Political Affiliations
Freedom News
Freedom News
Archives
February, 2012
January, 2012
December, 2011
November, 2011
October, 2011
September, 2011
August, 2011
July, 2011
June, 2011
May, 2011
April, 2011
March, 2011
February, 2011
January, 2011
December, 2010
November, 2010
October, 2010
September, 2010
August, 2010
July, 2010
June, 2010
May, 2010
April, 2010
March, 2010
February, 2010
January, 2010
December, 1969
|
November 1st, 2011
A pregnant woman and her husband in Honolulu, Hawaii were handcuffed and arrested after being detained by a Safeway supermarket for unintentionally not paying for a couple sandwiches totaling $5. Their daughter was taken away and was in state custody overnight.
I’m not a lawyer, and don’t have the answers theses questions, but I would like to know:
- What right does a private security person have to detain you?
- Why were they still detained after it was obvious that it was a mistake?
- Why were they still arrested after it was obvious that it was a mistake?
- Why were they still detained after they tried to pay for the damn sandwich in full?
- Why were they still arrested after they tried to pay for the damn sandwich in full?
This is a failure not only of law and law enforcement, but of this stupid supermarket chain. Why on earth would your policy be to arrest people for honest mistakes and then refuse to let them make it right by refusing payment? I really hope that Safeway suffers loss of business and protests for this.
Unfortunately, this sort of thing is not unheard of. You would think that businesses of any size would, all things being equal, desire good relations with the public. Imagine you or someone you know being arrested unfairly after being detained/turned in by a business. They would tell many of their friends. They may even get on Facebook and tell a hundred or a thousand. You would think that Safeway would not want that sort of bad publicity. It can’t be good for sales!
Why is it that we have to worry about not only government tyranny, but also corporate tyranny? In part, because government tyranny enables corporate tyranny! Why was the store security person not instead charged with false imprisonment and arrested? Must we submit to not only government law enforcement officers, but private “security” personnel working for any business? Are we such sheep in America now that we’ll let anyone in professional attire be gods over us?
Pregnant mom says sandwich arrest was ‘horrifying’ (Yahoo! News)
Posted in Corporate Tyranny, News, Opinion & Information | No Comments »
September 30th, 2010
I love to ask taboo, but extremely important questions. One of very few cherished principles in America, that it seems everyone agrees on (and you’re demonized if you don’t) is that everyone can vote once they reached 18. But if you step back and think about this, it’s very, very irrational. It is beyond absurd to believe the average person has any idea about how a nation, foreign policy and the economy should be run.
The founding fathers only intended for landowners to vote. That might be roughly comparable to the idea of a millionaire today. It is certainly no guarantee the person will have any sense, but it’s something. I do certainly agree that all races should vote. As with slavery, that was a severe blemish and contradiction in the founding of the United States to begin with. Equal rights is one of the very, very few improvements the U.S. has made on freedom since it’s founding.
John Stossel asks if some people are too dumb to vote. Personally, I think the criteria should be less about knowing facts and more about deep understanding about how the government, foreign policy and the economy works.
What if you had to be 30 to vote? How about 40? Maybe people that get too old and senile shouldn’t vote either?
Just something to think about.
The hard truth is, that there is much more that makes America work (or did make America work when America worked) than Democracy. Why is it so taboo and unacceptable to question whether most people have any mental capability to determine how best to run a nation?
Posted in News, Opinion & Information | No Comments »
September 27th, 2010
A Facebook post from a young conservative serious about freedom responds to Republicans’ recent “Pledge to America” and other promises that we real freedom-lovers are hesitant to believe:
“Promises promises. Forgive us Libertarians, libertarian-leaning conservatives, etc. for being skeptical… this song and dance has been done before (granted, without the same publicity).
Maybe I am conflating the GOP leadership and John Q. Republican a bit, but honestly, from what I’ve seen locally, with Republicans and Tea Party folks, they’re still for all the same things they were back when Bush was President (not to mention them being xenophobic as hell and eerily theocratic). Granted, I’ve heard Tea Party’s elsewhere are more “Goldwater-esque” and less focused on extreme social conservatism. But I’ve only heard one out of thousands of Tea Partiers even mention the name “Barry Goldwater”, much less know enough about him to say what they agree or disagree with him on. They all still seem to have some fetish about Reagan, which is the same fetish Republicans have had for years. Not to mention that it’s mostly and over-40 crowd, so you know they won’t stand for any badmouthing of their precious socialistic Social Security and Medicare, which my generation will be getting the hard, unlubricated shaft on.
Honestly though, with all the “Tea Party Candidates”, I’m not impressed, at all. I can overlook a little pandering here & there (at this point, Rand Paul has wore that one out, Mr. NeoCon-lite is going to drag his family name down down down), and I’ll ignore a candidate’s strongly held beliefs that masturbation is evil, or whatever moral high horse they want to get on… but if they’re not going to actively fight against big government, against ruinous foreign interventionism, against socialistic collectivism creeping in everywhere, against the Federal Reserve and Fiat Currency, and support free market economics (REAL free markets, not the neo-Keynesian corporatism and protectionism that both parties love so damn much), then what’s the point in placing one ounce of hope in them?
Yeah, maybe I’m being too harsh, but I believe my skepticism is entirely rational. Don’t get me wrong, I’d LOVE, absolutely LOVE to be pleasantly surprised by these folks, and see the GOP turn into a Goldwater-Conservative party, and/or move significantly back to the ideals of the “Old Right”. Now, I definitely have my issues and problems with the “Old Right”, Paleocons, and Conservatism in general, but if you guys pull off the whole “change the GOP from within” thing, I’ll be the first to eat crow. I just don’t see any rational reason to think that this new batch of Republican “reformers” won’t be any less two-faced or less impotent than the last several batches.”
Posted in Conservative, Opinion & Information, Republican, RINOs & Neo-Cons, Tea Party | No Comments »
March 27th, 2010
 Mitt Romney, Socialist Neo-Con This is why, for the first time in my life, I may vote for a Libertarian or Tea Party presidential candidate the next election instead of a Republican. What are Republicans anymore? Most Republicans nowadays seem to be the great compromisers, only pretending to resist the liberal/socialist agenda. This is also why I would never, ever vote for Mitt Romney specifically:
Obama’s health insurance rule – it was a GOP idea
I will give credit where credit is due, so thanks to the liberal journalist for calling attention to Romney’s betrayal of freedom. During the presidential campaign, I already knew about Romney’s support of socialist healthcare as Governor of Massachusetts, but thanks to some liberal journalists and bloggers, now more are aware.
If Republicans have a candidate as true-to-principles as Ron Paul or someone similar the next round, I’ll probably vote Republican, otherwise I’ll vote Libertarian or Tea Party. Obviously, I’m just one voter, but I am certainly not the only one feeling this way. The GOP needs to change it’s attitude and approach ASAP.
It angers me when Republicans say we don’t need a third party…. well, apparently we do (if nothing else, to keep them in line), and it’s all their fault. I appreciate the idea of banding together in numbers/votes with the side with similar-enough views, but enough is enough, and Republican efforts have not been good enough. I really hope the GOP wakes up fast and reinvents itself overnight, purging itself of those that have helped destroy the party’s image and the nation.
As Judge Napolitano points out, both the Democrats and Republicans have become big government parties. They just have different approaches and agendas. Now that I allow myself to see the reality, Republicans are just bringing about a dominating socialist police state that controls and meddles in every aspect of your life and business a little slower than the Democrats would.
The GOP needs to decide, do they want the votes of the RINOs & Neo-Cons or we Libertarian types? I don’t know which group is the bigger loss or gain, statistically-speaking (for the party and voting numbers), but how about this concept: just do the right thing!
Posted in Conservative, Healthcare, Libertarian, Opinion & Information, Republican, RINOs & Neo-Cons, Tea Party | No Comments »
July 26th, 2009
 Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr. I find it hard to imagine any justified reason to arrest an old man at his own home, unless he is threatening harm to the officers or others.
But… I don’t see any reason to think this was a racist incident. Unfortunately, even in America, cops “power-trip” all the time. I think the professor was no more likely to have been arrested being black as he would have if he were white or any other race. So I think the professor and especially the President of the United States were irresponsible, or at least irrationally paranoid, to imply this was racial profiling or a racist incident.
And as has been pointed out, the professor, Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr., certainly wasn’t looking to avoid trouble when he handled the situation in such a belligerent, uncooperative manner. That doesn’t make the arrest justified, however.
The policemen state that they were following procedure, and I believe them. But I don’t think someone should be arrested because of their attitude, because they’re pissing off the policeman or any other childish game of wits. There should be clear reasons for arrest, use of force, search, etc. and maybe they need to better screen policemen for the job if some of them can’t handle such logic. So, if this falls within procedure, they need to change procedure and possibly the law.
Now I believe there are many good cops out there that still have a high degree of common sense. You should be respectful of law enforcement no matter what, but at the same time know your rights if an officer goes too far. We need great policemen, we need to respect them and we need them to be very responsible, have common sense and not go too far, nor do too little. We need to teach our children to trust and comply with policemen as a base attitude, but it is absolutely critical that policemen in America remain worthy of that trust.
And again, what does this have to do with racism? Not a damn thing as far as I can tell. Now I’m not saying the professor doesn’t have reason to be a little paranoid or on-edge regarding racial profiling. He probably does have good reason. I haven’t had the same experiences as him, so I can only judge so far.
Posted in Libertarian, News, Opinion & Information, The U.S. Constitution | No Comments »
|
|
