Why The Libertarian Party Has So Many Ballot Access Problems

Skullduggery is underway in Ohio to keep the Libertarian Party off the ballot. 

In 2012, we had to find a Texan named Gary Johnson so that our presidential candidate named Gary Johnson could be on the ballot.  (That's a long, tiresome story that you wouldn't bother reading if I wrote it.) 

Baptist preachers can get on the ballot in Saudi Arabia easier than a Libertarian can get on the ballot in Oklahoma. 

Here's the simplest explanation, courtesy of somebody on Libertarian Reddit. 

I'm recruiting Tarrant County candidates until the December 9th deadline.  Every one of them will be on the ballot. 

God Bless Texas !! 

The March Against Monsanto - Fort Worth, Texas Edition

Why would the Tarrant County Libertarian Party participate in a "March Against Monsanto"? (Saturday, May 25th at 1:00 p.m., General Worth Square, Downtown Fort Worth)


Because that's where a crowd is going to be !!! We'll be handing out flyers and spreading the word about the Libertarian movement.

And seriously.... Monsanto developed some hybrid life forms. That's not problem for many of us.

Monsanto wanted a monopoly on these plants and started suing people who used "their" seeds without their permission.

One of Monsanto's former lawyers, Clarence Thomas, was appointed to the Supreme Court, where he eventually wrote a majority opinion in a 2001 lawsuit, stating that "newly developed plant breeds are patentable under the general utility patent laws of the United States".

Sorry, Clarence, but if someone purchases a John Grisham novel and then re-sells it to Half-Price Books, that individual can't be sued because he didn't mail John Grisham a check.

The same thing goes for purchasing, and then re-selling a car, a stapler, or Beyonce's Greatest Hits. It's called the "First Sale Doctrine".

The Tarrant County Libertarian Party Executive Committee believes that corporations shouldn't "own" life forms. Where would it end? Farmers have been planting, growing, and then re-using their seeds for ten thousand years. Clarence Thomas and Monsanto should not be allowed to interfere in that process.

Hope to see you there, Saturday May 25th, General Worth Square, 900 Main Street. It starts at 1:00 p.m. Go to the open area north of the Fort Worth Convention Center. Look for the old hippies and passionate Gen-X'ers.

I own me. You own you. And if you grow some soybeans, you have a right to do what you want with the seeds. It really is that simple.

The New York Times gets a clue

Here's a drawing of a very small fraction of a sliver of a percentage of the people who have "disappeared" in Mexico's fight against the drug cartels. 

It's from The New York Holy Times.  Hit the link.  Please read it if you get a chance. 

If a Statist organization as fundamentally dense as The New York Times can figure out that we need to end the Drug War, and the cartels' monopolies, and end the violence, and reduce the spending, and release the prisoners, and let people consume what they want to consume....

Can our politicians be too far behind? 

Keep up the good fight, freedom-fighters !!!   Everyone else, as long as you support Washington D.C. and Austin Texas Prohibitionists, these people have died for your sins. 

The Obamney Poster

Found it on Libertarian Reddit. 

Michele Leonhart and Barack Obama - Babykillers?

From The Washington Post, "Mexican Drug Cartels Now Targeting And Killing Children":

The children’s rights group estimates that 994 people younger than 18 were killed in drug-related violence between late 2006 and late 2010, based on media accounts, which are incomplete because newspapers are often too intimidated to report drug-related crimes.

[...]
Government figures include all homicides of people younger than 17, capturing victims whose murders might not have been related to drugs or organized crime. In 2009, the last year for which there is data, 1,180 children were killed, half in shootings.

From Michele Leonhart, head of the DEA:

U.S. and Mexican officials say the grotesque violence is a symptom the cartels have been wounded by police and soldiers. “It may seem contradictory, but the unfortunate level of violence is a sign of success in the fight against drugs,” said Michele Leonhart, head of the Drug Enforcement Administration. The cartels “are like caged animals, attacking one another,” she added.

No, you bureaucratic twit, they're attacking children.  Civilians, old people, journalists, cops, judges and children. 

Here's a pic of Michele Leonhart:

Here she is with Attorney General Eric "Gunwalker" Holder:

I couldn't find a pic of Leonhart with The Teleprompter Jesus anywhere on the internet.  He's probably keeping his distance since war criminals generally avoid hanging out in the same place. 

So here's a pic of Michele Leonhart's thugs raiding a house to see if the owners have any plants inside:

Finally, here's The Toker In Chief himself.  This is an excerpt from his memoir "Dreams From My Father":


"I blew a few smoke rings, remembering those years. Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though - Mickey, my potential initiator, had been just a little too eager for me to go through with that. Said he could do it blindfolded, but he was shaking like a faulty engine when he said it...

"Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed; the final fatal role of the would-be black man. Except the highs hadn't been about that, me trying to prove what a down brother I was. Not by then, anyway. I got high for just the opposite effect, something that could push questions of who I was out of my mind. Something that could flatten out the landscape of my heart, blur the edges of my memory.

"I had discovered that it didn't make any difference whether you smoked reefer in a white classmate's sparkling new van, or in the dorm room of some brother you'd met down at the gym, or on the beach with a couple of Hawaiian kids... You just might be bored or alone. Everybody was welcome into the club of disaffection.

"And if the high didn't solve whatever it was that was getting you down, it could at least help you laugh at the world's ongoing folly and see through all the hypocrisy and bullshit and cheap moralism. That's how it seemed to me then, anyway."

He then relates the story of Pablo, who didn't have "his driver's licence that day [when] a cop with nothing better to do check[ed] the trunk of his car... One day [my mother] marched into my room wanting to know the details of Pablo's arrest. I told her not to worry, I wouldn't do anything that stupid.

"'Don't you think you're being a little casual about your future?' she said. 'One of your friends just got arrested for drug possession. Your grades are slipping..."

"I didn't want to hear about this..."

Speaking of things that Obama doesn't want to hear about, there were 800,000 marijuana arrests in the U.S. last year. 

The Obama/Leonhart War On Drugs killed 40,000 Mexicans in the last 4 years.
 
Obama has more black men living in cages than the Confederacy did. 

There are only two people running for president who favor ending this disastrous war: Gary Johnson and Ron Paul. 

This stoner favors business as usual.
 

I see dead people. But not many from marijuana use.

I found this link on Samizdata. 

In the year 2010 in the U.K., there were 81,400 tobacco-related deaths and 8,644 alcohol-related deaths. 

Take out the big two (that have been subsidized by the U.S. government), and you're left with these, the drugs that are produced or distributed by the Mexican Drug Lords:

The numbers drop even further if you eliminate Poly-Drug deaths, (snorting coke while drinking Jim Beam, mixing any two in an unwise combination, etc.)  Call it 900 people. 

Here's a handy chart:

Please go here and read the whole thing, and to gather zingers like this one: 

According to the ONS data, in 2010 there were more helium deaths than cannabis, ecstasy, mephedrone and GHB related deaths combined. Helium is an inert gas which kills when people use helium to deprive themselves of oxygen. The recent explosion in helium deaths from under two per year until 2008 to 32 last year appears to be due to it’s recent promotion as a form of suicide.

In the meantime, here's how many Mexicans (most of them innocent civilians) have been slaughtered in the four years since Mexican President Felipe Calderon decided to participate in the War On Drugs four years ago:

34,612

Here's how many Mexicans died in the Drug War in 2010, the year in which 900 died from drug abuse in the U.K.:

15,273

When we decided to end prohibition of alcohol, the violence on the U.S./Canadian border ended. Alcholism didn't increase.  Corruption decreased. 
Yeah, people still died from alcohol abuse, just like they were already dying from alcohol abuse.
We could do the same thing tomorrow, and save thousands of lives and billions of dollars.
We could reduce the pain and suffering of cancer patients. 
But thanks to the Narc lobby, the prison lobby, and yes, the alcohol lobby, we won't do it. 

   
Mr. Obama, please end your dirty little war. 

The pic of the float from El Salvador's Anti Obama Drug War protest came from here. 
The conclusions about the massive waste of resources in the UK Drug War are terrifying, and the UK Drug War ain't nothing like our Drug War in the U.S. 

Seen and Unseen and Obscene in Washington State

Radley Balko, of The Agitator Blog, has been linking to and commenting on some of the greatest stuff ever.  I've started going to his recommended links now and then, hitting a few, ranting about them, and saving them for a slow news day.  Here's a ferinstance:

If you've read any Libertarian-ish stuff at all in the last few years, you know that Washington State and Pennsylvania have state-controlled liquor monopolies. 
Here are a few quotes Balko selected from Reason magazine on Washington State's recent decision to allow its plantation worker citizens to purchase Jim Beam from someplace besides the plantation commisary:

Here's a little Seen And Unseen for you:

Seen:


Beginning next June, liquor sales will shift from the state to grocery and warehouse stores, including Costco. It means more than 900 state employees will lose their jobs, most of them workers at state-run liquor stores.

Unseen:

The state budgeting office figures the number of outlets selling liquor will jump from 328 to 1,428. It also expects the change to generate an average of $80 million more in annual revenue for the state and local governments over the next six years....Some liquor prices are expected to drop.

Plus bonus hilarious overstatement from vested interests:

Tom Geiger, communication director for the union representing more than 700 workers in state-run liquor stores, said he thought the results raised questions about democracy itself.

Anybody who doesn't think that's funny needs to have a drink.  From a low-cost, private establishment that isn't subsidized by theft, of course. 

It's time to go knock back a few and watch the Buffalo Bills cover a 5 1/2 point spread against Jerry Jones's Dallas Cowboys.  Have a good Sunday. 

Ron Paul's most "extreme" positions

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man" - George Bernard Shaw

Mother Jones magazine recently took Ron Paul to task for being too extreme.  (As if there's a painless and moderate way to get out from under a 14 trillion dollar debt.)

Here are Dr. Paul's beliefs that made Mother Jones run for the smelling salts, along with additional commentary on my part. 

1. Eviscerate Entitlements: Believes that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are unconstitutional, and has compared the failure of federal courts to strike them down to the courts' failure to abolish slavery in the 19th century.

People of good will can indeed argue that the constitution's General Welfare clause gives Congress enough wiggle room to collect their party money via Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid contributions.  And all of those funds will be out of money by the time I retire.  The constitutionality of those programs is irrelevant.  Our government will never, ever use the money responsibly, and the contributions to those funds went to other programs ages ago.  This one is irrelevant, and the sooner I'm allowed to put my own money into my own retirement fund, the better off I'll be.  The sooner you can do the same for yourself, the better off you'll be. 
It takes a lot of humility to admit that I have no idea what is best for you.  I wish that our Washington Lords and Masters felt the same way. 
This one is a moot point. 

2. Lay Off Half His Cabinet: Wants to abolish half of all federal agencies, including the departments of Energy, Education, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Labor.

Ok, let's beat hook the winch and the chain hoist up to this dead horse and drag it out of the bushes for another beating. 

Since its founding, the Department of Education has almost doubled education expenses and test scores haven't budged. 

Since its founding (to decrease our dependence on foreign oil) the Department of Energy has spent billions and our foreign oil purchase percentage is within 1% of where they started. 

The Department of Agriculture gives subsidies to some of the wealthiest people in the nation.  They also support ethanol subsidies.  For this alone, their building should be nuked. 

If the Department of Commerce were to cease their endless quotas, tariffs, protectionism, kickbacks and allotments and let us have a more frictionless economy, we just might be able to get out of this recession.  But no.  They've got to do something.  Why does anyone need an 800 page Free Trade Agreement?  Why not just say "Fort Worth can trade freely with Dallas".  "Oklahoma can trade freely with Florida".  And last but not least, "You can trade freely with Canada".  We wouldn't need to take in so much in import duties if we didn't have to support these unnecessary a-holes.
 
I occasionally have to get things done via companies that are afflicted with Teamster's Union members.  Screw the Department of Labor, and all that they stand for.  If your boss promised you X, but didn't give it to you, take him to court.  If your boss had faulty equipment that took off one of your fingers, take her to court and sue her until she glows.  It's that simple. 

If we could get the CIA on a shorter leash, we wouldn't need a Department Of Homeland Security.  If we could get our troops out of Germany, Korea, Japan, and the Middle East, and bring 'em back to the house, we wouldn't need a Department Of Homeland Security.  We could cut troop levels in half, and still not be able to see the beach because of all the troops defending our borders.
 
Ok, imagine you won $100 million in the lottery, and you wanted to give it away to good, helpful institutions.  Make your list of your top 20.  Did you include the Department Of Health And Human Services?  Good.  Nobody else would either, including Ron Paul, or whoever wrote this tripe for Mother Jones. 

3. Enable State Extremism: Would let states set their own policies on abortion, gay marriage, prayer in school, and most other issues.

It's called States' Rights.  If a state wants to legalize gay marriage, abortion, etc., the state should be allowed to do so.  Gays and lesbians could be married in those states.  Women wanting an abortion could travel to those states.  Before long, those states would have an advantage that others did not.  The alternative is having the heavy hand of Washington oversee everything, with a one-size-fits-all policy. 

4. Protect Sexual Predators' Privacy: Voted against requiring operators of wi-fi networks who discover the transmission of child porn and other forms online sex predation to report it to the government.

Well, there's more to it than that.....

The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a bill saying that anyone offering an open Wi-Fi connection to the public must report illegal images including "obscene" cartoons and drawings--or face fines of up to $300,000.

That broad definition would cover individuals, coffee shops, libraries, hotels, and even some government agencies that provide Wi-Fi. It also sweeps in social-networking sites, domain name registrars, Internet service providers, and e-mail service providers such as Hotmail and Gmail, and it may require that the complete contents of the user's account be retained for subsequent police inspection.

 Most wi-fi providers have other things to do.  I don't want to spy on my neighbors.  I can also promise you that my definition of "obscene" doesn't match yours.  And then there's the 4th Amendment:

5. Rescind the Bin Laden Raid: Instead of authorizing the Navy Seals to take him out, President Paul would have sought Pakistan's cooperation to arrest him.

Would that have worked?  Who knows.  But our potential Paki enemies would be a lot less pissed if we had given Dr. Paul's method a try. 
How would you feel if a group of VietNamese invaded D.C. with a helicopter raid and took out Henry Kissinger? 

6. Simplify the Census: The questions posed by the Census Bureau's annual American Community Survey, which collects demographics data such as age, race, and income, are "both ludicrous and insulting," Paul says.

True.  The race questions are often used to reenforce tribalism.  They don't need to know anything but your name and address. 

7. Let the Oldest Profession Be: Paul wants to legalize prostitution at the federal level.

I believe you can find other instances where he says its a States' Rights issue. 
There's something funny about these people....

....enforcing a ban on whoring. 

8. Legalize All Drugs: Including cocaine and heroin.

Yes !!  And if we do, are you going to suddenly start doing coke and heroin?  I'm not.  I hope you don't.  But it'll end almost all of our problems on the Texas/Mexico border, they way the end of alcohol prohibition ended our problems on the Canadian border in the 1920's. 
Which monopolies do you want to preserve for the Drug Lords of Mexico and Afghanistan?

9. Keep Monopolies Intact: Opposes federal antitrust legislation, calling it "much more harmful than helpful." Thinks that monopolies can be controlled by protecting "the concept of the voluntary contract."

Yep.  Can anyone name a true monopoly that has existed without help from Uncle Sugar? 

10. Lay Off Ben Bernanke: Would abolish the Federal Reserve and revert to use of currencies that are backed by hard assets such as gold.

And speaking of monopolies that answer to no one, here's what The Fed has done to our money supply.  Folks, prices aren't going up because of weather, China, India, famine, or Global Warming/Cooling/Climate Disruption.  Dollars are less scarce.  Therefore it takes more of them to swap for something else. 

11. Stop Policing the Environment: Believes that climate change is no big deal and the Environmental Protection Agency is unnecessary. Most environmental problems can be addressed by enforcing private-property rights. Paul also thinks that interstate issues such as air pollution are best dealt with through compacts between states.

Yep.  The EPA is a jobs program. 

12. Not Do Anything, but Still...: Would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because it was a "massive violation of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of a free society."

This is true.  I discriminate.  You discriminate.  There are some people that I won't allow into my house or my truck.  There are others that I welcome. 
A business has the right to do this also.  But if you don't allow people in because they're black, gay, coneheaded, hispanic, or green, I'm not going to shop at your business.  Lots of other people will follow suit. 
The market works, and is more efficient that setting up a feast for lawyers. 

13. Let Markets Care for the Disabled: "The ADA should have never been passed," Paul says. The treatment of the handicapped should be determined by the free market.

Has the percentage of handicapped people in the workplace gone up or down since the passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act?  Google it.  (Hint:  It's gone down.  Government regulations screw up the best intentions, without fail.) 

14. First, Do Harm: Wants to end birthright citizenship. Believes that emergency rooms should have the right to turn away illegal immigrants.

It's called "Birth Tourism".  It's a huge problem as long as we have a welfare state.  Have your kid on this side of the border, and your kid is an American. 
End the welfare state, and its no problem.  Go here to join the Facebook group called "Ron Paul Supporters For Open Borders". 

15. Diss Mother Teresa: Voted against giving her the Congressional Gold Medal. Has argued that the medal, which costs $30,000, is too expensive.

When time permits, read "The Missionary Position", Christopher Hitchens' devastating attack on the life and works of Mother Teresa. 
The expense is the least of the problems. 
 
************************
 
Those are Ron Paul's positions that scare the bejeebers out of Mother Jones magazine.  What's funny is that getting out of our current mess is going to require people who make Ron Paul look moderate. 
Hope this helped ! 
Have a good Memorial Day !!!

The Weekly Radley: Protectionism At Work

I saw this on Radley Balko's site.  I hope you can't read the fine print at the very bottom of the advertisement, the obligatory "this ad paid for by.....".  
But first, try to guess who paid for it !  Doesn't it look like something designed by a group of concerned citizens? 
Give up? 
Ok, think "Bootleggers Dressed As Baptists"
You can hit the label at the bottom of this post to see more "Bootleggers And Baptists" stuff. 

Ok, go here to see who paid for the ad. 
It wasn't a "Parents Concerned About Kids Gambling Online" group, was it? 
It almost never is. 
The Indian Casino monopoly opposes online gambling.  Memphis, Tennessee wine shops oppose grocery store wine sales.  California's recent failed marijuana legalization proposition was opposed by almost all marijuana growers.  The funny thing is the way they all try to posture as guardians of our virtue, when all they're doing is blocking potential competitors.   
Big Bidness loves a monopoly.  And the only way they can have it long-term is if the government helps them preserve it.

Andrew Marr fears socially inadequate, pimpled, single, slightly seedy, bald, cauliflower-nosed young men who can type

From a British civil service lifer named Andrew Marr, who feels threatened by amateur typists....

Mr. Marr is the former political director of The BBC, which would sink like a stone if the British government allowed a true competitive market in broadcasting. 

"A lot of bloggers seem to be socially inadequate, pimpled, single, slightly seedy, bald, cauliflower-nosed young men sitting in their mother's basements and ranting. They are very angry people," he told the Cheltenham Literary Festival. "   "....the so-called citizen journalism is the spewings and rantings of very drunk people late at night."

Marr is wrong, wrong, wrong.  I'm not young ,socially inadequate, pimpled, single, slightly seedy, bald, cauliflower-nosed. spewing out drunken rants late at night. 

I'm fairly old and married.  The late night drunken rants are produced at my own dining room table.   

Here's a little more on the BBC, where Andrew Marr is still employed.  This is courtesy of Wikipedia  (Yeah, Wikipedia.  I'm in a hurry.  Gotta get a lot of work done early so I can get drunk tonight and start typing....)

. The BBC is an autonomous public service broadcaster that operates under a Royal Charter.  Within the United Kingdom its work is funded principally by an annual television license fee which is charged to all United Kingdom households, companies and organisations using any type of equipment to record and/or receive live television broadcasts;  the level of the fee is set annually by the British Government and agreed by Parliament. 

Good Lord, can you imagine the self-righteous crap we would have to endure if National Public Radio and Public TV were 100% supported by the Feds with some help from involuntary "donations" from every U.S. household?  And no real competitors were allowed ?
Hell, the hardware stores would instantly sell out of torches and pitchforks. 

I keep wondering how much longer the Brits are going to put up with this. 
Be afraid, Andrew Marr.  Be very afraid.  We're angry, pimpled, inadequate, and drunk.  And we're proving that ANYBODY can sit down and start typing. 

The picture of Andrew Marr's pasty Brit complection (that doesn't show his baldness level) came from here. 

What's the difference between a gas station and a hospital?

Robert Butler, Executive Director of the Libertarian Party Of Texas, sent me this little gem this morning. 

We hear a lot of Republican and Democrat talking points about healthcare. As Libertarians, it's important that people understand that we have our own voice and our own solutions for the rising costs of healthcare. If you like this story, please forward it to your friends and family by clicking the Forward button below.


So, what is the difference between gas stations and hospitals?

1. Prices - The most obvious difference is price. Gas Stations have big signs advertising their prices so that you as a consumer can decide how much you are willing to pay without even slowing down along the highway. There are federal regulations that prohibit hospitals from advertising and competing based on prices.

2. Upfront Estimates - When you need a mechanic to replace your head gasket, he will give you an upfront estimate of the price. He will often give you a list of less expensive alternatives if they are available. When you ask a surgeon to replace your heart, there are federal regulations and AMA rules that prevent the distribution of price estimates.

3. Competition - If someone wants to build a Gas Station across the street from a competing Gas Station, its quite alright. If someone wants to build a hospital, they have to prove to the Federal Trade Commission that the hospital won't lower prices in the community or cause undue competition.

4. Monopoly - In the early 20th century, the federal government broke up a monopoly on oil and gasoline distribution. In the mid-20th century, they created a monopoly on hospitals and doctors because the American Medical Association said there were too many doctors, too much competition, and doctor's couldn't earn enough money.

Allow me a brief digression....Please go here and then get back to Mr. Butler's excellent email.  The AMA's monopoly is the leading cause of high healthcare costs.  Deregulating this mess would lower costs quicker than any Republicrat or Demoblican scheme ever conceived. Things are expensive when they are scarce (relative to demand).  Ending scarcity or reducing demand is the only way to lower the cost of anything.  It really is that simple.   

5. Do It Yourself - When you go to the Gas Station, you can pay someone to fix your car and fill up your tank, or you can buy what you need to do it yourself. At a hospital or pharmacy, you can't make any decisions on what medications you can take, dosage levels, or treatments. You must have the "official" opinion of a state regulated doctor.

6. Choice - When shopping for mechanics, you can decide to hire your handy neighbor, or find someone with all the latest training and certifications. When shopping for doctors, your only choice is regulated by the state.

7. Purchasing Power - When you buy gasoline, you are paying for the gasoline you actually purchase (and a little extra for the small amount of theft). When you buy healthcare, your price includes a large government imposed subsidy for those who can't afford it, thus making healthcare less affordable to more and more people each year.

So if you wanted to make healthcare cheaper what would you do? Impose more rules or less? Allow competition or create a more restrictive monopoly?

Only the Libertarian Party supports more freedom, more choices, and more competition on healthcare. The Democrats have passed their bill to create a government guaranteed monopoly on health insurance and hospitals. And the Republicans will be campaigning this year on "Repeal and Replace". Yes, Republicans want to repeal or reject the Democrats' reform, and replace it with their own rules, restrictions, and regulations. "Repeal and Replace" is not the answer.

The real answer is to make hospitals a little more like gas stations and end the government's monopoly on healthcare. Vote Libertarian; the revolution is golden. 
 
Go here to double the effectiveness of any contribution you make to the Libertarian Party. 

Guess who came to dinner?

Martha Coakley, democrat candidate for the senate seat vacated by Ted Kennedy, held a fundraiser last night. Here's The Wall Street Journal:

We've argued that the leading health industry CEOs will one day be exposed as the most short-sighted business leaders in history, but how to explain the gala fundraiser that their top lobbyists hosted for Martha Coakley last night?
Amid a Beltway panic, the health lobby is riding to the rescue of the Massachusetts liberal, whose defeat in the special Senate race next Tuesday could deny Democrats the 60th vote for ObamaCare and thus maybe spare the U.S. health system from the coming damage.
As first reported by Timothy Carney of the Washington Examiner, the host committee for the fundraiser at Pennsylvania Avenue's Sonoma Restaurant includes lobbyists for Pfizer, Merck, Eli Lilly, Novartis and sundry other drug companies that have been among the biggest of ObamaCare's corporate sponsors. Other hosts—who have raised at least $10,000 for Ms. Coakley—include representatives from UnitedHealthcare, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Humana and other insurers. As far as we can tell, the insurance industry claims to oppose ObamaCare's current incarnation.
Naturally, lobbyists from America's Health Insurance Plans and Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the major trade groups, were on hand too. Money follows power in Washington, obviously, though this example seems especially inexplicable given that Ms. Coakley's GOP opponent, state senator Scott Brown, may be the last chance to defuse the health-care doomsday machine. But maybe someone in the press corps will bother to mention this episode the next time President Obama takes aim at the "special interests" he claims are opposing his agenda.
Against overwhelming public opposition, the only things keeping ObamaCare alive at this point are power politics and the misguided corporate cease-fire that Democrats have either coerced or bought—or is homegrown at companies like Pfizer that are deeply invested in more government control of the economy. Ms. Coakley's election would make that outcome a certainty.

Can someone please explain to me, using little-bitty words that I can understand, why it is that requiring us to spend money with these monopolist wannabes is some kind of "reform" ?

Samizdata's "Quote Of The Day"

Samizdata's Quote Of The Day for July 13, 2009:

“It has always been one of libertarianism’s insights…..that massive concentrations of government power are more likely to be used to benefit other huge concentrations of wealth and power than help the needy or downtrodden…the powerful few who benefit from government action are more highly motivated to work the mechanisms of democracy to their benefit than are the masses who all pay a little – often too little in each specific case to feel it worth fighting, or even knowing about – and thus win in the democratic game of shifting property and wealth from person, or group, to another. If a government were restricted to its libertarian minimums of protecting citizens’ life and property from force and fraud, all a corporation could do is to try to sell us something and we could decide whether or not to buy. It couldn’t tax us for its benefit, raise tariffs on its competitors to make their products more expensive, subsidize bad loans or overseas expansion, or take formerly private property on the grounds that it will make more lucrative use of it than would the former owner.”

Brian Doherty, Radicals for Capitalism, page 589.

The Libertarian Party Of Texas And Toll Roads

From my new friend Robert Butler, the Executive Director of the Texas Libertarian Party:

Libertarians Put the Brakes on Toll Road Transportation Bill

Twitter and Facebook Play a Role

AUSTIN, TEXAS - July 2, 2009 - The Texas Legislature left a controversial new toll road bill pending in committee today and Libertarians are claiming a major victory in stopping a billion dollar scheme to use taxes and pension funds to pay for private monopolies and foreign management of Texas toll roads.

I don't have a problem with foreign management of anything. The best factories in China sometimes have Taiwanese management. I recently had to go to the Tarrant County Department Of Motor Vehicles, and that place could've been better managed with 1970's Soviet-influenced Bulgarian Bureaucrats. Sheesh. Someone remind me to do a post about the DOMV Chair Nazi.

But if outsiders can do the job for less, bring 'em on. Unless, of course, there's a monopoly.

Oh, wait....there's a monopoly.

Libertarians worked together with TURF, Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom, and Texans for Accountable Government (TAG), to stop what some have dubbed the largest tax increase in Texas history.

Robert is new to us, and is still learning our ways and our habits. The largest tax increase in Texas history hasn't been formally legislated. It's coming in the form of printing money to pay government expenses, and will show up in your neighborhood soon. But I'm quibbling here.

I like those TURF and TAG acronyms. Someone should start a group called "Never Open -Super Highways In Texas".

On Wednesday morning, Libertarians from across the state converged at the Texas Capitol, emailed, and called their state representatives to demand that public-private partnerships funded with Texas tax dollars and pension funds be stopped.

According to many Fundamentalist, Foot-Washing, Snake-Handling, Speaking-In-Tongues Libertarians, toll roads are a fundamentally good thing. It's when Austin takes your money and gives it to Company X for the development of toll roads that toll roads become a problem. If they are such a good idea, let Company X use their own money.

"We used our extensive email lists, Twitter, and Facebook accounts to activate thousands of freedom-loving Texans," said LPT Executive Director Robert Butler. "Our people called, emailed, and personally visited every member of the House and Senate. Our press conference and grassroots effort had a major impact in potentially killing this bill. We have to continue our public awareness campaign until the special session officially ends."

"Credit goes to the work of our staff and volunteers for discovering the ugly details behind this legislation," said Libertarian State Chair Patrick Dixon. "For an organization with just over $100k in revenue, we certainly do have an impact on policy."

A word about Patrick Dixon: Patrick is probably the most efficient human in the state of Texas. Watching him run a meeting is a delight (for the first three hours, anyway). I'd like to see Patrick and Kathy Madeja do a Parliamentary Procedure steel cage deathmatch smackdown.

And speaking of organizations with just over $100K in revenue....if you're worried about the way Owebama is spending money, but can't quite find a way to get behind the Republicans? Send us some money. We need it. There aren't a lot of us, but we make a lot of noise.

"Toll roads cost up to twice as much to build as non-tolled expressways," said LPT Executive Director Robert Butler. "The toll roads aren't a free market privatization plan. You're granting monopoly rights to private operators. The bonds backing these toll roads have clauses that prevent competition and are guaranteed with tax dollars."

To hell with anything that prevents competition, and that's an official position statement.

In 2005, the State of Texas entered a 50-year agreement with a Spanish company named Cintra to develop the Trans-Texas Corridor, a 4,000-mile network up to 1,200 feet wide to carry parallel links of tollways, rails, and utility lines. Cintra's parent company, Grupo Ferrovial, S.A, was a major collaborator with Spanish dictator Francisco Franco and depends upon its political connections to secure toll road contracts around the world.

Does the state of Texas already own this land? Nope. Texas would have had to take it via Eminent Domain. Not good. Property rights are something that distinguish the U.S. from governments like, well, Francisco Franco's.

In 2007, by a combined vote of 169-5, the Texas Legislature passed a moratorium on private toll contracts, called comprehensive development agreements (or CDAs) that privatize and sell Texas highways to the highest bidder. That moratorium ends August 31, 2009, and CDAs, except for approximately a dozen projects that were exempted, sunset with it. CDAs are the primary financial vehicle used to construct the Trans Texas Corridor.

Will Texas taxpayers get a check in the mail if a highway is ever sold? Will we get to set a "minimum bid"?

"I want to cut taxes and spending," declared Libertarian activist Wes Benedict. "They have refused to approve low-cost road improvements claiming they don't have the funds, then propose rail and toll roads which cost up to ten times more than buses and non-tolled roads per passenger mile of added capacity. Light rail and toll roads cost too much and do too little."
"We Libertarians and our friends at TURF and TAG have shown that an educated voter can change the course of legislation." noted Butler. "This bill will be a litmus test in the 2010 elections, we'll make sure of that.

And let's hope the people at TURF and TAG don't forget their allies at "Never Open Super Highways In Texas".

For Liberty,

Robert Butler
Executive Director
Libertarian Party of Texas
http://lptexas.org/

P.S. - Robert, I do this kind of thing a lot. You'll get used to it. Great job, sir ! ! !

"Shut Up And Sing", Natalie Maines, Radio Censorship

I watched a DVD of "Shut Up And Sing" this afternoon. It's a documentary about the Dixie Chicks' popularity meltdown following lead singer Natalie Maines' criticism of George Bush.

Two observations I'd like to make:
1) All rock, pop, and country music documentaries now remind me of Spinal Tap.
2) Natalie Maines was right.

And now for some full disclosure....

My daughter The Future Aggie has always been a huge Dixie Chicks fan. She started a Dixie Chicks tribute band in the sixth grade. (You haven't lived until you've heard 12-year-old girls sing "Goodbye Earl" with their own instruments....) We've been to two Chicks concerts, and own the $90 Dixie Chicks baseball jersey. We own all the CD's, the songbooks, the concert DVD's, and some random Dixie Chicks jewelry.

Charlie Robison (see the About Me column, at right) is married to Dixie Chicks banjo/guitar/dobro utlity infielder Emily Robison. Charlie Robison puts on the best shows of anyone now alive. I've been to either 10 or 11 of them. If anyone wants to join me at Billy Bob's or 8.0's next time he comes to town, my email is also in the "About Me" link.

Charlie's brother Bruce Robison is the best songwriter in country music. "Angry All The Time" "Travelin' Soldier" "Wrapped Around Your Pretty Little Finger" etc etc etc.... If he were to record his laundry lists, I'd buy them.

Bruce's wife, Kelly Willis, is greatness. I own everything she's ever recorded. If you follow the link to her site, you'll learn that she's no longer touring. Something about trying to raise four kids.

Let's keep wandering around the family trees.... Dixie Chicks lead singer Natalie Maines has one of the most perfect voices on this or any other planet. Her father, Lloyd Maines, is possibly the best steel guitar maestro in existence. I've heard him 4 or 5 times with Terri Hendrix.

My next door neighbors, Amy and Cheryl, are good friends with Susan Gibson. Susan wrote the song "Wide Open Spaces", which became a mega-hit for none other than....the Dixie Chicks. Whenever Susan is playing in town, she usually comes to Amy and Cheryl's place afterwards and we sit around the backyard campfire and play guitars and sing. (Note: having Susan Gibson play along with my puny little 3-chord stuff makes me sound GOOD....)

My point is that the Dixie Chicks and their extended families are a favorite "brand" at my house. What with recordings, concerts, and other purchases, we've probably invested a thousand bucks in that extended family over the years.

I think the government has intentionally set out to harm the brand.

When Natalie went to London and said "We're ashamed that the President Of The United States is from Texas", it was a throwaway remark, and it was a cheap applause line. The video of the statement shows her looking very proud of herself. It got a huge ovation in London, but the negative response in the U.S. was overwhelming. It has cost them millions of dollars in recording and concert revenue. Perhaps that's as it should be.

However....

She had every right to say what she said.
Country music fans have every right to avoid their concerts and avoid their CD's.

But radio stations, in my opinion, despite being privately owned entities, do not have a right to suddenly stop playing Dixie Chicks' music.

Here's why. Radio frequencies are a government controlled monopoly. There are a limited number of broadcast frequencies, and the rights to those frequencies are tightly controlled. That's why you may have read editorials concerning Clear Channel's purchase of multiple stations in the same market. Not only are the broadcast frequencies a scarce commodity, but one organization (Clear Channel) is purchasing multiples of them in some areas.

Because of that glorious privilege (a monopoly of the airwaves), radio stations are in effect acting as government censors if they suddenly drop an artist from their playlists after the artist in question criticizes the government.

If Kanye West or Amy Winehouse or NWA or Lawrence Welk has the #1 selling CD, I'm not required to purchase their music and play it in my back yard. Backyard jamboxes aren't a monopoly.

But if Kanye, Amy, NWA, or Lawrence have the #1 CD in a particular format, and the government-controlled monopolies don't EVER play the CD ? Something's wrong. That's excatly what happened in the Dallas/Fort Worth market with the Chicks' CD "Taking The Long Way". I didn't hear a single tune from that CD on the radio.

And it won a Grammy, fer heaven's sake....

If an otherwise popular artist can only access a particular audience through a group of Clear Channel radio stations, then everything changes. Unless I'm missing something, the government has given these radio stations a unique privilege and the Clear Channel stations are returning the favor by stifling dissent. I don't think we'd put up with this from The Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
I heartily recommend this documentary, although I think going into Iraq was a necessity. Saddam had wiped out 90,000 Kurds with poison gas. The world is better with him out of the picture. We coulda woulda shoulda done a better job of the aftermath.

Here's the trailer for the documentary. I think it's worth a rental.

Look for Charlie Robison and Emily on their ranch in San Antonio. Lloyd Maines puts in an appearance about halfway through. John McCain is shown at a congressional hearing, gleefully grilling some corporate flak-catcher.

Don't watch this if you've seen "Spinal Tap" recently. You'll get the giggles.