Archive for: May 2006

John Tyson has a new campaign video. I have no intention of showing everyone’s campaign video on here, just the ones I like. It’s called bias, and I’m proud of it. If you want “fair and balanced,” go watch Fox News.

John Tyson’s video

John Tyson is a Democratic candidate for attorney general of Alabama. He faces primary opposition against Larry Darby, a racist atheist who has about a 1% chance of winning. Tyson will the winner of the Republican primary in the general election in November.

I follow state politics more than most people, and I have no idea what the state auditor does. It seems primarily to be a springboard for higher office. Several candidates are using it as a credential, and they all seem to have done pretty well there.

Beth Chapman (R) is the current state auditor, and she is moving on up and running for the Secretary of State. According to her website,

My staff and I have served in an efficient and effective manner producing 97% perfect audits with 25% less money than anyone before us.

That’s impressive, I guess. Susan Parker (D) is running for Public Service Commissioner, and she’s also been a state auditor. According to her website, as state auditor:

She instituted computerized auditing techniques, provided the public with audit information for the first time, and put no bid contracts on the internet to shine light on the process of government projects.

Sure, that sounds good too, I guess.

According to the Alabama Constitution, the state auditor gives the governor a report of all disbursements and receipts. According to statute, the auditor also has the authority to “audit” the state treasurer. That’s pretty much it. Makes you wonder why this office isn’t appointed or replaced with a cabinet-level Inspector General. Apparently the Huntsville Times agrees with me. In their endorsements of Constitutional offices, they had this to say about the state auditor:

The Times ceased recommending candidates for state auditor several elections ago. The editorial board believed - and still believes - the office serves no useful purpose.

So why can’t we get rid of it?

Sorry for the lack of posting today.  A certain Internet Service Provider seems incapable of fixing their infrastructure problems.  This is a recurring problem, and apparently I can’t do anything about it except complain and get credits to my account.

While this started out as a post about Stephen Gordon’s selection as the Communications Director of the national Libertarian Party, it eventually evolved into a long rant about the LP. By the way, although I’m a little dismissive about Loretta Nall’s run for governor, I like her and her message a lot. In fact, I’m probably going to vote for her. The criticism isn’t about the LP’s (or the Nall campaign’s) message, it’s about their delivery.

We subscribe to Reason magazine. I listen to Free Talk Live sometimes. I buy things from the Cato Institute and feel good that I’m giving them some financial support by doing so. I generally have a pretty libertarian (small “l”) outlook on politics, but I’ve always been hesitant about the Libertarian Party.

The Libertarian Party just doesn’t provide a viable option for state or national politics. The libertarian ideals are great — virtually zero government, less laws, less rules, more individual freedoms, open markets. The libertarian outlook shares Ronald Reagan’s words more than his actions, “Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.”

But for a free society to remain socially and economically free, and for that freedom to be sustainable, you need a government. It’s a two-edged sword. People institute governments to protect their life, liberty and happiness, as the Declaration of Independence says. But to give government that power, you must also give it the power to take life, liberty and property. The Libertarian Party’s answer is to marginalize government, but that just puts us back where we started.

So problem 1 with the Libertarian Party is that they want to take all power away from governments. I can agree that the government has too much power, but let’s face it, we need government and their pesky regulations to truely be free. Let’s take the Net Neutrality debate as a recent example. Internet Service Providers would like to create a multi-tiered internet where websites (like Between the Links) would have to pay for premium access. In other words, if I didn’t pay Charter $25 a month or so, every Charter internet user would have a slower connection when they tried to connect to Between the Links. Wealthy companies like eBay, however, could afford prime access. This would obviously lead to a situation where the wealthy elite of the internet would consolidate power. The individual, low-budget sites like this one would go away. Free ideas and free minds would be marginalize for the commercial gain of the few. The libertarian answer (zero government regulation) would lead to a very un-libertarian outcome (marginalizing expression of ideas on the internet).

