Monday, December 24, 2012

Blame the Person Not the Object

Another tragedy has enveloped the country and as usually the wrong suspects take the blame. At the time of this writing only two have come up; 1. Guns and 2. Video Games (or for some the entertainment industry as a whole). Predictably those who blame these two want the state to engage in some sort of enforcement to restrict if not outright ban law abiding people from obtaining either object. This type of outrage is misplaced and is not grounded in logic.

Video games and guns alone don't commit the horrors that is the Sandy Hook shooting and the shootings before it, someone does have to pull the trigger. Some may view the phrase "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" as a cheap argument but it's the truth. Guns aren't possessed by demonic spirits that brainwash the user into going into public and shooting as many people as possible no the gunmen know exactly what they're doing when they slaughter innocent people. Do we all of a sudden call for bans of vehicles in order to prevent car accident deaths? Vehicles can be made into weapons to you know? No we don't and anyone who would make such a ridiculous argument would be laughed at and rightly so. It's a human right to be able to defend yourself and in these times a gun whether it's a pistol, a shotgun, a rile, etc is the most likely solution. One could make the case for swords, axes and other melee weapons but from the looks of things it doesn't seem that modern society has to worry about attacking mongol hordes (or any other hordes on horseback for that matter) anytime soon. However it is good to have at least a knife around.

Gun restrictions only help the criminals and contribute to the murders of innocents. In addition the amount of mindless red tape that your run of the mill law abiding person has to swim through in order to get a pistol borders on being criminal. One shouldn't have to go through government approval in order to exercise a right. The right to bare arms should not be on the same level as the privilege to drive a vehicle. For example I present to you two pictures from the pistol permit application from Orange County in New York state.

Picture one looks pretty normal for your standard government red tape form

Here is picture number 2 when one goes down the list

Not only is the concept of having to get the state's approval to exercise one's right is absurd but the fact that a government needs to know your race because you wish to have a way to defend yourself is pathetic. What purpose does it serve for the government to know your race? Is their a special type of gun that is tailored to a specific race or some other absurd idea? One can draw their own conclusions but it's just another reason on how the government is not colorblind despite what the media and it's own cadre of lapdogs say.

In Orange County the process from filing the application to getting your actual permit from the county takes on average three to six months. Obviously this varies depending in which state and possibly county one lives in. If one feels that their life or those around them is in danger, three to six months is an awful long time to wait. Criminals don't like fair fights and aren't going to wait for their victims to gain equal footing against them. Like the drug war if people want to get a banned or restricted object or substance they will find a way to get it and commit the crime anyway.

Gaming and for some people the entertainment industry as whole has become the second whipping boy in the wake of Sandy Hook. Like guns the blame is fueled by emotion and lack of logical thought. Reports came out that shooter Adam Lanza played video games, so those who lack critical thought quickly tried to pin point gaming as one of the causes of Lanza's rampage. The problem with that is that Lanza wasn't some small child, he was a twenty year old man. By the time one is that age, one can tell the difference between right and wrong. There isn't a grey area in the question of killing innocent children. If there is one I sure as hell would like to see it. When it comes to gaming, the responsibility is on the parent. The old saying goes; "If you don't like it then turn it off/don't buy it/don't listen to it, etc." and throw in some good discipline for good measure.

Prohibition doesn't work no matter how good the intentions are the law of unintended consequences will rear it's ugly head sooner or later. In a true free society one must recognize that bad things do happen and that utopia is not an option.

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Campaign for Liberty Ditching Foreign Policy?

As per a post on Tom Woods' blog

A friend writes:
My source was a participant at the C4L annual cadre training meeting in Florida last week:  John Tate and Mike Rothfeld were featured and at the final full session Tate emphasized, without any real explanation, that C4L was to have nothing to do with foreign policy. It will only deal with domestic issues like audit the fed and will be supporting the Rand Paul agenda. Wead, Hunter, Benton and Tate are all already enlisted in the effort and are on the Rand PAC’s payroll.

Obviously there would have to be more evidence to show that Campaign for Liberty is giving up a key pillar in libertarian philosophy. However with what has happened in C4L over the course of the election cycle in regards to Benton and other C4L leaders it doesn't surprise me. Adam Kokesh has covered C4L slow erosion of libertarian principals here, here and here.

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Hard to be a bigot when...

Every once in awhile libertarians will be accused of being racists by liberals and conservatives. Lew Rockwell himself has been accused because of the supposed tie to Ron Paul's newsletter controversy. It's awfully hard to be a full fledge racist when you allow pieces like this on your site:


December 10, 2012

One Reason Why Hispanics Vote Democrat

There are many reasons, but one of them is that the anti-immigrant movement, which is pandered to by the GOP, is largely in agreement with this latest screed by Ann Coulter. Coulter repeats all the usual talking points used by conservatives as part of their imperishable faith in the idea that if they'll start winning elections once they can get a few more white (i.e., WASP) males voting Republican.
Coulter's position is that Hispanics are all lazy moochers who vote Obama because they hate freedom and love welfare. She repeats a lot of "data" that have become articles of religious faith among anti-immigrant types. All those stereotypes about Hispanics being decent people are wrong, Coulter tells us, they're actually a bunch of awful, awful, people. Coulter goes on:
It seems otherwise, Murray says, because the only Hispanics we see are the ones who are working — in our homes, neighborhoods and businesses. "That's the way that almost all Anglos in the political chattering class come in contact with Latinos," he notes. "Of course they look like model Americans."
Murray's talking about himself and Coulter of course. Rich Anglos have Hispanic servants, you see, and they all look so civilized in those maid and landscaper uniforms.
Those of us who are actually related to Hispanics know the real story. Hispanics are barefoot and pregnant leeches who hate freedom and they contrast so greatly with the industrious WASPs in our midst. Or so say Murray and Coulter.

(We could also note that Coulter's conclusions assume that all Hispanics are either immigrants or recent immigrants. This assumption has no basis in reality. Here in the West, many Hispanics are descended from people who came to what is now the United States 400 years ago. But for the sake of argument, let's just assume that this conflating of immigrants and all Hispanics is workable.)
Coulter's column contains nothing new, and is just a rehashing of talking points from hundreds of conservative books and columns written over the last 20 years.
So why would a Hispanic not rush to vote for the GOP? It must be because they're idle socialists. And who wouldn't want to go to meeting of conservatives and hear all about how the wetbacks are ruining this country?
The policy response on the part of the anti-immigration movement, not surprisingly, is to embrace big government. They advocate for fences and more border control agents and regulations on private business and instructing police to spy on people and demand their papers. That's the "pro-freedom" position, apparently. And in the mind of those opponents of immigration, the Hispanics who vote for the party that they perceive as being more likely to leave them alone, are, amazingly, the "anti-freedom" group. This is the logic of the anti-immigrant mind.
The conservative anti-immigrant position is simply a part of the larger conservative program: more government power, more nationalism, more police, and more control, while being sure to pay some lip service to "freedom" while supporting the latest authoritarian form of prohibitionism.
Prohibition of certain drugs and prohibition of certain people go hand-in-hand philosophically. The same sort of mind that sees nothing wrong with government declaring some kinds of plants to be "government-approved" while some other plants are not approved, is the same sort of mind that can accept that idea that some people should be government-approved while other people are not government-approved and thus verboten. Indeed, some anti-immigrationists are so misguided, that they are in favor of punishing small business people who hire non-government-approved labor, and are even in favor of punishing landlords who rent apartments to non-government-approved people:
The 69-year-old landlord was arrested and charged with dozens of crimes, including harboring fugitives and conspiracy — because his property manager rented to illegals. Although acquitted by a jury, he could have spent the rest of his life in prison, and been forced to forfeit the 60 or so units he owned jointly with his son to the State of Kentucky.
The fact that people who support this war on private enterprise in the name of driving immigrants out of the country, are then also able to convince themselves that their knee-jerk police statism is pro-liberty, is impressive to say the least."

Obviously a post like this won't silence Rockwell's critics from the left and right but it shows how the charges of racism against him are a pretty weak argument. 

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Robert Wenzel: Don't trust Rand Paul to be like Ron Paul

While many in the libertarian movement have disregarded Rand as another neocon who has no interest in abolishing statism. Some still want to carry idea that Rand is the best we have given that Ron is leaving congress. Robert Wenzel of Economic Policy Journal wants to set the record straight that no real libertarian worth his salt cannot support a statist like Rand.


An Open Letter to Libertarians: Don't Be Fooled By Rand Paul

Dear Libertarians,

There is a big difference between Ron Paul and Rand Paul that appears to be missed by many. Ron Paul was not hungry to be president of the United States. If he would have been hungry, he would have booted his grandson in-law and that entire gang out early on in the primaries when it was clear they were positioning themselves not to advance Ron Paul and liberty, but to advance their own  careers. Ron Paul just wasn't that hungry to do that and be president. He was satisfied getting the libertarian message out.

Rand Paul is different. It appears that he wants to be president. Wanting to be president changes a man, wherever they start off from.

Full Letter is here 

Tell me if you heard this one before.....

Mike Flynn of Breitbart has written up a piece stating the obvious in regards to Republican election failures. Nothing really new, just rehashing the same bullshit conservative excuses; "abandoning lesser government, etc".

He notes a few races that had Libertarian Party candidates and compares them to the Democratic victory margin. Surprisingly enough he doesn't use spoiler or the standard conservative charge directed at LP candidates of being "liberals in disguise". Then he goes into the all too familiar bullshit that conservatives and libertarians share the same values. Give me a break, as I have said in the past, conservatives are only against statism when they're not in charge of it. Most libertarians that I know of are well aware of this con game that has been going on for years.

Monday, November 26, 2012

Laurence Vance answers his Theocon critics

Those of us who read Vance's columns on are well aware of his constant slamming of the religious right for their support for the warfare state. He decided to take his time to write a piece addressing his most common and overall bad criticisms.

While I don't think Vance will ever change the minds of statist loving religious conservatives, he does provide excellent counters for libertarians who get into a "debate" with a theocon. 

Gun Rights, Peace, and Liberty by Darren Wolfe

Monday, November 12, 2012

Random Observations

When I do errands around my area I always see interesting bumper stickers. Today I saw this one;

Why I vote for Conservatives
The 10 Commandments

First of all I openly believe that organized religion is bullshit and a scam. At the very least Scientology is just a few hairs "honest" about their scam. For the record I'm technically a Catholic.

I usually get chuckles when I see conservative bumper stickers that invoke religion to promote their views. I didn't realize Jesus would approve of money stolen at government gun point to give to foreign nations, illegal government wiretaps, jailing without trial, military adventurism, torture and counterfeiting to name a few. But hey thats better than what liberals stand for right? Which in reality is the same thing.

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Post 2012 Election Thoughts: Conservatives have no one to blame but themselves

To start off, yes I'm a cynic and I'm not ashamed of that despite what Lindsey Graham says. Another rigged contest (or what some of you like to call an election) has come and gone. The results are as predicted; statism had won but then again statism has been winning since FDR all that really has happened is that a different wing of statism takes the reigns of power in Washington D.C. This time liberal statism gets another four years instead of conservative statism getting their shot. Those who think that elections of one power hungry government stooge or another power hungry government stooge actually changes things are shocked at the results. To fair people would've been shocked regardless of who won.

 It's funny right after Obama got elected, conservatives called for a movement to oppose Obama's statism. Which in reality was a continuation of the statism that they approved of when the previous government stooge was in power but lets forget about silly facts like that. Little did they know (or chose to ignore) that the movement existed it was the Ron Paul movement, which gave birth to the real T.E.A. Party. Paul was an actual difference to the polices of Obama; free markets, free trade, nonintervention and actually shrinking the police state. One of my favorite Ron Paul bumper stickers that I saw read "Ron Paul cured my apathy". Many libertarians and Paul supporters are quite open of their view that the system is a sham.

Some of us thought that there was hope that there was going to be actual change for once. An actual man who walks the walk about liberty with the record that shows it. The treatment of Paul and libertarian supporters by conservatives and the Republican establishment showed that they weren't interested in liberty just statism with their brand sticker on it. So what did they do? They nominated a white version of Barack Obama; a warmongering, crony capitalist, statist with a disdain for civil liberties thrown in for good measure. Many libertarians and Paul supporters said throughout the campaign on what they would do if Paul was not the nominee. Some were going to support Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson, some weren't even going to vote but all agreed that there was no chance in hell that Mitt Romney was going to get one ounce of support from them.

Apparently this act of not bowing down to conservatives upset some of them. With the amount of road blocks third parties have to get on the ballot, conservatives decided to thrown in some more. The Pennsylvania Republican Party tried so hard  to keep Gary Johnson off the ballot. When that didn't work, they tried making pathetic cases on why libertarians should vote for the grandfather of Obamacare. Of course then there was the "A vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama" bullshit that was peddled around from various conservatives. Despite all of that libertarians refused to be intimated by punk conservative fear mongering and stuck to their principals. By either voted for Johnson or just stayed home and refused to participate in a rigged contest.

Of course with Obama coming out the victor the blame game started.

Theocons, Religious Rightists or whatever they call themselves these days will blame the gay rights movement or cry about God being kicked out of public schools. Of course not one word railing about getting the government of education in the first place. So then schools can decide what religious bullshit if any at all they teach to their students. Paleoconservatives and Buchanites will join their theocon brothers and sisters with the same complains but then also add immigration to the mix. In addition of throwing some racial nationalism into the mix as well. You know when they say that they support a color blind society but then go full retard when some report comes out that white people will be the minority twenty years down the road. It's kinda hard for neoconservatives to be completely bummed out. Obama is still gun-ho with the whole sham that is the war on terror. He's still drone attacking Muslim countries and it's only a matter of time before he enters Syria and then into Iran. The only complaint that neoconservatives would actual have with Obama is that he doesn't kiss Israel's ass enough which in reality is splitting hairs.

Conservatives who want to blame libertarians for Obama's victory go right ahead but in reality you should be looking right in the mirror. Conservatives where the ones who put a statist on a pedestal and then tried to shove him down libertarian throats NOT the other way around. Will they learn that libertarians (who still vote) won't cast their ballot for those who violate their principals? I strongly doubt it, I see an instant cure for baldness before that will happen.

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Skip Oliva talks with Lew Rockwell

Skip Oliva is the writer of the sports blog Man, Economy and Sport. A blog dedicated to injecting free market principals into today's sports scene. He appears on The Lew Rockwell Show to discuss on how both college and professional sports have become similar to governments.

314. Football: Another Government Institution

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Another take down of a "Firebrand" Conservative by a Libertarian

When I first saw this I had to listen to it myself. Robert Wenzel of Economic Policy Journal apparently was able to get her to come onto his show. I thought "There is no way in hell Coulter would come onto a show that is libertarian and isn't all about bashing liberals." Turns out that I was right, Wenzel states in his video the excuses Coulter gives for not showing up. In the video he also crushes the talking points in Coulter's latest book.

People like Coulter and other conservative big mouths are good at one thing; bashing liberals. Yea thats fun for conservatives who are too blind to see or refuse to acknowledge that there isn't much of a difference between them and the typical liberal. There is a reason why conservatives like "libertarians" such as Eric Dondero, Neal Boortz, Wayne Allyn Root, among others and openly hate actual libertarians such as Lew Rockwell, Justin Raimondo and Ron Paul. Real libertarians don't buy into the bullshit conservatives like to squawk when it comes to liberty and call them out on it. Which of course leads to the standard conservative insults such as; Your anti-American, You're a liberal, etc. etc' etc." When you start hearing that, you know you have gotten under the skin of a conservative. 

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Are Conservatives Starting To Become Scared?

It's getting to be that time again; another presidential election in which the two main choices don't show a dime's worth of difference between each other. Like clockwork, conservatives are trying to get libertarians on their side to support their statist. In enter Kurt Schlichter of Breitbart who makes a pathetic plea for libertarians to support the constitution.

Adam Kokesh of Adam vs. The Man delivers a nice rebuttal of it

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

The basic differences between Liberals, Conservatives and Libertarians

Credit goes to Lawerence Vance of for posting it on his blog

Libertarian: The government's sole function is the protection of private property. There are very few persons who adhere to this philosophy. A few with this philosophy waste much of their time trying to convince others to believe the same. They won't succeed.

Conservative: The government needs to be all powerful, and to support our morality and way of life. Nothing is beyond its grasp. Government power is god given through the constitution, the 10 commandments, and biblical scripture. No other proof is necessary. This is the white-man's burden.

Liberal: The government needs to take from anyone who has more that someone else and make us all equal. We need the government to take care of the young, the old, and middle aged and to promote love between one another. This we know from our heart.

Friday, September 7, 2012

Another Phony Libertarian Leaves the Party

A little faith has been restored for those who are trying restore liberty in the Libertarian Party. has reported that Wayne Allyn Root is quitting the Libertarian Party and will be running for the US Senate as a Republican. His farewell letter has been published on independent political report for those who wish to read it.

All I can say is good riddance, since after the 2008 election, Root has been nothing but a conservative kiss ass. While Ron Paul never stopped preaching his message of liberty and peace, Root stayed away from topics that ruffled conservative feathers like our moronic foreign policy. Thus Root became another person in the guise of Neal Boortz and Eric Dondero, one who calls himself a libertarian to show that one is anti-establishment but when shows their true colors when faced with the tough issues. Granted to be fair I've yet to read any libertarian writer who actually considers Dondero anything other than a soft neoconservative. With Root finally gone, LP leadership has a chance to actually have a libertarian in a leadership position. The attempts to woo conservatives (and liberals for that matter) has failed, there are just some people that can't be reached and LP leadership has to see this.

Friday, August 17, 2012

Do Republicans fear electoral competition?

Below is a picture of a sent email by Independence Hall Tea Party PAC which is based out of Philadelphia, PA in regards to challenging the ballot access candidates of Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party. 

The next picture is an email from Louis R. Jasikoff to Don Adams who appears to be on the board of delegates for IH Tea Party PAC. The Wilkes-Barre Independent Gazette also has published Mr. Jasikoff's letter to Adams on their website.

At the time of this writing Jasikoff has yet to receive a response from Adams regarding the charges that supporters of Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode in are line with the views of President Obama and Vice President Biden. One of the reasons why people like Johnson and Goode run for office is because many people do not see a legitimate difference between the Romney/Ryan ticket and the Obama/Biden ticket. While Johnson and Goode have very obvious differences between each other, one cannot deny the fact that they both alternative from the two mainstream party candidates.

Such lawfare tactics that Adams is employing his supporters to engage in should serve as another reminder to libertarians that working with conservatives is a pointless exercise. The treatment of Ron Paul and Paul supporters in the various Republican caucuses should've been an eye opener. However if one needs more proof Bob Wenzel of Economic Policy Journal has pointed out several times that the pick of Paul Ryan as Romney's running mate was nothing but a smoke screen in a very poor attempt to woo Ron Paul supporters. Obviously this isn't the first time libertarians have felt the conservative knife in the back, this is just another file for the cabinet.

Thursday, July 12, 2012

Want to excerise your rights? If so the government needs to know your race

Over at Ammo Land it's been discovered that the new federal firearms transaction form now includes the question asking the said buyer if he is hispanic or not. First of all having to fill out any type of form to exercise one's rights is ridiculous in itself but then having to put one's race down is absurd. Funny how the state tries to say that it's colorblind but at the same time pulls mindless crap like this.

Friday, June 22, 2012

The Trial of Roger Clemens was a joke

Let me start by saying that I'm not a Yankees fan so this is in no way in defense of Clemens' steroid use. There is no conceivable reason that the federal government or any government for that matter should be involved in major league baseball's issues regarding performance enhancing drugs. This includes the ridiculous senate hearing that happen a few years ago with Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Clemens and Mark McGwire. Not only did it waste tax payer dollars (granted that's wasted tax dollars not going to something else to screw the people) but it served no actual purpose in fixing the issue of performance enhancing drugs in major league baseball. Some can argue that since many stadiums are built with public money (which I'm against) that the government does have a right to intervene with major league baseball's internal issues. That argument really can go as far as to local and state government as most of the sports welfare money is generated from local taxes not federal ones.  The other argument I've seen is that in some twisted reasoning that is apart of the fascist drug war fight. Which is insane since steroids are a legal drug, it's found in over the counter drugs such as benadryl.

 If major league baseball really wanted to rid the sport of performance enhancing drugs than it would have install much hard penalties for players who get caught testing positive. The problem however is that major league baseball would actually to enforce the rules and live up to it's own standard. As we saw with the issue with Ryan Braun of the Milwaukee Brewers that wasn't the case.

Monday, January 16, 2012

Has Dr. King's Dream been realized?

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
This quote comes from Dr. Martin Luther King's I have a dream speech which in itself argues that the concept of race is nothing but a social construct and that skin color isn't a reason for a man to be treated differently under the law. While King's movement made great strides (even in the face of government spies/plants and people who didn't want the challenge to the status quo) he died without seeing his vision fully realized. 
While there will always be individual people who will see race and nothing else (Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Pat Buchanan, Frosty Wooldridge, David Duke, Louis Farrakhan to name a few) government  should've supported the ideal which it doesn't. As far as I'm concerned there is no point in 2012 to release data or even engage in the collection of data that divides people based on race. What relevance does it have to say the Asian males are more unemployed than Black males? Last time I checked being unemployed is not a desired situation to be in no matter who you are. It's not just unemployment data, high school graduation rates, college attendance rates, poverty rates, abortion rates, the most recent census, etc, etc, etc. Yes I understand that news organizations and others will publish figures and polls based on race as well but the principal applies to them as well. Such data based on race does nothing but help the people King fought against since they'll likely use it for their various class/race warfare based agendas. 

Did King advocate things that sounded good on paper but wrong in practice yes he did but that shouldn't discount what he tried to achieve as a whole. Programs such as affirmative action perhaps made sense of the time (I was born in 1984 and I'm 27) but really have no place in 2012. Does it hurt not to get a job based on your skin color yes but it's better for a bigot to reveal themselves off the bat than further down the road which could make one's life a living nightmare. It's not just applying for a job, would you eat somewhere in which the restaurant manager uses a racial slur at you? I sure as hell wouldn't I rather the SOB call me a spic right off the bat then try to poison me later.  As the saying goes, your enemies will stab you in the face, while your "friends" will stab you in the back. Using the government gun on a person because of their skin color is bad but is as well forcing people to like each other. People are assholes and thats the way it will always be, it's wrong headed to think that a government gun can change that. Government is supposed to be colorblind, not hindering one group of people while helping another. 

Will King's vision ever be fully realized maybe, maybe not, I can't predict the future. Government seems to benefit from the race baiting and affirmative action baiting industries who paints the other as the enemy of the people.