Quick Observations of Spain
If you have your eyes gleefully open for the things that make another part of the world different than your own, you can't help but find a few glaring ones. I found such in Spain, and like to generalize them thusly:
1. Land density in Spain is an all or nothing proposition. Towns are so densely built that I like to refer to any Spanish town as The Land of 98% Impervious Surfaces. There is virtually NO green space in any Spanish town. If a tree is to be planted, an 8" diameter cut is made in the pavement. If it isn't a town, the area is rural and agricultural. Despite the enormously available space, the dwelling will rarely give the occupants more than 1,000 square feet.
2. Every Spaniard over the age of 12 has ready access to tobacco and is not discouraged from using it in public.
3. Every Spaniard over the age of 14 has ready access to spray paint and is not discouraged from using it to spout anarchist slogans in public places- even those that are beautiful and ancient.
4. Every Spaniard over the age of 16 has ready access to alcohol and is not discouraged from using it in public very late at night.
5. Every Spanish household has a washing maching. However, no Spanish household has a clothes dryer. Every Spanish household hangs its laundry outside. The combination of prolific strings of underwear and shirts along with the effusive distribution of spray paint creates an unfortunately dismal visage that conjures Bowery tenements circa 1890.
Andalucia is a beautiful region in Spain, with wondrous rolling hills topped with orange and olive trees, spectaular mountains, and soothing ocean views. The towns of Andalucia have some beautiful architecture, including ancient castles and even the amazing, breathtaking Alhambra. It would be more beautiful if their people treated the place with more respect. How sad that today's Spanish people have such little regard for this beauty and mar it with so much unnecesary ugliness. If you think that Americans can learn a thing or two from Europeans in terms of land use or the respect we give to our public places, you've obviously never been to Spain.
Thursday, February 05, 2004
Wednesday, February 04, 2004
Tuesday, January 20, 2004
Sunday, January 18, 2004
Go Colts!
I'm really looking forward to this afternoon's big game- Colts @ New England Patriots; winner goes to the Super Bowl. I have had a couple of experiences in my life where my hometown team had the chance to represent the AFC in the Super Bowl, but the Browns helped send John Elway there every time, and to the Hall of Fame, as he built his mystique around The Drive back in the '86 season. Denver beat the Browns again in the championship game after the '87 season, and again in '89. I've had this experience three times in my life, so I'm hoping that the change of scenery, and a remarkably potent offense, will bring the thrill of victory to my hometown.
I have reservations for the aftermath, though. No, I am not expecting that if the Colts win the good people of Indianapolis will celebrate by overturning parked cars, setting fires, and looting stores. I am concerned that they will celebrate by building the team a new dome. There are about 1000 good reasons not to build a stadium on the backs of the citizens. The Cato Institute's comprehensive studies are a must-read for Mayors, City-County Council reps, and news media alike. Cato Item #1, with streaming video. Cato Policy Analysis #339. Cato short article. Cato short article. Cato scholarly article.
I cannot stand socialized football. It pains me enough that there is redistribution of wealth in so many other areas of society. But football?
Cities do not belong in the business of being the landlord. They have enough to do addressing public safety and vital infrastructure. These should be priorities, but aren't. The police do a job I wouldn't do, and yet they have been working without a contract for over a year. The sewers gush raw filth into the ironically named White River every time a quarter-inch of rain falls because the system cannot handle the capacity. THESE THINGS ARE PRIORITIES! Mayor Peterson, however, has not addressed these things, and continues to hint that the Colts are still high on his priority list.
But, in the afterglow of a victory that helps assure us that we are big league, the people may be led by the Mayor to a big taxpayer dollar giveaway.
I am hoping that Mr. Irsay, the owner of the Colts, throws down the gauntlet and says, 'gimme gimme gimme or I go!'
Either way, I say, "Go Colts!"
I'm really looking forward to this afternoon's big game- Colts @ New England Patriots; winner goes to the Super Bowl. I have had a couple of experiences in my life where my hometown team had the chance to represent the AFC in the Super Bowl, but the Browns helped send John Elway there every time, and to the Hall of Fame, as he built his mystique around The Drive back in the '86 season. Denver beat the Browns again in the championship game after the '87 season, and again in '89. I've had this experience three times in my life, so I'm hoping that the change of scenery, and a remarkably potent offense, will bring the thrill of victory to my hometown.
I have reservations for the aftermath, though. No, I am not expecting that if the Colts win the good people of Indianapolis will celebrate by overturning parked cars, setting fires, and looting stores. I am concerned that they will celebrate by building the team a new dome. There are about 1000 good reasons not to build a stadium on the backs of the citizens. The Cato Institute's comprehensive studies are a must-read for Mayors, City-County Council reps, and news media alike. Cato Item #1, with streaming video. Cato Policy Analysis #339. Cato short article. Cato short article. Cato scholarly article.
I cannot stand socialized football. It pains me enough that there is redistribution of wealth in so many other areas of society. But football?
Cities do not belong in the business of being the landlord. They have enough to do addressing public safety and vital infrastructure. These should be priorities, but aren't. The police do a job I wouldn't do, and yet they have been working without a contract for over a year. The sewers gush raw filth into the ironically named White River every time a quarter-inch of rain falls because the system cannot handle the capacity. THESE THINGS ARE PRIORITIES! Mayor Peterson, however, has not addressed these things, and continues to hint that the Colts are still high on his priority list.
But, in the afterglow of a victory that helps assure us that we are big league, the people may be led by the Mayor to a big taxpayer dollar giveaway.
I am hoping that Mr. Irsay, the owner of the Colts, throws down the gauntlet and says, 'gimme gimme gimme or I go!'
Either way, I say, "Go Colts!"
Saturday, January 17, 2004
Hamilton County Sign Issues II
Ham Co is said to be the most Republican county in Indiana. If you were to assume that would mean "business friendly" or "pro-property rights" you would have assumed incorrectly. The Hamilton COunty Sign Police are making their presense felt with local small business owners with resulting bewilderment and anger, mainly because these good people had made the same assumptions.
Alas. Read a few lines of reporter Michelle Evans' account of the People v. the Cicero Sign Police. (I'd give you a link, but the Noblesville Daily Times makes you subscribe even to view their stories online.)
When Cicero resident Michelle Wiatt made the plunge to start her own travel agency this past November, she didn't know she would need a lawyer to decipher the community's 30-page sign ordinance.
"I just think that the rules are too strict and too hard to understand; I think they need to be updated," she said. "We're just trying to stay in business and support the community and we have to worry about whether our sign is two inches too big."
She's not alone. More than 50 business owners and a hanful of residents attended a Cicero Town Council special meeting Tuesday night to voice concerns about the ordinance.
In sleepy Cicero, that's almost like a Boston Tea Party. The important things to remember are:
1. The ordinance was drafted by Republicans.
2. The ordinance is enforced by Republicans.
3. The Libertarian Party is defending property rights and is the advocate for small business owners.
4. Democrats would make it worse.
Ham Co is said to be the most Republican county in Indiana. If you were to assume that would mean "business friendly" or "pro-property rights" you would have assumed incorrectly. The Hamilton COunty Sign Police are making their presense felt with local small business owners with resulting bewilderment and anger, mainly because these good people had made the same assumptions.
Alas. Read a few lines of reporter Michelle Evans' account of the People v. the Cicero Sign Police. (I'd give you a link, but the Noblesville Daily Times makes you subscribe even to view their stories online.)
When Cicero resident Michelle Wiatt made the plunge to start her own travel agency this past November, she didn't know she would need a lawyer to decipher the community's 30-page sign ordinance.
"I just think that the rules are too strict and too hard to understand; I think they need to be updated," she said. "We're just trying to stay in business and support the community and we have to worry about whether our sign is two inches too big."
She's not alone. More than 50 business owners and a hanful of residents attended a Cicero Town Council special meeting Tuesday night to voice concerns about the ordinance.
In sleepy Cicero, that's almost like a Boston Tea Party. The important things to remember are:
1. The ordinance was drafted by Republicans.
2. The ordinance is enforced by Republicans.
3. The Libertarian Party is defending property rights and is the advocate for small business owners.
4. Democrats would make it worse.
Wide World of Sports III
The cries of "censorship!" will shortly be raised. What in the wide world of sports?
Two ads that were intended to be placed on the Super Bowl broadcast have been rejected by CBS. One is PETA's. The other is moveon.org's. Article.
CBS explained thusly,
"We do not accept advertising on one side or the other of controversial public issues, partly because we don't think the debate ought to be controlled by people with deep pockets," said Martin Franks, CBS executive vice president.
CBS also covers these issues in a balanced way with its news department, Franks said.
Although it is amusing to make it a money issue, which is what the left likes to make matters of political speech, if I were Mr. Franks, I would have explained it in a different way. I would have reminded these would-be advertisers that they are asking to use a resource that they do not own. CBS owns the resource that is their signal, therefore, they decide what goes across it. This assertion of property rights needs no further explanation.
But the jilted advertizers do whine.
Although MoveOn.org founder Wes Boyd said he had no evidence the ad was rejected because it was anti-Bush, "I worry that it's about ideology," he said.
Worry not. America is a free country when its citizens and institutions can refuse to do something they do not want to do, which means, the ad should be rejected if CBS does not like the ideology.
But MoveOn blathers onward,
"It seems to be there's a capricious approach as to what ads are taken and which are not," Boyd said.
That's because it should be capricious. CBS owns the signal. They should be free to pick and choose as suits them.
Here's a way that perhaps Mr. Boyd could begin to understand. Let's all go to his house (assuming he owns it). Let's each hold a picket sign. One will be pro-Bush. One will be anti-Howard Dean. One will be anti-Bush. One will be pro-MoveOn. Who do you think will be asked to get the hell off his lawn, and which will be invited in for a cup of fair trade coffee?
Your guess will be correct, in every way. Or, perhaps we can approach Mr. Boyd with anti-MoveOn.org pop-up ads to be placed on MoveOn.org. Will he "deny us our right to free speech"? Will he take a capricious approach as to what ads are taken and which are not? Will it be based on ideology?
But, of course.
The cries of "censorship!" will shortly be raised. What in the wide world of sports?
Two ads that were intended to be placed on the Super Bowl broadcast have been rejected by CBS. One is PETA's. The other is moveon.org's. Article.
CBS explained thusly,
"We do not accept advertising on one side or the other of controversial public issues, partly because we don't think the debate ought to be controlled by people with deep pockets," said Martin Franks, CBS executive vice president.
CBS also covers these issues in a balanced way with its news department, Franks said.
Although it is amusing to make it a money issue, which is what the left likes to make matters of political speech, if I were Mr. Franks, I would have explained it in a different way. I would have reminded these would-be advertisers that they are asking to use a resource that they do not own. CBS owns the resource that is their signal, therefore, they decide what goes across it. This assertion of property rights needs no further explanation.
But the jilted advertizers do whine.
Although MoveOn.org founder Wes Boyd said he had no evidence the ad was rejected because it was anti-Bush, "I worry that it's about ideology," he said.
Worry not. America is a free country when its citizens and institutions can refuse to do something they do not want to do, which means, the ad should be rejected if CBS does not like the ideology.
But MoveOn blathers onward,
"It seems to be there's a capricious approach as to what ads are taken and which are not," Boyd said.
That's because it should be capricious. CBS owns the signal. They should be free to pick and choose as suits them.
Here's a way that perhaps Mr. Boyd could begin to understand. Let's all go to his house (assuming he owns it). Let's each hold a picket sign. One will be pro-Bush. One will be anti-Howard Dean. One will be anti-Bush. One will be pro-MoveOn. Who do you think will be asked to get the hell off his lawn, and which will be invited in for a cup of fair trade coffee?
Your guess will be correct, in every way. Or, perhaps we can approach Mr. Boyd with anti-MoveOn.org pop-up ads to be placed on MoveOn.org. Will he "deny us our right to free speech"? Will he take a capricious approach as to what ads are taken and which are not? Will it be based on ideology?
But, of course.
Friday, January 16, 2004
A Brief Political Reflection
I once was a leftist. Long before I was born, Churchill addressed why with an excellent quote:
"To be young and not liberal is to not have a heart. To be older and not conservative is to not have a brain."
Now, most Republicans fail to see me as a conservative, unless we are talking about economics, in which case I make the average Republican seem downright socialist. But, when I was a young man, I was a leftist because I believed that the poor got a raw deal. I believed the left's old saws:
1. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
2. The poor stay poor because the system (the man, the GOP, etc.) keeps them poor.
I also believed this one, that is shared by some on the right, such as the Buchananites:
3. As manufacturing jobs are "shipped overseas", our standard of living is plummetting.
Walter Williams has summed up in one nice column what required of me about 15 months of independent observation and thinking:
1. The rich frequently lose ground, while the poor often gain it; sometimes it is easier for the poor to advance than it is for the rich to prevent dropping back.
2. The poor who stay poor do so because they haven't done what is necessary to get out of poverty. (Living in an impoverished neighborhood for five years proved this notion thoroughly.)
3. Manufacturing jobs are on the decline, but the standard of living is skyrocketing.
Quoth Williams:
According to the 1995 Annual Report of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, only 5 percent of those in the bottom 20 percent category of income earners in 1975 were still there in 1991. What happened to them? A majority made it to the top 60 percent of the income distribution -- middle class or better -- over that 16-year span. Almost 29 percent of them rose to the top 20 percent.
So, if you are on the left, and these are the facts, what to do? This was my dilemma, after all, so many years ago. Do you ignore the facts and plow onward, hoping the emotion and the tone of the rhetoric will resonate with those who are currently poor? This is what the left seems eager to do. Being a fan of honest discourse, I turned from the left, and continue to find distaste in their approach.
I couldn't ignore the facts. Cognitive dissonance leaves me with sleepless nights. I will add my own conclusion, which Williams unfortunately did not draw: Although the standard of living did skyrocket, it still was relatively shackled by the levels of taxation all Americans, rich and poor alike, are burdened with.
I'd like to see a speculative column by Williams that would project the numbers if taxation and government spending were cut by just 5% over a five year period. That would be illuminating.
It would also be illuminating to see the left sport the courage and integrity necessary to declare that they are aware that the programs and spending they cherish have an enormous cost to our economy, but that they accept it and are willing to pay it. I certainly wouldn't vote in support of such schemes, but I would nod in approval of the honesty and suspect we could begin to look one another in the eye.
I once was a leftist. Long before I was born, Churchill addressed why with an excellent quote:
"To be young and not liberal is to not have a heart. To be older and not conservative is to not have a brain."
Now, most Republicans fail to see me as a conservative, unless we are talking about economics, in which case I make the average Republican seem downright socialist. But, when I was a young man, I was a leftist because I believed that the poor got a raw deal. I believed the left's old saws:
1. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
2. The poor stay poor because the system (the man, the GOP, etc.) keeps them poor.
I also believed this one, that is shared by some on the right, such as the Buchananites:
3. As manufacturing jobs are "shipped overseas", our standard of living is plummetting.
Walter Williams has summed up in one nice column what required of me about 15 months of independent observation and thinking:
1. The rich frequently lose ground, while the poor often gain it; sometimes it is easier for the poor to advance than it is for the rich to prevent dropping back.
2. The poor who stay poor do so because they haven't done what is necessary to get out of poverty. (Living in an impoverished neighborhood for five years proved this notion thoroughly.)
3. Manufacturing jobs are on the decline, but the standard of living is skyrocketing.
Quoth Williams:
According to the 1995 Annual Report of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, only 5 percent of those in the bottom 20 percent category of income earners in 1975 were still there in 1991. What happened to them? A majority made it to the top 60 percent of the income distribution -- middle class or better -- over that 16-year span. Almost 29 percent of them rose to the top 20 percent.
So, if you are on the left, and these are the facts, what to do? This was my dilemma, after all, so many years ago. Do you ignore the facts and plow onward, hoping the emotion and the tone of the rhetoric will resonate with those who are currently poor? This is what the left seems eager to do. Being a fan of honest discourse, I turned from the left, and continue to find distaste in their approach.
I couldn't ignore the facts. Cognitive dissonance leaves me with sleepless nights. I will add my own conclusion, which Williams unfortunately did not draw: Although the standard of living did skyrocket, it still was relatively shackled by the levels of taxation all Americans, rich and poor alike, are burdened with.
I'd like to see a speculative column by Williams that would project the numbers if taxation and government spending were cut by just 5% over a five year period. That would be illuminating.
It would also be illuminating to see the left sport the courage and integrity necessary to declare that they are aware that the programs and spending they cherish have an enormous cost to our economy, but that they accept it and are willing to pay it. I certainly wouldn't vote in support of such schemes, but I would nod in approval of the honesty and suspect we could begin to look one another in the eye.
Tuesday, January 13, 2004
Curious Bedfellows
I love it when common expectations or conventional wisdom is thwarted by an unexpected pairing, especially when it occurs in the political arena, leaving both Left and Right scratching their heads.
The ACLU and Rush Limbaugh? How marvelous!
"For many people, it may seem odd that the ACLU has come to the defense of Rush Limbaugh," ACLU of Florida Executive Director Howard Simon said in a released statement.
"But we have always said that the ACLU's real client is the Bill of Rights, and we will continue to safeguard the values of equality, fairness and privacy for everyone, regardless of race, economic status or political point of view," Simon said.
If only that were entirely true and the ACLU backed all ten Amendments of the Bill of Rights. Still, this will confound some, and more importantly, delight me.
I love it when common expectations or conventional wisdom is thwarted by an unexpected pairing, especially when it occurs in the political arena, leaving both Left and Right scratching their heads.
The ACLU and Rush Limbaugh? How marvelous!
"For many people, it may seem odd that the ACLU has come to the defense of Rush Limbaugh," ACLU of Florida Executive Director Howard Simon said in a released statement.
