The Militant Libertarian

I'm pissed off and I'm a libertarian. What else you wanna know?

Saturday, May 08, 2004

Utah Republican Convention

The Republicans in Utah have raped their own platform (as of today), so I guess I can't like even the hard-core ones
anymore either. They've removed the Jury Nullification plank from their platform and made a series of other anti-freedom changes thanks in large part to the work of their "Constitutional authority," Utah's Attorney General Mark Shurtleff. I should have pissed on his campaign signs when I had the chance...

At the convention today, someone told me that he was supporting Oleane Walker because the NRA gave her an "A" rating. I said, "Big deal. The National Republican Apologists gave George Bush their top rating too, and he said publicly that he'd sign an 'assault weapons' ban continuance. If the GOA gave her a good score, I'd consider voting for her."

Another told me he supported Marty Stevens because of his stance on "home schooling." I said "What stance? He won't outlaw it outright, but only in pieces?"

Today, at the Republican convention, I saw nothing but money and bullshit pandering. I saw Enid Greene shaking hands with Mark Shurtleff. I saw Chris Cannon guffawing with John Swallow. I saw lavish displays of money being spent.

Yet I heard no public displays of anything but same-old rhetoric and pandering from the candidates.

These people want to run our government. If they're planning to run it the way they're running their campaigns, I can only mourn for the future of Utah.

I used to like the Republican Party. After today, I have nothing but disdain for anyone who chooses to be a part of it. Even those who think they're going to "change it from within." It's beyond saving.

I will rejoice when the gun show packs the house as heavily as the Republican Party. I will cry to the heavens in thanks when the Republican Party is sad to find their Utah convention barely fills the County Council Chambers on 2100 South. I will bake a turkey and give thanks on the day that Republicans become overjoyed at one of their candidates "pulling 3% of the vote."

Were it not for third parties on the ballot, I would tear up my voter registration card today and forget about it.

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

Friday, May 07, 2004

Alan Keyes

I went to a pre-convention event for Parley Hellewell, who is hoping for the GOP nomination as a gubernatorial candidate in 2004. The GOP convention here in Utah is tomorrow.

This event featured Alan Keyes, who came to speak and endorse Parley for his run. It was held in Provo and was a small affair, with about 150 in attendance. Most of those there were delegates and supporters as the event was not heavily publicized. I was invited to go by a friend of mine.

So as the only shorts-wearing, long haired, anti-USA PATRIOT Act t-sirt wearing person in attendance, I felt a little out of place. Not that I cared. I lived in the valley of Mormania for a long time ("under the Zion curtain," as it's called) - all of this meaning Utah County or the Provo/Orem/American Fork corridor of Utah.

They had free food too. If they'd've had free t-shirts on top of that, I'd have been in, this is Mormania...I mean the Celestial Kingdom.

So anyway, Mormon jokes aside, it was actually a great little event. The venue: the outdoor atrium/gardens of the Noni building in Provo near the mouth of the Provo Canyon; beautiful and very nicely set up. The speakers: Alan Keyes and Parley Hellewell. The food: grilled (literally) chicken, potato salad, greens, and lemon-tinted water; sweet and free!

Anwyay, Keyes is arguably one of the greatest speakers for the conservative (aka "Republican Right") movement with a dramatic and very fiery way of spelling out his points. While I can't agree with everything he says, I can agree with his basic premise: the morals and family values of our nation are failing and we are reaping the rewards of our own sins against the world.

I wholeheartedly agree. I probably disagree with him on how, exactly, we should return to those values; I wouldn't label Keyes as a Jeffersonian. Regardless, people like Keyes are needed in today's society to keep throwing our problems in the faces of those who would brush them aside for so-called bigger issues (like "the economy" and "terrorism" and so forth). People like Alan Keyes are an embarrassment to the "status quo"/statist Republican "conservatives" who generally get elected to office. They remind them of what Republicans really are and that bothers those who are Republicans In Name Only (RINOs).

Hellewell, though he doesn't really have a chance in hell of getting the nomination of the GOP, is easily the only TRUE Republican running for that nomination. The rest are RINOs in different forms: pure Republicrats like Oleane, sell-out RINOs like Lampropolous or Stevens who will toss out the party platform and belief system as soon as one of them is elected, and ingrained-in-the-high-powers-that-be puppets like Hunstman - who is probably the "chosen one" who will win this time around.

Oh well. I shook Hellewell's hand, thanked him for the event, told him that I'm one of those "evil Libertarians" and said I wanted to meet the only Republican running for the GOP's nomination this year. It took a minute for that to sink in, but he got it and gave me a grin. He's a nice guy with Utah farm-boy charm, so I don't fault him. He's running his campaign on principle and therefore will never get anywhere here: the powers that be don't like principled people; they're hard to control.

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

The Top 13 Signs Your Presidential Candidate Is a Deadhead

13> Has already picked his live-in, Melody, as his "Secretary
of Dreams."

12> Instead of old fashioned whistle-stop campaign, wants to
go "truckin'."

11> "Building a Bong to the 21st... whatever."

10> Typical debate rejoinder: "Whoa. You're harshing my mellow."

9> "Inhaled? Shit, I toked righteously!"

8> Claims that, 150 years before he invented the Internet,
he invented patchouli.

7> His explanation why he never registered for the draft:
"I spaced."

6> Interrupts debate with charges that his opponent is
"bogarting the microphone"

5> Giggles uncontrollably when someone says "acid rain".

4> Breaks into a 20-minute-long, incomprehensible ramble in
the middle of every speech.

3> Can't spell "potato"; CAN spell "ganja."

2> Freely admits inhaling. Adamantly denies bogarting.

and's Number 1 Sign Your
Presidential Candidate Is a Deadhead...

1> He actually *likes* spending years traveling around the
country with the same act, distributing buttons,
t-shirts, and tapes.

[ The Top 5 List ]
[ Copyright 1999, 2004 by Chris White ]
[ To subscribe: ]

Don't miss out on the fun -- join NOW!

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

Thursday, May 06, 2004

What do the status quo enforcers really inflict on us?

From the author of "Hologram of Liberty" and "Molon Labe," Boston T. Party:

America is unique. It has a government which simply cannot tell the truth, and a people which simply cannot hear the truth. Hence the partnership. Our country is like a tawdry apartment in which everything has been swept under the rug but the residents walk all over the lumpy, undulating floor as if nothing were out of the ordinary. Those areas which have several feet of secreted truth - such as JFK being assassinated by triangulated rifle fire, or TWA 800 exploding from a missile strike, or the Murrah Building blowing up from shaped charges wrapped around its structural pillars - we navigate around in a conspiracy of silence. Americans are guilty en masse because they refused to march in the streets - refused to sit-down strike - until their government told them the truth.

-- From the F.A.Q. section of Boston's website

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

A few good men?

A few good men

On the morning of Wednesday, April 28, attorneys for the Bush administration put before the Supreme Court the argument that presidents in wartime must be trusted to detain, imprison and interrogate possible terrorists and enemy combatants in any way they see fit, without the worry of the courts or the public looking over their shoulder.

On the evening of Wednesday, April 28, pictures broadcast by the CBS program "60 Minutes II" put before the world stark and disgusting proof that the administration's argument is as wrong as wrong can be -- legally, ethically and, of the most immediate import, strategically.

The administration claimed that the need for security outweighs such legal niceties as judicial review, habeas corpus and the presumption of innocence. But it is the failure to observe these bedrock principles of the American system, supposedly in the process of being transplanted to the Middle East, that most endangers national security.

The administration's line that the sexual humiliation torture that unfolded in the Baghdad prison was the work of a few bad apples is swiftly falling apart. Reports that such behavior was systemic, with roots in the American campaign in Afghanistan, grow by the hour.

According to a report by Army Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, completed in February but not noticed by the president or secretary of defense until media reports forced the issue, the ill-trained soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison had every reason to believe that their superiors in charge of interrogating Iraqis were nothing but pleased with the hellhole they had created.

The president and his people have been falling all over themselves, and onto television screens the world over, to insist that this repulsive behavior is not the way Americans act.

But it is exactly the way Americans, and all those in positions of power, act when they think they will have no one else to answer to. The lack of oversight -- judicial, congressional and public -- is as responsible for these atrocities as were the men and women who perpetrated them.

Because of what these Americans did, more Iraqis will violently oppose the U.S. mission in Iraq, more foreigners will be under threat of torture and mutilation, more Americans will die.

The president stubbornly refuses to apologize, not that it would help much now. America's only hope of redemption lies in the hands of the dedicated military officers who will, who must, stand their post by following these crimes just as far up the chain as they go, and in the full light of day.

Because they know that the real principles of American justice are, in the end, their only weapon.

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

Wednesday, May 05, 2004

Too Late?

I posted this to the Underground Economy forum this morning (see "links" page for info on this forum). It was in reply to a thread regarding several Baptist ministers calling for their congregations to remove their children from public schools.

I applaud the Baptists for making this move. However, in my opinion, this is too little, too late.

It's great to assume that if we "save" the next generation (or two) from public school indoctrination, that they'll win the battle for liberty for us. I don't think so. Public school is only one big piece of the huge indoctrination pie.

These same parents will have to turn off the electric babysitter (TV), not allow most movies to be seen, filter magazines, newspapers, and even books... and all parents will have to do it; one parent not doing his/her duty could mean the poisoning of one child, who will spread that poison to other children.

No, people, we can't "hope for the future" by hoping that the "next generation" will take care of it. This is no better than the average Baby Boomer retiree demanding that the next generation pay for their retirement entitlements.

Don't put your payment to liberty on your children's shoulder. It's not their debt to pay. It should not be ours either, but our parents allowed it to be passed on. It will have to be paid eventually...and with interest. Better to pay it NOW with the interest already accrued than to take the easy way out and pass it on to the next generation with a higher interest burden...

We are quick to scream about our children dying in Iraq for reasons of shaky and unwarranted merit. We are quick to shout that our children are being educated into socialism in our public schools. We are quick to lament that our children will never understand liberty as we do...

Why aren't WE the ones, then, who stand up and fight? Why aren't WE the ones leading the New American Revolution?

I'm afraid that we're the last generation with any inkling of what true freedom and liberty really are. It is up to us to jump in and give it CPR or stand back with the crowd and watch it die...

Molon Labe!

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

They Hate Us Because of Our Freedom

'They Hate Us Because of Our Freedom'

by Alfred A. Hambidge, Jr.

Whenever I hear “they hate us because of our freedom” or "because they hate our way of life" or some other such drivel, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. If real people didn’t suffer the consequences of it, such ignorance would be amusing. But another annoying thing about statements like these is that they perpetuate the myth that we live in a land of freedom. The sad fact is, we are not free, and haven't been for a long, long time.

In They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45, Milton Mayer wrote about how the German people kept believing they were still free while the Nazis were tightening their control and extending their power over every facet of life. At first people refused to see the obvious, because the infringements on their freedom were coming in small steps. Each of those small steps, on its own, seemed to be no big deal, nothing to rebel against. But by the time you could no longer ignore the big picture, it was too late. “Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven't done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we do nothing) . . . You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair.” Remember, all the people had to do for all that to happen was--nothing. The same phenomenon is happening right here, right now, in the U.S. of A. It had been proceeding at a slower rate than 70 years ago in Germany , but now the pace quickens.

I know there are some who will say, “Wait a minute, fella. You’re going too far. The U.S. of A. is still a free country.” O.K., then. If you’re free, you should have no trouble doing something that people have done for time immemorial. Buy a cow, shelter and feed and care for it, milk it, and sell the milk. Go ahead, try it and see what happens. Come back and let us know how free you are to do such a simple thing, which has been done since the dawn of civilization.

Click here to read the rest.

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

Tuesday, May 04, 2004

Anarchism, True and False

Henry Appleton - Anarchism, True and False
Liberty, Vol. 2, No. 24, September 6, 1884, Whole No. 50

There seems to be no end of those singularly ordered minds who can conceive of no radical system of reform except something is to be torn down, ripped up, blown to pieces, or annihilated after some terrible fashion. These persons will have it that the Anarchist is a mere destructionist, - that he is bent upon levelling down all existing institutions. They see blood in his eye and dynamite in his boots as they sadly inquire: "Well, what do you propose to substitute in their place, after you have levelled down all existing institutions?"

The philosophy of Anarchism has nothing whatever to do with violence, and its central idea is the direct antipodes of levelling. It is the very levelling purpose itself projected by republican institutions against which it protests. It is opposed, root and branch, to universal suffrage, that most mischievous levelling element of republics. Its chief objection to the existing State is that it is largely communistic, and all communism rests upon an artificial attempt to level things, as against a social development resting upon untrammelled individual sovereignty. Sifted to its elements, the government of the United States is after all nothing but a mild form of State Socialism. The true Anarchist indicts it largely on this very ground. He is opposed to all manner of artificial levelling machines. How pitiful the ignorance which accuses him of wanting to level everything, when the very integral thought of Anarchism is opposed to levelling!

Read the rest at this link.

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

Cartoon of Truth

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

Monday, May 03, 2004

The Horseman

It was a bitter, cold evening in northern Virginia many, many years ago. The old man's beard was glazed by winter's frost while he waited for a ride across the river. The wait seemed endless. His body became numb and stiff from the frigid north wind. He heard the faint, steady rhythm of approaching hooves galloping along the frozen path.

Anxiously, he watched as several horsemen rounded the bend. He let the first one pass by without an effort to get his
attention. Then another passed by... and another. Finally, the last rider neared the spot where the old man sat like a snow statue. As this one drew near, the old man caught the rider's eye and said, "Sir, would you mind giving an old man a ride to the other side? There doesn't appear to be a passageway by foot."

Reining his horse, the rider replied, "Sure thing. Hop aboard." Seeing the old man was unable to lift his half-frozen body from the ground, the horseman dismounted and helped the old man onto the horse. The horseman took the old man not just across the river, but to his destination, which was just a few miles away.

As they neared the tiny but cozy cottage, the horseman's curiosity caused him to inquire, "Sir, I notice that you let several other riders pass by without making an effort to secure a ride. Then I came up and you immediately asked me for a ride. I'm curious why, on such a bitter winter night, you would wait and ask the last rider. What if I had refused and left you there?"

The old man lowered himself slowly down from the horse, looked the rider straight in the eyes, and replied, "I've been around these here parts for some time. I reckon I know people pretty good."

The old-timer continued, "I looked into the eyes of the other riders and immediately saw there was no concern for my situation. It would have been useless even to ask them for a ride. But when I looked into your eyes, kindness and compassion were evident. I knew, then and there, that your gentle spirit would welcome the opportunity to give me assistance in my time of need."

Those heartwarming comments touched the horseman deeply. "I'm most grateful for what you have said", he told the old man. "May I never get too busy in my own affairs that I fail to respond to the needs of others with kindness and compassion."

With that, Thomas Jefferson turned his horse around and made his way back to the White House.

~Author Unknown~

Got comments? Email me, dammit!


Got comments? Email me, dammit!

Sunday, May 02, 2004

Hologram of Liberty (book review)

I got this book some time ago, but hadn't gotten around to reading it until now. Holy crap! Had I known what I was missing, I definitely would have read it earlier!

Hologram of Liberty, by Kenneth W. Royce (aka Boston T. Party) is by far the best analysis of the United States Constitution and its founding than any other anti-federalist book I've ever read. Boston documents and fully explains his premise with hard-to-refute proof, using quotes from the Founders themselves!

Boston starts with a simple question, asked on the back of his book:
"Civic Belief #1
Congress was given few specific powers. All else was left to the States and to the people. Ample checks and balances protect the Republic from federal tyranny.

Civic Belief #2
The Federal Government has become so powerful only because despotic officials have overstepped their strict, constitutional bounds.

"If #1 is true, then how did #2 happen?"

During the time I was reading this book, I had the chance to see Boston T. Party speak twice: once at a local libertarian fundraiser and another at the Grand Western Alliance ("free state west") meeting about a week later. Both times, Boston mentioned this premise and this book.

I also got to speak with him a little bit and learned some more of his viewpoint on this matter.

Boston is not an anti-American. At worst he is an anarchist. However, he lays out his premise, denoting several facts about the Constitutional Convention (vs. the Continental Congress and the real Founding Fathers of this nation) that are not widely known to most Americans. He points out the difference between our Founding Fathers (Washington, Jefferson, Patrick Henry, et al) and the Founding Lawyers (Hamilton, Adair, et al). The Founding Fathers were instrumental in fighting the American Revolution. The Founding Lawyers were responsible for creating our Constitution, including ambiguities and weak phraseology which was later construed to destroy what the Founding Fathers fought for.

Whether you believe this premise or not, I highly recommend that you read this book! If nothing else, it will make you reconsider your religious-like beliefs in the Constitution and realize that it was written by men...fallable, imperfect man.

Got comments? Email me, dammit!

Ashcroft Is Winning: Libertarians Begin to Knuckle Under

Ashcroft Is Winning: Libertarians Begin to Knuckle Under
by David Wiggins

The patriots are succumbing to the Patriot Act. For the record, I have the greatest respect for the intentions of the fine people alluded to, but not named here. Consider this a lament, a pep talk, a rallying cry.

I recently had the final paragraph of one of my articles, “Let Them Eat Lead,” intentionally deleted without my knowledge. Here is that paragraph:

“On October 14, 1793, Marie Antoinette was awoken at night; tried and found guilty of treason, and soon after, was beheaded.”

Here is the reason it was deleted:

“David, with the various bad guys reading the site, I can't have anything that implies that something similar might or ought to happen to G. They look for this stuff.”

I was stunned. This site is actively censoring itself from publishing things that might be implied to threaten G (presumably George Bush) due to the fear of some bad guys presumed to be reading the site. This is scary, and made even more so, considering that libertarians in general, and websites such as this one in particular, are some of the most vocal, most ardent defenders of free speech in the United States . If these guys are running that scared, what does that say about the rest of us?

Never mind that the paragraph never mentioned George Bush or suggested in the slightest manner that he be harmed in any way. Never mind that the person mentioned, Marie Antoinette, was tried in a legal court of law, convicted of treason, and given the legal sentence in France at the time and the United States now (the death penalty) for the crime of treason. Never mind that I personally am opposed to the death penalty. All that matters is that a bad guy might possibly imply that the statement might somehow encourage “something similar” happening to George Bush. That’s all it takes these days to get the most ardent defenders of free speech in the United States to censor themselves. Scary days indeed.

But perhaps this was all just a bit of over-cautiousness. Maybe a passionate plea to restore the censored paragraph would work. I wrote to the involved parties: read the rest, go to this link.

Got comments? Email me, dammit!