Archive for the ‘Government and Politics’ category

The ‘Disparate Impact’ Racket by Thomas Sowell

March 18, 2015

Thomas Sowell

Thomas Sowell takes a look at the two reports about the Ferguson Missouri shooting of Micheal Brown, issued by Eric Holder’s Justice Department, in this article titled, The ‘Disparate Impact’ Racket.

In the article Dr. Sowell talks about the difference between the hard evidence and facts used in the first report that proved Brown was in the wrong, and the “sweeping assumptions” and “misleading statistics” used to condemn the Ferguson Police Department as racist in the second report.

Here are some excerpts from the article.

“According to the second report, law enforcement in Ferguson has a “disparate impact” on blacks and is “motivated” by “discriminatory intent”.”
“Like many other uses of “disparate impact” statistics, the Justice Department’s evidence against the Ferguson police department consists of numbers showing that the percentage of people stopped by police or fined in court is larger than the percentage of blacks in the local population.”

“The implicit assumption is that such statistics about particular outcomes would normally reflect the percentage of people in the population. But, no matter how plausible this might seem on the surface, it is seldom found in real life, and those who use that standard are seldom, if ever, asked to produce hard evidence that it is factually correct, as distinct from politically correct.”

“Blacks are far more statistically “over-represented” among basketball stars in the NBA than among people stopped by police in Ferguson. Hispanics are similarly far more “over-represented” among baseball stars than in the general population. Asian Americans are likewise far more “over-represented” among students at leading engineering schools like M.I.T. and Cal Tech than in the population as a whole.”

“None of this is peculiar to the United States. You can find innumerable examples of such group disparities in countries around the world and throughout recorded history.

“Even with things whose outcomes are not in human hands, “disparate impact” is common. Men are struck by lightning several times as often as women. Most of the tornadoes in the entire world occur in the middle of the United States.”

“Since the population of Ferguson is 67 percent black, the greatest possible “over-representation” of blacks among those stopped by police or fined by courts is 50 percent. That would not make the top 100 disparities in the United States or the top 1,000 in the world.

THE MYTH OF PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION

Here is a video of a younger Dr. Sowell addressing statistical disparities with host William F. Buckley on Firing Line.

Net Neutrality?

February 26, 2015

Here is a video of The President talking about net neutrality.

Sounds like he really wants to protect us, the little guys, from big corporations doesn’t it. Why should we believe the man who pushed a bill titled, “The Affordable Care Act”? Obamacare has made individuals less free to choose how they want to pay for their healthcare. Insurance companies were for this law because they thought they would benefit from its passage. With the stroke of the pen, the law created 30 million more costumers for insurance companies. The fact that it expanded Governments power over the individual makes politicians and bureaucrats happy. But who among us wouldn’t want our power expanded? Is the term “Net Neutrality” any different from “The Affordable Care Act”.

You can bet your life that Net Neutrality regulations will make the internet less neutral, less free, and more expensive.

Net neutrality laws will help the already established tech companies and hurt the upstart competitors who, under normal market conditions, would normally be a check on the big providers. The threat of competitors trying to get market share keeps them in line. This is what Uber is doing to the taxi cartel. Big tech companies will be for this, or at least be tepid in their resistance to it. Once Government regulates the internet, these tech companies will be the protected cartel.

Politicians and bureaucrats will not only be able to tax the internet more easily, they will be able to make rules about content, access, and will probably make you get a license to have a website. Think of what bureaucrats (Lois Lerner) in the IRS did to stifle liberty minded groups from getting their message out. Politicians and bureaucrats are only in favor of free speech if they agree with what is said, they are never neutral when it comes to losing power.

Politicians and bureaucrats have been trying for years to figure out how to intervene into the internet. The internet is what has allowed our economy to grow in spite of the interventions by the Government and the Fed. Now, for some reason, the President and bureaucrats want to intervene into an area of the economy that has had exponential expansion without the “help” of Government regulations.

