Great Oratory

I watched the Obama speech last night, and on the whole found it pretty useless, even though it was excellent oratory. He's easily the best speech giving President in my lifetime, better than Reagan or Clinton even. Impressions:

Obama is a quick study. After months of campaigning on Hope(tm) and then ditching Hope (tm) for Fear Itself in his first press conference, Obama rediscovered Hope(tm). It was a campaign speech, loaded with platitudes and warm fuzzies.

Like any campaign speech by any politician, it promised all kinds of goodies, all while cutting taxes and the budget. Well! The Obama Administration, with the help of his rubber stamp Congress, has already doubled the deficit 'he inherited' in just one short month with the 'stimulus'. How is it going to be possible to spend even a penny more and yet manage to cut anything? This I want to see.

Obama talked about 'not governing from anger', and yet couldn't resist taking jabs at the CEO who spent bailout money on drapes, and the CEO who bought a corporate jet. That's one of the sources of popular anger, as if he didn't know.

The Republican response was hilarious, except that The Office wasn't going to be on for another half hour. It may not have seemed like an actual response, because it didn't address the speech terribly well and sounded like one man's campaign and story time. But, that's what made it an actual response, because Obama's speech didn't address the country's problems terribly well and sounded like one man's campaign and story time.

If anyone, Obama of the Congress, would like to address the real problems, here is where to go to work:

Cut spending
Cut spending
Treat the banks like you treat the automakers
Cut spending
Stop printing money without value to back it
Cut spending
Cut spending
Get out of Iraq already
Cut spending

Pretty simple, but then, our problems are actually pretty simple: We borrow and spend too much.

New LPIN Podcast Posted

This week's edition features Hagerstown Libertarian Rex Bell. He ran for Indiana House in District 54, and put up some fantastic numbers:

2006: 14.3% in a 3-way race, D-L-R
2008: 33.5% in a 2-way race, L-R

One of the planks of Rex's platform was the elimination of property taxes. He believes that was a key position to take in getting these results. I asked him to discuss the proposed property tax caps, which he did in some great detail.

Podcast archive. You know what to do.

This Can't Be True

This is a hoax, right? Mencken and the 'Bathtub Hoax', but more mean-spirited, right? From the Lafayette Journal & Courier:

BUFFALO, N.Y. - Police say an upstate New York television executive who sought to improve the image of Muslims in the media beheaded his wife after she filed for divorce.

Muzzammil Hassan (moo-ZAHM'-mel HAH'-sahn) is charged with murdering his wife, Aasiya (AH'-see-ya) Hassan. Police say she had an order of protection against her husband and he had been kicked out of the house they shared in Orchard Park, near Buffalo.

They accuse the 44-year-old Hassan of cutting off his wife's head at the TV station where he launched his Bridges TV network in 2004. In an AP interview, he said he hoped the network would balance negative portrayals of Muslims following the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

I'd say that if true, his TV work pretty much was in vain.

Ed Coleman Press Conference Audio

It is available now, in an unedited form, on the latest podcast.

Ed Coleman is now recognized as the highest-ranking elected Libertarian in the USA.

Here is the statement of welcome, from Libertarian National Committee Chair William Redpath:

"I commend Ed Coleman on his courage and his recognition that the Libertarian Party is the only political party in Indiana and the United States that truly stands for limited, fiscally responsible government and real respect for civil liberties. I gratefully welcome him, as I hope to do with other elected officials who are tired of the now clearly unaffordable politics as usual, and who yearn to join 'The Party of Principle.'"

No Change Chronicles

I was discussing with a friend Bush's Shock Doctrine, as described by Naomi Klein. Darned if the tactic doesn't seem exactly what Obama used to promote the 'stimulus'.

Yesterday's Cato Daily Podcast discusses exactly this, with David Boaz citing Rahm Emanuel, Paul Krugman, and Arianna Huffington promoting crisis as a political opportunity. I love Boaz's line about Obama's tenor:

Hope helps you get elected, but fear helps you get your program through.

