Conspiracy Theorists and Libertarians

No wonder why people identify libertarians with wackos, on facebook today two of the libertarian pages I 'like' were talking about conspiracy theories. Namely chemtrails and 9-11 conspiracies. They're all spouting pseudoscience non-sense, selective recall, and erroneous media reports. One claim says it would be impossible to coordinate the 9-11 attacks and over power the aircrews with just box cutters. I mean, really how so? The only coordination was having to buy tickets on the same morning...that's not very hard to do. After that there was no more coordination, each terrorist team just had to do it's part which was taking over the airplane and guiding it into their designated target. And back then the prevailing wisdom was to cooperate during a hijack situation and that was your best chance at survival. It wasn't until learning both the Pentagon and WTC were struck that the passengers of flight 93 took action. Then of course WTC itself, how it was meant to withstand a jet liner crashing into it and it must of been explosives. Well first of all, what something is design to withstand and can actually withstand are two different things. And second, it was meant to withstand a low flying 707 coming in for a landing, not a fully fueled jet crashing into it at full 600mph. Then of course WTC-7 because someone was caught on camera saying to 'pull-it', yeah a demolition crew stuck in, planted explosives and destroyed the building and have been lying about it! Or the fires weren't hot enough to melt steal, maybe not but it was hot enough to weaken it. The main problem with conspiracy theorists is that have an answer for every rebuttal using pseudoscience logic and logical fallacies, they can make up bullshit all day long. And since it seems most of the conspiracy theorists are part of the liberty movement / libertarians / classical liberals it's going to be really hard to affect and sort of change for freedom and liberty when no one will take us seriously.

Some People are so off Base with Rand Paul filibuster!

I was listening to Red Eye Radio on my way home last night, I don't listen very often but the few times I did normally they had a well reasoned opinion which more then half the time I could agree with.  Tonight they weren't well reasoned and I disagreed to the point of turning off the station.  They went on for hours about how Rand Paul's filibuster was just a stunt, and how government would never hurt unarmed citizens....and that it's somehow disrespectful to ask the President if he'd ever use drones against Americans.  They basically took the whole, 'if you didn't do anything, you have nothing to worry about' stance which goes against everything liberty stands for.

Rand Paul was never against taking action against an citizen who was actively carrying out an attack (a combatant), same way a police officer is allowed to shoot a suspect who is threatening their life or the life of another person. What police can't do is go in and shoot someone while they're watching TV because he's suspected of having done something or is planning to do something. Rand wanted assurances that the President couldn't use drones against Americans on American soil like the drone attack overseas used to kill that 16yr old American citizen who wasn't actively engaged in carrying out any sort of attack.

Rand Paul was defending due process rights that every American has, even ones actively planning terrorist attacks. For example, lets say the FBI is tracking an individual he's making threats of jihadist forums, he just bought a box truck, he's buying up fertilizer, etc, etc. Without a doubt this guy is planning a major strike. That man still has the right to due process and the government shouldn't be able to take his life away without it (ie putting a drone missile through his window while he's eating breakfast). Get a judge to sign a search warrant, surround the house with swat teams, etc. If he goes for a gun or knife, by all means police have the right to defend themselves. If not take him into custody gather evidence and put him on trial. Now if the man as actively carrying out attack, he's in his rigged box truck heading towards the Washington bridge into the city.....yes green light drone missile, take him out. BOOM. Because you're at the point where the person is an immediate danger to police and citizens. I don't want to put words in Rand Paul's mouth but I think he'd agree with everything I just said there.

All Rand wanted from the administration was basically they wouldn't use drones to kill Americans without due process of a trial, he didn't want the US drone strike policy that's being used overseas and that was headed by Brennan to be used on American soil, and the administration gave very mixed messages on the issue of whether due process rights would be respected which is why Rand held his filibuster. Again, police defending themselves or other citizens against someone has their "finger on the trigger" so to speak is not violating due process rights, I'm 99% sure Rand Paul is OK with that.

So Only the Other Guy is Lying?

Has anyone been following the whole Senator Mendendez hooker scandal? A quick back story, the website the Daily Caller posted video of two hookers claiming  Mendendez paid them for sex.  The Washington Post came out with a story yesterday where the one of the alleged women recanted her story and claimed she was paid to make it up.  Since then the Daily Caller posted back saying that's not the hooker they interviewed.  Fox news has a story about the conflicting reports with links to both stories.

Clearly someone is lying and hopefully the truth will come out, but this blog is about the reactions to the Washington Post story.  Around the web today on various chat forums discussing this anyone who suggested that perhaps the original story was in fact truth and someone is paying this women lots of money to say she lied is being attacked, down voted, or censored. Yet the same people who are attacking others for making that suggestion are willing to believe that she was paid to lie in the first place and has suddenly got a conscious and decided to tell the truth. And it's not just the normal I'm going to stick up for my guy type response, it almost seems coordinated on reddit again people who say perhaps she's lying now are getting 50 down votes, it's normal for people who go against the hive mind to be down voted -5 or -10 but rarely over -20 unless they're being a troll.  While both sides of the political aisle are hypocrites, ie believing one plausible story, over the other because one puts their guy in a more favorable light, I find liberals to be much less tolerable of other people's opinions. Where a republican or conservative will at least, even if just for a moment, consider merit of the other story a liberal will immediately dismiss a counter-story and slap you in the face for even bring it up.

Minimum Wage Hurts

The Minimum Wage Harms the Most Vulnerable http://reason.com/archives/2013/03/03/the-min-wage-harms-the-most-vulnerable

Gun control

I fully support gun control....everyone should have one and learn how to use their gun properly ;)

I'm a Libertarian!

Hi welcome to my blog, I hope to write about politics and my views on different issues. I'm a free-market laissez faire capitalist libertarian, some might say I'm a minarchist I still believe the state is necessary mainly for protection and providing public works or institutions private companies or individuals can't provide because the profit could never repay the expense.  I'm also opened minded about the anarcho-cap position that the state is 100% unnecessary, but like I said above I'm not there yet.    My motto is everyone should be free to do whatever they wish, so long as that action doesn't harm anyone else physically or financially. I believe compulsory taxation is theft, that means income taxes. I think the Federal Reserve should be abolished  I enjoy reading Mises, Bastiat, Rothbard, Rand, and Friedman.