IS THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERNET COMING SOON?

DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED TYRANTS

Tyrants want to control information because truth is never on their side. Even democratically elected tyrants want to have the ability to control and/or propagandize their message. The internet is a marketplace where truth can be discovered, and lies can be uncovered, because of the volume of information that can be brought to bear almost immediately.

The President, the FCC, most democrats, and some republicans are showing their true tyrannical colors by supporting these regulations, but the internet Jeannie is out of the bottle. The marketplace will find ways to deliver this highly demanded economic good outside of these Government regulations. The tighter they squeeze, the more we will slip through their hands.

Related ArticleBeck Breaks Down What He Thinks Is The Real Goal Of Net Neutrality, at theblaze.com.

Related ArticleInternet Fast Lanes Would Be Banned Under Planned FCC Proposal, at entrepreneur.com.

 

Vaccine Controversy! Private Property Trade Offs vs. A Government Solution

February 12, 2015

Robert P. Murphy has an interesting take on how to solve the recent “vaccine controversy”. In his article, (click here), he shows that their isn’t any “solution” that would satisfy everybody. How could there be in a country populated by 330 million people? Trade offs have to be allowed for, as each individual makes particular decisions concerning vaccinations.

Read the whole article, it is well worth your time. Here are some excerpts to give you a small taste of Robert P. Murphy’s thoughts on the subject.

“The only way to address these fundamental conflicts is to take the State out of the equation. Let private property owners set the relevant rules on their land. Privately run schools, daycare centers, youth clubs, and pediatricians can set their individual policies regarding vaccination requirements for participating children. Health insurance companies can decide if they will insist on vaccination in order for a newborn to remain on a parent’s plan.”

“Private property doesn’t eliminate conflict, but it is a necessary foundation for the peaceful resolution of very heated disagreements. Bringing the State into the picture will hurt all children.”

Most people today can’t even fathom something as simple as property rights being an alternative answer to government solutions concerning any problem, let alone the vaccine controversy.

RelatedRobert P. Murphy’s Blog: Free Advice, at consultingbyrpm.com.

Thomas Sowell: Obama Versus America

February 10, 2015

Thomas Sowell

Her is another outstanding article by Thomas Sowell, “Obama Versus America” read here, in which he tries to answer the question: Why does the President “denigrate the United States in front of foreign audiences“?

The President is always comparing the history of the US to some standard of perfection that can’t possibly exist. Why can’t it exist? Because nothing human is perfect. He wants us to agree with him that if the US doesn’t match up to a standard of perfection, as defined by him, than our whole system must be in need of “fundamental transformation“.

The President is using the straw man of perfection as the standard to be judged against, when in fact it is the history of the US that should be compared to the standards set by the histories of other countries. Or better yet, it is other countries histories that should be compared to the standard set by the history of the US.

Here are some excerpts from the article.

“In his recent trip to India, President Obama repeated a long-standing pattern of his – denigrating the United States of America to foreign audiences. He said that he had been discriminated against because of his skin color in America, a country in which there is, even not, “terrible poverty.”

“Make no mistake about it, there is no society of human beings in which there are no rotten people. But for a President of the United States to be smearing America in a foreign country, whose track record is far worse, is both irresponsible and immature.”

“Years after the last lynching of blacks took place in the Jim Crow South, India’s own government was still publishing annual statistics on atrocities against the untouchables, including fatal atrocities. The June 2003 issue of “National Geographic” magazine had a chilling article on the continuing atrocities against untouchables in India in the 21st century.”

“Nothing that happened to Barack Obama when he was attending a posh private school in Hawaii, or elite academic institutions on the mainland, was in the same league  with the appalling treatment of untouchables in India. And what Obama called “terrible poverty” in America would be called prosperity in India.”

“The history of the human race has not always been a pretty picture, regardless of what part of the world you look at, and regardless of whatever color of the rainbow the people have been.”

