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!
Friday, November 28, 2003
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.
Wednesday, October 29, 2003
Many Inspections Means USA Today For Lunch.
While I do devour the newspaper, I enjoyed a Hardee's 'Thickburger'. They really are terrific fast food. Busy times in the field means the 'Across the USA' section, which offered two positive stories that should have gotten wider coverage.
From Palmer, Alaska, "Phillip Mielke, 44, a minister who fatally shot two burglars at his church in Big Lake, was acquitted on all counts. He had been charged with manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide."
I like a preacher who packs heat, and I like even more a sensible jury.
From Washington D.C., "The police chief supports Mayor Anthony Williams' push for stronger penalties against juvenile offenders. Metropolitan Police Chief Charles Ramsey said many crimes committed by those under the age of 18 are not child's play. The city's culture of violence will change only when people understand the consequences of their actions, he said. "
I like a rational mayor in a crime-addled city. I like even more a rational police chief supporting a rational mayor in a crime-addled city. Go figure- two high-ranking public officials talking about cause and effect. It warms the heart and clears the bleary eyes.
While I do devour the newspaper, I enjoyed a Hardee's 'Thickburger'. They really are terrific fast food. Busy times in the field means the 'Across the USA' section, which offered two positive stories that should have gotten wider coverage.
From Palmer, Alaska, "Phillip Mielke, 44, a minister who fatally shot two burglars at his church in Big Lake, was acquitted on all counts. He had been charged with manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide."
I like a preacher who packs heat, and I like even more a sensible jury.
From Washington D.C., "The police chief supports Mayor Anthony Williams' push for stronger penalties against juvenile offenders. Metropolitan Police Chief Charles Ramsey said many crimes committed by those under the age of 18 are not child's play. The city's culture of violence will change only when people understand the consequences of their actions, he said. "
I like a rational mayor in a crime-addled city. I like even more a rational police chief supporting a rational mayor in a crime-addled city. Go figure- two high-ranking public officials talking about cause and effect. It warms the heart and clears the bleary eyes.
Well? Which Way Is It?
I've never been a fan of the phrase, "it's all relative," but I can see the distinction in the following case.
In the US, collectivist Democrats (is that redundant?), Republicans (is that, too?), and other economic authoritarians are fond of farm subsidies, often on the grounds of boosting the poor and oppressed who happen to be farmers.
However, outside the US, these same subsidies were denounced in the 22nd Socialist Congress, as reported in today's USA Today. Delegates "called for an end to agricultural subsidies in the United States, the European Union and Japan, saying they were strangling economic growth in developing nations."
I guess there is just no pleasing meddling busybodies. They do give socialists here a good reason to fear their international comrades: the poor here are viewed as the rich everywhere else, and will be treated with the same regard as the Bolsheviks treated owners of mom & pop stores in 1917.
I've never been a fan of the phrase, "it's all relative," but I can see the distinction in the following case.
In the US, collectivist Democrats (is that redundant?), Republicans (is that, too?), and other economic authoritarians are fond of farm subsidies, often on the grounds of boosting the poor and oppressed who happen to be farmers.
However, outside the US, these same subsidies were denounced in the 22nd Socialist Congress, as reported in today's USA Today. Delegates "called for an end to agricultural subsidies in the United States, the European Union and Japan, saying they were strangling economic growth in developing nations."
I guess there is just no pleasing meddling busybodies. They do give socialists here a good reason to fear their international comrades: the poor here are viewed as the rich everywhere else, and will be treated with the same regard as the Bolsheviks treated owners of mom & pop stores in 1917.
Need More Hours!
Life has been so full lately. I was telling Ame how I had a minute to reflect on my 13 months in Indiana, and the full immersion. I have so many exciting things going on, I am finding it extremely difficult to keep up.
I am the manager of an active campaign that can use every waking minute I have to offer. I have a refinancing deal needing my attention. My trip with Ame to visit Alex in Spain needs final details solidified. And I haven't called Mom in a while. We want to buy a house next year and I may run for office myself, all of which will require a lot of planning and work. This blogging isn't priority #1, but it sure helps to clear my head for transitioning between tasks.
Tonight was hockey, which means I'll be awake for a good while. It wasn't my best game, but I'll chalk that up to wearing a face cage for the first time ever. It really was harder to see the game. I'd always been told that at first it is, but really downplayed it. No goals, no assists, but good aggressive penalty killing and a +1. I'll take it.
Life has been so full lately. I was telling Ame how I had a minute to reflect on my 13 months in Indiana, and the full immersion. I have so many exciting things going on, I am finding it extremely difficult to keep up.
I am the manager of an active campaign that can use every waking minute I have to offer. I have a refinancing deal needing my attention. My trip with Ame to visit Alex in Spain needs final details solidified. And I haven't called Mom in a while. We want to buy a house next year and I may run for office myself, all of which will require a lot of planning and work. This blogging isn't priority #1, but it sure helps to clear my head for transitioning between tasks.
Tonight was hockey, which means I'll be awake for a good while. It wasn't my best game, but I'll chalk that up to wearing a face cage for the first time ever. It really was harder to see the game. I'd always been told that at first it is, but really downplayed it. No goals, no assists, but good aggressive penalty killing and a +1. I'll take it.
Details
I have had a few requests for details on the questions raised by the LP of Marion County regarding the Abduallah paperwork. Follow this link for the LPIN press release. This link will give the Indy Star's brief report.
It interests me that the Star report does not even mention either of Abduallah's Libertarian opponents: Brad Klopfenstein (even though he was at the press conference) and Republican Phil Schoffstall. Could it be that they don't care to work against their endorsement of Abduallah?
It interests me to see if this story will ever be picked up in earnest. RTV6 and Channel 13 each ran segments running 60 seconds or less yesterday on their early evening news, but not on their late news.
I have had a few requests for details on the questions raised by the LP of Marion County regarding the Abduallah paperwork. Follow this link for the LPIN press release. This link will give the Indy Star's brief report.
It interests me that the Star report does not even mention either of Abduallah's Libertarian opponents: Brad Klopfenstein (even though he was at the press conference) and Republican Phil Schoffstall. Could it be that they don't care to work against their endorsement of Abduallah?
It interests me to see if this story will ever be picked up in earnest. RTV6 and Channel 13 each ran segments running 60 seconds or less yesterday on their early evening news, but not on their late news.
Tuesday, October 28, 2003
Making Waves
Brad was doing his homework- checking to make sure everything looked right with the pre-election paperwork he filed, and that of his opponents- when he discovered something a bit odd: Democrat Patrice Abduallah's form listed a donor that happens to be a public entity.
What are the possible scenarios? 1. He received money from a public entity; 2. He made a significant error on his form.
If 1. is true, then either something is amiss with either that public entity, the candidate, or both. If 2. is true, there is something amiss with the candidate's effort.
So, the LP went to the press this morning to lay out its findings. That's about all we are going to do about it- put the info out there and see if it has merit.
I'm betting it's a mistake of some kind. Still, a significant mistake made on a campaign finance form strikes me as a telling sign. After all, the City-County Council has control over the power to tax and to spend. One need not be a CPA to be a Councilperson, however, a basic ability to tend to important details should matter to the voters of Indianapolis.
Let's see if the voters of District 15 notice and if they change their 80% Democratic voting habits.
Brad was doing his homework- checking to make sure everything looked right with the pre-election paperwork he filed, and that of his opponents- when he discovered something a bit odd: Democrat Patrice Abduallah's form listed a donor that happens to be a public entity.
What are the possible scenarios? 1. He received money from a public entity; 2. He made a significant error on his form.
If 1. is true, then either something is amiss with either that public entity, the candidate, or both. If 2. is true, there is something amiss with the candidate's effort.
So, the LP went to the press this morning to lay out its findings. That's about all we are going to do about it- put the info out there and see if it has merit.
I'm betting it's a mistake of some kind. Still, a significant mistake made on a campaign finance form strikes me as a telling sign. After all, the City-County Council has control over the power to tax and to spend. One need not be a CPA to be a Councilperson, however, a basic ability to tend to important details should matter to the voters of Indianapolis.
Let's see if the voters of District 15 notice and if they change their 80% Democratic voting habits.
Sunday, October 26, 2003
Status Check
It amazes me how capitalism is the whipping boy for the world's woes, when it is merely a system of interactions, not a motive.
Capitalism is that system by which individuals own property and control the use of it. In my three-word definition of both capitalism and libertarianism, it comes out like this: you own yourself.
Many people ascribe greed, avarice, and a host of other negatives to capitalism, when it is so clear that these motives are just as common- if not moreso- in countries that are less capitalist than the United States. For a fuller definition of capitalism and libertarianism, I use this: "you are free to do what you like with your life so long as you do not initiate force or fraud on another human being".
After failing to see anything of interest in the political coverage of this morning's Star, I turned to the New York Times best seller's list. There at the top of the Hardcover Non-Fiction List is Michael Moore's "Dude, Where's My Country?"
I won't make the crack about Moore's book being in the Non-Fiction list that is so common. What I will point out is that Moore attacks capitalism, yet Moore is a capitalist.
Observe that his book is not atop the "Hardcover Most Given Away to Libraries List". Nor is it on the "Hardcover Produced by a Non-Profit Organization". Nor is it atop the "Hardcover Produced by a Collective List".
Interestingly, even though Moore himself claims the book is a collaborative work, with a team of fact-checkers poring over every assertion, Moore takes sole credit for the work on the front cover. His books are sold as property to anyone who can afford to buy them. They are not subsidized by the government. They are not sold at a reduced price to those with a lower income. Readers do not flock to Canada to buy Moore's books at a discount (Amazon.com saves you the trouble).
Of course, that is all as it should be. Michael Moore owns himself, and is free to do what he likes with his life so long as he does not initiate force or fraud against anyone. As far as I can tell, he lives out my philosophy to a 'tee'. It does make me wonder why he rails so against the very way he lives his own life, though...
Flipping through Mother Jones is always an excruciating experience for me. The mag has so much potential in being a self-proclaimed hellraiser, but they are so interested in curbing the corporate power they see across the globe that they turn a blind eye the monstrous government power here in the US.
Corporate power does leave me leary, but not in fear, as it does Ma Jones. (A Google search for 'Mother Jones' turns up their link with the description, "A bimonthly magazine of investigative journalism that exposes the evils of the corporate world".) After all, corporations are a device of ownership. Corporations are staffed by people who want to earn money, but rely on voluntary interaction. People in corporations who want to earn money have to offer me something worth my trading my money, or they don't get it.
Can you imagine Wal-Mart rounding up people who haven't bought anything there and forcing them to go to the store and buy things?
Government power is different. Governments are a device of management. Governments are staffed by people who want to manage human interaction, but rely not on voluntary interaction, but on compulsion. People in governments who want my money do not have to offer me something worth my trading my money. They get some of it by intercepting it from my employer before it gets to me, and the rest via the threat of force.
Ma? Given the difference, why so afraid of corporations? You can picture- imagination unnecessary- the IRS rounding up people who haven't paid Federal Income Taxes.
Interestingly, as Mother Jones pushes the socialist from my old neighborhood, Dennis Kucinich, touting his progressive protectionsim in their new issue (not on the web yet), they are just like Michael Moore in being capitalists by accepting scads of advertising dollars from other capitalists, including a few big multinational corporations, like Toyota and Virgin.
The ads are the most fascinating part of Mother Jones. There are ads from Non-Profits such as the ACLU and Amnesty International, but the vast majority are from capitalists. Aveda makes hair products. Eden Foods makes soy milk. Pax World offers mutual funds from companies that pay CEOs less, workers more, are non-defense contractors, etc. These companies are pure capitalists, operating for their own selfish reasons, from the principles they choose, not from ones imposed upon them.
Of course, that is all as it should be. Mother Jones Publisher Jay Harris owns himself, and is free to do what he likes with his life so long as he does not initiate force or fraud against anyone. As far as I can tell, he also lives out my philosophy to a 'tee'. It does make me wonder why his magazine rails so against the very way he lives his own life, though...
The bitter irony is this: capitalists don't really care what your motives are. If you have a product to sell, whether or a book or a magazine, a hybrid car, hemp products, whatever, capitalists say, "welcome to the marketplace, may the best seller win". Indeed, capitalists are incredibly tolerant people, dealing with the competition of other sellers that threaten their very livelihood, even if they dispise the motives of the producers, allowing the choices of consumers to dictate. Capitalists are willing to live side-by-side. Socialists and other attackers of capitalism, on the other hand, are incredibly intolerant and very eager to eliminate the competition of those they dislike, lobbying vigorously to erect laws that would stamp out the producers and methods they dispise, unwilling to co-exist and so contrary to their stated beliefs in tolerance and co-existence.
The other bitter irony is that Mother Jones and other anti-capitalist mags, suhc as the Nation, have more advertising than their pro-capitalist counterparts, such as Reason or Liberty.
Status? Sanity still does not prevail.
It amazes me how capitalism is the whipping boy for the world's woes, when it is merely a system of interactions, not a motive.
Capitalism is that system by which individuals own property and control the use of it. In my three-word definition of both capitalism and libertarianism, it comes out like this: you own yourself.
Many people ascribe greed, avarice, and a host of other negatives to capitalism, when it is so clear that these motives are just as common- if not moreso- in countries that are less capitalist than the United States. For a fuller definition of capitalism and libertarianism, I use this: "you are free to do what you like with your life so long as you do not initiate force or fraud on another human being".
After failing to see anything of interest in the political coverage of this morning's Star, I turned to the New York Times best seller's list. There at the top of the Hardcover Non-Fiction List is Michael Moore's "Dude, Where's My Country?"
I won't make the crack about Moore's book being in the Non-Fiction list that is so common. What I will point out is that Moore attacks capitalism, yet Moore is a capitalist.
Observe that his book is not atop the "Hardcover Most Given Away to Libraries List". Nor is it on the "Hardcover Produced by a Non-Profit Organization". Nor is it atop the "Hardcover Produced by a Collective List".
Interestingly, even though Moore himself claims the book is a collaborative work, with a team of fact-checkers poring over every assertion, Moore takes sole credit for the work on the front cover. His books are sold as property to anyone who can afford to buy them. They are not subsidized by the government. They are not sold at a reduced price to those with a lower income. Readers do not flock to Canada to buy Moore's books at a discount (Amazon.com saves you the trouble).
Of course, that is all as it should be. Michael Moore owns himself, and is free to do what he likes with his life so long as he does not initiate force or fraud against anyone. As far as I can tell, he lives out my philosophy to a 'tee'. It does make me wonder why he rails so against the very way he lives his own life, though...
Flipping through Mother Jones is always an excruciating experience for me. The mag has so much potential in being a self-proclaimed hellraiser, but they are so interested in curbing the corporate power they see across the globe that they turn a blind eye the monstrous government power here in the US.
Corporate power does leave me leary, but not in fear, as it does Ma Jones. (A Google search for 'Mother Jones' turns up their link with the description, "A bimonthly magazine of investigative journalism that exposes the evils of the corporate world".) After all, corporations are a device of ownership. Corporations are staffed by people who want to earn money, but rely on voluntary interaction. People in corporations who want to earn money have to offer me something worth my trading my money, or they don't get it.
Can you imagine Wal-Mart rounding up people who haven't bought anything there and forcing them to go to the store and buy things?
Government power is different. Governments are a device of management. Governments are staffed by people who want to manage human interaction, but rely not on voluntary interaction, but on compulsion. People in governments who want my money do not have to offer me something worth my trading my money. They get some of it by intercepting it from my employer before it gets to me, and the rest via the threat of force.
Ma? Given the difference, why so afraid of corporations? You can picture- imagination unnecessary- the IRS rounding up people who haven't paid Federal Income Taxes.
Interestingly, as Mother Jones pushes the socialist from my old neighborhood, Dennis Kucinich, touting his progressive protectionsim in their new issue (not on the web yet), they are just like Michael Moore in being capitalists by accepting scads of advertising dollars from other capitalists, including a few big multinational corporations, like Toyota and Virgin.
The ads are the most fascinating part of Mother Jones. There are ads from Non-Profits such as the ACLU and Amnesty International, but the vast majority are from capitalists. Aveda makes hair products. Eden Foods makes soy milk. Pax World offers mutual funds from companies that pay CEOs less, workers more, are non-defense contractors, etc. These companies are pure capitalists, operating for their own selfish reasons, from the principles they choose, not from ones imposed upon them.
Of course, that is all as it should be. Mother Jones Publisher Jay Harris owns himself, and is free to do what he likes with his life so long as he does not initiate force or fraud against anyone. As far as I can tell, he also lives out my philosophy to a 'tee'. It does make me wonder why his magazine rails so against the very way he lives his own life, though...
The bitter irony is this: capitalists don't really care what your motives are. If you have a product to sell, whether or a book or a magazine, a hybrid car, hemp products, whatever, capitalists say, "welcome to the marketplace, may the best seller win". Indeed, capitalists are incredibly tolerant people, dealing with the competition of other sellers that threaten their very livelihood, even if they dispise the motives of the producers, allowing the choices of consumers to dictate. Capitalists are willing to live side-by-side. Socialists and other attackers of capitalism, on the other hand, are incredibly intolerant and very eager to eliminate the competition of those they dislike, lobbying vigorously to erect laws that would stamp out the producers and methods they dispise, unwilling to co-exist and so contrary to their stated beliefs in tolerance and co-existence.
The other bitter irony is that Mother Jones and other anti-capitalist mags, suhc as the Nation, have more advertising than their pro-capitalist counterparts, such as Reason or Liberty.
Status? Sanity still does not prevail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)