Author: CS Admin

Categories
Common Sense general freedom ideological culture national politics & policies responsibility

Supremacist Progressives?

Bernie Sanders and Black Lives 2

“Thank you, Seattle, for being one of the most progressive cities in the United States of America,” socialist-​cum-​Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders shouted to the large crowd in the City of Goodwill.

Seconds later, two women with a local Black Lives Matter group jumped the stage, threatening to shut down the event. Quickly, they were rewarded for their extortion-​by-​tantrum. Sen. Sanders and company relinquished the microphone, podium and stage.

The kidnapped crowd booed the violation, only to be screamed at by Marissa Johnson, one of the protesters, as “a bunch of screaming white racists,” who practice “white supremacist liberalism.”

“I was going to tell Bernie how racist this city is, filled with its progressives, but you did it for me,” Johnson added.

Angry audience members yelled, “How dare you?!” and “How dare she call me a racist.”

“You guys are full of bull-$@%# with your ‘black lives matter,’” she chided, acknowledging that the event had already recognized the anniversary of Michael Brown’s shooting in Ferguson, Missouri.

What a fascinating marriage of outrage and entitlement!

And yet … real grievances abound.

“Welcome to Seattle,” Johnson told Bernie, “where our Seattle Police Department has been under federal consent decree for the past three years, and yet has been riddled by use of force, racial profiling, and scandals throughout the year.”

Sen. Sanders doesn’t even stand up for his own speech rights, much less ours. Apparently fearing the loudmouths, he proved unwilling to confront them or address their complaints.

Sanders and his “progressive” Democrat comrades (governing cities like Baltimore and Seattle) must take responsibility for the results of their policies, and admit that the black voices shouting against racism are shouting at them.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Bernie Sanders and Black Lives

 

Categories
Common Sense general freedom ideological culture media and media people national politics & policies Popular

Are Democrats Socialists?

Deer in the Headlights

Does it matter that the chair of the Democratic National Committee doesn’t know if her party is socialist?

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews was grilling Debbie Wasserman-​Schultz on the meaning of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s popularity within the Democratic Party. Mrs. Wasserman-​Schultz responded by boasting that the Democrats “really are a Big Tent Party.” Then Matthews veered out her comfort zone of horse-​race politics and self-​congratulatory posturing.

“What is the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist?” he asked.

Mrs. W‑S chuckled. Uncomfortably.

“I used to think there was a big difference,” Matthews went on. “What do you think it is?” Mrs. W‑S evaded, blathering on how it is that the difference between Democrats and Republicans is what will really count in the upcoming election.

Karl Dickey, at the Examiner, holds that Democrats, today, are socialists: “one only needs to look at the Democratic Party’s platform to understand that it is a socialistic political party.”

Meanwhile, Juan Williams, discussing the issue on Fox News’s The Five, argues that there is a big difference between Democrats and socialists: Dems just like regulation and redistributing wealth; socialists want to nationalize industry and run everything through a central bureau.

And that is the definition that anti-​socialist economists Yves Guyot and Ludwig von Mises settled on. Technically, Williams is right.

But the fact that the head of the Democratic Party waffled on the distinction says more about the party than a definitive answer would have.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Deer in the Headlights

 

Categories
Accountability government transparency term limits

Listen to Lobbyists

Institutional Memory

With 25 of 40 council seats turning over, “term limit advocates are enthusiastic about the influx of new folks and ideas,” explains Tennessean columnist Frank Daniels III, “but many council members are worried about the loss of knowledge and institutional memory.”

More precisely, “many council members” fret that the city cannot afford the loss of their “knowledge.” Politicians so want to kill such thinking that on today’s Nashville ballot is not one, but two measures to weaken the “eight is enough” council limit. Amendment 1 weakens the limits by 50 percent — from two terms, eight years to three terms, twelve years.

Amendment 2 weakens term limits just like Amendment 1 does. But Amendment 2 also reduces the size of the metro council from 40 representatives to 27. Reducing the number of “politicians” has some popular support, but what’s needed is closer representation. Which means more representatives, not fewer.

Nevertheless, when Amendment 2’s proponent, Councilwoman Emily Evans, was asked why the reduction in the council was combined with weakening term limits, she replied, “You have to give the voters something.”

The perennial argument against term limits asserts that lobbyists, special interests and the bureaucracy will have greater “institutional memory” and, therefore, take advantage of council members.

Talk about hollow! The group pushing Amendment 2 just released their campaign finance report. Their largest donor is the Service Employees International Union, representing city workers — followed by lobbyist after lobbyist, after developer, after payday loan company CEO, and a horde of politicians.

