Archive for December, 2007

Abraham Lincoln’s feet of clay: “The Great Emancipator” was a racist tyrant

Posted in Tuma's Voice by R Lee Wrights on December 31st, 2007

by Kevin Tuma

courtesy of Kevin Tuma“My paramount objective in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery.”

- Abraham Lincoln, August 22, 1862, letter to newspaper editor Horace Greeley

In recent news, the Press has begun to pillory Ron Paul over his unconventional views of the US Civil War. It is unknown what they hope to accomplish by spotlighting a 147-year old historical event as a campaign issue; but the inference, since the discussions concern slavery, suggests a subtle attempt to smear Paul as a racist.

Before the socialist tyrant lovers in the mainstream media wax too orgasmic about using Paul’s position against him, it is worth pointing out that his position is the intelligent and informed position. It’s long since past obvious that the MSM is uninterested in reaching an intelligent, informed audience—but I’m not too sure this Lincoln debate is something they really want to dredge up into a national controversy. The odds are much too high that modern-day people may actually learn something new.

Read the rest of this entry »

The war of the wrong

Posted in Liberty's Lady by R Lee Wrights on December 30th, 2007

by Lady Liberty

Lady LibertyJust as there is a War on Drugs and a War on Terrorism ongoing in this country, there is a war without such a catchy name that continues unabated in America. That is the War on Guns. And just as the War on Drugs has spent billions of dollars with quite literally nothing to show for it but growing incidences of violence and the highest incarceration rates in the world; and as the War on Terrorism has cost untold losses of liberty to date; the War on Guns has prohibitive expenses all its own.

The grassroots forces in the War on Guns like to say that they’re “pro-gun control” or “for the children.” In reality, they’re anti-gun at best, and card-carrying members of the rights-denial contingent as a matter of course. These are people who will take a fact and exaggerate it beyond recognition, or who will take inconvenient facts and obscure them in entirety with passionate rhetoric. There’s no denying the emotional commitment that many of these people have to their cause. The problem, however, really lies in their ethical shortcomings.

The recently expired Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) actually gives real insight into the mindset of the Million Mom March, the Violence Policy Center, or the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. The AWB, which went into effect in 1994, was passed largely as a “feel good” measure. It made some politicians look like they were concerned about gun violence at the same time the law was essentially worthless. Though the anti-gun advocacy groups praised the AWB, and even demanded its renewal and expansion before it sunsetted in 2004, the reality of the AWB was that it addressed almost nothing but purely cosmetic features of various “ugly” firearms. The banned firearms, outside of appearances, didn’t fire different calibers at greater speeds than many hunting weapons not affected by the ban. This shows that anti-gunners are far more concerned with how things look than with how they actually are.

Read the rest of this entry »

Gun owners get stabbed in the back

Posted in Dangerous Politics by R Lee Wrights on December 29th, 2007

by GOA staff

GOA“To me, this is the best Christmas present I could ever receive”

- Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), CBS News, December 20, 2007

Gun Owners of America and its supporters took a knife in the back yesterday [Dec. 19], as Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) out-smarted his congressional opposition into agreeing on a so-called “compromise” on HR 2640 — a bill which now goes to the President’s desk.

The bill — known as the Veterans Disarmament Act to its opponents — is being praised by the National Rifle Association and the Brady Campaign.

The Brady Bunch crowed “Victory! U.S. Congress Strengthens Brady Background Check System.” The NRA stated that last minute changes to the McCarthy bill made a “good bill even better [and that] the end product is a win for American gun owners.”

But Gun Owners of America has issued public statements decrying this legislation.

The core of the bill’s problems is section 101(c)(1)(C), which makes you a “prohibited person” on the basis of a “medical finding of disability,” so long as a veteran had an “opportunity” for some sort of “hearing” before some “lawful authority” (other than a court). Presumably, this “lawful authority” could even be the psychiatrist himself.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Stamp Tax reconsidered

Posted in LFA Flashback by R Lee Wrights on December 28th, 2007

by Robert T. Murphy

Robert T. MurphyI want to propose a solution to what is probably the most important but little discussed problem in Libertarian politics; a method of financing the enforcement of laws without coercive taxation. The basic idea I’m proposing is to use a variation of a Stamp Tax as a user fee system for the civil courts, essentially charging a fee for contract enforcement, and using the revenue generated to finance the enforcement of the Law.

