Skip to content

Month: September 2015

The Endless Discussion on “Gay Marriage” Continues…

Kim Davis is the county clerk in Kentucky who refuses to give marriage licenses to homosexual couples, even though federal law says she must. Supposedly Kentucky state law says homosexual marriage is forbidden by law. In my view — and I believe that the Framers would agree with me — the laws of the states supersede federal law. That is partly because the people of the states (which existed at that time) created the federal government, which would act as their agent who would serve their interests. Ms. Davis has been thrown in jail for contempt of court, because as an employee of the government she must enforce the law. Apparently the judicial overseers in Kentucky believe that federal law supersedes Kentucky state law. In my view, however, government bureaucrats who interfere with the right of any individual to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” the right to establish contracts voluntarily with others, and the right to free association, are being just as intrusive as people’s neighbors who interfere with those rights. In other words, morally there is no role for government in permitting or forbidding marriages or contracts, period.

One issue I have is that Kim Davis, who claims to be acting in observance of her religious convictions, has been divorced several times. Therefore, her opposition to homosexual marriage or lifestyles in the name of the Bible is hypocritical. It seems to me that she is just another one of those people who believes that heterosexuals “own” marriage and only they may have society’s permission to have a marriage, by law. I don’t understand that, as I believe in live and let live. If you want to form a relationship and establish a contract, voluntarily, then the terms of the contract, and the decision as to who are the parties to the contract, are your own business. As long as you are peaceful, don’t initiate aggression or use coercion against others, don’t steal or commit fraud, it’s your life. Finally, if Kim Davis feels so strongly about not allowing homosexuals to marry, she needs to get another job. And that’s what I have to say about that.

Some News and Commentary for Labor Day Weekend

Paul Craig Roberts tells us of the rise of the inhumanes in Amerika today.

William Grigg on your duty to protect and serve the police.

Butler Shaffer discusses the abortion issue and Planned Parenthood’s latest controversies.

Carlos Morales says, Abolish Child Protective Services.

Daniel McAdams thinks the refugees fleeing to Europe may not be like the refugees we’ve seen in the past.

Simon Kent with an article on the “young, fit, overwhelmingly male” migrants to Europe.

Lew Rockwell has some good suggestions for housing for the refugees.

Anne Williamson on the refugee crisis a false flag alert.

Robert Wenzel says it is time to build a welfare wall.

Jacob Hornberger on cause, consequence, and responsibility.

Joshua Krause discusses America’s sham elections.

Bill Buppert asks, Why does anarchy make people fill their pants with fear?

Justin Raimondo asks, Who will stand up to the War Party?

Laurence Vance says that Republicans are not that different from Democrats on health care.

Donald Miller, MD discusses modern medicine at the crossroads.

Ryan McMaken on the failed moral argument for “living wage.”

David Stockman says the U.S. economy is not awesome and it is not decoupled.

Doug Bandow wants to revive the freedom to work by ending licensing.

Veronique de Rugy says Ex-Im’s working capital programs benefit big businesses and banks.

And Fred Reed on why they hate us.

Bernie Sanders et al. for a “Mixed Economy”: A Mix of Socialism and Fascism!

Donald Trump’s numbers continue to go up as he attracts all the useful idiots gullible sheeple who respond like drooling Pavlov’s dogs to his emotional nationalist and collectivist rhetoric. If Trump were serious, which I don’t believe he is, then he is a dangerous fascist, with the most un-American of views (or should I call them threats?).

At the same time, we have the popular Bernie Sanders who says he is a socialist, which he is in some ways, but a fascist in other ways. Supposedly Sanders is attracting many frustrated Americans with his socialist (and fascist) rhetoric. You see, socialist rhetoric sounds nice to many people. But when socialism is actually implemented it creates great damage, to the people’s freedom as well as to their standard of living. The 20th Century economist Ludwig von Mises wrote a book refuting socialism in the 1920s and he forecast that socialist states such as Soviet Union would collapse. He was right. And now Venezuela’s situation is getting worse and worse. Why? Because of socialism, obviously. And fascism. Wage and price controls commanded by government bureaucrats have extremely disastrous unintended consequences. In my view, wage and price controls and other economic regulations of privately-owned businesses are fascist policies. However, the takeover of industries by government is part of socialism. (Besides the aforementioned Mises book, another good informational source is Murray Rothbard’s Man, Economy, and State.)

