Below, are very insightful words from The Sparknotes version of George Orwell’s, 1984 – Important Quotations Explained:
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.”
– Ayn Rand
Apparently, in California, you can’t pay people with your expertise and knowledge. NO! You must pay them with Government monopoly money, and pay the local Government Overlords their protection money. This is like Atlas Shrugged in real-time!
Below, is an insightful article from The San Jose Mercury News:
CASTRO VALLEY — A small-time vintner’s use of volunteer workers has put him out of business after the state squeezed him like a late-summer grape for $115,000 in fines — and sent a chill through the wine industry.
The volunteers, some of them learning to make wine while helping out, were illegally unpaid laborers, and Westover Winery should have been paying them and paying worker taxes, the state Department of Industrial Relations said.
“I didn’t know it was illegal to use volunteers at a winery; it’s a common practice,” said winery owner Bill Smyth.
State law prohibits for-profit businesses from using volunteers.
“The claims of these organizers of humanity raise another question which I have often asked them and which, so far as I know, they have never answered: If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? The organizers maintain that society, when left undirected, rushes headlong to its inevitable destruction because the instincts of the people are so perverse. The legislators claim to stop this suicidal course and to give it a saner direction. Apparently, then, the legislators and the organizers have received from Heaven an intelligence and virtue that place them beyond and above mankind; if so, let them show their titles to this superiority. They would be the shepherds over us, their sheep. Certainly such an arrangement presupposes that they are naturally superior to the rest of us. And certainly we are fully justified in demanding from the legislators and organizers proof of this natural superiority.”
- Frederick Bastiat (The Law)
In this 1959 interview, Mike Wallace interviewed the famous author, Ayn Rand, who is most famous for her 1957 novel, “Atlas Shrugged.” In this interview, Rand, very astutely, explains how, and why Capitalism is far superior to Socialism; and what has gone wrong with the Free-market system, since our Founders first implemented it, with the creation of our new Republic.
Below, is the transcript to the video portion of this brilliant interview:
The Washington Post: “The Supreme Court on Tuesday [April 22nd] made clear that states are free to prohibit the use of racial considerations in university admissions, upholding Michigan’s constitutional amendment (via a 2006 referendum – Prop 2) banning affirmative action.”
CNN: “The referendum effort was led by Jennifer Gratz, who was at the center of the decade-old high court case.
As a white student, she was put on the waiting list for undergraduate admission to the state’s largest university. She eventually attended another school, and became the lead plaintiff in a subsequent discrimination lawsuit.
After the Supreme Court’s 2003 decision, she began a public campaign to end racial preferences in admissions.
“This will be an important day in the fight for true equality,” said Gratz, who is now CEO of the XIV Foundation, which advocates for “equal treatment.” “How the court rules in this case will have national importance, determining whether or not citizens have the right to choose equality over discrimination.”
Earlier today, on Fox News Sunday, was a great debate between Jennifer Gratz, and Shanta Driver. And, I must say, I was “very impressed” with Jennifer Gratz. She made many well-reasoned, and well-articulated arguments against affirmative action. She was brilliant!
And, while Shanta Driver, “the civil rights lawyer who argued unsuccessfully before the Supreme Court to end Michigan’s affirmative action ban” was, for the most part, very cordial, she “repeated Sunday that the high court’s decision was “racist.”
Here is the full debate:
Below, is a very insightful article, from The Wall Street Journal, by Charles Koch, CEO of Koch Industries:
I have devoted most of my life to understanding the principles that enable people to improve their lives. It is those principles—the principles of a free society—that have shaped my life, my family, our company and America itself.
Unfortunately, the fundamental concepts of dignity, respect, equality before the law and personal freedom are under attack by the nation’s own government. That’s why, if we want to restore a free society and create greater well-being and opportunity for all Americans, we have no choice but to fight for those principles. I have been doing so for more than 50 years, primarily through educational efforts. It was only in the past decade that I realized the need to also engage in the political process.
Below, is a very insightful article, from Geology.com, which breaks down, nicely, the many wonderful uses of gold:
The Most Useful Metal
Of all the minerals mined from the Earth, none is more useful than gold. Its usefulness is derived from a diversity of special properties. Gold conducts electricity, does not tarnish, is very easy to work, can be drawn into wire, can be hammered into thin sheets, alloys with many other metals, can be melted and cast into highly detailed shapes, has a wonderful color and a brilliant luster. Gold is a memorable metal that occupies a special place in the human mind.
On April 3rd, Mozilla , the developers of the popular Internet browser, “Firefox,” posted this post on their blog site – announcing that Brendan Eich has resigned, after only 10 days as CEO of Mozilla.
The below paragraph is from this CNN article, which gives some background into how the controversy began:
“Last week, Mozilla promoted Eich, a longtime employee who was previously the company’s chief technology officer, to the position of CEO. The move prompted renewed outrage by third-party developers and employees. Eich donated $1,000 to support Propostion 8 in 2008. The California ballot initiative sought to ban same-sex marriage in the state. The donation was made public in 2012 but Eich held onto his job.”
Below, is a very insightful segment from the libertarian show, “The Independents,” with guest, Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters, discussing the waste, fraud, and abuse with military contracts:
“The Congress under the new Constitution have the power “of organizing , arming and disciplining the militia, and of governing them when in the service of the United States, giving to the separate States the appointment of the officers and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.” Let us inquire why they have assumed this great power. Was it to strengthen the power which is now lodged in your hands, and relying upon you and you solely for aid and support to the civil power in the execution of all the laws of the new Congress? Is this probable? Does the complexion of this new plan countenance such a supposition? When they unprecedently claim the power of raising and supporting armies, do they tell you for what purposes they are to be raised? How they are to be employed? How many they are to consist of, and where to be stationed? Is this power fettered with any one of those restrictions, which will show they depend upon the militia, and not upon this infernal engine of oppression to execute their civil laws? Continue reading
Below, is a very insightful article, from The Wall Street Journal, called, “Why Unions Want a Higher Minimum Wage”:
Organized labor’s instantaneous support for President Obama’s recent proposal to hike the minimum wage doesn’t make much sense at first glance. The average private-sector union member—at least one who still has a job—earns $22 an hour according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s a far cry from the current $7.25 per hour federal minimum wage, or the $9 per hour the president has proposed. Altruistic solidarity with lower-paid workers isn’t the reason for organized labor’s cheerleading, either.
The real reason is that some unions and their members directly benefit from minimum wage increases—even when nary a union member actually makes the minimum wage.
“When we see that the most ardent advocates of the minimum wage law have been the AFL-CIO, and that the concrete effect of the minimum wage laws has been to cripple the low-wage competition of the marginal workers as against higher-wage workers with union seniority, the true motivation of the agitation for the minimum wage becomes apparent.”
- Murray Rothbard (Making Economic Sense)
Imagine, if you will, if our Federal Government, in all their “brilliance,” created something called “The Managed Grocery Act.” And, in accordance with this law, every citizen would have a predetermined amount of their money automatically deducted from their pay checks. In return, every citizen would be issued a grocery card, and depending on the plan they have chosen, would be told which food products they could acquire.
Beyond that, every grocery store owner in the country, by law, would be required to remove all prices from the shelves, and the products offered would be highly regulated by the Government. Every consumer would be instructed as to which products, and the amount, they could acquire, but, by no means, could they be made aware of the individual cost of these items.
In the donation section of The Tenth Amendment Center’s website, are the below words:
“Gifts to TenthAmendmentCenter.com are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Why? Based on our principles – we won’t accept any government handouts, bribes, or tax discounts to partner with the organization we’re working to limit. We believe in freedom of action and equal treatment for all organizations. Thus, we see the tax “benefits” (at risk of giving up freedom to operate and express free speech) offered to some organizations to be unfair, unequal, and unacceptable.
The feds tell us that 501c3 and other non-profit groups are serving the community and deserve to be tax exempt. But doesn’t your neighborhood plumber or carpenter or grocer also serve the community? We think so. Therefore, we stay “for-profit” and will never get handouts or grants from those looking for benefits from Washington D.C. Please join us”!
Below, is a clip, from February 6th, of Catherine Engelbrecht, who is a small business owner, and founder of the King Street Patriots, testifying before a Congressional Committee. In her testimony, she said that, ever since she applied for tax-exempt status for the King Street Patriots, her family and her business have been scrutinized by multiple federal agencies – which suggests that this scrutiny, from the Federal Government, may very well be “politically motivated.”
On John Stossel’s January 30th episode of Stossel, he had on Emergent Order co-founder and CEO John Papola, to talk about cronyism, and how his video cartoon and action figures, “The Kronies,” relate to American politics.
For anyone who despises ‘Crony’ Capitalism as much as I do, you will, likely, appreciate this wonderful video – and it’s concept, and creativity. It is spot on!
Below is an excellent episode of Stossel, from January 9th, called “Equality versus Liberty,” where John Stossel examines the issue of income inequality. Enjoy!
“The legislature of the United States are vested with the great and uncontrollable powers of laying and collecting taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; of regulating trade, raising and supporting armies, organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, instituting courts, and other general powers; and are by this [necessary and proper] clause invested with the power of making all laws, proper and necessary, for carrying all these into execution; and they may so exercise this power as entirely to annihilate all the State governments, and reduce this country to one single government. And if they may do it, it is pretty certain they will; for it will be found that the power retained by individual States, small as it is, will be a clog upon the wheels of the government of the United States; the latter, therefore, will be naturally inclined to remove it out of the way.”
The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions:
“In the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government” and “where powers are assumed [by the general government] which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.” James Madison, in his Virginia Resolution of 1798, asserted the core premise of all nullification laws– that State governments not only have the right to resist unconstitutional Federal acts, but that, in order to protect liberty, they are “duty bound to interpose” or stand between the Federal government and the people of their state.”
Nullification Begins with YOU:
“Nullification is not secession or insurrection, but neither is it unconditional or unlimited submission. Nullification is not something that requires any decision, statement or action from any branch of the federal government. Nullification is not the result of obtaining a favorable court ruling.”
“Nullification: any act, or set of actions, that results in a particular law being rendered null, void or even just unenforceable within a particular area. So, for example, when a state passes a resolution denouncing a particular federal law, it is not nullifying that law on its own. Or, when a state or local government passes a law refusing to comply with a federal act, they haven’t nullified that law…yet. Or, even when a state or local government passes a law that includes criminal sanctions for federal agents trying to enforce a particular federal act in the area – the law may still not be nullified. What? You see, it’s less about the legislation and more about the results. So, on the other hand, when three-dozen states pass non-binding resolutions denouncing a federal act, swaying public opinion so strongly that the federal government simply stops enforcing the law – it has been nullified.”
Below, is a very insightful article, from Forbes.com, called, “Obama To Americans: You Don’t Deserve To Be Free”:
President Obama’s Kansas speech is a remarkable document. In calling for more government controls, more taxation, more collectivism, he has two paragraphs that give the show away. Take a look at them.
Back in August, I wrote a post called, “Article Five And The Liberty Amendments,” referring readers to the Article V process in The United States Constitution, and Mark Levin’s great book, “The Liberty Amendments.”
In this post, I wanted to share the 10 (below) proposed Amendments that Mark Levin suggested in his book. While we may not agree with all of the suggested amendments, in their totality, or perhaps we may feel that some amendments should be added or deleted, Mark Levin gave us a great starting point for which to begin the discussion:
Recently, Gallup released a very telling poll, which says that, 72% of Americans say that Big Government is a greater threat than big business or big labor. While, for many of us, this is not really a shock, it is definitely a positive sign for those of us who do not believe in Big Government, and favor Individual Liberty.
According to Gallup:
“Seventy-two percent of Americans say big government is a greater threat to the U.S. in the future than is big business or big labor, a record high in the nearly 50-year history of this question. The prior high for big government was 65% in 1999 and 2000. Big government has always topped big business and big labor, including in the initial asking in 1965, but just 35% named it at that time.”
The entire poll can be viewed here.