Libertarians are notoriously proud of their opposition to coercive taxes, but terribly weak when it comes to describing ways to pay for legitimate services such as police, military forces, and court systems. When asked, “How would you pay for the enforcement of laws without taxes?” most libertarians have only one of two answers. Anarcho-libertarians, six-guns and Winchesters loaded and ready, answer that they are perfectly willing and able to enforce the law for themselves, thank you (and by the way, you’ve got about thirty seconds to get your trespassin’ ass off my property!). Minarchists grudgingly allow for taxes, but insist on a Flat Tax, a National Sales Tax, or simply Customs Duties and Excise taxes, anything but the hated and un-American Progressive Income Tax. Both of these answers are inadequate. The first because of its naivete and Hobbesian impracticality, the second because, by allowing for any type of coercive taxation, it is an admission of a failure to consistently apply libertarian principles to real-world situations.

A Libertarian society needs to have some sort of organized, professional, and public system for enforcing laws derived from the non-initiation of force principle. Such a system is not going to evolve naturally from the statist mess we’re in now. It is up to us to design ways - simple, practical, easy-to-understand ways - to dismantle or reform the inadequate systems we have now - and the most essential thing is to come up with a Libertarian method of paying for it.

Read the rest of this entry »

The real cost of Ladies Night

Posted in Random Thoughts by R Lee Wrights on December 27th, 2007

by Tyler Beebout

Live and let liveA crusader for justice has come to Colorado. He has traveled around the country fighting discrimination, tirelessly combating prejudice and unfair treatment. Already, his efforts have paid off in Minnesota and the EU is listening to his calls for justice. This man is Steve Horner, and he’s here to end Ladies Night.

Mr. Horner moved to Colorado a year ago and quickly took issue with Proof Nightclub’s “Ladies Night” promotion. Ladies Night is a common bar special where women’s cover charges are waived or their drinks are discounted. The goal of the promotion is to attract more women and, by doing so, attract more men as well. Mr. Horner argued that only waiving cover charges for women was gender discrimination, and that he shouldn’t be charged more for simply being a man.

Mr. Horner took his complaint all the way to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, and on June 25 commission members decided that Ladies Night is indeed an illegal practice in Colorado. To justify its decision, the Commission cited a State Statute that prohibits a place of public accommodation from “denying an individual equal enjoyment of goods” based on their sex.

To enforce this decision, the Commission has been granted somewhat less than far-reaching powers. They can request that any employees who were wrongly fired as a result of Ladies Night be rehired, and they’ve been given the power to post notices that Ladies Night is illegal.

Read the rest of this entry »

Got that warm and fuzzy feeling?

Posted in NtheDrgWar by R Lee Wrights on December 27th, 2007

by Rusty White

Rusty WhiteSaw on TV today about the 4 Drug Dealers Mexico sent to us which our government demanded. Now as you watch the media and the drug warriors claim victory in a veiled attempt to justify and continue this failed policy, ask yourself these questions.

1. How many MILLIONS of dollars is it going to cost US the American tax payers to put these people on a mock trial that we all know the end to???

2. How many MILLIONS of tax dollars is it going to cost YOU AND ME, to lock them up for the rest of their lives??? Due to their custody level, the average MINIMUM yearly rate will be over 80,000 dollars a year, not counting medical! If they each live 40 years in our prisons, 4×80,000= 320,000 x 40 = 12.8 MILLION tax dollars, NOT COUNTING MEDICAL!

3. Now multiply these MILLIONS by the numbers our government demands ALL countries send to us???

4. Why do the American tax payers have to foot the bill for the wrongs of other countries’ people, while the FACTS show it does NOTHING to solve our problem???

Read the rest of this entry »

You know my number, look up my name (or anything else about me)!

