Well, folks, Carnivalitis has bitten Forward Biased two weeks in a row (something I'm gonna make dang sure never happens again—hosting a Carnival right is a lot of work), and this week it's the 37th iteration of the Second Most Important Carnival in the Whole Dang Blogosphere™, the Carnival of (drumroll, please) Liberty!
It's all about Life, Liberty, and Property, Folks. If you don't have those, what else matters? Security? Really?
This time you get a bonus, too, to wit, I'm not going to run my mouth quite as much as I did last Wednesday. Sort of. So, without further ado (just what is "ado," anyway? And how much is enough? Does anyone ever begin with ado? Isn't it time I just shut up?), I give you this week's Carnival of Liberty.
(The categories into which Your Humble Host™ has sorted these excellent entries are, no doubt, debatable, but are simply as they initially occurred to him, who, being the Host, gets to do it however he wants, unlike most other things in life.)
Gullyborg over at Resistance is futile! starts us off by letting us know that red is the new blue, and furthermore, that green is the new red! Confused yet? Read it; he'll explain, of course. He even changes his blog's color scheme to emphasize these issues.
If you can follow that train of logic, then you can see why I am leaving the blog green for a while. If you can't follow that train (or if your train derailed), allow me to elaborate...
THE NATION IS TRENDING CONSERVATIVE, AND THE PEOPLE REJECT LIBERAL IDEALS.
Sure, you can point to Bush's low popularity in the polls. But take that with a grain of salt: for one thing, the polls are highly stacked against the President (with a combination of push-poll questions and demographic weighting); second, many of the "negative" respondents are hard core conservatives dissatisfied with Bush (over record spending, failure to live up to promises like a defense of marriage amendment, etc.). If you add up the people who support the President and the unhappy folks who want a more conservative Commander-in-Chief, you get a solid majority.
Even in Oregon.
And in you made me...promises, promises...why should I believe? (to which my gut reaction is, amen! Preach it, brother!), Gullyborg supports Sen. Jason Atkinson for governor of Oregon, and tells us exactly why.
Ron Saxton is now making a campaign promise that violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. As an attorney, he should know better. If he can't get this right as an attorney, what can we expect from him as Governor?
Not that we all didn't already know all this stuff anyway. Eye rolling may commence now, unless you've been asleep since last September.
In a stunning reversal, the City of New Orleans revealed yesterday to attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association that they do have a stockpile of firearms seized from private citizens in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.
Stunning! I'm shocked, outraged! Outraged, I say! Who knew anything like this was going on?!?
The disclosure came as attorneys for both sides were preparing for a hearing in federal court on a motion filed earlier by SAF and NRA to hold the city in contempt. Plaintiffs’ attorneys traveled to a location within the New Orleans city limits where they viewed more than 1,000 firearms that were being stored.
...“We’re almost in disbelief,” admitted SAF Founder Alan Gottlieb. “For months, the city has maintained it did not have any guns in its possession that had been taken from people following the hurricane. Now our attorneys have seen the proof that New Orleans was less than honest with the court.”
What? They were dishonest?? NOOOOO!!
I'd like to believe that this will result in dozens of NOLA city officials and police officers doing hard time, but my more cynical side doesn't believe much will come of this. They're mostly Democrats, after all, and the Legacy Press, which would pounce on this story and tear it to shreds were it happening in my town, will largely ignore it, or at least treat it with kid gloves. Democrats, of course, being Naturally Good People, are given a pass for things for which Eeee-vil Right-wing Monsters (anyone who isn't a leftist) would be shredded, feet first.
I ask, how can it be permitted for the media to do something that private citizens cannot? Does the media have more freedom of speech than a private citizen? I would submit that the first amendment was clearly intended to protect both equally.
Do we want privileged classes in the US. Admittedly, we have them de facto, but is this a practice we wish to discourage, or encourage, de jure?
I am sick of being preached to by a bunch of phonies. These celebrities tell us all how we need to be concerned about global warming and not drive SUVs, meanwhile they fly around in private jets burning more fuel in one trip than the average American burns driving a SUV for an entire year!
They tell us that public figures are afraid to speak out against the Bush Administration because he is some sort of ‘dictator.’ Spare me. Criticizing President Bush is the safest career move one can make in the entertainment industry. A riskier move would be for an entertainer to actually admit support for the president.
