Entries Tagged as 'Freedom'

Housing “Rescue”

So, did you read about the housing rescue that passed the House? In case you didn’t, let me sum it up for you:

There shall be no economic freedom in this country. You shall not be free to engage in monetary risk at all, because government has decided that’s not safe. You will not buy a house in the hopes it will increase in value if you and the seller agree, because government says that’s not safe. If you do it, you will be jailed. In addition, because everyone now has a right to housing, it’s much too dangerous to leave housing to the free market, so government shall control any and all housing transactions. In addition, government will now buy and sell houses because they know better than you how much houses should cost. If you want a house, ask government, and they will buy it for you. The conversion to complete socialism in the mortgage industry is now complete.

Seriously, that’s what it says. The government just spent (presuming it passes the Senate) nearly $5 trillion dollars (even if they won’t admit that’s what they spent). They have completely taken over the mortgage industry because government will now back ALL mortgage loans. They are going into the business of buying and selling houses — go ahead, try and compete with someone who has literally unlimited money. They’re buying votes from all sorts of people by taking money from responsible working people. I am starting to understand more people like Ed Brown who simply stop paying taxes because government is so corrupt it’s insane.

Go ahead, keep thinking this is a free country. You’re just plain wrong. We currently have some sort of government that’s between communism and total socialism. Government controls industry and we’re only allowed to vote for those that the two political parties choose. Oh, how I yearn for freedom.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Mooresville Recycling

How about I show you how government specifically is interested in control and power instead of freedom and people? Here it is, on a tiny town level. Mooresville, NC has around 10,700 households. It’s not a big place. Their government is considering forcing people adding recycling. Yes, I’m well aware this is how you force people to recycle because you make it voluntary at first, then mandatory later on to “save costs.” It’s crappy, horrible, controlling, anti-freedom government at it’s worst.

But the government put together a presentation that shows they honestly do not care one bit about how much money they spend. Sure, if you take the presentation at face value, it looks like this effort would actually bring income to the city. But if you look a little closer, you see that’s not actually the case.

In one place, the presentation bases all its numbers, including those that show a “profit,” on a 70% household participation. However, on the previous page, they show the nationwide average figures of participation is 40-80%, and their own goal is only 50%! So the city is going to try and get 50% participation, but bases ALL the calculations and figures on 70%! I don’t know if you can call that outright lying, but it sure is dishonest in every sense of the word. They also don’t mention in the presentation the line that helps them “earn” money listed as “tax income.”

Worse, they go on to claim that it would cost more if they let a private company do the collections for them — and then provide the data to show that’s completely untrue! The presentation claims that a private company will pick up recycling for just $3.75 per house per month. That’s all. So what would happen in a freedom-based country? The claimed 72% of town residents that want recycling could just pay $3.75 a month and get it. That’s it. There would be no government employees to pay. There would be no administrators to pay. There would be no mismanagement by the government. And best of all — the 28% of residents who do not want to be forced to pay to make other people feel good WOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY!

In other words, the options are clear. Government can use force to require people to pay them, and government will spend nearly $70 a year per household; or people could be free to contract with other free people to get curbside recycling for less than $4 a month (around $48 a year). I bet you can guess what the board “suggested” that the town do, can’t you? Government today, even in small towns, is about using force to control people and nothing more.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Stimulus: Republican vs. Democrat

The “big” news is that the Democrats want to pass a new stimulus plan. Now I’m no longer a fan of the big-government Republican party, but some times they are actually different from the Democrats (not often). In this case, the difference is rather extreme:

Republican Stimulus: Give people some of their own money.

Democrat Stimulus: Let government spend more of the people’s money.

Then again, you can consider what would happen if people like Ron Paul, Libertarians, or the Constitution Party were running the place:

Stimulus: Government stop collecting and spending money that’s not theirs.

Popularity: 7% [?]

