For libertarians we've been pointing out the hypocrisy and bullshit from conservatives for years. Adam Kokesh points out that they have no real ground to stand on to oppose gun control while supporting government thuggery in other areas.
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Thursday, January 24, 2013
The Republican Party wants your help to learn from it's mistakes
So the Republican Party once again trotting out the predicable line that happens when they lose an election; they're ready to learn from their mistakes. According to this piece they're taking suggestions on how to rebuild the Republican Conservative brand and they have their own website set up for people to leave suggestions. Of course most libertarians know that this is just a dog and pony show that liberals and conservatives run when they lose.
However if someone from the RNC task force stumbles upon my soap box here are my suggestions to get voters to vote for them;
1. Reject statism in all it's forms which includes both Neoconservatism and Paleoconservatism
2. End all foreign alliances and entanglements which would include but not limited to the United Nations, NATO, OAS, etc
2a. Close all US military bases that are on foreign soil and bring all military personnel from said bases back to the US
3. End all foreign aid immediately, no weening period just cut the cord and be done with it
4. End the drug war. History shows that alcohol prohibition failed miserably, the drug war is no different. You can't say that gun control doesn't work while at the same time openly supporting the drug war since they both rely on the same "principals"
5. Repeal, SOPA, the Patriot Act and other arms of the national security state
6. End the federal minimum wage
7. End immunity laws for those in law enforcement who are caught abusing civil liberties of citizens
8. Support the real free market by ending government subsidies, federal licensing mandates, etc
9. End not just cut all taxes across the board
10. End the TSA, DHS, remove government security from transporation hubs and allow the owners of the various airlines to provide their own security
11. End eminent domain. This is nothing but legalized theft and has to stop. If a property owner doesn't want to sell his land than the state has no legal authority to take it
There are plenty more suggestions that the RNC task force can actually use but I figure these 11 would be a nice start. Not that they would actually use them mind you
However if someone from the RNC task force stumbles upon my soap box here are my suggestions to get voters to vote for them;
1. Reject statism in all it's forms which includes both Neoconservatism and Paleoconservatism
2. End all foreign alliances and entanglements which would include but not limited to the United Nations, NATO, OAS, etc
2a. Close all US military bases that are on foreign soil and bring all military personnel from said bases back to the US
3. End all foreign aid immediately, no weening period just cut the cord and be done with it
4. End the drug war. History shows that alcohol prohibition failed miserably, the drug war is no different. You can't say that gun control doesn't work while at the same time openly supporting the drug war since they both rely on the same "principals"
5. Repeal, SOPA, the Patriot Act and other arms of the national security state
6. End the federal minimum wage
7. End immunity laws for those in law enforcement who are caught abusing civil liberties of citizens
8. Support the real free market by ending government subsidies, federal licensing mandates, etc
9. End not just cut all taxes across the board
10. End the TSA, DHS, remove government security from transporation hubs and allow the owners of the various airlines to provide their own security
11. End eminent domain. This is nothing but legalized theft and has to stop. If a property owner doesn't want to sell his land than the state has no legal authority to take it
There are plenty more suggestions that the RNC task force can actually use but I figure these 11 would be a nice start. Not that they would actually use them mind you
Saturday, January 12, 2013
Glenn Beck Rips Alex Jones Apart For 'Crazy' Piers Morgan Rant
While many in the libertarian movement have mixed views on Alex Jones there's no denying that Jones fights to exposes the abuses by the state. Glenn Beck however has been exposed for the conservative statist that he is that just uses libertarian rhetoric to appeal to people.
Friday, January 11, 2013
No, The US Federal Government Should NOT Take Over The NHL
Over on the SBNation blog, Battle for California the author Megladon makes the case for the government to take over the National Hockey League. Anyone who believes and supports actual free market economics knows that the state has the reverse midas touch when it comes to running a business, running a sports league wouldn't be much different. I will address several parts of the article;
This kind of action would not be without precedent in U.S. history. In the past, to serve the public interest, the U.S. government has taken over banks, railroads, airport security, and power companies.
Just because the government took over these types of business doesn't mean it's worked well for them. The bank bailout of 2008 has been viewed as a huge failure. One popular phrase coined by those of us who thought the bank bailout was a bad idea was "Privatize the profits while socializing the losses". Amtrak for years has been operation at a loss and are only kept afloat via government subsidies. As for running the power industry, you can ask Sandy hurricane victims how they enjoy having a legalized monopoly being the only ones who control their electricity.
Just think: run properly, by people who actually care about the fans and the product more than short-term profit, the Nationalized Hockey League could actually make a lot of money for the country, in the future. Rather than lining the pockets of plutocrat billionaires, every dime from ticket sales would either go back into making hockey the best it could possibly be or it would be used to pay down the national debt.
This is just silly. If anything a government run sports league would make a great product like the NHL into something much worse. Instead of individual clubs building their teams to compete for a spot in the Stanley Cup Playoffs, you have the potential of winners and losers being picked based on what may be politically popular not on actual athletic ability. With the NHL being 4th in terms of popularity compared to the NFL, MLB and NBA such tainted results does have the potential to turn off casual fans which the league has spent years trying to attract. Losses of fans would result in the tax payer having to subsidize the league even further to keep it afloat.
As for not lining the pockets of billionaires, I can understand the sentiment. There are owners not just in the NHL but also in MLB, NFL and NBA who have no desire to make their teams better, only to pocket the profits from their teams fans. Whos to say that problem would be resolved if the government took over ownership duties? Bad ownership and ownership groups are already more difficult to weed out now a days than in the past via fan boycots.
