In November 2012 the voters of Austin passed a ballot initiative called the 10-1 plan that broke the city into single-member districts to elect City Council members (as opposed to being elected At-Large).
What this did was to prevent the small select group of liberal elitists from being continually elected to City Council. Now with their power transitioning into the hands of the people they are acting to transfer power over to the Mayor.
Please go to the following page (yes, it's a liberal group, but 10-1 had broad coalition support) to oppose agenda item #46 on Thursday's City Council meeting:
Video showing new drone surveillance technology:
ACLU: Police Given Option to Arm Drones(Non-Lethal, For Now)
FAA Releases New Drone List—Is Your Town on the Map?
PBS: Rise of the Drones (click watch program)
List or at lesat partial list of drone applicants in America... many law enforcement agencies and a ton of universities:
Good afternoon to all of our liberty loving readers across the land! As many of you may know, I spent the last several weeks traveling through Argentina and Uruguay. I make a concerted effort to travel outside of the country every year for several reasons, the biggest of which as a liberty activist is to just “get away from it all”. Leaving the country also helps to get some great perspective on how other societies function, and how their citizens view the world.
Many Argentinians, despite having a popularly elected, verifiably socialist President, have a generally skeptical view of government, largely stemming from the economic collapse of 2001. I will have a full report on the current goings-on with the Argentinian economy, and what we can learn from it, later this week. But first, a brief note from something I witnessed in the quiet town of Puerto Iguazu, which serves as the staging area for tourists looking to visit the spectacular Iguazu Falls.
While having dinner in the center of town, we noticed something strange about the 6-way intersection where all of the main roads leading into town came together: there were no traffic signals whatsoever. No lights. No stop signs. No “caution: crazy-ass six way intersection ahead” signs. Zero, zip, nada. By typical statist logic, the lack of a government intervention to create traffic lights and/or signs in this area would of course result in complete chaos. We should have seen cars ablaze and the mangled corpses of pedestrians everywhere!
Revitalization of the State Militias
A Review of Edwin Vieira’s The Sword and Sovereignty
by Nelson Hultberg
On April 19, 1775, the battles of Lexington and Concord on the outskirts of Boston ignited the conflict that led to the most momentous political event of man’s history – the Declaration of Independence and the birth of America. In the early morning hours of that day, a command of British troops was dispatched from Boston to search out and confiscate stores of militia weapons and supplies at Concord. On the way they confronted a small and unimposing band of armed American militia at Lexington. The British Major John Pitcairn shouted out, “Ye villains, ye Rebels, disperse; damn you, disperse! Lay down your arms!”
The American militia were under the command of Captain, John Parker; and their orders were to remain non-antagonistic to the British. They were outnumbered by almost ten to one. So why didn’t they lay down their arms when ordered to do so? “Because,” says constitutional scholar Edwin Vieira, “free men with a duty to keep and bear arms never willingly lay down their arms. And at Lexington, none of them did.” The heroic militia Captain John Parker warned his men, “if they mean to have a war let it begin here.” And begin it did.
Importance of the State Militias
With his newest book, The Sword and Sovereignty, Edwin Vieira, Jr., has given us a magisterial work that meticulously documents the history of the early American militias and why similar units must be revitalized today if we are to adequately confront our disintegration as a society and restore the republic that the Founders gave us. It is a book that will profoundly shock 98 percent of Americans. It is so overpowering in its legal logic and constitutional veracity that the intellectuality of Cicero and Plutarch comes to mind as one reads the prose. It is not a book that can be read lightly; it demands a tolerance for legal thought and abstract conceptualization. But for those “men of the mind” who understand the importance of ideas in the unfolding of history, the effort will be most rewarding. You will be shown an entirely new way of seeing things regarding guns, militia, the Second Amendment, homeland security, how they intertwine, and how they have been grossly misrepresented by quisling, pseudo-experts of the establishment.
This is (finally) and update to the January 26 post, "Who's the Commander?"
The Commander is none other than George Washington, Commander in Chief of the Continental Army.
Below is a diorama in the lobby of the Commander Hotel in titled "Washington Takes Command - July 3, 1775, Cambridge Massachusetts." The diorama depicts
Across the street in the Cambridge Common, where Washington took command, is this memorial:
REUTERS - Consider the U.S. Federal Reserve.