“If you want to spend your life nursing grievances, you will never run out of grievances to nurse, regardless of what color your skin is. If some people cannot be rotten to you because of your race, they will find some other reason to be rotten to you.”

Even with all of its present and past imperfections, the US is still the standard of judgement.

Related ArticleThomas Sowell: Stormy Weather And Politics, at austrianaddict.com.

The Hidden High Cost Of Green Energy

January 27, 2015

Government politicians and bureaucrats have been pushing Green Energy for years. The reason these central planners are pushing this is because as Robert Bradley Jr. has stated, “When Government tries to pick winners and losers, it typically picks losers. Why? Because the free market consumers pick winners to leave the losers for Government.

Even with all the Government regulations on the fossil fuel industry, and with all the subsidies and breaks the green energy sector has received, what’s left of the free market has chosen fossil fuels. Fossil fuels produce the most efficient energy at the lowest cost, which is why the market has chosen them to power our world. At some point in the future there may be a more efficient and lower cost source of energy, but not even Government power can bring this into the future before it’s time. When Government tries to bring the future into the present, which is also what they try to do when they electronically print counterfeit money, they create a misallocation of resources. In other words, they waste scarce resources because economic reality trumps the utopian vision of the world they are trying to impose on us.

No central planner or board of central planners, can produce a better order than the spontaneous order produced by millions of people cooperating and competing in the free market.

Here are some articles that explain why fossil fuels are better than green energy, and will be for the forseeable future.

150 Years Ago, Scholars Knew The Need Of Dense, Not Intermittent Energy, by Robert Bradley Jr. at instituteforenergyresearch.org.

Making The World A Better Place – By Using More Fossil Fuels, by Alex Epstein, at news.nationalpost.com.

Climate Alarmist Turn Back The Clock, by Viv Forbes, at masterresource.org.

Government Mandates Keep Electric Auto Manufacturers In Business, at instituteforenergyresearch.org.

Power Plant Closures, at instituteforenergyresearch.org.

 

THE STORY OF ELECTRICITY

Why Stop At Community College? Let’s Make Everything Free!

January 20, 2015

President Obama wants to make tuition free at 2 year community colleges. Here is an excerpt from the White House Fact Sheet: Free Community College For Responsible Students, at whitehouse.gov: “Today the President is unveiling the America’s College Promise proposal to make two years of community college free for responsible students, letting students earn the first half of a bachelor’s degree and earn skills needed in the workforce at no cost.

WHAT IS AN ECONOMIC GOOD

College education can’t have “no cost”, because it is an economic good. No matter how much the Presidents utopian vision of the world tries to tell us it isn’t an economic good, it is. What is an economic good? It is a good that is scarce and/or has to be brought to the market by the use of labor and capital. In other words it has to be produced. Air and sunlight are examples of non economic goods because they exist in abundance without having to be produced by anyone. There are very few non economic goods.

Someone has to pay for an economic good. The producer pays the original cost for the production of an economic good. If the good can’t be exchanged at a price that covers the cost, plus a profit, it tells the producer that there is no market for the good and the producer will cease production and absorb the loss.

I love the phrase “AT NO COST“. There is no such thing as, at no cost, in a world ruled by scarce resources that have alternative uses. Economic goods always have a cost and no amount of rhetoric can escape this reality. Political rhetoric is an attempt to shift the cost to someone else. I suspect we, the tax payers, are going to be forced to pay the cost for this new “free” good. Let’s take a look at this from another angle. Instead of shifting the cost of community college to the tax payers, lets see if we can shift the cost to some other individuals.

LET’S MAKE EVERYTHING FREE!

If educating our children is so important that we need to make it free, let’s make the professors volunteer to teach at no cost. Let’s make the workers at the colleges provide their services at no cost. Let’s make text-book companies provide their books at no cost. Let’s make businesses who support the infrastructure of the college provide their good of service at no cost. This would lower the cost of college significantly or possibly make it free if we went far enough down the chain of production.

