The greatest moral argument for the free market is the freedom of individuals pursuing their hopes and dreams without government coercion or interference. Freedom is America’s greatest virtue and moral value. Freedom is a God-given right to every man and the inherent desire to be free from government oppression and coercion is so strong in man, he will die to get it and die to defend it. Many have died in the defense of American freedom and many have died trying to escape tyranny to reach a free America.
Defending freedom in peacetime has proven to be more difficult than in wartime. Government weasels its way into our lives with promises of making life better. The demagogues sell it, the gullible buy it. But trading one’s freedom for a “better life” government program, be it “The Great Society” or any the welfare program before or since, is always a losing transaction. The results of all these government social programs that manage people’s lives have been an increase in poverty.
Government never delivers “a better life”, only more restraint on individual freedom and the individual’s ability to improve his own life. Government was never designed to improve anyone’s life and doesn’t care about improving it. Government was designed to protect your freedom. Outside of its protective role, government creates poverty. The individual, not government, cares about to improving his life. The historical record shows that in the role of managing people’s lives, government always creates more poverty. But wealth is created by the free market, borne out by the historical record of America in the 1800’s until the early 1900’s.
Misapplied to the free market, the saying that “greed has little or no concern for the doctor patient relationship or the health of the individual” is actually a perfect description of how government works when it unconstitutionally meddles in our lives. Greed, corruption, and theft is found in greater magnitude in government than anywhere else. Government wants to insert itself into every facet of your life that it possibly can because it wants YOUR money and MORE power. The federal government is NOT your friend. It was never designed to be you friend and was never meant to be your friend.
Government Healthcare vs. Free Market healthcare
The feds’ desire to commandeer your healthcare has NOTHING to do with your health at all but it has everything to do with greed and avarice. A distant, bloated, and stupid bureaucracy with a bureaucratic head who wants to expand his fiefdom with more power and more of your money, inserts itself between you and your doctor while knowing and caring little about you or your doctor. Government healthcare is like turning your doctor’s office and hospital into the DMV. “Take a number. What? You’re dying? Sorry, we can’t do anything about that. Sit down, and shut up. Maybe we’ll call your number.” We need to get that.
We need to understand that federal meddling in healthcare is patently unconstitutional. That alone should be the end of the debate but, sadly, does not seem to be.
So we also need to understand what the free market is. The free market is the voluntary cooperation between buyers and sellers pursing their interests in the open competition of the marketplace. It is freedom in action. It is what made America the wealthiest and most powerful nation on earth until the feds unconstitutionally began weakening individual freedom in America since about the mid 1930’s.
The opportunities and incentives in the free market economy tends to bring out the best in people: initiative, imagination, ingenuity, inspiration and integrity all in the self-interest of free pursuits in the marketplace between buyers and sellers. Generally, a free people are strong morally, spiritually, and economically. America, especially in the 1800’s, is a good example of a market economy free from government interference where the average American was better off than those in other countries. Little, resource-poor Hong Kong is another example of the wealth created by a free market economy.
In contrast, a government command-and-control economy saps initiative because there is very little opportunity or incentive. That is why socialist countries around the world like Russia, China, and Mexico are so poor economically. In contrast to its generally backward poor agrarian economy, Communist China’s almost overnight successes in its “free-trade zones” like Shanghai show at least the potential of what free markets can do.
The best healthcare is where there is a direct relationship between the patient (buyer) who is free to choose his doctor, and the doctor (the seller) who is free to charge whatever he chooses. The patient searches for the best quality care for the best price and the doctor works to provide the best care for a reasonable price (else he will have few patients). This voluntary arrangement is what made healthcare in America the best in the world until the feds began mucking it up in the 1970’s.
Self Interest vs. Greed
Many have been brainwashed by leftist government schools about what self interest is and the difference between self interest and greed. Self interest is a God-given human trait that is necessary for self preservation and well-being. Self interest is healthy and is what drives the free market economy. The desire for profit is not greed. Everybody is born with a desire to profit. Don’t you want to profit in your endeavors? Of course you do. Everyone does.
