Oh, Schadenfreud, Mr. Souder!

I went through a long period of time where I did not enjoy revelling in the misery of others. Maybe I'm becoming an old man. Get off my lawn! See?

But today's news that 'Family Values' Republican Mark Souder, A US Representative from District 3 in Indiana, has me snickering. From Fox News:

Eight-term Rep. Mark Souder will announce his resignation Tuesday after it came to light that he was conducting an affair with a female aide who worked in his district office, Fox News has learned.

Multiple senior House sources indicated that the extent of the affair with the 45-year-old staffer would have landed Souder before the House Ethics Committee.

Elected as a family values conservative as part of the Republican revolution in 1994, Souder survived a tough re-election challenge in 2008 and survived a contested primary two weeks ago.

(Wait! This report came from 'Faux News'. It therefore cannot be true!!! Shouldn't we dismiss it out of hand?)

So why am I enjoying? Well, if you get elected on something I don't care for- legislating morality- you had better damn well be squeaky clean. I hate hypocrisy, from Al Gore's environmental crusade launched from a ginormous mansion via private jets, to this kind of thing. In and of itself, an affair is his personal problem, and in my opinion doesn't necessarily make one unfit to legislate. But I love the speed and finality that is apparently closing out this hypocrite's political career. It just makes me feel that there is some poetic justice in the world.

Now, if only Charlie Rangel had this kind of 'backdoor integrity'.

While the Republicans scramble to put somebody on the ballot, I'm pleased to note that Libertarian candidate Scott Wise is running. A former County Commissioner, he would serve northeast Indiana ably- and would NOT legislate morality.

Left Doesn't Walk The Walk, Disappointingly

By the miracle of Facebook, I've been catching up with a lot of old friends, some of whom are folks left off with in Cleveland, from 2002 (when I left for Indiana) or earlier then that, as lives changed. Some of these same friends are somewhat alarmed by my libertarian politics, for a variety of reasons. This has caught me somewhat off guard, since I've been plainly advertising myself as a Libertarian since 1995, and was doing a libertarian radio show in that year, and then again 2001-2002.

My experience has long been that those on the left think of libertarians as far right wing, despite vast shared interest in things like civil liberties and at times, foreign policy. Meanwhile, those on the right think of libertarians as being far left, despite common ground on economic issues or the 2nd Amendment.

But most of my 'old' friends are left of center, as I once was. My best guess is that the reaction is thanks to Glenn Beck, who often calls himself a libertarian. He's moving in my direction, but I wouldn't call him one yet. I like that he admits that he knew nothing about our country and its founding, and then read up on it. That's rare. But he's a lightning rod, and the left hates on him. I mean, HATES.

And that's one of the things that gets my reaction. I react against people on the left for using hateful speech about Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, et al, because the left likes to play the role of being on the high road will identifying hate speech. Problem is, too frequently, the left doesn't walk the walk. Plenty of talk, but I only really care about substance. Sure, we're human, and we have passions, but decent people will retract or at least acknowledge the passion of the moment. I find too little of the actual high road in the left these days. I find too much justification of the hypocrisy, and I just don't take that well.

Do I hold the left up to a higher standard? Heck, yeah I do! That's because I was there once upon a time, and was betrayed. Wasn't ever betrayed by the right, since I was never there. It hurts more when you feel hurt or attacked from inside your own camp, as opposed to from the outside, where attacks are what you expect.

The first betrayal was Tipper Gore and the PMRC, with their attack on music lyrics. When I was a young man, the issues that mattered to me were few: 1st Amendment, no draft, an end to interventionist foreign policy. So, when the wife of Al Gore was on the attack on music I liked? I felt totally betrayed. I couldn't believe it. Messed up the black & white picture I had created where Democrats were the good guys, and Republicans were the evil, repressive bad guys.

Over time, my confidence in the Democrats in particular, but also the left as a whole, was eroded in many strokes. But each time, it was a hypocrisy that got my goat. Clinton promised a middle class tax cut, then didn't following through, the Brady Bill, the Americorps 'volunteers', and then taking us to Bosnia? I was done with the Democrats politically. The more I started to see, hear, read and learn, the more I discovered that I was not really well suited to the left, and especially the Democrats. I was a huge fan of Thomas Jefferson, and had simply accepted that his party was still classically liberal, which I was. Alas. Wow, did I learn.

I learned how the left couldn't help but being what it decried. Sure, dislike Rush Limbaugh, or now Glenn Beck, but the vile hatred I've heard over the years directed at Limbaugh- by the people who decry hate speech?

Now I've seen the left, which was all about the anti-war protests while Bush was in office, but not so much once Obama was inaugurated. The plain, political opportunism was revealed at the expense of principle. I've seen this over and over again, and so, I've simply come to the conclusion that the left is completely full of it.

But hey- prove me wrong. Show me that you are holding the feet of your own to the fire about the wars, about indefinite detention, Gitmo, the Patriot Act, the war on drugs, spying on US citizens, and a host of other things that were allegedly important to you before January of 2009, and I'll begin to think better of your side of the spectrum, and even more so if you will take those on your own side to task for saying things like, "I'd like to see that Limbaugh (or Beck, Hannity, etc,) dead". Squash your own hate speech and racism, and I'll take your protests on it seriously. But not until.

The Face of the Ron Paul Opposition

I railed previously at the trendiness of the leftward opponents using derivatives of "retard" to slag off Ron Paul. At the risk of repeating, I am wholly dismayed by this use of language. The Left, which loves to enjoy the feeling of being the sensitive side of political life, does everything it can to run from the reality of it with this kind of snide put-down. I'm still waiting for someone prominent on the Left to smack some of its' own down, in the interest of at the least not looking so hypocritical, and better than that, of looking like it means it.

In the meantime, here's the face of the Ron Paul opposition, in a You Tube video going by the name "Ron Paul is also a Fucktard":

I sure hope he does a lot more of these, because if he is the opposite of Ron Paul, he stands to push a fair number of people towards Paul. Dude! Would you be so kind as to run the first 30 seconds of this clip on the Iowa TV stations today? That would be excellent.

Thank you.

Fishers-Geist Annexation News

Apparently, there is going to be a special Fishers Town Council meeting, tomorrow, Thursday July 12, at 8:00pm, on the issue of Fishers' attempt to forcibly annex Geist neighborhoods in Fall Creek Township. First thoughts:

Typical short notice on the special meeting. It seems Indiana municipalities are very fond of short and limited notice for special meetings. Is it that the Councils don't want attendance?

I am a Fishers resident who has been against the annexation from the beginning. Mainly, I don't care to have my Town's government growing. It will, as more area to manage means more employees and bureaucrats to govern. Also, I don't want the Town floating bonds against the increased assessed value that the annexations would create. Lastly, I thing it is wrong morally to forcibly annex non-municipal residents who chose non-municipal living into municipalities. If they voluntarily choose it- fine. Otherwise, leave 'em alone.

Here's text of an email I received from a Geist resident who is an opponent of the annexations:

I wanted to let all of you know that Fishers will be holding a special town council meeting Thursday, July 12 at 8:00 p.m.at the Fishers Town Hall. They will be voting on whether to pull the 4 ordinances regarding the annexations in Geist. If Fishers pulls the 4 ordinances, they will then proceed to meet with individual neighborhoods to try to get them to agree to be annexed "voluntarily".

My belief is that Fishers Town Council members will try to tell people that due to the Carmel case, their goal to annex Geist is all but a done deal. To be clear, Southwest Clay lost to Carmel because of the deal that NOAX (the anti-annexation group) cut with Carmel. The State Supreme Court held that the agreement was binding because enough residents signed it that the remonstration effort could not reach its 65% threshold; therefore, Southwest Clay could not fight the forced annexation any longer. We should not make the same mistake. Fishers is trying a "divide and conquer" strategy. They are hoping to get enough people to get on board with them that The Geist residents can no longer reach the 65% threshold it needs to remonstrate. The FTC thought that we wouldn't be able to meet that 65% mark because of some sewer waivers that were in place. These waivers prohibit people from remonstrating. Even with the sewer waivers (assuming they hold up in court- which is very questionable), more than enough Geist residents are opposed to annexation that the 65% remonstration number can be met. Fishers was not counting on such strong opposition to annexation.

Fishers is hoping that if they offer enough tax abatements to Geist residents that people will give up and sign on with them. Keep in mind that there is a limit to how much tax abatements they can offer, and when that time is up, Geist will begin paying the Fishers municipal tax rate. With the recent increase in property taxes, another taxing entity is not something most of us need or want.

This is not a Fishers vs. Geist battle. It never has been. It is about not wanting a 22%+ increase in taxes to receive services we are already getting -and paying for. While it may appear to be great news that Fishers is pulling these 4 ordinances- it is only a temporary measure. They are waiting to see if they can get enough Geist residents to come over to their side. If they cannot, they will try forced annexation
again.

Please consider doing the following 3 things:
1. Attend the Fishers meeting Thursday night and make your opinions known to the media that will be there.
2. Be very aware that Fishers is pulling a divide and conquer strategy. Please don't let them succeed!!!
3. Pass this message on to other neighbors in the affected Geist area

I am hopeful that I can attend and speak on the record on this issue.The new wrinkle to me is the idea that Fishers would grant tax abatements to the newly annexed Geist areas.

I am very much opposed to any tax abatements if an annexation occurs. That would mean that the existing Fishers residents would be subsidizing services to the Geist residents for the duration of the abatements, which is wrong.

This is the most senseless twist yet. The Town Council has long made the spurious argument that the Geist residents aren't paying their fair share, thus the impetus to annex. Well, if that's the case, stick to your guns! If they get tax abatements, they won't be paying their fair share!!!

This twist really reinforces to me the idea that the annexation is really about adding assessed value so that more bonds can be floated. That means more taxes over 30 years.

It's all bad government.