles are on the internet about the consternation politico’s have with those that refuse to vote.

            In one case, the Rep. drove out to one person’s house 5 times trying to get him to vote.

            So think about that: out of, oh, 30,000 people in this district, the guy went out 5 times trying to get ONE man to vote.

            When you ignore them, they begin to diminish.

            Do not call them for help. Do not obey them. Ignore them.

            They will fade. They will stomp their feet demanding all sorts of things – but without the People they are powerless.

            It is you who gives them power.

            So – do NOT give it to them.

            • TexasChem says:

              When the tyrants are in control then by doing nothing you are an accomplice to their evils by doing nothing.

              They are the ones imposing their will through the threat of violence and use of violence!

              example:If you do not pay taxes you go to jail.

              If you take one of the “kings” fish,deer,pheasant etc… out of “season” without paying your license fee (tax) you pay a larger (tax) fine and/or go to jail.

              • Texaschem

                There is a difference between being indifferent and not doing anything.

                A tyrant is powerless if I do not obey him.

                So how can he do evil?

                Hitler did not kill anyone (excepting his war duty). His hands are bloodless.

                His minions killed the people.

                All human action is ultimately individual – and that is where the solution lies.

                When the People do not pick up the gun, the tyrant is done.

            • Seems like it would create collapse, which would be a sudden knife removal…

      • V.H.

        It would be my opinion they are the victim of “Global Government”. Haiti has not been in charge of its own destiny for quite some time.

        But there is one caution I provide today for everyone on this govt vs. no govt issue.

        Those opposed to no govt always fall into the trap of using places like Haiti and Somalia as examples of what will happen. But they ignore the corrosive effect of prior corrupt govts on the culture and mind set of the population.

        Here in the USA we have a different cultural norm. We are losing it rapidly but there are significant remnants. I Govt were to collapse, that is the Federal, I don’t think we would get the same results as the rest of the world.

        Yes, there would be riots in some places. But I do not think it would be the same as we saw in Greece or France, for example.

        The caveat, on my part, is that the reactions today would depend on the nature of the leadership. Those who instill a sense of confidence, sacrifice and purpose could prevent massive decay. But those who foment division and hatred for specific segments of society will enhance the “burn effect”. That is the greatest danger of the Progressive and Green crowds. They are ALL ABOUT class warfare. A toxic mix during hard times.

        • TexasChem says:

          JaC stated:”Yes, there would be riots in some places. But I do not think it would be the same as we saw in Greece or France, for example.”

          The crap I saw after the Hurricanes makes me differ in my opinion JaC.It was bad.

        • I wouldn’t be, and I am not, opposed to a no-government society to live in. I just – as I said on the other thread – don’t see humanity being capable of it at this time or in the foreseeable near future.

          Though I pondered a bit about testing the different philosophies on my own blog:

          “America should go to the social laboratory and experiment with the different social philosophies. Lets set up areas of the nation consisting of urban/rural mixes run under the different philosophies. There would be test areas for strong progressive style government, one for conservative limited government, one for libertarian government philosophy, and one for no-government libertarian philosophy, etc. The federal/state governments would not be allowed to interfere in the experimental areas. They must govern under their philosophies. Outside interaction with the current governments would be handled as if the rest of us were a foreign nation to the test area governments.”

          You can read the complete posting at my blog (http://plainlyspoken.wordpress.com/2010/11/01/lets-experiment-with-politicalsocial-philosophies/).

          I also do not subscribed to the Haiti or Somalia examples of what would happen in general if we suffered total government collapse here in the US.

          I agree with your caveat on our leadership impacting reactions in a collapse.

          • The best system is Freedom.

            But as one said:
            We will not become free when the state goes away.

            Rather, the state will go away once we are free.

            When the People realize that to be Free, one must accept the Freedom of others, the State will dissolve.

            As long as the People are willing to impose their will upon others by force, the State will always exist.

    • Flagster,

      So you are saying I like institutional theft, predation, rape, destruction, and mass murder? Just because I think small government is necessary in today’s world, as it was in the past. Until all peoples are civilized, we must all be wary of the next Genghis Kahn.

      http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/10/31/hostages-freed-iraqi-church/?test=latestnews

  14. All,

    It’s the busiest day of the month for me, so I don’t have time to play in the sandbox with you all, but I heard something and I was hoping that someone here could provide some color.

    My trader told me that the inflation index is being held down by a deliberate rebucketing of the goods which comprise the official “basket.” He informed me that the basket used to account for steak and was then switched to hamburger and then to spam (spam!?) before being switched back to hamburger. By lowering the value of the goods in the basket, they can lower the “price” of the basket and thus claim to have negligible inflation. (since many benefits and entitlements are tied to inflation, this seems highly advantageous).

    Now, I knew that they hadn’t necessarily weighted it appropriately for the modern word (ie, insufficient accounting for consumer electronics, electricity, cable, etc) and that food was still overvalued relative to rent. I considered these to be holdovers from back in the day, but if what he is saying is correct, then they may be part of a deliberate effort to artificially suppress the “price” of the inflation basket.

    Anyone care to elaborate? Black Flag, I’m looking at you in particular.

    The One,
    The Only,
    The Mathius

    • Mathius

      It is being deliberately manipulated. Has been since the 70’s that I know of.

      BF will be along with the site that monitors the inflation index using the original data set. That would be the one that includes things like gas and food.

      The purpose is not to cut welfare COLA’s however. It is to allow the Fed to maintain lower rates, thus lower interest payments on massive Federal Debt. It also helps them lure us all asleep. Wouldn’t be good if we realized we were living in a declining economy with inflating prices.

    • JAC is correct.

      I can’t say “purposeful” manipulation – they create as much up as down …. but it does “deflect” away from what people feel economically.

      Food prices are up 15% or more. But as long as the People hear inflation is “1%” – they attribute the rise in food costs as an anomaly and disassociated from the whole market place, for example.

      I look at food and resources to measure inflation.

      Food – because of the short inventory – food inventory must “turn” over fast, or it rots on the dock. So you get a closer to real world view of inflation/deflation as the food purchases are nearer-term.

      Energy – because it infects all things. So if it goes up, it will accelerate all other rising costs as well.

      • Do you have anything, or know anything, about the goods being used to make up the ‘official’ basket versus what ‘should be’ used to make up the official basket?

        • Mathius

          Here is a source on the CPI.

          You may need to read at home in order to focus on the meat.

          Pay careful attention to discussion about the different CPI’s calculated and how they are used. Like the one that excludes food and fuel.

          According to this the “basket” is determined largely by the consumer. So if you start buying SPAM instead of steak the basket will reflect Spam, or some adjustment to account for the difference in value.

          Like most BLS data, it is largely based on “survey” information.

      • Wow…BF….we actually agree on two things. Food/Resources is the only true measure to inflation. All others are smoke screen because of the massive manipulations. However, one must beware of a wolf in sheeps clothing….should the great Uncle get Cap and Tax….then you will see no true inflationary measure but one of only manipulation…probably on a global scale….Do you agree to this?

        • D13,

          Yes, however, we’d simply move our review to the price at the well-head.

          • Perhaps…I will ask my bro..he is the geologist and runs the oil anf gas side of our family business’

            But the cost of getting it out of the ground would be the same regardless, once the casing is set…so the supply side prior to the tax would be a good indicator.

  15. Lysander Spooner:

    “These voters, having given their votes in secret have put it out of your power to designate your principals individually.

    You have no legal knowledge as to who voted for you.

    And being unable to designate your principals individually, you have no right to say that you have any principals.

    And having no right to say that you have any principals, you are mere usurpers, making laws and enforcing them upon your own authority alone.

    A secret ballot makes a secret government; and a secret government is nothing else than a government by conspiracy.

    And a government by conspiracy is the only government we now have.

    You say that “every voter exercises a public trust.”

    Who appointed him to that trust?
    Nobody.

    He simply usurped the power; he never accepted the trust.

    And because he usurped the power, he dares exercise it only in secret.

    Not one of all the voters who helped to place you in power would have dared to do so if he had known that he was to be held personally responsible for the acts of those for whom he voted.”

    • Worthy of repeat, to all you voters out there:

      Not one of all the voters who helped to place you in power would have dared to do so if he had known that he was to be held personally responsible for the acts of those for whom he voted.”

      • BF

        There is a hole in this theory.

        We don’t vote to select our personal representative.

        We vote to select a person to represent a group.

        The group understands the rules as does the person selected.

        It is false to try and use some legal argument of contract or designation of principals as the basis to negate the authority of voting.

        This is once again using the definition of an apple to prove that an orange does not exist.

        • JAC,

          There is no hole in the theory.

          By what Right do you claim you can select MY representative – whether by a group or not!

          I am NOT part of your group, yet your group demands that I agree to your edicts.

          It is not a “legal” definition. It is a grant of authority – you (whether you have a right to do this or not) authorize this individual to act. It is by your legitimizing him that he acts

          Further, you selected him you are responsible.

          • BF

            I claim no such Right. In fact Rights are not involved at all.

            You are mixing the authority granted to the one elected and the action created due to the form of govt, or nature of the decision being made.

            I did not select him to act on MY behalf. I selected him to act on behalf of my community.

            Voting has been accepted by humans for eons as a method of handling decisions when there are too many people to reach full agreement. It has become part of the common law of man, if you will.

            Voting, whether on a specific issue or for a representative is no different if a “unanimous” vote is not required for action. Who makes that choice? The group, tribe, community, society affected. That is “human nature”.

            So it is not the means of deciding that is the issue. It is the range of decisions that are allowed. This is the legitimate point of argument, not voting for representatives.

            And I do not personally legitimize the person to act. We as a group comprising a majority have granted that authority. And that authority is also granted by those who did not vote for him but have accepted the cultural and natural laws of “representation” and “Majority choice”.

            • JAC

              I claim no such Right. In fact Rights are not involved at all.

              Yes they are

              You have NO right to enforce your edicts upon others.

              Thus any system which legitimizes this abuse of Rights is evil.

              You are mixing the authority granted to the one elected and the action created due to the form of govt, or nature of the decision being made.

              It is YOU, the voter who is legitimizing (you can’t “authorize” a man to exercise what you do not have) your representative’s actions.

              I did not select him to act on MY behalf.

              You participated in the process that legitimized him – whether your vote counted for him or not.

              I selected him to act on behalf of my community.

              You do not have the Right to make ANY choice for anyone else, no matter how big the group happens to be!

              “Size” does not allow you to usurp another persons rights.

              Voting has been accepted by humans for eons as a method of handling decisions when there are too many people to reach full agreement.

              Voting ONLY is a Right where the group is voluntary.

              You vote, thus, it unjust.

              It has become part of the common law of man, if you will.

              “Common” Law does not grant rights nor have power to revoke rights.

              Who makes that choice? The group, tribe, community, society affected. That is “human nature”.

              It is not a matter of “who”.

              It is a matter of RIGHT.

              It is the range of decisions that are allowed.

              Your argument is that YOU are “allowed” to make decisions FOR ME.

              Where do you get this Right?

              This is the legitimate point of argument, not voting for representatives.

              You are legitimizing another person to act on your behalf to attack other people to enforce an edict.

              Thus, you are responsible for the actions of that person you legitimized.

              It matters not whether you fly the missile or it is a fire and forget missile, you are the one who pressed the button to launch. You are the one responsible for what it hits.

              And I do not personally legitimize the person to act.

              Yes you did – you voted – confirming the process AND/OR the person.

              We as a group comprising a majority have granted that authority.

              You cannot separate the individual from the group. The group is nothing without individuals.

              You therefore cannot separate your responsibility from that group either.

              • The process by which humans make decisions and the range of decisions that humans consider acceptable are NOT the same thing.

                A majority vote that does not impose upon your natural rights does not violate any right you have.

                It is not the act of voting that violates your rights, but the action that is approved by voting.

              • JAC

                The process by which humans make decisions and the range of decisions that humans consider acceptable are NOT the same thing.

                I agree – and that is my point.

                There is no RIGHT to make decisions on my behalf, regardless if you legitimize another man to usurp my Right or not.

                A majority vote that does not impose upon your natural rights does not violate any right you have.

                If the organization is voluntary – you are correct.

                If it is not voluntary – you are not correct.

                It is not the act of voting that violates your rights, but the action that is approved by voting.

                It does not matter whether you vote to provide me money and wealth or vote to remove it –both are a violation of Rights

  16. Joe’s foot-in-mouth comments are like audibly passing gas in a crowded room – very embarrassing. 😯

  17. Sometimes it is OK to just appreciate somebody’s creativity and humor. Without the philosophical critique.

    Enjoy a little chuckle everyone.

    Well, almost everyone, 🙂

  18. I can here my mama dancin in heaven tonight.

    Her Giants finally got it done.

    Now if only a few thousand of those over joyed (also called gay in the olden days) folks would get so drunk they forget to vote tomorrow.

  19. TexasChem says:

    Read an article the other day that stated Barney Frank spent 200,000 of his own personal funds towards his election campaign.

    House members make a 174,000 salary.

    Point: How do you justify spending more money than you make in a year on election campaigns? Is that smart financial business?

    It is if you plan on making more through illegal routes!

    They justify it because of the kickbacks/favors these pieces of shit recieve throughout their terms from lobbyists and insider trading etc…

    Ethics be damned! The system doesn’t work.They are all POS criminals leaching off of the tax payer!

    I wonder how much this upcoming two day trip to India is costing tax payers. Obama has reserved over 850 hotel rooms, 570 in the Taj Mahal Hotel, plus all banquets and restaurants in Taj Mahal.Ridiculous!

    There are two jumbo jets coming along with Air Force One, which will be flanked by security jets. There will be 30 to 40 secret service agents, who will arrive before him. The President’s convoy has 45 cars, including the Lincoln Continental in which the President travels.” Oh, and he is bringing his own chefs. So, how much is this costing?

    • Barack Obama’s trip to India next month will be the biggest by any US President – with a staggering 40 aircraft and six armoured cars.

      Details of the elaborate arrangements for the tree-day presidential visit on November 6 were leaked to Indian newspaper earlier this week.

      Forty aircraft – including the Air Force One military plane – and six heavily armoured cars will follow the president around the country.

      The huge security operation comes days after a suspected bomb was found on a cargo plane at East Midlands Airport.

      The entourage will be the biggest ever in terms of logistics and manpower for any US president.

      The president himself will be ferried around in a black Cadillac – dubbed ‘Barack Mobile’ – which has its own built in communications centre – to enable Obama to be in touch with the White House, US vice president and the US strategic command

      The car also has the US nuke launch codes and the nuclear switch for the president. It can also withstand a chemical or germ warfare or even a bomb attack.

      Obama will be accompanied on the trip by US first lady Michelle Obama and their daughters Malia and Sasha, according to Indian newspaper Headlines Today.

      Earlier, Obama’s daughters Sasha and Malia were not to be part of the trip. But Michelle’s opinion prevailed and now the girls will accompany the first American couple to India, according to the paper.

      Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1325075/Obama-India-visit-Biggest-US-President-40-planes-6-armoured-cars.html#ixzz148Gq3vlw

      Have to say one good thing about Joe Biden, who was the poorest member of the Senate. He never used his position for personal finical gain.

    • Mathius

      Obama has done nothing on most of these issues except sign his name to paper and then let others say he did it.

      Notice that he does not take nor deny credit for many of these. The man has no courage.

      And the lists are phony in that they double, triple, and quadruple count things as separate that are withing one piece of legislation.

      They also ignore the stuff the left doesn’t want counted.

      For example the lists often tout “transparency orders given”. Yet they ignore the fact that all agency communications with the public must be cleared and in many cases prepared by the White House.

      Let alone that the claims of what many of these “acts” are supposed to do vs. what they actually accomplish seems at odds.

    • “Signed financial reform law prohibiting banks from engaging in proprietary trading (trading the bank’s own money to turn a profit, often in conflict with their customers’ interests)”

      OK, great. Uh, what has he done about Freddie/Fannie? You know, the cause of our current economic crisis, that he wants to spend another 50 billion to “fix”? It seems to me, that if you had a fire, you would want to fix the cause
      of the fire, before going in and installing a sprinkler system? Maybe even put the fire out first? I know, I know, racist, you are a racist, Illusion.

      • That’s right, LOI. Now write on the chalkboard 100 times: “I will not question a black President.”

        • “I will not question a black President.”
          “I will not question a melanize President.”
          “I will not question a African-American President.”
          “I will not question a melanise President.”
          I will not instigate revolution
          I am not smarter than the President
          The Pilgrims were not illegal aliens
          This school does not need a “regime change”
          I did not win the Nobel Fart Prize
          I will not fake my way through life
          I will not get very far with this attitude
          I will not grease the monkey bars
          Spitwads are not free speech
          “Bart Bucks” are not legal tender
          I will not expose the ignorance of the faculty
          I saw nothing unusual in the teacher’s lounge
          This punishment is not boring and pointless
          The Pledge of Allegiance does not end with Hail Satan
          Five days is not too long to wait for a gun
          “Bagman” is not a legitimate career choice
          I will not hang donuts on my person
          I will remember to take my medication
          The Good Humor man can only be pushed so far
          The First Amendment does not cover burping
          “Bewitched” does not promote Satanism
          The boys room is not a water park
          The truth is not out there
          I am not licensed to do anything
          I will not hide the teacher’s Prozac
          I did not invent Irish dancing
          There was no Roman god named “Fartacus”
          Rudolph’s red nose is not alcohol-related
          Silly String is not a nasal spray
          I was not told to do this
          I am not the new Dalai Lama
          “The President did it” is not an excuse (shown the day after President Clinton was impeached)
          I have neither been there nor done that
          I am not the acting President (a reference to the 2000 Presidential election, whose winner had still not been determined when this episode aired)
          Network TV is not dead
          I will not “let the dogs out”
          I will not hide the teacher’s medication
          I will not buy a Presidential pardon (a reference to President Clinton granting Presidential pardons to people who made donations to his campaign)
          I will not scare the Vice President (reference to Dick Cheney’s hospitalization with a heart condition)
          Genetics is not an excuse
          Fun does not have a size
          I am not Charlie Brown on acid
          Over forty & single is not funny
          Beer in a milk carton is not milk
          A booger is not a bookmark
          Does any kid still do this anymore?
          Global warming did not eat my homework
          Pearls are not oyster barf
          The capital of Montana is not “Hannah”
          I will not waste chalk
          This punishment is not medieval.

          http://listoftheday.blogspot.com/2008/08/complete-list-of-bart-simpsons.html

          Can I go home now???

      • Damn LOI. If YOU are a racist, I guess I am the Grand Wizard of the KKK!!!! 😀

  20. Mathius-tell us about the rally, please -I saw a sign from the photos, it said squire 🙂 I couldn’t help but wonder.

    • squire should be Squirrel

      • Sadly, I couldn’t make it. I just couldn’t find a way to go that made logistical sense (either leaving at the crack of dawn, or fighting my way through 10 hours of traffic, or taking a day off, or a $300 train ride, etc). So I went to Atlantic City instead.

        For the record though, “Squirrel!” is a fantastic sign idea, but I would have personally gone with “I am holding a sign!”

  21. My Election Day prognostications.

    Back in June I predicted that Reid would win and that California, Oregon and Washington would remain Democrat in the Senate. Meaning that Boxer and Murray would win.

    As of yesterday I stand on this with one exception. Spousal Unit Leader returned from a trip to Nevada and reported that all our friends who were supporting Reid over Angel has switched their votes.

    It seems they have finally had enough of Reid. The straw that broke the camel was Reid’s family profiting from real estate and other deals made possible by Reid’s votes in the Senate. Now these are rational hard thinking independent folks, who lean center right for the most part (conservative on money, freedom and liberty but liberal on social issues).

    So if this is true for these folks then I assume it is happening across the State. Despite the National Dem Party’s attempts at portraying Angel as a “nut case” the story within the State is that she has appeared much more reasonable and less threatening.

    So……………UPSET in Nevada is now on my list.

    Brown and Boxer win in Kalifornia. Murray pulls off a squeaker, giving Rossi two losses within a percentage point or two (the other was for Governor).

    Oh, almost forgot Alaska. This is one state where a “write in candidate” could actually pull off an upset.

    Murkowski is ahead in the polls and if the Alaskans follow through history will be made. I think they will, given the problems Wilson has had in the home stretch. Murkowski in an upset. Proving that cockroaches are in fact very hard to exterminate.

    The Dem and Repubs will all Crow about their gains, in one form or another. Whether it is we got more than historically happens or we didn’t do as badly as everyone said we would. Both ignoring the fact that it was their media talking heads that set the stage with bogus clap trap.

    For example, notice that the left leaning sites, like HuffPo, put Alaska in the camp of “other” rather than Republican. This creates the illusion that the Republicans are not going to control this seat. Now tell me please who you think Murkowski will caucus with if she wins. Especially after the establishment Republicans funneled money to her for her campaign.

    In the end, far to many incumbents will get re-elected. But here again the reporting is distorted. I see numbers that are based only on those running. They ignore the large number who decided to “suddenly retire” in wake of the summer of 2009 voter revolt. In fact, the R’s wouldn’t be doing so well in many places if the incumbent Dems had decided to weather the storm.

    So in the end, WE THE PEOPLE have failed to reach the grander goal, but we will have made significant progress to cleaning house.

    The largest question will remain…………..Can WE THE PEOPLE maintain the enthusiasm for as long as it takes?

  22. I was reading the letters to the editor for Sunday, Oct. 31, the pre-election edition of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. How very interesting that of eight letters published, two have no bearing on the elections, six in some way, advocate for the Democrats.

    One recommends independent, T. Drown for the senate. Nothing against him, just makes me think he is more likely to pull votes from possible Republican John Boozman, than he will from Lincoln. Another appeals for voters to support agriculture by keeping our head of that senate committee in place.

    I dropped my subscription to this paper years ago, just buy a Sunday edition three or four times a year. I think I will have to cut back a little more. I just do not want to support a blatantly biased “news”paper.

    • LOI

      Newspapers in the USA have always been biased.

      Start a competing newspaper.

      • LOI,

        Belay JAC’s comment~!

        Newspapers are dying. Even the Enquirer is going bankrupt.

        The world is the Internet – here is where the new world will be born and thrive!

        • Too late Flag, just bought the printing press….

          No worries, I have a day job I plan to keep until the Obamanation puts it under. I do hope/think that even on the internet, truth in reporting will prevail in their thriving or failing. Exceptions would be like Media Matters, where Soros doesn’t care if it’s profitable or not.

          Belay? You nautical pirate! Not over your Halloween dress-up yet?

          • LOI,

            Actually I dressed as the Joker – for the first and last time.

            I guess I looked so sinister, even adults were struck by a moment of fear. The kids were terrified.

            It’s amazing what dark painted eyes and a bloody smile will do …..