"But we have always said that the ACLU's real client is the Bill of Rights, and we will continue to safeguard the values of equality, fairness and privacy for everyone, regardless of race, economic status or political point of view," Simon said.
If only that were entirely true and the ACLU backed all ten Amendments of the Bill of Rights. Still, this will confound some, and more importantly, delight me.
Monday, January 12, 2004
What's Your Rhetoric Worth?
Probably not much.
After work today, I stopped into a little shop in Westfield hoping to catch the owners present. I was in luck, so I introduced myself and asked if they wouldn't mind discussing their hassles with the town's planning commission regarding placing signs on their commercial property.
They definitely wanted to talk about this. It seems the planning commission has dictated what an acceptable sign is, and it wasn't the one they had near the street. Understand that the point of a sign is to catch the eye of the passerby in the hopes of luring would-be customers. This purpose is lost on the planning commission, who believes the purpose is to create objects that are nearly invisible, so as not to be 'clutter'. This is not a saftey issue, where, say, the sign blocked visibility on the roadway. This is an aesthetic issue.
I offered the services of the Libertarian Party. I was met with skepticism. The man expressed concerns over differences between his views and the party's. I explained that I expect that, just as there are Republicans who support abortion and Democrats who support war in Iraq. Then he expressed a bigger concern- that the LP might not be able to be effective for him.
This is the real deal issue. If the party cannot be effective, it doesn't matter how great the rhetoric is, nor how much agreement there is. At the end of the day, he agrees with our stand on property rights: that the property belongs to the owner, and should be used as the owner sees fit. And although nobody else- no Republican or Democrat- had come to offer their support, he was skeptical of a representative of the one party that offered support.
The task for the Libertarian Party in Hamilton County is to get the planning commissions to listen to property owners in Westfield (and Cicero), and to remember that the property owners own the land, and that the commissioners are public servants, working to serve the citizenry, not to forward their aesthetic agendas.
This issue interests me greatly, as (rhetoric, please!) planning commissions are beginning to run amok throughout Hamilton County, which is commonly known as the most Republican county in the state. Republicans are ostensibly pro-business, but you'd never know it to learn of the pronouncements of their planning commissions. I was told that the Italian restaurant near this business was told that the colors of their signs were not permissible. What colors were used? Red, white, and green- just like in virtually every Italian restaurant worldwide.
It is important to get the attention of planning commissions, since they aren't just focusing on signs. They zero in on any property usage, dictating by whim as suits their tastes. This means homeowners in addition to commercial entities. Every fence, deck, swimming pool, and shrub is being scrutinized. Fees are charged, and the citizens made to beg for permission to use their own land as they see fit. In America?
Well, that last bit is rhetoric. You probably agree with it. It means nothing if we can't move policy in our direction.
Probably not much.
After work today, I stopped into a little shop in Westfield hoping to catch the owners present. I was in luck, so I introduced myself and asked if they wouldn't mind discussing their hassles with the town's planning commission regarding placing signs on their commercial property.
They definitely wanted to talk about this. It seems the planning commission has dictated what an acceptable sign is, and it wasn't the one they had near the street. Understand that the point of a sign is to catch the eye of the passerby in the hopes of luring would-be customers. This purpose is lost on the planning commission, who believes the purpose is to create objects that are nearly invisible, so as not to be 'clutter'. This is not a saftey issue, where, say, the sign blocked visibility on the roadway. This is an aesthetic issue.
I offered the services of the Libertarian Party. I was met with skepticism. The man expressed concerns over differences between his views and the party's. I explained that I expect that, just as there are Republicans who support abortion and Democrats who support war in Iraq. Then he expressed a bigger concern- that the LP might not be able to be effective for him.
This is the real deal issue. If the party cannot be effective, it doesn't matter how great the rhetoric is, nor how much agreement there is. At the end of the day, he agrees with our stand on property rights: that the property belongs to the owner, and should be used as the owner sees fit. And although nobody else- no Republican or Democrat- had come to offer their support, he was skeptical of a representative of the one party that offered support.
The task for the Libertarian Party in Hamilton County is to get the planning commissions to listen to property owners in Westfield (and Cicero), and to remember that the property owners own the land, and that the commissioners are public servants, working to serve the citizenry, not to forward their aesthetic agendas.
This issue interests me greatly, as (rhetoric, please!) planning commissions are beginning to run amok throughout Hamilton County, which is commonly known as the most Republican county in the state. Republicans are ostensibly pro-business, but you'd never know it to learn of the pronouncements of their planning commissions. I was told that the Italian restaurant near this business was told that the colors of their signs were not permissible. What colors were used? Red, white, and green- just like in virtually every Italian restaurant worldwide.
It is important to get the attention of planning commissions, since they aren't just focusing on signs. They zero in on any property usage, dictating by whim as suits their tastes. This means homeowners in addition to commercial entities. Every fence, deck, swimming pool, and shrub is being scrutinized. Fees are charged, and the citizens made to beg for permission to use their own land as they see fit. In America?
Well, that last bit is rhetoric. You probably agree with it. It means nothing if we can't move policy in our direction.
Wisconsin Libertarians
Should I make that singular instead of plural? When work training took me to Madison, I decided to phone ahead so that I could meet up with other state-level party officials for dinner and to swap info.
I met up with Rolf Lindgren, who just left his position as State Vice Chair so that he could more fully pursue being a pain in the governor's backside, with his recall effort.
I would never dream of doing such a thing, but Rolf says he's getting tons more media attention for his stunt than he might for a traditional campaign. Then again, Ed Thompson is getting huge milage out of his traditional campaign for governor, where he polled better than 10%. The day I arrived in Madison, the local paper, the Madison Capital Times, had an article on what Ed Thompson thinks about Russ Feingold. I'd really like to have the LPIN at the stage where entire articles are devoted to what one of our guys thinks about one of the other guys.
But, Wisconsin is a different state with different rules. For instance, Thompson was elected mayor in his home town, but did not run that race with the party label. It seems most races are non-partisan in Wisconsin, unlike Indiana. I imagine that makes it easier to run for local races, being free of the albatross that is the national party, but it can't help in building local party name support.
It was fun listening to Rolf give me a narrated tour of his political landscape. I strongly recommend that other libertarians similarly network when out on business trips.
Should I make that singular instead of plural? When work training took me to Madison, I decided to phone ahead so that I could meet up with other state-level party officials for dinner and to swap info.
I met up with Rolf Lindgren, who just left his position as State Vice Chair so that he could more fully pursue being a pain in the governor's backside, with his recall effort.
I would never dream of doing such a thing, but Rolf says he's getting tons more media attention for his stunt than he might for a traditional campaign. Then again, Ed Thompson is getting huge milage out of his traditional campaign for governor, where he polled better than 10%. The day I arrived in Madison, the local paper, the Madison Capital Times, had an article on what Ed Thompson thinks about Russ Feingold. I'd really like to have the LPIN at the stage where entire articles are devoted to what one of our guys thinks about one of the other guys.
But, Wisconsin is a different state with different rules. For instance, Thompson was elected mayor in his home town, but did not run that race with the party label. It seems most races are non-partisan in Wisconsin, unlike Indiana. I imagine that makes it easier to run for local races, being free of the albatross that is the national party, but it can't help in building local party name support.
It was fun listening to Rolf give me a narrated tour of his political landscape. I strongly recommend that other libertarians similarly network when out on business trips.
Running Into Pain
Getting into running for the first time in 20 years, my biggest fear was for my knees. My biggest surprise was not experiencing any pain in the knees as I noticed quick improvement.
Then I went to Madison, WI. There, I reached the 1.5 mile mark, but did it on a treadmill. I had never run on a treadmill belfore, and somehow it didn't feel right, but I didn't think anything of it. Ever since, I feel pain in both knees with every step I take.
I thought that it might just be one of those adjustment things, that I should run through tht pain, so I have run twice more since. Pain's still there. I'm opting for rest temporarily, but I'm hoping that I am able to start again so that I can run with Alex in Spain about two weeks from now.
Getting into running for the first time in 20 years, my biggest fear was for my knees. My biggest surprise was not experiencing any pain in the knees as I noticed quick improvement.
Then I went to Madison, WI. There, I reached the 1.5 mile mark, but did it on a treadmill. I had never run on a treadmill belfore, and somehow it didn't feel right, but I didn't think anything of it. Ever since, I feel pain in both knees with every step I take.
I thought that it might just be one of those adjustment things, that I should run through tht pain, so I have run twice more since. Pain's still there. I'm opting for rest temporarily, but I'm hoping that I am able to start again so that I can run with Alex in Spain about two weeks from now.
Monday, January 05, 2004
A Brief History of the Celebrity Trashing of Marriage
MSN featured a Top Ten list for shortest-lived celebrity marriage. Note that each of these involves straight people... with the possible exception of the Earnest Borgnine-Ethel Merman union. The very thought jars the mind more severly than even the Tanya Harding wedding night video did.
MSN featured a Top Ten list for shortest-lived celebrity marriage. Note that each of these involves straight people... with the possible exception of the Earnest Borgnine-Ethel Merman union. The very thought jars the mind more severly than even the Tanya Harding wedding night video did.
Sunday, January 04, 2004
The Threat to the Institution of Marriage
It's gay people, right? That's what I constantly hear, but what I hear is nonsense. The gay people I know are in committed relationships, some even married. None of the gay marriages I know have ended in divorce.
Celebrities are The Threat. Britney Spears personifies the cheapening of the sanctity of marriage with her ONE-DAY union. That's right, ONE DAY.
Show me even one gay couple that has done this, and I will begin to accept that they are a threat to institution. I'll bet dollars to your dimes that you can't find an example, and yet you barely need 10 seconds to name a celebrity that has been in a marriage (or three) that lasted less than a year.
It's gay people, right? That's what I constantly hear, but what I hear is nonsense. The gay people I know are in committed relationships, some even married. None of the gay marriages I know have ended in divorce.
Celebrities are The Threat. Britney Spears personifies the cheapening of the sanctity of marriage with her ONE-DAY union. That's right, ONE DAY.
Show me even one gay couple that has done this, and I will begin to accept that they are a threat to institution. I'll bet dollars to your dimes that you can't find an example, and yet you barely need 10 seconds to name a celebrity that has been in a marriage (or three) that lasted less than a year.
Friday, January 02, 2004
Not a New Year's Resolution
For years (since 1984, in fact) I have avoided running due to concerns about my knees. I have had no trouble biking or even playing hockey as these activities create little in the way of stress on the knees.
But Ame loves to run and I wanted to add another thing that we could do together despite our incongruous schedules, so I decided I would run. She reserved our place in a half-marathon, so I was committed.
I tried running just once, about two years ago. I tagged along with Ame for a job with her in the park. I lasted about a quarter mile before my lungs were screaming and my legs tightening. I was also running in flip-flops- you know, for maximum comfort.
The training began this week, with a trip to the mall. I finally bought a pair of decent running shoes, Nike Shox, that have crazy exaggerated springs in the heels. They felt cushy and gave good support.
Run #1: I walked a half mile to Bishop Chatard High School, who has a dilapidated cinder track. No way am I running on paved surfaces. I walked a mile around the track for additional warm-up, and then I began my run. Ame timed my quarter mile, which was all I could do before my calves cramped up miserably. Ame commended me on my great time of 2:19. I was horrified! She tried to cheer me up by pointing out that I would get under a ten minute mile. Hell- I can walk a mile in less than fifteen! On the upside, my lungs were doing great, thanks to hockey.
Run #2: I managed a full half mile! Better than that, I timed my quarter at 1:50, and didn’t cramp up. I know that this doesn’t mean that I am now under eight minutes for the mile. After all, I still haven’t run a mile.
Run #3: I timed my half mile at 3:50. Again, it was all I ran, but I was very enthused for the time. I was expecting about 4:15. This is all good, but my next three runs will be about hitting the miracle mile, which I have not achieved since I was a sophomore in high school. Ame already can run 4 miles without a huge amount of effort, so I have a lot of catching up to do.
For years (since 1984, in fact) I have avoided running due to concerns about my knees. I have had no trouble biking or even playing hockey as these activities create little in the way of stress on the knees.
But Ame loves to run and I wanted to add another thing that we could do together despite our incongruous schedules, so I decided I would run. She reserved our place in a half-marathon, so I was committed.
I tried running just once, about two years ago. I tagged along with Ame for a job with her in the park. I lasted about a quarter mile before my lungs were screaming and my legs tightening. I was also running in flip-flops- you know, for maximum comfort.
The training began this week, with a trip to the mall. I finally bought a pair of decent running shoes, Nike Shox, that have crazy exaggerated springs in the heels. They felt cushy and gave good support.
Run #1: I walked a half mile to Bishop Chatard High School, who has a dilapidated cinder track. No way am I running on paved surfaces. I walked a mile around the track for additional warm-up, and then I began my run. Ame timed my quarter mile, which was all I could do before my calves cramped up miserably. Ame commended me on my great time of 2:19. I was horrified! She tried to cheer me up by pointing out that I would get under a ten minute mile. Hell- I can walk a mile in less than fifteen! On the upside, my lungs were doing great, thanks to hockey.
Run #2: I managed a full half mile! Better than that, I timed my quarter at 1:50, and didn’t cramp up. I know that this doesn’t mean that I am now under eight minutes for the mile. After all, I still haven’t run a mile.
Run #3: I timed my half mile at 3:50. Again, it was all I ran, but I was very enthused for the time. I was expecting about 4:15. This is all good, but my next three runs will be about hitting the miracle mile, which I have not achieved since I was a sophomore in high school. Ame already can run 4 miles without a huge amount of effort, so I have a lot of catching up to do.
Tuesday, December 30, 2003
More Boortz, LP Convention
The January 2004 LP News hit my mailbox today, and from it sprung an insert touting the 2004 National Convention.
Anti-Boortz fanatics will be sad to note that he was touted on Page 3 with a photo and bio, but glad that he wasn't hailed above the fold on Page 1. That space of honor was reserved for that luminary and paragon of pro-liberty thinking, Jimmy Vaughn... the blues guitarist.
The anti-Boortz crowd should be plenty busy, though. The Convention will not only be hosting Neal, but two others equally objectionable to libertarian purists. Bootz is objectionable due to his pro-war position. The other two are Congressman Ron Paul- a REPUBLICAN from Texas, and pro-life at that; and Carl Milsted, Jr. PhD, also known as "The Incrementalist".
How infuriating is this! How DARE the LP host these heretical deviants?! Pro-war? Pro-life? These things are inherently at odds with (hum the Battle Hymn of the Republic) libertarian philosophy! An incrementalist? It's all or nothing, damn it! It's destination, not direction. If it need be nothing instead of all, then I'll take it and wrap myself in the comfort of my righteousness!!!
I am so looking forward to this Convention. I can't wait to shed the Losertarians who object to the inclusion of voices that flow from the same principles to conclusions that differ slightly from theirs.
The irony here is that the purists have been loudly anti-Boortz, but tend to hail Ron Paul as a returning hero every time he takes the floor. I admire Paul a great deal, as I do Boortz, but what I ask of the purists is that they be what they claim they are- consistent. If you're going to boot Boortz, then boot Paul, and Milsted too. Then rid your bookshelves of all Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand and a hundred others.
The January 2004 LP News hit my mailbox today, and from it sprung an insert touting the 2004 National Convention.
Anti-Boortz fanatics will be sad to note that he was touted on Page 3 with a photo and bio, but glad that he wasn't hailed above the fold on Page 1. That space of honor was reserved for that luminary and paragon of pro-liberty thinking, Jimmy Vaughn... the blues guitarist.
The anti-Boortz crowd should be plenty busy, though. The Convention will not only be hosting Neal, but two others equally objectionable to libertarian purists. Bootz is objectionable due to his pro-war position. The other two are Congressman Ron Paul- a REPUBLICAN from Texas, and pro-life at that; and Carl Milsted, Jr. PhD, also known as "The Incrementalist".
How infuriating is this! How DARE the LP host these heretical deviants?! Pro-war? Pro-life? These things are inherently at odds with (hum the Battle Hymn of the Republic) libertarian philosophy! An incrementalist? It's all or nothing, damn it! It's destination, not direction. If it need be nothing instead of all, then I'll take it and wrap myself in the comfort of my righteousness!!!
I am so looking forward to this Convention. I can't wait to shed the Losertarians who object to the inclusion of voices that flow from the same principles to conclusions that differ slightly from theirs.
The irony here is that the purists have been loudly anti-Boortz, but tend to hail Ron Paul as a returning hero every time he takes the floor. I admire Paul a great deal, as I do Boortz, but what I ask of the purists is that they be what they claim they are- consistent. If you're going to boot Boortz, then boot Paul, and Milsted too. Then rid your bookshelves of all Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand and a hundred others.
Sunday, December 28, 2003
Help Not Wanted?
Here's intense hatred for you: Iran suffers a catastrophic earthquake with at least 20,000 dead. Israel offers help. Iran refuses! Per a spokesman for Iran's Interior Ministry,
"The Islamic Republic of Iran accepts all kinds of humanitarian aid from all countries and international organizations with the exception of the Zionist regime".
Incredible. 'We'd rather all sink into the earth than take your stinkin' help!'
I found this item on the Shark Blog, which I frequently read. Thanks to the Shark!
I found no mention of this offer-refusal in my local media, or in the national stuff I sometimes browse. The AP story in the Indy Star mentions the assistance provided by the US, names others, such as the Swiss, British, Russians, and naturally, the UN.
Of course, this is why I frequently scan blogs, and why I only sometimes browse the rest.
Iran's hatred for Israel is hard for me to comprehend. The US named Iran as part of the Axis of Evil, and yet, American aid is good enough to accept.
Here's intense hatred for you: Iran suffers a catastrophic earthquake with at least 20,000 dead. Israel offers help. Iran refuses! Per a spokesman for Iran's Interior Ministry,
"The Islamic Republic of Iran accepts all kinds of humanitarian aid from all countries and international organizations with the exception of the Zionist regime".
Incredible. 'We'd rather all sink into the earth than take your stinkin' help!'
I found this item on the Shark Blog, which I frequently read. Thanks to the Shark!
I found no mention of this offer-refusal in my local media, or in the national stuff I sometimes browse. The AP story in the Indy Star mentions the assistance provided by the US, names others, such as the Swiss, British, Russians, and naturally, the UN.
Of course, this is why I frequently scan blogs, and why I only sometimes browse the rest.
Iran's hatred for Israel is hard for me to comprehend. The US named Iran as part of the Axis of Evil, and yet, American aid is good enough to accept.
Checking the Stats
This blog offers me a number of tools to see what draws people to read it. Look for the little square at the left of the page, and you can see what I check on every so often.
I had a lot of fun observing certain entries around the elections in November. Dean Barkley's mayoral run in Carmel brought a lot of hits to the blog. I was amused to see a certain Indy Star reporter's name on the hit list. My guess was that he did a Google search on himself. I'm sure he was pleased with the results. Har.
One thing I noticed falls into the Possible Foregone Conclusion department. I had a very large number of hits after people did Google searches on "Ceaucescu Execution", and variations thereof, immediately after the capture of Saddam Hussein. Ironically, I had linked the release of Uday and Qusay Hussein's autopsy photos with the release of the video of the Ceaucescu executions with the explanation of proof, along with the treatment of Mussolini.
I have not really made an effort to promote the blog, so the hit numbers are still pretty low. That's okay. I'm enjoying watching people discover the blog for their own reasons. It is gratifying to see some of you come back for more. Thanks!
This blog offers me a number of tools to see what draws people to read it. Look for the little square at the left of the page, and you can see what I check on every so often.
I had a lot of fun observing certain entries around the elections in November. Dean Barkley's mayoral run in Carmel brought a lot of hits to the blog. I was amused to see a certain Indy Star reporter's name on the hit list. My guess was that he did a Google search on himself. I'm sure he was pleased with the results. Har.
One thing I noticed falls into the Possible Foregone Conclusion department. I had a very large number of hits after people did Google searches on "Ceaucescu Execution", and variations thereof, immediately after the capture of Saddam Hussein. Ironically, I had linked the release of Uday and Qusay Hussein's autopsy photos with the release of the video of the Ceaucescu executions with the explanation of proof, along with the treatment of Mussolini.
I have not really made an effort to promote the blog, so the hit numbers are still pretty low. That's okay. I'm enjoying watching people discover the blog for their own reasons. It is gratifying to see some of you come back for more. Thanks!
Tuesday, December 23, 2003
Not Booting Boortz
Neal Boortz has the largest audience of any radio talker who self-identifies as a libertarian. It's no contest, as his show is heard coast-to-coast. The nearest challenger I can think of is Larry Elder.
As the Libertarian Party is hosting its' national convention in Atlanta come May, and as Boortz hosts his program in Atlanta, it made perfect sense to convention organizers to schedule Neal to speak. What the heck, he was one of the featured speakers here in Indianapolis in 2002, addressing the 'gold ticket' conventioners at a fancy fund-raising dinner, and was well-received.
In fact, Boortz was welcomed with racous cheering. There was no apparent opposition, before, during, or after. Why would there be? He is easily the most prominent proponent of libertarianism in the media. Indeed, even Nadine Strassen of the ACLU was tolerated at previous conventions. And why not? Although we may not agree on everything, there is so much value in reaching out to those with differences: we can build bridges with what we agree on; we can learn what tactics work for them; we can show others that we aren't the crazy aunt that is best kept in the broom closet...
So, because it is so incongruous, it surprised me not a whit to receive an e-mail from a fellow LP of Indiana member, asking me to sign on to a petition seeking to boot Boortz from the convention line-up.
Feh? While it is to our credit that the LP is a party based on principle far beyond the GOP or Dems, it is to our detriment that many of our members have an ideological purity fanaticism that leads to these irrational witch hunts.
See, Boortz is guilty of thinking independently in his interpretation of the philosophy, and of the world. The purists hate realpolitik and pragmatism. They'll ditch reality in a heartbeat in order to get back to the orderly security of theory. Not Boortz. He has said repeatedly on his program that because of years of foreign policy mistakes, the United States is faced with a situation where we must initiate force against those who merely threaten us.
Like these petitioning detractors, I initially bristled against the idea. I have been committed to using force only to retaliate. However, today's situation is such that a terrorist with a nuclear, biological, or chemical device could wreak such havoc, death, and destruction that it would be irresponsible to wait for this threat, which so many deem inevitably coming to fruition. This is Boortz' reasoning, and I rather agree.
It would have been nice if, after World War 2, the United States resumed its relatively isolated position in the world, without troops stationed across the globe, not supporting both sides in China, etc., etc., etc. But we did, and with consequences. Should we ignore the consequences now that they are pressed up against our noses? At what cost?
The sort of libertarian that would sign onto the petition is the kind who would rather be ideologically correct at any cost rather than consider reality and put it to work. It reminds me of the Bolshevik who would happily cling to the dialectic while starving rather than engaging in a capitalist scheme to survive.
Instead of encouraging Boortz to go on stage so that they might be challenged by his thoughts, the petitioners would rather desperately act to keep him out, as though he were some sort of heretic who must be kept from the Santuary, lest he profane it with his mere footsteps.
I hope the LP sheds a whole lot of these types. It will be serious addition by subtraction.
I think it is revealing to see that of those 600 or so on-line signatures, only about two-thirds are legitimate. Many of the other third hilariously lampoon the whole proposition.
Neal Boortz has the largest audience of any radio talker who self-identifies as a libertarian. It's no contest, as his show is heard coast-to-coast. The nearest challenger I can think of is Larry Elder.
As the Libertarian Party is hosting its' national convention in Atlanta come May, and as Boortz hosts his program in Atlanta, it made perfect sense to convention organizers to schedule Neal to speak. What the heck, he was one of the featured speakers here in Indianapolis in 2002, addressing the 'gold ticket' conventioners at a fancy fund-raising dinner, and was well-received.
In fact, Boortz was welcomed with racous cheering. There was no apparent opposition, before, during, or after. Why would there be? He is easily the most prominent proponent of libertarianism in the media. Indeed, even Nadine Strassen of the ACLU was tolerated at previous conventions. And why not? Although we may not agree on everything, there is so much value in reaching out to those with differences: we can build bridges with what we agree on; we can learn what tactics work for them; we can show others that we aren't the crazy aunt that is best kept in the broom closet...
So, because it is so incongruous, it surprised me not a whit to receive an e-mail from a fellow LP of Indiana member, asking me to sign on to a petition seeking to boot Boortz from the convention line-up.
Feh? While it is to our credit that the LP is a party based on principle far beyond the GOP or Dems, it is to our detriment that many of our members have an ideological purity fanaticism that leads to these irrational witch hunts.
See, Boortz is guilty of thinking independently in his interpretation of the philosophy, and of the world. The purists hate realpolitik and pragmatism. They'll ditch reality in a heartbeat in order to get back to the orderly security of theory. Not Boortz. He has said repeatedly on his program that because of years of foreign policy mistakes, the United States is faced with a situation where we must initiate force against those who merely threaten us.
Like these petitioning detractors, I initially bristled against the idea. I have been committed to using force only to retaliate. However, today's situation is such that a terrorist with a nuclear, biological, or chemical device could wreak such havoc, death, and destruction that it would be irresponsible to wait for this threat, which so many deem inevitably coming to fruition. This is Boortz' reasoning, and I rather agree.
It would have been nice if, after World War 2, the United States resumed its relatively isolated position in the world, without troops stationed across the globe, not supporting both sides in China, etc., etc., etc. But we did, and with consequences. Should we ignore the consequences now that they are pressed up against our noses? At what cost?
The sort of libertarian that would sign onto the petition is the kind who would rather be ideologically correct at any cost rather than consider reality and put it to work. It reminds me of the Bolshevik who would happily cling to the dialectic while starving rather than engaging in a capitalist scheme to survive.
Instead of encouraging Boortz to go on stage so that they might be challenged by his thoughts, the petitioners would rather desperately act to keep him out, as though he were some sort of heretic who must be kept from the Santuary, lest he profane it with his mere footsteps.
I hope the LP sheds a whole lot of these types. It will be serious addition by subtraction.
I think it is revealing to see that of those 600 or so on-line signatures, only about two-thirds are legitimate. Many of the other third hilariously lampoon the whole proposition.
Sunday, December 14, 2003
Better Response, But Not Perfect
Dean's response to the Hussein news was much wiser than Kerry's or Gephart's. Dean offered congratulations in his statement:
Dec. 14, 2004, WEST PALM BEACH-- Governor Dean issued the following statement this morning:
"This is a great day for the Iraqi people, the US, and the international community.
"Our troops are to be congratulated on carrying out this mission with the skill and dedication we have come to know of them."
Of course, he failed to congratulate the President. No surprise there. Then, I guess because none of the Dems can resist doing so, Dean went to a line that will not play- bring in the UN:
"This development provides an enormous opportunity to set a new course and take the American label off the war. We must do everything possible to bring the UN, NATO, and other members of the international community back into this effort."
The UN wasn't needed, as was shown by the capture. That is as plain as day.
Dean's response to the Hussein news was much wiser than Kerry's or Gephart's. Dean offered congratulations in his statement:
Dec. 14, 2004, WEST PALM BEACH-- Governor Dean issued the following statement this morning:
"This is a great day for the Iraqi people, the US, and the international community.
"Our troops are to be congratulated on carrying out this mission with the skill and dedication we have come to know of them."
Of course, he failed to congratulate the President. No surprise there. Then, I guess because none of the Dems can resist doing so, Dean went to a line that will not play- bring in the UN:
"This development provides an enormous opportunity to set a new course and take the American label off the war. We must do everything possible to bring the UN, NATO, and other members of the international community back into this effort."
The UN wasn't needed, as was shown by the capture. That is as plain as day.
Presidency Secured
I had previously figured that, with Bush's signing of the legislation authorizing the prescription drug giveaway to senior citizens, he had secured his re-election. Then, Howard Dean was annointed by Al Gore the Pious, which in my mind sealed the deal.
Now, Saddam Hussein has been captured. Can there be any doubt that Bush's approval ratings will soar?
It has been amusing to watch Democratic presidential hopefuls respond. John Kerry was quick to point out that Osama bin Laden is still out there. He's right, but that won't play. Dick Gephart was quick to point out that the US hasn't been including the rest of the world. It was just shown that the rest of the world wasn't needed, so that won't play, either.
It will be interesting to see who will be the first, if anyone does, to point to something that will play. Congratulating the president and the military might be wise.
I had previously figured that, with Bush's signing of the legislation authorizing the prescription drug giveaway to senior citizens, he had secured his re-election. Then, Howard Dean was annointed by Al Gore the Pious, which in my mind sealed the deal.
Now, Saddam Hussein has been captured. Can there be any doubt that Bush's approval ratings will soar?
It has been amusing to watch Democratic presidential hopefuls respond. John Kerry was quick to point out that Osama bin Laden is still out there. He's right, but that won't play. Dick Gephart was quick to point out that the US hasn't been including the rest of the world. It was just shown that the rest of the world wasn't needed, so that won't play, either.
It will be interesting to see who will be the first, if anyone does, to point to something that will play. Congratulating the president and the military might be wise.
Issue Number One
For most Americans, terrorism has been Job One, hence President Bush's relatively high approval ratings. Yes, I know, the ratings have been slipping, but they are going to go through the roof if the news of the capture of Saddam Hussein is true. Story.
I have held my nose on the war effort for some time. I thought it quite appropriate to go after Osama bin Laden after the attacks on September 11, but did believe it to be appropriate to go after Iraq. Was Iraq developing weapons of mass destruction? Undoubtedly, just as the Clinton Administration informed the nation. Has China? Did the USSR? Is there any doubt that those nations developed the weapons with us in mind? Should we have gone after them? Would I be here to write this if we had?
My greatest fear is that the US will perpetually be a nation at war. We can endlessly accuse nations of potentially having the United States as a target, and endlessly be issuing pre-emptive strikes. I don't trust governments that act pre-emptively based on what they think someone will do. One that does it abroad may just as easily do it at home.
Gun owners, I'm talking to you. If you have guns, you have the ability to kill. If you are a politically vocal gun owner, might a government official conclude that you are a threat, and should be locked up or taken out, just to be safe?
I know that the Hussein regime was as evil as they come, and I am glad for the Iraqi people that Hussein is out of power. I lament that we have not captured bin Laden, which IS Job Number One.
Question: Is it the job of the United States to overthrow evil empires? If so, who qualifies? The President has identified North Korea and the axis of evil. Iran is probably on the list. Where do we stop? China? Russia? Cuba? France? If this is our job, we're going to be busy for the rest of our lifetimes.
Now that Hussein is in our hands, let's end this thing. Turn the reins over the the Iraqi people and let their experiment in self-government begin.
For most Americans, terrorism has been Job One, hence President Bush's relatively high approval ratings. Yes, I know, the ratings have been slipping, but they are going to go through the roof if the news of the capture of Saddam Hussein is true. Story.
I have held my nose on the war effort for some time. I thought it quite appropriate to go after Osama bin Laden after the attacks on September 11, but did believe it to be appropriate to go after Iraq. Was Iraq developing weapons of mass destruction? Undoubtedly, just as the Clinton Administration informed the nation. Has China? Did the USSR? Is there any doubt that those nations developed the weapons with us in mind? Should we have gone after them? Would I be here to write this if we had?
My greatest fear is that the US will perpetually be a nation at war. We can endlessly accuse nations of potentially having the United States as a target, and endlessly be issuing pre-emptive strikes. I don't trust governments that act pre-emptively based on what they think someone will do. One that does it abroad may just as easily do it at home.
Gun owners, I'm talking to you. If you have guns, you have the ability to kill. If you are a politically vocal gun owner, might a government official conclude that you are a threat, and should be locked up or taken out, just to be safe?
I know that the Hussein regime was as evil as they come, and I am glad for the Iraqi people that Hussein is out of power. I lament that we have not captured bin Laden, which IS Job Number One.
Question: Is it the job of the United States to overthrow evil empires? If so, who qualifies? The President has identified North Korea and the axis of evil. Iran is probably on the list. Where do we stop? China? Russia? Cuba? France? If this is our job, we're going to be busy for the rest of our lifetimes.
Now that Hussein is in our hands, let's end this thing. Turn the reins over the the Iraqi people and let their experiment in self-government begin.
Saturday, December 06, 2003
The Wide World of Sports
Every person uses tools to perform the work they do. A plumber uses wrenches and sealants. A landscaper uses mowers and rakes. Doctors use instruments. All use their minds to some degree or other, or should.
Athletes have their bodies as their foremost tool. Some people argue that athletes don't use their minds very much. I tend to give most athletes more credit than that, but I will have to concede that there is a group that clearly does not use their minds. In fact, this group is destroying the tools in order to make a point.
What kind of worker destroys his tools in order to demonstrate how oppresed he is? A moron? I guess some union strikers in a wildcat frenzy will do that... but I repeat myself... besides, their intent is to damage the tools provided them by the employer.
Honduran soccer players are destroying the tools, on a hunger strike. Not that I support the employers failing to make good on their end of the deal- far from it. It's just that it's hard to tell who is now harming the worker at the moment. It will be easy to tell in about a month.
Every person uses tools to perform the work they do. A plumber uses wrenches and sealants. A landscaper uses mowers and rakes. Doctors use instruments. All use their minds to some degree or other, or should.
Athletes have their bodies as their foremost tool. Some people argue that athletes don't use their minds very much. I tend to give most athletes more credit than that, but I will have to concede that there is a group that clearly does not use their minds. In fact, this group is destroying the tools in order to make a point.
What kind of worker destroys his tools in order to demonstrate how oppresed he is? A moron? I guess some union strikers in a wildcat frenzy will do that... but I repeat myself... besides, their intent is to damage the tools provided them by the employer.
Honduran soccer players are destroying the tools, on a hunger strike. Not that I support the employers failing to make good on their end of the deal- far from it. It's just that it's hard to tell who is now harming the worker at the moment. It will be easy to tell in about a month.
Thursday, December 04, 2003
So It's Anathema? Big Deal
One of the biggest hurdles in taking the Libertarian Party from third party to major party status lies in the libertarians themselves. Stay with me on this.
Libertarians abhor government. They join a political party only with the greatest reluctance. Libertarians are living laissez faire, which means "leave us alone". So, it's anathema for libertarians to embrace the idea of becoming government officials.
Pity for us. You can't allow liberal Republicans and socialist Democrats to be the government officials and then also be surprised when they draft anti-liberty legislation or erect a labyrinth of red tape. In the language of my son Alex, "Duh".
In some parts of Indiana, there is actually an opportunity for LP members to be appointed to boards, such as zoning or planning, and some of our members are actually cringing at the thought. (Tell this to the LP of Ohio, where they just poured their souls into getting on the ballot. They have wet dreams about our opportunity.)
I understand the gut-reaction of the cringe. In a better world, government would be nice and small, and would leave us alone. Fact is, it isn't and it doesn't. So, who will it be? Us or them? Would you, as a libertarian, rather have a libertarian serving on a taxing body or a committed statist?".
I'll up the ante and point to what I do these days as an example of what being on the inside of the process can produce. I work for a County Surveyor's Office. Yes sir, I am inside the belly of the beast itself. I was hired by an elected official- a Republican- who has won re-election every time since 1977. I have found that he agrees with us on rather a lot. Not everything, of course, but he's a small government Republican. However, he has even asked me what it would take for us to replace the Democrats on the boards in the county!
Think about that possibility in terms of fiscal issues. If Democrats are on the left, and Republicans right of them, they meet in the middle, more or less. Consider what it would be like in some counties if taxing bodies were comprised of Republicans on the left and Libertarians on the right, meeting in the middle, more or less. Would that be of value to you?
Being alongside elected officials in the day-to-day work setting helps break down the barrier of common thought that goes, "if a Libertarian is elected, the city will be in flames within a week". I do my job very well. They see me do my job very well. They decide, "he's ok". They'll vote for me when I run for office. Moreover, being in government gives you the platform to talk about government in a real, germaine way... unlike Thanksgiving dinner.
I know that most libertarians are so because government is anathema to who they are. However, if we really want to change things, we'll have to get our hands dirty and do some things that may on first blush cause us to hold our noses. Who knows, though? You might even have some fun along the way. (For instance, I'm in Hamilton County, which is one of the most Republican counties in Indiana. I love telling Republicans that I could be one of them if they weren't such fiscal liberals! I love watching them cringe to that music.)
Look, the Declaration of Independence wasn't drafted by a bunch of people who sat around and theorized correctly about Adam Smith in cozy saftey. No, they did something they would rather have not done. They gave up their cozy safety and put their lives on the line.
I'm asking for much less when I ask libertarians to get off their debate society duffs, to put their money where their theory-gushing mouths are, and to get involved in government to affect change towards freedom. If you aren't willing to hold your nose and sit on a zoning board, YOU AREN'T WORTHY OF FREEDOM ANYHOW.
One of the biggest hurdles in taking the Libertarian Party from third party to major party status lies in the libertarians themselves. Stay with me on this.
Libertarians abhor government. They join a political party only with the greatest reluctance. Libertarians are living laissez faire, which means "leave us alone". So, it's anathema for libertarians to embrace the idea of becoming government officials.
Pity for us. You can't allow liberal Republicans and socialist Democrats to be the government officials and then also be surprised when they draft anti-liberty legislation or erect a labyrinth of red tape. In the language of my son Alex, "Duh".
In some parts of Indiana, there is actually an opportunity for LP members to be appointed to boards, such as zoning or planning, and some of our members are actually cringing at the thought. (Tell this to the LP of Ohio, where they just poured their souls into getting on the ballot. They have wet dreams about our opportunity.)
I understand the gut-reaction of the cringe. In a better world, government would be nice and small, and would leave us alone. Fact is, it isn't and it doesn't. So, who will it be? Us or them? Would you, as a libertarian, rather have a libertarian serving on a taxing body or a committed statist?".
I'll up the ante and point to what I do these days as an example of what being on the inside of the process can produce. I work for a County Surveyor's Office. Yes sir, I am inside the belly of the beast itself. I was hired by an elected official- a Republican- who has won re-election every time since 1977. I have found that he agrees with us on rather a lot. Not everything, of course, but he's a small government Republican. However, he has even asked me what it would take for us to replace the Democrats on the boards in the county!
Think about that possibility in terms of fiscal issues. If Democrats are on the left, and Republicans right of them, they meet in the middle, more or less. Consider what it would be like in some counties if taxing bodies were comprised of Republicans on the left and Libertarians on the right, meeting in the middle, more or less. Would that be of value to you?
Being alongside elected officials in the day-to-day work setting helps break down the barrier of common thought that goes, "if a Libertarian is elected, the city will be in flames within a week". I do my job very well. They see me do my job very well. They decide, "he's ok". They'll vote for me when I run for office. Moreover, being in government gives you the platform to talk about government in a real, germaine way... unlike Thanksgiving dinner.
I know that most libertarians are so because government is anathema to who they are. However, if we really want to change things, we'll have to get our hands dirty and do some things that may on first blush cause us to hold our noses. Who knows, though? You might even have some fun along the way. (For instance, I'm in Hamilton County, which is one of the most Republican counties in Indiana. I love telling Republicans that I could be one of them if they weren't such fiscal liberals! I love watching them cringe to that music.)
Look, the Declaration of Independence wasn't drafted by a bunch of people who sat around and theorized correctly about Adam Smith in cozy saftey. No, they did something they would rather have not done. They gave up their cozy safety and put their lives on the line.
I'm asking for much less when I ask libertarians to get off their debate society duffs, to put their money where their theory-gushing mouths are, and to get involved in government to affect change towards freedom. If you aren't willing to hold your nose and sit on a zoning board, YOU AREN'T WORTHY OF FREEDOM ANYHOW.
I Do Not Miss Cleveland
When I left Cleveland, I left a numbing mindset of clutching ever backward towards the past. I admit that one of the things I loved about Cleveland was the presence of big industry- steel, railroads, foundries, auto plants, and more. But, I love these things as functional giants, not the rotting hulks in closed-up mills and yards, and the ornamentation they have become in the entertainment district known as the Flats. These things made Cleveland a first-class city in around 1890. No more.
I left the punishing greed of the Democratic Party that rules northeast Ohio to the point that statewide, Ohio's Republicans are left of Indiana's Democrats. I gave myself a full 9.5% raise just by leaving Ohio, saving 4% in state income tax, 3.5% in municipal tax, and 2% in sales tax. The Democratic Party was innovative around 1900, with Mayor Tom. L. Johnson, the capital 'P' Progressive who made Cleveland the first city in the U.S. to own an electric utility. In better than 100 years, the Democrats have more or less owned the city, and look at the result. It was a first-class city that was loaded with towering industrialists such as John D. Rockefeller, and was an immigrant magnet around 1900. No more.
When I left Cleveland, I left a numbing mindset of clutching ever backward towards the past. I admit that one of the things I loved about Cleveland was the presence of big industry- steel, railroads, foundries, auto plants, and more. But, I love these things as functional giants, not the rotting hulks in closed-up mills and yards, and the ornamentation they have become in the entertainment district known as the Flats. These things made Cleveland a first-class city in around 1890. No more.
I left the punishing greed of the Democratic Party that rules northeast Ohio to the point that statewide, Ohio's Republicans are left of Indiana's Democrats. I gave myself a full 9.5% raise just by leaving Ohio, saving 4% in state income tax, 3.5% in municipal tax, and 2% in sales tax. The Democratic Party was innovative around 1900, with Mayor Tom. L. Johnson, the capital 'P' Progressive who made Cleveland the first city in the U.S. to own an electric utility. In better than 100 years, the Democrats have more or less owned the city, and look at the result. It was a first-class city that was loaded with towering industrialists such as John D. Rockefeller, and was an immigrant magnet around 1900. No more.
I Miss Cleveland
For the first time in my 15 or so months away from the ol' mistake on the Lake, I actually felt like I missed it once there. I was getting to where I was certain I would never feel such a thing, despite having spent most of my first 34 years there.
It wasn't the industrial landscape that I so love that moved me. I got to play an old game as I drove through the city, called, "I did a job here".
As a surveyor in the Cleveland area doing a lot of work for utility companies, I really blanketed the area. East Side, West Side, Downtown, outer suburbs- it doesn't matter. I can drive in any direction in the area for three minutes, and invariably I will be able to claim, "I did a job there". This is a game I used to annoy a co-worker as we drive across town.
It was a lot of fun to play. What I realized is that I had tangible evidence that I was contributing to my region. I could point to a telephone pole, a pedestal, a service cabinet, a vault, a manhole, and a hundred other structures and know that this was a result of my effort. I could see it every day.
I had no idea I could be so concrete! I know that I am having an impact in Indiana, both in the Surveyor's Office and in the Libertarian Party, but having it be evident almost everywhere was really gratifying.
For the first time in my 15 or so months away from the ol' mistake on the Lake, I actually felt like I missed it once there. I was getting to where I was certain I would never feel such a thing, despite having spent most of my first 34 years there.
It wasn't the industrial landscape that I so love that moved me. I got to play an old game as I drove through the city, called, "I did a job here".
As a surveyor in the Cleveland area doing a lot of work for utility companies, I really blanketed the area. East Side, West Side, Downtown, outer suburbs- it doesn't matter. I can drive in any direction in the area for three minutes, and invariably I will be able to claim, "I did a job there". This is a game I used to annoy a co-worker as we drive across town.
It was a lot of fun to play. What I realized is that I had tangible evidence that I was contributing to my region. I could point to a telephone pole, a pedestal, a service cabinet, a vault, a manhole, and a hundred other structures and know that this was a result of my effort. I could see it every day.
I had no idea I could be so concrete! I know that I am having an impact in Indiana, both in the Surveyor's Office and in the Libertarian Party, but having it be evident almost everywhere was really gratifying.
Wednesday, December 03, 2003
Adios, Alex
It was so great to have Alex with me for four days over an extended Thanksgiving weekend. It was just like old times to be with him in Cleveland, and in our own little world. We went to Tower City in downtown Cleveland, went bowling, ate tons of food, visited with Grandma & Grandpa, played card games, wrestled, and generally had a blast.
It's tough saying goodbye to him- I hadn't seen him since getting married in June- but the upside is that Ame & I will be visiting him in January in Espana, and we get to look forward to that time when he will show us around his world, which is Rota and Andalucia. It will be a hoot!
I was chuckling as he squirmed through Grandma's, "look at how big you've gotten" -isms. I used to squirm to them, too. I spared him that corny spiel, but I did tell him many times that I think he's a great kid. It's no spiel. He really is a great kid.
Four days never passed so quickly.
It was so great to have Alex with me for four days over an extended Thanksgiving weekend. It was just like old times to be with him in Cleveland, and in our own little world. We went to Tower City in downtown Cleveland, went bowling, ate tons of food, visited with Grandma & Grandpa, played card games, wrestled, and generally had a blast.
It's tough saying goodbye to him- I hadn't seen him since getting married in June- but the upside is that Ame & I will be visiting him in January in Espana, and we get to look forward to that time when he will show us around his world, which is Rota and Andalucia. It will be a hoot!
I was chuckling as he squirmed through Grandma's, "look at how big you've gotten" -isms. I used to squirm to them, too. I spared him that corny spiel, but I did tell him many times that I think he's a great kid. It's no spiel. He really is a great kid.
Four days never passed so quickly.
Tuesday, December 02, 2003
A Republican Member of Congress Speaks
Ok, so this is cheating a bit in my quest to dispel the notion that I am a frothing lunatic due to my prediction that the GOP is running itself into a schism. Now Ron Paul (R-TX) has chimed in with his own 'hear ye, fiscal conservatives: abandon all hope in the GOP' message. It's cheating because Paul was the Libertarian candidate for President in a past life. Still, he's a Republican today- just like Andy Horning.
"The Medicare prescription drug bill passed by Congress last week may prove to be a watershed event for political conservatives in America. This latest expansion of the federal government, potentially the largest in our nation’s history, is firmly in keeping with the failed New Deal and Great Society programs of the utopian left. This leaves true conservatives, who believe strongly in limited government and identify with the Goldwater-era Republican party, wondering whether they still have a political home in the modern GOP. In the eyes of many conservatives, today’s GOP simply has abandoned its limited-government heritage to buy votes and gain political power in Washington."
Last week, Neal Boortz brought it home thusly, and I paraphrase, 'Today's Republicans are where Democrats were in 1963, and today's Democrats are where the socialists were in 1963'.
Yep. The statists are winning the war, but this schism will help the individualists clarify the objectives.
Ok, so this is cheating a bit in my quest to dispel the notion that I am a frothing lunatic due to my prediction that the GOP is running itself into a schism. Now Ron Paul (R-TX) has chimed in with his own 'hear ye, fiscal conservatives: abandon all hope in the GOP' message. It's cheating because Paul was the Libertarian candidate for President in a past life. Still, he's a Republican today- just like Andy Horning.
"The Medicare prescription drug bill passed by Congress last week may prove to be a watershed event for political conservatives in America. This latest expansion of the federal government, potentially the largest in our nation’s history, is firmly in keeping with the failed New Deal and Great Society programs of the utopian left. This leaves true conservatives, who believe strongly in limited government and identify with the Goldwater-era Republican party, wondering whether they still have a political home in the modern GOP. In the eyes of many conservatives, today’s GOP simply has abandoned its limited-government heritage to buy votes and gain political power in Washington."
Last week, Neal Boortz brought it home thusly, and I paraphrase, 'Today's Republicans are where Democrats were in 1963, and today's Democrats are where the socialists were in 1963'.
Yep. The statists are winning the war, but this schism will help the individualists clarify the objectives.
Monday, December 01, 2003
The Ink Keeps Spilling
There seems to be an endless supply of well-known or well-placed conservative writers willing to criticize the GOP for their free spending ways. It is pleasing to me that there are so many that do retain their integrity, and who do criticize when the GOP parts ways with principle. (On the left, there are some who will criticize the Democrats, but rarely the well-known, and less than that for the well-placed, and usually the pseudo-intellectual types such as Christopher Hitchens.)
Donald Devine, a Reagan administration official, joins the chorus over the $400 billion Medicare 'reform' / prescription drug transfer of wealth in his article entitled "What Should Reaganites Do?".
Why, join the Libertarian Party, of course, but he dare not say that. What he does say, and the numbers he uses again reinforce that I am not a frothing lunatic.
An ABC News poll recently found disapproval of Bush's job performance among self-described conservatives has increased from 14 to 23 percent. By contrast, Ronald Reagan wanted to cut the welfare state and was generally successful, being rewarded with committed conservative support in good times and bad. Conservatives may have no option in 2004 (other than staying home) but, if they want to recover the Reagan philosophy, they will get no assistance from anyone in party or government today, so they had better start devising a course of action by themselves.
Reaganites who care to be honest will have to begin to assert themselves forcefully while they still can wrest control of the GOP back to its' small government ways. Otherwise, the LP will be their only hope, like it or not.
There seems to be an endless supply of well-known or well-placed conservative writers willing to criticize the GOP for their free spending ways. It is pleasing to me that there are so many that do retain their integrity, and who do criticize when the GOP parts ways with principle. (On the left, there are some who will criticize the Democrats, but rarely the well-known, and less than that for the well-placed, and usually the pseudo-intellectual types such as Christopher Hitchens.)
Donald Devine, a Reagan administration official, joins the chorus over the $400 billion Medicare 'reform' / prescription drug transfer of wealth in his article entitled "What Should Reaganites Do?".
Why, join the Libertarian Party, of course, but he dare not say that. What he does say, and the numbers he uses again reinforce that I am not a frothing lunatic.
An ABC News poll recently found disapproval of Bush's job performance among self-described conservatives has increased from 14 to 23 percent. By contrast, Ronald Reagan wanted to cut the welfare state and was generally successful, being rewarded with committed conservative support in good times and bad. Conservatives may have no option in 2004 (other than staying home) but, if they want to recover the Reagan philosophy, they will get no assistance from anyone in party or government today, so they had better start devising a course of action by themselves.
Reaganites who care to be honest will have to begin to assert themselves forcefully while they still can wrest control of the GOP back to its' small government ways. Otherwise, the LP will be their only hope, like it or not.
Sunday, November 30, 2003
Letters To The Editor, IV
What fun to be in Cleveland for an extended holiday weekend and to discover that the Indy Star has printed another one of my letters.
I am amazed that it ran as-is, since the thing essentially reads like ad copy. I am pleased and grateful. Is that redundant? I think so.
What fun to be in Cleveland for an extended holiday weekend and to discover that the Indy Star has printed another one of my letters.
I am amazed that it ran as-is, since the thing essentially reads like ad copy. I am pleased and grateful. Is that redundant? I think so.
Couldn't Have Said It Better, II
I am becoming less and less a frothing lunatic as the chorus of committed conservatives and Republicans chimes in to criticize the $400 billion Medicare "reform" bill.
Cal Thomas' article is especially damning, chucking skewers at the GOP in general:
"Smaller government and less spending? That's a joke. Eleven years ago, Newt Gingrich, who would soon become Speaker of the House, blasted Democrats for seeing "no contradiction between adding a billion and a half dollars in pork-barrel (spending) for the politicians in their big-city machines and voting for a balanced budget amendment." Now that Republicans are doing precisely what Democrats did when they were in the majority, what shall we call these overspending Republicans? Hypocrites? Liars?"
Thomas asks, rhetorically, "Is it time for another revolution yet? Who's got the tea?"
I like the fissure that is emerging. Let's make it a chasm. We have the tea!
I am becoming less and less a frothing lunatic as the chorus of committed conservatives and Republicans chimes in to criticize the $400 billion Medicare "reform" bill.
Cal Thomas' article is especially damning, chucking skewers at the GOP in general:
"Smaller government and less spending? That's a joke. Eleven years ago, Newt Gingrich, who would soon become Speaker of the House, blasted Democrats for seeing "no contradiction between adding a billion and a half dollars in pork-barrel (spending) for the politicians in their big-city machines and voting for a balanced budget amendment." Now that Republicans are doing precisely what Democrats did when they were in the majority, what shall we call these overspending Republicans? Hypocrites? Liars?"
Thomas asks, rhetorically, "Is it time for another revolution yet? Who's got the tea?"
I like the fissure that is emerging. Let's make it a chasm. We have the tea!
Friday, November 28, 2003
Couldn't Have Said It Better Myself
It must have been weird for fiscal conservatives to have to cheer Ted Kennedy and other liberal Democrats as they threatened fillibuster on the $400 billion entitlement program that just passed the Senate. Of course, they were in opposition because the deal wasn't destructive, er, large enough.
Reuben Navarrette's Friday column is excellent analysis. It's almost as though I wrote it on Tuesday. He gave AARP its' due, and even the Democrats the punch in the nose they deserve, but could have given the GOP a bit more of the what for. Still, good stuff!
It must have been weird for fiscal conservatives to have to cheer Ted Kennedy and other liberal Democrats as they threatened fillibuster on the $400 billion entitlement program that just passed the Senate. Of course, they were in opposition because the deal wasn't destructive, er, large enough.
Reuben Navarrette's Friday column is excellent analysis. It's almost as though I wrote it on Tuesday. He gave AARP its' due, and even the Democrats the punch in the nose they deserve, but could have given the GOP a bit more of the what for. Still, good stuff!
The Meaning of Thanksgiving
Thanksgiving is one of the few holidays celebrated nationally that I enjoy taking part in. Honestly- and I know how curmudgeonly this sounds- I find most holidays negatively disruptive to my average day. I prefer my average day to the average holiday, mainly because I find my self-esteem in my daily work than in my ceasing my work and making merry about things that do not matter to me.
I especially like the Independence Day celebrations, for obvious political reasons. I am always moved on Memorial Day, for the price paid willingly (usually) by our military. I try to work on Labor Day when I can.
I am not a religious man, so I do not get religious value from Christmas, Easter, or Hannukah. But isn't Thanksgiving a day of offering gratitude to God? Not for me.
Thanksgiving is a day for me to be grateful, God or no god, for my life and for those things in my life that bring me joy. I do not need religion to be grateful for Ame and my love for her. I do not need religion to feel joy at holding my niece for the first time. I do not need a the guidance of man's interpretation of an alleged deity to appreciate the warmth of my extended family. I certainly am not thinking of anything but myself and my son as I wait in excited anticipation for seeing Alex for the first time since June.
Gratitude is a privileged sensation to possess. It is rather akin to satisfaction. I am grateful for the progress I have made in my life. This progress was achieved through my effort and my skill, and little else. After all, luck is little more than opportunity meeting preparation.
I find depressing the notion that all gifts come from God, and that man is hopeless and helpless without the blessings of God. That perspective is the notion of the successful having hit life's lottery. Does man not have free will? Does man not make choices, good and bad? Are we merely pawns on a supreme being's chessboard? If so, I should be grateful for that, and give thanks? No thanks. I'll do it my way.
Take whatever value you can from Thanksgiving, and every other day. I try to do the same with Christmas, substituting the reunion with family over the celebration of the birth of Jesus. On the whole, though, living the average day in the present, means a whole lot more to me than commemorating something from the past.
Thanksgiving is one of the few holidays celebrated nationally that I enjoy taking part in. Honestly- and I know how curmudgeonly this sounds- I find most holidays negatively disruptive to my average day. I prefer my average day to the average holiday, mainly because I find my self-esteem in my daily work than in my ceasing my work and making merry about things that do not matter to me.
I especially like the Independence Day celebrations, for obvious political reasons. I am always moved on Memorial Day, for the price paid willingly (usually) by our military. I try to work on Labor Day when I can.
I am not a religious man, so I do not get religious value from Christmas, Easter, or Hannukah. But isn't Thanksgiving a day of offering gratitude to God? Not for me.
Thanksgiving is a day for me to be grateful, God or no god, for my life and for those things in my life that bring me joy. I do not need religion to be grateful for Ame and my love for her. I do not need religion to feel joy at holding my niece for the first time. I do not need a the guidance of man's interpretation of an alleged deity to appreciate the warmth of my extended family. I certainly am not thinking of anything but myself and my son as I wait in excited anticipation for seeing Alex for the first time since June.
Gratitude is a privileged sensation to possess. It is rather akin to satisfaction. I am grateful for the progress I have made in my life. This progress was achieved through my effort and my skill, and little else. After all, luck is little more than opportunity meeting preparation.
I find depressing the notion that all gifts come from God, and that man is hopeless and helpless without the blessings of God. That perspective is the notion of the successful having hit life's lottery. Does man not have free will? Does man not make choices, good and bad? Are we merely pawns on a supreme being's chessboard? If so, I should be grateful for that, and give thanks? No thanks. I'll do it my way.
Take whatever value you can from Thanksgiving, and every other day. I try to do the same with Christmas, substituting the reunion with family over the celebration of the birth of Jesus. On the whole, though, living the average day in the present, means a whole lot more to me than commemorating something from the past.
Tuesday, November 25, 2003
Next, the Feathers
I give thanks this week for so much, but I will begin with the small political stuff.
President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Frist, and the rest of the GOP tar-wearers have just committed treason against the supporters of their party who have clung to the misguided, seriously outdated belief that the GOP is the party of small government. They may be a party of smaller government than the Democrats, but the Dems are the party of government just smaller than socialism.
I give thanks not for the $400 Billion price tag to this prescription drug plan masquerading as a Medicare reform bill. I give thanks not because my generation and those younger than I will have to pull the weight of the Gimme Gimme generation. I give thanks not because the Democrats have not a prayer in November 2004 of reclaiming the White House.
I give thanks because Bush, Frist, et al have just delivered the fiscal conservatives with a small degree of integrity, spine, or naked self-interest to the Libertarian Party.
This shall mark the finest Pyrrhic victory ever seen in American politics. Bush has purchased the votes for 2004 at the cost of the long-term viability of the GOP. Roll in the feathers, boys!
I know, I know... this analysis makes me a frothing lunatic. That's fine. Galileo was a lunatic... until he was shown to be correct. In January, I thought that the GOP would disintegrate by 2020, sending most of its members to the Libertarians, and the rest to the Democrats, leaving again two major parties, each with a starkly contrasted view. The Dems would represent collectivism, and the LP would represent individualism. With the Senate's passage of this hideous crapola, I will revise my estimate and predict that this split and consolidation will be complete by 2012.
Look at the postings on the Wall Street Journal for immediate evidence. Yeah, my response is in there. Why not spray gasoline on the Burning Bush?
I give thanks this week for so much, but I will begin with the small political stuff.
President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Frist, and the rest of the GOP tar-wearers have just committed treason against the supporters of their party who have clung to the misguided, seriously outdated belief that the GOP is the party of small government. They may be a party of smaller government than the Democrats, but the Dems are the party of government just smaller than socialism.
I give thanks not for the $400 Billion price tag to this prescription drug plan masquerading as a Medicare reform bill. I give thanks not because my generation and those younger than I will have to pull the weight of the Gimme Gimme generation. I give thanks not because the Democrats have not a prayer in November 2004 of reclaiming the White House.
I give thanks because Bush, Frist, et al have just delivered the fiscal conservatives with a small degree of integrity, spine, or naked self-interest to the Libertarian Party.
This shall mark the finest Pyrrhic victory ever seen in American politics. Bush has purchased the votes for 2004 at the cost of the long-term viability of the GOP. Roll in the feathers, boys!
I know, I know... this analysis makes me a frothing lunatic. That's fine. Galileo was a lunatic... until he was shown to be correct. In January, I thought that the GOP would disintegrate by 2020, sending most of its members to the Libertarians, and the rest to the Democrats, leaving again two major parties, each with a starkly contrasted view. The Dems would represent collectivism, and the LP would represent individualism. With the Senate's passage of this hideous crapola, I will revise my estimate and predict that this split and consolidation will be complete by 2012.
Look at the postings on the Wall Street Journal for immediate evidence. Yeah, my response is in there. Why not spray gasoline on the Burning Bush?
Monday, November 24, 2003
Plenty O' Tar
I have my brush ready and a tanker truck loaded with tar. Line up the Republicans, please.
This is what passes for leadership from the "MBA President" on the domestic front: a hideous, monstrous redistribution of wealth from the healthy and young to the less-than-healthy and the more-than-young.
Give Bush this- he's consistent. He violates everything he should have learned in an Econ 101 class, beginning early on with steel, then with farms, then lumber, and now with prescription drugs. Mainly, the redistribution of wealth is inefficient to the economy despite the unexcelled efficiency in securing votes. Since spending has not decreased under this Republican president, this Republican House, and this Republican Senate, the money must come to the Federal budget in one of two other ways: via taxes or deficit spending. Shall we pay now or pay later? If the AARP is granted the ability to have their cake and eat it too, we'll go the deficit spending route.
Kudos to MSNBC for correctly noting the ploy by Bush, Frist & Co. as a drive for securing votes.
A dripping goo-wad of tar for the Senate Majority Leader, and bucket of the crud over the head of the President.
Now, line up the Democrats.
Only in the fantasy world that is contained inside Ted Kennedy's alleged mind could phrases such as these emerge:
He claims this $400 BILLION expropriation and transfer of wealth “starts the unraveling of the Medicare system.” Well, spit in my eye. If this begins the unravelling, what would be the booster? A trillion dollars?
And yet, I have to acknowledge that Kennedy is on to something here, even if unwittingly. From his Senate webspage, "Why would anyone want to make these destructive changes in Medicare, which has served senior citizens so well for almost forty years? The answer is a right-wing ideology that says government insurance is bad and private insurance is good."
Herein lies the difference between Republicans and Democrats, as Kennedy correctly nods to. A 'right-winger' believes that government insurance is bad, private insurance is good, and it must be funded by taking money from one set of citizens and giving it to another. A 'left-winger' believes that government insurance is good, private insurance is bad, and it must be funded by taking money from one set of citizens and giving it to another.
Ted, there's still plenty of tar in this tanker. Why not just jump in?
What needs to be challenged is the notion that one person's health care options are the responsibility of someone else. Neither the Republicans nor Democrats are willing to do this. Both believe that the right way for anyone to do anything is to take money form someone else to make it happen.
Ready to vote Libertarian yet? If not, what will it take? Where shall the line be drawn? Is it somehow not clear yet that Republicans and Democrats share the same basic premise for approaching domestic policy?
I have my brush ready and a tanker truck loaded with tar. Line up the Republicans, please.
This is what passes for leadership from the "MBA President" on the domestic front: a hideous, monstrous redistribution of wealth from the healthy and young to the less-than-healthy and the more-than-young.
Give Bush this- he's consistent. He violates everything he should have learned in an Econ 101 class, beginning early on with steel, then with farms, then lumber, and now with prescription drugs. Mainly, the redistribution of wealth is inefficient to the economy despite the unexcelled efficiency in securing votes. Since spending has not decreased under this Republican president, this Republican House, and this Republican Senate, the money must come to the Federal budget in one of two other ways: via taxes or deficit spending. Shall we pay now or pay later? If the AARP is granted the ability to have their cake and eat it too, we'll go the deficit spending route.
Kudos to MSNBC for correctly noting the ploy by Bush, Frist & Co. as a drive for securing votes.
A dripping goo-wad of tar for the Senate Majority Leader, and bucket of the crud over the head of the President.
Now, line up the Democrats.
Only in the fantasy world that is contained inside Ted Kennedy's alleged mind could phrases such as these emerge:
He claims this $400 BILLION expropriation and transfer of wealth “starts the unraveling of the Medicare system.” Well, spit in my eye. If this begins the unravelling, what would be the booster? A trillion dollars?
And yet, I have to acknowledge that Kennedy is on to something here, even if unwittingly. From his Senate webspage, "Why would anyone want to make these destructive changes in Medicare, which has served senior citizens so well for almost forty years? The answer is a right-wing ideology that says government insurance is bad and private insurance is good."
Herein lies the difference between Republicans and Democrats, as Kennedy correctly nods to. A 'right-winger' believes that government insurance is bad, private insurance is good, and it must be funded by taking money from one set of citizens and giving it to another. A 'left-winger' believes that government insurance is good, private insurance is bad, and it must be funded by taking money from one set of citizens and giving it to another.
Ted, there's still plenty of tar in this tanker. Why not just jump in?
What needs to be challenged is the notion that one person's health care options are the responsibility of someone else. Neither the Republicans nor Democrats are willing to do this. Both believe that the right way for anyone to do anything is to take money form someone else to make it happen.
Ready to vote Libertarian yet? If not, what will it take? Where shall the line be drawn? Is it somehow not clear yet that Republicans and Democrats share the same basic premise for approaching domestic policy?
Thursday, November 20, 2003
Rant 2: The Best Tribute Isn't Even Being Considered
I absolutely DETEST the memorials considered finalists for the World Trade Center site. Has it been forgotten what the Twin Towers were?
They were selected by the terrorists for being symbols of capitalism. The Twin Towers were the defining skyscrapers in the defining skyline of the world's definitive financial center. To stand today at the Statue of Liberty and look across the River is to feel the void like a lost love as much to see the void.
There was a lot of talk in the days following the attacks that the American people must not allow the terrorists win, that we must proceed in the spirit of that hated capitalist mantra, 'business as usual'. How right that common wisdom was.
Well, THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON. It isn't that they ended business as usual. Thankfully, that has resumed. But the symbol of capitalism is gone and won't be replaced.
If I was in charge of the process, I would give the greatest tribute to those firefighters who ran up the stairs and to the people who perished while conducting business as usual. I would rebuild the Twin Towers IN EXACTLY THE SAME PLACES UPON WHICH THEY ONCE STOOD, with all dimensions exactly as before save one: the buildings would finish one story higher.
To let the terrorists know that they will not win, they must be given the symbolic 'fuck you' that they gave to the American Spirit. Raising the Twin Towers for all to see is the greatest pair of raised middle fingers the haters of America would ever see.
THAT would be the greatest tribute to those who died in the World Trade Center attacks. No candles or mirrors or list of names will EVER come close to honoring them as new Towers would.
I absolutely DETEST the memorials considered finalists for the World Trade Center site. Has it been forgotten what the Twin Towers were?
They were selected by the terrorists for being symbols of capitalism. The Twin Towers were the defining skyscrapers in the defining skyline of the world's definitive financial center. To stand today at the Statue of Liberty and look across the River is to feel the void like a lost love as much to see the void.
There was a lot of talk in the days following the attacks that the American people must not allow the terrorists win, that we must proceed in the spirit of that hated capitalist mantra, 'business as usual'. How right that common wisdom was.
Well, THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON. It isn't that they ended business as usual. Thankfully, that has resumed. But the symbol of capitalism is gone and won't be replaced.
If I was in charge of the process, I would give the greatest tribute to those firefighters who ran up the stairs and to the people who perished while conducting business as usual. I would rebuild the Twin Towers IN EXACTLY THE SAME PLACES UPON WHICH THEY ONCE STOOD, with all dimensions exactly as before save one: the buildings would finish one story higher.
To let the terrorists know that they will not win, they must be given the symbolic 'fuck you' that they gave to the American Spirit. Raising the Twin Towers for all to see is the greatest pair of raised middle fingers the haters of America would ever see.
THAT would be the greatest tribute to those who died in the World Trade Center attacks. No candles or mirrors or list of names will EVER come close to honoring them as new Towers would.
Rant: I Do Not Care a Whit
I do not care about the details of real crimes involving a single victim and a single perpetrator. I do not care to know about murders, rapes, stick-ups, or assaults. When I see such details in the newspaper, my eyes keep moving. When they are on the TV, the channel is changed. Ditto the radio.
Of course, I am very glad to know that police do the job of apprehending the perpetrators of such crimes. I am pleased that prosecutors see to it that criminals go to jail.
I am sometimes interested in crime statistics. I like to have a handle on crime rates and the relative safety of locations. This is useful news. I can take the information and choose to avoid to go alone into some areas with this knowledge. With it, I can avoid other areas when I have my wife or son with me that I might venture into alone. I rarely complain about seeing crime statistics, because it is actual news I can use.
On the other hand, the crimes allegedly committed by celebrities- Michael Jackson, Kobe Bryant, Phil Spector, Robert Blake- DO NOT INTEREST ME IN THE SLIGHTEST.
Why? Details of the violence instigated by Joe Blow against Jane Doe ARE NOT USEFUL NEWS TO ME. Does the alleged violence of some idiot suddenly become relevant to my life because the idiot is Michael Jackson? NO! Mainly, I am not the sort of man who would allow my 11-year-old son sleep in the home of a man who calls the place "Neverland".
Spare the argument that the parents of the children who did stay at Jackson's crib might have found this sort of news about the man useful. Allegations of Jackson's child molestation is a recurring story, and the fact of the news being splashed all over the media before did nothing to deter these parents here.
When I hear ANY details about Michael Jackson on the radio, I will do as I do when I heard details about Kobe Bryant: I will change the station.
Besides, it's all George W. Bush's fault.
I do not care about the details of real crimes involving a single victim and a single perpetrator. I do not care to know about murders, rapes, stick-ups, or assaults. When I see such details in the newspaper, my eyes keep moving. When they are on the TV, the channel is changed. Ditto the radio.
Of course, I am very glad to know that police do the job of apprehending the perpetrators of such crimes. I am pleased that prosecutors see to it that criminals go to jail.
I am sometimes interested in crime statistics. I like to have a handle on crime rates and the relative safety of locations. This is useful news. I can take the information and choose to avoid to go alone into some areas with this knowledge. With it, I can avoid other areas when I have my wife or son with me that I might venture into alone. I rarely complain about seeing crime statistics, because it is actual news I can use.
On the other hand, the crimes allegedly committed by celebrities- Michael Jackson, Kobe Bryant, Phil Spector, Robert Blake- DO NOT INTEREST ME IN THE SLIGHTEST.
Why? Details of the violence instigated by Joe Blow against Jane Doe ARE NOT USEFUL NEWS TO ME. Does the alleged violence of some idiot suddenly become relevant to my life because the idiot is Michael Jackson? NO! Mainly, I am not the sort of man who would allow my 11-year-old son sleep in the home of a man who calls the place "Neverland".
Spare the argument that the parents of the children who did stay at Jackson's crib might have found this sort of news about the man useful. Allegations of Jackson's child molestation is a recurring story, and the fact of the news being splashed all over the media before did nothing to deter these parents here.
When I hear ANY details about Michael Jackson on the radio, I will do as I do when I heard details about Kobe Bryant: I will change the station.
Besides, it's all George W. Bush's fault.
Monday, November 17, 2003
I Could Have Written This One
George Will's latest column reads like one of my spiels on my late radio show, Laissez Faire.
Back when I lived in Cleveland, I traded messages with now-Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich. I don't have the first, since it was an email, but I have the response from him. It is clear that he thought I was a Republican (what else could there be besides Republicans and Democrats?) because he replied, "I voted with the President on this issue". Well, that was the form-letter response he sent out to the other side. I didn't get that it was a form letter until after I sent the following reply:
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Attn: Dennis J. Kucinich
1730 Longworth Office Building
Washington DC 20515
Dear Mr. Kucinich: July 18, 2002
I am in receipt of your letter which responded to mine regarding steel tariffs. Thank you for your response. It is gratifying to know that the comments were read and considered
I am not quite sure what I wrote, since it was an email, so I would like to add a few more thoughts.
As I understand it, the problem with other nations “dumping” steel is that it causes there to be too much steel on the market, which causes the price of steel to plunge, making the relatively less subsidized American steel less competitive. If this is true, why were tariffs the solution of choice? Do you know what a tariff does?
A tariff on imported steel is a subsidy for American steel. No problem so far, since the point of the policy was to boost the US steel industry… except that any time you subsidize anything, you get more of it, because there is greater incentive to produce and try to gain market share. If the problem is that the price is too low, the tariff raises the price, and that looks good, right? Unfortunately, whenever prices rise, the incentive is to produce more, which, if acted upon, has the effect of bringing the price right back down because more steel lands on the market, which was the problem in the first place.
Wouldn’t it have been better to devise a policy that would have made it cheaper for Americans to produce steel? If the steel costs less to make, it is easier to meet the competition on price and thus sell the steel.
Besides, cheap steel, while painful for the steel industry, is a positive boon for every other American industry that uses steel. Cheap steel means cheaper cars, tools, appliances, bridges- anything at all that uses steel. In fact, on analysis, it looks like the countries that dump steel actually do us a favor. It may not be politically expedient to say that, but it’s true.
Come to think of it, though, it might be politically expedient to say all of this if phrased properly, after all, the brothers in the UAW must certainly appreciate the availability of cheap steel, as must machinists and other tradesmen and assemblers.
I would be very interested to know what, in your estimation, is fair subsidization. You cited steel that was “unfairly subsidized” by other nations. It interests me because other nations, especially the EU nations but also others, are now looking at our tariffs on steel and calling them unfair subsidies. In light of the host of commodities we have recently subsidized (farm products) or placed tariffs on- (foreign steel and lumber), we face the prospect of a trade war with many of our international friends. Do other nations have a point when they look at our subsidies and call them unfair? And what do American producers of fruit or cotton think of steel tariffs when they are told that tariffs will be placed on American fruit and cotton in response?
So, I have to say that I disagree with your assertion that “tariffs correct this imbalance”. On the whole, I think it is rather like driving on ice on W. 25th Street in January. You start to veer off-course, so you pull the wheel feeling like you’ve got the car under control, but the harder you pull the wheel to straighten out the car, the more you swing it side to side, and less in control. I think if you asked an economist at Cleveland State, you might hear the same thing.
Sincerely Yours-
Michael R. Kole
2436 Grovewood Ave
Parma OH 44134
There was no response from Kucinich on this one. The EU is responding finally, and will target products made in states like California and Florida so as to attack the Bush Administration on the grounds the battle is being fought- tariffs in exchange for the favor, or disfavor, of American voters.
George Will's latest column reads like one of my spiels on my late radio show, Laissez Faire.
Back when I lived in Cleveland, I traded messages with now-Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich. I don't have the first, since it was an email, but I have the response from him. It is clear that he thought I was a Republican (what else could there be besides Republicans and Democrats?) because he replied, "I voted with the President on this issue". Well, that was the form-letter response he sent out to the other side. I didn't get that it was a form letter until after I sent the following reply:
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Attn: Dennis J. Kucinich
1730 Longworth Office Building
Washington DC 20515
Dear Mr. Kucinich: July 18, 2002
I am in receipt of your letter which responded to mine regarding steel tariffs. Thank you for your response. It is gratifying to know that the comments were read and considered
I am not quite sure what I wrote, since it was an email, so I would like to add a few more thoughts.
As I understand it, the problem with other nations “dumping” steel is that it causes there to be too much steel on the market, which causes the price of steel to plunge, making the relatively less subsidized American steel less competitive. If this is true, why were tariffs the solution of choice? Do you know what a tariff does?
A tariff on imported steel is a subsidy for American steel. No problem so far, since the point of the policy was to boost the US steel industry… except that any time you subsidize anything, you get more of it, because there is greater incentive to produce and try to gain market share. If the problem is that the price is too low, the tariff raises the price, and that looks good, right? Unfortunately, whenever prices rise, the incentive is to produce more, which, if acted upon, has the effect of bringing the price right back down because more steel lands on the market, which was the problem in the first place.
Wouldn’t it have been better to devise a policy that would have made it cheaper for Americans to produce steel? If the steel costs less to make, it is easier to meet the competition on price and thus sell the steel.
Besides, cheap steel, while painful for the steel industry, is a positive boon for every other American industry that uses steel. Cheap steel means cheaper cars, tools, appliances, bridges- anything at all that uses steel. In fact, on analysis, it looks like the countries that dump steel actually do us a favor. It may not be politically expedient to say that, but it’s true.
Come to think of it, though, it might be politically expedient to say all of this if phrased properly, after all, the brothers in the UAW must certainly appreciate the availability of cheap steel, as must machinists and other tradesmen and assemblers.
I would be very interested to know what, in your estimation, is fair subsidization. You cited steel that was “unfairly subsidized” by other nations. It interests me because other nations, especially the EU nations but also others, are now looking at our tariffs on steel and calling them unfair subsidies. In light of the host of commodities we have recently subsidized (farm products) or placed tariffs on- (foreign steel and lumber), we face the prospect of a trade war with many of our international friends. Do other nations have a point when they look at our subsidies and call them unfair? And what do American producers of fruit or cotton think of steel tariffs when they are told that tariffs will be placed on American fruit and cotton in response?
So, I have to say that I disagree with your assertion that “tariffs correct this imbalance”. On the whole, I think it is rather like driving on ice on W. 25th Street in January. You start to veer off-course, so you pull the wheel feeling like you’ve got the car under control, but the harder you pull the wheel to straighten out the car, the more you swing it side to side, and less in control. I think if you asked an economist at Cleveland State, you might hear the same thing.
Sincerely Yours-
Michael R. Kole
2436 Grovewood Ave
Parma OH 44134
There was no response from Kucinich on this one. The EU is responding finally, and will target products made in states like California and Florida so as to attack the Bush Administration on the grounds the battle is being fought- tariffs in exchange for the favor, or disfavor, of American voters.
Friday, November 14, 2003
Great Radio Day
Fridays have been great for radio since Rush Limbaugh has been on 'vacation' as George Mason University economist Walter Williams has been subbing. Today is his final fill-in.
Inbetween inspections, I'll tune in Williams on WIBC from 1-4pm, right after having listened to Neal Boortz from 10am to 1pm on WXNT 1430-am.
Two libertarians for six hours... in one day! Very great!
Fridays have been great for radio since Rush Limbaugh has been on 'vacation' as George Mason University economist Walter Williams has been subbing. Today is his final fill-in.
Inbetween inspections, I'll tune in Williams on WIBC from 1-4pm, right after having listened to Neal Boortz from 10am to 1pm on WXNT 1430-am.
Two libertarians for six hours... in one day! Very great!
Thursday, November 13, 2003
Dixon Backlash
Rev. Greg Dixon ran easily the highest profile race for City-County Council the Libertarian Party of Marion County has ever seen. And yet, he may have been more vigorously opposed by long-time libertarians than any other candidate in recent history. I can only chalk it up to a superficial take on the man.
Most know him as his father. Obviously, he isn't his father, but when most people hear the name "Rev. Greg Dixon", they recall the elder man, who took his Indianapolis Baptist Temple to the wall in a tax dispute with the IRS. The elder man is now retired. The younger man now leads the Indianapolis Baptist Temple. I can see the confusion if one heard, "Rev. Greg Dixon of the Indianapolis Baptist Temple". The younger man ran for office this fall.
In case anyone has never experienced a father and adult son before, I'll point this out about the Dixons: they share a lot of values, but they have their own ways of expressing them politically.
I was among the LP officials who met with Dixon The Younger for an exploratory lunch, where we asked him to consider running for office, from Mayor to City-County Council. We knew we had common ground on taxes, but were concerned about his stand on issues such as reproductive rights, drugs, homosexuality, etc. Never mind that as Mayor or City-County Councilman he would not be in a position to affect policy on reproductive rights or drugs... we still wanted to know. His answer was shocking.
He said (and I'm paraphrasing) that he personally opposes abortion, and does not support drug use or homosexuality, but he does not believe that government should make those decisions.
That sold me that he is a libertarian. From then on, I supported and encouraged his campaign. I have also found myself defending it.
I emailed LP members who live in Klop's district, trying to drum up support. In the message, I mentioned that Brad had put together a radio spot with Dixon. I received a curt reply from one members:
"Greg Dixon is no libertarian. Count me out."
One Lucius Alexander had a letter printed in the Oct. 22 Nuvo, thirteen days before the election, that trashed Dixon and Libertarians alike, assailing his candidacy as an axiomatic lack of integrity.
I defended Dixon with a letter of my own, which was printed the day after the election. Thanks, Nuvo.
Nuvo has since printed in the Nov. 12 edition a "thumbsup thumbsdown" slag on local Libertarians,
"Known for losing elections but sticking to principles, this time the party smelled victory and heavily promoted City-County Council candidate the Rev. Greg Dixon, anti-liberty on choice and fuzzy on drug legalization. Libertarians lost both the race and some credibility."
Naturally, if we are losing credibility with the socialist Nuvo, we are probably doing a lot of things right. I will point out again that reproductive rights and drug use are not something a City-County Councilperson can legislate, so the critique is pretty irrelevant.
So, I'd like to know which libertarian principle promoting Dixon violated. OK- I can think of a few. He ran an active, vibrant campaign. He ran to win. Those are hard for the professional iconoclast wing of our party to accept. He raised money. He went door-to-door and met the voters. Those are hard for the air castle-building debate society wing of our party to accept. But he was plain that those things he does not personally support, he does not want government to dictate on.
How I LONG FOR candidates who enunciate this! How right that this sentiment was expressed by an LP candidate! Rev. Dixon expressed glorious tolerance with this position on these issues, something I am betting his detractors have not even considered giving him credit for.
He deserves credit for it.
That is why I wrote the following letter to Nuvo (who really should link their published letters as they do their articles):
Editor-
Should we gather from Lucius Alexander's letter regarding Libertarian city-county council candidate Rev. Greg Dixon that all who refuse to comply with authority are "sleazy"? Or setting fire to their own house?
By that logic, the brave civil rights activists who sat-in at lunch counters merely "sleazy" and "obstructing" the proper mores of the day. Certainly, Rosa Parks was not following her conscience, but merely acting out in reckless defiance. Yes, Mr. Alexander, Parks should have known her place and found her way to the back of the bus, where she might have more properly passed the time drafting legislation to present to the Birmingham city council for the consideration of eliminating Jim Crow.
Far too many people react to the violation of their consciences with quiet acquiescence. A few rare individuals are true to their principles, no matter how grave the threat, and no matter how they may be perceived.
Rev. Dixon is one such man. People like Rev. Dixon make this world a better place for having the courage to do what 99.9% of the population lacks the resolve to undertake. The Libertarian Party reached out to Dixon because he is a man of sterling character and integrity. Agree or disagree with his positions, you know he holds them as a matter of deep, heart-felt conviction.
I must concede that these are characteristics not usually found in those running for public office, and I can sympathize with Mr. Alexander's bewilderment. However, if you want something other than business as usual from officials, you must be willing to vote for those such as Rev. Dixon who sometimes refuse to say, "yes, sir. I will obey."
Sincerely Yours-
Michael R. Kole
Vice Chair, Libertarian Party of Marion County
Besides, the LPMC has run other candidates who personally oppose abortion, such as Andy Horning and Webster Smith. I have never heard of any outcry against them. In fact, those two gentlemen have been revered by local libertarians. It's about time that the Rev. was too.
Rev. Greg Dixon ran easily the highest profile race for City-County Council the Libertarian Party of Marion County has ever seen. And yet, he may have been more vigorously opposed by long-time libertarians than any other candidate in recent history. I can only chalk it up to a superficial take on the man.
Most know him as his father. Obviously, he isn't his father, but when most people hear the name "Rev. Greg Dixon", they recall the elder man, who took his Indianapolis Baptist Temple to the wall in a tax dispute with the IRS. The elder man is now retired. The younger man now leads the Indianapolis Baptist Temple. I can see the confusion if one heard, "Rev. Greg Dixon of the Indianapolis Baptist Temple". The younger man ran for office this fall.
In case anyone has never experienced a father and adult son before, I'll point this out about the Dixons: they share a lot of values, but they have their own ways of expressing them politically.
I was among the LP officials who met with Dixon The Younger for an exploratory lunch, where we asked him to consider running for office, from Mayor to City-County Council. We knew we had common ground on taxes, but were concerned about his stand on issues such as reproductive rights, drugs, homosexuality, etc. Never mind that as Mayor or City-County Councilman he would not be in a position to affect policy on reproductive rights or drugs... we still wanted to know. His answer was shocking.
He said (and I'm paraphrasing) that he personally opposes abortion, and does not support drug use or homosexuality, but he does not believe that government should make those decisions.
That sold me that he is a libertarian. From then on, I supported and encouraged his campaign. I have also found myself defending it.
I emailed LP members who live in Klop's district, trying to drum up support. In the message, I mentioned that Brad had put together a radio spot with Dixon. I received a curt reply from one members:
"Greg Dixon is no libertarian. Count me out."
One Lucius Alexander had a letter printed in the Oct. 22 Nuvo, thirteen days before the election, that trashed Dixon and Libertarians alike, assailing his candidacy as an axiomatic lack of integrity.
I defended Dixon with a letter of my own, which was printed the day after the election. Thanks, Nuvo.
Nuvo has since printed in the Nov. 12 edition a "thumbsup thumbsdown" slag on local Libertarians,
"Known for losing elections but sticking to principles, this time the party smelled victory and heavily promoted City-County Council candidate the Rev. Greg Dixon, anti-liberty on choice and fuzzy on drug legalization. Libertarians lost both the race and some credibility."
Naturally, if we are losing credibility with the socialist Nuvo, we are probably doing a lot of things right. I will point out again that reproductive rights and drug use are not something a City-County Councilperson can legislate, so the critique is pretty irrelevant.
So, I'd like to know which libertarian principle promoting Dixon violated. OK- I can think of a few. He ran an active, vibrant campaign. He ran to win. Those are hard for the professional iconoclast wing of our party to accept. He raised money. He went door-to-door and met the voters. Those are hard for the air castle-building debate society wing of our party to accept. But he was plain that those things he does not personally support, he does not want government to dictate on.
How I LONG FOR candidates who enunciate this! How right that this sentiment was expressed by an LP candidate! Rev. Dixon expressed glorious tolerance with this position on these issues, something I am betting his detractors have not even considered giving him credit for.
He deserves credit for it.
That is why I wrote the following letter to Nuvo (who really should link their published letters as they do their articles):
Editor-
Should we gather from Lucius Alexander's letter regarding Libertarian city-county council candidate Rev. Greg Dixon that all who refuse to comply with authority are "sleazy"? Or setting fire to their own house?
By that logic, the brave civil rights activists who sat-in at lunch counters merely "sleazy" and "obstructing" the proper mores of the day. Certainly, Rosa Parks was not following her conscience, but merely acting out in reckless defiance. Yes, Mr. Alexander, Parks should have known her place and found her way to the back of the bus, where she might have more properly passed the time drafting legislation to present to the Birmingham city council for the consideration of eliminating Jim Crow.
Far too many people react to the violation of their consciences with quiet acquiescence. A few rare individuals are true to their principles, no matter how grave the threat, and no matter how they may be perceived.
Rev. Dixon is one such man. People like Rev. Dixon make this world a better place for having the courage to do what 99.9% of the population lacks the resolve to undertake. The Libertarian Party reached out to Dixon because he is a man of sterling character and integrity. Agree or disagree with his positions, you know he holds them as a matter of deep, heart-felt conviction.
I must concede that these are characteristics not usually found in those running for public office, and I can sympathize with Mr. Alexander's bewilderment. However, if you want something other than business as usual from officials, you must be willing to vote for those such as Rev. Dixon who sometimes refuse to say, "yes, sir. I will obey."
Sincerely Yours-
Michael R. Kole
Vice Chair, Libertarian Party of Marion County
Besides, the LPMC has run other candidates who personally oppose abortion, such as Andy Horning and Webster Smith. I have never heard of any outcry against them. In fact, those two gentlemen have been revered by local libertarians. It's about time that the Rev. was too.
Saturday, November 08, 2003
Lesson For Libertarian Candidates
In the previous post, I have shown some numbers for Brad Klopfenstein's campaign. Remembering that Brad took 262 votes, or 5.38%, take a look at the totals for Precinct 11-1:
CITY-COUNTY COUNCIL DISTRICT 15
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 58 / 27.49%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 83 / 39.34%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 70 / 33.18%
70 votes is 26% of Brad's 262 total votes. What's the deal? Is this the most Libertarian precinct in Marion County? Heh.
STRAIGHT PARTY
Votes / Vote%
REPUBLICAN PARTY (REP) 35 / 38.46%
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DEM) 55 / 60.44%
LIBERTARIAN PARTY (LIB) 1 / 1.10%
Only one stinkin' straight party vote for the LP. So what gives?
Precinct 11-1 is Brad's home precinct. Brad got out and went door-to-door here more than anywhere else. He is well-known by his neighbors as President of his Homeowners Association. He approached his neighbor-voters with a simple message: "I am your neighbor". This message works and needs to be employed in the future by ALL LP candidates, even lineholders. This is the low-hanging fruit!
Consider the math: Brad took 70 votes in his precinct. Let's assume instead that he was a lineholder at home. If he was, it's fair to assume that he would have taken 5% of the 201 votes cast in this race in this precinct rather than the 38.46% he got. He would have gotten 10.5 votes. We'll be generous and round up to 11. That means that he has 59 less votes overall, leaving him 203 votes. His percentage of the vote plunges from 5.38% to 4.16%. In a smaller district, the home precinct matters much more due to being a greater percentage of the whole race.
In the previous post, I have shown some numbers for Brad Klopfenstein's campaign. Remembering that Brad took 262 votes, or 5.38%, take a look at the totals for Precinct 11-1:
CITY-COUNTY COUNCIL DISTRICT 15
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 58 / 27.49%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 83 / 39.34%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 70 / 33.18%
70 votes is 26% of Brad's 262 total votes. What's the deal? Is this the most Libertarian precinct in Marion County? Heh.
STRAIGHT PARTY
Votes / Vote%
REPUBLICAN PARTY (REP) 35 / 38.46%
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DEM) 55 / 60.44%
LIBERTARIAN PARTY (LIB) 1 / 1.10%
Only one stinkin' straight party vote for the LP. So what gives?
Precinct 11-1 is Brad's home precinct. Brad got out and went door-to-door here more than anywhere else. He is well-known by his neighbors as President of his Homeowners Association. He approached his neighbor-voters with a simple message: "I am your neighbor". This message works and needs to be employed in the future by ALL LP candidates, even lineholders. This is the low-hanging fruit!
Consider the math: Brad took 70 votes in his precinct. Let's assume instead that he was a lineholder at home. If he was, it's fair to assume that he would have taken 5% of the 201 votes cast in this race in this precinct rather than the 38.46% he got. He would have gotten 10.5 votes. We'll be generous and round up to 11. That means that he has 59 less votes overall, leaving him 203 votes. His percentage of the vote plunges from 5.38% to 4.16%. In a smaller district, the home precinct matters much more due to being a greater percentage of the whole race.
A Boatload of Impropriety
Ever since arriving in Indy, I had heard from fellow Libertarians that the inner city Marion County Democrats used a lot of dirty tricks at the polling place. I took it all with a grain of salt because I have held the belief that both the GOP and the Dems use dirty tricks. Historically, for every Democratic Boss Tweed, there was a Republican Boss Cox. I never reacted too sharply on behalf of accusers, because they lacked mirrors. Recall the Dems who could point to Florida in 2000 while ignoring their own tactic of using cigarettes to lure the homeless to the polls in Minnesota, where voters can be registered at the polls on election day.
Anyhow, I strongly doubted that much of this nonsense would transpire in an election featuring a mayor's race that was a foregone conclusion a full year before the election. Boy, was I wrong.
The polls opened at 6:00am, and I arrived at my home polling place to vote at 6:02. At 6:14, I arrived at another polling place, Trinity Episcopal Church, to serve as a poll watcher. Immediately, I found a girl distributing literature for the Democrats beyond the 'no electioneering beyond this point' sign. I advised her that she had to be on the right side of the line, to which she responded, "it's dark outside". As the sign did not read, 'no electioneering beyond this point unless it's dark outside,' I had her move, advising her that I would be outside with her if she needed to feel safe. I went inside to advise the judge, who turned out to be a Democrat. He also pointed to the darkness, and I reiterated my point. He made a snide remark about Libertarians being election day amateurs and Democrats being 'professionals'. I discovered that the Democratic precinct committeewoman was the mother of the Judge. She was also the wife of an inspector, and the mother of another paid election official. Another of her sons sat inside wearing a baseball cap promoting Democratic at-large candidate "King Ro" Conley. There was a pile of Democratic literature sitting on a chair 15 feet from the poll.
Before 6:30am, I had seen electioneering and nepotism.
I went out and stood outside with the girl to distribute literature. She mentioned being 16 years old. I asked her if it was her keen interest in politics or a day off school that had her out here. She conceded that it was a little of both. I figured she was pretty honest, so I drilled her with a battery of questions. I found out that she is not a member of the Young Democrats club, but a member of Speedway High School's Key Club, where she and about 30 others volunteered to participate in the elections. Somehow, all of them were distributing literature for the Democrats.
By 6:35, I had seen the use of child labor.
I stayed there until 8:00, leaving because turn-out was very flat, and went to Crispus Attucks Middle School. I was looking forward to going there, as it was once a high school, and home to basketball legend Oscar Robertson. He attended Crispus Attucks when Indianapolis still had segregated schools. At Crispus Attucks I saw amazing nonsense.
A very nice elderly man stood outside to distribute Democratic literature. The first hand-off of literature I observed was done while his arm was around another elderly man and as they were walking beyond the 'no electioneering beyond this point' sign. I mentioned to him that doing this was electioneering. He grinned and laughed, "I know!" I reminded him that it was illegal. He laughed again, "well, I know. I'm sorry". We had this exchange better than 10 times throughout the day.
The Republicans didn't bother to send a poll watcher to either of these polling places, but a Ward Captain did come by and observed the same thing. He made the same complaint with the same result- none. He said he was going to make a call to the Board of Elections.
I chose not to make too great a fuss since the nice old man knew about 90% of the people coming to the polls- almost all elderly black folks just like him. It was an amusing scenario. The voters would approach and I would get to them first, handing them a palm card extolling the virtues of a vote for Brad. I would say, "please consider voting for Brad Klopfenstein for City-County Council. He's endorsed. Thank you." The nice man would put his arm around the voter and confidentially ask, "now, you're going to get the job done, aren't you?" He would hand them a Democratic palm card that instructed the voter how to vote straight ticket. Occasionally, he would follow them right up to the ballot box itself. Not wanting to violate electioneering laws myself, I would scramble to remove the partisan pins I had on my shirt so that I could enter the sanctum to pull the old man out. He would laugh and apologize for "forgetting".
I went to other polling places throughout the day, and at 6:00, I was again at Crispus Attucks. The poll closed, and I removed my pins so that I could enter and observe the closing procedure. There I observed a pile of 'voided' ballots. I noticed that every one of them had a straight ticket vote for the Republicans. Some of those had the straight Republican vote as the only mark on the ballot. Others had both the Republican and Democratic straight ticket, making it a genuine void. A couple of the voids had the Democratic straight ticket and a vote for Brad, making it a genuine void, but telling me that handing them his palm card had an effect. I'm sure one of the nice old men 'helped the voter correct his mistake'.
How much of this was illegal? Probably a good portion of it. How much of it was legal but stinky? Another good portion, no doubt.
I'll say this again, though. The Democrats were well organized in the inner city. The people who worked the polls were not Abduallah supporters. I checked by asking. Many didn't even know who he was. They were purely Democratic Party people. You could have had Newt Gingrich or a hamster running for City County Council as a Democrat, and I have no doubt that the party faithful would have been there to do their jobs. Their jobs included staffing the polling places for better than $100/person, calling those who hadn't voted yet, providing rides- including cabs- to get voters to the polls.
I concluded that the LP will get nowhere in these inner city precincts without an organization to match the Democrats. Hell- the Republicans are nowhere without it. Doubt it? Here are the results of the whole 15th District:
CITY-COUNTY COUNCIL DISTRICT 15; Precincts Reporting 42 / 42 (100.00%)
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 531 / 10.90%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 4,080 / 83.73%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 262 / 5.38%
A very Democratic District! But hey, we used to get excited when our candidates got 2% in such districts, so 5.38% is pretty fine. Where did Brad's votes come from? Not Crispus Attucks. Here are the results for Precinct 7-1, at Crispus Attucks:
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL 138 / 100.00%
STRAIGHT PARTY
Votes / Vote%
REPUBLICAN PARTY (REP) 0 / 0.00%
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DEM) 129 / 100.00%
LIBERTARIAN PARTY (LIB) 0 / 0.00%
CITY-COUNTY COUNCIL DISTRICT 15
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 1 / 0.72%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 136 / 98.55%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 1 / 0.72%
Zero straight party for the Libertarians. Zero straight party for the Republicans. 129 for the Dems. How did those two votes for Brad and the Republican get by?
Precinct 7-6 results, at Crispus Attucks:
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL 7 / 100.00%
STRAIGHT PARTY
Votes / Vote%
REPUBLICAN PARTY (REP) 1 / 20.00%
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DEM) 4 / 80.00%
LIBERTARIAN PARTY (LIB) 0 / 0.00%
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 1 / 16.67%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 5 / 83.33%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 0 / 0.00%
Tiny precinct. I can take a zero here.
Results for Precinct 12-3, also at Crispus Attucks
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL 166 / 100.00%
STRAIGHT PARTY
Votes / Vote%
REPUBLICAN PARTY (REP) 7 / 5.26%
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DEM) 125 / 93.98%
LIBERTARIAN PARTY (LIB) 1 / 0.75%
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 12 / 7.50%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 137 / 85.62%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 11 / 6.88%
This result actually makes me feel great. 11 votes for Brad isn't a lot. It isn't even enough for second place. But in a district like this, I cannot help but believe that handing out his palm cards had an effect. It further makes me question the zeros in Precinct 7-1 especially.
Ever since arriving in Indy, I had heard from fellow Libertarians that the inner city Marion County Democrats used a lot of dirty tricks at the polling place. I took it all with a grain of salt because I have held the belief that both the GOP and the Dems use dirty tricks. Historically, for every Democratic Boss Tweed, there was a Republican Boss Cox. I never reacted too sharply on behalf of accusers, because they lacked mirrors. Recall the Dems who could point to Florida in 2000 while ignoring their own tactic of using cigarettes to lure the homeless to the polls in Minnesota, where voters can be registered at the polls on election day.
Anyhow, I strongly doubted that much of this nonsense would transpire in an election featuring a mayor's race that was a foregone conclusion a full year before the election. Boy, was I wrong.
The polls opened at 6:00am, and I arrived at my home polling place to vote at 6:02. At 6:14, I arrived at another polling place, Trinity Episcopal Church, to serve as a poll watcher. Immediately, I found a girl distributing literature for the Democrats beyond the 'no electioneering beyond this point' sign. I advised her that she had to be on the right side of the line, to which she responded, "it's dark outside". As the sign did not read, 'no electioneering beyond this point unless it's dark outside,' I had her move, advising her that I would be outside with her if she needed to feel safe. I went inside to advise the judge, who turned out to be a Democrat. He also pointed to the darkness, and I reiterated my point. He made a snide remark about Libertarians being election day amateurs and Democrats being 'professionals'. I discovered that the Democratic precinct committeewoman was the mother of the Judge. She was also the wife of an inspector, and the mother of another paid election official. Another of her sons sat inside wearing a baseball cap promoting Democratic at-large candidate "King Ro" Conley. There was a pile of Democratic literature sitting on a chair 15 feet from the poll.
Before 6:30am, I had seen electioneering and nepotism.
I went out and stood outside with the girl to distribute literature. She mentioned being 16 years old. I asked her if it was her keen interest in politics or a day off school that had her out here. She conceded that it was a little of both. I figured she was pretty honest, so I drilled her with a battery of questions. I found out that she is not a member of the Young Democrats club, but a member of Speedway High School's Key Club, where she and about 30 others volunteered to participate in the elections. Somehow, all of them were distributing literature for the Democrats.
By 6:35, I had seen the use of child labor.
I stayed there until 8:00, leaving because turn-out was very flat, and went to Crispus Attucks Middle School. I was looking forward to going there, as it was once a high school, and home to basketball legend Oscar Robertson. He attended Crispus Attucks when Indianapolis still had segregated schools. At Crispus Attucks I saw amazing nonsense.
A very nice elderly man stood outside to distribute Democratic literature. The first hand-off of literature I observed was done while his arm was around another elderly man and as they were walking beyond the 'no electioneering beyond this point' sign. I mentioned to him that doing this was electioneering. He grinned and laughed, "I know!" I reminded him that it was illegal. He laughed again, "well, I know. I'm sorry". We had this exchange better than 10 times throughout the day.
The Republicans didn't bother to send a poll watcher to either of these polling places, but a Ward Captain did come by and observed the same thing. He made the same complaint with the same result- none. He said he was going to make a call to the Board of Elections.
I chose not to make too great a fuss since the nice old man knew about 90% of the people coming to the polls- almost all elderly black folks just like him. It was an amusing scenario. The voters would approach and I would get to them first, handing them a palm card extolling the virtues of a vote for Brad. I would say, "please consider voting for Brad Klopfenstein for City-County Council. He's endorsed. Thank you." The nice man would put his arm around the voter and confidentially ask, "now, you're going to get the job done, aren't you?" He would hand them a Democratic palm card that instructed the voter how to vote straight ticket. Occasionally, he would follow them right up to the ballot box itself. Not wanting to violate electioneering laws myself, I would scramble to remove the partisan pins I had on my shirt so that I could enter the sanctum to pull the old man out. He would laugh and apologize for "forgetting".
I went to other polling places throughout the day, and at 6:00, I was again at Crispus Attucks. The poll closed, and I removed my pins so that I could enter and observe the closing procedure. There I observed a pile of 'voided' ballots. I noticed that every one of them had a straight ticket vote for the Republicans. Some of those had the straight Republican vote as the only mark on the ballot. Others had both the Republican and Democratic straight ticket, making it a genuine void. A couple of the voids had the Democratic straight ticket and a vote for Brad, making it a genuine void, but telling me that handing them his palm card had an effect. I'm sure one of the nice old men 'helped the voter correct his mistake'.
How much of this was illegal? Probably a good portion of it. How much of it was legal but stinky? Another good portion, no doubt.
I'll say this again, though. The Democrats were well organized in the inner city. The people who worked the polls were not Abduallah supporters. I checked by asking. Many didn't even know who he was. They were purely Democratic Party people. You could have had Newt Gingrich or a hamster running for City County Council as a Democrat, and I have no doubt that the party faithful would have been there to do their jobs. Their jobs included staffing the polling places for better than $100/person, calling those who hadn't voted yet, providing rides- including cabs- to get voters to the polls.
I concluded that the LP will get nowhere in these inner city precincts without an organization to match the Democrats. Hell- the Republicans are nowhere without it. Doubt it? Here are the results of the whole 15th District:
CITY-COUNTY COUNCIL DISTRICT 15; Precincts Reporting 42 / 42 (100.00%)
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 531 / 10.90%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 4,080 / 83.73%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 262 / 5.38%
A very Democratic District! But hey, we used to get excited when our candidates got 2% in such districts, so 5.38% is pretty fine. Where did Brad's votes come from? Not Crispus Attucks. Here are the results for Precinct 7-1, at Crispus Attucks:
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL 138 / 100.00%
STRAIGHT PARTY
Votes / Vote%
REPUBLICAN PARTY (REP) 0 / 0.00%
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DEM) 129 / 100.00%
LIBERTARIAN PARTY (LIB) 0 / 0.00%
CITY-COUNTY COUNCIL DISTRICT 15
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 1 / 0.72%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 136 / 98.55%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 1 / 0.72%
Zero straight party for the Libertarians. Zero straight party for the Republicans. 129 for the Dems. How did those two votes for Brad and the Republican get by?
Precinct 7-6 results, at Crispus Attucks:
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL 7 / 100.00%
STRAIGHT PARTY
Votes / Vote%
REPUBLICAN PARTY (REP) 1 / 20.00%
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DEM) 4 / 80.00%
LIBERTARIAN PARTY (LIB) 0 / 0.00%
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 1 / 16.67%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 5 / 83.33%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 0 / 0.00%
Tiny precinct. I can take a zero here.
Results for Precinct 12-3, also at Crispus Attucks
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL 166 / 100.00%
STRAIGHT PARTY
Votes / Vote%
REPUBLICAN PARTY (REP) 7 / 5.26%
DEMOCRATIC PARTY (DEM) 125 / 93.98%
LIBERTARIAN PARTY (LIB) 1 / 0.75%
Votes / Vote%
6A PHILLIP SCHOFFSTALL (REP) 12 / 7.50%
6B P. MUUMBA ABDUALLAH (DEM) 137 / 85.62%
6C BRAD KLOPFENSTEIN (LIB) 11 / 6.88%
This result actually makes me feel great. 11 votes for Brad isn't a lot. It isn't even enough for second place. But in a district like this, I cannot help but believe that handing out his palm cards had an effect. It further makes me question the zeros in Precinct 7-1 especially.
Wednesday, November 05, 2003
So Much To Say
Too much, in fact, and I'm pretty burned out, so I'll summarize. I'll flesh this out later.
There were some major bummers: Libertarian incumbent (how wonderful that sounds!) Phil Miller was defeated in his Greenfield city council race; Rev. Greg Dixon finished third in his Indy city-county council race; Brad did not get double-digits in his race; No victories in Noblesville; No upset for Dean Barkley in Carmel.
Major breakthroughs: Miller got 47% in losing- no landslide against, as is always predicted after a Libertarian win, along with the city in flames; Dixon's 14+% was highest ever for a Libertarian in a 3-way partisan city-county council race; Klop got 34.3% in his home district, narrowly trailing the Democrat, who had 38.8% there. By the way, the Dem had about 84% overall, so that mark in the home precinct is awesome; the Noblesville losses were with 43% by Rob Place and 40% by Mark Schreiber; Dean took 27% from a man who had $150,000 more to spend.
I witnessed with genuine awe, and genuine horror, the efficiency of the inner-city Democrats. They do a lot of things very professionally, and a lot of things rather improperly. That will have to be an item all by itself.
Too much, in fact, and I'm pretty burned out, so I'll summarize. I'll flesh this out later.
There were some major bummers: Libertarian incumbent (how wonderful that sounds!) Phil Miller was defeated in his Greenfield city council race; Rev. Greg Dixon finished third in his Indy city-county council race; Brad did not get double-digits in his race; No victories in Noblesville; No upset for Dean Barkley in Carmel.
Major breakthroughs: Miller got 47% in losing- no landslide against, as is always predicted after a Libertarian win, along with the city in flames; Dixon's 14+% was highest ever for a Libertarian in a 3-way partisan city-county council race; Klop got 34.3% in his home district, narrowly trailing the Democrat, who had 38.8% there. By the way, the Dem had about 84% overall, so that mark in the home precinct is awesome; the Noblesville losses were with 43% by Rob Place and 40% by Mark Schreiber; Dean took 27% from a man who had $150,000 more to spend.
I witnessed with genuine awe, and genuine horror, the efficiency of the inner-city Democrats. They do a lot of things very professionally, and a lot of things rather improperly. That will have to be an item all by itself.
Monday, November 03, 2003
'Twas The Night Before The Election...
Nah, forget it. I'm not that cute. But tomorrow is election day, which means I will be up at 5:00 so that I can dress for the day, vote at my home polling place, and then go to a District 15 polling place in support of Brad Klopfenstein, where I will be until the polls close. After that, party at the Press Club.
Let's recap: Brad's running in a district that has recently voted almost 80% Democrat. Brad is not the Democrat. Nor is he the Republican. Hopeless for a Libertarian? No way! We're not delusional or crazy enough to think that it's a win or nothing deal, so we have plenty of secondary objectives.
1. Win Lockerbie, Brad's home neighborhood and a handful of precincts in the area surrounding Lockerbie, thereby building a base.
2. Come in second, ahead of Republican Phil Schoffstall. That would be an excellent achievement!
3. District-wide double digits would be a great success.
4. Demonstrate to the Marion County LP the value of running an active campaign. Rev. Greg Dixon and Brad are really the only two running active campaigns in Marion Co., and it should be apparent in the results. Dixon walked his whole district. There are some streets that were walked and others that were not, mainly due to limited resources. Just as we have no doubt that Dixon will fare well, and may even win, we have no doubt that Brad's numbers will be higher where the hands were shook and the literature distributed. Time to take the LPMC to the next level.
5. Add party members.
6. Show the voters that the LP's candidates are not kooks or anarchists, but good people with good ideas.
We've already accomplished #6. We'll know tomorrow night whether or not we've accomplished #2-4. #5 will show up over the next two months. Brad earned the F.O.P. endorsement over the other two. The big thrill lies in knowing that something good yet unexpected will come out of Brad's candidacy. Someone he met may be inspired to become a candidate or a supporter. One of his issues may be co-opted by someone who wins office or even by one of the other parties. Something great always comes out of an active and good candidacy.
All of that will make the first drink at the Press Club delicious.
Nah, forget it. I'm not that cute. But tomorrow is election day, which means I will be up at 5:00 so that I can dress for the day, vote at my home polling place, and then go to a District 15 polling place in support of Brad Klopfenstein, where I will be until the polls close. After that, party at the Press Club.
Let's recap: Brad's running in a district that has recently voted almost 80% Democrat. Brad is not the Democrat. Nor is he the Republican. Hopeless for a Libertarian? No way! We're not delusional or crazy enough to think that it's a win or nothing deal, so we have plenty of secondary objectives.
1. Win Lockerbie, Brad's home neighborhood and a handful of precincts in the area surrounding Lockerbie, thereby building a base.
2. Come in second, ahead of Republican Phil Schoffstall. That would be an excellent achievement!
3. District-wide double digits would be a great success.
4. Demonstrate to the Marion County LP the value of running an active campaign. Rev. Greg Dixon and Brad are really the only two running active campaigns in Marion Co., and it should be apparent in the results. Dixon walked his whole district. There are some streets that were walked and others that were not, mainly due to limited resources. Just as we have no doubt that Dixon will fare well, and may even win, we have no doubt that Brad's numbers will be higher where the hands were shook and the literature distributed. Time to take the LPMC to the next level.
5. Add party members.
6. Show the voters that the LP's candidates are not kooks or anarchists, but good people with good ideas.
We've already accomplished #6. We'll know tomorrow night whether or not we've accomplished #2-4. #5 will show up over the next two months. Brad earned the F.O.P. endorsement over the other two. The big thrill lies in knowing that something good yet unexpected will come out of Brad's candidacy. Someone he met may be inspired to become a candidate or a supporter. One of his issues may be co-opted by someone who wins office or even by one of the other parties. Something great always comes out of an active and good candidacy.
All of that will make the first drink at the Press Club delicious.
Sunday, November 02, 2003
Evidence of a One-Newspaper City
First, let's be fair and give credit where credit is due. Today's Star has an excellent pull-out Voters' Guide section that identifies all of the candidates on the ballot, and carries their brief answers to four 'key' questions. This is good stuff, and sadly absent in many other top newspapers.
That highlight is tarnished by a horrible City & State section that features the following:
- Just two days before the election of the Indianapolis Mayor, 29 City-County Council positions, and a host of other offices in communities in the greater Indy area, the only "Election 2003" article on the front page of that prominent section covers one of three underdog Republicans candidates for Governor... a 2004 race. Couldn't that have waited just one more week? Or five? Shouldn't the space have been for any of the races in the election two days away, rather than the one 367 days away? The Star got the '2004' graffic right on the website, by the way.
- As if that wasn't enough, on page B3, there is a second article on the same man, in the same race 367 days away, by the same writer, Mary Beth Schneider. Wow.
- In the interest of fairness, I guess, there is an article on the two Republicans who are extreme underdogs in the race that is 367 days away and not two days away, on B7.
One can only surmise that stories on the minor Republican contestants in the far-off governors race somehow hits the target with the Star's demographic(s) of choice for the race that is 367 days away to be so highlighted in the City & State section over the race that is two days away. One can further conclude that if there was another real daily paper in town, the crucial City-County Council races would get proper coverage. Good as the capsule coverage is, it still could have been so much more.
Speaking of proper coverage, I find the coverage of the Marion County LP's press conference, and the substance contained therein, appalling.
Here is the LP press release:
Patrice Abduallah lists donation from city fund
Libertarians call for Abduallah to exit city-county council race, seek investigation of mayor’s GIPC actions
As a usual practice, the Libertarian Party will occasionally pull Republican and Democrat campaign finance reports.
While reviewing the campaign finance report of Patrice Abduallah (Democrat seeking the City-County Council District 15 seat) that was filed with the Marion County Election board Oct. 17, we noted a donation of $3,450 made to Mr. Abduallah on Sept. 13 by the Greater Indianapolis Progress Committee (GIPC).
This donation is inappropriate for the following reasons:
GIPC is a 501c3 corporation. All corporations are limited by Indiana law to giving no more than $2,000 combined in a calendar year to all candidates who are seeking local offices. Mr. Abduallah received almost 1½ times that amount.
Quoting the GIPC’s own website, "Funding for (GIPC) Action Grants comes from application fees paid to the city by businesses requesting tax abatement." Most importantly, we believe that some of those public funds may have been used to help fund Mr. Abduallah’s campaign.
Additionally, Mr. Abduallah’s campaign finance report indicates that there is $755 in cash missing from his campaign fund between April and October. It also lists the repayment of a loan for $500 when no loan has ever been listed in his report.
The Libertarian Party will be requesting that the following actions occur:
That the entire $3,450 be immediately returned to the City of Indianapolis.
That Mr. Abduallah withdraws from his city-county council race.
That Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi begins an investigation into the $3,450 donation from GIPC to Mr. Abduallah.
Additionally, the Libertarian Party of Marion County will be filing a complaint with the Marion County Election Board regarding the improper donation from GIPC to Mr. Abduallah.
GIPC is a nonprofit organization that implements the Neighborhood Action Grant program. Application fees for tax abatement and other private donations fund these grants. GIPC is run out of Mayor Bart Peterson’s office on the 25th floor of the City-County Building. It falls under the responsibility of the Deputy Mayor for Public Policy.
The Libertarian Party of Marion County finds this all very disturbing. We also have the following questions regarding GIPC:
Why is an organization housed within Mayor Bart Peterson’s office making political donations?
Why is GIPC using public funds for projects that are not included in the city budget? This puts spending outside of the control of the City-County Council, which by law is supposed to control the pursestrings.
Why is it that when organizations default on the conditions of their abatement, the clawback penalty is awarded as a grant by the mayor to community organizations instead of being returned to the county budget? Amounts from organizations like United Airlines and Bindley-Western make a substantial impact on the county budget.
How could Marion County Treasurer Greg Jordan and Marion County Auditor Marty Womacks not be aware of this sketchy revenue stream?
Are there other questionable uses of grant money by GIPC?
Are there other agencies that bestow public funds upon candidates?
To the objective reader: Does this release contain a personal attack on any individual? Does it contain a smear? Is it a slam? Or, does it ask questions? Should these questions be asked, given the information provided? Do the questions merit investigation by public officials in a position of oversight, by watchdog groups, and by the press? When filling out the forms, the applicant is warned that they are to be filled out correctly, for to do otherwise is to commit perjury.
The LP could have inferred the possibility of incompetence on the part of the person filling out the form, but did not. Lying could have been inferred, but was not. Questions were asked, with restraint, and in the interest of the public.
Here is the Star's original story:
Candidate fixes error as Libertarians complain
October 29, 2003
The Marion County Libertarian Party on Tuesday criticized Democratic City-County Council candidate Patrice Abduallah for an error on a recent campaign-finance filing.
The statement, filed Oct. 17, included a $3,450 contribution from the Greater Indianapolis Progress Committee, an arm of city government that is not allowed to make political contributions.
Abduallah said the listing was a typo -- it should have read "Greater Islamic Progress Committee" -- and filed an amendment Tuesday correcting the error.
Abduallah is running in the heavily Democratic 15th District, which includes portions of Downtown, the Near Northside and the Westside.
Just a typo. No problem, folks. Nothing to see here. Move along. Picture the cop in South Park, as I do.
Remembering that this was a non-story, here is what the Star wrote several days later, in their Sunday edition:
No pulling punches
Politicians, and the people who work for them, become different people in the days leading up to Election Day. This year has been no different.
The week started off with Brad Klopfenstein, executive director of the Indiana Libertarian Party and a City-County Council candidate in Downtown's District 15, holding a news conference to slam Democratic opponent Patrice Abduallah.
Libertarians held forth at the Indianapolis Press Club to attack Abduallah for a $3,400 contribution that appeared on his campaign finance statement as coming from the "Greater Indianapolis Progress Committee" -- a quasi-governmental agency legally barred from giving contributions.
Of course, by the time cameras were rolling, Abduallah had said the item was a typo -- it should have read "Greater Islamic Progress Committee" -- and had filed an amendment. A reporter called Klopfenstein the night before to see whether he would still hold the news conference.
He would, he said, admitting that the move might be "a little sensationalistic."
So, who is guilty here of a slam? The unnamed Star reporter or the LP? Who is guilty of an attack? The unnamed Star reporter or the LP? No pulling punches: that would be John Fritze, who is the unnamed reporter. He, along with the anonymous editor, appear to be different 'reporters' when writing collectively under the cloak of the 'Public Interest' column.
First, let's be fair and give credit where credit is due. Today's Star has an excellent pull-out Voters' Guide section that identifies all of the candidates on the ballot, and carries their brief answers to four 'key' questions. This is good stuff, and sadly absent in many other top newspapers.
That highlight is tarnished by a horrible City & State section that features the following:
- Just two days before the election of the Indianapolis Mayor, 29 City-County Council positions, and a host of other offices in communities in the greater Indy area, the only "Election 2003" article on the front page of that prominent section covers one of three underdog Republicans candidates for Governor... a 2004 race. Couldn't that have waited just one more week? Or five? Shouldn't the space have been for any of the races in the election two days away, rather than the one 367 days away? The Star got the '2004' graffic right on the website, by the way.
- As if that wasn't enough, on page B3, there is a second article on the same man, in the same race 367 days away, by the same writer, Mary Beth Schneider. Wow.
- In the interest of fairness, I guess, there is an article on the two Republicans who are extreme underdogs in the race that is 367 days away and not two days away, on B7.
One can only surmise that stories on the minor Republican contestants in the far-off governors race somehow hits the target with the Star's demographic(s) of choice for the race that is 367 days away to be so highlighted in the City & State section over the race that is two days away. One can further conclude that if there was another real daily paper in town, the crucial City-County Council races would get proper coverage. Good as the capsule coverage is, it still could have been so much more.
Speaking of proper coverage, I find the coverage of the Marion County LP's press conference, and the substance contained therein, appalling.
Here is the LP press release:
Patrice Abduallah lists donation from city fund
Libertarians call for Abduallah to exit city-county council race, seek investigation of mayor’s GIPC actions
As a usual practice, the Libertarian Party will occasionally pull Republican and Democrat campaign finance reports.
While reviewing the campaign finance report of Patrice Abduallah (Democrat seeking the City-County Council District 15 seat) that was filed with the Marion County Election board Oct. 17, we noted a donation of $3,450 made to Mr. Abduallah on Sept. 13 by the Greater Indianapolis Progress Committee (GIPC).
This donation is inappropriate for the following reasons:
GIPC is a 501c3 corporation. All corporations are limited by Indiana law to giving no more than $2,000 combined in a calendar year to all candidates who are seeking local offices. Mr. Abduallah received almost 1½ times that amount.
Quoting the GIPC’s own website, "Funding for (GIPC) Action Grants comes from application fees paid to the city by businesses requesting tax abatement." Most importantly, we believe that some of those public funds may have been used to help fund Mr. Abduallah’s campaign.
Additionally, Mr. Abduallah’s campaign finance report indicates that there is $755 in cash missing from his campaign fund between April and October. It also lists the repayment of a loan for $500 when no loan has ever been listed in his report.
The Libertarian Party will be requesting that the following actions occur:
That the entire $3,450 be immediately returned to the City of Indianapolis.
That Mr. Abduallah withdraws from his city-county council race.
That Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi begins an investigation into the $3,450 donation from GIPC to Mr. Abduallah.
Additionally, the Libertarian Party of Marion County will be filing a complaint with the Marion County Election Board regarding the improper donation from GIPC to Mr. Abduallah.
GIPC is a nonprofit organization that implements the Neighborhood Action Grant program. Application fees for tax abatement and other private donations fund these grants. GIPC is run out of Mayor Bart Peterson’s office on the 25th floor of the City-County Building. It falls under the responsibility of the Deputy Mayor for Public Policy.
The Libertarian Party of Marion County finds this all very disturbing. We also have the following questions regarding GIPC:
Why is an organization housed within Mayor Bart Peterson’s office making political donations?
Why is GIPC using public funds for projects that are not included in the city budget? This puts spending outside of the control of the City-County Council, which by law is supposed to control the pursestrings.
Why is it that when organizations default on the conditions of their abatement, the clawback penalty is awarded as a grant by the mayor to community organizations instead of being returned to the county budget? Amounts from organizations like United Airlines and Bindley-Western make a substantial impact on the county budget.
How could Marion County Treasurer Greg Jordan and Marion County Auditor Marty Womacks not be aware of this sketchy revenue stream?
Are there other questionable uses of grant money by GIPC?
Are there other agencies that bestow public funds upon candidates?
To the objective reader: Does this release contain a personal attack on any individual? Does it contain a smear? Is it a slam? Or, does it ask questions? Should these questions be asked, given the information provided? Do the questions merit investigation by public officials in a position of oversight, by watchdog groups, and by the press? When filling out the forms, the applicant is warned that they are to be filled out correctly, for to do otherwise is to commit perjury.
The LP could have inferred the possibility of incompetence on the part of the person filling out the form, but did not. Lying could have been inferred, but was not. Questions were asked, with restraint, and in the interest of the public.
Here is the Star's original story:
Candidate fixes error as Libertarians complain
October 29, 2003
The Marion County Libertarian Party on Tuesday criticized Democratic City-County Council candidate Patrice Abduallah for an error on a recent campaign-finance filing.
The statement, filed Oct. 17, included a $3,450 contribution from the Greater Indianapolis Progress Committee, an arm of city government that is not allowed to make political contributions.
Abduallah said the listing was a typo -- it should have read "Greater Islamic Progress Committee" -- and filed an amendment Tuesday correcting the error.
Abduallah is running in the heavily Democratic 15th District, which includes portions of Downtown, the Near Northside and the Westside.
Just a typo. No problem, folks. Nothing to see here. Move along. Picture the cop in South Park, as I do.
Remembering that this was a non-story, here is what the Star wrote several days later, in their Sunday edition:
No pulling punches
Politicians, and the people who work for them, become different people in the days leading up to Election Day. This year has been no different.
The week started off with Brad Klopfenstein, executive director of the Indiana Libertarian Party and a City-County Council candidate in Downtown's District 15, holding a news conference to slam Democratic opponent Patrice Abduallah.
Libertarians held forth at the Indianapolis Press Club to attack Abduallah for a $3,400 contribution that appeared on his campaign finance statement as coming from the "Greater Indianapolis Progress Committee" -- a quasi-governmental agency legally barred from giving contributions.
Of course, by the time cameras were rolling, Abduallah had said the item was a typo -- it should have read "Greater Islamic Progress Committee" -- and had filed an amendment. A reporter called Klopfenstein the night before to see whether he would still hold the news conference.
He would, he said, admitting that the move might be "a little sensationalistic."
So, who is guilty here of a slam? The unnamed Star reporter or the LP? Who is guilty of an attack? The unnamed Star reporter or the LP? No pulling punches: that would be John Fritze, who is the unnamed reporter. He, along with the anonymous editor, appear to be different 'reporters' when writing collectively under the cloak of the 'Public Interest' column.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)