Blogs

Yes, the Affordable Care Act is "the law"... and?

Upheld and vetted and harumphed by all branched of government, just as the hundreds of thousands of other laws are.  And like most other laws, it is destructive of freedom and liberty and worthy of all the ridicule, disparagement, and disobedience anyone can muster.
 
The idea that something must be right simply because it is "the law" denounces the very soul of humanity, the soul wherein we know what is right and wrong, and act on that knowledge.  Law provides the magic words by which we can confuse our intellect to override our senses.  We know it is wrong to steal, but if there is a law, some magic words, some clever turn of phrase and logical fallacy, we will accept it, or even champion it.
 
That is the power of politics and politicians, to turn our reason against our selves.
 
 

D.C. Police Execute Unarmed Dental Hygienist for Traffic Mishap -- to Congressional Applause

Am I the only one who finds it barbaric that a uniformed donut-grazer (thanks, Becky Akers for the technical term) automatically shot to death a woman who was guilty of nothing more than reckless driving when nobody had been seriously injured as a result? The victim, Miriam Carey, was unarmed, completely surrounded by police, was never capable of harming the Sanctified One in the heavily barricaded White House, and apparently she was suffering from post-partum depression. Is an automatic death sentence without trial the new treatment protocol for this sad condition under ObamaCare? Now her one-year-old daughter has no mother. And will Obama now claim that the death was the result of the so-called government shutdown?
 
 

Saudi Cleric Says Women Who Drive Risk Damaging Their Ovaries

"A conservative Saudi Arabian cleric has said women who drive risk damaging their ovaries and bearing children with clinical problems, countering activists who are trying to end the Islamic kingdom's male-only driving rules."
 
"In an interview published on Friday on the website sabq.org, Sheikh Saleh bin Saad al-Lohaidan said women aiming to overturn the ban on driving should put 'reason ahead of their hearts, emotions and passions'."
 
Yes, let's give reason a chance, but that would lead us in the opposite direction of bin Saad al-Lohaidan.

What "Non-essential" really means....

The gang leaders can't decide how to spend the loot, so they decide to "shut down" until they can work it out.  Because of thier self-imposed hardship, it should be easy to see and understand what their priorities are.
 
They shut down the operation of parks, museums, arts, issuing grants, welfare checks, WIC cards, social services...
 
But not the DEA, ATF, EPA, FBI, CIA, DHS, TSA, or other alphabet agencies.  So it seems anything to do with service is non-essential, and anything to do with enFORCEment must carry on at any cost. 
 
The agencies that deal in violence are essential.  The agencies that deal in service are not.
 
It seems these two rival gangs agree on quite a bit more than they let on. 

US Drones Bomb Silk Road

They are the kind of drones who inhabit plush offices at our expense, awaiting fat pensions while doing work for which in the coming free society there will be zero demand.
 
In a triumphant announcement yesterday the FBI boasted they had raided and closed down the popular on-line mood-enhancement retailer called Silk Road, by arresting the alleged owner Ross Ulbricht of San Francisco. This PBS News Hour report showed how Silk Road used TOR to enable customers to surf safely to their site, and Bitcoin to make confidential purchases. The fellow explaining that procedure was a little man with big hands and a silly hat, and as an example of caricature propaganda his performance would have earned Dr Goebbels a commendation from his Leader.
 
The transcript does not say, however, that either Bitcoin or TOR have in some way been closed down. Maybe so, maybe not. The bombers have, unfortunately, introduced an element of doubt. The market is springing to offer replacements.
 
The incident removes all shadow of doubt, if any remained, that government is implacably hostile to free enterprise, honest money, privacy and self-directed ingestion. It is utterly beyond hope of redemption or reform. There is zero alternative to its total eradication. The way to achieve that in short order is presented here. If you're not taking part, start now.

NSA Tries to Shut Down Spoof T-Shirts

The folks at LibertyManiacs.com sell a hilarious t-shirt that triggered a tweet from Glenn Greenwald. The NSA wanted to shut them down and forbid sale of the t-shirts. Their complaint? Copyright infringement! Well, maybe if they weren't so busy spying on LibertyManiacs.com, they wouldn't have noticed! I've taken to wearing this t-shirt whenever I go out in public. You should, too. Among its phrases:

  • The NSA. The only part of government that actually listens.
  • Peeping While You're Sleeping (around the seal of the NSA).

 
With these shirts, you can do somethig for liberty awareness even while your mouth is shut!
 

Putin Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

Hell, why not?  Anything goes in this upside down world.  Didn't Barry win it after a couple of weeks as President?  link

Revenge Porn

The government of the Peoples' Republic of California has just enacted another nasty law to limit the freedom of speech; Gov. Brown signed a prohibition against “Revenge Porn.”
 
Suppose you like a lover so much that you send him (or her) a nude photo of yourself. Then later the two of you break up, and in a fit of peek he (or she) publishes the photo on the Net, for the satisfaction of revenge. The CA prohibition would penalize the publication.
 
It's a vicious thing to do, for sure, but Karen de Coster argues that it should not be illegal. She's right, but then nothing should be illegal, and in the coming free society nothing will be illegal. Why not? - there won't be any government, so there won't be any laws.
 
However the victim of such spite might have a recourse, in that free society – and possibly even in the present one. She (or he) could sue; on the grounds that when sending the lover the nudie pic she did not accompany it with permission to publish to all and sundry; that it was intended and understood to be for his exclusive use, given that the two of them were enjoying an exclusive relationship.
 
I don't know whether that argument would prevail, and damages be granted. But at least the matter could be adjudicated, without the monstrous interference of government. And of course with restitution if it did, instead of retribution.

Intervention

It always messes up the delicate balance of human interactions.

Here's a report of how, faced with the FedGov's mandate to provide employees with health care if they work more than 30 hours a week, some companies are responding to this unwanted stimulus but cutting hours from 35 to 30. Of course! Couldn't someone have predicted that?

So the company loses some of their services (preferable to losing the cost of providing a benefit both parties had already agreed to omit from the labor contract) and the worker loses some of the salary. Government is a lose-lose proposition.

In the coming free society, health care will be furnished like any other service in the market, at a vastly lower price than today - as shown here.

Selling Your Vote

in

Just wanted to put a question out there to garner some thoughts:
 
While -- or perhaps since -- most if not all of the people reading this don't exercise their "right" to vote, if there were no governmental repercussions (or at least no serious ones) from selling your vote to someone each election cycle for a monetary fee (or other suitable compensation), would you be amenable to this?  Why or why not, depending?

Syndicate content