This may explain why he's lecturing the rest of us on the best way to prevent gun violence -- after all, his plans have worked so well in Chicago -- and lobbying to erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights.
Rahm Emanuel to Banks: No More Credit for Gun Manufacturers
Back in July, Rahm Emanuel attempted to shut Chick-fil-A out of Chicago because the owner didn’t agree with his personal views regarding gay marriage. He had asked city officials to block their ability to build.
Now, the Master of the Chicago Way is at it again, this time attacking legal and law abiding gun makers. He has requested that several large banking institutions no longer offer lines of credit to manufacturers such as Smith & Wesson until they agree to his proposals on gun control.
...If corporations and financial institutions continue to be intimidated by the Chicago style threats and bullying we have come to expect from Emanuel and this administration in general, we are in serious trouble. There is no longer any need for them to legislate anything when they are able to use propaganda and manipulation to shut down anything they do not agree with, legal or not. This is starting to set an incredibly dangerous precedent for the future of this country.
There are, of course, things we can still do.
The way I read this story, Emanuel is calling for a national boycott of Chicago.
Consider: there are only about 80 million gun owners in the United States. By slamming all of those law-abiding gun owners, Emanuel has very effectively called for a nationwide boycott of his own city. And I, for one, am more than happy to oblige.
Forcing one company out of town or a small sector into submission makes it much easier to extort the other businesses in the bandit's territory, I mean city. Al Capone showed Chicago politicians how to do it, and Chicago politicians are showing the country
ReplyDeleteThe nature of the state - Cafe Hayek
=== ===
[edited] There is a notion that the state is a legitimate agency deserving respect; that despite its flaws, it generally promotes or tries to promote the welfare of its citizens. This is increasingly difficult to understand, much less to accept.
The late Mancur Olson had a far more realistic view: The state is a stationary bandit. Ordinary people might have to tolerate this, but they should understand that dealing with the state is dealing with organized thuggery. Obey the state because it can unleash its guns and prisons on you. But, please don’t pretend that the state’s commands are issued with your best interests in mind.
=== ===
The fundamental problem with politics is that it is driven by incentives, like all other activities. Political parties are organized to collect the spoils of government. They benefit from implementing good policy only to the extent that they can confiscate more of the prosperity of the citizens.
Their fight for dominance is not primarily driven by greater prosperity for the average citizen, and so that prosperity will often suffer from the fight.
Possibly the populace will reject nanny (protection racket) government after the general economic collapse which is coming. But, the example of Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930's, and of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela doesn't cheer me. Each became or has become more popular as his country declined.
why don't they just make chicago a young black male free zone?
ReplyDeleteONLY KIDDING!
if these killings are merely chicagos thugs turning their territories into self-cleaning ovens then should anyone really care?
is this thugs killing other thugs or are innocent people being killed?
Is that a photo of Rahm dancing or is that really Tim Curry??
ReplyDeleteThink about what we've been told lately.That the NRA and GOA are just pressure groups shilling for some nebulous group of capitalists who don't care what happens to real people,they just care about their profit.Yet,these are VOLUNTARY associations.Ordinary citizens who believe in something band together to protect their rights.On the other side,we have Feinstein's attempt to use pictures she's seen to determine what we can own.She wants to force her choices on the rest of us.A voluntary act in your own self-interest is the last thing she would approve of.Rather like obamacare,a mandatory association forced on the rest of us by someone who knows nothing about medicine or insurance.So think about this:what matters most to you, a voluntary choice in your own self-interest,or getting along and being subserviant to people for whom your interests,your health and well-being,and your freedom of choice are unimportant compared to their whims and demands?
ReplyDeleteDoug -
ReplyDeleteMany thanks for the link to heyjackass.com. I'm adding more and more stats and metrics everyday in order to illustrate the slow-motion train wreck that this broke, violent, liberal and progressive utopia has become.
Check back early and often.
W.H. Thompson - purveyor of heyjackass.com