Scary School

(Sierra Vista, AZ)- While I've been sad to have Alex living away from me again, I had been happy with how he landed in Arizona. He really likes the area- the weather, the landscape, the laid-back nature of the kids, and the school. He's been getting good grades and making friends.

But then he laid this bomb on me. A fellow student was stabbed at school. It was a predictable outcome because there was talk it would happen before it happened. It was gang related. From a Sierra Vista Herald article:

A federal hold has been placed on the teenager charged with stabbing a fellow Buena High School student Tuesday morning.

U.S. Border Patrol spokesman Jesus Rodriguez said Wednesday afternoon that the detainer was filed at the Cochise County Jail for Kevin R. Suarez, 18, because the Border Patrol was unable to verify that Suarez was in the United States legally.

Interestingly, the newspaper states that the incident was not gang-related. I always figure the kids know the lay of the land better than the school administration. I know we always did when I was in school. He anticipated more, retaliatory violence, so my visit was a double reason to skip school Friday and visit the Pima Air & Space Museum up in Tucson.

So, I'm glad Alex is on the move once again, going to the Cleveland area. Mainly, he has a lot of family in Cleveland. But getting away from this nonsense makes the move all the better.

As we talked about the incidents, I asked him if illegal immigration was a problem. He said the problem he saw was with students either struggling or refusing to learn English. In either case they slow the class down such that it often becomes tedious for kids to wait for the language to be bridged before instruction can resume. Also, the self-segregating that kids do, aka gangs, is very much along national lines.

I don't see any of that as healthy, but what can you do with a public school system? It has to take all of the kids- until they stab someone- so long as they are citizens.

And this begs the question- why are non-citizens educated in American schools?

Understand that I do not support the rationale of public schooling to begin with. I believe that if you bring a child into the world, you should pay for the child's education. If you don't have kids, you shouldn't be subsidizing someone else and their kids.

There is an awful silence on the part of those who do accept the public school rationale. OK, if it is the role of a community to take on the citizens of the community and support them as their own, but what right is that benefit conveyed to non-citizens?

I've seen the strife this kind of easy, free welfare benefit creates. When in Denmark, I found the Danes suffering a great struggle as immigrants converged to suck up all manner of welfare benefits- without contributing, in the manner the old Danish work ethic demands. It's not merely a strain on the ability of the people to peacefully coexist. It's a strain on the economy besides. In sum, a terrible negative.

I'm a great proponent of legal immigration. I do not want walls at our borders. If those who choose to come here are made to fend for themselves, they either will fend for themselves, or they will go back home. If we give away the store, we will draw those who might not have been otherwise coming- just as the Danes have found. Because we are giving away the store, it's hard to support an open border policy. It's disgusting, but our own welfare state mentality makes nativism a common sense approach.

I don't think any of the presidential candidates have even begun to get to the root of the problem. I've heard some talk about a wall. That doesn't eliminate the draws, like free education. This is the root problem.

At the very least, we need to eliminate public education for non-citizens. We would do even better if we could eliminate public education altogether, and create a social climate of self-responsibility. I'm willing to work incrementally, though, and it should be an easy sell. How can anyone really support the education of non-citizens, at the expense of citizens in terms of cost, and in terms of efficiency of instructing citizen students?

Leaving things as they are, the best rational decision a parent can make is to pull their kids from a school. I'm glad Alex won't be returning to the ironically named Buena High School.

Big Fun With Alex

(Sierra Vista, AZ)- As dumb luck would have it, I missed a turn exiting Tucson's airport en route to I-10, and in so doing, I discovered a tremendous airplane boneyard.

This was no ordinary collection of mothballed planes. These were mostly military planes- fighters and transports, mostly American but also Soviet MIGs. I had discovered the Pima Air and Space Museum. Alex was going to love this!

Image from Pima Air & Space Museum webpage.

Alex is currently entertaining the idea of becoming a pilot. As we entered the grounds Friday afternoon, two gray planes roared above, having just taken off from the nearby Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. He immediately identified them as A-10 "warthogs", and described their purpose in combat. He looked down at the map of the grounds and didn't know where he wanted to go first.

This is a father's joy.

Alex repeatedly said, "I could spend all day here," meaning, in this cockpit.

Dad recreates Richard Nixon, in front of a retired Air Force One.

We spent about four hours here. I can't remember the last time I saw him smile so much.

What's Wrong With Government

(Sierra Vista, AZ)- Ok, this is the excerpted Reader's Digest version...

One of the things I find most wanting today is the absence of consistent thought, and the development of solid ideas into public policy. One of my favorite quotes is of John Adams:

"A government of laws, not of men."

This means, not a government of personalities, of popularity, or any other whimsical nonsense. Personality and popularity is fleeting and ever-changing. Solid law based on solid principles gives the opportunity for clear understanding and thus clear footing.

Reading recent posts by Hoosier Pundit and Doug Masson on the crafting of property tax legislation brought this all to mind, as it focused on the importance of three figures: Governor Mitch Daniels, Republican State Senator Luke Kenley, and Democratic House Leader Pat Bauer.

It's ironic. They're drafting law. But it is illustrated here that we are a government of men first, with laws resulting secondly.

I could stand it if there was great clarity where either of these three men stood on the issue. Kenley in particular is a "stick your finger in the air and see which way the wind blows" kind of man. For certain, none of these is a statesman. Oh, for a statesman or two!

I'd much rather see solid competing IDEAS, rather than these three egos, and the kind of horsetrading they will marshall. Let's talk about abolishing the property tax. Let's have a discourse about the things the property taxes fund. 

The dialogue should be much more than, "what can we do to look it make like we've created tax relief all while maintaining the funding status quo." That's what it has all come down to, and it is because we are a nation of men, not of laws.

Happy Birthday Alex!

(Sierra Vista, AZ)- 16 years ago today, my son Alex was born. I'm visiting with him for an extended weekend to celebrate.

We took a short hike at the Kartchner Caverns State Park. The Whetstone Mountains loom in the background beyond the nearby Mesquite trees and cacti.

Alex, the two-fisted meat eater. The birthday was celebrated with a dinner at the El Paso Bar-B-Que in Sierra Vista. He was in his glory, with a trio of smoked meats: chicken, brisket, and pulled pork.

We're planning to check out Tombstone (site of the Gunfight at the OK Corral) and Bisbee (an old mining town), and will probably cross the border at Agua Prieta, Sonora for a look around.

Another One Gone

Frankly, I thought it would be Rudy Giuliani out of the running on the Republican next, but alas, Fred Thompson called it quits today. From CNN's report:

Thompson played to the voters as a staunch conservative and a son of the South. While he did draw some evangelical voters from one-time Baptist preacher and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, it wasn't enough to pull him into contention for the nomination.

He finished with 16 percent of the vote. Sen. John McCain won Saturday's contest with 33 percent, followed by Huckabee with 30 percent.

"He's really been good lately, but it's too late," CNN analyst Bill Bennett said of Thompson after South Carolina returns started to come in. "If you're a Southern conservative and you can't make it in South Carolina, it's over."

Also, if you aren't running on anything distinct, like say a consistent set of ideas, and you aren't near the top, it's over. So far, Romney and McCain are getting away with a lack of the former.

So, now that the Republican field is down to five, what are the odds that the last place candidate (Giuliani) continues to get as much press as the front-runners? And the odds that the 4th place candidate continues to be consciously ignored? About the same.

Rare, Honest- Refreshing

I was bowled over by a CNN article, on it's own news story.

It's very rare that I'm going to be interested in that kind of story. News that talks about itself? That's usually self-absorption on the order of an American Idol contestant, and thus, not at all interesting. But since it may signal that finally, FINALLY, on the day after the holiday to celebrate the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., finally CNN and other mainstream media may begin to be getting the greatest essence of King's great speech:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

You see, CNN and all the other major media tend to denote Barack Obama as the 'black candidate', and Hilary Clinton as the 'female candidate', at least implicitly. A recent CNN article promoted this 'vision' as the main way for black female voters to look at the Democratic primary in South Carolina, with race and gender the only factor; issues a non-factor, John Edwards a non-factor... nevermind for Dennis Kucinich. Choose: a female president, or a black president.