What would happen if Government bureaucrats mandated that every good and service was free? Would you continue to work as many hours at your job, or would you spend some of your time doing other things that are now free? Anybody with a degree of common sense knows that this wouldn’t work. No one would provide their good or service for free. People trade their good or service for money, and then exchange this money for other goods (food, clothing, shelter, etc.) that allow them to survive every day. If everything was free they wouldn’t need to work.

When you went to the grocery would you choose the ground beef you’ve always purchased, or would you upgrade to ground sirloin or a T-Bone steak? When it was time to get a new car would you choose a used car like you’ve always chosen or would you get a new car?

Do you see the problem? People will choose to consume more things and different things than they would have when there was a price on goods. People will also produce less because they know they can get what they want for free without any corresponding production. We can’t escape the reality of the world we live in. We live in a world of scarce means that have to be used to satisfy the unlimited ends desired by all individuals. Scarce resources, time, labor, and capital have to be rationed in some way. There are three ways to ration scarce resources: 1) through prices in a free market economy, 2) by bureaucrats in a centrally planned economy, 3) or by fighting over them. Voluntary cooperation in a price coordinated free market economy uses scarce resources in the most efficient way possible. It also satisfies a higher amount of ends out of the unlimited number of ends that exist among all individuals. There is no other way of rationing scarce resources, that currently exists, that can come close to what the free market has produced.

Free college isn’t free, the cost is just shifted. Obamacare is an attempt by Government to shift the cost of healthcare to the taxpayer. Welfare, food stamps, and subsidies to big businesses are other examples of shifting costs to the tax payer. As more is made free by Government officials, less will be produced in the free market. Central planning ultimately leads to a lower standard of living, or as F.A. Hayek has said, it’s “The Road to Serfdom“.

OTHER OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE FACT SHEET

Here is another excerpt from the fact sheet; “Responsible.. students who attend at least half-time, maintain a 2.5 GPA while in college, and make steady progress toward completing their program will have their tuition eliminated.

Why is the President going to discriminate against students who, through no fault of their own, are irresponsible. Why should they be made to pay? Why should there be a cut off at a 2.5 GPA? Why not 2.2 or 2.0? What heartless bureaucrat arbitrarily chose 2.5? Shouldn’t it be more like our graduated income tax? Wouldn’t it be “fair” to gradually increase the amount a student would pay at each incremental point they receive below a 2.5 GPA? The President is being mean and unfair, which are the very qualities he paints his political opposition with.

Read the fact sheet. It is a piece of political propaganda that would make Joseph Goebbels blush.

 

What’s The Rule Of Law, by Walter E. Williams

December 16, 2014

Walter E. Williams recent article asks the question, What’s The Rule Of Law (read here)?

If the rule of law is defined as 1) general rules, 2) known in advance, and 3) applying to the rulers as well as the ruled; than the breakdown of the rule of law is caused by government, 1) making laws that are micro managing, 2) so numerous we can’t possibly know them in advance, and 3) not applying to the rulers, only to the ruled.

When our Government betters think of themselves as being exempt or above the law, and act in a way that flaunts this attitude, regular people will start to push back against such lawlessness by disregarding laws. (There are examples in the related articles below). Here are some excerpts from the article by Dr. Williams.

