Categories

A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Invitation: South Bay Libertarians Monthly Dinner/Meeting

New Meetup
Greater Los Angeles Libertarian Party Meetup Group
Thursday, June 15, 2017
6:30 PM
Raffaello Ristorante
400 South Pacific Avenue
San Pedro, CA 90731
6:30 pm:Social Hour & Dinner 8:00 pm: Meeting, Speakers, Discussions Our featured guest this month is Randy Herrst who will speak on the effects of Proposition 63 and other recently passed legislation and public trends on firearms ownership in Ca…
Learn more

2017 Session: Week 17

 

2017 Session: Week 17

Even though the 2017 Legislative Session is winding down, Liberty Lobby LLC continues to advocate for maximum freedom at the statehouse and Legislative Office Building (LOB) testifying for pro-freedom legislation and against anti-freedom legislation.

On Tuesday May 9, Liberty Lobby LLC CEO Darryl W. Perry attended the House Election Law Committee work sessions on SB113 & SB3, and testified on the following bill:

HB580 Regulating online fantasy sports contests. oppose

Liberty Lobby LLC also distributed a list of voting recommendations for the May 11 Senate Session.

Audio of testimony on HB580 is available on the Liberty Lobby LLC YouTube channel. You can find updates on committee recommendations, and actions by the House and Senate, on legislation we are tracking, here.

If you appreciate our efforts, please consider starting or increasing a monthly pledge via PayPal or Bitcoin.

– OR –

Please demonstrate your confidence in our efforts by investing a one-time contribution via PayPal, BitcoinDash or Zcash.

In Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry
CEO, Liberty Lobby LLC

The mission of Liberty Lobby LLC is to advocate for minimal government and maximum human freedom by weighing all legislation against the litmus of our principles and responding accordingly by testifying in legislative hearings, holding court with individual legislators, and crafting liberty-minded legislation.

Our goal is to acquire a mere $5,000 per year in contributions from people like you to help pay for travel and administrative expenses. If you are interested in helping fund Liberty Lobby LLC, you can start with a recurring contribution of as little as $5 a month. Every contribution helps bring us that much closer to achieving our goals and ensuring liberty in our lifetime.

Liberty Lobby LLC is not for hire to the highest bidder, and will advocate for 100% freedom on every issue, every time. Liberty Lobby LLC specializes in Election Law (specifically ballot access reform and voter rights), Freedom of Information / Government Transparency, Freedom of Speech & Municipal and County Government.


Can a state Attorney General unilaterally violate federaltax privacy laws?

downsizeDC

 

More action needed in case where LBJ-appointed judge compared Cal AG’s actions to segregationists. RETWEET

We need to file two amicus briefs opposing illegal actions by the state Attorney General of both California and New York.

These officials have forbidden nonprofits from raising money in their states unless they first provide a complete, unredacted, IRS Form 990 Schedule B. This requirement…

  • Is illegal under federal tax law
  • Exposes confidential donor information
  • Could potentially lead to retaliation against donors to unpopular or non-establishment causes

Federal law requires that nonprofit organizations provide their Form 990 upon request. 990-Schedule B is a list of donor’s names and addresses. When fulfilling these requests, groups can redact the Schedule B to protect the donors listed. But in the case of California…

In order to obtain a permit to fundraise in the state, AG’s office insisted that organizations start filing 990s, including their Schedule B forms containing confidential donor information. When groups complained that this would violate the privacy of their donors and open them to intimidation, they were given a promise of confidentiality.

Americans for Prosperity went to court. During their case, it was revealed in discovery that…

  • Hundreds of Schedule B forms had been published on the web
  • The confidentiality promise was empty, as no employee had been tasked with actually preventing such breaches

In his ruling, Judge Manuel Real noted the “ample evidence establishing that AFP, its employees, supporters and donors face public threats, harassment, intimidation, and retaliation.” Then, he made a harsh comparison…

“[A]lthough the Attorney General correctly points out that such abuses are not as violent or pervasive as those encountered in NAACP v. Alabama or other cases from that era, this Court is not prepared to wait until an AFP opponent carries out one of the numerous death threats made against its members.”

Our next steps…

  • As we reported last year, we’ve won an injunction against the California Attorney General. But the fight continues on appeal (Americans for Prosperity Foundation v Harris). We want to file an amicus brief in that appeal and create a valuable precedent.
  • In New York, Citizens United was denied an injunction against the AG and has now appealed to the Second Circuit. This case (Citizens United v Schneiderman) is so closely related, that we want to file an amicus brief in that case, as well.

That’s two amicus briefs (making it three, for us, so far in 2017).

Our briefs will address the following issues:

  • The Supreme Court ruled that state charitable solicitation laws are invalid unless they’re narrowly aimed at preventing fraud. Exposing confidential donor information does not serve that purpose.
  • Past court rulings involving campaign finance laws are inapplicable because charitable nonprofits cannot and do not participate in political campaigns.
  • The Supreme Court’s Talley ruling (1980) to protect anonymous speech does apply. That case dealt with a requirement that the printer of anonymous handbills be publicly disclosed. The Court ruled that such a requirement had nothing to do with preventing fraud.
  • The New York and California AGs may be committing a federal crime by “soliciting” confidential IRS taxpayer information. This is an argument Downsize DC has made to Congress when we called for the impeachment of the IRS Commissioner.

NOTE: We, at DownsizeDC.org, are partnering with the Downsize DC Foundation (and others) to file both of these briefs. We use the contribution form of the Foundation’s initiative, the Zero Aggression Project, so that your contributions can be TAX-DEDUCTIBLE if you itemize.

Please makes these briefs possible. Make a donation, or please start or increase a monthly pledge.

Thanks in advance for your support,

Jim Babka
Downsize DC Foundation

P.S. We get invited to participate in these cases because of our longtime affiliation with the Free Speech Legal Defense Fund and the Free Speech Coalition.

  • We utilize the expertise and experience of their legal counsel to fight First Amendment violations for non-profit organizations.
  • I, Jim Babka, sit on the committee that determines legal and legislative strategy in those groups.
  • Also, thanks to your support, Downsize DC Foundation and DownsizeDC.org were each able to issue modest grants to these groups, respectively.

P.P.S. The key issue we’ll argue in this case is the right of anonymity in political expression, which has a long, rich, and very American history. We argued for this right in our Supreme Court case, Paul v FEC. And this is will be the fourth and fifth amicus briefs where anonymity has been our key argument. We hope you’ll join us.

Our copyright policy

Our mailing address is:

DownsizeDC.org

872 Mark Drive

Akron, OH 44313

Add us to your address book


Is the Age of Violence upon Us? by Robert Ringer

Ringer_head_image

 

Today is a day in U.S. political history like no other. The excitement in Washington is like nothing the city has ever before seen. Barack Obama’s inauguration was historic to most Americans, but I would estimate that at least a third of the population knew the truth about the mysterious, unknown young man who seemed to appear out of nowhere. Nevertheless, the anti-Obama people stayed low key through his inauguration and well beyond.

Not so in 2017. A lot of people are concerned about outright violence at today’s presidential inauguration and subsequent presidential balls, and with good reason. As I have repeatedly stated, the Radical Left is comprised of true believers when it comes to employing violence as a justifiable way of overriding the wishes of voters and usurping power.

When I use the term Radical Left, I’m referring not only to those who are committed to an ideology that has brought enormous poverty and suffering to every country where it has been tried, but also to those who support this destructive ideology out of sheer ignorance or stupidity. (The troglodytes in Hollywood are classic examples of the latter.)

As I wrote in my December 17 article titled “My Next Unequivocal Prediction,” Radical Leftists will never let go of their hate-mongering, childish name-calling and mudslinging, and nonstop lying. Nor will they ever change their warped beliefs that racism in America is institutionalized, that manmade global warming has been proven beyond a doubt, and that the use of violence is justified by those who believe that their objectives are morally superior to those of everyone else.

So now, after a year-and-a-half of dirty tricks, criminal behavior, smear tactics, and rioting in an attempt to stop the people’s choice, Donald Trump, from becoming the 45th president of the United States, the standard bearers of malevolence and ignorance are primed and ready to try to tear America apart.

I don’t know what’s going to happen today, nor do I know how much violence there will be over the next four to eight years, but there will be violence, of that you can be certain. That being the case, the important question becomes, what will be the result of the violence?

Because of the heightened security, those who are intent on creating havoc at the inauguration or the events that follow it throughout the afternoon and evening will have a difficult time achieving their ultimate goal — inflicting death on those who dare to take part in Donald Trump’s inauguration. But that doesn’t mean they won’t try.

The issue of violence, however, goes far beyond Inauguration Day. Regardless of what happens today, my concern is how the entire Trump family can be fully protected 24/7 over the next four-to-eight years. Let’s hope the Secret Service finds a way to succeed at this seemingly impossible task.

If, however, those who embrace violence succeed in harming Trump, his wife, his children, or, God forbid, any of his grandchildren, what will that do to America? Because there are millions of people out there with sick minds who would like to see the Trump clan harmed, I’ve given this unpleasant possibility a lot of thought.

What would the result be? There are so many variables that’s it’s hard to know for certain, but here are a few possibilities that come to mind:

  • It could trigger a sympathetic backlash that could result in a dramatic improvement in Trump’s favorability ratings, perhaps to as high as 60 percent. If Trump delivers quantifiable results in addition to this, it could hasten the total disintegration of the Democratic Party, which I believe will happen anyway after the Republicans swamp the Dirty Dems in the 2018 mid-terms.
  • Funded by George Soros and other wealthy, far-left evildoers who are masters at profiting from social unrest and national upheaval, it could result in an all-out civil war. Our normalcy biases make it hard to picture such a scenario, but if the far left maims and kills enough people, it’s entirely possible that the intellectually inferior flyover folks who cling to their guns and bibles might just decide to fight back.It goes without saying that either way, the violence would be blamed on Trump. When the Radical Left goons inflict pain and death, the Lying Left will yell and scream, just as they did at Trump’s rallies, that it is his divisive rhetoric that caused them to be violent. You know the thinking … the Devil made them do it. As the incomparable Chris Plante would say, “Ah, it’s good to be a Democratic, isn’t it?
  • Trump could back down, which is highly unlikely. However, there are many spineless men and women in the Republican Party — Little Marco, Mush McCain, Gomer Graham, and Paul Ryan, to name but a few — who can be counted on to try to appease the Radical Left and engage in political babble like “We have to all come together as Americans” and “We need a national dialog.”This could create a knockdown, drag-out fight between Trump loyalists and old-guard Republicans who are intent on preserving the good life to which both Democrats and Republicans have become so accustomed. Which means business as usual and another win for the Dirty Dems.
  • The Radical Leftists in the Democratic Party could suddenly realize that they are committing political suicide and do an about-face. In other words, they would put aside the phony theatrics and lies and act like adults who really want to work with Republicans for the good of the country. Unfortunately, with the exception of a handful of sane but out of place Democrats (Senator Joe Manchin comes to mind), the chances of that happening are virtually zero.

So, my fellow Americans, we shall see what the lawless Radical Left has in store for us today and from this day forward, and whether or not we can survive it. Just know that violence is a virtual certainty. When and how much are the two big questions. Let’s hope that we’re all pleasantly surprised and that the quantity of violence is much less than some might now be expecting.

P.S. I still believe that splitting America into at least two countries is the best possible solution for everyone. The Radical Left could attack each other with reckless abandon in their own country, while those who believe in liberty could spend their time working to make life better for everyone within their borders.

Just think, the United States of Good Guys and the United States of Bad Guys. Has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it?

 

original story appears here: http://robertringer.com/is-the-age-of-violence-upon-us/


FEE – Illinois Enters the Death Spiral

Actually, Friendship Is a Powerful Antidote to Racism

by Jeffrey A. Tucker

It’s true that you can be a white racist and have black friends. However, it’s harder. The ideology of racism – the view that some races are less deserving of dignity and human rights than others – is more difficult to maintain in light of friendship. It strikes me as counterproductive and even destructive to put down friendship as a path toward universal human understanding.

READ NOW

13 Essential Books to Shape the Libertarian Worldview

by Daniel Bier

There are books that every libertarian should read and books every libertarian has read, but those circles don’t perfectly overlap. Here are 13 diverse book recommendations for well-rounded thinkers.

READ NOW

Being Reckless with Nukes Is a Bi-Partisan Affair

by Carey Wedler

There is no doubt Trump is advocating dangerous policies on nuclear weapons, but like many other issues currently terrifying Americans fearful of The Donald, Obama set the stage for Trump to implement his aggressive goals.

READ NOW

FEE’s Top 25 of 2016

by FEE

FEE is consistently publishing the most interesting, most fresh, and most penetrating content around.

READ NOW

The Prussian Aristocrat Who Spoke Out for Liberty

by Ralph Raico

During a time of Prussian nationalism, Wilhelm von Humboldt wanted to limit the activities of the state as severely as possible. When he was dismissed for his radical views in 1819, Humboldt refused the pension offered to him by the king.

READ NOW

Illinois Enters the Death Spiral

by Daniel J. Mitchell

Since Illinois raised taxes in 2011, taxpayers have been fleeing the Land of Lincoln in record numbers. To make matters worse, the average person moving into the state makes $20,000 less per year than the average person moving out.

READ NOW

Why I Don’t Relish Leftist Rage

by Bryan Caplan

Don’t I want to see them choke on their own rage?  Not at all. To give me pleasure, they would have to display a far rarer reaction: heart-felt repentance.

READ NOW


Republicans celebrate passage of weak bill with weak beer

NicSarwark

 

Paul Ryan and the Republican establishment celebrated over Bud Light the narrow passage of the AHCA in the White House Rose Garden.

 

Their ‘victory’ was as lacking in substance as the beer they chose to drink.

 

The AHCA does nothing to solve the health care crisis that Americans are facing under the disaster of the Affordable Care Act. It changes how mandates are done, passes out a lot of tax money to insurance companies, shifts burdens around by tax brackets, and puts Republican labels on failed Democratic policies. Replacing a penalty paid to the IRS with a penalty paid to insurance companies doesn’t help the American people.

 

The American people want real solutions to the spiraling costs of health care for themselves and their families, and only the Libertarian Party is suggesting real solutions.

 

If Congress wants to fix the health care crisis, they can:

 

— Grant the same tax incentives to individuals that are given to employer-purchased health care plans to remove the perverse incentive for health insurance to be tied to a particular job or employer.

 

— Remove government restrictions that prevent people from purchasing catastrophic insurance coverage while paying for routine health care expenses out of pocket. That will drive down costs for health care services as consumers are allowed to shop for the best prices.

 

— Allow health insurance to be sold across state lines and remove other government barriers to competition that keep prices high.

 

— End all federal laws and regulations that restrict use, or that drive up the cost, of drugs, medical supplies and equipment, and other health care products and services. This includes ending all regulatory powers of the Food and Drug Administration. Doing so will drive down the cost of drugs while accelerating discovery of cures and treatments of debilitating diseases.

 

These simple proposals would give people more freedom to make the right health care choices for themselves and their families, improve health care outcomes, and reduce costs for all Americans.

 

Passage of the AHCA is an example of the broken Washington culture that says, “We have to do something. This is something. We have to do this.”

 

For the health of all of our families, government needs to do less to screw up a system they’ve been making worse for decades with regulation on top of regulation that increase costs and reduce health outcomes while lining the pockets of health care industry lobbyists and cronies.

 

Yours in liberty,

Nicholas Sarwark
Chair, Libertarian National Committee

 

Paid for by the
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Content not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.

The Liberty First Network is hitting the road

LibertyFirstNetwork

 

The 2017 Florida legislative session is complete. What went right and what went wrong in this session? Who were the legislators that were supporting liberty and who was standing in the way?

Find out about all of this and more as the Liberty First Network goes on the road to give the 2017 Florida Legislative Session review.

We will go over what went well in the 2017 Florida legislative session, what went poorly and what you can do to help influence the Florida legislature in 2018.

If you are part of a group or organization and would like to schedule this presentation for your group contact Alex Snitker at (813) 315-0513. Dates are filling up fast so contact us today to schedule your group.

Scheduled Events:

Palm Beach County 2017 Florida Legislative Wrap Up Presentation

Alexander Snitker will join the Libertarian Party of Palm Beach County on Tuesday May 23 at 7PM for the 2017 Legislative Wrap up presentation. This will take place at Brouges Downunder located at 621 Lake Avenue, Lake Worth Florida, 33460

Click HERE to RSVP

Orange County 2017 Florida Legislative Wrap Up Presentation

Alexander Snitker will join the Center Right Coalition on Friday June 9th at 11AM for the 2017 Florida Legislative Review presentation. This will take place at Harry P Leu Gardens located at 1920 N Forest Ave, Orlando, FL 32803

Click HERE to RSVP

Highlands County 2017 Florida Legislative Wrap Up Presentation

Alexander Snitker will join the Highlands County Tea Party on Tuesday June 20th at 6PM for the 2017 Florida Legislative Review presentation. This will take place at Homer’s Restaurant located at 1000 Sebring Square, Sebring, FL, 33870

Click HERE to RSVP

Okaloosa County 2017 Florida Legislative Wrap Up Presentation

Alexander Snitker will join the Panhandle Patriots on Thursday July 6th at 6:30PM for the 2017 Legislative Wrap up presentation. This will take place at the Elks Lodge located at 1335 Miracle Strip Pkwy SE, Fort Walton Beach, FL 32548

Click HERE to RSVP

****DON’T FORGET****

The Liberty First Network is moving to a new E-Mail service for our Action Alerts. CLICK HERE to sign up

 

Liberty First Network · 9851 State Road 54, New Port Richey, FL 34655, United States


How Trump Can Beat The Terrorists And Restore Generous American Immigration

RalphBenko

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2017/02/19/how-trump-can-beat-the-terrorists-and-restore-generous-american-immigration/#19773c0374b9

Feb 19, 2017 @ 12:00 PM

Terrorists seek to terrorize. The purpose of terrorism, a form of guerrilla warfare, is not merely to inflict casualties but to terrorize the populace. As Robert Taber wrote in his authoritative study The War of the Flea: A Study of Guerrilla Warfare Theory and Practice:

Essentially, then, the guerilla fighter’s war is political and social, his means are at least as political as they are military, his purpose is almost entirely so. Thus we may paraphrase Clausewitz: Guerrilla war is the extension of politics by means of armed conflict. At a certain point in its development it becomes revolution itself- the dragon’s teeth sprung to maturity.

Guerrilla war = revolutionary war: the extension of politics by means of armed conflict.

Until this much is properly understood by those who would oppose it, nothing else about it can be understood and no strategy or tactics devised to suppress it can prevail.

This insight might help better frame Trump’s immigration policy. As an arch-conservative I naturally, strongly, favor a generous immigration policy including a path to earned citizenship for the vast preponderance of the undocumented.

I infer that Donald Trump agrees. There are reasons why even the economically nationalist populist Steve Bannon might agree too (albeit maybe with less enthusiasm than mine for Muslims).

>snip<

As Peter Thiesson wrote for The Washington Post as reprinted in The Chicago Tribune, Trump has a soft spot for illegal immigrants:

“They got brought here at a very young age, they’ve worked here, they’ve gone to school here. Some were good students. Some have wonderful jobs. And they’re in never-never land because they don’t know what’s going to happen.”

Which political leader made these compassionate remarks about the “Dreamers” (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) — the roughly 1.8 million children who were brought to this country illegally by their parents and know no other home than the United States?

President Barack Obama? Hillary Clinton?

No, it was Donald Trump.

Trump told Time magazine during his “Person of the Year” interview that while he was not backing off his pledge to rescind Obama’s executive amnesty, when it comes to the Dreamers, “We’re going to work something out that’s going to make people happy and proud.”

Actually, for those who were paying attention, Trump’s heart has always been soft on immigration — not just for Dreamers but for most illegal immigrants.

During the presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly said that he wanted to find a way for the vast majority of illegal immigrants (the “good ones,” as he called them) to get right with the law and secure legal status.

The mainstream media ignored this, because this did not fit with the media’s narrative of a heartless Trump who wanted to break up families and send all 11 million illegal immigrants permanently back to their countries of origin.

Trump can only make it possible “to get right with the law” if there is a politically safe way. There is one: to propound this from the right. Welcome to the road not, yet, taken.

First we must understand the nature of the “dragon’s teeth” being sowed by those fanatics — I will not dignify them by calling them Islamic — whose political purpose is, through terror, to restore the Caliphate.

Acts of terror, whether epic in scope like 9/11, lone wolves like the San Bernadino attack, or attacks remotely orchestrated by Daesh (formerly known as ISIS) are designed to terrorize Americans. Guess what. They worked.

Undermining of people’s sense of security undermined America’s political consensus in favor of generosity toward immigrants. That generosity made a great contribution to making America great. It is an essential ingredient in making America great again.

Understanding how even isolated acts of terror would be amplified by a transfixed mass media, especially cable TV news, Daesh went for our emotional jugular. Trump sensed our insecurity and exploited it in his political campaign. His attunement to the voters’ feelings is a good thing, not a bad thing. But all is not as it superficially seems.

>snip<

Taking a stand for “the well-being of the American people” — including our emotional well-being — is not an impeachable offense. That said, Trump has not yet fully articulated what he is getting at. It’s hard to do speak clearly when speaking into a tsunami of vituperation.

So, how can he deliver?

>snip<

This terror must be neutralized. Only someone with as bully a pulpit as a president could do so. How?

As Cato Institute reported last September as summarized by CNN.com, “the chances of an American dying in a terrorist attack committed by a foreigner in the US stands at about one in 3.6 million. The breakdown includes attacks over a 41-year period and includes the 9/11 attack, in which 3,000 people died. Once you narrow it to refugees and illegal immigrants, the threat is even smaller.”

How much smaller? Business Insider reports — and I am persuaded — that your (and my) chance of being struck and killed by lightning is 260 times greater than that of being killed by a refugee terrorist. Yet I still go outside during thunderstorms with nonchalance. You probably do too.

The perception of the terrorist threat is astronomically greater than the threat itself.  Yet as the old political axiom has it, “perception is reality.” It’s one of the jobs of a president to make perception and reality converge. Trump appears much better equipped to achieve this than were any of the other presidential contenders.

While talking (and acting) tough against Daesh Trump can also help America put its threat into perspective. Doing so would resolve our anxiety and go a long way toward vanquishing the terrorists, who thrive on drama.

>snip<

More, here, is possible. One can argue the case for generous immigration policy from a right-wing perspective. Demanding generous immigration policy is a principled conservative stand.

Few have argued this case. It’s easy to do.

My arch-conservative credentials are pretty impeccable and I have long argued that conservatives should be militantly demanding a more generous immigration policy if only out of selfish motives. Most Latinos consistently demonstrate themselves to be solidly center right. They consistently prove more patriotic, more religious, more family-minded, a stronger work ethic, and more invested in human dignity — in short, more right wing! — than most official conservatives.

Mexicans in the United States diaspora, especially, are a potential El Dorado for the conservative movement and, if it does right by them, the GOP. How nationalistic is that?

Mine is a small voice. Trump could make this declaration stick.

If you are an economic nationalist, a là Steve Bannon, population growth is a great thing for America. As The Economist pointed out way back in 2002, immigration plus fertility rates are making America more richly populated than the European Union …

>snip<

In a more recent headcount the E.U. now has around 506 million to the USA’s 326 million. We’re closing the gap. Good, nationalistically speaking, for us!

Generous immigration policy is in America’s self-interest. It’s not just some sentimental “social justice warrior” stand. Donald Trump could make the America First argument for generosity with great credibility.

Beyond allaying unfounded fears of terrorism, championing conservatism, and promoting nationalism Trump would be greatly helped by fostering robust economic growth. >snip<

Next, Trump proudly keeps a bust of Dr. Martin Luther King in his office.  Let his policy be informed by King’s immortal words: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” “Color of their skin” naturally extends to national origin. Trump has extolled immigrants of character. Let him say it louder and repeatedly.

Final card: Few know that the predicament of America, and it’s undocumented population (or, if you prefer, illegal aliens, like Superman!) was caused by a horrible secret deal. This deal was cut, decades ago, between the anti-immigrant and the pro-immigrant forces. The deal concluded that illegal immigration would be strongly prohibited but the prohibition would not be seriously enforced.

Clever, but terrible, deal! That deal led to something like 10 million people getting caught in legal purgatory. That is not good for those people. That is not good for America. Leaving them there would not be good for President Trump.  How to bring his base along?

There is a legal doctrine called “equitable estoppel.” It holds that if you fail to enforce your legal rights for too long the courts won’t enforce them. (Call it the “you snooze you lose” rule.) The “law-and-order” types are in the circumstances, as a matter of law and order, estopped in their tracks.

There are lots of tells that Trump’s heart is in the right place.  And he has been dealt a political full house.

>snip<

I wish him success. You, too, whether conservative or progressive, nationalist or globalist, Republican or Democrat, should wish him success.

America is at stake. So take a deep breath, now, and help Donald Trump to lift his lamp beside the golden door.

 

To read the full column click here.

 

 


American Spectator – Obama Embeds Leak Investigations to Help Hillary Win- and Failed

The American Spectator Logo

Obama Embeds

HowInvestigating the Trump Campaign Backfired on Obama’s Embeds

BY: GEORGE NEUMAYR

If you strike at a presidential candidate, you better defeat him.

Confirmations of the Obama administration’s investigation of the Trump campaign keep trickling out. Naturally, the media has shown no interest in them. It wants evidence of Trump-Russia collusion, not evidence that Obama’s embeds were sniffing around Trump’s computer server — an abuse of power no different than LBJ wiring Nixon’s campaign plane to see if he was colluding with the Vietnamese. READ MORE

Gorsuch

Gorsuch Gets First Amendment Rights

BY: LUKE WACHOBGovernment shouldn’t be harassing private citizens exercising their constitutional rights.

One of the major threats to free speech today is not censorship. It’s harassment.

Here’s how it works. People join or give money to groups that support causes they believe in. Those groups attract the ire of government officials when they criticize them or take a position they oppose. Unable to ban the group from speaking, an angry bureaucrat does the next best thing: launch an investigation into how the group operates and who supports it.

The best part for the government? It doesn’t matter how the investigation turns out or if no charges are ever pressed. The investigation ties up the group’s resources and scares away supporters. The process is the punishment for speaking. READ MORE

Healthcare Swamp

Tales From the Healthcare Swamp

BY: WILLIAM MURCHISONOnce government giveth, it’s a mess getting it to stop.

Uh… just a minute. How did we get to this point — poised either to disassemble and haul away Obamacare or spend the next two years in recriminations having to do with how the job was done? Or not done?

Could these prospects have faced us under Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Polk, Lincoln, Cleveland, McKinley? Not exactly.

