But we have to make sure the border is secured by the US government, right?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100608/ap_on_re_us/us_border_patrol_shootin...

Be Seeing You!

Check out this paragraph:

"The Labor Department's new employment snapshot released Friday suggested that outside of the burst of hiring of temporary census workers by the federal government many private employers are wary of bulking up their work forces."

NO! Really? You mean private business owners are hesitant to hire new people given the mountain of federal regulations (including the health insurance mandates) that will hit them? WOAH! What a shock!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_economy

Be Seeing You!

This never ends.

In the article, the Transportation Sec, LaHood, is quoted as saying, "passengers have rights". Sure, passengers have rights, and so do the airline business owners and operators. They ALL make exchanges with each other in the market that they intend to be beneficial to themselves. What LaHood really means is that the federal government will begin to tell one side what to do in that private exchange (which is already royally messed up by standing government regulations and the air route and security system the gubment has imposed) -- then the gubment will claim they are "helping".

Check this out.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37472913/ns/travel-news

Be Seeing You!

For some reason, this is incredibly funny.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/woman-douses-herself-...

Be Seeing You!

Ahh, nothing like bipolar disorder thru government. Now the US forces are aiding growers of poppies in Afghanistan, because if they didn't, the taliban would pay the growers and gain their support. So, does that mean US citizens have a DUTY to use herion, morphine, and other opiates derived from poppies in order to fight the "War on Terror"?

A strange world made stranger by politicians.

http://breakthematrix.com/latest/we-tolerate-the-cultivation-of-opium-po...

Be Seeing You!

There comes a point when even the most dim-witted begins to reqalize he is living in a nation where there are NO assurances againt government coercion.

Is this such a point? Perhaps for a few...

Bile of blog ofbile, Found this on Schumer trying to outlaw anonymous pre-paid cell phones http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/05/senators-call-for-end-of-anonymous-prepaid-cell-phones.ars

Be Seeing You!

In the 5-25-10 production, Gard features audio derived from a conversation between Megan Kelly, of FoxNews, and John Stossel, of Fox Business Network. The conversation centers on the so-called "Public Accommodations" portion of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. As you listen, you'll hear Gard pick up on some of the themes introduced by Mr. Stossel, and then you'll get to hear a portion of a video response by a man named Jerry McClellan, who posts at Youtube under the name JMcClellan54321. We hope you will watch the video in its entirety, and visit his blog site.

To see more videos by Mr. McClellan, simply go here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/jmcclellan54321

And for his blog, visit this site!

http://jmcclellan.blogspot.com/

Is anyone really surprised? If the thuggery at the heart of government is ever questioned or threatened, the thugs will target those who make them feel uncomfortable and feel their retribution.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2010-05-24-TSA-threatening-fliers...

Be Seeing You!

Technically, the ruling is on the time frame in which the plaintiffs brought their suit for discrimination, however, inside the parameters of the case, one can see more troubling precedents being either established or accepted. For example, the US Constitution's "equal protection" clause (14th Amendment) mentions only equal PROTECTION by state laws, not equal treatment. To make it mean anything else would require a further amendment. The Congressional law banning "discrimination" based on race, etc., is predicated on the previous, erroneous, reading of the 14th Amendment. The result? The city of Chicago has been determined to have acted in a racially discriminatory way by actually selecting for the firefighter jobs those who did THE BEST on the test.

Please take a few minutes to read this excellent piece on the subject Gard and Sheldon Richman discussed last week, the recent US Supreme court decision in the "Comstock" case. It's going to set off some alarm bells.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/headline/due-process-in-jeopardy/

Be Seeing You!

You only have to be ARRESTED by a local or state cop, and the feds will pay your state gubment to collect your DNA to be put into the federal database.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20005458-38.html

If you would like more information on the over abundance of "federal crimes", please listen to our 5-20 and 5-21 Audio Productions. Better yet, download them at Podomatic!

http://libertyconspiracy.podomatic.com/entry/2010-05-21T09_18_44-07_00

and

http://libertyconspiracy.podomatic.com/entry/2010-05-20T14_42_46-07_00

Be Seeing You!

Look forward to all your private transactions being monitored by the federal government, massive powers to bailout banks given to the Federal Reserve, mortgage controls and loan controls, and further dampening placed on economic innovation and investment.

The bill still has to be "reconciled" with the House version.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37254090/ns/business-us_business/?GT1=43001

Sorry, must go puke. Will return later...

Be Seeing You!

How's that "recovery" going?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100520/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy;_ylt=Ag...

Be Seeing You!

A mixed bag here. Considering the fact that the Interior Department told us everything was safe, having the oil companies be the only ones liable, and the only ones CULPABLE, seems a bit off. Why not hold all politicians and bureaucrats involved as memebrs of a joint liability situation? In fact, why not force all politicians to be liable for the ills their legilsation causes? And why not hold all the people who voted for them as liable as well?

That would probably stop about 90% of all legislation from ever being proposed. If thes people had to operate as PRIVATE COMPANIES did, then we'd be in a lot better shape in society!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37205691/ns/gulf_oil_spill

Be Seeing You!

While Rand isn't in line with many major portions of the pure free-market principles, his race is significant.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37414.html

Be Seeing You!

When will free people wake up and realize that the artifice of government bureaucrats "protecting" them from bad food, bad products, or dangerous endeavors such as oil drilling is not protection they can count on? When will they realize that private interactions -- sans government and politicians and bureaucrats -- based in private property and liabilitiy and opportunities to succeed or fail based on a competitive marketplace will spur a better paradigm for protection of land and sea?

Here we have an article that details the shoddy, corrupt and false work of so-called "safety inspectors" employed by the feds.

Isn't it strange that under this new "pro-civil liberties" Administration, we seem to be posting more and more stories that "tab" "privacy" in the category line? Hmmmmmm...........

Big thanks to Stephen Smith, of www.abeginnersguidetofreedom.com and Glenn Jacobs, of www.adventuresofcitizenx.com for the info!

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/data-248115-financial-bill.html

Be Seeing You!

Took them long enough, and it's only a rhetorical tool to get people to accept the invasion of privacy they're going to eventually push.

Take a look. All they needed to do was contact Law Enforcement Against Prohibition for the stats on the amounts spent on the drug "war" and the numbers of people still using "hard" drugs.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100513/ap_on_re_us/failed_drug_war 

Be Seeing You!

Ahh, it's the new Prohibition thinking from the anti-constitutionalists in DC!

Cheers!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100514/ap_on_bi_ge/us_food_and_farm_wine_sh...

Be Seeing You!

This time, the politicians in the Senate (a species known by their scientific title as Conceitus Giganticus) has voted to force credit card companies to reduce their fees for debit charges. Guess what will happen? Yeah, you got it, higher charges elsewhere, fewer options for consumers... It's all been seen before. Last year's "Credit Card holders' Bill of Rights", that passed with numbskull bipartisan support, merely inspired the credit card companies to shift costs and fees, and offer fewer special bonuses to customers.

Why not get the government out of the financial business, and all businesses for that matter...