By now, we're all used to the fact that the most moral, most generous, most selfless government in the world, the one that gives the most and takes the least, the one that restricts its own behavior on the battlefield far beyond the point of going against its own national interest, is constantly being decried as the most evil and tyrannical and fascist and selfish nation the world has known since Hitler himself. No, they're worse than he was. Naturally, the organization ostensibly devoted to promoting civil rights is at the forefront of this abuse, trying to disassemble that nation like so many Legos.
Currently the ACLU are appealing to the U.N. Human Rights Committee with their cries of how evil the United States Government is.
...As sickening as this is; it is only one step in the ACLU’s agenda to undermine America’s sovereignty and freedom that so many soldiers have sacrificed and died to preserve. The ACLU are obviously frustrated by their inability to advance their radical agenda more quickly under the U.S. Constitution, and are now determined not only to convince the American judiciary to look to international law, but also to use it as a means to their ends. They hold it as a higher authority than our own Constitution and are more than willing to sacrifice our sovereignty in their pursuit to radically force change on America to fit their own radical views.
The sad thing is that they don’t have to try very hard to convince our judiciary.
By now we all know about SCOTUS Justice Darth Vader Ginsburg's argument for submitting our Constitution to something that doesn't even exist, to wit, International Law.
Allow me to repeat: International Law does not exist. It's a mere construct existing solely in the misguided minds of a few fervent souls who worship at the altar of a mutated, monstrous form of "Social Justice."
She isn’t the only Justice that buys into this philosophy. FIVE Justices believe that international law should bear weight in interpreting our constitution.
FIVE?? Oh, boy. Trouble's a-brewin'.
While the ACLU’s rhetoric and efforts to use international law to rewrite, undermine, and bypass the Constitution has already gone beyond academic debate into the realm of actual use. As stated earlier, there are plenty of judges that have already adopted the philosophy and the ACLU are already participating in court cases where the judge uses international law in their decisions. It isn’t only at the federal level, but has penetrated even into the state level.
Read it all, if you dare.
It would be easy to say “good riddance” to former Yugoslav President and “Butcher of the Balkans” Slobodan Milosevic…and that’s why I am saying exactly that. Yes, I understand the need for a certain segment of the Serb population to say goodbye to their “hero” and patron saint. What greatly disturbs me, though, is the willingness of so many Serbs to look past the reality of Slobodan Milosevic and his murderous, despotic reign and lionize him as some sort of national icon of courage and steadfastness.
...To far too many Serbs, Milosevic represented the dream of Greater Serbia, the creation of a state where only Serbs would be allowed to live, thereby ensuring the safety and security of the Serbian people. The dream of “Greater Serbia” is a facade that was used to justify the murder and repression of untold thousands of former Yugoslav citizens in the name of Serbian racial and ethnic purity.
Samo sloga Srbina spasova.
Only where there are only Serbs will Serbs be safe.
Did you know this was going on?
So you thought socialism was dead, huh? The in-eminent Paul Krugman of the NYTimes is pushing quite hard for socialized medicine and insurance, besides. Trapier of Hayek, MD sets us straight in Holt vs. Kling, part II: Who's afraid of socialized medicine?
Is there any doubt then where one of the most prominent public intellectuals of our day stands on health care? To Krugman, Kling, Holt, Klein and anyone else, my answer is a vehement “No.” He is, purely and simply, unabashedly promoting “honest-to-God socialized medicine,” for whatever its worth.
When asked what he thought about being called “Europe’s last dictator”, Lukashenko said, “A dictatorship in the middle of Europe is impossible. Those who say so are stupid people.”
...Worried about promises by students to stage protests on election day, the KGB - Lukashenko has retained the Soviet acronym for his secret service - has threatened to treat demonstrators as terrorists, an offence with a 15-year jail sentence. The mass of police seen on the streets have orders not to stand for any demonstrations.
Ultimately, it’s just as vital that we stop accepting stolen money from the government as it is that we stop letting them steal our money.
When the government gives money or privilege, the recipients in return help to empower that government — whether they want to or not. The government, by selectively rewarding some and withholding rewards from others not only rewards compliant behavior directly, but also gives additional power and prestige to those who behave as the government wants and to those who by their actions provide a role model for submissive behavior. The privilege or money granted is only the government’s to give because the government denies it to or steals it from someone else.
...were unanimously in favour of sending our troops to Afghanistan when the decision first had to be made. Now, with the socialist CBC's "rising body count" - a handful of accidental deaths - our opposition politicians are squirming and saying, we don't have the stomach for this (they'd prefer we let the terrorists rebuild and then kill us here at home).
"Rising body count?" (As if the body count could go any other direction. Hey, people are wriggling right out of those body bags, actually lowering the body count!). Sheesh. I sympathize, dude.
...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...
He asks, when is "an illegal action inciting resistance to lawful authority and tending to cause the disruption or overthrow of the government" sedition, and when is it our duty?
We may all want to see this movie and contemplate the proper role of government, ask has the government strayed from its principles declared in our early documents, and if it has, discuss how we can bring about the necessary changes without violence.
...the President completely missed the point of the question. In his conception, apparently, the role of private citizens is to lend their support to the initiatives of government. What the questioner was interested in, which I think is much more important, was the ways in which private citizens can act independently of government in ways that advance freedom and the broad national interest.
You'll want to find out what he believes some of those ways are. They're good ones.
The Skwib's Mark A. Rayner delivers breaking news: journalists are movin' on up in the world!
...Nearly 49 percent of Canadians felt that journalists were more trustworthy than “wise” guys, prison snitches, French lovers, lawyers, used car salesemen and of course, politicians.
In Mark's words, "Man, it's a serious problem when the press is excited that only half of us believe them."
But, hey, progress is progress.
The latest round in the eminent domain battle may well be unfolding right in the shadow of the Capitol Building.
City officials have asked the D.C. Council to authorize the use of eminent domain in the neighborhood that includes the Sursum Corda housing cooperative, a move that provoked some Sursum residents to accuse the city yesterday of plotting to take their homes.
"Eminent domain. I know what that means. That means, 'Get out. Your kind is no longer welcome here,' " Lorraine Rooker, a resident of the low-income housing complex since 1969, told council members at a public hearing on the proposal. "You folks were elected to protect our rights, not take our property."
And property rights and political power focuses on an often-overlooked abuse of property rights. Sheesh...talk about your bad neighbors...
A couple who bought and renovated an 82-year-old house in Chevy Chase must tear it down because Montgomery County officials erred in approving the project.
And what bizarre course of events could possibly have happened that would result in someone being forced to demolish their home because, at worst, a mistake by a government official ?
A neighbor complained. That was all it took.
This isn't eminent domain, but it might as well be. Through zoning laws such as this, the government often restricts the ways in which property owners can use their property in manners which have a significant impact on their value, none of which is compensated. While we're paying attention to the impact of Kelo, we shouldn't forget that there are other laws that restrict property rights.
I've got a neighbor just like that. Read the whole thing. It's worth it.
If you don't know what "cuckold" means, check out Dictionary.com. We'll wait.
He goes on to discuss the economics of marriage and the legal status of polygamy.
So: Should polygamy be legalized? Provided we are talking about adults, yes.
Like all peaceful activities driven underground by criminalization, those that continue the activity tend to be those with little concern for laws or how much they may harm others. This is why we see polygamy practiced in the monstrous manner of the fundamentalist LDS adherents throughout the U.S., Canada and Mexico. Since they have no recourse to the law, and also must keep their life style hidden, they also hide abuses.
...But if this were legalized for adults, that enter these arrangements consensually, with full knowledge of their rights, their legal protections, and with the right to leave the arrangement legally and with police protection of need be, we could all but wipe out the hideous slavery that polygamy often is today.
By legalizing it, we can eliminate the evil practices of those child predators and slavers that infest that community, and protect the weak and vulnerable, adults and children alike.
...Now many would argue that monogamy is the norm in human relationships, and I agree. On the surface, at least.
Polygamy is actually going on all the time. It is just hidden under the mask of monogamy.
...So it would appear that monogamy is merely a way for male Lotharios that are successful in the mating game to get cuckolds to bear the expense and effort needed to raise the Lotharios offspring. Much in the same way that a yellow-billed cuckoo or a cowbird may lay its eggs in the nest of another bird, forcing the care of the chicks to someone else.
No wonder there is such a prejudice against polygamy.
I won't take the time now to point out all the parallels between this argument and those for decriminalizing drug use, but they are there for all to see.
Excellent post all around, folks. Be sure to read it all.
No kidding, dude.
