Posted by : Brian | On : December 7, 2013

Do you label yourself pro-life?

The majority of Americans who vote for the guy with an “R” next to his name would probably answer yes to this question, but that’s also assuming that “life” only refers to the unborn child.
Conservatives are known for being pro-life in the abortion debate – at least when it comes to the ballot box or the comments section at the bottom of a Yahoo! article. Unfortunately, conservatives have joined alongside their liberal counterparts, relying on the government to point everyone’s moral compass to the same direction as their own. The belief that “if we just make a law” will stop the murder of innocent children is as fallacious as believing that the prohibition would stop people from drinking.
(Side note: Yesterday in 1933, the 21st amendment was ratified, repealing the 18th amendment – alcohol prohibition within the United States)
Now don’t get me wrong, I am not against creating laws to make abortion illegal. I think the only just laws are the ones that protects a person’s life, liberty, and property. Murder just so happens to deprive a person of their life. If the litmus test for a just law is protecting a person’s life, liberty, or property, then a law against abortion is a just law.
But do you think you’re doing enough to end abortion by voting for it?
Consider this quote from, you guessed it…
   “Law reflects the morality of the people. Ultimately, law or no law, it is going to 
    be up to us as parents, as clergy, and as citizens-in the way we raise our 
    children, how we interact and talk with our friends and neighbors, and the 
    good example we give – to bring about changes to our culture toward greater 
    respect for life.”
                                                                                           – Ron Paul
…toward greater respect for life…
This brings me to the actual point of this post and my reason for possibly questioning your pro-life stance. You see, those same Americans that usually vote for the guy with the “R” next to his name, are usually very excited and proud to see the young men and women of this nation march off to another war – to kill. They exalt people like Navy Seal Chris Kyle who is known as the “American Sniper” with over 160 confirmed kills.
“Yay for the people that kill a lot of people – except for the people that kill unborn babies. They’re evil.”
Do we see a disconnect here? The killing of unborn babies is demonized (which it should be) while the rejoicing of killing people in other countries is celebrated? Oh wait, I know. They are fighting against Americans, so their death is justified -which explains why they believe American’s deaths are justified for the sole reason that we are their enemy. Plus, what about the civilians over there that are killed? Maybe we don’t exactly rejoice over their deaths, but we sure don’t care about them.
Can we see why people think the pro-life labeled groups are hypocrites? Channeling Jeff Foxworthy:
If you are against abortion, but for more war – you might be a hypocrite.
If you are against abortion, but celebrate the troops that are used to kill in offensive, interventionist wars – you might be a hypocrite.
If you are against abortion, but vote for candidates that support endless wars – you might be a hypocrite.
If you are against abortion, but couldn’t care less about non-Americans being killed – you might be a hypocrite.
Here’s the bottom line:
The pro-life label must mean what it says. Be pro-life. Be for life. Celebrate life. ALL LIFE. Americans or non Americans, black or white, baby or adult. Life is a precious gift from God and should be seen as such. Does the way you live your life reflect your respect for life, or only your ballot?



Posted by : Brian | On : April 15, 2013


“Could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of its history.
Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker’s paycheck. In the late 1800s, when Congress first attempted to impose an income tax, the notion of taxing a citizen’s hard work was considered radical! Public outcry ensued; more importantly, the Supreme Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional. Only with passage of the 16th Amendment did Congress gain the ability to tax the productive endeavors of its citizens.
Yet don’t we need an income tax to fund the important functions of the federal government? You may be surprised to know that the income tax accounts for only approximately one-third of federal revenue. Only 10 years ago, the federal budget was roughly one-third less than it is today. Surely we could find ways to cut spending back to 1990 levels, especially when the Treasury has single year tax surpluses for the past several years. So perhaps the idea of an America without an income tax is not so radical after all.
The harmful effects of the income tax are obvious. First and foremost, it has enabled government to expand far beyond its proper constitutional limits, regulating virtually every aspect of our lives. It has given government a claim on our lives and work, destroying our privacy in the process. It takes billions of dollars out of the legitimate private economy, with most Americans giving more than a third of everything they make to the federal government. This economic drain destroys jobs and penalizes productive behavior. The ridiculous complexity of the tax laws makes compliance a nightmare for both individuals and businesses. All things considered, our Founders would be dismayed by the income tax mess and the tragic loss of liberty which results.”
-Ron Paul
May 7, 2001 “case against the income tax.”



Posted by : Brian | On : April 7, 2013

A message from your dear friends at MSNBC

So THIS is what we’ve been doing wrong all this time. Silly parents thinking that they should train their children. They should know it’s not their job. If they would just hand them over to society, then everything would be A-OK!




Posted by : Brian | On : March 29, 2013

Today I ran across a website that will solve all your future insult problems. No longer are insults such as “poopy head” and “I don’t like you” sufficient, let alone appropriate.

Using Martin Luther’s random insult generator, you will never have a lack of insults to throw at the next person that cuts you off or makes fun of your tie dye shirt.

Some examples:

“If you who are assembled in a council are so frivolous and irresponsible as to waste time and money on unnecessary questions, when it is the business of a council to deal only with the important and necessary matters, we should not only refuse to obey you, but consider you insane or criminals.”

From Defense and Explanation of All the Articles, pg. 80 of Luther’s Works, Vol. 32

(Why isn’t Martin Luther in Congress right now?)

“You are full of poisonous refuse and insane foolishness.”

From Against Latomus, pg. 140 of Luther’s Works, Vol. 32

Your words are so foolishly and ignorantly composed that I cannot believe you understand them.

From Explanations of the Ninety-Five Theses, pg. 87 of Luther’s Works, Vol. 31

And of course my personal favorite that I’ve come across so far:

“I was frightened and thought I was dreaming, it was such a thunderclap, such a great horrid fart did you let go here! You certainly pressed with great might to let out such a thunderous fart – it is a wonder that it did not tear your hole and belly apart!”

From Against the Roman Papacy, an Institution of the Devil, pg. 344 of Luther’s Works, Vol. 41

He really has a way with words, doesn’t he?

Let me know your favorite insult! There’s a lot of good ones!



Posted by : Brian | On : March 14, 2013

These are all great men, and do you know what they have in common?

That’s right, fashionable eyewear.

Well today at my physical, the optometrist figured that now is a good time for me to join the ranks of these great men, and join them I shall with great dignity and pride.

All I need is help figuring out what style suits me best. I sort of like the Teddy Roosevelt style, but maybe it is a tad old fashioned.

Using the latest photo editing software (Word), I did my best to give you some options to judge:




Posted by : Brian | On : March 7, 2013

History is happening. Are you watching?

At this very moment, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is conducting a traditional (aka “talking”) filibuster on the Senate floor. At the time of writing this. he has had the Senate floor for 10 hours and 43 minutes. For up to the minute information on how long he’s been going, check this site.

The premise of the filibuster is the recent admission from Attorney General Eric Holder that the President has the authority to carry out drone strikes on American citizens on U.S. soil, without any trial.
If you remember your constitution, the 5th amendment clearly states that Americans can not “…be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law…”
This is what we call “assassination.” Do you believe that the President has the authority to assassinate Americans on U.S. soil?
Click here to watch it live (if it’s still going)
It is also live on C-SPAN2.

Update: Just hit 12 hours!



Posted by : Brian | On : February 28, 2013

Last night I had the opportunity to attend a gun debate between 4 student groups on the UW campus.

It was quite interesting, but if you follow the gun control debate, it was much of the same talking points, just done in a much less professional manner. Here’s how I would sum up the talking points of the debate:

College Republicans: Guns are good. They help save lives. Here’s some statistics.

Socialist Alternative: THE WHITE MAN AND CAPITALISM ARE CAUSING ALL THIS GUN VIOLENCE! Here’s some statistics.

Young Americans for Liberty: We have a right to have guns, all guns. Here’s some statistics.

Young Democrats at UW: People are dying right now because of those evil black assault rifles that are only designed for mass killing as well as those evil magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Here’s some statistics

The debate in itself was poorly done. It was only one hour long and the first 30 minutes was taken up by opening statements. There was only one planned question, then time for two audience questions before closing statements. I may only be a little bitter because they didn’t ask my question.

Before closing statements, the word “constitution” was used only once, and it was used within the word “unCONSTITUTIONal.” If there was any reference to the the constitution, or “rights,” it was spoken of briefly and the argument ended at “it’s our rights, so there.” If you can believe this, my question was on the purpose of the 2nd amendment. I was assuming that the answers would sound something like this:

College Republicans: The 2nd amendment was designed so that citizens could protect themselves from bad guys.


Young Americans for Liberty: The 2nd amendment was designed so that citizens could fight off a tyrannical government.

Young Democrats at UW: The 2nd amendment was designed so that Americans could keep single shot, muzzle-loading muskets locked in a safe with a trigger lock. There’s no real purpose behind it.

Alas, I was never able to affirm my predictions. Maybe next time.



Posted by : Brian | On : February 18, 2013

Somehow I have yet to talk about guns on my blog (unless you count a video about shooting cops), which is very interesting. I’m not sure why, because I like them and think they are very important. Here’s something that you should at least know about.

Washington State Senate Bill 5737 (SB 5737)

This bill is your feel-good legislation in response to the national outcry against gun violence. Somehow, the legislators in Washington think that by banning “assault weapons” from law-abiding citizens, we will all be safer.

Because I don’t know who actually reads this thing, I don’t know where you as the reader may stand on the gun issue. Either way, this is an important bill to be aware of.

Here’s a link to the entire bill (it’s actually pretty short, it wouldn’t hurt you to read a bill, you know)

Here’s a quick summary of the main parts of this bill:

First, the definition of an “assault weapon” is any semi-automatic pistol or semi-automatic or pump-action rifle or shotgun capable of accepting a detachable magazine, and also includes – a number of things that almost every semi-auto weapon has. (Read section 1 (20) for all the info)

If you are unfamiliar with what semi-auto means, it basically means that only one round is fired for every pull of the trigger.

This bill says that you may not manufacture, possess, purchase, sell, or otherwise transfer ANY “assault weapon.” The exceptions to this are those that were legally owned prior to the bill (if signed), but in order to keep them, the weapons must be registered and remain on the person’s property or at a licensed firing range. That’s it.

Now, the good news is that the bill has a very rare chance of passing, and if it does, it will most likely be quickly seen as unconstitutional thanks to the Supreme Court case D.C. v. Heller.




Posted by : Brian | On : January 17, 2013

Often I’ll ask people if they watch the news. If they say no, then I know that they are most likely uninformed. If they say yes, then I know that they are most likely either misinformed or still uninformed on important issues.

I would highly encourage you to get your news from the internet.

“But…but…but…You can’t believe everything you read on the internet”

Yes, yes. I know you can’t. But you’re implying that you can believe what you see on TV, and if you believe that, you’re fooling yourself.

The internet is a wonderful thing because you get news from EVERY angle and you can make your own conclusions, rather than the talking head on TV telling you what is happening. Also, most mainstream news websites look something like this:

Kim Kardashian Wore a Red Dress to the Oscars!
Obama uses executive order to destroy the 2nd amendment while Congress increases the debt ceiling for the 75th time this month while Ben Bernanke claims that we need to do away with the debt ceiling all together because it serves no useful purpose.

So, without further ado, a list of where I get my news from (These are all currently on my bookmarks bar):

1. The Drudge Report

This is by far the best “all around” news site. This website doesn’t write any of their own news article, but scours the web and posts links to important news articles. If I could convince you to check just one website once per day, this would be it.

2. The Daily Paul

This website is my addiction. This is one of the biggest forums formerly dedicated to Ron Paul. Notice that this is a forum, not necessarily a news site, but the owner of the website, Michael Nystrom, posts all the “newsy” things and posts them on the homepage. I will also point out that the “Paul” in the title of the webpage is written “P.Au.L” – which stands for “Peace-Gold-Liberty.”

3. Reality Check / Full Disclosure

The name Ben Swann may ring a bell. I posted one of his videos back on November 17. He works for a local news station out of Cincinnati, Ohio and does a segment called “Reality Check” where he digs through everything to find out what people are saying are true or not. Think of it as snopes for journalism. He is a true voice of reason in investigative journalism. He recently started his own side show sort of thing called “Full Disclosure.” You’ll notice that “Full Disclosure” site is a FaceBook website, which as you know I don’t have. The Daily Paul always keeps me up on what Ben is up to and all his latest videos. If you do still have Facebook, “like” him (Ben Swann WXIX) to get all his updates for both Reality Check and Full Disclosure.

Fun fact about Ben Swann: He was home-schooled through what is called “accelerated education.” His mother home-schooled all 10 (yes, 10!) children with this method which resulted in all 10 (yes, 10!) children graduating high school at 11, getting a college degree at 15, and a master’s at age 16. Read more about it here. (It really is interesting)

4. Lew Rockwell

This is similar to the drudge in the sense that it is a bunch of links to others’ blog posts, but still good stuff. Lew Rockwell is the chairman/CEO of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. This is a heavily leaning libertarian/Austrian economics website.

5. Yahoo

That’s right – is on my bookmarks. This is my “what’s the mainstream news saying” website. If you scroll to the bottom of the page, you’ll find the comments section. You should read those.

So there it is. I occasionally will glance at the other mainstream news just to see what’s being put out there. To my conservative friends, please stop watching FoxNews. To my liberal friends, please stop watching MSNBC.

Any places that you would add to get news from?



Posted by : Brian | On : January 9, 2013

If that title doesn’t grab your attention, I’m not sure what will. This is a great video I found that I highly recommend you watch before you answer “NEVER!”

When evil is ‘legal,’ become a criminal. When oppression is enacted as ‘law,’ become a lawbreaker.” – Larken Rose

Note* -There is a “bad word” written (not spoken) at 7:42

More to come on the upcoming gun legislation, it’s coming quickly.