Libertarian commentary on News, #06-16E by Nathan Barton

Limits on government? Executive power? Don’t make me laugh. Clearly, the leading Democratic presidential candidates, as well as the guy now in DC, don’t think that there are any limits. Consider…

Socialist Bernie: tyrant on steroids? The Democratic debates to see who gets to run for Massa in November are quite revealing. It seems that the tyrannical rule of the current squatter at 1600 PA would be just the opening act for the REAL tyrant. CNS News reports that Sanders doesn’t like the current guy’s “deportation” practices – which seems to be “deporting” about 1 in a thousand, and will rule without Congress unless Congress does exactly what he wants regarding immigration and naturalization. Both Clinton and Sanders would use rule by decree as the default setting.

Mama’s Note: And if the congress wasn’t actually fully on board with that, when it suits them, they could stop it in a day. Not happening because they like it this way.

And if we thought the nanny state was bad now, well, Sanders at least (according to CNS News) claims that the “government” has a MORAL RESPONSIBILITY to guarantee “a decent standard of living for everyone.” Of course, he did not show just WHEN God died and made government King. Or when we voted on this, or where in the Constitution this power is assigned. BUT – never fear – he stated that there is SOME limit in size to government as he envisions it, although he didn’t say what that limit was. I presume it would (for now) be limited to just the Soar System.

Meanwhile, it is clear that even with Big-Gov Christie now toast, there are still a lot of advocacy for expanding government to be found in Trump, Kasich, Cruz, and of course Bush. But nothing compared to Congress: Demo OR GOP. Paul Ryan, “the bearded wonder” who began disappointing even conservatives within minutes of being elected Speaker, sounds more and more liberal as he goes. CNS News reports that Ryan is being as wishy-washy as any of his GOP predecessors: he won’t even say if he believes that women should be drafted into military service. Pelosi, on the other hand, (CNS News) seems to be backing away from her “feminist rights” agenda that would DEMAND “equal opportunity” servitude. I do note that the Marine Corps Commandant’s “endorsement” of draft registration for women might be a (too?) subtle dig at the stupidity of opening ALL combat assignments to men, women, and …whatever. Could it be that he thinks opposition to drafting women might cause the White House and Congress to reverse the stupidity of using women in ground combat?

Mama’s Note: Seems to me that if this conscription slavery is reinstated that nobody in government, or others who approve it, will have another legitimate word to say about “racism.” Slavery of any kind is a curse to the entire human race, not just one flavor.

Putting it another way, government is now pushing to take away yet another limit on government. Let me be clear: conscription is immoral and nothing more than a form of slavery, and as Heinlein pointed out, shows the society has degenerated to the point of no longer being viable. Drafting of women is to the male draft as sexual slavery is to “labor” slavery: even more disgusting and despicable.

Are there any GEOGRAPHIC limits on government power? For example, the Boston Herald tells us that the US has charged an Iraqi woman with a crime committed in Iraq. “The wife of a senior Islamic State leader who was killed in a U.S. raid last year has been charged in federal court with holding American Kayla Mueller hostage and with contributing to the aid worker’s death, the Justice Department says. Nisreen Assad Ibrahim Bahar, also known as Umm Sayyaf, admitted after her capture last May that she and her husband kept Mueller captive along with several other young female hostages, according to an FBI affidavit filed in the case. … The criminal complaint, filed by federal prosecutors in Alexandria, Virginia, charges Umm Sayyaf with conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terror organization, resulting in death.” [Tom Knapp notes: I wonder when the New York State Patrol will start setting up speed traps on Germany’s autobahn, and when New Jersey’s gaming commission will start issuing citations to Monte Carlo’s casinos for operating without permits?]

Clearly, this also applies between states: will Wyoming try to charge its residents who indulge in marijuana use while in Colorado? Will Colorado attempt to punish South Dakota residents who travel through Colorado because they own a weapon which they bought in South Dakota without a Colorado-mandated background check (even if they don’t have the weapon with them in Colorado)? If the FBI and Federal courts can get away with this, why couldn’t a state?

Mama’s Note: The various government agencies are already talking about how they will control and tax mining in the asteroids. Dang… wish I was going to live long enough to see how that works out!  If you’d like some ideas, read “The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress” by Robert Heinlein.

Government, by its very nature, refuses to accept limits that are not imposed on it by people capable of resisting it, by force if necessary. We are seeing attempts to break even the limits currently in existence; limits which have already stolen much of our freedom.

Mama’s Note: There is no hope of resisting the power and size of government piece by piece. There simply are no rational limits to it possible as long as people accept the idea that there is such a thing as legitimate non-voluntary government, and that such an entity has any legitimate authority over them. When they can shake off that myth, they will become self governors. And first, they must accept the fact that no non-voluntary government has any intention or ability to protect them or making their lives better.