On Yer Belly!

If I've learned anything from the Andre Carson comments... and then the Jimmy Hoffa comments, and the rush by many on the left to defend said comments, it's that the same defenders have decided not to try to elevate discourse, but to accept the belly-crawling nature of it, and slither alongside. This is after watching exactly the same from the right, of course.

I keep waiting to see which side will take the high road. Neither is apparently up to the task.

Heh- "Fleebaggers"

I'll repeat my position that the Democrats walkout from the Indiana legislature is a surprise gift to me. I never expected any kind of gridlock, but here it is, and I love it. No laws being passed = no reduction in liberty.

That said, I find this website hilarious. INDemsGPS.com "We keep track of 'em so you don't have to." Oh, I love the ease and speed of self publishing online.

In other news, the Indy Star's Mary Beth Schneider at last touched on a future consideration for this walkout, in this article:

The fear that House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, and Senate President Pro Tempore David Long share: If Democrats, outnumbered 60-40 in the House and 37-13 in the Senate, think they are winning this battle of wills, boycotts could become a regular legislative tactic across the nation. Much the same way, Democrats point out, that minority Republicans have used the filibuster in the U.S. Senate to prevent votes on things they don't like.

That would mark a departure from past practice. Walkouts have been used by both parties. But they typically focus on a single issue and end after a couple of days when the majority makes a few tweaks that let the minority declare victory and return. Not this year. (bold is mine)

What a wonderful gift that would be! I'm not dismayed at all. This is perfect! No new laws passing? Excellent!

2-party partisan politics has been such that when one team employs a tactic, the other team decries it... until they are on the other side, and then they happily employ the same tactic they had until recently decried, justifying it with a Charlie Sheen-like righteousness. So, you gotta know that the next time the Democrats have a majority in the Indiana House, the Republicans will walk out for the entire session. This becomes the safest bet in politics.

The other side of that coin comes to pass in November 2012. Will voters reward or punish Democrats for this action? I'm betting that every Democrat who walked out will now have a Republican running against them, and the top campaign issue will be the walkout. Some districts are so solidly Democrat that it won't matter, but others could be swayed.

So, let's assume for consideration's sake that the voters do punish enough of the walkout Democrats such that the Republicans gain a quorum-ready majority. What do you think the Rs will do with their legislative agenda? Think any compromise will be part of the plan? I conjure images of ramrods.

Even if the voters don't punish the Dems, the redistricting that will take place this year is controlled by the Republicans. In my estimation, if the maps are drawn blindly, without partisan consideration, the Republicans gain at least 8 seats in the Indiana House. If they gerrymander it? Maybe 12-15 seats? In any case, my opinion is that, barring some amazing shift that suddenly makes the Democrats exceptionally popular, or an incredible shift to the Libertarian Party occurs, the Republicans are going to have that quorum-ready majority in both the Indiana House and Senate. The Republicans are seething right now. I expect a full cram-down in 2012.

My Facebook Chill

I generally love Facebook. I caught up with more old friends in 2010 because of it than I had in the previous 10 years without it, and really enjoyed it. But lately, the politics has gotten way too stupid, even for me.

Part of the problem is that my friends range the political spectrum. My libertarian friends are there. My punk rock friends are almost entirely left of center, and generally far left. I have friends on the far right. Political agreement is not something I require of friends.

But lately, in this union fight, the unreason has come to dominate. The partisanship is the whole story anymore, and that's hard to take, because left and right look fairly identical to me in mechanics.

• Grousing about the Koch Brothers funding the right? Forgetting about George Soros? Or Peter White?
• Outraged that Republicans would go after unions? Forgetting that unions fund the Democrats?
• Shocked (I tell you) that Democrats walked out of the Indiana Statehouse? Forgetting that Republicans have done this too? Several times?

Few are those who can acknowledge these things, on either side. So, I've tuned out for a while. I had tried to engage, to it failed. I loved the one where the claim was made that if teachers made minimum wage for every hour they put in, they would be paid $250,000/year.

$250,000 / $7.25 (min. wage) = 34,483 hours
168 hours in a week
8,736 hours in a year

The claims are outrageous. When you can't even bother to pull out a calculator to verify the most basic claims, you're killing your cause. Another claimed that public school teachers are paid less than private school ones. That's so incredibly backwards, and again, kills the cause.

In 2007–08, the average annual base salary of regular full-time public school teachers ($49,600) was higher than the average annual base salary of regular full-time private school teachers ($36,300). Source link, from the US Department of Education.

I never thought I would, as a Catholic School survivor, feel the desire to rally behind my old teachers as The Oppressed. The numbers are what they are.

So, because there is so much bullshit flying around, I'm on a sort of Facebook sabbatical. I still look here and there, because there might be an old friend out there, and because there are a million other things to share besides politics. When I get to that point, you know the stew is thick.

Primary Voting For Libertarians

I've been asked about voting at Indiana's Primary Elections May 4 as a Libertarian, so I thought to post some pointers.

Most Libertarians will want to ask for a 'School Board Ballot'. This ballot will not have any partisan 'R' or 'D' voting attached to it, only the non-partisan school board candidates, and any local issues. This is what I will do.

Some Libertarians may be tempted to vote on the Republican or Democratic ballot, for a variety of reasons. Be advised of this: If you pull a partisan ballot, you are making a legal statement. Pulling a partisan ballot legally commits you to vote for a majority of that same party's candidates in the General Election in November.

So, if you take a Republican Primary Ballot in May, and you vote straight ticket Libertarian in November, you will be guilty of perjury, by law.

Also, if someone at the polling place recognizes you as a Libertarian, and you are asking for a partisan 'R' or 'D' ballot, and they challenge your affiliation, you may be barred from taking that partisan ballot, or reduced to casting a provisional vote. Only a member of that party can challenge you, but they can in the interest of protecting their party's private business.

See: Indiana Code 3-10-1-9.

Why is the challenge possible? Why can't people just vote however they like? Some think it is merely rhetorical when Libertarians declare the Primaries to be largely private, partisan political party business. This law is the proof that it is not mere rhetoric. Republicans and Democrats see fit to foist the cost of their business onto all of the taxpayers. They wrote it into the law as a bi-partisan effort.

There is no Libertarian ballot. We conducted our business at our county convention, at our expense. The law also dictates that, but as a matter of principle, that's the way we think it should be done.

So, look into your school board candidates. See if there are local issues. Please vote in the May 4 Primary Election.

Another Thought On Bayh

One of Senator Bayh's stated reasons for bowing out is the increasingly partisan nature of the game.

Ok, but if Bayh is a moderate, and believes that being a moderate is for the better, what does leaving accomplish but reduce the number of moderates and throw it more over to the more purely partisan? It doesn't make sense.

I'm a Libertarian, and it's frustrating as hell being one. So, I should quit, stand aside, and assure that the Republicans and Democrats continue to destroy the country? Um, no.

I really believe one of two things, or a combination: He didn't want his wife to take arrows on the basis of her corporate board positions; and, there's some heavy dirt out there that he just didn't want to have see the light of day. Pure speculation, of course.