Happy 4th of July!!!

[Harry]

Have a GREAT HOLIDAY!

[Sponsored Links]

[John Bridge]

Thank you, Harry. :)

You can take the day off too, you know. :D

[Hobbit]

Thanks, Harry....:)

[cx]

Ahhh, wouldst that it were still Independence Day. :(

And that we still had and cherished the independence, liberty, and personal responsibility that day fostered, and that there were a copy of the Declaration on the front page of my newspaper instead of pictures of Saadam and his sons, and stories about fireworks.

Pardon the small tear on my cheek. :o


Thanks, Harry, do celebrate with us, eh? :)

[RandyL]

Hey you guys are lucky, your holiday landed on a friday. Guess we wont be seeing yous this evening or for some of you all weekend.....:loaded: Have a good one guys!

[Hobbit]

Randy...some of us will get stooopid today and some of us won't. But, at any rate, its still the best reason we have down here for a celebration.:)

Boy CX....you sure know how to bring a party back to reality..:shades: :) :)

[flatfloor]

Thank you Harry.

:)

[John Bridge]

Take heart, CX. For the past seven years they've printed the entire text of the Declaration on the op-ed page of the Houston Chronicle. I read it every year. I also have it framed and hanging on the wall in my living room. :)

[cx]

Actually, that is a bit heartening, John. :)

Im never farther than my briefcase from a copy of the Constitution, but I don't have a good copy of the Declaration. Is that sad, or what. :(

I got a smile out of this from our own op-ed section:

[John Bridge]

:)

I don't carry the Constitution around in my briefcase. I carry it around in my head. :)

The Declaration I have is one of those facsimile copies with the painting of the signing at the bottom. It's very hard to read, but it's up there on the wall begging someone to ask me what it's doing there. ;)

[cx]

Sorry to turn your thread into a political forum, Harry, but I think this fits under the heading quite well. The author was on the ballot for President in every state during the past two election cycles. Got my vote.



Uncelebrating the Fourth

by Harry Browne

Unfortunately, July 4th has become a day of deceit.

On July 4, 1776, the Continental Congress formally declared its
independence from Great Britain. Thirteen years later, after a
difficult war to secure that independence, the new country was open
for business.

It was truly unique -- the first nation in all of history in which the
individual was considered more important than the government, and the
government was tied down by a written Constitution.

It was the one nation where you could live your life secure in the
knowledge that no one would ask for your papers, where you weren't
identified by a number, and where the government wouldn't extort a
percentage of your income as the price of holding a job.

And so each year July 4th has been a commemoration of the freest
country in history.

False Celebration

But the America that's celebrated no longer exists.

The holiday oratory deceitfully describes America as though it were
the unique land of liberty that once was. Politicians thank the
Almighty for conferring the blessings of liberty on a country that no
longer enjoys those blessings. The original freedom and security have
disappeared -- even though the oratory lingers on.

What made America unique is now gone, and we are much the same as
Germany, France, England, or Spain, with:

* confiscatory taxes,

* a Constitution and Bill of Rights that are symbolic only --
merely documents used to justify governmental actions that
are in fact prohibited by those documents,

* business regulated by the state in the most minute detail,

* no limits on what Congress or the President might decide to do.

Yes, there are some freedoms left, but nothing like the America that
was -- and nothing that you can't find in a few dozen other countries.

The Empire

Gone, too, is the sense of peace and security that once reigned
throughout the land. America -- bound by two huge oceans and two
friendly neighbors -- was subject to none of the never-ending wars and
destruction that plagued Europe and Asia.

Now, however, everyone's business is America's business. Our
Presidents consider themselves the rulers of the world -- deciding who
may govern any country on earth and sending Americans to die enforcing
those decisions.

Whereas America was once an inspiration to the entire world --
its very existence was proof that peace and liberty really were
possible -- Americans now live in fear of the rest of the world and
the rest of the world lives in fear of America.

The Future

Because the education of our children was turned over to government in
the 19th century, generations of Americans have been taught that
freedom means taxes, regulations, civic duty, and responsibility for
the whole world. They have no conception of the better life that could
exist in a society in which government doesn't manage health care,
education, welfare, and business -- and in which individuals are free
to plot their own destinies.

Human beings are born with the desire to make their own decisions and
control their own lives. But in most countries government and social
pressures work to teach people to expect very little autonomy.

