@Jack,

What you say is true in regards to the citizens allowing an environment (society) where politicians can do what they do.

I don’t think we’ve really got a disagreement, so much as a different viewing angle on the same thing.

Here’s a key point. As citizens in a Constitutional system, we have specific means at our disposal to work WITHIN the system. Namely, we have the vote to put our Congressional Reps in office. We also have the right to speak out, and demand our voices be heard. The problem is that THIS method has its limitations. A politician can tell us one thing, and then once elected, violate his promises and his oath of office. We certainly have the power to vote them out, but in the meantime, we have little else we can do (I’ll get back to that in a second).

At this level, even if the Citizens did their duty (questioned, and voted accordingly), a lying politician can still fool us. So, I think that these people DO have some blame. We are to blame for allowing them to stay, instead of making darn sure they never serve again.

I think it is important to state that these politicians ARE to blame, because it is one part of our duty–to make it clear that they are REQUIRED to adhere to the Constitution. It is the first step in taking responsibility for our Government–by saying what is and isn’t acceptable. We have to set those boundaries before we act on enforcing those boundaries.

Now, we actually do have other means at our disposal, and they are rooted in the 2nd Amendment. Anyone who has read any Jefferson, knows that the people have the right to throw off a government that isn’t acting properly. Some people might think that’s radical, but it’s the root of our Nation. I believe in this ultimate right, but it can’t be taken lightly. If we are left with no other alternative, we MUST do this, but there will be (massive) consequences. It is the proverbial can of worms.
Is there a time when citizens will have no choice but take up arms and force our politicians to stop violating the Constitution? Perhaps, but I pray to God we never get to that point, because while it might be the right thing to do, the negative consequences will be terrible.

My bottom line is that I think it is important to point out that politicians are doing the wrong thing(s), when they do, despite the fact that ultimately the people (all of us) are responsible for maintaining the Constitution and now allowing for an environment that enables these things.

I think that we agree on the point that the responsibility ultimately rests with the people, and when it comes down to it, we must be the ones to fix this. Where we may differ is that I think we need to keep the light focused on those acting wrongly. The pressure on them in my view is part of what will help maintain proper action.

Unfortunately, I think we (the citizenry) is failing almost universally at this duty, for a variety of reasons.

I doubt I’m saying anything here you’re not aware of, but just taking this opportunity to clarify my view a bit.

What I love about TSP is that you devote your time to things we CAN do even in the face of these things we dislike and find unacceptable. TSP gives people tools and ideas on how to claim victory from that state of Defeat you spoke of.

@Jack,

Right on. Glad I could contribute in some way.

“The government is not the problem, it’s the people.”

I agree with that 100%. I view government the same way I would view the nosy neighbor who complains to everyone about what everyone else in the neighborhood is doing. You know the type: “That damn dog of theirs is always barking”, “His tree is too close to the property line”, “Why are her kids running down the street after 6 o’clock”, “You’re grass is too tall”… You know the person I’m talking about.

The government is the collective voice of the people, nosy bitches included. All those bad neighbors are the driving force behind bad decisions in the government.

Sometimes it’s something small they demand, safety labels on children’s toys alerting parents of a choking hazard for instance. It seems like a good idea, so people let it pass. Of course every parent knows that kids put random things in their mouth, everything is a potential choking hazard. But now the toys have to go through a long process of review, be classified and labeled, which costs the producer money, and translates to those toys costing more or being produced with cheaper materials, possibly overseas. Small issue, I know, but there are millions of them with an accumulative effect. You can’t mandate common sense.

Then there are bigger issues like FDA regulation, Healthcare, National security…

People always vote for what they perceive to be in their best interest, even if what their voting for is detrimental to someone else. It’s rationalized that if it’s good for me, it’s good for you too. We all get one thing we want and 100 things we don’t.

What is a Libertarian?
Let’s start with what it is not. To spite there being a “Libertarian party”, it is not a political movement at ends with other political movements. Being Libertarian doesn’t mean you can’t also be a Republican or Democrat, Communist, Green Party, Independent etc. Libertarianism doesn’t tell you what to believe or how to act. There is no moral or ideological structure to it, save one key principal: Individual Liberty. That trumps everything else.

