This country needs reform, let alone its prisons.

"Fleming is among more than 1,350 inmates exonerated nationwide in the last 25 years."

Wow, that is heart-breaking. How do we stop wrongly convicting the innocent? Is it better to err on the side of more or less people in prison? Traditionally we say to err on the side of safety...don't assume more people in jail is the "safe" option. We place non-violent "criminals" in prison with violent criminals-literally creating criminals that will surely never leave the US criminal "justice" system. Rehabilitation occurs in the real world, not in lockup with [really] bad people.

Political Groupthink

If you think like we do, you deserve the freedom and liberty to be enslaved by groupthink.

If however you exercise the freedom and liberty to think differently you will be enslaved to the court of public opinion.

Enter Bundy.

His words couldn't be less palatable to contemporary sensibilities...but the question isn't "is he right or wrong?"; the question we should be asking is "does he have the right to think differently?".

Big Bad Bureaucracy

Man who never served prison sentence on clerical error awaits fate

So they made a mistake...but in a bureaucracy you can just shift the decimal, or in this case the date to the right and make it "right." Forget about the human element; forget about forgiveness; forget about his family. If they now incarcerate him, it would be a travesty against humanity. The only "slippery slope" is not punishing the bureaucrats who failing at their job would punish a woman and four children for a "clerical error."

We Have a Crisis in America

We have a mental health crisis in America. I cannot condone the violent actions of the tortured souls that have responded in the only way they thought that they could make their voices heard. It's sad, pitiable, but absolutely a problem that must be addressed. It's also a place where politics should not be involved, but alas politics is already involved. I have a friend who works in special needs and he says we have problems.

Some of the things he outlines:

Segregation

We segregate those who need to have healthy-minded individuals around them to only be around others whom have mental health issues. So instead of the "town fool" of yore, we have mental hospitals (where we don't have to see, experience, or feel responsible to help those whom need it) where those who could live fairly normal lives learn bad behavior from other mental health patients (i.e. we treat them like prisoners; it has been observed that we have created a wicked process by which non-violent criminals are segregated from society with violent criminals and they themselves typically become violent criminals).

Poor Treatment

Who wants to work with the mentally ill or at nursing homes? My friend told me that the treatment is typically poor because the caretakers feel they can easily get away with it (similar to parents who mistreat their children). What recourse do the victims have? Who will take their side? I have seen what it's like in nursing homes.

I'm not saying everyone under care is mistreated and all caretakers are evil. I am saying we should not take the mentally ill out of society. We need to keep them in society. We need to embrace them as members of our community. We may have to watch them a little closer as we would with our children (because we care) but not "treat them as children." With positive peer pressure they will try to fit in as best they can and will be a part not set apart. They will feel heard not ignored. They will feel that they matter, that they have a voice. We need to listen on our terms not their terms because we have a responsibility to care. If we ignore the problem, this is what will continue to happen:

Study: All But Two Multiple Public Shootings Since 1950 Took Place Where Guns Were Banned (I disagree with the "aggressive institutionalization" statement. Mental health point made.)

Why did the Ft. Hood gunman do it? Because a gun-crazy country let him (Self-admittedly this author has made slop of argumentation, and when corrected stuck to his non-sequitur conclusion, otherwise note his pointing out of the mental health crisis we are in. Instead of advocating for help on this point he simply has a gun agenda.)

Fort Hood Victim's Dad: Gunman Snapped After Seeking Time Off

On the Other Hand

James Holmes: Mental Illness or Social Frustration? (Exactly! Regardless of whether it's mental illness or social rejection or some combination, it is a societal problem not an institutional fix.)

So really, we have a social crisis in America. We have forgotten how to be a community. Mental health is an issue, but how much of an issue would it be if we had true community? We would help each other physically, emotionally, spiritually, psychologically, et cetera. We do this to a small extent but on such a small scale. There are pockets of community in this country. Certain churches practice community (but there is a line between community and cult). Certain neighborhoods practice community. In the military there is a sense of community but it's two-dimensional and needs expanding. I will pray for the cultivation of Christ-centered community which will truly enrich the world, because that is what we need now.

It's Official: FB Saves Lives (Tongue-in-cheek)

Facebook post saves girl’s vision as 'glow in the eye' raises alarm

A bittersweet and inspiring story like this leads me to laud progress. The concept of progress can be really open-ended but please don't take it too far or misattribute to me something I am not saying. To be crystal clear, what I praise here is the good that comes from the "information age" in which we live. How amazing is it that through unintentional "crowdsourcing" people are saving and improving lives and livelihood?!

The Rise and Fall of the Political Ultra-Rich

The Rise of the Political Ultra-Rich

The most important statement made in this article is the heading of the final paragraph: "How establishment Republicans are trying to survive Tea Party challenges." This is the most telling data point of the whole piece. It clues us in to the reality of the situation: the Supreme Court's decision doesn't affect the Rep-Dem stranglehold on political posturing. The writer indicated that there will be a short-term benefit to Reps but that it would only be short, really short.

So in the least pontificated "paragraph" of the article do we find an exquisite exposition of the incredible implications? No. It reads almost as if the article was truncated. It ends abruptly.

So in the spirit of charitable free-lance, allow me to finish the article which was just starting to get good before it got gone.

How establishment Republicans are trying to survive Tea Party challenges

Turning to Senate contests, we’re seeing examples of how establishment Republicans are trying to survive Tea Party challenges. In North Carolina, American Crossroads is airing a TV ad for establishment GOPer Tom Tillis highlighting his work for voter ID laws. And in Mississippi, Thad Cochran is using guns and abortion as way to strengthen his conservative bona fides.

But saying that they are merely challenges is to obfuscate the symptoms with the source of those challenges. As indicated earlier in the article, the power of influence is via the power of the dollar, traditionally speaking. However the "Republicans" of today are less traditional. In fact, this is a problem for establishment Democrats as well. The establishment's base of support is dwindling due to changes in the culture, largely brought about by reactionary changes from generation to generation as well as the technological changes that have sparked the information revolution.

The response is revolutionary. What is becoming ever obvious to ordinary citizens is that the bureaucratic machine continues to polarize the public and pander to the politically minded. The establishmentarians fail to realize that the new generation of collective, political activism known broadly as the Tea Party is an idealist, intellectually-grounded, free-thinking, and politically-centrist movement of ideologues that cannot be bought by anachronistic advertising. They deal in the currency of ideas. They are neither republican, nor democrat. They are neither conservative, nor liberal. They desire the one thing that a bureaucratic machine cannot deliver: freedom. And like their forefathers, they are ready to fight for it.

Billions of dollars spent on smear campaigns won't deter the coming tide. If the establishment will not change to suit their constituents, their constituents will change the establishment. The rise of the political ultra-rich is also, paradoxically, the fall of the political ultra-rich.

Global Warming and Risk, Risk, Risk! Subtitled: Our Diar[rhea] Circumstances...

Holy Crimea Batman! This piece reads like the alarmist literature it claims to not be. As I got a good laugh out of how it linked all of the world's ills to global warming, I thought to myself, "Why not blame the widening rich-poor gap on global warming too!" And guess what? Unfortunately, I cannot even muster the courage to quote the ridiculousness contained therein. Instead, I shall make a prediction.

I have no idea how long it will take for policy setters...er...modern scientists, to quit their shenanigans. Thus I give no timeline to my prediction. One disclaimer: I don't mean all scientists have disavowed science for politics, I mean that those policy setters wearing the academic garb of scientia are not scientists in any sense of the word (hyperbole). The average person will one day view global-warmers as we now view flat-earthers. Unfortunately, they will probably misattribute the held belief of the common uneducated person to the religious who have opposed the common view if for no other reason than that it fails to align with divine revelation. #endrant

Good News for the BK Baby (circa 1986)

It is refreshing to read some good news once in a while.

What did they expect?

Lawmakers steamed over ritzy AIG retreat after bailout

Vote No for those who voted Yes

Find your Representative in the roll call for the vote on the bailout...er, Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

My SC Rep Brown is down. Whoever the Democrat running against him may get my vote...

"Nobody really wanted to do this" and yet they did. They didn't want to vote against "their conscience," so they ignored the voters who put them in office. Pardon me!? Honorable Sir/Madam, I am your conscience. You are answerable to me, not Wall Street bankers. But I guess I have no sway with you because I don't pander to you. But I thought you worked for me...

If you (reader) want to make a difference, know that we are in the fight for the long haul.

1. Educate yourself (Google: campaign for liberty, restore the republic, ludvig von mises institute, austrian economics, Christian economics, gary north, ludvig von mises, frederick hayek, carl menger, murray rothbard, laissez faire, austrian theory of the trade cycle, rousas john rushdoony, david chilton, greg bahnsen, ron paul, constitution party, howard phillips, etc.)

2. Stay away from D.C./get involved locally ("All politics is local.").

3. Educate/catechize/indoctrinate your children in the same, thereby perpetuating the growing ranks of freedom lovers (who will do the same, and on and on and on).

Senate roll call vote on the bailout bill.

Senate roll call vote on the bailout amendment.

Update: Gary North's post that inspired my call to arms: A Civics Lesson for Very Slow Learners: American Voters

A small victory for liberty

Lawmakers quickly point fingers after bailout fails

Managed "Free" Market

Conservatives: 'Take a breath' before passing bailout

"Nobody wants to do this. Nobody wants to be involved in this. Nobody wants to take the chance, but I would argue... if we do nothing, we are jeopardizing our economy, jobs and people's retirement security," [Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the top Republican in the House] said.

"[I]f we do nothing" is exactly what this country needs from you Sir. Please do nothing and allow the economy to right itself.

Shameful behavior

Commentary: Christian bookstore's shameful actions

Story Highlights
Lifeway stores put Christian magazine behind counter

Magazine featured female pastors on its cover

Lifeway has no respect for freedom of the press, Martin says

Lifeway, Southern Baptist Convention should apologize, he says

What gives religion a bad name? Behavior so described and responses of the like. Yes, it is true the bookstores should have been more professional. But deal with it on that level. The moment you start making it a religious issue then professionalism isn't what the true story is about, but the real story is one of retaliation for hurting his wife's feelings.

We can deal with the polemics in another forum but to give your interpretation of doctrine is to add insult to injury. Furthermore you undermine the authority of scripture by claiming that not all of scripture is God breathed and given by Him. Even when Paul said "this is my own thoughts," was he not carried along by the Spirit?

CP Email Newsletter; 9/8/08

Rep. Ron Paul Asks Only “Secure Borders” Presidential Candidate to Join His Press Conference:

Chuck Baldwin of Constitution Party to be Joined by Border Agent’s Wife

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin (www.Baldwin08.com) will join former GOP presidential candidate Rep Ron Paul (R-Tex.) at a News Conference at 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, September 10, 2008, at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

Baldwin, who joined other constitutionalists at Ron Paul’s “Shadow Convention” on September 2 in Minneapolis, will be joined by Monica Ramos, wife of imprisoned Border Patrol agent Ignacio Ramos. Baldwin has called for the immediate pardon and release of Ramos and Jose Compean, who are serving 11 and 12 year sentences for attempting to uphold immigration law.

Congressman Paul, who is expected to present non-negotiable points voters must demand from a presidential candidate, invited Chuck Baldwin, the only anti-illegal immigrant amnesty presidential candidate, to the September 10 News Conference. Baldwin, a long-time critic of the open-borders policy,will join concerned Americans attending the annual Hold Their Feet To The Fire Radio Row protest and Lobby Days sponsored by the Federation for American Immigration Reform(FAIR) Congressional Task Force.(www.feettothefire08.com)

Baldwin, a popular political commentator on national TV shows, is a radio talk show host, author of two books, and pastor of the Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola. Florida. He is the only candidate who received an “EXCELLENT” rating by pro-secure borders group Numbers USA .

The group rated Obama and McCain “abysmal” and rated Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr “bad” on the immigration issue. (http://www.baldwin08.com/files/ImmigrationIssues.pdf)

“The United States government aids and abets illegal criminals, and jails its own law enforcement agents for doing their job. Despite these injustices, both parties controlling our government offer us more of the same with identical pro-amnesty presidential candidates,” Baldwin said.

“Neither Obama nor McCain will end the invasion from the south, nor have they called for the release of our brave border agents. I am the only candidate representing the 75% of Americans who want illegal immigration and amnesty to end.”

In April 2008, Chuck Baldwin was elected by delegates of the nationwide Constitution Party to be their presidential candidate. The CP, founded in 1992, was initially called the U.S. Taxpayers Party. It is the fifth political party to be recognized by the Federal Election Commission. It's expected to be on the ballot in almost every state.

____________________________________________________

You can read it online here.

Just further proof that voting "Republican" is a completely wasted vote. Sarah Palin seems to be conservative...Great. What is she going to do when someone else (McCain) gets elected...That's what I thought.

If you want a better political climate in America vote CP, especially if you're a Christian; you won't have to compromise your values for a bowl of porridge.

Impale...Pale-Im...Palin

Just Politics as usual...And people don't see it.

If you do, read Sarah Palin as Stalking Horse and Sugar and Spice and Everything Nice?.

The answer for America is not a dream of a better America but a reality of a better America. You want reality...People are stupid, lazy, power-hungry, greedy, gluttonous, and such the like...I apologize if you take offense to my calling you out, but it is necessary.

Truth is the only answer. Not edited truth, mind you. Austrian economics and Libertarian politics have a measure of truth but they are not enough to solve the real problems. "Larceny in our hearts" can only be solved by the Lord Jesus Christ.

Hey Hanna!

Weathering the storm...(7:23pm)

Borrowed from http://www.weather.com/maps/news/atlstorm8/floater5_large.html?from=hp_main_maps.

Coming to you live from Goose Creek...Well, almost live. The picture is from about 24 minutes ago.

(7:47pm)

(8:49pm)

Latest Thoughts on Bruce Ivins

Did FBI Scientists Identify a Single, Unique Flask?

We are slowly getting more information about the FBI's lack of a case against Bruce Ivins. When we first learned of his suicide, we were told that he was the anthrax killer. Period. Then we got a statement that there was some technology developed by the FBI for the purpose of this case. Is this why nearly 7 years passed before an arrest was made?

The full briefing was still skimpy on the details, and not very convincing. But what we were told is that the anthrax was traced to a single flask that was in Bruce Ivins’ possession at Ft. Detrick. Then, Science Magazine reported on a "close reading" of the four relevant paragraphs in the 25-page written brief. We now had a better idea of what exactly this new technology was, although the FBI refused press access to its staff scientists.

Read more.

It saddens me to think there may be more to the tragic story than meets the uncritical eye.

Discriminatory Tax Cuts

If I were to vote solely on the basis of who gave me a larger tax cut, I would vote for Barack Obama. The Washington Post article Obama and McCain Tax Proposals shows us something of politics and media. John McCain caters to the capitalists; Obama caters to the populace (or at least 60% of taxpayers). So who wins out?

McCain gets the backing of the wealthy; money is necessary to a campaign and the backing of those with money. Obama gets the backing of a large voting block; votes are necessary to a campaign and the accompanying charisma. Will money and advertising sway the voting public or will popularity and the vague doctrine of "change" rue the day?

We also see what the Washington Post wants us to see. "Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy." This appeal to emotion fails the test of logic. Is it right or better to give tax cuts to those who make the least? Is it right that those who work harder/smarter bears the larger burden because they make more money?

This is a case of "politics of envy." Show me someone who votes to raise the taxes on America's wealthiest and I'll show you a hypocrite who would vote the contrary if his economic position improved to the point where he was in the top 1% of wage earners. Is Obama supposed to be some kind of "Robin Hood" because he "steals from the rich to give to the poor?" The reality is that he will "rob Peter to pay Paul."

Under Obama's plan capital is transferred from the few experienced and knowledgeable investor to themany fractious and divided mass of consumers who spend what they do not have, do not save money and do not know how to successfully invest their money. This is not a good economic plan. This is a good political ploy. This country needs sound money not political pandering.

My view is that our current state of taxation is unethically high for everyone. Although McCain is giving back more than Obama by an average of almost 7X as much. This would benefit the economy more if that is what your aiming for in the tax cut.

