Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

Thursday, 21 March 2013

[LPNM] Patti Bushee and Pat Davis Hinder, Not Help, the LGBT Cause

Santa Fe City Councilor Patti Bushee and ProgressNow New Mexico’s Executive Director Pat Davis will tell you that they are all in favor of expanding the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people. In reality, they are ultimately hindering the LGBT cause, as opposed to helping it.

“How so?” you might ask. After all, both of them have been rather outspoken in support of same-sex marriage.

In today’s Albuquerque Journal, Bushee was quoted (and her hand photographed) as “urging county clerks to start issuing same-sex marriage licenses.”[1]

And ProgressNow New Mexico joined in yesterday with an email blast and Facebook posting.[2]

Now remember that in 2005, Democrat Attorney General Patsy Madrid filed litigation against same-sex marriage licenses issued by Victoria Dunlap. Those with good memories for the political scene will note that Dunlap was the Republican County Clerk in Sandoval County at the time. After Dunlap left office, Patsy dropped the lawsuit she filed against Dunlap’s actions.

The lesson to be learned from this is the Democrats will treat people of the LGBT persuasion as a political soccer ball, to be kicked around at a whim. Why shouldn’t they, as LGBT people will vote overwhelmingly for the Democrat regardless of what Democrats do between elections?

And it should also be noted that both Bushee and Davis regard the rights of others not in their political circle as soccer balls, to be kicked around at their leisure. If not as flies to be swatted.

On the latter, I’m referring to one issue in particular, specifically the individual right of private civilians to own and carry weapons, for the purpose of self-defense.

On 20 December 2012, Bushee said that she would sponsor a ban on civilian possession of “assault weapons” – military-pattern semiautomatic rifles – within the city limits of Santa Fe[3]. Warbling in tune with Bushee, ProgressNow NM has kept up a steady flow of strident, hoplophobic catcalls on behalf of the victim disarmament cause[4].

Consider that since it was founded in 1971, the Libertarian Party has supported the rights of LGBT people to live their lives free from coercion just the same as we libertarians support the rights of conservatives to live free from coercion.

How many conservative-type people in New Mexico really care per se about LGBT people being of the LGBT persuasion? Probably not many. So when I bring up to them the idea that LGBT should be just as free as they are to live without coercion, my case is undermined by Davis, Bushee and their ilk clamoring to infringe upon other, equally-cherished rights. “Why should I care about their rights when they don’t care about mine?” goes the question.

In short, if Bushee and Davis want their cherished freedom to be LGBT to be upheld, it would behoove them to respect the rights of others to own and carry weapons, among other rights.


NOTES

  1. Albuquerque Journal: 20 March 2013 – City Attorney: Same-sex marriage OK
    Santa Fe New Mexican: 19 March 2013 – Santa Fe leaders ask county clerks to honor same-sex marriage
  2. ProgressNow New Mexico – Facebook page post and email blast
  3. Albuquerque Journal: 20 December 2012 – Assault Weapons Ban?, 14 January 2013 – Coss Headlines Santa Fe Gun Control Press Conference
  4. http://facebook.com/progressnownm/posts/488185797897738
    http://facebook.com/progressnownm/posts/488015187914799
    http://facebook.com/progressnownm/posts/487840961265555
    http://facebook.com/progressnownm/posts/487719194611065
    http://facebook.com/progressnownm/posts/487713881278263
    http://facebook.com/progressnownm/posts/526701757382247
    http://progressnownewmexico.pnstate.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=81426.0
    http://facebook.com/progressnownm/posts/487208071328844
    http://facebook.com/progressnownm/posts/487207284662256
  5. Original article
  6. Links to this post
  7. Reposted –
    1. Personal blogs – WordPress / Yahoo!
    2. The Weekly SeditionWordPress / Yahoo!
    3. Duke City Fix

Copyright © 2013 Libertarian Party of New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Advertisements

Tuesday, 19 March 2013

The “Sequester,” The Budget and Other Goodies

Filed under: Economics, Philosophy, Politics — Tags: , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 3:37 AM (03:37)

Taking note of an article in The Weekly StandardReporter Asks Carney: Will Obama Cut Back on Lavish Vacations, Golf Trips?

So I guess a cut of 85,000,000,000[1] out of a budget of 3,800,000,000,000[1] really isn’t such a bad thing after all, is it? Maybe, just maybe . . . they could, you know, cut a bit more?

Dare I hope for such “slash and burn” legislation?

Never mind that no such budget has actually been passed by both U.S. House and U.S. Senate and been signed by Dear Leader Obama, as the U.S. Constitution supposedly requires?

Isn’t someone who was allegedly a “Constitutional law professor” supposed to notice things like these?

How is it that I, with ZERO formal schooling beyond the high school level in the law, the legislative process or the political process can notice this, but 535 people who allegedly swore to uphold and defend the Constitution blow it off without a second thought?

In my opinion, it would be worth it to pay Obama (and Biden, and Boehner, and the other 534 idiots) 1,000,000 a year, tax free, to do nothing but play golf all year around.

Just make sure that they understand that the deal is OFF the second any of them picks up any sort of writing implement or touches any sort of keyboard.


NOTES

  1. These numbers are ballpark wild-assed guesstimates, of course. As the cliche goes, “close enough for government work.”
  2.    

  3. I have a habit of using the null set symbol (“∅”) to represent Federal Reserve Notes as opposed to the “dollar sign” (“$”), because the dollar is supposed to be backed by gold or silver, where the Federal Reserve Note is redeemable upon government demand from yours and my life, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness.
  4. Original article

Copyright © 2013 Libertarian Party of New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Thursday, 14 March 2013

The Armed Defense of Liberty by Dr. Alan Keyes

The Armed Defense of Liberty

By Dr. Alan Keyes – July 30, 1999

Despite the heroic efforts of Sen. Bob Smith to turn it back, the latest batch of irrational and servile restrictions on the Second Amendment continues to ooze its way through that allegedly deliberative institution, the Congress. Perhaps because the gun control debate is now so entirely drenched in the emotive sludge that is the principal intellectual food of our political establishment, this seems a good moment to recall the deep reasons, the fundamental context, that must inform any responsible deliberations on the question of an armed citizenry.

I believe that underlying all of the prominent issues of the day – abortion, the breakdown of the family and of our educational institutions, the betrayal of our national sovereignty and military readiness, and the ongoing expansion of government’s tyrannical claims to tax and regulate – we can discern what is essentially one moral challenge which manifests itself in many areas. Simply stated, that challenge has to do with the corruption of our understanding of freedom, which leads to the abandonment of respect for law and individual responsibility, the twin pillars which ought to under-gird true freedom.

As a free people, our way of life depends upon certain moral ideas. As a matter of personal conscience, I believe that Christianity most perfectly embodies those ideas. But since Americans come from many different religious backgrounds, in dealing with issues of public policy, we must derive these ideas from sources that are open to support from all the people.

Nothing meets this purpose more completely than the principles and logic of our own Declaration of Independence, so American citizens and statesmen should make it the explicit basis for dealing with the moral crisis we now face.

The Declaration is fundamentally a statement of the principles of justice that define the moral identity of the American people. It presents a certain concept of our human nature and draws out the political consequences of that concept.

All human beings are created equal. They need no title or qualification beyond their simple humanity in order to command respect for their intrinsic human dignity, their “unalienable rights.” The purpose of government is to secure these rights, and no government is just or legitimate if it systematically violates them.

But the Declaration is more than just an assertion of rights. It also makes a clear statement about the ultimate source of authority which commands respect for those rights. God, the Creator, the author of the laws of nature, is that source.

Thus the effective prerequisite for human rights is respect for God’s authority and His eternal laws. This is also the prerequisite for the idea of government based upon consent, which includes free elections, representation, due process of law, etc. If we accept the logic of our Declaration of Independence, this reverence for God is not just a matter of religious faith. It is the foundation of justice and citizenship in our republic.

Therefore, our freedom is derived from our respect for law, especially the highest law as embodied in the will of the Creator. Thus freedom, rightly understood, cannot be confused with mere licentiousness. It first of all involves the duty to respect its own foundations in the laws of nature and nature’s God. That’s why our rights are “unalienable,” which means that we do not have the right to surrender or destroy them by our choice or actions.

Indeed, if we make the judgment that our rights are being systematically violated, we have the duty to resist and overthrow the power responsible. This duty involves both the judgment and the moral and material capacity to resist tyranny. These principles constitute our character as a free people, which it is our duty to maintain.

It is in the context of these principles that we must understand the purpose of the Second Amendment, and the duties that it implies. The Founders added the Second Amendment to the Constitution so that when, after a long train of abuses, a government evinces a methodical design upon our natural rights, we will have the means to protect and recover those rights.

If we make the judgment that our rights are being systematically violated, we have not merely the right, but the duty, to resist and overthrow the power responsible. It is very hard to do this if the government has all the weapons, something that our Founders and the generations before and after them knew from repeated and first-hand experience, as well as from a study of history. A strong case can be made, therefore, that it is a fundamental DUTY of the free citizen to keep and bear arms.

The claim that the Second Amendment is principally concerned with the maintenance of state militias – military bodies under the direction and control of state governments – is not just historically false, it is also fundamentally incoherent. It would make no sense whatsoever to restrict the right to keep and bear arms to state governments, since the principle on which our polity is based, as stated in the Declaration, recognizes that any government, at any level, can become oppressive of our rights. And we must be prepared to defend ourselves against its abuses. The gun control movement is incompatible with the sovereignty of the people, because it aims to eliminate one of the key material supports of that sovereignty.

This is not the principal danger of the gun control movement, however. Perhaps more important than the physical disarmament the government is attempting is the moral disarmament that accompanies it. If we accept the view that the American people cannot be trusted with the material objects necessary to defend their liberty, we will surely accept as well the view that the American people cannot be trusted with liberty itself. Why should a man who can’t be trusted to refrain from murder be trusted with the much more difficult and morally subtle task of choosing his leaders responsibly?

The advocates of gun control take as their first principle that the American people are morally incompetent creatures of passion. The America they envision for us is, accordingly, more like a national 24-hour day-care center than a self-governing republic of free men and women. If we agree to accept this apparently comfortable arrangement, we will have to check our citizenship at the door along with our guns.

If, on the other hand, we intend to exercise the duties of self-government and justice that are our patrimony as free and rational creatures, then we will need to think clearly and coherently about securing the means necessary to do so. We must defend the moral self-confidence of America by reasserting the capacity of our people to make the most important decisions and bear the most important responsibilities themselves. And we must retain the material means necessary to shoot the windows out of the national day-care center, if it comes to that.

Second Amendment rights are sacred because of their connection to higher rights and higher duties, which are the very substance of liberty and justice, and to the God that America has always acknowledged as the source of both. We cannot surrender our guns without surrendering the vision of human dignity under God which is our national soul. The slow erosion of our national understanding of this fact is continuing in the Congress. Only a citizenry armed with a clear understanding of what is at stake can ultimately save us from the civic imbecility to which the gun control movement leads. By disarming, we will confess to our government that we no longer aspire to sovereignty, and wish our rulers to take up this burden in our stead. We will be signaling with great clarity that we wish to be comfortable slaves – and slaves, at least, we will soon become.

The terrible history of the 20th century should make clear enough that subjection to unlimited government is not desirable. But a clear and thoughtful examination of our national principles teaches us also that it is our duty to shun such servitude. It is our right, and it is our duty, to remain free.


Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Saturday, 2 March 2013

LPBC Press Release about BCSO “Buy-back” Events

LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF BERNALILLO COUNTY RESPONDS TO COUNTY-SPONSORED
GUN “BUYBACK” EVENTS OF FEBRUARY 9th AND 23rd, 2013

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (3/2/13)
Contact: Mike Blessing, County Chair – 505-249-1248
Alternate: Elizabeth Hanes, LPNM Press Secretary

[ALBUQUERQUE] – The Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County New Mexico (LPBC) strongly condemns the use of taxpayer money to conduct so-called “buybacks” of firearms in Bernalillo County. Such activities constitute a waste of tax dollars and do nothing to serve public safety.

“First, this wasn’t a buy-back event at all. The word ‘buy-back’ assumes that you originally owned the guns and are buying them back, when the truth is that the firearms purchased by BCSO weren’t owned by Bernalillo County in the first place,” said LPBC Chair Mike Blessing. “Second, this event was advertised and reported upon as some sort of ‘public service,’ in order to ‘get the guns off the streets.’ This is code-speak from the victim disarmament crowd for getting firearms away from private citizens, whom as ‘we all know,’ ‘can’t be trusted’ with any weapon more powerful than a plastic straw loaded with spitballs.”

At the event, the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office reportedly confiscated 333 firearms, some of them assumed to be stolen property. Criminals turning in stolen weapons were subsequently compensated – no questions asked – using taxpayer dollars, thereby creating great incentive for these lawbreakers to target law-abiding gun owners for burglary.

“The LPBC decries this waste of taxpayer money, not only the $50,000 paid out to individuals surrendering firearms but also the wages of law enforcement officers conducting the event,” Blessing added. “The LPBC will continue to work to abolish this sort of nonsensical activity by our county officials.”

-30-

ABOUT THE LIBERTARIAN PARTIES OF NEW MEXICO AND BERNALILLO COUNTY

Established in 1972 by Margaret Mathers in Farmington, LPNM is the third-largest political party in the state. LPNM seeks to preserve personal liberty and freedom by opposing new or more restrictive laws, new or more expensive spending programs, and new or higher taxes. Guided by the Non-Aggression Principle, which opposes the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals, Libertarians promote peace, personal freedom, and unfettered capitalism.

The Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County was started in December 1997 as a county-level affiliate of the LPNM.

Official LPNM website: http://lpnm.us

Official LPBC website: http://lpbcnm.blogpsot.com


Copyright © 2013 Libertarian Party of New Mexico and Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Wednesday, 20 February 2013

Responding to the BCSO “Buy-Back”

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Responding to the BCSO “Buy-Back”
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 00:19:37
From: Mike Blessing
To: Tom Zdunek, Debbie O’Malley, Art De La Cruz, Maggie Hart Stebbins, Lonnie C. Talbert, Wayne A. Johnson, Dan Houston
BCC: [89 individuals]

Dear Commissioners, Mr. Zdunek:

Recently I was surfing the web and found the following:

BernCo Compass: Gun Buybacks, Strip Club Rules and Downtown Housing

Here’s the pertinent part:

Issue: Gun Buyback

The county conducted its first gun buyback day on Saturday, Feb. 9, in the North Valley. People who anonymously surrendered their firearms were compensated – no questions asked. If the weapons were stolen, they were to be returned to their rightful owners. Deputy County Manager Tom Swisstack said the program brought in 333 weapons, seven of which were assault rifles. The $50,000 put up by the county for purchasing the guns ran out within two hours.

Swisstack added that it’s the most successful buyback day in the state so far. He thanked Sheriff Dan Houston for doing an outstanding job, and Commissioner Debbie O’Malley for moving the program forward.

BernCo View

O’Malley thanked everyone for the compliments but said when she got to the North Valley Command Center on Saturday, she was surrounded by other gun traders in the parking lot. They waited outside harassing folks, she said, telling them they would buy the guns for more than the county was paying. She said she was surprised people could do that kind of gun trading in a parking lot without permits.

Swisstack assured that next time, the sheriff would block off the area around the substation. The next buyback day is Saturday, Feb. 23, at the South Area Command Center (2039 Isleta SW).

First, this wasn’t a buy-back event at all – the word “buy-back” assumes that you originally owned them and are buying them back, when the truth is that the firearms purchased by BCSO weren’t owned by Bernalillo County in the first place.

Second, this event was advertised and reported upon as some sort of “public service,” in order to “get the guns off the streets.” This is code-speak from the victim disarmament crowd for getting firearms away from private citizens, whom as “we all know,” “can’t be trusted” with any weapon more powerful than a plastic straw loaded with spitballs.

Third, the ONLY good thing about these “buy-back” events is that BCSO is apparently to return any firearms found to have been stolen back to their rightful owners.

Fourth, considering Tom Swisstack’s anti-Constitutional comments of ” . . . next time, the sheriff would block off the area around the substation,” perhaps it’s time that Bernalillo County picked out a new Deputy County Manager. As well as a new Sheriff if Dan Houston goes along with this.

It seems that I have until 1 May 2014 to gather sufficient signatures to recall Mr. Houston, and 1 May 2016 to do the same for Ms. O’Malley.

_______________________________________________________________________
Mike Blessing / Phone – 505-249-1248
State Chair, Libertarian Party of New Mexico – http://lpnm.us

Who owns you? Who runs your life? Who should – you or someone else?
Freedom is the answer – what’s the question?

“If you wanna live long on your own terms
You gotta be willing to crash and burn”
– Motley Crue, “Primal Scream”


NOTES

  1. Reposted –
    1. Personal micro-blogs, blogs, etc. – Facebook / Google Plus / Twitter / WordPress / Xanga / Yahoo!
    2. LPUSA / LPNMLPBCNM Blog / LPNM Official Facebook group / New Mexico Libertarians Facebook group / [LPNM-discuss] Yahoo! group
    3. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / WordPress / Yahoo!
    4. nmpolitics.org / Tea Party Nation

Copyright © 2013 Libertarian Party of New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, 24 January 2013

Quiz2d Results

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , — mikewb1971 @ 10:27 PM (22:27)

Radical Libertarian on political map


Copyright © 2013 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.

This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Friday, 28 December 2012

Gun Owners are the True 99 % — BOTE Math on American Gun-Related Deaths

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 3:23 AM (03:23)

Current mood: irate

For the uninitiated, “BOTE” stands for “back of the envelope” – cocktail napkins rip and tear too much to used for anything other than as napkins.

32,000 – annual number of firearms-related deaths in America (source: CDC)

270,000,000 – number of guns in America’s private sector (BATFE estimate – other estimates double or triple this number)

Now we simply divide the first number (32,000) by the second number (270,000,000) to get a guesstimate of the number of guns involved in fatal incidents in America. Granted, this is rather inaccurate in that it assumes that each fatality involved a separate gun – the recent spree killers in Aurora, Colorado and Newton, Connecticut that Senator Feinstein is gleefully using to justify her latest victim disarmament scheme used the same firearms to kill multiple people. The fact is, that VD movement was rather stagnant here in the States after the year 2000 – this is just what the Senator needed to kick-start it back to life. As the adage goes, “never let a crisis go to waste.”

(32,000) / (270,000,000) = 0.0001185185 – that’s 0.0118518519 % of American guns are the ones that “kill people in America” (guns don’t kill people – when was the last time you saw one fly around on its own, load itself, point itself at anyone and pull its own trigger? But try telling that to an advocate of victim disarmament.)

So to comply with the Senator’s demands, allegedly to prevent spree killers like Lanza and Horton, the other 99.9881481481 percent of American gun owners simply must give up their liberty and property. Never mind that the 99% here never engaged in such evil, nor have any desire to do so.

Never mind that the 1994 “assault weapon” ban signed by Waco Willie Clinton was a dismal failure in stopping such massacres (or any other sort of crime) – the 101 California Street shootings were carried out using two pistols that the State of California had declared illegal six years before (the crappy Intratec TEC-9). What Feinstein wants, Feinstein is determined to get, and to Hell with the truth, or the consequences.

Calculations done with Libre Office Calc

Here’s some more from the international scene:


Figure 1 – Gun-related deaths vs guns per capita, by country
The data used to make the above graph [PDF]

Sources for the above graph

List of countries by firearm-related death rate
Number of guns per capita by country


Copyright © 2012 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.

This blog entry created with Notepad++.

 

// var __chd__ = {‘aid’:11079,’chaid’:’www_objectify_ca’};(function() { var c = document.createElement(‘script’); c.type = ‘text/javascript’; c.async = true;c.src = ( ‘https:’ == .protocol ? ‘https://z’: ‘http://p’) + ‘.chango.com/static/c.js’; var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(c, s);})(); //

Monday, 24 December 2012

Guns aren’t the problem, and never really were

Current mood: irate, pissed

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Fwd: Guns aren’t the problem, and never really were
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:16:38
From: Mike Blessing
To: LPNM Discussion list @ Yahoo!, My Public Email Archive, The Weekly Sedition @ Yahoo!, New Mexicans for Liberty
BCC: [80 individuals]

Re: Gun Arguments Die in Latest Massacre

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Guns aren’t the problem, and never really were
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 01:51:55
From: Libertarian Party of New Mexico <lpnm.chair@gmail.com>
To: <llinthicum@abqjournal.com>, <opinion@abqjournal.com>

“And it’s time for Americans to stop talking about our individual rights and start accepting our collective responsibilities.”

With that one sentence, Ms. Linthicum disavows the one thing that separates America from the rest of the world – the United States is the only country with the notion of individual rights written into its core documents: the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

She says “I don’t want to hear that it’s not guns that are the problem, people are.” Well, she’s going to, and not just from me, from what I see on the Journal’s website. Because it’s the truth. Inanimate objects such as guns, knives and baseball bats don’t cause violent crime, as she alleges. That’s like saying cars cause drunk driving.

Then she says she doesn’t want to hear about how an armed teacher could have prevented the tragedy. Again, she doesn’t want to hear the truth. She’s got an agenda to promote and doesn’t want anything to get in the way.

Fact is, Linthicum’s pet cause of victim disarmament legislation has been a stagnant one since the year 2000. Twenty dead kids in a public school is just what she needed to bring it back to life.

Why hasn’t she asked any questions about Adam Lanza’s psychiatric state at the time of the tragedy? Was he doped up on Ritalin, Prozac or any other anti-depressant?

And about the shootings themselves:

Why is it that not many (if any) people shoot up private schools or religious schools like this? What makes the public schools so special in this regard?

Why is it that there’s never any coverage of these sort of incidents happening with homeschooling families? After all, quite a few of those in the homeschooling movement are also supporters and exercisers of the right to own and carry weapons.

Why is it that these sorts of shootings never seem to happen at gun shows, at gun stores or at shooting ranges? After all, by Linthicum’s brand of thinking, these are the places that they should happen the most at – lots of guns present, lots of ammo present.

Anyway, Linthicum wants us to put our inalienable Constitutional, civil, God-given human rights aside for her notion of “collective responsibility.” Well, what happens when her side loses an election, and she becomes subordinate to someone else’s notion of “collective responsibility” – a version that she doesn’t particularly care for? Maybe then she’ll learn to appreciate that “outdated” notion of individual rights?

I can only hope so.

_______________________________________________________________________

Mike Blessing / Phone – 505-249-1248
State Chair, Libertarian Party of New Mexico

Who owns you? Who runs your life? Who should – you or someone else?
Freedom is the answer – what’s the question?

“If you wanna live long on your own terms
You gotta be willing to crash and burn”– Motley Crue, “Primal Scream”


NOTES

  1. Links to this post
  2. Reposted –
    1. Personal micro-blogs – Facebook / Google Plus / Twitter / Xanga
    2. Personal blogs – Blogspot / WordPress / Xanga / Yahoo!
    3. LPUSA / LPNMLPNM Blog / LPNM Official Facebook group / New Mexico Libertarians Facebook group / [LPNM-discuss] Yahoo! group
    4. The Weekly SeditionFacebook / WordPress / Yahoo!
    5. Duke City Fix / NMPolitics.org / Tea Party Nation

Copyright © 2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.

This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Monday, 17 December 2012

Quote of the Day — Sunday, 16 December 2012

Current mood: irate, pissed

 

“Laugh at me. Call me mad. Call me evil. But just remember me when you or your loved ones are being raped, or mugged, or dragged off never to be seen again – and you are an obedient, disarmed little citizen who can do nothing about it.”

– Sean Gabb, Director, Libertarian Alliance
   from The Libertarian Enterprise #701, 16 December 2012:
   The War Against Armed Crime: We Need Guns to Make Us Safer


Copyright © 2012 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.

This blog entry created with gedit Notepad++.

Thursday, 1 November 2012

Ken Brown Is NOT a Free-Market Advocate

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 2:09 AM (02:09)

Current mood: cranky

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Ken Brown Is NOT a Free-Market Advocate
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 21:40:47
From: Libertarian Party of New Mexico
To: opinion@abqjournal.com

Re: Vote for Johnson May Help Obama

This isn’t the first time that Kenneth Brown has blown off free-market principles to support the Republican Party, and I suspect it won’t be the last time.

How are the individual health-insurance mandate that’s part of both Slick Willard’s Massachusetts RomneyCare and the ObamaCare that was created from it compatible with free-market economics? They aren’t, yet Brown says that Mittens is the best candidate in the race.

Another part of this comedy of errors is how Romney, Ryan and Heather Wilson are crying that ObamaCare was paid for by looting Medicare to the tune of 716,000,000,000 bucks. Let me get this straight – these “fiscally-restrained” “free marketers” are complaining that Obama’s scheme to federalize health care is being paid for by robbing Lyndon Johnson’s scheme to federalize health care?

How were George Bush’s TARP bailout and Bush’s bailout of General Motors compatible with free-market economics? They weren’t, yet “Mr. Free-Marketer” Brown insists that the same Romney who supported both bailout plans is the candidate that deserves the libertarian vote.

Yes, Mr. Brown, I’m calling you out as a phony where your “free market economics” creds are concerned. Deal with it.

For what it’s worth, I’m proud to say that I voted for Gary Johnson and Jon Barrie on Wednesday, 24 October. When Gary and Jon talk about their Tea Party values, they actually mean it. Imagine that.

______________________________________________________________________
Mike Blessing
State Chair, Libertarian Party of New Mexico
505-249-1248 / http://lpnm.us/wp

Who owns you? Who runs your life? Who should – you or someone else?
Freedom is the answer – what’s the question?


NOTES

  1. Reposted –
    1. Personal micro-blogs – Facebook / Google Plus / Twitter / Xanga
    2. Personal blog – WordPress
    3. LPUSA / LPNMLPNM Blog / [LPNM-discuss] Yahoo! group
    4. The Weekly SeditionWordPress / Yahoo!
    5. Duke City Fix / NMPolitics.org


Copyright © 2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with gedit and Notepad++.

Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: