Hey guys, I started a new little fun blog/slideshow at Postcards from the Revolution.
Boston, where I live, was a pivotal place in America's first revolution, and everywhere are markers of that historic period. I have a feeling my days here in the Northeast are numbered, and so I wanted to document what have been my stomping grounds for the past 7 years, as much for myself as anything. All of the pictures on the blog are within a short walk or drive from my home. As such, I see them daily, and they have become as much a part of me as anything. When I see these monuments and reminders, I am touched with a profound feeling of what has happened here long before me, and made my way of life possible.
Without further ado, here is a picture I snapped yesterday, and short post I wrote about it this morning:
What happens when you're too old to run? You stand your ground and keep shooting.
The memorial pictured below at 181 Washington Street in Somerville MA, just down the hill from America's First Flag, serves as a reminder of the great courage that built this country:
Here is the reason, on page 152 of this book, The Willpower Instinct. My wife got it for me for Christmas. When I read this, it made me laugh out loud, so I thought I would share it with you:
Vowing to change fills us with hope. We love to imagine how making the change will transform our lives, and we fantasize about the person we will become. Research shows that deciding to start a diet makes people feel stronger, and planning to exercise makes people feel taller. (Nobody said these fantasies were realistic.) People will treat us differently, we tell ourselves. Everything will be different. The bigger the goal, the bigger the burst of hope. And so when we decide to change, it's tempting to give ourselves some very large assignments. Why set a modest goal when setting a gigantic goal will make us feel even better? Why start small when you can dream big?
Unfortunately, the promise of change -- like the promise of reward and the promise of relief -- rarely delivers what we're expecting. Unrealistic optimism may make us feel good in the moment, but it sets us up to feel much worse later on. The decision to change is the ultimate in instant gratification -- you get all the good feelings before anything's been done. (That's the part that got me to laugh out loud.)
The only British political party that describes itself as libertarian is the United Kingdom Independence Party, or "UKIP". Twenty years ago, it did not exist. Today, it has the support of anywhere between 7 percent and 14 percent of the British electorate. This rise from non-existence to a force in British politics so powerful that even the mainstream media have begun to identify it as the biggest threat to the governing Conservative party is all the more remarkable because the majority of the British electorate doesn't actually know what the word "libertarian" means.
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. - 2nd paragraph, Declaration of Independence
All legislative Powers herein vested shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, - Article 1, Section 1, Constitution of the United States (and similar language with Article 2, Section 1 on the Executive and Article 3, Section 1 on the Judicial powers)
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain Rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment IX, Bill of Rights
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or the people. Amendment X, Bill of Rights
A grave injustice has been done, and a failure needs to be addressed. The heavily Republican Oklahoma Congressional Delegation is positioned nicely to make a huge impact. They can advance the cause of conservative government - which is something they all ran for office claiming they would do. Now is the time to act, and stand, and be counted. First, the injustice:
Four Congressmen have been removed from positions because of their conservative positions. This was something the GOP leadership apparently had a problem with. Representatives Justin Amash (R-Michigan) and Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) were removed from the Budget Committee. Representatives Walter Jones and (R-North Carolina) and David Schweikert (R-Arizona) were removed from the Financial Services Committee. Here is an article from Red State about this purge, and the records of these men. Fortunately, Oklahoma has some influence on the committee that makes these decisions.
Newly elected to the Chair of the House Policy Committee is Oklahoma's 5th District Representative James Lankford (McCarville Report story on that here). By virtue of this position he is on the Steering Committee for the GOP House Conference. Former Chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee Tom Cole, representing Oklahoma's 4th Congressional District, is also on the Steering Committee. Representative Frank Lucas - from Oklahoma's 3rd Congressional District - has been renamed Chairman of the House Agricultural Committee, a position of great influence (there are only 19 spots such as the one he holds). These three men in particular have major influence on their colleagues. Representatives Lankford and Cole, in particular, are on the actual committee (the Steering Committee) responsible for this attack on conservatives, and should do all in their power to reverse this and future purges of those who would uphold our Republican Platform.
My mother is someone I frequently describe as “June Cleaver”. She has led a truly charmed life, and as a result has a very happy and rosy outlook. This last year has been difficult for our relationship. We have had increasingly difficult discussions about politics, raising children, and life in general. I have made sincere efforts to get through to her, and she to me, but we disintegrate into heated discussions almost every time we see each other. This forced me to evaluate both my own perspective and hers. An epiphany struck me when I did so:
I have been asking the wrong questions.
A quote has been attributed to both Cecil Rhodes and Rudyard Kipling. It goes “To be born and Englishman is to win first prize in the lottery of life.” You could say this lottery-winner status shifted to the United States after World War II, and that the peak of the last century was the era from 1950 to just before President Kennedy was shot. It was certainly a great time to be an American. My mother graduated from high school in 1958. This should give you a clear picture of who she was, and who she is today is a direct result. With this in mind, I began to look for what defined her beliefs in a general way. I came up with a stunning divergence with my own perspective: she has faith in the institutions of society.
This is the core disagreement we have. Her faith is in direct opposition to my lack of it.
How to Take the Ron Paul Revolution to the Next Level
Nelson Hultberg | AFR
In the aftermath of the sickening travesty that Obama's reelection represents, pundits on the right are building up their strategic juices to project how conservatives and libertarians can "take over the Republican Party" and begin taking the country back.
My answer to them is: It will never happen! Oh, we can take the country back, all right, but not through control of the GOP. The ideological sycophants that comprise the GOP couldn't take back a sack of sunflowers from spinsters in a rest home.
Far too many pundits on the right have ceased to think. Irrationality saturates their minds regarding how to confront the political leprosy that Obama represents. This is because they believe we must, now and forever, work within the statist establishment. This is grievously in error. The present political insanity in America mandates a new direction, a dramatic new strategy. Dare I say it? We need a THIRD-PARTY to provide an escape from the GOP's debilitating lack of chutzpah.
Conservatives desperately need to purge the me-too welfarists from their command centers. But tragically all we hear today from “respectable” voices on the right is the same me-too welfarism we've heard for over four decades about how the GOP must "become more inclusive" and "build a bigger tent." Translated, this means we need to shelve our principles in favor of more compromises with the leprosy of the liberals.
by Nelson Hultberg | AFR.org
Karl Marx was asked once how he could justify advocating a political system of slavery for the individual, which is what socialism is. He replied that, socialism is not slavery; it is a "new kind of freedom." As all perceptive students of history know, the intellectuals of Europe bought into such Alice in Wonderland sophistry and plunged into the twentieth century nightmare of collectivist tyranny. But unfortunately so did American intellectuals about 30 years later when the Progressives of Woodrow Wilson's era established the Creature from Jekyl Island to usher in centralized government banking and the progressive income tax to "spread the wealth around."
Socialism is not really so bad, reasoned the American intellectual community. If we think about it, it actually is a "new kind of freedom." We just have to do what the Red Queen and the Mad Hatter advocated. We have to change the meaning of the words that define the fundamental values of our lives. After all, there is no objective reality; words can mean whatever we want them to mean. All we have to do is teach Marx's new definition of freedom to the young at an early enough age, and when they grow into adulthood they will not think of a government-dominated society as slavery at all. It will be a "new kind of freedom" to them.
Americans never bought into Lenin's violent revolutionary socialism, but they did buy into the Fabians' democratic evolutionary socialism. Fabian ideas in Britain were readily picked up by the American progressives and liberals of the twentieth century. This redefinition of values has been consuming us now for 100 years ever since the Creature from Jekyl Island and the tax revenuers took over Washington. The progressives and liberals have even redefined their redefinitions. Fascism, being basically the same as socialism, is now acceptable in the mix.
Gary Johnson Libertarian Presidential Candidate joins Daily Paul Radio with Kurt Wallace for ‘Daily Paul interview with Libertarian Presidential Candidate Gary Johnson’ to discuss many issues facing our country: medicare, debt, undeclared wars, civil liberties and the war on drugs.
In interviewing Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate for President, I was following the advice of Ron Paul, who recently stated, "[Gary Johnson] is wonderful, and I think he's doing a good job, and I think people should look at him, and every individual should make up their own mind."
A curious thing about Johnson’s candidacy is that if you are not a libertarian – but you are liberal who believes in basic civil rights, the right to due process, personal privacy, an unregulated Internet, a peaceful foreign policy, marriage equality, and an end to crony corporatism and pro-wall street policy making, for example, then Johnson – not Obama - is much closer to you on policy, but you’ll probably vote for Obama. Similarly, if you are a conservative who believes in the Constitution, small government, free markets, balanced budgets and the Fed out of huge areas of your personal and economic life that could be better handled by yourself or even the States, then Johnson – not Romney – is much closer to you on policy, but you’ll probably vote for Romney.
If you do vote for Romney or Obama, you probably have no clue who Gary Johnson is.
Since the Republican National Convention in Tampa, I have been spending my free time working to get Darrell Sorrels elected as Sheriff of Oklahoma County. I would encourage all of my friends in the Liberty Movement to find a candidate they like and get busy. Here are some recent posts I have made about this race:
In California, an incumbent Congresswoman, who has voted for the indefinite detention of citizens without trial (NDAA) and the surveillance state (Patriot Act, etc.), is expecting the voters of her district to return her to office. She does not believe that Americans should enjoy their fourth amendment right to privacy or their fifth amendment right to due process. She voted for corporate bailouts but against auditing the Fed to allow the American people to know which huge financial corporations (foreign and domestic) have benefited from the secret actions of our central bank.
Christina Tobin of Free & Equal joins Daily Paul Radio with Kurt Wallace for ‘Free & Equal Preview: Larry King moderates 3rd Party Debate’ to discuss the upcoming 3rd party debate with moderator Larry King. Christina breaks down the debate on October 23rd between four candidates. She says viewers will have the opportunity to vote for their favorite top two candidates to debate each other on October 30th in Washington DC.
Don’t miss this historic Presidential debate, moderated by Larry King, broadcast online, and via satellite worldwide!
This debate is the only 2012 Presidential debate where the top six Presidential candidates have been invited to participate. Confirmed candidates include:
Gary Johnson, Libertarian Party | Jill Stein, Green Party | Virgil Goode, Constitution Party | Rocky Anderson, Justice Party
Unlike the “debates” between Romney and Obama, these candidates aren’t afraid to provide more than rehearsed talking points for answers. Our debate is sure to feature some heated exchanges and a wide array of viewpoints.
One of the most troublesome developments for Americans who like Democracy is the rise of the "top-two-go-through" voting system. America's political system is already rigged to ensure that Democrat or Republican partisans always win, but this new voting system is set to make things even worse.
Under this new system, a primary election is held among all candidates (of whatever party) for a particular office. Only the two who receive the most and second-most votes may compete in the "general election".
In a nation with a healthy multi-party democracy, a case can be made for such a voting system, but in a political duopoly such as exists in the USA, maintained by federal laws that protect that duopoly against ballot access and media access by others, such a system is pro-Establishment and anti-Democratic. It ensures that even insurgent non-Republicrat candidates are excluded from general elections, and prevents their ideas from being presented to the electorate.
The simple "most-votes-wins" system at least allows a strong third-party or Independent candidate to force the "major" Republican or Democratic candidates (his opponents) to campaign hard to secure a win against the potential "spoiler" effect of an Independent's pulling enough votes from the Republican (Democrat) to let the Democrat (Republican) win. In contrast, the new "first-two-go-through" system allows the dominant party in very red or very blue districts to fill both slots on the ballot, securing the seat for the party without having to spend even a dime to compete with anyone else.
A better name for such a system might be, "The Establishment Always Wins".