My other problems with the Libertarian Party are pretty quick: Racist fringes, shock politics, and an uncompromising attitude. Libertarians attract some racist fringes because their reluctance toward anything to do with government regulation means their shouldn’t be a Voting Rights Act or a Brown v. Board of Education decision. Libertarians aruge that, if the South were left to segregate, blacks would eventually leave and the South would suffer the economic consequences of oppressing their labor force. That message, while philosopically consistent with libertarianism, is pretty shitty. Other issues lead to shock politics and an uncompromising attitude. While Loretta Nall is frantically trying to let everyone know she has many positions on many issues, the Libertarian Party can’t really blame everyone for focusing on her marijuana advocacy. I’m not saying the Libertarians should change their outlook on marijuana, but if you put up the founder of the US Marijuana Party, you’ll win headlines, but not votes. In Washington state, Ruth Bennett ran a similiar campaign being a strong supporter of gay marriage. Again, I agree with both of those things to certain degrees, but I don’t want to join a party that’ll fight a losing battle against an unjust system. I want to join a party that will be effective at changing the system.

But anyway, I’m hopeful that the Libertarian Party will soon start to show some progress, maturity and sustainability. Stephen Gordon, who is currently working with Loretta Nall’s ballot access drive and is a major contributor to Hammer of Truth, has recently been named as the Communications Director for the national Libertarian Party. I met Gordon in Birmingham, and I’ve always read his posts. I think he may have an idea as to what I’m talking about. He even wrote a post the other day about the LP’s lack of presence in the black community.

[W]hy isn’t the libertarian movement and the Libertarian Party attracting a greater number of minority participants? …
I certainly don’t claim to know all of the solutions to this problem, but I would like to start the dialogue about how to effectively reach out to our allies in the black community.

I wish Gordon well in his new job, and I would advise him to realize that there are many people like me who would love to join the LP. The people are increasingly cynical about the Repuglican/Dummocrat duopoly that drives American politics, but we want a real choice in elections.

I hope the LP gives some credence to the message of the Libertarian Reform Caucus, who say they are, among other things, “Libertarian Party members who have grown tired of losing,” and, “Libertarians who realize that to shrink government a lot, we must first shrink it a little.” These people have concluded:

The platform and message of the Libertarian Party is extreme, sacrificing practicality and political appeal in favor of philosophical consistency with a single axiom. As such, the party currently appeals only to a tiny fraction of the voting public.

If the LP transforms into realistic organization and offers solutions that, while radical, are obtainable, then I may consider joining myself. I’d even consider running, but I wouldn’t run unless I thought I could win.

In case you missed it, Judge Johnny Hardwick ruled against Mark Montiel in the Community Service Grants lawsuit. This means that Montiel will have to file a new lawsuit in the case and also re-file a motion to temporarily suspend spending while the case is pending. This will probably mean that the grant commission will be able to spend all of their allocated money on “community services,” which many call pork projects.

In an effort to help the small PR problem this caused him, Troy King joined Governor Riley in filing a lawsuit two hours after Hardwick made his decision. There can be no mistake now. King isn’t friendly toward the “pork spending” any more than Montiel. That’s the message you’re supposed to get, anyway.

The suit, filed in circuit court, says: “Only the governor is vested with the power and duty to take care that the laws of Alabama, including those that relate to the expenditure of public funds, be faithfully executed,” the lawsuit says. “None of the commission members is vested with that authority so long as the governor remains in office.”

This is the same argument Montiel made, but Montiel tried to use a similiar lawsuit against the service grants he filed a year ago. Montiel and King are also facing off for the Republican nomination for attorney general. This move by King will help him get back some conservative street creds. His role as attorney general, the state’s attorney, led many to believe he would defend the legislature.

Politically, this type of lawsuit would help any Republican hopeful. Legally, however, I’m starting to doubt that this will work. In 2005, the Alabama Supreme Court suspended this type of spending because the executive branch of the government was not involved in the spending of state money. So this time they created a “commission” of executive officers, even though they obviously left out the governor for political reasons. The argument that only the governor can be involved in spending any state money is false. The members of the commission are all elected, and they all spend public money for a variety of other reasons.

That doesn’t mean I agree with it. This whole ordeal might bleed over into the general election, though. Won’t that be fun.

(h/t Alabama Politics)

The University of South Alabama and the Mobile Press Register recently did a poll for the Democratic primary for governor. The poll was conducted from May 20-25 and has a margin of error of 5%. It polled 404 Democratic voters.

Lucy Baxley: 45%
Don Siegelman: 27%
Others: 2%
Undecided: 26%

However, a SurveyUSA poll tells a much different story. This poll was conducted within the same time-frame, May 22-24. The margin of error is 4.4%. It polled 520 Democratic voters.

Lucy Baxley : 43%
Don Siegelman: 43%
Others: 12%
Undecided: 3%

The only difference in methodology I can guess is that in the SurveyUSA poll, they asked if they would vote for Lucy Baxley, Don Siegelman, or some other candidate. Being “undecided” was not an option given to the respondant. I can’t find the methodology used in the Press Register poll, but from the results, I think it’s likely that “undecided” was an option.

From wikipedia, this anecdote is about a helicopter pilot named Hugh Thompson, Jr., his crew chief, Glenn Andreotta, and his gunner, Lawrence Colburn:

After coming across the dead bodies of Vietnamese civilians outside My Lai on 1968, [Warrant Officer Hugh] Thompson set down their OH-23 and the three men [Thompson and his helicopter crew] began setting green gas markers by the prone bodies of the Vietnamese civilians who appeared to still be alive. Returning to the helicopter however, they saw Captain Ernest Medina run forward and begin shooting the wounded who had been marked - and the three men moved their ship back over the village where Thompson confronted Lt. Stephen Brooks who was preparing to blow up a hut full of cowering and wounded Vietnamese; he left Andreotta and Colburn to cover the company with their heavy machine guns and orders to fire on any American who refused the orders to halt the massacre. None of the officers dared to disobey him, although as a warrant officer, Thompson was outranked by the commissioned lieutenants.

Thompson: Let’s get these people out of this bunker and get ‘em out of here.
Brooks: We’ll get ‘em out with hand grenades.
Thompson: I can do better than that. Keep your people in place. My guns are on you.

Thompson then ordered two other helicopters (one piloted by Dan Millians) flying nearby to serve as a medevac for the 11 wounded Vietnamese. While flying away from the village, Andreotta spotted movement in an irrigation ditch, and the helicopter was again landed and a child was extracted from the bodies, and brought with the rest of the Vietnamese to the hospital at Quang Ngai.

Thompson subsequently reported the massacre, whilst it was still occurring, to his superiors. The cease-fire order was then given.

Glenn Andreotta was killed in action a few weeks later. Hugh Thompson died on January 6, 2006. Lawrence Colburn lives in Atlanta. Everyone in the armed forces are heros (except those murdering S.O.B.s who started My Lai and similiar atrocities), but Thompson and his crew did something I’m not sure I would have the courage to do.

By the way, if you’re one of those freaks who thinks that Calley is a hero or that Thompson was a traitor, please don’t comment. It’s Memorial Day, and I’m just not in the mood to deal with facists right now.

UPDATE: I forgot to put a link to the Time story about this.

I really hope this isn’t true. Several Marines have been accussed of a war crime that allegedly occurred in the Iraqi city of Haditha in November 2005. “War crime” is a nice way of saying murder. The U.S. Senate is set to open an investigation into the incident and a possible coverup.

On November 19, 2005, a roadside bomb went off in Haditha, killing Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas. The Pentagon originally claimed that 15 Iraqi civilians were also killed in the blast (the media says 24 civilians died). The military re-opened the investigation in March, presumably because Iraqis went to American officials to complain. The investigation is expected to claim that 24 Iraqi civilians were murdered by 12 Marines from the 1st Division. There are ideally 13 members of an infantry squad, so those results would indicate that LCpl Terrazas alone was killed in the blast, and that the remaining members of his squad participated in a retaliatory atrocity against civlians.

