|
Posted on 05.12.08 by George Phillies
We’re Libertarians. There is no issue we all agree upon, except perhaps how we spell our party’s name. It’s not surprising, then, that sometimes some members of our party will support an isolated Democrat. Or a lone Republican. If you are an LNC member, your burden is more severe. You made a commitment to your fellow Libertarians. You ran for our office so you could leverage your time and energy to build a stronger Libertarian Party. If you instead spent your time building an opposing party, you are not doing what you implicitly promised. I’m state chair of LPMass, the Libertarian Party of Massachusetts. I’ve worked vigorously to revive my state’s Libertarian Party. Our State Committee is now meeting monthly. Our State newsletter is now appearing monthly. We’ve revived fundraising. I’ve committed thousands of dollars of my own money for our Presidential ballot access campaign. You may rest assured, I haven’t given a Democrat or a Republican a dime or a minute. And I’m a Presidential candidate. When I identify my political beliefs, I say I’m a *Libertarian*. Here we come to one of my differences with LNC member Bob Barr, who I view as a friend. While on the LNC, Bob Barr has also been the champion of the Bob Barr Leadership PAC. Since the start of 2007, his PAC has raised more than a million dollars. That’s very impressive. Now, raising that money was expensive. Much of it went to general expenses. But when Bob Barr PAC money went since the start of 2007 to individual political candidates, it largely went to Republicans. And that means? If I’m your nominee this Summer, that means I hope to be in Georgia to campaign with Libertarian Senate Candidate Allen Buckley. His opponent Saxby Chambliss received $3,500 from Bob Barr’s PAC. I hope to be in New Hampshire to campaign with Libertarian Senate Candidate Ken Blevens. His opponent John Sununu received $3,000 from Bob Barr’s PAC. I hope to be in Virginia to campaign with Libertarian Senate Candidate Bill Redpath. The Gilmore for Senate campaign received $1,000 from Bob Barr’s PAC. I hope to be in North Carolina to campaign with Libertarian Congressional Candidate Thomas Hill. His opponent Robin Hayes received $1,000 from Bob Barr’s PAC. I hope to be in Texas to campaign with Libertarian Congressional Candidate Ken Ashby. His opponent Jeb Hensarling received $3,500 from Bob Barr’s PAC. I hope to be in Idaho to campaign with Libertarian Senate Candidate Kent Marmon. His erstwhile opponent, Larry Craig, dropped out, but not before he received $1,000 from Bob Barr’s PAC. That’s Republicans who have a Libertarian opponent. Bob Barr supported a longer list of Republicans who don’t yet face Libertarian opposition. The longer list matters, too. When you donate to a candidate, your money counts twice. It counts once for that candidate. It counts again for the candidate’s party. When I invest money in my campaign, I am building our Libertarian Party. And when Bob Barr through his PAC invested in Republican candidates, he was building up the Republican Party. And that leads to the question. What do we want and expect from a Presidential candidate? I urge you to consider: We only get one Presidential campaign every four years. It’s your decision. —– Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 02.25.08 by J. Neil Schulman
Often enough I hear my pro-RKBA, libertarian, and conservative/patriot friends complaining that Hollywood doesn’t make movies for us and that the movies they do make are hostile to our core values. Here’s your chance to turn that tide by supporting some new movies made by friends who do share our values. First up is the new comedy Witless Protection, starring Larry the Cable Guy, Jenny McCarthy, and Yaphet Kotto, released this past weekend by LionsGate. (This is the same studio that is producing Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.) The writer/director of Witless Protection is Charles Carner, a friend I met through our long attendance at the pro-Second-Amendment ATF nights (where Alcohol and Tobacco were consumed and Firearms discussed). This being a Larry the Cable Guy movie with a lot of redneck humor, don’t expect an evening of Oscar Wilde or Noel Coward, but Charles emails me, “I managed to put some politically-incorrect humor into the movie, which was fun.” The critics are, of course, attacking the movie because it’s not aimed at them but targeted to people who actually have to pay to see movies. So it didn’t have the biggest opening weekend and, without support, might be gone from the theaters by next weekend. So please pass along the message to go see this movie sometime this week to all Second Amendment, libertarian, and patriot lists. If there’s enough business during the week it might be held over another weekend and have time for a viral word-of-mouth campaign to boost its box office. Next up is Second-Amendment scholar David T. Hardy’s feature documentary, In Search of the Second Amendment, which is having its film-festival premiere at the Backlot Film Festival at the Veterans Memorial Auditorium in Culver City, CA, April 2-5, 2008. The website for this excellent analysis of the history and legal status of the Second Amendment — more timely than ever with the Heller case on DC’s gun ban being reviewed by the Supreme Court this year — is at http://www.secondamendmentdocumentary.com/. The Backlot Film Festival is the same festival where my own suspense-comedy feature, Lady Magdalene’s, starring Nichelle Nichols, is having its first LA-area screening the evening of April 3rd. I don’t think it takes much convincing that a movie written and directed by the author of the libertarian-award-winning Alongside Night and Charlton-Heston endorsed Stopping Power has plenty of pro-individual-liberty and pro-Second Amendment content. Nichelle Nichols will be present to introduce our screening plus the one after it, a restored print of the classic MGM all-black musical, Cabin in the Sky — and Nichelle will be singing live between the screenings with piano accompaniment, Because of Nichelle’s association both with Star Trek and now Heroes we expect this to be a star-studded event. And the timing couldn’t be better for our prospects to achieve distribution since at our February 2nd film-festival premiere at the San Diego Black Film Festival, Lady Magdalene’s won the festival’s Best Cutting Edge Film Award. Full details on our website at http://www.ladymagdalenes.com/. Discount tickets to the Backlot Film Festival, including all film screenings, will be available through various pro-RKBA and libertarian groups. Details on the where and how will be forthcoming. Remember, if we don’t support the filmmakers who embody our own values, they might not remain in the business so they can keep on trying to balance Hollywood’s politically-correct offerings. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 01.14.08 by Michelle L
