Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 31, 2009 1:40 pm

After hearing this week’s return to Government Medicine proposals, combined with seeing how the government is screwing up the H1N1 vaccine distribution, I am more freaked out than ever. Just seeing how President Obama is drooling to take control over the entire medical and insurance industries is a stressful experience. Please excuse my bitterness and sarcasm in this post.

These people in our government now are nothing more than little dictators who like to have as much control over the lives of others as possible. They do not understand what actual freedom is, or understand the history of when nations, societies and cultures give their freedom away to vultures like President Obama (described by Rush Limbaugh as trying to “dismantle America”) and Harry Can’t Reid and Nancy Smelgrosi.

I don’t think Obama et al. are trying to “dismantle America,” but they are trying to dismantle our freedom and property, take away our freedom and steal our property, as well as enslave the masses. Some people believe that government should be reformed, but what we need to do is dismantle government, which doesn’t mean dismantling America. That’s the only way to save our freedom.

Government actions have disastrous effects.

Looking ahead at the 2010 and 2012 elections, there are a few new candidates who are proposing to dismantle government, such as Peter Schiff, who is running for US Senate from Connecticut, and Rand Paul who is running for US Senate from Kentucky.

I’m not as optimistic towards 2010 as others might be, and less so for 2012. I don’t want any government officials involved in my health matters! But just who in 2012 will actually follow up with any promise to dismantle what has become such an overwhelmingly oppressive government? Mealy-mouthed Mitt? Sassy Sarah? Hermione Gingrich?

How about this Schlep of State?

Jeepers, that is just so appropriate for Halloween, isn’t it?

Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 29, 2009 2:19 pm

In my previous post I linked to this article, Classical Liberalism versus Anarcho-capitalism. Now, I’m not an “anarchist” in the sense of “lawlessness, chaos, corruption and looting,” etc. However, one can make the argument, especially after reading that article, that having no organized government (“state”) might be preferable to what we have now: a government so overgrown, oppressive, and intrusive that it actually can be characterized by that previous phrase, “lawlessness, chaos, corruption and looting,” etc. Personally, I would like to live in a land of peace and freedom. Governmental actions in the USA are anything but “peaceful,” as Federal, state and local governments constantly violate our property, our privacy, our associations and our liberty.

Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh played some excerpts of Ronald Reagan’s speeches, among which Reagan noted that once you start a government, or a government program,  it always grows and it’s almost impossible to get rid of it or even reduce it. As opposed to businesses or people with their own personal budgets, all government has to do to make ends meet is raise taxes, or borrow and raise debts (and selfishly let future generations suffer because of it).

Peace, man

It is necessary that Limbaugh and others be realistic about the Reagan presidency. Yes, in his presidential campaigns he was an advocate of individual liberty and economic freedom, and private property rights and freedom of association. However, while he promised to cut whole cabinet level departments, such as the Departments of Education (let the local districts control their education, etc.) and Energy, he not only didn’t eliminate them, he added three new cabinet level departments. Reagan also signed a major illegal alien amnesty bill, that was largely responsible for making America one big magnet for illegal immigration. Reagan caved to the big spenders on Capitol Hill, signing every budget they gave him. The Ronald Reagan of 1980 sounded like he would throw a pork-filled budget back to Congress and tell them to cut out that pork. Instead, he caved and kowtowed. And, oh yes, that doggone Iran-Contra fiasco.

With the proposals now for so many more big government expansions and thefts of property and liberty, especially with this fascist, totalitarian Government Medicine that the Obama Administration wants to shove down our throats, secession from Washington might be the only logical and reasonable answer to those who want to live in freedom.

Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe said it much better than I or Reagan could have, in Hoppe’s article, Reflections on State And War:

Conventionally, the state is defined as an agency with two unique characteristics. First, it is a compulsory territorial monopolist of ultimate decision-making (jurisdiction). That is, it is the ultimate arbiter in every case of conflict, including conflicts involving itself. Second, the state is a territorial monopolist of taxation. That is, it is an agency that unilaterally fixes the price citizens must pay for its provision of law and order.

Predictably, if one can only appeal to the state for justice, justice will be perverted in favor of the state. Instead of resolving conflict, a monopolist of ultimate decision-making will provoke conflict in order to settle it to his own advantage. Worse, while the quality of justice will fall under monopolistic auspices, its price will rise. Motivated like everyone else by self-interest but equipped with the power to tax, the state agents’ goal is always the same: to maximize income and minimize productive effort.

Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 28, 2009 11:54 am

Classical Liberalism Versus Anarchocapitalism, by Jesus Huerto de Soto (Excerpted from Property, Freedom and Society: Essays In Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe)

….This “infantilization” of the masses is deliberately fostered by politicians and social leaders, since in this way they publicly justify their existence and guarantee their popularity, predominance, and governing capacity. Furthermore, a legion of intellectuals, professors, and social engineers join in this arrogant binge of power….

The state has become the “idol” everyone turns to and worships…statolatry represents the chief threat to religion, morality, and thus, human civilization…..statism fosters and drives irresponsibility and moral corruption, as it diverts the focus of human behavior toward a privileged pulling on the reins of political power, within a context of ineradicable ignorance that makes it impossible to know the costs of each government action.

Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 28, 2009 10:33 am

- Matthew Hoh’s Letter of Resignation From Afghanistan Assignment

-Jacob Hornberger on The Only One Genuine Way To Support The Troops

-Bob Higgs on Democracy’s Most Critical Defect

"Destruction of Leviathan" by Gustave Doré.

…What is the state? It is the group within society that claims for itself the exclusive right to rule everyone under a special set of laws that permit it to do to others what everyone else is rightly prohibited from doing, namely aggressing against person and property. Why would any society permit such a gang to enjoy an unchallenged legal privilege? Here is where ideology comes into play. The reality of the state is that it is a looting and killing machine. So why do so many people cheer for its expansion?…We must become the intellectual dissidents of our time, rejecting the demands for statism that come from the left and right. And we must advance a positive program of liberty, which is as radical, fresh, and true as it ever was.

–From the Introduction to The Left, The Right, and The State, by Llewellyn Rockwell

Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 27, 2009 1:46 pm

Now that it’s October, I can get WABC on my radio and hear Mark Levin again and his intelligence and occasional wisdom, and his occasional yelling and name calling. I don’t understand why 96.9 WTKK no longer has him on, but he also does provide audio rewinds to hear.

Levin sure has called a lot of people “statists” though, which he describes people on the left in their pursuit of Big Government social programs, bailouts and government takeovers of industries. However, in his “Conservative Manifesto” tirades, he tends to leave out people such as former President George W. Bush and the elder President Bush, whose statism would be overwhelmingly criticized by the American Founders and has done nothing but ruin this country.

Recently, I referred to expansionist “Military Industrial Complex” statism, which is hardly “conservative,” but of which Levin has been a staunch defender, particularly from both Bush presidents’ crusades of “nation building.” Levin often speaks of “independence” and “free markets” and “capitalism,” but still defends the Keynesian economics of expanding deficits and the National Debt as well as using taxation to fund the expansionism of the US Government on foreign lands.

Levin often praises the American Founders, who frequently promoted nothing but skepticism  and distrust of our politicians and government officials. I’ll never understand the blind trust that “conservatives” had in the Elder Bush who wanted our military to invade Iraq to protect Kuwait, and worse, the younger Bush’s taking us to Iraq to finish the job of getting Saddam. Defending America when attacked is a good idea, but using aggression for other purposes destroys America, as we are seeing right now.

This article, Reflections On the State And War by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, gives some insight and provides an understanding of how the state uses the intrusion into people’s liberty with taxation to fund its own increasing state-centralization, especially with the use of initiating aggression against other states to justify it. These US-led wars of the last 10-20 years are truly statist policies that serve the state (and don’t protect the country from other states’ aggression and from terrorism). If Levin is really interested in free markets and capitalism, he might be interested in reading Hoppe’s book, The Myth of National Defense, promoting an alternative to the status quo in “defense.”

Support for these statist, expansionist policies has given us a “kinder, gentler America” that is quickly becoming submissive to the “New World Order” of the international community and escalating us towards the international statism of its one “global government.”

Mark Levin

Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 24, 2009 11:19 am

President Obama ’s paranoia of Rush Limbaugh and talk radio and Glenn Beck and Fox News should be of no shock to anyone. It’s good that the other news networks decided to defend Fox’s presence in the White House press corps’ interviews with Pay Czar Kenneth Feinberg, although Fox’s Major Garrett has interviewed Feinberg. The White House, however, did ban Fox’s Chris Wallace from interviewing Obama in a recent Sunday talk show blitz.

When will the news be reporting “Obama spots Fox News Black Helicopters?”

Paranoia is a phenomenon very much characterizing the Left, as noted by Weekly Standard’s Noemie Emery here, and by Dr. Sanity in this post. Paranoid personality usually coincides with control freakishness, as seen in those such as Obama who need to use the armed power of government to control every aspect of everybody else’s life. They know they are being intrusive and invasive on others, and are afraid the truth of that could get out.

Some people have labeled Obama’s paranoia as Nixonian, with an “enemies list.” He does have an enemies list, including the aforementioned, and The Chamber of Commerce and insurance companies, as well as Town Hall meeting people and Tea Party protesters. Pat Buchanan says that Lamar Alexander’s comparison of Obama to Richard Nixon is a little off, and that, compared to Nixon, Obama has been given a “cakewalk.”

Rarely do we hear a national news interviewer as objective as Chris Wallace. Not even Tim Russert. The left-bias of the mainstream news media has been extremely blatant now in the Age of Obama. I would even say “propagandist,” from the Roto-Writers of the New York Times to NBC’s Brian Williams bowing to his Messiah, and ABC’s Charlie Gibson looking down his schnozz at Sarah Palin.

("Hmmm. Why are these people looking at me that way?")

Even former President George Herbert Hoover Bush described Rachel Madcow and Keith Oldermen as “sick puppies.” For once, he’s right about something.

Talk show host Michael Savage predicted this week that, despite high ratings, Glenn Beck will be off Fox in 90 days, “mark my words.” Okay, Savage, your words are marked. If that really does happen, it will show that Obama is wrong about Fox News and that they really don’t want to “Ba-rock the boat.”

Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 21, 2009 1:12 pm

Army Veteran Michael Gaddy on the Real Reason For More Troops In Afghanistan

Robert Murphy on How The Wall Street Journal Defends The Predator State

Pat Buchanan on the “Oath Keepers”

Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 20, 2009 1:56 pm

Yesterday on his radio show, Michael Graham was discussing how some people were whining that the New England Patriots shouldn’t have won by so many points (59-0) over the Tennessee Titans, and that Tom Brady shouldn’t have been allowed to throw so many touchdown throws in one quarter. Graham brought up how in so many schools now, teachers and administrators are either stopping keeping score when it reaches so many points in sports, or just not keeping score altogether. Losing makes kids “feel bad.”

Unfortunately, what these goofballs are doing is taking the value of learning and benefitting from failure and loss away from the kids. It’s a self-destructive attitude. How could Andrew Carnegie and J.P. Morgan have succeeded so much had they not had the benefit of learning from their earlier failures? You learn from failure and  make changes towards being more successful. That’s the value of failure.

When kids lose a game, they do certain things differently or improve on their weaknesses with the goal of scoring more points. Regardless of what the whiners and nincompoop parents and teachers believe, there is also a psychological benefit from achieving. Winning a game is a corrective experience from the failure of losing.

That whining nonsense goes with what has become an attitude of rewarding failures and incompetence (giving kids a “B” or an “A” when they should be getting a “C” or a “D” and then not knowing what’s going on in the next grade; banks lending to people who don’t qualify for loans, etc.) and punishing success (burdensome taxes and regulations, etc.). It comes from the resentment and envy by those who either can’t achieve or don’t try, towards those who do work hard and are successful and rewarded for their work.

The society is all backwards now, with rewarding failure and punishing success, where “ignorance is strength, war is peace, freedom is slavery.”

Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 19, 2009 3:05 pm

George Washington foresaw that “foreign entanglements” would be against America’s self-interests, and he meant US governmental foreign entanglements with other countries’ governments, although he encouraged Americans to engage in free trade with people in other countries.

Unfortunately, it may take a Lyndon Johnson-like Obama for supporters of our invasions, wars and occupations abroad to realize that military Big Government Statism not only goes against America’s integrity and Constitution, but goes against America’s own self-interests, those being protecting and preserving our freedom and prosperity.

40,000 more troops, 100,000 more or 500,000 more troops will not promote security or freedom in the Middle-East or in our country, in the long run, despite the fantasizing of the neocons and followers of the “Bush Doctrine.”

President Eisenhower warned of the "Military Industrial Complex."

Whether we’re still fighting Al-Qaeda or the Taliban or whether we’re nation-building, our governmental and military intrusions abroad are intrusions. When we use governmental and military powers to “spread democracy,” those powers will be corrupted by special interests, and our presence in that region only incites more violence. People don’t like their territories being occupied. The only reason the “surge” of 2007 “worked” was that it pushed the terrorists back into Iran, Egypt or Saudi Arabia, or over to Pakistan, as we have seen now. We are not protecting America from terrorism.

How can we “spread democracy” abroad when the US has a one-party system of Democrat/Republican legally-protected political monopoly that locks out other parties and individuals from getting elected to public office?

We have been occupiers for many years in the Middle-East because of our dependence on their oil, and I am reiterating my suggestion that the states declare their Ninth and Tenth Amendment Rights and drill for oil and gas, and build nuclear power plants, and ignore all Federal laws and regulations regarding those activities.

America really has two choices. We can continue the path of self-destruction by continuing our governmental  “foreign entanglements” and campaigns abroad and risking further terrorism here, as well as growing our Big Government, Big deficits and Big Debts while further taxing ourselves to death and digging a grave for our freedom. Or we can go back to the Independence, Freedom and Prosperity we once had–that the professional politicians and bureaucrats have been stealing from us.

I have read carefully the treaty of Paris, and I have seen that we do not intend to free, but to subjugate the people of the Philippines. We have gone there to conquer, not to redeem. It should, it seems to me, be our pleasure and duty to make those people free, and let them deal with their own domestic questions in their own way. And so I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land.

—Mark Twain, New York Herald, Oct. 15, 1900

Comments (0)

By Scott Lazarowitz, October 17, 2009 3:08 pm

Obama Pay Czar Kenneth Feinberg is demanding that Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis receive no salary nor bonus for 2009, and will also have to repay the bank the $1 million he’s already earned. Granted that BOA was one of the large financial institutions that received TARP Bailout money, and that the takeover by BOA of Merrill Lynch (for which Lewis had strong reservations) was quite controversial, still, the very idea of a “Pay Czar” is very fascist in nature, like many of President Obama’s policies and proposals. There’s little doubt that it will go from applying to companies receiving TARP money to all businesses, and this kind of government intrusion into the private sector only comes from the resentment and envy of the Left, and control-freak politicians.

A private business, no matter how large, has a right to pay its CEO and top executives what the owners and shareholders think their labor is worth. Many people don’t see what the executives do as “labor,” but that concept includes intellectual as well as physical labor. A CEO doesn’t just sit there at his or her desk looking out the window, but makes very important, sometimes stressful decisions. A lot of pressure, for example, was on Ken Lewis when he was testifying before Congress regarding his misgivings on the Merrill Lynch acquisition. Just one decision by a company CEO can affect millions of people, and billions of dollars. Most business owners and shareholders think that their CEOs’ labor is worth their high salaries.

Likewise, the NFL (in the news a lot this week) values the labor of dog-fighter/dog-executioner Michael Vick and that’s why the NFL hired him back, although fans have been split on that. That reflects more on the decline of values in America in recent years. But Vick’s labor is valued.

When or if the government takes over the entire medical care system, the value of doctors’ and nurses’ labor will decline, along with the quality of care. Already we are seeing doctors planning to retire early or college students deciding against that profession if the government takes over. Those less skilled but who don’t mind being servants of the state will enter the profession as government doctors. The good doctors now are usually those who prefer independence, and who value the confidential relationship between doctor and patient. Doctors and nurses will be paid what government officials, not markets, decide their labor’s value is worth, hence the decline in quality.

We can see how things get devalued when controlled by government bureaucrats. Just look at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And look at the products of government-run (aka “public”) schools.

A further example of that has been the Cash For Clunkers program, with more people trading in their clunkers for foreign made vehicles, because of the decline in the value of American-made cars. That isn’t just because of the government takeover of General Motors,

Which Obamobile is this?

but in large part because the quality of American-made cars has declined over the years, as the labor unions’ workers compensation and benefits packages have greatly increased.

New York City Garment Workers Striking Many Years Ago

And that situation isn’t because their employers put a higher value on their labor, but because of the unions’ strong-arm tactics and pressures on the auto makers. In contrast, the Americans who work at Toyota plants in the United States, for example,  are payed less and, with the exception of at only one plant which is closing next year, are not unionized. Toyota pays American workers the value of their labor, calculated much more accurately according to buyers in the free market and the employers, not an organized labor union.

The value of labor and the products of labor are promoted by freedom and free markets, and downgraded by mobs and government intrusions.