In the old days, health care wasn’t a government concern at all, save, here and there, on the local level: a municipal hospital, a state-funded medical school, that sort of thing. READ MORE

More of Today’s Headlines:

The Spectacle Blog:

Read More


2017 Session: Week 16

 

2017 Session: Week 16

Even though the 2017 Legislative Session is winding down, Liberty Lobby LLC continues to advocate for maximum freedom at the statehouse and Legislative Office Building (LOB) testifying for pro-freedom legislation and against anti-freedom legislation.

HB151 Relative to industrial hemp as a controlled substance support
SB67 Relative to the authority of state police employees. oppose
HB473 Relative to the sale of gift certificates. support
HB242 Relative to the definition and regulation of e-cigarettes. oppose

Audio is available for most of these hearings on the Liberty Lobby LLC YouTube channel, with video to be available soon. You can find updates on committee recommendations, and actions by the House and Senate, on legislation we are tracking, here.

If you appreciate our efforts, please consider starting or increasing a monthly pledge via PayPal or Bitcoin.

– OR –

Please demonstrate your confidence in our efforts by investing a one-time contribution via PayPal, BitcoinDash or Zcash.

In Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry
CEO, Liberty Lobby LLC

The mission of Liberty Lobby LLC is to advocate for minimal government and maximum human freedom by weighing all legislation against the litmus of our principles and responding accordingly by testifying in legislative hearings, holding court with individual legislators, and crafting liberty-minded legislation.

Our goal is to acquire a mere $5,000 per year in contributions from people like you to help pay for travel and administrative expenses. If you are interested in helping fund Liberty Lobby LLC, you can start with a recurring contribution of as little as $5 a month. Every contribution helps bring us that much closer to achieving our goals and ensuring liberty in our lifetime.

Liberty Lobby LLC is not for hire to the highest bidder, and will advocate for 100% freedom on every issue, every time. Liberty Lobby LLC specializes in Election Law (specifically ballot access reform and voter rights), Freedom of Information / Government Transparency, Freedom of Speech & Municipal and County Government.


Trump Slashes Renewable Energy Budget By 70%: Understanding the Potential Impact

Since the beginning of his election campaign, President Trump has targeted clean and renewable energy investment as one of his primary areas of budgetary cuts. He is now making good on those campaign promises, with the 2018 draft budget that was recently leaked indicating that he intends to cut the budget for the U.S. Department of Energy’s renewable energy and energy efficiency program by 70% in 2018.

A comprehensive breakdown of the proposed figures shows that in 2017 there was a $613 million budget for sustainable transportation but this will be cut by almost 70 percent to $184 million in 2018. Similarly, the budget for renewable power was $451 in 2017 but this will also receive a 70 percent drop in 2018, taking the figure down to $134 million. Finally, the $762 that was invested in energy efficiency in 2017 will be slashed dramatically, by 79 percent, to just $160 in 2018. Libertarianism is wholly opposed to any and all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production, particularly when there are so many free market corporations prepared to steerhead this kind of innovative research and forward the nation’s environmental agenda without negatively impacting on the overall budget.

A Negative Example of Government Energy Control

In direct opposition to this Libertarian attitude, in the UK comparing gas and electricity prices is now recommended by the government as a way of enabling residents to control their energy expenses: what’s more, the most recent Conservative government has pledged that if it is re-elected in June is will also introduce a price cap on the cost of energy for those families on the lowest incomes: approximately 17 million households. However, the biggest energy companies within the country have warned that by implementing these price caps for some families, prices for other families not included under the new policy would soar. This effectively means that through their control of what should be a free market, the British Government is negatively impacting on the financial, economic and social position of those it does not deem to need their support. Iain Conn, the Chief Executive of Centrica (who own the UK’s largest power provider, British Gas) said in a statement about the issue that “Price regulation will result in reduced competition and choice, stifle innovation and potentially impact customer service.”

Whilst his primary concern was about finding and improving sources of renewable energy in the long term, Barack Obama admitted that his climate change regulations (including the Clean Power Plan) had the potential to drive up the price of energy for normal US consumers, just as the British policy is currently doing to their domestic consumers. Higher costs to American families is exactly what Donald Trump is trying to avoid by making such aggressive cuts to the clean energy, energy efficiency and renewable energy government-sanctioned research programs. But have these cuts gone too far? Has the President removed too much, too soon, and what impact with this have on our national environmental concerns?

Too Much, Too Soon

By pulling the rug on green energy research funding so quickly, and so dramatically (a 79% percent cut in government funding in just 12 months is unprecedented) there is very little time or opportunity in place for the private market to pick up this research, fund it independently, and ensure that it continues. Whilst it may not necessarily be within the government’s remit to ensure that American consumers have access to clean energy and that we preserve our fossil fuel resources for as long as possible (and find an affordable, viable alternative for when they run out) it is certainly an important issue that needs to be addressed. Those best placed to conduct this research are those bodies within the private energy sector who have a vested interest in finding a long-term solution and ensuring it is a success: Trump is certainly correct to disengage politics from this process. But by removing funding so drastically and not ensuring there is a plan in place for the private market to take over this research, our commitment to sourcing clean and renewable energy now stands in jeopardy, and in the long term that could prove a costly mistake.


PeaceOptions – Building Block: Introduction to Knowing Yourself

PeaceOptions

 

Apr 18, 2017 05:03 pm | John Dennison

 

Let’s forget politics today and talk about you. Or more particularly, knowing yourself. Who are you really? What is your life all about? Why? Talk about heavy. But really, isn’t this what it’s all about? You? You are at the center of your universe. So why shouldn’t your life be about you? It’s bringing you…

The post Building Block: Introduction to Knowing Yourself appeared first on PeaceOptions.

Like Building Block: Introduction to Knowing Yourself on Facebook
Google Plus One Button
share on Twitter
Apr 11, 2017 12:54 pm | John Dennison

 

Am I the only one torn over what we see in the news? It’s as if the Trump election and months since have ripped a hole in the fabric of my reality, making me question some of the foundations of this life I’ve been living. It’s put me through something of an existential crisis lately….

The post Conscious Choices: Joining the Fight vs. Standing for Peace appeared first on PeaceOptions.

Like Conscious Choices: Joining the Fight vs. Standing for Peace on Facebook
Google Plus One Button
share on Twitter
Apr 10, 2017 10:32 am | John Dennison

 

What’s the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result? Well, then I must be nuttier than a fruitcake. Because I’m still here talking about peace while addressing the conditions — both inner and outer — that combine to steal it. Lately that’s had me writing and speaking…

The post The Insanity of Trying to Change My World appeared first on PeaceOptions.

Like The Insanity of Trying to Change My World on Facebook
Google Plus One Button
share on Twitter
Apr 06, 2017 10:43 pm | John Dennison

 

Do you like to watch a good fight? There’s a great one going on and I thought maybe you’d like to watch it with me. It’s called ObamaGate, and we’ve got ringside seats for a winner-take-all death match now going on for the future of our country. Once upon a time I thought I’d be…

The post #ObamaGate: Ringside Seats for the Fight of the Century appeared first on PeaceOptions.

Like #ObamaGate: Ringside Seats for the Fight of the Century on Facebook
Google Plus One Button
share on Twitter
Mar 23, 2017 11:01 am | John Dennison

 

This is the time of changes. Where we go from here is up to us. We all know the news. Turmoil abroad. Turmoil at home. Passions run hot, and people are at each others’ throats. We can’t seem to agree on much of anything. Worse, we don’t want to listen to those who see things…

The post Either We Change, or We Will Perish from the Earth appeared first on PeaceOptions.

Like Either We Change, or We Will Perish from the Earth on Facebook
Google Plus One Button
share on Twitter

Copyright © 2017 PeaceOptions, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:

PeaceOptions

1224 NW 114th Ave

Coral Springs, Florida 33071

Add us to your address book


The Council House Smoking Ban

LibertarianAlliance.mvc

 

The Council House Smoking Ban
by Sean Gabb
(8th May 2017)

I used to do a lot of radio and television. In the past few years, I have largely given up. The BBC no longer pays for appearances, instead expecting its contributors to drive to London or to remote studios for the love of being broadcast. The quality of discussion has dropped through the floor. Until about five years ago, it was still possible to go on air and make one or two comprehensible points. The presenters nowadays tend to be authoritarian hags and girlie-men whose job is to switch off anyone who fails to agree with the ruling class. Internet radio discussions are far more civilised, and may soon get larger audiences.

For these reasons, the approach this morning, from BBC Three Counties Radio, earned a curt rejection. The issue I was called on to discuss is a growing call for smoking to be banned in council accommodation. According to The Independent:

Smoking should be banned in all new council houses to protect children from harmful second-hand smoke, a public health chief has said…. Anti-smoking campaigners consider smoke-free housing to be the next major frontier in reducing the harmful effects of passive smoking.

This is a step in the War on Smoking I have predicted for years. Smoking has been banned almost everywhere else. Why not redraft council tenancies to ban smoking? Indeed, why stop here? The next step will be to lean on insurance companies to make it hard for private landlords not to ban their tenants from smoking. After that, it will be more pressure on the insurance companies, and perhaps on mortgage lenders too, to cover owner-occupied properties.

