Miscellany: 8/31/15

Quote of the Day
Behind an able man there are always other able men.
Chinese Proverb

Tweet of the Day

Congrats all! If you make $34K, you're in the world's 1% splains @brianmdoherty @reason http://t.co/3hU7H3GraJ

— Nick Gillespie (@nickgillespie) August 31, 2015

Fascism: the belief that the economically successful who sustain you through the markets owe you a debt.

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) September 1, 2015

"The biggest thing we need to do is have a functioning immigration system, with a good work program." - Rand Paul. http://t.co/jiGxwjvtPJ

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) September 1, 2015

Hillary Clinton:"I did not have diplomatic relations through that email server." #sarcasm http://t.co/ZSzAoQ5P4j

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) September 1, 2015

Rubio is wrong about food subsidies (notably sugar) being a national security issue. New Zealand has an open market. http://t.co/85JdrNUJ9e

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) September 1, 2015

Image of the Day

via Free State Project

via LFC

Nanny of the Month Series Finale (Aug 2015)



Regulatory Empire Building



Facebook Corner

(National Review). You've got to love her candor.
Who is Ronda rousey anyhow never hear of her.
The world's best female fighter; who is Donnie Trump--never heard of him.
 Love love love Ronda but don't care what she thinks about Trump. Trump makes better points than half the candidates other than Cruz and Carson. Ronda however is the baddest toughest most dominate fighter ever do I care what her politics? nope. I just want to see her fight.
Listen, retard, he's the moron who raised her name, and she pointedly responded. Trump is by far the most unqualified, ill-tempered, incompetent, ill-tempered, self-serving, corrupt, unprincipled right-fascist son of a bitch who has ever run for President, and anyone who supports him is a retard cultist.
One thing is for sure, Rhonda Rousey could kick the s41t out of every wienie on the staff of NatRev.

Not to mention the right-fascist demagogue Donald Trump.
Why not D.T. Ms. Rousey. Reagan was an actor and made one of the best President we ever had. The best in my lifetime. Go to the Marine Ball with the man that ask you.
I know great Presidents. I knew Ronald Reagan--he was a self-described libertarian-conservative. And you, Donald Trump, are no Ronald Reagan. Reagan, among other things, supported immigration reform and opposed class warfare tax hikes. There is only one candidate in this race who is worthy of a comparison with Ronald Reagan--Rand Paul.

(Pro-Life Libertarians). First he tells me I use the term Strawman too much, then he posts this.
Is there any way to correct this kind of bad logic?

What happens when firefighting is a Statist monopoly? Recall this incident from 2010 when the local firehouse let a man's house burn to the ground because he forgot to pay a $75 fee? Never mind the man offered to pay the fee--and more than that--on the spot, offered to cover all direct costs for putting out the fire. Never mind the fact that a fire put adjacent properties at risk. What free market company would refuse a la carte payment vs. a subscription plan for fire containing services? Only the State and bureaucratic inertia would allow this to happen...



(Huff Post). Rand Paul Calls Canada Border Wall Idea 'Pretty Dumb'
 It's the world's longest international border. Rand Paul is right, as usual--and the only GOP candidate in the race who is treating the disease (bad public policy) vs. the symptoms of unauthorized entry: " the biggest thing we need to do is have a functioning immigration system, with a good work program".

(Peter Schiff). Donald Trump: Pat Buchanan’s Heir
Unlike a principled conservative like Buchanan, Trump is an unprincipled political opportunist, a billionaire trying to buy the Presidency by engaging in manipulative, phony right-populist rhetoric. He seems to be this year's version of Sarah Palin in drag, although Sarah is not a rude, thin-skinned asshole. He may be the dumbest man ever to run for President in my lifetime; he has openly admitted to buying political favors, and yet his gullible cultists want to put the fox in charge of the henhouse, think that the economically illiterate, ill-tempered demagogue knows how to fix the economy. Everything he stands for--anti-immigrant, the wealth tax, anti-trade--seems like Herbert Hoover redux. The authoritarian wannabe has no clue that the antidote to the status quo is to downsize government; the solution to the left-fascist Obama is not the right-fascist Trump.
 No. Trump is the new improved Trump. He is about himself and America.
You are a gullible cultist. Trump is an ill-tempered, incompetent, politically corrupt, unqualified, petty, self-serving right-fascist.
He isn't dovish. And he is for free trade; the tariff retoric is just to get better deals with mercantilist countries.
They are referring to his rhetoric on Iraq. No, you're full of shit on trade--he specifically threatened a tariff on Ford's Mexico-produced vehicles, and his rhetoric is explicitly protectionist. You're in a state of denial and a rather gullible cultist.
He's head and shoulders above Buchanan ! No comparison at all !!
No, the SOB may be a better political tactitian and marketer, but he's pretty much of a mental pygmy. Take the flimsy defense of his immoral smear charge that Mexico was dumping prisoners across the border. He said unspecified people in Border Parol were telling him that. Yeah, they've been capturing people with prison release documents only Trump has access to, like the "real" Obama birth certificate (what a retard!). If you buy that bullshit, you are a delusional gullible cultist.

(Reason). An extremely predictable lesson in consequences.
And when their stores fail to operate at the necessary pace, they'll end up hiring again. It's not like the Waltons can't afford to pay their employees fair wages.
Once again, we aee an economically ignorant troll bringing up the left-fascist notion of "fair wages". It's isn't any of your business what WalMart pays its workers. Workers are paid a going rate, assuming productivity, that he or she brings to the business; that rate may in part reflect experience level, specialized skills, and/or education. For example, WalMart pays significantly higher for pharmacists (I've seen $55-72/hour). It can also vary by the overall labor market; e.g., during the recent Williston, ND shale oil boom, with unemployment rates under 3%, many positions were starting at over $17/hour--not because some local, state or federal political whore was pulling some number out of his ass.

(IPI), Belleville News-Democrat: "If you are a local barber, you make $44,480 on average. If you are a barber for the State of Illinois, you make $70,561.
If you are a local cook, you make $22,430. If you cook for the State of Illinois, you make $43,723.
If you are a local switchboard operator, you make $27,740. If you answer phones for the State of Illinois, you make $40,207.
On average, Illinois state employees make $11,433 more each year than those doing the same job in the private sector. Adjusted for cost of living, they are the highest paid state employees in the nation.
And they are asking for more."
Why is it wrong when they ask for more but it's ok when you ask for more? Are advocating that they make less? When was the last time you came to your employer asking for less? Where is your outrage for the cook who only makes $22000 a year? That's not a living wage for anyone! Especially an Illinois resident.
Fascist asshole. Why is it you're so economically illiterate? The fact of the matter is that wages in this case are NOT in a fair, open market but are the result of crony monopoly privileges. The wages are not competitive but are imposed on taxpayers by corrupt politicians.
Screw all state and federal employees, they are all rude , stupid and useless. They couldn't answer a question correctly if it meant their lives. Exceptions are police and fire .
The OP is true for the most part. I've worked as a contractor at all levels of government, and I've run across a few committed hard workers who would be employable in the real economy, but I could literally count them on my hands. I don't share the OP's exceptions for public safety; there are some bad apples in there as well.
o what your saying is if you want a decent wage and benefits....join a union
No, not if your employer can't afford to pay you.

(LFC). Half the problem is socialists don't know they're socialists. At least most Democrats know they're socialists.
See: 
>Republicans 
>"Limited government" aka limited socialism
>Nationalism
>Centrally planned "Constitutional Republics"
>Political opinions enforced under the color of "law"
Mises and Hayek were minarchists, not AnCaps. Minarchists, like Ron Paul, are hardly socialists.
Ron Paul a minarchist? Source for that?
You've got to be kidding. This is obvious, but the great Walter Block, an AnCap, discusses it here: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/06/walter-e-block/anarchism-minarchism-ron-paul-and-me/


Then Ron Paul told AnCap Tom Woods this: "I haven’t accepted the idea that tomorrow we can scratch it and have no government." http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/top-8-most-awesome-libertarian-minarchists/

via Pro-Life Libertarians

 Fascist; The belief that others who sustain you through markets owe you a debt..

(Proud to be American). Donald Trump says this proposal of his would provide a huge boost to America's middle class. Do you like the idea?
 Trump is economically illiterate; not only is this counterproductive and divisive, but even if you stole all the assets of the richest Americans, you would get only a 1-year bump in the deficit--guess who they come after next?

(Ron Paul). Nothing annoys the central bankers as much as Americans getting concerned about the the Federal Reserve. Annoy the Fed: Scrutinize them!
The Fed Deplores Scrutiny
http://bit.ly/1O4q1pr
It is great to see the great awakening! Rise up country men and women to the sham we have been led into without our knowledge. We have been lied to and been enslaved by this corporation since before our birth. Rise up against your enslavement. Become reborn as real Americans, and not a corporate entity. Do what is right and just.
Knock off the corporate-bashing bullshit. The issue is not their form but the fact they have a government-sanctioned monopoly over money and/or are unaccountable for their actions.

The Fed is okay. We just need better Banking Regulations like bringing back Glass-Steagell.

You economically-illiterate fascist (parroting the clueless rhetoric of left-populist political whores like Cherokee Lizzie). You know zero about the history of banking; Glass-Steagall has never been the Holy Grail of banking. The bank failures had more to deal with dysfunctional policies involving restrictions on reserves and/or unit banking policies; in contrast, Canadian banks have been far more resilient because they didn't have American policies. Also, none of the failures during the 2008 tsunami had to do with any purported blurring of the lines between commercial and investment banking.

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of the original artist via LFC

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Tina Turner (with Ike), "Proud Mary". An indisputable pop standard, the duo's only Top 10 hit on the Hot 100. We'll next look at her stellar solo career...

Miscellany: 8/30/15

Quote of the Day
There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.
Daniel Dennett

Chart of the Day: Keep Ex-Im Dead!

Image of the Day

via Catholic Libertarians

Add caption

via LFC

via LFC

Rant of the Day: Former Obama, now Rand Paul, Supporter Eric July Rants on Economically Illiterate Leftists



Trump and the Damaging of His Brand

One of the things you learn in marketing is to be wary of tarnishing a carefully cultivated brand's hard-earned reputation. For example, Cadillac has a reputation as an American luxury car.  If you slapped a Cadillac nameplate on a low-end car, it could cheapen the brand. Trump has put his name on almost everything and the results have been unimpressive:

There’s more than buildings, of course. Trump bragged that Trump Mortgage — anybody remember Trump Mortgage? — soon would be the No. 1 home-lender in the United States; it is defunct. Trump vodka is no longer on the shelves, though there is Trump-label vodka served at some Trump properties. The Trump board game, the GoTrump.Com search engine, the New Jersey Generals and the United States Football League in which they played, Trump University, which lives on only in fraud investigations . . . none has exactly set the world on fire.

But I think Donald Trump's eccentric views and toxic personality have undermined his own brand; it goes beyond losing lucrative contracts with NBC and Univision. Oh, make no mistake; up until now, he's been running away from the rest of the field of 17; he's even zoomed ahead of favorite sons, like Graham of SC, Cruz or Perry in Texas and Bush or Rubio of FL. But there are some signs he might be peaking, e.g., he's placing third in Wisconsin, and Carson is creeping up on Trump in Iowa. Trump went too far with his anti-immigrant pitch, which alienates the largest-growing minority group, Latinos, possibly a death wish for the party. He's not only losing to a weakened Clinton but to Sanders.

Trump's third-party threat is empty; like Perot, he has no chance of winning, plus even if he could, he would have an adversarial relationship with either party. I think a lot of his current GOP support is soft; it's more protest in nature. But when push comes to shove, after 8 years of Obama in the White House, I don't think GOP voters want to put another Democrat in the White House, and a Trump on the top of the ticket kills the Republicans on the lower part of the ticket. So far, Trump is defying gravity, but I think he's gotten as high as he is going to get 25-33% of the vote; don't misunderstand me--the Know Nothing/anti-immigrant wing is there, but I suspect if Trump is seen as the threat to the GOP's chances in the 2016 election, we could see something happen which would change the playing field--e.g., Speaker Boehner finally brings up immigration reform in the House. It's possible that Obama vetoes it to help Dems in 2016, but I don't think so--I think he wants immigration reform on his legacy. I would not be surprised if there are some covert negotiations going on right now. But if I was RNC chair right now, I would be strategizing with Boehner and McConnell, to do something. It would undermine Trump's campaign (he would no doubt take credit for the Congress taking up the issue, of course.) All this is speculative, of course.

In Anticipation of Biden 2016....



Just How Clueless is Hollywood?  Consider Director Tarantino... 

You supported Obama. How do you think he’s done?
I think he’s fantastic. He’s my favorite president, hands down, of my lifetime. He’s been awesome this past year. Especially the rapid, one-after-another-after-another-after-another aspect of it. It’s almost like take no prisoners. His he-doesn’t-give-a-shit attitude has just been so cool. Everyone always talks about these lame-duck presidents. I’ve never seen anybody end with this kind of ending. All the people who supported him along the way that questioned this or that and the other? All of their questions are being answered now.

Facebook Corner

(LFC). Politicians are pretty great for one reason: They come up with the best worst ideas. It's the crowds of voters that take them seriously you got to be wary of.
We are tracking immigrants like parolees and those under house arrest? Is this the land of the free? No doubt he would like us all to wear ankle bracelets so the NSA could track the movements of all Americans so the NSA can collect vendor records. Just say no to Big Brother Christie...

(Reason). No, a New Uber-Like App for Yellow Taxis Won't Save This Dying Industry.
Yellow Cab in Orlando has an app that predates Uber by several years and is functionally identical, including storing credit card info and real-time GPS tracking. Uber is trendy..
That's why the cab companies in Orlando are bitching about Uber, I guess. You're putting lipstick on a pig; taxidrivers are paid different, are locked into territories, start off with a high daily fee before they make a nickel, etc.

(Independent Institute). "The tax treatment of health benefits must follow the tax code. It cannot lead it. Governor Jindal has not proposed a massive overhaul of federal taxation. Even Senator Rand Paul’s proposal to rip up the IRS and start again would give us a 14.5 percent flat tax on household incomes above $50,000 (for a family of four). The federal government would remain the dominant tax collector and still fund welfare programs."
All of these plans are still a perversion of the ideal of a free market in health care; we need consumers more vested in efficient health care spending, and I don't believe in tax gimmicks which effectively serve to artificially lower the prices of health care and are intrinsically morally hazardous.

But to the extent these Republican proposals serve to eradicate the unconscionable double standard with individual/household policies being paid with after-tax dollars and end central government rule-making and shift dollars and regulatory authority to the states (although I still want state markets to be more open/competitive than they have been, with certain anti-competitive barriers to entry) more consistent with the principle of Subsidiarity, they are a positive step forward and the only sustainable alternative to the growing government failure in health care policy.

(National Review). Some call it “passion,” but it’s much worse than that
National Review, breaking ground as a Transgendered news outlet by dressing itself as Conservative.
There is nothing conservative about an economically-illiterate, volatile, vain, incompetent, unprincipled asshole like Trump. Only his cultists are gullible enough to believe he's not trying to buy the Presidency with his uncivil behavior and cheap demogoguery.
He doesn't need to be president we need him to be president. Go get M Trump
I don't need a thin-skinned, incompetent, unqualified, self-serving right-fascist to be my President. Only retarded cultists need him.
“Trump’s Worst Argument” is a WSJ Editorial explaining Donald Trump idiot assertion that because he is so rich, he cannot be influenced by contributors. What he is really saying is unless you are a Billionaire, you should not be running for President because you might be influenced by Special Interest Campaign Contributions. The broader the support a Presidential Candidate has – the less likely he will be influenced a single contributor. What is Donald Trump’s Agenda besides making ridiculous statement about immigration and trade and foreign policy that are absurd? http://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-worst-argument-1440368198
The OP is spot on; when the gullible, delusional Trump cultists say that that he can't be bought, they tacitly ignore it means that he can buy everybody else and they also ignore the fact that the unqualified, ill-tempered, incompetent, unprincipled, self-serving right-fascist is trying to buy the Presidency. How many people has he admittedly bought political favors from? What kind of a person does that make him? It's like putting a fox in charge of the henhouse. Anyone who believes he knows what Joe Six-Pack is going through is delusional; anyone who believes only rich people are incorruptible is absurd--I would never work for the bastard at any price.

Academic Freedom Intolerance

• Washington State students risk a failing grade in one course if they use any common descriptors professor considers “oppressive and hateful language.”

• In another class, students will lose one point every time they use the words “illegal alien” or “illegals” rather than the preferred terms of “‘undocumented’ migrants/immigrants/persons.”

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of the original office via Peter Schiff

Courtesy of Gary McCoy via Washington Examiner

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Tina Turner (with Ike), "River Deep, Mountain High". I think where I first heard of this song was in liner notes by George Harrison on a Phil Spector compilation, calling it something like the perfect track. I agree, and it's high on my personal all-time favorites.

Miscellany: 8/29/15

Quote of the Day
Knowing others is Wisdom, 
knowing yourself is Enlightenment.
LaoTzu

Image of the Day

via Independent Institute

via LFC

Ron Paul on the Big Issue of 2016

This is a great commentary, spot on. We are dealing with economic insecurity. But the problem is that government will only exacerbate things.



Did Hillary Clinton's Insecure Home Email Server Lead to Ambassador Stevens' Death?

WWII Veteran Runs For Touchdown



Facebook Corner

(National Review).  Cruz is a transparent, manipulative, unprincipled windbag, hoping to gain supporters when the right-fascist Trump's campaign implodes.
Cruz is a transparent, manipulative, unprincipled windbag, hoping to gain supporters when the right-fascist Trump's campaign implodes.

(Rand Paul). I'm on my way to the airport, but we decided to stop by the NSA facility in Utah. When I become President, we'll convert it into a Constitutional Center to study the Fourth Amendment! Bulk data collection must end! What would you turn it into?
Target practice for drones flying over America

(Cato Institute). "The Department of Transportation will spend about $80 billion in 2015, or about $650 for every U.S. household."
Imagine the surprise when voters learn that "free" roads cost them $650 a year. Privatize it.

(Ron Paul). Authoritarians on the Left are fighting authoritarians on the Right for the privilege of ruling over us for the next four years. Does liberty have a chance? Please have a look at my views on what should be the real issues in the 2016 presidential campaign: The Big Issue For The 2016 Campaign https://youtu.be/yiJiG6c1n00
Big issues should be campaign reform and term limitations. Anything to minimize the power of special interests.
Not another lleftist crackpot business conspiracy. No, anti-liberty constraints aren't going to solve the problem. Term limitations to some extent yes. But keep in mind there is no incentive to reduce government spending in one's district or state; the special interests come out of the woodwork--it could be government workers protecting their pensions, people who could lose eligibility in a government program, etc., not hypothetical corporations. Crony capitalists only exist because politicians want to intervene in the economy . But these guys can't do anything because they don't have a vote in Congress; they depend on political whores.
Rand Paul seems to be trying to play the political game so that his own party does not ostracize him, like they did with Ron...not sure that strategy will work, as he is also alienating many of those who favor Ron as an alternate candidate...in the end, sadly, money wins out, as always...
I'm tired of the campaign finance trolls. Look, in the 2008 campaign McCain was down to traveling coach, carrying his own luggage, and he was up against Romney who put millions into his own campaign.I don't have to remind you Romney lost... As did Perot...` Jeb Bush is getting nowhere, and he's well-financed. It's not enough to have money--you have to connect with voters. I loathe Trump intensely, but he's connected with an unlikely populist appeal. It's very tough to win saying things people don't want to hear, like we are on an unsustainable course. It's bread and circuses.

(Rand Paul 2016). Part of keeping America strong is not policing the world. Going to war only when absolutely necessary and having Congress declare it. Rand Paul is the only Republican running for president who understands this.
No he's not. That's also Obama's policy. That's why China and Russia are expanding.
We outspend the next 10 countries put together. Actually under Obama's first term, real (inflation-adjusted) defense spending increased 10%. Just another neocon troll spouting bullshit propaganda.

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Gary Varvel via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Tina Turner (with Ike), "It's Gonna Work Out Fine"

Miscellany: 8/28/15

Quote of the Day
It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong, 
and an even bigger one to keep his mouth shut when he's right.
Jim Fiebig

Earlier One-Off Post: How Can Rand Paul Make a Comeback in the GOP Presidential Race?

Image of the Day

via the Independent Institute

A Small Rancher vs. EPA Fascists



Thomas Sowell on the Welfare State



Facebook Corner

(Reason). A major project to reproduce study results from psychology journals found that more than half could not be replicated.
I don't like the leftist conspiracy nonsense that funding is a bias. As someone who has done peer-reviewed research and served as a scholarly journal reviewer, this is not an issue. I think it may be more of a case of incompetent reviewers, of researchers trying to establish their reputations by reporting significant findings, etc.

All of us during our doctoral residency period took methodology courses which hammered home research designs, adequate statistical power, reproducibility, etc.

Just a couple of small examples to make my point. During my dissertation research, I had developed doubts about a famous paper in my field about psychological dimensions of information. I wrote to the author asking if his study data were available, and he replied in a comment written over my query that the data probably got lost during a prior move. A few years later I did a replication study where his theoretical model failed confirmatory factor analysis. I wrote up my findings and presented the paper at a national conference. (Quite often you might find a handful of professors attending a session; I delivered mine to a standing room only crowd in a good-sized classroom, which loved my little paper presentation; I was hoping the original author would show up, but he didn't.)

There was also a famous computer user satisfaction measure, which had been published in a well-known management journal and later adapted in a famous computing journal. It really wasn't until I got into the busywork of designing and validating my own measure that I whiteboxed the methodology. I had never seen a single professor in my area ever challenging the methodology, simply repeating the original researcher's arguments. In the interim I had probably read hundreds, if not thousands of articles in reference fields and never once saw similar arguments presented. (My mom once told me of seeing a famous beautiful celebrity but noticed up close there were flaws in her complexion.) I had never whiteboxed the study with the idea of debunking it; if anything, if I felt the methodology was sound, I looked at possibly emulating it.

My doubts about the measure intensified years later, as I saw more and more studies published using the scale in question. I decided to write a note hoping at least to alert some of my fellow researchers my doubts about the measure and open a dialogue. I submitted the note to a journal and got scathing reviews/rejection back, with personal attacks on me. Clearly the article had been farmed out to reviewers with a vested interest in the measures I was criticizing. They really didn't question my discussion; it was just stuff like "instead of bitching about it, why don't you design your own measure?" or "why doesn't he reference something over the last 10 years in the psychometric literature?"; these weren't bad ideas, but I wasn't trying to write a comprehensive review.

My point is to combat the impression that the psychological literature is simply a vanity press for corporate sponsors, which many commenters suggest.

(Jeffrey Tucker). Conservatives and libertarians have been so focussed on fearing the Reds that many are blind to the more immediate danger of the Browns. How else to explain the astounding blindness that so many have toward Trump and what he represents? He does represent an actual tradition of thought, one that was very successful in the 20th century. Now that we know that Trump called for the execution of Edward Snowden, can we put a bit of thought into the ideology of fascism and what it means for human freedom? This, after all, is the whole thesis of Hayek's Road to Serfdom and Mises's Omnipotent Government.
Yes, fascism is a stealth cancer, whether by the left (Sanders) or the right (Trump). I wonder what Tucker makes over Rockwell's jubiliation over Trump's challenge to the GOP establishment? I honestly worry that this is going to be a case, like Obama, of people needing to be really careful of what they wish for. This guy can't let go of petty disputes with Rosie O'Donnell and Megyn Kelly; I cannot even imagine the damage Trump would do with trade wars or military engagements around the world.
Trump's national populism is not alarming. What's alarming is the amount of people swooning over him for it, and basically making up a fantasy in their head about who he is and what he represents. As you said before, I've never been so fearful of "democracy". I've heard the most bizarre beliefs on what Trump will do for America, all of it mythical.
 I do think that economic nationalism is something worrisome, especially if Trump thinks that he has a mandate. The personality cult thing is also worrisome, as you suggest. There have been unrealistic expectations by these people who thought a GOP Congress could dictate terms to a veto-bearing Obama, and they are voicing their protests through an absurd candidate.
Okay, let's assume that your main premise is correct: Trump's thinking is potentially dangerous and he isn't a person we should want to see in the White House. Then what? What candidate or candidates do you see as better alternatives? If Trump is really the GOP front-runner (as current polls suggest) and you succeed in tearing him down, how does that leave us better off? If all we do is criticize Republicans we deem "unacceptable", does that not lead to the disaster of another Democrat victory?


These posts attacking Trump seem to reflect the same flawed thinking as Rand Paul has shown in some of his campaigning. It shows a loss of focus. Trump may not be the best candidate. Trump may even be a "bad" candidate. But the bottom line is that Trump is not the enemy. Democrats are the enemy and beating them requires that we assert positive arguments and convey a positive vision of what a "good" candidate has to offer.
No, you don't get it whatsoever. Trump is trying to buy the Presidency; he is unprincipled, a corrupt buyer of political favors, like putting a fox in charge of the henhouse. He is thin-skinned; he is volatile. If you think that this guy will have his way with Congress, he will be like Nixon on steroids. He promises an activist Presidency--and will abuse the powers of the Presidency. This has already shown itself when he talks about slapping tariffs on Ford products and attacks birthright citizenship. Unauthorized immigrants are not a key issue on any reasonable standard, but he's made them the centerpiece of his campaign; in fact, the number of unauthorized aliens has gone down a million over the Great Recession, but instead of focusing on granting temporary guest worker programs, he wants to throw money into walls and beefed up Border Patrols. This is dangerous shit. We libertarians don't want an activist run amuk in the White House; we need less federal government, not an authoritarian wannabe. Almost anyone sane would be preferable to Trump. Rand Paul is by far the best choice out there; he just does a poor job marketing himself.
It was lawlessness and authoritarianism of the Left the gave rise to Hitler and it is that same high-handedness that will do it again here. Democracy cannot reform itself from within. It is like asking a meth-head to simply get straight. I no longer vote. I withdraw my sanction from this system. As to what is coming, I hope Trump is good, but whatever he is, he is certainly not bad as the slow-motion jailers and crooks at a distance we currently suffer under. Trump is a man, democracy is a system. Men come and go. Systems are forever or until they have drained their victims bone dry.
No. Trump is a right-fascist; you just get a mirror-image of left-fascism. What's serious is he has an army of cultists who are willing to sacrifice the liberty of others to empower the authoritarian-wannabe.
Based on Trump's history, I don't think he actually believes any of this stuff. It's all for show. But that's telling because the reason he's putting on the show is that he has determined that this is what a sizable chunk of the American public actually wants. And his success in the polls is confirming that he's right. Granted, I think a lot of those people won't like where it ends up if we really get serious about it. But it's too late by then, isn't it?
Well, the problem is, this egotist would actually believe that he has an anti-liberty mandate if and when he gets elected to office. Make no mistake, this guy thinks that he's running for CEO of the US and sees the Congress as reporting to him. He will not respond well to a Congress bottlenecking his agenda.

(Rand Paul 2016). Here's something very important Trump just said that Rand Paul has been saying for years--and has been attacked for it.
Unlike the right-fascist Trump, Rand Paul has never suggested that we should have stolen Iraqi oil.

On a separate matter, I recently wrote a personal blogpost on how I think Rand Paul should refocus his campaign.

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Chip Bok via Reason

via LFC

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Tina Turner (with Ike), "A Fool in Love"

How Can Rand Paul Make a Comeback in the GOP Presidential Race?

This is an interesting question that I saw on a recent forum; I ran into technical issues before I could post a response. I'm not sure, in a field of 17 where Trump is steamrolling the opposition, with two recent early primary states, NH and SC, with percentages in the 30's, easily lapping the field, more than tripling the runner up Kasich in NH and doubling Carson in SC, how Paul, who once had poll numbers in the mid-teens and now sees numbers in the 4-8% range, can regain momentum.

One should always be wary of polls at this point of the election cycle; in 2007 McCain's campaign had imploded and his ratings shrank to single-digits, and in 2011, the GOP had a volatile change of front runners, with Romney, like McCain, an early leader, only to fade in favor of Bachman, Trump, Perry, Cain, and Gingrich ). Giuliani had locked up nearly a quarter of the vote by the fall of 2007, and Santorum, who had lost his Senate reelection by 20 points in a purple state (in terms of electability if you can't beat Casey, how can you beat Obama?), came from the single-digits to give Romney a run for his money after Florida.

One thing is clear: some of Rand Paul's supporters defected to Trump. Part of what Rand Paul must assess is why. It's not so much policy, but it's more of a "I'm mad  as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore" attitude, capturing the understandable mood of frustration of the center-right which has had to endure the nearly 7 years of the failed Barack Obama presidency. They are frustrated about a finally GOP-controlled Congress, the leadership of which is all too aware of the fact that either chamber of Congress sustain an Obama veto. They feel Trump is modeling their own frustrations and admire how his wealth shields him from the PC crowd.

I have never been paid a single penny as a political pundit, so this post and $5 will get you a Starbucks coffee, but here are some general comments how I might respond, facing Paul's circumstances:

• Have Realistic Expectations. The pro-liberty forces are still a minority in Congress, and chances of picking up the support of neocon candidates are, at best, dubious. After all, Ron Paul got 8-12% of the 2012 (GOP) Presidential vote against a weaker field. To a number of voters, a pro-liberty agenda means economic uncertainty, anarchy and chaos in government policy, and austerity at their expense. Paul will need to educate voters on the unreliability of government policy. Like in the case of his father, Rand probably needs to work on building a base and honing a message that requires multiple election cycles.
• Focus on Young People, Moderates, the Well-Educated, and Principled Libertarians and Conservatives. It may well help to aim at winning some caucuses, which would probably boost his credibility and numbers elsewhere.
• Use the Doctor Archetype. Of course, I am mindful that Ben Carson can exploit a similar line, but the idea is a folksy doctor, talking about some straight news about the nation's health, about the wisdom of "first, do no harm" politics, diagnosing massive debt, government overreach, warning about his competitors treating the symptoms vs. the disease.
• Avoid Negative Ads: Use Humor. Donald Trump knows how to play the victim card, and you're not going to best Trump in a battle of flames--the only thing you do is drive up your own unfavorables. But I could see some viral ads against Trump, e.g., using a mockup of the variation of the popular Monopoly game where Trump cards allow you to declare eminent domain on adjacent properties and add hotels, where you can draw a "get out of bankruptcy" card, where you collect a  million dollars from other players and proceed to go and collect one billion dollars from the bank. (This is a freebie to the Paul campaign...) Another example might be a takeoff on "Presidential Apprentice" where the voters in November 2016 tell Trump that he's fired; challenging Trump to a "shave-your-head-bald" wrestling match with a Marine barber; or running a variation of the Match Game where contestants try to identify Trump's positions and the panelists identify contradictory opinions; holding a mock debate between the Donald the Younger and Donald the Elder or Donald the Democrat vs. Donald the Republican.
• Focus on Attacking 16 Years of Government Failure and Anemic Economic Growth Under the Bush and Obama Administrations. Focus on the Fed, how nation building has cost the US thousands of casualties and over $1T we didn't have. Point out we don't have the resources to get involved in regional conflicts; we need to count to 10 before trying to resolve the disputes of allies, the concept of moral hazard in foreign policy.
• Develop an Alternative Populist Message Focusing on Restoring Control Over One's Life From Federal Government Elitists To the Individual and the Local Community. No more of the FDA setting guidelines to school lunches, no police militarization, no centralized education mandates, no unaccountable IPAB, no FCC empire building over the Internet, etc.
• Run Against Washington, DC Business As Usual; Point Out That You Are Not a Professional Politician and You Have Filibustered to Make a Difference. Part of Trump's quixotic appeal is the ultimate insider has been running against the GOP establishment.
• Avoid  Sounding Like Other Candidates; Try to Recast Issues From a Fresh Pro-Liberty Perspective. Don't talk the usual soundbites of  "build a fence, increase the Border Patrol, etc." For example, point out that trade and immigration are positive for American economy growth, that government restrictions, like shutting down the Bracero program and pressing non-economic policy issues (e.g., the environment and labor union demands) have exacerbated issues. Point out that we have the most highly incarcerated population in the world, that federal imprisonment rates have skyrocketed at the expense of the taxpayers and ruining people's lives, that our priorities should not be on punishing victimless crimes.
• Argue That You Are Running As the President Of Peace and Prosperity. We have been been at nearly nonstop war over the past century, which has cost innumerable lives and huge demands on the Treasury; we need to pick our battles more carefully ("haste makes waste") and avoid exacerbating global tensions in trade and regional conflicts. Point out that unlike your opponents, you are not looking to add to the empire building of the Presidency or Congress but to restore balance in government and shift government services and empowerment back to the state and local government and to cut the federal government's strings restraining more localized government innovation and business hiring.
• We Need to Vest Bureaucrats and Legislators in Efficient, Focused Governance: Run Against the Government Debt and Stack of Government Regulations. Talk in terms of some variation of zero-based budgeting and regulation.
• Reassert Constitutional Control Over Monetary Policy: Eliminate the Fed's Second Mandate and Discretionary Authority, Shrink the Federal Reserves Empire, and Fully Audit the Fed On an Ongoing Basis.
• Develop a Privatization Agenda. Start with disentangling the federal government's control over the healthcare sector, flood insurance, college student financing, mortgage securitization, etc.

I do not pretend that this list is exhaustive, and quite frankly it reflects my personal policy preferences. But I do think that it's a starting point for a retooled campaign.

Miscellany: 8/27/15

Quote of the Day
Some people say that dreaming gets you nowhere in life. 
But I say you can't get anywhere in life without dreaming. 
Rose Zadra

Tweet of the Day

@realDonaldTrump in his mock Asian accent: "We want deal." No doubt he wants to build on the Chinese Exclusion Act. http://t.co/w11VIPTe6D

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) August 28, 2015

Here's how Asians can imitate @realDonaldTrump negotiating a deal: https://t.co/KFKa1VxRLk

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) August 28, 2015

Will the Chinese foreclose on the @realDonaldTrump House when Trump files for national bankruptcy?

— Ronald Guillemette (@raguillem) August 28, 2015

Government Foreign Aid vs. Locally-Focused Charity



NYC, Government-Protected Taxi Medallion Cartels, and Uber



The Importance of Free Speech Rights



Facebook Corner

(Reason).Why should taxpayers bailout bankrupt taxi medallion owners? https://video-mia1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hvideo-xfp1/v/t42.1790-2/11928672_10153066010584117_1670090705_n.mp4?efg=eyJybHIiOjM2MywicmxhIjoxNzU0fQ%3D%3D&rl=363&vabr=202&oh=afdadb6977d68074cb66c1858861506e&oe=55E01188
 Hell NO. The medallion system is an anti-consumer policy instituted by corrupt political whore elitists. Does the government reimburse the pharmaceutical or biotech industry when a drug doesn't work out? None of us get bailouts for bad investments. There's a risk to any investment; these people, in bidding medallions high, are responsible for their own decisions--as if medallions were backed by the full faith of the NYC government (yeah, right).
See, we're all victims of crony capitalism -- even the crony capitalists.
Well, let's not scapegoat the private sector for the actions of political whores. No doubt the elitists saw licensing as a lucrative tax revenue, but a way of restricting traffic congestion, clogged with an oversupply of cabs. The factor is that the State, by restricting market competition, is intrinsically anti-consumer.

(Ron Paul). If you want prosperity in this country, get rid of the wars. The Wars Are Draining Us: Ron Paul's Final Word http://bit.ly/1JplnBe
This is the Ron Paul I love as apposed to the capitalist I have heard too much from recently.
Most of the commenters are in this thread are leftist economically illiterate idiots who don't have the slightest clue about Ron Paul's philosophy. 

First of all, crony capitalism is the bastard child of corrupt government, one that intervenes in the private sector. A limited government which focuses on core essentials, like common defense and contract enforcement, does not choose winners and losers in the economy, does not impose artificial constraints (regulations) that typically have disparate adverse effects of smaller-scale competitors or adversaries. As a simple example, take NYC's restrictions on taxicab medallions. This is manifestly an anti-consumer policy which manipulates fares higher because of scarce competition. Enter Uber; as one might expect taxicabs have been losing business (and hence have been vehemently arguing for regulating their competition); many taxi owners have gone into debt for their medallions; prices for medallions (city revenues) are tanking, and taxi owners may be headed for bankruptcy. Taxis did not cause the government corruption; the government policy restricting taxicabs caused the problem. Yes, the cabs are lobbying for Uber restrictions and loan bailouts, in part because a lot of them went into debt to buy high-price medallions with the expectation the city government would support higher fares. This explains why the problem is not businesses, but the government and why I call politicians "political whores". You guys put the cart before the horse. If government minded its own business, markets would sort themselves out; for example, businesses who gain a reptuation for bad quality, service, public safety concerns, etc., may find themselves sued by wronged consumers and under attack by competitors without the intrusion of incompetent, parasitic government bureaucrats.

Second, the market is the ultimately democratic force where consumers buy with their unfettered dollars, instead of some fascist elitists limiting choices for "their own good".

Third, capitalists are by their very nature anti-war (except for the military industrial complex--but again this is the consequence of corrupt political forces at the expense of the rest of the private sector). You generally don't want to kill your customers; it's not good for business. Ron Paul is little more than a more consistent fiscal conservative who applies limited government both on the domestic and foreign scenes. It's all interrelated, but you guys don't get it.

(The Hill). "If they were ‘All Lives Matter’ or ‘Innocent Lives Matter,'" Rand Paul said. "I am about justice and, frankly, I think a lot of poor people in our country, and many African-Americans, are trapped in this war on drugs and I want to change it. But commandeering the microphone and bullying people and pushing people out of the way I think really isn’t a way to get their message across."
 I do not understand why my favorite Senator wants to revisit the soundbite that led to issues for both Sanders and Clinton. I do think that the movement should retool its name to something like "Equality Under the Law Matters". We could talk about an unconscionable judicial double standard where money buys the best lawyers for wealthy households while lower-income defendants may need to rely on the overburdened public defenders assigned to their cases.

(George Will). "Every sulfurous belch from the molten interior of the volcanic Trump phenomenon injures the chances of a Republican presidency."
deport all the illegals, then re-admit what would probably be most of them under some guest worker scheme. Mr. Trump would have the government blow a staggering amount of the taxpayers money to achieve an outcome not noticeably different from the status quo. Sounds a lot like a democrat to me
No, the asshole would rather blow a lot of taxpayer money into prohibiting temporary workers than establishing a much cheaper modern-day temporary worker program, not unlike the Bracero program which the unions ordered JFK/LBJ to dismantle, which caused the "illegal" migration.

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Jerry Holbert via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Kenny Rogers (with Dolly Parton), "Real Love". This marks the end of my Rogers retrospective. Next up: Tina Turner.

Miscellany: 8/26/15

Quote of the Day
Most people get a fair amount of fun out of their lives, 
but on balance life is suffering, and 
only the very young or very foolish imagine otherwise.
George Orwell

Image of the Day

via LFC

Featuring one of my all-time favorite  flicks....

via 

via LFC

via Catholic Libertarians

Jim Grant On the Recent Stock Market Chaos



Boater Rights



For the Right to BBQ in Your Own Backyard

I remember when I lived in Milwaukee, I could smell the pleasant smell of chocolate pervading the neighborhoods around the Ambrosia Chocolate Factory. (Later the factory became unfortunately linked to its once employee Jeffrey Dahmer.) I enjoyed the delicious smells; more recently, of course, Sriracha chili sauce, now a staple on my shopping list, smells almost led to the company moving out of California. In the clip below, a man is being told his smoke is legal only insofar as it stays within his property lines



Facebook Corner

(Lew Rockwell). As Tom Woods notes, in the American establishment there is no dissent. Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives, all agree on issues from war to empire, from welfare to banksterism. Anyone who threatens this ruling class is, of course, demonized and–they hope–silenced. And now, right on schedule, we’re starting to hear that Trump’s supporters are racists, sexists, antisemites, etc. Ross Perot got the same treatment, as did Pat Buchanan, and for the same reason. But I have a feeling that this time, it’s not going to work. Most Americans are tired of the reign of PC terror, which grows more evil and idiotic by the day. And–trigger warning–Trump has given them safe spaces from all the micro-aggressions.
Pretentious rubbish. Trump is an authoritarian in the making, he's a cartoonishly repulsive trade warrior, he never learned to play with others, he's a flip-flopper beyond Kerry and Romney, and he's a corrupt insider, paying for political favors, like his notorious abuse of eminent domain. 

The sophistry to defend Trump is astounding. Trump has called for the assasination for the "spy" Snowden; he said that we have to err on the side of security on things like the NSA phone metadata collection, he wants to throw a lot of money at DoD, including our nuclear stockpile, he opposes our open immigration heritage, he is an avowed protectionist, he is willing to consider putting boots on the ground over ISIS: this is just the tip of the iceberg. 

How Rockwell can ignore Trump's alarming black-and-white, zero-sum politics is astonishing. This is the recipe for someone who wants to grow the Presidency, the last thing a libertarian wants. Whereas Rockwell celebrates Trump's ubiquitous unfiltered uncivil behavior as a battle against political correction, ask me what a thing about the character of a man so petty that he retweets one of his cultists calling a former debate moderator a "bimbo". Really, a self-centered, egotistical billionaire playing the victim card? Give me a break, Lew. 

And stop using Tom Woods' idiotic simplistic analysis of how the Dems and the GOP are the same--even novice libertarians play that line. It's intellectually vacuous. It was not the GOP which started the $93T unfunded entitlement liability, it ws not the GOP which nationalized mortgage securitization and student college loans, which bailed out the unions against the rule of law in the auto bankruptcies, which increased the government foothold in healthcare by up to 50% or more. I am well-aware that the GOP has its share of faults, but it's the only party where libertarian voices like the Pauls, Massie, Amash, Goldwater, Reagan, and others found a home.

(Reason). Vowing to recapture some of the enthusiasm his campaign has lost over the past few weeks, Rand Paul said he will focus on property issues and eminent domain abuse in order to make the case that Donald J. Trump is out of step with conservative Republican primary voters.
Good for Rand Paul! however, didn't Rand Paul vote in favor of the Keystone XL pipeline in which Canadian owned company can use the US Government to declare eminent domain on American private property owners to run the pipeline through their land? I expect Trump will smack back with that, but no self-respecting Libertarian would consider voting for Donald Trump.
I can't believe Progressives are still asserting this discredited bullshit notion. Unlike Trump, who has had small business locations condemned, say, to make way for limousine parking at his properties, oil and gas pipelines do not aim to condemn properties but to seek an easement on a narrow strip of land through the property. Pipelines are typically buried 4 feet under and do not impede a property owners access to the topsoil, and the pipeline pays a market fee for land use; pipeline companies generally are able to negotiate 80-85% of the pipeline successfully before resorting to eminent domain for holdouts. The intentionally misleading troll also fails to note that there are literally thousands of pipelines criss-crossing the US and the only reason the Feds are involved is because the pipeline would cross the national border. The xenophobic twist on the company's headquarters in Canada is yet another disrespectful twist of the ignorant troll.
I think voters are tired of electing people to the House and Senate and nothing happens. I dont think those supporting Trump think he is the most qualified, I really think its abut sending a message to congress that we elected you, you do NOTHING, and we have the ability to send someone to DC who , as president, will make your life a living hell. I think many Americans , regardless of party affiliation are ready to roll the dice for 4 yrs and see what happens. Very much like when they sent Reagan to the White House...it was a FED UP moment in American history then, and it is now!
Hell NO. For one thing, there is no validate comparison between Reagan and Trump. This is from a 1975 Reason piece on Reagan (still online), years before he became President: " in recent months Reagan has taken to using the term "libertarian" (or "libertarian-conservative") to describe his political philosophy"; there is nothing libertarian about Trump; every part of his message is authoritarian and Statist; from a libertarian perspective, a stalemate in the central government is a good thing.

Now for any rational human being to vote for an unqualified, ill-tempered, politically corrupt, economically illiterate, unprincipled populist demagogue right-fascist Trump is impossible to contemplate. Do you seriously trust a man who still has anger issues with Rosie O'Donnell and Megyn Kelly in trust of our nuclear arsenal? If you thought Obama abused his executive authority, what do you think Trump will do when he finds himself possibly facing a Democrat-controlled Congress or even an alienated GOP-controlled Congress?
Only two people can beat Trump: Rand Paul and whoever the democrats choose to run for president
Shooting stars fall fast. You're forgetting that Trump can do or say something that causes his support to evaporate. Go back to 2012 and see how Akins and Mourdoch, who appeared to have a lock on Senate seats, were undone by single soundbites. So far Trump seems to have politically benefited from his uncivil behavior, but he's playing with fire.

(Independent Institute). "Patterns of assimilation on the part of contemporary
immigrants are not very different from those of yesteryear who are judged by current critics to have been more culturally compatible." —Alvaro Vargas Llosa
http://blog.independent.org/2013/07/30/a-new-case-for-freedom-of-immigration-alvaro-vargas-llosas-global-crossings/
1780, 1850, 1920 there was no free ride for these immigrants, now we pay them after they brake our laws.
Don't be a nativist retard. Immigration has NOTHING to do with the welfare state, which your very own comment acknowledges. In fact, we've actually have a net decrease of 1M unauthorized since the Great Recession began. Economists universally acclaim the win-win nature of immigration on economic growth. But let's talk about your bullshit rationale: unauthorized aliens are not eligible for any federal welfare programs, even authorized immigrants are ineligible for 5 years. All immigrants pay taxes.
Um this doesn't seem to be very accurate. Were not the immigrants from 1780, 1850, and 1920 all LEGAL immigrants? If I am wrong then please correct me.
If by "illegal" you mean the morally unconscionable and economically illiterate restrictions imposed by a tyrannical majority of nativists, xenophobes, bigots and labor protectionists (unionists) with no regard for the natural right to migrate, to contract, etc., completely out of step with the pro-liberty principles on which this country were founded. The fact is when the US embraced a temporary worker permit program (Bracero) in the 1950's, arrests went down 95%. The corrupt labor unions forced JFK/LBJ to drop the Bracero program, even though they were advised it would result in migrant workers working around the labor prohibition.

You nativists not only are Statists cutting off your noses to spite your faces, willing to throw money at "border security", far more than your alleged claims of social welfare support of unauthorized aliens: at least a third of Mexican visitors had no intent of staying here permanently, but since there are barriers to return, they can't afford to lose work here and instead send for their families to come here.

Political Cartoon

Courtesy of Steven Breen via Townhall

Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists

Kenny Rogers (with Dottie West), "What Are We Doing In Love?"