Posts Tagged ‘Economics’

Lo Tech solutions

March 17, 2010

Well, I really cannot say “it’s back.” It never left, and the way that things are going, it never will. Epic Fail obama, as usual, is using smoke and mirrors. But pay no attention to that man that is always on the television screen in front of a teleprompter.

While we are all focused upon Epic fail obamacare the usual suspects are hard at work pursuing other ways of destroying America. Yes, putting the break (no that is no misspell ) to the Salinsky type of attack on the U.S. economy and personal freedom that is obamacare there are indeed many other things going on.

One that in all honesty I simply refuse to dump into the impostor in chief’s lap is the porous border. No POTUS has done squat about that since Eisenhower. Read about this latest royal screw up regarding illegal immigration HERE.

I have a very low technology solution (H/T Texas Fred) for this never ending invasion. Militarize the border, it is as simple as that. Shoot a few drug and gun runners and in short order things will change…

Epic Fail obama throws a temper tantrum

January 30, 2010

The impostor in chief acted like a two year old when he showed up at a GOP retreat. Just what we need in a POTUS right?

WASHINGTON – President Obama dove headfirst into the belly of the GOP beast Friday – and left the not-so-loyal opposition bleeding on a Baltimore ballroom floor.

He skewered Republicans for obstructionist tactics, dubious facts and a lack of civility in opposing his domestic agenda, especially health care reform.

Let’s see Mister President. You can’t seemtofigure it out, so I will address just a few of the issues that have the people of America not just angry, but thoroughly ticked off at you, and your gang of thugs!
  • Health care is for us to decide about not you, or any of your czars!
  • Cap and trade is nothing but a money making scheme that will cripple our economy even further.
  • Man made climate change is a farce. Call it what it is and get on with business…
  • Your closet attempts at gun control will only lead to a full blown revolution. Molan Labe!
  • The American people are against illegal immigration as well as any sort of amnesty for those that broke our laws. Figure it out bright boy!
  • Taking over private business’s should be done through our quasi free market system, not by politicians.
  • We really are in a war on terrorism, and as of late most terrorist’s are muslims. Admit it, and do your job as CIC.
  • Americans do not bow to foreign leaders, ever!
  • The stealth approach to gun control via the U.N. isn’t so stealthy, read above.
  • You hired a pervert to be “safe schools czar?”
  • The economy will not be helped by more Keynesian socialism. Stop spending our grandchildren’s  heritage.
  • Lastly, stop blaming Bush, it’s your agenda now.

No Mister obama, it’s not the Republicans. It is the American People that are against you, your programs, and the thugs that you have working on your team…

Climate Gate: As the world turns..? This is some soap opera!

December 13, 2009

The faux science called man made Global Warming is being blown apart as scandal after scandal, as well as lie after lie becomes exposed to the light of day. Anthony, over at The Liberty Sphere assembled a rather astonishing array of evidence, much of it from another WordPress Blog, Watts Up With That.

After nearly a month and counting since the story broke on the biggest scandal in scientific history, a major daily newspaper has finally undertaken a thorough examination of the evidence in the Climategate scandal.

(AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

Granted, the newspaper in question is not in the United States but the U.K.  And still, even after a month the television news broadcasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC continue to ignore the story.

The London Daily Mail published their findings of a special investigation into Climategate.  And, the news isn’t good for the scientific community, the United Nations, or anyone else who attempts to peddle the hoax of ‘global warming’ or its snake-oil cures.

Perhaps the most damning of the findings of the Daily Mail’s investigation is the following admission by Professor Roger Pielke of the University of Colorado’s environmental studies:

‘These emails open up the possibility that big scientific questions we’ve regarded as settled may need another look.

‘They reveal that some of these scientists saw themselves not as neutral investigators but as warriors engaged in battle with the so-called sceptics.

‘They have lost a lot of credibility and as far as their being leading spokespeople on this issue of huge public importance, there is no going back.’

Just as damning as the admission that the scientists on the front lines of the ‘global warming’ propaganda have lost all credibility is the data showing that temperatures during the era known as ‘the Medieval warm period,’ which lasted roughly from 1000 to 1300 B.C., were much warmer than global temperatures today–a full 400-700 years before humans began pumping out those ‘deadly greenhouse gases.’

~snip~

Full Article

Please follow the links, and comment as you would. The shear economic impact upon the entire world should these maniac’s agenda come about should be enough to wake up anyone, anywhere.

Good News! The great recession is over!

December 10, 2009
SOURCE

Lies, and more lies…

November 20, 2009

So many things are going on at once that I think it’s a strategy of the left. Distract, and then slip things through that otherwise would not pass muster. Once again, The Patriot Post provides meaningful analysis.

The BIGGEST LIE Yet

“It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth — and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. … For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.” –Patrick Henry

Sometimes the biggest lies come under cover of a truth.

Such was the case this week, when Barack Hussein Obama proffered this observation about deficits: “I think it is important, though, to recognize if we keep on adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession.”

“Keep on adding to the debt”? From this, one might conclude that Obama has never suggested such a thing, and is truly concerned about deficits.

His revelation came amid discussion of tax reductions engineered to increase employment, as if our Constitution has a provision for that, anymore than for Obama’s other proposals.

Obama is feigning concern about deficits now that there is discussion of tax cuts, which he concludes would increase deficits.

“At some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy”? Like the Red Chinese, who hold more U.S. government debt than any other nation ($800 billion), and upon whom we are depending to fund more of our debt. No coincidence that Obama’s remarks were made while on his most recent appeasement tour in Beijing.

“Even in the midst of this recovery”? What recovery?

Oh, the one that his $787 billion “hope-n-change” big-government payout package was supposed to ensure?

At the time of that proposal, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office offered this summary: “In the longer run, the [Obama] legislation would result in a slight decrease in gross domestic product compared with CBO’s baseline economic forecast.” Put another way, the CBO static scoring projected that Obama’s big government pork giveaway would hinder economic recovery. Dynamic scoring by economists shows a much worse destiny.

But Obama warned, “If nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.”

Now, after a quick assessment of the Obama Recovery through October, one is stuck with the conclusion that his spending spree has resulted in 10.2 percent unemployment — except, of course, in such places as Washington, DC, where government jobs are immune to recession.

That would be double-digit unemployment — so now you know why Obama cleverly framed his recovery program in terms of jobs “created or saved.” His administration announced that through October, the American Recovery Act had “created” or “saved” 640,329 jobs. However, a growing number of skeptics, even among his once-adoring media, found some very questionable accounting methods used to come up with that figure.

Asked about some of the discrepancies, Obama’s Recovery Czar, Ed Pound, responded, “Who knows, man, who really knows?”

Recovery reality check: Remember when Obama claimed, “This is our moment, this is our time to turn the page on the policies of the past, to offer a new direction”?

That is a reference to Obama’s v Reagan’s policies, big government solutions v. free enterprise solutions.

Ronald Reagan’s economic policies unleashed an unprecedented period of growth, which continued right up until the financial sector collapse in ’08, a calamity resulting from policies implemented during the Clinton years, which undermined the values of derivatives used as collateral due. Those policies, as we now know, gave license for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to back high-risk loans to unqualified buyers, thereby setting the stage for the subprime mortgage meltdown and the crash of 2008.

Recall that in 2005, Sen. John McCain sponsored the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act, saying, “For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac … and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. … If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.”

McCain noted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulators concluded that profits were “illusions deliberately and systematically created by the company’s senior management.”

McCain was right, but Democrats, including Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, ensured that nothing would be done to alter current practices at Fannie and Freddie. “These two entities … are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” Frank said at the time.

The net result of the derivative dilution was a crisis of confidence in the U.S. economy, second only to that which led to the Great Depression.

