2/11/2013 | Laissez-Faire Capitalist
Posted on Monday, February 11, 2013 2:29:28 PM by Laissez-faire capitalist
Yep, Sen. Rand Paul – some Libertarian leanings and all – (and not all bad, either, especially with his middle of the road approach on foreign policy, him being neither interventionist nor isolationist) is certainly not a shill for the GOP-e… and we have had enough of that.
Expression for undergoing a voluntary financial strike or decrease in income.
An individual might choose to do this in order to protest the amount of money going to the government, or to protest what they feel are unfair taxes (if they earn less, they will be taxed less, therefore hurting the government).
The term is taken from a character in Ayn Rand‘s novel “Atlas Shrugged“; the main character John Galt leads a movement where the wealthiest individuals leave their jobs for low-paying jobs in order to protest the socialist economy.
BELMONT, Maine — Mack Page was sound asleep in his bed at 11 p.m. on Monday, Dec. 3, when he was startled awake by the frantic barking of his black Labrador.
“What have I got now?” the 63-year-old commander of the Maine Militia remembers wondering. “A raccoon? A coyote?”
But it was none of those things. Instead, Page’s dark residence on a quiet Belmont road suddenly was lit up by men outside his windows carrying flashlights. He lives alone, he’s not in the best of health and he was scared.
you are not your brother’s keeper.
Rather, your primary purpose is to the live the best life that you possibly can. This means being your own master and living on YOUR terms. You will be the most successful when you are the freest to pursue your goals and dreams. Unfortunately, this important debate is all but ignored during most political campaigns. Until we address this threshold issue, not much human progress will be made
As Dr. Brook puts it, all statistics and collectivists assume your purpose on Earth is to care for your brothers in need, whether you want to or not.
Ayn Rand on the topic of a female president:
Posted on Friday, August 19, 2011 3:17:39 PM by ReformationFan
Ayn Rand’s response when asked about the topic of a female president.
Ayn Rand’s scary vision of government coming true
Ayn Rand’s scary vision of government coming true
coachisright.com ^ | April 17, 2011 | Suzanne Eovaldi, staff writer
Posted on Sunday, April 17, 2011 11:28:03 AM by jmaroneps37
While you were sleeping, your industrious federal government was busy establishing new guide lines for 2011 washing machines that, according to my source, cut down on efficiency, deceive the customer into thinking hot is hot, cold is cold, and make her lights flicker.
Doing things on the sneak is a characteristic of the Obama administration that I find especially odious, and this “Energy Efficient Washing Machine” two step is cloying to say the least. My source, who is most reliable, reports she bought a new basic model, and was shocked to discover after doing her first load of laundry, “when set on HOT, the sensor automatically adds COLD along with the hot.” The warm is a mix of both and the COLD SETTING ADDS HOT AS WELL.”
Whittaker Chambers 1957 Review of Ayn Rand
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles2/ChambersAynRand.php ^ | 1957 | Whittaker Chambers
Posted on Saturday, April 16, 2011 1:49:59 PM by stfassisi
Big Sister is Watching You BY Whittaker Chambers
Miss Ayn Rand wrote The Fountainhead. Despite a generally poor press, it is said to have sold some four hundred thousand copies. Thus, it became a wonder of the book trade of a kind that publishers dream about after taxes. So Atlas Shrugged had a first printing of one hundred thousand copies.
The news about this book seems to me to be that any ordinarily sensible head could possibly take it seriously, and that apparently, a good many do. Somebody has called it: “Excruciatingly awful.” I find it a remarkably silly book. It is certainly a bumptious one. Its story is preposterous. It reports the final stages of a final conflict (locale: chiefly the United States, some indefinite years hence) between the harried ranks of free enterprise and the “looters.” These are proponents of proscriptive taxes. Government ownership, Labor, etc. etc. The mischief here is that the author, dodging into fiction, nevertheless counts on your reading it as political reality. “This,” she is saying in effect, “is how things really are. These are the real issues, the real sides. Only your blindness keeps you from seeing it, which, happily, I have come to rescue you from.”
Since a great many of us dislike much that Miss Rand dislikes, quite as heartily as she does, many incline to take her at her word………………………
As the below document makes clear, Southern Poverty Law Center is Now Officially Part of DHS.
The CEO of SPLC now sits on the DHS “Working Group on Countering Violent Extremism” along with the leaders of other So-called Non Government Organizations but can we really call them such now that they are part of the government?
Make recommendations on training and how to use all of the local resources – police, social services, media, NGO’s, you name it – to fight “extremism. So, now no need to file a FOIA request to discover that SPLC is writing the reports naming constitutionalists as possible terrorists.
Now it is in your face and the mask is off.
When you read the below document, keep in mind the current ordeal of the Irish family where their newborn baby was taken based on an affidavit that notes the father’s “association with a militia group known as Oath Keepers.”. Pay attention to who sits on this panel see pages 26-30, to who DOESN’T, how they plan on reaching DHS tentacles down into every level of society, and how they talk overtly about the need to utilize local SOCIAL WELFARE and MENTAL HEALTH agencies to counter “violent extremism.”.
In other words, what is now being done to the Irish family will be done all over. This is the overt politicization of DHS, to use it against political enemies
America‘s liberal media routinely demonstrate a formulaic knee-jerk response to the threat of white militias no matter what disorganized, shapeless form any such rag-tag organizations may take. Any white lunatic who perpetrates a violent event is immediately cast unquestioningly by the mainstream media as possible new evidence of some vague, relatively unstructured but assuredly white threat to all those of a progressive persuasion.
By the way, for any aspiring liberal Journolistas, here’s the formula: Any white + any violence = probable white militia. See Time Magazine‘s new cover story this week!If you are Caucasian and mildly pleased with being so, then you are not only a racist in the eyes of the liberal media, you are, as well, a potentially violent threat to all people of color. Never mind the countless mainstream media articles praising those same people of color organizing in such a way as to proclaim their black pride or brown pride. In the eyes and minds of liberal America there is equal and then there is equal. If you are of Caucasian descent, you can forget about either term ever being applied to you and your offspring. Consider the New Black Panther Party and their extra-legal existence as a racial militia in contemporary America.
Look at this rather self-defining list of demands which constitutes their platform, taken from their website, and draw your own conclusions. If it doesn’t scare the hell out of you that people who subscribe to this sort of racist militancy are meeting with foreign leaders who have openly spoken of the end of America, then you aren’t tuned in, Bubba…
(Gunny G: An Explanation of Militias Vs. A Standing Army…)
***** ***** *****
Terry Anderson and Fred McChesney relate how Thomas Jefferson found that during his time negotiation was the Europeans’ predominant means of acquiring land from Indians (1994, 56). By the twentieth century, some $800 million had been paid for Indian lands. These authors also argue that various factors can alter the incentives for trade, as opposed to waging a war of conquest as a means of acquiring land.
One of the most important factors is the existence of a standing army, as opposed to militias, which were used in the American West prior to the War Between the States.
On this point, Anderson and McChesney quote Adam Smith, who wrote that “‘[i]n a militia, the character of the labourer, artificer, or tradesman, predominates over that of the soldier: in a standing army, that of the soldier predominates over every other character.’”.
A standing army, according to Anderson and McChesney, “creates a class of professional soldiers whose personal welfare increases with warfare, even if fighting is a negative-sum act for the population as a whole.”
The change from militia to a standing army took place in the American West immediately upon the conclusion of the War Between the States.