Daily P.Au.L - Peace | Gold | Liberty |
- Andrew Napolitano: WHAT If...? What if our democracy is a fraud?
- Boston Police Say Residents Do Not 'Need' to Own Shotguns, Rifles
- Justin Amash: The Man the Chamber of Commerce Can’t Beat
- The Utilitarian Argument for a State and where it Fails
- Statism is the Disease
- Laura Ingraham On O'Reilly: Rand Paul's Isolationist Foreign Policy Captures What Americans Are Feeling (VIDEO)
- The BRICS Bank Signals the End of the American Financial Empire and U.S. Dollar
- Press Release: University Silences Scientist After Dinosaur Discovery
- Is there legal recourse when NSA perverts spy on you naked?
- The time the United States blew up a passenger plane—and tried to cover it up.
| Andrew Napolitano: WHAT If...? What if our democracy is a fraud? Posted: 25 Jul 2014 08:22 AM PDT Part of Judge Napolitano's What If... Series essays Andrew Napolitano: WHAT If...? What if our democracy is a fraud? Andrew Napolitano | July 23, 2014 What if you were allowed to vote only because it didn't make a difference? What if no matter how you voted, the elites always got their way? What if the concept of one person-one vote was just a fiction created by the government to induce your compliance? What if democracy as it has come to exist in America today is dangerous to personal freedom? What if our so-called democracy erodes the people's understanding of natural rights and the reasons for government and, instead, turns political campaigns into beauty contests? |
| Boston Police Say Residents Do Not 'Need' to Own Shotguns, Rifles Posted: 25 Jul 2014 08:21 AM PDT by William Vaughns | July 25, 2014 Residents of Boston do not need shotguns or rifles, according to Boston Police Commissioner William Evans. Boston's top cop made that statement Wednesday on Boston Public Radio in response to Massachusetts state senator Stan Rosenberg's position that there are already "sufficient controls" on long guns at the federal level, giving no need for new state laws that grant police additional powers to deny ownership to citizens. According to WGBH, Evans responded: |
| Justin Amash: The Man the Chamber of Commerce Can’t Beat Posted: 25 Jul 2014 06:00 AM PDT "The annual parade and fair, which locals claim is the largest free fest of its kind, occupies most of the main street and all of a nearby park. By 11 a.m. the best seats along the parade route are taken, and the free sidewalk space has been chalked up, courtesy of a nearby church, with suggested prayers and Bible verses. As the crowd sweats, the grand marshal reminds everyone to return in August for a Vietnam veteran motorcycle ride. "They didn't really get the respect they deserved when they returned home," he says. "Let's make it up to them." |
| The Utilitarian Argument for a State and where it Fails Posted: 24 Jul 2014 09:59 PM PDT Most arguments for the existence of a State structured society boil down to a single premise - through the existence of a State, violations of Natural Law can can be minimized. For instance, "there will be less theft," "there will be less murder," and so on. On the whole, it is argued that, folks will be better off. This is the Utilitarian Argument for a State. Let's explore. The following figure demonstrates the proposition. In the absence of a State, society would arrive at a Natural Equilibrium where the inherent – yet informal – organization would result in some baseline level of violations against Natural Law – which can be assumed to be measured in some arbitrary units of value (i.e. money, emotional value, etc - shown as blue). When a State is put in place, money, sweat, tears, etc must be extracted from the populace to sustain its existence. Under the influence of a State, by Le Chatelier's Principle, the equilibrium level of Natural Law violations will be shifted – for the better or for the worse. Under a State, both of these must be assigned a value and, subsequently, added together. If the summed value falls below the Natural Equilibrium, the State could be said to be "worth it" (shown in dotted green) from the perspective of a cost-benefit analysis – whereas the red dotted line represents the case where the sum exceeds the Natural Equilibrium, and so, is "not worth it". |
| Posted: 24 Jul 2014 08:47 PM PDT |
| Posted: 24 Jul 2014 08:15 PM PDT BY FOX NEWS INSIDER Laura Ingraham was on "The O'Reilly Factor" to discuss if Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) can be a viable presidential candidate with his isolationist foreign policy, which departs from that of many of his fellow Republicans. Ingraham said Paul is capturing what a lot of Americans are feeling after wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus so many ongoing global conflicts. |
| The BRICS Bank Signals the End of the American Financial Empire and U.S. Dollar Posted: 24 Jul 2014 07:15 PM PDT What many of us here on the Daily Paul have been discussing for awhile goes mainstream. Most scoff at a competitor to the US dollar- that is based less on analysis than an inbred mentality regarding the strength of the dollar. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-nasser-h-saidi/the-brics-ba... |
| Press Release: University Silences Scientist After Dinosaur Discovery Posted: 24 Jul 2014 07:12 PM PDT 07/23/2014 |
| Is there legal recourse when NSA perverts spy on you naked? Posted: 24 Jul 2014 07:01 PM PDT In this episode of the Rare Report... Do you want the NSA looking at your naked body? Americans are fed up with the NSA–but are they ready to do something about it? Have we reached a tipping point? What legal grounds do we have against federal workers who pass around nude pics of us and our loved ones? Is it government's job to tell you what we should eat, drink, smoke and think? Shopping carts with Michele Obama telling food stamp recipients what healthy foods to buy? Is this for real? Should government control what they–or you–buy? Can you be a conservative without being a libertarian? Establishment Republicans are attacking libertarian conservatives like Rand Paul and Justin Amash every chance they get. But can you even be a conservative without, to some degree, being a libertarian? We take a hard look at the definition of conservatism and it's future. |
| The time the United States blew up a passenger plane—and tried to cover it up. Posted: 24 Jul 2014 06:31 PM PDT Fury and frustration still mount over the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, and justly so. But before accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of war crimes or dismissing the entire episode as a tragic fluke, it's worth looking back at another doomed passenger plane—Iran Air Flight 655—shot down on July 3, 1988, not by some scruffy rebel on contested soil but by a U.S. Navy captain in command of an Aegis-class cruiser called the Vincennes. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Peace . Gold . LOVE To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment