by Eric Dondero

Another example of the hypocrisy of so-called libertarian policy wonks. They brillantly defend free market policies espoused by Republicans, but just cannot bring themselves to praise the very people who are making the proposals. That might be seen as too partisan you see.

From Mike Tanner, syndicated column by Gannett, "At least Ponzi didn't force people to enroll" Sept. 15:

Despite this, Social Security faces more than $20 trillion in future unfunded liabilities. That means payroll taxes would have to be hiked by nearly 50 percent, or the equivalent in other taxes, to keep the program solvent.

Social Security can also cut benefits. Under current law, if nothing changes, a 30-year-old worker today can expect to receive just 76 percent of the benefits that he has been promised. That will be far less than the amount of money he could have had if he had been able to invest his Social Security taxes privately. In fact, many young workers will be lucky if they receive back as much in benefits as they pay into the system.

Unlike Charles Ponzi's original Ponzi scheme, Social Security will never go broke as long as the government can force people to pay more taxes and accept fewer benefits. But does that make Social Security better than a Ponzi scheme - or worse?

In the entire 12-paragraph piece, Tanner did not mention Rick Perry one single time.

Back in 2005, when President Bush famously proclaimed that he was going to use some of his "political capital" fresh off a big victory over John Kerry, to push Social Security reform, libertarians similarly stayed away from defending his proposals. The irony was that Bush got his proposal straight from the Cato Institute. When Bush was attacked severely by the liberal media for including a proposal for partial privatization, libertarians, including those at Cato, were nowhere's to be found. It proved yet again that policy wonker libertarians more often than not are completely clueless when it comes to real world politics.

From Eric Dondero:

55 electoral votes. The closest state in electoral vote count is Texas with 34, followed by New York with 31. And now the Democrat bastion of the left coast may be in play.

From the SacBee "Field Poll: Californians sour on Obama":

Even in heavily Democratic California, President Barack Obama's job approval rating has plummeted among voters, largely on his handling of the economy, according to a new Field Poll.

Though Obama is strongly favored to win California in his re-election bid next year, the poll suggests many Democrats may vote for him only begrudgingly, and it is yet another indication of weakening support nationwide.

The Field Poll has him at just 46% job approval. That's a dramatic drop from the June approval numbers of 56%.

Obama's decline has been quick and widespread... Since June, his rating has suffered double-digit percentage drops among Democrats, nonpartisans, Central Valley residents, men, African Americans, Asian Americans and voters over 65.

Also of interest, Field reports that Asians in California are the one group that has shifted on Obama most dramatically, with a 36% decline. Asian-Americans now support him just 48% to 34%.

Editor's comment - Of course, even if Obama squeeks by in California, a close win could have enormous ramifications for downticket GOP races.

Image credit - edjoin.com and flckr.com Asian American Republicans

Nevada fiscal conservative Brian Sandoval

Release...

Our nation needs a leader in the White House who understands the role of government and our economy. Governor Rick Perry has the strongest record of job creation, fiscal discipline, and executive branch leadership among the presidential candidates. As a governor, Rick Perry created a tremendous blueprint for job creation and as President, I know he will get America working again. I consider Governor Perry a friend and I am proud to endorse his campaign for President.

RickPerry.org

From Dave Nalle:

I'm very pleased to announce my appointment as Texas State Director for the Gary Johnson for President campaign. With the help of State Finance Director Charles Lupton I'll be working with the national campaign to raise awareness of Governor Johnson's principles and platforms as we move forward towards the Texas GOP primary in March.

No state has a greater love for individualism and liberty than Texas does and Gary Johnson's vision of a smaller and less intrusive federal government which respects state and individual rights is just what most Texas Republicans want to hear. We've had enough of a government which is constantly meddling in our wallets and our bedrooms and our businesses.

For our nation to recover from the disastrous policies of the Obama administration we need real leadership with a proven record. In two terms as Governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson vetoed over 750 bills, cut state budgets, created impressive job growth and found sensible solutions to serious problems facing his state. We need the same kind of pragmatic and proactive leadership in Washington to get our government under control and back on track. Gary will bring us balanced budgets now, not 20 years down the road, with immediate budget cuts and lower taxes to spur job creation. Gary has a realistic plan to reduce the size and cost of government by 42% if we just stop spending, stop borrowing and stop printing money we don't have.

Gary has the experience, the skills and the ideas we need in a president, but he needs our help. The media is trying to pick the candidates. They're keeping Gary out of the debates and focusing on big government and big spending candidates like Mitt Romney and Rick Perry. Their Republican Party of crony capitalism and endless bailouts for special interests cannot be the future of our party if we are to preserve our republic and our liberty. We need to be more than just voters. We need to become citizen activists.

Gary is running a true grassroots campaign. It will only succeed with your effort and your support. We need volunteers here in Texas to work on getting Gary on the ballot and to coordinate local efforts all around the state. If you're interested in volunteering, please send me an email at dave@fontcraft.com. All are welcome. Gary's ideas appeal across the political spectrum because we're all waking up to the fact that government has become our master and not our servant. We'll welcome Republicans, Democrats, Independents and Libertarians who are ready to take back our nation and restore our liberty.

If you have more money than you have time, the campaign needs all the financial help it can get as we start things up here in Texas and to make a real mark in the early primaries. Anything you can give will help at http://www.garyjohnson2012.com. We want Texas to lead in fundraising just like we lead in our love of liberty.

We're also sponsoring Hangout events in September and October where groups of supporters can get together at a home or in a coffee shop or anywhere else to talk with Gary live by teleconference.

I hope you'll also keep in touch through social media. A great start for that is joining our Facebook page.

Times may be grim, but I see hope glimmering on the horizon. With your help and a candidate like Gary Johnson we will see a new day dawn for liberty and a restoration of true government for the people in 2012.

Please don't hesitate to contact me by email or phone 512-656-8011, and expect to hear more good news as the campaign progresses.

From Eric Dondero:

Humbled, and surprisingly mellow (perhaps a bit tired from a previous night of no sleep?), the big victor Bob Turner appeared on Fox News with Megyn Kelly.

Kelly asserts loudly:

90 years... 90 years...

The seat has not been held by a Republican since 1923.

Kelly then asks, "what was the magic?"

Turner responds:

President Obama, loud and clear. The people of this district are concerned about Israel... Jobs... the inability to return to prosperity.

Note - This website was an early and enthusiastic supporter of Bob Turner for Congress, way back to 2010.

by Eric Dondero

I could have never predicted this. Sure, you'd think they'd downplay Bob Turner and Mark Amodei's wins in New York and Nevada. But to completely ignore the biggest political story of the week?

A look at Reason, arguably the top libertarian site, shows the following headlines this morning:

Bachmann's Vaccine Panic

India's Mangled School Reforms

Use the Tiny Tiles—And Other Tales from the Stimulus

Okay, the Bachmann story. Understandably reportable. But School Reform in India?

Bob Turner, a Republican, won a seat in a district that was 5 to 1 Democrat over Republican registration. The seat had not been held by a Republican since 1923!

And the top libertarian website chooses to report on India education instead?

There are 12 headline stories at LewRockwell.com. Not a one of them is about the elections in New York and Nevada. And nothing at the Rockwell blog either.

Daily Paul? They're pumping up Radical Islamists, as usual: "Bombshell: Saudi Arabia threatens to cut ties with US over Palestine UN Veto."

The official Libertarian Party site LP.org? The sound of silence on NY and NV.

Nothing but policy issues on the front page of Cato.org. But don't get the idea that they totally avoid politics. Au contraire. Dave Boaz has an article at the blog "Is It Too Late for Another Candidate?" Apparently, it's more important to Boaz to get all-dreamy about another possible GOP prez nominee rather than report on this huge election news.

20 headline articles at NolanChart.com. Not a one of them on the Turner and Amodei victories.

The Humble (so-called) Libertarian, similarly, not a word about the elections.

Radley Balko's much-lauded The Agitator has zero coverage of Turner and Amodei.

There is one single libertarian website covering the story: Rational Review, edited by anarch-libertarian Thomas L. Knapp.

Bob Turner's win in New York was historic. Mark Amodei's victory in Nevada portends nothing but bad signs for 2012 for the Democrat Party in that critical swing state.

You'd think a movement that promotes itself as "pro-liberty" would have at least something to say about these two incredibly historic victories for the freedom side.

One can only conclude, that a pro-defense, pro-Israel Republican winning in New York, and a Tea Party conservative winning in Harry Reid's backyard, doesn't quite fit their template. What else could explain this nearly-complete libertarian media blackout of the biggest political story of the week, and perhaps the entire year?

PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Andrew Horning Phone: (812) 585 0504 cell To Volunteer: andrewhorning@hotmail.com Andrew Horning, Candidate for Indiana U.S.A. SenateConstitution Day, September 16, 2011 The Freedom Farm, Freedom, Indiana We The People have exactly and only what We The People have chosen. It should now be apparent that We The People have [...]

by Bryan Preston, PJTatler

Those of us who have spent any time at all around Rick Perry, and I’ve spent a few minutes around him here and there over the past couple of years, recognize how well this story fits with the man we’ve seen up close. That’s just him.

It’s fair to argue the policy on the merits, but to ascribe the Gardasil order to some ulterior motive just doesn’t square with the character of the man at all.

Editor's note - Bryan from Austin and former Republican Party of Texas Communications director, is a friend, and sometimes behind-the-scenes advisor for LR.

Note - Perry on the motorcycle without the helmet!

Islamization of America

From Eric Dondero:

Libertarian sexual values be damned. Here come the Muslim prudes.

From the NY Post, "Devout taxi drivers allowed to veto strip-club roof ads"

Devout Muslim hacks -- who were crouched behind their steering wheels in shame while driving with ads for strip clubs atop their taxis -- won a major victory yesterday in their war on roof smut.

The city’s Taxi & Limousine Commission agreed to give cabbies who own their vehicles absolute veto power on the content of ads on their cars -- delighting scores of modest hacks of various faiths who had fought hard for the rule overhaul.

“We are Muslims, and we do not like the ads!” crowed cabby Mohamed Tahir, 66, whose cab is topped with an image of a sexy brunette from Flashdancers Gentlemen’s Club.

He added, “If I had another ad, I’d change it right away! It bothers many of us.”

Sure, property rights come into play. But a big loss for uniquely American cultural values?

Next up, sexy lingerie, fashion designer ads, or ads supporting Israel?

Paki Men "milking the system" producing multiple children on the welfare rolls through polygamy

From Eric Dondero:

Baroness Flather is a Conservative Party member of the British House of Lords. She represents Windsor in the Royal County of Berkshire. Her family are originally from the Punjab province of India.

Excerpt from the UK Daily Mail, "BARONESS FLATHER: Polygamy, welfare benefits and an insidious silence" Sept. 16:

As I said in Parliament this week, there is now a growing wealth of evidence that the generosity of the welfare state encourages some Muslims from these two regions — along with plenty of white families — to produce ever larger families in order to claim extra payments and publicly-subsidised housing. And it’s something the system seems to allow too easily.

For example, a Pakistani man contracts a marriage in his native country, and then brings his wife to England to start a family. Because they have been married only under Islamic law, she isn’t legally registered by British authorities as his wife. Even so, they are able to claim child benefit for any children they have.

But the state handouts do not end there, for under Islamic Sharia law, polygamy is permissible. So a man can return to Pakistan, take another bride and then, in a repetition of the process, bring her to England where they also have children together — obtaining yet more money from the state.

Because such Islamic multiple-marriages are not recognised in Britain, the women are regarded by the welfare system as single mothers — and are therefore entitled to the full range of lone-parent payments.

As a result, several ‘families’, fathered by the same Pakistani man, can all claim benefits as they are provided for by the welfare state, which treats them as if they are not related.

Man Ban at some events in Australian towns wins support

From the Sydney Herald-Sun, "Men banned as Muslim women win council backing" Sept. 18:

MAN bans are spreading as two more council functions are declared off-limits because it is "not appropriate" for men to mix with Muslim women.
And in a surprise twist, VCAT backed the latest bans, declaring there was no discrimination and councils no longer needed to apply for exemptions.

The Darebin City Council ban will be in force for a music concert to be held in December, while another female-only event to mark the end of Ramadan was cancelled last week.

Editor's comment - Sorry Crocidile Dundee. Better cover up that exposed chest of yours, so as not to offend the sensitivities of Muslim immigrant women.

Supporters of the 'O' more prone to commit crimes?

by Clifford Thies

Dateline - Boston. Parole officer Kevin Devlin thought it a bit odd. Why did Edward Corliss who had previously been given a life sentence for murdering a store clerk in 1971, have an Obama bumper sticker on his car?

Then it happened: on December 26, 2009, a man in the act of robbing a convenience store, murdered the store clerk, Surendra Dangol, a 39-year-old immigrant from Nepal, and was caught on video tape leaving the scene of the crime in a car with an Obama bumper sticker. Same bumper sticker. Same car.

From the Boston Herald "Obama bumper stick led cops to killer" Sept. 15:

A paroled killer’s “Obama” bumper sticker was the break that helped cops nab the man accused of the cold-blooded murder of a Tedeschi’s convenience store clerk, jurors in Edward Corliss’ murder trial learned yesterday.

“It struck me as odd,” state parole officer Kevin Devlin testified yesterday in Suffolk Superior Court about the campaign sticker plastered on the back of parolee Corliss’ white Plymouth Acclaim.

“He’s a guy from Somerville, so I was surprised he was supporting Obama,” Devlin said.

With the suspect identified, the police were able to assemble other evidence sufficient for conviction.

It seems Obama paraphernalia is quite common amongst the criminal element (see photo montage).

But please don't jump to any hasty conclusions. Remember the old saying: All criminals may be Democrats, but not all Democrats are criminals.

by Clifford F. Thies

In a forthcoming book it will be revealed that twenty-four years ago an attractive unmarried female sports reporter, who was then and still is white, had some kind of a relationship with a handsome unmarried male basketball player, who was then and still is black. When asked about it, the woman, who later married another man, with whom she has had five children, had no comment. The man, who later married another woman, with whom he had one child, would only say that she was a sweetheart and respectful.

The thing that makes the story interesting is fact that the woman, then Sarah Heath, is none other the amazing Sarah Palin, which is not to disrespect the man in the story, Glen Rice was "only" a three-time NBA All Star, led the University of Michigan to an NCAA national championship and, along with fellow players Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant and others, and legendary coach Phil Jackson, won an NBA championship.

So, Sarah before she was Palin had some kind of relationship with Glen Rice. Why am I not surprised?

How does this compare to Barack Obama's snorting coke when he was a young adult? Or, George W. Bush driving under the influence? Well, those are bad things. If at all true, what's wrong with an unmarried woman having a relationship with an unmarried man? Would this have something to do with the fact that they were differentially pigmented?

Just how insipid are liberals nowadays?

by Clifford F. Thies

Continuing deterioration of conditions within Syria, the massing of forces at the border with Turkey, and criticism of the regime's brutal suppression of the people of the country are certainly sufficient reason for evacuation.

Up to now, the tanks of the Syrian army have been quite effective against unarmed civilians. Hospitals and schools, homes, marketplace and mosques have proven no obstacle to the advance of Syrian forces. On the other hand, were the Syrian armed forces to confront a military force, it could be another story.

The last time the Syrian military was tested in battle against another military was during the 1982 Lebanon War. In that war, the Israelis decimated the Syrian air and ground forces. Since then, Syria has been re-equiped by the Soviet Union/Russia, and can be suspected to be reinforced by Iranians. A confrontation between Syria and Turkey could be dicey, even though Turkey's armed forces are far superior to those of Syria.

Source: Trust.org/news

Closeted Randian CEOs at Ford corp hq?

From Eric Dondero:

Destined to go viral. And for good reason. Perhaps that was the plan for Ford marketers.

And we here at Libertarian Republican are proud to give them some free advertising.

Good job Ford folks! Buy (Free Market) American.

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Representative Ron Paul what we should do if a 30-year-old man who chose not to purchase health insurance suddenly found himself in need of six months of intensive care. Mr. Paul replied, “That’s what freedom is all about — taking your own risks.” Mr. Blitzer pressed him again, asking whether “society should just let him die.”

And the crowd erupted with cheers and shouts of “Yeah!” -- Paul Krugman, NY Times editorial, "Free to die" Sept. 15

by Clifford F. Thies

At the recent Republican presidential candidate forum the question was posed should a person who refuses to pay for health insurance nevertheless be administered medical care. Ron Paul, a medical doctor and a principled libertarian, was trying to say he could not imagine that such a person would be refused. But some in the audience said "no."

The question is sophomoric. Let me give the supposed ultimate killer question to a libertarian: If a baby is observed starving to death on another person's property, would you commit trespass in order to feed that baby? Of course you do. Pending a hearing, you would also take the baby and make sure he or she was not abused or neglected.

The purpose of law, after all, is to protect us in our rights, and those who need their rights protected the most are the most vulnerable among us, infant children, persons enfeebled by old age, those who are least able to make good choices in the marketplace. Government protects us all from the violent criminal element, but government also protects us from neglectful and abusive family members and from fraudulent businessmen.

But, what about adults, presumably capable of making their own decisions, who decide badly; who take physical or financial risks, or who just plain act stupid. Who drive motorcycles without a helmet, smoke cigarettes and eat Big Macs, who promiscuously engage in homosexual acts, or who go to Michael Moore movies. What about them?

Well, says Paul Krugman, writing in the New York Times, they are to be treated like children, and be taken care of by the government. Instead of dealing with the question posed to Ron Paul, to which the audience answered "no" and Ron Paul hesitated to answer, Krugman said that because we would not let a child make a very bad decision, we shouldn't let any adult.

Pretty brave words from somebody now famous for Space Aliens and 9-11 Truther conspiracy. But, what will Krugman say when the police come after him?

First, they went after those who smoke marijuana, and I said nothing because it's been years since I did any of that shit. Then they went after the members of the Church of Scientology, and I said nothing because I'm into the New Age. Then they went after the Austrian economists, and I said nothing because I'm a Keynesian. Then they went after me and there was nobody to protect me.

First of all, if health insurance were a good deal, almost everybody would freely buy it. But, it's so damn expensive, because of the cross-sbsidies, the practice of defensive medicine, the "one size fits all" mentality of the country when it comes to medical care, and the fact that it's not health insurance but merely third-party reimbursement. If we reformed our health insurance so it operated the way health insurance works in Japan, Taiwan and Singapore, it would be a tremendous bargain.

Secondly, if somebody shows up without insurance and it really was because they decided to not pay and used the money other people use for health insurance in order to buy other things, then it depends on whether they happen upon somebody like Ron Paul, who is a kind and decent man, or somebody like the members of that audience that said no. You gotta ask yourself, punk, do ya feel lucky?

Dr. Thies is a professor of economics at Shenandoah Univ. in Virginia

Nation States have the right to band together to Protect Life and Property from Aggressors

From Eric Dondero:

There is a new website in the pro-defense libertarian community. It is called, "Natural Rights Libertarian."

An excerpt from his piece "Natural Rights Libertarianism and Foreign Policy" Mark Friedman, Sept. 10:

the international sphere closely resembles Locke’s state of nature because there is no single power that can claim a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Rather, there are a large number of states, all acting in what they perceive to be their self-interest, with varying degrees of ruthlessness and willingness to resort to unprovoked violence. Locke held that in a state of nature any peaceful party may justly punish an aggressor, even though the aggressor has not specifically acted against him/her, because an unpunished aggressor represents a clear and present danger to the entire community. See Second Treatise, Chap. III, sec. 16-8. I think Locke’s reasoning is sound.

An unconstrained aggressor imposes two serious costs on those who wish to abide by what Locke called the law of nature, i.e. showing due regard for the equal rights of other persons. First, a party willing to take the life or property of one innocent victim is not likely to stop there. Accordingly, criminals cause fear in even those not directly harmed by their aggression.

Second, the persistence of criminality imposes significant material costs on peaceful parties. Because of the anxiety referenced above, blameless persons will be required to beef up security for themselves and their loved ones. Individuals wishing to conduct mutually-beneficial trade may be prevented from doing so because the goods or the payment will be stolen. Farmers may not plant crops because thieves will seize the harvest, and so on.

Given these considerations, if a peace-loving person in a state of nature is entitled to punish a criminal who has not attacked him directly, then it also seems clear that they may band together in defensive alliances to deter, resist or punish aggressors in a coordinated way. On this same logic, this principle should also apply today to peaceful states, and this conclusion also seems to potentially justify foreign bases, alliances, etc.

Friedman is a retired attorney with a law degree cum ladae from Georgetown Univ.

From Cliff Thies:

Tea Party response to Obama's speech.

Washington, D.C.

Brooklyn Bombshell!!

From Eric Dondero:

There is hope for New York and the Nation.

From Politico.com:

Republicans are poised for a dramatic upset in next week’s special election for a New York City congressional seat, according to a new poll out Friday.

The survey, conducted by the Siena Research Institute, found Republican Bob Turner holding a 50 percent to 44 percent lead over Democrat David Weprin.

The poll comes as national Democrats grow increasingly nervous about Weprin’s prospects in the race for a Brooklyn and Queens-area seat that has long favored the party.

Note - The District's registration is 5 to 1 Democrat over Republican.

"Side[s] with GOP..."

From Eric Dondero:

Surprise kudos to California Democrat Governor Jerry Brown for his veto of a bill that would have required mandatory helmets for under-18s on ski slopes in California.

From SFGate.com "Gov. Brown vetoes ski helmet, phone fine bills":

In his veto message accompanying the helmet bill, SB105 introduced by Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, Brown appeared to side with GOP critics who had characterized the measure as "nanny government."

Brown, a Democrat, wrote, "While I appreciate the value of wearing a ski helmet, I am concerned about the continuing and seemingly inexorable transfer of authority from parents to the state. Not every human problem deserves a law."

Editor's comment - First NY Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo sides with GOP against new taxes in his state, then a week ago the Democrat-controlled state of Illinois relaxed seat belt law enforcement, and now this. Are they finally getting the Tea Party message against the Nanny-State perhaps?

Photo credit - AZZTraining.com