For these women, a unique, and most unexpected dilemma, presents itself: Should they vote their race, or should they vote their gender?

In the context of Dr. King's words, or any other intelligent context, it's appalling. But, it's refreshing that CNN viewers and website readers rebelled. It's just as refreshing that CNN had the courage to create an article out of the acknowledgment of their stupidity. That's the sort of accountability in media I would like to see more regularly, so kudos to CNN.

The email response is just marvelous. Here's just one message:

An e-mailer named Tiffany responded sarcastically: "Duh, I'm a black woman and here I am at the voting booth. Duh, since I'm illiterate I'll pull down the lever for someone. Hm... Well, he black so I may vote for him... oh wait she a woman I may vote for her... What Ise gon' do? Oh lordy!"

Tiffany urged CNN to "pull this racist crap off" the Web site and to stop calling Hillary the "top female candidate."

"Stop calling Barack the "Black" candidate," she wrote.

The entire articles are worth reading. And if you didn't yesterday, read the entire text of Dr. King's great speech. Then remember: 'content of character', and think about the policy they would promote.

Ron Paul Finishes 2nd in Nevada

I was happy to see RP's high finish in Nevada. Sure, it isn't a win, but if you don't win, you can do worse than second- just ask Rudy Giuliani. The newsletters were a real downer, but even with that baggage, Ron Paul is really the only candidate talking about liberty, so I have to hold out hope for him- at least until the Libertarian convention in May.

McCain won the South Carolina Republican primary, with Paul coming in 4th there. Interesting quote from CNN's political analyst, Bill Schneider:

"Essentially, McCain did it on a personal vote. It wasn't ideology; it wasn't issues. It was a vote for him personally, which has always been his strongest appeal," Schneider said.

Gosh, that gives me a warm fuzzy. If the last two presidents taught us anything, it's that ideology and issues matter. Give me the flattest, dullest personality possible with the right ideology, and the country will go far.

Changing The Rules, Midgame

I was pleased to see that a bill is advancing that could prevent my home town of Fishers from preventing the forced annexation of some Geist neighborhoods.

For a refresher, the Geist neighborhoods are among the state's most well-to-do. The Town has been aggressive about adding assessed value via annexation. A majority of Geist residents are opposed to the annexation.

The Indy Star's report is short, but has some pretty interesting bits:

A senate panel voted Wednesday to advance a bill that could stop the Town of Fishers from annexing Geist.

The legislation, proposed by Sen. Jeff Drozda R-Westfield, would prohibit municipalities from annexing homeowners against their wishes. The Senate Committee on Local Government and Elections voted 6-4 along party lines in favor of the bill during a packed hearing at the Statehouse.

I'm surprised this went along party lines. Certainly enough Republicans- like the all-Republican Fishers Town Council, the all-Republican Carmel City Council, and Republican Carmel Mayor Jim Brainard- initiate forced annexation. Hamilton County Democrats lined up to oppose forced annexation in response. And yet, Senate Democrats opposed advancing the law. Why?

Sen. Timothy Lanane D-Anderson objected to the provision, saying it was "changing the rules in the middle of the game."

Unless Senator Lanane is unaware of the effect any legislation has, all new laws change the rules in the middle of the game. Perhaps the Senator from Anderson is making his statement that he will never again vote for any legislation. Strange argument.

Indeed, the Town of Fishers attempted to change the rules midgame on the Geist residents, who bought their properties knowing full well that they were buying unincorporated township residences. Forced annexations are a prime example of what Lanane says he opposes.

That's some weak logic.

In Shape? Yeah, Right!

It doesn't matter how much stretching, weight training, or other exercise one might do- it still doesn't prepare you for competitive skating and hockey.

So, after a three-year break, I played my first game at the Fishers Forum Sunday night. My legs are really sore and tight, although Ame reports that my skating is better than ever. There's no real good reason for that, but I'm glad of it.

The hallmark of "old fart league" hockey- players gliding while sucking wind, wearing jumbled uniforms. Time to replace the red & black gloves and socks.

As for the game, we lost 7-2. My stats are pretty lame: no goals, no assists, and a -3 rating. The whole game was mainly played in our defensive zone. Maybe we just faced the aces of the league. Hope so!

One nice feature of the league is that the players can wear any jersey they wish, so long as the "home" team wears white, and the "road" team wears dark jerseys. We may not look good in terms of our play, but a lot of us have spiffy gear to wear. I wore an AHL Worcester Sharks home jersey for this game. I have many more choice for our "road" games.

Anyhow, the fashion isn't my big focus. Getting in shape is, so I'll be doing even more stretching and working out during the week in an effort to get into game conditioning. Then the points will come!

More Unsolicited Advice For Ron Paul

Keep apologizing. Please- do everything you can to renounce the racist and homophobic views put forward on your old (circa 1992) newsletters.

The attacks on you have been numerous. They probably hurt you in New Hampshire. If you don't make strong statements, they are going to continue to hurt you within the offended groups.

I am glad you made this statement, which was published by CNN:

"Libertarians are incapable of being a racist, because racism is a collectivist idea."

That's important to me, because nationally visible libertarians are few. When Ron Paul, most-visible libertarian is seen as a racist or homophobe, then libertarianism is liable to be seen as racist or homophobic.

So, keep distancing yourself from these writings. You would do even better if you identified who wrote them. There is fair criticism about not identifying the writer, if not you. Check out what Alex Blaze had to say, on Bilerico.com, a top gay issues website:

But still, laziness isn't a good quality in a president. If he didn't have time to edit a newsletter with his name in huge letters across the top, or at least read it before it went out and make sure that the "Ron Paul column" was something he'd agree with, then he should have stopped publishing.

Until the writer is identified by you, those who were hurt by the comments on your newsletter are going to continue to sling arrows and mud your way. It distracts from your very worthy message of liberty, and worse- makes people equate liberty with racism or homophobia, which of course is patently wrong. It's a huge disservice to liberty and the libertarian movement, but if the primary evidence they have are these news items about the 'racist and homophobic writings of Ron Paul', then what else are they to think?

American Sound Money Problems, In Lego

This sums it up very nicely. For those not interested in watching the whole thing, shame on you... but I'll give you a spoiler, below.

"How in the world can we expect to solve the problems of inflation... with more inflation?"
-Ron Paul

Unsolicited Advice For Ron Paul

I'm glad I never had to endure a primary election as a candidate, where you battle with those within your party, splitting hairs while making the case for yourself, often with negativity coming through in the process of showing difference.

But I'm a Libertarian, and the differences between one LP candidate and another generally comes down to nuance. Not so in the Republican primary. Ron Paul is vastly different from the rest of the field, which does only separate by nuance.

I'm not just talking the war. Paul stands alone as one who would shrink the size, scope, and cost of government. Huckabee and Romney have raised taxes as governors. Thompson and McCain have voted for outrageous spending.

So, Dr. Paul, I have some unsolicited advice for you: Promote your ecomonic points first and foremost, even to the near exclusion of everything else.

Why? First off, you have to win the GOP nomination. It's just too much to ask of the Republican base, the people who are voting delegates, to go from supporting George Bush through this misguided war to taking the opposite position. If the war remains your #1 issue, you cannot win the nomination. Yes, you've been invoking Bush's campaign stances on foreign relations circa 2000, but it scarcely makes the 6+ years since 9/11/2001 vanish.

Give these folks a chance to save face. If you make the Republican base remember the fiscal conservatism of their increasingly distant past, you could well win the darned thing. None of the other Republicans sounds even remotely like a fiscal conservative, and when comparing their records to yours, most of them look like Karl Marx. You are making great points about the need for sound money. Americans who hate facts and study scoff at the gold standard and discussions of anti-inflationary monetary policy, but it's hard for anyone to deny being worried about the fact that the US dollar is weaker than the Canadian dollar.

That point alone sets you up for winning the election post-nomination. There isn't a single other candidate who has been talking about sound money, and it is becoming evident to absolutely everybody that our economy is beginning to ring the bowl. Every candidate who has voted for massive spending and borrowing- which is to say, everyone else- is guilty of causing the problem. They are guilty of making the US dollar weaker than the Euro, and weaker than the Canadian dollar.

You will not alienate your supporters by talking up fiscal policy. Indeed, that's why many of us support you, and give you these increasingly worthless greenbacks.

You have to win the nomination. Iraq is a losing issue strategically, at least right now. Go with your suprior fiscal policies.

People In Glass Houses...

While Ron Paul was being excluded by Fox News from their GOP candidate roundtable, CNN was interviewing him. Here is what was easily the most amusing comment that Wolf Blitzer referred to, with regards to Paul's chances. It was a quote from the Campaign Manager of a former presidential candidate:

"Ron Paul's only option is to buy as many flat screen TVs as he can, put 'Ron Paul' bumper stickers on them, and hand them out to voters in New Hampshire. I just don't see where he goes... He will probably be the only presidential candidate ever to have a surplus when he drops out, because he has an incredible amount of money and no campaign strategy to win."

So, this came from Bill Clinton's campaign manager? Or George W. Bush's? No, this came from Scott Reed- the manager of Bob Dole's LOSING campaign.

Ron Paul was much too nice in dealing with this goofiness, saying what he plans to do. I would have dismissed the credibility of the quote out of hand, and chatised Blitzer for pulling up something so irrelevant, from someone so without credibility. Link to the CNN video. The quote is about 6 minutes in.

Hooray, Hockey!

I've signed up to play in an 'old fart' league at my neighborhood rink. The games start this Sunday.

I'm very excited! I love hockey. I love playing the game, and besides- I really need the exercise. There's about three inches on the waist I'd like to part with, and competitive skating can really burn it off.

This league is different in that it not only has coaches, but it includes instruction. I'm looking forward to that part of the league, because I need all the practice I can get on stick-handling and puck control, and skating. Mainly, I can skate like a demon up ice, but I have trouble stopping. If I get the puck, I'm an accurate passer and shooter, but a defender who is aggressive with me will throw me off.

Biometrics Are Useful?

Civil libertarians have been tepidly questioning the great increase in funding to the various surveillance methods available to FBI and police at the various levels. It is justified as a response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks: Identify people and keep track of them, and terror can be prevented.

The Cato Daily Podcast from January 4, 2007 features Jim Harper of the Cato Institute, and a 9-minute discussion of biometrics. Cato Podcast archives. Key quote from Harper, at 7:06:

We thought somehow identity was going to protect us from future terrorists. In fact, terrorism makes use of surprise, not anonymity.

So, are we wasting a lot of money? Seems like it, if only from a practical standpoint. Add the civil libertarian angle...

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.

New Year's Spleen Vent

I'm a fit to be tied! For the first time since May '07, there was a TV show scheduled for broadcast that I really, really wanted to see. The NHL scheduled it's second-ever outdoor regular season hockey game, in Buffalo with the Sabres hosting the Pittsburg Penguins. NBC has the coverage in the USA, and the game is being played right now as I hammer the keys.

So, why am I not watching? Because WTHR-13 in Indianapolis is showing the weepy MONTEL WILLIAMS SAP-FEST INSTEAD! My lack of God!

Further infuriating is the WTHR website, which does not allow the user to fire off the angry email. They don't like user feedback, apparently. Customer service? Never heard of it!

Arrrgh. The one time I want to watch something. Thanks for nothing, WTHR. Way to ring in the New Year.

Update: Nice work WTHR. The rest of the country's NBC affiliates enjoyed strong ratings for showing the outdoor hockey game, while you ran Montel and Dr. Phil. Say- how'd that work out for you? From an ESPN report:

More people tuned in on New Year's Day to see the NHL play outdoors than any other regular-season game in more than a decade.

The Penguins-Sabres game in snowy Buffalo -- the first regular-season outdoor NHL game in the United States -- drew a 2.6 overnight rating and a 5 share on NBC. Those were the best numbers since a six-game regional telecast on Fox drew a 3.0 overnight rating and a 7 share on Feb. 3, 1996.

...and...

The Buffalo and Pittsburgh markets led the ratings, at 38.2/58 and 17.7/30, respectively. But markets such as Sacramento, Calif., St. Louis and Denver also drew strong ratings, even though the game went up against a number of college football bowl games, including an intriguing Capital One Bowl between Florida and Michigan.

Hey, WTHR! Next time you have a unique NHL game like this, don't pass on it. You can show the Montel re-runs any time. You can have hockey fans love you long time, if you'd like.

Huckabee and the Fair Tax

I received a questioning email and a link to a Washington Post article about Mike Huckabee and his backing of the Fair Tax. The inquiry was, "why aren't you backing Huckabee? Ron Paul isn't endorsing the Fair Tax?" Good question, and long overdue in addressing.

Mainly, I've given up on the Fair Tax, not because I don't think it will pass (I don't), but mainly because I am not convinced that it is fair after all.

The Fair Tax would eliminate all the various taxes we have at the federal level: income taxes, social security taxes, payroll taxes, and myriad other hidden taxes that are embedded into the cost of goods and services. It would eliminate the IRS.

THAT is the basis of my earlier support for the Fair Tax. I am in favor of all of the above.

Problem is, the Fair Tax would replace those things with a 23% sales tax on services and new goods.

So, what's unfair? It charges the same rate to all people, regardless of income, regardless of age, regardless of wealth. It eliminates all the loopholes currently in the convoluted tax code. If you don't want to pay the Fair Tax, don't spend. (That's kind of like saying, "if you don't like air pollution, don't breathe. You can't avoid it.)

Fine, but I don't think that the amount you spend is any kind of a measure of one's fair share in the cost of government.

I thank the critics on the left for spurring this thought. It's been churning inside my mind for months. So many on the left argue that the basis for payment is one's fair share. I agree! But they have it wrong. I do not believe that because you worked longer, or harder, or smarter, such that your wealth increases, that your share in government correspondingly increases.

True, if you use government services more than others, you should pay more than others. That is fair! But what correlation does that have upon spending (Fair Tax)? Or income (The Left)? Well, none whatsoever.

So, the Fair Tax has become in my mind, something that is typical of anything good that ever comes of government anymore. Mainly, it has some rotten component that I have to hold my nose over in order to enjoy the other parts.

Not exactly the basis for getting all excited, and certainly not enough to make me a single-issue Huckabee supporter. On the balance, I still prefer Ron Paul on all things economic.

I will say that I am glad at least one presidential candidate is talking about the Fair Tax. I still think something useful can come out of it, like really getting towards all of us paying a genuine fair share. That would be very useful, because I have to think that if we were sharing in the tax burden equally, fairly, a whole lot of people would discover that they've been getting a free ride, and that maybe, just maybe, some of this government really isn't so 'essential' or 'necessary'.

The Short Romance Is Over

It wasn't so long ago (June '06) that popular leftward blogger Daily Kos was courting libertarians. I took note of it, and thought then that it was merely a cynical ploy to grab a small constituency, but one sizeable enough to swing an election.

Consider the cynicism well justified. The onslaught of Ron Paul bashing by the top left blogs is begetting a slurry of ugly comments from the True Blue Left. From a recent Kos post calling Paul a racist:

If he has "moral responsibility" for his comments, then why not apologize or retract those statements? Why not express outrage that his good name was misappropriated with scurrilously racist sentiments and demand an honest admission and retraction in his newsletter?

Why? Because he agreed with the sentiments. That's why. And it's precisely writings like those, and his refusal to disavow them, that have made him a favorite of the Stormfront/Neo Nazi crowd.

Of course, Paul's supporters will take this post, along with any other criticism of their demigod, as evidence that he is "feared" or other such nonsense. Hardly. When he cracks single digits in the polls in any state we can start worrying. Until then, he doesn't even reach "Ross Perot-like nut" status. I worry about McCain. I worry about Huckabee. I used to worry about Giuliani. But Paul? Nah. He is what he is -- fringe.

But it's also clear that some of his supporters would benefit from a full airing and education about what Paul stands for and has stood for in his years in the public limelight. If people still want to support him despite his bigotry, then that actually says more about his supporters than about Ron Paul himself.

Let's break this down. What are the racist comments? Kos has highlighted some:

Indeed, it is shocking to consider the uniformity of opinion among blacks in this country. Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action.... Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the "criminal justice system," I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.

If similar in-depth studies were conducted in other major cities, who doubts that similar results would be produced? We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers. (emphasis as in original Kos post.)

I have to say, I don't like Paul's generalizations in that first paragraph. 95%? That's nonsense. Paul's off-base here, and should apologize for his generalizations. I wish he would do that right away.

As for the second paragraph, I do have my own experiences. I have been mugged exactly twice, both times by black men. I have had my house burglarlized exactly once, by a black man. I caught him tearing the aluminum off the house. Given my experience, I still don't generalize all or most black males as criminals or semi-criminals. Generalizing the whole on the basis of the subset is incorrect and absurd. But, would it be rational for me to conclude that should I be mugged, the likelihood is higher that a white man will mug me? Am I a racist is, based on my own experience, if I conclude the likelihood is greater that a black man might? Moreover, factually speaking, do "black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and bulglaries all out of proportion to their numbers"? If so, why would an apology be warranted? For the crime of saying something that is a source of sensitivity to the racial group in question? It isn't the same as racism, that's for sure.

I would like Paul to revisit his statements with regard to race, use some care to examine them, and to apologize for and retract the ones that are bunk. (I suspect, though, that the ones that are not bunk, and are actual fact, and that might not be retracted, would still be a source of complaint and "ah ha, gotcha!" by Kos and so many others on the left.)

So, is this any kind of dilemma for me? Not especially. I've never found a perfect candidate, one that I agreed with on everything- besides myself. If I had to eliminate all candidates from the possibility of my support or vote on the basis of a single objection, I could never vote in good conscience. I kind of think that this is what Kos is after- creating cognitive dissonance in the minds of Paul backers, such that they just stay away from the process until after the 2008 election. For me, the kind of law policy Paul would actually put forth is what is important, and I'm betting that even if he is the most venomous closeted racist the world has ever known, he still wouldn't be advancing racist policy. So, is Kos' work what we call a red herring?

At any rate, I find it very interesting that Kos chose to discuss the angle of moral responsibility for the comments made available on a publication with his name on it. Kos must believe that is what is right and correct. Very well. Let's look at some of the comments that follow Kos' latest anti-Paul article:

"Libertarianism (or his style, anyway) is effectively racist itself. I mean, the guy wants to do away with the FDA, I can't imagine HUD, civil rights departments or similar are going to fare much better."

"Poisoning pooties and children is a rational business decision to the libertarians"

"Ron Paul fanboys are better known as Paultards."

Kos' apostles do exactly what Kos criticizes of Ron Paul: generalizing libertarians in the extreme and in the negative. Then there's the word, 'Paultards'. Well now that's intelligent. I guess from this we can infer that Kos believes it's okay to use a derivative of "retard" as a pejoritive, because he permits the use of it as such on his site. Kos could argue that Paul is running for president, and thus open to such scrutiny. It's also a way of saying that few Kos readers could qualify themselves. I see the word "Paultard" all over the comments on the Kos site, but no rebuke from other users, and certainly not from the man himself. The same is true at Wonkette and a host of other left sites.

Looks like Kos is the man in the glass house, but without any mirror. If Kos believes his own words, he should be striking about a third of the comments. Exorcist, heal thyself! Alas.

And if Paul was the sort of non-threat Kos makes him out to be, would he even be worth a post on his site? Right. Perhaps this was just Kos' announcement that henceforth, Daily Kos is merely an exercise in the trivial, unimportant, and miniscule. Yeah- saw through you on that, big guy.

But, reading the comments was truly depressing. It showed me what the left thinks of me, in essense. Libertarianism isn't perfect. Nothing is. But I am just astounded at the impression the left has of liberty. Astonished. Disappointed.

I guess the courtship is over.

New Poll

How Did Ron Paul Do on Meet The Press? Vote at the right.

If you didn't see MTP, here's the You Tube for the first part of Paul's appearance. The other three parts are linked below.



Part 2 of 4
Part 3 of 4
Part 4 of 4