Remember when Obama claimed, “We are fundamentally transforming the United States of America”? Well, we’re in mid-transformation, and how are things looking now?

Obama also said, “Generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was our time.”

Indeed, his time to saddle them and their children with unprecedented debt, not only from his “stimulus” folly, but next up, ObamaCare, and then his job-killing cap-and-tax scheme.

If you think you can count on the administration’s estimates of the true cost of ObamaCare, think again. The Washington Times recently reminded us of the estimated cost of Medicare shortly after Democrats implemented it in 1965. Then, it was predicted to cost $12 billion by 1990. In actuality, it cost $98 billion, which is to say the original estimate was short by more than a factor of seven.

In my home state of Tennessee, we’ve already been there and done that. Our state’s version of ObamaCare, known as TennCare, implemented by Democrats in 1994 ostensibly to contain healthcare expenses, has quickly grown to consume more than a third of state revenues.

The CBO now says that the $1 trillion estimated cost of ObamaCare is “subject to substantial uncertainty.” How’s that for qualifying understatement?

As for the big picture, U.S. National Debt topped the $12 trillion mark this week, or approximately $39,000 for every man, woman and child in America, and the federal deficit that Obama now pretends to be concerned about hit a record high $1.42 trillion for fiscal year 2009.

Obama’s administration projects that the national debt will top $14 trillion by this time next year, and my sense is that they’re being modest. At the current pace, within 10 years our national debt will exceed our Gross Domestic Product.

Of these staggering debt figures, Obama now claims, “I intend to take serious steps to reduce America’s long-term deficit because debt-driven growth cannot fuel America’s long-term prosperity.”

But, what’s his real endgame?

We can be certain that Obama’s solution to deficits will not be less government. Instead, it will be unprecedented tax increases, a.k.a., socialist redistribution of wealth, a.k.a., “the fundamental transformation of America.”

The Tax Foundation now estimates that to offset deficits, “Federal income tax rates would have to be nearly tripled across the income spectrum,” with the lowest bracket at 27 percent and the highest at 95. Even the CBO estimates that rates would have to exceed 80 percent, and that’s before state and local taxes.

Do you get the picture, folks?

Obama will succeed in his effort to socialize the U.S. economy, using the tax code as his hammer and sickle, unless growing ranks of Americans object to the fact that he has no constitutional authority to do so.

In the meantime, Patriots, keep your powder dry.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US

Smarter than the average bear!

October 31, 2009

No this is not about recent culinary habits of bears in Colorado. as much as I wanted to post about all the antics that have gotten bears into the press of late the inherent tragedy of such would be served best the next time some nitwit posts about how kind and cuddly the creatures are. The Patriot Post brings us yet another example of economic suicide… Read on.

Regulatory Commissars: Oil Off Limits for Thriving Bears

Believing themselves to be smarter than the average bear, bureaucrats in the Obama administration continue their quest to create a, well, bear market — at least for oil. The White House decided to designate more than 200,000 square miles of Alaskan land and coastline as “critical habitat” for polar bears — the same bear population that has reached greater numbers than previously recorded in history. In fact, despite what Al Gore and his fellow global warmists would have us believe, the population has actually risen by 40 percent since 1974.

This new non-endangered species habitat is enormous enough to qualify as the third largest state in the union, placing it between Texas and California in terms of square miles. Former UnitedHealth general counsel and now Assistant Interior Secretary Tom Strickland claimed at a news conference that the greatest threat to the bear is Arctic ice melt and that “we will continue to work to protect the polar bear and its fragile environment.”

However, the new designation as a critical habitat is the first step in requiring even more government consideration of the supposed negative effect on the escalating polar bear numbers before allowing oil and gas development. The state of Alaska responded by filing a complaint in an effort to stop the listing under the Endangered Species Act.

In the meantime, some 30 percent of the world’s gas supplies and 4 percent of the estimated global oil supply will be placed off limits because of this deceitful claim that the polar bear population is endangered. Next up, the loggerhead turtle, which, if listed as endangered, would bring regulations on everything along the eastern seaboard, including what lights you can put on the ocean-facing side of your house.

SOURCE

Sleazy politics: it’s worse than watching sausage-making

October 16, 2009
Anti-gun ObamaCare Now Moves to the Senate Floor
— But Obama does not yet have the 60 votes he needs

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://gunowners.org

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Well, there’s good news and bad news.

If you’ve been listening to the media, you know the bad news.  Senators voted the Baucus version of the ObamaCare bill out the Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday, and the legislation now moves to the Senate floor.

So what’s the good news?  President Obama still doesn’t have the 60 votes he needs to overcome a filibuster of his nationalized health care bill.

In brief, the Baucus bill which passed out of committee will hurt you in several ways:

* You will have less money for buying firearms and ammunition. Hopefully, you have $25,900 that you don’t know what to do with — every year.  Because that’s how much the Baucus bill is going to cost an average family of four to pay for a government-mandated ObamaCare policy every year.

That’s right … $25,900 every year!  That will be your cost, according to a Price Waterhouse study of the Baucus legislation.  You will be required to purchase this ObamaCare policy and pay this amount under penalty of law under Baucus’ bill. (Go to http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_pwc2.html to read the Price Waterhouse study.)

* Anti-gun medical database that can be used to deny your right to purchase firearms. As GOA has warned for several months, the ObamaCare legislation will pump your medical information into the medical database that was created under the stimulus bill earlier this year.

The federal government has already used medical diagnoses (such as PTSD) to deny more than 150,000 military veterans the right to own guns — without their being convicted of a crime or receiving any due process of law.  So don’t be surprised if socialized ObamaCare results in your medical information being used to infringe upon your Second Amendment rights.

* Discrimination against gun owners. ObamaCare legislation in Congress will very likely empower anti-gun bureaucrats to deny medical reimbursements to individuals who engage in supposedly “dangerous” activities, like hunting or keeping loaded weapons for self-defense.  As GOA pointed out in an earlier alert, this type of discrimination against gun owners has already occurred in the homeowner insurance industry. (See documented examples of this at http://gunowners.org/op0231.htm on the GOA website.)

Bottom line:  Don’t be surprised if an Obama-prescribed policy precludes reimbursement of any kind in a household which keeps a loaded firearm for self-defense.

Sleazy politics: it’s worse than watching sausage-making

In order to get a somewhat positive financial analysis from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) kept the details of his health care rationing scheme secret.  He did this by providing the CBO an outline of the legislation, rather than providing real legislative language.

In fact, at the hour that the Senate Finance Committee was being forced to vote on the Baucus bill, the legislative language was still not available!  So the Senate Finance Committee voted on a bill that will take over one-sixth of the American economy without even seeing specific legislative language.

Otto von Bismarck, the first Chancellor of the German Empire, used to say that, “Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.”

That’s still true today.  In order to get this sleazy effort to the Senate floor without anyone knowing what is in the legislative language, the Senate leadership has developed a really contemptible scheme:

* They will take a totally unrelated piece of legislation — perhaps a bill that deals with AIG bonus legislation — and then amend it with a thousand-page health bill that no one, to this date, has been able to read.

* The Republicans will filibuster this attempt to vote on “secret legislation” — requiring the Democrats to muster 60 votes.  If Democrats are successful in doing so, many of them will be free to vote against the health care bill on final passage, since only 51 votes will be needed for the final passage vote.  These switch-hitting Democrats would then be free to tell their constituents that they “opposed” the anti-gun socialized medicine bill because they voted against it on “final passage” — a nearly irrelevant vote that only requires the assent of 51 senators.

But make no mistake:  The REALLY IMPORTANT VOTE is the one that requires 60 votes.  That’s the vote to end the filibuster (or “invoke cloture”) on the motion to proceed to the secret bill.