Greed on the other hand is an unreasonable and excessive desire for wealth and power. The problem isn’t “greed” per se. That’s simply one of many human flaws. The problem is what’s implied when the incendiary word “greed” is used: the lust for wealth and power AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS – the exact definition of the corruption we have in today’s federal government. The lying leftist government schools make no distinction between self interest and greed and call all desire for personal profit “greed” – with one BIG exception: those in government. Somehow, those in government are angelic beings who have no desire to put food on the table for their families or have the finer things in life. But in fact we know those in government, especially career politicians, are the greediest and most corrupt group found anywhere. That is one reason Trump got elected.
So the lying leftist government schools conspicuously do not mention the greed of government officials, bureaucratic heads, and politicians in their lust for more and more power by essentially “legally” stealing more and more of your money. Eventually (we’re almost there) the government thinks ALL of you money actually belongs to them. If that isn’t greed, I don’t know what is.
Is there greed in the marketplace? Of course. Buyers and sellers are humans aren’t they? They are just like the humans that run the government except for a big difference. In the free and open marketplace, competitive forces will curb greed at the expense of others because buyers always look for the best quality at the best price. If you’re not careful, greediness can bounce you out of business. Many in the free market are there for healthy self interest. Some are there for greed. But in the free market it doesn’t really matter because the marketplace itself will weed out those who don’t perform honestly with quality products or services because again, buyers in their own self interest always look for value. You can only cheat for so long and then you’ll be gone.
Not so in government. Some politicians make a career of cheating the American people and often get promoted for doing so. All they have to do is lie to enough gullible people and hide their corruption and extortion. Happens all the time.
Government Corruption and Bribery Mislabeled “Crony Capitalism”
Bribes you say? “Crony capitalism” you say? Bad free enterprise and their bribes? Well think again. There is no such thing as “crony capitalism. Only CORRUPT GOVERNMENT. Free enterprise is not doing its job if it is not looking for every legitimate way to cut costs and increase revenues. If government is offering to give a business or an industry an edge through “subsides ” or flat-out bribes from special-interest lobbies, free enterprise would be negligent and stupid not to take advantage of such competitive edge. But on the government’s part, it is pure illegality and corruption. It is the bribe-taking feds that are committing unconstitutional acts and are outside the law. Get the feds out of the marketplace where they don’t constitutionally belong and all this special-interest crap and lobbyist bribes will be gone. That is the answer to government corruption mislabeled “crony capitalism”.
Freedom vs. Force
Government hates the free market because government hates freedom in general because freedom is the ABSENCE OF GOVERNMENT and its coercion. A major difference between the free market economy and government command-and-control economy and is the free market is voluntary – people exercising their God-given rights to their pursuits as they see fit – whereas the government is coercive and force is used with the threat of imprisonment.
Government is not your friend. It basically does one thing every well: force its will on others. If it is kept small and constitutional, that force can be for our good (ex. the local police). Our federal government was basically designed by the Constitution to do one thing: use force to protect us from invasion and incursion into our freedoms. Government is like a deadly wolf meant to protect us from our enemies but if it chews through its chain, it can turn and kill those it’s supposed to be protecting. That is what has happened in America. The feds have chewed through its constitutional chain and is poised to destroy our individual rights and freedoms.
Restoration of Our Free Constitutional Republic vs. “Conservative”
Whether all of this is “conservative” I don’t know. I don’t care about “conservative” whatever that is. I care about restoring our Free Constitutional Republic.
House Republicans made basic, easily avoidable errors on health care reform. Here’s how they can do it right on taxes. But will they?
The rule of law in America is the Constitution as written and originally understood and intended (U.S. Const. Art VI, Cl 2). The presumptions of the Constitution are contained in the Declaration of Independence which declares that the right to life, liberty, and free pursuits come not from man and his government but from God. The presumption of individuals being born with unalienable rights of life, liberty, and free pursuits means that government does not have inherent God-given rights to ANYTHING. God created man and his inalienable rights. Man created government.
This is a very important presumption, missed by many because it hasn’t been taught in government schools. It means that whatever God-given rights man does not delegate to the government does not legitimately belong to the government. The only valid and legitimate power a government has is derived from those individuals who wish to create that government. It means that if it is not a power expressly enumerated in the Constitution to the feds, it is not a valid or legitimate federal power. The power belongs to the states and the people (U.S. Const. amend. X).
This is the crucial presumption upon which the Constitution rests and is confirmed by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. It is also why the government through its Supreme Court has ignored the Ninth and Tenth Amendments because these amendments confirm strict constitutional limitations on the feds.