At present the Fed prints $85 billion of new money monthly and distributes it to banks and Wall Street investors by buying government bonds. And the Fed has promised to continue this monthly “quantitative easing” until such time as unemployment drops and is clearly and sustainably declining to more normal levels.
Now suppose instead that the Fed divided its $85 billion monthly money production into 300 million checks of $283 each and sent these to every man, woman and child in America. Suppose, moreover, that the Fed promised to keep sending out these checks, worth more than $1,000 a month for a four-person household, until the United States reached its unemployment target – and the Fed chairman added that he would increase the checks to $1,500 or $2,000 a month for that household if $1,000 monthly proved insufficient.
Great episode of Full Disclosure. What are your thoughts on this?
Prosecutors always expand laws far beyond their intent. Attorneys in civil cases do the same. For example, the 1970 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act was passed in order to make it easier for the government to convict members of the Mafia. However, the law, despite its intent, was quickly expanded by prosecutors and attorneys and used in cases against pro-life activists, Catholic bishops, corporations accused of hiring illegal immigrants, and in divorce cases. “Junk bond king” Michael Milken, a person with no ties to organized crime, was threatened with indictment under the RICO Act. Prosecutors have found that the asset freeze provision in the Act is a convenient way to prevent a defendant from being able to pay attorneys and, therefore, makes it easier for prosecutors to coerce innocent defendants into a guilty plea.
We are now witnessing the expansion of Obama’s Kill List. The list began under the Bush regime as a rationale for murdering suspect citizens of countries with which the US was not at war. The Obama regime expanded the scope of the list to include the execution, without due process of law, of US citizens accused, without evidence presented in court, of association with terrorism. The list quickly expanded to include the American teen-age son of a cleric accused of preaching jihad against the West. The son’s “association” with terrorism apparently was his blood relationship to his father.
Approval rate has grown over past poll taken last year
Despite renewed controversy over the United States' secret drone strike program in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia, a new poll shows that a majority of Americans on both sides of the aisle support the program.
More people currently approve of the program than in July of last year, according to the PEW Research Center poll conducted over the weekend. Last year, 55 percent of American approved of U.S. drone attacks; now, 56 percent approve. Just 26 percent of Americans disapprove of drone attacks according to the latest poll, compared to 34 percent last year.
The poll found a gender gap in support of the strikes: 68 percent of men approve of drone strikes; just 44 percent of women do.
(This idea came from one of my many many Brian Tracy cassette tapes, so credit goes to him. The guy is such a genius that brilliant ideas like this one that are worthy of an entire tape course themselves get mixed in with all the other great things he has to say. Here is my take.)
Opposite Thinking is a method of problem solving and simple goal achievement that forces you to step back from your situation and view it from multiple angles. It consists of just one step that is repeated until desired results are attained. The single step is this:
What is your problem? What would its opposite be? What would the opposite of the opposite look like?
Wednesday, February 06, 2013 - HOUSTON (KTRK) -- Next time you try to sell gold, silver or other precious metals you can expect to be fingerprinted and photographed.
The Houston City Council passed an ordinance meant to help track down criminals who try to resell stolen valuables. Gold-buying businesses will now be required to photograph and fingerprint sellers as well as photograph the items that are being sold to the dealer.
"It's going to allow us the tools necessary to combat a lot of the high-end jewelry thefts that's going on in the city, whether it's robberies or burglaries," said Houston Police Officer Rick Barajas.
This is Larry Pratt's favorite example in response to the question.
"Why do you need a 30-Round magazine"
Judge Napolitano on the Unusual Circumstances Surrounding the Manhunt for Christopher Dorner
Fox News | February 11, 2013
Presidential Memorandum -- Presidential Determination Regarding Drawdown Under Section 506 (a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as Amended, for Chad and France to Support Their Efforts in Mali
I hereby determine that an unforeseen emergency exists that requires immediate military assistance to Chad and France in their efforts to secure Mali from terrorists and violent extremists. I further determine that these requirements cannot be met under the authority of the Arms Export Control Act or any other provision of law.
I, therefore, direct the drawdown of up to $50 million in defense services of the Department of Defense for these purposes and under the authorities of section 506(a)(1) of the Act.