End the War on Freedom

Vin Suprynowicz at The Las Vegas Review-Journal - what really happened at the Nevada Republican Party Convention. [gsc] Quote:First, America does not have two major parties. It has one major party -- the Incumbent Party -- which is divided into two social clubs, the Republicrats and the Demopublicans. This single party has a single agenda: Tell the voters you stand for "change," and then deliver them no change at all, except incremental further steps toward the brand of state socialism popularized by Bismarck, Mussolini, Hitler and Roosevelt the Second. If we have two different major parties, tell me which one, placed in power, would quickly end the War on Drugs; pull our troops out of 103 nations overseas; restore the Second Amendment right to own a machine gun without having to sign your name or show a photo ID; end the actuarially bankrupt and constitutionally unauthorized Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security Ponzi schemes; shut down the Federal Reserve Board and put us back on a sound, non-inflating dollar made of gold and/or silver. Tell me which one would declare that children belong to their parents, shutting down the state "Child Protection" kidnapping racket (kids have been kidnapped and killed for an offense as minor as mom not "getting them their shots" -- see Cameron Justin Demery, Oct. 14, 1996) and the vastly expensive Government Youth Propaganda Camps which are dumbing down our children into quasi-literate sociopaths. That would be "change." And the One Party has none to offer.

Lindsey Williams at Google Video - 75 minute talk about Mr. Williams' book (more). He claims that "there is as much crude oil on the north slope of Alaska as there is in Saudi Arabia... potentially enough crude oil ... to supply the United States of America for over 200 years... Russia has just dug some super deep wells... they have found massive amounts of oil. The world is nowhere near to running out of oil... 'Since Lindsey left the Prudoe Bay oil field as Chaplain, we since have discovered another field as large as Gull Island. America has everything we need on the north shore of Alaska.'" Same with natural gas. He discovered this in the late seventies, after being invited to Alaska as a preacher, and allowed into the inner circle of the oil company executives there. According to Mr. Williams, the existence of that oil was classified the day after it was discovered. There's another copy of this video here.

Tyler Hamilton at Technology Review - a Hollywood-based startup, Sunrgi Solar Energy Systems, has created a concentrated photovoltaic module that they expect to be able to produce electricity at a price competitive with fossil-fuel generation. Hope it works. [gsc] Quote:Sunrgi, which emerged out of stealth mode last week, has created a concentrated photovoltaic system that uses a lens to focus sunlight up to 2,000 times onto tiny solar cells that can convert 37.5 percent of the sun's energy into electricity. Stronger concentrations of sunlight allow engineers to use much smaller solar cells, making it more economical to use higher-efficiency--but higher-cost--cells. Sunrgi, for example, will use cells based on gallium arsenside and germanium substrates. ... Sunrgi estimates that its system will be capable of producing electricity at a wholesale cost of five cents per kilowatt-hour. Prototypes have been built and tested both in the laboratory and in the field, and the company expects to start commercial production in 12 to 15 months...

Ron Paul's Texas Straight Talk - Why Dr. Paul's "Affordable Gas Price Act" (HR 2415) is the best way for the federal government to lower gas prices. Quote:The free market can meet the American people’s demand for a reliable supply of gasoline as long as government does not distort the market through excessive taxation and regulation. Therefore, Congress should lower prices gas prices by pursuing an agenda of low taxes, regulatory relief, and sound money by passing legislation such as my Affordable Gas Act.

