THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 563, March 28, 2010
"The Joy of Stealing"
Send Letters to firstname.lastname@example.org
My long-time friend and award-winning, best selling author F. Paul Wilson has embarked upon a daring and wonderful experiment, part of a movement that will very likely change the nature of the relationship between writers and readers forever. See the following link:
for more details. I also plan to discuss this in the next issue of The Libertarian Enterprise, and on my blog at BigHeadPress.
L. Neil Smith
State AGs Miss Target with Health Care Lawsuit says the Tenth Amendment Center
Relying on a federal lawsuit to invalidate the new Health Care Reform Law is not only an uncertain endeavor in the face of decades of bad Supreme Court precedent; it could also take years to go anywhere, according to the Tenth Amendment Center. "The reality is this, considering a lawsuit as the primary response leaves the people in opposition holding the bag," says Michael Boldin, founder of the Center. "That's why we advocate a solution to this mess that leaves the people, not the courts, in charge."
Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) March 25, 2010"Prominent founders such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison warned us that if the federal government ever became the sole and exclusive arbiter of its own powers, those powers would continue to grow, regardless of elections, courts, separation of powers or other much-vaunted checks and balances in our system," said Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center.
Nullification, according to the Center, is the rightful remedy to an unconstitutional act, as it considers the recently-signed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to be. When a state nullifies a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or non-effective, within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.
Today, the Tenth Amendment Center announced a different strategy for activists and state government. "We are pleased to announce model nullification legislation that is crafted to specifically address the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on a state level," Boldin said. "We encourage grassroots activists and state legislators alike to work to get this bill passed in their home states."
The legislation, the Federal Health Care Nullification Act, would codify in state law that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act "is not authorized by the Constitution of the United States... is hereby declared to be invalid... shall not be recognized... is specifically rejected... and shall be considered null and void and of no effect" within the boundaries of any state enacting it. It also mandates that it "shall be the duty" of the State's legislature "to adopt and enact any and all measures as may be necessary to prevent the enforcement."
"The greatest problem with relying on lawsuits by state Attorney's General for Constitutional protection is the reality that the Supreme Court has set years and years of bad precedent, allowing the federal government to control many aspects of our lives that the Founders and Ratifiers never authorized," said Boldin. "The real question we must ask is this," he continued, "Does the Constitution mean what the founders said it means, or does it mean what the Supreme Court says it means.until it changes its mind?"
"Like any legal document, the words of the Constitution mean today the same as they meant the moment it was ratified," said Boldin. "The Commerce Clause, the General Welfare Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause have not been amended, and the original Constitutional meanings of those clauses do not permit the federal government to exercise such powers."
According to the Center, on a political level, the new health care reform legislation not only violates conservative principles by greatly enlarging federal power and control, but also is an affront to traditional progressive principles because it requires millions of people to their money to an industry that many liberals revile, and interferes with the ability of states and local communities from enacting their own health care programs as they see fit.
"It's time to remind the federal government that We the People are in charge and not the other way around," said Boldin. "Following the Constitution every issue, every time, without exceptions or excuses requires us to resist federal overreach and keeping our health care decisions where the Founders assured us that they'd be and where they belong.close to home."
About the Tenth Amendment Center:
Old Women in Pants
In one of his novels (The Devil's Alternative I believe, but it could be The Fourth Protocol. It's been a generation since I've read either.) Fredrick Forsyth includes the quote " With all the old women in pants of both genders in the government, thank God a real man is in charge," referring to the book's equivalent of Iron Pants Maggie Thatcher (obviously a paraphrase. Like I said, it's been a generation since I've read the book.).
Could it be that one of the greatest allies, if not causes of tyranny, is a bunch of prissy old women in pants (From here on referred to as the COPOW, Coalition of Prissy Old Women)? Consider an earlier discussion about public dishabille in TLE. Texas law is pretty liberal about this, until you hit the proviso about someone complaining. There is a similar proviso applying to the open carrying of long guns, that is, you may, with or without a license, carry a long gun in Texas as long as you do not brandish it in a careless or threatening manner. COPOW's are always threatened, always ready to complain. One 911 call and a topless young thing or gun buyer who figures seven blocks is a waste of gas is discussing the intricacies of Texas law with an overworked cop.
As they say in so many TV ads, but wait, there's more. While Texas law permits carrying long guns openly in public, no license required, as long as you don't scare Ms. Grundy, the open public carry of pistols by civilians is strictly verboten in almost all cases. You may legally carry concealed on your person with an easily if expensively obtained license. You may carry a pistol concealed in your vehicle. You may not legally carry a handgun openly, even if you have a CCW license, in Texas (obvious exceptions such as from your vehicle to your house apply, I recommend being very inconspicuous.).
Attempts to correct this folly recently came a cropper, died in the legislature. As far as I can tell this goes to a fear of being labelled a bunch of yahoos and rowdies by COPOW's in the legislature and among the lobbying groups. Believe it or not there is a large group of people in the Lone Star State who are somewhat embarrassed by our Frontier history and image. They are worried not so much that a bunch of Texicans running around with Peacemakers and Glocks will start a bloodbath as that we will look like a bunch of Texicans running around with guns. They are worried about being embarrassed to death rather than shot to death.
COPOW's engage in, or at least support, tyranny from a lack of testicular and ovarian fortitude, Perhaps it's time someone gave these hormonally deprived people a shot or two of testosterone. Oh yeah, and speed up the production of .45LC and 9mm short ammo while they're at it.
I'm waiting until the census taker gets to my house, at which time I will follow Prof. Walter Williams's advice and ask for my Miranda warning.
When the taker finishes the part "You have the right to remain silent", I will shut the door in their face.
None Of The Above
For years, ever since reading The Probability Broach (no one here should be ignorant of this, BUT L.NEIL SMITH is the author), I have been advocating "None of the Above" as a ballot option. Here is how I see it working.
When none of the above is the winner, ALL the previous candidates are booted out of the race. The incumbent is permitted to fill the seat, but he can't vote or sign anything. In 3 months, a new election is held, new candidates run. If N.O.T.A. wins again, the position is eliminated as un-necessary to the running of the country for the period of that normal term in office. If it is the President, no new laws. The Budget is carried over (no increases allowed, but decreases permitted), if a war is necessary, 75% of the Congress is required to declare it.
Well, do you like it? Let me know. Same if you don't.
Personally, I'm writing it in for president in 2012 if we nominate our last candidate again from the LP.
Spurious Founder Quotation
The Washington quotes in Neil Osborn's letter would be more useful if they were genuine. However, the quotations offered have never been found in any of George Washington's surviving papers. Both Guncite and the Second Amendment Foundation have summaries of the evidence for the quotes being spurious:
And now it get's interesting
Obamacare has been passed. For better or worse President Obama does deserve the credit(or blame) for it. A promise on his part that none of the federal funding generated by "Health Care Reform" would be used for abortion except in cases of rape or incest or to protect the mother's health was what got the bill passed. All votes for it were by Democrats. Not all Democrats voted for it.
On the Second of November 2010 the American people will express their irrefutable opinion about this. Currently many people expect that Democrats who voted for the bill will be voted out. There is a possibility that in seven months or so the American people will embrace the reforms and punish those who voted against them.
Undoubtedly the new law will do great harm to Libertarian ideals. If it does no other harm, does not wreck the economy, does not lead to the failure of the health care system, fails to live down to all our other negative expectations it will strike one great blow. Willy-nilly it will lead to the greater dependence of the people on the state and thus weaken our freedom.
What truly frightens me is that now the opponents of gun rights have so much less to lose. On the one hand, it may be that they have become strong enough, at least in their minds, to impose the laws they want. On the other hand, having shot their bolt, they may believe they are doomed politically anyhow so they might as well "stand up for the right." Of course, there is the possibility, perhaps the greatest probability, that those from conservative districts will feel they've done all their constituents will tolerate and try to buy back votes with progun laws, or at least by voting against antigun laws.
