Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
September 16, 2014, 12:43:38 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Thomas Sowell & Walter Williams Thread - 2 Masters & Icons at work.  (Read 1487 times)
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #25 on: February 22, 2012, 09:19:16 AM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGnfjRStNok" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGnfjRStNok</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #26 on: February 22, 2012, 09:24:55 AM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6vrteO-6xw" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6vrteO-6xw</a>


Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #27 on: February 24, 2012, 10:21:32 PM »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_E._Williams


Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #28 on: February 28, 2012, 04:51:35 AM »

         
Email   Print   35Comments   Share
February 14, 2012
The 'Progressive' Legacy
By Thomas Sowell
Although Barack Obama is the first black President of the United States, he is by no means unique, except for his complexion. He follows in the footsteps of other presidents with a similar vision, the vision at the heart of the Progressive movement that flourished a hundred years ago.

Many of the trends, problems and disasters of our time are a legacy of that era. We can only imagine how many future generations will be paying the price -- and not just in money -- for the bright ideas and clever rhetoric of our current administration.


The two giants of the Progressive era -- Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson -- clashed a century ago, in the three-way election of 1912. With the Republican vote split between William Howard Taft and Theodore Roosevelt's newly created Progressive Party, Woodrow Wilson was elected president, so that the Democrats' version of Progressivism became dominant for eight years.

What Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson had in common, and what attracts some of today's Republicans and Democrats, respectively, who claim to be following in their footsteps, was a vision of an expanded role of the federal government in the economy and a reduced role for the Constitution of the United States.

Like other Progressives, Theodore Roosevelt was a critic and foe of big business. In this he was not inhibited by any knowledge of economics, and his own business ventures lost money.

Rhetoric was TR's strong suit. He denounced "the mighty industrial overlords" and "the tyranny of mere wealth."

Just what specifically this "tyranny" consisted of was not spelled out. This was indeed an era of the rise of businesses to unprecedented size in industry after industry -- and of prices falling rapidly, as a result of economies of scale that cut production costs and allowed larger profits to be made from lower prices that attracted more customers.

It was easy to stir up hysteria over a rapidly changing economic landscape and the rise of new businessmen like John D. Rockefeller to wealth and prominence. They were called "robber barons," but those who put this label on them failed to specify just who they robbed.

Like other Progressives, TR wanted an income tax to siphon off some of the earnings of the rich. Since the Constitution of the United States forbad such a tax, to the Progressives that simply meant that the Constitution should be changed.

After the 16th Amendment was passed, a very low income-tax rate was levied, as an entering wedge for rates that rapidly escalated up to 73 percent on the highest incomes during the Woodrow Wilson administration.

One of the criticisms of the Constitution by the Progressives, and one still heard today, is that the Constitution is so hard to amend that judges have to loosen its restrictions on the power of the federal government by judicial reinterpretations. Judicial activism is one of the enduring legacies of the Progressive era.

In reality, the Constitution was amended four times in eight years during the Progressive era. But facts carried no more weight with crusading Progressives then than they do today.

Theodore Roosevelt interpreted the Constitution to mean that the President of the United States could exercise any powers not explicitly forbidden to him. This stood the 10th Amendment on its head, for that Amendment explicitly gave the federal government only the powers specifically spelled out, and reserved all other powers to the states or to the people.

Woodrow Wilson attacked the Constitution in his writings as an academic before he became president. Once in power, his administration so restricted freedom of speech that this led to landmark Supreme Court decisions restoring that fundamental right.

Whatever the vision or rhetoric of the Progressive era, its practice was a never-ending expansion of the arbitrary powers of the federal government. The problems they created so discredited Progressives that they started calling themselves "liberals" -- and after they discredited themselves again, they went back to calling themselves "Progressives," now that people no longer remembered how Progressives had discredited themselves before.

Barack Obama's rhetoric of "change" is in fact a restoration of discredited ideas that originated a hundred years ago. 

Copyright 2012, Creators Syndicate Inc.

   Email         Print      35Comments       Share
Report to moderator   Logged
MM2K
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1401



« Reply #29 on: February 28, 2012, 10:03:11 AM »

Great article by Sowell. I give TR overall high marks only because of his aggressive foreign policy. But domesticly he was highly overrated.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jan. Jobs: 36,000!!
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #30 on: March 08, 2012, 07:33:54 PM »

Free Republic
Browse Search   Pings Mail   Bloggers & Personal
Topics Post Article
Skip to comments.

Is it Time to Part Company?
Walter E. Williams ^ | Sept 8, 2000 | Walter E. Williams
Posted on March 8, 2012 9:11:15 PM EST by B.O. Plenty

The political situation in the US is winding up day by day..clearly screaming louder and getting more vicious.

The left are getting more insane, right down to insisting that we all pay for their health care, food stamps, college tuition...and now even their condoms!....God only knows what their next demands will be...maybe they will demand that we all chip in and get them a car...or a house, or a vacation to France...Huh

Walter E. Williams suggested a solution years ago. I dust it off every now and then because a lot the younger Freepers haven't seen this:...so here goes:

It's Time To Part Company

One political question we have to answer is whether George W. Bush or Albert Gore shall be president and just which party will control the House of Representatives and the Senate. But I'd suggest that there's a far more important long run question we must answer: If one group of people prefers government control and management of people's lives and another prefers liberty and a desire to be left alone, should they be required to fight, antagonize one another, risk bloodshed and loss of life in order to impose their preferences or should they be able to peaceably part company and go their separate ways?

Like a marriage that has gone bad, I believe there are enough irreconcilable differences between those who want to control and those want to be left alone that divorce is the only peaceable alternative. Just as in a marriage, where vows are broken, our human rights protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them. Americans who are responsible for and support constitutional abrogation have no intention of mending their ways.

Let's look at just some of the magnitude of the violations.

Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution enumerates the activities for which Congress is authorized to tax and spend. James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, explained it in The Federalist Papers: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. . . . The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."

Nowhere amongst the enumerated powers of congress is there authority to tax and spend for: Social Security, public education, farm subsidies, bank bailouts, food stamps and other activities that represent roughly two-thirds of the federal budget. Neither is there authority for Congress's mandates to the states and people about how they may use their land, the speed at which they can drive, whether a library has wheelchair ramps and the gallons of water used per toilet flush. A list of congressional violations of the letter and spirit of the Constitution is virtually without end.

Americans who wish to live free have two options: We can resist, fight and risk bloodshed to force America's tyrants to respect our liberties and human rights, or we can seek a peaceful resolution of our irreconcilable differences by separating. That can be done by peopling several states, say Texas and Louisiana, control their legislatures and then issue a unilateral declaration of independence just as the Founders did in 1776. You say, "Williams, nobody has to go that far, just get involved in the political process and vote for the right person." That's nonsense. Liberty shouldn't require a vote. It's a God-given or natural right.

Some independence or secessionists movements, such as our 1776 war with England and our 1861 War Between the States, have been violent, but they need not be. In 1905, Norway seceded from Sweden, Panama seceded from Columbia (1903), and West Virginia from Virginia (1863). Nonetheless, violent secession can lead to great friendships. England is probably our greatest ally and we have fought three major wars together. There is no reason why Texiana (Texas and Louisiana) couldn't peaceably secede, be an ally, and have strong economic ties with United States.

The bottom line question for all of us is should we part company or continue trying to forcibly impose our wills on one another?

Walter E. Williams










I agree with him.   If we don't split this country in two in some way - I truly believe we hare heading to civil war. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #31 on: March 09, 2012, 08:16:49 PM »

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1498449698001/sowell-gingrich-only-one-who-can-debate-obama/?playlist_id=87247


Sowell is a mountain of intellect.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #32 on: March 10, 2012, 03:16:35 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7butJGdUmK0" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7butJGdUmK0</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #33 on: March 10, 2012, 03:45:47 PM »

BRILLIANT MAN 

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUL152yGVGI" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUL152yGVGI</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #34 on: March 10, 2012, 03:54:49 PM »

WAKE UP DUMMIES! 

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrT0kBeld3Q" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrT0kBeld3Q</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #35 on: March 10, 2012, 03:58:13 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiB8foERtrI" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiB8foERtrI</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #36 on: March 10, 2012, 04:13:05 PM »

How can anyone disagree w this?

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcugkz-5u4Q" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcugkz-5u4Q</a>

Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #37 on: March 10, 2012, 04:50:54 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adGmk2tiotw" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adGmk2tiotw</a>


I am embarassed for our nation that guys like Sowell and Williams are not running for high office. 


Walter Williams is a treasure. 

Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #38 on: March 10, 2012, 05:35:24 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLC51XHi3u4" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLC51XHi3u4</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #39 on: March 10, 2012, 05:39:43 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TK_-iVppgQs" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TK_-iVppgQs</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #40 on: March 10, 2012, 05:46:09 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmFBzuLJ6ac" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmFBzuLJ6ac</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #41 on: March 10, 2012, 05:56:24 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jK22PS1wgzI" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jK22PS1wgzI</a>


williams / sowell 2012 


I might even  . . . . .  people for that ticket! 


I love these two - pure brilliance 
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #42 on: March 10, 2012, 06:00:08 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih4Itl0PmaE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih4Itl0PmaE</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #43 on: March 10, 2012, 06:04:43 PM »

Is it Time to Part Company?
Walter E. Williams ^ | Sept 8, 2000 | Walter E. Williams





The political situation in the US is winding up day by day..clearly screaming louder and getting more vicious.

The left are getting more insane, right down to insisting that we all pay for their health care, food stamps, college tuition...and now even their condoms!....God only knows what their next demands will be...maybe they will demand that we all chip in and get them a car...or a house, or a vacation to France...Huh

Walter E. Williams suggested a solution years ago. I dust it off every now and then because a lot the younger Freepers haven't seen this:...so here goes:


It's Time To Part Company


One political question we have to answer is whether George W. Bush or Albert Gore shall be president and just which party will control the House of Representatives and the Senate. But I'd suggest that there's a far more important long run question we must answer: If one group of people prefers government control and management of people's lives and another prefers liberty and a desire to be left alone, should they be required to fight, antagonize one another, risk bloodshed and loss of life in order to impose their preferences or should they be able to peaceably part company and go their separate ways?


Like a marriage that has gone bad, I believe there are enough irreconcilable differences between those who want to control and those want to be left alone that divorce is the only peaceable alternative. Just as in a marriage, where vows are broken, our human rights protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them. Americans who are responsible for and support constitutional abrogation have no intention of mending their ways.


Let's look at just some of the magnitude of the violations.


Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution enumerates the activities for which Congress is authorized to tax and spend. James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, explained it in The Federalist Papers: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. . . . The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."


Nowhere amongst the enumerated powers of congress is there authority to tax and spend for: Social Security, public education, farm subsidies, bank bailouts, food stamps and other activities that represent roughly two-thirds of the federal budget. Neither is there authority for Congress's mandates to the states and people about how they may use their land, the speed at which they can drive, whether a library has wheelchair ramps and the gallons of water used per toilet flush. A list of congressional violations of the letter and spirit of the Constitution is virtually without end.


Americans who wish to live free have two options: We can resist, fight and risk bloodshed to force America's tyrants to respect our liberties and human rights, or we can seek a peaceful resolution of our irreconcilable differences by separating. That can be done by peopling several states, say Texas and Louisiana, control their legislatures and then issue a unilateral declaration of independence just as the Founders did in 1776. You say, "Williams, nobody has to go that far, just get involved in the political process and vote for the right person." That's nonsense. Liberty shouldn't require a vote. It's a God-given or natural right.


Some independence or secessionists movements, such as our 1776 war with England and our 1861 War Between the States, have been violent, but they need not be. In 1905, Norway seceded from Sweden, Panama seceded from Columbia (1903), and West Virginia from Virginia (1863). Nonetheless, violent secession can lead to great friendships. England is probably our greatest ally and we have fought three major wars together. There is no reason why Texiana (Texas and Louisiana) couldn't peaceably secede, be an ally, and have strong economic ties with United States.


The bottom line question for all of us is should we part company or continue trying to forcibly impose our wills on one another?


Walter E. Williams


September 8, 2000




________________________ _________




I agree w Williams   
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #44 on: March 10, 2012, 06:09:51 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6hpWjWtZ8s" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6hpWjWtZ8s</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #45 on: March 10, 2012, 06:13:21 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atuOZnq5Smg" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atuOZnq5Smg</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #46 on: March 10, 2012, 06:18:49 PM »

WAKE UP DUMMIES! 

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL3ruDj4Ffg" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL3ruDj4Ffg</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #47 on: March 10, 2012, 06:34:43 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkaxekY2Hqg" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkaxekY2Hqg</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #48 on: March 10, 2012, 06:43:15 PM »

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rcNR63hNoc" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rcNR63hNoc</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8614


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #49 on: March 12, 2012, 11:48:27 AM »

The Big Hoax (Thomas Sowell)
Creators Syndicate ^ | March 13, 2012 | Thomas Sowell



 
 
There have been many frauds of historic proportions for example, the financial pyramid scheme for which Charles Ponzi was sent to prison in the 1920s, and for which Franklin D. Roosevelt was praised in the 1930s, when he called it Social Security. In our own times, Bernie Madoff's hoax has made headlines.

But the biggest hoax of the past two generations is still going strong namely, the hoax that statistical differences in outcomes for different groups are due to the way other people treat those groups.

The latest example of this hoax is the joint crusade of the Department of Education and the Department of Justice against schools that discipline black males more often than other students. According to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, this disparity in punishment violates the "promise" of "equity."

Just who made this promise remains unclear, and why equity should mean equal outcomes despite differences in behavior is even more unclear. This crusade by Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is only the latest in a long line of fraudulent arguments based on statistics.

If black males get punished more often than Asian American females, does that mean that it is somebody else's fault? That it is impossible that black males are behaving differently from Asian American females? Nobody in his right mind believes that. But that is the unspoken premise, without which the punishment statistics prove nothing about "equity."

What is the purpose or effect of this whole exercise by the Department of Education and the Department of Justice? To help black students or to secure the black vote in an election year by seeming to be coming to the rescue of blacks from white oppression?

Among the many serious problems of ghetto schools is the legal difficulty of getting rid of disruptive hoodlums, a mere handful of whom can be enough to destroy the education of a far larger number of other black students and with it destroy their chances for a better life.

Judges have already imposed too many legalistic procedures on schools that are more appropriate for a courtroom. "Due process" rules that are essential for courts can readily become "undue process" in a school setting, when letting clowns and thugs run amok, while legalistic procedures to suspend or expel them drag on. It is a formula for educational and social disaster.

Now Secretary Duncan and Attorney General Holder want to play the race card in an election year, at the expense of the education of black students. Make no mistake about it, the black students who go to school to get an education are the main victims of the classroom disrupters whom Duncan and Holder are trying to protect.

What they are more fundamentally trying to protect are the black votes which are essential for Democrats. For that, blacks must be constantly depicted as under siege from whites, so that Democrats can be seen as their rescuers.

Promoting paranoia translates into votes. It is a very cynical political game, despite all the lofty rhetoric used to disguise it.

Whether the current generation of black students get a decent education is infinitely more important than whether the current generation of Democratic politicians hang on to their jobs.

Too many of the intelligentsia both black and white jump on the statistical bandwagon, and see statistical differences as proof of maltreatment, not only in schools but in jobs, in mortgage lending and in many other things.

Some act as if their role is to protect the image of blacks by blaming their problems on whites. But the truth is far more important than racial image.

Wherever we want to go, we can only get there from where we are. Not where we think we are, or wish we are, or where we want others to think we are, but where we are in fact right now.

But political spin and pious euphemisms don't tell us where we are. After a while, such rhetorical exercises don't even fool others.

If we don't have the truth, we don't have anything to start with and build on. A big start toward the truth would be getting rid of the kinds of statistical hoaxes being promoted by Secretary of Education Duncan and Attorney General Holder.
 
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!