Most people get a fair amount of fun out of their lives,
but on balance life is suffering, and
only the very young or very foolish imagine otherwise.
George Orwell
Image of the Day
 |
| via LFC |
 |
| Featuring one of my all-time favorite flicks.... |
 |
| via |
 |
| via LFC |
 |
| via Catholic Libertarians |
Jim Grant On the Recent Stock Market Chaos
Boater Rights
For the Right to BBQ in Your Own Backyard
I remember when I lived in Milwaukee, I could smell the pleasant smell of chocolate pervading the neighborhoods around the Ambrosia Chocolate Factory. (Later the factory became unfortunately linked to its once employee Jeffrey Dahmer.) I enjoyed the delicious smells; more recently, of course, Sriracha chili sauce, now a staple on my shopping list, smells almost led to the company moving out of California. In the clip below, a man is being told his smoke is legal only insofar as it stays within his property lines
Facebook Corner
(Lew Rockwell). As Tom Woods notes, in the American establishment there is no dissent. Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives, all agree on issues from war to empire, from welfare to banksterism. Anyone who threatens this ruling class is, of course, demonized and–they hope–silenced. And now, right on schedule, we’re starting to hear that Trump’s supporters are racists, sexists, antisemites, etc. Ross Perot got the same treatment, as did Pat Buchanan, and for the same reason. But I have a feeling that this time, it’s not going to work. Most Americans are tired of the reign of PC terror, which grows more evil and idiotic by the day. And–trigger warning–Trump has given them safe spaces from all the micro-aggressions.
Pretentious rubbish. Trump is an authoritarian in the making, he's a cartoonishly repulsive trade warrior, he never learned to play with others, he's a flip-flopper beyond Kerry and Romney, and he's a corrupt insider, paying for political favors, like his notorious abuse of eminent domain.
The sophistry to defend Trump is astounding. Trump has called for the assasination for the "spy" Snowden; he said that we have to err on the side of security on things like the NSA phone metadata collection, he wants to throw a lot of money at DoD, including our nuclear stockpile, he opposes our open immigration heritage, he is an avowed protectionist, he is willing to consider putting boots on the ground over ISIS: this is just the tip of the iceberg.
How Rockwell can ignore Trump's alarming black-and-white, zero-sum politics is astonishing. This is the recipe for someone who wants to grow the Presidency, the last thing a libertarian wants. Whereas Rockwell celebrates Trump's ubiquitous unfiltered uncivil behavior as a battle against political correction, ask me what a thing about the character of a man so petty that he retweets one of his cultists calling a former debate moderator a "bimbo". Really, a self-centered, egotistical billionaire playing the victim card? Give me a break, Lew.
And stop using Tom Woods' idiotic simplistic analysis of how the Dems and the GOP are the same--even novice libertarians play that line. It's intellectually vacuous. It was not the GOP which started the $93T unfunded entitlement liability, it ws not the GOP which nationalized mortgage securitization and student college loans, which bailed out the unions against the rule of law in the auto bankruptcies, which increased the government foothold in healthcare by up to 50% or more. I am well-aware that the GOP has its share of faults, but it's the only party where libertarian voices like the Pauls, Massie, Amash, Goldwater, Reagan, and others found a home.
(Reason). Vowing to recapture some of the enthusiasm his campaign has lost over the past few weeks, Rand Paul said he will focus on property issues and eminent domain abuse in order to make the case that Donald J. Trump is out of step with conservative Republican primary voters.
Good for Rand Paul! however, didn't Rand Paul vote in favor of the Keystone XL pipeline in which Canadian owned company can use the US Government to declare eminent domain on American private property owners to run the pipeline through their land? I expect Trump will smack back with that, but no self-respecting Libertarian would consider voting for Donald Trump.
I can't believe Progressives are still asserting this discredited bullshit notion. Unlike Trump, who has had small business locations condemned, say, to make way for limousine parking at his properties, oil and gas pipelines do not aim to condemn properties but to seek an easement on a narrow strip of land through the property. Pipelines are typically buried 4 feet under and do not impede a property owners access to the topsoil, and the pipeline pays a market fee for land use; pipeline companies generally are able to negotiate 80-85% of the pipeline successfully before resorting to eminent domain for holdouts. The intentionally misleading troll also fails to note that there are literally thousands of pipelines criss-crossing the US and the only reason the Feds are involved is because the pipeline would cross the national border. The xenophobic twist on the company's headquarters in Canada is yet another disrespectful twist of the ignorant troll.
I think voters are tired of electing people to the House and Senate and nothing happens. I dont think those supporting Trump think he is the most qualified, I really think its abut sending a message to congress that we elected you, you do NOTHING, and we have the ability to send someone to DC who , as president, will make your life a living hell. I think many Americans , regardless of party affiliation are ready to roll the dice for 4 yrs and see what happens. Very much like when they sent Reagan to the White House...it was a FED UP moment in American history then, and it is now!
Hell NO. For one thing, there is no validate comparison between Reagan and Trump. This is from a 1975 Reason piece on Reagan (still online), years before he became President: " in recent months Reagan has taken to using the term "libertarian" (or "libertarian-conservative") to describe his political philosophy"; there is nothing libertarian about Trump; every part of his message is authoritarian and Statist; from a libertarian perspective, a stalemate in the central government is a good thing.
Now for any rational human being to vote for an unqualified, ill-tempered, politically corrupt, economically illiterate, unprincipled populist demagogue right-fascist Trump is impossible to contemplate. Do you seriously trust a man who still has anger issues with Rosie O'Donnell and Megyn Kelly in trust of our nuclear arsenal? If you thought Obama abused his executive authority, what do you think Trump will do when he finds himself possibly facing a Democrat-controlled Congress or even an alienated GOP-controlled Congress?
Only two people can beat Trump: Rand Paul and whoever the democrats choose to run for president
Shooting stars fall fast. You're forgetting that Trump can do or say something that causes his support to evaporate. Go back to 2012 and see how Akins and Mourdoch, who appeared to have a lock on Senate seats, were undone by single soundbites. So far Trump seems to have politically benefited from his uncivil behavior, but he's playing with fire.
(Independent Institute). "Patterns of assimilation on the part of contemporary
immigrants are not very different from those of yesteryear who are judged by current critics to have been more culturally compatible." —Alvaro Vargas Llosa
http://blog.independent.org/2013/07/30/a-new-case-for-freedom-of-immigration-alvaro-vargas-llosas-global-crossings/
1780, 1850, 1920 there was no free ride for these immigrants, now we pay them after they brake our laws.
Don't be a nativist retard. Immigration has NOTHING to do with the welfare state, which your very own comment acknowledges. In fact, we've actually have a net decrease of 1M unauthorized since the Great Recession began. Economists universally acclaim the win-win nature of immigration on economic growth. But let's talk about your bullshit rationale: unauthorized aliens are not eligible for any federal welfare programs, even authorized immigrants are ineligible for 5 years. All immigrants pay taxes.
Um this doesn't seem to be very accurate. Were not the immigrants from 1780, 1850, and 1920 all LEGAL immigrants? If I am wrong then please correct me.
If by "illegal" you mean the morally unconscionable and economically illiterate restrictions imposed by a tyrannical majority of nativists, xenophobes, bigots and labor protectionists (unionists) with no regard for the natural right to migrate, to contract, etc., completely out of step with the pro-liberty principles on which this country were founded. The fact is when the US embraced a temporary worker permit program (Bracero) in the 1950's, arrests went down 95%. The corrupt labor unions forced JFK/LBJ to drop the Bracero program, even though they were advised it would result in migrant workers working around the labor prohibition.
You nativists not only are Statists cutting off your noses to spite your faces, willing to throw money at "border security", far more than your alleged claims of social welfare support of unauthorized aliens: at least a third of Mexican visitors had no intent of staying here permanently, but since there are barriers to return, they can't afford to lose work here and instead send for their families to come here.
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Steven Breen via Townhall |
Kenny Rogers (with Dottie West), "What Are We Doing In Love?"
