When Choosing the Next President, Look for the Union Label

Homosexuality: Ask-The-Preacher With Pastor Carl Gallups [Video]

Related Articles

• Uganda Pastors Accuse U.S. Of Spreading ‘Gayism,’ Imposing ‘An Agenda For Homosexuals’ (thinkprogress.org)
• Is Homosexuality A Sin? (pilgrimpassing.wordpress.com)
• Cardinal Schönborn trumps local pastor, permits man in homosexual partnership to serve on parish council (ebougis.wordpress.com)
• US preachers export anti-gay ideology to Africa (thegrio.com)
• -UK: Case of Street Preacher Persecuted by ‘Offended’ Homosexuals (answersforthefaith.com)
• Pastor Scott Lively is sued for preaching against homosexuality (exministries.wordpress.com)
• Pastor Uses Stripper Pole To Preach Message (uniquedaily.com)
• Oprah tells Bishop TD Jakes he’s the best preacher she’s heard (video) (examiner.com)

What Left-Wing Law Professors Really Think About You, and the Role of Lawyers

By Hans Bader | April 3, 2012 | OpenMarket.org

You’re just a lab rat to be socially re-engineered by activist judges and lawyers — who think they know how to run your life better than you do — or a chump to be fleeced for lawyers’ enrichment. That’s the message some law professors apparently instill in students at Howard University: “At Howard, they tell us as soon as we get there, ‘If you’re going to be a lawyer, you’re either a social engineer or a parasite on society,’” a student at Howard declared. “That’s how I think about life, is to be a social engineer.” (Although Howard University is nominally “private” and thus not accountable to taxpayers, it is directly “funded by the U.S. Government, which gives approximately $235 million annually” to it in special appropriations.)

Promoting social engineering by lawyers (through “institutional-reform” lawsuits brought by left-wing lawyers and law-school clinics) is a bad idea. Left-wing law professors are a bossy lot: some want to ban conservative or politically-incorrect speech as “hostile-environment harassment,” control what you eat and drink, control your sex life (they view heterosexual sex as patriarchal and thus “consensual rape”), raise your taxes through state-court decrees ordering increased funding of government programs, and take away your property (and your children, if you home-school them).  They also often lack common sense, or a grasp of certain basic realities of life. One of my professors at Harvard Law School was notorious among his colleagues for behaving as if on drugs. Another of my professors, the radical Duncan Kennedy, who was so prominent and respected among law professors that he was called the “Pope” of the “Critical Legal Studies” movement, advocated rotating the law professors and the janitors into each others’ jobs. (The janitors liked the idea of being paid like law professors, but had no interest in teaching law, and thought Kennedy’s idea was flaky. Kennedy himself was married to a wealthy heiress, and did not need a law professor’s handsome salary to live on. America would be better off being run by Harvard Law School’s modest, hard-working janitors than by its mostly left-wing law professors.)

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Welcome (samstringfellow.wordpress.com)
• Harvard Radical Law, Critical Legal Studies: And Our Saul Alinsky President Radical (tarpon.wordpress.com)
• The Terrible Obama Video That Haunts Him (ken_ashford.typepad.com)
• Racial Quota Fallout (lewrockwell.com)
• A Future in Politics Less Desirable Among Today’s Pre-Law Students (usnews.com)
• Did Obama really teach Constitutional Law? (halfsigma.com)
• Rule of Law ” More Obama Tapes: Michelle Obama a Race Agitating Occupier? (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• What Left-Wing Law Professors Really Think About You, and the Role of Lawyers (openmarket.org)

The 2012 Index of Dependence on Government

Abstract: The great and calamitous fiscal trends of our time—dependence on government by an increasing portion of the American population, and soaring debt that threatens the financial integrity of the economy—worsened yet again in 201 and 2011. The United States has long reached the point at which it must reverse the direction of both trends or face economic and social collapse. Yet policymakers made little progress on either front since the 2010 Index of Dependence on Government was published. Today, more people than ever before—67.3 million Americans, from college students to retirees to welfare beneficiaries—depend on the federal government for housing, food, income, student aid, or other assistance once considered to be the responsibility of individuals, families, neighborhoods, churches, and other civil society institutions. The United States reached another milestone in 2010: For the first time in history, half the population pays no federal income taxes. Related to these disturbing trends, publicly held debt continued its amazing ascent without any plan by the government to pay it back. As if those circumstances were not dire enough, the country is about to witness the largest generational retirement in world history by a population that will depend on currently bankrupted pension and health programs.

Source: The Heritage Foundation

		
View this document on Scribd

Related Articles

• Report: Dependence on government up 23 percent under President Obama (hotair.com)
• Rex Nutting: Heritage Foundation is wrong about welfare state (marketwatch.com)
• Morning Bell: Dependence on Government Highest in History (genomega1.wordpress.com)
• Unsustainable – 49.5% of Americans don’t pay income taxes (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
• Dependency Index Shoots Up 23% Under President Obama (tarpon.wordpress.com)
• Vote Obama If You still Do not want to work! (wdednh.wordpress.com)
• Dependency Index Surges 23% Under President Obama (thedaleygator.wordpress.com)
• Open Thread: Foodstamp Nation? (newsbusters.org)
• Government Dependency (5ptsalt.com)
• Prison Planet.com ” Chart of the Week: Nearly Half of All Americans Don’t Pay Income Taxes (gunnyg.wordpress.com)

Defining the American Dream Down: Serfdom in the Era of Neo-Feudalism

“If you’re willing to put in the work, the idea is that you should be able to raise a family and own a home; not go bankrupt because you got sick, because you’ve got some health insurance that helps you deal with those difficult times; that you can send your kids to college; that you can put some money away for retirement. That’s all most people want. Folks don’t have unrealistic ambitions. They do believe that if they work hard they should be able to achieve that small measure of an American Dream. That’s what this country is about. That’s what you deserve.” ~Barack Obama

Klavan’s One-State Solution: Give the Middle East to the Jews [Video]

Related Articles

• Andrew Klavan: Liberalism Exposed – Beyond the Elitist, Preening America-Hating Stereotypes (johnmalcolm.me)
• New York Times #1 Best Selling Author Andrew Klavan’s Hot New Book Series Optioned by Twilight Filmmakers (prweb.com)
• Leading Hollywood Conservative Andrew Klavan Rips New Health Care Bill (prweb.com)

Trayvon Tragedy: Did NBC Edit the Zimmerman 911 Tape to Serve a Political Agenda? [Video]

Related Articles

• NBC Fires Producer Who Edited Zimmerman Audio (newser.com)
• Trayvon Martin 911 Call Controversy: NBC Apologizes For Editing George Zimmerman Recording (thehollywoodgossip.com)
• Zimmerman Lawyer Invokes Shaken Baby Syndrome (newser.com)
• Investigation Into NBC’s Misleading Editing Of Trayvon Martin 911 Call Blames ‘Seasoned’ Producer (mediaite.com)
• Fox Panelist On NBC Edit: NBC Has Ties To MSNBC, ‘A Kind Of Promoter’ Of ‘Trayvon As Victim Theme’ (mediaite.com)
• NBC fires producer for ‘racist’ edit of Zimmerman 911 call (examiner.com)
• Lawyer: Zimmerman Said ‘Punks,’ Not Slur (newser.com)
• George Zimmerman to Ask for Donations Online (newser.com)

The Supreme Bureaucrats’ Decision on ObamaCare

By Scott Lazarowitz | April 6, 2012 | Lew Rockwell

Recently by Scott Lazarowitz: Can America’s Descent Possibly Be Reversed?

No, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on ObamaCare and the individual mandate will not matter, especially when, as protected by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the states have a right to nullify the individual mandate – or all of ObamaCare if they want to.

The statists who rule over us, and their apparatchiks and propagandists, want to assert that the “Civil War settled everything” on issues of nullification and state secession. Those authoritarians suggest that President Abe Lincoln’s U.S. government war on the seceding states “settled” the states’ (and their individual inhabitants’) attempts at independence and the freedom to exercise their right to self-determination and the right to control their own lives.

The statists say that the federal government is supreme and the entire population must obey the will of our high-and-mighty federal rulers. But such an assertion goes against the principles of the American Revolutionaries.

Economic Historian Thomas Woods addressed these issues in his book, Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21^st Century. In an article that appeared last year, Woods addressed specific points made by the critics of nullification.

Of course people have a right to buy or to not buy health insurance. And yes, that right to choose is just as inherent and God-given a right as are the rights to self-defense and free speech. Just because the Bill of Rights does not list such a right to choose to buy or not to buy health insurance does not mean that such a choice is not a right.

Some people believe that the federal government is empowered to tell the people what to do, and that federal bureaucrats are our bosses. But the reverse is true. The states had formed the federal government as an agent to act on behalf of the states’ interests. The federal government is employed by the people of the states. The people of the states are the federal government’s boss.The Bill of Rights could not possibly enumerate all the rights we as individual human beings have, or such a list would never end. This was addressed by the Ninth Amendment to the Bill of Rights, which states: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

And it was especially Lincoln’s war against the people that reinforced the reversal of that original relationship into a centralized, federal dictatorship. President Barack Obama’s communist-like recent Executive Order to seize all of America’s resources, including food, agriculture, water and labor resources during non-emergency peacetime was a huge step further down America’s descent into totalitarian tyranny.

Obama’s recent Executive Order – in addition to Obama’s command that all Americans must buy health insurance – was just the most recent in a long list of federal power-grabs since Lincoln’s War on Independence. Here are just a couple more examples:

• The order via legal tender laws that all Americans must use only U.S. government-issued currency as their sole medium of exchange. And this despite the fact that the Federal Reserve‘s central planning manipulators have distorted prices, caused massive swings in the business cycle, caused constantly high unemployment levels, and devalued the dollar and its purchasing power. Such authoritarian dictatorial policies have greatly diminished freedom and enhanced the bureaucrats’ power to steal from us poor slobs.
• The order that all Americans must participate in the federal government-run retirement scheme known as Social Security, against the will and better judgment of individuals. The promises made by the government could not possibly be kept in such an inherently flawed and treacherous scheme. It is immoral for anyone to interfere with an individual’s right to save, spend or invest one’s earnings or wealth however one wants.

Regarding the Supreme Court, just how has this gang of nine protected our liberty or our rights (particularly, as noted in the American Declaration of Independence, the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness)?

Just recently the Supreme Bureaucrats approved of police strip-searching arrestees of minor technical violations such as parking tickets and so forth. In a typical judicial monopoly departure of common sense and in statist loyalty to police power, Justice Anthony Kennedy noted that “people detained for minor offenses can turn out to be the most devious and dangerous criminals.” Obviously, Kennedy isn’t aware of how local police neanderthals are known to arrest as many civilians as they can in the name of revenue collection quotas (and for jailer pervs to get off on power trips strip-searching innocent people).

In his apparent love for the TSA and his reference to all Americans as potential terrorists, Justice Kennedy went on to state that, “One of the terrorists involved in the Sept. 11 attacks was stopped and ticketed for speeding just two days before hijacking Flight 93.” Hmmm. So we therefore better let the police strip-search Grandma or some teenager on her way to a part-time job, to use Kennedy’s obediently childlike reasoning.

And last year, in an 8-1 decision, the Supreme Bureaucrats approved of police criminally breaking into private property, and without a warrant, based on an officer’s belief that residents are flushing marijuana down the toilet (“destroying evidence”). “Oooo, someone has marijuana in his own home, we better break in and get him!” This decision shows just how much government schooling has influenced even the highest public officials in the land.

The common sense opinion by Justices would be to nullify the actual law that police are illegally trying to enforce, such as laws against harmless and victimlessdrug possession. And this common sense approach should apply to the Court’s decision on ObamaCare as well.

I am assuming that a President Ron Paul’s Supreme Court Justices would not only strike down bad laws or policies such as ObamaCare based on violations of particular Constitutional protections, but that they would also outright nullify bad laws based on common sense, the Constitution notwithstanding.

After all, the U.S. Constitution itself has been a flawed document from the beginning, and the product of Hamiltonian centralists who got the Leviathan monstrosity they wanted, despite the Anti-Federalists’protests. As we have seen, from Lincoln to Wilson to Roosevelt to Bush/Obama, and from the Supreme Court, the FBI, the CIA and police departments all over America, the Constitution has been ignored time and again. As Hans-Hermann Hoppe has observed, the Constitution is itself “unconstitutional” in its multiple self-contradictions.

What the Constitution actually did was, instead of being a document whose rules and provisions were to protect the rights and liberty of the individual, it empowered a centralized, federal government to rule over the masses, and gave such an institution monopoly powers. Those monopoly powers go against the very core of the rights of the individual and the individual’s freedom to choose amongst various competitors in various industries, in health care, retirement planning, food and nutrition, and many other areas.

19^th Century individualist Lysander Spooner observed that the Constitution has “no inherent authority or obligation,” and that the Constitution’s alleged contractual obligations are to those who signed such a document, but not to others. (Members of the “Supreme” Court need to read more Lysander Spooner and less Barack Obama and Paul Krugman.)