No one expects these bans to be universally obeyed. They will not at first be universally enforced. The idea is to bring them in, and leave them for a while. First enforcement will probably be against the sort of council tenants who deserve to be evicted on other grounds. After that, the vice will gradually tighten. Before it is very tight, smoking will have been effectively made a criminal offence.

What is to be done? What are we, as libertarian activists, or merely outraged smokers, to do? The tobacco companies have obviously given up. The days when they employed Chris Tame to wear out the anti-smokers ended a quarter of a century ago. Go on the radio and mention personal freedom, and see how long your microphone stays switched on. Spend your own money on putting a case to the people – you might get more response going about a field and telling the sheep not to get into that lorry the farmer has backed in through the gate.

So, what is to be done? In the direct sense, nothing is to be done. Speaking for myself, perhaps nothing should be done. I gave up smoking many years ago, and am not affected by the restrictions. I see the inflated prices and the plain packets. I see miserable smokers huddled in doorways. I walk past them. There may be some truth in the mantra First they came for the smokers. There is certainly truth in the observation that the more hysterically they go after the smokers, the less time the usual suspects will have to spend on harrying me.

If there is one, the answer does not lie in Freedom to Smoke movements. The cause of all these campaigns against smoking, drinking, fatty foods, petrol, diesel, coal, fighting, flying and driving, various kinds of sex, and dissenting opinions of all kinds, falls under two headings. First, the directors of these campaigns are employed or funded by the State, and these apparatchiks measure success by how many lives they visibly control. Second, we live in a culture dominated by the people I mention in my first paragraph – the authoritarian hags and their girlie-men associates. Leave these two parts of the cause in place, and the only question is what gets regulated out of existence first.

The real answer lies, I think, in a recovery of manly virtue. We need more stiff upper lip and less hyperventilating – more self-respect, and less self-righteousness. We need to find leaders who want only to be obeyed, not loved. Tracts on the non-aggression principle are beside the point – so too Adam Smith Institute reports on how to privatise the paving stones. The first are so esoteric in the present state of opinion, they do not even need to be banned. The second give us more of the state we already pay for. The first and only step to recovery is to play the man. Do this, and the spell of our managerial state will be broken on the spot. We can purge it. We can shrink it. We can drive out its former agents and beneficiaries as the Puritans were driven out after 1660. The new state of affairs resulting may not be libertarian by design, but will, by its nature, be less inclined to meddle than the present ascendency of hags and girlie-men.

I could say more on this, but will not. Mind you, try saying any of it on the BBC….

 

Recent Posts


The First Amendment is ILLEGAL during these 90 days

downsizeDC

 

We’ve been defeating incumbent protection schemes. Here we go again. RETWEET

We’ve been chipping away at bad campaign finance regulations that go under the heading of “electioneering communications.” We’ve won several cases on this issue. Now we have a chance to kill these regulations permanently. This message will explain…

  • What “electioneering communications” is, and why it’s awful
  • What we’ve done to roll back this evil
  • How our new amicus brief in the case Independence Institute v. FEC could kill off these “regulations” permanently

We’re partnering with the Downsize DC Foundation (and others) to file a brief in the case Independence Institute v Federal Election Commission. Here’s the story…

Congress passed a hideous campaign finance bill in 2002: the “Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act” (BCRA). This bill was pure incumbent

protection, designed to entrench The Establishment by silencing the people.

We organized plaintiffs and challenged BCRA in court. Our plaintiff group, Ron Paul v FEC, was joined by nearly a dozen others in a case heard by the Supreme Court. Alas, the Justices affirmed BCRA. But we kept fighting…

We filed an amicus brief in the Wisconsin Right to Life v FEC case in 2007…

In it, we attacked the Electioneering Communications provisions of BCRA. These provisions prohibited ads (or any type of broadcast) that mention politicians who happen to be running for re-election during the 30 days before a primary or 60 days before the general election. Please notice…

The establishment news media does not have to be silent in this way during this period. They are free to continue raising and spending unlimited amounts of money on communications that report about, praise, or condemn officials running for re-election. They can do this because of their First Amendment freedom of the PRESS. Guess what?

You too have a freedom of the PRESS!

You should be able to join with others to raise and spend unlimited amounts to express political opinions. That is freedom of the PRESS!

And the argument which you just read — that Free Press is a distinct, individual right — is unique to us. In fact…

Everyone else who has questioned these incumbent protection schemes has focused on the freedom of speech aspect. And their argument has failed plenty. Their critics argue that “Money isn’t speech.” But it’s much harder to argue that a press — whether it be a publication or a broadcast — doesn’t cost money.

We used our freedom of the PRESS argument in Ron Paul vs. FEC and again in Wisconsin Right to Life v FEC. And…

We won a narrow victory!

The Court ruled that non-profit groups can distribute “issue ads,” so long as they don’t expressly advocate the election or defeat of a candidate. But the Court also said that such groups still had to file reports with the FEC first.

But that is like having to obtain a “license” to run a press that expresses political opinions. So there was still more work to be done and the opportunity to do that work soon arrived…

We played a crucial role in the Citizens United decision

Citizens United made a movie about the personal life and record of Hillary Clinton. They did not advocate for her election or defeat, though the movie was clearly unflattering. The FEC ruled that the movie was banned from broadcast, mostly because it raised money outside of the Electioneering Communications rules.

We filed the only briefs in Citizens United v FEC that argued for the freedom of the PRESS. And…

Our argument prevailed! The majority ruling cited prior press cases and employed traditional freedom of the press arguments, just like those UNIQUELY found in our brief.

And while the celebrity attorney working for the plaintiffs avoided asking the Justices to overturn Austin v Michigan Chamber of Commerce, we weren’t shy. We asked directly, and the Justices agreed with us. As a result…

Think tanks and other corporations no longer need to create segregated funds to pay for issue ads. Our arguments effectively killed the broadcast prohibition. The “blackout periods” were gone. But a key aspect of Electioneering Communications remained…

Groups, including your favorite think tank, still have to register with The State before they can exercise their freedom of the PRESS.

That’s what is at stake in Independence Institute v. FEC. Here are the facts…

  • The Independence Institute is a think tank.
  • They tried to run radio ads about an upcoming Congressional vote.
  • The ads were about the Justice Safety Valve Act — a bill that would prevent unjust sentences and reduce prison overcrowding by permitting federal judges to issue sentences lower than the mandatory minimum.
  • Members of Congress were reluctant to support the bill, fearing they’d be seen as soft on crime.
  • Independence Institute sought to demonstrate to Colorado’s Senators that there was public support for the bill. However…
  • One of the two of them was in a re-election campaign.
  • The FEC contends this is Electioneering Communications and that Independence Institute must first register and then file detailed reports with them.

Must organizations that you support expend energy and funds filling out compliance forms to effectively obtain a “license” to exercise their press rights? Traditional media companies don’t have to do this, so why should you and the groups you support?

Now, if this case seems familiar to you, it’s because we filed an earlier amicus brief about it last summer, at the District Court level. The case is now at the Supreme Court, and we need to file a new brief. Can you…

Make a contribution to the Downsize DC Foundation to fund this legal work?

In order for us to succeed, we’ll likely need…

  • At least one patron who gives $2,000 or even $1,000, OR
  • One to three donors who contribute at least $500, OR
  • 50 or so contributions of varying size — every bit counts!

Please, help us make this brief possible.

  • Your contribution to our partner, the Downsize DC Foundation, is tax-deductible.
  • We accept corporate and personal contributions.
  • As you’ll see on the Zero Aggression contribution form, we take Visa, MasterCard, Discover, American Express, Bitcoin, PayPal, checks, and appreciated securities.

Note: We use the secure, online form of the Zero Aggression Project so that contributions can be tax-deductible for those who itemize.

Thanks for your consideration and support,

Jim Babka, President
Downsize DC Foundation
& DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

Our copyright policy

Our mailing address is:

DownsizeDC.org

872 Mark Drive

Akron, OH 44313

Add us to your address book


Finally, the End of the Affordable Care Scam by Robert Ringer

Ringer_head_image

 

March 23, 2010, will go down in U.S. history as a day of infamy. It was the day Barack Obama signed into law the so-called Affordable Care Act, an unconstitutional piece of legislation that a majority of Americans clearly did not want.

Now, with Obamacare in its final death throes, it appears to be headed for the Trumpster. Of course, no one knows exactly what DT will put in its place, but we should have a pretty good idea very soon. Let’s hope for the best and not expect the worst.

The most important thing is to act fast and get rid of Obamacare immediately, before the Radical Left has an opportunity to put out more fake news in an attempt to obfuscate the truth about this hideous piece of legislation. And the truth is that it’s nothing more than a complex scam sold to the public on a foundation of lies.

The lies were essential, because without over-the-top, outright lying, the American public would have revolted against this arrogant government overreach early on. And what’s especially offensive about it is that Obama and his surrogates, both in and out of Congress, fully realized it would fail from the outset, which they hoped would lead to single-payer, government-controlled healthcare.

If there was any doubt about it, the scam was inadvertently exposed in 2013 when John Gruber, one of the architects of Obamacare, was caught on video laughing and bragging to a panel how he and his cohorts had gotten the legislation passed.

Said Gruber, in part, “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And, basically — call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever — but basically that was really critical to get for the thing to pass. Look, I wish Mark was right that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not.”

From whence came those infamous and embarrassing lies: “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor — period.” “If you like your healthcare plan, you’ll be able to keep your healthcare plan — period.”

It goes without saying that Obama has never once apologized or even acknowledged that he made these and similar statements dozens of times. When you sincerely believe that the people you’re hurting are beneath you, you don’t feel the need to apologize.

Even the official name for Obamacare, “The Affordable Care Act,” is a lie. If Obamacare is anything, it is most decidedly not affordable. Despite promises of lower insurance premiums for everyone, premiums have spiraled out of control — in some cases, up as much as 100 percent.

None of this should come as a surprise, given that Obamacare was never intended to help anyone. It’s real purpose from the outset was to (1) redistribute wealth and (2) increase government’s stranglehold over people’s lives. After all, 85 percent of Americans already owned health insurance, and polls showed that most of them were quite happy with their policies.

The Dirty Dems used their age-old strategy of pushing through unpopular laws by whatever means necessary, then, when people start realizing that the new law is bad for most Americans, they yell and scream that you can’t repeal it because too many folks now depend on its benefits. Let’s face it, it’s a cute little trick, and one that is used over and over again by the Dirty Dems. And with good reason: It works!

So it’s not surprising that the Radical Left is now yelling and screaming that 30 million people will lose their healthcare if Obamacare is repealed. It’s like a movie you’ve seen over and over again, but, as is usually the case, it’s a complete a ruse.

Why? Because, first of all, most of those 30 million people didn’t have medical insurance to begin with. The only reason most of them have healthcare today is because others — those who did have health insurance and whose premiums have gone up since the implementation of Obamacare — are paying for them. Again, Obamacare was never about creating a better healthcare system. It has always been about redistribution of wealth and people control!

If Obama and the Dirty Dems had really been interested in doing what was best for all Americans at the lowest possible cost, all they needed to do was target the 30 million or so citizens who were uninsured and pay for their health costs directly as a separate budgetary item.

No draconian law required, no new giant bureaucracy created. Just keep it simple by paying for the uninsured. I’m not saying that I necessarily would have supported the idea, but it certainly would have been simpler and far less expensive.

America already had the best healthcare system in the world, but the goal of the angry young community organizer in the White House was to destroy it. And, give him credit, he did what he set out to do, though it was (hopefully) only a temporary destruction.

Of course, many folks want to know why Obamacare has to be replaced with anything if we already had a healthcare system that was the envy of the world. In theory, I’m sympathetic to that question, but through the years I’ve become more of a pragmatist than a libertarian ideologue.

Let me make it clear that I eschew ridiculous statements like “healthcare is right, not a privilege,” because it most certainly is not a right. But the pragmatic (or humane) side of me doesn’t like the idea of people suffering from a lack of good healthcare.

So, one way or another, I’d like to see everyone have access to good healthcare, including those at the bottom end of the income spectrum. My only caveat is that the United States cannot afford to pay for medical care for everyone in the world, so anyone who violates our immigration laws and is here illegally should not have access to free healthcare — or any other government benefits.

That said, how Donald Trump addresses this biggest of all issues confronting him will tell us a lot about how serious he is about following through on his promises. Figuring out how to make 2 + 2 = 5 is not an easy task, but the fact is that he will have to figure out how to implement his agenda without bankrupting the country — i.e., bankrupting it more than it already is.

 

original story appears here: http://robertringer.com/finally-the-end-of-the-affordable-care-scam/


FEE – Marxism on the Menu: Why This Communist Restaurant Failed

College Players Flee Socialist Athletics for Capitalist NFL

by Harrison Burge

If university revenues increase courtesy of athletics while high-caliber athletes remain mired in a socialist collective existence, devoid of the opportunity for a market-based compensation, high-performing college athletes may increasingly look to the market of professional sports sooner.

READ NOW

What Jonathan Swift Thought of Politicians

by Donald J. Boudreaux

Johan Norberg, in his superb new book Progress brings to light a devastating passage from Gulliver’s Travels.

READ NOW

Overcoming Cultural Division in the Age of Trump

by Sam Peak

Both minorities and poor and lower-middle-class whites agree race relations are getting worse, but they disagree whether the solution is to talk more or less about race. Is his mantra “Make America Great Again” a promise to return to a time when American manufacturing thrived or is it code for restoring white male dominance and returning minorities to the second tier?

READ NOW

Marxism on the Menu: Why This Communist Restaurant Failed

by Abigail Blanco

A communist restaurant in Grand Rapids has gone out of business. Shocking, we know. Sooner or later, market forces will find you and those pesky profit and loss signals will win. Every time.

READ NOW

Your Right to Use Encryption

by Amul Kalia

Despite what the government has claimed recently, encrypted communications are not a novelty: they were at the heart of the ideas that led to America’s founding. The Founders believed that privacy of communication — and, consequently, being able to freely express their thoughts — was crucial to a free society.

READ NOW

Liberalism’s 20th Century Rebirth

by Ralph Raico

If a date were to be put on the rebirth of classical liberalism, it would be 1922, the year of the publication of Socialism, by the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises. By the end of the century, the old, authentic liberalism was alive and well, stronger than it had been for a hundred years.

READ NOW

What Are Your Star Wars Politics?

by FEE

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away the Galactic Empire was split between those using the Dark Side of the Force to accomplish their ends against those preferring peaceful and persuasive means. Answer this five-question quiz to see where your politics lie in the Star Wars Universe.

READ NOW


The Good and The Bad in the 2017 Florida Legislative Session

LibertyFirstNetwork

 

NOTE: The Liberty First Network has begun using the NEW LFN Action Alert Service. If you want to continue to receive Action Alerts from the Liberty First Network CLICK HERE to sign up. 

The Good and The Bad in the 2017 Florida Legislative Session

On Monday May 8th, the Florida Legislature formally ended the 2017 legislative session. The session was scheduled to end on Friday May 5th, but because the House and the Senate could not agree on the final budget in time, the session was extended to the following Monday. The budget was approved by the House and Senate and now will be sent to the Governor for approval, veto or line item vetoes. Tallahassee insiders are predicting that Governor Scott may veto the entire budget which would mean a special session would be called to start the budget negotiations all over again. The state constitution requires the Legislature complete a budget by July 1st to begin the 2017-18 fiscal year.

The reason Governor Scott may veto the entire budget bill is because the legislature did not include several of Governor Scott’s priorities. Governor Scott requested $100 million for tourism marketing under Visit Florida and only got $25 million. Governor Scott requested $85 million for incentives to bring businesses to Florida and the legislature gave him zero.

The Good

The final budget came in at $82.4 billion, which is only an increase of $100 million over last year’s budget. This budget increase is the smallest since the great recession when the legislature had no choice but to reduce spending. The Legislature actually had to make significant spending cuts, when you factor inflation, increased enrollment in Medicaid recipients as well the increase in students attending public schools.

We consider this a huge victory, we have been fighting every year to reduce spending and after years of record spending and last year’s budget that was increased by $3 billion, the Legislature finally is listening. Also the Florida legislature passed the fewest number of bills in 20 years, we believe we have too many laws on the books and we need to repeal more laws.

This session was a success in scaling back corporate welfare. Incentive programs in Enterprise Florida were totally defunded and received zero money in the budget and Visit Florida only received $25 million. Visit Florida had come under scrutiny for questionable spending of our tax money, like the controversial $1 million deal with recording artist Pitbull or $2.8 million advertising deal with a racing car team.

Florida Forever, the state program for purchasing conservation land received no funding, keeping with our position that before any additional properties are purchased for conservation purposes, existing waterways, estuaries, rivers and other water bodies presently endangered must be restored.

HB 221 passed the Florida Legislature and is now waiting for the Governor to approve. HB 221 will prevent local governments from regulating “transportation network companies” such as Uber and Lyft and would adopt uniform, common sense guidelines that focus on safety and access to the new technology. This legislation allows people in Florida to continue benefiting from ride-share companies like Uber and Lyft and allow affordable, reliable rides.

The Bad

We supported many more bills this session than last year and unfortunately many bills did not pass. The House did pass several of the bills we supported and all but the Uber/Lyft bill died in the Senate. Our biggest disappointments were not passing the repeal of Red Light Cameras and not even getting a committee hearing on Campaign Finance Reform legislation. The Direct Care bill died in the Senate and was a victim of the traditional horse trading between the House and Senate. Every session House and Senate leadership hold legislation hostage as a negotiating tool to get one their priorities passed. This is an ugly side of the legislative process, the Direct Care bill would have served Floridians well in receiving affordable health care and should not been used for political gamesmanship.