Fortunately, in America a remnant has kept alive the ideas of liberty,
peace, and self-respect -- passing the concepts on from generation to
generation. And so today millions of Americans know that the present
system isn't the right system -- that human beings aren't born to
serve the state and police the world.

Millions more would be receptive upon being shown that it's possible
to have better lives than what they're living now.

Both groups need encouragement to quit supporting those who are taking
freedom away from them.

You and I may not have the money and influence to change America by
ourselves, but we can keep spreading the word -- describing a better
society in which individuals are truly free and government is in
chains (instead of the opposite).

And someday we may reach the people who do have the money and
influence to persuade tens of millions of Americans to change our
country for the better.

I don't know that it's going to happen, but I do know it's possible. I
know that the urge to live one's own life is as basic in human beings
as the will to live and the desire to procreate. If we keep plugging
away, we may eventually tap into that urge and rally the forces
necessary to restore the real America.

And then the 4th of July will be worth celebrating again.


/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/


FreedomWire is Harry Browne's email list.

Harry Browne was the presidential candidate of the
Libertarian Party in 1996 and 2000. He is currently
the Director of Public Policy for the American Liberty
Foundation (www.AmericanLibertyFoundation.org). Read more
of his commentaries online at www.HarryBrowne.org .

TO JOIN the Libertarian Party online,
visit http://www.lp.org/action/join.html

[Davy]

CX, I like alot of what Harry Browne has to say. I'am not sure about legalizing drugs with restrictions on it simular to alcohol (is this right ?). I need to learn more about where he stands on this issue. A couple years ago I enjoyed listening to a guy named Neal Boortz (boortx.com) on a radio station in Dallas. He's a Libertarian and was interesting to listen to. He would touch on the drug issue every once in a while. He only lasted a year or so in Dallas.:)

[Sonnie Layne]

Aww, forget it, I've been typing for two hours and still can't get the words together.

Let's just say I'm Libertarian at heart, Conservative at the booth, liberal when in bed or bath.

[cx]

I'm not at all familiar with Mr. Boortz, Davy. I shall spend a little time on that site and see what I think.

In general, I think you'll find the Libertarian position is that should be free to do whatever you want with your own body, including filling it with drugs of any sort you choose, and that the so called war on drugs causes a thousand times more harm in this country that do the drugs themselves.

I would add that the two drugs that cause the most medical and societal damage, alcohol and nicotine, are quite legal, while somewhat regulated and heavily taxed, making the drug war even more ludicrous. Personal opinion there, but probably close to the party position.

The primary difference between the Libertarian party and the other party (Demopublican) is the desire to return to a position of individual liberty and responsibility, where the government is once again tightly controlled by the people as was the intent of the founders. This includes, of course, the right of each person to make really stupid decisions for himself.

The libertarian plan is really quite workable and would make the country a far better place to live again, it's just tough to sell to people who think this monster we have allowed to form is the only kind of government available.

The drug issue is always a difficult one to get across, but if you eliminate all the emotion and rhetoric and just look at the facts - not those from the government agency in charge of promoting the war, mind you, actual facts - the drug war is the problem, not the drugs. We have the 18th and 21st ammendments to the constitution as clear evidence against the workability of any such laws, but we are ever so slow to learn.

But that's just one of the major issues needing attention, eh?

My opinion; worth price charged.

And you'll be in good company, DaveM never agrees with me either. Maybe it's a Dave thing. :)

[Sonnie Layne]

No reason for our police force to shoot us because we choose to "hang out" in a park where drugs change hands. That's really something to celebrate on the fourth day of july every year, huh? I mean it's really weird when you're seventeen and the police that you think are going to protect and save you in crisis are shooting real bullets at you because you don't look right in their eyes. Really weird. Unforgettable how the fear invaded the eyes of my friends when they were delivered into the ambulance (reluctantly) to be taken to the hospital, where they were further treated like criminals tho' they'd offer'd no resistance nor evidence to substantiate their guilt of violating any law, imagined or written.

That's where I choose to go every 4th. If I could, I'd climb the same tree that saved my life, but of course they've cut that one down.

Nothing's safe.
Never forget.
Forth.

[sdaniels7114]

Gotta speak up in defense of the drug war. I watched two friends of mine become addicted to heroin about ten years ago. I learned that that drug makes you vomit and Cr*p your pants the first couple of times you use it. You'd think that would be deterent enough, but, no. The high is just too intoxicating. This is from the inhaled version, I'd guess that the injected version is that much more devastating on the body. I remember one of them was a little guy, about 5'9" and 160 or so. I'm much bigger, yet it was embarassing how much further that guy could hit a baseball than me. It's been a hard ten years for him, though. I don't know where he is; but, I'm told he's fallen pretty far. He can't play baseball anymore yet he's only 28 or so. He's one of the lucky ones.