Comparatively Obama will be far more ruinous to this country's economy than McCain will. But McCain will not provide a means of restoring sound money either. I vote for the clssic liberal who promotes freedom and liberty. For that is what this country needs (meanwhile I will concurrently promote attending to the deplorable spiritual state of this country as well).

But what about throwing your vote away when you could have a Republican with some adherence to the conservative agenda? This country needs long term vision. Short term gains and long term losses are unacceptable. I cannot in good conscience vote for the "lesser of two evils." You cannot split rotting wood (Gresham Machen). The war must be over the long run and short run battles must be in the direction of less not more government. Tactics must be consistent with strategy.

Both candidates will bring more government, not because they personally will seek its augmentation but because they will not resist those who do. We need a president who is keenly aware of the unwritted alliances and seek their abolishment. It is common knowledge that "politics is dirty." Then why are we upset by those who act in terms of that thinking? The policy setters are not the same people who are the policy makers. Who then set policy? Follow the money.

Why the title Discriminatory Tax Cuts? Because our entire tax structure is currently discriminatory and to give so little back (both candidates stop far too short) is discriminatory. Taxes discriminate against Americans. We fought for our indeppendence under a system of taxes lower than today's...Where have we gone wrong?

We need to get rid of income taxes altogether and support our fiscal needs on something like an excise tax(es). We need people like Ron Paul (R) and Chuck Baldwin (CP). But we need them all over this country and in every level of politics from the "dog catcher" to the president.

Classic Liberalism

Scandals, wars, economic ruination...Just a hard day at work for a politician.

There seems to be no end to the bad news. John Edwards had an affair? Of course he did. What drives men like Clinton, Edwards, Spitzer, et al. to become politicians in the first place? Are they after the money? Not likely. Most politicians are independently wealthy. There are numerous senators that are millionaires. Is it the power? Probably has something to do with it. Is it the sex? For sure. Money, power and sex are the drives, although money is not a great incentive for American politics. It seems like you already have to have money in order to join the fray.

Why does nothing ever change? The complaints my father had are the complaints I have. The complaints my father had are the complaints my grandfather probably had. Why?

It doesn't really matter who is elected to office, nothing changes. But that doesn't answer the real question. Can it be changed? Yes. But we have had no one willing to change the system. Until now...In 2008 we have witnessed a resurgence of "classical liberalism." It started when Ron Paul announced his candidacy for President. It still continues though the establishment has chosen its candidates: Barack Obama and John McCain.

Campaign for Liberty, Restore the Republic, Constitution Party and many other grassroots efforts are committed to the long term vision of restoring freedoms and liberties in America. Slowly our freedoms are being eroded in guises of safety and environmental and social concerns.

I have no fear that the establishment will maintain their stranglehold perpetually. It may get worse before it gets better but it will get better. George Orwell and Aldous Huxley amongst others may have foreseen where the evils of humanity would take us, but they did not figure God into their calculations. Without God their dystopian conceptions of the future would well play out as history, but God has different plans for our future. God grants freedom not slavery. Thus how can we even think that man could be enslaved in such "novel" ways?

The truth shall set us free. Ultimately evangelism is the spiritual answer to the "kingdoms of this world." They try and "lord it over us" and may succeed in their own goals, but we know that greatness comes from servanthood. So how do we reconcile our spiritual understanding with the politics of the day? Should we as good men sit idly by while evil men take the reigns of power? We are not talking about a monarchy here; we are talking about elected representative government.

Good men need to get involved. It is remarkable to note how a single man could change the attitude of a nation in the O.T. He would tear down the "high places" and bring God's blessing upon the land. He restored the Law-Word of God to its rightful place. Do I say we should foist a theocracy on America? No. It would not work. It would not be right. It would be missing the point.

Evangelism and changed hearts will precede a nation becoming godly. It has to come from the bottom up and inside out rather than from top down and outside in. Then and only then could we even start talking about theocracy.

