Wussification of America

The challenge . Get the "wussification dependency"state out of our lives in 2017-  will this be a worthwhile task? Can we become real men, women, and human beings again?( For those of us who learned through doing and experiencing real life) Push back Nannyism in 2017.

Canada is free, but what about you?

Canada is free, but what about you? Good question .I am less free because I do not do enough to protect my freedom. I let others take away my rights by not speaking out , I deserve what I get because of my lazy complacency and blind indifference to abuses. Thank you for reminding me that I have a personal responsibiity to keep Canada and myself free by voicing my opinions and making a tipping point and pivotal difference through real action. PR

FREEDOM
Posted By Christi Chartrand Brantford

The more I think about Canada, and look around at all of the wars going on around the world, I am truly grateful to be where I am. I am free ... well, at least more "free" than others.

It's true, I don't have bombs blasting all around me, but the guns in schools and on the streets still frighten me.

It's true, I am free to believe in whatever religion I choose, but I must be careful, because even the slightest thing can offend my fellow freedom fighters (such as a nativity on my front yard).

I am free to live on a peaceful street, but must be sure to lock my doors at night, too many children disappear these days. I am a woman, and even though I have many rights, I am still scared to go out alone at night.

I am free to have children, but not necessarily free to keep them. I am free to vote and I do, but the majority of the country doesn't. Canada is free, it's true, but how free are you? Christi Chartrand Brantford

Big Brother may ban smoking in your house – what's next?

Beware of more government terrorist activity that attacks your personal freedoms PR

Dear Friend, by Campbell MD

By now, smoking has been banned nearly everywhere: in bars, in restaurants, in offices, in movies, on planes, and – this one always gets me – at outdoor stadiums. The only place it's still OK to smoke is in the privacy of your own home, right?

Wrong.

There's a growing movement by the anti-smoking fascists throughout the country to create a smoke-free housing law. This law would ban smoking in multi-unit residences like apartment buildings and condominiums. That tug you feel is the anti-smoking lobby trying to pull away another of your personal freedoms.

I'm not a believer in smoking bans. But as a believer in personal freedom, I'll be the first one to hand you a match if you want to light up. I've pointed out time and again that smoking is not the primary cause of lung cancer. And yet, this myth persists. And the anti-smoking lobby is using it to further their cause.

If the road to hell is paved with good intentions, the smoking ban provides several hundred miles of blacktop. Why? Because wholesale government bans enacted under the guise of the "greater good" are always, always about the restriction of personal freedoms. (Did you know that Hitler was the original mastermind behind government regulated smoking bans?

As I was saying…Smoking bans are the first step on a slippery slope toward the obliteration of our individual rights. The simpletons in Congress and the Senate are often more concerned with celebrating our rights than protecting them. The smoke-free lobby seems to neither realize nor care that such a ban is discriminatory and, therefore, unconstitutional. Thankfully, there are some smart people speaking out against this ban. Many real estate companies are pointing out that this so-called "health concern" is about to take a big swipe at the sanctity of one of the most fundamental American rights: private property.

Don't let all this smoke cloud an issue that's crystal clear. When the government comes to your door and says they want to pass a ban to protect you – and your children – slam the door in their face. Whether you light up after you slam that door is up to you. And that's exactly how it should be.

The purpose of democracy and freedom of choice Food for thought

What is the essence of sovereign government?
Ultimately, is government something done for us, or done to us? The whole discussion turns on this. In the final analysis, is government to serve or impose?
Social and economic programs, for example, ostensibly represent governments acting “for” us -- whether as an innovative private company or as an indulgent uncle it is never clear.
On the other hand, policing – taxation – licensing of cars, dogs, restaurants and guns – and everything down to standard weights and measures, are typically done to us, or to someone else. They regiment what we all must do and must not do.
Any of these impositions may be absolutely necessary for public order, or may be utterly stupid; but either way, it’s what sets governments apart – their power to impose.
The purpose of democracy
Efficiency is the concern of supermarkets and car dealers. Maximum sale for minimum investment. They have competitors. They must be imaginative and efficient, or perish.
But governments don't. No organization that can compel the entire population to pay for its own overstaffing, irresponsible mistakes and occasional blatant injustices will be creative and efficient, except at imposing its will, because that is its business.

It is a fundamental error to see governments merely as administrative services, like the sales and accounting staff at Walmart. Walmart can't force ypou to surrender 40% of your income for products you can't get and probably don't want.
For this reason, it's best to give the most powerful government as little responsibility as possible, and favour less powerful, more controllable orders of government with more. For the lower and closer sovereignty lies to you and me, the easier we find it to control. But this been said often enough.
Given Ottawa’s usurpation of social sovereignty over the past 50 years – from the unemployment insurance revenue grab in 1940, to the ponzi-scheme Canada Pension Plan in the 1960s, to the straitjacket Canada Health Act in the 1980s – it is surely time to bring the democratic reins back closer to hand and back to the provinces (or the grass roots citizens and taxpayers) where it originated.