In Virginia: Political Sleaze
The Faith and Family Alliance was nothing short of a disgusting corrupt organization. Here is a good piece on them from Norm Leahy at Tertium Quids:
I’ve been reading an old Bob Gibson column “527 Group is anything but friendly” from the Daily Progress. It was published around the time of the 2000 Republican primary between Steve Martin and Eric Cantor and features The Faith and Family Alliance. The piece was written before the Abramoff money-angle was established, but there’s one thread that does stick out:
It was set up, in this case, under the guidance of political consultant Tim Phillips, who was employed in federal elections in Virginia this year by Republicans George W. Bush of Texas and Stephen H. Martin of Chesterfield County.
And later, this:
[Kevin] Gentry and [Phil] Cox said Phillips approached them about founding it as directors.
Later, it was Phillips who found Robin Vanderwall to run the group at an RPV convention. Vanderwall described their relationship this way in Bob’s article:
Vanderwall, 32, is president of the the Faith and Family Alliance and a friend of Phillips who said he has worked with him on campaigns but never for him.
Interesting. Phillips seems to be a central player, but there’s almost nothing — no comments, nothing — from him on the group or its activities.
Given the group’s spectacular flame-out and its link to Jack Abramoff, perhaps his reticence is understandable. But it does leave many questions unanswered.
Congress Must Audit the Fed
From C4L:
On May 5, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) grilled Federal Reserve inspector general Elizabeth Coleman. What knowledge did she have of Bloomberg’s report that the Fed had made trillions of dollars in off-balance sheet transactions? Did she know who received the trillion dollars that was added to the Fed’s balance sheets since last September? Was there any investigation into why the Fed didn’t rescue Lehman Brothers, a move that sent shock waves through the financial sector?
To all of these questions, Coleman professed total ignorance, and assured the Congress there were presently no investigations taking place. What madness is this? The economy is in shambles, and the group most responsible for keeping our financial system stable has no answers and doesn’t care to find any.
The Federal Reserve is accountable to no one. It has no budget, no Congressional committee monitors its operations, and although the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is tasked with auditing the Fed, it is so constrained as to be useless.
Read the rest of this entry »
More Government Expansion
From Will Frable:
A couple of days ago I read an article that mentions a Bill being proposed by a New York Senator that would put harsh regulations on young people seeking a credit card. Now given that this country runs on a credit system for any large purchase it is important to establish credit at an early age.
What the hell is the matter with our government? They have taken regulation to a new height. Senator Charles Schumer of New York is posing a bill that makes the legal age of having a credit card 21 and only under parental consent after a financial literacy test is taken. This is ridiculous on several levels. One is that this is a credit card that you have now put more restrictions on than alcohol consumption. Two this legislation puts kids even further behind because they are even more reliant on their parents. Third whatever happened to personal responsibility in this country? And last and this is the same argument for drinking, before I even turned 18 I had recruiters knocking on my door asking if I wanted to sign a 4 year contract to and they’ll pay for my college, talk about predatory lending. I believe that if at 18 you can sign your name and go off to war you should be able to drink, and by all means have a credit card.
My first grievance is that they are proposing more regulation than alcohol. The reason we have laws for alcohol consumption is because it kills people when used irresponsibly, and even then it is limited to a minimum age and not driving while intoxicated. However, credit which doesn’t kill people or affect anyone but the person’s credit in question we need a literacy test, and a permission slip. This is no different than the voter literacy test in the Jim Crow Era. Everyone has the right to choose to vote and everyone has the right to choose to have a credit card.
Number two, When I turned 18 my parents told me I’m free. Any decision I make from then on is my responsibility and mine only. Then I find out that in order for me to go to college and apply for loans I’m a dependent of my parents until I’m 24 or I have a kid whichever comes first. Now they’re putting me deeper in my parent’s shadow, with credit cards. Whatever happened to cutting the cord and letting people succeed or fail on their own merits.
What about personal responsibility, where did it go? These adults who are in college and fuck up it’s their deal no one else’s. I am just as old as they are I’m in college and I didn’t mess up why, because I was taught the importance of good credit. Nobody in my generation can say they didn’t know it is drilled into our head form grade school on up. The reason myself and people like me didn’t screw up is because we restrained ourselves from that pizza on a Friday night. Start taking responsibility for your actions.
And last is the age limit. At 18 you’re an adult all decisions, and I cannot stress “all” enough, should be yours and yours alone. As a society we need to abandon this mentality that when you turn 18 you’re adult in every aspect except “fill in the blank.” You are 18, you are an adult deal with the consequences, and reap the benefits.
In short this legislation should go absolutely no where, and as someone who is independent of my parents and younger than 21. I am personally insulted that the government is trying to tell me how responsible I am.
