Early Sunday morning, police in Inglewood, California, gunned down two unarmed men, killing one and wounding the other in the leg. According to reports, two officers heard gunshots while on patrol and responded. They saw a man run from the scene, get into a car, and drive toward them. They claim to have heard more shots and felt something hit their patrol car. That's when they fired on the approaching vehicle.

During the subsequent press conference, Chief Jacqueline Seabrooks mustered up as much compassion as anyone could expect from an agent of the state: "I am very sorry. My condolences go out to the family. ... If it turns out that the Inglewood Police Department could do something better, you can rest assured we would." A little late for that, isn't it?

The officers, of course, escaped without injury. That's understandable, since the patrol car in which they were riding showed no signs of being struck by gunfire.

The incident is far from being resolved. Call me skeptical, but I'm waiting for the official report to claim that the officers opened fire because they believed the "suspects" were trying to run them down.

Labels: Police State

Oh, the irony.

Labels: Abortion, Culture/Society

"The piecemeal engineer will, accordingly, adopt the method of searching for, and fighting against, the greatest and most urgent evils of society, rather than searching for, and fighting for, its greatest ultimate good. This difference is far from being merely verbal. In fact, it is most important. It is the difference between a reasonable method of improving the lot of man, and a method which, if really tried, may easily lead to an intolerable increase in human suffering."

-Karl Popper

Life isn't easy. Let's face it. We are either too busy or too lazy to think for ourselves. That's why we have politicians. It's much more convenient to let someone else -- preferably someone who thinks they are smarter than we are -- do our thinking for us. And it seems to work because we keep electing these people to office.

But what motivates these self-appointed saviors of humanity? I think most politicians get their start because they are easily irritated. They see something they don't like and decide to change it. What better way to shape the world into what you want than to rise to a position of power that allows you to force your desires on everyone else? Such is the nature of "social engineering."

We see this kind of thing all the time. For example, someone who was late for work one morning after getting stuck behind a driver who couldn't maintain the speed limit because he was talking to his buddy on his cell phone decides enough is enough. Between putting on her makeup in the rearview mirror and scanning the songs on her iPod, all while steering with one knee and balancing a large coffee on the other, she has an epiphany: Why not make the roads safer by outlawing the use of cell phones in cars? Upon getting elected to the city council, she proceeds to do just that.

An ex-smoker who is struggling with tremendous guilt over the knowledge that he may have killed upwards of 250,000 people over the years with his secondhand smoke decides to turn over a new leaf. He runs a strong campaign and gets elected to the state legislature. Recalling how difficult it was for him to quit smoking for the umpteenth time, he decides to give others a helping hand by pushing for a law that bans smoking in restaurants and bars. He reasons that non-smokers should never be put in the uncomfortable position of having to decide where to eat or drink based on the smoking habits of others, property rights and freedom of association be damned.

And so it goes. People who are unhappy with their own lives go into politics in an effort to make everyone else as miserable as they are.

Then I started thinking: What if I were in charge? What pet peeves do I have that I would like to see outlawed so that my life could be made just a little more tolerable?

For starters, I would pass a law requiring people to wash their hands after using the bathroom. Short of that, I would at least require automatic bathroom doors to be installed in all businesses and public buildings so that the rest of us don't have to touch the same handles used by the unwashed masses. I would also see to it that anyone failing to wash who then proceeds to shake someone else's hand can be charged with second-degree assault.

I would devote all education funding to making sure people learned how to pronounce words correctly. There is no excuse for saying "reeluhtor" instead of "realtor" or "supposably" instead of "supposedly." And don't even get me started on the use of non-existent words like "irregardless." If you're gonna talk, then I'm gonna learn you to talk good.

Under my control, it would be illegal for restaurants to automatically include a gratuity when serving groups of eight or more. I tip what I want, when I want. Period. If you want an extra seven percent, you'll have to earn it.

Let's see. What else?

Coffee shops will only be allowed to sell coffee. None of this decaf soy latte nonsense.

Cable companies could only provide me with the channels I like. I don't want to pay for what I don't watch. While we're on the subject, I would ban all "reality" TV shows.

Pepsi products? Gone. Under my regime, Coke would be the official soft drink. But only regular Coke. No diet sodas allowed. They're just so...stupid.

I like things as simple as possible. Until someone starts minting a nine-tenths-of-a-cent coin, gasoline will be priced like everything else.

It would be against the law for restaurant supply trucks to block the drive-thru lane when unloading -- especially when I'm hungry and in a hurry. And if I discover after driving away that I was given fewer than two napkins and four packets of ketchup, someone is going to face a hefty fine.

I could go on, but I thought I would share just some of the things I would do if I were in charge. So, if you know what's good for you, don't ever vote for me.

On the other hand, if you don't know what's good for you, I'd be more than happy to tell you. Based on your choice of politicians up to this point, I assume you like being told what to do.

Labels: Liberty, Party Politics

Is there even a single person left in this country who hasn't seen through the conservative facade of the Republican Party? The GOP is devoted to growing government and stifling the economy every bit as much as the Democrats.

The latest example comes from none other than the presumed Republican presidential nominee, John McCain, who was busy over Mother's Day weekend campaigning against global warming. His non-free market solution to this mythical threat includes implementing a cap-and-trade program on carbon-fuel emissions and forcing businesses to adhere to strict emission limits. In other words, more government control over the nation's economy.

OK, show of hands. Who is surprised by this?

Labels: Economics, Environment, Free Market

Get to know a little more about the Constitution Party's 2008 presidential candidate.

Labels: Elections

A vague, no-knock warrant served by soldier-wannabe cops who break down the door of a house, shoot and severely injure the resident, arrest him on bogus charges, and then try to cover up their mistake. Radley Balko reports on one of the latest tragedies in the so-called "war" on drugs.

Labels: Government Corruption, Police State, Privacy

Mark Nolt was finally apprehended by state troopers in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, on April 25, 2008. The arrest ended a nearly 20-month-long crime spree.

Was he wanted for rape? Child abuse? Murder? No. Mr. Nolt, a Mennonite dairy farmer, was guilty of something much more heinous: selling raw milk without a permit.

Nolt's permit expired in August of 2006, but that didn't stop this maniac from trying to kill off the population of Pennsylvania with creamy, organic, wholesome goodness. Fortunately, he was found guilty yesterday on four counts and fined $1,000 for each violation.

Almost as impressive as the arrest and conviction of a dangerous fugitive and the confiscation of $20-25,000 worth of equipment and contraband was the show of force at the trial, where a half-dozen state troopers were in attendance along with agents from the FDA. There was even an arrest. One man who showed up to protest on Nolt's behalf was taken into custody for standing too close to the road that runs in front of the courthouse. Yes, it's always encouraging to see justice prevail.

The lesson to be learned here is that it just doesn't pay to mock the State. Consider the big dairy producers. They continue to enjoy government protection because they play by the rules. Like the rest of us, they long for the day when every American can enjoy a glass of low-quality milk from growth hormone-enhanced, genetically modified corn-fed cows in comfort and safety, free from the fear of predatory bio-terrorists like Mark Nolt.

Labels: Free Market, Nanny State, Police State

You know, it's getting harder and harder not to be a conspiracy theorist in this country. Consider the case of the D.C. Madame, Deborah Jeane Palfrey. Here we had a woman running an escort service for D.C.'s elite and it was only when she decided to get out of the business that the government went after her. She threatened to name names and, lo and behold, she "commits suicide." And guess what? Not one mainstream media outlet has questioned the official report. No, that's the stuff of Internet conspiracy sites.

So, when you read stories like the one on PrisonPlanet.com, or listen to Palfrey say in an interview last July that she would not kill herself, that she was planning to fight the government in open court, it won't get noticed because the source of those reports is a site run by a well-known "conspiracy nut." Sure, Alex Jones sounds paranoid, but does that mean everything he says is bunk?

As another blogger noted, the feds find conspiracies all the time. They level conspiracy charges against mobsters and anti-abortion activists. (Does RICO ring a bell?) They accuse big corporations of conspiring to hide the dangers of smoking. (Do you recall all those tobacco lawsuits?) They even use conspiracies as justification for war. (Remember the supposed Iraq-al Qaeda link?)

Ah, but those were real conspiracies. If, however, you dare to suggest that there might be a conspiracy or cover-up in the death of a woman who had the potential to destroy the careers and reputations of high-level members of the most powerful government in the world...well, you're just a kook.

Labels: Crime, Government Corruption, Media

(This was originally posted at The Contemporary Calvinist.)

"The War Prayer" is a short story that was written during the aftermath of the Philippine-American War by Mark Twain and published after his death. In 2007, Markos Kounalakis, the president of The Washington Monthly, adapted the text for this animated short film.

This could easily have been written in response to the current "war on terror." We really haven't changed all that much.

Consider how many churches display the American flag prominently in their pulpits. Is it any wonder why we seem to have such a hard time drawing a distinction between loyalty to Christ and loyalty to country?

A couple of months ago, I heard a comment that saddened me deeply. In the context of discussing how the brutality of bin Laden and other Muslim thugs may be turning people away from Islam, someone mentioned that it's good for Christianity to have the U.S. military involved in the Middle East, and that having Christian GIs in Iraq will help spread the gospel.

Oh. Is that why we invaded Iraq and killed hundreds of thousands of people? It was all part of furthering God's kingdom?

What we did was commit a naked act of aggression against a sovereign nation that neither attacked nor threatened us. Our "liberation" of Iraq has since given rise to terrorist groups that weren't there before and has resulted in a great amount of bloodshed. It has also displaced thousands of Christians who now face violent persecution from militant Muslims. Do American Christians now feel we must justify the actions of our government on the basis that it will help spread the gospel?

My friend Dave Black asks, "How is that we have allowed the Christian Right to be defined by delusional idealism and religious zeal? How is it that American evangelicals not only approved but actually glamorized the war as a form of Christian 'mission'?"

As a Christian and a Calvinist, I understand that God controls all things and does ordain evil for good (Genesis 50:20). But we as Christians should never equate the spreading of the gospel with the use of military force. We are fighting a spiritual war (Ephesians 6:12-13) and our weapon of choice is the "sword of the spirit" (Ephesians 6:17). We should be prepared to give our own lives for the sake of the gospel (Matthew 16:25, John 12:24-25), not to take the lives of others.

Labels: Foreign Policy, Imperialism, Religion, War

You can imagine the shock Cuban immigrant Noel Llorente received when police and federal agents in Opa-Locka, Florida, kicked in the door of his home, threw him to the ground, and slapped on the handcuffs -- all because someone phoned in an anonymous tip that there was a hydroponics lab inside. There wasn't.

But the Llorente house was just one small mistake in a series of otherwise flawless raids. Dubbed "Operation D-Day" (yeah, I know, really original), the jack-booted thugs nabbed $7 million worth of marijuana plants. Surely that's worth damaging the property and reputation of one law-abiding immigrant.

This is the Land of the Free, after all. The Home of the Brave. The United Freakin' States of America. This is a safe haven for all those trying to get away from the kind of police state tactics that go on in Third World dictatorships (or Opa-Locka, Florida). Mr. Llorente must be the exception that proves the rule.

Labels: Police State

The latest essay from Gary North:

While I do my best to make economics clear, I am no match for America's most beloved retired humorist, Dave Barry. Breaking his book royalty-based silence, he has offered a stunningly brilliant insight into the likely economic effects of the 2008 tax rebate, which is called an Economic Stimulus Payment. I can do no better than to quote him verbatim.


Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.
Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.
Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. Only a smidgen.
Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.
Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China?
A. Shut up.


In presenting this analysis, he offered neither a graph nor an equation. He will therefore not receive the 2009 Nobel Prize in Economic Science and the $1.6 million economic stimulus payment it brings. But his analysis, I predict, will turn out to be far more relevant and unquestionably more coherent than any analysis ever offered by next year's prize winner.

The pastor, columnist, talk show host, and now Constitution Party presidential candidate tells us what he would do as the nation's chief executive officer.

Labels: Elections

There aren't as many as there should be, but here is a list of Ron Paul candidates seeking office this year.

Labels: Constitution, Liberty, Ron Paul, Tyranny

Remember that "Mission Accomplished" banner that became an infamous symbol of the Bush administration's blunders in Iraq? Well, the White House has finally admitted fault. Sort of.

White House press secretary Dana Perino said earlier today, "President Bush is well aware that the banner should have been much more specific and said 'mission accomplished' for these sailors who are on this ship on their mission. And we have certainly paid a price for not being more specific on that banner. And I recognize that the media is going to play this up again tomorrow, as they do every single year."

And to think that all of the confusion could have been avoided in the first place if they had only added a question mark.

Labels: Government Incompetence, War

I received the following e-mail today:

Today is an exciting day for our campaign and our movement: my new book, The Revolution: A Manifesto, is officially released.

Although a short book, it is the product of many years of thought and action. It is a defense of the principles to which you and I have devoted our lives.

My friends are calling it "Ron Paul's legacy."

These principles -- individual liberty, sound money, the Constitution, and the foreign policy of the Founding Fathers -- have had no home in American politics for a very long time. With The Revolution: A Manifesto, I'm letting the establishment know we're not going away.

Finally, Americans can hear and judge these great American principles for themselves, instead of through an unfriendly media filter. And they can learn once and for all that they need not be satisfied with the phony choices the system offers them every four years. Another way really is possible.

Two days ago I did a book signing in New York at the Borders on Wall Street. All 530 copies had been sold before I even arrived.

They had underestimated you again.

Imagine the attention our cause and our principles could attract with a fantastic opening day today, with people marching into bookstores across the country for their copies. If it should become a publishing phenomenon, The Revolution: A Manifesto can fuel our revolution for a long time to come. You can make that happen.

I hope you enjoy this book, which was a real labor of love for me. Please spread the word.

And may the future be ours.

Ron Paul

I should be receiving my copy soon.

Labels: Constitution, Free Market, Liberty, Ron Paul