The minimum wage is a law of mandatory unemployment. And the price controls as are imposed in Venezuela cause shortages. Empty shelves. There are also the socialist government-run food distributors as well as the obsessively-regulated privately-owned grocery stores. But these fascist and socialist policies are the policies of Bernie Sanders, as well as the Ted Kennedys and Bill De Blasios of the world, and most Republicans in Congress.

America has been a part socialist and part fascist society for many decades. A lot of people are in denial that Social Security is a redistribution of wealth scheme. No, it is not an “account” that you put your money into and get it back when you retire. That’s a myth. Even the Social Security Administration’s own website admits that. Social Security collects its funds from the workers paycheck involuntarily and redistributes the loot to retired and/or disabled people, and that’s what it is. So Social Security is just another redistribution of wealth scheme, and nothing more. The money the government takes from you involuntarily goes into the U.S. treasury’s general fund, and it gets spent by Congress, mainly on pork, special interest groups, corporate welfare, and other parasites. And that’s what it is.

Eventually, if the U.S. does collapse like the Soviet Union, it will not be because of greedy capitalists, producers or entrepreneurs. It will be because institutionalized theft is inherently immoral and a society of collectivism and institutionalized theft will suffer great moral decline, as well as continually reduce the people’s standard of living. Venezuela is an extreme example. And while the American people had a chance to elect in Ron Paul someone as President who understands the immorality and impoverishment effects of a mixed socialist/fascist economy, I am afraid that the people’s refusal to learn from history and common sense and their compulsion to repeat failed policies will enable the Sovietization of America to its final collapse. Especially if they elect Bernie Sanders. (But then, ALL the candidates, Republicrat and Demopublican, believe in this same kind of socialism and fascism mixed economy. They do not accept free markets, voluntary contracts, and private property as the fundamental principles for preserving a society’s freedom and raising its standard of living. Alas.)

Nothing Has Changed for Decades: Massachusetts Drivers Still the Worst!

It appears that Allstate’s “Best Drivers” in America shows that Boston’s drivers are the worst in a list of 200 cities. Two other Massachusetts cities’ drivers were also among the worst five, with Worcester and Springfield joining Boston. (The top cities are Kansas City, Kansas and Brownsville, Texas, FYI.) I am not surprised to hear about this at all. I remember hearing in the 1970s to “Watch out for those Massachusetts drivers!” And it isn’t just the drivers, by the way, in Massachusetts, but also the bicyclists and the pedestrians as well. Sometimes I see pedestrians intentionally crossing against the light like they’re challenging the motorists to hit them. Do you see that in other areas? I myself am a pedestrian because I haven’t been driving since the early ’90s, but I at least respect the motorists’ right of way. And I am not nuts and wouldn’t take any stupid risks, either. However, sometimes the motorists are too polite when they shouldn’t be. For instance, they stop to allow someone to cross the street when there is no light there. But if there are two lanes going the same way, the unsuspecting pedestrian might be crossing when another car in the other lane doesn’t see him in front of the car that’s stopped where he shouldn’t be stopping. But like those zombie pedestrians who can’t put their phones down and have to hold it like their baby’s rattle and constantly look down at it like zombies while they’re walking, there are some zombie motorists as well who shouldn’t be handling their phones and/or texting while driving. However, several studies have showed that the laws prohibiting “texting while driving” could be making the situation worse because while people know they might get in trouble for using their phones while driving, they now bring the phones lower down so the fuzz can’t see them, but they take their eyes off the road even more because of it!

More News and Commentary

Justin Raimondo asks, Who’s to blame for the exodus to Europe?

The Haaretz editorial board says that the Israeli army has lost its conscience.

Ron Paul says to blame the Federal Reserve, not China, for stock market crash.

John Whitehead writes about the muzzling of free speech in America.

Butler Shaffer distinguishes between the Christian bakers’ right to refuse service and the Kentucky clerk refusing a marriage license.

Alex Newman says that Obama’s prophesies of climate doom in Alaska fall flat.

William Anderson writes about the economics of Bernie Sanders.

Jacob Hornberger says that gun control is not the answer to widespread murder in American society.

Bob Unruh discusses the fascist anti-gunners in Ohio encouraging fellow fascists to engage in “SWATting” legal gun possessors.

Laurence Vance asks, Should libertarians vote Republican?

Stephen Walt on the soft logic of soft targets.

Tom Mullen says that Trump’s protectionist fallacies have been refuted by free market economists for hundreds of years.

Richard Ebeling says, “great national purposes” means less freedom.

Walter Williams promotes homeschooling.

And Gary North on why capitalism will win.

Yes, Ron Paul Is a “Libertarian”

On Wendy McElroy‘s website there was an argument over whether or not Ron Paul is a “libertarian.” Of course he’s a libertarian! Yeah, he has some statist views, such as supporting the feds’ control over immigration. That’s okay.

But Dr. Paul stated during the 2012 campaign for President that if elected he would pardon all non-violent “offenders” (including drug-related) who hadn’t actually harmed anyone, and he would release them from the prisons. Now, THAT’S a libertarian! He would also legalize all drugs, because he recognizes that the individual has the right to self-ownership, the right of ownership of one’s own body and the right to put into one’s own body what one chooses, and at the same time he advocates that each individual take responsibility for the consequences of one’s decisions and actions.

Dr. Paul also believes that the U.S. government has no moral authority to place its military bases on other peoples’ territories, and that the U.S. government acts criminally when it invades and occupies other lands in which the people there are of no threat to us. As President he thus would have closed down all foreign U.S. military bases overseas and would have brought all U.S. troops home. And yes, that is a “libertarian” policy.

On the aforementioned Wendy McElroy blog, someone posted the following video (I think it was H. Reardon), in which Dr. Paul says that “anarchists” are okay, as long as they don’t violate the non-aggression principle, as long as they don’t violate others’ persons or property. All “anarchy” means is “no ruler.” It does not mean chaos, lawlessness, destruction and violence, despite such false connotations with that word. You are your own ruler of your own life. Just don’t initiate aggression against others. And Dr. Paul states that libertarians generally support the right of socialists to have their own little community of socialism if they want it, as long as they don’t force others to take part who don’t want to take part, as long as the socialists don’t go over to others’ community to “tax” i.e. steal from them, etc. In contrast, however, the socialists probably would not be open to allowing libertarians to have their own little community of liberty, not subject to the will of the socialist outsiders. And I believe he is correct on that, and I would put fascists in the same category as the socialists. That is the big difference between socialists/fascists and libertarians. (And based on their policies and views, most Democrats and most Republicans are both socialists and fascists, in the accurate sense of those words, by the way!)

And here is that video:

Idiot Professors Being the Racist Pots Calling the Kettle Black

There is a very distressing post by Mac Slavo at, about these college professors who not only suggest that their students act like fools in censoring themselves and in being overly self-conscious for being white, but the faux teachers are actually threatening to give students lower grades for not complying with the censorship.

So these professors are actually telling the world just how intolerant and closed-minded they are, and now they are telling the parents of these students that those parents’ tuition payments are worthless. Why send your kids to college in which they would get good grades if they do good work and learn the course material in normal circumstances, when now it appears that the students might fail a course for not being sufficiently moronic like these idiot professors?

At Washington State University, for example, if students use terms such as “male” and “female” (I am not. Making. This. Up.), “students risk a failing grade,” according to a “Women and Popular Culture” professor’s syllabus. I’m glad I didn’t take a “Women in Popular Culture” course when I was in college. Obviously, that course material will be critical in  getting better paying jobs after college graduation!

Another Washington State University professor writes in his syllabus, “understand and consider the rage of people who are victims of systematic injustice…” (You mean like all the qualified white people who are denied jobs or placement in colleges because of their whiteness?) and he concludes, “James Baldwin wrote that people of color have an obligation to feel rage over this nation’s history of racism.” It is a shame that some elitist professor is putting all that pressure on some young black student to “feel rage,” when all the guy really wants to do is get through his classes so he can go back to the dorm and party it up, like all the other students.

The first professor also says the students risk a failing grade for not “deferring” to “non-white” students. How insulting, in my view. I mean insulting to the “non-white” students! But this just shows what these idiot professors think of their black students, that the black students need to be “deferred” to, like they are cripples or something. If I were a young black student, I would say, “No thanks” to the clown masquerading as a college professor. Just treat me as just another student, if you don’t mind. I think that many of these professors smoked a lot of pot and did other drugs as well, really frying their brains so that they don’t think rationally by the time they are in their mid-20s. (And frankly, look at all the burn-outs we have in the White House and other Washington apparatchiks, they are totally fried.)

This “white guilt” crap really is just that, a lot of crap. Only collectivists think that way. If you are someone who has not harmed anyone, then you have no guilt, black or white, Asian or Hispanic, etc. You are an individual. The real racist is someone who tells others that they have guilt or are bad just because of what their skin color is. And these professors are also racists when they demean black students by making them out to be cripples. And I think those racist professors should cut it out.