Reinke Faces Life

http://www.sokwanele.com/thisiszimbabwe/archives/658

***Begin Quote***

The price of jam (and what’s not for sale)

***End Quote***

Store shelves in hyper-inflation.

# # # # #

http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/9812692.html

Sep. 16, 2007
VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: New York Times parachutes into Vegas again to make stuff up

***Begin Quote***

… … the fruitlessness of laws that seek to ban consensual acts including gambling, self-medication and sex for hire?

***End Quote***

One really has to wonder about the people and their reps. Do they live in an alternative universe from the rest of us? In that alternative universe, maybe making gambling, drugs, and prostitution illegal stops real people from doing them, but not in the real world.

Making these illegal, ensure that the mob has a constant source of income. Make them legal, would put the mob in competition with a host of internet gambling sites, WalMart & many other “drug” stores, and bevy of “escort” services now legal.

Every time I hear of a person, usually a youngster, dying of a drug over dose or impurity in the stuff, I blame gooferment. If the stuff was legal, it would be USP certified and cheap. Then, we could focus on treatment. So, be ready, when you ask me if little kids should be able to buy “drugs”, my answer is that they do now. And, your stupid laws, that are attempting to legislate morality on other people by force of gooferment, are killing people.

Argh!

Join the real world, and let’s work on solutions that will really fix problems. If you’re going to stay in that alternative universe, then please keep your ideas from leaking in over here.

Double Argh!

# # # # #

http://www.nhinsider.com/matt-simon/2007/9/21/values-voters-get-earful-of-truth-from-ron-paul.html

Values Voters’ Get Earful of Truth from Ron Paul

***Begin Quote***

But anyway, I want to get back to the draft…

This is an issue where the pro-liberty position, the truly moral position, is painfully simple. If we are forced into a service for which we would not volunteer, then we do not own ourselves. If we do not own ourselves, we are not free people. This would have been a no-brainer for the founding fathers, who constructed our government based on the notion that individuals were born free and sovereign.

To the signers of the Declaration of Independence, it was “self-evident” that people were born with “inalienable rights” and that a legitimate government “derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.” Over time, we have been successful in extending the Declaration’s promise to individuals who happen to be female and/or non-white. But we’ve gone in a radically wrong directon on other fronts, and the draft provides a perfect example. Forced service is a form of slavery, period.

***End Quote***

It’s clearly an idea who’s time has past!

So why are the politicians afraid to end it?

It means jobs for their friends and relatives. Contracts for their contributors. And, more than anything, something they can pander about!

End the draft and draft registration now!!

# # # # #

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_253224943.html

Sep 10, 2007 11:57 pm US/Eastern
SHOCK: 95-Year-Old Woman Beaten In Manhattan
Police Say Robbery Was Motive, Have Suspect On Tape
Hazel Sanchez
Reporting

***Begin Quote***

(CBS) NEW YORK It’s happened again, an elderly woman has been beaten over a lousy purse. This time, the victim is 95 years old.

Police on Monday were looking for a man they say beat and robbed the woman right outside her 17th floor apartment. The incident happened around 2:15 p.m. at the East River Co-op on the Lower East Side.

The victim’s friends are shocked by the attack.

***End Quote***

I’m shocked.

Casablanca-style

<<< And, I am shocked, shocked, SHOCKED to find there is gambling going on at Rick’s cafe. Now where are MY winnings. ;-) >>>

I’m shocked that in the Pepuls Republik of Nu Yauk Titty that anyone would be surprised that the law of the jungle abounds. The strong take from the weak. Kill or be killed. Streets running with blood.

That’s the liberal paradise.

Even if you are the Good Samaritan passing one of these assaults, you have to have a death wish to become involved.

That’s where the War on Drugs and Gun Control gets you.

The war on drugs makes sick people turn to crime to afford their fix. And Gun Control disarms all the law abiding and turns them into victims.

Now visualize a Libertarian America. The drug addict would be able to buy their fix for modest sums. (Estimates say that MJ would be profitable at a penny a cigarette. Heroin would be akin to cough syrup; five bucks a bottle.) Charitable organizations would be offering drug treatment programs. Crime would be zero. Criminals would have to guess which victims were unarmed and do it in such a way that avoids a Good Samaritan. Criminals that guess wrong are “retired” from the business. We’d all be a lot better off and a lot safer.

