AP - The leader of a student protest movement that has emerged as a major challenge to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has won a $500,000 prize from a U.S.-based libertarian think tank.
The pro-free-market Cato Institute announced Thursday that law student Yon Goicoechea was chosen for his leadership as an advocate for freedom and democracy.
The think tank, which is headquartered in Washington, said Goicoechea will receive the Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty next month in New York. The prize is named after the Nobel Prize-winning economist who died in 2006.
Chavez denies that his government is restricting personal freedoms and says student leaders are being manipulated by the United States.
Goicoechea says he often receives threats due to his activism but isn't concerned about the government's response to the award from a U.S.-based organization.
"The government already says we're financed by the CIA. It already says we're paid by the empire. So if they say it one more time, it really isn't that important," he said.
The Cato Institute, a nonprofit public policy research foundation that lobbies for individual liberty, limited government and free markets, says it accepts no government funding.
RLCC Comment: The Cato Institute doesn't need government financing, because it's funded by U.S. billionaires, especially those in the tobacco industry who traffic in highly addictive, carcinogenic drug delivery products, mostly cigarettes. That's why they are so laissez faire ("let do"). They want to be left alone, unregulated, so they can continue on addicting new customers whose lives they have short change and shorten.
Also, receiving a prize named after Milton Friedman who helped the totalitarian, brutal dictator, General Augusto Pinochet, of Chile further enrich the rich of Chile is no honor. He also is largely responsible for the current global economic crisis due to his advocacy of deregulation. Without anyone looking over their shoulders, the greedy raped everything in sight. Now we have more soup lines and tent cities, foreclosures, bankruptcies, unemployment, suicides, pollution, global warming, and on and on down the list of results caused by the stupid economic system that is based on selfishness.
As for the CIA, of course they are heavily involved with the opposition to Chavez. It's what they do. They work for the Plutocrats who own the Empire. Everyone knows that. They don't ever bring freedom anywhere. They only open markets so their rich masters can move in to takeover and extract the wealth from the land and people even if it's over the dead bodies of children. It's a dog-eat-dog world in the eyes of the Plutocrats, so they, the Plutocrats pay others to be their dogs doing their dirty work.
It's too bad the journalist aren't free to write the truth. The capitalist for whom they work won't let them. It's very costly to real freedom. Of course, those so-called journalists could write elsewhere for righteousness' sake rather then being mammon worshipers. If they would all do that, the plutocrats wouldn't have the minions to keep the evil worldly system going anymore.
Yahoo! News: World - Latin America, April 24, 2008, 12:48pm, obtained via:
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)