Monday, July 30, 2012

A World Without America - by Kyle Becker



“There’s a great deal of ruin in a nation,” Adam Smith said to an anxious young man named John Sinclair, who was concerned about the British’s surrender to a rag-tag outfit of colonialists at Saratoga in 1777. Smith’s maxim is certainly being tested to the utmost by an American political class seemingly bent on national implosion.

Since the precarious period when America’s fate as a free nation was yet to be decided by a test of arms, the rugged and fiercely independent people of the New World built a country that ascended to the world’s greatest embodiment and defender of ordered liberty.

Yet a government charged to preserve the morally just system of human freedom, based on the individual rights to be secure in person and property, now threatens to be undone by a rapacious political class bent on subsuming all under an oppressive regime of coercive equalization.

Human history’s greatest champion of liberty is in dire threat of being lowered to the mediocre tier of middling dictatorships and disintegrating European welfare states.  There is a great deal of ruin a nation, as Smith once said, but the political elites who have been at the helm for the last one hundred years have in the main done everything conceivable to usher in America’s demise.

The successes of the last century are attributable to the afterglow of a philosophical revolution that sought to liberate mankind from the arbitrary caprice of statist overlords. Everything from the invention of the lightbulb to the mass production of the automobile was predicated on a consumer-driven market that exalted the profit motive as emblematic of the American Dream and a way of ensuring people were getting what they desired.

If people don’t get what they want in a market, they can stop paying for it. If the government doesn’t get what it wants from the people, it can tax them, fine them, and put them in prison. This is the normal state of affairs for mankind: some form of enslavement to whip-bearing masters.

But while the country was roused to fight and defeat European and Asian aggressors in defense of freedom, the fundamentals of civil society and market economy were being undone at home. Since the Wilson administration’s Espionage and Sedition Acts, a throwback to the rebuked Alien and Sedition Acts and Lincoln’s temporary suspension of habeas corpus, followed upon by Franklin Roosevelt’s desire to establish permanent central planning via the New Deal, the United States as a beacon of liberty has been waning.

Perhaps there was no perfect “Golden Age” of American liberty, as conservatives imagine, when the government restrained itself in deference to the rights of the people. Rather, millions of Americans were able to escape the long reach of government in the Manifest Destiny period, when the government was preoccupied with fending off external adversaries and didn’t have the manpower and resources to track tax absconders down. In any event, the settlers were serving the government’s purposes of colonization; just as did the building of the railroads. This arrangement made “freedom” all that much easier to sell in Washington.

The condition of slavery and the ineluctable but painful process of emancipation tarnished this period, when a fully committed experiment in human liberty might have demonstrated more impeccably the merits and the potential successes of the project. Yet the philosophical underpinnings of the revolution, as expressed well in the Declaration, had provided the impetus and inspiration for greater equality under the law, including Women’s Suffrage.

Surely, there was one prior period when the nation was in tremendous danger of falling apart at the seams; as Lincoln had said at that moment of tremendous trial, “a house divided against itself cannot stand.” But we should also point out that a house without a foundation cannot stand.

The American Empire is consolidated, and the wars against major external foes won. The great powers of the world possess nuclear weapons, making acts of aggression against one another suicidal. We are in an extremely dangerous period when the elites of the world see one another as natural allies against the people, instead of rivals for power on the world stage.

We must grapple with the fact that those of the political class of the United States see themselves as having more in common with European sophisticates and Chinese mandarins than with the shuffling masses; or at least, America’s elites aspire to the towering heights of political control and social esteem of their globalist colleagues.

Our elected representatives are being led by their unchecked egos into a world of miserable mediocrity, inescapable impoverishment, and unrevenged atrocities; in sum, a world without America. It is a willfully blind movement of shamelessly arrogant intellectuals who refuse to grasp that even their benevolent intentions cannot ensure that vast accumulations of power will not be abused by an increasingly unaccountable stable of central planners.

And their drive also reflects a hopelessly naive outlook that cannot fathom how a world of socialist despots, Islamist potentates, and petty tyrants would want to see America brought low for less than honorable reasons. In these warped individuals’ minds, it is America, the indisputable emancipator of tens of millions from state terror and ritual genocide, which is the aggressor and the one that should be humbled. And without a doubt, there are men scrambling for power over this country whose intentions can be considered anything but benign.

But our supposed betters should ask themselves a few questions before laying low the most magnificent empire in world history:

Where will all the socialist regimes of the world be without the despised capitalist economy of America to consume their goods? Where will the hopelessly oppressed peoples of the world turn to without a country that not only cares about them but will come to their aid and rescue? Where will the money come from to pay for the exorbitant generosity of politicians who bribe voters with the money of their children?

A world without America is a lonely place without a champion of liberty. But the good news is that the nation is ultimately a reflection of who we are as people. If we seek to restore this country to greatness, we must personally embody the ideals of our Founding and promote them in the culture despite all adversity.

