A worthy flashback to some common sense on gun control, and why it’s against everything libertarians stand for:
Warning: contains explicit language older people tend to frown upon. But, fuck it… you’re an adult that can handle it.
A worthy flashback to some common sense on gun control, and why it’s against everything libertarians stand for:
Warning: contains explicit language older people tend to frown upon. But, fuck it… you’re an adult that can handle it.
In the wake of the tragic, horrific slaughter of innocent school children in Connecticut, there has been a renewed cry for more gun control laws. This stems from the natural need to “do something” when a tragedy of this proportion occurs. I agree we need to do something, but the “something” I want is a bit different.
The “Gun Free Schools Act of 1994” made it a federal crime to possess a firearm on any school property. Many states enacted similar legislation at the state level, as the federal act required them to do so or lose certain federal funding. Thus, it has been a crime to go onto school property anywhere in the US while in possession of a gun for the past 18 years. Has that helped?
Well, I did some research and I cannot find a single mass school shooting in the US prior to 1994, when this bill was passed. For the purposes of this discussion, I will define a “mass school shooting” as one in which three or more people were killed. I have found 14 such incidents in the United States between 1997 and the Newtown, CT, incident of yesterday. That is an average of one incident every two years.
ALL OF THESE OCCURRED AFTER THE ENACTMENT OF THE GUN FREE SCHOOLS ACT OF 1994! Let me emphasize that—every mass school shooting in the US occurred AFTER it became illegal to possess a gun on school grounds.
The answer should be obvious. By making schools a “gun free zone”, you automatically disarm all law abiding citizens at those locations. This is tantamount to placing a sign on the front of the building inviting criminals and mentally deranged persons to come shoot up the place. “Come on in. We’re all unarmed, by law. We won’t interfere with your mayhem.”
I, for instance, have a state issued handgun carry permit. I am certified by the NRA as a Law Enforcement Firearms Instructor and I have been certified by the FBI as a police firearms instructor. I am certified by two states to train and certify new firearms instructors for those states. I have held a law enforcement officer commission. I travel all over the US teaching defensive firearms use. Yet, by law, I would commit a felony by stepping onto school grounds while wearing my sidearm. Despite this, someone who, for whatever reason, wants to shoot up a school can walk right in. If he is willing to murder six year olds in cold blood, he certainly won’t be deterred by a law against bringing a gun onto the campus. Duh….. To think otherwise is so naïve as to be a form of mental illness.
I think it is truly ironic that in the first mass school shooting I could find, occurring in 1997, the mayhem was stopped when the Assistant Principal got a handgun from his car and confronted the gunman, who surrendered to him. Thank God the Assistant Principal had an ILLEGAL gun that day.
A couple of weeks ago, there was an attempted mass shooting at a mall in Oregon. The demented shooter had a high capacity semiautomatic rifle, but he only managed to kill two people and wound one other before killing himself. Why was the body count so low, given that this was obviously a copy-cat version of the Aurora, CO, shootings? The answer is simple. Because Nick Meli, age 22, was at the mall there with his wife and child. Nick has a concealed carry permit and was wearing a handgun concealed on his person. When the suspect began shooting, Nick drew his gun and verbally challenged the gunman. Meli held his fire because of innocent people in the background (excellent judgment under stress), but his actions caused the gunman to break off the attack, run into a nearby service corridor and kill himself, ending the spree. Of course, the lamestream media will not tell you about Nick. They would prefer a higher body count rather than tell you a legally armed citizen saved the day.
Here are a few other instances that two minutes of internet research brought to light. In each case, a legally armed private citizen saved lives by being there and by being armed.
So, I do want some legislative action. I want “gun free zones” abolished, at least for legally armed citizens with government issued licenses to carry. This is real “common sense” gun legislation.
Atlanta rapper Big Boi (of Outkast fame) was interviewed by Pitchfork, and he’s mighty unimpressed by Obama:
Pitchfork: You had a few things to say about Obama on Sir Lucious, but it was recorded before he became president. And there was your song “Sumthin’s Gotta Give” with Mary J. Blige where she sang about cheering for Obama…
BB: I didn’t tell her to do that.
Pitchfork: No? She just did it?
BB: On my damn record. I had a problem with it. I’m not pro-government at all, I’m pro-people. Our freedoms are getting taken away every day with things that people aren’t aware of, like the [National Defense Authorization Act]. I don’t care who the president is– it ain’t just all about who’s black or who’s white or who’s Republican or Democrat, it’s about who is for the betterment of people, period.
Pitchfork: Do you have any feelings about Obama’s first term now that he’s been re-elected?
BB: Nope. What did he do? They say he’s trying to clean up a mess, right? Well, he needs a big-ass broom, and he gotta keep on sweeping. I ain’t on nobody’s team, you feel me? I’m about the American people.
And last month, he was on Hot 97 in NYC where he claims it was racist of some people to assume he (or other black people) voted for Obama, when in fact he says he voted for Gary Johnson:
Is Obama’s allure with the hip hop greats coming to an end? We’ll let you know when Jay Z gets his act together.
Erick Erickson writes at Red State:
Over the next couple of years, Barack Obama wants to raise the national debt to $18.9 trillion or so.
John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, and the congressional Republicans want to raise the national debt to $18.4 trillion or so.
The present leadership of the Republican Party has gone from making the case that government is the problem and the American people are the solution to making the case that Democratic controlled government is the problem and Republican controlled government is the solution.
By giving up on making the case that government is the problem and pivoting to “Democrats are the problem,” the Republican Party has failed the American people. Historically, when parties lost, their leadership went and hid for an appropriate amount of time under a rock after an acceptance of blame and a resignation.
The present Republican leaders in Washington, instead of hiding under a rock, have taken to standing on the rock and demanding conservatives self flagellate. Neither John Boehner nor Mitch McConnell are visionaries. They are survivors. They survive by recognizing the biggest threat to them and trying to befriend it or neutralize it.
Right now, both see conservatives as their biggest threat, not Barack Obama. Why? Because while Barack Obama maintains the White House, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell maintain their positions of power. They exist for power, not for vision. The visions they articulate are routinely backpedaled. Remember the pledge to nowhere the House Republicans concocted in 2010 as a second coming of the Contract With America? Within two months of returning to the majority they’d already ditched their pledge faster than a frat boy fleeing a one night stand. Only conservatives wish to hold them accountable for their breach of trust, thus conservatives are the threat.
The very same Republican leadership who paved the way for the rise of the Democrats in 2006 through moral opaqueness on the role of government in the lives of Americans now seek to shut up and shut out the conservatives who continue to loudly point out that the size and scope of the federal leviathan has grown too unwieldy.
I joined the Republican Party in 1964 and voted for Barry Goldwater, a man ahead of his times. The Republican Party was not what it should have been for years after the Goldwater nomination for President and his loss.
Finally it appeared the Republican Party got its act together with Ronald Reagan. We had eight very good years. The economy was so strong even Clinton could not undo it during his eight years. Then it was downhill again.
In 2005 I quit the Republican Party and became unaffiliated and dabbled with the Libertarian Party. After Obama was elected I was convinced to rejoin in 2008, shortly after his inauguration, and really got involved, close to a full time unpaid volunteer for the tea party grassroots movement and the Republican Party internal politics.
We appeared to have momentum in our favor with our wins in 2010. We, a bunch of amateurs, did not have the Republican institutional establishment professional politicians and operatives as allies. They were our enemies and we had an uneasy alliance with them and yet I did not realize how much they rejected us as part of the process until now.
Now, here we are, could not get a grassroots candidate nominated for President, lost ground at the state and local levels, lost the Colorado House, failed to get some grassroots Congressmen re-elected, and had to live with a presidential candidate many of us did not support in the primaries but choked it down anyway and worked hard on his behalf.
In two years the odds of keeping the Colorado State Attorney General’s office, the Colorado Secretary of State and the Colorado State Treasurer may be dismal. If the Democrats succeed in taking those three offices the transition of Colorado to a socialist state (think California) will be complete and nearly perfect.
Look what we have. The big dogs in the Republican Party are having a discussion on moving to the left of center, far left, not just a tad. NO, NO, UNACCEPTABLE. If they do, that will for sure end any alliances we grassroots common, hardworking citizens have with them.
I do not blame myself or any grassroots Constitutional conservative libertarian Republicans. I blame the institutional establishment old line Republicans for being ready, willing and able to destroy the Republican Party so they could destroy us and teach us a lesson. It was a political suicide bombing of the Republican Party by Republicans with them destroying themselves to destroy us.
Now what? Quit? Never, ever quit, just figure out another strategy even if it does not include the Republican Party or mainstream politics. I predict many of us who placed everything political in working within the Republican Party are going to transition and morph into something different, what that is I do not know but it will not be the same old politics. It may be peaceful, it may not. We will see. I know I will not again make the same mistakes twice.
Via Tom Knapp at Kn@ppster comes this cheeky reminder that if you fuck with capitalists/free-marketeers… we’ll let the parasites have our companies exactly the way we found them: nonexistent.
Good job America. You voted for socialism (again), and now there’s no more Twinkies. Well, at least not until new owners can swoop in and (maybe) pick up the pieces.
I’m looking forward to seeing a Galt wannabe come in with a non-union shop and slap the dollar sign ($) on the restored baked goods.
The federal government is nearing the edge of the “fiscal cliff.” The term is used to describe the simultaneous expiration of tax cuts, increase in tax rates and supposedly massive spending cuts. Some argue that allowing the federal budget to be cut by $500 billion across the board will send the economy into another recession and this must be prevented. Others, like Frank Shostak, argue “that a cut in government outlays is actually going to be good news to wealth generators. It is, however, going to be bad news for various nonproductive activities that emerged on the back of increases in government outlays.”
There are more than two options for the federal government to take. One proposal includes having the US Mint produce 2 (or more) platinum coins with a face value of $1 trillion, each. This is an actual proposal by Joseph Gagnon of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Gagnon is not the first person to mention this idea. During the 2011 “showdown” over the debt-ceiling, Yale Law School Professor Jack Balkin proposed the idea, as did Cullen Roche from Pragmatic Capitalism.
The Washington Post describes the scenario, “the U.S. Mint would produce (say) a pair of trillion-dollar platinum coins. The president orders the coins to be deposited at the Federal Reserve. The Fed then moves this money into Treasury’s accounts. And just like that, Treasury suddenly has an extra $2 trillion to pay off its obligations for the next two years — without needing to issue new debt. The ceiling is no longer an issue.”
Surprisingly, this monetary con-game appears to be perfectly legal. According to 31 U.S.C. § 5112 (k), “The Secretary may mint and issue platinum bullion coins and proof platinum coins in accordance with such specifications, designs, varieties, quantities, denominations, and inscriptions as the Secretary, in the Secretary’s discretion, may prescribe from time to time.”
This new money would solve everything, right? Balkin now says the platinum coin option is “very uncertain, and… could lead to complicated litigation.” And Gagnon claims, “There’s nothing that’s obviously economically problematic about it.” Gagnon’s statement couldn’t be farther from reality.
Whenever anyone creates money out of thin-air, there are going to be economic problems. Gagnon also claims that the “government would simply be using the money to keep spending at existing levels, so it wouldn’t create any extra inflation. And if it did cause problems, the Fed could always counteract the effects by winding down some of its other programs to inject money into the economy.”
Yes, injecting money into the economy to solve the problems created by injecting money into the economy sounds like a wonderful idea. Maybe the next time I’m on a sinking boat, I’ll try putting more water into the boat to keep the boat from sinking. It is past time for Congress to admit publicly the debt will never be paid off and repudiate the debt, because it is invalid.
Every year or two a proposal comes forth that would abolish the $1 bill and “replace it” with a dollar coin. Such a switch would save estimated $4.4 billion over 30 years or roughly $147 million per year (a drop in the bucket when compared to the federal budget of $3.7 trillion). The latest projection from the Government Accountability Office come as Congress begins exploring new ways for the government to save money by changing the money itself.
The Motley Fool reports a House subcommittee hearing in late November focused on two approaches:
Lorelei St. James of the Government Accountability Office told the House Financial Services panel it would take several years for the benefits of switching from paper bills to dollar coins to catch up with the cost of making the change.
St. James added, “we continue to believe that replacing the note with a coin is likely to provide a financial benefit to the government” and added that such a change would work only if the note was completely eliminated and the public educated about the benefits of the switch.
Benefit the government? The government benefits by controlling the production of currency and from the existence of legal tender laws.
Why not support a proposal that would benefit everyone? I believe the proposals to replace the $1 bill with a $1 coin are bad, not because they would impose on the people a coin they don’t want to use, but rather because it continues to invoke legal tender laws and government control of the currency. A much better alternative is legislation to repeal the legal tender law; abolish the central bank; repeal the government monopoly over the creation of coins for use as currency and prohibit federal and state taxes on precious metal coins and bullion.
