Republicans then and now

Pope endorses 24-hour work shifts

Republican exploitation was fun back then. Plant leaves were legal.(link)

I found the above item in the Meriden Daily Republican for Saturday, December 31, 1878. That was the year the Infallible Pope Leo, appreciative fan of Vin Mariani,  issued a papal bull decrying the cults formed by “semi-barbarian men calling themselves socialists, communists or nihilists…” (link) A free-trade agreement was entered into with the Samoan Islands, silver dollars were coined as legal tender and greenbacks were kept in circulation to please the Grangers and to simplify eventual resumption of the gold standard. 

There had been some ruffled feathers over dry fanatic Rutherford Hayes having been declared winner in 1876 with 165 electoral votes to Samuel Tilden’s 184.  The difference required a swap of 20 electoral votes from Southern States for withdrawal of federal troops so that ku-klux “Redeemers” could make damn good and sure Black voters were suppressed, and kept from voting against Democrats.(link) Four years of “Lemonade Lucy” Hayes refusing to serve alcohol at the Executive Mansion were enough.(link) Hayes was succeeded by Arthur Garfield who was quickly shot by a fellow Republican who had not been awarded “his” hoped-for political sinecure.(link) Observe that in 2016, Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson got more votes than either of these Reconstruction-era candidates.(link)

Amid the fallout from crony-assassinations and Jim Crow election-stealing, Democrat Grover Cleveland was elected, defeated by another religious prohibiton fanatic, then reelected despite voter suppression on a platform to do away with “sumptuary laws which vex the citizen and interfere with individual liberty.” (link) Oddly enough, the silver glut and monetary crisis so stressed agrarian cheap-money parties as to bring a surge in neo-communist electoral votes. Cleveland’s second term was so awash in post-Republican financial problems and socialist orators that it stood by as Congress approved a Communist Manifesto Income Tax in 1894.(link)

The banking collapse was so widespread that Supreme Court Justices struck down that Income Tax and saved enough banks to cash their own tax-free paychecks. So ended the first Republican war on enjoyable drugs, and the closest thing to a libertarian Administration since the Jefferson and Jackson Administrations. Communist anarchist assassins and meddlesome coercive prohibitionists rapidly proliferated in These States and in the effete mystical mercantilist monarchies of the Old World, and communist income taxes proliferated apace.(link) World War I soon followed.(link

Brazilian Sci-fi from 1926 featuring the usual beautiful daughter of a scientist touting prohibition and racial collectivism in America’s Black President 2228 by Monteiro Lobato, translated by J Henry Phillips (link)

Three dollars on Amazon Kindle

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Brazilian blog

Prohibition and spoiler votes

1922-3 no deposits till after nullification of dry laws

US v Sullivan, 1927, income tax looting causes slow, steady withdrawals

Prohibition–the constitutional product of the shotgun wedding of fanatical mysticism, socialist controls and eugenics theories–became reality and a nightmare all at once on the night of January 16th, 1920. Socialist candidate Eugene Debs got nearly a million votes in the showdown between the Dems (who got us into WW1) and God’s Own Prohibitionists (who insisted we stay in the War on Beer). Why? Because in 1916 Debs had said “There is too much prohibition.” 

German stocks crash as heroin export income taxable

Germany exported heroin and had U.S. plants in the 1920s

When the economy collapsed after 6 months of wartime prohibition plus 1 month of Constitutional prohibition, membership in communist organizations promptly doubled. But the Kleptocracy ignored reality in 1920-1923. Prosecutor Willebrandt didn’t, and got the Supreme Court to squelch the 4th and 5th Amendments and declare evidence from tax returns admissible for prohibition and evasion liability in mid-May of 1927. German stocks immediately went sour. Neither entrenched party published a repeal or modification plank, and in 1928, Dry Hope Hoover beat Whiskey Al Smith 5 to 1. The small looter parties were obviously no help to freedom–their platforms called for coercion. 

The Increased Penalties Act foisted onto Hoover destroyed the economy when ex-prosecutor Willebrandt (yes, the same lady) explained in over 20 nationally syndicated papers how income tax asset forfeiture would be used to enforce Prohibition laws. Federal Reserve bank balances also began dropping as soon as Willebrandt got the Supreme Court to scrap the Bill of Rights and use the income tax–copied from Karl’s Manifesto of 1848–to enforce prohibition. 

No surprise here. The addition of that same communist manifesto plank to a tariff bill in 1894–in violation of the Constitutional prohibition of capitation taxes–so completely destroyed the economy that the Supreme Court had to strike it down the following year in order to have banks at which to cash their own paychecks. When was the last time you saw or hear tell of this partially concealed newspaper story?

1 in 1000 blurred illegible

Druggan, Lake Indicted by U.S. as Tax Dodgers 14MAR1928–Markets panic

Moreover, the income-tax-as-bludgeon decision in US v Sullivan immediately coincided with a German bourse crash, while French stock exchanges also began falling for years to come. Markets went haywire when Druggan and Lake were grabbed by Internal Revenuers mid-March, 1928. The Liberal Party formed in 1930, drew up a wet plank which the Dems accepted with tears of gratitude, then won five consecutive elections while battling the National Socialist government Hoover’s 1931 Moratorium foisted onto Germany.

The outcome of that election was FDR beat Dry Hope Hoover 11 to 1, but the collapsing economy–officially unexplained–had opened the floodgates increasing communist party growth in These United States by a factor of ten by the time Ayn Rand formulated the Non-Aggression Agreement. 

Only by keeping the American people confused about Prohibition and The Crash have the subsidized media managed to keep voters mesmerized by subsidized Republicans who deny being fascist and subsidized Democrats who deny being communist. Then again, that’s what the Nixon law of 1971 pays them to do. Understanding how these looters wreck your retirement savings, then voting Libertarian to let them know the jig is up; that’s the road to recovery. Doing the right thing–using your leveraged LP spoiler vote to change bad laws–is winning. It’s your decision. 

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Brazilian blog

 

Monteiro Lobato book translation


My translation of Monteiro Lobato’s 1926 political sci-fi novel is online in Kindle format. I hope to format the softcover version in a few days. The translation is in 1920s American, and is guaranteed to surprise the daylights out of most readers.

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Brazilian blog

All persons born…

See many men among these voters?

Individuals who Voted to Enforce their Rights–and WON! Irish women won individual rights (link)

Does the Constitution allow men with guns to threaten physicians or coerce pregnant women? The Harrison Act enabled pseudoscience-addled politicians to have men with service pistols step between doctors and patients in 1914. See why missing an opportunity to vote Libertarian is tantamount to desertion under fire as mystical and collectivist reality control delegitimize individual claims to freedom of action.

Today’s guest repost is by Austin’s Constitutional Scholar Jon Roland, constitutionalism.blogspot.com.

U.S. Supreme Court: Issues with current contenders

Unenumerated rights

The first issue is presented by the statement by nominee appointee Brett  Cavanaugh in his acceptance speech, that he would not find rights not explicitly recognized in the main Constitution.. This has been an issue since the nomination of Robert Bork, who considered the Ninth Amendment, which calls for the nondisparagement of rights that are not “enumerated” (made explicit) somewhere in the Constitution, as amended, to be an “ink blot”. There is strong opposition to Supreme Court judges doing that, especially from so-called “conservatives”, who don’t understand that constitutional rights are all “immunities”, restrictions on the powers of government. They are not “privileges” to receive a sufficient amount of public resources, such as for education, healthcare, elder support, or any other objects of public subsidies.

Interestingly, in the case of Roe v. Wade, the Fifth Circuit decided that a “right to an abortion” was a Ninth Amendment right of a woman  “to choose whether to have children”, which by the 14th Amendment, was “incorporated” for the states. This presented the Supreme Court with an apparent problem,  because there was opposition to funding unenumerated rights in the Senate. The Fifth Circuit found a Ninth Amendment “right  to choose whether to have children”. So the SC tried to sustain the Fifth Circuit without embracing the Ninth Amendment. The result was an incoherent opinion. There was no way to avoid the Ninth Amendment.