The Constitution stands opposed to any federal law that strays from its constitutionally restricted boundaries. The Constitution is the rule of law against the feds – it created and then delegated limited and enumerated powers to the feds. The Constitution is the feds’ Daddy.
We need to familiarize/re-familiarize ourselves with the Declaration of Independence (D of I) and the Constitution. The Constitution as written and originally understood and intended is the Supreme Law of the Land (Art VI, Cl 2). All valid laws of the feds must be “in pursuance” of the Constitution (Id). Those federal acts and laws that are constitutional, are also the supreme law of the land. Those federal acts and laws that are not constitutional are illegitimate, null, and void.
Federal acts and laws untethered to the Constitution are not the rule of law as so many think but are actually acts of tyranny. Any unconstitutional federal acts and laws are by definition acts of tyranny and our obedience to them is obedience to tyranny, not to the rule of law. Unconstitutional federal acts are the rule of man not the rule of law. We need to understand the difference between the rule of law which protects freedom and life, and the rule of man, which brings tyranny and death.
To restore our Free Constitutional Republic, we need to get a better understanding of what is ours in the Constitution. The Constitution is designed to protect our freedoms from the would-be tyranny of the feds.
The ONLY good, solid healthcare system that works for the most people AND is constitutional, is the market economy free of government interference. Nothing in this world is perfect and nothing will completely satisfy everyone, but freedom and the free market is way ahead of whatever’s in second place.
Legal argument: The Constitution does not authorize the feds to meddle in healthcare at all. The Constitution did not create a central government to satisfy everyone. The Constitution created a central government to protect God-given individual freedom to pursue life and happiness as each individual saw fit. Why has freedom from government become such a radical idea in America which was founded on the idea of individual freedom?
Economic argument: Why would anyone want to trade the best healthcare in the world which we had until the feds began interfering in the 70’s, for the DMV or the Post Office running healthcare? “Take a number, maybe we’ll get to you.” Who wants some stupid bureaucracy inserting itself between you and your doctor? No one would trade freedom for tyranny unless it crept in very slowly and gradually without anyone really noticing. Creeping socialism. That is the only way we’ve reached the point where we are now.
When did the feds start unconstitutionally meddling in healthcare? When did the cost of healthcare become a problem? Both the meddling and the problems began in the 70’s and it was causal, not coincidental. Everything in the free market the feds touch turns to dust and ashes. Common sense tells you that when a third party (the feds) inserts itself into a transaction, the transaction will cost more because you’re also going to have to pay the third party. In this case, the third-party interference of the feds requires massive skyrocketing costs in the creation of more new, bloated, useless, and unconstitutional federal bureaucracies. Common sense.
Repeal Obamacare (“Obamabuse”) with the goal of getting the feds out of the healthcare business altogether. Although certain protections may be necessary for a one-or-two-step repeal, the repeal should be speedy followed by a quick divestment of ALL federal government involvement in healthcare. I don’t really care how or what it takes to get there and/or what kind of political maneuvering will be necessary.
My concern is that so few understand the goal itself – that healthcare must be in the market economy free of government interference. If we don’t have the right goal, we’ll never reach it.
God, by your grace, restore our Free Constitutional Republic.
This article is from Hillsdale College’s Imprimis. To view the original, click here: Imprimis.
Our globalist leaders may have deprecated sovereignty since the end of the Cold War, but that does not mean it has ceased for an instant to be the primary subject of politics.
Here’s a dazzling thriller that will keep you glued from the first page to the last. It’s the perfect prescription for getting away from the unending, hyper-news-alert environment we’re trapped in today. You’ll never think of the Shroud of Turin the same way again. Buy it. You deserve the break!
This article is from Hillsdale College’s Imprimis. To view the original, click here: Imprimis.
The key to producing good intelligence lies in asking the right question, rather than in just poring over what’s been randomly collected in hopes that somewhere in the pile of reports and intercepts on your desk you’ll spot something important.
Ref: State of Washington vs Donald J Trump, et al. Judge Robart Presiding; Court rules in favor of the Temporary Restraining Order. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-kYOJPWlHQ
The Rule of Law
Before starting, we need to get straight what “the rule of law” means.
WHAT THE RULE OF LAW MEANS: In America, the rule of law means the Constitution. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and reigns supreme over ALL federal activity, legislative, executive, and judicial. Any federal law or federal court ruling that conforms with the Constitution is also the Supreme Law of the Land.
WHAT THE RULE OF LAW DOESN’T MEAN: It does not mean any old law or court decision the feds come up with regardless of its constitutionality. Unconstitutional federal laws and court decisions are THE RULE OF MAN and are, therefore, acts tyranny. Submitting to tyranny is NOT submitting to the rule of law. Resisting federal tyranny by offering constitutional rationale is conforming to the rule of law, similar to the justifications presented in the Declaration of Independence.
To start, let’s stop calling Trump’s Executive Order (EO) what it isn’t and start calling it what it is. Trump’s EO is not a “travel ban” as the Lying Leftist Media likes to call it. Trump’s EO 13769 is titled, “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States”. It is a temporary restriction on the immigration of potentially dangerous people. Trump’ EO is a “protection order”, not a “travel ban”.
The full title and text of Trump’s EO is in this Federal Register link. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/02/01/2017-02281/protecting-the-nation-from-foreign-terrorist-entry-into-the-united-states.
I see this case as a tangled mess. It would be easy to blame Trump’s advisers and lawyers for not heading off these activist judicial moves but that’s 20-20 hindsight. Here’s how I see what has happened and what I think should happen as things currently stand.
First issue (should have been easiest to resolve): The hearing for restraining order. This hearing should never have happened at all because of lack of either standing or a genuine dispute of a material fact (no evidence of irreparable harm). But it did happen and should have been confined to the merits of the motion to restrain which required irreparable harm for which the plaintiff offered no substantive proof. STOP. Case suld have been closed – no merit to issue a restraining order. Trump’s protection order should have continued in effect.
Second issue: The validity of Trump’s EO/protection order in light of the federal statute. The issue of the merits of Trump’s EO should never have seen the light of day in this restraining-order case. Nevertheless, the EO itself was argued before the judge. The statute on which Trump based his EO, U.S. Code Title 8, Chapter 12, appears to be contradictory. The opposition argued that Trump’s EO violated section 1152 (a)(1)(a) (the anti-discrimination clause) which appears to conflict with section 1182(f) (the authorization clause), the basis of Trump’s EO. This is a rabbit hole. The DOJ brought a well-laid-out argument that the anti-discrimination clause doesn’t apply to the authorization clause because otherwise it renders the authorization clause of no effect. No matter. The judge had obviously already made up his mind.
I’m not sure how Trump’s writing a new EO based only on the federal statutes would get around this anti-discrimination argument before a Leftist judge. He might try appealing to vacate the restraining order showing the plaintiffs had no evidence of irreparable harm. Maybe he could even try to turn the tables, find a friendly court, and sue for a restraining order against this and other attempts to restrain his EO by offering evidence that shows that preventing Trump’s EO/protection order would create irreparable harm by allowing an influx of dangerous immigrants into the U.S. Long shot.
Enter the third issue (should be the first issue, but more difficult to resolve): The Constitution. The overriding issue in ANY federal action is the Constitution. Here, the Constitution MANDATES federal action to prevent invasion (illegal and dangerous immigration is invasion) (Art IV, Sec 4) and there is no constitutional provision that the action must be non-discriminatory. Barring success in lifting the current restraining order, Trump should issue a new EO referencing Art IV, Sec 4 of the Constitution as authorization and proceed with the protection order.
Attempts to again restrain Trump’s new EO/protection order should be rebuffed because there is no genuine dispute of a material fact to restrain (no evidence the EO creates irreparable harm). If the EO is challenged in court on the merits, the judge would have a problem reconciling years of unconstitutional federal anti-discrimination law with the actual Constitution as written and originally understood and intended. Of course, the Constitution validly trumps unconstitutional federal law. If Trump could get the case into a federal court with a just judge, he could win. If not, then the case could go up to the Supreme Court. If Trump’s nominee, Gorsuch, isn’t yet nominated, then four out of eight Justices could rule against the clear constitutional mandate at issue here. That would mean no decision in an evenly-divided court and, thus, the lower court ruling would stand. At that point we would have a clear constitutional crisis.