The New York Police Department (NYPD) is the closest thing to a totalitarian organization you can find in the United States. 21st Century New York City is a theme park for the world’s rich. The NYPD is given 3.9 Billion dollars a year to keep the janitorial staff of that theme park in line. It may deserve some credit for the city’s fall in crime, but not as much credit as it is given. Crime is falling throughout the United States and it is doing so without the NYPD’s extreme and racist tactics. The NYPD is currently under fire for many of its practices. Its policy of stopping and frisking law-abiding pedestrians at random is currently being challenged in court because 87% of its victims are black or latino. The NYPD famously spent six years illegally spying on New York City’s Muslim community at the cost of millions of dollars, and failed to produce a single credible accusation of terrorism. Up until recently they were also using the stop and frisk program to arrest 50,000 people a year for marijuana possession, despite the fact that New York City de-criminalized possession in the 1970s (victims were forced to publicly display the marijuana, which is still illegal). The NYPD’s appearance in serious news lately has largely been due to fall out from one of these scandals.
What is it most known for this week though? How are people all over the country hearing about the NYPD for the first time?
The story goes like this: Larry DePrimo, a “handsome” young officer according to People Magazine, noticed a shoeless homeless man in Times Square on the night of November 14th. It was a “cold November” night according to the New York Times, and Officer DePrimo was inspired to go to the local shoe store and buy the man some boots. This spontaneous act of charity was spontaneously recorded by Jennifer Foster of Arizona, who was inspired to email her story to the NYPD. According to her interview on the Today Show, Ms. Foster did this because her father was a police officer who often provided winter boots to homeless people in Phoenix, Arizona.
Every element of this story strains credibility. New York City is a large, progressive Northeastern City with a well developed shelter and social services network. As inspiring as DePrimo’s choice to buy boots for this guy may be, it probably would have made more sense to get him to a shelter. DePrimo’s “heroism” may have wasted an opportunity to get this guy off the streets and into subsidized housing. This officer is also surprisingly sensitive to cold. The Huffington Post: “I had two pairs of wool winter socks and combat boots, and I was cold,” DePrimo said Wednesday”. The weather recorded at Laguardia on November 14th was a high of 59 and low of 39, which this Tri-state area native has always seen as T-shirt weather.
If this story is not the transparent publicity stunt it appears to me to be, allow me to apologize to DePrimo and Foster. If the story is completely true, they are better human beings than I could ever hope to be.
Even if the story proves not to be, its treatment is definitely bull$*!t. This “news” was “reported” on the NYPD Facebook page, which is essentially a 21st century press release. Its details have been repeated verbatim, presumably with little fact checking, by every major news outlet in the country. This would not have been a story before Facebook. The news is the fact that the picture is a viral sensation. That is the story, and the only thing that national outlets really have to verify.
Every story prominently and positively points to the NYPD brand, and most of them do so in the headline, producing more viral brand love for the NYPD. None of these stories point to the institution’s deeply troubling past and present. If nothing else, this story has proved the utility of Facebook pages for large organizations.
Here is a law enforcement officer who protected the First Amendment rights of two citizens even though an airport low level bureaucrat objected. Hooray for Deputy Stan Lenic.
The Salt Lake Tribune reports, “This season appears to mark the end of Black Friday as we know it.” Well, that’s not exactly good news. ShopperTrak, a website which counts foot traffic in retail stores, estimated Black Friday sales of $11.2 billion. Bill Martin, founder of ShopperTrak, said, “More retailers than last year began their ‘doorbuster’ deals on Thursday, Thanksgiving itself. Those Thursday deals attracted some of the spending that is usually meant for Friday.”
It now appears that Black Thursday is here to stay. The Salt Lake Tribune also reports, “Lured by earlier-than-ever Black Friday sales, people left Grandma and Grandpa in search of Samsung and Toshiba. They did not go blindly. In dozens of interviews, people acknowledged how spending has become inseparable from the holidays. Older folks pined for the days of Erector Sets and Thumbelinas while in line to pay iPad prices. Even some younger shoppers said it felt wrong to be spending money instead of quality time with family on Thanksgiving… Some said that the Black Friday bleed into Thursday crossed a line, that merchants should not intrude like this. Yet amid these protests, people still talked about feeling powerless beneath the moment — as if they had no choice but to shop.”
I do not support the “consumerism” associated with holidays. As a matter of fact, I like the idea of Buy Nothing Day. However, I understand if people do need to make legitimate purchases, such as food, fuel or other essential items.
Don’t get me wrong, I do not oppose the idea of businesses offering good deals on items. What I oppose is the false sense of urgency on these deals. I oppose the tactic of using loss-leaders to get people into your store in the hopes that they will but things they probably don’t want or need and can’t afford. I like the idea behind Plaid Friday, Small Business Saturday and even Cyber Monday despite the fact that all three gimmicks, in some way, entice consumerism, which I oppose. I also find it ironic that American Express is a sponsor of Small Business Saturday, but I digress.
Whether or not Black Friday becomes Black Thursday or even Black Wednesday, I believe that businesses should offer products at an affordable price every day of the year and consumer’s should be smart enough not to purchase what they can’t afford.
The conflicts between Israel and Palestine have been going on for such a long time, it’s difficult to know when one conflict stops and another one starts. The latest exchange of missile fire is no exception.
Operation Pillar of Cloud (or Pillar of Defense, depending on what report you read) officially began on November 14 “after Gaza militants fired over 100 rockets at Israeli cities and towns over the course of several days.” However, if one looks closer, they will see that both sides were involved in the aggression. Palestinian’s in Gaza were being shot by the Israeli military, Palestinian’s then detonated explosives near the Israeli military. On November 8, the Israeli military clashed with Hamas and during the raid a 12 year old Palestinian boy was killed by gunfire coming either from a tank or helicopter. The two sides exchanged fire for several days and then Hamas reportedly fired over 100 rockets into Israel on November 10.
There were supposedly talks of a cease-fire on November 12, which the Israeli military claims was broken after a dozen rockets were fired from Gaza. Responsibility for those launches was “claimed by smaller groups, including a radical Salafi organization that rejects Hamas’s authority.”
On November 12, Jason Ditz of AntiWar.com wrote, “The reality is that Gaza poses no real ‘threat’ to Israel. Even before getting the US to pump money into their Iron Dome system the rockets rarely hit anything, and if they did the glorified fireworks in the Gaza arsenal usually did minor damage to someone’s roof at worst. In addition to being the impetus behind more US aid, Gaza is also a chance for Israeli hawks to grandstand. A prolonged Gaza armistice would imperil that policy.”
I believe the Israeli’s knew this, which is why they assassinated Hamas commander Ahmed Jabari just hours after he received the draft proposal of a permanent truce agreement with Israel. John Glaser of AntiWar.com writes, “Israeli peace activist Gershon Baskin, who helped negotiate the release of Gilad Shalit and maintained contacts with Hamas leaders, said the truce agreement included protocols for maintaining a cease-fire in the case of cross-border violence between Israel and Gaza.”
Baskin told Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper that provides “coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East”, that senior officials in Israel knew about the pending truce agreement, yet approved of the assassination, knowing it would terminate the truce and escalate the conflict with Gaza.
Baskin said, “I think that they have made a strategic mistake, which will cost the lives of quite a number of innocent people on both sides.” In less than a week, nearly 50 Palestinians (mostly civilians) have been killed and hundreds injured; 3 Israeli civilians and no military combatants have been killed.. Baskin added that Jabari’s assassination “killed the possibility of achieving a truce.”
I agree that it was a mistake to assassinate the man with whom a cease-fire was being negotiated and agree with Ann Harrison, the Deputy Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme for Amnesty International, who said, “All sides have to step back from the brink in order to protect civilian lives.”
In October, we informed you that Puerto Rico would be voting on whether to become the 51st member of the United States of America. It appears the majority of voters there may get their wish, but only if Republicans don’t drag their heels and block the process for purely political reasons:
VOTERS may have voted for more of the same in America on election day, but in Puerto Rico they opted for decisive change. In a two-stage plebiscite—the island’s fourth referendum regarding its relationship with the United States—54% of the electorate voted to change Puerto Rico’s current status as a self-governing “commonwealth”, and 61% wanted the new form of government to be full American statehood.
[...] The vote will not have immediate consequences. Congress would have to pass a law admitting Puerto Rico for it to become a state. With a fiscal squeeze looming at the start of 2013 lawmakers will have their hands full in the coming months. And the island’s government is unlikely to push the issue aggressively following the election as governor of Alejandro García Padilla, who supports a continued commonwealth.
Moreover, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has little incentive to address the topic. According to exit polls, 83% of boricuas on the mainland voted for Barack Obama. Statehood would add two Senate seats and a House delegation of five, the same size as Oregon’s and probably as reliably Democratic.
Unless the island holds another vote that yields a different result, however, Puerto Rico has now officially requested statehood. If Democrats retake the House in 2014, they would be well-advised to try to add a 51st star to the flag.
As a libertarian-republican with Puerto Rican friends dotted across the country, I say give the people what they voted for.
After all, once Puerto Ricans become full-blown hard-working Americans subjugated by the IRS like the rest of us, they will certainly not be so enthused about the Democrat Party’s nonsense core tenet of redistribution of wealth.
Update: A commenter here at HoT aptly points out that all is not as it appears.
José writes, “Puerto Ricans did not vote for statehood. When you add the votes in favor of independence as well as the blank votes which were casted [sic] in protest, along with those also casted [sic] in protest in favor of a sovereign comonwealth [sic], statehood just got the typical 45%.”
He continues, “Now, you’re probably asking yourselves why would anyone vote a certain way in protest? The answer is very simple: the Commonwealth option was NOT incuded [sic] in the referendum.”
The status referendum results do indeed show that while a majority chose to change the status of their country, a minority actually chose statehood with 480,749 casting blank protest ballots. “55% of the residents of Puerto Rico REPUDIATED statehood.”
“They just want to fix what they have so they can sustain their own economy without having to endure the indignity of Washington’s handouts.” I couldn’t agree more.
And yes José, I like spending words (especially for making corrections and clarification), I hope you’ll oblige a few more.
Reason.com has a piece on which writers turned people on to freedom.
However, what caught my eye was some traffic coming from a link the comments, where rumors of HoT’s death are being bandied about.
Firstly: thank you. Hammer of Truth never dies, but it was comatose.
Secondly: we’re supposed to be dead and you bastards never even sent flowers? Am disappoint.
Sure, I called it. But isn’t that special when Ron Paul backs me up on simple free market economics:
Had gas stations been allowed to raise their prices to reflect the increased demand for gasoline, only those most in need of gasoline would have purchased gas, while everyone would have economized on their existing supply. But because prices remained lower than they should have been, no one sought to conserve gas. Low prices signaled that gas was in abundant supply, while reality was exactly the opposite, and only those fortunate enough to be at the front of gas lines were able to purchase gas before it sold out. Not surprisingly, a thriving black market developed, with gas offered for up to $20 per gallon.
With price controls in effect, supply shortages were exacerbated. If prices had been allowed to increase to market levels, the profit opportunity would have brought in new supplies from outside the region. As supplies increased, prices gradually would have decreased as supply and demand returned to equilibrium. But with price controls in effect, what company would want to deal with the hassle of shipping gas to a disaster-stricken area with downed power lines and flooded highways when the same profit could be made elsewhere? So instead of gas shipments flooding into the disaster zones, what little gas supply is left is rapidly sold and consumed.
Governments fail to understand that prices are not just random numbers. Prices perform an important role in providing information, coordinating supply and demand, and enabling economic calculation. When government interferes with the price mechanism, economic calamity ensues. Price controls on gasoline led to the infamous gas lines of the 1970s, yet politicians today repeat those same failed mistakes. Instituting price caps at a below-market price will always lead to shortages. No act of any legislature can reverse the laws of supply and demand.
History shows us that the quickest path to economic recovery is to abolish all price controls. If governments really want to aid recovery, they would abolish their “price-gouging” legislation and allow the free market to function.
It’s a shame that RINO governor Chris Christie won’t listen to free market advocates, but he’ll be listening when citizens hit the voting booth next year and remember his handling of gas shortages by further exacerbating the situation with rationing. Even worse, they might remember him giving the green light to football fans to attend a Giants football game during said rationing and state of emergency. Or, they might remember that Christie was quick to send an army of 45 bureaucrats out to check gas station receipts.
Already polls are showing Governor Christie rather vulnerable against Democrat contenders (who most certainly would have also rationed gas, but go ahead and ask them yourselves). Hurricane Sandy and his mishandling of the aftermath have yet to be factored into these polls.
Gas rationing may have ended in New Jersey today, but the extended gas crisis’ actual costs to the New Jersey economy will no doubt haunt Christie well into next year’s re-election bid.
Mitt Romney has officially bid his presidential campaign adieu, and now comes the long unwind:
Some top donors privately unloaded on Romney’s senior staff, describing it as a junior varsity operation that failed to adequately insulate and defend Romney through a summer of relentless attacks from the Obama campaign over his business career and personal wealth.
“Everybody feels like they were a bunch of well-meaning folks who were, to use a phrase that Governor Romney coined to describe his opponent, way in over their heads,” said one member of the campaign’s national finance committee, who requested anonymity to speak candidly.
“Romney World,” the fundraiser added, “will fade into the obscurity of a lot of losing campaigns.”
Thanks to the Internet, we’re actually able to watch this unfold in real-time as supporters “unlike” Romney’s facebook page — on disappearingromney.com.
This is one unpopular program that Romney can truthfully say he cut after this election: his online campaign.
Fellow veterans, patriots and others
I went out this morning to display the Stars and Stripes as I have done for years to honor my fellow veterans on Veterans Day. I have always flown the flag during our holidays and special occasions. It has, in the past, been an honor to do so.
I did place the flag in its proper place and then returned to my house. After a few moments of thought and discussion with family members I returned and took the flag down. It will not be flown by me as long as this country remains a statist socialist nation.
I will not participate in the sham that has been perpetuated on us by one-half of those who voted for the socialist/Marxist in the White house. The first time they could be forgiven but this time they knew exactly what they were doing.
May the Maker of the Universe guide those who want God & family values, Constitutional restoration, individual liberty, limited government, free market economics, private property rights and a strong national defense (not nation building) to take action to do so. I am now a passive resistor. Will you join me? If not, then you are the problem, not the solution.
Combat Tracker Teams of the Vietnam War
P.S. – I will never forget them. May God bless them all.
May all of them rest in peace and be with God.
Not content with getting his ass handed to him by the Ron Paul supporters over his comments on the Federal Reserve (“there were plenty of internal audits”), and being forced to walk away from the 2012 Republican primary campaign trail in disgrace over multiple alleged sex scandals, Herman Cain is now calling for a civil war within the GOP which will culminate in a new third party full of social conservatives:
“I never thought that I would say this, and this is the first time publicly that I’ve said it: We need a third party to save this country. Not Ron Paul and the Ron Paulites. No. We need a legitimate third party to challenge the current system that we have, because I don’t believe that the Republican Party … has the ability to rebrand itself,” Cain said.
You can listen to the whole radio interview here.
It’s pretty clear from his actions that Cain has no interest in building anything other than a gold palace to himself in his lifetime, so I say let him start off down the third party road to failure so many have traveled.
Cain’s Pro War and Racist Pizza Party can ignore the Federal Reserve’s deplorable fiscal policy of printing fiat money by the truckload, offer to leverage the government to force people to conform to socially conservative policies that are widely rejected, and we can all laugh when this inexperienced upstart third party fails miserably behind the Constitution Party due to the ridiculous ballot access laws.
The media sneering will of course be bipartisan in nature, but maybe we’ll come to like him again in Internet memes if he’ll flash that creepy smile at us some more.
President Obama became the first President since FDR to win re-election by a smaller margin than his initial election (Obama receive 8 million fewer votes and 33 fewer Electoral Votes in 2012 than 2008). I was not surprised by his reelection or the fact that he was reelected by a smaller margin than his 2008 victory. I did find it surprising that within days of his reelection, the White House received a letter of resignation from CIA Director David Petraeus.
Jason Ditz of AntiWar.com writes, “The timing of the resignation is also telling, as indications are this FBI investigation has been ongoing for quite some time, but the resignation waited until immediately after the presidential election. President Obama has been a vocal supporter of Petraeus in numerous roles, and the revelation that he appointed a leader of the nation’s most visible spy agency who couldn’t even keep an affair under wraps would certainly have been politically damaging if it came out before the vote.”
In addition to Petraeus, Hillary Clinton announced that she will be stepping down as Secretary of State. Even though Clinton has been upfront about her intentions to only serve as Secretary of State for one term, the timing of this latest announcement seems rather convenient. In mid-October, she took responsibility for the deadly assault on a U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya on September 11 of this year. Military officials insist Petraeus’ resignation has nothing to do with Benghazi, his sudden resignation means that he will no longer be required to testify before Congress about the debacle.
Regarding the Benghazi attack, Clinton said, “I take this very personally. So we’re going to get to the bottom of it, and then we’re going to do everything we can to work to prevent it from happening again, and then we’re going to work to bring whoever did this to us to justice.”
Based on information obtained by AntiWar.com, local police were seen taking pictures inside the embassy, a small British security firm was hired to guard the consulate and some of the “security team” team assigned to guard the compound showed the rioters where the Americans were located. Blue Mountain Security told their unarmed guards “to sound the alarm over the radio and then run for cover if there was an attack.”
Justin Raimondo asks, “Unarmed ‘security’ guards — who ever heard of that? How the heck did Blue Mountain get this contract?” After going into detail on how Blue Mountain got the contract, Raimondo concludes, “The whole arrangement screams setup.”
I’m not saying that war-criminal David Petraeus was involved in this debacle, but it is very “coincidental” that he resigned days after the election and just days before being required to testify before Congress.
Libertarians are finally able to kick at least one hurdle out of their way in several states after this year’s election, according to an analysis presented by Gary Johnson subreddit contributor nozickian:
In New Mexico, the LP has ballot access through 2014 because Johnson got at least 0.5% of the vote.
In Georgia, all statewide LP candidates have ballot access through 2014 because Johnson got 1% of the vote.
In Nevada, the LP retains ballot access for House candidates because Johnson got at least 1% of the vote.
In Michigan, the LP retains ballot access because US Senate candidate Scotty Boman got at least 17,000 vote (he actually got over 83,000).
In North Carolina, the LP has ballot access through 2016 because gubernatorial candidate Barbara Howe got at least 2% of the vote.
In Utah, the LP retains ballot access for House candidates because US Senate candidate Shaun McCausland got at least 2% of the vote and because gubernatorial candidate Ken Larsen got at least 2%. Either one would have been sufficient.
In West Virginia, the LP has ballot access through 2016 because gubernatorial candidate Jesse Johnson got at least 1% of the vote.
In Wyoming, the LP retains ballot access in 2014 because US House candidate Richard Brubaker got at least 2% of the vote.
Source: Election results and http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/statewide-libertarian-vote-totals-that-will-give-lp-ballot-access
Edit: Bruce Majors also secured future LP ballot access in DC.
Whether the establishment media will give Libertarian Party candidates equal time and coverage during elections still remains to be seen.
UPDATE: The LP blog confirms and adds that the party “has full ballot access in 30 states and the District of Columbia.” By gaining party status in these states, it should help clear a psychological block in voters’ perceptions in addition to the benefits of money and time that will saved by avoiding the minor party ballot petitioning process.
Libertarian Party presidential candidate and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson did the unbelievable this Tuesday: he created the new high-water mark for Libertarians by earning over 1.1 million votes in the general election.
But — to paraphrase Kanye West, “Yo Johnson, I’m really happy for you, Imma let you finish, but Ron Paul had one of the biggest libertarian campaigns of all time.”
That’s right. Ron Paul, who ran as a Republican Party primary candidate for president, was this year’s actual winner of the highest libertarian campaign vote get, with over two million votes.
Now, big “L” purists would argue that Ron Paul’s campaign doesn’t count — but I’m busy counting libertarian votes, not Libertarian votes. And of course I’m coming from the position of wanting to elect libertarians; not merely paint a new, but otherwise meaningless, high-water mark.
I’ll be away from the blog this evening, but I encourage everyone to use the Google elections map, just because it’s probably the best tool out there created by some incredibly smart coders.
And just for giggles, here’s my predictions, cross-posted from IPR:
Johnson breaks 1M, barely. Gets credit for handing wins to Romney in Colorado and possibly Ohio. Time for democrats to hate libertarians.
Amendment 64 passes in Colorado with surprisingly strong republican support. Battle lines drawn for 10th amendment showdown with federal government.
I’m basing my judgement on the Romney/Obama matchup on an apparent gaffe by the president during the Town Hall debate when he (mis)stated “when I was president.”
I am rather certain he was being prophetic in that utterance.
Update: You can track Colorado’s Amendment 64 / marijuana legalization issue here, on the very last page (use the dropdown). Colorado polls close at 7PM MST / 9PM EST.
Here’s to “the entire country getting on airplanes to go to Denver for the weekend to chill out.” Good call GJ.
Update 11/7: Obama gets another four years, GJ got over 1M (yep, barely) and Amendment 64 passed (1,027,893 Yes to 898,317 No with 23 of 64 Colorado counties reporting)… two out of three predictions ain’t so bad, all things considered. I really should have stuck with my original assessment I told a few people (not on any record) that Obama would get re-elected if he convinced people the economy was rebounding by June, but I guess my time hanging out with Republicans had tinted my view. C’est la vie.