[cx]

Well, your friends got addicted to that stuff in spite of any and all laws and the alleged war, Steve, as have many others.

I'm personally not in favor of anyone doing that to themselves, but I'm fully in favor of allowing them the choice. I'm even in favor of helping them stop doing it, once they recognize it as a problem, but I'm fully against the federal government intervening.

That's the kind of difference in government I'm suggesting here.

The war on drugs didn't help your friends, nor will it help any one else who chooses their same path. I'm sure you know at least two more people who have had their health ruined by alcohol or nicotine. It's all about choices and personal responsibility. And should be.

We're speaking of adult decisions, of course. Minor decisions and parental responsibility is another argument, but the war on drugs is of no benefit there either.

[davem]

Kelly,
I'm closer to Libertarian than you think. Conservative to the core. Maybe I have the wrong strategy, but I just can't do it in the booth. You don't see a difference between Republicans an Dems, but I do. If more conservatives voted Libertarian instead of Republican, more Dems would win. Could be that's just short term thinking, but it's the way I see it.

[Davy]

CX, I agree with what you are saying. I'am very close to going down the libertarian road but it's the drug issue I'am stuck on. I'am thinking of the kids and if it will be easier for them to get their hands on drugs. Of course this is where parenting comes in. If a child gets ahold of a cigarette for the first time it's normally no big deal but the first time with some of these drugs can kill or hook you the first time.
Of course Dave is right, not sure on the exact numbers but didn't Perot get 19% of the vote in 1992 taking away from George Sr and giving us Clinton?

[Harry]

I guess it boils down (to some extent) that FREEDOM is having absolute control over our choices regardless of whether those choices be good or bad for our existence. But ... when our individual choices effect the safety of those around us then maybe we need to have a means of protecting one person's freedoms from the damaging effects of anothers person's choices.

But then we have the old adage "you give an inch , they take a mile" ... and that can be applied to both society and government alike.

I agree with CX that alcohol and nicotine are no less harmful than the other garbage on the streets and THAT ALONE destroys any credibility for government anti-drug programs.

Maybe the same advertising campaigns that puts the pictures of tumors and warnings on the cigarette packages should put similar warnings on crack vials or heroin kits (what a joke) .... those warnings fall to blind eyes when the urge to smoke takes control because addicts don't care and the surgeon general, government, cancer society and tobacco companies know it.

I guess it will never be perfect or balanced but I hope that at least the government will someday work for the society it was elected by instead of abusing its power to create a more totalitarian government with the illusion of freedom.

As long as people continue to question the government's actions as allowed by your Constitution or our Charter without reprisal ... then it's safe to say we live in a free world, but for how much longer depends on the comfort levels enjoyed by our complacency. The USA has some of the most amazing history when you talk about issues of freedom and in my mind it will be a very dark day if Americans wake up one morning under total control of their government.

I guess the "Fourth of July" means a lot to many in different ways and as long as continues to ... all is most certainly NOT lost.
Contratulations for all your accomplishments!
:)

[flatfloor]

Well spoken Mr Brown, CX, but it may be too late.

We have a populace that is constantly crying out...why doesn't the government do something...there should be a law.....get my attorney on the phone.

I would also like to point out the lack of response I recieved in this forum when I suggested we stay out of other countries squabbles, tribal warfare and religous conflicts.

My fears of going into Iraq are becoming reality. The POST WAR DEATH toll will eventually surpass the war time casualty totals. How do we extract ourselves? Now we are considering Liberia. The European colonial powers created this mess and now we should clean it up?

[sdaniels7114]

A person firmly addicted to heroin or cocaine is in a similar situation to someone chained to the bottom of a swimming pool. the difference in their desperate need for their fix be it a drug or air is only a matter of degree. Is either person free? I'd much rather see people choose on their own to stay away from them. Intellectually, I can see the comparison with the legal drugs. My gut tells me there's some kind of difference.

[John Bridge]

Yep, Harry comes in to wish us a happy Fourth, and we turn it into politics. :D

I think there is far too much government interference in private lives, and I think taxes are too high and levied for the wrong reasons at the federal level.

But I'm still not a libertarian with a big L.

[cx]

Yeah, Harry was just tryin' to be a nice guy, but he clearly understands where his thread went and why. :)

I fear that you're correct, Jim, it's too late to change things by conventional means. And more correct that we got here through our (We, The People) ignorance and apathy. Heavy on the apathy. Ignorance is correctable, apathy less so.

The people won't listen to you about the situation in Iraq because the President told them the war is over. Same American kids being killed by the same people we attacked, but now it's different so it's OK. And we accept that kinda thing from our government. We clearly have the government we deserve.

Dave and Davy: We hear that logic about wasting your vote all the time, of course. I find it faulty. In 1992, for example, George Bush drained away thirty some percent of the vote, which kept Ross Perot from winning the election. Same logic, same flaw: the person who received the most votes won. If half the people in the country had voted for Harry Browne, he would be President. They didn't; he isn't. But voting for someone you really don't want to be President, just to keep someone you want less from claiming the office, to my mind is where votes are truly "wasted."

We can't argue about drug addiction being a scourge on our society, Steve, because we agree on that. But you can't have a free society and still have a government or group mandating that any individual not be permitted to make bad decisions for himself, no matter how abhorrent those decisions might be to you. If he chooses to fill his body with unhealthy substances, so be it. Where would you stop with that sort of control? The government is pretending it can draw a clear line between particular groups of harmful substances that are and are not acceptable for consumption. And their line is ludicrous. More to the point, though, is that I don't want "them" drawing the line at all. Each of us was born with an individual and unique crayon. Each should draw his own lines and be responsible for what happens on his side, and his line should not cross anyone else's without that person's permission.

Your gut feeling about a particular type or group of drugs may even be correct, Steve, but that doesn't matter. If another person tries to force you take the drug, that's unacceptable behavior; if he wants to take it himself, that's not. He is still accountable for his actions, whether taking the drug or not.

PS: If you've never been addicted to nicotine, ask a couple guys around here about kicking that demon.


Thanks, again, Harry. :)

[sdaniels7114]

Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only optimist left:(

The right-leaning Supreme Court just came out with a new ruling that finally got around to saying that gays weren't some kind of moral scourge on the world. I would have never thought a Rehnquist led Court would allow it. A significant step forward for a small minority of Americans, and a major black mark removed from everyones' conciousness. Nobody seems to notice but me. It seems like to everyone else out there, and I mean on other boards as well as this one, there's some inexorable march toward a totalitarian state. Always less freedom for us more power for them.

[flatfloor]

Steve, I'm not sure I follow how the first part of your statement relates to the second.


Go red Sox ;)

[John Bridge]

On the drug issue, all I know is that asid destrois yer mine.

:D

I think drugs ought to be a personal choice, all drugs including prescription drugs. We could have a federal advisory board passing on prescription drugs, but the board would have no enforcemment powers. It should be up to the states to keep dangerous substances out of the hands of children, as it is now with alcohol and tobacco.

The whole thing boils down to federalism. The government was set up to look after the "general welfare" of the country, the institution. It was not set up to look after the needs of the people. That was deliberately left "to the states or to the people" themselves.

I think the "right-leaning" Supreme Court has given up on the Constitution altogether. Sandra Day O'Conner has come up with a couple renderings in which she claims that abridgement of the Constittution is okay as long as it's temporary or not too severe. De facto laws can be passed as long as the retroactivity doesn't stretch back "too far," for instance. I'll be glad when she's out of there. I like the liberals better.

I knew exactly what was going to happen in Iraq. The only thing that distinguishes it from Vietnam is the fact that we did not have military advisors there when we invaded. The result will be exactly the same. The longer we remain there the better the resistance will become organized. I can blame Bush, but I can't blame the system for this, though. The people of this country were firmly behind the invasion. Now they're having second thoughts, but it's too late.

Some of us kept asking to see evidence of weapons of mass destruction, the stated impetus for the invasion. Now we are being told that that was never an issue or that it's still an issue but not important.

So we have that debacle going on, we still have Afghanistan going on, we have people in Bosnia still, Korea is a mess and we're talking about pulling back from the DMZ, . . . and Bush wants to go into Liberia to keep the peace? Is he mad? Don't answer that.

I think it was a case of Perot taking votes from the first Bush, not the other way around, by the way. I went from having a Perot sign in my front yard to being convinced he was a crazy man.

I vote in every election, even school board elections and bond issues. I've never felt my vote was wasted, and there have been times when I've voted for a Libertarian or some other independent.

Thanks for starting this thread, Harry. :D