Constitutional Crisis and Gambit: Sooner or later, we must confront the massive, ongoing constitutional crisis in the federal courts which long ago went way off the constitutional rails and are basically in free-form with no apparent limitations. IMO, this is where Trump should throw down the gauntlet: call the Leftist judiciary bluff by notifying them of the reasons Trump is constitutionally mandated to take this action pursuant to Art VI, Sec 4 and why the courts have not shown a valid constitutionally-based reason for preventing his immigration EO. Then continue implementing the EO declaring the court’s ruling null and void.
This would be one branch, the executive, notifying the other, the judicial, with a constitutionally-based explanation why the action of the judicial branch is unconstitutional and, thus, null and void. Maybe include in the notice a time period for the judicial branch to correct their error but IMO the executive branch should continue with this constitutional EO/protection order for the safety of the nation at least until receiving a legitimate response from the judicial branch that would contain sound constitutionally-based reasoning. Trump should also notify Congress to correct THEIR error as well with appropriate legislation pursuant to Art VI, Sec 4. Maybe NOW is the time for this.
Trump’s rejecting the unconstitutional decision by the federal judiciary would almost certainly trigger a Congressional move to impeach Trump. Such a move would be without constitutional merit as Trump is the only party in this case trying to uphold the Constitution. What is the constitutional standard for impeachment? “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Art II, Sec 4). What is the constitutional standard for treason? “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort” (Art III, Sec 3, Cl 1). By constitutional standards, if anyone should be impeached, it should be these judges blocking Trump’s protection order.
The answer is Trump should take his case to the American People citing Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution MANDATING the feds PROTECT the U.S. from invasion. Trump should urge his fellow Americans to call their congressmen to support his efforts to protect the American People and ask Congress to fix the existing law or pass a new one pursuant to Article IV Section 4. It’s a gamble but sooner or later, this showdown needs to happen. Who knows if or when our politically-vacillating Congress will nominate Gorsuch and there’s also the possibility Gorsuch could turn Left at the Supreme Court stop light as so many others have before him. Maybe now is the time. Now or never. If Trump took his case to the American People like he did during his campaign, I think he would win.
It’s time We the American People stand up for OUR freedoms and protection, OUR Constitution, OUR country, and OUR President. Trump wants to constitutionally protect America from invasion which is the first duty of the Federal Government and invasion is exactly what illegal and dangerous immigration is. Let’s pray that God will again help America here. Let’s do what we can to help Trump win and continue to make America great again.
Businessman-turned-U.S.-Senator David Perdue gives his blunt warning about the proposed 20% border sales tax. He warns his colleagues of how destructive this tax would be. Instead, we should focus on pure, economy-stimulating tax cuts.
From what I can tell, an executive order combines legislative and executive powers in one act and one office, the substance of a dictatorship. The Constitution does not allow the executive branch to make law.
“All legislative Powers granted herein shall be vested in a Congress of the United States…” (Art I, Sec 1 – U.S. Constitution).
From what I can tell, the only valid Trump executive orders may be those repealing Obama’s stench of unconstitutional executive orders.
It’s not enough to cheer Trump’s good intentions in wanting to right decades of wrong-doing by the feds. Constitutionally, HOW is just as, if not more, important than WHAT when it comes to federal action. Other than overturning Obama’s surfeit of unconstitutional executive orders, which of Trump’s executive orders are not unconstitutional and shouldn’t first be passed as law in Congress?
WE THE PEOPLE need to be more than semi-mindless cheerleaders for “our side”. We need to be watchdogs verifying the constitutionality of federal acts including those done by those we have elected. “Trust but verify”, Ronald Reagan said in reference to treaties which effectively is the same as electing government officials. “Trust but verify” is exactly what we the people should be doing with our elected officials including Trump.
Tyranny on the Right is just as dangerous as tyranny on the Left because “benevolent” tyranny will sooner or later become very malignant, malevolent, and deadly tyranny.
We the people must once again understand that freedom comes from the feds being constrained by the objective Rule of Law (in America that is the Constitution) and tyranny comes from the feds unrestrained and limited only by their own subjective whimsy and morality – the rule of man.
In America, the only legal bulwark of protection of our freedoms against the tyranny of the feds is the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution as written and originally understood and intended. Our job in re-birthing our Free Constitutional Republic beginning here and now, is to reinstate the Constitution front and center as the Supreme Law of the Land against the feds.