“President Barack Obama said just before the recent Ferguson, Missouri, riots, “First and foremost, we are a nation built on the rule of law.” Most Americans have little or no inkling of what “rule of law” means. Many think it means obedience to whatever laws legislatures enact. That’s a vision that has led to human tragedy down through the ages…….
“Let’s ask ourselves what the characteristics of laws in a free society should be. Let’s think about baseball rules (laws) as a way to approach this. Some players, through no fault of their own, hit fewer home runs than others. In order to create baseball justice, or what’s sometimes called a level playing field, how about a rule requiring pitchers to throw easier pitches to poorer home run hitters? Alternatively, we could make a rule that what would be a double for a power hitter is a home run for someone who doesn’t hit many homers…….
“You say, “Williams, you can’t be serious! Can you imagine all the chaos that would ensue: players lobbying umpires, umpires deciding who gets what favor, and lawsuits — not to mention violence?” You’re absolutely right. The reason baseball games end peaceably — with players and team owners satisfied with the process, whether they win or lose — is that baseball rules (law) are applied equally to all players. They’re fixed, and umpires don’t make up rules as they go along. In other words, baseball rules meet the test of “abstractness.” They envision no particular game outcome in terms of winners and losers. The rules that govern baseball simply create a framework in which the game is played……”
“Laws or rules in a free society should have similar characteristics………. Laws envision no particular outcome except that of allowing people to peaceably pursue their own objectives. Finally, and most importantly, laws are equally applied to everyone, including government officials”.

 

Related ArticleThe Break Down  Of The Rule Of Law, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleThe Result Of The Breakdown Of The Rule Of Law, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleThe Ruling Aristocracy Does Not Abide By The Rules They Impose On The Serfs, at austrianaddict.com.

Gruber’s Congressional Comments, and The Senate Report On Torture

December 9, 2014

I’ve figured out over the years that these congressional hearings are strictly political theater. One side trying to make political hay by hammering the person testifying, and the other side trying their best to protect him [which means protect their ideology}. Nothing of consequence ever comes out of these kinds of hearings other than political posturing.

APOLOGY NOT ACCEPTED MR. GRUBER

Here is Jonathan Gruber’s opening statement in front of a congressional committee concerning his comments about The Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. Watch these comments under oath with his lawyer present.

Now watch his comments about the ACA when he felt he could speak freely.

Which Jonathan Gruber is telling the truth?

TORTURED DEFINITION OF TORTURE

In the stories I’ve read about the Senate report on torture that was released today, water boarding and sleep deprivation are the techniques mentioned as torture. They are also called,  ‘harsh’ or ‘enhanced’ interrogation techniques. They can’t be both. My problem with this whole report is we can’t agree on what is and is not torture and what is and is not an interrogation technique. Pulling out fingernails, hamstringing, thumbscrews, tarring and feathering, pulling or drilling teeth, beating or physical violence, breaking bones, scalping, knee capping, and branding are what I would call torture. What John McCain went through in Viet Nam was torture. Sleep deprivation and water boarding are not torture.

Many of these Senators who are planting their flag on the political high ground against torture knew that these enhanced interrogation techniques were going on during the Bush Presidency. It is much easier to be righteously indignant after the fact than it is to do what you consider to be the right thing at the very moment it happens. Always remember, politicians view everything through the lens of politics.

Related ArticleBurger King, Corporate Tax Inversions, and Political Theater, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleFiscal Cliff or Political Theater, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleHuman Action Reveals The Reality About Political Decisions, at austrianaddict.com.

 

 

Are People Smarter Today Compared To People 100 Years Ago?

December 3, 2014

The Thinker Statue by the French Sculptor Rodin - stock photo

I asked myself this question, “are people smarter today compared to people 100 years ago”, after reading an article titled, Dumb And  Dumber – Scientific Proof  That People Are Getting ‘Stupider’, at zerohede.com. In the article, the writer makes the assertion that people are getting ‘stupider’ {then humorously asks, is ‘stupider’ even a word}. The article states that there is now scientific evidence that this is so. SAT reading and verbal scores have been going down for decades, are examples cited as evidence to support the theory. The article also posts a 1912 eighth grade exam from  Bullitt County Schools in Kentucky. Try to answer some of these questions, you will be humbled.

DEFINE STUPID AND SMART

The question: are people getting stupider, needs to a few qualifying questions asked before we can answer it. 1) What are the standards used for comparing the intelligence of people who lived 100 years ago to people alive today? 2) Who decides what constitutes being smart and being stupid? 3) Does reciting  facts from memory, like a contestant on Jeopardy, show higher intelligence than being able to take facts and logically reason your way from point A, to a conclusion at point Z? 4) Does being smart in your chosen field magically make you smart in other fields? These are just a few questions we need to think about before we make a pronouncement about intelligence or lack of intelligence.

