Ozzy Osbourne Caused the Arizona Shooting


We here at Pithy Pontifications are fairly certain that World of Warcraft AND Ozzy are to blame for pretty much everything

Blaming anything for the Arizona shooting is insane, because the shooter, Jared Loughner, is insane.

What the control-freak prudes of each generation forget is that when someone’s that kind of crazy, it’s not that some specific thing sets them off, it’s that they’ll find something to set them off, no matter what.

I remember when Dungeons and Dragons was causing an outbreak of mayhem and badness around the country. And when it was heavy metal. And then it was video games. At one point it was the Ouija board. Oh, and television. And comic books. Movies. At one point, of course the madness was caused by reefer, and teen sex by Rock & Roll. Oh, let’s not forget science fiction…pure evil.

And kids did play with all of those things, then hurt themselves or others…because if they hadn’t fixated on one thing, it would have been another. The problem is in those specific, screwed-up kids, not the object of their fixation. Should we blame John Lennon for the lunacy of Mark David Chapman? Jodie Foster for John Hinkley Junior?

Now, Dungeons and Dragons is considered something that encourages learning and creativity in kids. Heavy metal music is used in educational cartoon themes. Comic books are considered the gateway to literacy. The objections were all nonsense, people being alarmed by “different”, more than any actual threat. Some of the “outbreaks of violence”, examined later, were actually all-time lows in violence, but specifically covered by a sensationalist, politically motivated media.

Let’s not forget the most laughable example:

When Ozzy Osbourne caused an outbreak in teen suicide.

Some crackpot group of ninnies actually took him to court, claiming his songs, like Suicide Solution and Paranoid caused kids to kill themselves.

“I tell you to end your life, I wish I could but it’s too late” from Paranoid was specifically mentioned. And a song called “Suicide Solution”, well…case closed!

Apparently, the incompetent lawyers and guilty parents involved didn’t even bother to actually check out the details of their accusation: In court, while suing Ozzy for the suicide of especially dimwitted teen John McCollum, it came out that the lyric in Paranoid was actually “I tell you to enjoy life, I wish I could but it’s too late”. And that Suicide Solution was a song warning against the dangers of alcohol abuse. That pretty much ended their case.

What we have, right now, are corrupt political thugs on both sides trying to doubly victimize Gabrielle Giffords and 9-year-old Christina Taylor Green by exploiting Arizona massacre, claiming it’s caused by freedom of speech (and we need to censor that with the Fairness Doctrine), or legal guns (and we need to reinstate the Brady prohibition, itself an exploitation of another shooting it never would have prevented anyway), or too much freedom for the dangerously common folk (whom we should ban from carrying guns within 1000 feet of any public official), et cetera.

Like Rahm Emanuel said:

You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.

But, really, you might as well blame Ozzy Osborne.

Billionaires Shouldn’t Give Their Wealth to Charity


There are few more wasteful, socially irresponsible things the wealthy can do than give away money

Warren Buffet, and other goofy, out of touch, guilt-ridden socialists have been pushing other billionaires to give away half of their money to charity.

But this would not be philanthropy. This would not be altruism. It would be a destructive blow against our society.

Why?

Because they would mostly be throwing that money down a black hole.

When, precisely, are Jerry’s Kids going to be cured? Jerry was panhandling for them halfway through the LAST century.

How about Red Cross? Why is it perennially struggling to make ends meat, when it managed to steal a billion dollars just from people giving to Katrina, Haitian Earthquake, and 9-11 victims?

Even the small percentage actually spent by a charity on the cause at hand just feeds existing needs. They spend the money and it’s gone. The problems remain. No charity has ever shut down because it solved its cause.

Those billionaires, on the other hand, have ALREADY given more to society than any, or in some cases, every charity combined.

Is Bill Gates worth sixty billion dollars? Then this reflects sixty billion other people voluntarily gave him, in return for software they must have valued at MORE than its asking price, otherwise they wouldn’t have bought it. Bill Gates, apparently, knows how to create wealth that benefits society…and every penny traded to him reflects that.

If he keeps the money and invests it in other wealth-creating ideas, he will do just that:

Create more wealth.

And THAT benefits society, more than all of the panhandling, anti-profit organizations ever do.

If he, or any other billionaire, wants to “give away” the money, then they should give it to ENTREPRENEURS.

The fool on Stossel right now, who says he’s giving away 75% of his six billion dollars, could simply hand out 4,500 one million dollar grants to the wildest, most unlikely, but serious and possible business plans and ideas they can find.

If just one percent of those ideas becomes a billion dollar company, he’s increased the benefit of his money to our society by TEN THOUSAND percent.

So he can toss it down the State-Mandated Non-Profit pit of poverty-enablement to be consumed by professional mendicants and vanish…or he can create a hundred times more wealth for our society, thereby permanently reducing poverty.

Political Experience is a Liability


People complained, of both Obama and Palin, that they lacked experience.

Now if that meant actual experience of being a manager or executive, a leader, it’s a reasonable discussion to have.

But when they mean lack of political experience, they are mistakenly attacking the BEST qualification of any candidate.

All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely“, as Lord Acton pointed out. And he noted that this includes power through influence, and “corruption by authority”, meaning the way that an institution corrupts its members.

And there is no more corrupting institution than government, which is set apart from all the rest of human society by the ability to legally initiate force…aka “power”.

There are few things more harmful in our society than career politicians. They know less about the real world, and find the evils of government coercion more normal. They are generally against responsibility, anywhere it should be expected.

They, and government employees, including government contractors, and their ilk, form what is now recognized as a separate class of people, the Political Class, that has the most harmful views of any segment of society.

They come to office and are indoctrinated in a culture that devours society and the economy for its own dubious benefit, becoming less aware of the real world every year they are there.

What we need is for our politicians to have less political experience, not more.

Even if we simply replaced every single politician, each year, with someone chosen from the general populace by random lottery, America would be far better off.

Why Tolerate an Unelected Congress?


This is an apt beginning to the political coup the opponents of Obama have feared...the convening of an unelected Congress. It should be stopped, its actions are not valid, including anything it passes.

You’d think it’s pretty obvious that if we had a Congress that was unelected, people be outraged. We are a constitutional republic, and our legislators should be elected.

And yet, that is what we have right now.

This “lame duck Congress” is not our elected set of legislators. In fact, not only are they not the ones we elected, they are the ones we specifically un-elected.

And that is outrageous.

You there, in the back, who just yelled out “But it’s always been that way”…yes, I saw who you were. Don’t worry, dissent is imperative to learning the truth.

And the truth is that lame duck Congresses are rare, because they are so obviously bad.

A Congress that is unelected, with members whose ideas have already been voted against, rushing those evils through a back door to lock them into place.

We specifically elected DIFFERENT politicians. The guys passing bills they know we oppose right now are, in effect, usurpers.

And, although there have rarely been lame duck Congresses before, this may be the first one that is specifically intended to violate the will of the people. Up until now, lame duck sessions are usually held NOT to pass laws the People are known to have just disapproved, but for a unique emergency, like impeachment, or the McCarthy hearings ostensibly to root out Communists.

But this political coup…and it is a coup, same as if the Army showed up in Congress with tanks one day and “temporarily” ousted the government…is unusual, because it’s all about passing new expansions of government that could not possibly get through next session:

  • A massive expansion of the FDA’s powers
  • Amnesty for Illegal Aliens
  • Gays in the Military
  • An unpopular arms treaty
  • A massive expansion in the already-overextended unemployment subsidy

All of these are important issues, that should be considered by our elected representatives, if by the Federal government at all.

Yet they’re being railroaded through by the corrupt Establishment on both sides. The Political Class have been carefully quiet about this, but we should not be. They think they can violate our will, for their own good…but it is intolerable.

As with the TEA Party backlash against the past three years of massive government expansion, we need to “rise up” and organize an objection to this coup, and stop it from continuing to seize power unconstitutionally.

REPLACE the Bush Tax Cuts


The American taxpayer suffers under the massive cost of complying with the tax code, as well as having to pay the taxes, themselves...and the Bush tax "cuts" only made this worse

Republicans, Conservatives, libertarians, independents, and even Democrats who aren’t rabidly Liberal are all defending the Bush tax cuts, insisting that some or all of them must be extended…but it’s not because any of us like them.

In reality, even Conservatives and Republicans never really liked the cuts, except as a lesser evil versus no cuts at all…and the same is even more true, today.

Why aren’t the Bush “cuts” likable? Because they’re ridiculously bloated with rules, exceptions, special favors for special interests, bureaucracy, government winner-picking and other distortion of the economy, and therefore are insanely expensive to implement.

In other words, Americans have to PAY billions of dollars, in time and actual cash, to deal with the complexity it adds to the tax code.

Unlike the Reagan tax cuts, that may actually have saved taxpayers even more in compliance cost than in taxes reduced, the Bush tax cuts were estimated to add up to $114 billion per year in compliance cost, with its maze of tax credits, exemptions, and other economy-distorting favoritism and punishments. This nearly cancelled out the actual “cuts”.

It is estimated that simply complying with the overall income tax costs about $350,000,000,000 every year. That is a little less than ten times as much as the “tax cuts for the rich” that the Liberals are trying to block being extended right now. It is far more than the ENTIRE set of Bush tax cuts being debated now. It is over several times as much as ALL of the cuts, including the Stimulus welfare disguised as “tax cuts” that Obama is demanding be extended as well.

We could let the ENTIRE tax cut package expire…all of the Bush cuts for the “wealthy” AND “middle class”, all of the Obama stimulus “cut” handouts, including in both cases all of the tax credits that give free money to people who don’t pay real income taxes at all…and yet leave the taxpayer with MORE money in their own hands, if:

We simplify the tax code.

We could flatten it, while letting the overall revenue estimate INCREASE to eliminate all of those “cuts”, and people would still save so much that the economy would prosper.

This could be done by eliminating most exemptions, credits, and other economy-distorting favoritism, and reducing the number of tiers of taxpayers.

We should, as any real economist has insisted for at least two decades, implement a flat tax…everyone pay the same tax rate…whatever it takes to match the current income tax revenue. Exempt everyone’s income up to the poverty level, so nobody in poverty has to pay, but leave everyone else paying the EXACT same amount.

This would reduce tax compliance to less than one tenth of its current cost. But let’s imagine it leaves compliance as high as $100 billion dollars per year.

That means we’d save $250 billion next year. Inflating this over ten years the way tax cut estimates usually are, this would “inject” between three and four TRILLION dollars into the economy in the next decade.

We don’t need Bush/Obama “cuts” that cost us more in compliance than they actually save us per year. What we need is a simpler, fairer tax system that we can pay and then get on with our job of creating wealth for ourselves, and therefore the economy.

Arizona’s Death Panel?


It’s bad enough that the Federal government created its first actual death panels thirty years ago, with organ transplants.

But, shortly after the Obamacare plan set up conditions that are likely to cause rationing, we have an example of how government health care is forced to decide who lives and dies, because of rationing.

In order to stay within their budget, Arizona has been forced to limit who is allowed to get organ transplants…literally picking who lives and dies. Already, 98 people have been identified who will not be allowed to get these transplants on Medicaid. This is what government health care must, inherently, do. It’s not the fault of Arizona, but part of Medicaid’s very nature.

In the 1980s, the Federal government imposed a ban on paid organ transplants, creating such a shortage that panels had to be set up to decide who got the rationed transplants, while a majority of transplant patients die while waiting, with lists up to ten years long.

Now, they are being forced by a socialized health care program to cut off even the few who might get transplants, dooming them to die.

We need real health care reform, not more of the very same government intervention that has caused the problem in the first place.

Gingrich and Santorum are Enemy Combatants


Freedom of speech is one of the most important, fundamental, sacred American values.

Secrecy in government, on the other hand, is one of the worst forms of tyranny.

So when politicos like Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum call for people fighting against government secrecy to be falsely classified as “enemy combatants”, “a terrorist organization”, or even to be assassinated or publicly executed, it’s pretty clear who the real enemy of America is.

What Wikileaks, and its founder Julian Assange, have vowed to do…and done, far more than most of us ever expected…is to bring the openness to American politics that politicians like Obama, McCain, and Bush promised but ended up opposing in almost all things.

They exposed Hillary Clinton ordering DNA samples and credit card information stolen from top UN officials.

They revealed a source of the bizarre push to attack Iran; it’s being ordered by the world’s top sponsor of terrorism, Saudi Arabia.

They showed that the US is secretly using its missiles and drones to slaughter people in foreign countries, while the tyrannical, abusive governments of those countries claimed credit.

The response to the whistle-blowing of these inexcusable coverups?

Above, we have a list of crimes against the American Constitution…but the criminals are named in the first half of each sentence, not the second.

Why Steal $700,000,000,000 from the US Economy?


Robin Hood stole from the Political Class and returned to the taxpayers made poor by the government's burden

With the US economy suffering its first depression in sixty years, why would the Liberal Democrats in Congress want to suck seven hundred billion dollars from the economy?

But that is what they’re demanding, with their bizarre claim that we should raise taxes in the midst of this economic crisis.

When they say letting job-producing businesses and families making more than $250K per year keep their money “will cost seven hundred billion dollars”, of course that means that NOT letting them keep it will cost the private economy that same amount.

And, of course, the private economy is what creates wealth and permanent jobs.

We have seen that for the past year, when the government’s make-work “stimulus” jobs each ended, causing unemployment to worsen.

A “stimulus” job is a burden on the economy that must eventually end, leaving the worker unemployed again…but a job at at a real company pays for itself…as long as the worker makes the employer a profit, the business keeps employing him.

So, in order to save our economy, we need to leave money in private hands, to create wealth that sustains private jobs, that create more wealth, on and on.

Remember, the Political Class thinks that it owns the money it confiscates in taxes…but in the real world, WE own it, and the entire economy is robbed when it’s taken by the government.

The T.E.A. Party is correct: We are Taxed Enough, Already.

Who is the Real Traitor: Wikileaks, or Their Attackers?


There is no more important expression to protect, than any truth embarrassing to the government.

That is, above all else, the freedom of speech the Founders wanted the First Amendment to preserve.

In fact, its big test, in 1798, was against the Alien and Sedition Acts, that were passed to silence those who would embarrass the US government.

This censorship so outraged the American public that it brought down the Adams administration, and destroyed the Federalist Party, that had dominated American politics up to that very point.

And that should tell you something about the kind of people who are wanting to censor Wikileaks, for the crime of publishing truth that is embarrassing to secretive liars in the US government.

And to those who would claim that Swedish/Australian Wikileaks isn’t protected:

The Founders clearly intended the entire Bill of Rights to restrain the US government in ALL actions, not just on Americans. Just ask Judge Andrew Napolitano.

Wherever the US government goes, the Constitution is there…it’s the sole source of its legitimacy. And the Bill of Rights is part of the Constitution.

Not only do the Obama administration and neocons want to violate the 1st amendment, but they are promoting the tyranny of government secrecy.

If the government keeps an embarrassing secret from its own voters, this changes how they vote. That is the same violation of an election as if there were armed stormtroopers in your polling booth, changing your vote.

What is the excuse these attackers of the Constitution use as their excuse? That people who have lied to and kept secrets from the American voter might be endangered.

It is yet another example of Appeal to Cowardice, their favorite tool today.

These people, who assault the American ideals of truth and justice, who want to engage in the terrorism of a police state against political speech, are the real traitors.

Entrapment: The FBI Rolls its Own Terrorism


The FBI has a disturbing pattern of taking loudmouth bluffers and pushing them into FBI-supplied "crimes"

All over America, right now, drunks are sitting in bars talking about how they’d love to shoot their evil Ex in the head. Almost none of them will ever do it, of course.

But, someday, one will.

If the police state then organizes a task force to go around offering guns and encouragement to those drunks, then arresting any who are talked into acting on their bluff, it will be entrapment.

Some of those men (almost all, in fact) would never otherwise have done it.

Right now, all over America, angry people are talking about how they’d like to do this or that thing that really amounts to terrorism, if it weren’t petty hot air. A task force looking for these people and offering to help them is exactly the same kind of entrapment evil.

Some goofy, poser kid in Oregon was recently bragging that he could “get a gun because I’m a rapper”, wanted to blow something up, et cetera.

The FBI contacted this kid, pretending to be a terrorist organization, and got him to accept a fake bomb, which he then tried to use to blow up a Christmas tree.

This was precisely the same kind of unacceptable entrapment. We will never know whether the kid would have actually tried to blow up anything, without our own government’s encouragement and enablement.

And worse, this is a disturbing pattern. They did it in Chicago, Dallas, New York, Rockford, and elsewhere. We also don’t know how many will be spurred on to do something they wouldn’t have, but end up bypassing the FBI scammer and actually kill someone BECAUSE of our own government’s urging, as happened with the 1992 WTC Bombing.

Entrapment is always wrong…even when the police state uses Appeal to Cowardice to justify it.

You’re Censoring People, not Corporations


The moment a corporation stands up, like Frankenstein’s Monster, and starts talking without human intervention, I’ll agree that they might be censored.

But the fact is that a “corporation” is comprised of individuals, and THEY have their freedom of speech protected…even while they work for or own that corporation.

Censorship advocates, like judicial nominee Elena Kagan, and Liberal Republican John McCain, want to silence people, on the flimsy premise that they happen to be members of a corporation. They are violating the first amendment, because individuals are writing the copy that is being banned from publication.

You might as well censor them for belonging to a political party. We could just say “the constitution protects individuals, not parties”.

For that matter, publishing houses, newspapers, and blog hosting sites are corporations…everything they publish could be censored the same way.

You could censor the corporation if it tried to talk like some monstrous creation, but not the employees and management of the company who are actually buying political ads or other speech.

Fire in a Crowded Theater


Why You CAN Yell Fire in a Crowded Theater...

Censorship advocates say “you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater”, to prove that there are limits to free speech.

But the way they mean it, is not true.

You cannot actually be banned from yelling fire in a crowded theater.

In fact, you are completely free to yell fire in a crowded theater, and as long as there’s an actual fire, you probably be treated as a hero.

If there is NOT a fire, but everyone believes that you honestly thought there was, you shouldn’t be penalized, either.

But if you LIED about it, and it turns out that people were hurt, money lost, et cetera, then you can pay civil and (dubiously) criminal penalties.

But that’s not a restriction of free speech: It’s justice for others, who have been violated by fraud, which is a kind of coercion as evil as any other.

In other words, it’s hurting people with lies that brings penalties, not that your speech can rightfully be censored.

Black Racism Proves the Problem is Government


The Obama administration's racist abuses show that the problem isn't the race or sex of the abusers, but that government authority always gets abused.

I have long said that the main problem with, say, black rappers and militant black activists against The White Man is simply that they are confusing “white” with “government”. This is illustrated by the fact that the Obama administration is committing abuses against whites, now, and then the black racist rants of the people they’re shielding from prosecution.

If you simply remove the word “white” from  “The White Man”, suddenly angry black men become part of a much larger movement, and their objections/complaints become perfectly valid, if not some of their “solutions”:

“The White Man is keeping you down!”

No, The Man [government] is keeping you down…it’s just that in your time and place, it happens to be “white”.

  • The problem with the laws that keep you dependent, or make becoming successful illegal, is the law, not the color of the skin of the fools passing it.
  • The problem with the drug war isn’t the White Man using it to keep down the Black Man, but that corrupt or foolish government officials are using it to oppress society in general, especially poorer people.
  • The problem with police brutality isn’t White Cops, it’s power-abusing cops, the culture of cowardice (shoot first, ask questions and get paid leave for being wrong later, for Police Safety), and entitlement/privilege (“we are paid to enforce the law, not obey it” and how dare you exercise your rights instead of complying abjectly) that is the problem.

Of course the solutions proposed, whether anarchist or black activist, can include foolishness like “kill the police“. But only among the most foolish or crazy, and it’s easier to fall into that animalistic reaction when it’s racial, as well. Racism is tribalism, which is always bad.

We can see this with Malcom X, who was reportedly outgrowing the violent racial nonsense, apparently that’s WHY Louis Farrakhan and friends had him killed.

As it’s revealed that the Obama administration ordered black crimes against whites to not be prosecuted, and that black government officials specifically neglected helping white people, we can see that the problem is that authoritarian government ALWAYS gets abused, not the race or sex of the people who happen to be abusing it at any given moment in time.

Hayek Trumps Rothbard: Free Market in Money, not Fiat Gold


ALL VALUE is a “mutually shared illusion” in the marketplace.

What we need is not for a socialist government to force us to all use Fiat Gold, which is what Rothbardian faux-Austrians claim, but instead to have a free market in currency, like Hayek and the real Austrians have long said.

Money is an accounting tool, it has its own intrinsic worth as a means of facilitating and measuring trade and value. If you saddle it with some secondary function and valuation, like forming jewelry and USB connectors, then you end up with an even more unstable economy, as the value of the money becomes less predictable, changing with the supply and demand of that secondary commodity.

This is why we had bigger, worse economic downturns from 1873-1934, on the gold standard, and our best overall period of growth from 1973-2001, when we left Breton Woods and had not yet encountered the massive, Hoover-like growth of government under Bush.

The True Means of Production


Socialists like to proclaim that the workers are the means of production, and therefore should own all of its benefits.
But the factory worker is, in fact, the LEAST of the elements that goes into the production of wealth:
  • The inventor’s role is indispensable.
    Without him, there is nothing to make.
  • The entrepreneur, who recognizes the value of the invention and promotes its production, is almost as important.
    Without him, the invention is a dead end.
  • While anyone can invest, those who do are unique among the society in taking a risk and enabling the production.
    Without them, there are no resources for making it.
  • Without the facilitation of the management, everything would still fall on its face. Only some people are capable of organizing with any competence.
    Without this, people end up running in circles.
  • The engineers, who may not know science, but figure out how to produce things efficiently, have a relatively rare skill.
    Without them, nothing can be built effectively.
  • After all of that, the workers are little more than human cogs. Almost anyone can be trained into a production worker’s role…a fact that is exploited by the oppressive union monopolies, who TREAT them like interchangeable numbers.

Laborers can be proud of how they accomplish their otherwise-interchangeable role, and of their potential to move beyond their basic position. They have a right to the ambition of moving up into a less disposable role…but to pretend they are the “means of production” is fraudulent.

Corporations are Socialism



It's amazing how many things government intervention causes, and then blames on economic freedom

When people discover Stop Blaming Capitalism for Socialism’s Failures, or its Facebook Group, some are astonished at the list of problems government intervention has caused, them blamed on freedom of choice.

What often surprises them the most is that it includes the modern corporation.

We’re taught, in socialized education anyway, that corporations are an icon of everything wrong with capitalism.

The problem is that everything that makes a modern corporation has been imposed on us by government laws and force…and that’s socialism.

In fact, you can’t anything like the modern “public corporation”, in a free market.

Why could British Petroleum take risks that no privately owned company would dare? Because it’s effectively nationalized, as a Public Corporation. No owners or managers will be held accountable for the oil spill, not even under Obama’s abrogation of Rule of Law. Likewise any managers or owners in a company selling products it secretly knows are harmful, or fraudulent.

This is why you hear ads on the radio, by The Company Corporation, saying that you should incorporate your business, or to avoid liability for any harm you cause.

In a free market, there would be no way to simply renounce your liability for actions you take, or a company you own.

This can only be done by government fiat.

The very reason that Liberal Democrats pushed for the creation of corporate law, in the US, was to nationalize industries that they could not openly take over.

Since they couldn’t get people to accept an unaccountable People’s Automaking Bureau like you could in China, they simply ensured that existing automakers would become unaccountable bureaucracies owned by People.

In order to get the special treatment of a public corporation, a company must become OWNED by “the public”:

It is not allowed to simply write a custom document of ownership and sell stock to the public, to raise millions in capital. Instead, the company must follow a massive set of regulations, becoming in effect a mini-government.  In return for selling out their property rights, its owners and management become exempt from the consequences and liability for their actions, just like government bureaucrats.

Companies that do this, of course, have an unfair edge over companies that do not…so they come to dominate an industry, for example automaking.

And thus, the automaking industry comes to be owned by The People, through a quasi-governmental agency.

Impure, adulterated socialism, called Market Socialism…but socialism nonetheless.

%d bloggers like this: