Why Is Anyone Shocked By The FBI’s Decision?


It was announced yesterday (7/5/16) that Director of the FBI James Comey was not going to recommend charges be brought against Hillary Clinton in the email scandal that has been ongoing for many years now. In his official statement, the FBI Director said the following, to sum things up:

As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.

Continue reading


Women In The Draft: Coming Soon


Are you ready to feel the equality yet? It’s coming…

The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2017 passed the Senate 85-13-2. The bill passed by both a vast majority with Republican and Democrat support, along with one Independent.

Some of the notable no’s:

  • Rand Paul (R-KY)
  • Mike Lee (R-UT)
  • Ted Cruz (R-TX)
  • Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)
  • Ron Wyden (D-OR)
  • Harry Reid (D-NV)

Who missed the vote, with some very crucial things like changes to Indefinite Detention and the Draft?

  • Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
  • Barbara Boxer (D-CA)

The next time someone tells you that Democrats stand with women, question it. Since the vast majority have signed on to having them drafted into war and killed on a battlefield, that high horse no longer should exist.

And the next time someone tells you that Bernie cares, tell them he skipped out and didn’t care at all. If he did, he would have been there, and fought.

Discussing Healthcare and Rights

I used this meme back last year in a post on whether people have a right to healthcare or not. Of course, I argued that people did not, as it does not naturally exist, and is the produc of other people’s labor. Still, many think they’re entitled to it, and for free as well. Recently, I responded to a few comments on this, and I will go ahead and post those below.

The first set are the criticisms that the Rand Paul argument received:

#1 – officermilky

Call me naive, but wouldn’t he be paid through taxes? He wouldn’t be working for free. The argument to that, of course, would be “robbing peter to pay paul” but healthcare would be taxes that, you know, a society would all agree to go in on because they democratically believe it’s the right thing to do?

I’m not even saying that’s a perfect solution to everything, but the Rand caption seems faulty.

#2 – ramblingferret

Yes just like in Canada and Europe we round up doctors and force them to work against there will. Like my poor shrink who works 8-5 with Wednesdays off.

#3 – sweertomato

And now, here is how I responded to each one of them:

@officermilky He would be paid under a market wage that he would have regularly earned, due to government price setting (both on goods and wages). Your main mistake is that you will not have all of society agreeing to this universal healthcare plan. You would only need 50% +1 to make this happen, and that doesn’t sound in any way like it “society would all agree to go in” with this, as you say. THAT WOULD BE THE CASE.

@ramblingferret You mention Canada’s system, and I’d be a bit careful with that. They tried to first off ban private insurance, which was ruled unconstitutional. Canadian healthcare wait times are far longer than American wait times.

canada healthcare times

In addition to this, Canada’s system is lagging in adopting to new technology and practices to improve the quality and speed of care. And I’d be even more careful to use Canada’s system, since it’s projected to eat up 97% of government revenues over time. If that’s something America should copy, I’d be skeptical. And if you still don’t believe I should be skeptical, I would ask the 40,000+ Canadians who sought medical treatment outside Canada due to these problems, and more.

@sweer-tomato You mention that it would be free. About that…


And if that is the route you wish to take (in saying that universal healthcare is free), then this also applies:


Weird how neither me nor Rand actually said the “ and saying oh “Survival of the fittest” if you get seriously ill / injured you deserve to die is the most barbaric and jackass thing you can say.” I honestly wonder where this even comes from, but I don’t think I care.

Now, under the current ACA, quality of care has gone down, and prices have gone up (especially when you’re not subsidised, like regular people with their own healthcare or through their business). Under the universal system, the costs become simply unseen by the everyday taxpayer, but is still felt on April 15, and don’t think for a second this is going to be in any way cheap, especially for people who are poor or have pre-existing conditions. Not when the plan require a bunch of crap that a) shouldnt be part of health insurance, and b) is mandated by government fiat.

And let’s chat about government mandated bull. I’ve yet to hear someone explain logically how the government can require health insurers to cover something, and the health insurers won’t raise their prices. The health insurers know they can simply jack up their prices all they want, because it’s now mandated that “x” service be covered. You wanna know why healthcare costs keep going up? It ain’t corporate greed that is the main problem. I’ll tell you that.

And let’s talk about 2016. If you’d like to see more poor people, go ahead, enact your universal healhcare system. Bernie’s plan sure ain’t cheap, since you’d have to come up with $3.2 trillion in new tax revenue per year (equalling $32 trillion in total, more than his original projections were) over the next decade to pay for just the healthcare costs. Since the Sander’s plan already boasts of tax hikes on the wealthy (aka the one’s who currently pay the majority of taxes), where is the rest of the money coming from? Hint hint, he will HAVE look lower. But don’t worry, you might be audited by the IRS after not paying taxes because you can’t afford them, but you’ll have healthcare still… that is, as long as they haven’t cut you off.

It’s 2016: let people actually keep their money for a change and get the damn government out of healthcare, so people can afford it and not go broke should something bad happen.

All in all, I haven’t done a good rebuttal like this in a while, and I probably could have done tons better, but this still came out good, and still hasn’t been rebutted by any of these three posters. I’m not expecting it to, but hey, we shall see.

Utah Fails To Learn What “Small Government” Is

Utah Senator Todd Weiler has proposed a bill to rid the state of porn by adding Internet filters and anti-porn software on all cell phones and requiring citizens to opt-in before viewing porn online. It’s to save the children, he says. Weiler successfully pushed an anti-porn resolution through the state senate earlier this year, declaring…

via Utah representatives want to install porn blockers on all cellphones — TechCrunch

Right now,  I’m reminde of The Simpsons episode where the one lady screams “Will someone please think of the children!”

That is exactly what this guy is doing, and he’s using that exact thing I’ve mentioned to pass this authoritarian power-grab onto people. Now, call me crazy, but that’s how you grow government, and it shouldn’t be a surprise that this guy is a Republican. It MAKES PERFECT SENSE.

This is part of the reason why I am a libertarian: I do no like authoritarianism on either side, or of either variety. I  don’t like it from the left when they want control of my economic freedoms, nor when the right when they want contro of my personal freedoms.

The only thing I see this doing is being  massive invasion of privacy, and sending more people into using TOR, which is a good/bad idea (for various other reasons).

Overall, good job Utah for really getting your priorities straight.

John McAfee Goes Up Against Trump & Clinton

I love John McAfee. There, I said it. Seriously, I have a bromance for this guy. This wonderful tech genius is making me really love him more and more with everything his campaign releases, from his campaign ads to his graphics and so on.

In one of his more recent ones, he decided to compar himself against Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, and his does a terrific job of making the two authoritarian psychopaths look almost the exact same, and shows the alternative that he is offering to the American people, should he be the Libertarian nominee.

Without further ado, here it is.

static1.squarespace.commstiffanymadison@gmail.comcarl saganmstiffanymadison@gmail.commstiffanymadison@gmail.commcafee patriot acttsamcafee tsaencryptionmcafee encryptionstatic1.squarespace.commcafee compares donald hillarywarmcafee warwar spending chartmcafee unitydownload

Source: [X]

Rand Paul vs. Tax Treaties


“I’m calling on the Senate, in particular Sen. Rand Paul, who’s been a little quirky on this issue, to stop blocking the implementation of tax treaties that have been pending for years,”

Someone sounds a little upset. These are the words of President Obama, who was talking about tax treaties that he’s really wanted to be passed in the Senate. The reason why he wants these treaties put through? So he can stop “tax evasion”, a problem which he is looking to address.

Now, on the surface, this doesn’t look like it should be much of an issue. You need to understand that nothing in Washington is simple though. What these tax treaties would do is allow for law enforcement to basically act as if it were unbound by the 4th Amendment, and become almost NSA-like, since it would have the power to allow law enforcement to see what you’re doing, when you’re doing it, and what comes in and goes out. Yes, this can all be seen from bank activity. Scary, isn’t it?

So what about tax cheats? To be honest, these are the symptom of a much larger problem: a tax system not many know how to properly navigate, and many would like to just avoid all together, seeing as how there is no hope in trying to figure it out while keeping their costs low. And compliance? Haha, that’s a funny one.

2 of these treaties are with Switzerland and Luxembourg, two of the wealthiest nations on the planet, and since they see a lot of monetary traffic, the White House feels like it would be wise to have access to their records, so they can be used in tax investigations by the IRS if needed.

Going further into some research, I can across this gem over at Accounting Today:

Of the eight treaties, seven of them are bilateral agreements with various countries to facilitate cooperation to avoid double taxation and to lower compliance costs. Regrettably, these agreements also unnecessarily change the standard for providing personal financial information to law enforcement agencies from probable cause of criminal behavior, such as fraud—which Paul correctly regards as the only constitutionally permissible standard under the Fourth Amendment—to what amounts to wholesale bulk collection on the pattern of the NSA’s violations of email and phone privacy.

This is Paul’s only concern with these seven bilateral treaties. A simple amendment could conform them to constitutional standards and they could move forward expeditiously.

However, that reasonable solution is not acceptable to Secretary Jack Lew’s Treasury Department. That’s because the Department also insists on using the treaties as a Trojan Horse for one of the most dangerous and dysfunctional laws enacted under the presidency of Barack Obama: the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA. 

FATCA, which few Americans have ever heard of, was passed by a Democrat-controlled Congress in 2010, supposedly as a weapon against “fatcat” offshore tax evasion. Disdaining the constitutional path of investigating individuals who are suspected of wrongdoing and securing a warrant for accessing their private records, FATCA takes the NSA approach: to require all non-U.S. banks to hand over information on U.S. private persons (not corporations, by the way) absent any requirement of reasonable suspicion, due process, or a court order. If banks fail to do so, they face crippling sanctions that essentially shut them out of the American market. FATCA has led many foreign banks to deny services to Americans rather than deal with the burdens and crushing compliance costs, thus impeding U.S. business and export opportunities and risking economic harm.

*bolding is my own*

Now you see why Obama wants these treaties passed in Congress, don’t you? There’s always another reason than just something like “tax evasion”. There’s always something more to it.

Rand Paul is right to be in opposition to these, and the thing is, is that these cannot pass while there is still opposition to them. Meaning, that as long as Rand keeps saying “I object”, then these cannot move on at all. They’ll just continue to sit around and collect dust.

Authoritarians Are Authoritarians, Regardless Of Political Party


For the last week, what have I been treated to by people in their Facebook, Twitter, and so on tirades? I will post these few examples of what has been the basic premise for my experience.

There’s this:

13102715_1015183188568376_6184046860963151887_n (1)

Then there’s this:


Then there’s this little video from The Blaze’s Tomi Lahren:

Then there’s stuff like this:

And this:

And this:

 And finally, this:

My first observation is that these people expect me to blindly come behind their candidate, and not say a word? Lol, that’s cute. If anything, they’re helping to drive away people. Social media supporters of Trump have known some very vile people, particularly The Forbes Group and Roger Stone. These people have been acting like little childish pricks since the day someone refused to throw their support behind their candidate.

It’s this mentality that will keep me away, and will keep me from considering him in the first place. But the next thing I really want to get to is that these supporters reveal something more deep and disturbing about Trump, and probably, how he will govern.

Trump is an authoritarian: it’s as simple as that. I believe it, and a lot of other people will back me up on that. Trump will govern as an authoritarian. He thinks he can come in, and everyone will bend to his will, but that is not how Washington DC works. He is a fool if he believes it. He is also a fool if he thinks he can appoint “really good people” (whatever the hell that means, since Obama said pretty much the same thing, along with every other President). That gimmick has been going on since the cabinet was formed back with Washington himself. Though as of late, we’ve gotten terrible people, and I for one don’t see that changing.

If you think that Obama’s use of the Executive Orders was bad, I can’t wait for you to see President Trump (that just doesn’t sound right). If this guy can’t work with Congress, and he’s souring a lot of them, then what’s his next and only option? Executive orders. All of a sudden, “conservatives” will be hailing President Trump, for moving past Congress, and “doing what needed to be done”, at which point, I will call them out for being hypocrites, and call out the liberals trying to call them out, since they were silent on Obama.

At some point, you have to come to the realization that Trump is an authoritarian, and a Keynesian authoritarian, which should concern the crap out of libertarians (I’m looking at you, Walter Block). He will not be good for the domestic policy of the United States. What one has to expect from this is an expansion of government that WILL control more of our lives.

Now, let me address something else: voting. Trump supporters are making the claim that in not supporting Donald Trump, the #NeverTrump movement is supporting Hillary Clinton. Now, let me be clear: #NeverTrump encompasses a lot of people from a wide prospective of the GOP and electorate. It is mostly the neo-conservatives who have begun supporting Hillary Clinton. But the rest remain just not Trump. Many, like me, have chosen to go to a third party, like the Libertarian Party. This vehicle is the most readily available and deployable vessel there is when in comes to a national third party, and there is no one even close to competing with them. I will be voting for whomever is the nominee, largely because I know that THEY WILL REPRESENT MY VALUES. Under Trump, it’s subject to the day.

The Trump supporters will claim we’re all just voting for Hillary, and want her to win. This is not true. We’re voting against BOTH Trump and Clinton. In case you haven’t noticed, #NeverTrump despises both of them, but recognizes that neither of them are good in any way, shape, gender, etc… There isn’t much that differentiates the two, so what point does it make to vote for either one? In reality, there is no point.

Are the Trump supporters upset that I won’t support their candidate? Probably, but they’ll just call me an idiot, or a cuckservative (how grown-up of you), or some other put down. These people have had enough with Republicanism, and now, they want their own dictator, who will say what they want to hear. They’ve suspended reason for security and comfort. They’ ve given up hard truths for comfortable lies. This, ladies and gentlemen, is how a nation dies.

Remember, if you liked this, please, give it a like by using the button below. Also, share it for your friends to read, as I know that they could always use a good read.