Tuesday, January 12, 2016

RAND PAUL BANISHED TO THE KIDDIES TABLE. THE LIBERTARIAN MOMENT PASSED WITH THEIR GAY MARRIAGE AND LEGAL POT VICTORIES

By GOP debate rules Kentucky senator and eye doctor Rand Paul, son of the anti-Federal Reserve firebrand, retired congressman Ron Paul, has been relegated to the kiddies table. This is for good reason.


Right now, Rand Paul would be a horrible president at this time of his life, horrible. Rand Paul is another one of these Koch-brothers pseudo-libertarians, which really makes him a Rockefeller Republican. For more on the Koch-brothers pseudo-libertarians, see my works:



I don't want to get you bogged down in details, but true libertarianism boils down to liberty over duty and right. In short, libertarianism means living by fewer laws and thus fewer rights and duties. Adding ever more rights and duties is how you lessen freedom and expand political control over everyone through legal means!

And to show you that organized libertarians aren't libertarians at all, In Rand Paul vs. The Libertarian Moment (Dec. 15, 2015), libertarian leader Nick Gillespie applauds his gang of libertarians for already having "an effect on politics (think pot legalization, gay marriage (legalization)." And what these jokers have done for smoking pot and licensed marriages for queers, libertarians now want to grant foreigners rights and impose duties upon you.

Rand Paul is one of these guys. Rand Paul is for wages-killing open borders and thus Paul stands against capitalism. In an interview with Andy Hallman who is part of the foolish Open Borders project, Rand Paul revealed his true colors:

Andy Hallman: "The short version of our exchange is this: I asked [Rand Paul] why the government could not exempt immigrants from welfare if that was the case. [Rand Paul] seemed open to the idea of unlimited immigration provided the immigrants came to work and not go on welfare, and suggested cutting welfare and opening the borders in the same stroke is not so easy."

Rand Paul: "We’re a country of 300 million, it would be a bit disruptive to have 600 million people show up, so it has to be an orderly process..."

It should be clear, Rand Paul on supporting massive immigration. By his own words, Paul says that Americans should double our population!

Paul says nothing about limiting foreign-born nationals as a percent of native-born U.S. citizens to 5% in any year, tops.


Paul goes onward to say this shocker:

"I’m for as many people coming to work who want to. I’m for an expansive work visa program where we don’t mind people coming to work."

So there you have it. Rand Paul is for unlimited work visas for foreigners! In short, Rand Paul says that you should pay taxes and lower your wages and thus living standards so foreigners can come to the USA and suppress your wages and maybe even take away your jobs.

Elsewhere, Rand Paul said this:

"When I think of immigration, I think that you do have to have a secure border, but I don't automatically think that immigrants are bad people. I think the opposite. I think of my great-grandfather, who came here from Germany, and I think that most immigrants come here seeking the American dream. And I'm not going to vilify all immigrants with a broad brush. I think there are some bad people--and I put in legislation on the sanctuary cities to try to make sure that never happens again, but I think by and large, the people who come to our country want the American dream."

Rand Paul supports the the Foreigner's Dream. Rand Paul believes the American Dream should be dreams of foreigners. Rand Paul doesn't support the the true American Dream.

The true American Dream is for an Americans to enter the middle class. As a son of the Massachusettes Bay Colony, I say the American Dream is for Americans — to become middle class through personal effort under a government of constrained politicians.

In, BUT WERE YOU EVER IN THE MIDDLE CLASS?, I gave you the true meaning of middle class —  those who earn 51% of their income from labor and who are free-and-clear title owners to an improved parcel. In short, if you're middle class, you own a house outright and you work for most of your income.

The USA never has been a nation of immigrants like Rand Paul's great-grandfather. In THE BIG LIE: AMERICANS ARE A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS, I reveal to you the data which easily refutes the big lie. Also, the data suggests the best years of American life, when the economy really grew and living standards rose, always happened when immigration kept the foreign-born well under 10% relative to the total population.

And here, Paul says he is for amnesty but he calls it something else:

"If we secure the border and we can say who is coming, who is going, and only people come, come legally, the 11 million that are here, I think there could be a work status for them. But I am open to immigration reform. I voted against the bill that came forward, though, primarily because it limited the number of legal work visas."
Real life is about your self-preservation and self-interest. Why would you want to pay taxes to import your own job competitors and job competitors for your offspring?

Rand Paul doesn't understand commerce and thus the whole of the economy. Rand Paul has an undeveloped, immature understanding of capitalism and commerce, both insular and foreign. It is all too clear that Rand Paul doesn't get capitalism at all.

In SOPHIE'S CHOICE OF CAPITAL OR LABOR. A FREE-MARKETS LIBERTARIAN BECOMES AN ANTI-CAPITALIST AND PERPETUATES AN ECONOMICS MYTH, I showed you that an increase the working-age population at an increasing rate relative to the return to extant capital, you get less capital. As capital is the sole source of wages, you get lower wages on falling capital.

Capitalism is about increasing returns to capital under efficiency. Increasing the working-age population destroys that return and leads to less capital. As capital is the sole source of wages, less capital means lower wages.

Guys like Rand Paul don't really understand capitalism because they don't really understand the capital part of capitalism. They don't understand how the return to capital is the key to wages and how growing your working age population at too fast a rate kills the return to extant capital and thus causes the capitalism death spiral.

For more on capitalism and what Rand Paul does not understand see my important works:



Paul also wants open borders and free trade agreements with countries that lack significant capitalism, the net result of which kills high-paying jobs for Americans. It's little wonder why Trump is winning (see: WHY TRUMP IS WINNING. THE REST ARE INTERNATIONALIST SELLOUTS WHO STAND AGAINST WORKING-CLASS AMERICANS).

Besides, Paul has no shot at winning against Hillary even if he were to win the GOP nomination precisely because he is a pseudo-liberarian, pro-open borders candidate. Rand Paul never could win the white, no-college grad vote, which is the vote that will decide this election (see: NO ORDINARY WHITE GUY COULD EVER HOPE TO WIN THE U.S. PRESIDENCY IN 2016 AND MAYBE NEVER AGAIN. THE GOP WILL BE OVER SOON ENOUGH).

American Libertarianism is little more than libertines who support big business and oppose welfare. It's the worst mix of ideological doctrines. The kind of mix American Libertarians support is what you would have seen in the failing days of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe communism — inefficient, big business combined with laziness and debauchery of a corrupt people.

American Libertarians don't understand the United States at all, not from its founding and not its present state. 

For more on Rand Paul's publicly-expressed stupidity on immigration, read On The Issue's Rand Paul on Immigration.











Read more ...

Sunday, August 24, 2014

OBSESSED WITH ALL THINGS ME, THE LOSERS AT REASON.COM WHINE OVER ME OWNING REAL ESTATE IN THEIR MINDS

Check out screenshots of the goofy exchange among the silly libertine progressives at Reason.com obsessing over all things me.

Here we see "Gilmore" trying to scratch a few brain cells together to sleuth.




Here you see other Reason.com geniuses lamenting my censorship by their cult handlers at Reason.com, not because they don't want me stifled, but because now, I own pieces of their minds. At least one mistakes me for "Mary" whoever she is.



Here, the clever-by-half Francisco believes he has me sussed merely because I mentioned marionettes. Meanwhile, I've been using the words as strings, dance marionette troll defense long before most of these Reason comment geniuses could even use a keyboard.


Gilmore pipes up to say that libertarianism is meaningless, effectively suggesting that its OK to claim to be libertarian if that is helpful to push one's liberal progressive agenda of legalized gay marriage, legalized pot smoking, legalized illegal aliens.


Alas, to the Gilmores of this world, concepts, definition and meaning are irrelevant as long as he can kick back in his mommy's basement and smoke bong hits all day without fear of being arrested while spewing blather-fueled comments on Reason.com. Now, if only prostitution were legalized so he could no longer fear getting arrested.

The psychology of group dynamics always amuses. To keep group cohesion and to gain status among peers, it is far too easy to attack the outsider who brings forth an alternative. Rather than struggle to refute truth, going for ad hominem against the outsider is far easier.

The regular commenters at Reason.com, the true definition of trolls living under the proverbial bridge of pseudo-libertarianism that is Reason.com, hope to gain status among their peers of toadies by attacking an outsider, in this case me. The cheap attacks come easy as these Reasonvoids hide behind LCD screens, flexing keyboard muscles. In real life though, likely these mice scurry away from adults fearing interaction.

Cult dynamics are fun to observe. The handlers at Reason.com are masters at it. They continue to forge group cohesion by spinning the same reinforcement stories — (1) arrested parents over free-range kids, (2) horrible abuse by cops during arrests, (3) free association commercial discrimination of homosexuals by religious zealots, (4) the plight of law-breaking illegal aliens.

Editors of Reason.com pick and choose articles for publication to push the agenda of the major contributors, not unlike lobbyists who push their agenda with legislators.  The cult handlers of Reason.com preach a  progressive, liberal social agenda to gain support for a big business agenda. It should be clear to all that pushing for legalization for gay marriage, for pot smoking, for illegals, is the opposite of libertarianism.

The editors at Reason.com aggressively court those of the so-called Millennial Generation. They are fond boosting stories that appeal to young men already softened by progressive, liberal public education — legalizing drugs, legalizing gay marriage, legalizing illegal aliens. The editorial board consistently panders to pot-smoking 20-dumbthings who prove to be easy pickings as their liberal public education masters have already soften them to the ideas of gay marriage and illegal aliens become legalized immigrants.

When those indoctrinated are in the throes of indoctrination, when having been told truth about existence, something in their minds catch a glimpse of this truth. Yet, through the forces of cognitive dissonance, they fight truth, going all out to defend the wall of their false beliefs precisely because the truth conflicts with their indoctrination.

Still, for those interested in authentic libertarian thought, you can find quality on the Internet, including right here at Bizarro Theater.

In the end, it's fun knowing I own pieces of real estate in all of their minds, however suffering they are from mind disorder owing to the pernicious effects of hyper indoctrination.

At least the geniuses at Reason.com are hot-linking to my blog, unwittingly sending me traffic.



Read more ...

Saturday, August 23, 2014

WHOA DUDE, WHAT? LEGALIZING ISN'T LIBERTARIAN? PASS ME THE BONG. GOO GOO GOO JOOB.

So today, editors at Reason.com published yet another indoctrination piece by Reasonoid cultie handler Shikha Dalmia, this time about the failings of the political establishment to understand 20-somethings in America, or those wrongly dubbed Millennials as they're were born seven years before the start of the new millennium.

"...they are aspiring entrepreneurs who want worldly success—along with legal pot." ~ Shikha Dalmia



Legal pot isn't what authentic libertarians want. Legal pot expands the size and scope of government, without doubt, an anti-libertarian result.

Libertarians seek fewer laws thus to live by liberty, also said in freedom, or that realm where politicians are content to leave alone anyone.

Legalization requires law. Law imposes duty and right. There can be no right without duty, no duty without right. There can be no law without matching duty and right.

Legalization adds law. Legalization doesn't subtract law.

Pushing for legalization pushes against libertarianism. No one can claim to be libertarian and also advocate for more law. Doing so would be the same as claiming to be on a diet and then doubling one's caloric intake.

Removing the law from the books is the libertarian act. Substituting one law for another is mere tweaking control and leaves power in place.

Take driving and flying. Once there were no laws with respect to driving or flying. Americans were at liberty to drive or fly. Americans had no duty not to drive or fly without license and politicians lacked any right to prosecute through their agency, anyone driving or flying. And then politicians legalized driving and flying.

Legalization isn't decriminalization. Only when laws that impose criminal liability thus giving right of prosecution to the agency of legislators get repealed, do previously deemed criminalized acts become decriminalized.

In 2012, voters in Colorado and Washington passed ballot initiatives legalizing marijuana for adults 21 and older under state law in their respective states. Long ago, Congress decreed that marijuana is a dangerous drug and that the illegal distribution and sale of marijuana is a serious crime.

What happens when someone in Colorado grows seven plants and gets caught by Colorado authorities? What happens when someone gets caught with one dram or even one grain over one ounce if the authorities so desire to measure? What happens if someone trades pot for a power drill and later someone reports this trade to the authorities? What happens when someone grows more than he can smoke over time and he accumulates more than eight ounces and the authorities catch him?

It is illegal to possess more than one ounce of marijuana for recreational use. It is illegal to grow or cultivate seven or more marijuana plants. It is illegal to give away marijuana to other adults aged 21 and over without trading pot for cash or bank credits.

The Colorado legislators decreed that possessing more than eight ounces is a Class 5 felony. Those convicted face between one to three years in prison and fines between $1,000 and $100,000.

If anyone is caught using marijuana in public or having it out in the open, that one can be sentenced to an additional 15 days in jail. If this is their second offense or more, that one could face double the maximum sentence.

As well, according to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, pot remains a Schedule I controlled substance. Those who use, grow or sell marijuana remain at risk for prosecution. There is no defense against marijuana charges in federal court.

The 21st Amendment to the United States Constitution repealed the 18th Amendment, which had criminalized the production and sale of beverage alcohol. Until 2013, the residents of Alabama and Mississippi were prohibited from home-brewing beer. Those living in those states had to suffer 80 years of brilliant legalization.



If only we get the laws right this time... — well that is the mantra of every progressive liberal in the history of progressivism and liberalism in the age of scientism.

Libertarianism means living by few laws, hence having few duties to few corresponding rights. Libertarians advocate liberty, not legalization. Libertarians advocate freedom not rules-adherence to officialdom.

Those who advocate for more law are not libertarians. They might be indoctrinated into the false belief they are, but they're not. Every "legalize it" advocate is a liberal progressive and not a libertarian.

That is the problem with the culties at Reason.com. These culties are Rockefeller Republicans / (Bill) Clinton New Democrats.

Owing to the pernicious effects of hyper indoctrination, the culties at Reason.com have been trained  to believe, wrongly, of course, that anyone can become "freer". Anyone is either free or not free. There isn't such thing as degrees of freedom, statistics and mechanics notwithstanding.

Freedom is the virtual realm where no laws exist in the presence of government. Freedom is what speakers of Old French into English called liberty. Where there is law, there isn't freedom. Where there is law, there is duty and right, capacity, authority and power.

Words are the means to meaning. Words label concepts. Concepts are invariant. The culties at Reason.com might  not like these concepts freedom and liberty but never are their misuses of words going to erase those concepts from reality.

Giving anyone permission, license and the like fails to make anyone free. Such instruments give those who grant such control. No one can be free while also being under control.

Nothing shall change as long as many let themselves become indoctrinated to false doctrine as the pseudo-libertarians have at Reason.com. No one shall get free adding new laws.

REASONOIDS OF REASON.COM, AMERICA'S CRYPTO-REPUBLICANS


Corporation t-shirt, stupid bloody Tuesday. Now let's get our tans standing in the English rain.



Read more ...