If you had a time machine, you would remember that way back in January 8, 2008 Senator Barack Obama, said, “No warrantless wiretaps if you elect me.”
For one thing, under an Obama presidency, Americans will be able to leave behind the era of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and “wiretaps without warrants,” he said. (He was referring to the lingering legal fallout over reports that the National Security Agency scooped up Americans’ phone and Internet activities without court orders, ostensibly to monitor terrorist plots, in the years after the September 11 attacks.)
When asked whether he supports shielding telecommunications and Internet companies from lawsuits accusing them of illegal spying, Obama gave a one-word response: “No.”
But the NAACP did not want her to represent their organization because she was 15 and had recently gotten pregnant.
If I asked you who was Rosa Parks, you’ll most likely tell me that she was a black woman who refused to go and sit in the back of the bus in Montgomery, Alabama. You might know that she was 42 at the time and a seamstress. I doubt you know that the bus driver’s name was James Blake, he order Rosa Parks to move to the back of the bus after some white patrons wanted to sit. And I further doubt you knew that she was not alone and was riding with two other black passengers. Did you happen to know it was all a set up?
No? Well nine months before Rosa Parks was launched into the public eye, whom the U.S. Congress later called “the first lady of civil rights”, shaking hands with Martin Luther King Jr, or even U.S. presidents, a 15-year-old girl, Claudette Colvin, was thrown off a bus in the same town and in almost identical circumstances. Like Parks, she too, pleaded not guilty to breaking the law. And, like Parks, the local black establishment started to rally support nationwide for her cause. But, unlike Parks, Colvin never made it into the civil rights hall of fame. Just as her case was beginning to catch the nation’s imagination, she became pregnant. To the exclusively male and predominantly middle-class, church-dominated, local black leadership in Montgomery, she was a fallen woman. A fallen heroine.
The NAACP, could not rally for her, but they needed a role model, someone else. So in between the nine month from Colvin to Parks, another black woman did the same thing, Mary Louise Smith, suffered a similar fate. Smith was arrested in October 1955, but was also not considered an appropriate candidate for a broader campaign, because the NAACP thought her father was a drunk. Rosa Parks was already a member of the Montgomery chapter of the NAACP, and was elected volunteer secretary, she believed in equal rights, and she knew what was going to happen when she refused to go to the back of the bus. The NAACP needed to get segregation on the political map, they needed someone to get arrested, but who? By the time Rosa Parks was arrested on a Thursday, that Friday pamphlets were distributed telling about Rosa Parks, and by the following Monday, Rosa Parks was cemented in the minds of America as an unfortunate every-woman who happens to be black, it also helped that she was married, and was educated.
Remember that when you studied history in the past, you remember dates and historic figures, we like our history in neat and clean order, and the less muddy that water gets the clearer we see the picture that is painted for us. Okay maybe not the true picture, but a clear picture nonetheless. Was the the history of civil rights distorted?
December 14, 1790
Alexander Hamilton proposes a Bank of the United States.
December 16, 1790
Patric Henry opposes the National bank because it is unconstitutional.
February 25, 1791
President Washington asks his cabinet members for opinions on the National Bank. Thomas Jefferson submitted that such a Bank was unconstitutional and would also violate the yet to be ratified 10th Amendment. Alexander Hamilton submitted that Congress’s power to collect taxes was also power to create a national bank. Not convinced by either side, Washington sided with Hamilton as it was Hamilton’s job as Secretary of the Treasury to know what he was doing.
December 12, 1791
The Bank of the United States opens its doors in Philadelphia.
January 21, 1793
Hamilton and the National Bank are accused of corruption and mismanagement. Opponents to the National Bank call for the demise of the unconstitutional Bank. Congress fails to act.
February 20, 1811
Congress refuses to let the National Bank renew its Charter on the grounds that the Bank is unconstitutional.
March 4, 1811,
The Bank of the United States is dissolved.
January 20, 1815
President Madison vetoes a bill that would create a second National Bank.
January 8, 1816
Faced with financial hardship from the War of 1812, Congress proposes a 2nd National Bank. The Bill also allows the President to suspend hard currency.
March 14, 1816
The 2nd National Bank gets Congressional approval.
January 1, 1817
The 2nd National Bank opens for business.
January 9, 1832
The 2nd National Bank applies for its Charter renewal 4 years early.
July 10, 1832
President Jackson vetoes the Bank’s recharter on the grounds that the Bank is unconstitutional.
With the National Bank powerless, Jackson successfully pays off the nation’s debt leaving the U.S. with a surplus of $5,000.
July 11, 1836
Paper money results in tremendous inflation in property value. President Jackson issues a Specie Circular mandating that land payments be made with gold and silver.
July 4, 1840
President Van Buren approves the Independent Treasury which allows the Federal government to control its own money.
June 7, 1841
Henry Clay, on behalf of the Whig party, introduces legislation to abolish the Independent Treasury in hopes to replace the national banking system with a Federal Bank.
July 28, 1841
The Senate passes a bill, sponsored by the Whig party, to revive the 2nd National Bank by creating a Federal Bank that would be called The Fiscal Bank of the United States. (A State chartered Bank for the District of Columbia that would be used by the U.S. Government. ) President Tyler vetoes the bill as unconstitutional.
August 13, 1841
The Independent Treasury Act is repealed leaving the National government without a Banking system for the next 5 years. The Secretary of the Treasury deposits the government’s money into State Banks.
September 3, 1841
Congress again tries to create a Federal Bank. This time, they set it up to be run by State office holders. Again, President Tyler vetoes it as unconstitutional.
September 18, 1873
A flood of paper money snowballs the Nation into a depression that lasts 5 years.
January 14, 1875
The Specie Resumption Act allows legal tender to be exchanged for gold. When the Act goes into affect in 1879, the nation starts to revive from the 1873 depression.
The Nation again goes into a Depression because of paper currency, but J.P. Morgan saves the Nation from a major crisis by providing the government with $100 million dollars in gold.
December 23, 1913
In response to the National Depression in 1907, President Wilson gets Congress to pass the Owen-Glass Federal Reserve Act. The Act is intended to better regulate paper money.
August 15, 1971
Under the regime of the French President Charles de Gaulle up to 1970, France reduced its dollar reserves, trading them for gold from the U.S. government, thereby reducing U.S. economic influence abroad. This, along with the fiscal strain of federal expenditures for the Vietnam War, led President Richard Nixon to end the direct convertibility of the dollar to gold in 1971, resulting in the system’s breakdown, commonly known as the Nixon Shock.
A levada is an irrigation channel or aqueduct specific to the Portugese island of Madeira. They were created from the sixteenth century to carry water across the island from the mountainous west and northwest of the island to the drier southeast, which is more conducive to habitation and agriculture The total levadas network extends over 2150 km in this island 57 km long, 23km wide in the widest point.
In any reasonably free society, these activities do not fall in the realm of political coercion. No government agency chooses who you are to marry and have children with, and punishes you with jail for disobeying their rulings. Voluntarism, incentive, mutual advantage – dare we say “advertising”? – all run the free market of love, sex and marriage.
What about your career? Did a government official call you up at the end of high school and inform you that you were to become a doctor, a lawyer, a factory worker, a waiter, an actor, a programmer – or a philosopher? Of course not. You were left free to choose the career that best matched your interests, abilities and initiative.
What about your major financial decisions? Each month, does a government agent come to your house and tell you exactly how much you should save, how much you should spend, whether you can afford that new couch or old painting? Did you have to apply to the government to buy a new car, a new house, a plasma television or a toothbrush?
No, in all the areas mentioned above – love, marriage, family, career, finances – we all make our major decisions in the complete absence of direct political coercion.
Thus – if anarchy is such an all-consuming, universal evil, why is it the default – and virtuous – freedom that we demand in order to achieve just liberty in our daily lives?
If the government told you tomorrow that it was going to choose for you where to live, how to earn your keep, and who to marry – would you fall to your knees and thank the heavens that you have been saved from such terrible anarchy – the anarchy of making your own decisions in the absence of direct political coercion?
Of course not – quite the opposite – you would be horrified, and would oppose such an encroaching dictatorship with all your might.
This is what I mean when I say that we consider anarchy to be an irreducible evil – and also an irreducible good. It is both feared and despised – and considered necessary and virtuous.
If you were told that tomorrow you would wake up and there would be no government, you would doubtless fear the specter of “anarchy.”
If you were told tomorrow that you would have to apply for a government permit to have children, you would doubtless fear the specter of “dictatorship,” and long for the days of “anarchy,” when you could decide such things without the intervention of political coercion.
Thus we can see that we human beings are deeply, almost ferociously ambivalent about “anarchy.” We desperately desire it in our personal lives, and just as desperately fear it politically.
Another way of putting this is that we love the anarchy we live, and yet fear the anarchy we imagine.
By Stefan Molyneux — Everyday Anarchy (via thinksquad)
The Isotope is all about contrast. The brilliant glow of the lume, and the sharp lines of the titanium create a visual moment that refuses to be ignored.
The special lume material in the Isotope ring soaks up both natural and artificial light and will glow bright green as soon as it is in a low-light environment. Wear it to bed and it will still be glowing when you get up for that 3am visit to the bathroom!
Moonglow is a ultra-high output photoluminesent polycarbonate. It soaks up both natural and artificial light and will glow bright green for hours once it is in a low-light environment. It also a passive-lume material, meaning it absorbs light. It does not generate its own light as radioactive materials such as tritium do.