The OMG Must-Watch Video of The Week

Wow! Thanks to The War Planner for directing our attention to this video:

Unfortunately, even some people who should know better are dismissing the assertion that redistribution of wealth by force is an affront to self-ownership tantamount to the threat of enslavement. Here's an elementary tutorial for those folks...

Self-Ownership and The Philosophy of Liberty

Update:

As usual, Ed Morrissey nails it:

"A few points should be noted. While the woman argues effectively about the 13th Amendment bar on slavery, the Fifth Amendment protection against confiscation of private property also applies, as does the Article I, Section 8 mandate on Congress to protect the ownership of “exclusive right to their Writings and Discoveries” for those in the sciences and the arts. Also, take a look at Stark’s body language in this exchange. Normally combative (and aggressively insipid in most cases), Stark seems to be collapsing in on himself as the woman builds an argument effectively enough to win applause from her fellow constituents."

Update II:

Proof provides a link to the website of Stark's opponent, Forest Baker: http://www.forestbakerforcongress.com/

Where's the Tip Jar??

Here's Forest Baker's Facebook page.

Update III:

Here's some good information from Michelle Malkin...

"Chris Pareja is the independent Tea Party candidate running against Stark. He’s a father and small business owner with solid grass-roots support and a limited-government agenda. Learn more about him here and help out his campaign."

Perhaps Chris would be a good TBF nominee...

I'll have to add a clip from the new Fortney Stark video to this video:

40 Compelling Reasons to Support Conservatism

These are the reasons I am a conservative:

• All men are created equal.  They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights including Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
  
• Once liberty is lost, it is rarely recovered.
  
• Private property and liberty are inseparable.
  
• The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. 
  
• The principal responsibility of the government is to the citizen. Otherwise, the government ceases to be legitimate.
  
• One-size-fits-all government fits no one well.
  
• A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
  
• An all-powerful government is the greatest threat to liberty.
  
• Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
  
• The powers not delegated to the Federal Government by the Constitution are reserved to the States or to the people.
  

• The Federal Government should make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
  
• No person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
  
• Equality is the natural right of every individual to live freely under self-government, to acquire and retain the property he creates through his own labor and to be treated impartially before a just law.
  
• Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.  
  
• The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
  
• The conservative despises tyranny.
  
• Redistribution of wealth for the "greater good" is tyranny in disguise.
  
• You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
  
• The only thing that can cure poverty is wealth.
  
• That some should be rich shows that others may become rich, and hence is just encouragement to industry and enterprise.
  

• The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
  
• The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish (without risk) to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder.
  
• You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
  
• To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
  
• If the Constitution’s meaning can be erased or rewritten, and the Framers’ intentions ignored, it ceases to be a constitution but is instead a concoction of political expedients that serve the contemporary policy agendas of the few who are entrusted with public authority to preserve it.
  
• To say that the constitution is a living and breathing document is to give license to arbitrary and lawless activism.
  
• The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.
  
• A people cannot remain free and civilized without moral purposes, constraints, and duties.
  
• The individual is more than an abstract statistic or faceless member of some group.
  
• Taxation of private property or the regulation of such property so as to reduce its value can become in effect a form of servitude, particularly if the dispossession results from illegitimate and arbitrary state action.
  

• The individual knows better how to spend that which he has earned than do large bureaucracies populated by strangers who see classes of people rather than individual human beings.
  
• Private property rights serve the common good: "What belongs to no one is wasted by everyone. What belongs to one man in particular is the object of his economy and care." 
  
• The conservative opposes crony capitalism where the Statist uses the power of government to subsidize one favored enterprise at the expense of another.
  
• The government is obligated to qualify immigration to those most likely to contribute to the well-being of the civil society.
  
• If a nation does not show and teach respect for its own identity, principles, and institutions, that corrosive attitude  is conveyed to the rest of the world, including newly arriving aliens.  And if this is unchecked, the nation will ultimately cease to exist.
  
• The moral imperative of all public policy must be the preservation and improvement of  American society.
  
• If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known, that we are at all times ready for war.
  
• Great nations have responsibilities to lead and we should always be cautious of those who would lower our profile because they might just wind up lowering our flag.
  
• Civil society is a harmony of interest, not a zero sum game in which the politically powerful exploit the politically weak.
  
• Free people working in self-interested cooperation, and a government operating within the limits of its authority promote more prosperity, opportunity and happiness for more people than any alternative.

There are two options: liberty and tyranny.  Which will you choose?

Sources: The Constitution of the United States of America, Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto, the Declaration of Independence, and many others.  We stand on the shoulders of giants.

More

Must watch: The National Debt Road Trip

Can you sum up the Obama presidency in two sentences?

Geithner: Bailouts may never end, no exit plans

A victim of Obama's "ruthless pragmatism"

Pure socialism

Just what the Doctor ordered? The GOP Health Care Alternative.

Tyranny in America — Updated

Where's the outrage? Why do 56% of voters say they approve of Obama's performance so far? Obama is making up the rules as he goes along:


Have you ever wondered what it would be like to live under tyranny? Now you know. We are no longer a nation governed by the rule of law. We now have the rule of Obama. America isn't bothered by this. Get ready for despotism.

Update: I understand any hesitance to use the word "tyranny". Inflammatory language strains credibility if not used appropriately and sparingly; but in this case, I believe tyranny is the appropriate word.

Tyranny... "oppressive power; especially oppressive power exerted by government"

Going by that definition I'd say we're there. It's a soft tyranny to be sure, but it's getting more serious every day. We now have a president who has no respect for the Constitution, contracts, or the rule of law. He has publicly stated his preference for redistributing the fruits of your labor.

What would be the most appropriate way to describe Obama's approach? Obama calls it "ruthless pragmatism." Is ruthless pragmatism any kinder or gentler than tyranny?

More

The Founders put the contracts clause in the Constitution for a reason.

The government's threats and bare-knuckle tactics set an ominous precedent...

Money Well Spent

Every favor from the government comes with strings attached.

Plagiarism At The NY Times

Maureen Dowd Steals From Blogger

Notes Toward a Theory of Obama: Ruthless Pragmatism

By Slate editor in chief Jacob Weisberg, author of The Bush Tragedy

Obama Still Denigrating America

After taking office, Obama granted his first television interview to the Arabic-language television news network, Al Arabiya. He took this opportunity to criticize America (pointing out her mistakes and imperfections) and condemned her for "dictating" instead of listening.

Perhaps naive conservatives can be forgiven for hoping Obama would never make that mistake again, but we were hoping in vain:

"While in Strasbourg, President Barack Obama told an audience in a townhall meeting that America needs to change its attitude toward Europe. He said America was wrong for not celebrating Europe's 'dynamic union' and not seeking 'to partner' with them to better address the 'common challenges' that face our nations. He even went so far as to say past American policy was misguided because it had 'shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive...'"

When abroad, Obama criticizes his own country, tells us that his job is to focus on the well-being of International Muslims, and bows to foreign potentates (literally).  At home, Obama has told us that we should live our lives in accordance with the wishes of "other countries."

As long as Obama insists on being the Groveler-in-Chief, there is no one truly representing the citizens of the United States of America.*

*...And taxation with out representation is tyranny.

More

Funny!  American Tea Time for Obama.

Obama Is the ‘Arrogant, Dismissive, and Derisive’ One

Newt: Obama has a fantasy foreign policy

Tyranny in America

Taxation without representation is tyranny.

Q: The average American worked 113 days to pay their federal, state and local taxes in 2008.  Is that not excessive? 

A: Well, uh, maybe.  But it's not tyranny.  You have elected representation.  Local officials, state officials, a representative and two senators in Washington, and a president in the White House.

Q: Yes...but who do these people really represent?  Do they represent you and me, or do they represent special interest groups?

A: Well, of course special interest groups have some influence, and that is sanctioned by the constitution, but your elected officials represent you, and you have the power to hold them accountable at the polls.

Q: Right now we have a huge spending bill winding its way through Congress.  When we are done paying interest charges, the total cost could easily exceed $1 trillion.  Understandably, this bill is NOT supported by most voters.  Congressional leaders are ignoring the will of the people, are they not?

A: Sometimes our elected officials are forced to take action that is very unpopular.  That's how our system works—this is a democratic republic, not a democracy.  In a democratic republic, the elected officials help to moderate the shifting whims of public opinion.

Q: But what if Congress looses touch with the voters?  What if our elected officials develop a herd mentality and begin making irrational decisions?  What if they begin making unpopular decisions that are, in fact, not in the best interests of their constituents?

A: That's where the Constitution comes into play.  The Constitution (particularly the Tenth Amendment) places limits on what the government can legally do.  The constitution is the supreme law of the land and protects citizens from abuses from the government.

Q: You think the constitution places limits on the government?  

A: Yes, the Tenth Amendment says that the Federal Government does not have powers that are not explicitly delegated by the constitution.

Q: Does the Constitution explicitly grant the Federal Government the power to spend billions of dollars on university building projects?  To spend tens of millions of dollars on the arts?  To spend tens of billions of dollars to feed fat people?  To spend hundreds of millions of dollars on train systems?  To spend hundreds of millions of dollars on hybrid cars?

A: Well, those are all very important things.  If we don't make those investments, it will cost our society much more in the long run.  (By the way, not everyone who receives food stamps is fat.)

Q: You're getting us off track.  Does the Constitution grant the Federal Government the authority to spend money on art, food, cars, trains and university buildings?

A: Well, not exactly.  But this spending is for the greater good.

Q: So the Constitution, the one thing that stands between us and the insidious abuses of a derelict government, isn't working very well for us, is it?

A: Well...

Q: Next question.  When Congress ignores the Constitution and ignores the voters; when you have a President who has lamented the fact that the Supreme Court did not "break free from the essential constraints placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution"; when your Commander In Chief spends an inordinate amount of time voicing the concerns of the nation's critics, rivals and enemies, what kind of government do you have?

A: [blank stare]

This bears repeating: taxation without representation is tyranny.

More

The change you can believe in is the change missing from your pocket.

Why is it that Obama, his economic advisers, and the liberal Congressmen strong-arming the legislature into passing the “stimulus” package, all ignore the lessons of history?  Here is the answer: not one of those individuals, entrusted with the welfare of America, cares about the lessons of history, the economy, or the country. They care about power.

Britain to America: 'What have you done?'

Given Obama's radical roots in the neo-Marxist, nihilist politics of Saul Alinsky, it is the undermining of America's fundamental values that is likely to be this President's most strategically important goal. 

Murphy's Law, the Peter Principle and Barack Obama

The perfect collision of Murphy's Law with the Peter Principle has arrived to explode in our faces.

Sometimes a President Is Just a President

If one wants a hawks-eye view into the minds of Obama voters, all one need do is read this piece published by the New York Times last week, detailing the fantasies, dreams and drooling-envy delusions of his followers.  Their celebrity is now their President. h/t, American Thinker

62% Want Stimulus Plan to Have More Tax Cuts, Less Spending

Audio: Hannity grills Specter on his support for the spendulus package.