Eric Englund at LewRockwel.com - Mr. England blames the environmental movement, especially Algore's human-induced-global-warming hoax, for America's economic problems. He may well be right. [lew] Quote:So let’s get back to the robust correlation between the rise of the green movement and the decline of the American economy. Greenies, and their political minions, are constantly bossing Americans around. Watch out for having too large of a carbon footprint. Did that bottled water come from Fiji? Recycle your paper, your plastic, your metals and don’t you dare mix any of these materials in the wrong recycling bin. Don’t water your lawn, get a low-flow toilet, and for gosh sakes replace your incandescent light bulbs with fluorescent ones. Are you driving an SUV? Shame on you. Think globally, but act locally. Blah, blah, blah. An enormous amount of physical and mental energy is expended to make the green busybodies happy. None of this "work" is productive. Sure there are those who feel a sense of fulfillment by following these mind-numbing edicts from greenies – as one feels more connected to nature and to a worthy cause (I suppose). I have little doubt that green sympathizers are the same people who celebrate the income tax so that money can be forcibly taken from bad people and transferred to the good downtrodden proletariat. Hurray for April 15th! All in all, going green is a monumental waste of time and energy. It is, consequently, a drag on our economy and a proximate cause of economic decline. MBAs, across the country, have been indoctrinated with the claptrap that just about anybody or anything can be a stakeholder in a business. It is passé to believe that simply treating employees well and pleasing customers are the keys to business success. No, it is now chic, and politically correct, to integrate varying degrees of environmentalism into a company’s business plan. For Mother Earth herself is a stakeholder in every business. The intrinsic value of nature must be acknowledged and celebrated in order for a business plan to be credible. By embracing such twaddle, it is no wonder once-great American companies are slipping into mediocrity or worse. MBAs, from top business schools, are part of the problem, not the solution.

Charley Reese at LewRockwell.com - Mr. Reese respects Reverend Jeremiah Wright. From what little I've read of his opinions, I do too. I certainly don't agree with everything he says, but he has the temerity to say unpopular things and stick to his guns about his opnions. I respect that a lot. [lew] Quote: Now, in the first place, this was the old guilt-by-association gimmick – Sen. Obama, you either have to denounce this man or we will assume you agree with and condone all of his views. Bull. The Rev. Wright is not part of the Obama campaign, doesn't write his speeches and doesn't speak for him. Obama should have said: "Look, we have no connection except a personal one. I've told you I don't agree with all of his views, but I cherish his friendship, and if you don't like that, you can go to hell. And if you have any questions about him or his views, ask him, not me." Then he should have stuck to his campaign message and ignored any questions about the Rev. Wright.

From gsc: "For my own part, I expect the war against individual liberty to move into additional renewed phases of overt violence. To me, the strategic implications of water-borne properties make them ill suited for what I see coming. I prefer mountainous terrain. Given what I expect of the filthy, putrescent, evil, heinous, murdering, raping, mutilating, torturing, thieving scum who run the major governments of the world, I think the sense of 4th Generation Conflict, that one survives and hits back as opportunity arises, strongly motivates a choice of difficult terrain in which to move..." -- Jim Davidson

Rhonda Cook at The Atlanta Journal Constitution - Michael Bloomberg's lawsuit against gun stores who sold guns that were later found in New York City was dismissed on Wednesday by a federal appeals court. Good. Now let's hope that the countersuits are successful, and that Bloomberg himself is forced to pay millions of his own money. More related stories here.

L. Neil Smith at JPFO - forbidding people from possessing self-defense tools, under color of law, is morally equivalent to murder. Hopefully, Bloomberg and Richard Daley and other victim disarmers will swing for their crimes before they die of old age. [jpfo] Quote: At this point, I want to make it clear that this is not a parable. It is not a metaphor, a simile, or any kind of analogy. It is an accurate, point-for-point description of the criminal behavior of the authorities in many of America's biggest cities -- New York, Chicago, Denver -- where you are forbidden to carry, or in some cases to own, a weapon of self-defense. Instead of using their resources to pursue criminals, the police in these jurisdictions are busy preventing you from exercising the unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right of every man, woman, and responsible child to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission. The crime I'm guilty of in my scenario is the crime they're guilty of in real life. Through force or the threat of force, they pin your arms and make you helpless while robbers, rapists, and killers do whatever they like with you. Certain of these authorities are even guiltier because they've mounted a deliberate, nation-wide effort to spread their particular kind of deadly criminality as far and wide as possible.

