Ron Paul Running Again

The former Libertarian candidate for President, and 9-term Republican Congressman from Texas is running for President again, this time as a Republican. From an AP Report:

Ron Paul, the iconoclastic nine-term congressman from southeast Texas, took the first step Thursday toward launching a second presidential bid in 2008, this time as a Republican.

Paul filed incorporation papers in Texas on Thursday to create a presidential exploratory committee that allows him and his supporters to collect money on behalf of his bid. This will be Paul's second try for the White House; he was the Libertarian nominee for president in 1988.

I endlessly get the question, "Wouldn't libertarians be better off trying to change the Republican Party from within?" I am shown how a man like Paul barely got 1% in 1988 running for President with an (L) next to his name, but is elected and re-elected repeatedly with an (R) next to his name. Same man, same principles, same votes.

Well, do consider this other part of the AP article:

Paul, of Lake Jackson, acknowledges that the national GOP has never fully embraced him despite his nine terms in office under its banner. He gets little money from the GOP's large traditional donors, but benefits from individual conservative and Libertarian donors outside Texas.

In fact, the GOP undertook a re-districting for the purpose of gerrymandering, not to eliminate a Democrat, but to eliminate Ron Paul! Funny enough, Paul won the next election anyway. From Paul's Wikipedia entry:

After his presidential bid, Paul returned to Congress in 1996. He was again elected as a Republican, but against the wishes of the party leadership, which had backed Paul's primary opponent, the incumbent Democratic representative who had switched party affiliation.

Given the tax-and-spend nature of Republicans, and the "Never Mind The Principles, Just Win" attitude of Republican supporters, I can't see Paul getting very far.

But, because I get the question so endlessly, let's make Paul's campaign the litmus test for the future. I ask those small-l libertarians who vote R to get behind Ron Paul for President. If he wins the Republican nomination, you will have made your point, that the GOP can be reformed from within. After all, this is a 9-term Libertarian/Republican fusion candidate. He's electable, obviously.

As for myself, I have overwhelming doubts that the culture of the Republican Party is any different than before the Congressional beating it just took in November. I look no further than my state government, and a Governor with a nickname like "The Blade" still putting forth budgets that are larger than before, with no actual cuts, with Republicans rah-rahing the thing as great progress. I still believe the best way to pressure Republicans into change is from the outside, putting the votes of fiscal conservatives at stake. The GOP has buried too many libertarians, from Andy Horning here in Indiana, to Ron Paul in Texas.

But, I'll be watching with interest!

State of the State Reviewer

I will represent the Libertarian response to Governor Mitch Daniels' State of the State Address, Tuesday evening on WXNT 1430-am, heard on-air throught Central Indiana, or online at www.wxnt.com.

As I understand it, WXNT's Abdul Hakim Shabazz will host a special evening edition of his show with representatives of the three parties issuing a preview of what we expect to hear, and then a re-cap with our takes on the speech.

These are fun events, as the Republican can be expected to rah-rah or at least spin everything Mitch says, the Democrat will assail or spin everything, and I'm free to simply analyze- does it make government smaller, less expensive, or less intrusive- on those merits.

Look for more broadcast details shortly.

Hat Tip to Congressional Democrats

This comes begrudgingly, because I happen to like foundering members of Congress... which defined the Republican majorities. Those clowns wrote damaging law, but without any particular sense of purpose or urgency.

This is unlike the Democrats. They do have a sense of purpose and urgency. I respect that. I like it a lot better when it happens in the private sector, because my liberty (personal and economic) isn't threatened one iota there. But give the Dems credit- they knew what they wanted to accomplish, and they are accomplishing it.

US House Passes Minimum Wage

No surprise, really. This was high on the Democrats' agenda, and they have the majority. Ever House Democrat voted for a hike in the minimum wage.

Because no Libertarian would have voted in favor of a minimum wage to begin with, let alone a hike, and because too many believe that Libertarians are just a different shade of Republican, I thought it would be useful to trot out the stats. From the AP report:

All 233 Democrats voted for the minimum wage measure, along with 82 Republicans. All 116 votes in opposition came from Republicans.

Get that? 82 US House Republicans voted with the Democrats in support of the minimum wage hike.

Message Recieved and Understood- At Last

At long last, due to severe embarrassment, Bart Peterson now gets it. It's the crime, stupid!

From Matt Tully's Indy Star column:

Mayor Bart Peterson went on TV last night to grab the attention of state lawmakers. He wanted to let them know the state's stumbling capital city has a serious problem with public safety.

Consider the message received. Received like a hard slap to the face. But not because of the mayor's much-touted "prime-time" speech -- the one that got "Inside Edition" bumped from Channel 8's Tuesday night lineup.

Nope. Lawmakers got the message the old-fashioned way -- with a simple street mugging. It happened when freshman state Sen. Sue Errington, D-Muncie, walked outside a Butler-Tarkington CVS and bumped into a pair of thugs. There was a gun and a punch to the eye and, in the end, a missing purse, a few stitches and another ugly headline for the city.

Too bad the great number of homicides wasn't the catalyst to revelation. It took the mugging of a State Senator to bring reality home like a sledgehammer. This has been in plain view for some time. The little people in body bags didn't register, but a State Senator with a shiner and stiches? Whoa, Nelly! We've got a problem!

Once again, I'm glad I left Marion County. It took me two years to figure out that it was not the place I wanted to raise a family. I've lived in areas on the bubble before, and our first Central Indiana residence was another such place. 58th & Keystone- just south of Glendale Mall, and east of Broad Ripple. Would the area rise or fall? It really looked like it could go either way. When you have the ability to choose and are preparing to spend good money on a home, you want certainty. That's why I chose to get out of Marion County and the Warfleigh neighborhood. It held no promise that it would rise, that the energy of Broad Ripple would extend further east, that Glendale Mall would survive and attract top notch retailers, that the negative influence of 38th Street wouldn't continue to drift northerly. We fled. I feel justified in that flight every time I read headlines with endless homicides and punched-out lawmakers.

That's the message Peterson needs to get.

So, Peterson was speechifying on Tuesday, explaining, rationalizing, and preparing the people for a tax hike. From Tully:

Even though the message was received, Peterson spent most of Tuesday explaining the city's plight. The mayor who would be governor boiled it down this way: We're broke, we're crime-ridden and we need a whole lot more cash.

Peterson has been Mayor for how many years now? If the city is broke, the Peterson Adminstration has failed. If the city is crime ridden, the Peterson Administration has failed. If the city needs a whole lot more cash, the Peterson Administration has failed.

Anyway, the mayor went on to announce an $85 million-a-year spending package. It would tackle the city's unfunded police and fire pension debt, a rash of recent anti-crime measures, and future policing and crime-prevention programs.

"The bottom line," Peterson said, "is there are going to be hard decisions. There is not going to be a painless way."

No- This should be an easy decision. It should have been an easy decision all along, but it was too tempting for Peterson to look at sexier things, like trying to get a stadium project under the city's aegis. No, public safety always comes first! Libertarians get this. A Democrat like Peterson only gets it when campaigning or embarrassed. If there's to be any 'pain', it's that tertiary priority items hit the cutting room floor. Big deal. Snip! See? That was easy!

Peterson could have made crime a priority. I understand he ran on it, way back when. It's easy to overlook priorities when they seem not to be problems, but if you don't, they suddenly become huge.

Or, in the case of the murder rate, not so suddenly. Anyhow, this is why JFK said that the time to fix the roof is before the rain. Well, Mayor Peterson, you have a full-blown storm. Better jack your butt up the ladder and fix the stuff before everything inside is flushed away.

Such as more people like me- people who take seriously the task of raising their families in safety.

Time To Examine Priorities In Indy Yet?

It's a shame it comes to this, but if a State Senator get mugged in a city, my bet is that city finally starts taking a good, hard look at its' crime problem.

Welcome to Indianapolis, Senator. From the Indy Star:

Sen. Sue Errington, D-Muncie, was thrown to the ground and lost her purse during the attack outside a CVS, 119 W. 56th St., about 9:30 p.m. Monday, according to an Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department police report.

One of the two robbers showed her a pistol and grabbed the purse, while Errington hung on.

The other bandit struck her in the eye.

When State Senators are being mugged in places perceived as not the hard parts of town, there's a widespread problem. Butler-Tarkington is really a fair place to be, as Indy goes. And yet, people commit these kinds of crimes there.

Is this the wake-up call Indianapolis has needed? It seems the shocking murder total for 2006 wasn't enough to make police and safety top priority, over the new hotel largesse, or socialized football stadium, or a library debacle. Does it take the mugging of a State Senator to provide the impetus to think, "my gosh, our city might not be seen in the most positive light".

Let's hope the light bulbs are appearing over 29 heads in the City-County Council, and one searchlight over the head of the Mayor. Nothing should be prioritized over public safety. Period.

Time To Hide Your Wallet

The Indiana Legislature is in session beginning tomorrow and in the words of Mark Twain, "No man's life nor liberty are safe when the Legislature is in session." I couldn't agree more.

I've posted a listing of the Indiana House & Senate members for Hamilton County, over in the Libertarian Party of Hamilton County blog. Link. Later, I'll review all of the bills these scoundrels, er, elected officials have proposed for this year's full session.

I urge my fellow Libertarian bloggers to list and review the proposed legislation that has been proposed by their elected officials. This is where the rubber meets the road.

2006 Winners & Losers

A short political re-cap as seen through these eyes. First, the winners...

1. Indiana Democrats, on the surface. They won a majority of US House seats this year, ousting three Republican incumbents. That is a big deal, so it was played up on the major media. But there is much more to Indiana politics than the US House. Indeed, we rarely see our US House Reps back home once they win. Dems also won a narrow majority in the Indiana House, which is also quite a reversal in a state that is vastly more conservative than liberal.

2. Fiscal conservatives. No, the Republican Party did not rediscover Barry Goldwater. The Democratic gains in the Congress and the Indiana House brings us gridlock, the partisan battle that will freeze spending far more effectively than a Republican majority any day. I love it!

3. Property Rights. The Kelo v. New London decision opened the door for massive discontent and a wave of new laws limiting the use of eminent domain in Indiana and many, many other states. Very refreshing!

4. District 6 Libertarians. The Bells and crew have made large gains. Today in Hagerstown, an elected Libertarian Judge (Susan Bell) will swear in two elected Libertarian Township officials- Conley Tillson and Steve Coffman. Rex Bell had the strongest showing ever in a 3-way Indiana House race in District 54. Other areas have elected Libertarians, but rather than it being a one-time occurrence, the Wayne and Henry County Libertarians continue to grow and elected more and more to office. Never mind New Hampshire, this is the Free State Project.

5. Jim Irsay. I gotta hand it to the guy. He got all $121 million in naming rights for a stadium he won't own. He gets the lion's share of the operating revenue for the stadium he won't own. He paid almost nothing into the construction of that stadium. After all- he won't own it! The brilliance of Jim Irsay is that he wasn't agressive about promoting this fleecing. He allowed panicky, fearful politicians rush to give him the sun, moon, and stars. He stood quietly and accepted their gifts. All hail Jim Irsay!

Losers

1. The Republican Party. How do you set up the Republicans positioning as a close second? Give them overwhelming majorities across the land and then wait a short while. They had the greatest majorities seen in 100 years of Federal government, and yet failed to advance any meaningful agenda. If I told you ten years ago that the Federal government would advance a sweeping Medicare prescription drug plan, you might have guessed that Teddy Kennedy was President with a Democratic Congress.

2. Indiana Dems. Yes they won that US House majority. Yes, they won the majority in the Indiana House. However, if you can't run a candidate for US Senate, if you lose all three statewide offices, and the overwhelming majority of the state's township offices are won by Republicans, and you barely have a third of the state Senate, you really are the equivalent of a third party. Dems have the gerrymandering of districts to thank for their Indiana House majority, and the ineptitude of Republicans to thank almost entirely for their other gains. Republicans dominate more than 70 of the 92 counties, as was evidenced by the Township returns. Dems were mostly smart enough to ride the wave in. It's hardly a foundation for a lasting shift. The swing voters will certainly swing again.

3. Property Rights. The other wave of laws sweeping Indiana and the country are the smoking bans. Although not intended as such, they are limits on property rights whereby the interests of the patrons trump those of the business property owner. With the War on Food as the next nanny state frontier, the hospitality industry is essentially being dictated to, with owners and patrons losing choices. This is an enormously disturbing trend.

4. Fiscal Conservatives. Even with precious gridlock, the premise of spending as much as possible will be unquestioned by Republicans and Democrats. Only partisan war will prevent spending from being as outrageous as it was under GOP majorities. Sadly, despite all the efforts of libertarians, whether the Libertarian Party, the Reason Foundation, the Cato Institute, and the myriad others sounding the alarm against an all-consuming government, we still move in that direction.

5. Melina Kennedy. Her run for Marion County Prosecutor must certainly be the worst run Democratic campaign in Indiana this year. Republican ineptitude allowed Dems to make gains in many high profile seats, except this one. Curious, because Marion County is now a Democratic bellweather. If Kennedy's campaign was positive, she could have simply ridden the wave into office. I was pleased to see another negative campaign go down in flames.

Toss Up

1. Foreign Policy. Democrats have been questioning US foreign policy in Iraq. Is this the beginning of a deeper introspection on the US role as World's Cop, seeking an end to so much US intervention into world affairs, or is it merely a shallow political attack on George W Bush?

2. Democratic Congressional Agenda. After campaigning on themes of bi-partisan spirit, can the Dems resist the thrill of power and avoid repeating history with their own attempt at impeaching a lame duck president? Will it be too much fun for Dems to say, "but we're right"? Also, can they really live up to the laughable perception that Democrats are fiscally responsible? Sure, the GOP is a bad yardstick to measure up to. Still.

3. Bold Daniels. I don't think Daniels will stop looking for cute, inventive ways to score quick revenue. Will the Democrats' slim majority in the Indiana House be enough to slow him down?

4. Libertarian Mayor? Will this be the year? Indiana Libertarians continued to make incremental gains wherever they ran local candidates. With past wins at the township and even city council level, mayor is the next rung up the ladder. It's a possibility in smaller locales where advertising money is less a factor, and personal reputations count for much more.

5. Where will it end? With the smoking bans in private businesses continuing to advance, and bans on trans-fats next, what will be the new frontier? Will smoking be banned in private homes? Will Americans have to keep and submit a log of foods consumed? Many scoff at this line of inquiry, but 20 years ago, we never would have believed the restrictions that passed in 2006. Is choice dead, or just dying? Will there be a backlash, or will Americans simply roll over and obey? My money is on the advance of the nanny state and the decline of personal choice and responsibility. I hope I'm wrong, but I have smart money.

Busy Week

Posts have been few and far between, but I'll be catching up shortly.

Now that Alex lives with me, he takes his breaks with his Mom and/or her family. We saw him off for a flight from Cincinnati on Thursday, so much of the week was spent being with him before he left.

Alex had me playing Time Splitters for many hours. I enjoy shoot-em-up video games, but rarely get to indulge in them. With it being the single-least productive week of the year (was anybody but me working?) we had plenty of time to play. Since both of us are very competitive, we play against each other. Naturally, he's way better at the games, so I was on a huge learning curve. No doubt he enjoyed beating on his Old Man.

Election Notes #5, Precinct Results

This is just a very thin scan of the precinct results that make me feel good, in response to a comment on my Election Notes #4. I'll only post a few in detail because it takes up a lot of space. Besides, this sort of analysis is what the County Chairs are supposed to do. Anyhow, LPIN State Chair Mark Rutherford has a blog entry with links to the LaPorte, Wayne, and Henry County results.

My best numbers were in areas where we have strong local Libertarian candidates and/or strong local Libertarian Party affiliates. So, I did especially well in Wayne County, where Rex Bell ran an outstanding campaign for Indiana House, and where Susan Bell is the elected Hagerstown Judge, and where Conley Tillson was just elected to Township office. Check out this precinct result, in Wayne County, Hagerson, Jefferson 1:

SECRETARY OF STATE VOTE FOR ONLY 1
TODD ROKITA (REP). . . . . . . . . 152 42.94
JOE PEARSON (DEM). . . . . . . . . 122 34.46
MIKE KOLE (LIB) . . . . . . . . . 80 22.60
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . . 0
Total . . . . . . . . . . 354

AUDITOR OF STATE VOTE FOR ONLY 1
TIM BERRY (REP) . . . . . . . . . 168 49.85
JUDY ANDERSON (DEM) . . . . . . . . 169 50.15
Total . . . . . . . . . . 337

TREASURER OF STATE VOTE FOR ONLY 1
RICHARD E. MOURDOCK (REP) . . . . . . 176 52.85
MICHAEL W. GRIFFIN (DEM) . . . . . . 157 47.15
Total . . . . . . . . . . 333

STATE REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 54 VOTE FOR ONLY 1
THOMAS E. (TOM) SAUNDERS (REP) . . . . 111 31.09
DAVID G. SADLER (DEM) . . . . . . . 82 22.97
REX BELL (LIB). . . . . . . . . . 164 45.94
Total . . . . . . . . . . 357

Thanks for the Coattails there, Rex! Interestingly, when compared to the other statewide offices, it appears I took more votes away from the Democrat than the Republican, even though I clearly drew down both of them. That certainly flies in the face of conventional wisdom. Rex took a lot away from both of his opponents, to be sure.

Here's another from Wayne County, Hagerstown, Jefferson 2:

SECRETARY OF STATE VOTE FOR ONLY 1
TODD ROKITA (REP). . . . . . . . . 165 47.28
JOE PEARSON (DEM). . . . . . . . . 105 30.09
MIKE KOLE (LIB) . . . . . . . . . 79 22.64
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . . 0
Total . . . . . . . . . . 349

AUDITOR OF STATE VOTE FOR ONLY 1
TIM BERRY (REP) . . . . . . . . . 201 57.76
JUDY ANDERSON (DEM) . . . . . . . . 147 42.24
Total . . . . . . . . . . 348

TREASURER OF STATE VOTE FOR ONLY 1
RICHARD E. MOURDOCK (REP) . . . . . . 194 55.91
MICHAEL W. GRIFFIN (DEM) . . . . . . 153 44.09
Total . . . . . . . . . . 347

STATE REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 54 VOTE FOR ONLY 1
THOMAS E. (TOM) SAUNDERS (REP) . . . . 122 34.27
DAVID G. SADLER (DEM) . . . . . . . 79 22.19
REX BELL (LIB). . . . . . . . . . 155 43.54
Total . . . . . . . . . . 356

Same situation. Well, I made more than 10 campaign appearances in Wayne County, with I think six of them in Hagerstown. This is the hometown of Rex & Susan Bell. Put it all together, and you get these numbers. Here's one from Wayne County, Perry, Economy:

SECRETARY OF STATE VOTE FOR ONLY 1
TODD ROKITA (REP). . . . . . . . . 86 44.79
JOE PEARSON (DEM). . . . . . . . . 76 39.58
MIKE KOLE (LIB) . . . . . . . . . 30 15.63
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . . 0
Total . . . . . . . . . . 192

AUDITOR OF STATE VOTE FOR ONLY 1
TIM BERRY (REP) . . . . . . . . . 102 53.13
JUDY ANDERSON (DEM) . . . . . . . . 90 46.88
Total . . . . . . . . . . 192

TREASURER OF STATE VOTE FOR ONLY 1
RICHARD E. MOURDOCK (REP) . . . . . . 107 56.91
MICHAEL W. GRIFFIN (DEM) . . . . . . 81 43.09
Total . . . . . . . . . . 188

STATE REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 54 VOTE FOR ONLY 1
THOMAS E. (TOM) SAUNDERS (REP) . . . . 65 32.66
DAVID G. SADLER (DEM) . . . . . . . 42 21.11
REX BELL (LIB). . . . . . . . . . 92 46.23
Total . . . . . . . . . . 199

In this area Rex still whupped 'em, but my numbers dipped a bit, and I was drawing more from Repulicans. Still, these are great numbers!

No Spin, Indeed

I was listening to Bill O'Reily today, because I wanted to self-flagellate for some private guilt. It was horrible! He was talking about this wrestling match or boxing match between Donald Trump and Rosie O'Donnell. My sins were absolved, and I got to hear O'Reilly get to the essence of what he believes.

He said, and I'm working from memory here, 'the day we are for the individual instead of the common good, we are done'.

So, for those of you who thought O'Reilly anything other than the collectivist populist that he is, there it is. He was very plain. Individualism is bad. Collectivism is good. The power of the state is good so long as it serves you!

The Star Has It Wrong

The Indy Star published an opinion on annexation this morning. It's the usual Star brand of milquetoast, taking no solid position, aiming for some amorphous, gray, middle of the road.Along the way, they said some stupid things:

But lawmakers should use caution in hobbling annexation efforts. Had Indianapolis been foreclosed from annexation, it could be a Byzantine collection of tiny communities. Resistance to annexation led to the passage of Uni-Gov, effectively a wholesale annexation that many credit with helping Indianapolis become the Cinderella of the Rust Belt.

Wow, that's chock full of stupid.

For instance, what's wrong with a Byzantine collection of tiny communities? Tiny communities tend to be tighter-knit, with more common ground from one side of town to the other, and better still, with a government small enough to be responsive.

When the whole region is one municipality, many decent areas suffer being dragged down by the worst areas in town. Consider: Why do people from Lawrence, Washington, and Pike townships flee for Hamilton County? To escape the higher Uni-Gov taxes, to escape higher sales tax rates, to escape the horrible IPS schools, to escape the higher auto insurance rates, to escape the higher home insurance rates, to escape the domination of Center Township politics... just for starters.

You might consider how Crows Nest, Beech Grove, and Speedway are pleasant oases within Marion County. Yes, it's those Byzantine tiny communities, with their sense of identity and pride- and of not being Indianapolis.

Cleveland is a good counterpoint to Indy. Yes, Cleveland is one dismal city, but people there tend more to flee the city, not all of Cuyahoga County. Sure, the lousy suburban communities suffer flight, but that's as it should be. For the most part, people still happily reside in most of Cuyahoga County's inner and outer ring suburbs, embracing their schools and their communities. If Strongsville or Bratenahl suddenly became incorporated into Cleveland, you would see for sale signs spring up and wholesale flight throughout the formerly independent towns, because the well-to-do would want to get their kids out and to protect their assets. Annex Beech Grove into Indy and you would see the same thing. On the other hand, offer the Broad Ripple area the opportunity to break away and become its own municipality and you would see an amazing flowering happen there, beyond the interesting things that are already there.

In fact, Marion County would be greatly served by dismantling Uni-Gov, and creating a Byzantine collection of tiny communities. You might start to see better schools, less government waste, and less flight as people have more reasons to choose to identify with their communities. I'm proof. I fled Indy after just two years. I removed my son forevermore from IPS schools after just one semester. There was absolutely no way I would permit my family to live within the city limits of Indianapolis so long as I had children.

Indianapolis, the Cinderella of the Rust Belt? Bwaahahaha! Just check out the murder rate for a reality check on that puffery. Then, the schools.

Then, let the people decide whether or not they want to be a part of a city. They chose to live where they are on the basis of what the place is. In Geist, Home Place, and Southwest Clay, it's township living. It should be almost impossibly hard for a city or town to annex. The burden of petitioning should be on the entity that wants to gobble its neighbor, not on the defenders.

Being annexed into Carmel or Fishers is obviously not as detrimental to one's bottom line or safety as is being annexed into Indianapolis. Still, the right to self-determination should be paramount. And no matter how good a government is, the smaller it is, the more responsive it is. Thus, the urge to annex should be curbed.

(This opinion was first posted to the Hamilton County Libertarian Blog. I post there along with three other Hamilton County Libertarians. Check it out!)

Technorati Tags:Libertarian, Forced Annexation, Indianapolis, Geist, Indiana

Election Notes, Part 4

Immediately after the election, I was pretty down on my results. I'm not used to losing, and while I accepted going in that the overwhelming odds were against me and that I needed to take stock in the secondary objectives, I found that easier to say than to do.

Mainly, my numbers were less than our candidate for the same office the last time around. Indiana Libertarians improved in every category but one- mine. So, I found myself questioning my strategies.

Logistics

I am convinced that in terms of this years results, making 200 campaign appearances made no difference. I could have done 1000, and my numbers would have been the same. I was actually advised not to run a real campaign, but to sit back and raise money exclusively. I rejected that advice, so I can't complain too stridently. In short term thinking, I was plainly wrong.

Long term, though, I believe the results will be better for future candidates because of the full-scale campaign. I was at so many events where my R & D counterparts failed to turn up that it was literally becoming front page news. We improved relationships with the media and the hosts of events, especially by turning up in Clark County, Knox County, LaPorte County, and others on the remote corners of the state.

Also, the bar has been raised up high. It will be tough for any future statewide candidate to run the way we used to, as paper candidates, and not have some scrutiny come their way. This is good, because if we are going to compete, running a real campaign is one key component. Raising a million remains the other significant one.

Message

I also came to question my focused message. Having heard the complaints from media and voters while observing other campaigns about irrelevant candidacies (running on drug war opposition while seeking the office of surveyor!), I was determined to be germaine. I was running for Secretary of State, so I endeavored to learn about the office and to formulate policy positions aimed at improving that office to the extent I could. This means, I couldn't eliminate the office, but I could make it less wasteful, less a tool for self-promotion, more adherent to the core functions prescribed by the Constitution and by law. I could further lobby to change the law.

This bored our base and the undecided voters alike, but especially our base. While very few had enough interest in improving my campaign, or even the courage of their convictions to question my message directly to me, there was plenty of sniping going on about the boring nature of the campaign. Well, Secretary of State is a boring office. I don't think you get anywhere by turning the campaign into a circus. Some Libertarian candidates get short-term media hits by flashing part of their anatomy, but many of those hits happen on News of the Weird. Oscar Wilde was wrong. Sometimes it is better to be ignored than covered, if you're being an idiot. No, the goal was to further the growing opinion that Libertarian candidates are serious candidates and not charlatans.

You have to know that I really questioned this after seeing the results. It would have been a lot more fun for me to talk about the issues that really rile me up. Many times I said to myself, "I should have cut loose! I should have just gone off! The results would have at least been the same, but maybe a bit higher." But really, while that would have been self-satisfying, I was running for something bigger than my own short-term satisfaction. I was running to assure continued Libertarian Party ballot access as a minimum, and to build the esteem of the Libertarian Party of Indiana. This was achieved. That will give me long-term satisfaction.

Bridge Building

I began seeing this with greater clarity once Bob Barr signed on to be a representative on the Libertarian National Committee. Bob Barr is a former Republican Congressman. As it happens, the LP was instrumental in defeating Barr in his re-election attempt, as we targeted him on his drug message, running a candidate in that race and turning the district over to the Democrat. Barr hasn't entirely walked away from his position on drugs, and this has upset many Libertarians. This recalled for me the fact that there isn't a single person alive that I agree with 100%. Believe me, I've looked.

So, Barr is with us enough to become a life member with a contribution of $1,000 and to take a large leadership role. Why isn't that good enough? So, he doesn't agree with the whole platform? He is willing to advance the Party, thus, the platform and the principles that the candidates will espouse.

There was a great comment on Reason Hit & Run from a Gerry Tripwell:

Welcome Mr. Barr to the party and give him some time and slack. I became a Libertarian 15 years, mostly in response to Bush I's war in the middle-east. I accepted the party's positions one-by-one and the last one that I accepted was the oppposition to the war on drugs.

Liberty applies to the whole scope of human affairs. Is it better to embrace a man who has a 95% appreciation of liberty, or to alienate him for the 5% he can't see?

I say it's better to embrace one who even only gets liberty on one issue. Show appreciation and affection, and soon enough that person will begin to see it on more and more issues. Indeed, some of the more ardent Libertarians I know came from other parties and with reservations. Today, they are the staunchest, most stalwart Libertarians you could ever hope to meet.

I was a Democrat as a teen. I got liberty on exactly three issues. For the rest, the coercive power of the state was excellent, as far as I was concerned, especially where money was involved. In time, I came to see the injustice of state interference in every area of life. It took time- until I was 25. If a Libertarian had gotten in my face about an issue, it would have hindered my acceptance of liberty, not accelerated it.

So, I did what I thought was the respectful thing, and tried to find the area where a person had affinity with liberty, and talked it up. It seemed so entirely pointless to learn the area where we had disagreement and to zero in on that and let the person know he was wrong and stupid, and that I had the right answer. No, I worked to build a bridge on our agreement and encouraged them to seek out our positions in other areas of life.

After seeing the comments on Barr I finally got over my disappointment with the numbers. I found some peace with my campaign. I have no regrets. I believe I did it correctly, long term.

Update: Bob Barr's position on the War on Drugs is already moving towards a more pure libertarian philosophy, per Reason Hit & Run.

Glad I Fled Marion County, Part 8

The City-County Council Democrats showed where they have their priorities. From this morning's Star:

The City-County Council tabled a 3 percent pay raise for county elected officials and introduced a 2008 pay raise of 75 percent for themselves Monday night.

Me, me, me, me, me, me, me. There's the spirit of public service for all to see. But, here's the finest Allow-Me-To-Insult-Your-Intelligence line of 2006:

"I think it's long overdue," said Monroe Gray, the council president. "It's not for us; it's for the next council."

Bwaahahahaha! What a load. If you believe that nonsense, please contact me right away for the real estate bargain of the century. Meanwhile, the City-County Republican comments reflected their usual stellar best- 35% correct.

Philip Borst, the Republican leader, said the timing is not right to raise council salaries. The city already faces more than $100 million in shortages for public safety and other needs, he said.

"He's doing it the right way, but it sends the wrong message," Borst said.

Read with clarity, he means that the timing is poor because the municipal elections are coming up in 2007, and this thing could hurt them all. Doesn't Rozelle Boyd, who introduced this measure, understand that the time to do anything obviously controversial is immediately after elections? That way time passes and the people forget.

Indianapolis has a murder rate this year that makes people think well of Washington DC and Detroit, and these clowns are thinking about giving themselves raises. Harumpf!

Yessir, I'm glad I fled Marion County!

Check Your Premises

Thanks to Jeff Pruitt for offering the thought provoking response to my previous post! I disagree with him at the most fundamental level, but his comments made me think about privatization beyond it being a mere function.

I think the fundamental difference is that government is responsible to the people (directly) and private entities are responsible to the shareholders. What is good for the shareholders is not always inline with the common good.

I think that it's safe to say that along these lines, one of the common leftward criticisms of capitalism is that it creates winners and losers.

It's time for some intellectual honesty here, with regard to the "common good", and "winners and losers". But first, I will give my intellectual honesty.

Capitalism does create winners and losers. Those who offer little to employers tend to get little in the way of rewards, and are losers. Those who offer much to employers thend to be greatly rewarded. I believe that to be just. I like it. I work hard myself to be one of capitalism's winners.
I always bristle at the notion of the common good. I find it rather a falicy. For instance, stalwart Republicans would tell you that a ban on gay marriage is for the common good. The majority of Americans support a ban on gay marriage, so it must be so. At the same time, stalwart Democrats would tell you that government intervention into health care is for the common good. A majority of Americans support government intervention into health care, so it must be so.

The proponents of doing things for the common good must recognize that they create winners and losers, if they have any intellectual honesty. Certainly, gay people are the losers in the first example. Certainly, people in good health who end up paying for the health care of others are the losers in the second. Both left and right need to own up to this.

The difference is, with capitalism, you can opt out.

• Don't like Wal Mart? No problem. You don't have to shop there.
• Don't like American social policy? Tough. You're in the minority. Suck it up.

See the differences? What's done in the name of the common good invariably oppresses the minority.

How you like them apples, those of you on the left?

Sure, government is "accountable to the people". That's the abstract of it. Don't like public policy? Just vote 'em out! But, something for nothing is very popular. The reality is that it is virtually impossible to remove an incumbent.

• In capitalism, a 2% market share is enormous. You become wealthy on that. You're a winner!
• In goverment, a 49% vote share is a bitter loss. You find something else to do afterwards. Your a loser!

Besides all this, I think it's important to question those who are high and mighty enough to let you know that they represent the common good. What kind of conceited, self-righteous powermonger does it take to issue proclamations that not only is their side "the common good", but that it's so "good" that even those who don't like it have go along with it? The worst kind, as far as I can tell.

To me, the hallmark of freedom is the ability to withhold your participation. I guess that's why I like capitalism. I can choose whether or not I'll eat at McDonalds, shop at Wal Mart, use Tide or Ecover in the wash. I don't suffer the insult of choosing to go to Kroger's and then endure having to buy brussels sprouts, beef liver, and Wonder Bread- all of which I detest.

But, that's how government works. I cannot choose government a la carte. I can't say that I will withhold my taxes if I oppose certain policy. No, I have to fund it against my better judgment and without my approval! I cannot say, well, I support having public police, fire, safety & rescue, and courts and am glad to pay for those, but will withhold that percentage of my taxes that goes to fund the war in Iraq, the war on drugs, and socialized football. These have all been adjudged by our elected officials to be, you got it, the common good. It's an all or nothing proposition. The taxes come out of our pockets, go into the meatgrinder that is the Treasury, and goes out according to all these things that are, we are told, the common good. Things that you may well regard as bad or worse so often get fully funded, and you get to contribute to it. Justice? My eye!

So, if doing things for the common good is part of your fundamental M.O., please do me a favor and acknowledge that you create more winners and losers than capitalism does, but only if you would like me to hold you in the esteem of one intellectually honest.

Privatization Fears?

Indiana's left blogosphere is suffering a heavy case of Chicken Little-ism right now over the growing number of privatization initiatives being taken by governor Mitch Daniels.

While concern over cronyism is certainly valid, and contracts should be awarded by bids only, I am pleased by the move.

The recently deceased Nobel-winning economist Milton Friedman summed up in his series and book "Free To Choose" why private enterprises are more likely to better deliver on the services than government. Check out Friedman explaining " The Four Ways To Spend Money", on this grainy clip:

The 4 Ways to Spend Money by Milton Friedman


Private employers spend their own money on their employees in the pursuit of making more money. Government employers spend someone else's money on their employees, not in the pursuit of making money. So often you hear people say, "I don't expect this government enterprise to make money". So, yeah, I figure privatization will be a blessing in cost savings- so long as there isn't cronyism, or no-bid contracts being awarded.

I question the motives of those fearing privatization. Mainly, privatizing a service performed by government doesn't eliminate that service. It merely allows for the likelihood of more efficient delivery of that service. Especially for those on the left, don't you want to see social services better delivered to the recipients? Or, is the real motivation protecting cushy government jobs?

Just asking.

Statewide Anti-Annexation PAC Formed

I was delighted to learn that the statewide anti-forced annexation political action committee (PAC) is at last being formed.

While forced annexation has been a hot topic here in Hamilton County as Carmel tries to forcibly annex Southwest Clay and Home Place, and Fishers does likewise with Geist, it is not isolated to this part of the state. It is in fact a statewide issue, with actions and remonstrances also happening in the Muncie, Fort Wayne, Jeffersonville areas, just to name a few.

Geist resident Rachel Quade has been a driving force in opposing Fishers' largely unwanted advances, and in forming the PAC. From the Indy Star report:

Working with like-minded residents across Indiana, Quade plans to form a political action committee to push for annexation reform. Though Quade has no way of knowing how many will join the PAC, she figures it will represent the interests of more than 5,000 property owners."

I started calling these people saying, 'Would you guys want to work together in getting the law changed?' " Quade said.

Vanessa Smith, who heads an anti-annexation group from Southern Indiana, agreed. Her group is trying to avoid annexation into Jeffersonville.

"We are working on our own legal strategies and we hope that we can delay the Jeffersonville annexation long enough to get the laws changed," Smith said.

Geist resident and PAC member Pete Peterson was quoted in the Noblesville Ledger story, hitting just the right philosophical notes, so foreign to our local Republicans:

Peterson said it is unfair for a municipality to annex an unincorporated area populated by residents who do not have the power to vote for that city's or town's government. He likened the scenario to early American colonists' cries of "No taxation without representation."

"Put this to the citizens. Let them have a say in this," Peterson said. "It really doesn't go along with the way this country was founded to not give people a say."

Libertarians have been strong in their opposition to forced annexations from the beginning. We believe a forced action, one that denies the right to self-determination, is not merely wrong, it is anti-American.

A voluntary annexation is perfectly acceptable. I believe that the laws regarding annexation should be changed thusly:

• Municipalities should no longer be permitted to initiate an annexation.
• Only citizen petitions voluntarily brought forth should be permitted to initiate an annexation.
• The citizens of the receiving municipality, not merely their city or town council, should then have a vote on whether or not to accept the petition.

I am inspired by Rachel Quade and Pete Peterson, and their genuinely grassroots effort. I am further delighted that legislators are starting to hear the pleas of those being forcibly annexed.

Democratic Rep. David Orentlicher is offering legislation that would change the laws, as is Republican Senator Beverly Gard. Both are to be commended for their willingness to be responsive.

This stands in contrast to the tax & spend Hamilton County Republicans, who have been initiating these forced annexations as mayors or town councils, and ducking from taking a conservative position against them. The Hamilton County GOP had a laughable non-position posted on its website earlier this year.

I look forward to this PAC taking part in the process of endorsing and financially supporting anti-annexation candidates in the 2007 municipal election cycle.

The Decline of the American Comedy Club

Accordingly, this is written in the most politically correct fashion I can muster.

I think everybody reading will be familiar with the Michael "Kramer" Richards story, where Richards responded to a heckler by repeatedly using a racial slur. The follow-up is that the comedy club where this occurred forbade all future acts from using the word in their club.

Daman Wayans promptly violated the ban. He was fined and banned from the Club. Story. I imagine Dave Chappelle won't be welcome there anymore. In fact, so many black stand-up comedians use the word and stand to be banned, that it might begin to look like a conspiracy to keep the black comic down. But I digress.

Hey- the club belongs to the owners. They are free to set their own policy... except with regard to smoking, and perhaps soon, trans-fats.

This turn of events is sad, though. Comedy clubs used to be the bastians of uncomfortable free speech and the home of the uncomfortable word. Lenny Bruce was arrested for using words in some cities. George Carlin expanded upon the boundaries Bruce opened with his "Seven Words You Can't Say On Television" routine. Now clubs ban the use of an uncomfortable word, even if uttered by a man who is of the group the slur targets.

Well, good for Wayans! He ought to use the word and give a little history lesson for good measure. The owners of that LA club sure could use it. I'll grant that the pop culture use of this particular epithet is disturbingly overused, and in my opinion, disturbingly embraced by some in the group the slur targets. However, if someone tells me that a word that might describe me has been banned, I'll take a moment from my busy schedule to endulge in a gratituitous overuse for a few minutes, just to show my opposition to any attempts to evade the real issues that bely the word by wishing it to be gone from existence.

Here's a link to an interesting discourse between aspiring comics and comedy fans, taking on the issue of free speech vs. censorship. Beware salty language!

US Foreign Policy, Iraq, and Intervention

First things first: I was against the war in Iraq from the beginning. Agreed that Saddam Hussein was a horrible dictator and a violent threat to the numerous minorities he oppressed, but not agreed that he was any real threat to the USA. I take counsel from the Founding Fathers who warned against foreign entanglements and adventurism.

So, the Democrats have been working for a few years slowly, and now rapidly, towards a withdrawal from Iraq. It appears that President Bush is likely to go along with it. And yet, it really gives me little comfort.

I do not for a minute believe that the withdrawal is coming pursuant to a non-interventionist perspective. I would be delighted if I thought that was their course. But the Democrats I know have often ridiculed me as an isolationist over the years, and I’ve not really heard a one enunciate homage to the Founders. It’s hard to see it as anything but purely political, as a means to attacking a weak President.

Indeed, when Democrats were last in control of US foreign policy, we found ourselves in Bosnia and Somalia, where there was no real threat to the USA- just like Iraq.

It’s hard to know what to make of US foreign policy right now, and its direction. With a Republican dominated government, I knew what to expect, and to expect not to like it. Now I have no idea what to expect, but I still expect not to like it.

I used to have a handle on Democratic foreign policy. Democrats presided over the prosecution of World War 2, and the subsequent rebuilding/occupation of Japan and Germany. So stay-the-course was that effort that we still have troops in those countries. Again, I didn't agree with the invasion of Iraq, but once it happened, we eliminated the Iraqi leader and government. We destabilized the country and the region. So, we should leave? Once we made our mess, I came to believe it became our responsibility to fix our mess.

Those committed to an international, interventionist role had always cited "nation building" as their goal. What happened to that here with Iraq? Is the opportunity to attack a weak President so irresistable that nation building in conditions that warrant it due to our invasion efforts just go out the window?

These are interesting times, in the Confucion sense. If this whole episode doesn't reveal the value of a Libertarian foreign policy, I don't know what does.

Post-Election Notes, Part 3

If you want to lose 30 pounds, run for statewide office like you mean it. This is not for everyone, and I certainly don't recommend it strictly as a weight-loss program. But hey- it works! If you have an interest in smaller government, wider freedoms, and a smaller waistline, the CFA-1 form awaits you!

On January 1, 2006, I tipped the scales at 198 pounds. I was concerned that all the chicken and bean dinners, the nights of beers with supporters, and too much eating on the fly would push me over the 200-pound mark.

Ha!

If you really work every room you're in like you should, you won't get to eat. I don't know how many times I worked the room and then found the spread packed away, with maybe a bun or a dinner roll left out. I rarely ate at functions that were dinners for me. I made it a point to start eating at these functions when none of my suits fit anymore, in October when I got down to 166.
I marvel at how some candidates gain weight on the trail. These are people who are not working the room.

For me though, throw in a year of ill health on top of not eating too much, and you've got a 30-pound weight loss guarantee. I hid the fact of my generally poor health as best I could during 2006.

I have Lyme Disease. It comes and goes, but generally, when it strikes me, it's because I have been dehydrated, sleep deprived, or a little of both. Running a statewide campaign like you mean it assures being sleep deprived. Drinking as much Diet Coke as I did assures dehydration. So, I had a fever of about 101 for the entire month of February, and for half of April and half of May. There were several events where it was a function of willpower just to get up and do my speaches. I lost 10 pounds during each month-long bout. I had a couple of minor flare-ups, but with naps and a lot of water, I kept it at bay.

Then there was the kidney stone. I was lucky in the sense that I decided to tough it out after a trip to Lake County and drive home late at night rather than crash at a supporter's home or at a motel. Lucky because after getting into bed at about 1am, I started feeling a mounting pressure in my abdomen that became a curious pain. My greatest fear in the world is being opened up surgically, so I began worrying about a burst appendix. Knowing that can kill you, I figured I'd better get it out in the open. I described my pain to Ame (an RN, in addition to CNM) and she gave me the "good news" that I wouldn't have to worry about being opened up, just having to pass the stone.

The emergency room story is hilarious like a Monty Python skit. After a night of writhing on the floor, we went to the ER. The staff had a million questions about my pain tolerance, because apparently junkies try to use the ER as means to score narcotics. The doctor asked about any broken bones in my past. I have a lot of those. I listed fingers, toes, and thumbs. He shook his head. I remembered broken ribs. A little more impressed. Ah! I broke my sternum. Twice. Now he was impressed. "Was it hard to breath?" Almost impossible. "Great!" Really? That's great? "How did you rate that pain on a scale of 1-10 at the time?" An easy 10. "Compare that with this." The broken breast bone was a 4, and this was a 10. "OK! You get morphine!" But I had to fill out all sorts of forms. I felt like the patient who was stabbed by the nurse in the Python skit, who upon filling out the form halfway was lectured by the Doc, "Surely you knew when the Magna Carta was signed. Even I knew that"!

I was concerned about having to take morphine. I mean, it was a great pain eraser. It really took the pain away, and I felt no high or even nausea. But, as Libertarian candidates always take scrutiny over anti-criminalization issues, I lost my ability to produce a clean sample. I always had it in my pocket that if anyone challenged me on the issue of drugs, this drug-free candidate would challenge them to a pee test. This episode was good for another 10 pounds.

Now that we are about a month out of the campaign, I've gone back from an Election Night low of 166 back to 183. I've been eating absolutely everything and loving it, but it's time to put on the brakes. 180 is perfect for me until I hit the weights once I get clearance on my hand.

Kole's soon-to-be-patented weight loss plan is all yours. Step right up and sign the CFA-1 and you too can fit into clothes you haven't worn for five years or more!