The Real State of the Union by John Stossel

What should Obama have said in his speech? Here’s what John Stossel wishes he’d said.

| January 26, 2012

Has Barack Obama learned nothing in three years? Last night, during his State of the Union address, he promised “a blueprint for an economy.” But economies are crushed by blueprints. An economy is really nothing more than people participating in an unfathomably complex spontaneous network of exchanges aimed at improving their material circumstances. It can’t even be diagrammed, much less planned. And any attempt at it will come to grief.

Politicians like Obama believe they are the best judges of how we should conduct our lives. Of course a word like “blueprint” would occur to the president. He, like most who want his job, aspires to be the architect of a new society.

But we who love our lives and our freedom say: No, thanks. We need no social architect. We need liberty under law. That’s it.

Obama—and most Republicans are no different—doesn’t understand the real liberal revolution that transformed civilization. The crux of that revolution is that law should define general visible rules of just conduct, applicable to all, with no eye to particular outcomes. In other words, as Nobel laureate F.A. Hayek taught, the only “purpose” of law is to enable us all to pursue our individual purposes in peace.

If Obama really wanted, as he says, a society in which “everybody gets a fair shot,” he would work to shrink government so that the sphere of freedom could expand. Instead, he expands government and raises taxes on wealthier people, as though giving politicians more money were a way to make society better. Instead, the interventionist state rigs the game on behalf of special interests.

What should Obama have said in his speech? Here’s what I wish he’d said:(click  to the goto the full story)

First NDAA; Now Enemy Expatriation

by Chuck Baldwin

On the heels of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), otherwise known as the “Indefinite Detention Act,” comes another draconian bill designed to give the federal government the power to turn American citizens into enemies of the state for virtually any reason it deems necessary. Stephen D. Foster, Jr. has the story.

“Congress is considering HR 3166 and S. 1698 also known as the Enemy Expatriation Act, sponsored by Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Charles Dent (R-PA). This bill would give the US government the power to strip Americans of their citizenship without being convicted of being ‘hostile’ against the United States. In other words, you can be stripped of your nationality for ‘engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States.’ Legally, the term ‘hostilities’ means any conflict subject to the laws of war but considering the fact that the War on Terror is a little ambiguous and encompassing, any action could be labeled as supporting terrorism.”

Foster goes on to say, “I hope I’m wrong, but it sounds to me like this is a loophole for indefinitely detaining Americans. Once again, you just have to be accused of supporting hostilities which could be defined any way the government sees fit. Then the government can strip your citizenship and apply the indefinite detention section of the NDAA without the benefit of a trial.”

To read the rest of the column click this link: First NDAA; Now Enemy Expatriotation

Rock River Patriots Meeting This Friday January 27th

The Rock River Patriots invite you to our meeting this Friday January 27th at 6pm in Fort Atkinson.  The meeting will be held in the community room of the Dwight Foster Library located at 209 Merchants Avenue.

At this meeting we welcome former WI Congressman and U.S. Senate Candidate Mark Neumann to speak and answer questions from our group about his candidacy and issues facing America.  Hope to see you there!

Pat Buchanan: Who Wants War With Iran?

Who Wants War With Iran?

By Patrick J. Buchanan

On Sept. 21, 1976, as his car rounded Sheridan Circle on Embassy Row, former Chilean ambassador Orlando Letelier was assassinated by car bomb. Ronni Moffitt, a 25-year-old American women who worked with Letelier at the leftist Institute for Policy Studies, died with him.

Michael Townley, an ex- asset in the hire of Chile’s intelligence agency, confessed to using anti-Castro Cubans to murder Letelier, in what was regarded as an act of terrorism on U.S. soil.

Which raises a question: Are not the murders of four Iranian scientists associated with that nation’s nuclear program, by the attachment of bombs to their cars in Tehran, also acts of terrorism?

Had the Stalin- or Khrushchev-era Soviets done this to four U.S. scientists in Washington, would we not have regarded it as acts of terrorism and war?

has accused the United States and of murder. But emphatically denied any U.S. complicity: “I want to categorically deny any United States involvement in any kind of act of violence inside .”

“The United States had absolutely nothing to do with this,” added National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor, “We strongly condemn all acts of violence, including acts of violence like this.”

Victoria Nuland, Clinton’s spokeswoman at State, denounced “any or attack on an innocent person, and we express our sympathies to the family.”

The assassinated scientist was a supervisor at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility that hosts regular inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. If is building a bomb, it is not at Natanz.

U.S. denial of involvement leaves as the prime suspect. has not denied it, and this comes at a sensitive time in U.S.-Israeli relations.

In Foreign Policy magazine, author and historian Mark Perry, claiming documentation, alleges that agents in London posed as agents and contacted Jundallah, a terrorist group, to bribe and recruit them to engage in acts of terror inside .

Jundallah has conducted attacks in Sistan-Baluchistan province, killing government officials, soldiers, and women and children.

According to Perry, when George W. Bush learned of the agents posing as while recruiting terrorists, he “went totally ballistic.”

Yet Meir Dagan, head of at the time, denies it, and, ironically, has called any Israeli attack on ’s nuclear facilities “the stupidest thing I have ever heard.”

Who is telling the truth? We do not know for sure.

What we do know is that “Bibi” Netanyahu is desperate to have the United States launch air and missile strikes to stop Teheran from becoming the world’s ninth nuclear power. And he is echoed not only by U.S. , but candidates save .

Nor should we be surprised.

To bring America into its war with Germany, Winston Churchill set up William Stephenson, “A Man Called Intrepid,” with hundreds of agents in New York to engage in everything from bribery to of U.S. senators to get the United States to enter the war and pull England’s chestnuts out of the fire.

This is what desperate countries do.

And while America First kept us out of the European war until Adolf Hitler invaded Russia, ensuring that Russians, not Americans, died in the millions to defeat him, eventually America was maneuvered into war.

Whoever is assassinating these Iranian scientists, be it homegrown Iranian terrorists, Jundallah at the instigation of , or , the objective is clear: Enrage the Iranians so they strike out at America, provoking a U.S.-Iranian war.

Is such a war in America’s interests? Consider.

While U.S. air and naval power would prevail, Iranian civilians would die, as some of their nuclear facilities are in populated areas. Moreover, we cannot kill the nuclear knowledge has gained. Thus we would only set back their nuclear program by several years. And a bloodied and beaten would then go all-out for a bomb.

The regime, behind which its people would rally, would emerge even more entrenched. U.S. bombing did not cause Germans to remove Hitler or Japanese to depose their emperor. And we lack the ground troops to invade and occupy a country three times the size of Iraq.

All U.S. ships, including carriers in that bathtub the Persian Gulf, would be at risk from shore-based anti-ship missiles and the hundreds of missile boats in Iran’s navy. Any sea battle would send oil prices to $200 and $300 a barrel. There goes the eurozone.

Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shia of the Saudi oil fields and Bahrain, home port to the Fifth Fleet, and Iranian agents in Afghanistan and Iraq could set the region aflame.

As America started up the road to Baghdad in 2003, Gen. David Petraeus is said to have asked, “Tell me how this ends.”

Before some agent provocateur pushes us into war with Iran, Congress should debate the wisdom of authorizing President Obama, or anyone else, to take America into her fifth war in a generation in the Middle and Near East.

The First State To Rebel Against Indefinate Detention of Americans

World Net Daily Article: Single state defies Obama detention plan

Here is a letter to send to your state representatives regarding the NDAA.  It is time to nullify this unconstitutional act by the federal gov’t.

Your Senator and Representative,

Please take time to watch this very short 2:39 video http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/9019.html about Rep Daniel P Gordon from Rhode Island who is seeking to do something to protect the people of his state from the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) act passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama. I am asking that you both join together and introduce similar legislation in Wisconsin to protect the people of your districts and state from the act your federal colleagues were not willing to vote against. If you meant it when you took your oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution of Wisconsin and the United States, this should be a very easy bill to introduce and promote.

I would appreciate your response to this request.

Your name, address, phone number

South Carolina, Ron Paul, and The Lincoln Myth

On the topic of Lincoln…as was mentioned in our last meeting, a good book to read is “The Real Lincoln” by Thomas DiLorenzo.

Indefinate Detention: The NDAA and the Expatriation Act

Thank You Gov. Walker for FINALLY Turning Down Early Innovator Grant Money

Governor Walker issued the following press release late yesterday afternoon.  Thanks to all of you who sent in your strings, and those of you who coordinated the effort.

Madison—Today Governor Walker announced he will not pursue the implementation of a health insurance exchange and has turned down Early Innovator Grant funding from the federal government. The Governor also will repeal the executive order that created the Office of Free Market Health Care.

“I have directed the Department of Health Services to notify the federal government that we will discontinue any development on a health exchange and that Wisconsin will turn down funding from the Early Innovator Grant program,” said Governor Walker. “Stopping the encroachment of ObamaCare in our state, which has the potential to have a devastating impact on Wisconsin’s economy, is a top priority. Wisconsin has been a leader and innovator in health care reform for two decades, and we have achieved a high level of health insurance coverage without federal mandates. When job creators and Wisconsin families are facing difficult times it doesn’t make sense to commit to a federal health care mandate that will result in hidden taxes for Wisconsin families, increased health care costs and insurance premiums, and more uncertainty in the private sector.”

Governor Walker will sign Executive Order 57 into law, which repeals the executive order that established the Office of Free Market Health Care.

It would be great if many people would contact his office via email or phone call to thank him for this stand he has taken against this unconstitutional federal encroachment of power.   govgeneral@wisconsin.gov   (608) 266-1212

Strings #3

Strings #2


 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 98 other followers