How many federal laws would I be breaking…. …if I suggested that the world would be a better, cleaner place if this person and all his sycophants choked to death on cans of caffeinated alcohol?
I note that Sch**er adds a nice incongruous touch:
Let This Serve as a Warning to Anyone Who Tries to Peddle Dangerous Beverages to Our Kids, Do it, And We Will Shut You Down
[The Ultimate Answer to Kings]
Naturally I don’t spend much time in government buildings, but I know that both prisons public schools and courthouses have drinking fountains. I don’t think there’s any beverage on Earth that’s killed more people than water…
Prepared headlines for Wednesday. It all comes down to a choice between the left-wing socialist and the right-wing socialist.
Southerners prefer a socialist who will redistribute the wealth from the taxpayers to government employees (military), agricultural interests, and corporations with “defense” contracts. They also prefer someone who bombs lots of foreigners in the name of “national greatness.”
Northerners prefer a socialist who will redistribute wealth from the taxpayers to government employees (non-military), the urban poor, and union members. They also prefer someone who will bomb lots of foreigners (albeit with less bravado) in the name of “human rights.” [LewRockwell.com Blog]
That’s what presidential elections are, today: deciding which socialist warmonger you want ruling the Evil Empire. “Change” was never one of the choices.
Obama-Mania.
Larken Rose has penned yet another essay in his TMDS series (The Most Dangerous Superstition: the belief in imposed authority). He explains what collectivism is, why it always leads to violence, and why Obama, McCain, and every other Republican and Democrat candidate are all collectivists.
[End the War on Freedom]
It’s a good, and lengthy, article that covers some of the same ground as The Road to Serfdom. The following is from his conclusion:
Barrack Obama is a collectivist. Despite the usual window-dressing and euphemisms which conceal the true nature of what he advocates, he is, in every way, an advocate for the idea that every individual– and all wealth–is the property of the collective, as represented by “government.” In other words, he believes in communism. So should everyone vote for John McCain? No. Mr. McCain is also a collectivist. In fact, with very rare exceptions, ALL Democrat and Republican politicians are collectivists, as they have been for many decades, even back when they were feigning concern about the “spread of communism.” So why did I focus on Obama? Because, unlike Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama seems to have a lot of enthusiastic support from well-meaning, albeit misguided, Americans. As with Bill Clinton, Mr. Obama makes the advocacy of widespread government violence, theft and oppression sound both noble and useful. It is not. So if all of the above was not intended to make you vote for someone–and it certainly was not–then what is being suggested? Intellectual honesty. First, I want people to understand what the self-proclaimed “leaders” are actually proposing, because it is not “hope,” or “change,” or “progress,” or any of the other vague, feel– good rhetoric being fed to the general public. It is what EVERY government “leader” always proposes: more power for the state, less freedom for the people. They pretend to have the purest motives for it, but the means to their goals will ALWAYS be less freedom for you, and more power for them. After people realize that, next I want them to be honest about their OWN beliefs and agenda. If, for example, you support any of the collectivist redistribution plans and programs pitched by both major parties, then I simply ask that you drop the charade, set aside the euphemisms and obfuscations, and do it openly and honestly. If you believe that there is someone somewhere whose supposed “need” entitles him to what my time and effort have produced, with or without my consent, then pick up a gun, come to my house, and take it from me yourself. Don’t hide such destructive evil behind elections, legislation, and political rhetoric. Do it openly and honestly, or don’t do it at all. If you give your vote to ANY collectivist, you are just as guilty of robbing me, and robbing a couple hundred million other people, as if you had done it yourself. But in addition to being a thief, you’d also be a fraud and a coward, because you lie (maybe even to yourself) about what it is you advocate, and don’t have the spine to go do it yourself.
Barrack Obama is a collectivist. Despite the usual window-dressing and euphemisms which conceal the true nature of what he advocates, he is, in every way, an advocate for the idea that every individual– and all wealth–is the property of the collective, as represented by “government.” In other words, he believes in communism.
So should everyone vote for John McCain? No. Mr. McCain is also a collectivist. In fact, with very rare exceptions, ALL Democrat and Republican politicians are collectivists, as they have been for many decades, even back when they were feigning concern about the “spread of communism.” So why did I focus on Obama? Because, unlike Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama seems to have a lot of enthusiastic support from well-meaning, albeit misguided, Americans. As with Bill Clinton, Mr. Obama makes the advocacy of widespread government violence, theft and oppression sound both noble and useful. It is not.
So if all of the above was not intended to make you vote for someone–and it certainly was not–then what is being suggested? Intellectual honesty. First, I want people to understand what the self-proclaimed “leaders” are actually proposing, because it is not “hope,” or “change,” or “progress,” or any of the other vague, feel– good rhetoric being fed to the general public. It is what EVERY government “leader” always proposes: more power for the state, less freedom for the people. They pretend to have the purest motives for it, but the means to their goals will ALWAYS be less freedom for you, and more power for them.
After people realize that, next I want them to be honest about their OWN beliefs and agenda. If, for example, you support any of the collectivist redistribution plans and programs pitched by both major parties, then I simply ask that you drop the charade, set aside the euphemisms and obfuscations, and do it openly and honestly. If you believe that there is someone somewhere whose supposed “need” entitles him to what my time and effort have produced, with or without my consent, then pick up a gun, come to my house, and take it from me yourself. Don’t hide such destructive evil behind elections, legislation, and political rhetoric. Do it openly and honestly, or don’t do it at all. If you give your vote to ANY collectivist, you are just as guilty of robbing me, and robbing a couple hundred million other people, as if you had done it yourself. But in addition to being a thief, you’d also be a fraud and a coward, because you lie (maybe even to yourself) about what it is you advocate, and don’t have the spine to go do it yourself.
I came across this amusing bumper sticker—it’s probably the closest we’ll ever see to an honest campaign ad. However, I think it’s too optimistic. Experience suggests that if Obama does indeed win the election, the Obamessiah cult will praise him to the heavens for continuing to do exactly the same things that Bush has been doing for the past eight years, while the Busheviks will condemn him as the Antichrist for doing exactly the same things that Bush has been doing. And of course none of them will ever acknowledge that their “beliefs” have reversed overnight, any more than they did when Bush replaced Clinton.
