Superb!

http://tim.movementarian.com/archives/000453.html

The Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution is literally the most damaging line in it. (second place is the “provide for the general welfare” line) Nearly every single market regulatory agency has its constitutionality built on that simple clause.

If I ever find the Founding Father who put that in there (and I have some suspicions), I will dig up his grave and give him a good kick in the head.

I have a special grievance with Mr. Lou Dobbs, on CNN. Normally I find CNN to be superior to the other 24 hr news networks, but Dobbs and Larry King disgust me.

The way Dobbs plugs the economic charlatanism of “protection” reminds me distinctly of the way Larry King provides an “understanding forum” for the charlatanism of “psychics” like Sylvia Brown.

Maybe it’s just me, but I sort of thought heros were people who managed to succeed as individuals, relying on their own hard work and ingenuity — rather than lobbying the government to force people to stop doing things they don’t like.

This is similar to how I feel about John McCain and his “standing up to special interests” with the Campaign Finance reform. Both are “heros” who have helped legislate freedom of choice and speech out of existence.

Indeed, and the ‘capitalist-friendly’ republicans are handing money out like it’s going out of style. But then again it only seems topsy-turvy if we haven’t been paying close enough attention; both sides of the aisle have been buying allegiances for decades, if not centuries. At the end of the day all there is is Statism, and the robbery to benefit a few in the name of the whole. Statist force to change and alter must be offered by a select few with inordinate power, otherwise it would be left to the majority to do as they please unencumbered. It passes because enough people have been conned that they get a net benefit by having official X and bureaucrat Y soaking up the mass’s funds and property. Seeming ‘contradictions’ such as this are cracks in the facade.

How can a party (such as the Democrats) support ‘workers’ in general, but be pro-race? Blue collar unionists can be some of the most racist people around, yet both are supposedly represented under the flag of the Democrats. The resolution? The Democrats are in it for themselves and only have to concede as much as necessary to secure votes. The ‘represented’? Conned. As for republicans, they talk a good game about low taxes but they don’t seem to do much about spending, so they can spend just as much for votes, especially those who think their vote is going toward fiscal restraint. Again, conned.

Seriously, is anyone thinking here? By refusing to allow the state to hire the cheapest workers possible, everyone will pay more to get the same basic services. Who’s interests are more important, the few (workers) or the many (taxpayers)?

Interestingly, this appears to be socialism turned on it’s head. In an attempt to promote fairness, we are punishing the entire public sector by protecting a handful of individuals. It vaguely resembles capitalism, but with none of the crunchy goodness of the free market!