Aggregator
Terry Rozier could face new federal bribery charges in alleged gambling scheme
Jimmy Kimmel repeats ‘hateful’ joke about ‘expectant widow’ Melania Trump in attempt to defend himself after WHCD shooting
Magic overcome shooting woes to push top-seeded Pistons to brink with Game 4 win
Betnijah Laney-Hamilton ‘felt good’ making long-awaited Liberty return in preseason opener
A warning about the ‘billionaire tax’ — from 200 years ago
Aaron Judge, Ben Rice join rare company as Yankees keep rolling with win over Rangers
‘Selfless and caring’ Costco employee, 61, who was elderly mom’s only caregiver, shot dead by senseless customer
Ex-Alabama player pleads guilty to impersonating NFL players in fraud scheme
America: Land Of The (Not Really) Free
Authored by Ron Paul via the Ron Paul Institute,
Two weeks ago, President Donald Trump commemorated income tax payments being due by having DoorDash deliver food from McDonald’s to the White House. The delivery was intended to highlight the first year of tax-free tips. Removing tax on tips was part of the 2025 Big Beautiful Bill (BBB).
As the sponsor of the first No Tax on Tips legislation introduced in Congress, I was obviously pleased to see this change in tax laws included in the BBB. The bill also included other good tax changes such as removing tax on overtime and extending the 2017 tax cuts. Unfortunately, the bill also increased federal spending and debt.
Supporters of the income tax implicitly endorse the idea that our rights are gifts from government and, thus, can be revoked by government at the will of our rulers. Adoption of the income tax signified the abandonment of the belief that individuals have inalienable rights granted them by the Creator.
Therefore, those who believe in natural rights must reject income taxation. It is also a violation of the people’s rights when the central bank reduces the value of the dollar, and thus the people’s purchasing power, via the hidden inflation tax.
The income tax system’s rejection of natural rights is exemplified by withholding that gives government first claim on an individual’s earnings. The government then may return, via what it calls a refund, some of what was taken. However, a normal refund is when a business returns a customer’s payment because the customer is dissatisfied with the good or service he received, not when a thief returns some of what the thief stole.
Withholding was implemented during World War Two as a “temporary” wartime measure. Yet, it is still with us decades later.
Milton Friedman, as a young economist, played a role in the US government’s development of withholding. Of course, Friedman went on to become a leading advocate for free markets. He also redeemed himself for his work on withholding by becoming a prominent advocate for ending the military draft.
The draft is the worst example of how the government has rejected the principles of the Declaration of Independence. The draft gives government power to force young men (and possibly young women) to join the military and kill or be killed in a war. Contrary to the beliefs of some progressives, support for the draft is not justified by allowing individuals to choose between serving in the military or performing some other form of mandated “service.”
While the US does not have a military draft, the infrastructure for the draft remains in place via Selective Service registration. A provision in this year ‘s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) allows Selective Service to automatically register all men between the ages of 18 and 25. This makes it easier than ever for government to reinstate a draft.
Income taxes, along with the military draft and other types of mandated “service,” are incompatible with a free society and should be opposed by all who value liberty and peace. As Ronald Reagan said in a statement that could be modified to apply to income taxes, the draft “rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state…. That assumption isn’t a new one. The Nazis thought it was a great idea.”
Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 23:25Rays reporter comes to rescue after man wrestles ball away from young fan
USC star freshman Alijah Arenas to return for second season
Phil Jackson comes out of social media hibernation to offer way to better NBA game
Lakers’ Marcus Smart, Luke Kennard fined for criticism, interaction with refs
Woman plunges to her death from balcony on Carnival cruise ship near Catalina Island
The Billionaire Tax debate needs a reality check
Dems have the power to stop all the violent rhetoric — like Hasan Piker’s — and if not their silence is tacit approval
"Racial-Profiling" Or Race-Baiting? Tom Steyer's Illiterate Take On English Proficiency
If you go to NASCAR to watch the cars crash, the Democratic gubernatorial race in California has been a thrilling pile-up.
The recent debate saw all the Democratic candidates play the race card over a curious issue. When asked if they supported the move to rescind at least 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, every single Democrat declared the policy racist. The candidates also pledged to support truckers who cannot speak or read English.
When Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican candidate, said that being able to read English (and particularly English signs) should be mandatory, Porter lectured the Hispanic sheriff on racism, saying that his support for English proficiency by truckers disqualified him from being governor of California.
Not to be outdone, Democratic candidate Tom Steyer declared that requiring truck drivers to be able to read English is “racial profiling.”
Steyer, a billionaire, has been funding his own campaign with almost $120 million and has tried to capture the far-left supporters of Swalwell. In so doing, he has increasingly looked like Howard Hughes with better-trimmed nails.
Steyer grabbed Swalwell’s platform of pledging to arrest ICE officers and take punitive measures against them. He cannot fulfill that pledge, and the Ninth Circuit recently shot down the flagrantly unconstitutional California law seeking to dictate the conduct or appearances of federal officers. The law was supported by Gov. Gavin Newsom and all of the Democratic candidates.
Steyer’s claim that English proficiency rules are “racial profiling” is more Looney Tunes than law.
Racial profiling occurs when a person’s racial appearance alone is grounds for reasonable suspicion for a stop or search. English proficiency requirements are race-neutral conditions to ensure basic safety in the operation of large trucks. We have seen several fatal cases involving undocumented persons who could not read or speak English proficiently.
Even the use of apparent race or ethnicity is allowed when part of a totality of circumstances or observations by law enforcement. Last year, the Supreme Court stayed a racial profiling case from California on that ground, in favor of law enforcement, in a 6-3 decision in Noem v. Vasquez-Perdomo.
If requiring English proficiency is racial profiling, a wide array of jobs in the United States are the products of racism, including airplane pilots, air traffic controllers, U.S. military, astronauts, mechanics, and baseball umpires. Even the European Space Agency has required English proficiency.
By Steyer’s standard, he may also be the product of a racial profiling system. In order to appear on the ballot, Steyer certified that he is a U.S. citizen. To be a U.S. citizen, you must be proficient in English. Thus, a candidate must certify that he is both a citizen and English-proficient. He can then go on a stage and call such requirements racial profiling without any basis in the law.
Ironically, Steyer made much of his money managing Farallon Capital Management, which profited from owning private prisons and, in the case of Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), actually runs one of the largest ICE facilities. Now called CoreCivic, the company requires not only U.S. citizenship but also English proficiency.
As with the pledges to arrest ICE officers and dictate how they conduct their operations, the racial profiling claim is knowingly misleading and unfounded. It is designed to pander to the far left by suggesting that requiring basic English skills of large-truck operators is somehow unlawful or unconstitutional.
The only thing that Steyer proved, again, is that there are sadly few requirements to run for governor of California beyond a large fortune and little shame.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Tyler Durden Mon, 04/27/2026 - 22:35