[COLUMN] Bailouts: Cash for trash
Goodbye Constitution.
The U.S. Congress, in cahoots with the president, wants to affect a bipartisan deal that would result in the largest transfer of power to the executive branch of our government since the current Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union on March 4, 1789.
Whenever the government tells us it is working in a bipartisan fashion, be very afraid.
What is most striking about this unconstitutional $700 billion bailout of Wall Street firms is that most Americans are opposed to it. They see it for what it is: A cash-for-trash deal that bails out rich Wall Street firms at the expense of struggling Main Street Americans and leaves the American taxpayer in possession of bad debts.
A recent Rasmussen Reports survey found that only 7 percent of Americans support the bailout and a whopping 65 percent said to let the companies file for bankruptcy.
That is the correct path in a free country governed by a constitution dedicated to the idea that government should not interfere in people's lives. In fact, based on the idea of limited government enshrined in our Constitution, the federal government has no authority to bail companies out of financial ruin of their own design.
Read more!
[COLUMN] U.S. economy is sound
The fundamentals of the U.S. economy are essentially sound.
Despite John McCain's backing off from the same statement in the face of the left-wing media's ignorant credulity that he could say such thing, he was correct.
I am confident that when I go to the store today to buy a gallon of milk, the store clerk will accept my note from the federal government as a valid form of payment. Not every citizen in every country can say the same thing.
I am also confident that when I go to work today, my company will not be a state-owned enterprise. I am confident that when I get home from work, I will still own my house. I am confident that when I make my mortgage payment, my bank will still be there to cash the check.
In fact, for 401(k) purposes, I am buying more shares with my money and when the stock market rises, as it will and as it did during every year of the Great Depression, the value of my 401(k) will increase dramatically.
The problem is, Americans have become so accustomed to unnaturally large economic growth, they have forgotten what a market downturn feels like. Even so, we still are not even officially in a recession.
There are some things, though, that could make the economy better. Let me give just three.
Read more!
Bob Barr on the Constitution
He's holding a copy of the Constitution from the Cato Institute. I have the same copy. If you are looking for a pocketsized Constitution, that is a very good copy for, I think, $4.95 from Cato.org. Very sturdy. Holds up well to abuse, unlike the real Constitution as Barr points out in this video.
Barr sues to kick McCain, Obama off Texas ballot
Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr speaks at the National Press Club in Washington, Friday, Sept. 5, 2008. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari)
It's about time someone turned the tables on the major parties. For decades, the Republicans and Democrats have used the courts to keep third-party candidates off the ballot while ignoring campaign laws themselves or exempting themselves from certain ballot-access laws.
I don't see how the Texas Supreme Court can possibly reject this lawsuit and still maintain a system of laws with integrity. I know they will rule against Bob Barr, but I will still love to see the hijinks they pull in their opinion on the case. It will be some fantastical reading, if they even bother to explain themselves at all.
Barr Tries to Kick McCain, Obama Off Texas Ballot
FOX NEWS -- Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr has filed a lawsuit in Texas demanding John McCain and Barack Obama be removed from the ballot, saying they missed the official filing deadline.
Texas law requires that written certification of the party's nominees be delivered before 5 p.m. of the 70th day before Election Day. This year, the deadline fell on Aug. 26.
Barr's campaign contends that because neither candidate had been nominated by the official filing deadline, it was impossible for them to file under Texas law.
"The seriousness of this issue is self-evident," reads the lawsuit, which was filed Tuesday. "The hubris of the major parties has risen to such a level that they do not believe that the election laws of the State of Texas apply to them."
Is the Rev. David Harris a racist? What does this sign mean?
Either this sign at Trinity United Methodist Church, which I photographed this morning on my way out of town, is an act of vandalism or the Rev. David Harris feels the need to use gimmicks to put butts in his pews.
If it were vandalism, there is not much that he could do, though I wonder what he did to inspire someone to make such an accusation.
However, if it is simply a pubicity stunt, why would you do that? Why would you publicly claim to be a racist knowing that most of the people reading that sign will never come in to hear the sermon and find out what it really means.
Either way, I am perplexed by the behavior. Can anyone explain it?
[COLUMN] Palin more qualified than Obama
Republican vice presidential candidate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin addresses supporters before introducing Republican presidential candidate Sen., John McCain, R-Ariz. during a campaign rally at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pa., on Tuesday, Sept. 9, 2008. (AP Photo/Intelligencer Journal, Vinny Tennis )
Liberal Democrats are stumbling over themselves to claim that Republican Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is unqualified to be vice president and they cite, humorously enough, her lack of experience.
