Steve G.

Archive for February, 2008|Monthly archive page

Kubby Wants to Bring MMJ Activists as Delegates to LP Convention in Denver

In Libertarian on February 27, 2008 at 6:55 pm

From the desk of Steve Kubby


Fellow Activists,

MSNBC will be there, so will the Associated Press and NPR. CSPAN will probably cover 2-3 days of the event continuously. Fox and CNN will have their own coverage as well. This is easily the premiere media opportunity of the year for our movement. Best of all, it will be YOUR best opportunity to be seen and heard by millions of TV viewers — less than three months from today!

Make no mistake, the media WILL want to hear from YOU, because we will all be there — as OFFICIAL DELEGATES — to do something historic and compelling. We are going to put a medical marijuana patient on the national presidential ballot for this November.

YOUR opinion will matter to the media, because we will arrange for
you to become a credentialed DELEGATE to the 2008 Libertarian
National Convention and the media will be fascinated by the idea of a Med MJ patient winning the nomination and going on to the November ballot. The media will be looking for folks like you to explain what it all means.

The convention will be held in Denver, Colorado over Memorial Day
weekend from May 22 to May 26, 2008. During that time, nearly 1,000 delegates from around the nation will gather to select their
presidential and vice presidential nominees. Obviously, the more
activists who show up and are issued credential as a Kubby Delegate, the more certain our ability to make me the next presidential candidate for the third largest party in the US.

If you are an activist, patient, or supporter of medical marijuana
and/or full legalization of cannabis, we will get Liberatarian Party
credentials issued to you as a delegate, with full voting powers.
All you need to do is contact.

See below for details.

Let freedom grow,

Steve Kubby

——————-

Dear Steve,

All Delegates in the Libertarian Party are uncommitted. This means
people from any state can vote for whoever they want for the
presidential nomination. Also most states will agree to seat
delegates from other states to vote even if they are not from that state. In the history of the Libertarian Party all those that show up and are members are almost always seated and allowed to vote.

Those that want to vote for the Presidential Nominee at the
Libertarian National Convention in Denver on May 22-26 must join the party now at http://www.lp.org for a small fee, sign the non-aggression pledge and contact us so we can help you register to vote as a Libertarian in your state.

If Medical Marijuana activists from across the country want to run a Medical Marijuana patient for president of the United States as the nominee of the largest third party in the country with the best ballot access of all the third parties. All they have to do is join the party is register.

Not only that, but Libertarians already in the party will be so happy that you joined just to vote for your candidate, it will sway them to vote for your candidate too, because they want a candidate that can grow the party. They set it up so the nomination will be taken by the person that brings the most people to the convention. In fact that is why Libertarians run a presidential candidate. They want to use the automatic media attention that person will get to grow the party.

Also, once you join, we will help you immediately contact your state Libertarian Party and confirm you will be seated as a delegate even before you get to the convention.

Mark Selzer
Current alternate to the California Libertarian Party Executive
Committee
Past Southern Vice Chair for 3 terms in California
Past alternate to the Libertarian National Committee
Past Candidate for the Libertarian Party
Producer of the Libertarian Alternative www.LibertarianAlternative.org

By request

In Daniel Imperato, Entertainment, Humor, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Mike Jingozian, Politics, Presidential Candidates, Wayne Allen Root on February 27, 2008 at 6:54 pm

I’m not sure I should identify the requestor, and I certainly should not identify the author of this image.

By the way, I’m not trying to be mean. I met Mr. Jackson in Las Vegas, and he was a nice fellow from what I can tell. I’ve also met and talked one on one with all the other Liberty Decides qualifying candidates and I don’t hate any of them. This is just supposed to be a lighthearted parody as a followup to

Liberty Decides

moneydecides.jpg

Cops Gone Wild: Quadriplegic Edition

In Cops Gone Wild, Courts and Justice System, Crime, Health, Human Rights Abuses, Law, Law Enforcement, People in the news, Police Brutality, Police State on February 26, 2008 at 10:55 pm

I had heard about this, but seeing really is believing.

In Tampa (Hillsborough County, Florida) a quadriplegic man named Brian Sterner was arrested for a traffic violation (I’m not sure what the violation was, since they didn’t say, but obviously the guy wasn’t a violent felon or anything like that). An incredibly stupid cop didn’t believe he really was a quadriplegic, even though it’s obvious from looking at his body, so she walked behind him and dumped him out of his wheelchair face-first, and the fall broke several of his ribs. She then proceeded to frisk him, while he was one the ground, completely unable to move. Another idiotic cop is seen laughing about it, and not one person who witnessed the assault thought it needed to be reported.

Luckily, that shocking example of police brutality was caught on surveillance cameras.

The cop who did this was fired, but that’s not enough. She should be arrested, and charged with felony assault upon a disabled person.

The cop who laughed about it should be fired, along with all the other cops and jail employees who witnessed it but did nothing to help Sterner, and did not report the incident; and they should all also be charged with being an accessory to felony assault upon a disabled person.

Hat tip to The DeeZone

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

Make Congress read the laws it passes

In Activism, Congress, Corruption, Law, Politics on February 26, 2008 at 10:42 pm

Logo from DownsizeDC.org

I ran across this proposed law at DownsizeDC. I absolutely agree that no member of Congress should ever vote to pass any bill they haven’t actually read in its entirety, yet it happens all the time. Worse, far too often special interest items are inserted at the last minute. The truth is that Congress passes laws on a regular ongoing basis, which the majority of Congressmen have never even read.

The failure of our elected representatives to read bills before passage causes multiple problems, the most obvious of which is an out of control bureaucracy with laws either so complicated, or so poorly written, that even the courts can’t agree upon what they mean.

Since Congress has proven that they won’t do their elected jobs properly on a voluntary basis – by knowing exactly what laws they are passing, and what the effect and cost of that law will be – it should come as no surprise that some citizens are suggesting that laws be passed, effectively forcing them to do their jobs properly.

What follows is the draft of a proposed bill along those very lines.

A BILL

To require before final passage of any Bill the printing and full verbatim reading of the text of such Bill, and each and every amendment attached thereto, to each house of Congress called to order with a quorum physically assembled throughout, the entry of such a printing and reading in the journal of each house of Congress, and the verbatim publication of every such Bill, and each and every amendment thereto, on the official Internet web site of the Senate and the House of Representatives at least seven days before floor consideration and final passage of any Bill, and each and every amendment thereto by each house of Congress; and to provide for enforcement of the printing, reading, entry, publication, recording and affidavit requirements herein.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE

This Act may be cited as the “Read the Bills Act.”

SECTION 2. FINDINGS

(a) The United States Constitution vests all legislative powers granted therein to the United States Congress, members of both the Senate and House of which are elected by the people to whom each member is accountable to represent the people of the State and of the House District in the exercise of each member’s legislative powers.

(b) To the end that Congress be politically and legally accountable to the people, Article I, Section 4 of the United States Constitution requires each House of Congress to keep a journal of its proceedings and from time to time publish the same.

(c) To the end that no legislation be passed without effective representation of the people’s interest by the elected members of the Congress, Article I, Section 7 of the United States Constitution states that only those Bills “which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate,” and not vetoed by the President, “shall become” Laws.

(d) According to Section I of Thomas Jefferson’s 1812 Manual of Parliamentary Practice for the Use of the Senate of the United States (“Jefferson’s Manual”), “nothing tended more to throw power into the hands of administration and those who acted with the majority … than a neglect of, or departure from, the rules of proceeding [which] operated as a check and control of the actions of the majority [and] a shelter and protection to the minority.”

(e) According to Sections XXII and XL of Jefferson’s Manual, it was the rule of the Senate that every bill receive three readings, two full readings by the Clerk of the Senate, and a third reading of the title of the bill only in that “every member of the Senate had a printed copy [of said bill] in his hand.”

(f) According to Sections XXIV, XXV, and XL of Jefferson’s Manual, it was the rule of the House of Representatives, following the parliamentary procedure of the English House of Commons, that every bill received two full readings by the Clerk of the House, and a reading of the whole contents of the bill verbatim by the Speaker of the House before the House voted on each bill.

(g) Under current Senate rules, the Senate has departed from its original practice of a full first and second reading of each bill, and of ensuring that each Senator has a printed or other verbatim copy of each bill before passage thereof, having by Rule XIV limited each reading of a bill to the reading of the bill’s title only, unless the Senate in any case shall otherwise order.

(h) Under current House rules, the House of Representatives has by Rule XVI (8) and Rule XVIII (5) embraced its original practice of full first and second readings of each bill, but has regularly departed from this practice by unanimous consent of the House, and has dispensed altogether its original practice of a verbatim third reading of each bill before passage, limiting such third reading to the reading of the title only, including the reading of the title only even when members of the House have no printed or other verbatim copy of a bill before passage.

(i) Although Section 106, Title 1, United States Code, requires a bill to be made available in written form to each member of Congress before final passage Congress has by statute conferred upon itself the power, during the last six days of a session of Congress, by concurrent resolution, to vote for passage of a bill that is not in form at the time of final passage.

(j) As a direct consequence of the Senate and the House of Representatives departure from the salutary practice of full, verbatim readings of each bill before final passage, and further, as a direct consequence of Congress, by concurrent resolution, having permitted certain appropriation and budget bills to be enacted into law without such bills being printed and presented to Congress in written form prior to final passage, Congress has: (a) imposed upon the American people excessively long bills, largely written by an unelected bureaucracy, resulting in generally incomprehensible, cumbersome, oppressive and burdensome laws, containing hidden provisions for special interests; (b) deprived the American people and their elected Senators and Representatives of a full and fair opportunity to examine the text of said bills, and all amendments thereto, prior to passage; (c) undermined the confidence of the American people by its failure to give adequate notice to the people before a vote is taken on said bills and their amendments in the bills; and (d) has called into question the integrity and reliability of the legislative processes in both houses of Congress by its failure to ensure that each member of the Senate and each member of the House has, prior to passage, either listened attentively to the reading of the full text of each bill, and its amendments, or has personally read the text thereof.

SECTION 3. READ THE BILLS BEFORE PASSAGE

(a) Chapter 2 of Title 1, United States Code, shall be amended by inserting at the end of the first sentence of Section 106, the following: “provided however, that no bill — including, but not limited to, any bill produced by conference between the two houses of Congress and any bill or resolution extending, modifying, or otherwise affecting the expiration date of a bill previously passed and enacted into law by Congress — shall pass either house of Congress: (a) without the full text of said bill, and the full text of each and every amendment thereto and — if the bill or resolution extends, modifies, or in any way affects the expiration date of a bill previously passed and enacted into law — without the full text of such bill or resolution and the full text of the bill previously passed and enacted into law having first been individually read verbatim by the Clerk of each house to the body of each house called to order and physically assembled with a quorum present throughout the time of the full textual reading of said bill, and of the full text of any bill previously passed and enacted into law, if any, that is the subject of a bill or resolution extending, modifying or in any way affecting the expiration date of such previously passed bill enacted into law; and (b) without the full text of said bill, and the full text of each and every amendment thereto, and the full text of the previously passed bill and enacted into law, if any, having been published verbatim on the official Internet web site of each house at least seven days prior to a final vote thereon in each house, together with an official notice of the date and time on which the vote on the final version of said bill and its amendments will take place.”

(b) Chapter 2, Title 1, United States Code, shall be further amended by striking the last sentence of Section 106, and substituting therefor: “With respect to each bill and each and every amendment thereto, and each bill previously passed and enacted into law, the expiration date having been extended, modified or in any way changed by a bill or resolution, each house of Congress shall cause to be recorded in its journal of proceedings: (a) that the reading, printing, and publishing requirements of this section have been met; and (b) the names of those members of the Senate and of the House present during the reading of each bill and each and every amendment thereto. Each member of the Senate and each member of the House shall execute a sworn affidavit, such affidavit being executed under penalty of perjury as provided in Section 1621, Title 18, United States Code, that the member either was present throughout the entire reading of each bill, each and every amendment thereto, and listened attentively to such reading, or, prior to any vote on passage of the bill, and each and every amendment thereto, personally read attentively each bill, and each and every amendment thereto, in their entirety. Neither house of Congress, nor Congress jointly — by concurrent resolution, or by unanimous consent, or by any other order, resolution, vote, or other means — may dispense with, or otherwise waive or modify, the printing, reading, entry, publishing, recording, or affidavit requirements set forth herein.”

(c) Chapter 2, Title 1, United States Code, shall be further amended by renumbering Sections 106a and 106b to 106b and 106c respectively and adding a new Section 106a as follows: “Enforcement Clause. No bill shall become law, nor enforced or applied as law, without Congress having complied fully with the printing, reading, entry, publishing, recording, and affidavit requirements of Section 106, Title 2, United States Code and any person against whom such a bill is enforced or applied may invoke such noncompliance as a complete defense to any action, criminal or civil, brought against him. Any person aggrieved by the enforcement of, or attempt or threat of enforcement of, a bill passed without having complied with the printing, reading, entry, publishing, recording, and affidavit requirements of Section 106, Title 2, United States Code, and any member of Congress aggrieved by the failure of the house of which he or she is a member to comply with the requirements of Section 106, and any person individually aggrieved by the failure of the elected Senator of the State in which the aggrieved person resides, or elected member of the House of the District in which the aggrieved person resides, to fulfill that Senator’s or House member’s obligations under Section 106, shall, regardless of the amount in controversy, have a cause of action under Sections 2201 and 2202, Title 28, United States Code and Rules 57 and 65, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, against the United States to seek appropriate relief, including an injunction against enforcement of any law, the passage of which did not conform to the requirements of Section 106.”

SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE

If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid for any reason in any court of competent jurisdiction, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or any other application of this Act which can be given effect without the invalid provison or application, and for this purpose the provisions of this Act are declared severable.

If you agree with the above, and want your Congressmen to become involved, you can locate and contact your Congressmen through the US House of Representatives website and the United States Senate website

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

Libertarian Party’s Resolution on Iraq War

In Activism, Iraq War, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics 2008, Middle East, Military, Politics, US Government, War on February 26, 2008 at 10:27 pm

Libertarian Party logoWHEREAS the government of the United States should return to its historical libertarian tradition of avoiding entangling alliances, foreign quarrels, and military adventures and;

WHEREAS the armed forces of the United States have invaded Iraq, a foreign nation that neither directly attacked nor imminently threatened to attack the United States and;

WHEREAS the injustice and imprudence of this invasion cannot be undone by the continued presence of the armed forces of the United States in Iraq and;

WHEREAS the stability and security of Iraq lie outside the jurisdiction of the government of the United States;

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Libertarian Party National Committee calls on the government of the United States to withdraw the armed forces of the United States without undue delay.

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

My response to “Ode To Imperato”

In Daniel Imperato, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on February 26, 2008 at 7:54 pm

Daniel ImperatoThere has been a discussion over at Third Party Watch, regarding whether Daniel Imperato should be listed as a Libertarian on the official Libertarian Party website. Among other statements by Stephen Gordon, owner of TPW, he didn’t call the media to cover a Libertarian presidential candidate debate, due to the participation of Mr. Imperato.Just as some brief background, Mr. Imperato is either a liar of unimaginable proportions, or insane. I haven’t decided yet, mostly because I honestly don’t care one way or the other about his candidacy since he will never in a zillion years become President, or even the Libertarian Party’s nominee. Yet his wackiness also isn’t interesting enough to keep my attention for more than a minute or two.I started to respond on that blog, then decided to do so here instead, so my thoughts on this issue aren’t buried in the comments section of someone else’s blog. I am so disgusted with the Libertarian Party and its powers-that-be that I don’t care if they know it. What follows is that response.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If it were not for “Liberty Decides“, Imperato would still be just the butt of jokes among those of us who follow the lunatic fringe in politics. Without “Liberty Decides”, he would have forever remained an obscure Independent candidate whose only supporters were the voices in his head.

The Libertarian Party, however, recognized Imperato as a fully qualified Libertarian presidential candidate on their website, in “Liberty Decides”, which is nothing more or less than a moneymaking scheme for the LP since it does not stop candidates from buying their way to the top; and there is absolutely no accountability regarding the dates, amounts, or identities of contributors. Yet Imperato is not even a Libertarian candidate, even by his own admission, since he filed with the FEC as an Independent.

It is pathetic that no one invited the media just because Imperato was there, since it robbed the legitimate Libertarian candidates of much-needed exposure (especially true when it cost them $500 to participate, not to mention travel and lodging costs). Wackjob or not, I think Imperato would only have made the other candidates look even better, so perhaps you should have invited the media anyway. It’s not like it’s going to be shown on the evening news, after all. The only people who would be interested at all are libertarians, and insomniacs.

However, since you decided not to alert the media due to Imperato’s participation, someone in authority at that event should have alerted the media themselves (again, because they charged the candidates $500 each for the opportunity to participate). If they and you both thought Imperato was just too far out in left field to invite the media, you could have simply said, “We’re sorry, Mr. Imperato, but you’re registered with the FEC as an Independent, and thus you are not qualified to participate in this debate as a Libertarian. Here is a refund of your participation fee”.

How hard is that?

In my opinion, the LP has made a mockery of the party’s entire presidential candidate process. Not only did they ignore their own candidates in order to support a candidate from another party who repeatedly said he was not interested in becoming the LP’s nominee, but they also rolled out the red carpet for a wackjob who isn’t even registered with the FEC as a Libertarian candidate (and did the same for a lot of candidates who aren’t filed with the FEC at all).

The entire situation is an embarrassing mess, but it didn’t need to happen at all. Nevertheless, no matter how I view it, the LP is entirely to blame by lending Imperato credibility where he otherwise would have none.

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

Will Ron Paul presidential campaign cause him to lose his seat in Congress?

In Congress, Democracy, Libertarian, Local Politics, Media, Politics, Republican on February 14, 2008 at 8:34 am

From the Galveston County Daily News (letters to the Editor):

District Needs A Better Man To Represent Us

Are we really getting the most effective representation with Ron Paul as our congressman?

The presidential debates have exposed stubbornness and inability to compromise that is at odds with the intentions of the Founding Fathers.

Democracy requires negotiation and compromise to reach a consensus.

We negotiate and compromise in our daily life, at work and at home. Paul’s inability to reach consensus on vital issues makes him ineffective as our congressman.

He is a self-described Libertarian; if he is so enamored with Libertarian philosophy, why is he running in the Republican primary for Congress?

I welcome his participation in the political process and respect the views of his supporters as honest and sincere.

The question is, does he truly represent the values and priorities of the Republican voters in this district or is he using the Republican Party’s structure and established appeal just to get elected because he can’t get elected as a Libertarian?

If the latter is true, it is intellectually dishonest.

We need a Republican of conviction representing us in the U.S. Congress, not a Republican of convenience.

I urge readers to look at the sterling qualifications, impeccable character and genuine passion and sincerity of Chris Peden as our Republican candidate for Congress.

Peden is a pro-life, pro-family, conservative Christian who is a CPA and the mayor pro tem in Friendswood. He has a proven track record of not only fighting for our conservative principles, but of achieving conservative results. Paul is long on words, but a little short on results.

Just a few days ago, on the Michael Berry radio program, Paul said that being a congressman was his “plan B.” I don’t know about other readers but I don’t want to be anybody’s second choice.

The catchword for this year’s presidential election is “change.” It’s time for real change in congressional District 14 also. Paul is the past — Peden is the future. Let’s put someone in Congress who represents all of us, not just the Libertarians.

Letty Packard
La Marque

Project Vote Smart

In Barack Obama, Christine Smith, Congress, Democrats, George Phillies, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics, Republican on February 14, 2008 at 8:02 am

Project Vote SmartI just ran across a website called “Project Vote Smart“. This site gathers information from various candidates for office, so you can view it all in one place, and even very easily compare the candidates if you open them up in side-by-side tabs on your browser.

It is very interesting to see the “political courage test”, which pins the candidates down on the issues. Unfortunately, it appears that most mainstream candidates (including all of the presidential frontrunners from both major parties, and including Ron Paul) have refused to complete the quiz portion. However, Barack Obama did complete the questionnaire when he was running for the Senate, which gives a good insight into how he views the issues; while Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul both refused to complete it even when they were running for Congress. There is no older questionnaire information for any of the other frontrunners.

I think it’s obvious why candidates wouldn’t want to complete it, since it can later easily be used against them. Accordingly, I think any candidate which refuses to answer those questions should be viewed with suspicion.

Some third party presidential candidates did complete the “courage test” though, including libertarians. I was quite surprised to see that I disagree with some libertarian candidates on a few issues I thought we’d agree upon. For example, I was extremely surprised to see that neither Phillies nor Kubby have chosen to eliminate inheritance taxes (Phillies wants to slightly decrease them, while Kubby wants to greatly decrease them). Yet why should the government get any of it, since it’s a gift from one person to another? Christine Smith is the only libertarian candidate to propose eliminating that tax.

On the other hand, Kubby wants to greatly decrease gasoline taxes and certain “sin” taxes (alcohol, cigarettes, etc) while Phillies and Smith want to eliminate those taxes altogether. On those tax issues, I agree with Phillies. I would agree with Smith, but she wants to eliminate ALL federal taxes (including income taxes); and while that’s an idea I’d love to get behind, I don’t think it is realistic, at least not at this time.

I will have to study the candidates’ responses a lot more closely, and I strongly suggest others do the same. While it won’t help much with regard to mainstream candidates who have refused to answer the questionnaire (and personally, I hold that against them because it is to my mind proof that they plan to say one thing to get elected, and do another once they are in office), it does give quite a bit of insight into third party presidential candidates.

