Tuesday, September 27, 2016

Why I Bash Trump More Than Clinton

I haven’t been writing anything recently, and I didn’t really plan to write today, but I have some things on my mind, and I feel the need to get them off my chest. 
I’ve written a lot of criticism of Donald Trump, and yet I’ve barely breathed a word of criticism towards Hillary, and I feel kind of bad about that. Hillary is awful. Hillary is a socialist, and socialism is bad. Really bad. Socialism is hundreds-of-millions-of-people-have-died-from-it level bad, yet even though Hillary has moved further and further left over the course of this election cycle, it’s Donald Trump that consumes all my thoughts and frustrations. 


The reason is simple. Everybody knows who Hillary is. I mean I’m sure she has a few fans that think Hillary is the bees knees, but it seems the vast majority recognizes her for what she is, a corrupt Democrat politician. Hillary is essentially running for Obama’s third term. If you liked Obama’s policies, you’ll probably like Hillary’s policies. Everybody basically understands that the Democrats want the government to have more control over the economy and more money taken from the citizenry in exchange for a pinky promise that the government will spend your money more wisely than you would and the vain hope that they wont screw things up through incompetence, corruption or the inherent vices of bureaucracy. 

People might not view the Democratic platform as cynically as I do, but they get the general gist of it. The Democrats have supported greater government control over people for generations. Nothing has changed. You can take it or leave it.

Trump on the other hand is a complete sea change in what it means to be a Republican and a conservative. Though I’m no fan of Romney, McCain, the Bushes, or Bob Dole, they did all have more consistent track records than Trump of advocating a more Constitutional approach to governing, respecting the law, general honesty, embracing Christian values, lowering taxes, opposing abortion, ect. Granted, they were all bad in their own ways and often ended up betraying their promises once in office, but at least we had the excuse that we expected more of them. 

Trump on the other hand has brought about a new form of conservatism which transparently spits in the face of these older values. The man is a moral blackhole and claims he has no reason to repent to God for his sins, and yet conservative Christians everywhere are praising him as the moral alternative. Conservatives who balked at Obama’s stimulus package now embrace Trump’s promised stimulus package. Trump has recently suggested the federal government should get involved in maternity leave and child daycare areas that would previously have been anathema to conservatives, but it’s all swallowed completely by most Republicans because Trump proposed it. 

I could go on for ages about Trump’s leftist polices, but it doesn’t matter. I’ve pointed out these things over and over again in personal and online exchanges and through my articles, and yet it has no effect on people. I don’t know if conservatives are so blinded by fear of Hillary that they can’t see the snake in their midst or if they never really believed in small government, Constitutional, moral principles in the first place and are just shallow partisans who want to see their side win, but there seems to be nothing Trump can do to lose his fans nor that I can do to reveal his true nature. 

And that in part is why I stopped writing. I keep trying to say to people, “Can’t you see this? Are you blind? Don’t you see he’s peeing in the face of everything you claimed to believe?” 

And the answer is no. People can’t see it. We seem to be living in a world where facts no longer matter, so what’s the use of providing them?

I’m not writing for you anymore. I wrote this for myself. If it helps someone else, that’s great, but I’ve given up on trying to reach other people. I don’t know what you want to hear or what you need to hear. I wish I did. I truly, deeply wish I did.

What I do know is that I expected better of conservatives, and I just can’t stop myself from wondering how so many can’t see who Trump truly is. 

If you enjoyed this, please Like and Share me on Facebook and Follow and Retweet me on Twitter.

Friday, July 22, 2016

Everybody Is Angry at Ted Cruz's Speech for the Wrong Reasons

In his speech Wednesday at the RNC Convention, Cruz refused to endorse Donald Trump for President sending a sizable portion of Republicans into an uncontrollable and ongoing hissy fit, and though I personally like Ted Cruz and supported him in the primary, I have to admit that I too am a bit perturbed though not for the same reason as everyone else.