SB 554/HB 679 would have allowed small craft breweries to self-distribute and not be mandated by law to use a distributor. HB 141/SB 166 dealt with craft distilleries and would have removed restrictions on how much distilleries can sell directly to customers. Unfortunately the big Distributor Companies used their political muscle to make sure SB 554/HB 679 failed and HB 141/SB 166 was watered down to increase the 2 bottle limit to 6 bottles.

Several good gun bills were filed in the Senate this year, mainly dealing with state mandated “gun free zones”. Senator Greg Steube filed multiple bills that eliminated many “gun free zones” such as airports and college campuses. Unfortunately all the bills were referred to Senator Greg Steube’s Senate Judiciary Committee which included Senator Anitere Flores and Senator Rene Garcia, both stated their opposition to the gun bills. Without their support, Senator Steube did not have the votes to get out of the Judiciary Committee. Their opposition effectively killed the gun bills for the session.

Summary

All things considered, the session was successful, despite many bills that we supported failed. The process to pass legislation in Tallahassee moves very slowly, and that probably is a good thing. The Founders set up a system of checks and balances to make sure bills are not rushed through the process on a Federal level and there is time to thoroughly vet each bill. We know in Washington DC, Obamacare was rushed through the process and has been a disaster. But, that also means good legislation will not pass any given session. The secret is to never give up, and keep coming back every session to pass good legislation. Because all of you made the phone calls and e-mails to legislators, our chances to pass good legislation next session are significantly increased.

Liberty First Network will continue to make the case and fight for the good legislation that failed this session. Our chance will start soon, Legislators will be filing bills starting in June for the 2018 Session and will begin voting on bills in committee as early as September.

We will be sending out reports on the specific legislation the Liberty First Network was tracking this session with our new Action Alerts E-Mail service. CLICK HERE to sign up.

Liberty First Network · 9851 State Road 54, New Port Richey, FL 34655, United States


Libertarian Party: Trump’s ‘revenue neutral’ tax proposal is taxpayer negative

Libertarian Party letterhead with torch eagle logo: slogan "Shrinking Big Government - Advancing Liberty"; address 1444 Duke St. Alexandria, VA 22314; 1-800-ELECT-US; www.LP.org

 

For immediate release
May 1, 2017

Libertarian Party: Trump’s ‘revenue neutral’ tax proposal is taxpayer negative

By Bernd Schade - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0

Nicholas Sarwark, Chair of the Libertarian National Committee, released the following statement today:

American taxpayers get to take home just 54 cents on every dollar they earn, while federal, state and local governments take the other 46 cents.

What a great deal for federal, state and local governments. Not so hot for taxpayers. Crushing, in fact.

President Trump’s tax reform proposal that he partially-unveiled on April 26 includes cuts in corporate tax rates, death taxes, and alternative minimum taxes. Republicans claim this plan will be ‘revenue neutral’ after these measures stimulate economic growth.

But when politicians say their plan is ‘revenue neutral,’ what they’re saying to taxpayers is, “we’re keeping your taxes high. We’re not cutting them a nickel.”

“Drain the swamp” President Trump wants to keep spending at the same perilously-high $4 trillion water mark as President Obama.

Keeping taxes and government spending high means government will remain wasteful, bloated, and dysfunctional. It will sustain thousands of wasteful bureaucracies and failed government programs. It will kill jobs, diminish people’s freedom, invite more overseas meddling, and inflict stifling red tape on businesses and individuals.

It’s taxpayer negative.

The goal of any tax reform proposal should be to dramatically reduce the total amount of money in politicians’ hands.

Government revenue negative is taxpayer positive.

We need tax cuts that give back thousands of dollars – every year – to taxpayers. Cuts that substantially hike everyone’s take home pay so taxpayers can save for their retirement, pay off their debts, support their families, enjoy the fruits of their labor, and take care of their loved ones in need.

Politicians forget: the money they take is not the government’s. It belongs to the hard-working taxpayers who earned it.

Better than two-thirds of all Americans believe that federal government spending is way too high.

We must reduce total government spending enough to both immediately end deficit spending and enable huge, immediate taxpayer-positive tax cuts.

The only way to drain a swamp is to pump water out of it – not keep it at the same level.

The only way to drain the swamp in Washington D.C. is to dramatically reduce total government spending and slash taxes.

Revenue negative.

Taxpayer positive.

 

Paid for by the
Libertarian National Committee, Inc. (LNC)
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Content not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.

Wednesday: Join 10 Liberty Lovers at “Central L.A. Mixer/Meeting (Region 64)”

Wednesday
Greater Los Angeles Libertarian Party Meetup Group
Wednesday, May 24, 2017
7:30 PM
Gill’s Indian Restaurant
838 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90017
This month’s featured topic: Exciting news. The amazing Jonny Stryder will reveal his not-yet trademarked 12 Activist Things You Can Do To Change The World. Any one of these activist things, competently executed, could make you world famous. For a fu…
Learn more

Alex Snitker gives wrap up of 2017 Florida Legislative Session

Alex Snitker gives wrap up of 2017 Florida Legislative Session

Don’t miss Alex Snitker’s review of the 2017 Florida legislative session one week from today in Lake Worth.

Liberty First Network President Alexander Snitker will join us to give his take on the results for the 2017 Florida legislative session.

How did liberty fare? What can you do to make 2018 better?

Although we are not directly affiliated with Liberty First Network, if you are able to contribute to their cause, I am sure they would appreciate it. http://www.floridaactionalerts.com/

Admission is free, though if you are able to order at least a drink, it helps us use the back room for free. http://www.broguesdownunder.com/

The LP Palm Beach Executive Committee will meet following Mr. Snitker’s presentation.

Copyright © 2017 Libertarian Party of Palm Beach County, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:

Libertarian Party of Palm Beach County

303 E Woolbright Rd #233

Boynton Beach, FL 33435

Add us to your address book


Invitation: Central L.A. Mixer/Meeting (Region 64)

New Meetup
Greater Los Angeles Libertarian Party Meetup Group
Added by Jonathan Jaech
Wednesday, May 24, 2017
7:30 PM
Gill’s Indian Restaurant
838 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90017
This month’s featured topic: Exciting news. The amazing Jonny Stryder will reveal his not-yet trademarked 12 Activist Things You Can Do To Change The World. Any one of these activist things, competently executed, could make you world famous. For a fu…
Learn more

The Left, Not Kellyanne Conway, Invented ‘Alternative Facts’

RalphBenkohttp://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2017/02/11/the-left-not-kellyanne-conway-invented-alternative-facts/#1b0be90b51b8

The left is engaged in an all-out war on Trump and his supporters. One of its weapons is to attack declarations as “Fake News.” Prominent journalists had a field day with Trump Counsellor Kellyanne Conway for coining the phrase “alternative facts” in defending Sean Spicer’s observations about the crowd size at Trump’s inauguration.

The left pioneered what it now criticizes. >snip<

Something fundamental is at stake. What we are seeing in the political arena is a War of The Narratives. Conway, of course, is only a proxy target. Trump is the real target. Trump’s adversaries are trying to strip him of his most valuable advisors through ridicule and catastrophizing their trivial slip-ups.

Meanwhile, the left and right have their own views of the way the world works, as do sub factions within each. Loud voices on each side now tend to invalidate the other’s views as “Fake.”

I am aware of some of the flaws and contradictions within my own worldview. While not softening my convictions that awareness disinclines me to go ballistic when I (often!) detect errors or omissions in the arguments of my adversaries. As one who knows he dwells in a glass house it doesn’t makes sense to throw stones at those who disagree with me.

As it happens, though, the left laid the foundation for “alternative facts.” That’s an artifact of a world view which it pioneered. It condemns this as pernicious only when adopted by populist conservatives.

What’s really going on? Postmodernism, that’s what.

I’ll let you in on this Open Secret. It is one I know as myself a self-identified, dues paying, postmodernist. Postmodernism sounds scary. It’s not.

Consider its most succinct definition by Jean-Francois Leotard who distilled postmodernism into “incredulity toward metanarratives.” In plain English: “don’t swallow stories that pretend to explain everything.”

I am incredulous toward my own  passionately held arch-conservative metanarrative. That incredulity toward my own gives me license to be genially incredulous toward the progressive metanarrative. I don’t drink my own Kool-Aid®. I am not about to drink the other team’s.

>snip<

Walter Truett Anderson, a Good Guy, wrote the clearest (and most fun) exposition of postmodernism I’ve encountered in his book Reality Isn’t What It Used To Be.  Per cultureandyouth.org‘s review of this indispensable and delightful book:

Constructivists, with whom he [Anderson] generally identifies, understand that “we do not have a ‘God’s eye view of nonhuman reality, never have had, never will have.” (p. x) Rather, each culture, and now each generation, attaches meaning to reality by symbols. It is through these collective symbols that we begin to view and experience the objective “real world.” The world is not a “single symbolic world, but rather a vast universe of ‘multiple realities,’ because different languages embody different ways of experiencing life.” (p. xi)

As postmodern as some are calling today’s culture, the author notes the persistence of faith and spirituality; “if there is anything we have plenty of it is belief systems.” …

People and societies today, then, are trying to adjust to the increasing plurality of worldviews.  The author is optimistic as to our ability to make the best of this cacophony of beliefs, to make sense of it all, to find meaning in our lives, and to live with others in a positive manner.