Can Democrats really be so blind? Are some liberals so full of hate for everything that does not conform to their skewed worldview in which all citizens are wards of the state that they can't even see the irony of their own words? Are they really accusing Palin of being too inexperienced to be vice president while at the same time claiming U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, who has less experience than Palin, is qualified to be president?
Of the four people occupying the two major-party tickets, U.S. Sen. John McCain, Palin, Obama and U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden, Palin is perhaps the most qualified to be not only vice president, but president.
Palin is the only one of the four who has held an executive position in or out of government similar to that of president, or about as similar as you can get without actually being president.
Let's compare their experiences, shall we?
Read more!
Bob Barr asks Ron Paul to be running mate!
In am move that would make the Libertarian Party ticket even more desirable, Bob Barr has asked Ron Paul to replace Wayne Root as Barr's running mate. (read the press release and Barr's letter to Paul here.) Root has agreed to step aside if Paul accepts.
There is no indication as to Paul's response. I hope he accepts. Barr, Root and Paul all have deep Republican roots and all are committed to a smaller government and to getting back to the original American values of personal liberty.
Of course, the Republicans and Democrats are up to their usual shenanigans and fighting tooth and nail to keep Barr of the ballot in as many states as possible. Barr was just kicked off the Louisiana ballot and the McCain ticket has sued Barr to keep him off the Pennsylvania ballot as the video above explains.
Why do the two major parties fear third parties? Why do they want to keep you, the voter, from making an informed choice?
That alone makes me not want to ever vote for a Republican or Democrat again.
In America, people have a right to wear sagging pants
The story I excerpt below is ludicrous.
I agree with Jeremy Fouquet that people who walk around with their pants down around their knees look like morons, probably because they are.
However, despite how stupid that looks, what Fouquet proposes is far more sinister and far more dangerous than a silly looking fashion statement. He wants to use the force of law to keep people from expressing themselves. That is un-American. In a free country, a person has a right to look stupid, whether I like it or not. If Fouquet does not like someone walking around with their pants pulled down low, he has the freedom to walk away or politely tell the person he does not like that. He does not, in a free society, have the right to use the force of law to make everyone else conform to his vision of how people should dress.
Read more!
[COLUMN] The liberal attack on Palin
In this Aug., 29 file photo, Republican vice presidential candidate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is introduced by Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., during a campaign rally in Dayton, Ohio. (AP Photo/Stephan Savoia, File)
Liberal bloggers have to be the lowest form of life on the planet.
I am a classical liberal, so I disagree with liberals and conservatives alike, or at least what passes for liberalism and conservatism today. They are simply two sides of the same big government, anti-freedom coin. Being neither a conservative nor a liberal gives me a perspective on both that adherents of those two philosophies lack because of their natural biases.
It is important, if one wishes to be informed, to read a variety of arguments on the issues of the day. Refusing to read viewpoints that run contrary to your own personal beliefs is intellectual sloth as well as intellectual vanity. Reading opinion with which you agree merely confirms your own prejudices and comforts your own ignorance.
Besides, it is boring.
To that end, I read many liberal and conservative viewpoints as well as listen to and watch pundits and politicians from both camps. I can say, without a doubt, that the left is far more hateful and irresponsible than the right.
I am, frankly, downright disgusted by the pure, hate-filled vitriol I read on left-wing blogs, much of which can't be published in a family newspaper.
It sickens my heart.
Read more!
Why have the death penalty?
China Arnold enters the Montgomery County Common Pleas Courtroom for her trial sentencing phase Wednesday morning, Sept. 3, 2008, in Dayton, Ohio. Arnold, 28, was convicted Friday of aggravated murder for killing her baby in a microwave oven in August 2005. Her trial continued Wednesday as closing arguments were presented for sentencing, and the jury began deliberations. (AP Photo/Dayton Daily News, Jim Witmer)
Unbelievable.
If you can't get the death penalty for cooking your 1-month-old child to death in a microwave oven, then why do we have the death penalty?
This might be the straw that breaks the back of my support for the death penalty. I am seriously reconsidering my support for the death penalty.
Ohio woman in microwave case spared death penalty
DAYTON, Ohio (AP) -- A woman who killed her 1-month-old daughter by microwaving her was spared the death penalty Wednesday when the jury couldn't reach a decision on a recommended sentence.
After deliberating for five hours, the jury told the judge it couldn't agree on whether to recommend the death penalty or life in prison for 28-year-old China Arnold. Since the death penalty wasn't recommended, that sentence cannot be imposed.
![[Valid RSS]](http://www.lucente.org/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