Here’s an example I’ve used before: Gay Marriage. Personally I’m against it. I was brought up with the belief that marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman. That’s how I was raised, that’s how my kids will be raised. If I see it on a ballet and I’m asked to vote for or against the legalization of gay marriage, I will vote for it. There is a superseding principal at play. No matter how I personally feel about it, your neighbors (government) should not be allowed to decide who you can or can’t marry based on any criteria. It isn’t their business, and it isn’t mine.

So even though I hold the stereotypical Conservative view on the subject, My vote falls in line with the liberal view anyway. Even though I detest what I’m voting for, voting against it would be a violation of my most fundamental principals. It works the other way too.

Abortion. I don’t think an embryo with no brain activity constitutes a living organism. My toe nail is a collection of living cells with no brain activity, and it’s had more experiences than a zygote. It’s walked on the beach, it’s been stubbed on the sofa, and won a harrowing battle against some type of foot fungus. Still, I wouldn’t think twice before cutting it off. Feel free to disagree with me on that one, or draw the line between stages of development and question at what point it becomes wrong. For this example I’m keeping it more cut and dry than the subject really is for me. Now let’s say the government wants to give more funding to planned parenthood facilities. I’ll vote against it. Other people do have a strong moral objection to abortion, and they shouldn’t be forced to pay for it through the tax code. If that money isn’t given to those doctors voluntarily, while I don’t believe them to be murders, they are undeniably thieves (which I hold in the same regard).

Let’s say some “evil capitalist” wants to build a Wal-Mart in your town. Shut up and enjoy the new store, or just don’t shop there at all, hell, Picket them for all I care. Just don’t try to get an injunction. They purchased the lot they’re building on, and have a right to build there. If you wanted to do something else with that land, you had the opportunity to buy the lot when it was for sale. Where was the community action group then? They could have pooled their money, built a park, whatever. They relinquished that right through their own inaction, and have no standing to infringe on Wal-Mart’s right to build, regardless of how much it pisses off the community.

Maybe some “Hippie Leftist Green Peace loser” wants to put up 6 wind turbines in his yard, next to your $2 million houses. So what? His land, His right. The “Not in My back Yard” crowd can blow it out their ass. It’s not in your back yard, it’s in his. Again, property rights. You only have them if you actually own the property in question.

You can look at these issue and disagree with everything I’ve said, or agree with a completely different rationalization. Whatever your other beliefs are, If you believe you are capable of (and responsible for) making your own decisions, and that the ability to do so is inherently the right of all people, and any infringement upon that right by a third party who is not directly effected by your decisions is a crime of ethics, you are a Libertarian.
Being a Libertarian doesn’t mean walking around with a “Don’t tread on me” T-shirt and putting campaign signs for Ron Paul in your yard. It’s just asking your self “If my neighbor (the government, by now you should see the terms are interchangeable) told me not to do this, or else incur his wrath, would I say ‘Okay’, or would I tell him to mind his own business”. We are the “Mind your own damn business, and I’ll mind mine” crowd. Everyone else is the bitchy neighbor.

Oops! I meant to say “tactics”, not “strategies”. I look forward to listening to the show while I garden this evening. Enjoy your vacation, Jack!

Good show as usual. Since I stumbled upon this show, the main points hit home almost every day.

Your show has replaced Alex Jones for my afternoon headphone entertainment / info while I am wired in at work concentrating and blocking out the background noise.

Today’s show hit home in that I have been one of the “defeated Libertarians” — just listening to the conversations the dumb yuppies have every single day who surround my office at work drive me insane. I honestly make a point (and have always made a point) of NOT discussing politics or social issues, or anything related to those topics whatsoever at work or in a business situation EVER.

Mainly because even though I find out later on that many people agree with me, I really just run the risk of losing my job or at the least ostracizing myself. When it makes sense to throw out a point to make the sheeple think I do, but that’s about it.

The reason I like this show is because you have a positive attitude about everything. When you listen to Alex Jones for 4hrs you are left feeling powerless and hopeless because frankly I don’t need “Jonesy” pointing out the wrongs in our culture. All I need to do is read some news or like I said, listen to the stupid shit that comes out of the mouths of the braindead yuppies I am constantly surrounded by (marketing folks).

I blame the American people for what is happening to our society and get very angry with people who are totally ignorant, or are marching in the left/right army and have firmly chosen a “side.”

I feel hopeless most of the time because of my own financial situation and due to the fact that all I need to do is listen to the idiots around me for 10 minutes and the idiotic nonsense that spews from their mouths to know it is a lost cause.

However, listening to the way you present ideas and try to keep your show solution focused vs. bitching about problems with no solutions is a really good thing. The Freeman Perspective is another show I love listening to just because of the dude’s attitude. He talks about some of the craziest “tin foil hat” topics but you both come across as dudes I’d love to have around chillin’ by the campfire.

Thanks for the positive energy.

I have to side with KAM on this one and point my finger at the government.

When it comes to government, our vote really doesn’t count (unless it’s part of a mass collective).

That said; you hit the nail on the head with your description of Freedom & Libery Jack! Great show.

I am going to have to disagree with the whole “its the government’s fault” arguement.

I WILL agree that your vote doesn’t count for anything.

HOWEVER… If just 5% of the people would stand up in mass and take action against the unjust it would force the hand of government to address those grievances one way or another whether it is violent or peaceful uprising.

Ghandi forced the British hand to come down HARD on the people of India when they began to stand up to the tyranny. Did a lot of people DIE needlessly and get killed for peaceful demonstration? Yes, THOUSANDS of them did. Do I want to die for marching around a public square holding a sign? Certainly not…

However, the people need to take a stand and do SOMETHING.

This is a small example but the same concept TOTALLY applies to the American People in general…

In High School, the teachers were on strike and picketing out in front of the school, which resulted in an away team turning the busses around and we lost a soccer game as a result (soccer in my high school was the equivalent of Texas High School football — we had the LARGEST natural grass soccer field stadium in New York State and I graduated with 70 people in my class).

There were other programs being cancelled and cut because of the teacher’s strike etc. A bunch of us decided to stage a “sit-in” which for me was just a reason to raise hell and be a trouble maker but with a secondary purpose of seeing if we could affect change…

Of course the school officials caught wind of the event beforehand and warned everyone in homeroom etc there would be severe consequences for participation. When the time came, the ENTIRE school mulled about the foyer and the looks on people’s faces were all identical. They were all waiting for the first person to have the balls to sit down in the hallway before they would muster up the courage to do it.

With 4 minutes between classes my group of friends and I (who were also waiting for someone to sit down first) finally, with less than a minute before our next class and people streaming out of the foyer heading to class we finally said “F-IT” and 3 of us sat down and locked arms.

Within 2 minutes the entire school (except those who’s parents were teachers) came and sat down with us and locked arms. The news media and police showed up a little bit later.

Instead of backing up their claims of punishment (they could not suspend 95% of the school for this) they had us go into the auditorium, set up a podium and let students take turns talking about why we were doing this.

In the end all of the things we were actually trying to change were CHANGED! The teachers stopped picketing and basically stopped dragging us into the middle of their disputes with the board.

It even helped the teachers get what they were trying to achieve.

If just a handful of us had sat down without any back I would have been suspended from school with the rest of them.

Our country is the same way. Civil disobedience is just one option.

The British did not leave the colonies because they were ASKED to or because people complained about them constantly. Eventually a large group of people had to try peaceful means and eventually brute force to dislodge the power.

The British did not leave India because they were ASKED to or because people complained about them constantly. Eventually a large group of people had to try peaceful means and eventually expose the british brutality to the rest of the world to force their hand to leave.

Either way, someone had to start the avalanche. I GUARANTEE you that if enough people got fed up and simultaneously filled out the forms to stop federal withholding from their paychecks and simultaneously stopped filing tax returns, if that number was 30 million or more the IRS would not be able to do anything about it other than what they do right now (grab a few people and “hang them” publicly in order to scare the rest of the rabble into compliance).

A wall of 100 pigs with riot gear, shields, and machine guns cannot outfight an angry unarmed mob of 10,000 people who are ready to kill them regardless of the cost. People will die in the confrontation but the pigs are going to die the second they have to reload.

I am not advocating violence but people need to stand up TOGETHER, and it doesn’t even need to be THAT MANY people.

However, getting people to come together in this country for any reason these days is almost impossible. When the stupid yuppies I work with are all jobless, lost their homes, and are having trouble keeping food on the table THEN they MIGHT stand together.

@ Adam B. Which ISN’T to say that we are powerless and there is nothing we can do. There is PLEANTY we can do. Like growing our own food, and striving for our own liberty. For me, this is just more of a “KNOW THY ENEMY” type of thing. Calling a spade a spade. The best thing we can do to change the world is change ourself. Others then follow.

Interesting that we have the same internet radio listening journey. I used to listen to Alex Jones 4 hours a day until I started working from home and then I didn’t need the 4 hour rants anymore. Opting instead for things like The Survival Podcast and The Freeman Perspective (like you said – great show with, like you said, the craziest “tin foil hat” topics).

@ Jack “Here is the issue if government is the problem we can only fix it by violent revolution. If the people are the problem, all we have to do is change.”

AH… I see what you’re getting at here. I completely agree with the above.

@Jack,

I like your philosophy about taking control of your own life, because it is proactive and I agree it is the foundation for further improvement. If this was widespread enough, it is true–the government wouldn’t be an issue at all.

However, I believe our Constitutional system was designed and intended to be a bulwark against democracy (mob rule). We are supposed to be able to resist the tyranny of the majority, but cannot if the people we entrust with power violate their oaths of office (regularly).

Another example that might illustrate my view–from the Reverse. If I’m a Senator or Representative, and the people in my district or State want a gun ban (for example). It is my duty to against that ban in defense of the Constitution. In other words, this is a demonstration that the politician has direct power that can go against the desire of the people (at least for his term of office). And in fact–this would be proper, because the Politician is sworn to uphold the Constitution, not the whims of the people.

It is true that if the people (as a whole) would not tolerate violations of the Constitution, we would not elect people who would violate the Constitution. However, it is also true, that if all politicians refused to violate their Oath to the Constitution, that the people could not succeed at demanding things like money from the treasury.

That’s why I say responsibility falls on both the electorate and the elected official. The politician is empowered to do the right (Constitutional) thing. They CHOOSE to violate their oath of office. We CHOOSE to let them.

Rock on,Jack!
Here’s my take…..

http://www.rationalpublicradio.com/featured-guest-editorial-for-whom-do-you-live.html

Government is inherently evil. The only good government is no government. Both the people and the politicians are complicit in the evil! Peaceful, civil society, complete with justice for crimes and contracts, can and has existed without government (e.g. Ancient Ireland and Medieval Iceland). An “necessary evil” is still evil and the government is not even necessary!
@ Adam B. I like my neighbors. A family from Chicago was moving into a $800,000 home directly across the street from me. I was afraid what they thought about my partially started permaculture projects. So, I wanted to build up some good will before that happened and took the new neighbors a carton of eggs from my chickens as gifts. To my surprise, they were already very interested in permaculture and homesteading and thought I was the coolest neighbor! I always seem to land next to awesome neighbors, even when I lived in the yuppie assclown DC suburbs of the Peoples’ Republik of Maryland.
One of my relatives was massacred by British Troops in Punjab (the scene was depicted in the 1982 movie Ghandi). 20 years ago, I was featured on the front page of the Washington Times when my high school also had sit-ins walk-outs to protest cuts. I get angry when I think about it- I was used by agitators for their political ends. Schools got way too much money, even back then, even more so now! Government schools should be abolished! Controlled opposition and engineered protests by ignorant masses. It is happening now. Thank you for sharing and it is a valuable lesson. How do we use the statists’ tactics to advance freedom?
I tend to be negative, and I was much more so before listening to this show. It wasn’t healthy and I kept indulging in information that made my blood boil! It’s like the dark side of the force in Star Wars. At the end of the day, what did I have to show for it?

Nice… @agriculture reminded me of why I hate one of my neighbors… An out of control Pit Bull…

What is hilarious is that while sitting in my backyard with a loaded 12guage ready to take it out when it comes back into ny yard I was thinking I should get some pepper spray because it won’t be easy dealing with the popo when they hear shotgun blasts coming from my yard and a bunch of crying children….

Then the next day on the podcast Jack is talking about how it would probably be easier to explain to your neighbor why you pepper sprayed their dog vs explaining why you shot it.

I want this dog dead for various reasons but really don’t WANT to kill it either. I have been able to get it to chill out by constantly spraying it with the jet setting on the garden hose whenever it starts growling barking and trying to jump the fence to attack us. Now it runs away from me when it sees me especially if I grab the hose.

<< Believe and do as you please (within the law)

Within just laws, yes. Within the law merely because some other people decided how my life should be limited, no.

TJ again offers are for more compelling vision.

"Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I DO NOT ADD “within the limits of the law,” because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."

I’ve heard it used before and I have to get you to rethink the meaning of the quote “The right to swing my fist…”  If taken literally, as mantra, it implies a belief in the right to threaten violence.  It’s like saying, “The right for me to shoot bullets near your feet ends when I put a hole in your shoe.”

I’m sure the statement was originally used with some jest during a political argument in a pub.  I understand the sentiment, but, absolute freedom based on doing no harm must consider some restrictions on the ability to threaten people with violence.  Yes, I’m too analytical.

@Everyone,

The notion of “doing as you please within the law” is interesting, and I agree with that notion. It is my belief, that is the system our Founders built for us, and further that those laws should be minimal.
However, today, I honestly don’t think anyone can really even know the laws, as it is an indiscernible web of laws and rules all blurred together. I think we literally live in a system where if someone wants to find something to pin on you, they can. Fishing expeditions and unequal enforcement of the law is immoral, but that’s what we face.

The good news is, knowing this, we can basically ignore the details, and treat other people with respect and fairness, and go about our business. The entire reason we have laws is to uphold these common principles.

There is a conundrum here. As Jack points out, one of the best ways to help improve our world is to be an example, which means we need to be “seen” but being “seen” exposes us to unjust actions of out-of-control “law.” But what other choice do we have other than to be hermits?

Funny how many of the “Libertarians” I see are given their marching orders by right wing think tanks, rabidly conservative radio jocks, climate deniers etc, most of whom are funded by Big Oil, Big Coal and Big Mining. One words comes to mind, ironically: pawns.

@Clåte cåos

Please enlighten us, so we can realize that the word “Big” before any industry makes it evil, to spite the fact that in a truly free an unregulated market (the aspiration of every libertarian), the fundamental driving force behind all business is to become “Big”.

I don’t deny many of the companies in those industries have made mistakes, but they’ve also done a lot right. What happens if “Big Oil” was dissolved. What would we have? Mom an Pop Oil companies? They can’t drill locally in 99% of the world, and the certainly can’t refine it themselves. Destroy Big Oil, you take down the entire distribution network, force energy commodities to change hands many more times en route to the consumer and drive up the price significantly. Enter the pissed off masses, lobbying for price caps and cost fixed energy rates, which forces government’s hand into further regulation, and eventually subsidizing. Exactly the thing we are trying to avoid.

There are risks to our freedom with any big industry, but they are far outweighed by the risks posed by larger government.

A Libertarian system is not perfect, in fact it’s not even possible under our current system of law. A Libertarian country is a weak collection of strong individuals. The inverse, Totalitarianism seems more where we’re headed now, a meek populace ruled by an elite few. We aren’t there yet, but this country is definitely leaning in that direction, and we “pawns”, true to our nature can’t step back in the face of opposition. We will win and that scares you. Honestly, it scares me too, but it’s better than the alternative.

Adam – I’m sorry you don’t like your neighbors, that stinks. I like the majority of mine – they are good people and we help each other out. We moved in about 6 years ago and it seemed that most folks waved to each other cutting grass, but had little interaction beyond that – baked goods can cure such problems – bring people a slice of cake or plate of cookies and talk. Works wonders. Now that I homebrew, I share some of that as well along with extra seedlings for the garden. Begining with a general dialogue, we have now actually discussed prepping type issues with several neighbors – people are starting to build some small gardens, check on each other when we get snowed in and power is out, etc. It’s a good start! This summer, I envision a block cookout – if a plate of cake gets people talking, imagine what grilling out some burgers and sampling homebrewed ale with do!

My idea of a Libertarian is Matt Drudge, a self-proclaimed Libertarian BTW. He is a denier of anthropogenic climate change, as are many people at this site, including Jack, which makes you, inadvertently at least, supporters of large, polluting industries that are paying, like Big Tobacco did in the last century, millions of dollars to fund a disinformation campaign. You’ve bought the disinformation because these people have pressed your buttons, painting action on climate as a nasty Tax and Big Government plot, instead of the vital necessity it is. As an aside, Drudge is also right wing as you can get, but, strangely, he is also a closet homosexual (like so many ultraconservatives, eg ex-Chairman of the Republican National Committee, Ken Mehlman, GOP congressman Mark Foley, etc).

AMAZING lack of objectivity, hearing someone pointing out the supposed failings in those who believe “disinformation” coming from someone proudly declaring their belief in possibly the largest scam ever perpetrated on humanity (global warming hysteria).

The very use of the term “denier” is the height of propaganda. Dishonest as it gets.

What really bothers me about these zealots is that this political campaign is actually damaging the concept of science, by continually insisting that what they represent is scientific. It is a bastardization of science beyond anything the world has seen before.

Here’s another thing. I’m so sure that global warming hysteria is a scam…I’m willing to bet my life on it. That is–since these zealots claim that within 10 years (or is it 6 now…or has it already passed? It constantly changes) we will be past the point of no return (at which point we will have “destroyed the planet”). Since I am likely to be alive at that point, I will be signing my own death warrant and that of everyone I know and care about (and those I do not).

Now, of course, the liars who have created this myth will of course disappear, or more likely just keep changing their story–easy to do, since science/truth/fact isn’t a factor. Perhaps they will do a 180 and go back to global cooling. Someone, the credibility of this movement survived it before–why not flip it again.

For all of you who choose to believe this Global Warming hysteria. Please stop driving cars, using AC, heating your home with any fossil fuels or using electricity. I guess we’ll just have to miss your wisdom, because I’m sure you won’t want to use a computer–just think of the amount of carbon dioxide you’ve created posting here.

I have something for you to occupy your daylight time with (nighttime of course will be a dormant time, since you won’t have any electric lights to see by). Go start cleaning up (by hand if necessary) all those CFL lightbulbs your propaganda masters have pushed on the public. I’m holding all of you responsible for mercury getting into our ground water. Go on, get to work, and come back in 10 years (to apologize) when your doomsday predictions fail to come true (again).

@Adam B,

I have to admit I have to fight off feelings of hopelessness in regards to the direction of the Country. I think what Jack advocates is our only real hope. Change our own lives and be the model we can for what we think is the solution (to whatever extent we can). It is likely to get worse (and I think “it” is getting worse), but in the meantime, I’m doing what I can to make my life better, even if everything around me (you, us) is spiraling downward.

I have to disagree with the “vote for your favorite” crowd. There is a time to vote for your favorite – it is in the primaries. The time to get your favorite on the ballot is in March not in November. The only time I would say voting for a non starter in November is a good idea is when you are in a “safe” state where your vote is a waste anyway (CA was a fine example – neither party did significant campaigning last presidential election because the outcome was a forgone conclusion – I voted for Ron Paul). When people say that voting for the less of two evils is still evil, you have to ask first if the “favorite” candidate is really so perfect (or simply least evil), and second if you are de facto voting for the most evil.

HAHAHA… can’t argue with that.

🙂

re: bitcoin

ARS has a recent article: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/06/bitcoin-inside-the-encrypted-peer-to-peer-currency.ars

I’m also skeptical, but this caught my attention, and might change my mind:

“Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) this weekend blasted Silk Road, an online drugs outlet that allegedly relies on TOR to obfuscate Internet traffic and Bitcoins for payment. “It’s an online form of money laundering used to disguise the source of money, and to disguise who’s both selling and buying the drug,” Schumer said. ”

If Chuck doesn’t like, it must be good 🙂

My point is; if your vote REALLY counts then you should vote for peaches. A vote for a turd is always a wasted vote.

In this system, unless you’re a part of a mass collective, your vote really doesn’t count. You’re gonna get a turd regardless.

I wonder if this show will break whatever record you have for the most comments on a show LOL…

@InBox485 I am always going to vote for a ripened uneaten peach still clining to a peach tree than pulling a lever for some stinking turd.

And no I am not voting for a turd by voting for a ripened peach. I am voting for a ripened peach.

I will stay home and not vote at all before I show up to the polls to vote for a piece of poop.

Referencing South Park, do you think ANYTHING would be different whatsoever if the turd sandwich had won the last presidential election instead of the giant douche?

I have a feeling we would be bitching about some health care bullshit that nobody bothered to read before passing it, a shitty economy with no jobs, and having to get felt up by the TSA before getting on a plane. I honestly believe citizenship and a birth certificate would actually be an issue even if the other guy had won since those were issues in his campaign as well.

@ All

There is a massive difference between Obama and Bush in the ideologies of their court nominees, and the integrity of the court system is one of the very few hopes that we have left. Bush’s nominees were largely originalists, whereas Obama’s nominees have all been extreme living document theorists. If Obama gets re-elected it is almost guaranteed that the current slim originalist majority will become a solid living document majority. That scares the hell out of me and I don’t know how it could not concern anybody that likes the constitution to be read as written rather than as desired at the moment. If I were in a swing state where my vote could actually impact that possibility I would have to be bat shit insane to vote for a third party in some vain attempt to protest the establishment. Those of us in “safe” states on the other hand, of course it makes all the sense in the world to vote for no hope candidates.

There is also a MASSIVE difference in media scrutiny between the parties. McCain probably would have rubber stamped every letter of the healthcare bill if it landed on his desk, but if it was a republican bill, the media would have drilled every single example of corrupt nonsense in it rather than just nodding to the king. Same goes for the bailouts etc.

@InBox485:

Well, perhaps if Justice Department officials weren’t stonewalling investigations, we could get to the bottom of this.

Here’s an excerpt about this from Hearings:
“The project began as a trial during the Bush administration in Laredo, Texas in 2005. It ultimately morphed into a national program in 2006. The guns were sold and tracked electronically, giving law enforcement agents valuable intelligence on where the weapons went and who had them.

During the Bush years, no guns were allowed to cross the border into Mexico. When President Obama took office in 2009, things changed. Obama’s ATF continued Project Gunrunner, but made a crucial decision to allow guns to be “walked” into Mexico. The weapons eventually ended up in the hands of Mexican drug cartels.”

Let’s see if we can find a reason for this. Obama administration officials have been using Mexican drug cartel problems as a means to attack gun ownership in the US–mostly unsuccessfully, and claims of US weapons being in Mexico were exaggerated. Then suddenly under the Obama administration these weapons are let into Mexico.

Is is a major leap to put two and two together, and CONSIDER that they were looking to make their claims true–by their own actions. I’m not into conspiracy theories, but this seems pretty obvious.

Additionally, given the Obama administrations mantra of “Its Bush’s fault” I HIGHLY doubt they’d pass up a chance to pass the buck backwards again.

Is it possible that the Bush administration did something like this? Sure, I wouldn’t put much past the ATF, but I don’t recall the Bush administration pushing that narrative. This conveniently DOES match the narrative the Obama administration has been pushing.

Ok, so Jack comes out with the same old tired conspiracy theories about Maurice Strong (yawn) and how this is all a great big plot. Jack, firstly, you should be told that it’s Texas and the SW USA that is going to suffer greatly because of the AGW (anthropogenic global warming) you scorn, so heaven help your BOL.

Anyhoo, I’m glad I’ve got you thinking about it. That’s step one. Next, peruse the Facts at Skeptic Arguments and What the Science Says and the New Scientist’s feature on Climate Myths.

Come on, Jack, you owe it to your family to put the nonsense aside and listen to the scientists on this one.

@KAM

I don’t disagree with you. When they said “tracked electronically” I have a hard time believing they really had any measure of control beyond the sale. That aside my point was that while Bush/McCain/et al weren’t really that great on individual rights, their court nominees have been much more respectful of the constitution as written.

@InBox485:

I have to disagree–those sites aren’t impressive at all. They merely repeat the talking points that they’ve been pushing for years, and calling it “science.” Global Warming hysteria is an all-out, shameless attack on the very foundation of science.

Also…is it just me or does this “I’m talking to you like a close personal friend” stuff really stalkerish? It certainly isn’t the behavior of someone who is serious about an issue. However, it is the sort of behavior you’d find at a lot of inbred political forums, where people are fed a regular dose of talking points and told to go “spread the word.” Noise-machine logic is apparently still high on the tactics list.

Do these people not realize they are internet stereotypes that most people see through immediately? Maybe someone needs to publish “Activism for Dummies” because most middle schoolers could present a better “argument.”

Onto a real subject. True–neither Bush nor McCain were/are dedicated champions of individual rights and they certainly aren’t libertarians. I still maintain there are many consequences based on who wins elections.

LMFAO… Can you disable email notifications on these? hahaha… I wonder if a year from now I will still be getting notifications in my email about this thread.

Just started listening to your shows about a month nd a half ago.

Excellent and thought provoking! Especially liked this episode.

To put into context – i’m a disabled guy from birth (muscular problem) born in the UK and just spending some time at present with my in-laws in Pakistan –
Yours is a good, universal message and I think the libertarian message is really needed here – especially with huge tax hikes and so many people looking for the gov to help them instead of people rising to stand on there own feet and resources.
Excellent podcast and thank-you for efforts.
God Bless you!

@Jack
You mentioned needing to learn more about Bitcoin. There is a podcast called EconTalk done by a professor from George Mason. He recently interviewed one of the guys from Bitcoin. Roberts was a student of Milton Friedman and is a follower of Hayak, just to give you his ideological background. Here’s the link
http://cafehayek.com/2011/04/bitcoin.html

@InBox485,

Yes, I was kidding of course. It is somewhat amusing that wannabe activists don’t even bother looking that far into it to see that their “evidence” is anything but “facts” as they wish to portray it.

“Moderating the Truth” Good description. Of course, the tactic is to intimidate people with dire predictions “Don’t you want to save the children” sort of nonsense, and bombard the populace with propaganda with the help of a compliant (or complicit) media.

What’s really bizarre about this is that Jack is likely doing much more than most people to be “green” in terms of Carbon Dioxide–again, not because of Polar bears, but because he’s producing for his own needs directly (eliminating massive supply chains) in many areas, and eliminating waste. However, because he isn’t championing the AGW hysteria, he is attacked by this…person here. Perfect example of why this is dependent on propaganda–because words are more important than actions. This scam NEEDS compliance and blind acceptance. Unfortunately, they find plenty of people to provide that.

@InBox485:

Well, isn’t that usually the story–all of these central planners (either in or out of government) have all sorts of grand plans, few (if any) of which ever do what they promise.

When Bush & Gore were duking it out, I heard many people say that would vote libertarian if the libertarians could win. I vote libertarian every time. I told them if everybody voted what they want instead of what they don’t want, the libertarians would win.

Wow, you are a wonderful speaker! I’ve longed for a reasonable, non-extremist follower of actual liberty!
I agree that waay too much time is spent on political banter which leads no where instead of actually taking action for protecting liberty!
Keep up the good work!