Is Life Priceless?
From Adam Bitely:
As I was reading up on libertarian philosophy the other night (Machinery of Friedman by David Friedman, which I heavily recommend reading), I approached the question in the title of this post. I have thought heavily on this subject and decided to write some of my thoughts out.
First, if one believed life was truly priceless, he would expend all possible resources to protect his life. As well, this would consume his entire existence and would thus refrain from dangerous activities. This is basically what Friedman argues in his book.
In my work in politics, I often hear people discussing the value of life being priceless. I am troubled to hear people advocate such a position without understanding what it actually means. If ones life were indeed priceless, then why would one partake in certain risky activities. These could range from riding roller coasters to driving in a vehicle. The risks involved in such activities include the loss of ones life. Even factoring in the chances of death in such an activity (which is rather low), just the sheer fact that the life which was valued as priceless was put in such a jeopardizing position shows that no one actually believes it is (nor acts like it).
In my opinion, this simple principle is a major thing that made me consider myself libertarian rather than a American conservative. In American conservatism, life is generally considered priceless. In fact, I am yet to meet a conservative who does not value in life in this way (I can still be proven wrong). While I am against abortion (as are most conservatives), I cannot fathom the value of life being priceless.
Value is assigned to everything. For instance, the soldier who signs up to fight for one’s country has fixed the success of that country as the value of his life. This is a simple example to show that life, does in fact, have a certain value and it is not priceless.
Outcry! Detainees Coming to VA?
From Adam Bitely:
Bob McDonnell, a professional politician (his full time job is being a candidate for Governor), is in the middle of running a typical fear campaign. Every candidate from the two major political parties does at least one of these fear campaigns every election cycle.
If you live in Virginia, as I do, you would know that Bob McDonnell is currently raising campaign money off the fear of Guantanamo Detainees potentially being moved to Virginia. Remember, McDonnell is a full time politician, so if you send him money because of this it won’t do anything to help stop this from happening. While McDonnell has failed to mention that none of these people have actually been charged with any crime (which is a problem in and of itself), he is trying to use this potential move of “suspects” as a cash cow for his campaign (he is advertising this crap on Drudge report).
Here is some info on Guantanamo Detainees that people who are as concerned as McDonnell is should see. Please educate yourselves before falling for the political drivel from a licensed member of the only legalized profession of con aristry (the political class).
Guantánamo in numbers
And from Jim Harper at Cato @ Liberty:
Though I’m not a Virginia resident or voter, nor a donor to politicians, Virginia gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell (whose party affiliation I’m not aware of) has added me to his email list. His name is similar to a past roommate, and that affinity has caused me to open more of his emails than I ordinarily would.
Today’s is worth writing about: It’s a political candidate transparently trying to scare voters and use their fear for fundraising.
Dear Jim,
Terror suspects could be headed to Virginia…
With the closing of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay the federal government must find new locations in which to house and try the roughly 240 terrorist suspects currently held 90 miles from our shores. Recent news reports indicate that the Department of Justice is considering transferring a number of the detainees to the Commonwealth of Virginia. One specific location: Alexandria. And other Virginia locations could be possibilities as well.
There are security details to be worked out when prisoners are transferred out of Guantanamo Bay, but the prisoners themselves are not dangerous as such. They’re prisoners, and they will always be under heavy guard. Terrorists are not radioactive, and they do not have lasers built into their eyes.
The problems with housing prisoners in the past have been over-the-top security precautions that make a great show but don’t necessarily meet actual security problems associated with housing terror suspects.
Bills have been introduced to bar detainees from being transferred to various states.
A precious few Americans have exhibited cool in this fear-of-detainees brouhaha. Alexandria Sheriff Dana A. Lawhorne is quoted in this Washington Post article, at least saying “he would do what he can: ‘You can’t run the other way when your country calls.’”
But McDonnell, the politician seeking a prominent leadership position in the state, would “lead” by pretending that captured terrorists are too big a security risk for Virginia. It’s shameful fear-mongering meant to capitalize on the ignorance and weakness of Virginians who don’t understand terrorism. The only links in the text of the email are to the fundraising page on McDonnell’s Web site.
McDonnell exhibits leadership malpractice with this kind of campaigning.
Book Review: The Invisible Hook by Peter Leeson
By Justin Williams
What begins as a simple story of Pirates soon turns into an unique journey through Economics and History. Peter Leeson, who is an Economist, uses methodological individualism to analyze the behavior of Pirates as simple profit seekers. This allows Leeson to give a different view of the Pirates then most of us are used to. He also introduces us to many unknown facts about Pirates, who are a common cultural obsession. The secret to his book is the fact that he teaches us both Economics and History without you even realizing it. Books like More Sex is Safer Sex by Steve Landsburg and Freakonomics by Steven Levitt teach you an unconventional way to look at problems, but often not through a classic historical case. This book will do both without you hardly noticing.
