Anarchists? Really?

I went undercover to explore New York’s anarchist underground during the days before the Republican National Convention.

Really? Anarchists?

I’m more an anarchist than these folks. Like Thoreau,”I heartily accept the motto, ‘That government is best which governs least’; and I should like to see it acted upon more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe–‘That government is best which governs not at all’; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.” Since when does anarchist mean tool of big government and supporter of socialism. Let’s look at who supports more freedom vs. who supports more government power:

Restrictions on Freedom of Assembly – Democrats placed protesters in a fenced in yard at their convention. Republicans give them free reign over 90% of Manhattan and basically just asked that they not tear up the new grass at Central Park and that they not be violent.

Freedom to Arm Yourself Against Government – Republicans support, Democrats oppose

Free exercise of religion – Democrats consistently oppose, Republicans inconsistently support

Free political speech – Democrats and fellow traveller RINOs oppose, Republicans support

Freeing children from government indoctrination – Democrats strongly oppose, Republicans support

Ownership of our bodies – Democrats support on sexual matters and oppose with regard to everything else. Republicans oppose on sexual matters and illegal drugs but generally support. Cases in point: tobacco, drinking, medicine (Hillarycare and FDA bureaucracy), the fruits of our labor, McDonald’s hamburgers, lawn darts.

Freedom from search and seizure – the record is spotty on both sides on this in terms of legislation, but Republicans tend to be guided by a respect for the Constitution. You often hear Republicans frustrated that the Constitution blocks something in this regard, but it’s Democrats who you’ll hear advocating just ignoring it.

Now those are just your basic “social” freedoms, since these socialist anarchists (oxyMORONic term there if I ever heard one) aren’t too concerned about government power in the economic sphere. What they seem blind to is the fact that government exercises its greatest power when it makes people dependent on it economically. When government has both a monopoly on violence and control of your next meal, resistance is futile. So lets look at a few more freedoms.

Freedom to trade without regard to arbitrary government imposed borders – Republicans support, Democrats oppose. Borders are constructs of governments. Opposing free trade, which an odd number of these so-called anarchists do, is by definition supporting government.

Freedom from taxation. Taxation is theft in the anarchist worldview. Now an armchair anarchist like myself looks at the real world situation where the choice is some taxation to defend ourselves or being overrun by the likes of China and North Korea and generally decides to put up with a reasonable amount of theft. We haven’t reached the point of being ready for a government which governs not at all. These anarchists on the other hand are agitating in favor of a party that believes in the divine right of government to confiscate 100% of everything. How much more diametrically opposed to “anarchism” can you get than ceding control of all resources including our own labor to government?

Bottom line. Call these fruitcakes anything you like, but don’t insult my intelligence by claiming that they are opponents of government.

Ramesh Ponnuru on John McCain & Republican Convention on National Review Online

Ramesh Ponnuru on John McCain & Republican Convention on National Review Online

My guess is that McCain’s speech did more good for Bush than Giuliani’s did. I think the delegates knew it, too, and gave McCain credit for it. McCain’s own instincts, and bad advice, have foiled him before. But he just made a plausible claim on the party’s nomination for 2008.

Um, no, he didn’t. As a US Senator of the Republican Party his support of the President and his policies and of Republican values has been lukewarm at best. What he may have done is paid the dues necessary to keep his Senate seat. He has a long way to go before he should even be remotely considered as a Republican candidate for President. It’s a real shame to see someone at National Review hoodwinked by one speech from a man who has made a name for himself by trashing his own party.

More on the first nonviolent peace activist

Just ran across more thoughts to share with the lady protester who I took the photo of on July 30 who was of the opinion that Jesus was the first nonviolent peace activist. Here is some of the wisdom of the Man, or Son of Man.

Luke 22:36

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Presumably He must have considered a sword pretty important if He suggested trading the shirt off one’s back to get one. And apparently the right to keep and bear arms in the Second Amendment is redundant – it’s a commandment of the Christian religion that the Founders shared and so presumably covered under the First Amendment.

That He suggested keeping track of their purse and scrip indicates that perhaps He wasn’t so totally opposed to money as some would have it either. Yes, He drove the moneychangers from the temple because the temple was God’s place, not theirs. Anyway, enough religious speculation from this sinner for today.

What did the 9-11 Commission say about Saudi Arabia?

What did the 9-11 Commission say about Saudi Arabia?


According to the 9-11 Commission: …”no evidence that any flights of Saudi nationals’ took place before the reopening of national airspace on the morning of September 13, 2001.”

“the FBI conducted a satisfactory screening of Saudi nationals who left the United States on charter flights.”