The officers were mistaken in believing Mr. Guerena fired at them. However, when Mr. Guerena raised the AR-15 semi-automatic assault rifle in their direction, they needed to take immediate action to stop the deadly threat against them.
Police need to try to understand: when a team of them kick down someone’s door for no good reason and infiltrate with guns drawn, they are guests in the other people’s homes.
In Madison’s version, the power to tax needed to be tied to the following enumerated powers. The problem is that interpretation was quickly abandoned, as the 1798 healthcare act, among many acts before and after it authorizing “beyond enumerated powers,” show.
A founder’s violation of the constitution should not be interpreted as some sort of retroactive amendment. Acommenter named aepryusmentioned this in the comments, and O’Rourke replied:
The abandonment of Madison’s interpretation occurred in the drafting Congress, it didn’t wait until the 1798 law. The 1798 law just shows Paul’s ignorance of history and that general welfare isn’t dependent on the following enumerated powers.
It is a curious method of drafting: First write a thing, then alter its interpretation without altering the writing. It could have happened. I’m interested to see O’Rourke’s support for this, since aepryus quoted Federalist 41 at length. Perhaps O’Rourke could trouble himself to mention the dates of the Constitutional Convention in which we’ll find support for his proposition? I invite anyone who knows them to please comment.
(Note that Paul J. O’Rourke is not to be confused with Patrick Jake “P. J.” O’Rourke.)
…and let the liberty bashing begin! Let’s rewrite these positions so they sound a little nicer: 1. Eviscerate the national deficit. 2. Restore power to local authorities. 3. Restore power to local authorities. 4. Protect internet users’ privacy and Internet companies’ autonomy. 5. Give Bin Laden due process. 6. Respect Americans’ privacy. 7. Respect individual autonomy. 8. Respect individual autonomy. 9. Don’t punish success. 10. Stop inflation. 11. Enforce private-property rights. 12. Respect individual autonomy. 13. Respect individual autonomy. 14. End birthright citizenship. 15. Spend taxpayers’ money carefully and sparingly.
Okay, I had a really tough time saying No. 14 in a positive way. It pretty much is what it is. Now decide.
From February, 2009. Subtitled “Children’s books burn, courtesy of the federal government.” Allegedly under The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, thrift stores are no longer permitted to sell childrens book published prior to 1985, due to the alleged health hazards of trace amounts of lead in the inks.
Snopes’ evaluation of the claims made above. The stated verdict is “FALSE”, but it should probably read “TRUE”. While the Consumer Protection Act of 2008 does not require testing, it seems pretty clear that vendors’ resale of untested items is done at the vendors’ peril. The testing is not explicitly required, but its necessity is obviously implied. The article contains useful links to CPSC clarifications.
I think self-proclaimed socialists will disagree with Kevin Williamson’s definition. They’ll correct me if I’m wrong, but my impression has been that those who identify with socialism tend to lump corporations and governments together in the bourgeois ruling class of enemies. I don’t think they want power in a centralized state, yet they still want to quash free enterprise. I’m not quite sure how that works out. But anyway, point is, if you want to know what socialism is, try asking a socialist.
I should also object to the calling of socialists “adolescent”. Libertarians get it all the time. It is a weak ad-hominem. I don’t like it, so I don’t do unto others. For some reason, though, I find the charge of “envy” to carry more weight.
HuffPo was built on the hugely popular, yet unpaid, bloggers that populated the site with interesting and fresh content every single day. Arianna Huffington says that writers should be glad to write for free in exchange for all the free exposure they get. They can showcase their work and gain a following. That argument held water until Arianna got filthy rich[er] off of the web site and brand that all of these unpaid writers helped her build. Organized labor is about workers being treated fairly. Management/owners should not be able to get rich while treating their employees poorly or not paying them at all.
Actually, the argument still holds water. That Ariana got filthy rich[er] after selling the HuffPo site and brand does not negate the Ariana’s claim that that writers should be glad to write for free in exchange for all the free exposure they get. Try to understand that if you give something away for free, the person you give to will be enriched. This seems to be the way of things.
Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.
This entry was posted on Sunday, May 22nd, 2011 at 7:30 pm and is filed under Diigo. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.