Unlearned lesson
Posted in Tuma's Toons by R Lee Wrights on March 31st, 2009 Archive for March, 2009
Posted in Tuma's Toons by R Lee Wrights on March 31st, 2009 
Am I a terrorist?
Posted in Sound Off Soapbox by R Lee Wrights on March 30th, 2009 by Jessica Pacholski
I have been called many names in my life, everything from cute nicknames to derogatory monosyllables, however this week added a new and surprising one to the list- Terrorist.
It’s now a well known fact that the Missouri Police had been advised by MIAC, the Missouri Information Analysis Center, that people who support third party candidates, such as Libertarian Candidate Bob Barr or the Constitution Party’s Chuck Baldwin, may be part of violent Militia movements and should be considered possible domestic terrorists. Interestingly enough they also singled out Ron Paul supporters even though he ran for President as a Republican and the last time I checked they were not considered a “third party”. MIAC has now been forced to apologize and retract their statements, but I feel the damage has already been done. So, I beg the question, what is a terrorist?
I was always under the assumption that terrorist organizations used violence in order to further their agendas, hence their bad reputation. Bombings, murder, arson, and riots are usually the stock and trade of such murderous and onerous gangs of thugs, yet I cannot think of one violent action in the news that has been linked to supporters of Ron Paul or the other candidates mentioned in the report. Nor can I think of any violent incidents linked with the parties mentioned, libertarians are adherents to the philosophy of non aggression and respectful of private property.
‘Fusion centers’
Posted in Straight Shooter by R Lee Wrights on March 29th, 2009 by Jessi Winchester, author of From Bordello to Ballot Box and America: The Final Chapter
“Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear, kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it.”
- General Douglas MacArthur
A disturbing document prepared for Missouri law enforcement agencies but not meant for public consumption, has garnered deserved nationwide ire in recent weeks. The Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) distributed their report titled, “The Modern Militia Movement” and in the section titled “Political and Anti-Government Rhetoric,” it claims, “Militia members most commonly associate with third party political groups” and goes on to state, “It is not uncommon for militia members to display…Libertarian material. These members are usually supporters of former presidential candidate Ron Paul.”
The MIAC collects and analyzes data to identify trends or patterns of criminal or terrorist activity within the State of Missouri. It then distributes their conclusions to local, state, and federal agencies working in conjunction with Homeland Security. They are part of a national “fusion center” project underway since 9/11 in which $254-million has been allocated to state and local governments to support ‘fusion centers’ in their effort to gather ‘intelligence.’ If one reads between the lines, it is clear ‘fusion centers’ are nothing more than domestic spy centers similar to the ones found in Marxist states. Their motto could easily be, “Profile ‘em and round ‘em up!” Government always employs ‘fear and necessity’ or an ‘impending national emergency’ as their lame excuse to invade private citizens’ lives and gather personal data they don’t need and to which they aren’t entitled.
Nickels’ proposed gun ban will be challenged
Posted in Press Releases by R Lee Wrights on March 28th, 2009 from SAF
BELLEVUE, WA - Once again when faced with a controversy, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels is reviving his plan to ban legally-carried firearms from city property, and the Second Amendment Foundation today promises once again to immediately take him to court.
“This time around,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, “Mayor Nickels needs to raise this issue to distract public attention from the political smell arising from the snow plowing investigation. We remind the mayor that his office has been warned by Attorney General Rob McKenna that neither he, nor the city, has the authority to enact such a ban under state preemption.
“Mayor Nickels thinks he can enact this ban merely by executive order,” Gottlieb observed. “He’s not even thinking of putting this before the city council as a proposed ordinance, because he knows it would never pass. Greg Nickels is the mayor of Seattle, not the emperor of a city-state.”
Nickels’ plan was revealed by the Seattle Weekly Tuesday morning. A spokesman for the mayor’s office told the newspaper that the ban “is expected to begin sometime in May.” Gottlieb said SAF expects to be joined in a legal action by other gun rights organizations.