Anyway, the upshot of his contribution this week includes the fact that the government makes more from a gallon of gas than do the oil companies, and he gives us a no-nonsense solution some may not have thought of:
I've got a simple free market solution for people who think gasoline prices are too high. Don't buy it. Along will come the screeches of, "But I need it to drive my car to work!" Then let me suggest another free market solution. Allocate your limited resources accordingly. Which do you value more: a gallon of gas to get to work or $2.40 in your pocket? It is a choice that really is as simple as that. When you try to allocate Exxon Mobile's resources to meet your desires then you are acting like a tyrant.
Dan Melton of the always-useful Searchlight Crusade discusses the pros and cons of debt consolidation refinance—you know, the stuff they're always advertising on television (if you watch that stuff). "Lost another loan to DiTech," that sort of thing. You'll want to base your decision on something a bit more, well, balanced, and Dan delivers.
The basic come-on is this: Your home has appreciated in value, and is worth more than you paid for it, so now you have equity on the one hand. On the other hand, you have loads of consumer debt, whcih is costing you hundreds or even thousands of dollars per month, which is impacting your lifestyle. So you borrow on the equity in your home and save money on your payments as well as causing them to be tax deductible in most cases.
...The important thing to remember is to not get distracted by the fact that your minimum monthly payment goes down, and see if you (and your prospective loan officer) can come up with a loan and a plan that really makes you better off down the line, instead of one that sucks the life out of you financially, like the vast majority of these scenarios do.
If you're even thinking about refinancing your home, read the whole thing.
"Der Eidelblogger," Perry Eidelbus of Eidelblog, opines that when conservatives don't get it about illegal immigration, they
...should stick to pure politics and refrain from discussing any economics. Take Rich Lowry's March 14th column as an example, which I read in today's New York Post. Instead of attacking illegal immigration from a legal standpoint, he brought up economics -- and showed he doesn't really understand that aspect of illegal immigration.
Like Michelle Malkin, Lowry brought up a myth by which anti-immigration pundits create irrational fear. In fact, he started off with it:
A core element of the American creed has always been a belief in the dignity of labor — at least until now. Supporters of a guest-worker program for Mexican laborers say that "there are jobs that no Americans will do." This is an argument that is a step away from suggesting that there are jobs that Americans shouldn't do.
Actually, and this is not being racist in the least, there are jobs Americans shouldn't do.
If you want to know why, go and read the whole thing.
The common argument among government intervention advocates is that without government regulation and intervention, a free market would lead to chaos, people would exploit one another. Here is a personal story that will debunk that myth.
...It was the black market that ended the starvation – starvation caused by government action. It was the black market that cured people and gave them a decent quality of life. It was the black market that sustained the entire country economy.
Liberal economic concepts such as invisible hand or spontaneous order are not abstract concepts. They are real and observable – and they are wonderful. They show the superiority of free market over government intervention. And even unregulated black market is proven to be superior to government.
Read and be ye enlightened.
Dr Chris R Tame, founder and President of the Libertarian
Alliance (formed in 1967) has finally succumbed to his long and painful bout with cancer. According to Mario Huet, List Administrator of the Libertarian Alliance Forum,
"His end was peaceful. With him to the end were Helen Evans and Petica Evans, and Sean Gabb... The President of the Libertarian Alliance, Dr Timothy Evans, and the Director of the Libertarian Alliance, Dr Sean Gabb, both wish to say that in spite of today's deeply sad news, the work of the Libertarian Alliance will continue."
That's it, folks. Next week, Dan Melson of Searchlight Crusade will host the Carnival of Liberty, and I'm looking forward to that.
Trackback and Refers
The Liberty Papers linked with Carnival of Liberty #37
Below the Beltway linked with Carnival of Liberty XXXVII
Mensa Barbie linked with Lukashenko in the Lead
The Skwib linked with Wednesday-O-Rama
The Steel Deal linked with Carnival of Liberty
New World Man linked with To the Fair!
The Liberty Papers linked with Carnival of Liberty XXXVII
Searchlight Crusade linked with Links and Minifeatures 03 22 Wednesday
The Unrepentant Individual linked with Carnival of Liberty XXXVII (yes, Brad, those Roman numerals are catching up to everyone)
Combs Spouts Off linked with Carnival, falling cat, and white trash
Target Centermass linked with Carnival of Liberty XXXVII
Quotulatiousness returned to posting again with Belated pointer to Carnival of Liberty