First, it is important to remember exactly who saved the NHL from this last lockout. It wasn't Wayne Gretzky, or Sidney Crosby, or your fearsome Moose King. It was Scot L. Beckenbaugh, a U.S. federal mediator. Scot is an American. He went to American schools, and his salary is paid by American taxpayers. When the NHL needed a hero, it was an American federal government employee who saved the day. Sure we still lost half the season, but it's thanks to Scot, the government that employs him, and the country that raised him, that we are getting any hockey this year at all.
That's what we do, after all. We're Americans. We may be late to the party, but when we show up we kick ass.
The second reason why it should be the U.S., and not Canada, that runs the NHL is the simple fact that the National Hockey league, as a business, is an American enterprise, not a Canadian one. The vast majority of NHL teams are based in the United States, just as the vast majority of team owners are Americans:
There is no economic or logical basis in this argument other than an appeal to nationalist sentiment. Your average fan cares less where an owner, player, coach is from but only if they produce the results that help their team win. However it should be noted that when the Atlanta Thrashers were moved to Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada the team did turn a profit which is unusual for expansion/relocated teams which typically for the first few years operate at a loss.
In the end Mr. Megladon does not make a very compelling case to prove that a government takeover of the NHL would be a positive for the league and their fans. When in fact there is overwhelming evidence that shows that government takeovers of business never turn out the way they hope for.
This kind of action would not be without precedent in U.S. history. In the past, to serve the public interest, the U.S. government has taken over banks, railroads, airport security, and power companies.
Just because the government took over these types of business doesn't mean it's worked well for them. The bank bailout of 2008 has been viewed as a huge failure. One popular phrase coined by those of us who thought the bank bailout was a bad idea was "Privatize the profits while socializing the losses". Amtrak for years has been operation at a loss and are only kept afloat via government subsidies. As for running the power industry, you can ask Sandy hurricane victims how they enjoy having a legalized monopoly being the only ones who control their electricity.
Just think: run properly, by people who actually care about the fans and the product more than short-term profit, the Nationalized Hockey League could actually make a lot of money for the country, in the future. Rather than lining the pockets of plutocrat billionaires, every dime from ticket sales would either go back into making hockey the best it could possibly be or it would be used to pay down the national debt.
This is just silly. If anything a government run sports league would make a great product like the NHL into something much worse. Instead of individual clubs building their teams to compete for a spot in the Stanley Cup Playoffs, you have the potential of winners and losers being picked based on what may be politically popular not on actual athletic ability. With the NHL being 4th in terms of popularity compared to the NFL, MLB and NBA such tainted results does have the potential to turn off casual fans which the league has spent years trying to attract. Losses of fans would result in the tax payer having to subsidize the league even further to keep it afloat.
As for not lining the pockets of billionaires, I can understand the sentiment. There are owners not just in the NHL but also in MLB, NFL and NBA who have no desire to make their teams better, only to pocket the profits from their teams fans. Whos to say that problem would be resolved if the government took over ownership duties? Bad ownership and ownership groups are already more difficult to weed out now a days than in the past via fan boycots.
First, it is important to remember exactly who saved the NHL from this last lockout. It wasn't Wayne Gretzky, or Sidney Crosby, or your fearsome Moose King. It was Scot L. Beckenbaugh, a U.S. federal mediator. Scot is an American. He went to American schools, and his salary is paid by American taxpayers. When the NHL needed a hero, it was an American federal government employee who saved the day. Sure we still lost half the season, but it's thanks to Scot, the government that employs him, and the country that raised him, that we are getting any hockey this year at all.
That's what we do, after all. We're Americans. We may be late to the party, but when we show up we kick ass.
The second reason why it should be the U.S., and not Canada, that runs the NHL is the simple fact that the National Hockey league, as a business, is an American enterprise, not a Canadian one. The vast majority of NHL teams are based in the United States, just as the vast majority of team owners are Americans:
There is no economic or logical basis in this argument other than an appeal to nationalist sentiment. Your average fan cares less where an owner, player, coach is from but only if they produce the results that help their team win. However it should be noted that when the Atlanta Thrashers were moved to Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada the team did turn a profit which is unusual for expansion/relocated teams which typically for the first few years operate at a loss.
In the end Mr. Megladon does not make a very compelling case to prove that a government takeover of the NHL would be a positive for the league and their fans. When in fact there is overwhelming evidence that shows that government takeovers of business never turn out the way they hope for.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Your Absurd Government Policy of the Day
Sometimes when I read about absurd government policies I just have a chuckle but this one in Iceland takes the cake.
A 15-year-old is suing the Icelandic state for the right to legally use the name given to her by her mother. The problem? Blaer, which means "light breeze" in Icelandic, is not on a list approved by the government.
Like a handful of other countries, including Germany and Denmark, Iceland has official rules about what a baby can be named. In a country comfortable with a firm state role, most people don't question the Personal Names Register, a list of 1,712 male names and 1,853 female names that fit Icelandic grammar and pronunciation rules and that officials maintain will protect children from embarrassment. Parents can take from the list or apply to a special committee that has the power to say yea or nay.
Just another area where government definitely doesn't need to be sticking it's nose in.
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
http://i1252.photobucket.com/albums/hh569/nycynic/Political%20Sheets/pistolpermit1_zps8624922e.jpg
Here is picture number 2 when one goes down the list
http://i1252.photobucket.com/albums/hh569/nycynic/Political%20Sheets/pistolpermit2_zpsf57f45fa.jpg
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.
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
http://i1252.photobucket.com/albums/hh569/nycynic/Political%20Sheets/pistolpermit1_zps8624922e.jpg
Here is picture number 2 when one goes down the list
http://i1252.photobucket.com/albums/hh569/nycynic/Political%20Sheets/pistolpermit2_zpsf57f45fa.jpg
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)