DIFFERENT ERAS REQUIRED DIFFERENT KNOWLEDGE

People today need to know less about some things and more about other things than the people who lived 100 years ago. If you look at the eight grade test in the article linked to above, you will find questions about spelling, arithmetic, grammar, geography, physiology, civil government, and history that not many of us could answer today. However the answers to these questions are just a click on the computer, or a swipe on a cell phone away from getting answered in today’s world. The knowledge that people had to memorize back then is now stored on a computer chip and is able to be called up at a moments notice. Think of the times you have been with people and someone asks a question that no one can answer until someone uses their cell phone to look it up. The ability to write these posts would be exponentially more time-consuming if it wasn’t for computers. The ability to use spelling and grammar checks makes writing so much easier (some times these tools can’t even save me from spelling and grammar mistakes). Think about a sports writer decades ago pounding out his story on a typewriter: talk about having to get it right on the first take. Calculators have made complex math problems easy for dummies like me. You don’t have to know how to read a map today because you have GPS on your phone with the hot British female voice telling you, “in 200 feet turn right”.

The advance in the standard of living since the industrial revolution brought about a situation where more and more people didn’t have to know how to produce food, clothing, shelter, etc in order to win their battle against the planet for their survival. People began to specialize in producing these things more efficiently which freed up time and labor to be used to produce new products and services that were created by entrepreneurs who speculated, but were not assured, that markets existed for these new products and services. Through this trial and error process of becoming more productive, we can safely say that the over all amount of knowledge in society is obviously expanding, while at the same time we can say that an individual needs less over all knowledge to survive. The process of production has become so specialized that an individual can be a welder at a John Deere plant and literally trade his labor for food, instead of knowing how to actually produce food.

THOMAS SOWELLS TAKE

Thomas Sowell writes about what we are talking about in his book, Knowledge And Decisions ( one the best books I have ever read),  was inspired by F.A Hayeks essay, The Use Of Knowledge In Society.

Dr. Sowell writes in Knowledge and Decisions (which was written in 1980), “The growing complexity of science, technology, and organization does not imply either a growing knowledge or a growing need for knowledge in the general population. On the contrary, the increasingly complex processes tend to lead to increasingly simple and easily understood products. The genius of mass production is precisely in its making more products more accessible, both economically and intellectually to more people.”

Think of how much more true this is thirty-four years after Dr. Sowell wrote this. Things we use in our everyday life weren’t around in 1980.

More from Dr. Sowell. “…Matthew Brady required far more knowledge of photographic processes to take pictures with his cumbersome equipment during the Civil War than a modern photographer requires to operate his automated cameras…..The printing press performs daily communications miracles beyond the ability of an army of the most highly trained and dedicated scribes of the Middle Ages….An ordinary individual can easily arrange travel across thousands of miles through cities he has never seen by tapping the knowledge of travel agents and/or the American Automobile Association.”

Photographic equipment? The printing press? Travel agents? Seriously. We take pictures with cell phones. We have the internet and inkjet printers. We don’t call Triple A to make travel arrangements, we call Triple A if we need a tow.

THE ONE AREA IN WHICH WE ARE CERTAINLY DUMBER

If you haven’t seen the eighth grade exam from 1912 in the Dumb and Dumber article above you should go look at it. The civil government and history part of the eighth grade exam is where we have become woefully ignorant. Unfortunately these two areas are the most important areas we as individuals need to be smart about if we want to have continued prosperity. Being smart in these areas would have kept us vigilant about the incremental taking of individual freedom by people in Government that has happened over the last 50 plus years. Two questions from the civil government part of the exam prove my assertion. How many adults, let alone eighth graders today, could get these two questions right. 1) Name three rights given Congress by the Constitution and two rights denied Congress,  and 2) Define the following forms of Government: Democracy, Limited Monarchy, Absolute Monarchy, Republic. Give examples of each.

These questions aren’t even asked today. The first question, “name three rights given congress by the constitution…and two rights denied congress”, speaks volumes about what was understood about the constitution in 1912 that isn’t even taught in schools today. The fact that congressional powers are limited is stated in the question. Today most people think congress has unlimited power to make any law individuals in congress wish to make. Most people today think the President has unlimited power to decree what he wishes. But I bet most eight graders in 1912 knew that the President had limited powers.

CONCLUSION

The amount of over all knowledge has expanded exponentially over the last 100 years, while at the same time the amount of knowledge an individual needs to survive is less, and also the kind of knowledge each individual needs to survive is different.

The real question is not; are we smarter today than 100 years ago,? The real question is; are we smart enough to understand that the process that produced today’s standard of living stretches far back in time? Free individuals cooperating in free markets produced the standard of living we enjoy today. Central planning by Governments didn’t produce it, in fact, it has hampered our advance. The passage of time has separated us from the founding principles of our country.  If we aren’t smart enough to understand this, we will continually allow democratically elected tyrants to incrementally crush our individual freedom under the heel of their central plans.

Related ArticleWe’re All Born In The Middle Of The Story, by austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleJuly 4th, Declaring Independence From Tyranny, by austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleSpontaneous Order = Free Markets, by austrianaddict.com.

 

 

 

Walter E. Williams: Obama vs. Us

November 25, 2014

Walter E. Williams writes in this article, Obama vs. Us, how the President isn’t incompetent at all. His actions are perfectly compatible with his ideology, and he will not allow something like the constitution get in the way of his agenda. Here are some excerpts from the article.

“In my colleague Dr. Thomas Sowell’s column last week, he says, “Pundits who depict Obama as a weak, lame duck president may be greatly misjudging him, as they have so often in the past.” After suffering an elective trouncing at the polls, President Barack Obama issued Congress an ultimatum, saying that if it doesn’t enact the kind of immigration law that he would like, he will unilaterally issue an executive order to change the nation’s immigration laws. This threat, along with other abuses of his office, is not a sign of presidential stupidity or incompetence“.

“Obama is doing precisely what he promised during his 2008 presidential campaign, to cheering and mesmerized crowds: “We are going to fundamentally change America”….. Obama is living up to those pledges by subverting our Constitution and adopting the political style of a banana republic dictator. He showed his willingness to ignore the Constitution when he eliminated the work requirement in welfare reform laws enacted during the Clinton administration. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare, was enacted by Congress and hence is the law of the land. Obama has used executive orders to change the law on several occasions. Ask yourself whether our Constitution permits the president to unilaterally change a law enacted by Congress“.

“Seeing as all branches of federal government ignore most of the provisions of the Constitution, I think we can safely say that we’ve reached the post-Constitution stage of our history. Washington politicians are not to blame. It’s the American people who’ve lost their love and respect for our Constitution. Washington’s politicians are simply the agents for that contempt“.

THE PROGRESSIVE IDEOLOGY

The President is the current face of an ideology that stretches far back in time. The people who believed in the ideals of the French Revolution shared this ideology as did the progressives in the early 20th century. These people think that their superior wisdom gives them the right to decide whats best for us. This ideology is pervasive in Washington DC in both parties. The constitution is suppose to be a check on governmental and bureaucratic power grabs by people with the central planning ideology. Unfortunately as the late Joseph Sobran stated so well, “The constitution is no threat to our current form of Government”.

SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE SKIT

Here is a skit from Saturday Night Live that drives the point home about the Presidents lack of respect for the rule of law in general and our constitution specifically.

 

Related ArticleTyranny Is Hidden Inside The Bureaucratic Maze, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWhat Is Tyranny? The President Should Know The Definition, at austrianaddict.com.