Liberty in one easy lesson; or, Rachel’s Manifesto
by Rachel Mills
I have the great honor of sitting on a panel for a political discussion with other leaders of the Durham community. Other county chairs of other parties have been invited, and since that is one office I hold, I am on the invite list. I get 10 minutes for opening remarks. I’ve decided that a simple explanation of party principles and misconception vs. reality is in order. Here is what I plan to say:
It is my great honor to be here with these esteemed leaders, and how fantastic it is of the Chamber to afford us this opportunity to dialogue about our community and the political forces at work here. Thanks to all who put this together!
I’d like to use my 10 minutes to briefly explain the principles of the Libertarian Party, and how we differ from the R’s and the D’s. We are not that different, when you get down to principle, and that is what the political quizzes I have passed out do - get down to principle. We are half and half. There are two major axes on the political playing field: Personal liberty and economic liberty. While the Republicans will argue for economic freedom all day, personal freedom is another matter for them. They tend to be against abortion, against gay marriage, against decriminalizing victimless crimes, for laws governing consensual sex between adults. (Yes, sodomy laws are still on the books in this state) Gambling. The lottery. The inane drug war that costs billions, provides opportunity for crime to pay, and decreases drug use not even 1%. All in the name of saving you from yourself.
Foreign aid to Africa: Bonuses to corrupt and tyrannical rulers?
Posted in Back Door Politics by R Lee Wrights on March 26th, 2009 by Habtamu Dugo
Americans and the rest of the west must start to be outraged by the mismanagement of their donated tax money in Africa.
Long after the African public woke up to the reality that western aids never work to uplift the continent from deep corruption and tyranny, this idea has recently started to resonate with some aid organizations and aid workers.
Billions of aid dollars collected from western tax-payers are directly channeled to tyrannical and corrupt leaders in Africa. Literally, African leaders are rewarded bonuses for their deeds of underdevelopment and poor governance, just like the CEOs of the AIG got bonuses after the company failed. The western public needs to respond with the same outrage to funds that have been rewarded to Ethiopian and Sudanese leaders. These funds have been hijacked by the rulers and hardly reached the needy. As a result, the conditions of millions of hungry people in the region became worse than ever.
I read a comprehensive Wall Street Journal article on how the aid to Africa has failed the continent. Instead of uplifting the continent, it has been used to uplift ‘the leaders and their people’. The article draws a clear connection between aid and rampant corruption in the Horn of Africa region. This Wall Street Journal article is well supported with a range of evidence and statistic. It maybe worth reading if you are interested. Such an analysis is relevant and timely because it marks the belated awakening of the west to the fact.
Should bailed-out homeowners be required to pay restitution?
Posted in Random Thoughts by R Lee Wrights on March 25th, 2009 by Stan J. Liebowitz
The U.S. public is outraged at the $165 million in bonuses paid to employees of insurance giant American International Group after AIG received billions in government bailout funds-and Washington is looking for ways to make bonus recipients pay back the money.
But what about bailed-out homeowners? Shouldn’t they also pay back money they receive from taxpayers?
The government can provide stressed homeowners the help they need-and recover much of the cost-simply by taxing most of the capital gains that bailout recipients realize on home sales until the value of the assistance is fully paid back to lenders and taxpayers.
Let’s be clear: The administration’s plan to help homeowners avoid foreclosure is a giveaway to those homeowners.
And a restitution policy would have many benefits besides reducing the burden on taxpayers and lenders and providing economic incentives for future homeowners to avoid similar mistakes.
Missouri Libertarian Party welcomes resolution to MIAC memo controversy
Posted in Press Releases by R Lee Wrights on March 24th, 2009 from Missouri LP
(Columbia, MO) - The Missouri Libertarian Party stands for, among many other positive things, the peaceful resolution to political disagreements and conflicts. That is what we have today as the controversy surrounding the Missouri Information Analysis Center’s “Strategic Memo” on militia activity comes to a close.
The memo, a training document for law enforcement officers throughout the state, stated that support for third political parties, including the Libertarian Party, and for specific Presidential candidates, including Bob Barr (Libertarian) and Ron Paul (Republican), could be an indicator that someone is involved in a violent militia group.
Today, Missouri Department of Public Safety Director John Britt sent a letter to the candidates named in the memo, acknowledging that references to specific political candidates or third party political organizations should not have been made and are unnecessary in the effort to stopping violent extremist groups.
Without exception
Posted in Liberty's Lady by R Lee Wrights on March 24th, 2009 by Lady Liberty
Last week, I was searching through news headlines when I found another story about another state working for passage of a “stand your ground” law (that’s a law that says you aren’t obligated to retreat before using deadly force if you believe that deadly force is warranted). While I thought the law was a good thing, when I passed along the news to others online I also pointed out (just a little tongue in cheek) that all of us already had one of those, no matter where we lived, and that it’s called “The Second Amendment.”
States have some good reasons to consider these “stand your ground” laws. Not least of them is the fact that would-be crime victims are all too often victimized again by both the government (when unwarranted assault or murder charges are filed but which are never-the-less mandated by one of thousands of anti-gun laws on the books) and the criminal or his family (who apparently believe it’s entirely the fault of the victim that their loved one is hurt or dead). What probably pushed at least some legislators over the edge is the added factor of state’s utter inability to protect those they’ve sworn to keep safe (just this month, an appalling story out of Tennessee showed that 911 operators weren’t even answering some of the calls that were coming in).
Needless to say, The Brady Campaign (which I like to call The Brady Bunch given the similarity between the anti-gun zealots and the often pointlessly squabbling children of the 1970’s TV show) isn’t happy about such laws. In fact, the group even set up a special web site and advertising campaign specifically geared toward making a big deal out of the Florida law (which happened to be the first of its kind). That there’s only been one reported shooting under the measure in the months since it became law gives lie to Brady Bunch hysterics (what else is new?), but has had little effect on those opposing such laws in other states who are considering doing the same.
First black president to reinstate slavery?
Posted in Liberty's Friend by R Lee Wrights on March 23rd, 2009 by Larken Rose
When tyrants want to take the next big step towards totalitarianism, they usually toss out some “trial balloons,” both to see how people react and to begin desensitizing people to the new fascist agenda. If they’re smart, they first propose a big leap toward totalitarianism, and then cut it back to a small step. By contrast, the peasants will not only be pleased with the smaller step, but will be trained to think that the larger step is at least debatably a good idea.
The American tyrants, and those in other countries, have done this over and over again with “gun control” (peasant disarmament), taxation, regulation, and so on. They suggest something startlingly bad, then scale it back to only mildly obnoxious, and pass it. And they keep doing it over and over again, until they’ve imposed all sorts of things that in the past seemed outrageous. And since hardly anyone thinks from principle, it works. Most people just compare what is being proposed to what already is, assuming that what already is must be more or less rational. For example, the feds steal half of what everyone earns, and then bicker over little increases here and there, each one of which doesn’t seem all that important. Whether you’re a 49% slave or a 50% doesn’t make much difference, and those accustomed to their slavery aren’t about to insist on 0% slavery. That would require them to think based upon principles, which most Americans are utterly incapable of.
A recent trial balloon of the Obama Regime came in the form of H.R. 45, proposing national gun registration, and enough “regulations” to basically amount to universal disarmament. It won’t pass, not now anyway, but the Nazis wanted to see how people would react to the idea, and begin to get the people used to it. For now, they’ll take smaller steps, like reinstating the “Depriving the People of the Means of Resistance Act” of 2009–also known as the reinstatement of the Clinton “Assault Weapons Ban.” (The weapons targeted there are not used in any significant amount of crime, but are used throughout the world to resist tyrannical regimes. So why does the government not want you to have them? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out.)
« Previous entries
