Any threat especially against law enforcement or politicians will get you banned.
Categories
Daily Hits. Just my own thoughts Links from other news sources.

Why my articles are short, sweet, and to the point. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

Hits: 21

Why my articles are short, sweet, and to the point. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

This article was originally posted here.

First I must confess that by trade I’m not a journalist or professional writer. Just a 69 year old white dude retired and living the good life. But I’m trying my best to be a good writer. One thing you won’t see a long original article from me.

My articles are short and to the point. I know that I myself will most of the time see an article and usually stop after the first few paragraphs. Now when doing research I will read the whole contents. But most of my articles are usually two maybe three paragraphs. My feeling is that if I can’t get my point across in less than 500 words, 10,000 words will just bore you

 

Start writing today. Use the link below to create your Substack and connect your publication with Josh’s Newsletter

Start a Substack

 

50
Categories
Economy Links from other news sources.

Winning. Hey Progressives, guess who’s benefitting from your green spending? Red states.

Hits: 14

Hey Progressives, guess who’s benefitting from your green spending? Red states. Biden’s Climate law has had a reverse effect on blue states. They’re not getting the green energy benefits like they had hoped. They’re going to the red states. And why’s that?

My guess is that the cost to build wind, solar shields, and electric battery plants are going to red states. Roughly two-thirds of the major projects are in districts whose Republican lawmakers opposed the Inflation Reduction Act, according to a POLITICO analysis of major green energy manufacturing announcements made since the bill’s enactment.

54
Categories
Links from other news sources. Reprints from others.

Drag Shows Are an Actionable Violation of Children’s Rights. And parents’ rights too

Hits: 27

Christopher was the  Editor and owner of Western Free Press and my boss. He’s joined substack so please think about subscribing to his website. Here’s one of his articles.

(As I mention in my About section, there will be times when I lay out well-crafted arguments, rooted in months or years of deliberation and research, and there will be other times when I work things out on the fly. This will be a combination of both.)

Libertarianism is perpetually complicated by the reality of children—by their temporary condition of helplessness and inability to have full communion with their rights, and by the natural realities that grant parents temporary authority over them. Libertarian formulations that can easily be applied to adults become more challenging when applied to children. In spite of this, we do need to craft rights-based arguments for children too. They are sovereign beings, even if they cannot enjoy full expression of every aspect of that sovereignty from their first breath.

The Freedom Scale is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Conservatives intuitively sense that a person dressed in drag, wearing a cartoonish prosthetic penis, taking a child by the hand and parading him or her around the room is—somehow—a violation of rights.

Even drag-queen story-time, with its general air of hyper-sexualization, crosses a clear line. Parents understand that this is about more than telling children a story. Putting drag queens in front of kids is the point of the exercise, not telling them a story that could otherwise be read by anyone.

So how can this be understood to be a violation of either the child’s rights, or the parents’, or both? Ultimately, I think the argument hinges on consent. So let me try my hand…

First, consent is central to the core rights of all humans. In the months ahead, I will be laying out formal proofs for this, but in brief…

You have exclusive and inalienable self-ownership as a natural fact of your existence, and coercive force exercised against the enjoyment of your self-ownership is morally (and ontologically) impermissible. Thus, things done directly to you against your will—things to which you do not consent—are impermissible.

But children cannot competently consent to anything. Normal human beings recognize this, and most of those charged with acting in loco parentis (teachers, daycare minders, etc.) don’t push anything so far that consent becomes an issue. They do normal things: they feed them, stop them from sticking forks in electrical sockets, and so on. The kids cannot exactly consent to those things either, but normal people try to do only those things that a parent would also do—reasonable things that a child needs. But leftist activists, I am sorry to say, are not normal. And at this point, neither are those who are seduced by the easy path to leftist-style “virtue” offered by the activist: “Letting me come to your preschool in drag and read weird stories to the children under you care will make you a better person.”

This then raises a problem: we don’t exactly have a hard-and-fast rule for the consent of children. Just like their parents have temporary authority over their children and can forcibly stop them from electrocuting themselves, or even make them clean their rooms, those acting in loco parentis have some of this authority too.

But surely they have this authority by proxy. Surely the parents are granting this authority, provisionally and temporarily, to teachers and others acting in loco parentis. So how, then, do the parents get this authority? There is not space for all the sub-arguments here, but the facts are pretty simple. It boils down a specific form of responsibility.

If you get drunk and drive through your neighbor’s fence, you have initiated a kind of force against his property. His property is, of course, an extension of his self-ownership, which means it was an act of force against your neighbor. Your act has made you responsible fix the fence. The same is the case, of course, if you drive over your neighbor’s foot rather than his fence.

This is also the case if you are a signatory to a contract. A contract involves the exchange of alienable property (or labor, which is an extension of self-ownership). If the other party abides by the agreement but you do not, you are essentially stealing from him (an act of force). You have taken an action—signing the contract—that makes you responsible to its terms.

If you are a parent, you are responsible for your child’s existence in the world. You have taken an action which produces a person who requires your help in order to exist. You are not responsible if a homeless person starves somewhere; you did not cause that homeless person to be. But you are responsible if your child starves because you are responsible for the existence of your child.

It might not feel, at first blush, as clear-cut as your responsibility for the hole in your neighbor’s fence, but the reasoning, and justification, are the same.

The natural facts of reality—specifically the temporary helplessness of the child—are such that in order to meet this fiduciary responsibility, you must exercise authority over the child. Common sense, Common Law, and the laws of nature all recognize this. Ideally, a parent eases this authority at a pace commensurate with the child’s growing ability to enjoy full communion with his own rights and sovereignty, and then, at a certain age, releases a free human being into the world. It’s not always easy to get the timing perfectly right, but the facts of nature make this the only logical and moral system to use. This authority places exclusive, dispositive decision-making power in the hands of the parents.

This is the essence of a right.

A child’s consent is thus placed, pro tempore, in the hands of the parent. A child cannot consent to being led around by the hand by a drag queen wearing a giant phallus. Period. Doing so violates the child’s rights. But since the decision about consent is temporarily in the hands of the parent, then doing so is a violation of the parent’s rights as well.

To sum up…

  1. Parents’ fiduciary responsibility to their children grants them temporary authority over their children.
  2. This authority includes the right to hold the child’s right of consent in proxy until the age of majority.
  3. Anything to which the child is subjected without the consent of the parent is a violation of the rights of consent of both parent and child.

Again, this is not an issue most of the time, because most of the time, outside forces do not act against the wishes of children or their parents. Normal people will teach children math, read them a nice story, or keep them from getting hit by a bus, and parents are fine with things like that. But we’re not dealing with normal people; we’re dealing with leftists. And now we’re also dealing with people who have substituted the left’s idea of “virtue” for their own—people who have become so addicted to the narcissistic frisson they get from thinking they’re one of the BeautifulPeople™ that they actually think it’s okay to do this to children. And weak-minded, compliant narcissism addicts are just as dangerous as the leftists giving them the drug in the first place.

Drag queen story-time and similar activities are clear violations of the right of consent of both parent and child. They are acts of force against self-ownership, and are thus actionable. If the system does not punish these acts, then the system has failed. If the system allows them to occur—or worse, abets their occurrence and prevents recourse by the parents—then the system itself is committing an act of force against children and parents alike.

This too is actionable.

 

1

Libertarians ought to sense this as well, and many do, but presumably not quite as many. Libertarians are more rights focused, but I suspect they are, in the aggregate, less children focused. (This is based on an assumption that they are less likely to be married and have children than conservatives, though I do need to research that to be sure.)

2

This is one area where the otherwise rock-solid Murray Rothbard goes careening off the rails: In The Ethics of Liberty, he argues that a parent may, through inaction, starve his children.

3

If a person does a poor job of exercising his exclusive, dispositive decision-making power over his own life, that’s on him, but the parent-child situation is complicated by the fact that the child is a separate being from the parent. Nonetheless, ceteris paribus, this authority is natural, necessary, and generally good.

Subscribe to The Freedom Scale

By Christopher Cook  ·  Launched 2 days ago

Human rights. The madness of the left. A way out of the darkness. The world has gone insane—we already know that. My job is to help figure out WHY.

59
Categories
Corruption Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. Progressive Racism

Say his name. Service members forced to pay back signing bonuses after being fired over COVID vax.

Hits: 14

Say his name. Service members forced to pay back signing bonuses after being fired over COVID vax. So now we see that the military kicked out our men and women for not taking the jab. Making matters worse, they want the signing bonus back cause they didn’t do the promised service time.

U.S. service members who were fired for refusing to comply with the Pentagon’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate are now being forced to pay back their original recruitment bonuses, which they tell Fox News Digital is a “kick in the face” after years of dedicating their lives to protecting the country.

The push by the Pentagon to recoup signing bonuses from fired service members comes after President Biden signed the fiscal year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, which included a provision, cleared by the House and the Senate, to repeal the administration’s military vaccine mandate. This month, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin signed a memo that will update the records and remove letters of reprimand from troops whose exemption requests to the vaccine were denied.

Give those bonuses back. Remember Austin was the one who ordered our troops to flee for their life from the advancing Taliban.

42
Categories
Crime Links from other news sources. Uncategorized

California is number one in gun laws and number one in active shooters.

Hits: 12

California is number one in gun laws and number one in active shooters. Yes my friends high crime and strict gun laws go hand and hand. Just ask the feds if you don’t believe me.

 FBI’s figures which show California was number one in “active shooter incidents” in 2021. Breitbart News pointed out that the FBI figures mean California was number one in gun control and number one in “active shooter incidents” at the same time.

 The city of Los Angeles alone witnessed 382 murders in 2022, according to Crosstown. Moreover, on July 12, 2022, ABC 7 explained that Los Angeles homicides “hit the highest level in over a decade” during the first six months of 2022.

So what does the WP write?

The Washington Post propped up California’s failed gun controls after a Saturday night shooting at a Lunar New Year celebration in Monterey Park resulted in ten deaths.

 

54
Categories
Back Door Power Grab How funny is this? Links from other news sources.

Lawmakers seek to bar Jan. 6 insurrectionists from holding public office. If you believe January 6th was an attempt to overthrow the government or an insurrection, than I have Pacific Ocean front property to sell you in Frost Bite Falls, Minnesota.

Hits: 35

Lawmakers seek to bar Jan. 6 insurrectionists from holding public office. If you believe January 6th was an attempt to overthrow the government or an insurrection, than I have Pacific Ocean front property to sell you in Frost Bite Falls, Minnesota.

Democratic lawmakers in a handful of states are trying to send a message two years after the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol: Those who engage in an attempted overthrow of the government shouldn’t be allowed to run it.

New York, Connecticut and Virginia are among states where proposed legislation would prohibit anyone convicted of participating in an insurrection from holding public office or a position of public trust, such as becoming a police officer. 37

Categories
Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. Progressive Racism The Law

But, but how could this happen in California? White man goes on a killing spree. Oh wait he was Asian.

Hits: 51

But, but how could this happen in California? White man goes on a killing spree. Oh wait he was Oriental. California, the state where Progressives pass the crazy laws saying it’s gun control. And what happens? People die. I know, some loon will say the gun probably came from out of state. Or will say the shooter didn’t kill and injure those folks, his gun did.

And you have this crazy person who blamed the shooting on whites anyway. We have this.

It didn’t take long for one leftist lunatic to blame white dominant culture for the shooting. She vowed to make it him/her mission to take down the white dominant culture following the shooting.

Only in California.

 

 

 

  68

Categories
Links from other news sources. Reprints from others.

Environmental rules stoke anger as California lets precious storm-water wash out to sea

Hits: 20

Environmental rules stoke anger as California lets precious stormwater wash out to sea.

Thanks LA Times

Back in 2014 voters approved 3 billion dollars to build more reservoirs. To this day not a penny has been spent. If done, they would have enough reservoirs to hold water for ten years.

Environmental rules designed to protect imperiled fish in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta have ignited anger among a group of bipartisan lawmakers, who say too much of California’s storm-water is being washed out to sea instead of being pumped to reservoirs and aqueducts.

Since the beginning of January, a series of atmospheric rivers has disgorged trillions of gallons of much-needed moisture across drought-stricken California, but only a small fraction of that water has so far made it into storage. In the delta — the heart of the state’s vast water system — nearly 95% of incoming water has flowed into the Pacific Ocean, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

“With so much excess water in the system, there is no reason that exports south of the Delta cannot be increased,” read another letter that State Sen. Melissa Hurtado (D-Sanger) and Assemblymember Jasmeet Bains (D-Bakersfield) addressed to Newsom.

“We must make the most of the heavy precipitation we are receiving and use it to our advantage,” Rep. Jim Costa (D-Fresno) wrote in a letter to state and federal officials. He called for increased flexibility on the first flush rule.

 

  49

Categories
Reprints from others. The Law Un documented.

America’s Broken Immigration System: A Debate

Hits: 17

 

America’s Broken Immigration System: A Debate
A restrictionist and a proponent of open borders walk into a bar . . .

By The Free Press

January 21, 2023

Like
Comment
Share
In 2022, there were over 2.76 million illegal migrant crossings at the Southwest border. That’s roughly the population of Chicago, America’s third largest city. To address this unprecedented surge, President Biden recently announced tougher restrictions and made a show of visiting the border himself.

But unlike a decade or two ago, when the immigration debate was mostly about economics, today it’s an issue that’s subsumed by the culture wars and our polarized discourse. Republican governors bus migrants to sanctuary cities and they’re called “xenophobic” and “cruel” by the left. But what happens when a Democratic governor does much the same thing, bussing migrants from Colorado to New York City and Chicago? Is it still a heartless political stunt? Or is all of this just an inevitable consequence of our broken immigration system?

So this week: a debate moderated by guest host Kmele Foster between Alex Nowrasteh and Jessica Vaughan. Are current levels of immigration helping or hurting America? How do we balance humanitarian concerns with America’s economic and security needs? Should we be trying to enforce more or less restrictions at the border? And what exactly should we do to fix our immigration policies?

Alex is the director of Economic and Social Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. Jessica is the director of Policy Studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that describes themselves as “pro-immigrant but low immigration.”

While Alex and Jessica couldn’t be more opposite in their approach—Alex favors free immigration, while Jessica argues for restrictionist policies—in this episode of Honestly we look for common ground, debate the facts, and search for solutions.

  53

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Corruption Links from other news sources. Politics Reprints from others.

Probe Biden Admin over Plan to Hide Classified Docs Scandal

Hits: 10

Probe Biden Admin over Plan to Hide Classified Docs Scandal.

Is it time for another special prosecutor? Thursday the WP ran a article where the DOJ and the WH were not going to go public with the information about the missing top secret papers found at the Penn Center or Biden’s home. All documents Biden had no right to have. Documents that were Top Secret.

According to the Washington Post on Thursday, the White House and Justice Department not only agreed to obscure the scandal from public view, but they also refused to divulge that the second trove of classified documents was already unearthed at Biden’s home in Wilmington when CBS News first contacted the White House about the initial leak of classified documents illegally stored at the Biden Penn Center.

“CBS News was the first news organization to learn of the matter, contacting the White House on Jan. 6 to ask about the Penn Biden Center documents,” the report continued. “White House officials confirmed the scoop, but since the investigation was ongoing, they decided not to offer any additional details — including the critical information that a second batch of documents had been discovered at Biden’s home.”

And a third. Who knows if more will be found?

  42

Any threat especially against law enforcement or politicians will get you banned.
%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights