An abolitionist speaks to 21st century America

Abolitionism - Wikipedia
William Lloyd Garrison - Wikipedia

"I am aware that many object to the severity of my language; but is there not cause for severity? I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. On this subject, I do not wish to think, or to speak, or write, with moderation. No! no! Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; – but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present. I am in earnest – I will not equivocate – I will not excuse – I will not retreat a single inch – AND I WILL BE HEARD. The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal, and to hasten the resurrection of the dead."
-The Liberator, 1831, William Lloyd Garrison

"I am a believer in that portion of the Declaration of American Independence in which it is set forth, as among self-evident truths, 'that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' Hence, I am an abolitionist. Hence, I cannot but regard oppression in every form – and most of all, that which turns a man into a thing – with indignation and abhorrence. Not to cherish these feelings would be recreancy to principle. They who desire me to be dumb on the subject of slavery, unless I will open my mouth in its defense, ask me to give the lie to my professions, to degrade my manhood, and to stain my soul. I will not be a liar, a poltroon, or a hypocrite, to accommodate any party, to gratify any sect, to escape any odium or peril, to save any interest, to preserve any institution, or to promote any object. Convince me that one man may rightfully make another man his slave, and I will no longer subscribe to the Declaration of Independence. Convince me that liberty is not the inalienable birthright of every human being, of whatever complexion or clime, and I will give that instrument to the consuming fire. I do not know how to espouse freedom and slavery together."
-No Compromise with Slavery, 1854, William Lloyd Garrison

Obama seeks expanded power to seize firms

U.S. Seeks Expanded Power to Seize Firms - Washington Post

Why did the Washington Post title this article, "U.S. Seeks Expanded Power to Seize Firms"? The U.S. isn't seeking this, Obama and his administration are seeking it.

President Obama is rapidly attempting to bring the entire economy under the control of the executive branch, under his authority. He appears to be willing to break the back of the economy, so that he can rebuild a new economy patterned after his ideals.

If we permit this to happen, what are some of the headlines that soon may follow?

"President demands expanded powers to avoid economic meltdown"
"President wins power to seize any 'unhealthy' company"
"President insists capitalism needs 'rescue'"
"Obama to nationalize all private banks and thrifts"
"FDIC reimbursements frozen pending 'restructuring'"
"IRA and 401k funds frozen pending 'restructuring'"
"President proposes 'housing relief' tax on mortgage holders not in default"
"Federal Reserve empowered to review and adjust employee compensation plans"

What else?

Oppose the Illinois "State Freedom of Choice Act"

Catholic Conference of Illinois ACTION ALERT

Illinois House Bill HB 2354 seeks to:

• make abortion a fundamental right, preventing any common-sense regulation such as parental notification;
  
• expand public funding of abortion through Medicaid during a time when the state cannot meet its current fiscal obligations;
  
• invalidate the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act protecting health care professionals and employers; and,
  
• mandate comprehensive sex education for all children in public schools.
  

Making the killing of one's unborn child a "fundamental right" is a radical attack on the truly fundamental rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, rights that belong to "all men", as affirmed in the Declaration of Independence.

Today, living, unborn children lack legal protection of these rights, much as Native Americans and negro slaves in this country 150 years ago did not enjoy a legal recognition of their human rights on par with white citizens.

Should the state of Illinois not only ignore, but march against the best currents of history, by enshrining as a "fundamental right" a legal right to kill one's offspring? And should the state go further still, denying medical professionals the right of conscience, the right to refuse to perform abortions or other procedures that believe immoral, and imposing harsh penalties on those unwilling to carry out such acts? The result will be to make even late term, partial birth abortion, a "fundamental right", and to compel those who reject the practice for profound personal reasons to carry it out.

These are powerful reasons to stop the State "Freedom of Choice Act", reasons strong enough to call for our prompt action...

Please, contact Your legislators and urge them to vote NO to HB 2354.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
-Edmund Burke

Misguided activists vent anger at AIG employees

Angry activists on protest tour over AIG bonuses -AFP

Activists from the "Connecticut Working Families Party" demonstrating at the homes of AIG employees display a misguided anger.

AIG is not the source of the problem. Showing up in buses at the family homes of AIG employees suggests a radical class warfare mentality. I hope that this isn't what CWFP intends, but this is the impression many people will form.

Angry protests at employees' homes distract from the real problems, which have more to do with years of the federal government's wrongheaded manipulation of mortgage lending, and now its massive (damage control) "rescue" programs, rather than the compensation plans of individual companies.

Blame for the current situation lies primarily in the federal government. Protesters who want to show their displeasure should board buses for Washington, D.C., not Fairfield, Connecticut.

Bonus outrage: Is the federal government deliberately inciting class hatred?

AIG bonus outrage has employees living in fear - Associated Press

Why are AIG employees receiving bonuses? For the same reason many other individuals have received bonuses: they earned them under the compensation plans of their employer.

So why is there such outrage toward AIG employees that some now fear for their families' safety? Is it because these individuals are known to have been dishonest, or done any harm to their communities, their country, or the economy? No. It's because of anger that our tax money has been used to bail out a company that is so important, we are told, that it simply CAN'T BE ALLOWED to collapse. And now that numerous billions of our dollars have been handed over to AIG, the company has directed a large percentage to foreign recipients, as well as a relatively tiny portion (about 0.1%) into employee bonuses.

Oh, there is much cause for outrage here. It's outrageous and unfair that public money is being used to prop up certain struggling corporations suffering the consequences of their own decisions, while others less well connected are left to solve their problems on their own. But those who direct their anger toward AIG employees have been taken been fooled into overlooking the real offenders.

Who pushed the plan to use huge amounts of public money to bail out AIG and other companies? Congress and the president. Who specifically added a provision to the stimulus package to allow AIG to pay out bonuses with bailout money? Senator Chris Dodd (who initially denied adding it but later admitted it). Three Republicans and almost every Democrat voted for the stimulus package which included this bonus provision. They rushed it through Congress over the loud objections of the minority party. The president signed it. Now that there is a public outcry, the president and his cohort are, oh, so shocked -shocked and angry!- that AIG has paid out bonuses. But these are the guys who legislated the funds and authorized the bonuses, so their outrage is political posturing as false as a three dollar bill. These are the real offenders, and these are the ones who deserve our anger and opposition: not AIG employees.

President Obama and prominent members of Congress have been exploiting the public anger to promote hostility toward the wealthy in general and to deflect anger from themselves. Their motives are obvious. In a socialist government those in power are satisfied with nothing less than total control over the economy. Therefore, successful private producers are adversaries of the state. The wealthy must be brought down, their assets confiscated at once or little by little. To justify this, the economically successful must be shown to be greedy, dishonest parasites standing in the way of equal opportunity and economic justice. Their companies must be regulated, their incomes capped, their bonuses restricted, their assets taxed punitively. They must be stigmatized. "Activists" must appear in the news, denouncing the "greedy" rich and intimidating them in their neighborhoods. And Congress and the president "must act now" to pass more and more draconian measures to "rescue" the economy from the clutches of such greedy capitalists.

This sort of revolution has taken place at many times in many places. But it's not American, and it's not what our ancestors in this country fought for. We shouldn't permit it to take place here.

We need to halt the reckless course our government is following. Congress and President Obama need to be rebuked loudly by the American public: NO to the slavery of crushing debt! NO to federal "rescues" of failing companies, NO to the use of public money to prop up private investments and risky mortgages! NO to the devaluation of our currency by excessive printing of new money.

And we need to remember that our neighbors who go to work and produce things, who earn incomes and pay their bills, and sometimes even earn bonuses... these neighbors are NOT our enemies. Americans now more than ever need to be united in order to stand up to a government that ominously seems intoxicated with the desire to nationalize and socialize the economy, and promotes a hostile class mentality to achieve its goals.

Outraged with AIG bonuses? OK, but Congress and the President approved them

Congressman McCotter (R-MI) Slams those Protecting AIG Bonuses in Voting for Stimulus Bill



I'm upset that AIG accepted federal funds and then paid bonuses. But that's not nearly as scandalous as the fact that Congress not only gave them the funds to begin with, but specifically provided a loophole to allow the bonuses to be paid.

Does Millsaps College condone religious bigotry?

Open letter to Dr. Frances Lucas, President of Millsaps College
frances.lucas@millsaps.edu

Dear Dr. Lucas,

Dr. Robert McElvaine's piece in the Washington Post, "Impeach the Pope" (March 18, 2009) is an irrational screed that repeatedly (and intentionally?) misrepresents the teachings of the Catholic Church and the actions of Pope Benedict XVI. The author's clear willingness to distort historical fact and his shrill tone betray not just ignorance but malice and religious bigotry. The letter contributes nothing scholarly or constructive, and the reader must wonder what really prompted Dr. McElvaine's eruption of anti-Catholic hostility. Whether the professor was prompted by moral issues or the desire for attention and financial gain ("...As I detail in my latest book..."), I can't say.

To abuse facts as the author has done, and so to fabricate a club to publicly assault another individual with whom one disagrees is not innocent freedom of speech; it is not an expression of academic freedom. It is unscholarly, illiberal, and inexcusable. It demands public reproach by the academic community and individuals of good will. As president of Millsaps, I hope and ask that You will do so.

Prior to Dr. McElvaine's article I hadn't heard of Millsaps College. Now that I have, I must offer You my sympathy that Dr. McElvaine's ill rant, while presumably of his own doing, is an embarrassing reflection upon Millsaps. I don't suppose this was the professor's first embarrassing outburst, nor is it likely to be his last. Will Millsaps become an accomplice by guilty silence, its reputation tarnished by one small-minded professor?

My question to You, the president of Millsaps College, is: how will You respond?

Regards,
John Robin.