Thomas E. Woods, Jr. at LewRockwell.com - nine things accomplished by Ron Paul's new book, The Revolution: A Manifesto ($11.55 plus shipping). I ordered a copy. [lew] Quote:9. For your friends who have heard of Ron Paul only in caricature, or have never heard of him at all, it shows him to be a learned, thoughtful, and mature statesman. Its arguments are consistently persuasive, and it’s written in a way that keeps your attention from the first page to the last. It is a book that can change minds. And we sure need plenty of that.

Nathanael Johnson at Harpers - pretty good coverage of the science and politics of raw milk. I mostly avoid milk, since my colds are much milder without it, but I have found raw milk to be worlds better than the pasteurized/homoginized variety. Raw milk is alive, vibrant, real. Pasteurized is dead, boring, mechanical. Public health my ass. If people want to drink raw milk, it ain't nobody's business. [root] Quote:If the police actions against Schmidt and other farmers have been overzealous, they are nevertheless motivated by a real threat. The requirement for pasteurization—heating milk to at least 161 degrees Fahrenheit for fifteen seconds—neutralizes such deadly bacteria as Campylobacter jejuni, Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli, and salmonella. Between 1919, when only a third of the milk in Massachusetts was pasteurized, and 1939, when almost all of it was, the number of outbreaks of milk-borne disease fell by nearly 90 percent. Indeed, pasteurization is part of a much broader security cordon set up in the past century to protect people from germs. Although milk has a special place on the watch list (it’s not washable and comes out of apertures that sit just below the orifice of excretion), all foods are subject to scrutiny. The thing that makes our defense against raw milk so interesting, however, is the mounting evidence that these health measures also could be doing us great harm. Over the past fifty years, people in developed countries began showing up in doctors’ offices with autoimmune disorders in far greater numbers. In many places, the rates of such conditions as multiple sclerosis, type 1 diabetes, and Crohn’s disease have doubled and even tripled. Almost half the people living in First World nations now suffer from allergies. It turns out that people who grow up on farms are much less likely to have these problems. Perhaps, scientists hypothesized, we’ve become too clean and aren’t being exposed to the bacteria we need to prime our immune systems.

Brian Doherty at Reason - it is not hard to generate your own power, from any sort of plant matter, with old technology, a "gassifier". A group of bohemian machine-artists, spearheaded by Jim Mason, did it on a fairly large scale in San Francisco, when their grid power was turned off over building code violations. This kind of locally-generated power may provide a better solution to America's energy problems than taxes and regulations on centralized power. It's also carbon-neutral, for those in the audience who care about that (not me). [root] Quote:The costs in time and sanity borne by Mason and his crew were apparent. They were also far beyond what most of the non-art-obsessed will want to pay. But so were the innovations that arose from, say, the Homebrew Computer Club of Silicon Valley, that mid-’70s gang of PC enthusiasts—including a young Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak—dedicated to DIY computer making. Yet from the homebrewers’ irrational enthusiasms arose the modern world of personal computing. We haven’t reached the point where flicking a switch for coal-fired power from far away seems as inadequate as the five-mainframes-for-the-nation computer vision that the proto-hackers of the ’70s were rebelling against. But Mason notes that all sorts of human endeavors, from our computing to our food to our transportation, have evolved away from bare resource economizing. They’ve become instead arenas for play and assertions of identity—or, as Mason likes to think of it, areas in which there is at least some opportunity to impress girls. “We can turn power into something experiential, expressive, personal,” he says. “Not a problem to be solved but an opportunity to be explored, like the cultural movement in food from a thing you eat for raw energy to food as an idiom of pleasure, creativity, and expression, an excuse for gathering friends and family. “Computing had a similar transformation. It wasn’t until the computer became an idiom of personal expression that it exploded into something ubiquitous as clothes on our body.

