Selected Blogs
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
There was once a time in America when we all praised the open mind. That we praised hearing open, honest and thoughtful debate on all sides of an argument; that we looked at all information, data and evidence; that we listened and read openly what people had said and wrote; that we would test our hypothesis over and over again always with the open mind and the come to our own conclusions.
Since the late 1960s and early 70s, most Americans have abandoned all that considering it all passé. They replaced it with their own prejudices, ideology and their own beliefs. In short, since that time, there has been a deliberate closing of the American mind.
- Details
- Written by: Seth Grossman
- Category: Selected Blogs
“Congress shall 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.”
This First Amendment, adopted on Dec. 15, 1791, is the most important part of the Constitution. With free speech and press, we can be informed when government officials violate other parts of the Constitution. And we can inform others any way we can, and form organizations strong enough to either make them stop – or vote them out of office.
Without the absolute right to freely speak, assemble and organize, a constitution is useless. The Soviet Union under the dictator Stalin had a constitution that gave its citizens all sorts of rights. But anyone who reported violations of those rights or who tried to organize any opposition to the government was killed or sent to prison.
Last week Norm Cohen, my fellow columnist, wrote that he, and others with him on the left, want to “take the money out of politics.” They include filmmaker Michael Moore and MSNBC commentator Dylan Ratigan.
- Details
- Written by: Joe Siano
- Category: Selected Blogs
From our friends at the Mises Institute. This is chapter three of Jeffrey A. Tucker's book It's a Jetsons World: Private Miracles and Public Crimes.
- Details
- Written by: Radley Balko
- Category: Selected Blogs
I’m saddened to learn this morning that Siobhan Reynolds died over the weekend in a plane crash.
I met Reynolds several years ago when I attended a forum on Capitol Hill on the under-treatment of pain. Her story about her husband’s chronic pain was so heartbreaking it moved me to take an interest in the issue. I eventually commissioned and edited a paper on the DEA and pain treatment while I was working for Cato.
Reynolds was fierce and tireless. She ran her advocacy group the Pain Relief Network on a thin budget, and often used her own money to travel to towns and cities where she felt prosecutors were unfairly targeting a doctor. And then she’d fight back. And sometimes she’d win. And the DEA and the federal prosecutors she fought weren’t really accustomed to that.
- Details
- Written by: Geoffrey Lewin
- Category: Selected Blogs
Last May, New Jersey’s Supreme Court delivered the 21st Abbott vs. Burke decision, appropriating $500 million more from the state treasury for Abbott school districts. However, New Jersey’s history of court-ordered taxation to fund education originated with the Gross Income Tax Act of 1976. Advertised as a means to lower property taxes and limit the growth of public spending, the income tax was forced on residents by the court in order to improve student performance in economically disadvantaged districts by increasing per-pupil spending to the level of the wealthier districts.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
While Article VI of the U.S. Constitution states that “…no religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States,” throughout history, there have been those elements in society that have attempted, and sometimes succeeded, in applying that which the Constitution strictly forbids.
In the presidential election of 1800, those elements applied the religious test to Thomas Jefferson in his contest with Aaron Burr solely because Jefferson was a Deist. In 1928, the test was applied to Al Smith because he was a Catholic. In 1960, the test was applied to John Fitzgerald Kennedy because he was also a Catholic. In 2011, these elements, in which a majority of them can be found in the mainstream press, are applying the test to Republican candidates Michelle Bachmann, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
Since the Progressive Era, a belief has been established by the American people that when something is wrong in society, that it is the duty of government to act and get involved. Often times, the remedies that they put forth and enact make matters only worse for the people that it is suppose to serve. Furthermore, when the situation does make the matter unbearable, government cures it all with more government intervention. For example, if there aren’t adequate housing apartments in a great metropolis, government forces landlords and landowners to reduce their rents through Rent Stabilization laws, i.e. Rent Control. This causes even more of a shortage of housing apartments (We see this case in New York City). If people are worried about high incidents of crime being committed afterhours in big cities like Newark, New Jersey, they call on the City Council and The Mayor to act. Recently, the City Council passed and Mayor Cory Booker signed a law that if business establishments were open afterhours, then these businesses must hire contract security. This law will cause some businesses to close and will cause others to lose money. If the automobile industry is not building enough hybrid or fuel efficient motor vehicles, then government uses CAFE standards to punish these businesses until they comply, never mind that some of these standards causes safety hazards in designs and construction.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
Suppose that the welfare state, with its promise of cradle to grave entitlements and its promise of wealth redistribution, “social justice,” and “benefits,” ceased to exist. Suppose that the welfare state, constructed during the progressive and New Deal era and afterwards, ended totally and permanently. What would happen? If we are to believe the progressive philosophy, old people, the unemployed, the weak and the needy, children, the disabled and others would suffer immensely. The progressives, along with “moderates” and “compassionate conservatives” would claim that the streets of every town, hamlet and city would be littered with a sea of human misery and awash in human tragedy. I believe otherwise.
If the welfare state were to end, the following would transpire:
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
In his book, ‘Leviathan,” it was Thomas Hobbs that wrote that in the state of nature, man is entitled to everything. He or she is not only entitled to his or her own property and possessions, but also to the property and possessions of others. To some in this society, this kind of reasoning is a sacrilege and an abomination to civilized and human norms. However, when one survey’s the environment and the politicians not only in Washington, D.C. but around the globe, there is no question that Hobbs’ philosophy is followed down to the last letter.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
In American Society today, there is a great many misconceptions of what is meant by “The American Dream.” There are forces in the mainstream press, in politics, in academia and elsewhere who claim that the dream is to own a home, regardless if one can afford it or not; that it entails having a government sponsored heath care system and other entitlements; that it means getting paid by government to do, what they believe, is “the right thing;” and that it entails society being controlled by a central power located in a distant capital.
It is not nor will it ever be any of these things.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
In every war that the U.S. has fought in, from the Korean conflict to today, these wars were never declared by the institution called Congress. They were declared, instead, by the presidency, both in Democratic and Republican hands. Under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, the power to declare war is the sole responsibility of Congress and no other. Yet, as with most issues, Congress has been diverting more and more power to the executive branch. Even the War Powers Act of 1973 allows for the President to commit troops to battle provided that Congress is notified 60 to 90 days of deployment. This act is nothing more than a poor and faulty attempt at compromise. The question of whether it is the president or Congress that has the power to declare war has never been decided by the Federal Courts, let alone the U.S. Supreme Court.
If I had the standing, I would challenge the authority of the executive not only to wage war, but to also commit troops overseas. I would file the papers in court if I were allowed to do so. I am surprised that a member of Congress, who would have more of a standing than I, has never filed with the courts on such an important issue such as war, peace, life and death. It is high time that the question be answered once and for all. Can one person decide to send young men and women to face gun fire? Or is that the duty of 535 persons? Can the executive commit troops to battle? Or is that the right of the legislative? These and other questions must be resolved and must be answered for the sake of the future and the sake of the American people.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
For over 40 years, this nation has spent $40 Billion a year to fight a war that is not winnable. This war is not against a hostile or enemy nation, nor is it against an enemy organization such as Al-Qaeda. This war is none other than the war on drugs. It is a war on the American populace itself; it is war that breeds law enforcement corruption; it is a war that breeds violence in the street of every metropolitan city; it is war that makes criminality and criminal conduct sound appealing; it is war where profits are earned in the black market; and it treats those who abuse and use drugs like criminals and the dreads of society at large.
A War on the American Populace: There are individuals whom believe that the war on drugs targets only those who are considered “Kingpins” and members of organized crime. This may be true in some aspects, but it is not the whole picture. Often times, innocent civilians and regular folks are targeted. These people may or may not use drugs, but acting on tips from informants and others, police officers use their S.W.A.T teams to break into homes without a search warrant and search the dwelling. This has happened in states like Louisiana, Georgia, Florida and elsewhere. If the person is arrested, he or she is subject to asset forfeiture laws, child authorities are notified, his or her children are seized and the person’s life is turned into a living nightmare.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
On K Street in Washington, D.C., there are many offices that are occupied by special interest groups. Everyday, those offices send a lobbyist for the purposes of attempting to make some members of Capital Hill and The White House to support their causes and their endeavors. About 95% of the time, what these lobbyists request is tax monies to fund their projects as well as lobby for other spending legislation and monetary support. It is these special interest groups and their political supporters whom are an impediment to reducing the size and scope of government, and an impediment to reducing this nation’s $14 Trillion dollar and counting national debt.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
There are many progressive and so-called “moderate” politicians like Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) that always claim that they are “pro-choice.’ However, when you look at their records and what they support, you will see that they are only “pro-choice” when it comes to the issue of abortion and nothing more. They are not “pro-choice” when it involves the right of an individual to own and purchase a firearm; they are not “pro-choice” when it comes to the right of parents to decide whether to send their children to private or parochial schools; they are not “pro-choice” when it comes to the right of an individual to smoke in public or private places; and they are not “pro-choice” when it comes to the right of individual to not join a Labor Union or opt out of government programs like Social Security.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
When people talk about blindness, it is usually meant with regards to an individual losing one’s own eyesight; however, truthfully, there are other ways that an individual could become blinded. A man or woman could be blinded due to one’s own ego and pride. A man or woman could be blinded by living in denial and being oblivious to it all. A man or woman could be blinded by a cause or an endeavor. Finally, there are the men and women that become blind due to ideology.
To me, this can be all too dangerous.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
Whenever there is an argument about cutting spending and cutting the deficit, often times there will be those voices that will claim that the supporters are hurting a segment of the population, hurting children, hurting workers, etc, or engage in the fine art of denial. Recently, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) claimed that by cutting spending for things like public television, supporters wanted to hurt Elmo and Big Bird. In Wisconsin, there are protesters that are saying that by cutting spending deeply, it is tantamount to Nazism. Some people, like propagandist filmmaker Michael Moore, are even claiming that there is no budget crisis and that states and the federal government have tons of money available. All in all, when you hear the opponents of debt reduction and spending restraints talk, it is not only comical but tragic as well. It is as if they are alcoholics and drug addicts who do not want to admit that they have a problem.
States like New Jersey, Wisconsin, Florida, New York and others are facing big budget and state deficits; the federal government’s national debt is at $14 trillion and counting. Painful choices will have to be made and the days where we lived in blindness are very much over. This nation has to face reality, and while reality is not pretty, it is better than living in denial.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
For over 40 years, every presidential administration has promised that by a certain date, the U.S. would be energy sufficient and would very much lower its dependence upon foreign oil. The administrations of Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43 and now Barack Obama have all stated by a certain date and time in the future, the U.S. would be independent when it came to energy. All these statements and all these promises have turned out to be untrue.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
There are many individuals that have this belief that politicians are a “smart lot.” That they know the law and what is just and unjust according to it. Over a period of five months now, I have heard, read and watched interviews and speeches that have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that when it comes to law, particularly U.S. Constitutional Law, politicians are ignorant. It does not matter if these politicians reside in local or state government, nor does it matter if they are at the federal level. The fact that these people have this belief that there are no limits to their power and that they can do anything to force their will upon people and individuals is not only frightening but also disgusting.
- There are politicians that believe that they have a right to restrict political speech using campaign finance laws and other legislation and force.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
In every human life, there are times when one must make tough and painful choices in order to move forward. These choices may come in matters concerning one’s health and welfare, one’s emotional and psychological well being, with regards to one’s family or regarding one’s financial, moral or economic well being. These choices are very difficult and are very tough to make. Nevertheless, these choices are made everyday to secure a better tomorrow and are done bravely with great consultation. When it comes to politicians, however, it is a very different story. Often times, politicians would like to take the easy way out or make no decision whatsoever in terms of issues, policy and when it comes to deficits and spending. These are people who not only want to have their cake and eat it too, but also want to keep what they have in terms of access, money, prestige and power, not to mention control of the purse strings.