At this point, it is not clear that Obama has the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster.  Already, one Democrat, Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, has announced he is opposed to the Baucus plan.

And Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa indicated recently that there may be one more Democrat who is leaning against the bill.

That’s why it’s IMPERATIVE that you contact both of your senators.  Don’t think:  “Oh, my Senator is a Democrat and he’s going to support the President.”  We can’t afford to think that way.  All we need to do is pick off one more Democrat Senator and this bill is dead!

At the same time, we need to make sure all the Republicans vote against this anti-gun monstrosity.  Even with liberal Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine defecting, it is still possible to win the war over this legislation.

ACTION: Contact your two U.S. Senators.  Let them know of your disgust for the Baucus bill, and urge them to vote against cloture on the motion to proceed to a “secret” composite bill crafted behind closed doors.

You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your senators the pre-written e-mail message below.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

This may come as a surprise to you.  But most Americans can’t afford $25,900 a year to pay for health insurance under the sleazy bill passed out of the Senate Finance Committee.

According to a Price Waterhouse study, by 2019, the cost of the average family’s government-mandated Obama-drafted health insurance policy — which I would be required to purchase under penalty of law — would be $25,900 A YEAR.  This is a much bigger increase in premiums than if Congress did nothing.

Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office agrees that premiums would climb faster under the Baucus bill than if Congress did nothing.

Incidentally, please do not try to tell me that the “fines” for not purchasing an ObamaPolicy have been reduced and that I can’t be sent to prison.  This is largely a lie.

An ordinary family would pay $1,500 in fines when the bill fully kicks in.  And, while an amendment added by Senator Charles Schumer says you can’t be sent to prison if you can’t afford the policy, it does NOT say you can’t be sent to prison if you can’t afford the fine.

The next step will be a motion to proceed to a bill which would implement a government takeover of a sixth of the American economy — and put the government in charge of making decisions over whether my family and me live or die.

That motion to proceed will be made at a point when there is no CBO score based on legislation — and possibly no legislative language at all.

I would urge you, in the strongest terms, to vote against that motion to proceed — particularly if there is not a final CBO score BASED ON LEGISLATIVE LANGUAGE.

Please do not vote wrong on this crucial cloture vote — and then expect that you can trick me by voting “no” on a meaningless final passage vote which only requires 50 senators.

Sincerely,

TABOR Defense War Room, and More

October 15, 2009

Things are heating up in Colorado politics that’s for sure. Must be that Algore global warming thing. Just don’t mention all that snow, and record low temps. Enjoy!

And just what is it that our friends in Golden are up too?

TABOR Update: Are the proponents of higher taxes and bigger government gearing up for an assault on Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights? You bet they are. Is the Independence Institute ready to educate the uninformed about the many benefits of our tax and spending limitations? Absolutely we are. Anytime and anywhere. In fact, our resident TABOR rock star Barry Poulson has been doing just that.

Read: Barry’s new Issue Paper, “A Fiscal Roadmap for Colorado.” In it, Barry presents some important measures to preserve and strengthen Colorado’s fiscal constitution.

Read: Barry’s recent “TABOR Amendment has Saved Colorado” op-ed in the Denver Post.

Watch: Barry on this episode of Independent Thinking, along with State Representative and TABOR Warrior Kent Lambert.

Listen: Barry on the David Boze radio show, 770 KTTH, Seattle, Washington.

Seeking Technology Advisors: The Independence Institute is currently looking for advisors to assist the organization in the advancement of technological innovation. We are specifically interested in individuals who have market experience in the areas of software engineering, network administration and online marketing, and who share the Independence Institute’s free market and individual liberty philosophy. If you feel that you may fit this role, please apply here.

Charter School Victory: Last week brought a rare bit of uplifting news from the Colorado Supreme Court: The state’s top justices said they weren’t interested in hearing the Boulder Valley School District’s legal challenge to the Charter School Institute (CSI), the special state authorizer for many Colorado charter schools. As noted on our GoBash blog, this was a good decision. Listen as our Education Policy Center director Pam Benigno and CSI chairman Alex Medler discuss the legal victory for families and charter schools on a new iVoices podcast.

Must-Attend Western Slope Event: “Prison spending, Sentencing and the Colorado Budget: How many more prison beds can we afford?” That is the topic of an upcoming panel event in Grand Junction co-sponsored by the Independence Institute and Club 20. The all-star panel includes Mesa County District Attorney Pete Hautzinger, Mesa County Sheriff Stan Hilkey, Colorado Department of Corrections Director Ari Zavaras, Colorado Department of Public Safety Director Pete Weir and State Senator Morgan Carroll. That’s October 22 from 4:00 PM-6:30 PM at the Two Rivers Convention Center in Grand Junction. The event is free and will fill up fast, so RSVP quickly to Angeline Roles at (970) 242-3246, or aroles@club20.org.

Save The date: Can you believe it, the Independence Institute turns 25 years young this year!! So save the date and book your seats now for our 25th Annual Founders’ Night Dinner with keynote speaker P.J. O’Rourke…it’s going to be huge! That’s Thursday, November 19, at the Infinity Park International Ballroom in Glendale, CO. Details and RSVP info here. Or you can call Mary at (303) 279-6536, or email her at mary@i2i.org. Hurry, this event is filling up fast.

Must Hear Podcast: The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to take another crack at the Second Amendment and hear a case involving Chicago’s gun ban. Over at ivoices.org, Jon Caldara sits down with Second Amendment Project Director Dave Kopel to find out what this might mean for the Second Amendment and earlier Supreme Court decisions. Give a listen here.

Must See TV: Health insurance mandates like in Massachusetts? Or maybe health care rationing like in Oregon? Check out ex-Colorado State Senator Ken Gordon and Health Care Policy Center Director Linda Gorman on Independent Thinking as they join host Jon Caldara to talk about the state of the health care debate in Colorado. Tune in this Friday night at 8:30 pm to KBDI Channel 12; repeated the following Monday afternoon at 1:30 p.m.

Perspective: Colorado’s tax and spending limits are under attack, just as they once were in California. Check out our resident TABOR superstar Barry Poulson in the Colorado Daily newspaper as he asks the all important question: Do we really want to follow California’s disastrous abandonment of fiscal discipline? Barry’s answer is obviously a resounding no.

Check out the whole thing here.

Until next week…

Straight on

Jon Caldara

www.independenceinstitute.org

Butter or Guns?

October 7, 2009

Butter or guns? That question is a classic when you study economics. It involves just about everything, not just guns and butter though. It is about choices, called Opportunity Cost that you and I make everyday, and all of the time. However, when it strays into the realm of Political Economics? Strange things happen.

All too often we allow others to make personal judgments on our behalf when we should be doing the hard lifting ourselves.

Read on…

In the 1856 case Dred Scott v. Sandford, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the idea that Africans and their descendants in the United States could be “entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens.” To emphasize how absurd that notion was, Chief Justice Roger Taney noted that, among other things, those “privileges and immunities” would allow members of “the unhappy black race” to “keep and carry arms wherever they went.”

The 14th Amendment, approved in the wake of the Civil War, repudiated Taney’s view of  the Constitution, declaring that “no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens,” who include “all persons born or naturalized in the United States.” Just four years after the amendment was ratified, however, the Supreme Court interpreted the Privileges or Immunities Clause so narrowly that a dissenting justice said it had been transformed into a “vain and idle enactment.” The Court now has a chance to rectify that mistake—fittingly enough, in a case involving the right to arms.

Last week the Court agreed to hear a Second Amendment challenge to Chicago’s handgun ban. Since that law is very similar to the Washington, D.C., ordinance that the Court declared unconstitutional last year, it is bound to be overturned, assuming the Court concludes that the Second Amendment applies not just to the federal government (which oversees the District of Columbia) but also to states and their subsidiaries.

That seems like a pretty safe assumption, since over the years the Court has said the 14th Amendment’s “incorporates” nearly all of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights. But the Court’s reasoning in applying the Second Amendment to the states could have implications far beyond the right to arms. If it cites the Privileges or Immunities Clause instead of (or in addition to) the usual rationale for incorporation, the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause, it can prepare the ground for a renaissance of economic liberty.

Full Story

Directly related to the above…

The website for all the Chicago case filings is here. For 19th century history, Stephen Halbrook is by far the most important scholar. His articles include: The Freedmen’s Bureau Act and the Conundrum Over Whether the Fourteenth Amendment Incorporates the Second Amendment, Northern Kentucky Law Review (2002); Personal Security, Personal Liberty, and The Constitutional Right to Bear Arms: Visions of the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment, Seton Hall Constitutional Journal (1995); The Right of Workers to Assemble and to Bear Arms: Presser v. Illinois, One of the Last Holdouts Against Application of the Bill of Rights to the States, University of Detroit Mercy Law Review (1999); and (co-authored with Cynthia Leonardatos and me), Miller versus Texas: Plice Violence, Race Relations, Capital Punishment, and Gun-Toting in Texas in the Nineteenth Century–and Today, Journal of Law and Policy (2001).The lead attorney in the Supreme Court case of McDonald v. Chicago is Alan Gura. He did an excellent job in District of Columbia v. Heller, so the new case is in very good hands.

SOURCE

Right Wingnut Extremist’s? G-20

October 1, 2009

Sure looks like it to me… NOT!

“House Speaker Nancy Pelosi berated town hall and tea party protesters this month, tearfully warning they’d incite violence. Well, there’s been violence all right, at Pittsburgh’s G-20. But it wasn’t the tea partiers. It takes gall to characterize ordinary Americans, freely exercising their rights of speech and assembly in civic forums, as ‘mobs’ while ignoring a pack of leftist thugs now smashing a U.S. city. But that’s what Pelosi did, directing her righteous tocsin to the Norman Rockwell-like gatherings of Americans who opposed her expansion of government this past summer. ‘I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw … I saw this myself in the late ’70s in San Francisco,’ Pelosi said, choking up, her eyes brimming with tears. ‘This kind of rhetoric is just, is really frightening and it created a climate in which we, violence took place and … I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made,’ she told a congressional forum Sept. 17 in a bid to silence peaceful protesters. Scroll ahead one week to the G-20 summit in Pittsburgh: Some 1,000 hooded rioters descend on the city waving signs such as ‘Smash the G-20’ and ‘Eat the Rich.’ Many take ‘direct action’ to ‘challenge capitalism’ in what organizers brazenly call an ‘unpermitted protest.’ Unlike the town hall citizens, they didn’t ‘hurl’ statements — just tire irons, bricks and rocks, in an effort to damage private businesses. … This kind of violence is nothing new. It was found in Seattle in 1999, where former Obama administration green czar Van Jones got himself arrested. It was repeated at other summits in Turin, Italy; Washington, D.C.; and London. These leftists detest capitalism, abhor private property — and have ties to the Democratic Party. The unwillingness of the Democratic establishment to defend free markets emboldens the rioters. In destroying private property and impeding trade, these anarchists prove their aims aren’t democratic. They resemble the mobs of Castro’s Cuba who engage in violence against citizens to enforce conformity. The outrage of it all raises questions about Pelosi’s real agenda in her one-sided criticism of tea partiers. By criticizing only tea partiers and ignoring rampant thugs, she seeks to repress peaceful dissent. With that setup, it’s no surprise that there’s a mudslide of violence now rolling down on us from an energized radical left.” —Investor’s Business Daily