I probably shouldn't start with "I was listening to Alex Jones on the shortwave last night . . ."

... but I was. And as much as I fear that gives the big-government supporters an excuse to refuse to address the substance of what follows and instead paint both me and Jones as tinfoil-hat-wearing whackos, I have to give my two cents on what he spent much of the show discussing.

This Missouri Information Analysis Center report business (you can view the document here).

It seems the authors of this report need to be reminded that "extremism" is not a synonym for "terrorism." Extremism, as used in the famous Goldwater quote, is the holding to one's ideology without compromise. Terrorism is the infliction of violence to instill fear.

This part is rich:

"Political Paraphernalia: Militia members most commonly associate with 3rd party political groups. It is not uncommon for militia members to display Constitutional Party, Campaign for Liberty, or Libertarian material. These members are usually supporters of former Presidential Candidate: Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr."

(There were so many [sic]s in that quote I gave up trying.)

1. What is the methodology they used to reach this conclusion? Did they survey known militia members and ask them what sort of bumper sticker they have on their cars? Where is their research to back up this claim?

2. One of the things that makes Libertarians Libertarians and not anarchists is the principle of noninterference in the lives of others. This is incompatible with militiaism.

3. This will lead to ideological profiling. Is D.W.L.* the new D.W.B.**? And isn't this WAY over the line into Thoughtcrime?

4. Bob Barr is the grouchy brother-in-law at the family reunion; Ron Paul is the eccentric grandpa. Both are harmless. Any notion that they are leaders of some militia movement is patently absurd.

5. Isn't it convenient how this further marginalizes third parties that present a clear and concise alternative to the duopoly of Republicans and Democrats? Doesn't it give them another arrow in their quivers to shoot at us? "You don't want to vote for them, do you? After all, there is a perception that they are vaguely dangerous. Are you vaguely dangerous too?"

6. Timothy McVeigh was a Republican. John Wayne Gacy was a Democrat. As long as we're painting broad strokes here, doesn't that mean Republicans are terrorists and Democrats are murderous child molesters?

That's my two-cents after a quick once-over. I'm printing the report out to go over it more in-depth at my leisure.

And here I was ready to order a "Don't Blame Me; I Voted For Ron Paul" bumper sticker...

[H/T 2 Alex Jones.]

[Update: State apologizes, removes Paul, Barr & Baldwin's names. I don't see anything about removing the names of the Libertarian and Constitution Parties, though.]

* D.W.L. - "Driving While Libertarian," also known as DWACI - "Driving With A Consistent Ideology."

** D.W.B - "Driving While Black."

Hey, Bob. I gotta suggestion.

Pick Sam Nunn as your running mate. C'mon. It'll be cool.

Barr/Nunn '08.

I'd still rather vote for Paul/Gigot, but that doesn't seem like it's gonna happen.

Barrples and oranges.

A little more on Bob Barr.

If forced to choose between Bush and Clinton, he chooses Bubba.

President Clinton... I certainly had my problems with him. But what he did, in terms of perjury and obstruction was bad but it was not destructive of the very systemic foundations of our country.

What Barr isn't seeing is that Clinton had his party in control of Congress for only two years, whereas Bush had his party in control for six. Give Clinton six years of a Democratic Congress, and there'd have been Wacos and Elian raids all over the place.

It's not evidence of the intrinsic good of Clinton and the intrinsic bad of Bush, but rather of how much liberty dies when government can "get things done" without the intrinsic good of gridlock.

You almost had me, Bob.

I try to look at what candidates are doing, not what they're saying. So, I was disappointed to find my friend Mr. Hanna seemingly ready to drink the McCain Kool-Aid after he listened to Senator Palpatine talk.

I hear McCain saying all the right things, but then I look at what he's doing as a Senator to advance these issues. And I don't find much of anything.

But I shouldn't be surprised. I myself, after listening to a Bob Barr interview, was almost ready to drink the Barr-Aid. Barr's no longer in a position where he COULD do much of anything to advance his new-found libertarian ideology, even if he wanted to, so all we have to judge him on IS his words. He might sincerely regret his authoritarian past, and the only thing he can do about it is say he was wrong.

So I was ALMOST ready to give him the benefit of the doubt.

That is, until 5:02 - 5:22.



What's so hard to understand about the concept that the government should not be in the business of dictating the genders of the participants in a private contract?