The open secret of our age: lobbyists hate term limits, voters love ’em.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

 

P.S. And if you live in Nashville, don’t forget to vote today, yet again, to keep the citizen-​initiated, voter-​enacted, three times voter re-​affirmed term limits against the latest ballot schemes of politicians and their cronies

Printable PDF

Institutional Memory

 

Categories
Common Sense folly ideological culture media and media people national politics & policies political challengers responsibility

Gross Domestic Prevarication

Eternal Koch, meme, Paul Jacob, Koch Brothers, collage, photomontage, http://cognitivebiasparade.prosite.com/

A sign of these sorry times for professional journalism: Time magazine runs a dishonest smear against Charles Koch, completely twisting the billionaire’s remarks at a recent meeting of major donors in Orange County, California.

“Charles Koch Says US Can Bomb Its Way to $100,000 Salaries,” screamed the headline. The sub-​heading added, “Building bombs and using them is one way to growth, the billionaire suggests to allies.”

What did Mr. Koch actually tell the assembled crowd of major donors?

“I think we can have growth rates in excess of 4 percent. When I’m talking about growth rates,” explained Koch, “I’m not talking about that GDP, which counts poison gas the same as it counts penicillin. What a monstrous measure this is. If we make more bombs, the GDP goes up — particularly if we explode them.”

In other words, while Time’s headline portrayed Koch as a warmonger, the billionaire businessman wasn’t suggesting this country “Bomb Its Way” anywhere. Certainly not “to growth.” In fact, Koch was making the opposite point: true economic growth can’t come from producing or using “poison gas” or other munitions.

Apparently, I wasn’t the only one who had found this article’s headline to be a flat-​out concocted falsehood; Time soon changed the headline.

Yet, even the re-​written headline was sort of a slap: “Charles Koch Mocks Common Measure of Prosperity.” Only after reading the sub-​head — “Calls ‘monstrous’ the notion that GDP values bombs as much as medicine” — was it clear that Koch was making a very common sense point.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Eternal Koch

 

Categories
free trade & free markets general freedom individual achievement

Call for Great Communicators

Great Communicators Tournament

Money can’t buy me love. So, the $10,000 first prize in the Second Annual Great Communicators Tournament doesn’t matter to me at all. Nor does the $5,000 second prize entice me, and certainly not the $2,500 for third place.

You, however, may be fond of money.

And if you can effectively communicate the freedom message, this contest is well worth joining. But the deadline — THIS FRIDAY, August 7 — is fast approaching.

The tournament’s “goal is to identify … and promote individuals who can effectively and persuasively discuss and defend the free market and the founding principles.”

It’s the brainchild of the folks at Think Freely Media — the good souls who sponsor this Common Sense program. They know that liberty advocates must take the moral high-​ground in making the case for freedom, and not merely argue by empirical analysis.

The competition is easy to enter. No later than midnight this Friday provide a 1 – 3 minute video of yourself addressing one of several issues listed on the contest website.

“Videos should be … clear and concise, make sure … that you use moral, not material, arguments,” contestants are informed. “We’re looking for solid arguments and messages, not flashy production value.”

Your video will be posted, so a combination of public voting and deliberations by the Think Freely staff and judges will identify twelve semi-​finalists. These twelve will then compete in person for the top prizes at the State Policy Network’s Annual Meeting in Grand Rapids, Michigan, in September.

Why not see just how talented a communicator you are? And perhaps get even better … at growing liberty.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul McCart … er, Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Great Communicators Tournament

 

Categories
Common Sense crime and punishment general freedom

Ultra Anti-​Civilization

Against tolerance

The stabbing event at a Thursday “Gay Pride” march in Jerusalem reveals an element of the much-​talked-​about “clash of civilizations” not often discussed any longer. But it used to dominate the conversation.

Why? It was not a Muslim jihadist who stabbed six people and ultimately killed one of them, a 16-​year-​old girl (she died in the hospital this weekend).

It was an Orthodox Jew.

That is, the man arrested at the event, identified as Yishai Schlissel, certainly looked Orthodox, when I saw him on TV, briefly, in an early report. The BBC now refers to him an “ultra-Orthodox Jew” (“ultra” theirs; emphasis, mine). He had previously carried out a similar attack in 2005.

“Israel’s government would have ‘zero tolerance’ for Jewish extremists, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at a security cabinet meeting on Sunday,” according to a BBC report.

What suspect Schlissel shares with other terrorists is not merely a rock-​hard belief that certain other people are sinful and corrupt, etc. He somehow also believes that he may assume the role of judge and executioner … of people he only knows by their differences.

This is beyond “ultra.” Schlissel repudiates not only the rule of law (since he acts outside it), but a basic idea that has grown in Western civilization — from roots found in his own religion.

Liberty.

The essence of liberty? Leaving peaceful people you disagree with alone.

It is more than possible for the religiously orthodox to get along with the un-​orthodox. We can all get along if we respect each others’ rights, regardless of our differences.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Against tolerance