Obama: TSA pat-downs frustrating but necessary

open quotePresident Barack Obama on Saturday acknowledged some travelers’ “frustrations” with having to go through full-body pat-downs and scans at airports, but he said the enhanced security measures are necessary to keep America safe. close quote (Read more from msnbc.msn.com)

Yes we can!

See also:
– As if subjecting millions of Americans to X-rated x-ray scans and public groping sessions weren’t bad enough, the agency now threatens $11,000 in fines against anyone refusing to submit to humiliation at the airport.

– TSA agents forcibly separate mother from child

– TSA confiscates nails clippers from soldiers armed with carbines & machine guns.

– Subways and trains are next! Protecting riders on mass-transit systems from terrorist attacks will be as high a priority as ensuring safe air travel, the new head of the Transportation Security Administration promises.

– TSA pat-down leaves traveler covered in urine

Ron Paul to TSA: Enough is Enough

open quoteMr. Speaker, today I introduce legislation to protect Americans from physical and emotional abuse by federal Transportation Security Administration employees conducting screenings at the nation’s airports. We have seen the videos of terrified children being grabbed and probed by airport screeners. We have read the stories of Americans being subjected to humiliating body imaging machines and/or forced to have the most intimate parts of their bodies poked and fondled. We do not know the potentially harmful effects of the radiation emitted by the new millimeter wave machines.

In one recent well-publicized case, a TSA official is recorded during an attempted body search saying, “By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights.” I strongly disagree and am sure I am not alone in believing that we Americans should never give up our rights in order to travel. As our Declaration of Independence states, our rights are inalienable. This TSA version of our rights looks more like the “rights” granted in the old Soviet Constitutions, where freedoms were granted to Soviet citizens — right up to the moment the state decided to remove those freedoms.close quote (Read more from paul.house.gov)

Federal Regulation in Every Room of your house

open quoteThese regulations are sure to raise the price of appliances — often by more than consumers are ever likely to earn back in the form of energy savings. And some will make the product perform well.

The administration is meddling with every room in the house:

The Basement

New standards are in the works for water heaters and furnaces. For water heaters, the Energy Department estimates price hikes from $67 to $974, depending on size and type.
The Bathroom

The same 1992 law that gave us those awful low-flush toilets also restricted the amount of water showerheads could use to 2.5 gallons per minute. Some consumers who disliked the resulting weak trickle opted for models with two or more showerheads, each using the maximum 2.5 gallons. But Team Obama has now eliminated this “loophole” by requiring that the total flow must comply with the limit.
The Kitchen

Think remodeling a kitchen is expensive now? Pending regulations target refrigerators, dishwashers, microwaves, ovens and ranges.

For refrigerators (at least), this is a clear case of overkill. The American fridge has already been hit by several rounds of tighter standards, with each new rule saving less energy than the last — but boosting the price and compromising performance and reliability. Even the Energy Department admits that most consumers will lose money on its latest refrigerator regulation.
The Laundry Room

New standards are on the way for washers and dryers. When the last clothes-washer regulation hit in 2007, Consumer Reports lamented that several ultra-efficient models “left our stain-soaked swatches nearly as dirty as they were before washing” and that “for best results, you’ll have to spend $900 or more.” The Obama rules will probably mean even worse news.
Any Air-Conditioned Room

Both central air conditioners and window units are scheduled for new regulations. When the Energy Department rolled out its last round of central-AC rules back in January 2001 (one of those last-minute Clinton administration “midnight” regulations), it admitted that many homeowners would never recoup the added up-front costs. The new standards will follow the same “logic” — and thus should make for another lousy deal.

The Obama regulations come on top of all the past ones, including the worst one of all — the Bush-era requirement that will effectively ban incandescent light bulbs starting in 2012. close quote (Read more from mises.org)

Three Great Criticisms of Marx

From the Mises Institute.

The Conflict of Ideologies: Marxism vs. the Majority
– Marxism denies consciousness by attributing all thought to class affiliation.
– Marx considered all dissent treason, and developed anti-democratic ideas where majorities failed to endorse his views.

***

The Critics of Marxism
– Materialism denies consciousness and contradicts itself by attempting to attribute all human decisions and civilization to material conditions.
– Marx hated Prussia’s Hohenzollern’s socialism, because it wasn’t *his* socialism.
– Marxism became decidedly anti-Christian.
– Dialectic materialism falls apart in trying to explain simplest historical events.
– Marxians never ascribe positive trends to class machinations, only negative ones.
– Marxism sharply contrasts Freud. The former denies consciousness, the latter relies on it. Even Marx critics ignore this.
– Christian Marxists ignore Marx’s decidedly anti-Christian views. Marxism, for example, teaches religious ideas are the “super structure” of material production.

***

The Ideological Impregnation of Thought
– Thoughts are always & inevitably attributed to one’s class, and they serve the interest of that class.
(Marx never reconciles this w/ his undeniably bourgeois background. Nor does he define “class.” Nor does he address the possibility that a correct theory might be more useful to a person than a false one.)
– Marx’s motive was the adoption of socialism. Instead of addressing the devastating criticism of economists, he dismissed their whole work as the machinations of a rival “class,” and ridiculed them. They are wrong, because they are bourgeois, and there is no reason for careful analysis.
– They made exception to their own thoughts and theories, which they assumed were true and pure.