http://www.nytimes.com/…

So the House passed the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill. In political terms, it was a remarkable achievement.

But 212 representatives voted no. A handful of these no votes came from representatives who considered the bill too weak, but most rejected the bill because they rejected the whole notion that we have to do something about greenhouse gases.

And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn’t help thinking that I was watching a form of treason — treason against the planet.

To fully appreciate the irresponsibility and immorality of climate-change denial, you need to know about the grim turn taken by the latest climate research.

I keep fairly up to date on the latest information regarding climate change and I’m still not convinced of the extent to which humans have influenced the climate. The lists of scientists which oppose the politically correct version of anthropogenic global warming climate change grows larger and larger all the time. Regardless of whether or not global climate change is man made the solution is more freedom and property rights protection rather then less. It is fascism and collectivism which has lead to the increase in pollution and use of oil. The government is the largest polluter, excuses other polluters and subsidizes organizations which the free market likely wouldn’t had invested in.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/…

On Wednesday, according to news reports, James W. Von Brunn, a longtime belligerent racist and anti-Semite, walked into the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and opened fire, murdering a security guard before he himself was shot and neutralized. Good people everywhere recognize the vicious criminality of his attack, and the particular insidiousness of his motivation to lash out where he did.

Read more…

Another excellent article by Mr. Gregory.

http://anarchyinyourhead.com/…

Bureaucrash has been a bold voice for liberty for years, steadily growing in popularity, but it’s taken on a not-so-bold new direction toward partisan politics as usual. Lee Doren was chosen as the new Crasher in Chief by the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

It seems to me that Lee might best be described as a moderate Republican. That’s arguably not the worst thing a person can be, certainly, but his personal principles seem not at all in line with the stated goals of Bureaucrash. Lee’s referred to certain blogs as conservative (slash) libertarian, as if these are interchangeable terms, and some new entries on the B.C. blogroll since he arrived include Michelle Malkin’s and Rush Limbaugh’s. He also demonstrates a failure to grasp the fallacies of collectivism. In short, his failure to even understand the principles of liberty himself means that he will inevitably use the powerful voice of Bureaucrash to distort the meaning for thousands of others.

If you are disturbed by this new direction of the organization, I encourage you to join a new group on the Bureacrash Social website called Countering the Crasher-in-Chief. In the span of just a few days, it’s accumulated over 80 members.

Sadly, the organization is not likely to simply fade away. Instead, by embracing the mainstream, it will probably grow, but it will have lost the edge that made it a special place for principled lovers of liberty. For now, it has chosen a quantity over quality approach when it comes to members, which I feel is very short-sighted, but then that depends on the goals of the owners. If their only goal is to grow membership, then perhaps they have chosen well. I just hope they have more meaningful goals than that.

If this new direction is not quickly changed, Bureaucrash will lose quite a few supporters, including Ian Freeman, host of Free Talk Live, and myself. I do not want Mr. Doren wielding the voice of Bureaucrash to distort the already diluted meaning of the word “libertarian”. If this mistake isn’t nipped in the bud, it is my opinion that Bureaucrash goes far beyond becoming unworthy of your support. They become an enemy.

While browsing through the ole’ google reader I came across this nifty little story on self-reliance and homesteading.  I am particularly fond of the parts about the sense of community derived from living in a coop and the shopping list at the end.  Enjoy!

Follow up to New York Times a little more to the left this morning: Yes Men release special socialistic edition

November 12, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT:
writers@nytimes-se.com
917-202-5479
718-208-0684
415-533-3961

“SPECIAL” NEW YORK TIMES BLANKETS CITIES WITH MESSAGE OF HOPE AND CHANGE
Thousands of volunteers behind elaborate operation

• PDF: http://www.nytimes-se.com/pdf
• Ongoing video releases: http://www.nytimes-se.com/video
• The New York Times responds: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/12/pranksters-spoof-the-times/

Hundreds of independent writers, artists, and activists are claiming credit for an elaborate project, 6 months in the making, in which 1.2 million copies of a “special edition” of the New York Times were distributed in cities across the U.S. by thousands of volunteers.

The papers, dated July 4th of next year, were headlined with long-awaited news: “IRAQ WAR ENDS”. The edition, which bears the same look and feel as the real deal, includes stories describing what the future could hold: national health care, the abolition of corporate lobbying, a maximum wage for CEOs, etc. There was also a spoof site, at http://www.nytimes-se.com/.

“Is this true?  I wish it were true!” said one reader. “It can be true, if we demand it.”

“We wanted to experience what it would look like, and feel like, to read headlines we really want to read. It’s about what’s possible, if we think big and act collectively,” said Steve Lambert, one of the project’s organizers and an editor of the paper.

“This election was a massive referendum on change. There’s a lot of hope in the air, but there’s a lot of uncertainty too. It’s up to all of us now to make these headlines come true,” said Beka Economopoulos, one of the project’s organizers.

“It doesn’t stop here. We gave Obama a mandate, but he’ll need mandate after mandate after mandate to do what we elected him to do. He’ll need a lot of support, and yes, a lot of pressure,” said Andy Bichlbaum, another project organizer and editor of the paper.

The people behind the project are involved in a diverse range of groups, including The Yes Men, the Anti-Advertising Agency, CODEPINK, United for Peace and Justice, Not An Alternative, May First/People Link, Improv Everywhere, Evil Twin, and Cultures of Resistance.

In response to the spoof, the New York Times said only, “We are looking into it.”  Alex S. Jones, former Times reporter who is an authority on the history of the paper, says: “I would say if you’ve got one, hold on to it. It will probably be a collector’s item.”

Think big and act collectively? I’d like to name some others who did that to great success. Hitler and the National Socialist Party, Lenin and later Stalin and the Russian Communist Party, Mao and the Chinese Communist Party, Castro and the Cuban Communists… I’ll stop my predictable list of state socialists who thought big and murdered millions in the name of “collectivism.”

“Massive referendum on change”? “We gave Obama a mandate”? Define massive. To me it means more then 52.7% of the votes. A lot more actually. Upwards of 65 or 70 percent at least. And who is we? Those who voted for him? That’s 66,354,771 people. Or 30.5% of the voting population. Is that really a mandate? Is that a massive referendum. Is it okay for 30.5% of the voting population to control the other 69.5%?

I wasn’t much of a fan of those groups mentioned who are involved in this project. This solidifies my dislike of them.