Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Monday, December 28, 2009
Friday, December 25, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Monday, December 21, 2009
Monday, December 14, 2009
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Monday, December 7, 2009
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Friday, November 13, 2009
I can imagine this sickening thought:
Mommy, mommy, I wanna be a faithful soldier for the Gweat and Mighty State and for Massa Pwesident Mussobama. When I gwow up, I wanna wear the uniform and learn to kill or be killed.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
Thursday, November 5, 2009
The Nazification (or is it Stalinization) of these united States continues its' march forward.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Something for everyone except anti-statists, supporters of freedom of speech and expression, and opponents of our continued involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
As someone once said, you'd have to break some eggs to make an omelet.
A rotten-tasting omelet.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Friday, October 30, 2009
The presidency must be destroyed. It is the primary evil we face, and the cause of nearly all our woes. It squanders the national wealth and starts unjust wars against foreign peoples that have never done us any harm. It wrecks our families, tramples on our rights, invades our communities, and spies on our bank accounts. It skews the culture towards decadence and trash. It tells lie after lie. Teachers used to tell schools kids that anyone can be president. This is like saying anyone can go to Hell. It's not an inspiration; it's a threat.
The presidency – by which I mean the executive state – is the sum total of American tyranny. The other branches of government, including the presidentially appointed Supreme Court, are mere adjuncts. The presidency insists on complete devotion and humble submission to its dictates, even while its steals the products of our labor and drives us into economic ruin. It centralizes all power unto itself, and crowds out all competing centers of power in society, including the church, the family, the business, the charity, and the community.
I'll go further. The U.S. presidency is the world's leading evil. It is the chief mischief-maker in every part of the globe, the leading wrecker of nations, the usurer behind third-world debt, the bailer-out of corrupt governments, the hand in many dictatorial gloves, the sponsor and sustainer of the New World Order, of wars, interstate and civil, of famine and disease. To see the evils caused by the presidency, look no further than Iraq or Serbia, where the lives of innocents were snuffed out in pointless wars, where bombing was designed to destroy civilian infrastructure and cause disease, and where women, children, and the aged have been denied essential food and medicine because of a cruel embargo. Look at the human toll taken by the presidency, from Dresden and Hiroshima to Waco and Ruby Ridge, and you see a prime practitioner of murder by government.
Today, the president is called the leader of the world's only superpower, the "world’s indispensable nation," which is reason enough to have him deposed. A world with any superpower at all is a world where no freedoms are safe. But by invoking this title, the presidency attempts to keep our attention focused on foreign affairs. It is a diversionary tactic designed to keep us from noticing the oppressive rule it imposes right here in the United States.
Lew Rockwell said this in 1996.
Yes, it's amazing how the "anti-war" left, who detested Republican wars, now support the same wars, now that one of their own is Commander-In-Thief.
I think we may see the breakup of this country during our lifetimes.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Will the Oath-Keepers support an end to the insane War on Drugs?
Friday, October 23, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Monday, October 19, 2009
Let's see the folks at the Walt Disney Company do a remake of "Mary Poppins" with this rousing, cheerful tune.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
We can expect to see more of this in Emperor Barack's Amerika.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Monday, October 12, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
We are the crossroads of the most serious crisis in modern history. The US in partnership with NATO and Israel has launched a global military adventure which, in a very real sense, threatens the future of humanity.
At this critical juncture in our history, the Norwegian Nobel Committee's decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to President and Commander in Chief Barack Obama constitutes an unmitigated tool of propaganda and distortion, which unreservedly supports the Pentagon's "Long War": "A War without Borders" in the true sense of the word, characterised by the Worldwide deployment of US military might.
Apart from the diplomatic rhetoric, there has been no meaningful reversal of US foreign policy in relation to the George W. Bush presidency, which might have remotely justified the granting of the Nobel Prize to Obama. In fact quite the opposite. The Obama military agenda has sought to extend the war into new frontiers. With a new team of military and foreign policy advisers, the Obama war agenda has been far more effective in fostering military escalation than that formulated by the NeoCons.
Since the very outset of the Obama presidency, this global military project has become increasingly pervasive, with the reinforcement of US military presence in all major regions of the World and the development of new advanced weapons systems on an unprecedented scale.
Granting the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama provides legitimacy to the illegal practices of war, to the military occupation of foreign lands, to the relentless killings of civilians in the name of "democracy."
Saturday, October 10, 2009
I wonder if this is the kind of guy who might be perfect for the Mussobama regime's proposed federal police force.
Friday, October 9, 2009
I certainly think Obama's Civilian Defense Force is intended to be an auxiliary Party force, very similar to the Sturmabteilung [the infamous SA] of the Nazi's that grew out of the Freikorps and became the Party's private army, as Trotsky's Red Army was the private army of the Bolsheviki, not of the state. Hitler was himself eventually threatened by the SA and killed off the leaders and folded the troops into the new SS, which became the private army of Hitler, swearing allegiance to him personally in the Nuremberg Sportsplatz ceremonies, rather than being subject to the orders of the German General Staff, the Wehrmacht. The Soviet Party always maintained heavily armed special forces around Moscow responsible to the Party. They also had their own more loyal Spetznetz forces, very much like the US Special Forces, and the Party-controlled Cheka-NKVD-KGB, GRU, and MVD. Putin came from the KGB but controlled all of them in the new regime. [He still does informally.] The US Imperial President controls the 19 [plus secret-secret units] secret police from the FBI and CIA to DEA and BATF, but they do not have heavy weapons. They have more direct control of some of the Special Forces for that but I do not know the details of such secret matters.
The U.S. Constitution provides for the state-controlled reserves, national guards for emergencies, etc. The federal government is moving to take control of the state military forces upon command of the President.Any bets we will end up in concentration camps---perhaps complete with firing squads, gallows, and/or oversized ovens?
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
Thursday, October 1, 2009
According to Macedonian Radio and Television On-line (MRT), a Russian professor predicts the United States will fall apart in July 2010. MRT reports,
"'Mr. Obama is similar to the last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev was also making great promises for the Soviet Union, but the situation was only getting worse,' he said. By next summer, according to Professor Panarin, the US will disintegrate into six blocs--and everyone will get their piece. 'The probability that the United States of America fall apart in July 2010 is more than 50 percent,' said Igor Panarin, Professor at Moscow's Diplomatic Academy within the Russian Federation's Ministry of Foreign Affairs."
MRT went on to report:"Panarin came up with his grim forecast while analyzing the parallels between the Soviet Union in its final days and the current situation in the United States.’American dream ballooned seven times in 11 years. During Gorbachev era, the Soviet dream ballooned five times.' Americans hope [President] Barack Obama 'can work miracles,' he wrote. 'But when spring comes, it will be clear that there are no miracles.'"
Should some socialistic country emerge out of Washington state and Oregon, I think several counties in eastern Washington and eastern and southwestern Oregon, as well as maybe six counties from northern California may band together and form their own independent country or countries, so as to avoid being under the influence of Portland, Seattle, Olympia, Salem, or Sacramento.
Fanned by angry contempt for Washington, secession movements have sprouted up in perhaps more than a dozen states in recent years. In Vermont, retired economics professor Thomas Naylor leads the Second Vermont Republic, a self-styled citizens network dedicated to extracting the sparsely populated New England state from "the American Empire."
And on the other side of the continent, Northwestern separatists envision a "Republic of Cascadia" carved out of Oregon, Washington and the Canadian province of British Columbia.
While most Americans dismiss the breakaway sentiments, sociologists and political experts say they are part of a larger anti-Washington wave that is rapidly spreading across the country.
I think this country could be broken into several independent countries in our lifetimes.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Yes, folks, coming to a town near you, your very own local paramilitary force.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Here are Steve Doocy and Judge Andrew Napolitano on the Massachusetts Forced Immunization Law on Monday's edition of Fox & Friends on Fox News Channel.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Sunday, September 27, 2009
The question I have is, are they our national treasure, or , a treasure for the super-rich?
Friday, September 25, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Friday, September 18, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Monday, September 14, 2009
Lesson number one is that the cops do not believe in your First Amendment rights, or any other rights of yours, for that matter. If they find it convenient for their own purposes, which often seem to include nothing more than throwing their weight around, they will yell at you, shove you, threaten you with night sticks, dogs, and horses, whack you with their clubs, and lob tear gas into your ranks. It’s all in a day’s work for those who have sworn “to serve and protect.” Best you remember, however, that the phrase is short for “serve and protect the state,” not for “serve you and protect your rights to life, liberty, and property.” Protecting your right to demonstrate peacefully against state policies is not part of the cops’ job description.
Lesson number two is that the people in the demonstrations are there for all sorts of reasons, despite what one might suppose from their announced issue(s) as signified by signs, banners, and group statements. I often bemoaned the lack of seriousness in many of the antiwar demonstrators with whom I marched. A great many of the younger ones seemed to be there mainly because demonstrating against the war was, literally, a sexy thing for a college student to do: at the demonstration, one might meet someone suitable for a not-very-subsequent sexual liaison – in plain language, participating in a demonstration served as a reasonably promising avenue to getting laid. Beyond this quite understandable motivation, however, people had all sorts of other reasons for participating. Some fancied themselves radicals out to overthrow the government. Others were worried that children, grandchildren, or other relatives and friends might be drafted, shipped to Vietnam, and killed. Some of us actually cared about the countless hundreds of thousands of Asians being slaughtered by U.S. forces for no good reason. Although we were all against the war in some way, our ways varied widely. The participants in most demonstrations, including the recent one in Washington, no doubt have this same heterogeneous quality. In a protest, however, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Lesson number three is that the mainstream media are in league with the government when they report on demonstrations. For example, they will minimize any violence the police use against the demonstrators and exaggerate any violence the demonstrators perpetrate. I recall one protest in particular, where our group included tens of thousands of marchers passing through the streets of downtown Seattle. The police, as usual, were out in force, lining the streets and salivating for a chance to crack some heads. Present also were the undercover agents with their cameras; for some reason, the authorities always wanted lots of photos of us dangerous protestors – college students, hippies, grandmothers, little kids in their mother’s arms, and so forth, all obviously dangerous subversives. At this particular protest, the organizers took great pains to instruct everybody about scrupulously avoiding any kind of violence, because we all knew that the media would use it to discredit everything about the event. So we maintained absolute order, or so I thought as I made my way through the streets somewhere in the middle of the long parade. No violence whatsoever did I see. Hooray! The next morning, however, the banner headline in the Seattle Times read, “Violence Mars Antiwar Demonstration.” Someone, it seems, had broken ranks and smashed a shop window, an occurrence so inconsequential that even I, positioned right in the middle of the affair, had not noticed it. This incident illustrates well what passes for journalistic impartiality and balance in this country. Rest assured that if you are bucking the system, the system’s guardians in the news media will smack you down by stigmatizing you as some sort of dangerous hooligan or totally out-of-touch wingnut. They’ll also minimize your group’s numbers, again seeking to marginalize and trivialize your efforts.
Lesson number four is that the powers that be don’t give a damn about your demonstrations or the reasons that have impelled you to participate in them, except to the extent that your actions create bad press for them and their policies. The minute they conclude that your demonstrations actually imperil their personal grip on power, they will cease to be so accommodating of your First Amendment rights. They might even cook up something called COINTELPRO, whereby they employ every political dirty trick in the book against you, up to and including murder. (If you suppose I’m exaggerating, I suggest you do some research on COINTELPRO and other such government schemes to violate the people’s civil rights systematically.) Nowadays, the USA PATRIOT Act lends itself splendidly to broad-gauge surveillance and disruption of peaceniks and other troublemakers.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Monday, August 17, 2009
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Friday, August 14, 2009
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Monday, July 27, 2009
Friday, July 24, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Is this country on the road to National Socialism?
Manufacturers in Germany were panic-stricken when they heard of the experiences of some industrialists who were more or less expropriated by the State. These industrialists were visited by State auditors who had strict orders to "examine" the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company (or individual businessman) for the preceding two, three, or more years until some error or false entry was found. The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error. Obviously, the examination of the books was simply a pretext for partial expropriation of the private capitalist with a view to complete expropriation and seizure of the desired property later. The owner of the property was helpless, since under fascism there is no longer an independent judiciary that protects the property rights of private citizens against the State. The authoritarian State has made it a principle that private property is no longer sacred.
The rules begin to change slowly so that enterprise could no longer make decisions in the interest of profitability. The banks were nationalized. The heads of major companies were changed. Hiring and firing became heavily politicized. The courts ruled not on justice but on political priorities. It was no longer enough merely to obey the laws. The national will must trump economic concerns:
The capitalist under fascism has to be not merely a law-abiding citizen, he must be servile to the representatives of the State. He must not insist on "rights" and must not behave as if his private property rights were still sacred. He should be grateful to the Fuehrer that he still has private property. This state of affairs must lead to the final collapse of business morale, and sound the death knell of the self-respect and self-reliance which marked the independent businessman under liberal capitalism.
Price controls were next, enforced intermittently and with them grew up a large gray economy, with businesspeople spending more time getting around the rules than producing wealth. "To increase his prices a dealer must have a special permit from the Price Commissar. A request for a price increase must first be certified to by the group leader; it must be accompanied by a detailed statement of necessity and other pertinent data, such as production and distribution costs."
State production mandates were next. Goods were to be produced according to political goals. "Backed by the General Staff of the army, Nazi bureaucrats have been able to embark upon schemes which compel the most powerful leaders of business and finance to undertake projects which they consider both risky and unprofitable."
Bankers were required to act as state actors. "Under fascism, big bankers, formerly independent – except, of course, ‘non-Aryans’ – have become State officials in everything but name. They are often in high and influential positions, but they are all members of the compact, centralized State machine. Their independence, their individual initiative, their free competitive position, all the principles for which they once fought fervently, are gone."
If you think that the parallels stopped after Bush left power, consider this passage from Reimann: "The totalitarian State reverses the former relationship between the State and the banks. Previously, their political influence increased when the State needed financial help. Now the opposite holds true. The more urgent the financial demands of the State become, the stricter measures are taken by the State in order to compel these institutions to invest their funds as the State may wish."
And, of course, our contry is playing buttinski again.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Monday, July 6, 2009
In the early 1900s union membership rose to 6% of the labor force and 2.7 million members by 1913 and the share stayed around 6–7% until 1917. This was the “Progressive Era” of 1900–1918 which “fastened a welfare-warfare state on America which has set the mold for the rest of the twentieth century…because a unique set of conditions had destroyed the Democrats as a laissez-faire party and left a power vacuum for the triumph of the new ideology of compulsory cartelization through a partnership of big government, business, unions, technocrats, and intellectuals.” 
WORLD WAR I
Prior to World War I, unionists were still on a relatively short leash. From 1842 onward unions had the clear legal right to exist, and workers could join such “self-help” organizations, but employers were under no obligation to “bargain” with these unions. The courts also tended (ultimately) to restrict union tactics such as threats of violence, violence itself, mob action and interference with voluntary trade. Further, the courts tended to make little distinction between business and union “restraints on competition.” They ruled, for example, that union actions in a boycott organized by the United Hatters of Danbury, CT, against the products of D.E. Loewe and Company (1908) was in restraint of trade under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890 and fined individual union members responsible for the union’s acts (unions never incorporated lest they be held liable as an organization for damages they cause). Unionists therefore prominently demanded governmental privilege and mounted persistent and intensive campaigns for favorable legislation.
In 1912 Congress supplied new assistance with the Lloyd-LaFollette Act to compel collective bargaining by the post office and encourage postal union membership. In 1914 Congress passed the Clayton Act with provisions to exempt unions from the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Act, restrict the use of court injunctions in labor disputes, and declare picketing and similar union tactics as not unlawful. Samuel Gompers hailed the Clayton Act as labor’s “Magna Carta” but subsequent court interpretations neutered the pro-union provisions.
The “national emergency” of U.S. entry into World War I provided much of the experience and precedent for subsequent intervention on behalf of unionism, as well as other cartel-like policies. Historian William E. Leuchtenburg, for instance, points out, “The panoply of procedures developed by the War Labor Board and the War Labor Policies Board provided the basis in later years for a series of enactments culminating in the Wagner National Labor Relations Act of 1935.”  Under pressure of World War I and the government’s interventions, union membership skyrocketed, hitting 12% of the labor force.
The War Labor Board and the War Labor Policies Board, the latter led by Felix Frankfurter and modeled on a directive by Franklin D. Roosevelt who represented the U.S. Navy on the board, proclaimed governmental support of unions and enforced pro-union measures on industry. The boards, for instance, ordered establishment of “work councils” composed of employee representatives and seized defiant enterprises.
The government even created a union, the Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen and forced lumbermen to join in its battle against the radical leftist Industrial Workers of the World (IWW, known as the “Wobblies”). The Loyal Legion collapsed after the war despite government efforts to keep it alive while others became so-called company or independent unions, subsequently banned by the 1935 Wagner Act.
Just as the War Industries Board led by Bernard M. Baruch and Army General Hugh S. Johnson was the forerunner for the 1933–35 cartelization under the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) administered by Johnson, the War Labor Boards were forerunners to the federal labor boards used to administer Section 7(a) of NIRA and the subsequent National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) created by the National Labor Relations (Wagner) Act of 1935.
Now, President Mussobama and his Chicagp-oriented fascistic thugs are trying to turn this country into one big closed shop----at taxpayers' expense.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
We’ve seen that the government doesn’t have a stellar history when it comes to cutting costs. Yet it has a miserable record when it comes to reducing paperwork, too. When filling out tax forms every April, nobody says, "Wow, that was refreshingly easy! If only the rest of the world worked like the I.R.S.!"
The government ruins everything it touches. Many high school graduates are functionally illiterate, even though per pupil funding is much higher now than in previous generations. Despite billions in subsidies over the years, Amtrak continues to lose money. The Post Office, though not an official arm of the government, enjoys a monopoly on first-class mail and is not renowned for its efficiency. And when a comedian wants to illustrate poor customer service, his reference case is the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Why in the world do so many people want to entrust this same government with our health care?
Things get worse. It’s not merely that bigger government will exacerbate the problems in the health care industry. More than that, the problems themselves are largely the fault of earlier government intervention.
For example, government restrictions allow the American Medical Association to act as a cartel, limiting the supply of new health care providers. Many tasks (such as checking blood pressure, administering shots, and otherwise prepping a patient) could be safely administered by employees with merely on-the-job training. Yet many of these tasks are "union jobs" under the present system. Government regulations also restrict the supply of pharmacies who are able to fill prescriptions, tending to raise prices.
I think there is doubt that any statist health insurance reform will be passed into law this year.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Here's more wisdom from the peace, freedom, and sound money presidential candidate.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Cedric Glover, Shreveport's Castroite mayor.
What a bastard.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Monday, June 22, 2009
Here and there you may notice small, dark clumps of the disaffected, those dour punk/goth/whatever kids who don't seem impressed by any of this. They will be treated harshly by teachers for being negative, antisocial, or – heaven forbid! – lacking in proper "school spirit." There is something wrong with them, most would agree, or they just want attention. And these malcontents are all freshmen or sophomores. Upperclassmen of their ilk have long since learned that such rallies are the perfect time to sneak behind the school for a cigarette or a few bong rips.
Of special significance is the rally against the major rival school down the road, the archenemy who must be denounced, ridiculed, and defeated. No one can tell you why that particular school is the big rival. "Because they're the Broncos (or whatever the rival mascot might be)" is a typical, circular answer. Some don't even bother moving in a circle: "They just are," such people say, probably convinced, after a lifetime of learning to accept such answers from teachers, that this would appropriately resolve the question.
In my experience, one revealing answer came from my high school Latin teacher: "You must support the home team. Support the home team. Support the home team." (Also, teaching Latin by rote had apparently programmed her to repeat all statements three times. Not kidding.) She didn't follow up with any explanation of the virtues and benefits to accrue from home-team-supporting behavior. It was just crazy to think that, although the state forced us into this ridiculous institution, with its ridiculous rules and overlords, we would ever consider the school to be anything but our "home." We were certainly intended to identify it as such. The football team was there to defend our honor (against what, nobody knows).
Having read some Henry David Thoreau and Thomas Jefferson, I concluded that the entire culture and organization of public schools must be a mistake. There were so many authoritarian attributes, I thought, they weren't teaching kids to be responsible citizens of a republic, but subjects of a police state. Serious reforms were clearly needed. (Years later, having studied John Taylor Gatto and Austrian economics, I realized that a) the state raises kids this way deliberately, not by mistake, and b) a free market in education would quickly find and disseminate the best methods for teaching children.)
Sometimes these assemblies could be miniaturized versions of Nuremberg rallies.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Friday, June 12, 2009
Apparently, Keith, as long as your side is conducting their version of hate crimes, you have no qualms, but when the other side comes up with reasoned counterpoints, like eliminating the Federal Reserve, you love to tar and feather them.
Here's a very reasoned take from Ron Paul:
We may very well see bathtub smokes after all. Thanks again Nanny State fascists. The should reshape the rotunda at the Capitol building into the shape of a vagina.