HR 4004: A Plan To Lower Gas Prices

Former Libertarian Party Presidential candidate Ron Paul (now a Republican Congressman from Texas) has developed a plan to lower the gas prices and a surprise to some is that it requires less government regulation than more.

Many Americans understandably are upset with the sharp spike in gas prices since Hurricane Katrina hit the gulf coast in August, and are concerned by reports of oil company profits. But we must understand that high oil prices are not the result of an unregulated free market. On the contrary, the oil industry is among the most regulated and most subsidized of U.S. industries. Perhaps we need to ask ourselves whether too much government involvement in the oil markets, rather than too little regulation, has kept the supply of refined gasoline artificially low.

Consider Marathon Oil, which operates a refinery in Texas City. Marathon recently announced the construction of new refinery that will bring several hundred thousand barrels of oil online every day- which is exactly what the nation needs. But building a new refinery is a daunting task that requires billions of dollars in capital investment. The process of obtaining federal permits alone can take several years. As a result, we won’t see a drop of refined gasoline from the new Marathon facility until 2009.

Federal subsidies and regulations are largely responsible for limiting the supply of refined gasoline in this country. The demand for gasoline has risen dramatically in America due to population growth in recent decades, but virtually no new refining capacity has been added. Basic economics tells us that rising demand and a fixed supply will lead to higher prices. No amount of congressional grandstanding about price gouging will change this economic reality. We must increase domestic exploration, drilling, and refining if we hope to maintain reasonable gas prices. We need more competition, which means we need less government.

Read more.

It would lower the gas prices almost twenty cents a gallon and maybe much more. You can read the full text of the Bill here.


Senate Holds Closed Session on Iraq

Senate closed hearingsIn what may be little more than a political stunt by Democratic leader Harry Reid today, the Senate halted all normal procedures, kicked the public out and finally talked about Iraq in the most democratic form anyone could hope for… behind closed doors.

We’ve been too busy tipping at the titty bar thanks to FEMA debit cards to really give a shit about this whole “why are we still in Iraq” thing, so we’re gonna just turn the whole “question the government” schtick over to our homeboy Knappster, who has questions for both sides:

Question for Senator Reid — If “the American people and U.S. troops deserve to know the details of how the United States became engaged in the war,” then why call for a closed sesion instead of an open one?

Question for Senator Lott — If Reid was just interested in making “some sort of stink about Scooter Libby and the CIA leak,” then wouldn’t he have done so in public instead of in secret?

Question for Senator Reid — If Senator Pat Roberts “reneged on a promise to fully investigate whether the administration exaggerated and manipulated intelligence leading up to the war,” then why haven’t Senate Democrats moved to bring Senate work to a halt until such an investigation is done, or introduced a motion to censure Roberts for dereliction of duty?

Question for Senator Lott — If Senator Reid’s procedural move “violated the Senate’s tradition of courtesy,” how would you characterize Senate President Dick Cheney’s admonition, given on the Senate floor, to Senator Pat Leahy to “go f–k himself?”

Last word before we go back to stuffing bills into g-strings: If no one was paying attention to the Democrats raising a stink about Iraq before, exactly how is a closed-door session meant to change that?

Update: Fafblog puts the “stunt” in hilarious perspective.

Another Update: Wonkette gives us more to laugh at with this infographic depiction of the difference between “pure stunt” and “extraordinary move.”


What’s Wrong With That?

Jeff Jarvis posts this one-liner from Triumph the Insult Dog on Howard Stern:

Libertarians are just conservatives who like porn

I’m sure there’s a long-winded libertarian reponse to that, but I’ll just let it stand that it was said by a dog that gets filmed with a hand up his ass.


Scooter Libby’s Erotic Literary Past

As if things couldn’t get any worse for Scooter Libby, the New Yorker has turned up an embarrasing dirty novel written by Scooter in 1996 entitled “The Apprentice.” in reality, it would have been better named “The Aristocrats” considering the lurid nature of the work, which includes scatology, bestiality, pedophelia, bestiality with pedophelia, scatology with bestiality and so forth. Some of the prized passages:

“At age ten the madam put the child in a cage with a bear trained to couple with young girls so the girls would be frigid and not fall in love with their patrons. They fed her through the bars and aroused the bear with a stick when it seemed to lose interest.”

[…]”At length he walked around to the deer’s head and, reaching into his pants, struggled for a moment and then pulled out his penis. He began to piss in the snow just in front of the deer’s nostrils.”

[…] He asked if they should fuck the deer.

The New Yorker informs us that, indeed, he does.


Liberal Spender Says What: Bush’s $7.1b Flu Plan

Bush pandemic spendingShowing once again how out of touch he is with fiscal conservatives, president Bush today unveiled a $7.1 billion plan to fight a flu pandemic. Broken down into individual measures, the expensive plan would pay $1.2 billion for stockpiling 20 million of the perishable doses, or enough for less than 10% of the U.S. population (which he admitted may not even combat the specific strain that may cause a pandemic).

Another $2.8 billion would be given away by the government to private industry in the form of technology freebies and vaccines (which they would undoubtedly turn around and sell back to the government for a pretty penny).

And another $1 billion would be spent on the most realistic measure, stockpiling antiviral medicines such as Tamiflu and Relenza.

While it’s evident that president Bush is pandering to the media hype surrounding flu pandemic fears, the money has to come from somewhere. And with a federal budget stretched thin by recent hurricane spending and the Iraq war, there’s no indication where the new proposal will find funding (aside from more deficit spending).

Oh, and if the lackadaisical security response since 9/11 (or hurrican Katrina) is any indication, the U.S. government will have an effective response to a flu pandemic at least four years after it hits.

Update: Prairie Weather has a very good analysis and breakdown of this government giveaway scam, noting that avian flu is just the latest tangible boogeyman for the administration, and saying we need to kep an eye on thing “to the extent to which “pandemic” is replacing “bin Laden” as a political tool.”


Willie Nelson Raises $170K for Kinky

Note: this article contains dead links, the url is still in the hover/alt text. Keep the web working, curate content well!

Kinky Friedman fundraiserWe’ve grown accustomed to pointing out the independents- winning- 2006- elections- yumminess being spouted by some of the media when it comes to third parties in 2006, but it looks like one candidate is really trying to pull off a gubernatorial upset in Texas for 2006.

Kinky Friedman recently raised and estimated $170,000 in one night thanks to friend and country music singer Willie Nelson. And while it’s a far cry from the $5 million his manager say he needs just to get on the ballot (that seems preposterously high, but we’ll roll with it), Freidman has some serious star alliances going on, including former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura and comedian Penn Jillette.

You know, there might be some real legs to third parties races if they can duplicate this kind of fundraising (and this kind of message).


Is it Your Employer’s Business if You Do?

smokerRecently, Wal-Mart got some heat for an internal memo proposing ways to save health care costs by attracting a “healthier, more productive workforce.” But Wal-Mart’s proposed strategy is only the tip of the iceberg, as more and more companies are involving themselves in their employee’s personal health and lifestyle choices. And even moreso in their politics and first amendment rights.

Weyco, an insurance company, has even gone so far as to ban its employees from smoking (at home or at work), firing those who couldn’t kick the butt. And Weyco owner Howard Weyers wants to go even further — firing employees whose spouses smoke (and theoretically anyone they associate with).

This is one of the grey areas of libertarian ideology for some that tends to generate a lot of flack. Because we agree that the companies should be able to hire and fire employees based on whatever criteria they choose, most people (read: Democrats) tend to dismiss us as in favor of big business. Some democrat libertarians will disagree with me, saying that it’s none of an employer’s business what they do at home. Unfortunately, this argument holds no water when it comes to covering that same behavior with health insurance. One person’s hobby of being shot out of cannons on the weekend is suddenly a huge liability for everyone.

The reality is a little more pragmatic. If you don’t agree with how these companies treat their employees, it’s up to you to vote with your dollars. If you continue to buy Weyco Insurance, knowing that the company policy is to openly discriminate against them — you’d be endorsing their behavior, plain and simple.

Common sense says that’s the ideal way to deal with companies that bully their employees.


The Sham Trial of Irwin Schiff

Many of you may be aware of the recent “trial” (if one can even call it that) of Irwin Schiff, the grand-daddy of the tax honesty movement. You may not like him, but this man has put his life on the line to expose just how corrupt the american judiciary has become.

In a previous posting, I’ve discussed that it really doesn’t matter what the law says if we don’t hold the government and ourselves to them. People say the USA PATRIOT Act was a sign of the beginning of the end. Not true. The government was already exceeding it’s constitutional limitations already. Merely making the unconstitutional laws was more a slap in the face than a change in American Jurisprudence.

So why was this a sham? As one Schiff supporter summarized:

Judge Kent Dawson stated he was the LAW, and anything that Congress wrote was of no bearing in his courtroom.

We would like to resolve the matter, but it appears that Irwin Schiff, 77 years old, will be spending the rest of his life in prison because Judge Kent Dawson stated he was the LAW, which Congress was NOT.

Judge Kent Dawson:
1) Refused to allow the Internal Revenue Code to be read in the courtroom unless it supported the prosecution.
2) Sustained every objection by the prosecution when the defense was asking the questions, which was more than 80% of the defense’s questions.
3) Had only the defense’s witnesses Mirandized and not the prosecution’s witnesses.
4) Had only witnesses in for the defense to be questioned on the character of Irwin Schiff and nothing about his books or other materials on tax law.
5) Allowed the prosecution to state to the jury before they went to deliberate; “You are hereby notified that if you do not bring back a decision of guilty you will be breaking the law.”/span>
6) Denied the jurors from seeing the Internal Revenue Code when they asked for it, thus making the jurors guilty of; “ignorance of the law is no excuse.”
7) Had Irwin Schiff and Cindy Neun convicted on “WILLFULNESS” which was not given in great detail of what it was.
8) Denied bail for both Irwin Schiff and Cindy Neun as they were both flight risks for their promoting the TRUTH of the law, and NOT for any felony!!!

If we are going to try and win back this country, the first thing we need to do is actually adhere to the laws that exist. If the laws on the books are stupid, then repeal them. It’s that simple. But let us not enforce laws that don’t exist.

Update by Stephen VanDyke: In my view this is yet another loss for the legality (loophole) argument of tax evaders, which has always struck me as the intellectually lazy way to fight back. Contrast with tax resistance or tax protesting — not paying based on political beliefs or actual opposition to paying taxes regardless of their legality — and you’ll notice that historically there is a much better case to be made for simply not paying (because you oppose how it is spent or just don’t want to part with your money), whether you’re legally required to or not.

Update by Rick Rajter:Apparently, I did not make this clear. Irwin is an ACTIVIST. He never just quietly stood back in the background and didn’t file just to save a few bucks. The guy has wrote numerous books, joined up with We The People at and their petitions for redress of grievances, and has testified and helped numerous people get in the government’s face at every turn.

Finally – Riddle me this. How does one repeal what doesn’t exist?


New World RFID Passports

The government is going to start to use tracking devices in passports which will hold your personal information and can be read by the government. RFID can also be implanted into your skin or placed into your drivers licenses.

The US government will require nearly all of the passports it issues to have a computer chip containing the passport holder’s personal information by October 2006, according to regulations published this week.

Starting in early 2006, the US Department of State will begin issuing passports with 64KB RFID (radio frequency identification) chips containing the name, nationality, gender, date of birth, place of birth, and digitised photograph of the passport holder.

Read full story.

Update: Chase Rolls Out RFID Credit Cards in N.Y.


Blog Free Or Die?

It appears a Constitutional conflict may be on the horizon in New Jersey because a Catholic High School has decided students should remove personal information from the internet even if they used their own computers from home to publish it.

A Roman Catholic high school has ordered its students to remove personal blogs from the Internet in the name of protecting them from cyberpredators.

Students at Pope John XXIII Regional High School in Sparta appear to be heeding a directive from the principal, the Rev. Kieran McHugh, to remove personal postings about the school or themselves from Web sites like or, even if they were posted from the students’ home computers.

Officials with the Diocese of Paterson say the directive is a matter of safety, not censorship. But constitutional experts say the case raises interesting questions about the intersection of free speech and voluntary agreements with private institutions.

Read full story.

Who do you side with on this issue?


Rick Stanley’s “The Revolutionary Coalition”

Note: this article contains dead links, the url is still in the hover/alt text. Keep the web working, curate content well!

Rick StanleyI know what you’re thinking. A revolution? That’s sooo 18th century. Well unfortunately, the same is being said for our beloved US Constitution. For most lawmakers and law enforcers, the Constitution is pretty much a dead letter or a ‘quant relic’ of the past.

Stanley is no stranger to the Patriot movement (and no, not the George Bush definition of roll over and play patriot). He was arrested on Bill of Rights Day in 2001 for openly carrying a firearm without a permit. What ensued was one of the most well documented and disheartening cases of power abuse by the judiciary. Despite proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that both the US and Colorado State Constitutions forbid laws limiting the right to keep and bear arms, Stanley was put through the legal wringer. Last February, he gave a powerful speech to the rotary club about the ordeal, and an mp3 of this can be heard here. I’ve listened to it at least 6-7 times and it still gives me chills.

Rick Stanley’s platform is one line – “To defend our God given (natural), unalienable, Constitutionally protected and guaranteed rights.” It’s that simple folks. I agree with Rick, because if we can’t even support the framework of law, then getting elected as libertarians and passing or repealing laws means nothing without people actually respecting those changes.

So dismiss it as a pipe dream if you like, but we are losing the battle to an ever encroaching federal government which essentially does at it pleases. The choice is yours. I stand with Stanley.


Prison Industry: Cheap Labor for Big Business

jail cellSo you want to pay your employees less than illegal-immigrant rates? Well you are in luck! Prison labor is dirt cheap, and you don’t even have to have an HR department to worry about silly things like healthcare.

They don’t have to worry about strikes or paying unemployment insurance, vacations or comp time. All of their workers are full-time, and never arrive late or are absent because of family problems; moreover, if they don’t like the pay of 25 cents an hour and refuse to work, they are locked up in isolation cells.

That sounds pretty darn good for menial tasks… but how many potential workers are we talking about?

There are approximately 2 million inmates in state, federal and private prisons throughout the country. According to California Prison Focus, “no other society in human history has imprisoned so many of its own citizens.” The figures show that the United States has locked up more people than any other country: a half million more than China, which has a population five times greater than the U.S. Statistics reveal that the United States holds 25% of the world’s prison population, but only 5% of the world’s people.

“Land of the free” my ass. 2 Million inmates? Are we really that much safer having a bunch of pot heads or deadbeat dads (and moms) behind bars? This reminds me of one of my favorite books, Go Directly to Jail: The The Criminalization of Almost Everything . And finally.

“The private contracting of prisoners for work fosters incentives to lock people up. Prisons depend on this income. Corporate stockholders who make money off prisoners’ work lobby for longer sentences, in order to expand their workforce. The system feeds itself,” says a study by the Progressive Labor Party, which accuses the prison industry of being “an imitation of Nazi Germany with respect to forced slave labor and concentration camps.”

Boy, I can’t wait for the day when they start invoking the USA PATRIOT Act a bit more and we all become political prisoners for questioning Big Bro. But hey, at least we’ll get 25 cents an hour. Only 20 hours of work for a value meal at McDonalds if inflation stays low.


How do Democrats “Bork” a SCOTUS Nominee?

Bork-o-maticWith Harriet Miers now yesterday’s news, the Supreme Court nomination process begins anew. But many of you may wonder just how the anti-nomination process works once it reaches the desks of the Democrats. Thankfully, Independent Sources clues us in with this tongue-in-cheek flowchart — The Bork-o-matic:

Independent Sources has happened upon Senate Democrat’s secret flow chart that provides guidance to Barbara Boxer and friends on how to handle Supreme Court nominees. It explains so much. You’ll be shocked! Dismayed! And then you’ll realize that once the President’s next selection is announced, you’re going to save an immense amount of time ignoring the Democrat’s rote opposition.

All that’s missing is excessive use of baseball analogies.

( -)-(- )1 comment

Libby Scooted from White House

Libby leaving White HouseVice president Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby Jr. was indicted today on 5 charges (indictment documents) related to the outting of CIA agent Valerie Plame — ranging from obstruction of justice, perjury and making false statements — and could face up to 30 years behind bars if found guilty. Libby, 55, immediatedly resigned and left the White House.

We assessed yesterday that Libby would be the fall guy for the charges stemming from the scandal, while it also appears presidential advisor Karl Rove may also see some indictments for perjury. And there’s been some speculation in the past that Bush himself might be called before the grand jury, though that seems unlikely now.

Curiously, special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald has yet to connect the charges with any political motive or conspiracy, which could bring higher level charges such as treason. Fitzgerald however, has said that the investigation portion is still underway and more charges may still be brought:

“Is the investigation finished? It’s not over,” Fitzgerald said at a news conference. “But… very rarely do you bring a charge in a case that’s going to be tried in which you ever end a grand jury investigation. I can tell you that the substantial bulk of the work of this investigation is concluded.”

This could bode very badly for the vice president’s office if Fitzgerald can connect enough dots to connect Cheney to a conspiracy.


Forbes Goes After Bloggers in Cover Article

Forbes: Attack of the BlogsIn a move drawing much scorn within the blogosphere (led by ultra popular sites like BoingBoing and Instapundit), Forbes magazine’s cover story next week is “Attack of the Blogs,” a venomous article by writer Daniel Lyons — a figure already despised by many within the Linux community for his advocacy of SCO intellectual property lawsuits.

What will generate such contempt? Well, certainly such blanket generalizations as “Web logs are the prized platform of an online lynch mob spouting liberty but spewing lies, libel and invective” won’t garner much accolades from bloggers. The premise of Lyons’ argument is taking small examples of bad behavior bloggers (a pump-and-dump scammer who is now under indictment for the same crime from 2000) and skewering what many consider good blogging and fact-checking (“Microsoft has been hammered by bloggers; so have CBS, CNN and ABC News, two research boutiques that criticized IBM’s Notes software, the maker of Kryptonite bike locks, a Virginia congressman outed as a homosexual and dozens of other victims”).

But what is sure to raise the ire of many bloggers are some of the dastardly solutions to negative blog coverage: astroturfing (paying other bloggers to support your viewpoint in the blogosphere); mudslinging (digging up dirt on the blogger attacking your company to discredit them); censorship (find any possible copyrighted item on the blogger’s website and call their hosting company to snitch); suing for defamation (if all else fails, just destroy the blogger with your multi-million dollar team of lawyers).

Now, unfortunately, the article fails to give even a cursory look at the good things the blogosphere promotes when it comes to businesses. Like when Savvis CEO Rob McCormick frivolously blew $241,000 at a strip club (he’s been sent on unpaid leave), or when Dell’s customer service causes one blogger to coin the term Dell Hell (and Dell’s subsequent failure to adequately respond drew the criticism of Business Week), or the various political bloggers who demanded spending cuts after Rep. DeLay declared ‘victory‘ in the war on budget fat (a project called Porkbusters was born).

And there’s hundred of similar, good tales for every negative tale about a scammer. Unfortunately, Lyons misses the big picture, that the blogosphere is a community of millions of people who are just as good or bad as the people we meet in real life. Fortunately for us, his doom and gloom outlook isn’t quite as dire as he makes it out to be. But unfortunately, we have to wonder how many businesses will now take his advice and use his guide to counter-attack all criticism, legitimate or not.

Update: VodkaPundit posts an insightful email from one of his readers:

The article’s really quite astonishing. You know, after reading [Gillmor’s post] and the accompanying comments, it occurred to me that one reason blogs are viewed as dangerous is that they serve as means to the (at least ostensible) ends of both liberals and conservatives. Those ends are definitely not always the same, and they come from different motivations, but if liberals want “freedom of information” and conservatives want the “marketplace of ideas,” those are both at least neighboring territories, and blogs go a little ways toward making them more of a reality. Corporations, big media, the government–any entrenched power–can’t help but be nervous, and will eventually seek ways to fight them.


Libertarians Lauded in St Petersburg, FL Strategy

Pinellas County Libertarian ClubIt’s rare to see highly positive coverage of Libertarian campaigns, but this exhaustive writeup on Libertarian strategy in St Petersburg, Florida may be one of the most insightful I’ve seen in a while (which isn’t getting wide coverage at the moment, save for the keen eyes over at Liberty for Sale).

It was an inspired move, not only getting respectable totals, but deliberately doing so the hard way: intentionally low campaign budgets while submitting candidates via thousands of petitions without a single challenge or rejection by opponents, utterly unheard of in US politics. even more, Libertarian candidates were under strict instructions not to wage negative campaigns, sticking neutrally to the issues. ‘Brilliant’ said Florida Business Insight, while ‘Politics in Florida is changed forever’ said another newspaper. ‘Libertarians basically showed both the other parties and the public that they were able to do things the other parties wouldn’t dare to do, and they knew they could do it whenever they chose‘ said Frank Longo, a member of a local government board who helped lead the effort. ‘It woke a lot of people up, and Libertarians made a lot of friends.’

[…] Meanwhile, the Libertarians startled observers when they declined to run a mayoral candidate [in St Petersburg] despite proposed backing from many in the other parties, saying they’re focusing modestly on community boards and coalitions this round.

“It’s a brilliant strategic move,” said William Sachs, a Democratic activist who recently switched to the Libertarians. “It emphasizes their long term focus while they quietly build up local people in government and keeps encouraging the other parties to work with them. It has to be, because the Republican and Democratic players aren’t exactly stupid here and are interested in what the Libertarians have to say. In the end, the voter benefits.” The Libertarian approach may prove all the more interesting as Libertarian State House candidates have polled over 30% in recent elections.

I could quote much more of the article in length, needless to say. This is the first I’ve heard of the St Petersburg strategy, and I must say it’s impressive. Even though running a mayor if the support was there might have been a good idea, it shows that Libertarians aren’t about gaining and consolidating power just for the sake of the power, instead there’s a distinct urge to educate people about the role of what government should be, and to do that through smaller races that are more winnable. This is an admirable strategy and I look forward to hearing more from this Florida city in coming months as more mainstream coverage finds its way down there.

You can learn more about the Libertarian Party of Pinellas County (or if you’d like, donate to them).


Re-indicted and it feels so good…

For over two years, I’ve been publicly predicting that the race for GOP nomination in the Alabama Governor’s race would be between Judge Roy “Ten Commandments” Moore and incumbent Governor Bob “Raise Taxes in the Name of Jesus” Riley. I’ve also stated that when the political season begins, this battle will be between two candidates trying to “out-Jesus” each other. It was interesting to see the Birmingham News use my line in their headline the other day:

“If the race turns into a competition with at least two of the candidates actively engaged in trying to “out-Jesus” one another, voters may forget to think about who’s most qualified to govern the state.”

Libertarian candidate Loretta Nall added to the “out-Jesus” line to sum up the race (so far) pretty well in a recent AP wire piece:

“I’ve got this gut feeling that come November of next year, I stand a very good chance of being governor with the Republicans trying to out-Jesus each other and the Democrats trying to out-socialist each other,” she said.

Most of us are also aware of the successful ploy by HealthSouth ex-CEO Richard Scrushy to invoke the name of Jesus as a judicial tactic. provides:

Lawyers were also skeptical of Scrushy’s decision to join the Guiding Light, a predominantly black church in Birmingham. Although Scrushy said he was “born again,” critics said it was an attempt to influence a predominantly African American jury at his trial.

Alabamians awakened this morning to headlines proclaiming that both Scrushy and former Governor (and current gubernatorial candidate) Don Siegelman had just been indicted by a federal grand jury for charges that Siegelman turned his public office into a criminal enterprise in order to solicit millions of dollars in payoffs. As one might expect, Scrushy had an established position on the donor list, with accusations made that he traded half-a-million bucks for a board seat.

Among the accusations is that Scrushy paid $500,000 to Siegelman’s lottery campaign in exchange for a seat on the state board that decides whether hospitals can expand and for influence over that group’s decisions. Siegelman’s former transportation director, Mack Roberts, was charged with mail fraud for his role in agency actions that helped certain companies.

In a news conference, Siegelman said the indictment stems from a few obsessed government officials who have spent taxpayers’ money in an attempt to control a governor’s election. Siegelman, a Democrat, is running for governor in 2006 and said he has no intention of dropping out of the race.

“The charges are false. I’m going to be proven innocent again and we’re going to go on to win this primary and win this election,” Siegelman said. Prosecutors dropped charges against him last year in an unrelated case.

It seems clear to me that the timing of these indictments is very political. One wonders how much influence Governor Riley used to ensure that Siegelman was indicted in the heat of the political season, as opposed to right after the alleged crimes occurred. If Siegelman follows the lead of his old buddy Richard Scrushy, we can expect to see him at services at the Guiding Light, too. Then we’ll have three candidates trying to out-Jesus each other.

The Alabama race for for Jesus Governor shakes out this way (alphabetical order), so far:

Alabama Gubernatoral Candidates
Name Party Claim to Fame
Lucy Baxley Democrat Ran for her current position of Lt. Gov. on a platform of “We [heart symbol] Lucy” and seems to be using the same platform in the gubernatorial race
Roy Moore Republican Worships graven images in defiance of the Ten Commandments and at considerable expense to taxpayers
Loretta Nall Libertarian Internationally reknowned marijuana journalist and political activist
Bob Riley Republican The former congressman and incumbent told us to “Do the Right Thing” by voting for the greatest increase in taxation in Alabama history. We told him where to stick his tax plan by a vote of 68% to 32%.
Don Siegelman Democrat The former Governor consistently runs on a gambling platform while continuing to run faster than the teams of prosecuters chasing him.

It’s time to put the “goober” back in “gubernatorial”, as opposed to the holy name-dropping competition currently taking place. With choices like these in the race, I’ll likely be rooting for the pot-head.

( -)-(- )Comments Off on Re-indicted and it feels so good…

Miers Withdraws; Public Scatologists Disappointed

Miers withdrawsToday, controversial Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers withdrew herself as nominee –on concerns of breach of Executive Priviledge by probing into her work as White House council — which president George Bush accepted:

I understand and share her concern, however, about the current state of the Supreme Court confirmation process. It is clear that senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House disclosures that would undermine a president’s ability to receive candid counsel.

It’s no secret that GOP strategists have been looking for an excuse to get Miers to gracefully bow out of the position, especially after the revelation of certain correspondence (“P.S. No more public scatology“). Whatever the flimsy reasoning, there really wasn’t a chance in hell Miers would have gotten confirmed, given all the negative commentary from established Republicans crossing the aisle.

One question remains: Who will the White House pick to represent their scatology base now?

( -)-(- )Comments Off on Miers Withdraws; Public Scatologists Disappointed

Challenge to LP “Zero Dues” to Proceed

We noted earlier that there was some resistance to the Zero Dues Initiative a while ago, and it’s now official that the challenge, initiated by the Texas Libertarian Party, will be heard by the National LP Judiciary Committee in the coming weeks.

In a 4-3 vote in favor of hearing the challenge, there was some contention by those against the challenge that Texas may not be acting in accordance with their own bylaws in bringing the complaint. Texas LP requires a 5% approval from members to issue challenges, which was not proven to the Judicial Committee. The Committee voted to hear the complaint regardless, possibly hoping not to complicate the matter with more legalities than necessary.

The challenge stems from the assertion that membership dues cannot be lowered to zero, with the argument that zero is not a number. There is no technical specification within the national bylaws that dues must set at a valid number (“Dues for membership in the Party shall be set by the National Committee”).

From our perspective, should the challenge is deemed correct, the short-term fix if would be to raise dues to $1 until the national convention next year. Of course, with all the recent turmoil (Executive Director Joe Seehusen resigning in August and his replacement not yet determined), the LP is certainly in no position to have more internal strife at the expense of focusing on external politics.

Update: Do we know something JC chair David Nolan doesn’t? We swear we’re not using a crystal ball to report this news, just our network of friendly tipsters (we trust they’re accurate on this one). Yet an email asking for comment from Nolan received this response:

The Judicial Committee has not yet officially decided to accept the Texas request. We should have a definitive answer by tonight or tomorrow.


Plamegate: Dude, Where’s My Charges?

Friday sounds like the day for Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald to announce that someone (and perhaps pals) in the White House committed treason by outting CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Of course, the speculation is that Libby will be the chosen fall guy here in order to get Rove and Cheney off the hook:

Rove also testified that he may have learned about Plame from Libby, according to a person familiar with Rove’s testimony. Some saw this as an effort to show Rove had no reason to believe the information about Plame was classified.

Whatever happens tomorrow, this has been simmering long enough and the wafting scent of this scandal is about to become a full entree of indictments, which we’re happy to see.

( -)-(- )1 comment

Schwarzenegger Street: Trite, Tasteless, Typical

Arnold\'s NeighborhoodBig ups to our peeps over at Independent Sources for spotting this doozy of a mud-slinger campaign ad by Democratic California gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides — Schwarzenegger Street (a spoof of Sesame Street done Jib Jab style, but without being funny or clever):

The Governor’s “neighborhood” inhabited by the usual liberal bogeymen: President Bush! Vice President Cheney! Fox News! Enron’s Ken Lay! Karl Rove! And others! Too bad most of them have only tenuous connections to Schwarzenegger.

Oh man, as much as I think Schwarzenegger is a douchebag suckup to corporate special interests, this ad is just horrible. What’s worse, Angelides vowed to take the high road (“I believe in the high road.”), and this proves once again Democrats and Republicans really only care about kicking each other out of the way in their quest for more state control and don’t really care about discussing the issues in an adult manner.

On a juvenile note… O’Reilly the Grouch looks like the love child of Joan Rivers and Milton Bradley.


45% of Iraqis Support Attacks Against Allies

A leaked poll by an Iraqi university research team on behalf of the British government is creating quite a stir since it directly conflicts with statements that there is wide support for the invasion. In some areas, the support for suicide bombings against occupying forces spikes to 65%. Other poll numbers easily indicate the rosy news being told at home doesn’t stack up with reality (thanks Joe Stump):

* 82% of Iraqis are “strongly opposed” to the presence of coalition troops

* Less than 1% of the Iraqi population believes coalition troops are responsible for any improvement in the country

* 67% of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation

* 43% of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened

* 72% do not have confidence in the multi-national forces.

You know, at this point, I’d rather not bother saying anything more. I want one of our token 37%, follow the course, pro-Iraq occupation readers to spin this for us in the comments. Come on and tell us all just how wrong we are to want to leave this country that doesn’t want us there.

Tell us how spreading democracy in Iraq logically ignores 82% of those who don’t want us there.

Because I call bullshit.


DoD: Promised Re-Enlistment Bonus? Whatever!

Freedom Isn\'t Free! Support Yourself, Soldier!Here’s another fine example of the DoD supporting the troops. If by support you mean reneging on some promises to pay a $15,000 bonus to members of the National Guard and Army Reserve who agree to extend their enlistments by six years:

The bonuses were offered in January to Active Guard and Reserve and military technician soldiers who were serving overseas. In April, the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs ordered the bonuses stopped, [Sen. Patty Murray (D-Seattle)] said.

[…]A Pentagon spokeswoman, Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, confirmed the bonuses had been canceled, saying they violated Pentagon policies because they duplicated other programs. She said Guard and Reserve members would be eligible for other bonuses.

Krenke said some soldiers had been paid the re-enlistment bonuses, but she was unsure how many or whether the money would have to be repaid. Murray’s office said that as far as it knew, no active Guard or Reserve members had received the bonuses.

Here’s the mostest, bestest warm and fuzzy part:

“As in the private sector, bonuses are quite effective in keeping talented people with high demand skills,” Krenke said in an e-mail response to questions.

Well, except unlike the private sector, you can’t just quit your military career and find another if your signing bonus gets ripped out of your hands by some pencil pusher in the Pentagon. You know because of that thing called the UCMJ Article 86.

And there’s at least one milblogger who got the bonus, but is a little more than wary he may get a bill from the Pentagon:

I hate to say this too loud for fear that they try to take my money back, but what the heck is going on at the Pentagon? If the Pentagon drives me to support Patty Murray, we’re all going to have a problem here.