Stefan Molyneux at Strike the Root - Mr. Molyneux paints the United States' founding documents as so much political propaganda. He may be right. [root] Quote:If Mafia Gang A attacks Mafia Gang B – while claiming eternal hatred for Mafia Gang B’s evil practice of extortion – and then, as soon as it overthrows Mafia Gang B, immediately sets up its own more predatory extortion rackets, we can clearly understand that Mafia Gang A was motivated by jealousy of Mafia Gang B, not out of any fundamental dislike of their practices. If we continue to believe the pious lies of statist propaganda, we will forever be drawn to drown ourselves in the mirage of a mythical past where people were “free.” If we continue to believe that the “founding of the Republic” – really the overthrow of a relatively benign foreign gang by a vastly more rapacious domestic gang – was defined by the moral fairy tales designed to dull the scepticism of the average citizen, then we shall be forever drawn to repeat the mistakes of the past and waste our lives believing that a new criminal gang will somehow set us free. If we believe that the Constitution was genuinely designed to limit the power of the state, then we will forever try to limit the power of the state by revising political documents or pursuing other kinds of political solutions. If we understand that political documents are in fact mere tools of hypocritical moral propaganda, we will be no more tempted to revise them than we would to fact-check back issues of “Pravda.”

L. Neil Smith at The Libtertarian Enterprise - great idea! The Peace Amendment. [tle] Quote:It is time to ratify the Peace Amendment. Here's how it would work: the first clause would repeal the War Powers Act and any other law, regulation, or directive that allows a president to send troops overseas (or do very much of anything else militarily) without a formal declaration of war passed by majority of congress. Maybe even a super-majority. The second clause would reinstate the 1878 Posse Comitatus in full, forbidding the government to use the military to enforce its will anywhere within the United States. Perhaps this idea belongs in another piece of legislation, but my belief is that politicians feel an irresistible urge every waking minute to use the military to beat somebody up and kill them. Prevent them from doing it overseas, and things could get worse here, unless we prevent that with the same stroke. The third clause is the meat of the amendment. Having voted to declare war, every Congressman who voted "aye" will immediately get up from his seat and march right out the door, where he will be handed a uniform and a weapon and be conveyed directly to the front, defined as that area of military activity that is producing the highest number of casualties. No excuses. Practicing politicians will be denied Conscientious Objectorhood. As long as they voted to subject yet another generation of Americans to war, their age, sex, prior service, or state of health won't keep our valiant congressional warriors from going with the "boys". If they can't march, they'll be given knobby tires for their wheelchairs. In the case of another 20th century-style undeclared war, where all Congress does is contribute our money and our children to the conflagration and give the President the go-ahead, everybody goes, whether they voted affirmative or not. Voting "no" is not enough. They should have gotten up and walked out, in protest of the rape of the Constitution. The fourth clause winds it up. Immediately upon notification that the Congress has declared war, the President will put on a uniform of his own, pick up his rifle, and march into the sunset as a common soldier. The Vice President replacing him will do the same thing in 30 days if the war isn't over. War is hell for everyone else, but heaven for politicians. If we desire to survive the 21st century, that has to change.

Two new ones from Larken Rose, telling the meaning of unalienable rights, and explaining why treason "is an insane, authoritarian concept." Well, treason does make sense, but it only applies to people who have sworn an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. If they do otherwise, they are guilty of treason. If you haven't sworn such an oath, then the Constitution doesn't apply to you. It is a limit on government power, not a license.

• Unalienable
• Treason

Quote:People who talk about preserving their rights by way of "the system" don't understand what a right is. By definition, a "right" is something that you don't NEED "legal" permission to do. You have the right to do it no matter WHAT any "law" says. I know it's about as politically incorrect as you can get to say this, but the proper response to "gun control" is not lobbying and petitions--which imply that its up to the damn politicians to decide whether we can be armed or not. The proper response, if one actually believes in unalienable rights, is to declare, "I have the right to be armed, and trying to violate that right will be hazardous to your health." Now it's time to get REALLY politically incorrect. Suppose Barrack "I'm-For-Unspecified-Change" Obama becomes President, and successfully introduces a bill to ban all private gun ownership, thus attempting to violate the rights of around 100,000,000 gun-owning Americans. If some thug then shows up at your door, and declares that in the name of King Obama (or King Bush, or any other tyrant) he's going to be swiping your firearms, you have the right to use any amount of force necessary to stop the thug.