In essence, we are the torchbearers for our Founders’ legacy. We must enter the philosophical cave of darkness to cast light upon mankind’s future travails if our nation should fail freedom. The struggle that many American “conservatives” refused to take seriously and thus forsook for decades, which is taking the fight to our political opponents on the basis of moral principles, must be taken up in earnest if there is to be any hope of winning the long ideological war to restore the noble America of our longing.

Monday, July 23, 2012

The Gun Control Elephant In The Room


There's no shortage of opinion on the Aurora shooting.  Nothing new either; the usual suspects making the usual demands, including the standard insipid bleats for more gun control, outlawing guns, etc., etc.

Frankly, I've found it amazing that you can explain logically to these people that if you outlaw guns, what you're basically doing is taking the guns away from the people who could fight back against the bad guys.  You'll only get the guns away from the law-abiding who grudgingly give them up; the criminals aren't going to give you their illegal guns any more than they cared about acquiring them legally in the first place.  So effectively, all you're doing is making sure that the criminals end up being the only ones with guns.

I've never heard a gun control advocate give a good response to that reality.  It's at this point that they employ the liberal debate tactic that makes you want to scream, changing the subject slightly so that it seems like they're still debating even though they've fallen and they can't get up.  (And if that doesn't work, then they just get downright derisive and start insulting you and everything you believe.)

The stark reality of this situation is simply this:  there are crazy people who are going to do crazy things, and the tools they use change little or nothing about the fact that they and their actions exist.  I mean, do we seriously think that if the guy who did this couldn't get guns legally that he would have decided not to do something else instead?  Was the point of what he did killing people with guns, or was the point killing as many people as possible?  Are we honestly expected to believe that the point of the event was the use of guns and not the killing of the innocent people?  The apartment contained dozens of home-made booby-traps constructed from liquid explosives, chemical, powders and bullets, according to the Washington Post.  A guy who wants to kill will find a way to kill.  What we should do is outlaw killing.  Oh, wait...

Yes, this criminal procured his weapons legally and that's pretty much not preventable, because he was the extremely rare case where there was no history with the law or mental health services.  There was nothing about this guy (so far) to raise a red flag and say he shouldn't be able to acquire what he wants to in a sort of free country; there was no indication he'd do anything wrong with it.  If we're going to live in a society where we're going to say people can't have something because they might do something wrong with it, then we're in trouble.  You'll have to take away the cars, because sometimes people go berserk and drive them into a crowd.  You'll have to take away airplanes for similar reasons.  You'll have to take away 2X4s, because there's the possibility of swinging one at someone and injuring them.  And so on.  And let's say no one could buy a gun.  This guy obviously lived in Unibomber territory mentally; are you seriously telling me he wouldn't have just shifted his modus operandi to using explosives or something else for his plans?  Don't insult my intelligence.

Gun control is a "solution" looking for a problem.  The problem isn't guns, it's criminality.  More laws will not change anything.  If laws were the answer, we'd have no criminal activity already.  Oddly, the same people who argue for gun control often argue for decriminalizing drugs, and one reason they give is that it takes away the incentive for drug cartels to exist and work outside the law.  If you outlaw guns so that none can be purchased, the law-abiding certainly won't have any, but what do you think the criminal element will do?  Of course, exactly the same thing the drug crowd has done; go underground and grow their own.  How long before you have a black market for guns being manufactured and sold not by corporations but by cartels and gangs?  How would this be an improvement?

Aurora shows us what happens when the guns are taken away from the good guys; making that theater a "gun free zone" also made it a slaughterhouse killing pen.  Who can say what would have happened if when this pathetic figure threw that tear gas canister (where did he get tear gas anyway?) and fired that first shot, 15 legally armed citizens had stood up and opened fire?  Could he have been stopped?  Maybe.  He certainly would have been slowed down and couldn't have done as much damage.  I'll take "maybe" over "no chance" at all any day.

In the end, guns are like nukes.  Neither one is going away, and you can't pass laws that will make the bad guys get rid of theirs.  In other words, no matter what you do, the bad guys will always have them. The question is, will the good guys be able to defend themselves and their loved ones?  A cold war is better than a hot war, but even a hot war is better than an outright slaughter of the helpless.  Taking away guns from the law-abiding does nothing but tell the bad guys that no one can stop them.  It guarantees not less violence, but more and worse violence.  Think carefully about your position on guns, yours or that of a family member may someday be the life that a firearm in the hands of a law-abiding citizen saves...


Friday, July 13, 2012

Hey Stupid, They Mean YOU!

One would think by now that Americans would get what's going on.  Recent polls, however, continue to show a startlingly high incidence of "head in sand syndrome".  So it's time to spell it out.  This won't take long, but please pay attention if you're one of the ones who still plans to vote to re-elect the president who makes Carter look good.

