Comments on: Mr. Obama, Tear Down This Wall!

By: Love Shreck

Love Shreck — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 04:58:57 +0000

A chance to discuss blogs, allows for information as well as thoughts being shared between men and women all across the globe. Blogging and site-building is among the nearly all obtainable as well as important ways to converse.

By: Oliver Quinn

Oliver Quinn — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 00:20:45 +0000

This piece of writing concerning SEO gives clear thought in support of new SEO people that how to do Search engine optimization, thus keep it up. Pleasant work

By: President Orders 1,200 Troops to Southern Border | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty

Wed, 26 May 2010 13:09:13 +0000

[...] Today, Wednesday) Apparently the military is the answer to nearly all problems. FEE Timely Classic “Mr. Obama, Tear Down This Wall!” by Becky [...]

By: Common Sense Libertarian

Common Sense Libertarian — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 00:21:11 +0000

I saw this cover article by Ms. Akers in The Freeman and I was a bit disappointed. She did not address the fact that the next immigrant is necessarily the next new voter. She did not address the self-evident truth that the vast majority of new voters from south of the border will put socialist candidates in office that will only further destroy the liberties that Ms. Akers claims to promote. In response to her comment in this forum that a vote for McCain is no different than a vote for Obama, this is a broad-brush argument that is a little less than honest. Even if we assume Obama and McCain would govern identically, such a vast influx of new voters is effectively removing any chance of a libertarian or semi-libertarian candidate from being elected in the future, and for good. Instead of this open-borders dogma, we need to close the southern border to immigration to preserve our remaining liberties. Moreover, Akers’ view of immigration to the US is by no means the consensus among libertarians. As a matter of fact, I have read articles by Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, Hans Hermann Hoppe, and Thomas Sowell that suggest a halt to such immigration. One of these eminent scholars should be given equal space by FEE to explain why a porous southern border is only going to damage the cause of liberty at the end of the day, not promote it.

By: drik

drik — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:01:49 +0000

Forgotten theme: ‘Liberty enlightening the world’ was the title of this piece of art. Not to represent a hostess or usher for immigrants.
She was to celebrate the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, and to represent the desireability of the philosophy of republicanism. At the time of her creation, the 3rd French Republic was newly created and on shaky ground and viewed by many as temporary by the French that were hot to set up another king. The emphasis on lauding the values of a republic were to focus the republican movement in France. Her appearance was to foster the impression of the Roman goddess Libertas, and to represent that by setting up our republic, that we as a country were freed from tyranny and oppression. The republic was the ideal by which man would be able to be free.

As Jefferson said: The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the rights(life, liberty, property) of mankind.

By: John Beach

John Beach — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:39:22 +0000

The Arizona law against immigrants show what social conservatism is–it is social fascism. “All power to the state” is both a leftist and rightist dogma. Those two buffoons of Fox News Brit Hume and Bill O’Reilly have claimed that blond people need not be bothered, thus stating only certain races should have natural rights. If the law is implemented fairly, all will be requested for their papers via a la East Germany. This ethnic cleansing program (pogrom) demonstrates what happens when government is given total power. Hopefully the AZ governor will have the courage to veto bill, but she may prove to be like Pontius Pilate and wash her hands of this crime against liberty. The country should return to “natural rights not national rights.” Thepossible request “for papers please” will not be a question but a command.

By: John Beach

John Beach — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:31:24 +0000

I just reviewed some of the coments. All I see is “follow the rules” I read one post about national property. Rules? State proprty? Nations (States) can’t own property –only individuals can do so, unless you believe in state power-apparently many commentators do. This is typical of social conservatives-they have nothing in common with market liberals.

Oh by the way-the U.S. is a state, a country, not a nation. the founding fathers Madison, Hamilton and Jay stated that the U.S. was to be a federation not a nation.

By: Arizona Senate Passes Requirement that Immigrants Carry Papers | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty

Tue, 20 Apr 2010 12:06:17 +0000

[...] Timely Classic “Mr. Obama, Tear Down This Wall!” by Becky [...]

By: Max

Max — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:27:16 +0000

“Like Milton Friedman said, we cannot have both free immigration and a welfare state. I would support tearing down the wall providing that we end all social welfare programs.”

To this condition I would add the requisite removal of the promise of free primary and secondary education and college tuition assistance, bilingual assistance and medical care (you can’t be turned away from an ER regardless of your ability to pay and immigration status).

Ain’t gonna happen any time soon…so don’t tear down that wall yet!

By: James Madison Fan

James Madison Fan — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:17:11 +0000

Curious,

Illegal Aliens are not criminals “because they exist” any more than a burglars are criminals “because they exist.” Each of these criminal groups made a decision to break the law. One broke into your home the other broke into your country. Giving IA’s amnesty would be equivalent to the police arriving at your house and saying, “I’m sorry Mr. Curious, but he’s already raided your fridge and made himself comfortable on your couch so we’re going to let him stay.”

Property rights are a core principle of Libertarianism. What Ms. Akers, Ms. Rand, and others that support open boarders fail to recognize is that personal property rights are a function of national sovereignty. If national boarders are “arbitrary lines in the sand” then nations do not have the legal authority to grant title to land within these “arbitrary” boarders. This means the property lines on your lot are every bit as “arbitrary” as our nation’s boarders.

The legal authority that allows – The People – to seize land in the Revolutionary War that was previously owned by Great Britain or purchase land that was previously owned by France or Mexico or Russia, is the same legal authority that allows – The People – to divide this property into parcels and assign ownership. You cannot have private property without recognizing the State’s right to acquire said property in the first place. That means national sovereignty. No sovereignty = no property rights.

Our ownership exists because the US has the legal authority to grant title and the military strength to enforce these claims not because you paid a mortgage. The People took / bought the land. The People broke the land into parcels. A Developer eventually bought the parcel and built homes. You bought the home. If the initial claim of ownership by – The People – was illegal then they did not have the right to grant title and your purchase was illegal as well.

I do not have the right to enter your home without being invited regardless of if you leave the doors and windows open or not. The same is true for entering the US. Negative behavior must have negative consequences or the behavior will be repeated. In this case more than 20 million times.