In Defense of Liberty - Daily News - 5/19
Written By: The Liberty Brothers, Mr. John C. Deming and Mr. Lee G. Deming | Posted: Thursday, May 19th, 2011
WeMeantWell.com - "State Department censors websites China allows". Although the title of this piece seems alarming enough in a "free" society, more detail is necessary to fully explain the situation. On May 15, 2011, Peter Van Buren's article on warrior pundits (included below) was posted on TomDispatch. As Tom Engelhardt points out, "The next morning, at his We Meant Well blog, Van Buren put up a post discussing the fate of TomDispatch on the State Department's computers. (Hint: it's banned)." This is obviously an attempt by the government to control access to information not aligned with its pro-government policies. Strangely, one justification forwarded is that some of the content of Wikileaks can be found on the site. However, there is much more detail on Wikileaks information on larger, mainstream news sites. Besides, the Wikileaks information is accessible from dozens of internet sites, regardless of whether or not the government continues to list the information as classified. Therefore, it is not reasonable to suggest that the Wikileaks information is the reason for the blackout. We have seen our government, cloaked in secrecy, target the media when it doesn't portray the government's actions in the best possible light (e.g., Rolling Stone and embedded journalists, Wikileaks private Manning, TomDispatch). This is dangerous, not only for the current stories, but because other media outlets may be unwilling to publish newsworthy items (or might modify their delivery) in order to continue receiving favorable government treatment. This changes the dynamic from a free and independent press to a controlled propaganda machine, and it sounds as though the machine is just beginning to rev up.
Arizonacentral.com - "LED bulbs hit 100 watts as federal ban looms". Traditional light bulbs of 100w or higher will be banned in 2012. Here is yet another example of government regulation gone wild. The government's preferred replacement bulbs have an estimated cost of $50 each. That's right, $50 for one light bulb. These preferred light bulbs also contain small amounts of mercury, making them more difficult to dispose of. Will the government also legislate a disposal method to save the environment from the mercury increase? It is probably true that most people would like to save energy if given the opportunity. However, the government should allow the free market to determine how to do this, rather than legislating preferred areas. This has the opposite effect of a free market. In this case, the preferred areas receive a virtual monopoly on the market, which suppresses innovation while increasing prices.
Sign into your account to read the rest of this article. »