Excellent. He also calls this the "Bush-Obama Era". So far, I have to agree. Check out the Cato Podcast for Feb 17 2009 via their archive.

Podcast With Ed Coleman

I was able to sit down with Ed Coleman this afternoon, to discuss his defection from the Republicans to the Libertarians. Coleman is a sitting Indianapolis City-County Councilor, who was elected 'at-large' in 2007.

Link to Podcast archive.

Welcome Home, Ed!

In about an hour, sitting Indianapolis City-County Council member Ed Coleman will take the podium at a press conference, announcing his switch from the Republican Party, to the Libertarian Party. From Coleman's press release statement:

This is not a decision I take lightly, nor did I come to it without deep reflection. I have found that the direction of the Republican Party has changed, and it is not the same party I joined many years ago. Nor do I believe its current leaders truly represent the ideals that the party markets and advertises to voters.

Both of the old two parties have forgotten their ties to the common man, and instead focus on power and control as elitists. I am a common man, I campaigned for the common people, and I still represent the common people; the voters and taxpayers.
I have come to find that my politics are actually more aligned with the Libertarian Party than any other; a party that still allows free thought, a party where dissent is not necessarily a dirty word.

Both of the old parties endeavor to silence dissent. During the Council’s previous period of Democrat control, the majority’s powers were used to silence Republicans. Now, under Republican control, the Council majority abuses their power to weaken Democrat influence. Over the past year I have been criticized for votes I made in response to the concerns I heard from my constituents. As a leader I have spoken out again the secretive and expensive affairs of the Capital Improvement Board; but the two old parties want obedient followers, not leaders.

Indy Star article. I can understand those kinds of thoughts. The Republican Party has changed its' direction more than any other party over the years. The Democrats have been steady on the march to socialism. The Libertarians have been steady on the march to liberty. The Republicans? They go from Nixon's Keynesism to Reagan's quasi-Goldwaterism, and back to George W. Bush's Keynesism. Locally, they seem even more rudderless. You could take a certain 'my way or the highway' if there was some consistent direction you could get behind, but there isn't. The one area where Republicans show some consistency, the Republican Liberty Caucus, is treated like the the red-headed stepchild. There is clearly no room for libertarian thought in the GOP, so why stay there?

I will be most interested to sit down with Ed to get the full story for the podcast!

Old Boss, New Boss Chronicles

The more I see of President Obama, the more I think he's the four-year extension of the Bush Administration McCain was supposed to be. Likewise, the Democratic Congress. I love this passage, from a NY Post article:

The push to get the bill through before the holiday weekend was so frantic, members of Congress didn't have a chance to read all 1,071 pages of the document before they could vote.

"In a perfect world it would have been nice to have had more time to process it," said Ilan Kayatsky, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).

Perfect? Heck, in a good world, we read the bills we're voting on. Is there a Democrat out there who, with a straight face, can express joy over not reading the bill prior to voting? You want to open the door to corruption? This is a GREAT way to do it. Allow staffers to write god-knows-what, and then vote on it.

Well, this is as good a chance as any to remind you of Downsize DC's "Read The Bills Act".

There's a basic principle at stake here. America was founded on the slogan, “No taxation without representation.” A similar slogan applies to this situation:
“No LEGISLATION without representation.”

We hold this truth to be self-evident, that those in Congress who vote on legislation they have not read, have not represented their constituents. They have misrepresented them.

Obama's promise to post bills for five days before passage is nice, but it's empty transparency. Posting the stimulus five days before VOTING on it would have been the real deal. It kinda reminds me of my favorite Che Guevara quote:

"We can hold the trials any time, so long as the executions happen now".

Honest government is unafraid of debate, unafraid of scrutiny, and is in no rush to get the signatures on the dotted lest anyone read the fine print. Alas.

New Podcast Posted

I've added a special edition of the Libertarian Party of Indiana's Weekly Podcast, to include more dialogue from Dr. Eric Schansberg. I asked him about the prudent ways Indiana should spend the stimulus money, since it seems certain that we aren't going to pull a Utah and say, "No thanks!" - plus the traps our state should avoid.

I very happy with the timeliness and the content!

I am very interested to talk soon with Ed Angleton (hopefully this week) about legislation at the Statehouse, and I have conversations with the dynamic duo of Susan & Rex Bell in the can, so there will be plenty more to listen to!

Incongruous Thoughts on Lincoln

Yesterday was Lincoln's 200th birthday, and of all the nice things said, I hadn't noticed anywhere that Abe Lincoln was once making a living in a way quite impossible to now: as a self-taught lawyer. If it was good enough to be self-taught then, and it produced Abe Lincoln...

The Lincoln penny was introduced in 1909, at Lincoln's 100th birthday. The Lincoln penny replaced the Indian Head penny, and is currently the longest running unchanged coin, at least on the obverse. In 1959, the 150th anniversary of Lincoln's birth, the reverse changed from images of wheat to the Lincoln Memorial. I still get about 5-10 "wheat pennies" every year in change, and I keep them all, just because. It's been about a year since I got a pre-1965 silver Roosevelt dime. I love getting those!

There is some talk about eliminating the penny altogether, on the basis of cost savings to the US Treasury. Now, I really like any cost savings that can be found. But there are other things I like about American money, such as the stability of the images of it, and, the fact that inflation, for all the damage it has done, has still not made the American penny as useless as, say, the Danish 25 Ore coin, which was just eliminated a few months ago.

Podcast Update

There are now five installments of the Libertarian Party of Indiana's Weekly Podcast available for your stimulation, and download. The most recent, just posted minutes ago, features Dr. Eric Schansberg, discussing the bailouts and stimulus, and whether the diseases might be less threatening than the cures.

Here's the linkages:

Dr. Eric Schansberg on stimulus and bailout

Chris Ward on business property rights vis smoking laws

Tim Maguire on the role appointed Libertarians can fulfill

Todd Singer on the Libertarian outlook for the new year

Mike Kole's intro podcast. Way exciting.

LPIN podcast archive

You can subscribe from the above archive link, and new episodes will be sent to your iTunes. Give me convenience, or give me death.

Cato's Retort

Obama made the claim that:

There is no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan
that will help to jumpstart the economy

To this, the libertarian think tank The Cato Institute created a full-page newspaper ad that ran in several papers, including the NY Times. The ad preceded the Obama press conference by several days. The ad begins:

With all due respect Mr. President, that is not true.

Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we the undersigned do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan’s “lost decade” in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policymakers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.

Then followed the names of 200+ economists who signed on, including Nobel Laureates. A second edition of the ad was created, because more than 100 other economists also wished to sign on.

So, I tend to think that Obama probably was speaking very specifically to libertarians when he marginalized those who would prefer no or little action as better than the deleterious 'stimulus'.

Indiana economists Cecil Bohanon and Courtenay Stone (both of Ball State) and Eric Schansberg (Indiana Southern Univ) are among the signers.

The Sky Is Falling!

President Obama is going all-in on the first hand dealt to him. That does one of two things in a poker tournament- it doubles your chip stack (political capital) or it sends you out of the tournament (see you in four years). That's a heavy gamble to take with a nation. From Obama's press conference:

So what I'm trying to underscore is what the people in Elkhart already understand: that this is not your ordinary run-of-the-mill recession. We are going through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. We've lost now 3.6 million jobs, but what's perhaps even more disturbing is that almost half of that job loss has taken place over the last three months, which means that the problems are accelerating instead of getting better.

and

If there's anyone out there who still doesn't believe this constitutes a full-blown crisis, I suggest speaking to one of the millions of Americans whose lives have been turned upside down because they don't know where their next paycheck is coming from.

So, was 2008 the worst year since the Great Depression? Hardly.

Now, I like science rather than articles of faith. Show me the facts. Take a look at the Misery Index. You will see that 2008's numbers are actually better than the first year of Clinton's first term, better than all four years of George HW Bush's term, the first five years of Reagan's presidency, all four years of Carter's term, all three years of Ford's term, and three of the five Nixon years.

Obama is appealing to emotion, not facts. Rather than speaking to someone who has lost his job- something you can do any day of any year, of any decade, of any century- I'd rather look at the economy as a whole, as a nation, by judging the facts.

Now, if I have it straight, the Left likes to say that it prefers facts over faith, science over emotion. (See: 'global warming', etc.) Well, stick to it!

The definition of propaganda and 'assertion' are useful to review here, especially since Obama said the debate over whether or not to have a stimulus is 'over'.

Full disclosure: I don't know where my next paycheck is coming from. I have had one new job come in since October 1, where I like to keep a portfolio of 50-60. Hardly a time to panic, though. It's been a time to get my house in order, to position for the next opprtunities. But, if Obama directs you to talk to me, I'll tell you that he's full of shit. I spent my time when making money paying off my debt and lining up a savings- something everybody else should have done. It shouldn't be my problem if they blew their dough on entertainment, and failed to pay down debt and save. One's financial woes are self-created, beginning with how one chose to educate himself, continuing forward to the decisions they made in better times, including what they bring to the table as a potential employee, and whether or not one should run through their money, or rack up unsustainable debt, as though it wholly impossible that the money could stop.

What Would A Libertarian Do?

President Obama really alienated me last night with his press conference/sales pitch for the 'stimulus' package, going out of his way to single out people who would prefer we did little or nothing in terms of government intervention. This had to be a jab at libertarians, because Republicans had made an Exhibit 'A' case for their brand of economic interventions and 'stimulus', especially in the first 6 years of the Bush Administration.

When is it better to do nothing? When the 'solution' is worse than the malady. In the words of Harvard's Jeffrey A. Miron, via CNN:

When libertarians question the merit of President Obama's stimulus package, a frequent rejoinder is, "Well, we have to do something." This is hardly a persuasive response. If the cure is worse than the disease, it is better to live with the disease.

In any case, libertarians do not argue for doing nothing; rather, they advocate eliminating or adjusting policies that are bad for the economy independent of the recession.

Biron's actions would include the following:

1. Repeal the Corporate Income Tax
2. Increase Carbon Taxes While Lowering Marginal Tax Rates
3. Moderate the Growth of Entitlements
4. Eliminate Wasteful Spending
5. Withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan
6. Limit Union Power
7. Renew the U.S. Commitment to Free Trade
8. Expand Legal Immigration
9. Stop Bailing out Businesses that Took on Too Much Risk

That's hardly a list of 'do nothing', in any case.

American leadership has gotten positively batty with overreactions and crisis. In this sense, Obama is a real continuum from Bush.

Is it bad out there? Sure, it's bad. Is the solution the same as taking all the money and going to Vegas and putting it all on 'red'? No, but it isn't far off, either.

Dog And Pony Show For Failure

It was mere months ago that Republicans were alarmists. So, what is President Obama's tone? It was mere months ago that President Bush's borrow-and-spend was failed policy. So, why are we to believe it is no longer failed policy?

So, here is Obama in my state, sounding alarmist, and promoting proven failure. From an Indy Star report:

Campaigning for action in the most dire terms, President Barack Obama said Monday that if Congress does not quickly pass an economic stimulus package, the nation will slip into a crisis so deep that “we may be unable to reverse” it.

“We can't afford to wait. We can't wait to see and hope for the best,” Obama said in Elkhart, Ind., a community reeling in job losses during the recession that has defined Obama's young presidency. “We can't posture and bicker and resort to the same failed ideas that got us in into this mess in the first place.”

Sorry- If Congress does pass this badly misnamed 'stimulus', that is when we slip into crisis that we may not be able to reverse. That is when we take Bush's recession and turn it into Obama's depression.

I am not suggesting 'doing nothing', although allowing failing businesses to go under would be good. It would be justice, for one thing. It would punish bad business practices, which would also be good. Rewarding failure with bailouts ensures continued bad business practices.

If you want to stimulate the economy, stop dragging it down with so many taxes. Reduce Federal spending by 25% or more, and stop ALL borrow-and-spend.

But, how about the panic in Obama's rhetoric? Where is the steady voice of Obama The Campaigner?

Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire

Or, as The Who sang, "Here comes the new boss, same as the old boss".

Then-candidate Obama was 100% correct when he described then-President Bush's bailout as 'Bush's failed economic policy of borrow-and-spend'.

Unfortunately, President Obama calls the same economic policy 'stimulus'.

In what meaningful way is it different from what Bush was doing? Are we going to hear a peep of criticism from Democrats about this?

I doubt it. In an Indy Star story covering Obama's planned visit to Elkhart, we see what 'stimulus' is all about. Pork, and paying off constituency groups, at the expense of the nation.

"Instead of focusing on a stimulus that will continue to open up the credit markets and create jobs, this bill spends billions on Democrats' wish-list projects," Indiana Rep. Mark Souder said last month after voting against the House version of the package. Souder, a Republican, represents part of Elkhart County.

The Bush bailout was spent on Republican cronies. The Obama bailout will be spent on Democratic cronies. The country will continue to slide towards depression. Thanks for nothing. Is this what 'change' amounts to? Different cronies? Is that the best we could do?

Let Me Tell You About My Narcissism

My friend, Cleveland Plain Dealer reporter Laura DeMarco, writes a weekly entry on visitors and ex-Clevelanders returning to Cle, with their impressions of the city. She quoted me on the immigrant backgrounds of Cle vs. Indy, sausage and corned beef, and on eating ethnic food:

What impressed him the most -- besides the corned beef, that is? "Cleveland's ethnic diversity is fantastic," he says. "I notice it because the depth of diversity is missing in Indy, because it wasn't an immigrant city until about 20 years ago, whereas Cleveland has a long history of immigration. Nothing better than eating my way through ethnic Cleveland! . . . If ethnic diversity was measured in nothing more than sausage, Cleveland runs rings around Indy."

I made comment also about Cleveland's shrinking industrial landscape. That's something I truly miss. I love the steel mills and rail yards, and every time I go back, I drive through for a look. I guess that wasn't sexy enough to print.

I wish Indy had some industrial landscape to speak of. I do get my fix here in Indiana by cruising through Gary on the way to Chicago when work takes me there. Yes, I detour through Gary. For the scenery.

Smoking Ban Testimony

I was reminded yesterday what an unpleasant business law-making is, as I testified before a House Committee in opposition to Indiana HB 1213, which proposes a statewide smoking ban in private workplaces.

Two hours was alotted for the proponents, and then two hours for the opponents. There were many speakers for both sides, so I winnowed my remarks, from four pages to one and a half. I was quoted in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette:

“At first blush, you think this is a noble cause, but there needs to be a balance,” said Mike Smith, president of the casino group. Mike Kole, a central Indiana resident, echoed Smith’s concerns.

“It sends a signal to business that we like to meddle in how you run your affairs,” he said.

Here are the 'full' comments I presented to the Committee:

I do not smoke. I do not own a restaurant or a bar, a bowling alley, or a casino. I'm a regular citizen who has been concerned enough about the direction our governments are moving in to have run for office as a Libertarian candidate. I am ceoncerene about this law because of the messages and signals it sends, both by design, and unintentionally.

Because I don't smoke, and don't like secondhand smoke, I choose smoke-free restautants. For the same reasons, directing myself towards work that would not have me be in a smoking environment was something I did by conscious design, by choice. That's an important value. Choice.

I am dismayed with the ease with which proponents disregard the value of being free to choose, in order that a few more places will be how they like them to be.

With all due respect to Mr. Maurer, creating a healthy business climate, where Indiana attracts employers, is not created by passing a law like this. It sending the signal to business that we like to meddle in how you run your affairs. I don't think you'lll find a business owner that is drawn because of regulations or higher costs of operation.

In fact, the business owner from Lexington, Kentucky made the case that businesses adjust. That's true! They do! They respond to customer feedback. If business does better without smoking in their establishments, as he says they do, they would respond to that fact, as he said they do, and embrace the policy voluntarily.

Just as Voltaire famously made the case for free speech by saying, "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it", I take a similar approach to this issue. Nobody thinks smoking is good for you, but tobacco is a legal product. And since we aren't calling for a prohibition of tobacco, and since this is still the land of the free, business owners should retain the right to set their policies within their four walls. Even if it isn't the policy I would set.

If government must be involved in this issue, it would be adequate to fully inform would-be patrons and workers of the smoking policy. I disagree with the person who gave testimony earlier, equating the signing of a waiver, which fully informs the worker of the working conditions, as 'intimidation'. It's information! And in a free society, we are able to make informed decisions. Post a sign indicating the smoking policy of the building and be done.

I urge you not to pass this bill, in the name of liberty, choice, and property rights.

Health should not come at the expense of these things.

I was a little astonished at the rudeness of many of the proponents. After the opponents sat quietly through two hours of their testimony, about half of their side left. About half of the remaining backers were talking loudly and answering their phones during their testimony, and some were even laughing at the opponents during their testimony.

Three women seated next to me were full of guffaws as a representative of the casino industry testified. When I returned from my turn to speak, I had to walk behind them to get back to my seat. As I sat down, the woman next to me leaned over and said, "I'm a libertarian, too".

I was completely stunned. I'm not sure in what universe the correlation between her rude behavior and her words has any meaning. I said nothing to her. If she's voting Libertarian, I'm glad of it, but she's doing so for all the wrong reasons.

The whole exercise reminded me just how much I dislike this process. Hearing two hours of the other side just made me cringe, for the complete disinterest they have in liberty, and in knowing they are probably a majority view. It take a tough hide, or completely mercenary disposition to tolerate it on a daily basis.

And that reminds me how much I've come to not respect the political mercenaries. I saw someone on the other side who smokes and whom I had come to believe was one who believes in liberty- especially as regards business property. That person is now deeply involved with the advancing of this bill, and I was told it is not at all about belief in right and proper government, but about being involved with a win.

That's just mindblowing and wholly contemptable. I've been known to get along just fine with socialists and other un-libertarians, on the basis of a good and vigorous debate that starts with the premise that we are interested in doing the best we can in the public arena. I can respect that person, even if I think they're wrong on their conclusions. What good is the political mercenary, who will even advance laws they think are bad, and not proper? This isn't a game. If you need to win at something that involves deception and cunning, play chess or poker, and leave the rest of us alone. Get the feather in your cap elsewhere.

In any case, this may not amount to much this year, as the Committee has to decide whether or not the bill will advance beyond the Committee. That vote is expected to happen next week.

New Podcast

The Indiana House Public Policy Committee is hearing testimony Wednesday morning on House Bill 1213, which would ban smoking in all Indiana workplaces if passed. 

I spoke with Chris Ward, the 2007 candidate for Lawrence Mayor in a special edition of the Libertarian Party of Indiana's Weekly Podcast. Chris has a useful perspective. He is a former smoker, and works in a restaurant that currently allows smoking in the bar area of the building. We talked about the health issues related to smoking in the workplace, worker choice, and the rights of business property owners.

For my part, I am scheduled to speak on the side of opponents of the bill in the House Chamber. I don't smoke, and I don't own a bar or a restaurant, but I believe in the primacy of the right of business owners over the intrusion of the state on the behalf of others.

Great Editorial Cartoon

Sometimes, a picture really is worth 1,000 words. This one says a lot about the reality of it:

Michael Ramirez does fine work. He appears in the Investors Business Daily, a fine newspaper if there ever was one.

(h/t Duncan Adams)