I have no objections with Cruz’s message to the RNC. Anyone who actually listened to his speech would know that Cruz spent the entire time articulating small government, Constitutional, conservative values and encouraging the audience to vote for candidates who upheld those values. If that’s taken as anything less than an endorsement for the GOP nominee, then it’s the Trump supporters who should be doing some soul searching about now. 
I’m also not particularly upset that Cruz broke his promise to support the winner of the GOP primary. Yes, he broke his word, but Cruz erred not when he violated his word but when he gave his word in such a foolish pledge in the first place. You’d have to be a partisan hack who blindly supports any Republican or a shortsighted nincompoop incapable of foreseeing the possibility that someone bad could win the nomination to make such a thoughtless promise, but having placed himself in an ethical bind, I think Cruz did the most honorable thing possible by refusing to endorse a man he believed would be bad for the country while struggling to articulate the most unifying message he could under the circumstances.

My frustration with Cruz isn’t that he refused to support Trump but why he refused to support Trump.

When asked Thursday about his violated pledge, Cruz responded, “The day that was abrogated (rescinded) was the day this became personal…I am not in the habit of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my father. And that pledge was not a blanket commitment that if you go and slander and attack Heidi that I'm going to nonetheless come like a servile puppy dog…”

Really, Cruz? That’s the reason you won't endorse Trump?

You didn’t refuse to endorse because of Trump’s long progressive record, his constant flip-flopping, his complete lack of Constitutional moorings, his narcissistic tendencies, his omnipresent stream of lies, his vast ignorance on political matters, his corrupt business practices or his awful polices? You withheld your endorsement not because any of the things that affect the country but just because your own personal vendetta? Really?

I agree that Trump’s low class and deceitful smears against the Cruz family should disqualify him for office, but these disgusting tendencies have been observed in countless instances long before Trump ever tweeted nonsense about Ted’s nuclear family, and yet I can’t read Cruz’s comments without getting the distinct impression that Ted would have forgiven everything if Trump hadn’t hit him personally, and that’s a shame.

I still think Cruz is one of the few good people in Washington DC, but perhaps it’s time he reevaluate his priorities and make sure he’s still in it for the good of the nation rather than the good his own ego. 

If you enjoyed this, please Like and Share me on Facebook and Follow and Retweet me on Twitter.

Thursday, July 21, 2016

Now That the GOP Has Anointed Trump, The Mainstream Media Will Spring Their Trap!

By this time next week, Trump will probably be surging in the polls. Almost all candidates benefit from the convention bounce, an uptick in favorable polling due to the constant media coverage all centered around the greatness of the nominee, and Trump might get an especially large bump in the polling considering his flair for the dramatic. If he has a good week, Trump might finally take a solid lead over Hillary in national polling, but once Trump’s bounce begins to fade, it will be time for the mainstream media to drop the hammer on the Donald. 

Trump fans love bragging about how Teflon Don can withstand any attack without anything sticking, but I’d argue Trump has only faired so well because he’s been treated so favorably. As a new Harvard study proves, Trump benefitted greatly from positive coverage during the GOP primary though that coverage has steadily become more negative as Trump locked down victory over Ted Cruz, yet though the media has strengthened their criticism of Trump, they still haven’t truly raked him over the coals. 

When something bad happens in the Trump campaign, the mainstream media and assorted leftist personalities will condemned his actions briefly before moving to a new story, but this is incredibly tame compared to the coordinated and persistent hatchet jobs done on other GOP candidates in past election cycles. In 2008, the left constantly branded John McCain a warmonger to the point where it stuck in everyone’s mind and Sarah Palin was lampooned as an utter fool by every news outlet and comedy program in the country over a handful of bumbling remarks, yet while attacks about McCain’s militarism and Palin’s ineptitude at least have some basis in reality, let’s not forget how Mitt Romney was put through the ringer on the most trivial of issues. An anti-Romney PAC released an ad accusing Romney of killing an innocent woman because he shut down a steel plant that provided her family with healthcare and countless pundits discussed the fact that Mitt Romney once strapped a dog carrier to his car as if it were somehow relevant to his ability to be President. 

Considering the mainstream media’s knack for making mountains out of molehills and harping on minor negatives for weeks at a time, Trump has comparatively been treated with kid gloves. It’s not like Donald Trump is some angel beyond reproach. He’s cheated on his wife, admitted to buying political favors, made countless sexist remarks, lied constantly, attempted to seize private property from little old ladies to build parking spaces for his casinos, and done dozens of other sleazy things which are easily proven. The moment the mainstream media chooses to end Trump’s presidential ambitions, they can begin running coordinated media campaigns highlighting any or all of these issues not to mention “investigations” into more ambiguous allegations such as rape claims, ties to the mafia and countless shady business practices. 

Since the media is sitting on this potential ratings goldmine, why aren’t they running with it? 

It’s simple. They wanted the Republicans to be locked into Trump as their candidate. If they’d hammered this stuff earlier, it might have spooked the GOP enough to back another horse, but now the Republicans are stuck with the deeply flawed Trump.  

More importantly, the media can now rip apart the GOP and the conservative movement as they rip apart the nominee for Donald Trump is the fulfillment of every nasty thing the left has ever said about conservatives. Whereas the mainstream media could never prove their accusations of racism, sexism, corruption, hard-heartedness and fake piety with past GOP Presidential candidates, they can prove all this with Trump, and sadly, his mistakes do reflect on the Party and the conservatives who backed him.

If you thought you had seen the media treat Trump harshly so far, just wait. You haven’t seen anything yet. 

If you enjoyed this, please Like and Share me on Facebook and Follow and Retweet me on Twitter.

Monday, July 18, 2016

Trump Can Bring Something to the GOP Convention That No Other Candidate Can Provide - Pizzazz

The GOP has manifold shortcomings among which are a lack of integrity, a lack of backbone and a lack of any true allegiance to the Constitutional and small government principles they claim to represent, but whereas Trump can’t help the GOP in any of these former areas, he may actually be able to fill the void in an equally important arena. If there’s one thing that the GOP has long lacked and Trump long possessed, it’s flair. 

Republicans are boring. As individuals, Republican politicians seem bland, and when they come together in large groups, their nigh uniform lack of charisma seems to merge together to form a giant black hole of apathy which pulls everything of potential interest into it’s gravity never to be seen again. The GOP Conventions highlight this showcasing a seemingly endless stream of dull white guys making predictable “low energy” speeches from behind a podium placed against an uninspired video backdrop all taking place on a big blank stage which only succeeds in making the candidate look small. It’s almost as if the GOP intentionally tries to sabotage itself. 

If you don’t believe me, compare the 2008 GOP National Convention with the 2008 DNC National Convention. Whereas the McCain Convention sadly earns every one of my former criticisms, the Convention that nominated Barack Obama stands in blatant contrast. The speakers for the DNC were diverse, the speeches were dynamic, the podium stood at the center of semi-circular staircase that simultaneously served to draw the attention of the crowd and emphasize the importance of the nominee and the backdrop featured props reminiscent of a Greek temple while creative video backdrops added depth and movement without stealing the attention of the eye. Sure, it felt a little like the Democrats had come together to recognize and worship a new demigod as he was added to their political pantheon, but creepy though that might be, nobody can accuse the 2008 DNC Convention of being boring.

The Democrats simply do a better job of making their candidates appealing to the masses. Even their music selection reflects this truth. Whereas the Democrat’s event playlist frequently includes songs that are new and fresh to appeal to the youth who are most likely to switch party affiliation, the Republican music ranges from Classic Rock to the Golden Oldies appealing to the people least likely to change politically. It’s well established that most people in media lean left, and nowhere is that more obvious than at the National Conventions where the Republicans are constantly behind the curve.

Yet perhaps the days of dull GOP conventions have come to an end for this is one area in which Trump should shine. Trump has made a good chunk of his millions not by shrewd business deals but by cleverly wooing people with his persona and selling his brand. Like Reagan the last GOP Presidential candidate with an ounce of charisma, Trump knows how to work a room and transform a simple political speech into an unforgettable and dramatic experience. The man who is most famous as a reality TV host now has the ability to put on the biggest reality TV program of his life, a four-day convention all centered around his specifications. If anybody could make a GOP event sizzle, it would be Donald J. Trump.