Originally posted on Adventures in Frickintardistan

UPDATE:  I received the following comment from Tom Knapp, Steve Kubby’s Communications Director:

I worked with Steve on filling out the Political Courage Test, and “eliminate” was not offered as an option on the document we got from VoteSmart. I sent them an email when I saw that it appeared on other candidates’ answers, but haven’t ever heard back from them.

Without going over the PCT line by line, I can’t say offhand that EVERY “greatly decrease” would actually have been “eliminate” had that option been visible, the inheritance tax would absolutely have been an “eliminate” item.

Thanks for that info, Tom!

Another blow to the ‘Paul Congress’ – Terbolizard arrested for DUI

In Uncategorized on February 13, 2008 at 5:28 pm

Theodore Terbolizard (not his Christian name) was among the first and most vociferous of “Ron Paul Republicans” running for Congress. Well, here is what we get for taking the guy seriously:

Theodore Terbolizard, a little known GOP congressional candidate, is facing possible charges of driving under the influence after Grass Valley police pulled him over for speeding.

Terbolizard was stopped at 1:43 a.m. Sunday for what officers described as excessive speed as he was on his way home from a bar in Nevada City, according to police records.

Police Capt. Rex Marks told The Associated Press that officers arrested Terbolizard on suspicion of a DUI after administering a breathalyzer test. They are waiting for results of a blood-alcohol test, Marks said.

Terbolizard, from Cedar Ridge, is running for the seat being vacated by Republican Rep. John Doolittle, who has announced he will not seek another term.

The candidate told The Union newspaper that is arrest will not affect his campaign — other than to give him publicity.

If you want to take the Ron Paul mantle, you shouldn’t even be coming home from a bar at 1:45 A.M., let alone be drunk driving. And how did Terbolizard respond? By acting as if this would be a publicity boost to his campaign. Disgusting.

Murray Sabrin – Worthy of support?

In Congress, Immigration, Republican on February 12, 2008 at 9:45 pm

Of the numerous individuals running for Congress as “Ron Paul Republicans,” only one has earned the Good Doctor’s official endorsement. Murray Sabrin, who as a Libertarian candidate for New Jersey governor achieved 5% of the vote (and accepted “matching funds”), is that one lucky candidate. And now Trevor Lyman, organizer of the first Ron Paul money bomb; and Larry Lepard, who paid for the full-page USA Today ad; have gotten behind Dr. Sabrin. In fact, there is an effort to have a money bomb for Sabrin‘s senatorial campaign, and with the Paul campaign winding down, those inclined toward “Ron Paul Republicanism” should take a closer look at Sabrin.

A closer look, indeed. I was at first excited to hear about Sabrin running for U.S. Senate, but troubled by his lack of an “on the issues” section to his Web site. Other than being for the gold standard and Ron Paul, it was unclear what Dr. Sabrin stood for. Now the “on the issues” page is up at his site, and there are some troubling anti-libertarian and even anti-Paulian positions Sabrin champions.

First, Sabrin says he supports the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, “rolling back federal government,” and implicitly abolishing the Department of Education. But later, he advocates big-government, unconstitutional programs such as “education savings accounts” and, worse yet, vouchers. Where in the Constitution are these things authorized?

Disregard for the Constitution extends into Sabrin’s anti-abortion stances. Instead of merely stating a personal opposition to abortion and advocating decentralism, Sabrin supports the unconstitutional federal partial-birth abortion ban and chides his opponent for not cheering on this exercise in federal power-mongering. Then he goes further by advocating a federal law to “criminalize” harming an “unborn fetus during the commission of a crime.” Again, where in the Constitution are these powers delegated to Congress?

And of course, Sabrin takes the Know-Nothing approach to immigration, greatly outdoing Ron Paul here. Unlike Paul, he advocates using confiscated tax dollars and eminent domain to build a socialist wall keeping Mexicans out and Americans in. And worse yet, his cultural protectionism extends to a demand for English as a “national language.” Libertarians aren’t, or at least shouldn’t be, for national anything.