Now, regarding Obama’s SovietCare and the idea of insurance mandates or government takeovers of the medical care industry (which has been Obama’s intention all along), Lew Rockwell noted that this socialized medicine is really “subsidizing sickness.” To me, health insurance discourages people to take care of themselves toward prevention of illnesses in the first place. An insurance mandate orders people to not act preventatively, and it implies that they should increase risky behaviors and lifestyles.

Unfortunately, rather than advocating personal responsibility and removing governmental restrictions on our medical freedom, politicians such as FDR, LBJ, Obama and Nancy Lugosi have gone the other way in diminishing our medical freedom and becoming more and more intrusive in our private personal matters.

But Hans-Hermann Hoppe had this better four-step solution to the health care situation in America:

1. Eliminate all licensing requirements for medical schools, hospitals, pharmacies, and medical doctors and other health-care personnel. Their supply would almost instantly increase, prices would fall, and a greater variety of health-care services would appear on the market…
2. Eliminate all government restrictions on the production and sale of pharmaceutical products and medical devices. This means no more Food and Drug Administration, which presently hinders innovation and increases costs…
3. Deregulate the health-insurance industry. Private enterprise can offer insurance against events over whose outcome the insured possesses no control. One cannot insure oneself against suicide or bankruptcy, for example, because it is in one’s own hands to bring these events about…
4. Eliminate all subsidies to the sick or unhealthy. Subsidies create more of whatever is being subsidized. Subsidies for the ill and diseased promote carelessness, indigence, and dependency. If we eliminate such subsidies, we would strengthen the will to live healthy lives and to work for a living. In the first instance, that means abolishing Medicare and Medicaid.

As Hoppe noted, “only these four steps, although drastic, will restore a fully free market in medical provision. Until they are adopted, the industry will have serious problems, and so will we, its consumers.”

But, regardless how the Supreme Bureaucrats decide, and in addition to our exercising our right to nullify federal dictates, the real solution to protecting ourselves from clueless bureaucrats and their totalitarian medical intrusions is this: DON’T GET SICK!

Scott Lazarowitz [send him mail] is a commentator and cartoonist, visit his blog.

Copyright © 2012 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Related Articles

• State Nullification (johnmalcolm.me)
• Hoppe or the ‘Supreme Court’? (lewrockwell.com)
• ObamaCare May Be in Legal Trouble, But the New Deal Is Not (reason.com)
• Weekend Reflections: Nullify Obama Now ~ 10th Amendment Codifies In Law That ‘We The People’ Of The States Created The Federal Government. (politicalvelcraft.org)
• Santorum on Nullification (outsidethebeltway.com)
• Obama Backtracks From Attack on ‘Non-Elected’, ‘Judicial Activists’ on Supreme Court Over ObamaCare (sfcmac.wordpress.com)
• LearnVest: The Great Debate: Is ObamaCare Constitutional? (wire.kapitall.com)

Your Cell Phone Makes You A Prisoner Of A Digital World Where Virtually Anyone Can Hack You And Track You

By Michael Snyder | April 6, 2012 | Activist Post

If you own a cell phone, you might as well kiss your privacy goodbye.  Cell phone companies know more about us than most of us would ever dare to imagine.  Your cell phone company is tracking everywhere that you go and it is making a record of everything that you do with your phone.  Much worse, there is a good chance that your cell phone company has been selling this information to anyone that is willing to pay the price — including local law enforcement.  In addition, it is an open secret that the federal government monitors and records all cell phone calls.  The “private conversation” that you are having with a friend today will be kept in federal government databanks for many years to come.

The truth is that by using a cell phone, you willingly make yourself a prisoner of a digital world where every move that you make and every conversation that you have is permanently recorded.  But it is not just cell phone companies and government agencies that you have to worry about.  As you will see at the end of this article, it is incredibly easy for any would-be stalker to hack you and track your every movement using your cell phone.  In fact, many spyware programs allow hackers to listen to you through your cell phone even when your cell phone is turned off.  Sadly, most cell phone users have absolutely no idea about any of this stuff.

The next time that you get a notice from your cell phone company about “changes” to the privacy policy, you might want to play close attention.  Your cell phone company might be about to sell off your most personal information to anyone that is willing to write a big enough check.  The following is from a recent CNN article….

Your phone company knows where you live, what websites you visit, what apps you download, what videos you like to watch, and even where you are. Now, some have begun selling that valuable information to the highest bidder.

In mid-October, Verizon Wireless changed its privacy policy to allow the company to record customers’ location data and Web browsing history, combine it with other personal information like age and gender, aggregate it with millions of other customers’ data, and sell it on an anonymous basis.

So who is buying this information?

We just don’t know.

But we do know that local law enforcement agencies all over the country are increasingly using cell phone data to nail suspects, and often it is the cell phone companies that are the ones selling them the cell phone data that they need.

According to a recent New York Times article, many local police departments are doing this without getting a warrant first….

Law enforcement tracking of cellphones, once the province mainly of federal agents, has become a powerful and widely used surveillance tool for local police officials, with hundreds of departments, large and small, often using it aggressively with little or no court oversight.

That same article says that cell phone companies have standard prices that they charge to local law enforcement officials for information that they request….

Cell carriers, staffed with special law enforcement liaison teams, charge police departments from a few hundred dollars for locating a phone to more than $2,200 for a full-scale wiretap of a suspect.

So if you are breaking the law, your cell phone may be used to gather evidence and to track you down.  In the United States, cell phone companies are required by law to be able to pinpoint the locations of their customers to within 100 meters.

So if you are a criminal, your cell phone could be leading the police right to you even as you are reading this article.

Sometimes the police don’t even use the cell phone companies.  Recently, the Wall Street Journal ran an article that discussed the capabilities of the “stingray devices” that many local law enforcement agencies are using now.

A “stingray device” acts like a cell phone tower and it can gather any information that a normal cell phone tower can.  The following is how a recent Wired article described these “stingrays”….

You make a call on your cellphone thinking the only thing standing between you and the recipient of your call is your carrier’s cellphone tower. In fact, that tower your phone is connecting to just might be a boobytrap set up by law enforcement to ensnare your phone signals and maybe even the content of your calls.

So-called stingrays are one of the new high-tech tools that authorities are using to track and identify you. The devices, about the size of a suitcase, spoof a legitimate cellphone tower in order to trick nearby cellphones and other wireless communication devices into connecting to the tower, as they would to a real cellphone tower.

The government maintains that the stingrays don’t violate Fourth Amendment rights, since Americans don’t have a legitimate expectation of privacy for data sent from their mobile phones and other wireless devices to a cell tower.

Isn’t that just great?

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Phone Tracking Big Business For Cell Companies (npr.org)
• Why Won’t the Boston Police Department Tell Us If They Are Tracking Personal Cell Phone Locations? (bostinno.com)
• ACLU: Police Tracking Cellphones as a ‘Routine Tool’ (commondreams.org)
• police tracking your cell phone (dimitrisnowden.wordpress.com)
• | ACLU: Most police track phones’ locations without warrants! (truthaholics.wordpress.com)
• Map of US police departments that track cell-phone use without a warrant (boingboing.net)
• Police Tracking Cell Phones (answers.com)

Share this:

https://johnmalcolmdotme.wordpress.com/2012/04/07/2225/

Share this:

Straying From the Flock

I read an article about a term that I had heard in the past: The Normalcy Bias. It was a very emotional rendition of a woman trying to evacuate her home as a wild fire began to overtake her neighborhood. As I read about her standing there watching the report as it was being read on the news, I thought to myself, wow, she could see the flames out of her window, but she spent those precious seconds staring at the television. The thought baffled me. Why would you stand in the face of imminent danger and do nothing? That is the power of the normalcy bias.

By definition, the normalcy bias refers to an extreme mental state people enter when facing a disaster. It causes people to underestimate the both the possibility of a disaster occurring and also its possible effects.

It is this “That can’t happen…

View original post 427 more words

https://johnmalcolmdotme.wordpress.com/2012/04/07/2224/

The Obama Presidency by the Numbers [Infographic]

To view the original infographic go here.

The Ryan Test: Demagoguery Versus Ideas

August 12, 2012 By John Malcolm Leave a Comment

By Jonathan S. Tobin | August 11, 2012 | Commentary Magazine As John wrote earlier today, liberals are convinced that Mitt Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan to be his running mate offers them a golden opportunity to savage the Republicans about the Wisconsin congressman’s budget plans. Predictably, the New York Times delivered one of the first such salvos in its editorial posted […]

Smoking Obama’s Crack and Yearning for the Mud

August 12, 2012 By John Malcolm Leave a Comment

By Vanderleun | August 10, 2012 | American Digest [From 2008. Only the names have been changed because the target has changed.] This downward flight of intellectuals has been going on ever since the Romantic movement began its counter-revolution a couple hundred years ago. No matter how much they flap their lips it’s a fall, not […]