But what of today? What should be our political goals and aims for this modern era? I would suggest that we start digging our heels in and slow the drift towards authoritarianism. In the short term we can work with the "freedom movement" to take back some of our God-given rights. Christian ideals lineup very closely with classical liberalism in most of its political ideals. The decentralization posed by Scripture meshes very well with individualistic libertarianism.

Philosophically the "only" problem with individualism is its neglect of man as a corporate entity. The rights of the individual supersede the rights of the group. Socialism goes to the other extreme and says the rights of the many supersede the rights of the few. Is there a moderate position to hold? I think the Christian position explains the apparent paradox between the rights of the one versus the rights of the many.

God is trinity. God is one. God is many.

Man is one. Man is many.

Socialism claims to care for the poor and libertarianism says that private charity can deal with that issue. Socialism has stated as its goal the eradication of poverty. Jesus said "The poor you have with you always." But it is also written that if you have power to do good and you neglect to do it, you have sinned. In Christianity charity is not an option.

So we can work within the confines of the "Freedom Movement" without conflict of conscience but we must note its inadequacies and make up for them with our doctrines. What if we do nothing? What if we allow evil or even aid and abet the evil by encouraging Christians to get out of politics? Will we slip into the modern "dark ages" when we are under a "one world government?" The U.N. is poised to accept a nomination...

"I motion..."

"I second..."

"All in favor..."

"Aye!"

Welcome to the "New World Order." Oh wait we are not there yet. Remember, baby steps. First it's the European Economic Community or Common Market; tomorrow it's the European Union. Today it's Canada, America and Mexico; tomorrow it's the North American Union.

Will humanity suffer it? They'll suffer it before they fight it. History bears this out. But you can bet they will fight it, eventually. These freedom loving philosophical movements all seem to begin in conditions of squalor. They all seem to originate under the most extreme of circumstances. Authoritarianism breeds a desire of freedom in people. It will happen again. There is no new thing under the sun.

Every empire has crumbled; every empire will crumble. Even this new type of empire will crumble. It is not an empire forged by war. It is not an empire built by imperialism. It is not an empire derived from politics at all. It is economic. Banking and economic alliances and economic treaties all serve to centralize the control of the monetary unit. The elitists think they are impervious to the plight of historical empires but they are wrong. People will eventually figure out who holds the reins. "Follow the money." And they will. Revolution will probably be bloody and violent. God has coded something in us...A desire to be free? Yeah. Freedom.

So what is this classical liberalism? It was a freedom movement that started under the absolute monarchies of the 17th and 18th centuries in Europe. Think authoritarianism, then think about the opposite; whatever is diametrically opposed to absolutism is classical liberalism, pretty much. These were the first "liberals." The "conservatives" during this period were the authoritarians.

Today the "conservatives" and the "liberals" are authoritarian parties. It seems as if the swapped ideologies; I guess it is the evolution of the movements. But liberalism did not maintain its freedom loving status. Today we generally say the liberals want civil freedoms while conservatives want economic freedoms and the inverse also being true. But where then did the classical liberals go? Today the expressions of classical liberalism can be found in the libertarian camp. Spawned by the free-market "Austrian" school of thought, libertarianism fights the fight of classic liberalism in the modern age.

I have a basic faith in humanity, that even if good men fail them, that they will not tolerate tyranny forever. I hope for my future and my children's future and so on that good men indeed will rise to the occasion to show the world what good people in positions of influence would do.

The status quo is no longer a good quid pro quo, when it is our liberties being traded for tyranny.

Excerpt from Constitution Party Email Update

Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate for president, is a minister, radio talk show host and writer. He has been an outspoken critic of the United Nations’ aggressive Agenda 21, a program Baldwin calls “the mechanism by which Americans are rapidly losing their sovereignty, their Constitutionally- guaranteed rights and their liberties”.

Baldwin points out: “The United Nations’ stealth policies, through so-called Sustainable Development will serve only to create a tyrannical New World Order. Americans must begin to connect the dots on global schemes to advance gun control, promote a globalist education agenda in our classrooms and take away our freedoms under the guise of ‘environmentalism’. The U.N. is behind the push for national ID cards, higher taxes, denigration of the Judeo- Christian world view and the coming North American Union”.

Agenda 21 wiki-page.

Agenda 21 Document.