Sunday, December 30, 2007

Rock the Hawkeye Cauci with Ron Paul

We all say that we’re tired of “politics as usual.” Then, when decision time arrives, (as it will on January 3rd here in Iowa) we vote for the candidates that the mainstream media and entrenched political power structure tell us are “electable.” When the election process ends, we all wonder why nothing has changed.

This continual cycle of events has left us with a federal government that is 9 Trillion dollars in debt and still increasing its spending. It is a government that has broken free of the constitutional shackles designed to protect us from it.

The Republican Party, which once wanted to reign in government spending and place it back within its constitutional bounds, has strayed from its course, instead aiding and abetting the enemies of the Constitution. Federal spending increased by at least 33% under the GOP and rights as ancient as habeas corpus were assailed.

Most of the current candidates have been a party to this. Romney, McCain and Guiliani have all worked to restrict Second Amendment rights. Huckabee increased taxes and spending within his sphere of influence. Thompson and McCain stomped on First Amendment political speech with their “Incumbent Protection Act,” to list a few examples.

Cue Ron Paul. In his 10 terms as a U.S. Congressman:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

I won’t tell you to vote for Ron Paul for “change,” because every candidate in the race says that they’re for “change” and we Iowans have been carpet-bombed with that message for months now.

What I will tell you is that if you support decreased spending and smaller, less obtrusive, Constitutionally-limited government, then you should vote for Ron Paul. If you believe that government exists to protect your life, liberty and property, not to provide you with someone else’s, vote for Ron Paul. If you thirst for liberty and want your progeny to have more of it, rather than less, you must vote for Ron Paul.

I implore all Iowans who like Ron Paul’s message to attend the Republican caucus. Dr. Paul’s Iowa website can help you find your local caucus location and give you other pertinent information. For freedom’s sake, caucus for Ron Paul!

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Liberty and Charity

Hope everyone had a good Christmas. As 2007 wraps up, its not too late to make those tax-deductible contributions to your favorite charities so that your money can go towards something good and useful rather than to the government. If you need some ideas of worthy charities with conservative or libertarian values, here’s a few:

Alliance Defense Fund: “The Alliance Defense Fund is a servant organization that provides the resources that will keep the door open for the spread of the Gospel through the legal defense and advocacy of religious freedom, the sanctity of human life, and traditional family values.” Charity Navigator rating: 4 out of 4 stars.

The Cato Institute: “The Cato Institute seeks to broaden the parameters of public policy debate to allow consideration of the traditional American principles of limited government, individual liberty, free markets and peace. Toward that goal, the Institute strives to achieve greater involvement of the intelligent, concerned lay public in questions of policy and the proper role of government.” Charity Navigator rating: 2 of 4 stars.

Gun Owners Foundation: “Defending America's unique constitutional right to keep and bear arms, through education and legal assistance in important firearms cases.” Charity Navigator rating: NA

Institute for Justice: “Simply put, we sue the government when it stands in the way of people trying to earn an honest living, when it unconstitutionally takes away individuals' property, when bureaucrats instead of parents dictate the education of children, and when government stifles speech. We seek a rule of law under which individuals can control their destinies as free and responsible members of society.” Charity Navigator rating: 4 of 4 stars.

Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership: “To destroy "gun control" and to encourage Americans to understand and defend all of the Bill of Rights for everyone. Those are the twin goals of Wisconsin-based Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO). Founded by Jews and initially aimed at educating the Jewish community about the historical evils that Jews have suffered when they have been disarmed, JPFO has always welcomed persons of all religious beliefs who share a common goal of opposing and reversing victim disarmament policies while advancing liberty for all. JPFO is a non-profit tax-exempt educational civil rights organization, not a lobby.” Charity Navigator rating: NA

The NRA Foundation: “Established in 1990, The NRA Foundation, Inc. ("NRA Foundation") is a 501(c )(3) tax-exempt organization that raises tax-deductible contributions in support of a wide range of firearm-related public interest activities of the National Rifle Association of America and other organizations that defend and foster the Second Amendment rights of all law-abiding Americans. These activities are designed to promote firearms and hunting safety, to enhance marksmanship skills of those participating in the shooting sports, and to educate the general public about firearms in their historic, technological, and artistic context. Funds granted by The NRA Foundation benefit a variety of constituencies throughout the United States including children, youth, women, individuals with physical disabilities, gun collectors, law enforcement officers, hunters, and competitive shooters.” Charity Navigator Rating: 4 of 4 stars.

Public Interest Institute: Located at Iowa Wesleyan College, it’s goals include: 1)“Promote the importance of the free-enterprise economic system and its relationship with free and democratic societies” 2)“Formulate proposals and action programs that revolve around taxpayers' rights and the general principle of limiting the role of government” 3)“Assist and become an integral part of similar organizations in promoting the importance of limited government, individual freedoms, and the impact of governmental policies on the operation of the free-market” 4)“Define the concept of the proper role of a limited government in a free and democratic society based upon individual freedom and liberty.” Charity Navigator rating: NA

Happy and free new year!

Saturday, December 22, 2007

To Be or Not To Huckabee

If Ron Paul doesn’t get the Republican nomination I’ll probably vote for whoever the Libertarian Party runs. (By the way, that might just be Dr. Paul since the L.P. has offered him the slot if the GOP doesn’t want him.) But I’m always curious if the Republicans can field someone who could lure me back. Besides “m’buoy” Ron Paul, the only other GOP contenders that have piqued my interest are Fred Thompson and Mike Huckabee. Huckabee is polling in first place here in Iowa.

A Baptist preacher, I think we can safely assume that he wouldn’t preside over the moral cesspool that the last Arky we had in the Whitehouse did. But how does Huckabee stack up on the issues? Here’s a few of my hot buttons:

Second Amendment- Top Marks! I consider Huck to be second only to Ron Paul on the right to keep and bear arms. In 1998 there was a school shooting at a Jonesboro, Arkansas middle school while Huck was governor of that state. The media and liberals (but I repeat myself) from President Clinton on down to Katie Couric were screaming for the Second Amendment’s head on a pike. This is when most politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, dive for political cover and throw the Second Amendment to the wolves. Not Mike Huckabee! He stood by the right to keep and bear arms, resisted calls for gun control and even locked horns with members of the news media pushing for it. He still opposes gun control, and remains a stalwart friend of gun owners.

Taxes and Spending- Here’s where Huck stinks the place up. According to The Club For Growth, Governor Huckabee increased state spending by 65.3% and supported numerous tax increases on everything from gasoline to nursing home beds. The Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank, gave the governor an “F” on spending and tax policy in 2006. On the positive side, Huck supports the FairTax, a plan to deep-six the income tax and replace it with a national sales tax. (If you haven’t heard about the FairTax, read about it here before passing judgment.) However, being a demonstrated real-life tax hiker outweighs support for a good but hypothetical plan that may never come to pass. On taxes and spending, Huck sucks.

10th Amendment/ Limited Government- I’m afraid Mike Huckabee doesn’t smell any better in this category either. The number of state government workers increased by 20 percent during his tenure as governor. His support of a national smoking ban and expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program shows me that he’s not the man to stem the tide of governmental paternalism or slow the march of the Health Nazis in this country. He advocates an increased role for the federal government in local education, fighting global warming, building infrastructure and healthcare. When it comes to the federal government butting out of Americans’ day to day life, Huckabee is a big- government neo-con.

Mike Huckabee is pro-gun and pro-life. He seems like a personally good and spiritual man. I’m inclined to like him. Unfortunately, his record on nearly everything else demonstrates that, as president, he would be George W. Bush sans the tax cut. Too bad. If Huck gets the GOP nod, I’ll definitely be voting Libertarian.

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Omaha Mall was a "Gun-Free Zone"

Unfortunately, I caught some of the TV news coverage of the mall shooting in Omaha. Some local nut-bag shot 8 people at a shopping mall with an AK-47, (which, along with the Uzi, are the only guns that liberal anti-gunners know by name) then ate a bullet himself.

On the cable news network that I was watching, they were interviewing their on-staff “security expert,” asking him how public shootings like these can be avoided. He pointed to the example of Israel. Over there, Palestinian terrorists had invented a new terror tactic of going to public places, such as markets, and lighting up the crowd with automatic weapons. The Israelis have managed to all but stop these public shootings. He rattled off a list of security measures, everything from metal detectors to more cops, that the Israelis had used to combat these shootings.

Glaringly absent from the expert’s list was one of the most cost-effective and unobtrusive security measures that the Israelis had implemented: issuing concealed gun permits to its citizens. Since cops and soldiers can’t be everywhere, the Israeli government decided it was best to allow the people to defend themselves. After a few terrorists died of citizen-induced lead poisoning, the rest figured out that innocent bystanders were no longer just defenseless victims. The shootings soon abated. (Unfortunately for the Israelis, the terrorists switched to suicide bombings instead.)

Here in America, a study by crime researchers Professor John Lott and Bill Landes revealed similar circumstances. Analyzing all "multiple-victim public shootings" (two or more victims) from 1977 to 1999, they found that when states passed right-to-carry laws (which automatically grant concealed weapons permits to citizens meeting certain requirements), these attacks fell by 60 percent. Deaths and injuries from these attacks fell by 78 percent.

While all but a few states now issue concealed weapons permits to citizens, most multiple-victim public shootings now occur in places where these permit-holders are forbidden to carry their weapons. This prohibition on carrying can either be by law, such as in schools (like Virginia Tech and Columbine) or at the behest of property owners (such as at Omaha’s Westroads Mall and Utah’s Trolley Square Mall, both of which posted signs banning guns on their premises). Either way, “Gun-Free Zones” are nothing but “Disarmed Victim Zones” for budding psychopaths.

I know I shouldn’t hope for the news to include information like that in their reports. I’m just glad that the expert didn’t start screaming “Ban all guns!” and jump about frothing at the mouth as I expected, or blither techno-nonsense about “super automatic high-powered assault sniper guns” that can be purchased anywhere by children using their underwear labels as ID. Maybe on another channel.

Saturday, December 01, 2007



As always when working for a huge bloated inefficient government entity, I am re-learning all about Civil Rights. In fact, I became a Civil Rights Rep, mainly because I was out doing actual work when they had a meeting to pick one.

One would think a Constitutionalist like myself would be all about Civil Rights. And I am. All men are created equal under God. I always try to judge each individual I meet by his or her own merits, not by what group they belong to, with the exception of bureaucrats and Hillary supporters. My copy of Webster's Dictionary and even Wickapedia defined Civil Rights about like I do; there's a whole pesky bunch of INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS that are known collectively as CIVIL RIGHTS in that pesky old document known as the BILL OF RIGHTS.

Well, that ain't the way Civil Rights work in the Federal Alphabet Soup Bureaucracy. The Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution do not concern the powers-that-be; in fact, many of them are verbotten. Earlier this year, a certain tree-related Federal agency spent close to a million dollars having an outside firm "study" it's problems. The almost universal consensus of the employees anonymously studied was that, "The Agency is adrift and leaderless." Caring for the land and serving the people had long since gone out the window. Nobody actually even knew what the agency's mission even was these days. Facilities, programs and workers that might in any way be of some benefit to the public were being cut (field-going permanent employees down 24%, field-going seasonal workers down 42%) while the positions for useless bureaucrats in distant offices are expanding exponentially. We receive numerous emails from above shouting in alarm because the agency cannot get bright young, or even dim young, college kids to show any interest in government jobs with us. A once well-respected and productive agency has become, in the words of a colleague, a "For-shit, do-nothing organization" which is increasingly held in contempt and even hatred by the Western public.

Not to worry! The new Chief is on the ball. In something eerily right out of Atlas Shrugged, she hath decreed that all our problems can be effortlessly solved in one fell swoop by simply adding more diversity to the workforce!

This is the current definition of Civil Rights. Some in our organization are even flying teams of outreach recruiters down to the American Southwest to beg Hispanics to apply for jobs with us. We need to do more "out-reaches". We must hire more "diverse" candidates whether or not they are even remotely qualified for the position. We must make people who live in warm and sunny Arizona and So-Cal "feel at home" in the frozen wastes Alaska, Montana, and Idaho. An Alaska workforce of natives and whites may represent perfectly the demographics of Alaska, but it does not represent the demographics of the United States as a whole, which is an intolerable situation. Boil it all down and the individual need not change anything to fit into the agency; the rest of the population of the entire organization needs to change to kiss the individual's butt. And if that still doesn't work, I suppose "Shanghai-ing" diverse candidates from waterfront bars is the next step.

Of course, no one can or is even trying to explain just exactly how a more "diverse" workforce will suddenly solve all our problems, make manna fall from heaven, and cure male pattern baldness all in one fell swoop. That's because, obviously, it won't have any effect whatsoever. But the powers-that-be have latched onto a SOLUTION, an idiotic one to be sure, and perhaps a solution in search of a problem, but by God it will be implemented.

Meanwhile, the flushing sound continues and the water swirls dangerously low in bowl.