In fact, out of thirteen issues Sabrin chooses to focus on, at least nine are anti-libertarian, wishy-washy, or contradicted by his other issue stances. For example, what the heck does “paying down debt by rating programs’ effectiveness mean”? Should we only eliminate socialist schemes that are “ineffective”? And do we really need a Balanced-Budget Amendment to the Constitution? If we were to summon the political will to achieve that, wouldn’t it be better to pass an amendment abolishing the income tax and/or Federal Reserve? A little debt is not the worst thing in the world — the means by which debt is monetized and what the government does with the money it borrows are far bigger concerns.

If he were elected, I’m sure Murray Sabrin would be the most libertarian member of the Senate. But before deciding to support his candidacy, one must take his anti-libertarian positions into account. In contrast to Ron Paul’s presidential bid, the only real good of a Sabrin candidacy would come from actual electoral victory. From a “movement” perspective, nothing is to be gained by a candidate who not only fails the purity test, but seems to be ignorant of the Constitution’s limits on government and hostile to the notions of cultural freedom and free-market pluralism.

The unreported near-slaughter at last week’s SuperBowl

In Media on February 9, 2008 at 12:58 am

AR-15 assault rifleI don’t remember hearing about this before. Do you? Yet, it should have been big news when it happened.

A would-be bar owner angry at being denied a liquor license threatened to shoot people at the Super Bowl and drove to within sight of the stadium with a rifle and 200 rounds of ammunition before changing his mind, federal authorities said. Kurt William Havelock, who ultimately turned himself in, had vowed to “shed the blood of the innocent” in a manifesto mailed Sunday to media outlets, according to court documents. “No one destroys my dream,” he wrote.

The documents say he was armed with an AR-15 assault-style rifle Sunday when he reached a parking lot near University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, where pre-game activities were happening.

“He waited about a minute and decided he couldn’t do this,” FBI agent Philip Thorlin testified at a detention hearing for Havelock on Tuesday.

Read the rest of this article at Sports Illustrated.

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

Southwest Michigan LP launches new website

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US on February 9, 2008 at 12:57 am

Libertarian Party logoThe new website for the Libertarian Party of Southwest Michigan, launched January 1st, is well worth a look. My good friend Jason Gatties is on the Executive Committee, and his beautiful and very talented wife Priscilla is their webmaster. She’s done a great job on the website, and I’m sure Jason will do a real bang-up job as well!

The Libertarian Party of Southwest Michigan is an affiliate of Libertarian Party of Michigan and the National Libertarian Party. The Libertarian Party of Southwest Michigan represents Berrien, Cass and Van Buren Counties.

The Libertarian Party of Southwest Michigan meets the first Wednesday of each month (unless otherwise noted). The public is always welcome! The business meeting will take place at the Benton Harbor IHOP and the General Discussion portion of the meeting will take place at The Livery in Benton Harbor.

International House of Pancakes
1981 Pipestone Rd
Benton Harbor, Mi 49022

The Livery
190 5th Street
Benton Harbor, Mi 49022

The Business Meeting begins at 6:00 PM at IHOP and the General Discussion Meeting begins at 7:15 at The Livery. For more information, please contact one of the Executive Committee members listed above.

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

The UK starts its own Libertarian Party

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US on February 9, 2008 at 12:56 am

Libertarian Party logoLibertarianism is growing the world over, and is no longer a singularly American ideal. As of January 1st, even the United Kingdom has started a Libertarian Party.

Unlike the politicians at Westminster, the Libertarian Party looks at the world in the same way that most people do. Libertarians understand that you, and your family, should be the focus of all political policy—government should exist to serve you, not the other way around.

Over the coming weeks, this website will be regularly updated and expanded. Here, you will be able to discover a new perspective on politics, read about our common-sense approach to dealing with the issues that face us all in the real world today, and find out how you can help change our society for the better.

Libertarians are largely apolitical—we don’t carry around the huge burden of ideological baggage which bedevils the other parties, and which stops them from taking the sensible decisions that our country so desperately needs. In fact, libertarian thought can largely be boiled down to one simple phrase:

YOU OWN YOURSELF

We believe that everyone in society has certain rights, and that the role of government is to protect those rights. Of course, if you hold these rights—the right to equality before a just law, the right to make your own decisions as to how best to live your life—then you must respect the equally held rights of others.

Other parties pay lip-service to this idea; on the one hand claiming to protect our rights and interests whilst, on the other, passing more and more legislation that curtails our hard won freedoms. Only libertarians truly trust each individual to know what is in their own best interests, and that of their families. Only libertarians want to put people back in charge of their own lives, and call a halt to the endless gravy-train of political corruption in our country.

The Libertarian Party exists as a voice for all who cry “Enough!”, but find their words go unheard. Our aim—and we will succeed, with your help—is to put government back in its rightful place; as a servant of our people, rather than our master.

Hat tip Jason Gatties

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

WMD ignited at flea market

In Big Brother, Crazy Claims, Crime, Humor, Law, Law Enforcement, Police State, Terrorism on February 9, 2008 at 12:54 am

Plastic eggsThis, I wouldn’t have believed had I not read it in a print newspaper’s online edition. Honestly, it reads more like an April Fool’s Day joke:

An Elizabethtown man was charged Saturday with possessing a weapon of mass destruction after police said he ignited a device filled with plastic pellets inside Saturday’s Market in Londonderry Twp., hitting at least five people and causing alarm in the building.

The device looked like a plastic Easter egg

No one was taken to a hospital, Beckley said.

I bet that’s the very same weapon of mass destruction that Bush claims was in Iraq.

Read the entire article here.

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

Faux News: “White women are a problem”

In Crazy Claims, Lies and the lying liars who tell them, Media, Politics on February 9, 2008 at 12:49 am

Faux NewsOn Fox News Sunday this week, the panel discussed the possibility of Hillary Clinton being chosen as a vice-presidential candidate. Bill Kristol picked that apart, saying:

Kristol: Look, the only people for Hillary Clinton are the Democratic establishment and white women. The Democratic establishment, it’d be crazy for the Democratic party to follow an establishment that’s led them to defeat year after year. White women are a problem – but, you know … we all live with that …

(laughter)

Juan Williams: not me…

Brit Hume: Hey, Bill, for the record, I like white women.

Kristol: I know, I shouldn’t have said that.

Kristol is right. He really, really shouldn’t have said that. The other talking heads shouldn’t have laughed about it either.

Here’s the clip, so you can see it for yourself:

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

Medical marijuana vending machines

In Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Medical Marijuana on February 9, 2008 at 12:43 am

McMarijuana Patients suffering from chronic pain, loss of appetite and other ailments that marijuana is said to alleviate can get their pot with a dose of convenience at the Herbal Nutrition Center, where a large machine will dole out the drug around the clock. ”Convenient access, lower prices, safety, anonymity,” inventor and owner Vincent Mehdizadeh said, extolling the benefits of the machine.But federal drug agents say the invention may need unplugging.“Somebody owns (it), it’s on a property and somebody fills it,” said DEA Special Agent Jose Martinez. “Once we find out where it’s at, we’ll look into it and see if they’re violating laws.”

However, the vending machines only allow purchase by those with a valid marijuana prescription, and there are multiple safeguards in place, including fingerprint identification.

Are the feds overreacting?

Read the entire article here.

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan 

Blogger keeping track of all taxes paid this coming year

In Taxation on February 9, 2008 at 12:41 am

Taxes cartoonFormer National Journal Tech Daily editor Danny Glover (no, not the actor) will be blogging to keep track of every single cent his family pays in taxes for 2008. I have a feeling many people will be shocked. I usually pay attention to how much tax I pay on everything, including hidden taxes such as those built into the price gasoline, cigarettes, liquor, etc., and it always, always pisses me off.I haven’t kept track of my tax expenditures in a written form, so I find this to be an interesting experiment sure to open the eyes of many.The average person pays a lot more in hidden taxes, I suspect, than they do in income taxes. It will be interesting to see if my theory is true. Here is the description of the blog in question:

How much do you really pay in taxes? If you knew, you might get angry. You should — and I hope this blog will get you riled. For the next year, I’ll be blogging about the taxes our family pays so you can appreciate how much you pay.

Keep track of the taxes they pay here.

Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

Damn.

In Uncategorized on February 6, 2008 at 7:47 am

Long time no see. I’ve been thinking about this place for a bit while I’ve been out, hoping it’s been going okay. I should have known better than to question any project associated with the fine bloggers here, though, and I see it’s gone pretty smoothly. Apparently we lost our domain name but that might be back, but no matter what it looks like we’re staying here.

I’ve been out for a while due to pressing IRL issues (I’m going to be a dad? Muh?) but hopefully I can return in a somewhat limited form, at least, for a while. In the meantime I’ve noticed that Ron Paul’s been steadily following a stealth delegate strategy. What can I say? I hope it works out for him; if it doesn’t it means that the only political story I’ve really had time to follow will end in defeat.

What’s happened in the Libertarian Party since I’ve been out, guys?