  23. Oh, boy-Hopefully no ones head will explode-Mr. you can’t say anything against Obama without being a racist. And the graduate school comment-JAC you have been warned your head may actually explode.

    • This is good. Chris, if that’s what you learned in grad school, glad I saved my money and didn’t go.

    • V.H.

      Not as bad as I expected with your lead in. An admission of what these elites have been taught about economics.

      I especially loved his comment that the Pres should have sold health care as an “economically” beneficial thing in the long run then said point blank “even if it isn’t, he should have sold it that way”.

      In my language that means, the President should lie if he has to, in order to get his socialist programs approved.

      Gawd, these elites are gradually coming unraveled. I love it.

      How did you like Mitchell trying to put words in Mathew’s mouth and he cut her off. Ha, ha, ha.

      Good find V.H. You added some good humor to my afternoon.

      By the way, have you read the 5000 Year Leap yet?

      • I wasn’t sure how to take his remarks-I can’t decide if he wanted the President to lie or if he’s starting to doubt the truth of what he was taught in grad school. Maybe his words were a freudian slip. 🙂 It was great to see Mitchell so dumbfounded that she really didn’t know what to say. And the speech at the end-how could anyone listen to that speech and be surprised by his far left agenda.

        I haven’t read the book-Should I?

  24. Happy Birthday, Anita!!!! 🙂

  25. Hell! Seems like some folks will never learn. We in Georgia have the choice for Governor between a complete and utter moron who has already been Gov oncet. The most notable thing he did was change our state flag DESPITE the fact that we didn’t want it changed. Out othe choice is a crook and a thief who ran from Congress just ahead of a ethics investigation.

    Some choice huh?

    We had choices in the primary but NO! We put up these two sorry excuses instead. I had to back up to the poll, hold my nose and pick, but I didn’t like either choice. We also had the choice of a Libertarian, so why you ask did I not choose him?
    1. He would not take a firm stand on anything. Very Obamaesque of him.
    2. He supports abortion. I DO NOT VOTE FOR BABY KILLERS.

    So I was left with just 2.

    My Senator and Congressman were unopposed. I guess because, unlike some others in Congress, they actually do their jobs. They say what they mean, and mean what they say. At least for Politicians.

    I find myself somewhat UNsuprised by the peoples choice to put the same old same old back in office. I have come to the conclusion that the only people who should be allowed to vote are Property owners or those who actually pay taxes. And I have reasoning for this stance.

    I notice that those who have NO stake in Government will vote for anyone who will keep the freebies that the taxpayers pay for coming to them. THEY don’t pay for them, so why should they care? And I am SICK OF IT!!!

    I dare say that if you have a stake in the Government that was raising taxes for every Rube Goldberg and boondogle program that gave the poor more government tits to suck from, they would not be so quick to vote some of these assholes back in.

    Maybe I’m wrong, but I seriously doubt it.

  26. A little humor (and intelligence?) from the non-partisan Restore Rally.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2010/11/01/time-to-play/

  27. The lighter side of Obamacare 🙂

  28. Just got back from voting and I feel great! There was no little voice wearing a black hat chirping at me while I was in the booth! I am SOOOOO over you BF!

    • I have to admit, he influenced me. There were a bunch of un-opposed (mostly Dem’s), I left that one blank. Voted Repug or Green Party for every other.

    • The following was at the end of an article I read earlier…I am sure BF disapproves.

      Were the Founders wiser than we? It is easy to believe that Washington was, along perhaps with Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and a few more. Or were they simply men, educated men, hard-working and in some cases propertied men of influence who had on their minds something bigger than their own prosperity. Men with a vision for a new nation, as Jefferson wrote, “conceived in liberty,” a place where fortune could smile on the industrious, clever and lucky, not just the well-born and well-connected.

      Unique in its time but now the model for the world, the United States is a place where we, each of us, have our destiny in our hands. A destiny we bring to pass, not through revolution or bloodshed, but through institutions like the jury box, the town meeting and the voting booth.

      In the long history of man it has not always been so. And, as Washington reminds us from the depths of the past, were it not for him it might never have been. But it is. More than simple responsibility, voting it is a sacred trust bequeathed to us all through the centuries, a proposition for which blood has been spilled many times in each of the succeeding centuries – to preserve that right for ourselves and to help extend that right to others.

      Why vote? Because in America, that is the way we change things. That is the way we reform the system. That is the way we guard against the threats to our liberties and exercise our responsibilities. That is the way that we keep America free.

      Candidates come and candidates go. Elections are won and lost. Sometimes we elect crooks and nobodies and, every once in while, a statesman who strides across the Congress or, from the Oval Office, across the world like a colossus, showing the world what it means to be a free people and, more importantly, why freedom matters.

      And, for the same reason, it matters that you vote. It is your voice – and the only person who can silence your voice is you. So applaud, complain, march, protest, petition – these are your rights but, without your vote, they are meaningless actions, backed up by nothing.

      • Bottom Line says:

        Were the Founders wiser than we? It is easy to believe that Washington wasn’t, along perhaps with Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and a few more. They were simply men, educated men, hard-working and in some cases propertied men of influence who had on their minds something bigger than their own prosperity. Men with a vision for a new violent nation, as Jefferson should have wrote, “conceived in liberty,” a place where fortune could be stolen from the industrious, clever and lucky, not the well-born and well-connected.

        Not so unique in its time and now the new empire of the world, the United States is a place where we, each of us, have our destiny taken from our hands. A destiny we bring to pass, not through revolution or bloodshed, not even through institutions like the jury box, the town meeting and especially not the voting booth.

        In the long history of man it has always been so. And, as Washington reminds us from the depths of the past, were it not for him it might never have been. But it is. More than simple false sense of responsibility, voting it is a sick game played on us all through the centuries, a proposition for which blood has been spilled many times in each of the succeeding centuries – to preserve that joke on ourselves and to help extend that joke to others.

        Why vote? Because in America, that is the way we think we can change things. That is the way we foolishly try to reform the system. That is the way we support threats to our liberties and call it our responsibilities. That is the way that we keep America from being free.

        Candidates come and candidates go. Elections are won and the people’s hopes lost. We always elect crooks and nobodies and never a statesman who strides across the Congress or, from the Oval Office, across the world like a colossus, showing the world what it means to not be a truly free people and, more importantly, why freedom doesn’t matter to our so-called representatives.

        And, for the same reason, it doesn’t matter if you vote. It isn’t really your voice – and the only person who can waste your time voting is you. So applaud, complain, march, protest, petition – these are your rights but, even if you vote, they are meaningless actions, backed up by nothing.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      @Kathy – I haven’t voted yet – heard lines were really long. Did it seem to you more people were voting or no?

      • hey Ray, this won’t help you this late, but yes, locally, we saw longer lines early morning when my husband voted, mid-day when I did and really long lines when my daughter went this evening. Heard some Philly posts had the new BP around again. You see anything?

    • Was probably as tempted as I’ve ever been to participate in the voting process this year, actually living in a battleground state for the first time, but managed to resist. 🙂

  29. Don’t usually give a hoot about races on the far side of the country that don’t involve incumbents I have come to despise. But here is one NEWBY I simply can’t stand.

    I was in Viet Nam before I didn’t go to Viet Nam. Pencil neck gutless two face peckerhead. This state deserves what it gets.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/02/blumenthal-defeats-wrestling-mogul-senate/

    Ladies of SUFA, I apologize for my forward language. As you can tell, I really, really, really don’t like this guy for his BS lies about serving.

  30. Russ Feingold! Move to the back of the unemployment line……… (and probably to the front of the lobbyist line)

    • Having fun following along on a live blog as Madison is responding to losing “such a man of integrity.” They are crying, really, over Feingold’s defeat. Pathetic, simply pathetic.

%d bloggers like this: