Running Out Of Other People's Money

The direct link to the video is Daniel Hannan MEP: The devalued Prime Minister of a devalued Government

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" - Margaret Thatcher.

Other videos by Daniel Hannan:

Jeffersonian Principles Part 1

Jeffersonian Principles Part 2

Jeffersonian Principles Part 3

And what do you know? Amazon has a book:

Jeffersonian Principles: Extracts from the Writings of Thomas Jefferson

Peace Through War

Jefferson to Adams in a July 11, 1786, letter: "I acknolege I very early thought it would be best to effect a peace thro' the medium of war."

Jefferson was speaking about the jihadis of his day.

The New Imperialism

Stephen Green, Vodka Pundit, on Tuesday's Republican debate thread had some thoughts on the new American Imperialism in the comments.

Let's not forget also that America's western foreign policy was explicitly imperialistic -- using our excess farmers, and their desire for cheap, new lands -- to push our western border to the Mississippi and beyond.

And Jefferson wanted to add Canada, Mexico, and Cuba to America's lands. *Jefferson*.

For those that want to delve deeper in the subject there is the wiki.

H/T Instapundit

Cross Posted at Classical Values

The Word Is Father To The Deed

There is a discussion going on at Dean's World about Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates. The folks there are trying to figure out if the jihadis of Jefferson's day have anything in common with the jihadis of today. It is a very interesting piece and has lots of interesting quotes such as this one:

…when Jefferson was ambassador to France, and Adams was ambassador to Britain, they met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the ambassador to Britain from the "Dey of Algiers."

Seeking a peace treaty, based on Congress' vote to pay tribute, the two Americans asked Dey's ambassador why Muslims had so much hostility towards America. They later reported to Congress the ambassador told them Islam "was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Quran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise."

Sound familiar?

In the comments maryatexitzero says (excerpted):

I can only interpret Jefferson's beliefs by interpreting his actions. His actions, and the laws he enforced suggest that he realized that the Koran may have been used to motivate certain deeds and actions. He also understood that the deeds and actions were the problem, not the Koran.

So I rephrased that to bring in a bit of modern history.

I can only interpret FDR's beliefs by interpreting his actions. His actions, and the laws he enforced suggest that he realized that the "Mein Kampf" may have been used to motivate certain deeds and actions. He also understood that the deeds and actions were the problem, not "Mein Kampf".

Or as the anarchist liked to say: the word is father to the deed.

Mein Kampf is a best seller in Turkey, and Palestine, and these folks claim it is the #2 best seller in the world, surpassed only by the Bible. Pedestrian Infidel compares Mein Kampf to the Koran. Evidently Oriana Fallaci also thought there were similarities between Mein Kampf and the Koran. The piece on Fallaci lays down the gauntlet:

It remains for those who identify themselves as moderate Muslims to convince violent Muslims that they are misusing the Qur’an – if indeed they are – and should lay down their arms. They have had no notable success in this so far.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

Religious Liberty

Not having much profound to say at this time I'm going to quote our profoundist president, Thomas Jefferson on religious liberty. Virginia Statute For Religious Freedom

Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as it was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical; that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the ministry those temporary rewards, which proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct, are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labours for the instruction of mankind; that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics or geometry; that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which in common with his fellow-citizens he has a natural right; that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing with a monopoly of worldly honours and emoluments, those who will externally profess and conform to it; that though indeed these are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way; that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own; that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them:

Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

And though we well know that this assembly elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding assemblies, constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act to be irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present, or to narrow its operation, such act shall be an infringement of natural right.

Cross Posted at Classical Values