I'll be honest up front; if you're on the government dole, part of that rapidly growing demographic being built to ensure Democrats are elected until the soon-to-come day when America swirls down the pipe, this isn't for you.  Stop reading now, because there's about a 1% chance you may end up feeling guilty and I wouldn't want that to happen.  Oh, who am I kidding?  Hahaha!

Maybe today, maybe within the next couple of days, comes "Tax Day" or "Cost of Government Day".  Do you know what that is?  It's the day where those of us who actually pay federal income taxes (all 51% of us who aren't the recipients of the redistribution of our earnings) finally get done paying for the cost of government, get done paying for other people and their families and begin to earn money to take care of our own families.  That's right, if you're one of the privileged to actually pay federal income taxes in this country anymore, you work until some time in July for the great social experiment's entitlement society and the cost of continually growing government.  Less than half of your income, around 45% maybe, do you get to keep.  (FWIW, the founding fathers had a word for what to do in a situation like this, it was "revolution".)

But hey, it's for a good cause, right?  I mean, Congress needs Cadillac health plans, right?  The president and his wife should live like royalty in America, playing over a hundred rounds of golf while Rome burns, spending millions on every whim, eating lobster everywhere they go, right?  We absolutely need to be nation-building in the quagmire of a so-called country whose impossibility had a great part in the demise of the Soviet Union, right?  And by all means, we should be maintaining an annual $1.3T deficit, never passing a responsible budget, spending obscene sums of money on only government knows what, growing our debt by completely unpayable amounts of money every year just for the sake of, well, I don't know, do you?

Now I know, my intended audience isn't reading this.  If they did, it wouldn't matter, because the last few sentences would have sounded like Charlie Brown's teacher...  Wa wa wa wa wa...  The people who are the problem only seem to hear one thing: "free stuff".  The government is going to give me free stuff.  Like free healthcare.  And free checks for doing nothing but sitting around and watching Oprah or worse.  They only hear things like "fair share", "tax the rich", "Bush tax cuts", "capitalism has failed", etc.  Ok, let's talk about a few of those then.

Fair share.  So, you pay nothing or close to it and I pay 65% of my income.  I have an idea.  How about we ALL pay 65% of our income as long as those of us who actually pay income taxes have to?  How about YOU start paying your fair share?  Sounds great, right?  No?  Then what makes you think it's "fair" for us to pay YOUR share?!?

Tax the rich.  Really?  Tell me you're not that ignorant.  Wealth is not taxed in America, INCOME is.  Who earns income?  Wage earners and businesses.  So your great plan for getting America out of the insane mess we're in is to tax into oblivion the people who create the jobs and the people who buy the products and services that keep those companies going?  What exactly DO they teach in the public schools anymore?  Aside from stuff that really should be taught by parents anyway, that is?  The rich in America won't even notice what your pet socialist government is doing because THEY are the rich and THEY will make sure that THEY are not affected.  THEY will never tax "wealth", THEY will simply continue to target income because people who actually earn money don't vote for THEM anyway.  Get it?

Bush tax cuts.  Um, if they've been around for a decade, we probably ought to be calling them standard tax rates and making them permanent.  Because anything you do now that involves letting any part of them expire, including the president's brain cramped idea of extending them only for "the middle class" amounts to a tax INCREASE and even the smartest man in the world said himself not so long ago that you never raise taxes in a recession.  And if you don't think we're in a recession, maybe you should watch less Oprah and get out there and have a look around.  Of course, if you're like him and you think that adjusting the workforce numbers so that you can fake an unemployment number of 8.2% means the recession is over, then yeah, I guess maybe it may be time to raise taxes.  (Real unemployment, by the measuring standard used during the Bush administration, is still over 10%.)

Capitalism has failed.  I love this one.  The government meddles in the free markets to the point where it's a conflicting mess of instruction like the ones that made HAL go insane in "2001: A Space Odyssey" and then blame the failure on capitalism.  The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (hey, there's Carter again!) demanded that banks make loans to lower income and inner city entities who banks would normally see as bad risk.  (Yeah, this is the part where you yell "RACIST!"  Go ahead, it's ok, I'll wait.  There, feel better?)  Now could there have been some banks who were being unfair?  Sure.  But you know what's cool about capitalism in its un-government-adulterated form?  You can just go try another bank.  Now, if ALL the banks laugh when you ask for $300,000 and you make, um, burritos at a certain fast-food pseudo-Mexican joint, well, maybe they're not being racist, maybe they think you can't make enough burritos to possibly pay off that loan.  So why should they give it to you?  I mean, I ended up with a fairly small house knowing the bank wouldn't think I was a reasonable risk for a half-million dollar lake-front mansion, does that make them anti-white-people too?  (Or maybe it's that I look vaguely Hispanic...)  Here's the key:  I didn't try to take out a loan I knew I couldn't pay.  So the banks had instructions to make bad loans, all these bad loans on the books, AND instructions not to have bad loans on the books.  Is it any wonder they did what they did?  What else were they supposed to do?

Free healthcare.  This one may be the best of all.  Think about this.  Is anything free, or doesn't someone always end up paying for it?  You realize that it is entirely possible to destroy the system by putting too heavy a burden on it, right?  I won't spell this one out, I'll let it be a surprise.  And believe me, if you think the Affordable Care Act was a good thing, then you sure are going to be surprised!  But here's a hint.  No one writes a 2,000 page bill and then rushes it through claiming "you have to pass it to see what in it" if it's a good thing.  If it's a good thing, you tell people what's in it and they beg for it.  When people find out what's in this thing they're going to beg for forgiveness for supporting the whole mess.

Here's the bottom line.  Moral constraints aside, a vote to re-elect is a vote for the end of America.  It's a vote for crippling taxes for earners, class warfare for everyone, huge socialistic government and a regulatory nightmare that makes entrepreneurs and corporations (you know, the employers) throw up their hands and leave the country.  (You'd think by now that even leftists would realize that more jobs means more revenue to spend on their crazy ideas.)  Now, if that's what you want, and you feel strongly about it, then technically I applaud you for standing up for your beliefs, especially because success to you includes your own personal destruction and you realize this and embrace it.  Sort of like how everyone who claims that euthanasia is a good idea should eventually commit suicide for the greater good.  If you're  a proponent of euthanasia but think YOU should live to die of natural causes no matter how old you get, we have a word for that:  hypocrite.  Likewise, if you're voting for the destruction of America because you think it should be destroyed and you should go down with it, then good for you.  But if it's just that you're too ignorant, uninformed or generally thought-less to realize that this man is a destroyer, then shame on you.  You are responsible for your vote, it's not something "cool" that you do on a whim.  If you're voting because you think it's about time America had a black president, well, been there done that got the $5 trillion dollar t-shirt, let it go.  America is over the racism thing, we elected a black president, now it's time to move on and elect someone whose agenda does not include the relegation of America to the garbage heap of history.  It's time to move on and elect someone whose agenda doesn't include taking what the earners earn and giving it to the non-earners for no other reason than simply to buy their votes with our money for future elections.

So Happy Cost Of Government Day, America.  There's no 1% and 99%.  They'd love you to buy that lie.  It's 51% and 49%.  51% of us pay for everything.  49% pay no federal income tax at all, and actually receive "rebate" checks.  Yeah, from the 51%.  Because of the jokers we elect.  And when that number flips the middle, and there are more not paying than paying, it's over.

When they talk about taxing the rich, they're talking about YOU.  Get it?

Thursday, July 12, 2012

What I Miss About America

By Stella Paul at American Thinker.

Here are just a few of the things I miss since America entered the golden age of Hope and Change in January 2009.


  1. Optimism
  2. Going for minutes, hours, even days, without worrying about what weird insanity the government is dreaming up next
  3. Having money
  4. The Border Patrol
  5. Looking up at the moon and thinking, "America - we own space!"
  6. Having a president whose background isn't more closely guarded than the formula for Coke
  7. Going on vacation without the TSA auditioning me for "Stella Does Dallas"
  8. Jobs
  9. Not feeling like I have to whisper, if I say something that's not completely, 100% complimentary about our president
  10. Listening to the latest rant against Israel at the UN, without wondering if it's coming from the American Ambassador
  11. Feeling protected
  12. Having a president who doesn't want to fundamentally transform me
  13. Getting a doctor's appointment right away and not thinking, "That was nice while it lasted."
  14. Having a president who would never, ever bow to the Saudi king, the Chinese premier, the Japanese prime minister and the mayor of Tampa
  15. Gazing up at the sky and not wondering if that's a bird or a drone
  16. Snacking on whatever I want, while the First Lady remains calm and indifferent
  17. Having a president who thinks it would be unimaginably crazy to bring the 9/11 conspirators to New York for a civil trial
  18. Privacy
  19. Separation of State and Media
  20. College graduates with a future in America, not China or Hong Kong
  21. Having a president who inspires us to feel that Americans are all in this game together
  22. A dollar that's worth 100 cents and isn't signed by a tax cheat
  23. America's Triple-A rating
  24. Having a president who doesn't seem needier for attention than Paris Hilton
  25. Strolling through the mall without worrying about racially-motivated flash mobs
  26. Looking at maps without trying to figure out where I can run
  27. Reading 1984 as an interesting work of fiction
  28. Dignity
  29. Pride

What do you miss?

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/07/what_i_miss_about_america.html#ixzz20Pp153ib