It would perhaps too much to expect a nominee to venture into an extended discussion of what a “right” is, and what it is not. It is awkward to say “I will not find a ‘right’ to a sufficient amount of a public resource.” That is too complicated for most senators. So the candidate denies he will try to find any “unenumerated” rights. That is somewhat disingenuous, but the issue needs to be discussed.

1968, NO LIBERTARIAN PARTY!

Republicans, Dixiecrats, No Libertarian Party!

When “life” begins

One of the potential nominees, Amy Barrett, has been reported to have stated that human “life” begins at conception. That is a misstatement of the issue in Roe v. Wade. which in its essence was not about “life” but about “personhood” because “Rights (immunities)” attach to “persons”, (roles in court), not to “life”, despite what the Declaration of Independence says. (That is why some activists have sought to move the commencement of “personhood” back to conception. That would be a mistake. We cannot allow each state to redefine “personhood”, because if we did, a state could define some people to be nonpersons, without rights. So there has to be a uniform definition across all states if the protections of the Constitution are not to be meaningless. That is the basis for finding the right to be incorporated under the Ninth Amendment, as the Fifth Circuit did.

So when does “life” begin?

Not at conception. Each individual is the latest in an unbroken chain of life that goes back to at least the point when the first single-celled organism became a multi-celled animal, which occurred about 650 million years ago, during the pre-Cambrian era, when the surface of the Earth was covered with ice (“snowball Earth”) and there was only one continent, Rodinia. We are all descended from that multi-celled organism. That is when “life” began.

So when does “personhood” begin?

This was declared by the jurist Edward Coke in the 15th century, and later restated by legal scholar William Blackstone, in the early 18th century, who provided most of the definitions for terms used in the U.S. Constitution. They held that “personhood” begins at natural birth, or induced natural birth (they had Cesarean sections in those days). Some of the states later found that personhood began with baptism, entry of a name in church records, or even later. Not at “conception”, the date of which could not have been defined with any precision in those days, or even now.

Consider what would happen if we defined “personhood” to begin at conception? It would make every fetus the ward of a court, with the court having power to supervise the pregnancy. It could order the woman to continue a pregnancy, and not terminate it, under penalty of law. That would be forced pregnancy. Do we want that? Every pregnant woman chained to a bed. Anyone see the play “A Handmaid’s Tale”. Good way to stop everyone from having sex.

Forcing women into involuntary servitude and labor

Sinfest.net webcomic 2 awe

Need for uniformity

Incorporation of a Ninth Amendment right is required by the need to have a uniform definition of “personhood” (legal role) across all jurisdiction, since constitutional rights attach to “persons” and not just to “citizens” or “life”.  If states could define personhood, they could deprive anyone of rights by defining him to be a “nonperson”. Thus a state could find that Blacks are not persons as a way to deprive them of their liberty.

Notes:

1. Roe v. Wade, 1221 (N.D. Tex. 1970) (“On the merits, plaintiffs argue as their principal contention that the Texas Abortion Laws must be declared unconstitutional because they deprive single women and married couple of their rights secured by the Ninth Amendment to choose whether to have children. We agree.”).

2. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

3, A Handmaid’s Tale, Margaret Atwood.

4. Robert Bork and the Inkblot, Kurt Lash.

5. Constitutional views on abortion

See also: Ayn Rand (link)

Get the complete story on other prohibitions in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in either if two languages for the price of a craft pint. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy in 1929 and 2008.

ProhicrashAmazon

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us

 

Economic Collapse, July 1930

Prohibition caused Depression

Chicago Tribune 17NOV1930

The stock market crash of 1929 marked the realization that prohibition laws would soon destroy the US economy and banking system. By mid-1930, financial collapse was so well underway that the old prohibition enforcement districts were redrawn to conform closely to existing Federal Reserve districts. This change took effect on July 1, 1930, the month Cook County Assessor Gene G. Oliver was convicted of tax evasion and sentenced to 18 months in prison and fined $12,500 by Judge Woodward in Chicago.

Here is a breakdown of the districts.

The transfer of the prohibition enforcement activity from the Treasury Department to the Department of Justice under the Williamson Act took place on July 1, 1930, under the Bureau of Industrial Alcohol in the Treasury Department, retained the duty of issuing permits for the manufacture and use of alcohol and other intoxicating liquor for non-beverage purposes, and of supervising the activities of the permitees.  The 27 prohibition districts hitherto existing were rearranged into 12 new districts, with boundaries corresponding in some measure with the 10 judicial circuits.  (Misdirection! The new prohibition districts were a nearly perfect fit to the Federal Reserve Districts–tr)

1. Boston: Maine, N. Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, R. Island, Connecticut
2. New York: New York State and Porto Rico
3. Philadelphia: New Jersey; Pennsylvania, Delaware
4. Richmond: Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, N. Carolina, South Carolina, DC.
5. New Orleans: Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas.
6. Cincinnati: Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee
7. Chicago: Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin.
8. St. Paul: Minnesota, N. Dakota, S. Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska.
9. Kansas City: Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma.
10. Denver: Arizona, Colorado, N. Mexico, Utah, Wyoming.
11. San Francisco: California, Nevada, Hawaii.
12. Seattle: Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, Alaska.
Source: NY World Almanac 1931 p 36

That same day, the Bank of Winter Park, Florida, closed its doors. As prohibition asset-forfeiture confiscations continued, many other banks would close. The Liberal Party, formed in 1930, published a plank in 1931 calling for the repeal of blue laws and the Prohibition Amendment. The Democratic Party copied this plank in the summer of 1932–in the middle of a major banking panic–and went on to win the election in November, plus four more.

That is an advance demonstration of the law-changing clout of libertarian party spoiler votes. By the time Franklin D. Roosevelt was sworn in as president in March of 1933, every bank in the nation had already closed its doors. After 1928, no Republican was elected until the Eisenhower-Nixon campaign brought German National Socialism to America.

ProhicrashAmazon

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

If you are disappointed not to have learned this in school, buy a copy of Prohibition and The Crash in Amazon Kindle format. For the price of a pint, the free app lets you see month-by-month how the economy was crushed–on a cellphone.

simultaneous interpreting

Next time choose a financial and accounting translator who won’t overlook things and cause added disappointment.

How Democrats can win

Death for Marijuana--Taiwan

Progressive Democratic Party female candidate elected President in 2016–of Taiwan!

Advice for Democrats: Hillary could have run in Taiwan without Legalization of Marijuana, but still lost for kowtowing to communism.

The DEMS LOST because they were against freedom and for communism, not because of the Grrrrrrl candidate. People who understand heat, power and energy preferred to side with christianofascists eager to coerce women and doctors–and hippies–even if it means another crash and multi-year depression… Why? Because the media ordered them to believe the only alternative was to allow evangelical econazis drunk on pseudoscience to destroy American generating capacity to please Communist China.

Even the Russians aren’t stupid enough to fall for a deal like that!

If Dems want to win next time, study some physics, and read The Health Hazards of NOT Going Nuclear by Petr Beckmann. Beckmann is to energy data fraud as John Scarne is to gambling cheats. Then tell Dem boys in Congress to try something new. Instead of sending goons with guns to meddle in electricity, try abolishing some fascist prohibition laws. The GO-Pee will still promise to coerce women to reproduce for Positive Christianity and the Jesusjugend–but only until they LOSE five elections in a row. Compare the libertarian vote count to the difference in the races you lost. Freedom is your only way to get that hand in the till. Republican National Socialists already have dibs on the coercive alternative.

I voted Democratic once. Jimmy lacked the guts to oppose prohibition, and failed when armed fanatical Mohammedans occupied Mecca and stirred up an anthill that got two U.S. embassies invaded. I voted Republican in one race, and Reagan did deliver on a nuclear defense initiative that collapsed a large Communist dictatorship. But Reagan also pandered to fanatical teetotalitarians of the sort that Herbert Hoover represented. Let go of Stalinism, and you will force the GO-Pee to let go of Hitlerism. If fellow Democratic partisans insist on looter prohibitionism, show them you mean business by joining the Libertarian Party.

Fact: the Prohibition party made light beer a felony for nearly 14 years by averaging 1.4% of the vote over the course of 11 election campaigns. The LP.org has managed similar performance, and repeal of prohibition is sweeping These States.

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Brazilian blog