So I’m shocked that more people don’t see that the meme of gooferment force just makes us all worse off.

Even a 95 year old can be trusted to defend themselves from the jackals in human form.

Just sprinkle a few sheep dogs among the sheep and crime will be very unprofitable. End the war on drugs and there’s no need for it either.

# # # # #

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0902korwin0902.html

Guns vital to our freedom, but schools demonize them
Alan Korwin
Special for The Republic
Sept. 2, 2007 12:00 AM

***Begin Quote***

Guns save lives. Guns stop crime. Guns protect people. Guns are good. Guns are actually fun when you go to a range and practice. You never hear about that in the news, though, because, like the education establishment, the news media basically has a zero-tolerance policy for stories that show the truth about guns. This is linked directly to student suspensions for gun sketches.

***End Quote***

Seems simple.

The police CAN NEVER stop crime. They just clean up. The people, the militia, are the the thing that stops crime.

The gooferment FEARS an armed citizenry since you can’t control an armed populace.

And, genocide requires disarmed people!

# # # # #

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/015045.html

September 03, 2007
Do the wrongfully imprisoned get compensation?
Posted by Stephen Carson at September 3, 2007 10:44 PM

**Begin Quote***

Dedge served 22 years of a life sentence for a rape all now concede he didn’t commit.

***and**

Prosecutors continued to oppose Dedge’s motions on sundry procedural grounds for three years, and, according to the Innocence Project site, went so far as to admit in court that they would oppose Dedge’s release “even if they knew that he was absolutely innocent.” Nice group of people.

***End Quote***

Ahh, the gooferment at its best!

# # # # #

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070830073724.ve9qnajc&show_article=1

Slow action faulted in Virginia Tech massacre
Aug 30 03:37 AM US/Eastern

***Begin Quote***

Virginia Tech was too slow to inform staff and students about a shooting incident in April that rapidly spiralled into the bloodiest campus massacre in US history, an investigation concluded Wednesday.

***End Quote***

Sorry, but the root cause was disarming those who wanted to defend themselves. They would have been in a position to defend the others.

Numbers I’ve read that about 10% of any large group will be armed if allowed to be.

(Based on my readings. I remember the Church break in story where the congregation of thirty people had three CCW holder in the crowd. And, the story where the down cop was protected by one armed bystander of about ten. It feels like its about 10% although on a raw number basis from permit issued versus the entire population in a subset indicates it could be higher.)

So of that class of thirty students where the bulk of the killing occurred, it would not be unreasonable to expect that there might be as many as three potential defenders. And, the gallant teacher that was killed! Surely he might have had a weapon given his life experience.

So, liberal disarm the population and then are astonished when bad things happen.

Imagine if one of those good kids was a “law breaker”. Imagine if he said “<insert favorite bad word here> it! I’m not going to be a sheep!”. Imagine the expression of surprise on the bad guys face if he had to face return fire! Assuming that our two lawbreakers were in that situation, who might be the better shot?

When they arrested our sheep dog for carrying an illegal weapon, who on the jury would say “no you should have died with the other 29”?

And, we wonder why the bumper stickers say “Better judged by 12 than carried by 6”.

So these delusional bureaucrats will blame “slow action” when the real problem was disarmament. Let’s sprinkle some sheep dogs in the flock of sheep and give the wolves a little surprise. If the bad guys are as cowardly as research tells us, we’ll see a huge drop in violet crime. There’s no profit in it. Guess wrong and you’re dead!

From an earlier blog post:

*** begin quote ***

I particularly like unlimited concealed carry. If the criminal regards the general public as sheep to be shorn, then let’s sprinkle in a few “sheepdogs” with big teeth in the flock.

Guess which gay to bash? Buzz, wrong, you picked a Pink Pistol and you’re dead!

Guess which woman to bash? Buzz, wrong, you picked a Paxton Quigly and you’re dead!

Guess which brown person to bash? Buzz, wrong, you picked a Massad Ayoob and you’re dead!

*** end quote ***

Overlay that strategy on the VT shootings and we might have a much better out come.

Remember another bumpersticker — dial 911 and die!

# # # # #

http://vtcommons.org/node/839

INSTANT WIRE TAPS: How the FBI Does It
Submitted by Rob Williams on Thu, 08/30/2007 – 10:06am.

***Begin Quote***

Maul Man says – So, Jason Bourne’s world is, in fact, the tip of the iceberg. From “Wired” magazine, courtesy of the ACME newswire. FOIA still lives – for now.

The FBI has quietly built a sophisticated, point-and-click surveillance system that performs instant wiretaps on almost any communications device, according to nearly a thousand pages of restricted documents newly released under the Freedom of Information Act.

The surveillance system, called DCSNet, for Digital Collection System Network, connects FBI wiretapping rooms to switches controlled by traditional land-line operators, internet-telephony providers and cellular companies. It is far more intricately woven into the nation’s telecom infrastructure than observers suspected.

It’s a “comprehensive wiretap system that intercepts wire-line phones, cellular phones, SMS and push-to-talk systems,” says Steven Bellovin, a Columbia University computer science professor and longtime surveillance expert.

***End Quote***

Makes it just a little too easy!

# # # # #

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070901/D8RCITJ00.html

Judge Sends Duke Prosecutor to Jail
Sep 1, 5:18 AM (ET)
By AARON BEARD

***Begin Quote***

Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III could have sentenced Nifong, who had already been stripped of his law license and had resigned from office, to as many as 30 days in jail and given him a fine as high as $500. Instead, he opted for a largely symbolic punishment – the public humiliation of sending a prosecutor to jail – that he said would help protect the integrity of the justice system.

***End Quote***

“protect the integrity” … … you have to be kidding me!

Once again the true nature of the criminal gang masquerading as the “gooferment” shows its true colors. Close ranks. CYA. Protect the “system”.

Here we have more “theater”!

Note the story goes out on Friday night of a three day week end where it is sure to be ignored.

Three young men’s lives are ruined. Their families emotionally tortured. And, the treasure expended in their defense.

Sorry, it’s a slap on the wrist. And, the system is fundamentally flawed.

The Grand Jury system doesn’t protect the accused. That’s its one purpose. Despite what you see on Law & Order, there’s truth in the old canard that “a prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted”. We need to rework the system. The prosecutor has an unlimited budget to overwhelm all but the rich. And, if you are acquitted, the prosecutor bears — in most cases — no punishment.

No the gooferment courts are part of that illusion of legitimacy. It’s just gooferment bureaucrats in costumes putting on a show and protecting other gooferment bureaucrats.

Sigh!

# # # # #

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=liberal_views,_black_victims&ns=WalterEWilliams&dt=08/22/2007&page=2

Liberal Views, Black Victims
By Walter E. Williams
Wednesday, August 22, 2007

***Begin Quote***

So here’s the question: Should black people accept government’s dereliction of its first basic function, that of providing protection? My answer is no. One of our basic rights is the right to defend oneself against predators. If the government can’t or won’t protect people, people have a right to protect themselves.

***End Quote***

Even if the gooferment could or would protect people, the people have the right to defend themselves.

Interesting. I’ve been quibbling with the great Professor more and more.

I think the formulation of a “right” is interesting process.

(1) To own myself, I acknowledge that all men own themselves.

(2) Thus, everyone owns their past and their future. (If I own myself but not my past and / or my future, then what do I own?)

(3) Rights are basically negatives. Right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

(4) If one man’s rights are infringed, everyone’s rights are infringed. (alone we are weak; together we are dominant.)

(5) I have rights that are “inalienable”. You can’t take them; I can’t give them away.

(6) I can fail to fight for my rights and you can infringe upon them.

(7) If you delegate, that representative can exercise no more rights than you had to delegate.

So, rights are recognized as inalienable but must be defended to “have” them.

Heck, yes, like Jack Nicolson said in A Few Good Men:

Col. Jessep: Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

I too don’t care what the gooferment thinks it’s entitled to. I don’t care what anyone thinks they are entitled too. I especially don’t care what some gang in fancy suits thinks they are entitled to.

I suggest that when push comes to shove over rights, we’ll both have to pick up a rifle and defend each other’s rights. Or “they” will pick us off one by one.

I would say that victims of crime have ONLY themselves to blame for not defending their rights. I’ll stand with them.

# # # # #