Constitutionally, Slavery was not a “National Institution”

A major criticism of the Constitution in recent years is that prior to the passage of the 13th Amendment it had maintained slavery as a national institution. Yet this claim does not match what took place at the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 nor is it reflected in what the document actually says about slavery itself.

In an opinion piece for the New York Times, establishment historian Sean Wilentz argues that contrary to recent statements by Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and others, the United States was not “founded on slavery,” calling this “one of the most destructive falsehoods in all of American history.”

Although many proslavery elements were present at the Constitutional Convention and strove to make slavery a permanent part of the Constitution, their efforts failed despite securing compromises that merely tolerated the existence of slavery rather than endorse it. Wilentz writes:

“James Madison (himself a slaveholder) opposed the ardent proslavery delegates and stated that it would be “wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in men.” The Constitutional Convention not only deliberately excluded the word “slavery,” but it also quashed the proslavery effort to make slavery a national institution, and so prevented enshrining the racism that justified slavery.”

Full commentary @ The Tenth Amendment Center

David Stockman “Clueless Carly———Crony Capitalist Warmonger With Flash Cards”

Carly Fiorina proved at least one thing last week. Namely, you don’t have to be a career GOP politician to come across as a war-mongering neocon and abortion-bashing statist demagogue. She took the stage fully formed as a frightul modern-day Torquemada, threatening to bring fire and brimstone down on anyone running afoul of her righteous indignation and crystal clear grasp of the Truth.

That included about everyone on the world stage, save for the presumably sainted Bibi Netanyahu. As for the others, Putin was to be given the silent treatment and a stiff dose of NATO encirclement, while Iran was to be occupied by US inspectors at “every military and every nuclear facility…….. anytime, anywhere……”

Full expose by David Stockman @

Riverside County Libertarian Meeting October 14, 2015

The Riverside County Libertarian Party will hold a general meeting on Wednesday, October 14, 2015. The meeting will take place at Back to the Grind Coffee House
3575 University Avenue
Riverside (Downtown)

The meeting will take place from 7:30 PM to 9:00 PM in the downstairs meeting room. It is open to anyone interested in political action for freedom. There is no charge but we will accept contributions to the Riverside County Libertarian Party.

We will discuss the upcoming initiative to legalize recreational marijuana in California, and the possible Gary Johnson for President Campaign in 2016. We will elect officers to lead the party campaigns through the next year.

For more information call Gene Berkman @ (951) 369-8843 or visit
Renaissance Book Shop
3772 Elizabeth Street
Riverside, CA 92506

William Anderson on “The Economics of Bernie Sanders”

As the political campaign of Hillary Clinton continues to run aground, Democrats are flocking to the campaign of Bernie Sanders, the self-described “socialist” US senator from Vermont, who has been a fixture in that state for more than three decades. Not unlike the presidential campaign of Ron Paul, Sanders is drawing large, enthusiastic crowds who are very receptive to his message of increased state control of the US economy.

Obviously, when a person running a campaign based upon socialist principles is drawing attention and big crowds, we might ask just what does Sanders mean by “socialist,” and what would he do if he were elected president of the United States? To better answer that question, I am taking a closer look at what we would call the “economics” of Bernie Sanders.

What Do We Mean by “Socialism”?

Before looking at Sanders’s platform, however, I believe it is important to note that when socialists speak of “victories” in the economy, they are not talking about actual results, but rather political achievements in the forms of laws being passed that mandate certain policies. Whether or not these policies actually achieve what socialists claim will be accomplished is another story altogether, but results are irrelevant to socialists.

This should surprise no one because, after all, socialism is based upon political control of the economy.

Full post by William Anderson @ The Mises Institute

340 Rabbis Urge Congress to Support Nuclear Deal with Iran

Today, 340 rabbis from all streams of Judaism sent a letter to all Members of Congress urging that they support the agreement between the international community and Iran on the Iranian nuclear program.

“We commend the U.S. and the other negotiating teams for their dedication to reaching an agreement to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. This deal is good for the United States and our allies in the region, and is the best arrangement possible given current international realities,” declared Rabbi Steven Bob of Glen Ellyn, IL.

Rabbi Rachel Mikva of Chicago added, “A wide array of views about the nuclear deal exist among American Jews, as demonstrated in the recent Jewish Journal poll that showed 49% approving of the agreement (31% opposed) and 53% wanting Congress to approve it (35% opposed). However many Jewish Federations, AIPAC and other leading national Jewish organizations are campaigning in opposition, which is being interpreted to mean that American Jews want to see the deal scrapped. This is a false and dangerous message that we as rabbis hope to counter with our letter to Congress.”

– See more at:

Arms Control Experts back agreement with Iran

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is a strong, long-term, and verifiable agreement that will be a net-plus for international nuclear non-proliferation efforts.

It advances the security interests of the P5+1 nations (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States, the European Union, their partners and allies in the Middle East, and the international community.

When implemented, the JCPOA will establish long-term, verifiable restrictions on Iran’s enrichment facilities and research and development, including advanced centrifuge research and deployment. Taken in combination with stringent limitations on Iran’s low-enriched uranium stockpile, these restrictions ensure that Iran’s capability to produce enough bomb grade uranium sufficient for one weapon would be extended to approximately 12 months for a decade or more.

Moreover, the JCPOA will effectively eliminate Iran’s ability to produce and separate plutonium for a nuclear weapon for at least 15 years, including by permanently modifying the Arak reactor, Iran’s major potential source for weapons grade plutonium, committing Iran not to reprocess spent fuel, and shipping spent fuel out of the country.

Full statement from a distinguished group of experts concerned with nuclear non-proliferation, with list of signers, can be read @

de Rugy:”Overseas Private Investment Corporation is ripe for termination”

Now that the Export-Import Bank’s charter has expired, it’s time to examine other programs that should follow in Ex-Im’s footsteps. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), a federal agency that subsidizes U.S.-owned overseas businesses with taxpayer-backed financing, is ripe for termination when its charter expires on September 30.

Immediately focusing on a new target on the heels of Ex-Im’s expiration is important. As Heritage Foundation’s analyst Diane Katz expressed to me in an email, “We should certainly celebrate the success of blocking Ex-Im from doling out yet more subsidies, but the victory may be temporary and is certainly incomplete. Ex-Im is only one of dozens of corporate welfare programs, such as OPIC, that must be ended.”

In the Washington Examiner, Timothy Carney explains what OPIC does and why it should go. “Want to set up a factory in a different country? OPIC can make it cheaper for you. For instance, a Brazilian granite business gets an OPIC subsidy, even though that hurts its U.S. competitors.”

The parallels between OPIC and Ex-Im are chilling: two government agencies that focus on artificially propping up U.S. companies in the name of economic growth and job creation by providing cheap financing to companies that could find capital on their own. In the process, both agencies transfer large risk to taxpayers.

Full post by Veronique de Rugy @ Reason