C. Crane is selling an 800 lumen LED light bulb, that uses 8 watts of power and lasts for 30,000 hours. $120. Out of stock until mid-May. 800 lumens is equivalent to a 55 watt light bulb. That's 100 lumens per watt, and 250 hours per dollar. Still quite a bit more expensive than compact fluorescents, which get 1600 lumens (95 watt incandescent) from 23 watts (70 lumens per watt) and glow for 12,000 hours for $4.75 (2526 hours per dollar). I predict that the end of the compact fluorescent is nigh. Long live the LED!

Glenn Roberts at Motorcycle Mojo - 18-year-old Ben J. Poss Gulak has invented a cross between a motorcycle and the Segway. The Uno, with two side-by-side wheels and a seat for one, foot pegs, and handle-bars, has only one user control, an on-off switch for the electronics. To go forward, you lean forward. To slow down, or go backwards, you lean back. Very cool. Lots of photo links at the bottom of the article. [gizmodo]

John Taffin at Guns Magazine - Mr. Taffin tells of how he verified the lies from an anti-gunner that evil assault weapons cause good people to turn violent. He bought two of them, and, golly gee, he didn't turn evil. I've seen this thesis before, but Taffin tells it very well. [guns] Quote: Fifteen years ago I did not own an assault rifle, and from here on we will use this term in the same way the all-knowing “mainstream” media does even though it is incorrect. My only semiauto rifle was a Ruger 10/22 customized by Jimmy Clark with a heavy match-grade barrel and match trigger. I had also given my daughter and son-in-law a 10/22 for a wedding present. I really did not see the need to personally own an assault rifle. Then it happened. I was sitting in my hotel room in Quincy, Illinois, after covering the Masters Tournament and waiting to go to the airport for the flight home. Turning on television I was astounded to hear the words of a Northeastern governor testifying before a Senate committee about assault rifles. He said, “It is the very nature of the weapon that causes normally law-abiding citizens to turn into criminals.” There it was! The cause of crime was not environment, nor poverty, nor someone looking for the easiest way to gather money. It was all the fault of this hideous weapon — the assault rifle. This man was saying these magic weapons could somehow change the character of anyone who even touched one. Could this actually be true? Did I dare to take the chance of finding out for myself? If I procured one would everything I have ever been taught be thrown by the wayside? Would the influence of parents, grandparents, teachers, and ministers suddenly be destroyed by a few pounds of metal and wood? Could the nature of this inanimate object really cause a normal law-abiding citizen to turn to crime and violent behavior? Did I dare take the chance to find out? If this governor was right and I put myself in possession of an assault rifle my whole life could change. It was a dangerous chance to take but I had to know if this governor was right. Surely he could not be either lying or ignorant. After all, he was an elected official. If he was right in his assessment, I could possibly ruin my life forever, perhaps destroy my family and lose any standing I had in my community. I thought about it for quite a while spending several sleepless nights. The decision was made and I would order not one, but two assault rifles. I would take the supreme test with both a .223 and a 7.62x39. It was possible one would not be enough to overcome my character. But if I survived both of them, I would be a stronger and better person, and I would also know that governor was either an ignorant liar or a lying ignoramus.

Century Arms has a new 7.62x39 AK-style bullpup rifle. Google lists prices from $479 to $595. Holt Bodinson, in a Guns Magazine review, calls it very accurate, for an AK. Images shamelessly cropped from a sale ad. [guns]

I bought a Cold Steel African Walking Stick from KnifeCenter.com. $24 plus $9 shipping. Arrived in two days. Below, you can see it with the walking staff I found at a local tobacco shop, with closeups of the top and bottom. It's 37" long, and has some heft. I wouldn't want to be hit with it. Haven't tried it on a walk through the woods yet.