Leadership is action, not position.
Donald H. McGannon
Tweet of the Day
Listen to the failed Keynesian economist and Democratic Party shill Paul Krugman argue Trump is self-serving, corrupt. Clinton Foundation?— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 2, 2017
Krugman is also trying to pin the abysmal Hillary Clinton's loss on Obama's blunder naming an anti-Clinton operative, FBI Dir. James Comey.— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 2, 2017
I don't doubt that other parties are hoping to gain influence with the Trump Administration through Trump business deals. Not unique.— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 2, 2017
What Krugman doesn't tell you is that corruption coexists inherently with Big Government's largesse and authority, a progressive ideal.— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 2, 2017
I don't think Trump is motivated so much by additional wealth he doesn't need, but by ego and a lust for power, shared by Clinton & others.— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 2, 2017
Trump's Achilles heel is his ego. He wanted to put his brand on anything, including failed Trump University, which tarnished his brand.— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 2, 2017
I don't doubt parts of the Clinton's home server security work. No doubt my emails would get marked as spam and my blog is in the URL filter— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) January 2, 2017
Millennials and Government Impediments
Anarchism vs. the State
I'm more of a minarchist, and anarchists have been more contemptuous of us than fully committed Statists, arguing that a little State is like being a little bit pregnant. Let's just point out that I completely agree with the thrust and arguments of the video, but I'm pragmatic in terms of how to guarantee common safety and individual liberties. But arguing for common defense does not imply being the world's policeman; you have to consider marginal cost/benefits of elevated security.
Facebook Corner
(Catholic Libertarians). See the anarchy clip above.
I expect anarchists to attack those of us minarchists as unprincipled heretics in our criticism of the State. We would argue things like a common defense and a justice system that guarantees liberty define a quasi-State.
Some would most wouldnt. However my only real criticism is I do find it naive to amlow the state a foothold and not expect it to grow
That's a valid concern; but I would argue this would be true even in a large voluntary association. Clearly the Founding Fathers would be dismayed at how the federal government has grown out of control. The safeguards obviously weren't sufficient. I blame the growth primarily on two things: direct taxation (the 16th Amendment) and the Carolene Products Footnote 4 decision.
I believe our system of government is the best outside the Theocracy the children of Israel had (which they rebelled against). I think it's the people who have corrupted the government. One of our forefathers said as much: "This government is designed for a moral people and will work for no other kind." I submit that the majority of the people are no longer moral
The idea that elitists are "better" than the people they rule is odd. History is full of monsters who have persecuted those under their control; the idea of "you made me do it" is self-serving. What John Adams was saying had to do with civic duty and is better stated by Noah Webster:
"In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate -- look at his character. It is alleged by men of loose principles, or defective views of the subject, that religion and morality are not necessary or important qualifications for political stations. But the scriptures teach a different doctrine. They direct that rulers should be men who rule in the fear of God, men of truth, hating covetousness. It is to the neglect of this rule that we must ascribe the multiplied frauds, breaches of trust, speculations and embezzlements of public property which astonish even ourselves; which tarnish the character of our country and which disgrace our government. When a citizen gives his vote to a man of known immorality, he abuses his civic responsibility; he not only sacrifices his own responsibility; he sacrifices not only his own interest, but that of his neighbor; he betrays the interest of his country."
Again, here: "...if the citizens neglect their Duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the Laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizen will be violated or disregarded."
We just had an election between the two worst POTUS candidates in recent US history: we ended with the election of an unprincipled man who tried to use eminent domain to take over the home of an elderly woman to use the property for chauffeur parking. who talked about restoring torture for terror suspects and targeting their families, who had openly admired unjust authoritarian leaders...
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Lisa Benson via Townhall |
Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists
Cher, "I Found Someone"
