Take back your rights!

Blog of personal philosophy, advocating liberty.

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Why it passed

According to the local "news" paper, including quotes from people in the street and letters to the editors, supporters of the just-passed health-care nationalization fall into two categories: Elitists who intend to run the lives of all of us, and drones and parasites who intend to let them, and who intend to sponge off the working and productive people.
One street person, described as a "senior" and, worse, a UTC (University of Tennessee, Chattanooga) professor, states flatly she's glad it passed because she's a senior and has a cancer-stricken daughter.
One letter writer whined he had to make a choice between paying his mortgage or his insurance premium payments.
Sure, that's a tough choice. And the alleged professor is in a tough spot.
But -- and here is an important aphorism -- a need is not a right.
And it certainly is not a right to someone else's money or property ... or life.

Sunday, January 25, 2009

A real news flash

Check this headline: "It's Obama's White House now."
That's on the front page of the TFP Thursday, 22 Jan 2008.
It really is news. Probably most people didn't realize the deed had been transferred from the people, or, really, the federal government to Mr. Obama.
Of course the real story is the continuing boot-licking by the "news" media.

Wednesday, May 09, 2007

Who Is Ron Paul?

Although the actual vote, the general election, is not till November 2008, oy the politicians are already at it -- campaigning -- hot and heavy.
Strangely, there is one candidate who is actually worthy of the American mantle of president: Ron Paul.
Please type in "Ron Paul" for a Google search.
You will likely be pleasantly surprised.
Also strangely, there are a couple others who rank above the "lesser evil" category, though not so above as Dr. Paul.


Monday, July 17, 2006

Partisanship and dishonesty

Though I won't have the filthy thing in my home, and I will certainly NEVER pay for it, still I do occasionally see the raggedy Times Free Press.
In anticipation of the August 3 election, the two editorial pages have begun publishing endorsements.
It is no surprise the Chattanooga Times editorially endorsed Terry Stulce, one of the Third District candidates for Congress.
After all, his Marxism lite is very much in line with Times editorial policy over the years and decades I've been reading the publication.
What is or should be surprising, though, is that no one in the editorial department, or even the news department, has yet bothered to contact the other Democratic Party primary candidate, Brent Benedict.
Mr. Benedict made a minimum of five efforts to contact the editorial board by telephone, and left a voicemail message each time.
He was in the publication's offices and handed his card to a minimum of 20 people in the news and editorial and other departments.
He was in the publication's offices to talk with Free Press editor Lee Anderson, who is right wing but obviously more open minded: Mr. Anderson had already set up an appointment to talk with Mr. Stulce.
Brent Benedict tried at that time to see the Times editorial page editor, who supposedly wasn't in.
I know for a fact the Benedict campaign sent to the news room the contact phone number, the contact fax number, the e-mail address, and the Web site of Brent Benedict, which also contains all the contact information.
"Without fear or favor"?
A Times endorsement does not, of course, mean very much to the open-minded and thinking people of the area; in fact, a Times endorsement is likely viewed to be as good a reason as any to vote for the other candidate, whoever it might be.
In this case, though, open-minded and thinking people of the area will want to vote for Brent Benedict anyway, for other reasons, because Brent Benedict is so much closer to the values and philosophy of most of the people of the Third District.
To those voters who have not yet decided: I urge you to check Brent Benedict's Web site at http://www.brentbenedict.com.
For contrast, also look at http://www.stulceforcongress.com.

Thursday, May 04, 2006

Journalists go to school?

Among biased and partisan newspapers, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution is as biased and partisan as they come, but it is even less literate than, say, the over-rated New York Times or the loathesome Washington Post.
Here is a headline in the AJC, 1 May 2006: "Georgia's season of unhealthy air."
Since we all need and appreciate air, I was sorry to learn it was ill.
I wondered if it was ill because of allergies, hence the "season" in the headline, or if it was ill because it had caught some kind of flu -- and avian flu would seem very likely since air, at least around here, is just full of birds.
Or, I suddenly realized, perhaps it was unhealthy because of an accident.
No, it was none of the above. It turned out the air was not really unhealthy; it was not destined to be hospitalized, or even to have to go to a clinic or a doctor's office.
No, the air was merely a victim of semi-literate "editors."
What the raggedy "news"paper should have said was that the air was "unhealthful," that it was allegedly full of pollutants, such as, perhaps, the fog emitted by semi-literate writers and editors.
Like the good, mind-numbed robots so prevalent throughout the "news" media, the AJC is in lock-step with the drumbeat against "the epidemic of obesity," and shrieks in horror that school-age young'uns have -- well, "had," since today, 4 May, there seems to be a new decree -- access to such poison as (gasp) Coca-Cola -- which, interestingly enough, was born and bred in Atlanta.
Yet that those same children are being fed a terrible education does not seem to matter very much. There are no shrieking "news" stories or editorials decrying the poison being fed in the guise of "facts" and information from the government schools.
And why should it? If those kids really did learn to read and write, they would never subscribe to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

I'm from the FDA and I'm here to help

FDA says, "no way, man" to marijuana, but here is a story about a drug the FDA said "Oh, yes" to.

FDA probing death linked to new antibiotic

Other cases of severe liver damage reported in patients taking drug

Updated: 12:37 p.m. ET Jan. 20, 2006

WASHINGTON - Researchers reported Friday three cases of severe liver problems, including one death, in patients at a North Carolina hospital after they began taking a novel antibiotic.

Federal regulators said they were reviewing an unknown number of U.S. cases involving the drug, telithromycin, and were consulting with their counterparts overseas.

One patient at Carolinas Medical Center in Charlotte, N.C., died after taking telithromycin, which is marketed as Ketek, researchers at the hospital said. Another required and received a liver transplant, while the third recovered from drug-induced hepatitis after treatment with Ketek was stopped.

Kettle calls pot black

Big news: FDA won't admit marijuana has any medical benefits.
Here is part of one version of the news story:

WASHINGTON - The Food and Drug Administration said Thursday that it does not support the use of marijuana for medical purposes.

The FDA said in a statement that it and other agencies with the Health and Human Services Department had "concluded that no sound scientific studies supported medical use of marijuana for treatment in the United States, and no animal or human data supported the safety or efficacy of marijuana for general medical use."

A number of states have passed legislation allowing marijuana use for medical purposes, but the FDA said, "These measures are inconsistent with efforts to ensure that medications undergo the rigorous scientific scrutiny of the FDA approval process and are proven safe and effective."

The statement contradicts a 1999 finding from the Institute of Medicine, part of the National Academy of Sciences, which reported that "marijuana's active components are potentially effective in treating pain, nausea, the anorexia of AIDS wasting and other symptoms, and should be tested rigorously in clinical trials."

Hypocrite-in-chief Bill Clinton had a "Drug Czar" who was an accused war criminal (during the war against Serbia) who frequently made the claim that the government (meaning the federal one) had never accepted there were any medical benefits in marijuana.

Following is, in contrast, a minor news item from 2001, as reported by the Associated Press.

MEDICINAL POT PIONEER ROBERT RANDALL DIES IN HIS HOME JUNE 2, 2001 – Robert Randall, who made history in 1976 when a court gave him access to government supplies of marijuana to treat his glaucoma, died at his home of AIDS-related complications. He was 53. A federal court ruled 25 years ago that Randall's use of marijuana was a medical necessity. Two years later the government cut off his access to marijuana. Randall sued for reinstatement of the drug and won. He kept on smoking pot with federal permission until his death.

Saturday, April 29, 2006

Illegal immigration problem solved

Worry warts, including racists, need no longer be concerned about immigrants swarming in from Mexico.
Here is the beginning of the news story that surely will lay those worries to rest:

Updated: 8:46 p.m. ET April 28, 2006

MEXICO CITY - Mexico’s Congress approved a bill Friday decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana, ecstasy, cocaine and heroin for personal use — a measure sure to raise questions in Washington about Mexico’s commitment to the war on drugs.
The only step remaining was the signature of the president, whose office indicated he would sign it.

So, why will they be coming to America, the United States part, when life in Mexico is going to be so much more pleasant?
At the same time, a lot of the United Statesians we don't want will surely be encouraged to move south.
Adios, amigos.