For what it's worth the great statists, LBJ and Tip O'Neil would have passed this law as a slam dunk in less than three months.
Let us see what this primary and election seasons bring.
Rule of the Deaf
I have seen a variety of reports that, for our own good, members of Congress are supporting a tax of a penny an ounce on soft drinks. Apparently they are betting that demand for sweet soda is sufficiently elastic the drop in consumption will help reduce obesity. Of course if it isn't the government will make out like bandits.
Have they not been listening? Have they not read the polls that people want government out of their lives? Did they not see the Tea Party rallies? Have they not noted the voting in of Conservative Republicans in almost every election since 2008?
Are they deaf or stupid with arrogance?
Obama and Friends, Thanks for freeing my kids from the need to work!
Seriously! I mean it. I know some of you who have read my writings think I'm joking, but I'm not. Here's why (there's two reasons). The first is simple. The American work ethic just got shot right in the head. Why the hell should MY kids bust their asses working to support the healthcare "needs" of Obama supporters? Every freeloader in the country just got a bigger free ride, and I don't wish to help them any more. The underground economy just got a HUGE boost. And, as taxes increase (and they must, no matter what the Dems claim) more and more people will barter, trade, swap or do whatever they need to do to keep your grubby mitts OFF the fruits of our labors. Second, the more people we can get ON the government freebie bandwagon, the higher taxes MUST go to cover them. The higher they go, the more people say "Screw It!" and drop out, joining the government roles. The more people who demand THEIR piece of the pie, the higher taxes go, and the worse the service from the medical system WILL become. Sooner or later, the Revolutionary War WILL be re-fought. And our soldiers, who have seen friends and family bankrupted by the greed of liberal lawbreakers, will NOT support the government responsible for it.
You guys have given America the chance to return to its roots. It will take years of strife, a lower standard of living across the board, the deaths of thousands when the fighting finally starts, and, finally, will probably result in the kind of dictatorship that always follows the fall of the republic. But eventually, a new republic will arise, and my grandkids MIGHT get the chance to experience the (re-born) American Dream. So thanks a lot! You will be directly responsible for the deaths of thousands (if not millions), the end of an era, and the rebirth of an ideal. Feel proud! This is all your fault, enjoy it while you can. In the meantime, I have to figure out how to screw you people out of as much tax money as possible. Anything to help bring about your goal of a changed America!
Regarding the movie Repo Men
In great annoyance, I would like to comment on an issue I have with a movie I just saw Repo Men, and my opinion on what this issue has to say regarding our present society.
Other than the movie being rather stupid and poorly written, there was an extremely disturbing scene towards the end of the movie, involving the male protagonist (played by Jude Law) slicing a large hole in the abdomen of the female lead (don't know or care who played her) and while in a rather close embrace, on a platform, sticking his hand and most of his arm in through said hole, and rooting around inside her with a device to scan her 'artificial organs'. This of course nearly ends up killing her.
Anyway, if you've seen the movie, you know the scene I mean. This scene has got to be probably the sickest sexual symbolism that the human imagination has ever come up with. To be very honest, I think it says something rather nasty about our current society, that a movie with a scene like this gets an 'R' rating, while a movie portraying actual, normal and healthy sex, or even a naked human body, gets an 'X' or 'NC-17' rating, as we think that normal sex or merely a normal human body are in some way more disturbing to 'the children' than the sort of violent and twisted parody of it that is shown in Repo Men.
Well, I suppose I should maybe not be surprised. Human governments have historically replaced real money with 'fiat' money throughout history, but while they do so, they have also replaced real morality (which would forbid force and fraud) with various forms of 'fiat morality' which either create a double standard, in which actions that are considered immoral for most people are somehow acceptable for the government; or an inverted standard, in which force and fraud are considered to be increasingly acceptable, but an artificial taboo is created against things that are actually not immoral at all (such as nudity or sex), and the shock value of this taboo is then exploited in order to distract people from what the government is doing.
Denver Tax Day Tea Party!!! Woot!
Everyone check it out!
Andrew G Eggleston Sr.
Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates.
We cheerfully accept donations!