The Objective Standard Blog
Archive for May 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Does the SEC Care about Fraud?
Anyone concerned with freedom in the financial markets should read this new, internal review by the SEC, in which the Commission admits that it:
- failed to “take appropriate action” related to fraud at Allied Capital, a politically-connected company staffed with former SEC employees;
- did not visit Allied’s offices a single time during their “investigation”—“even though they were located just blocks from the SEC”;
- never investigated “whether Allied was a Ponzi scheme, because of how it financed its dividends” (using proceeds raised from the sale of stock to uninformed investors);
- “inexplicably” deleted the work papers from an examination of Allied in which an SEC employee expressed concerns that the company was engaging in a Ponzi scheme;
- vigorously investigated David Einhorn—the man who exposed Allied’s fraud —both “after Allied met with [SEC] officials” and “without any evidence of wrongdoing” on the part of Einhorn;
- gave clearance to an SEC employee who “supervised the investigation against Einhorn” to register as a lobbyist for Allied immediately after leaving the agency;
- took no action when Allied admitted to the SEC that one of the company’s “agents” had engaged in “illegally obtaining Einhorn’s phone records”;
- concluded soon after the investigation that Einhorn was not guilty of violating federal securities laws but never told him what his status was with respect to the law and whether he was still being investigated “despite his request for such notification.”
The SEC is under new management and, according to The Washington Post, has promised “to fix the problems.” But since then it has:
- sucker-punched Goldman Sachs with charges of fraud for letting sophisticated investors pick what they want to buy from a list of what other investors want to sell;
- continued with the fraud charges against Goldman despite a 3-2 split along party lines among the five commissioners;
- timed the charges to coincide with the push for financial legislation by Obama.
The SEC has not been and is not concerned with prosecuting fraud. Since its inception, the SEC has pursued not justice, but power, and it has used that power to support its political masters. The case against Goldman is more of the same.
Related Article:
Related Post:
Image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsmoorman/2298671281/
Posted in: Business and Economics, Individual Rights and Law
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Today is “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day”
Here is the final batch of drawings of Mohammed, in defense of the requirements of human life and civilized society. In honor of “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day,” we have placed all of the drawings together on a single dedicated page, which can be found here.
I wish to thank those who participated in this campaign, and to encourage everyone to distribute this link far and wide today. Let the world know that you will not be silenced.
Drawing of Mohammed by Mark Wickens
Drawing of Mohammed by William Green
Drawing of Mohammed by Amit Ghate
Drawing of Mohammed by Andy Fingerhut
Drawing of Mohammed by David Chayes
Drawing of Mohammed by Jeffery Small
Drawing of Mohammed by Martin Gasser
Drawing of Mohammed by Diana Hsieh
Drawing of Mohammed by Richard Watts
Drawing of Mohammed by Meredith McCurdy
Drawing of Mohammed by Gus Van Horn
Drawing of Mohammed by Kyle Haight
Drawing of Mohammed by Greg Perkins
Drawing of Mohammed by Anne Haight
Posted in: Announcements, Events, Foreign Policy and War, Individual Rights and Law, Philosophy, Religion
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Drawings of Mohammed, in Defense of Life: Last Call
“Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” is tomorrow, May 20. If you’d like to participate and help defend the requirements of human life and civilized society, please email your drawings to blog@TheObjectiveStandard.com by midnight tonight (May 19).
Posted in: Announcements, Foreign Policy and War, Individual Rights and Law, Philosophy, Religion, The Arts
Saturday, May 15, 2010
The OList Empire of Excellence
Here’s a note from Diana Hsieh about her growing empire of excellence in activism and living:
Hi, I’m Diana Hsieh. I’m an Objectivist and a recent Ph.D in philosophy.
I oversee an independent network of e-mail lists for friendly discussion and information-sharing among advocates of Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism. They are the “OLists” : http://www.OList.com
The common goal of the OLists is to serve the real-life values and interests common to subscribers — such as activism, blogging, parenting, health, productivity, firearms, gardening, and academia. These lists have been active, informative, and useful to their hundreds of subscribers; they’ve helped connect Objectivists with values in common. In case you’ve not heard of them, I invite you to see whether they might foster your values too.
Please note that these lists are not free-for-all discussion lists. Each list has a clear purpose, as well as definite membership criteria. Also, some lists are limited to Objectivists, while others welcome non-Objectivist lurkers. Please check the list’s purpose and membership criteria before you request a subscription.
Without further ado, the OList e-mail lists are…
OActivists: http://www.OList.com/oactivists
OActivists is an e-mail list for Objectivists committed to fostering positive cultural and political change. Its purpose is to encourage and assist effective advocacy of Objectivist ideas in non-Objectivist forums by facilitating communication between Objectivist activists. Membership is limited to Objectivist activists. It is managed by Tammy Perkins.
OBloggers: http://www.OList.com/obloggers
OBloggers is an e-mail list for Objectivist bloggers. Its purpose is to facilitate communication about matters of mutual interest, such as upcoming events, blogworthy links, posts of interest, blog promotion, and best blogging practices. Membership is limited to Objectivist bloggers. It is managed by Kate Gerber of CareerMama (http://www.careermama.com).
OGrownups: http://www.OList.com/ogrownups
OGrownups is an informal e-mail list for for Objectivists and others interested in raising and educating children well. Its basic purpose is to facilitate discussion amongst Objectivists about child development, discipline techniques, education methods, parenting resources, and more. Non-Objectivist lurkers are welcome. It is managed by Jenn Casey of Rational Jenn (http://rationaljenn.blogspot.com).
OEvolve: http://www.OList.com/oevolve
OEvolve is an informal e-mail list for Objectivists and others interested in the proper application of evolutionary principles to diet, fitness, and health. Its basic purpose is to facilitate discussion and information-sharing amongst Objectivists about the practical sciences of cooking, nutrition, fitness, health, and more. Non-Objectivist lurkers are welcome. It is managed by Monica Hughes of Ancestral Generation (http://ancestralgeneration.com).
OProducers: http://www.OList.com/oproducers
OProducers is an e-mail list for Objectivists and others committed to improving their habits of productivity in their careers, projects, and other pursuits. Its purpose is to facilitate discussion and information-sharing amongst Objectivists about practical methods for better management of time, projects, money, people, and other resources. Non-Objectivist lurkers are welcome. It is managed by Tod of Optimal Living (http://blog.bytod.com).
OShooters: http://www.OList.com/oshooters
OShooters is an e-mail list for Objectivists and others enthused about firearms and committed to gun rights. Its basic purpose is to facilitate discussion and information-sharing amongst Objectivists about firearm models, shooting techniques, gun ranges, gun laws, and the like. Non-Objectivist lurkers are welcome. It is managed by Santiago Valenzuela.
OGardeners: http://www.OList.com/ogardeners
OGardeners is an informal e-mail list for Objectivists and others interested in gardening and landscaping. Its purpose is to facilitate discussion and information-sharing amongst Objectivists about the cultivation of flowers, vegetables, shrubs, and trees. Non-Objectivist lurkers are welcome. It is managed by Kelly Elmore of Reepicheep’s Coracle (http://reepicheepscoracle.blogspot.com).
OAcademics: http://www.OList.com/oacademics
OAcademics is an e-mail list for Objectivist academics to discuss teaching, research, coursework, dissertations, job prospects, publication, and all other aspects of life in (or after) academia. Membership is limited to Objectivist academics. It is managed by Diana Hsieh of NoodleFood (http://blog.dianahsieh.com).
If you have any questions or comments about the OLists, please feel free to e-mail me at diana@dianahsieh.com.
– DMHDiana Hsieh (Ph.D, Philosophy, CU Boulder)
E-mail: diana@dianahsieh.com
NoodleFood: http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog
NoodleCast: http://www.dianahsieh.com/cast
ModernPaleo: http://www.ModernPaleo.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/DianaHsieh
Posted in: Announcements, Ayn Rand and Objectivism
Thursday, May 13, 2010
NATO to Award “Courageous Restraint”?
According to this story (hat tip to Bob Murphy), NATO is considering honoring soldiers who courageously . . . choose not to fight.
Most military awards in the past have been given for things like soldiers taking out a machine gun nest or saving their buddies in a firefight, said Command Sgt. Maj. Michael Hall, the senior NATO enlisted man in Afghanistan.
“We are now considering how we look at awards differently,” he said.
British Maj. Gen. Nick Carter, the NATO commander of troops in southern Afghanistan, proposed the idea of awarding soldiers for “courageous restraint” during a visit by Hall to Kandahar Airfield in mid April. [NATO commander, Gen. Stanley] McChrystal is now reviewing the proposal to determine how it could be implemented, Hall said. . . .
“We routinely and systematically recognize valor, courage and effectiveness during kinetic combat operations,” said a statement recently posted on the NATO coalition’s website by the group, the Counterinsurgency Advisory and Assistance Team.
“In a [counterinsurgency] campaign, however, it is critical to also recognize that sometimes the most effective bullet is the bullet not fired,” it said. . . .
“There should be an opportunity to recognize and celebrate the troops who exhibit extraordinary courage and self-control by not using their weapons, but instead taking personal risk to de-escalate tense and potentially disastrous situations,” the statement said.
Of course, the “potentially disastrous situations” of which the NATO statement speaks are those involving the possibility of civilian casualties, because, as conventional wisdom and McChrystal would have us believe, “the war effort hinges on the ability to protect the population and win support away from the Taliban.” But, such “wisdom” notwithstanding, all wars have hinged and always will hinge on the ability to effectively fight and thus ultimately defeat the enemy, something that often necessitates attacking combatants and military assets in areas populated with civilians. Rather than diminish our military effectiveness by awarding soldiers for holding their fire, we should focus on using our overwhelming firepower to quickly destroy the Taliban with as little loss of life—American life—as possible, righteously recognizing that any civilians killed in the process are either guilty of sheltering our enemy or are genuine innocents whose tragic deaths were necessitated by Islamist aggression.
(For historical examples of effective war waging involving civilians, read John David Lewis’s TOS articles “William Tecumseh Sherman and the Moral Impetus for Victory” and “‘Gifts from Heaven’: The Meaning of the American Victory over Japan, 1945” or buy his new book, Nothing Less Than Victory: Decisive Wars and the Lessons of History. As to why the aggressor in a war is the murderer of any innocents killed by either side in that war, read this post.)
Image: Wiki Commons
Posted in: Foreign Policy and War
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Drawings of Mohammed, in Defense of Life—Batch #3
Here’s another set of drawings of Mohammed, in defense of human life. If you wish to contribute a drawing, please email it to blog@TheObjectiveStandard.com.
Drawing of Mohammed by Sharon Armstrong
Drawing of Mohammed by Mary Barbour
Drawing of Mohammed by Jason McCurdy
Drawing of Mohammed by Michael Garrett
Drawing of Mohammed by Steve Miller
Drawing of Mohammed by Alan Germani
Drawings of Mohammed by David Weatherell
Posted in: Announcements, Foreign Policy and War, Individual Rights and Law, Philosophy, Religion, The Arts
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Obama on “American Democracy”
In his commencement speech to University of Michigan graduates, President Obama quoted one of the Founders saying that America was a republic. Immediately thereafter he claimed—either ignorantly or dishonestly—that America was instead a democracy and that Americans must do two things in order to keep it.
“American democracy has thrived,” he said, “because we have recognized the need for a government that, while limited, can still help us adapt to a changing world.” Although Obama did not specify the ways in which government should be limited, he did detail how it has “helped” Americans adapt.
“When we transitioned from an economy based on farms to one based on factories, and workers needed new skills and training, our nation set up a system of public high schools,” he said, not mentioning that our government-run schools can be considered a success only if their goal is to graduate vast numbers of people who can neither read nor think.
“When the markets crashed during the Depression and people lost their life savings,” Obama continued, “our government put in place a set of rules and safeguards to make sure that such a crisis never happened again.” He failed to mention that government intervention in the economy caused and exacerbated not only the Great Depression but also numerous crises since.
The government also “put a safety net in place to make sure that our elders would never be impoverished the way they had been,” Obama said, neglecting to point out that Social Security is bankrupt and that, with the passing of government-run health care, our elders will have to convince bureaucrats that their life is worth the cost of the surgery that their doctor recommends.
Obama correctly noted that the trend toward this “democracy” is bi-partisan and that Republicans have instituted many large-scale government programs. This led to his next point.
“[The] second way to keep our democracy healthy is to maintain a basic level of civility in our public debate. . . . You can question somebody’s views or judgment without questioning their motives or their patriotism.” Obama did not here repeat his remark that the Tea Party movement is “un-American.”
“Throwing around phrases like ‘socialists’ and ‘Soviet-style takeover’ and ‘fascist’ and ‘right-wing nut’ . . . may grab headlines,” he continued. “but it also has the effect of comparing our government . . . to authoritarian, even murderous regimes.” The problem with such labels is that they close “the door to the possibility of compromise.” They make it nearly impossible “for people who have legitimate but bridgeable differences to sit down at the table and hash things out.” This, of course, was intended to intimidate Republicans away from calling him what he in fact is and toward helping him accomplish more of his statist goals.
Will Republicans cower, compromise, and “hash things out” with Obama? Or will they grow a spine, call a statist a statist, and defend Americans from tyranny? Will they stand again for the American Republic that is their namesake? Or will they help Obama drive the country further into the “democracy” that is already violating Americans’ rights in countless ways?
What would the Founders have done?
Image: Wiki Commons
Posted in: Individual Rights and Law
Monday, May 3, 2010
More Drawings of Mohammed, in Defense of Life
Here is another batch of drawings of Mohammed, in defense of human life. If you wish to contribute a drawing, please email it to blog@TheObjectiveStandard.com.
Drawing of Mohammed by Nick Stanley
Drawing of Mohammed by Jason Crawford
“A New America? No thanks!”
Drawing of Mohammed by Hannah Krening
Drawing of Mohammed by Charise Mirabal
Drawing of Mohammed by Nicholas Provenzo
Drawing of Mohammed by Ken Andrews
Drawing of Mohammed by Stephen Bourque
Drawing of Mohammed by Stella Daily
Posted in: Announcements, Foreign Policy and War, Individual Rights and Law, Philosophy, Religion, The Arts
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Reaching Active Minds Far and Wide
TOS in Barnes & Noble, Austin TX, May 1, 2010:
(Photo courtesy of Lance Moore)
Posted in: Announcements
TOS Updates & Commentary
Sign up to receive TOS updates & commentary.
Featured Posts
- Who Deserves Credit for Tebow’s 316 Yards?
- Santorum Stands for Big Government because He Stands for Collectivism
- When Ayn Rand Meets Patrick Henry
- The Justice of Income Inequality Under Capitalism
- The Beauty of Ayn Rand's Ethics
Blog Archive
Blog Topics
- Announcements (165)
- Ayn Rand and Objectivism (107)
- Business and Economics (234)
- Education (57)
- Environmentalism (56)
- Events (100)
- Foreign Policy and War (217)
- Health Care (84)
- History (55)
- Individual Rights and Law (352)
- Philosophy (139)
- Presidential Candidates (17)
- Productivity (2)
- Psychology (10)
- Religion (131)
- Science and Technology (70)
- Sports (2)
- The Arts (40)
- Week in Review (12)
Ideas presented in posts on TOS Blog are those of the authors of the posts and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Objective Standard. TOS Blog is powered by WordPress.