What are the political implications? For one, the concept of “Alternative Facts” grew in the loam of postmodernism and its sister philosophical schools mostly hosted by the left. The left, not Kellyanne Conway, fostered this way of looking at things. Conway just played the hand she was dealt.

And the left, more than the right, has grasped the political implications of Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems. The implications, for those of us who struggled with math, were elegantly summed up by Siobhan Roberts in the June 29, 2016 New Yorker, that admirable bastion of the center left:

>snip< Of course, it has a proper and technically precise formulation, but the late logician Verena Huber-Dyson paraphrased it for me as follows: “There is more to truth than can be caught by proof.” Or, as the British novelist Zia Haider Rahman put it in his award-winning début, “In the Light of What We Know,” “Within any given system, there are claims which are true but which cannot be proven to be true.”

The field of semiotics, also, has a left-wing cast. For example, as noted in Wikipedia, “Roland Barthes (1915–1980) was a French literary theorist and semiotician. He often would critique pieces of cultural material to expose how bourgeois society used them to impose its values upon others.”

When you hear concepts like “gender is a social construct” you’ve probably entered The Semiotics Zone. The left’s ability to declare that while simultaneously embracing the immortal words of Lady Gaga from “Born This Way” is a marvel of mental agility.

For the record, I was born this way: a right winger.

And, speaking of mental agility, I count myself one of Lady Gaga’s Little Monsters.

Semiotics’ cousin Deconstruction also is mostly a Thing of the left. >snip<

You just didn’t see too many people at Trump rallies brandishing placards blazoned with quotes from Derrida. You’re more likely to encounter his writings at Berkeley. That said, it’s Derrida’s world. We just live in it.

The left also pioneered the wholesale political use of Weaponized Narrative, in which the storyline takes on more salience than facts. I have previously written about one of its most brilliant tacticians, Patrick Reinsborough, an arch-nemesis who I greatly admire. Do not miss his essay Giant Whispers.

This is tactically brilliant. As Napoleon once said “Imagination rules the world.” Yet use of narrative also compromises the left’s chastity, undermining claims to legitimacy in attacking the use of Narrative by, say, Donald Trump. Dramatic License goes both ways.

>snip<

So let’s be aware of some of the internal contradictions when left-wing polemicists attack people like Kellyanne Conway or her boss. My favorite left-wing polemicist is Rolling Stone’s Matt Taibbi. His invective surpasses that of Donald Trump. Here he is on The End of Facts in the Trump Era:

This gets to the heart of a chilling truth that much of educated America has yet to face about the Trump era. Amid all the howling about Trump’s deceptions, the far more upsetting story is the mandate behind them – not so much the death of truth in politics, but the irrelevance of it.

Taibbi’s propaganda is utterly first rate. Also, when you think about it in context, hilarious. One marvels at the curious quiet of postmodernists, semioticians, deconstructionists, and pundits of the left-leaning variety. These latter may be presumed to be well familiar with the provenance of “Alternative Facts” and the role of the left in fostering our current political culture.

Most of the left-wing Commentariat defaulted at a strategically “teachable moment.” Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.

In the final analysis one is reminded of Pandora and her jar. As recorded by Hesiod in his Theogony:

I will give men as the price for fire an evil thing in which they may all be glad of heart while they embrace their own destruction.’ … For ere this the tribes of men lived on earth remote and free from ills and hard toil and heavy sickness which bring the Keres (Fates) upon men; for in misery men grow old quickly. But the woman [Pandora] took off the great lid of the jar with her hands and scattered all these and her thought caused sorrow and mischief to men. Only Elpis (Hope) remained there in an unbreakable home within under the rim of the great jar….

Yes, definitely, let us deplore Fake News. I do, unequivocally. Yet there is more here than meets the eye: “An evil thing in which they may all be glad of heart while they embrace their own destruction” as taught to us by Hesiod. And it was, predominantly, the left that opened our own peculiar Pandora’s jar.

Luckily for us all, whether conservative or progressive, as Hesiod teaches … Hope remains “in an unbreakable home within the rim of the great jar.” Hesiod, prophetically, was foretelling the advent of Hope Hicks, President Trump’s White House Director of Strategic Communications.

Don’t let me pwn you. That’s just my own whimsical indulgence in an “Alternative Fact.”

The left is getting blown up with its own IED. Its flimsy crusade against Conway, like its flimsy crusade against Bannon, is designed for one purpose and one purpose only: to isolate, and weaken, Donald Trump. The left, not Kellyanne Conway, created “alternative facts.”

To read the full column, click here.

 

 

 

 


American Spectator – The Monopoly of the Left on Campuses ⚠

The American Spectator Logo

The Real Lessons of Middlebury College

The Real Lessons of Middlebury College

BY: THOMAS SOWELL

The rot goes much deeper and is much older than this latest round of left savagery.

Many people seem shocked at the recent savagery of a mob of students at Middlebury College, who rioted to prevent Charles Murray from addressing a student group who had invited him to speak. They also inflicted injuries requiring hospitalization on a woman from the faculty who was with him.

Where have all these shocked people been all these years? READ MORE

History Lessons Unlearned

How and Why Obamacare Repeal Will Succeed

BY: DAVID CATRONIt is a practical, 3-part process, against which no Republican can afford to vote. 

The tsunami of criticism that greeted last week’s introduction of the American Health Care Act (AHCA) was probably inevitable, considering the questionable character of some career politicians, the liberal inclination of the legacy media, and the hopelessly convoluted maze of mandates, taxes, and regulations that is Obamacare. Even honest observers got important details of AHCA wrong, while failing to comprehend its place in the overall GOP plan to rid the nation of the “Affordable Care Act.” READ MORE

Want another perspective?: “Even If GOP Healthcare Bill Passes, It Is Destined to Fail

Daylight Saving

Deadly Daylight Savings?

BY: DIENEKESDaylight Savings may be doing more harm than good, studies find.

If you’re like most Americans who just lost an hour off your life when you awoke this morning due to having to reset your clock to “spring ahead” today, you’re probably wondering why we—and much of Western civilization—still honor that thing known as Daylight Savings Time.

Although we’ve been told that Daylight Savings helps save energy, there is evidence that Daylight Savings may actually cost more energyas noted by Duke Energy’s Illumination blog. READ MORE

More of Today’s Headlines:

The Spectacle Blog:

Read More


2017 Session: Week 15

 

2017 Session: Week 15

The 15th week of the 2017 Legislative Session has come to a close, and Liberty Lobby LLC continues to advocate for maximum freedom at the statehouse and Legislative Office Building (LOB) testifying for pro-freedom legislation and against anti-freedom legislation.

On Tuesday April 25, Liberty Lobby LLC CEO, Darryl W Perry testified on the following bills.

SB88 Authorizing wine manufacturer retail outlets. support
HB99 Relative to beverage containers. support
HB161 Relative to beverage sales at farmers’ markets. oppose

On Wednesday April 26, Liberty Lobby LLC CEO, Darryl W Perry testified on the following bills.

HB171 Prohibiting the state or its political subdivisions from assisting a federal agency in the collection of electronic data without a warrant. support
HB209 Relative to the adoption of Atlantic Standard Time. support

Audio is available for these hearings on the Liberty Lobby LLC YouTube channel. You can find updates on committee recommendations, and actions by the House and Senate, on legislation we are tracking, here.

And we have another success to mention, the Senate Executive Departments and Administration Committee voted unanimously to amend HB301 to incorporate our proposal to shorten that bill to eliminate the proposal to regulate electric grills. The amended bill was then amended on the floor to eliminate the requirement that the grill be UL certified. We’d like to thank Senators Woodburn and Guida for the Committee Amendment and Floor Amendment to this bill, respectively.

If you appreciate our efforts, please consider starting or increasing a monthly pledge via PayPal or Bitcoin.

– OR –

Please demonstrate your confidence in our efforts by investing a one-time contribution via PayPal, BitcoinDash or Zcash.

In Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry
CEO, Liberty Lobby LLC

The mission of Liberty Lobby LLC is to advocate for minimal government and maximum human freedom by weighing all legislation against the litmus of our principles and responding accordingly by testifying in legislative hearings, holding court with individual legislators, and crafting liberty-minded legislation.

Our goal is to acquire a mere $5,000 per year in contributions from people like you to help pay for travel and administrative expenses. If you are interested in helping fund Liberty Lobby LLC, you can start with a recurring contribution of as little as $5 a month. Every contribution helps bring us that much closer to achieving our goals and ensuring liberty in our lifetime.

Liberty Lobby LLC is not for hire to the highest bidder, and will advocate for 100% freedom on every issue, every time. Liberty Lobby LLC specializes in Election Law (specifically ballot access reform and voter rights), Freedom of Information / Government Transparency, Freedom of Speech & Municipal and County Government.

 

 


[PeaceOptions] Can You Hear the War Drums Beating?

 

Copyright © 2017 PeaceOptions, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:

PeaceOptions

1224 NW 114th Ave

Coral Springs, Florida 33071

Add us to your address book