The Health Fascists Keep on Coming

Is anyone surprised that the NYC health fascists are once again (see here and here for previous health fascist activity) on the move seeking to ban the use of trans-fatty acids. Once they stormed the gates of liberty and banned smoking in private establishments everything became fair game. Rest assured that this is just the beginning, a logical next step is to say that if the government can ban the use of a food substance in a private business then it can ban it completely and/or file child abuse charges against parents who allow their child to eat or drink it. Just think about the government coming in to lock up or fine grandma when she makes some good ole fashioned fried chicken or pie crust with animal lard instead of a “government approved” cooking oil for the grandkids.

Read more!

Wine and Beer Way too Queer

For those of you not intimately familiar with the puritanical and protectionist oriented alcoholic drink laws in Oklahoma then illuminate yourself by reading this article.

Originally OK's alcohol restrictions surely had moral and religious roots solidified by the first "victory" in the "War on Drugs", i.e. prohibition. However, when reading the above referenced article it becomes obvious that this is no longer the case. Today liquor store owners, via rent seeking, have held on to and hope to hold on to the wine, beer (above 3 point), and liquor monoply that so benefits then at the cost of consumers.

Quote from the article:

"Allowing wine sales in grocery stores means opening the doors to big business, Richard said. “All this is somebody trying to get into our back yard at our expense,” he said.

It is so depressing when people think freedom and liberty means the ability to use government to protect your way of business at the cost of the economy as a whole and, most importantly, the right of individuals to enter into competitive business and offer goods and services (in this case the ability to sell beer and wine in a place other than a liquor store) that may or may not be better or worse than the already established business (liquor stores). Besides where is the horrendous economic conditions in the other 40 some odd other states that allow grocery stores and others to sell 5 point beer (and cold at that so all the poor people can get drunk a lot faster than in Oklahoma) and wines???

While the OK restrictions are bad, Viriginia and their communist style state-run liquor stores aren't much better.

Read more!

Manufactured Rage Strikes Again

By now most people have heard about some comments from the Pope where he quoted a Byzantine emperor who most likely was not too fond of Islam as he knew it and was actually speaking of the evil of spreading religion by the sword. Now, of course, there is rioting and gnashing of teeth in parts of the Muslim world, all directed towards the Pope (even though the churches burned in Palestine were not even Catholic).

The issue is not about the Pope and his comments. If it was then the ones that disagreed with his comments would address the issue directly by refuting them in one way or another (for example. the government of Kazakhstan does not like what the Ali G character, Borat says about Kazakhstan so the Kazkh government has taken out ads in major U.S. publications to give a different perspective, even though Borat has probably done nothing but positive things by Kazakhstan by making people aware that the country exists).

The point is with the Pope controversy is that no matter what the Pope says or will say, the Muslim rage, hate, and violence will never be content because they only demand complete subservience to their world view and anything less is unacceptable.

Here is a quote that helps make my point:

"Whoever insults the message of Mohammed is going to be subject to capital punishment."

"I think that warning needs to be understood by all people who want to insult Islam and want to insult the prophet of Islam."

Read more!

Health Fascists Strike Again

Madrid’s regional government has issued restrictions on overly thin models from participating in Madrid’s fashion show, Pasarela Cibeles. Similar to the fanaticism displayed by anti-smoking activists, the government officials have made these requirements all in the name of “health”. I would enjoy seeing pictures of the government officials who came up with this restriction, surely they are pristine examples of health, envious over-weight bureaucrats could never think of doing such a thing. I have always maintained that the ban on second-hand smoke in private businesses, a despicable assault on private property rights, sets up a precedent for more governmental control over our private lives all in the name of “health”. From the article:

"If they [fashion show] don't go along with it [ban on skinny models] the next step is to seek legislation, just like with tobacco," said Carmen Gonzalez of Spain's Association in Defense of Attention for Anorexia and Bulimia, which has campaigned for restrictions since the 1990s.

Read more!

State of Responsibility

The concept of personal responsibility does not seem to be too complicated, if something happens and the result is of your own planning or lack of planning then you should be responsible for the situation, i.e. not expect others, especially the government to come in and save the day.

Well, obviously this principle is in a state of disrepair in the United States according to a recent survey. When asked who should bear the most financial responsibility for areas affected by natural disaster, 47% said the federal government, 23% said local agencies, and only 19% named individuals.

What is the threshold for a natural disaster? If a tree falls over and destroys someone’s house, who should be responsible? If a series of trees in a tree dense neighborhood falls and destroys a few houses, who should be responsible? If a storm with severe winds blows down hundreds of trees that destroys hundreds of houses in a city, who should be responsible? The point is that regardless of the scale, why should the government give handouts to individuals that, in most cases, made a poor decision to not obtain insurance to protect their property in the case of a natural disaster (I am especially distressed at the idea of helping those who are living in government subsidized housing). In a free society people should be allowed to take risks and live in locations that are dangerous/prone to natural disasters, however, in a free society, government should have no right to plunder people’s income and redistribute it to cover the losses of the irresponsible.

Ronald Reagan had a famous quote: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help’.”

Read more!

Don't Cry for Mexico

I guess the people in the below picture are crying because Mexico’s new President, Felipe Calderon, has not made promises to plunder The Rich™ in order to provide The Poor™ with a bunch of handouts. At least in Mexico these people are sad because they had hope for legalizing such a large theft transfer from one income group to another. In the U.S., however, we would have seen people ready for a revolution because a “right” was no longer going to be offered to them.

Before Mexico’s election we heard Calderon’s opponent, Lopez Obrador talk about his respect for democracy and how he would not cause problems in the case of a close election we have Obrador saying the following:

"I do not recognize someone who tries to act as the chief federal executive without having a legitimate and democratic representation," he told thousands of supporters in Mexico's main Zocalo plaza who chanted: "Felipe, the people don't want you!" [TT: if all legal means have upheld the election and no international observer questions the validity of the vote and there is no proof of fraud, how can you not be legitimate?]

One random thought to ponder: Did Obrador make certain promises to certain powerful figures that he could only keep if elected President which is the reason he is not stopping in his attempt to challenge the election?

ALEXANDRE MENEGHINI: AP

“Supporters of presidential candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador weep outside the electoral court's offices in Mexico City on Tuesday after hearing of a decision benefiting Felipe Calderon.”

Read more!

Immigration: No Crisis to be Found

Reason magazine recently published a great collection of articles focusing on the ‘crisis’ known as illegal immigration. The articles are a must read for anyone who is interested in a more libertarian perspective on immigration.

I have a new policy of asking people who are ‘so serious about stopping illegal immigration and closing the border’ the question: In what way has illegal immigration affecting you or you family in a negative way? The obvious answer is: that it hasn’t.

As far as I am aware of the one documented account of a terrorist being caught or known to have tried crossing the border into the U.S. to commit an act of terrorism was from Canada.

Read more!