Posted on 01/01/2002 5:06:05 PM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
Led to believe that they're still free to decide
Because the TV gave permission -- some a program on rights
Fed only the candy the part that they wanna hear
Slowly raped though they can only feel the tickle in their ears
A nation of puppets who worship a beast
Who drinks the blood of their souls as they lay at its feet
If seeing is believing then you can have your TV screen
I will worship a God who allows me to think
by THE CRUCIFIED
Mindbender
The Pillars of Humanity, 1991
Like?s Gandalf?s caveat about the ?precious? ring in J. R. R. Tolkien?s trilogy, power corrupts, even ? perhaps especially ? when it?s wielded with virtuous intentionsOh, I'll say.
redrock--Constitutional Terrorist
p.s....I see it only took 10 posts for some idiot to prance around yelling "1%....1%".......
redrock--Constitutional Terrorist
p.s....I see it only took 10 posts for some idiot to prance around yelling "1%....1%".......
Oh, Sandlin and Miller, etc., don't necessarily vote Libertarian Party. Miller, for example, was one of the early movers in the California state Republican Liberty Caucus.
Understand that the Chalcedon Foundation has been considered "the ThinkTank of the Christian Right", much as Brookings and Urban Institute are the ThinkTanks of the Democrats, Heritage is the ThinkTank of the GOP and Cato is the ThinkTank of the Libertarians.
Understand further that Sandlin (author of the above piece) is Chalcedon's Executive Vice President, and Chalcedon has been moving ever more strongly in a libertarian direction.
Now realize that up until this point, the Statist-Authoritarian crowd has essentially enjoyed a "captive audience" on the Christian Right. Social Authoritarians such as Falwell, Robertson, Bauer and Ashcroft have enjoyed broad sway over legions of Christian Right voters, and have largely dominated the direction of Christian Right political activism... supported throughout the 80's, to a greater or lesser extent, by the intellectual firepower of the Chalcedon Foundation.
Should Chalcedon Foundation break with the Social Authoritarians, however, this will represent a major split within Christian Right political "orthodoxy". The intellectual core of Christian Right political activism will have cast its lot with Liberty, and against Statism... and I expect you will begin to see pitched battles between the two groups on the pages of World Magazine and Christianity Today -- both of which are already friendly to Chalcedon's background, as Chalcedon is predominantly Calvinist, and both CT ad World have a strong Calvinist editorial contingent (particularly World).
My friend Dana Rorbacher received 6% in one of the most liberal districts in California. Carla Howell received 12% in arguably the most liberal state in the nation and ran against Ted Kennedy.
Libertarians are making great strides and the poll results of Harry Browne are not a reflection of the true growth and influence of the LP.
Not that it matters now.
Not strictly true. The Federal Government may distribute a Tax Bill among the several States "according to the actual enumeration or census", i.e., in proportion to population. It would then be the prerogative of the States to determine how to raise the requisite funds, whether by Property Tax or excises, etc. (Ideally, you also repeal the 17th Amendment, so that the States are sending Senators whose jobs depend on sending the smallest Tax Bill possible home to their sovereign legislatures!! But even so, if a "State-Apportionment" Tax were adopted, at least you would have State Governors and Legislatures strongly opposed to Federal spending, and even without the ability to select Senators, that's a healthy adversarial relationship to encourage).
But I don't think that Sandlin is strictly against tariffs so much as he is against protectionism. The difference is simply a Laffer-curve question of whether or not your Tariffs are having a substantial "protective" impact, i.e., are scaring Imports away (and thus losing tariff revenue from the Imports which are driven away!!). If they are, that is "Protectionism", and Sandlin is against it. On the other hand, if your Tariffs are low enough that they are not having a substantial "Protective" impact, that's a "Revenue Tariff"... a low Tariff designed to garner revenue (by not driving Imports away), rather than a high Tariff designed to protect industry (by driving Imports away).
But yeah, at present, bit of a moot point. :-(
Not strictly true. The Federal Government may distribute a Tax Bill among the several States "according to the actual enumeration or census", i.e., in proportion to population. It would then be the prerogative of the States to determine how to raise the requisite funds, whether by Property Tax or excises, etc. (Ideally, you also repeal the 17th Amendment, so that the States are sending Senators whose jobs depend on sending the smallest Tax Bill possible home to their sovereign legislatures!! But even so, if a "State-Apportionment" Tax were adopted, at least you would have State Governors and Legislatures strongly opposed to Federal spending, and even without the ability to select Senators, that's a healthy adversarial relationship to encourage).
But I don't think that Sandlin is strictly against tariffs so much as he is against protectionism. The difference is simply a Laffer-curve question of whether or not your Tariffs are having a substantial "protective" impact, i.e., are scaring Imports away (and thus losing tariff revenue from the Imports which are driven away!!). If they are, that is "Protectionism", and Sandlin is against it. On the other hand, if your Tariffs are low enough that they are not having a substantial "Protective" impact, that's a "Revenue Tariff"... a low Tariff designed to garner revenue (by not driving Imports away), rather than a high Tariff designed to protect industry (by driving Imports away).
But yeah, at present, bit of a moot point. :-(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.