The Invisible Hook is not written in a way that is hard for non-Economists to understand. It is written just for that type of audience. This book now ranks top on my list of books to recommend those as an introductory lesson into the economic way of thinking. At the same time, if you do study Economics you will not be bored as the historical mechanism takes over. For example, you may know what signaling is but the economics student likely does not know exactly how the Pirates used the flag, the Jolly Roger, to signal to other ships.
One of the most interesting parts of the book is the very last chapter. Leeson sets up a class in Pirate Management with the professor Blackbeard. Without giving to much away, he goes through and restates points in the book with modern literature. He also provides a very good reading list for those who want to read further into Economics in that chapter. This is the most unique way I have ever seen anyone end a book. It allows Leeson to review the points and restate them in a new light without putting the reader to sleep, as I am famous for skimming through conclusions.
I would highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to learn anything about Pirates or Economics. It is probably likely that most of Leeson’s readers will buy the book for the former, but the reader will soon find himself interested in the latter. Dr. Leeson is a rising star in the field of Economics and this is a good way for him to start.
Rating: 10/10
Who’s Watching
Today the New York Times ran an article on the NSA exceeding their public monitoring privileges which congress just extended last year. Monitoring of the public is wrong to begin with, but this, along with the MIAC Report, the recently released DHS Report, and the full body scans coming to an airport near you have put the United States down a scary road of government control, that most people are unwilling acknowledge.
People in general take their rights for granted and believe The Constitution is there to protect them. They are right, but if we don’t exercise and protect our rights then The Constitution becomes little more than an old piece of paper.
People close to me have used the argument that if I don’t do anything wrong or suspicious then I should have nothing to worry about and shouldn’t be concerned with these laws. Look at what is being deemed as “wrong” and “suspicious”. They have specifically targeted Ron Paul supporters, people who support the second amendment, and citizens calling themselves pro life. Calling these specific things suspicious is no different than racial profiling.
In the upcoming years there will be a dark alley atmosphere. Meaning we will feel the imposing presence of something watching us, but it will be to dark to see.
The Forgotten Generality Principle
By Justin Williams
The contract theory of how government forms is one of a community banding together to prevent violence. They all want rules and regulations to keep one another from preying upon each of their property. We understand that this is how the United States came together. It was a social contract that was semi not imposed on. As the country has grown so has the size of government. Politicians went from being part-time to full-time. They became professionals. They mastered spreading out the costs and concentrating the benefits. This is in completely disregard for the generality principle, as this contract theory means equal protection for equal pay.
The generality principle is one in which everyone who pays for a public good is not excluded from that good. This is called in more common terms discrimination. This means that if the government protected my house from a fire then it would also have to protect my neighbors house, assuming he pays the same taxes I do. We have long abandon this ideal and both F.A. Hayek and James Buchanan have advocated and studied this in detail. It is the simple idea that if “We the people” pay the costs then “We the people” should receive all its benefits.
Only then will the costs get smaller. As long as the politicians can get you to fill their pockets so that they can spread it out among its special interests then the government will only get bigger. It is a minority exploiting a majority.This is exactly what earmarks are. They are spreading the costs among the whole of the United States, while concentrating the benefits in their area.
The bigger problem is that this government waste does not account for all of the social cost. When the government offers discriminatory funds, special interests will line up for it around the blocks. The extra costs we do not see are the funds used to lobby the government. These will sometimes be more than one company, thus causing competitive bidding for the contract. Meaning that some companies spend funds on something they did not get, funds that could have been used for something better. Imagine if you went to Wal-Mart to buy a new DVD player and there was a politician who was given the DVD player free and you and the rest of the consumers had to find a way to get it from him. You would wine and dine him, while offering him outright payments (or bribes).
So what is the solution? The solution is to call on politicians to not allow discriminatory politics to persist. That means that if we are going to give government handouts to people, we must give it to all. Hopefully then government will begin to restrain itself. Of course, this will never happen because you are asking for much of the power the politicians wield back.
Buchanan, James and Roger Congleton, “Politics by Principle, Not Interest” (1998) The Collected Works of James Buchanan Volume 11. Liberty Fund. 2003.
Excessive Force of the Day
From Adam Bitely:
Today, at the New School in New York City, the NYPD ended a protest using what most would call “excessive force”. Fortunately, a patriot was able to capture the footage for public consumption. Here is yet another example of how the Government gets carried away with it’s monopoly on force.
Here is the NYPD beating up some students earlier today:
Get the full story including the police trying to tell you that what was in the video didn’t actually “happen”.