Posted in The Freedom Beam by R Lee Wrights on December 26th, 2007

by Roderick T. Beaman

Liberty BellMr. Kent Snyder of The Liberty Committee has issued a warning about a proposed “unique health identifier number” to track patients through the health care system. He cites that it has been put into effect in Great Britain, soon will be in Australia, and forces are at work to put one into effect here in the U.S. of A. These forces have been frustrated by Congressman Ron Paul.

While Mr. Snyder’s concerns are honorable and Ron Paul is one of the few principled libertarians in Congress, in fact, that horse is long since out of the barn. No unique health identifier is even necessary because we already have the Social Security Number (SSN). It is unquestionably, a national identification number, so what else is needed? As usual, a little history is in order.

When Social Security was first proposed, there was a huge controversy over whether the number might become part of a national identification system. Even the most ardent advocates conceded that the Act would never have passed if it was to be part of such a system, yet here we are, three quarters of a century later, and that is exactly the case. How did it come to pass?

When I received my first SS card, it was written across it, that it was not to be used for identification purposes. My replacement card does not have that, which should tell you something. Today, the number is used for virtually everything. You are required to provide it for drivers’ licenses, professional licenses, bank accounts and loans. Utilities even request it. Apartment complexes require it. Applications from those who refuse to divulge it, are rejected out of hand. Those are just the ones that immediately spring to mind. Any child claimed as an income tax deduction must have one.

Read the rest of this entry »

Being reasonable

Posted in Liberty's Friend by R Lee Wrights on December 26th, 2007

by Larken Rose

Independence HallIt seems that when collectivists run out of other excuses for their anti-freedom agenda, they fall back on calling real limiting of government “unreasonable” or “impractical.” For example, Mona Charen recently opined that doing away with the IRS (as Ron Paul suggests) isn’t a “serious” proposal. The underlying message is clear: dramatic change–in fact, any change that is significant at all–is unreasonable, impractical, and so on, because it would be a dramatic change.

What an odd concept. Suppose your morning ritual consisted of getting up, taking a shower, getting dressed, having breakfast, hammering a nail into your foot, and driving to work. And suppose you had been doing that for all of your working career, until some radical, wacko extremist suggested that perhaps you would be better off if you completely removed the sticking-a-nail-in-your-foot part of your morning routine. “Well, I can’t just stop it entirely! That’s impractical! It’s unreasonable! Perhaps I could use smaller nails, or hammer them in not quite as deep, but do away with the act altogether? Come on, be reasonable!”

Read the rest of this entry »

Merry Christmas

Posted in Tuma's Toons by R Lee Wrights on December 25th, 2007

by Kevin Tuma

Kevin Tuma

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read the rest of this entry »

All I want for Christmas is to end this stupid war

Posted in JDM at LFA by R Lee Wrights on December 24th, 2007

by Jonathan David Morris

Jonathan David MorrisI like how people these days are out of their minds.

When I was a kid, nobody cared if you said “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays.” Both phrases had the same degree of utility. I distinctly remember this.

Back then, “Merry Christmas” was the odds-on favorite just because more people celebrated Christmas than any other holiday. This is still true, but the difference is, back then, it didn’t matter if you said “Merry Christmas” to someone who didn’t celebrate Christmas, because you didn’t really mean they should be merry about Jesus. You just meant they should have a festive month of December. For all intents and purposes, “Merry Christmas” was the “shalom” of holiday greetings. People used it the same way they used “hello” and “goodbye.”

“Happy Holidays” was exactly the same, except slightly different. It didn’t mean you should enjoy every holiday in December whether you liked it or not; it just meant you should enjoy whichever ones you celebrated. For some people, this meant Christmas. For others, it meant Chanukah. And for others, it meant Hanukah. It would’ve meant Kwanzaa, too, if Kwanzaa existed back then (which, to the best of my recollection, it didn’t). But the point is, no one ever accused you of bowing at the altar of diversity if you said “Happy Holidays.” No one ever said that the phrase was “just another example of political correctness run amok.”

Read the rest of this entry »


« Previous entries