In an e-mail discussion with a long-time reader, we were discussing military atrocities. Lieutenant William Calley was obviously brought up. Calley was convicted for the My Lai Massacre where 347 to 504 Vietnamese were murdered. The reader suggested that all is well because Calley was convicted for his role in the murders. The truth is, though, that Calley served 3 1/2 years of house arrest. He currently lives in Columbus, GA. Calley was the only person to be convicted.

Congratulations, Attorney General Gonzales, you’re finally learning how to do you job instead of kissing a–. I don’t know about you, but this blows my mind.

In case you’re not addicted to the news like crack (as I am), the FBI raided a Congressman’s office (with a court warrant, believe it or not). Democratic Congressman William Jefferson of Lousiana was caught red-handed taking a bribe on tape. A subsequent search found some more evidence.

But then something amazing happened. Congress started flailing around like madmen because the FBI dared to investigate one of them. Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert even went to the White House to demand the President stop the investigation. Bush, that bullwark of integrety, then ordered the documents that were siezed by the FBI to be sealed.

That’s right. The government can wiretap any American citizen it says might be talking to terrorists, they can throw American citizens in jail indefinitely without a trial, they can order anyone to release your personal information with a “national security letter” and then make it a crime for them to tell anyone about it ever, they can torture you to get intelligence, but they can’t investigate a member of Congress. This apparently didn’t make the attorney general very happy.

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and senior officials and career prosecutors at the Justice Department told associates this week that they were prepared to quit if the White House directed them to relinquish evidence seized in a bitterly disputed search of a House member’s office, government officials said Friday.

Mr. Gonzales was joined in raising the possibility of resignation by the deputy attorney general, Paul J. McNulty, the officials said. Mr. Gonzales and Mr. McNulty told associates that they had an obligation to protect evidence in a criminal case and would be unwilling to carry out any White House order to return the material to Congress.

So Gonzo’s figured out that Congress isn’t above the law. Now if he’d just learn that the President isn’t above the law, either.

H.R. 5417, the Net Neutrality Bill (or the Internet Freedom and Nondiscrmination Act of 2006), passed the House Judiciary 20-13. Unfortunately, Spencer Bachus is on the committee. He voted against it, but has yet to indicate why. The bill must now go to the full House for a vote. If it then passes the Senate, it will become law.

Why would Spencer Bachus vote against this bill?

• Bellsouth has given $56,200 to his campaigns
• Other telephone utilities have given an additional $60,000 to his campaigns

No, that can’t be it.

Although I’m typically against government involvement with anything, this is one of those times where regulations are needed to have a truely free market. Also, this is one of the few justifiable uses of Congressional power under the interstate commerce clause.

Man, the federal government is sooo great. In addition to being in charge of our retirement, our charity, and everything other damn aspect of our lives, Americans now seem content to let them listen to all of our personal phone calls and e-mails and faxes. We also say it’s okay to keep our phone records. Apparently, we believe Bush when he says,

We’re guarding your civil liberties. And we’re guarding the civil liberties by monitoring the program on a regular basis, by having the folks at NSA, the legal team, as well as the inspector general, monitor the program, and we’re briefing Congress.

So as long as he says he promises to “protect those liberties,” we buy his BS. Guess what, though? The %$^& Veterans’ Administration can’t even keep a %$^& mother %$^& employee from keeping the records of every military veteran in the United States sitting at her home for 3 mother %$^& years! Then they didn’t tell anyone about it for 3 %$^& weeks after it was stolen!

Three years of my personal data sitting in someone’s obviously unsecure home? Three weeks before anyone decides it’s a good idea to tell someone it was stolen? Are you kidding me? Here’s what the VA Secretary, Jim Nicholson, said:

I can’t explain the lapses of judgment on the behalf of my people. We will stay focused on these problems until we get them fixed.

Here’s how I would explain the lapse in judgement of your employees. You’re fired. What a leader. Blame the subordinates. Just for that, I’d fire that loser. But NO! Bush said he has “full faith and confidence” in Nicholson. I’d imagine it’s the same “full faith and confidence” he has in the idiots at the NSA (including General Hayden, who was just confirmed by the Senate) and Justice Department who are “protecting your liberties.”

A gubernatorial candidate’s views on crime, given at a forum in Tuskeegee, AL:

I want you to know that what I am saying to you today is not about the right to get high. It is not about the right to use drugs. It is about evaluating what we are doing to see if it is meeting its stated objective. I think we can all agree that the drug war has failed. We all want the same things. We want safe neighborhoods where there are no gangs, no violence, no people selling drugs to any kid that wants them in an unregulated market. We want to keep families together. If I were to sit down with our law enforcement officials today and have a rational discussion about the drug war you would see that we are all really on the same page. I am not anti-cop but I do readily admit that the drug war has fostered disrespect and contempt for law enforcement. I want our officers to be safe and to protect all of us from real crime.

If you want your court system unclogged and able to deal with crimes like rape and murder then you have to address it by ending the drug war. If you want the forensics lab to devote its time to solving violent crimes with actual victims then you have to address it by ending the drug war. The drug laws actually create the crime that they were designed to protect us from. People who smoke marijuana do not belong in jail. Marijuana should be legal and available to adults. That would solve our prison crisis as most people in prison in Alabama for drug crimes are there for marijuana. It costs us $95 million a year just to house the marijuana smokers in Alabama’s prison system. That is a lot of money that we could use to make things better for our state and our communities.”

–Loretta Nall (click here for her post on this forum)

You can find the ballot access petition here. Loretta Nall needs 42,000 signatures by June in order to have her name on the ballot.

A reader pointed me to an article in the Gadsden Times that says that Worley will indeed be running “voter education ads” despite a legislative committee’s objection.  The air time will cost $250,000 of your money, and are aimed to urge you to vote and help you know how to vote.  If you add in the production, the ads will cost over $500,000.

Rep. Blaine Galliher (R-Rainbow City) states the obvious.  It’s a political campaign ad disguised as a “voter education” ad.

The taxpayers that I have spoken with about this issue, and there have been numbers of them, indicated to me they did not need to be educated how to vote and this was a waste of money.  It’s a half a million dollars of political advertising that’s taxpayer-funded and it’s wrong.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with a “voter education” ad, but these commercials show Nancy Worley’s image and name prominently.  They also end with Worley surrounded by children, and they’re set to run just before the primary.

Ed Packard, Worley’s opponent in the primary, has also given his criticism.

No details yet, but apparantly shots have been fired at the Rayburn House Office Building. The Capitol Complex is on lockdown. The sound is said to have come from the garage level (Which means everyone in the media is going to feel really silly if this turns out to be a backfiring car.) The Senate has continued on without interruption and there’s no indication that anyone is hurt, so things are probably not nearly as bad as the initial news break freakouts made it sound.

The CNN and Reuters reports are beginning to conflict a little bit. According to CNN producer Ted Barrett, the alert came after only one staff member reported hearing shots fired. Reuters, on the other hand, quotes Senate Sergeant at Arms Bill Pickle as saying, “Police responded to the area where they believed the shots came from and smelled what seemed to be gunpowder.” The Washington Post finally chimed in, but their report doesn’t offer anything new. USA Today is indicating that the lockdown has ended as of 11:30 ET, and that the chief of staff of Rep. Howard Berman supports the “car backfiring or balloons popping” theory.

There’s a Capitol Police briefing going on right now, but - again - I’m unable to find a live feed. It’s interesting that in the wake of this story unfolding everyone has a different theory about what the noise actually was. We’ve now added forklifts, construction workers dropping metal pipes, and someone leaving the firing range door open as possible culprits. “The sounds, which one official said could also have been fireworks…” Wait, what?! FIREWORKS? Do they do a lot of Memorial Weekend celebrations in the parking decks of capitol buildings? This story becomes more bizarre by the minute.

UPDATE: Ahh, of course…it was the air hammer. I should have known.

Jack Cafferty of CNN goes off about the Congress’ sudden concern for Constitutional privacy when they’re the ones being subjected to an investigation. A great analysis of the Congress’ desire to be subject ONLY to the Capitol police. This is the same police force that recently drove a Congressman home after he wrecked his car and smelled of alcohol. No sobriety test of any kind was administered.

P.S. - We’re going to try this video thing for a while and see if it’s soft enough on the bandwith.

Nothing pisses me off more than this moron named Fred Phelps, and I generally support the Congress’ ban on protesters duing military funerals. (See previous post here). However, it also worries me a little bit. I think the way they did it is okay. Basically, they only said you can’t protest an hour before or after a military funeral on federally-owned cemeteries.

Under the Senate bill, approved without objection by the House with no recorded vote, the “Respect for America’s Fallen Heroes Act” would bar protests within 300 feet of the entrance of a cemetery and within 150 feet of a road into the cemetery from 60 minutes before to 60 minutes after a funeral. Those violating the act would face up to a $100,000 fine and up to a year in prison.

How can I even come close to siding with free speech where this guy is concerned? Here’s my philosophy. The government didn’t give you a mouth. Let’s pretend you believe in God. How you use your mouth, vocal cords and free thought it is between you and God. I think it’s mighty presumptuous of the federal government to pretend for ONE SECOND that they can do better than God’s plan. I think it’s pretty cocky for them to assume that they can do better than the “free will and morality” that God gave us. I think it’s pretty high and mighty for the government to feel like they can interfere with a God-given, natural right.

Having said that, the government does have the right (as any property owner does), to determine a reasonable amount of rules and regulations about what happens on federal property. So as long as it stops here, I’m okay with it. But we do not need a complete federal ban on any protesters at funerals. Good citizens are capable of keeping the sanctity of military funerals intact, and a group of bikers have been following Phelps around to protect the families of those fallen troops.

The bikers say they’re not going to hurt anyone, but I just hope this Phelps guy gets some sort of confidence and believes God will protect him. Because I bet there are about 400 bikers who could prove him wrong.

They came out with their opinions on the candidates for Attorney General of the state of Alabama.

On Larry Darby:

Democrat Larry Darby is a right-wing fruitcake whose only value is to add levity to an otherwise serious primary election. The Holocaust denier and white supremacist has no place in public office.

On John Tyson, Jr.:

Mr. Tyson, Mobile County’s district attorney, has a solid track record, innovative ideas and a vision for how the attorney general’s office should serve the people of Alabama.

On Troy King:

Mr. King gave the voters what they wanted when he announced the filing of lawsuits against four gas stations in the state, one of which was in Decatur, for what he termed price gouging after Hurricane Katrina

The only profit Mr. King specified, at a Stop ‘N Go, was $65.72. That’s total profit over the time period specified in the lawsuit, not excess profit.

Notwithstanding this nugget of reality, Mr. King announced the settlement with the words, “We have sent a warning that price gouging will not be tolerated.” …

Mr. King has never practiced law in the private sector. His ability to supervise lawyers and to determine what cases his office should pursue, or not pursue, requires an intimate understanding of the trial process that he lacks.

On Mark Montiel:

The best qualification of Mark Montiel, Mr. King’s Republican opponent, may be that he is Mr. King’s opponent. Another qualification is that he had collected negligible PAC money as of the end of April.

I think I can agree with those sentiments, although Montiel deserves a little more credit. Even if it was for Republican activism, his lawsuit against the state over the Democratic gerrymandering of legislative districts was needed.

Circuit Judge Johnny Hardwick made a decision yesterday about whether or not Mark Montiel will have to file a new lawsuit in his court battle against Community Service Grants.  He decided not to make a decision yet.

Schools hoping for a “yes” or “no” Wednesday on state money to buy computers and make repairs will have to keep waiting after Montgomery Circuit Judge Johnny Hardwick failed to deliver a planned ruling on what some critics call pork spending.

If Hardwick says Montiel has to file a new lawsuit, the grant board will likely have time to disburse the rest of the money and Montiel will probably have to wait until after the primary to get his name in the paper again.

It’s not that I don’t want Montiel’s name in the paper, and it’s not that I don’t want Troy King to lose, but you have to see that this is at least partially political for Montiel.