Category Archives: libertarianism

UPDATED: Thankful For BBC World News (Bang-Up Job On Same-Sex Marriage & More)

Bush, Family, Gender, Journalism, libertarianism, Media, Political Philosophy

Federalism, the right of individual states to decide, a case that should not have been brought before the Supreme Court of the United States for adjudication—these points of political philosophy should inform the American media’s reports on the case currently before the SCOTUS. They don’t! For such fleshed-out and nuanced reporting on California’s ban on same-sex nuptials, watch BBC World News.

BBC News’ Washington correspondent Jonny Dymond does a bang up job of not only answering every What, Where, When, Why and How journalists are obliged to address in a lede—but of providing a substantial level of abstraction and analysis, after discharging his duties as a correspondent.

All this without a hint of opinion. From his American counterparts expect the furrowed brow, the tsk-tsk, the clucking, the pouting and the noggin nodding—all to convey that the idiot anchor is on the side of the angels at all times, on all issues.

That’s when America’s news men and women aren’t openly opining.

I’m thankful for the much-maligned broadcaster. In general, BBC World News is a refuge from the anti-intellectualism and plain piss-poor news reportage you find on CNN, Fox News, Fox Business, MSNBC, and most other American cable and news networks.

UPDATE: Ideally, government should divorce itself from the nuptial business, heterosexual and homosexual. Ideally, religious institutions ought to act as the ministers of marriage. If marriage were thus privatized, conservatives would have to accept that some liberal churches and synagogues (the mullahs would resist) would wed homosexuals.

Rand Paul’s Goofy ‘Case’ For Amnesty

IMMIGRATION, Labor, libertarianism, Reason, Republicans, Ron Paul

Not so long ago I wondered whether Rand Paul was “Action Hero, Or Political Performance Artist?” “Like most Americans,” the column ventured, “I like an action hero. I am just incapable of telling whether Rand Paul is such a hero, or whether he is no more than a political performance artist.”

Soon a determination will be possible. A picture is emerging of a deft political player.

Rand’s dad, Ron Paul, called for an “End [to] Illegal Immigration”:

A nation without borders is no nation at all. After decades of misguided policies America has now become a free-for-all. Our leaders betrayed the middle class which is forced to compete with welfare-receiving illegal immigrants who will work for almost anything, just because the standards in their home countries are even lower.
If these policies are not reversed, the future is grim. A poor, dependent and divided population is much easier to rule than a nation of self-confident individuals who can make a living on their own and who share the traditions and values that this country was founded upon.

The Center for Immigration Studies paints “A Bleak Picture” of high “unemployment and non-work” among “American citizens, especially less-educated citizens (those with no more than a high school education). The less-educated are the most likely to compete with illegal immigrants,” say the Center’s scholars.

Rand Paul, however, has joined the Gang of Eight (Gof8), in whose states the plight of low-skilled Americans is especially dire. Now Rand is on the offensive, defending against allegations from Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh:

In an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “America Live” on Thursday, Kentucky Republican Sen. Paul told host Bill Hemmer that Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are wrong to criticize him for working to provide legal status to illegal immigrants.

Rand Paul’s apparently goof-proof “case” for amnesty appears to be that “de facto amnesty” must give way to amnesty de jure—that given the reality on the ground, legislators must take action to turn it into a legal reality.

Iraq: A Decade Hence, Suffocated By Sorrow

Iraq, Journalism, libertarianism, Republicans, War

“I wish the Americans had never come. They ruined our country. They planted divisions. They made us cry for the days of Saddam Hussein.” So Mohammed Rejeb, an Iraqi from Baghdad, told Arwa Damon.

CNN does have one most excellent war correspondent, unmatched, naturally, on the neoconservative channel. She is Arwa Damon, who has been covering America’s aggression abroad for almost (but not quite) as long as this column has been analyzing it.

Unlike the congenitally stupid entertainers around her on cable, right and left, Damon is a serious reporter (if a bad writer). She’s the Yin to Michael Ware’s Yang. The latter was another worthy war-time reporter in the old mold. One could only wish the gaggle on cable possessed Ware’s understanding and knowledge of the geopolitical terrain in Iraq. Naturally, this made Ware persona non grata. He’s gone. Fired, I believe.

Unlike her cretinous colleagues, little tough Arwa seldom smiles or frolics on camera. What’s there to smile about? She covers the carnage of America’s crusades abroad. Damon is also decidedly awkward when that estrogen-oozing ignoramus, Anderson Cooper, draws up a seat for her at a CNN Stupid Panel, and subjects her to his forced bathos.

Here is an excerpt of her report from Baghdad, a decade since that evil invasion:

Ten years on, one can easily look around Baghdad and see a veneer of normalcy. But nothing about Iraq or what it has been through is normal. The cloak of sorrow that hangs over the capital is more suffocating than ever, even if violence is slightly down.
“We’re not living,” one Iraqi colleague told me. “We’re just surviving.”
I think the ones who are good left, and only the bad people stayed here.
It’s as if the violence created a façade. People were so focused on staying alive they didn’t fully notice the corruption, suspicion and tribalism that had seeped into society and government. Now that attacks are down — and fewer Iraqis are killed every day — all that and more has risen to the surface.
Basma al-Khateeb and her two daughters, 22-year-old Sama and 14-year-old Zeina, are among the remnants of Baghdad’s elite — a family that could have left but chose to stay. Basma is an IT professional and well-known activist.
We’ve known Basma and her family for years — she is a regular guest on CNN — and have always marveled at their courage and determination, a love for country that trumped their desire to escape.
But even Basma is uttering what for her was unimaginable. “I lost hope six to seven months ago,” she said. “You don’t feel it’s home any more.
She paused, crushed by the weight of her own words. “Did I really say that?”
“Now the fear is different,” she explained. “You don’t know who is in the next car. They look at you as if you are different, your clothes, or even your gestures, your body language is different. We’re not comfortable being around the streets.”
“I think the people changed,” her daughter Sama added. “I think the ones who are good left, and only the bad people stayed here.”
It’s such an emotional, mentally complex notion that the family struggles to clearly define it — to be an alien in your own country.
“It’s a different culture, it’s a tribal culture. Before, there was no kind of culture that was dominant.”
Now there is. The streets feel hostile, and people continue to be wary of each other.
For the young, there is no room to mentally expand. For a professional like Sama, it’s either adopt the “principles” of corruption or find yourself unemployed.
“I had hope in the beginning and then I lost it,” she says. “It was like climbing the stairs and then there’s no end to it. You have to go down the stairs again. And that is depressing and very disappointing.
“This is no place for us. Because if I stay here, I have to be corrupt also, to live, to survive.”
In another time and place, Sama might have pursued her passion for the arts. She plays the piano beautifully. It’s a dream she plans to pursue far from her homeland.
As for Zeina, who has known nothing but war, she too wants to leave. Her first memory is of violence. Her defining moment of the last 10 years was a church bombing in 2010 in which her best friend was killed.
For their mother, this is the only home she has known. “I don’t want to have another home.”
But Basma wants something better for her daughters.
“In a certain time, at a certain point, it’s best for them to leave,” she says. “For study or work … for them to find out about themselves (and) be strong. They will not be strong here.”
Tragically, so many Iraqis I know echo those same sentiments. For the vast majority of them, the defining moments of the last 10 years are not of Saddam Hussein’s trial and execution, the drafting of the constitution or dipping their fingers in purple ink in the first elections.
It is the moment they last saw their loved one, gave them that last hug or kiss goodbye — not knowing it would turn out to be such a precious moment — before they were inexplicably, harshly torn away.

[SNIP]

IT IS TIME FOR Arwa Damon to go to Libya and expose Barack Obama’s follow-up crimes in that country and elsewhere, through proxies, covert special operations, drones and armaments.

UPDATED: The Balanced Budget Deception (‘Debt? What’s That,’ Says The Ass With Ears)

Conservatism, Constitution, Debt, Economy, Federalism, Founding Fathers, Individual Rights, libertarianism, Republicans, Rights, Taxation

At least those who tout the Republican budgetary version of a decrease in the increase in spending are no longer claiming to downsize the government.

So proud was Sean Hannity of Paul Ryan’s latest budget iteration that he boasted that, while it increases spending by trillions, it still manages to shave off $4.64 trillion in increases.

According to the Washington Examiner, the current spending trajectory will see “federal government outlays … rise from $3.61 trillion this year to $5.77 trillion in 2023, for a cumulative 10-year total of $46.1 trillion in federal spending.”

“Under Ryan’s new budget, federal spending would reach just $4.95 trillion in 2023, for a 10-year total of $41.46 trillion. That’s $4.64 trillion in deficit savings, which is a good start,” conclude the Examiner editors.

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan has dusted off last year’s budget, tweaked it a bit and resubmitted it to Republican applause.

Lauding so-called “balanced budget” initiatives is laughable. The real problem is that the quest to “balance federal spending and taxes” is meaningless. It does nothing to stop the federal government from raising taxes as it increases spending and grows in scope and size, ad infinitum.

Ultimately, “A balanced-budget requirement implies is that government has the constitutional right to spend as much as it takes in; that government is permitted to waste however much revenue it can extract from wealth producers, and that the bums must merely bring into balance what was stolen (taxes) with what is squandered (spending).”

“The Powers Delegated to the Federal Government are Few and Defined.” A return to the 18 or so functions the Constitution delegates to the federal government would be a much better start. This requires that entire departments be shuttered.

UPDATE: Scrap everything I’ve just said (NOT). This just in from the president: “There is no debt crisis.”

Without reading what TAWE (“The Ass With Ears”) has said, you know that, to dismiss a $16.5 trillion debt, you have to think that macroeconomics and microeconomic are two separate solitudes, governed by different laws.

To say such a stupid thing as TAWE has said, “You have to to believe that the values and virtues ordinary mortals hold themselves to don’t apply to government; that the laws of economics are NOT natural, but political, laws.”

“We don’t have an immediate crisis in terms of debt,” President Obama told ABC News correspondent George Stephanopoulos this week.

In uttering such a fatuity, BHO showed that he has no regard for or knowledge of what Thomas Jefferson was warning about, when he said:

“The greatest danger came from the possibility of legislators plunging citizens into debt. We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude.”