With so many Democrats (you know, the ones who supposedly believe in freedom of expression) in office in DC, it's doubtful this thing has a chance. But it's a nice thought, unnecessary under a US government that actually followed the Constitution, but nice given the present state of things.

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090219171331.aspx

BTW, the Constitution could never have stopped the growth of the gubment, only slowed it. The US stopped operating under it during Washington's administration.

What we need is free markets, not gubment.

When Franklin Roosevelt moved to impose heavy regulations on banks in the 1930's, he used Biblical rhetoric, criticizing the "money lenders" for their greed and desire to take advantage of the average American. Instead of blaming the government policies that made it difficult for banks to diversify their portfolios, thus making it easier for them to be nailed by the economic instability caused by central banking, he blamed the people in the financial industries, and focussed on himself and Congress as the folks who would save America from the unscrupulous bankers.

Is there ANYONE out there who still thinks the Republican Party establishment is in favor of "less government"?

Come on.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2ad3b750-fd27-11dd-a103-000077b07658.html?ncli...

Be Seeing You.

From where else? Lewrockwell.com!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis137.html

What's that Talking Heads line?

"Same as it ever was..."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29225492

Of course, if this were to be played on a talk radio program, that would get the statists upset. They'd call for more "balance" through fascistic regulation of radio and television content.

Just give all the politicians the power, you'll be fine, y'all.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0209/Clinton_wants_more_balance_on_the_airwaves.html

Be Seeing You!

It's too bad they have any power to do anything one way or the other in this regard. Living free would mean they wouldn't have their positions in the first place, and we would be free of THEM, not just their changing plans and schemes.

So, kudos do the despots for letting us live without tarrifs and quotas for a while longer. Now, let's go further and get rid of the government and super-government agencies that make their positions of power possible. Then we would NEVER have to worry about tarrifs and quotas!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090214/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_g7

Be Seeing You!

Wow.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88851

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/us/politics/13gregg.html

Well, gee, when did he discover these "differences"? Wasn't there a presidential campaign or something?

Hmmmm. Puzzling!

Be Seeing You!

So the US has moved from "we're all Keynesians now" to this.

Not far to move. In fact, it's only a matter of degree.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/183663?gt1=43002

Be Seeing You!

The Obama Stimulus Plan Part 2: An Example of Pervasive Socialist Blindness to Economic History

Feb, 2009

As the Dems work to impose more fascism on the airwaves (refer to Gard's article in the CABAL, or the series of special audios on the history of the FCC), writer Camille Paglia has discovered one interesting aspect about the forces behind the push. To quote:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02112009/news/politics/congress_hopping_carts_154496.htm

The Only Thing We Have to Fear, Is Government Trying to “Save” the Market

 P. Gardner Goldsmith - Number Six

The statists, from the Clintons, to Ted Kennedy, to Orrin Hatch, to John Lynch, to Barack Obama, to Newt Gingrich, have been pushing for the federalization of medical data for over a decade. It is coming. And, as WND reports, there is the possibility that the rationing of medical care could come right along with it.

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88457

More, from Bloomberg Opinion:

But... Aren't the gubment people supposed to "protect" us from bad food? Wasn't that why gubment was created? Help! It's sooo confusing!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/04/fema.peanut.butter/?iref=mpstoryview

Too bad the CBO cats didn't mention the inflationary spiral the "stimulus" will cause.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/04/cbo-obama-stimulus-harmful-over-long-haul/

Ahh, yes... Nothing like the sweet smell of freedom in the morning. Or is that Napalm we smell? Yes, it's the latter, burning up liberty, the Constitution (which are not always one and the same, of course), and economics. Even though Repairman Jack doesn't really fix appliances, we sure could use his services to fight the baddies in DC right now.

Someone needs to ask F. Paul Wilson if politicians have a lot of "O-DNA", 'cause the "otherness" they exhibit is pretty scary! (Lil' reference to his novels there, in case you're wondering...)

Barack Obama said in an editorial today that if his "stimulus" package was not passed, the United States might enter into an economic downturn out of which it might never rise. Soooo... What kinds of things is he recommending, in addition to the overall breach of the US Constitution, the retardation of real productivity, the incredible burden of debt, the movement of productive money into non-productive endeavors, and the inflationary pressures the increase in government-created money will inspire? Hmmm.. Well, how about these as a small sample?

Some "bullitt" points, from Steve McQueen:

- The expansion will, just like the creation of the program, impose higher taxes on tobacco products, and funnel that booty into state governments, giving the governors (like Howard Dean and Jeanne Shaheen) the ability to claim they "got" kids health insurance.

- People 400% above the "poverty" line have been able to sign on to the program, which gives partial handouts to them. It inspires people at these various levels to drop their own personal-family health insurance coverage in favor of the government system.