Another Court-Ordered Murder: Lauren Marie Richardson

Well, why not? After all, that’s why we have courts, right? To determine when and where to kill people — even if the people don’t want to die, even when the people have done nothing wrong, and even when the people have others willing to care for them. This time it’s Lauren Marie Richardson in Delaware. Her mother wants her dead. No, really. The girl is sitting around, minding her own business. The girl isn’t causing anyone any harm. She just needs a little help eating. Her father is completely willing to feed her. Her mother isn’t. So the mother’s gone to court to withhold food from her. How is that not absolutely disgusting? I thought there was a law against killing innocent people. Apparently I was wrong.

Yes, this is similar to the Terry Schiavo case, but I think it’s much worse. Terry was married and one could question that her parents were more important than her husband. In this case, the girl’s own father is willing to take complete care of the girl. The mother says “no.” And we all know how courts rule when there’s a custody battle. By default, the woman wins. And in this case, the court order has been given: Murder Lauren because her mother says so.

And people claim we’re civilized. If this is civilized, I want to go live in a cave.

Popularity: 14% [?]

War on Christians Continues

Oh sure, go ahead and dismiss this post because of the title. I’m sorry, but it’s true. There are a LOT of people in this world who honestly despise Christians and will do anything they can to destroy everything associated with Christianity (including freedom). And I’m not just talking about the Muslims who want to literally kill every Christian.

In Brasil, you may soon be jailed for reading the Bible. Yup, they don’t like those judgmental people down there in Brazil. Anyone want to defend that one? 5 years in prison for reading the Bible. Anyone?

Oh, I know we’re not that bad here in America. Instead, we’re supposed to hide being Christian. If not, you get fired. No, not for telling gays anything at all. If you simply don’t want to help someone be gay now, you are FIRED. It’s no longer about “accepting” gays — if it ever was — now if you do not openly approve and completely SUPPORT the gay lifestyle, you are not allowed in this country.

I want freedom. I wish the radical gays did, too.

Popularity: 19% [?]

Congress on Free Speech

So, have you heard the latest from Congress regarding freedom of speech? In a nutshell, Congress, led by Democrats, are saying that if you are a member of Congress, you are not allowed to speak to anyone about anything that happens in the Congress — at least not in electronic form.

It appears that you’re allowed to speak about what happens in Congress, but if you make a blog posting, or put other information on a web site, the Democrats will shut you down. So if you want to explain to your constituents (I know, it’s an outdated concept) what’s happening and why you voted a certain way on a law, you cannot do so via the Internet. If you do, Democrats will actually bring you up on charges.

Despite what the Democrats claim, they want total control. They want to control all access you have to them and their inner workings in Congress. They know that if they are filtered through the formerly mainstream media, that they will only be shown in a good light. They also know that the Internet can show them as they truly are — which is why they so strongly oppose freedom of speech. Sorry, but that IS today’s Democrat Party. Don’t believe me? Watch how bad speech rules will get if Obama wins. After all, Obama wants to create a HUGE internal federal secret police force to enforce his own rules and desires on people.

Popularity: 25% [?]

On The Mortgage and Banking Crisis

So, have you been reading all the news about the current economic crisis in America? Have you, personally, lost millions of dollars in recent days? Or are you satisfied that you’re fine, you just head to work and get paid, and go buy your groceries, wondering what this is all about? Perhaps you’re thinking that this won’t effect you because you don’t have money invested in the stock market in the financial sector. Or do you? Do you really know where all your company’s retirement plans are invested? Do you know where all your mutual fund investments are stored? Let’s say you do, and you’re still not in those funds. So none of this will effect you, right? Certainly it shouldn’t, but it appears more and more that it will.

You see, our government has completely and totally lost track of the Constitution. Those elected officials in Washington, DC are prepared to completely violate their words and their solemn oath. All the Congressmen in office now swore:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God

But that was all just talk. All the actions they are considering this week are absolutely, unquestionably, in direct opposition to that statement.

[Read more →]

Popularity: 26% [?]

Guns Are Scary

Mary C. Schulken, Democrat opinion writer for the Charlotte Observer, is terrified. No, she’s not scared because violent crime is on the increase in Charlotte. No, she’s not scared because the Charlotte police department is more interested in being social workers than policemen. And no, she’s not even scared because her car was stolen by thieves recently. So why is she suddenly scared? Because she just now found out that a few people who are not policemen have guns.

I know, it’s really scary. I can only guess that Miss Schulken has so insulated herself from the reality of the world that she honestly didn’t realize that people have owned and been carrying guns for, well, as long as this country has existed. I imagine the recent Supreme Court decision that says government will actually permit subjects citizens to own guns was also quite a shock to her. But either way, she’s just absolutely terrified to know that I, personally, am armed.

Now I don’t live in Charlotte any more — primarily because of crime and insane taxes. But let me try and put your fears to rest, Miss Schulken, because I bet there are a few others like myself that do live in Charlotte:

I own guns. I own a number of different guns. I have revolvers, semi-automatic pistols, shotguns, and rifles. Yes, I even have one of those “banned” “assault” rifles. I have large pistols, and I have small ones — including one that I carry with me nearly everywhere I go. And know what, Miss Schulken? Not a one of my guns has killed an innocent person. Oh, but one time the mere presence of my shotgun did cause a group of about 8 “youths” from continuing to walk towards me when I was leaving work at 1am. I’ve had some of these guns as long as 15 years and never once has one killed someone by itself. I may have even once walked right past you in the city of Charlotte on the sidewalk, and you weren’t killed by my gun. Your fears are completely and totally unfounded.

Now I realize that you’re a female, so your emotions are more important than facts. I know that you, and many others like you, do not care that no one has been killed by my guns, you’re just plain terrified. I am sorry that my mere presence scares you. However, your emotions are not my responsibility. While I will point out that your fears have no basis in reality, I will not order you, nor will I force you to not be scared. And therein lies the difference between Miss Schulken and myself. I believe in freedom. I believe you should be free to have your emotions. You, however, do not believe that I should be free to protect myself from those who would do me harm.

People like you, Miss Schulken, scare me. It scares me that you would allow government to take away my means of protection so that the scum who would rob me would have more power than I do. It scares me that you would trust the government to protect you from others when you should take responsibility for yourself. However, if you do not want to take responsibility for yourself, I won’t force you to. But most of all it scares me that you want to use government force to stop me from taking responsibility for myself. You are the reason the Constitution exists: to protect me from people like yourself.

Popularity: 30% [?]

War on Freedom

So, do you think the war on freedom will ever end? I honestly don’t. I think it’s been going on for centuries, and while sometimes freedom gets ahead, the war on freedom will continue as long as governments exist. I was just reading an article about the next “war” — the possibly coming “war on illegals.” Now I don’t think that war is coming — neither Obama or McCain have ANY interest in stopping any illegals at any time. And no, the two of them honestly don’t care what YOU want, they will do what they want. But looking at the article, it writes about the various previous “wars” that are all utter and total failures:

The war on alcohol. How did prohibition work out? The war on poverty? $10 trillion and we still have poor people (and they STILL vote Democrat?). The war on drugs? Hundreds of completely innocent people dead. I think the big connection between all these is freedom. Government is the enemy of freedom. All these “wars” are about taking freedom away from otherwise law abiding, peaceful citizens that are not harming anyone.

And the war continues.

The latest is a “war” on gas prices and lending. Government is working hard to take away the freedom to invest money. Yes, because government wants to do something, and because their enemy is freedom, they’re trying to stop people from buying and selling oil. The only effect that will have is a loss of freedom. Oh, and slightly delayed increases in prices of gasoline. Government also wants to reduce economic freedom even more by stopping you from lending money. That’s right, if you have cash and want to lend it to someone, the government wants to stop you.

It’s a clear war on freedom, and the government is the enemy.

Popularity: 27% [?]

Happy Birthday

Happy Birthday, America. I wish these could be under happier circumstances. I wish this were a day to celebrate freedom. Unfortunately freedom in America simply does not exist. Perhaps these words, written so long ago, are needed again — this time directed AT Washington, DC. Read this, everyone, please:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

—–

Replace “he” with “The Federal Government” in most of the list of complaints and you will find it quite accurate today, sadly.

Popularity: 33% [?]

Welfare Preachers

Another quote from that incredible classic and prophetic novel, Atlas Shrugged. And this one, although written back in the 1950s, could and does apply to 95% of today’s Congressman. This speech is addressed to every last one of those people in Congress who is voting to take tax money from working people to give it to anyone else who didn’t earn it: welfare, corporate tax breaks, “non-profit” organizations, and “disaster” relief:

“That’s what you want — that’s what all of you really want — not money, not material benefits, not economic security, not any of the handouts you keep demanding.” She spoke in a flat monotone, as if reciting her thoughts to herself, intent upon giving the solid identity of words to the torturous shreds of chaos twisting in her mind. “All of you welfare preachers — it’s not unearned money that you’re after. You want handouts, but of a different kind. I’m a gold-digger of the spirit, you said, because I look for value. Then you, the welfare preachers… it’s the spirit that you want to loot. I never thought and nobody ever told us how it could be thought of and what it would mean — the unearned in spirit. But that is what you want. You want unearned love. You want unearned admiration. You want unearned greatness. You want to be a man like Hank Reardon without the necessity of being what he is. Without the necessity of being anything. Without… the necessity.. of being.”

Popularity: 40% [?]

Evil Money?

I have to post this speech, not just because it’s one of Harvey’s favorites, but just because it’s so darn good.

(As a side note, this often misquoted verse actually says, “For the love of money is the root of all evil” - 1 Timothy 6:10)

“So you think that money is the root of all evil? Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for money. Money is not the tool of moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

“When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will excahnge it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor — your claim upon the energy of men who produce. You wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money. Is this what you consider evil?

“But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man’s capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of the man who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made — before it can be looted or mooched — made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his own ability. An honest man is one who knows that he cannot consume more than he has produced.”

Francisco d’Anconia, from Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand. And I agree.

Popularity: 37% [?]

Reardon on Freedom

Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged should be required reading for all citizens in a free country, despite the wordiness of it. One of my favorite speeches is Hank Reardon’s defense of capitalism where he is actually on trial in a courtroom:

“No, I do not want my attitude to be misunderstood. I shall be glad to state it for the record. I am in full agreement with the facts of everything said about me in the newspapers — with the facts, but not with the evaluation. I work for nothing but my own profit — which I make by selling a product they need to men who are willing and able to buy it. I do not produce it for their benefit at the expense of mine, and they do not buy it for my benefit at expense of theirs; I do not sacrifice my interests to them nor do they sacrifice their to me; we deal as equals by mutual consent to mutual advantage — and I am proud of every penny that I have earned in this manner. I am rich and proud of every penny I own. I made my money by my own effort, in free exchange and through the voluntary consent of every man I dealt with — the voluntary consent of those who employed me when I started, the voluntary consent of those who work for me now, the voluntary consent of those who buy my product. I shall answer all the questions you are afraid to ask me openly. Do I wish to pay my workers more than their services are worth to me? I do not. Do I wish to sell my product for less than my customers are willing to pay me? I do not. Do I wish to sell it at a loss or give it away? I do not. If this is evil, do whatever you please about me, according to whatever standards you hold. These are mine. I am earning my own living, as every honest man must. I refuse to accept as guilt the fact of my own existence and the fact that I must work in order to support it. I refuse to accept as guilt the fact that I am able to do it and do it well. I refuse to accept as guilt the fact that I am able to do it better than most people — the fact that my work is of greater value than the work of my neighbors and that more men are willing to pay me. I refuse to apologize for my ability — I refuse to apologize for my success — I refuse to apologize for my money. If this is evil, make the most of it. If this is what the public finds harmful to its interestes, let the public destroy me. This is my code — and I will accept no other. I could say to you that I have done more good for my fellow men than you can ever hope to accomplish — but I will not say it, because I do not seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I recognize the good of others as justification for their seizure of my property or their destruction of my life. I will not say that the good of others was the purpose of my work — my own good was my purpose, and I despise the man who surrender his. I could say to you that you do not serve the public good — that nobody’s good can be achieved at the price of human sacrifices — that when you violate the rights of one man, you have violated the rights of all, and a public of rightless creatures is doomed to destruction. I could say to you that you will and can achieve nothing but universal devastation — as any looter must, when he runs out of victims. I could say it, but I won’t. It is not your particular policy that I challenge, but your moral premise. If it were true that men could achieve their good by means of turning some men into sacrificial animals, and I were asked to immolate myself for the sake of creatures who wanted to survive at the price of my blood, if I were asked to serve the interests of society apart from, above and against my own — I would refuse. I would reject it as the most contemptible evil, I would fight it with every power I possess, I would fight the whole of mankind, if one minute were all I could last before I was murdered, I would fight in the full confidence of the justice of my battle and of a living being’s right to exist. Let there be no misunderstanding about me. If it is the belief of my fellow men, who call themselves the public, that their mood requires victims, then I say: The public good be dammed, I will have no part of it!

Don’t you wish there were just 5 members of Congress today that understood those ideas, instead of working hard to reject and destroy them?

Popularity: 40% [?]

Another Firing For Religion

Once again, we have yet another example in America of someone being fired for the crime of being Christian. Don’t believe the crap about “branding crosses,” that’s just totally made up crap. Look at the picture. You really have to WANT to see a cross to see a cross there. And no one was ever injured. Nope, sorry, they weren’t.

What were the biggest “crimes” committed by this man? Two of them. The first is that he dared science students to question science. That’s heresy to government today. You’re simply not allowed to question ANYTHING that the government or government scientists claim are fact. No, it’s not the middle ages where the church is not allowed to be questioned, it’s America today where the church of science is not allowed to be questioned. That shows you how much science has changed in the years. When I went to school, science was ABOUT asking questions and finding answers. Apparently today it’s about accepting what you are told without question.

The second, and more serious offense this man committed was that he dared own a Bible. And yes, he actually took it into the government house of worship (school) where such things are not allowed. You see, in the government house of worship, you may only worship government and may not question ANYTHING government says or tells you. If you bring any other sort of Christian religious emblem there, you will be removed by force.

Unfortunately, there’s really not any other country where you actually have more freedom of religion. Christians, welcome to the end days where you will be persecuted for your beliefs. It’s in America now, whether you want to admit it or not.

Popularity: 43% [?]

Selfish Government Bullies

I’m starting to understand more and more why true conservatives don’t want to have anything to do with government. Just look at the company you’d be forced to keep. Look at John McCain, speaking in Iowa:

Whatever assistance you need I’m sure you will get.

Or, to finish that statement more accurately, what McCain is saying is:

I want you to like me. Therefore, I’m going to help you. Oh, I’m not going to give you anything myself. Instead, I’m going to help you by forcing as many people as I can to help you. I’m not going to work. I’m not going to give you one thin dime of any money I earn. But I am going to find men with guns who will do my bidding. I will get those men with guns to take money from people. I’ll use part of that money to pay the men with guns. I’ll use more of that money to pay myself for helping you. And I’ll use even more of that money to pay people to give you whatever money remains. And I hope you like me, because me taking money from people who don’t want to give it to me by force is compassionate in my mind.

And the other slimeball for president is the same:

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama recalled paying off his own mountain of student loan debt and promised struggling college students Tuesday he would help them pay for school.

Once again, a more accurate description:

I borrowed money to get through school. And can you believe I actually had to pay it back? I know, that’s just crazy! And I’m going to make sure all of you people who vote for me can get as much money as you want and you won’t have to pay it back! I’m going to make sure all college students that I like will be able to go to school for free. I’ll make sure that they can have whatever they want in school and that they won’t have to work for it. I’ll make sure you can all buy computers and have HD TVs while you’re in school, and I’ll make sure that you have time to drink beer and have sex so I’ll make sure you don’t have to work to PAY for that education. And yes, like Juan, I’ll hire men with guns to get the money from people who actually work and earn it. No, I won’t give you ANY of the $4.2 million *I* earned last year, because that’s MY money. Instead, I’m going to take money from OTHER people who actually work for a living.

These two are perhaps some of the most selfish, miserable, horrible, evil people I have ever seen. And the worst part of it is that so many people believe they are nice, caring, and compassionate people. They’re not. They’re horrible, horrible, selfish bastards. And they do hate freedom, whether anyone wants to admit it or not.

Popularity: 45% [?]

Illegal Religion

Are you aware that there are various countries around the world where you can be arrested simply for mentioning the words, “Jesus Christ?” I was just the other day talking with someone who had just returned from Laos. The government there puts up with people talking about Jesus, but only if it’s done in private. You’re allowed to go to a Christian church, but you are not allowed to invite anyone else to go with you. In fact, if you ask people who attend the church to accept Jesus Christ, “back pockets” will turn you in to the government and you will be jailed.

In China, things have been getting worse as the Olympics approach. The government in cities has started allowing churches to exist. You can have a church, and you can go to that church. But as with Laos, if you invite someone else to come to church with you, or if you attempt to tell someone about Jesus Christ, you will be jailed.

And did you know there’s another country that’s getting worse? Yes, it’s America. Right here in America, more and more, if you dare to mention Jesus Christ in public, you can be jailed. Sure, you’re allowed to go to a church, but if you show up in the wrong place and ask others to come with you, the government throws you in jail. As far as I can tell, the only difference regarding religious freedom in America and Laos is the time you spend in jail.

Popularity: 43% [?]

Libertarians in North Carolina

Hey, did you know that Libertarians are allowed to run for election in North Carolina again? Yes, despite some of the most difficult ballot access laws in the country, they’re permitted again to run. And that’s despite a superior court judge who actually said, “there is no fundamental right for a voter to vote for the party of their choice.”

And yes, of course, libertarians candidates will be excluded from the election process as much as possible by the media, the Democrats, and the Republicans. But it sure is refreshing to see that in some elections people will actually have a choice. Keep in mind, this is the same North Carolina where as many as 80% or more of the state legislature only changes hands when those in power want them to (there’s zero competition).

So this year, why not join ‘em? If you live in an uncontested district, get your name on the ballot. It’s not too expensive and people will actually have a choice. You know, I think I’ll see if they want me on the ballot — I know in my districts, there’s zero opposition for either the state house or the state senate…

Popularity: 33% [?]

Gay Faith and Credit

So the news world is all abuzz over the new ability for same-sex “marriages” in California. And make no mistake about it, this is NOT gay “marriage.” Gays have ALWAYS had the ability to get married. They just didn’t like the fact that the word “marriage” applied to people of different sex. So the only new “right” here, completely invented by judges, in opposition to people, is same-sex “marriages.”

But one thing I keep hearing about is that California’s newly judge-discovered “right” lets non-residents of California “marry” a person of the same sex (or a dog, or many people, etc). And people are already claiming that because of the full credit and faith clause of the Constitution (sure, the left wants to use that thing now), other states will be forced to recognize same-sex “marriages” in their home states. I think that’s a damn load of crap, and if state government had any guts at all, this would be a complete non-issue. And I can find at least two ways that this is true.

First, why does the application of the “full faith and credit” clause only go one way? In other words, why can California decide they like a law, then they can FORCE every other state to have that same law, but it doesn’t work the other way? In other words, if NC judges created a law that said all people who engage in homosexual sex should be jailed, why shouldn’t California be FORCED to follow that law due to the “full faith and credit” clause? In addition, that clause actually says, “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.” That says EVERY OTHER state. In other words, if every single other state doesn’t have the same law, we should be able to ignore it.

At the same time, I can see another way that the rest of the states who don’t want to be forced to recognize this newly created toilet of a societal norm can easily apply it. It goes like this:

Sure, we, as a state, recognize that you, as North Carolina citizens, are “married” in California. We do not dispute that, and we give California the full faith and credit that you’re “married” there. But you’re not married here, so go suck eggs.

Oh, how I yearn for freedom.

Popularity: 24% [?]

Freedom of Speech? Not in America

I wish there were a country left in the world where people had freedom of religion. I wish there were a country left where people would be free to peaceably exercise their religion without going to jail. I wish there were a place where government did not prohibit the free exercise of religion. But as far as I can tell, there is no such place on this entire planet — and absolutely is not America.

Popularity: 19% [?]

Quote of the Day

Found here:

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United Stated where men were free.” - President Ronald Reagan

You mean, Mr. Reagan, like right now, today? I can certainly tell a lot of stories right now of what it used to be like to be free in America.

Popularity: 25% [?]