For the past several decades, the GOP has been promoting ideas that though imperfect still stand head and shoulders above the agenda of the left, and yet the conservative movement has failed on almost every front. The sad truth is that the vast majority of people will never listen to the GOP’s ideas if the Republicans can’t capture the masses pathetic, Twitter-conditioned attention spans with something shiny to wave in front of their faces, and no matter what your opinion of Trump may be, there’s no denying that the man has a knack for capturing people’s attention. Granted, he captures my attention in the same way the mangled metal and flesh of a roadside car wreck makes it impossible to look away, but still, the man has charisma.

Now that the GOP finally has a candidate with a little pizzazz, maybe they can use this year’s convention to lure the public into actually listening to some GOP ideas. This would be great if the GOP still stood for something worthwhile, but apparently, that’s asking too much. 

If you enjoyed this, please Like and Share me on Facebook and Follow and Retweet me on Twitter.

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

You Should Become A Libertarian (Even Though Libertarians Are Insane)

Cruz supporters, #NeverTrumpers, and any other malcontents of the mainstream political parties who want the government out of your business, you should all consider becoming members of the Libertarian Party. 

“But Jeremy,” I hear some of you saying, “Didn’t you just say recently that Libertarians Are Insane?”

Why yes, gentle reader. Yes, I did though saying they are insane is a bit of an oversimplification. To be more precise, I was trying to say that the Libertarians have an excellent platform in theory, but in practice, they’ve been infiltrated by a bunch of anarchists, stoners and social imbeciles who drag down what would otherwise be a solid message of liberty into a platform that too frequently caters to an eccentric cadre of political misfits with muddled political aims and little idea how implement their agenda. 

I suspect I’m not yet convincing you of the value of membership in the Libertarian Party. Give me a second.

As bad as some aspects of the Libertarian Party may be, there’s also a solid chunk of Libertarians who truly desire small government, have taken the time to carefully consider the complex issues and will fight for their small government values with a tenacity and stubbornness that would put every member of Congress to shame, and these voices though a minority are not too far from the mainstream of the Libertarian Party. 

Gary Johnson won the Libertarian nomination for President this year, a candidate not without his merits but considerably more wishy washy on several issues than what I would prefer, but if you look at the man who took second place in the Libertarian Presidential Primary, you’ll see someone that I believe many discontented Republicans could support, Austin Petersen. Petersen is a rock solid pro-life Constitutionalist who does a better job explaining his positions than any other candidate I’ve seen running for elected office in any Party this year. He’s a game changer who could reform the Libertarian Party and make it the true voice for liberty the United States has been missing. 

And yet he lost, so why should people discontented with the faux small government proclamations of the Republican Party jump ship to join the wishy-washy small government proclamations of the Libertarian Party?

The answer is simple. Since the Libertarian Party is so small, it can easily be reformed by a small influx of true Constitutional conservatives. In 2012, only a mere one million people voted for the Libertarian Presidential candidate as opposed to the sixty-one million who voted for Mitt Romney. If only one million of the GOP voters, a tiny fraction of the whole, became sick of the games and changed their political alliance to the Libertarians, that would be more than enough to push the crazy Libertarians to the fringe and create a party that truly represents limited government. 

If you’re determined to stick with the GOP as the lesser of two evils, I understand, but you’ve got to know that the GOP will betray you this time just as they’ve betrayed you in every Presidential election since Reagan. They aren’t truly conservative or Constitutional, and if you’re telling yourself things will be different this time, you’re just fooling yourself. The fact that the GOP primary was a contest fought between two anti-establishment candidates proves the GOP’s days are numbered, so why cling to the dusty bones of the past? If you truly want a revolutionary change for individual liberty, why not try to reform the party that’s small and easily malleable rather than the big intransigent party that stabs you in the back every chance it gets?

Monday, June 27, 2016

The Bright Side of Mass Murder

I’ve had the misfortune of reading the news over the last couple weeks, and no doubt much like you, I feel like I’ve been emotionally clobbered by a bevy on nunchuck wielding ninjas putting a beatdown on my soul. It’s tough to think of all the lives lost and all the emotional wreckage left in the wake of the murders while at the same time enduring the streaming torrents of rage from opportunistic pundits and the endless political pandering as everybody uses the latest pile of dead bodies to push their political agenda. I can’t speak for you, but this and the generally depressing political climate of the election season has all combined to make me want to crawl into bed, pull up the covers and sleep away the rest of my days in blissful ignorance.

However, there is a simple bright truth lurking underneath these layers of awful, and I hesitate to point it out for fear of seeming naive, but I believe it to be true, so I’m going to say it anyway. 

Here’s the bright spot. In a world where people can walk into a club and murder forty-nine innocent people, most people don’t. 

I hope you will forgive me for being morbid, but the simple truth is that it’s not that hard to kill people. It doesn’t take a criminal mastermind to think of easy ways to murder a person or two, and given a little time and consideration, most people could probably find easy ways to commit mass murder. It’s not as if the douchebag Orlando club shooter accomplished some inconceivably supernatural feat of terroristic genius. As hideous as it is to contemplate, these types of crimes are something we could all replicate if we chose, and yet we all choose not to do such wicked things.

Over the past week, the media has been flooded by story after story of violent crimes, the number of guns, the dangers of religion and other tales meant to inspire fear and feelings of doom, and yet, can’t we take the exact opposite message from these stories? Sure, some people are dicks, but in a country of 319 million individuals of all different political views, religious affiliations, racial groups, sexual orientations and with almost all these people having access to guns and other weapons, the overwhelming majority of people choose to live in peace.

These general values for life and peaceful coexistence might seem like small consolation compared to the recent murders, but the fact that America holds these values is actually quite remarkable. A simple look around the globe and throughout history will show you that common decency is not all that common, and in many ways, we live in a golden age of peace, freedom and prosperity. We’d be fools to let the few wicked nutjobs of society keep us from recognizing how remarkably blessed we are as a people and spook us into treating our neighbors as our enemies. 

We have serious problems in need of serious solutions, but in the midst of our pain, let’s not forget that in a nation full of all different sorts of people, the overwhelming majority of Americans choose the path of peace

Monday, June 13, 2016

On the Orlando Club Shootings, Have We Lost Ourselves Completely?

I feel tired and defeated. 

The lives destroyed by this monstrous excuse for a human being pain me, but the murders themselves don’t discourage me. Evil only provokes me to want to prevail for the cause of good. 

What I find discouraging is the way people respond to this story. Anytime something bad happens, it's just used as an excuse for the government to seize more control, and people are not only letting this happen but begging for it to happen. When I see evil, I wish more power were in the hands of good people so they could defend themselves, but so many of my fellow citizens, well-meaning but misguided, wish to see power consolidated in the hands of the already overpowered and undeniably corrupt government. In a million tiny ways, the American people have allowed their fears to guide them and bind them. They've said, "I don't care what you do. Just make us safe!" and those with wicked hearts and ambitious minds lick their lips when they hear those words. 

Too many of us have become cowardly and lazy. Freedom is hard. It's so much easier to hand the problems off to someone who promises us utopia. It's so much easier than considering, striving, working, struggling and taking personal responsibility. 

We look at these tragedies and say, "Why us? Why here? Why now?" but in so many ways, we are merely reaping the seeds we continue to sow. Generations have been so isolated from responsibility that they don't know how to handle it to the point that the very idea that people should be held responsible for their own actions is now deemed offensive. We refuse to think about or even listen to any ideas outside our comfort zone locking ourselves in safe echo chambers where everyone affirms our own beliefs. Rather than attempt to understand the world around us and growing as people, we demonize and attack those who view the world differently. We hate each other, and as we waste effort in hating one another, those who hate us all implement their plots. We wonder how a soul can become so lost as to murder in the name of a god, and yet we say morality is relative, all views are equally valid, there is no truth and there is certainly no Truth-Giver. We wonder how things got so wrong while rejecting the very concept of right.  

The solutions to our problems will never be found in Washington. The answer has been and always will be with the individual who chooses the difficult path of righteousness. Any society which through its own wickedness degrades and destroys itself will eventually require a strongman to put the house back in order. Only a moral people can be a free people.

Friday, June 10, 2016

Can We All Admit Democrats Are Socialists?

Hillary Clinton finally secured enough delegates to win the DNC Presidential nomination, so unless the Department of Justice indicts Hillary or some other unforeseen catastrophe befalls her, it looks like Hillary has finally bested her challenger, socialist Bernie Sanders, but though Sanders and his particular version of socialist utopia might be temporarily defeated, the Sanders campaign has revealed one of the political world’s worst kept secrets, the Democrats are all socialists. 

Now upon hearing this, some people will immediately get defensive and complain that I’m resorting to name-calling, but the word socialism is not a slur. It’s simply a description of someone’s political views, and when describing the political views of Democrats, socialist is the only fitting description. 

Look at the popular vote split between Hillary and Bernie. Sanders has 43% of the support from left leaning voters, so everybody has to concede that roughly 43% of Democrats support an admitted socialist as opposed to a comparatively moderate candidate, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Over the past few months, Bernie has consistently held higher approval ratings than Hillary among Democrats and Democratic leaning voters. Since Bernie has earned 70% approval from the Democrat voters, that leaves only 30% who could possibly find socialism objectionable, and keep in mind, this approval number is measured at the heat of the campaign season when Democrats’ attitudes should be at their most divisive and hard feelings about competitors at their strongest, and therefore you would expect disapproval numbers to be at their highest. 

All this just proves that Sanders and his socialist views aren’t the fringe of the Democrat Party; they are the mainstream. 

Still, Hillary is winning, so doesn’t that show that socialist feeling in the Democrat Party, though prominent and appreciated, isn’t quite dominant? No, it doesn’t prove that at all.

Perhaps we need to refresh out memories on the actual definition of socialism. Socialism is, “a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned OR regulated by the community as a whole.”

It’s true that Hillary doesn’t advocate for the government to own the means of production, distribution and exchange (also known as business), but without question she wants to further regulate business as does every other Democrat living. Over the past hundred years, we’ve had a nigh constantly growing set of laws increasing government control over every single industry, and yet I challenge you to find a single industry that Democrats don’t want to regulate further. 

The distinctions between Hillary and Sanders are slight. Sanders wants to control the banks by nationalizing them and Hillary wants to control them with increased regulation. Sanders wants to control healthcare by making it universal whereas Hillary wants to do it while working within the confines of Obamacare. Democrats aren’t choosing between a socialist and a non-socialist but between two slightly different versions of socialism. 

For generations, Democrats have hidden behind masks of progressivism and liberalism without telling the American people their true agenda, but at this point, the Democrat ideology is clear. However they want to dress it up or disguise it, Democrats have fully embraced socialism. 

If you enjoyed this, please share it, and don't forget to follow me on Facebook and Twitter. Or don't. I'm not your socialist dictator. 

Tuesday, June 7, 2016

Libertarians Are Insane

I’ve been calling myself a Libertarian since 2008. I’m beginning to think I’ve made a mistake. 
For me, voting for Hillary is clearly out of the question since she’s socialist in everything but name and voting for Trump is also off the table since he’s a habitual liar and vindictive bully whose positions vary from strong conservative to left of Hillary depending on his mood and the time of day. Since I generally want the government to get out of my business, you might think the Libertarians would be a perfect fit for me, and I thought so too for a time, and yet…

On paper, the Libertarians are great. Looking over the Libertarian platform, I object strongly to abortion, but beyond that, I find myself in nigh complete agreement. Personal freedom, economic liberty and minimalist government? Sign me up!

However, I’ve spent a lot of time over the past month looking more carefully at the Libertarian movement, and sadly I’ve found that though their official positions are sound, they have an huge problem, the Libertarian Party is infested with druggies, anarchists and social imbeciles. 

Let me break it down for you. 


The Libertarian Party supports drug legalization, and this causes a problem. The problem isn’t the position itself but the fact that this position attracts large amounts of stoners who don’t care about anything other than drugs. This stoner-centric thinking causes Libertarians to spend an unnecessary large amount of time discussing the issue. Perhaps the best example of this occurred at the recent Libertarian Party National Convention where the Libertarians got some rare coverage on C-Span. Through the entire televised portion of the convention, the Libertarians only showed one policy video, and what video did they choose as the most important thing they must tell the nation? They wasted six minutes of national air time on a mini-documentary about a pot dispensary. (11:30 to 17:30)

I think drugs should be legalized, but instead of emphasizing how it’s your right to get high, why don’t the Libertarians emphasize the fact that there are people dying of terminal diseases every year that are denied the opportunity to try experimental drugs because the FDA hasn’t approved of them? Better yet, why not take those six minutes to talk about an issue of greater importance like the national debt, domestic spying or any one of several dozen other pressing concerns? If there weren’t so many of them stoned, the Libertarians might realize how stupid it is to make pot their central issue. 


Libertarianism represents small government not zero government, and yet there’s a sizable and vocal faction of the Libertarian movement usually posting under the #TaxationIsTheft mantra that believes all government is wrong. Though the anarchy position is rejected by Libertarian think tanks, anarchist ramblings among the base are significant. These words from libertarian anarchist Christopher Cantwell typify this view. “Libertarians are anarchists, whether they realize it or not…the goal is not to win your elections, the goal is to turn a large enough minority against the legitimacy of the State as to make its continued function impossible.”

I’m all for drastically reducing the size and scope of government, but anybody who thinks that we should be living in the world of Max Max is nuts. 

Social Imbeciles

The Libertarians present themselves horribly. To a certain degree, the lack of polish is understandable. After all, nobody donates money to Libertarians and few people actually are Libertarians, so they’re drawing from a limited pool or resources which partially explains why they don’t have the political and media sophistication to match the mainstream parties, yet Libertarians problems aren’t just in terms of polish but in a complete misunderstanding of the rules of polite society. 

Examples of this can be found everywhere, but the latest and greatest example was brought to light by James Weeks II who while running for the position of Libertarian Party Chair stripped on stage at the National Convention while it was being broadcast on C-Span. To their credit, most of the Libertarians in the room rejected the strip tease and jeered the juvenile display, but if the discussions I’ve seen online are any indicator, a large portion of Libertarians see no problem with Weeks’ strip routine. 

When this is allowed to happen and celebrated by a good portion of the community, it either means that the Libertarians don’t even take themselves seriously or they have no understanding whatsoever of social standards, and either way, it’s incredibly damaging to the movement. 


In theory, Libertarians hold most of the principles that the United States needs to adopt to get back on the right track, and for my money, the severely flawed Libertarian presidential candidate is still a much better alternative to Hillary and Trump, but I’m not sure I want to call myself a Libertarian anymore because a bunch of people in the Libertarian Party are out of their minds.

Friday, May 27, 2016

The Insidious Agenda of the Bubble Gun Ban

Another grade-schooler got suspended for bringing an obviously fake gun to school.

How many times have you heard similar stories? Once? Twice? Two dozen times?

Immediately, people start complaining about a lack of common sense and political correctness run amok, and sure, that’s fair, but let’s look a little deeper for once. 

The school sent home this five-year-old girl for the day and recorded the suspension in her permanent record because she took a transparent, plastic, bright green and orange bubble blowing gun to school, so what does this and the many cases like this teach kids? I contend it teaches two things.

First, this nonsense teaches kids that guns are bad. School is a place where are we are taught to be good little boys and girls, but guns are so horrible that even a finger or a Pop-Tart shaped like a gun has to be treated as if they might suddenly take on a life of it’s own and massacre a school full of innocent children. Any child who would dare even draw a picture of a gun clearly has animosity towards others and is a menace to any safe society, so the message is clear. “Fear the gun, fear the gun, fear the gun!”

Second, this nonsense teaches kids to blindly follow the rules and not use an ounce of critical thinking skills. Any rational society would at bare minimum call the parents and say, “Hey, no big deal, but we noticed Suzy brought a bubble gun to school, and that violates the school policy. We know it’s nothing, but it’s against our policy, so can you just double check to make sure the kid isn’t bringing any gun shaped toys to school?” but no, this zero tolerance bull crap requires suspension and a note to be placed in the child’s permanent record even though anyone with a single brain cell would know that the child is no threat, but it’s not about thinking but about rules, and the numbskulls at the school are merely pawns of the school policy. They do what they are told unquestioningly, and by unthinkingly conforming to the system, they are training up a new generation which will be even more mindlessly conformist than themselves. 

Is it any wonder that American college students are crying out for safe spaces and screaming about micro aggressions when we’ve spent over a decade training them to avoid any critical thought and freak out at anything that even remotely resembles an object that could be dangerous if used improperly? We have raised and are raising generations of cowardly morons. 

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Captain America: Civil War - A Second Amendment Allegory

Here’s a fun tidbit for anybody wanting to start up a discussion on gun rights. 

Captain America: Civil War recently opened in theaters to great box office success continuing Marvel’s trend of making ridiculous amounts of money off their cinematic universe. As everybody knows, these characters are ripped straight from the comics, but less well known is the fact that the stories themselves are often retooled adaptations of specific comic storylines. The newest Marvel movie is based off an incredibly popular comic series called Civil War published back in 2006, and unbeknownst to the vast majority of comic book readers, it makes a nigh perfect case defending the Second Amendment. 

In the comic book version of Civil War (nothing in this article will spoil the movie), a group of superheroes who are part of a reality TV show botch an attempt to apprehend a super villain. Instead of putting down the villain quickly away from the public, the showboating heroes give the villain enough time to use his powers to cause an explosion that vaporizes a grade school and all the students inside. This high publicity incident causes a swell of popular outcry against superpowers, and the politicians soon draft the Superhero Registration Act which requires all people with superpowers to register with the government. If super powered people wish to continue using their powers, they must submit to training and work as government agents.

Iron Man becomes the leading figure for the pro-Registration movement believing that opposition to the wave of populist outcry for government oversight would be futile and thinking that as chief organizer of the movement he can create a stronger force of super heroes by making moderate and common sense reforms. In contrast, Captain America believes that people have the fundamental right to use their powers and abilities to help themselves and others and therefore refuses to support the Superhuman Registration Act condemning it for oppressing the individual and violating civil rights. The superheroes choose sides over the issue, and shortly after the government begins regulating superhuman activity, it becomes an all out superhero civil war as Iron Man’s forces begin to imprison heroes simply for defending themselves and their community. 

Ostensibly, the entire Civil War story arc presented two differing and equally defendable points of view and readers were supposed to decide which side they supported, but the story was clearly written with Captain America as the protagonist and his side as the virtuous one which left readers almost unanimously landing on the anti-Registration side of the argument, but it’s less clear how many comic readers understood how closely the Registration Act corresponded to real life gun control measures. 

Isn’t a gun basically a superpower? It grants great strength to normal people who would otherwise be at the mercy of the strong. It allows people to defend themselves and other innocents, and according to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution, gun ownership is a civil right, yet every time a mass shooting occurs at a school or any other location, some people get scared and demand stronger gun regulation. Many say guns should only be in the hands of the government, but more moderate gun control advocates say we need “common sense reforms” allowing private ownership of guns but giving government regulatory oversight of who is allowed to have guns, how you keep track of guns, what guns are allowed, what kind of training is necessary for gun possession and where and when you are allowed to use guns. It’s the Superhero Registration Act. 

This pro-2nd Amendment message can be found to a certain degree in the movie as well, but in the film, political implications are overshadowed by interpersonal conflict leaving the overall message a bit muddled. Still, the basic idea in the movie remains that the government wants all those with power under their thumb and under their control, and that’s a message that most people will reject while watching the movie and all people should reject in real life, so if you know people who like Marvel movies and support gun control, point out the similarities between regulating superpowers and regulating weapons. Maybe they’ll see the hypocrisy in opposing jail time for someone who has a suit of armor that can rip through buildings while they applauding efforts to imprison people for having a magazine with eleven rounds instead of ten.