“I find war detestable but those who praise it without participating in it even more so.” — Romain Rolland 1866-1944 Bear with me while I engage in what can only be termed journalistic masturbation. After watching wall-to-wall coverage in the mainstream media concerning the incident in the Strait of Hormuz between Iranian speedboats and US warships, one would be hard pressed to not experience a feeling of deja vu — the parallels to the Gulf of Tonkin are amazing. For a few days now, the major networks have breathlessly trumpeted the provocative confrontation and reported that “US warships were seconds away from firing on the speedboats.” Everybody panic! Eh, not so much. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 11.26.07 by Thomas L. Knapp
Guest Column by Rob Kampia Would you like to see criminal gangs growing marijuana in your community, making large profits, which in turn would fund other criminal activities? A new federal report says that our current marijuana policies are actually making this more likely. If you live in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Arkansas, California, or parts of New York State, you may be particularly at risk. The report is the U.S. Department of Justice’s “National Drug Threat Assessment 2008,” released to the public on November 8. The only mention it got in the press had to do with supposed shortages of cocaine in some areas, but the report’s findings on marijuana will affect many more Americans. Marijuana, after all, is far and away the most commonly used illegal drug. Filed under: Feature Articles and Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 10.08.07 by George Phillies
… (and Help Businesses Reward their Employees). There is no family responsibility more important than educating the next generation. You may be wealthy or poor. You may be healthy or sick. No matter your conditions, you can be sure: If your children are not educated well, they will end up poor and sick. As Libertarians, we believe that competitive private and market solutions will generally provide superior answers to challenging questions. Private and home schooling should offer children a richness of individually-designed education programs that other arrangements will find difficult to match. However, sensible Libertarians also recognize that public schools enjoy two huge advantages, namely large tax subsidies and a huge market and production base already in place. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 09.04.07 by George Phillies
A few pithy thoughts and quotes: Civil Liberties — The Oath of Office of the President is to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States. When a President takes office, he should place his hand on one place: the Constitution he is swearing to protect. When an advisor tells the President “The Constitution is not a suicide pact” as a justification for his illegal deeds, he is urging that our government be overthrown. As President, I will appoint officials and advisors who support the Constitution. A Loyal, Patriotic Civil Service — Loyal Americans honor our Constitution and obey the Law of the land. They do not make warrantless searches of your home. They do not wiretap your phone calls without court orders. They do not throw Americans into jail and detain them without trial or access to attorneys. We need a Federal government composed of loyal Americans who love our country. Federal employees who made warrantless searches, performed warrantless wiretaps, and detained citizens without trial will be replaced with patriotic Americans. And then the facts of their actions should be presented to grand juries. Presidential Royalism — We have a President, not an Emperor. Americans who dissent from elected Federal officers are true patriots who understand where America was born. Advocates of Free Speech zones, into which protesters are herded and hidden from the press, are dangerous subversives attacking our Constitution. Patriotic Americans do not grovel. They should not mindlessly stand and applaud because a President walks into the room. [Mind you, if you want to stand, applaud, or throw yourself on your kneepads, that’s your privilege.] Libertarians reject royalism. Torture. Rendition. Secret Prisons. — Real Americans do not torture. Real Americans do not kidnap so others can torture for us. Real Americans support timely public trials with juries, not military kangaroo tribunals. Real Americans should ensure that torture, renditions, and secret prisons are ended, and the people who committed crimes, such as torture, kidnap, and secretly imprison, are brought to justice. —– Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 08.09.07 by George Phillies
The Cold War is over. Bring home the army that defends Europe against the Soviet Union. World War II is over. Bring home our post-war garrisons. Transform the National Guard into state defense forces not available for overseas service, as the law currently allows. Only a Libertarian will bring our men and women home. We have the best navy in the world. We maintain a huge Atlantic fleet, when no hostile nations border the Atlantic. We build the world’s finest amphibious landing ships, which are only useful for launching invasions. We aren’t planning any. We should right-size our armed forces to an order of battle matching the threats we face. Only a Libertarian President will Finding Mr. Bin Laden is a job for spies and special forces, not a job for tank divisions. The Afghan people have been governing themselves for hundreds of years. They will not long tolerate foreign occupation. Only a Libertarian President will give the Bin Laden problem to the right people. The real foundation of our national security is our technology and industry. They let us deploy real defenses against real threats. Resources spent by our standing military are resources extracted from our industrialists and farmers and educators. When we spend our resources on a pointlessly large military, we weaken the foundation of our national security. Only a Libertarian President will strengthen our national security by right-sizing defense spending. —– Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 07.26.07 by George Phillies
Family Values - There are few parts of family life more sensitive than guiding medical care for family members unable to act for themselves. In the Terry Schiavo case, Congress tried to steal control of her medical care. Congress voted against real family values. If you support real family values, you should elect Libertarians. We believe Uncle Sam has no business making life and death decisions for you and your loved ones. The Kelo Decision - Your house should belong to you, not to the lounge lizard who bribed your city council. Eminent Domain takings should be limited to traditional public purposes. Eminent domain should not be used to steal your house for a developer or sports team. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 07.16.07 by Michelle L
I seriously doubt that there are too many folks out there who haven’t heard about Michael Chertoff’s gut feeling by now. That government officials are reduced to using such obscure rationalizations in order to get our attention, I believe really speaks volumes for the sorry state of affairs existing today. A quick search for the word “gut” happlily confirms my suspicions; the online dictionary of Merriam Webster starts the definition of gut with the word, bowels. I have long suspected that the administration’s facts are rectally sourced or, in other words, they pull them out of their collective asses. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 07.05.07 by Michelle L
My husband thinks it’s cute the way I always seem to be surprised by all the fairy tales, falsehoods and fabrications that emit from the White House; that I must somehow hold out hope that our elected (or not elected as the case may be) officials have some deep seated humanity that would cause them trouble sleeping at night should they lie to their constituents. Odd, I always considered myself to be rather cynical and jaded about politicians. Now we come to Bush commuting (not pardoning because after all, he still has to pay money and be on probation and he is still convicted — and we all know that convicted liars have no place in politics) Scooter Libby’s sentence. You can read the entire pack of lies at: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070702-3.html For your convenience, I have graciously copied the pertinent parts and noted the pants-on-fire-level whoppers for your enlightenment. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 07.05.07 by George Phillies
Six decades ago, President Harry Truman ordered that the Armed Forces be desegregated. No longer would there be separate military units for different people, sorted by the color of their skin. Instead, all soldiers were to be the same color: Army Green. All airmen were to be the same color: Air Force Blue. And so on across all our Armed Forces. Armed Forces desegregation actually began in Arizona, where the Air National Guard’s commanding officer was a prominent social liberal: He and his wife later brought Planned Parenthood to Tempe. His later political book warned emphatically about the dangers of overpopulation and the need for population control. The officer in question eventually went into politics, continuing to espouse his principles of individual freedom and equality before the law: In 1964, he became the Republican Party’s nominee for President of the United States. It is now 2007. Six decades after the Armed Forces were desegregated by race, the Armed Forces are segregated by gender orientation. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 06.03.07 by George Phillies
Rational Review is a wonderful place, if not precisely a conservative site. This message is directly applicable to some readers. For the rest of you, the following is a message to forward to any conservative sites you know, because some conservatives already have been saved. They just need to learn where the pearly gates are located. Let me draw a few comparisons: Barry Goldwater wanted to reduce the size of government. George Bush conservatives offer “big government conservatism” and the largest expansion in welfare since Lyndon Johnson. Barry Goldwater supported a balanced budget. George Bush conservatives offer the largest budget deficits, funded and unfunded, in our history. Barry Goldwater said that “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.” George Bush conservatives give us extremism, just not in the defense of liberty: extraordinary rendition, detention without trial, and torture. Barry Goldwater knew that secret police who listened to phone calls were Commies working for the KGB and Chairman Mao. George Bush conservatives bring us bigger and better American secret police, who use computers to listen to every single phone call and Internet message. Barry Goldwater was in love with technology. He was a jet pilot. His home was filled with high-tech gadgets. He ran for President of a country that strove to be the world leader in technology and science. Modern conservatives oppose stem cell research. When asked about evolution, four Republican Presidential candidates expressed disbelief. Worse, the other six did not burst into laughter. Barry Goldwater believed in personal privacy. Bush conservatives want to introduce state identity papers. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 05.23.07 by George Phillies
At the South Carolina debate, Republican candidates were asked if they would torture prisoners. Some of them thought torture was just fine. What is the libertarian answer to the torture question? It’s the American answer, the answer the American people have already given. Torture is a crime against civilization, reviled by all patriotic Americans. Let’s take it from the top. First, there is nothing for a President to decide. Inside the United States, torture is a felony. If you are anywhere in the United States, and you torture someone, you are committing more crimes than I care to list. There is no exception in those laws for government officials. If you are an American abroad and torture someone, it’s a felony. If your victim dies, you have earned the death penalty. There is no exception in those laws for government officials. Second, those laws reflect the wisdom of the American people. Torturers are the filth of the earth, properly grouped with child molesters and mercenaries. We need not ask what the founding fathers and their fellows thought of mercenaries. Their position is enshrined in the third verse of The Star-Spangled Banner: “And where is that band who so vauntingly swore Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 05.21.07 by Jim Davidson
Special to Rational Review People persist in asking me for whom should they vote. I strongly believe that if you are voting for any incumbent, you are making a grave error, which is likely to be deadly to many, disastrous to private property, and beneficial only to graft and corruption. In the case of nearly every challenger I’ve ever scrutinized closely, the same is true. There are a few exceptions, but they are indeed rare. So, for whom should you vote? I think the Libertarian Party has an excellent idea. In every election, for every office, a legitimate candidate to consider is “None of the Above.” If you vote for “None of the Above” in a Libertarian Party primary, and that choice wins the most votes, then the party runs no one for that office. Where allowed by law, they place “None of the Above” on the ballot for that office. So, you would have the opportunity to elect no one to that office, and, in the event that any jurisdiction allowed such a vote to be credentialed, no one would serve in that office. Isn’t that a fine idea? Wouldn’t you be better off? Can you think of any office at any level that would not be improved by sitting empty for a year, two years, four years, or six years — depending on the relevant term? Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 05.20.07 by J. Neil Schulman
Sometimes I wonder if people even listen to themselves talk. The Bush administration tells us that the United States has not yet achieved its objectives in the War in Iraq so American troops have to stay there until a stable Iraqi democracy can fend for itself against an insurgency fueled by al Qaeda-fed Sunni Muslims and Iranian-fed Shia Muslims: that the Iraqi InSurgency has to be fought with an American Surgency. The Democratic Party opposition tells us that, because of this InSurgency, the Bush administration already lost the War in Iraq so it’s time to cut our losses and bring American troops home. Neither the Bush administration nor its critics see the obvious fact that Operation Iraqi Freedom was a total victory, and any discussion of whether American troops should stay or go have to follow from that fact. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 05.20.07 by Ben Kalafut
It could be called the “diss heard ’round the world.” Rudolph Giuliani’s dismissal of Ron Paul’s assertion that U.S. foreign policy makes us more likely to be attacked by terrorists may have won him the debate, but its long-term impact on his credibility has yet to be seen. The war in Iraq remains the issue of greatest importance to voters. In Paul and Giuliani we have two candidates for a major party’s nomination whose views on the matter couldn’t be farther apart and whose disagreement has become perhaps the most talked-about event to date of the 2008 Presidential race. It’s thus a natural time for a real debate, a structured intellectual dispute over an issue as opposed to a soundbite-generating Q and A session. The resolution: The United States should adopt a noninterventionist foreign policy. Paul takes affirmative, Giuliani takes negative. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 05.09.07 by George Phillies
Civil disobedience is a political act. It may be nonviolent or violent. We may greet it with approval; we may condemn it. Civil disobedience remains a political act. When Gandhi led Indians to the sea to protest the British salt monopoly, he committed an act of nonviolent civil disobedience, an act that many Americans would approve. When George Washington led the Continental Army against the British, he committed an act of civil disobedience, an act of violent civil disobedience that most Americans also endorse. The attacks of the Iraqi resistance against our Army of Occupation in Iraq are equally acts of violent civil disobedience, acts directed against our fellow Americans. Peaceful or violent, approved or disapproved, acts of civil disobedience are extraordinary political acts. For better or worse, acts of civil disobedience have the intent of causing political change. The opposite of Civil Disobedience is Civil Disobedience by Government. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 04.02.07 by George Phillies
Your Vote Counts Twice When you vote for a candidate, your vote counts twice. It counts once for the candidate. It counts again for the candidate’s party. Even when your candidate loses, your vote for the candidate shows that the candidate’s party and the ideas it represents have support. When a D.C. resident votes for a Republican Presidential candidate, or a Utah resident votes for the matching Democrat, they know their candidate will lose in their state. There is almost no chance that their popular votes will translate into electoral votes for their candidates. Their popular votes are still important, because they show that their candidate enjoys popular support for his views, popular support that may well manifest itself in other elections for other offices. That’s why there are no wasted votes. Every vote counts as a show of support for the candidate’s positions and ideas. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 03.15.07 by George Phillies
(and Help Businesses Reward their Employees) There is no family responsibility more important than educating the next generation. You may be wealthy or poor. You may be healthy or sick. No matter your conditions, you can be sure: If your children are not educated well, they will end up poor and sick. As Libertarians, we believe that competitive private and market solutions will generally provide superior answers to challenging questions. Private and home schooling should offer children a richness of individually-designed education programs that other arrangements will find difficult to match. However, sensible Libertarians also recognize that public schools enjoy two huge advantages, namely large tax subsidies and a huge market and production base already in place. How can Libertarians change America from where we are, to where we want to go, on a path each of whose steps is positive? Any proposed change must add to choice, not take away options from parents anxious for their children, or the change will not be adopted. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 03.05.07 by George Phillies
When It’s All Over The Libertarian Party nominating convention is more than a year away. The General Election, results unpredictable, is far beyond that. Nonetheless, someday the election campaign and its outcome will have come to an end. I have no idea whether I will win or lose the race for the nomination. I am doing my best to win, as are each of my serious opponents. What should the candidate do when the election is said and done? I realize that there have been past Presidential candidates, who have faced the same question. I’m not talking about them for the moment. They will answer to higher judges, namely to our party’s members and to the weight of history. Here I am only talking about my perspective on my possible future. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 02.21.07 by Jeff Riggenbach
Books cited or discussed in this essay: Doherty, Brian. Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement. New York: Public Affairs, 2007. Mencken, H. L. “Newspaper Morals” [1914] in A Gang of Pecksniffs: And Other Comments on Newspaper Publishers, Editors and Reporters. Ed. Theo Lippman, Jr. New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House, 1975 - - -. Minority Report: H. L. Mencken’s Notebooks. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1956. I Brian Doherty’s Radicals for Capitalism is an outstanding book. Anyone who has read Doherty’s work over the past fifteen years or so in Liberty and Reason knows he’s an excellent writer, but as an historian of the libertarian movement, he’s also comprehensive, evenhanded, and continuously interesting. This is not to say, however, that there are no significant problems with this book. And thereby hangs a tale … II
Childs was capable, no doubt about that. He was brilliant. He was a fine writer and a gifted editor-in-chief, the kind of man who could talk well-established intellectuals into writing for his magazine for a tenth of what they’d earn (and a fraction of the audience they’d reach) if they sold the same article to Harper’s or Esquire or the Atlantic. He was the kind of editor who planned issues months ahead, who saw the big picture, where the magazine was heading, and why. He was also, as Doherty styles him, “the sort of man whose presence put smiles on people’s faces. He was the sort of figure all ideological movements need … the tireless networker, letter writer, phone caller, dedicated to a larger vision of a long-term libertarian project that extended beyond whatever work he happened to be doing, as dedicated to promoting and connecting other libertarian comrades as producing specific tangible work of his own.” In the late spring of 1978, as our scene opens, he was already, as Doherty puts it, “the most consistent personal inspiration and support to a rising generation of young libertarians.” (450) In the years to come, he filled that role ever more impressively and effectively. But he could not meet a deadline. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 02.17.07 by Steve Kubby
I’ve recently been asked a number of times — by friends, fellow Libertarians, supporters of other candidates and even my own campaign volunteers — if my personal legal situation has any bearing on my presidential candidacy. More pointedly, I’ve been asked if the fact that I’m on probation in the state of California might not disqualify me as a candidate, if for no other reason than that it might limit my ability to travel. I’d like to turn these questions into an opportunity: An opportunity to explain my situation, and to explain why it’s not only not a problem, but a positive factor in my campaign. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 02.16.07 by George Phillies
2008 is Too Late! 2008 is too late to end the Bush Republican War On Iraq. By 2008, thousands more of our brave American men and women will have died totally pointless deaths. They won’t have died to protect America. They’ll be dead because George Bush is afraid to admit that he was wrong. By 2008, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis will have joined them. They’ll all be together, united in the grave. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 02.08.07 by Dan E. Phillips
According to News Max consumer activist Ralph Nader is leaving open the possibility of running for President again in 2008. He will decide whether to run later this year. He is reportedly unhappy with Sen. Hillary Clinton, a (the?) likely Democratic nominee. Per News Max, Nader described Sen. Clinton as a “panderer and a flatterer.” You don’t say? Major candidates are almost always overly “handled.” Nader’s observation that Hillary is a “panderer and a flatterer” is no doubt true, but the same thing could be said of all the major candidates. As a result you get a centrist, “handled” politics. Former Senator Edwards is a “panderer and a flatterer.” Former Governor Romney is a “panderer and a flatterer.” Pandering and flattering may well be the price of entry to major candidate status. Perhaps Sen. McCain is not your prototypical panderer, but he is definitely attempting to make nice with the base and evangelicals after routinely thumbing his nose at them. If anything his previous contrariness and independence was possibly pandering to moderates and the media. For rightists of all varieties, conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, paleoconservatives, Constitutionalists, third party advocates, etc., I believe a Nader run would be a positive development and should be encouraged. Cynically it potentially draws votes away from the Democratic candidate. Nader arguably cost Former Vice President Al Gore the election in 2000. However, there is a potentially more important reason to encourage ideological revolts on the left. American politics, despite frequent allegations of extremism on both sides, is actually totally dominated and paralyzed by the center (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 01.26.07 by George Phillies
The American people can see the truth. The United States is on the wrong track. The state of the Union is not good, and it is getting worse by the day. Our brave men and women perish in Iraq, fighting for ever-changing objectives. The trade deficit soars toward a trillion dollars a year. The national debt of the United States climbs three-quarters of a trillion dollars a year. The Federal government treats our Bill of Rights as a doormat. Our immigration laws are an unenforced joke. Some children receive excellent educations. Others face a dismal future with little studying or learning. Medical care costs are through the ceiling. Energy and environmental issues endanger our national safety. Take-home pay is stagnant. A third of young African-American men are someplace on their way through the justice system, in jail, on probation, or disenfranchised. And what has Congress debated, the past few years? Gay marriage. Abortion. French Fries: Congress renamed them. Twice. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 01.26.07 by Dan E. Phillips
Since the beginning of the Bush administration genuine conservatives have been taking a beating, but now there is hope. Friday 12 January 07 finally brought some good news for the conservative movement and the cause of authentic conservatism and constitutionally limited government! Rep. Ron Paul has set up an exploratory committee for a possible presidential campaign for the GOP nomination in 2008. For those of you who are unfamiliar with Rep. Paul, he is a Republican Congressman from the 14th District of Texas. In the Congress he is a bright shining light of limited government in a bastion of big government darkness. In an age when many Republicans have embraced the cause of activist, “big government (sic) conservatism” at home and abroad, Rep. Paul has been keeping the limited government faith. (Of course “big government conservatism” is an obvious oxymoron.) Rep. Paul’s, who is a physician by trade, support of constitutionally limited government has earned him the moniker “Dr. No,” because he so often votes against big spending bills. Rep. Paul, in an era marked by the abandonment of core principles, has remained a genuine constitutionalist. For awhile, I have had to set back and listen to conservatives debate whether Sen. McCain or Gov. Romney was the least objectionable candidate. Or even worse if that is possible, I had to listen to speculation about whether Mayor Rudy Giuliani could win the Republican nomination. Almost in despair I listened as conservatives mentioned amnesty supporters Sen. Brownback and Gov. Huckabee as possible conservative alternative candidates. I wondered to myself and also aloud, “Has the conservative movement really sunk this low?” Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 01.16.07 by J. Neil Schulman
Inaugural Address of the President of the United States The candidate for president of the United States who pledges to deliver this speech upon being inaugurated will get our support, whether he or she is a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, other party, or Independent. - J. Neil Schulman & Brad Linaweaver January 12, 2007 [After acknowledging the assembled dignitaries] . and my fellow citizens. The inauguration of a new president of the United States can be either a time for hope or a time for despair. It can be a time for hope when your choice was between a good presidential candidate and a better one, between two candidates who told you clearly what they thought, meant what they said, and who you could believe when either of them raised their right hand and swore the oath I just took to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” It’s a time for despair when the best you could do with your ballot was to cast it for your favorite among TV reality show contestants, all of whom were packaged media personalities with no real beliefs, no principles, no ideas, no courage - and no imagination - in other words, someone who would do anything or say anything to be the last one standing at the end of the presidential contest, and whose oath of office is as empty as the words spoken to win the election. You will not know for sure which sort of president stands before you now, until you see the job I do. But what I can do today is to tell you my vision of the job that needs to be done, so that you’ll be able to write out a report card at the end of my term and grade my performance. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 01.09.07 by Steve Kubby
To the returning and incoming members of the US House of Representatives and the US Senate: On January 3rd, our nation’s 110th Congress opened its first session, following an election in which America’s voters gave control of both bodies composing that institution to the Democratic Party for the first time in 12 years. Incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi has announced that the “first 100 hours” of Congressional work time will be spent righting wrongs and pointing American government in a new direction. Change is in the air — but what kind of change? Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 01.05.07 by George Phillies
For three thousand Americans, their relatives, and their families, peace with Iraq is now too late. Those three thousand Americans made the ultimate sacrifice for their country: They died fighting a pointless war in a foreign land. We cannot undo the sacrifice that they made. We should seek to ensure that more Americans do not go forth, courageously, only to make the same sacrifice in the distant desert sands of Iraq. Our soldiers in Iraq face hazards unknown in past wars. They are under constant attack. No matter how often George Bush claims that we are winning, the number of effective attacks against us continues to climb, in the past year from 70 to 180 per day. Worse, that count of attacks does not include vastly more “violent acts” committed against us. Those violent acts apparently number more than one thousand a day. Over the course of a year, that’s two violent acts for each serviceman and each servicewoman in Iraq. No matter where our troops go, to Iraq’s teeming cities, to the remote wastes of Al Anbar province, or even to their bases and bunkers, Iraqi guerrillas continue their incessant war on our men and women. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 12.27.06 by George Phillies
Building a Better America … The American future is going to be very different from its past. Our children and grandchildren will live in a world in which originality, creativity, and meticulous workmanship are prized. Thoughtless assembly line tasks will be done by robots. People who adapt to new circumstances and tools will thrive. People who choose not to change may find life is more challenging. We all want a bright, happy life for future generations. How can we best help our children? To give our children and grandchildren the shining future of that sunlit city on the hill, we must give them the most effective education that we can. We must give them an education that prepares them for the American future. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 12.21.06 by Jim Davidson
One of the difficulties of many existing space settlement advocacy groups is their insistence that the government play a leading role. Some groups are better than others, in that they suggest that current governmental policy is problematical, and they want less government interference with private space projects. The Space Frontier Foundation has been a class act in this respect, calling for less government and more private enterprise. But not all that much less government. Even those groups that want to see less government space activity are still focused on the government as the prime mover. I believe this idea is essentially mistaken. Government policy should not be the focus. After all, governments do not open frontiers. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
Posted on 12.18.06 by Rob Latham
News Item: U.S Mint bans melting pennies, nickels The motivation for the melting and export ban of U.S. pennies and nickels is the reality that the market value for the coins’ metal exceeds the faith-based denomination value stamped into them by the federal government. “In God We Trust,” indeed. Why is the federal government in the money business? (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 12.07.06 by George Phillies
American law and tradition make clear: The accused are entitled to speedy trials before a jury. The accused may not be tortured until they confess. Evidence obtained through torture is not admissible. The accused has the right to cross-examination of the witnesses against him. Older readers will recall the days before Miranda, when prisoners in American jails were likely to be abused until they confessed, especially if they were dark of skin or spoke with an accent. Fortunately, the Supreme Court brought those days to an end. The Military Commissions Act turns all American law and tradition on its head. The Military Commissions Act is un-American to its core. It should be repealed immediately. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 11.28.06 by David M. Brown
Just got this business opportunity by email. Can anyone tell me whether it’s legit?–me Dear Idiot, I am the son of a Nigerian multi-millionaire who was recently decapitated in a coup attempt in my war-torn country with lots of millionaires but not before hiding his wealth from his enemies in a secure bank account. PLEASE KEEP THIS INFORMATION TOP SECRET BETWEEN YOU AND ME. Scouring the Internet for someone avec whom I could communicate in strictest confidentiality I was given your name by a mutual friend who said you were trustworthy and would like to receive millions of dollars, if this is not you please to forgive. Trusting you to keep this matter in strictest confidence. Only you and the billion other people receiving this letter will be privy to this opportunity, which is occasioned by the desperacy of my circumstances here in the war-torn impoverished Nigeria, things suck here. Me and the other millions of tribally spat-upon sons of millionaires here are just frantic to get our money into the hands of Internet acquaintances like you so you can get the millions-of-dollars fee. Please help! Cuz there’s just no fucking way we Nigerian sons of millionaires have any idea of how to set up a bank account of our own outside of Nigeria without the help of a complete stranger I’m contacting off a spam email list. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Author: George Phillies Posted on 11.27.06 by George Phillies Recently, Congress took a radical step to protect our nation. Under the guise of protecting our country from terrorists trying to attack our harbors, it passed a ban on Internet poker games. Of course, it may be the case that someplace, somewhere, someone actually believes that Internet poker players are third-world terrorists out to destroy our way of life. Unfortunately, one of these people is a United States Senator. Real Americans know: Internet poker players are not terrorists. They are regular Americans, just like you and me. They have a hobby. They play cards. To meet more opponents, they play over the internet: On the internet, they can meet thousands of new opponents, from the safety of their own living rooms. Real Americans know: Poker is as American as apple pie. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 11.21.06 by Robert Milnes
I am, among several others, presently exploring and pursuing an interest in the Libertarian Party’s nomination for President of the UNITED STATES in 2008. Like most concerned Americans I have been following developments there over the years. Recent developments include the American midterm elections and the anticipation of a Memorandum opinion by the bipartisan Baker/Hamilton Iraq Study Group. Quite a while ago I formulated a proposal/plan for Iraq. It is on my campaign website and remains substantially little changed with perhaps some alterations/additions. Unfortunately I have seen little indication of any other proposal/plan similar to mine. Whenever the possibility of partition is brought up, it is associated with autonomy over sovereignty and presumed violent reactions and is quickly dismissed or discredited. I believe it is viable and I stand by it and I hereby attempt to publicize it further for the consideration of the American people. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 11.16.06 by George Phillies
We have glorious prospects before us. The Democratic and Republican parties shot themselves in the feet. With hand grenades. Our national debt increases a half a trillion dollars per year. Congress debates flag burning. Income of nonsupervisory workers is stagnant. Congress debates gay marriage. The trade deficit approaches eight hundred billion dollars a year. Congress renamed French fries. Twice! The cost of energy soars. Congress tried nationalizing the Schiavo family. The War On Iraq drags on. Congress banned internet gambling. It’s time for a change. The libertarian change. It’s time to elect grown-ups to Federal office. I urge you to consider two questions. First, how should we choose our next Presidential candidate? Second, who should you choose as that candidate? (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 11.16.06 by David M. Brown
Have a weird, impossible problem that only someone with a thimble of common sense could solve? Ask Dr. Know-It-All! EARTH VERSUS MARS, INABILITY TO ADMIT A DISABILITY, BILL CLINTON’S STUNNING ANNOUNCEMENT, TED HAGGARD’S STUNNING ANNOUNCEMENT, BUDGETARY TRIALS AND TRIBULATIONS DEAR DR. KNOW-IT-ALL: Should I move to Mars? I heard that our own planet is doomed — global warming is going to dunk several continents under a mile of water soon — and that this will cause quite a big dent in the economy. I’ve seen a Green Peace press release confirming this. First one polar ice cap is going to melt, then the other. (I forget the order, sorry.) Also, some movie I saw showed how things would be getting so hot that there would be constant blizzards, and people would be forced to announce traumatic developments to each other in stentorian cliches as cars crash through the window. Should I get off this globe while the getting’s good? Seems you’re onto something, Frank. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 11.15.06 by Steve Kubby
Dear fellow Libertarians, Since I declared my candidacy for our party’s 2008 presidential nomination back in August, one of the most frequently asked questions of me has been “where do you stand on the war in Iraq?” Some of you have found my answers unsatisfactory. I apologize. I’ve been thinking through a problem and haven’t found an answer … so I’m just going to bring it to you. We need to talk about it. First, let me make my own position on the US war in Iraq crystal clear: I oppose it. I opposed it when it was proposed, I opposed it when it began, and I oppose it now. If the American people put me in the White House, I’ll end it immediately with a unilateral and unconditional withdrawal of US forces from that country. But that’s the easy part. The hard part is re-uniting a country and a party that’s been divided by this war, and that’s the part that has to start NOW. If you haven’t found my previous answers satisfactory, please understand that I’ve been giving a lot of thought to the hard part. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 11.08.06 by James Landrith
Well, it is all over but the crying — at least for the GOP and their sell-out neo-libertarian buddies. For my libertarian readers who still labor under the delusion that we owe the GOP our support, please read: Lew Rockwell on War Loses, Again:
Jacob G. Hornberger on They Deserved to Lose:
We are long past the time when thoughtful libertarians should be confused about our role in the political process. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Author: David Tomlin Posted on 11.07.06 by David Tomlin Books Cited or Mentioned in this Column: Gilbert, Martin. Israel: A History. William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1998. Morris, Benny. The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949. Cambridge University Press, First paperback edition, 1989. Morris, Benny. Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-1999. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1999. Segev, Tom. One Palestine, Complete: Jews and Arabs Under the British Mandate. Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2000. This is the second in a series of columns [first one here] commenting on Thomas Knapp’s “Context is everything: American libertarians and Israel, part 1.” Tom wrote the article as a response to “Is Applying Libertarian Principles to Israel Anti-Semitic?” by Carol Moore. One of the most important claims in Carol’s article is that “Israel holds just claim to only a small percentage of even Israel proper.” Carol links to a scholarly article, “The Alienation of a Homeland: How Palestine Became Israel,” by Stephen P. Halbrook, which estimates the amount of land owned by Jews in 1947 as less than 7% of Palestine, and less than 10% of the Jewish state proposed by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (UNGAR 181) in that year. [Map] Tom doesn’t acknowledge the point, much less respond to it. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 11.02.06 by Elizabeth Price Foley
There is a growing tension in American law between individual liberty and public morality. Exit polling from the 2004 presidential election revealed that “moral values” is the most important issue among voters, surpassing the economy, war in Iraq, and terrorism. Little wonder, then, that Americans increasingly feel the need to codify majoritarian morality into law in a desperate attempt to stem the perceived moral decline. We must restrain the liberty of morally deficient individuals, the argument goes, to prevent their pestilence from spreading throughout society. But are such morality-based laws legitimate exercises of governmental power? In my new book published by Yale University Press titled, Liberty for All: Reclaiming Individual Privacy in a New Era of Public Morality, I answer this question “no.”
The problem with this logic, of course, is that it presupposes far too much about the proper scope of legislative power and far too little about the proper scope of judicial power. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Author: Pierre R. Beaumier Posted on 10.09.06 by Pierre B. We probably all remember stories our parents passed down when we were small of the “olden days” — some of them true, some of them legend. Often (when we got older, and in my case, after my father had passed on) we may only then realize the greater significance and value of the given story, and don’t we wish we’d paid a wee bit more attention to the details? Well, here’s one story where I wish I had. According to the history books, the British and the French fought a massive war over North America between 1755 and 1763, resulting in the loss of what is now Canada to the English. France abandoned some 70,000 French-speaking inhabitants, most of them living in farming communities that they had founded generations earlier, mainly along the St. Lawrence River. By the end of this conflict, these people suddenly became fearful of the unthinkable: that their entire culture — especially their language and religion — was now threatened, by a conqueror who had already exiled thousands of French-speaking Acadians in an “ethnic cleansing” move from Nova Scotia earlier in the course of the war. What would he do now? Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 10.09.06 by Ben Kalafut
From a certain perspective, it’s rare to receive solicitations for “libertarian solutions” in the mail. The ad circular, of course, is full of free-market solutions to problems such as bald tires and an empty pantry, but pitches no goods or services in competition with the government or overlapping with those which many reasonable people believe ought or must be provided by the State. From my credit card issuers, however, I receive at least one offer every other month — in the form of a $10 check! — for either medical discount and savings plans or, even more interestingly, a service which will postpone payments on my debts if I become unemployed or wipe them out totally if I am permanently disabled. Although (probably for legal reasons) they don’t call them such, these programs are social insurance. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 09.21.06 by Tibor R. Machan
There are small signs showing that many, many people even in this relatively free society are wedded to statism — the belief that the government is the head of society, which is itself a sort of organism. Those of us not part of the government are, in turn, its subjects, subservient to it. According to the political philosophy of the American founders and many of the framers, government is not the head of society. Instead it is instituted or established to perform a specific function, not very different from how other professional organizations, such as educators, scientists, doctors, and so forth are. In a complex, modern society all these have grown into nearly permanent agencies. But none of them is authorized to rule us, only to perform services for which we employ them. In other words, the relationship between citizens and government is akin to that between clients and professionals, fully voluntary and with both parties enjoying equal legal status. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 09.21.06 by Mike Renzulli
During July of this year, the Arizona Republic reported that a Scottsdale woman was indicted for trying to evade federal banking deposit rules. After Lucy Lu took over $300,000 from her massage business, she hid over half of the money in a safe in her house and then made small deposits with the rest into her mother’s bank account. Aside from the obvious question of: “who cares what this woman does with her money?” there’s a bigger issue here: When (not if) the economy here goes down the tubes, it may give Americans an incentive to look for jobs elsewhere. A number of government actions have accelerated this process: new passport requirements enacted by the State Department (for Americans traveling to Mexico, some Caribbean islands and Canada); the legalized monitoring and tracking of citizens resulting from the USA PATRIOT Act; and National Guard troops stationed at the U.S.-Mexico border and in our nation’s airports. As these things continue, the ability to leave the U.S. will be made even harder, and I’d dare to argue the stage is set for the time when the U.S. government can forcibly keep Americans in the United States. Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 09.01.06 by swainc55
Come with me, I wanna show you something. It’s just up the road from here, one of those large chain grocery stores — we call it Crackistan. As in, “Good God, these people are all smokin’ crack.” Pay close attention, there’s gonna be a test later. This is a huge parking lot, wouldn’t you say? About the only time it’s not crowded is at 4:00 in the morning, and then only during the week. Navigating one of these mega parking lots should be on all driving tests, don’t you think? Take note of the vehicles here; no shortage of glandular pickups with the obligatory huntin’ decals. Lotta SUVs, most of ‘em taking up two parking spots, due in large part to the fact that cities weren’t designed with these land whales in mind, and most of their operators are unable to negotiate the tight turns involved with steering these behemoths. Sleek oily-looking imports ooze alongside those slutty little domestic jobbies in a veritable palette of retina-searing colors — don’t look directly at them. Now note the bumper stickers on these vehicles. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 09.01.06 by Michelle L
kak·is·toc·ra·cy: Noun. Inflected forms: pl. kak·is·toc·ra·cies Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens. In what can only be serendipity, I have finally found the perfect description of our government; all but the most rabid Bushites would recognize both “least qualified” and “unprincipled” in our administration. Where crony is a job prerequisite and blind allegiance always trumps knowledge, the current residents of Washington are a case study in reverse evolution — where the weak prey upon the strong. We citizens are strong, aren’t we? (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 08.04.06 by David M. Brown
It may be tough for a gal to find romance with the severe and avenging Batman of “Batman Begins.” But the Superman of “Superman Returns” is a different story. He’ll show up under the pretext of granting you an interview, but with the plan of sweeping you off your feet. (Not just a metaphor here: actual sweeping-off-feet is involved: he can fly. Something to do with the difference between the sun of his home solar system and our own sun, it’s all very technical.) Although a romantic relationship with Superman might start out easily enough, the road will not always be smooth, and there are many complexities to keep in mind. (more…) Filed under: Guest Columns | |
|
Posted on 07.26.06 by Refused
[editor’s note: This article is by Donald Meinshausen and was posted on his behalf - TLK] As we all should know by now the state survives and grows by getting information through informants. It was estimated that East Germany had at least half the population informing on the other half. Turnabout is fair play. Let us create a hotline where IRS employees can call, anonymously if they wish, and give us information about their associates, bosses, and targets. This could be a website as well. To advertise in this service (yes, it is a service) to describe the bureaucrats we could leaflet IRS offices, conferences and any place they might hang out such as a nearby bar, which could be a good source of information in itself. File |