Walter In Denver

Hmm.

News from Nigeria:

The Lagos transport chief said 608 Nigerian motorists were tested for insanity after they were caught driving against the flow of traffic on city streets, local media reported on Wednesday.

The test consisted of one question, "Do you enjoy driving in Lagos?"

Muiz Banire said the 608 were selected from 22,418 people whose vehicles were impounded last year for various traffic offences.

"One person was found to be insane, while 20 people were found to have very low intelligent quota, which connotes they were not fit to drive cars along Lagos roads," Banire was quoted as saying in Wednesday's Punch newspaper.

Next time you find yourself in traffic you may wish you could conduct your own tests.

Link via TalkLeft.

Waddayano

I was at this show, too. We sat - yes, sat, cuz the Mrs. isn't standing much these days - on the second level, stage left.

one of the world's elite bands, stereolab "kicks it with a tasty groove", galvanizing and enchanting the rapt listener with churning, surging litebrite spacey loungepop. one of their songs i swear to god i was witnessing the aural equivalent of a catastrophic, yet supremely gorgeous and trance-inducing, supernova.

Yeah, it was kinda like that.

Since we didn't want to try to fight the crowd for too long, we didn't go in for the opening acts. Instead, we strolled a couple of blocks up Broadway to a Chinese restaurant. We wound up having dinner sitting next to three of the band members.

We bought 'em beer but they played OK anyway.

Good Thinking

Soon after 9/11 all us Americans* realized we needed a Federal Agency to standardize airline baggage screening and related safety procedures. A national government agency would be much more reliable and attract a higher class of employee than the mish-mash of agencies which preceded it. Thus was born the TSA.

Brilliant move.

Update: Andy has similar thoughts.

*well, maybe not all of us.

Lag Blogging

Pete Guither at Drug WarRant has the story I should blogged a while ago. The Denver North Metro Drug Task Force is being sued for stripping a woman naked in her condo parking lot while the neighbors watched.

Pete points out this the same bunch that tried to force the Tattered Cover book store to release sales records back in 2000:

This is a drug task force that is completely out of control. They seem to believe that they are a law unto themselves, answerable only to themselves.

The Search Is On

I'll have to find this song.

But Isobel Cambell stoops to doing a song with Mark Lanegan and gets labeled twee? Twee?

The show is at the Fillmore next Friday. I expect Zomby to be there.

Oops

Preble's meadow jumping mouse is a species native to Colorado's Front Range. It was declared a threatened species in 1998, and its habitat has been federally protected since then. Since this habitat includes populated areas around Denver this federal protection has been a major obstacle to some construction. You can imagine the consternation of some land owners who find their property held hostage to a rare rodent.

Unless it isn't rare:

The scientist who first classified the Preble's meadow jumping mouse as a distinct subspecies now believes the mouse is no different from a species found widely in North America, according to Gov. Dave Freudenthal's office.

There's no way the scientist, Philip Krutzsch, could have known in 1954 that his mistaken identification of a new species would have caused so much havoc decades later. He's trying to make amends now:

In a March 31 e-mail to Rob Roy Ramey, who conducted the new study, Krutzsch said the research clearly invalidates his own findings of almost 50 years ago. He called Ramey's methods "cutting edge" and his analysis "in-depth and reproducible."

He used Krutzsch's endorsement of the new study to call for using better scientific information and methods in making Endangered Species Act decisions.

RMBR!

The new Rocky Mountain Blog Roundup is here, hosted by Zomby.

If you find your blog reading stuck in a rut, visiting the same old sites over and over again, now's your chance to find new links at the Roundup.

TABOR Again

You remember TABOR, the Colorado state constitutional amendment restricting the growth of government spending. It's telling that even after the state budget grew by a hefty 4.4% this year the anti-TABOR voices lost none of their shrillness.

Today's Denver Post had a pair of point-counterpoint guest columns on the subject of TABOR reform. Between the two you could find out just about all you need to know on the subject.

Jon Caldara, pro TABOR:

In the decade since TABOR's passage in 1992, the size of state government has grown by a whopping 64 percent. Government is hardly withering away.

Rutt Bridges, anti:

TABOR put Colorado's government on the nation's strictest diet. Between 1992 and 2004, we cut government 27 percent relative to our state's total economy.

Bridges' comment tells more than he wants, probably. In his mind it's not enough that government grows, it must maintain its status relative to the economy. If it were the private sector, we would all rejoice - just as we do when we spend less on groceries, for example. But a goverment that runs cheaper is a bad thing in itself, according to his way of thinking.

Bridges' logic further deteriorates later in his article:

Health care is a big concern for many of us. To provide a safety net for really poor kids, Washington provides $2 for every state dollar we invest. Last year, we barred new kids from joining the program.

So where does Johnny's mom go when he gets sick? The emergency room. And who pays? We all do.

As opposed to paying his bill through tax revenue, which of course comes from the tax fairy. To think this guy almost was a major party candidate for the US senate.

Vouchers Fail

The Colorado House yesterday defeated a new school voucher program meant to replace the one struck down by the courts last year. A number of students and parents were left in the lurch, forced to go back to failing public schools, as they couldn't afford to pay private tuition.

Vouchers have some problems - it's hard to like seeing the state educrats get an inroad into private schools. However, between all sides of the debate the ones who look worst are the voucher opponents, as pointed out by this Rocky editorial:

[T]he coalition that opposed vouchers will challenge the law again on other issues, including the participation by religious schools.

It's difficult to understand why the same people who claim to be "for the children" are working so hard to keep them trapped in public schools that are failing them. Allowing parents to choose the school that is best for their children is a sensible and compassionate idea for educating Coloradans. You'd think the state's political establishment could get behind a modest pilot program, which tests whether the academic performance of poor, at-risk, often minority kids can be improved via school choice. But that would require making the interests of kids truly its highest priority.

I doubt that group, lead by the teacher's union, is looking out for the best interests of the private schools.

We're Secure!

Time now to stop and be thankful that our airport security is keeping us safe from terrorists cancer patients. Today's Rocky:

A Denver cancer patient who said she lost weight and hair to chemotherapy was stopped from flying home from Orlando, Fla., this week because a security screener said she didn't resemble her identification photos.

Be thankful, too, that we have the TSA:

Denver-based TSA spokesman Mike Fierberg said of LaPera's experience: "I feel for her. I really do."

Many people change their looks dramatically, he noted. "People gain weight, lose weight and change their hair color. The obvious solution is to get your driver's license photo redone. Security requires a valid photo ID," he said.

Mike, you tool, she had a valid ID. What would we all do without these chimps looking out for our well being?

Update: Talkleft has the photos.

Point of Order

Question for the blog cognoscenti, strictly speaking, is this a fisking, or do we have to invent a new verb?

Maybe we could ask a linguistics professor.

There's This

News from Colombia:

The mystery surrounding the disappearance of a co-founder of Colombia's feared right-wing paramilitary groups in the aftermath of a gunbattle deepened with a paramilitary commander denying an attack took place.

On that day, rival paramilitary members attacked a ranch in northwest Colombia where Castano was staying, killed at least six of his bodyguards and forced Castano to flee, Assistant Attorney General Andres Ramirez has said, citing an account from a wounded bodyguard.
[...]
In Santa Fe de Ralito, a paramilitary stronghold close to the ranch where the shooting on Friday occurred, local paramilitary commanders said they did not know what really happened. But nobody ruled out that Castano might have been killed.

However, the AUC on March 31 announced that Castano was no longer part of the peace negotiating team. That further isolated Castano, who had publicly lashed out at other paramilitary leaders for trafficking drugs - even though Castano himself is being sought in a U.S. indictment for smuggling tons of cocaine to the United States.

Is anyone there not smuggling drugs? Does anyone think Colombia will have peace as long as the drug war continues?

BTW, never spell the country 'Columbia.' Please.

Bad Music Is Everywhere

I've been watching, with some bemusement, the reaction to those Blender articles about the worst artists and worst songs in history. A popular local AM drive time talk show had a fit - seems they and their listeners liked some of those bands.

What Blender did was point out that just because certain music is popular doesn't mean it has any redeeming quality. You'd think that's obvious, but, I suppose, there are some people out there who watch the Grammies because they like the music.

Years ago I came up with a few simple rules for judging pop music.

1. If it's played frequently on commercial radio it's probably not very good.

2. If it's popular and the singer is good-looking then it's likely the music is wretched.

3. Points one and two go double for country music.

The Next Blog Roundup

The next Rocky Mountain Blog Roundup will be held at Resurrection Song. Time to get crackin.'

The previous is here.

Columbine Story

The lead story right now at Slate and msn.com is about the Columbine killers' motivation. Highly recommended, and only partly because it's written by local blogger and Rocky Mountain Blog Roundup contributor Dave Cullen.

Pity

Take one college age Colorado native, send him to live in DC, and what do you get?

A good case of culture shock.

And Now, For a Dissenting Opinion

John Laughland, in The Australian:

A patrician grandee with a pleasing mix of liberal and patriotic views might seem to many Americans a welcome relief from the bellicose Texan with his faux swagger and his team of men who seem to have military-industrial complex written across their menacing foreheads. But if anti-war Americans do elect Kerry for that reason, they will have duped themselves. Warmongering will be worse under Kerry than under Bush and real peaceniks should therefore vote for Dubya. Bush and Kerry agree on almost everything in foreign policy but, where they disagree, Kerry is more hawkish.

I think some readers may disagree. More Laughland:

Serious neo-cons, indeed, might be calculating that the bungling Bush is more of a liability than an asset for their desire to remodel the Middle East and to consolidate the US's unchallenged military power.

Kerry might be just what they need to draw the sting of that left-wing anti-Americanism around the world and in the US that inspires so much anti-war feeling. The Kosovo war showed that a war for human rights and against oppression, fought by a slick Democrat, plays far better with world public opinion than all that red-neck bull about dangers to national security. It will be far easier for president Kerry to fight new wars than for the mistrusted and discredited Bush. So to those who think that the election of a Democratic president will put an end to US militarism, I say: You ain't seen nothin' yet.

I tend to agree that Kerry's personal philosophy doesn't make him any more pacifist than Bush, but there are political considerations. Kerry is, after all, a politician foremost. If he plays to his constituency he may not drop the anti-war veneer too quickly once in office.

Randall McElroy uses this article to point out, "Libertarians have known this for a long time: there is very little real difference between Democrats and Republicans."

I suspect my Republican and Democratic friends will disagree vehemently.

Moving

Publicola, RKBA blogger of note, has moved to a new address.

Don't know what RKBA means? I'm sure Publicola will tell you.

Big Alcohol

What do you get when you mix a wheelbarrow of neo-prohibitionism, a few gallons of bile, and a sickly dose of anti-capitalism?

Bigalcohol.com, purveyors of such gems as this:

Big Alcohol, the industry that makes 50% of its $139 Billion in profits from underage and problem drinkers is trying to send one of its own to Congress. Peter Coors, the man whose company did the impossible - actually lowering the standards for TV commercials - is now apparently running for the U.S. Senate.

I just spent a few minutes looking around that site, and now I have to go take a shower. Ick.

Oh yeah, no thanks to Matthew Edgar for that link.

Thank You

Readership continues to climb around here. If you'd like to help this little blog stay afloat, and make the very pregnant Mrs. InDenver happy, you can buy Mary Kay stuff here.

Guys, the shaving cream is really nice.

Cities

I read that some Iraqi cleric has warned us from conducting military operations in some town or other because it's considered a holy city. What a concept! It occured to me that there's a decided military advantage to declaring something to be holy and exempt from attack, and perhaps we should declare the 101st Airborne to be holy.

It also occured to me that we are sorely lacking in holy cities stateside, and who better than your Recognized Authority to designate a few. I figure we should have at least one per state. In no particular order:

Tupelo, Miss. You know, Elvis.

Green Bay, Wis. Even if you're not a Packer fan you can appreciate Lambeau Field.

Why not Lynchburg, Tenn.? Milwaukee, too, for similar reasons.

Alliance, Neb.

Las Vegas, Nev., of course, and Las Vegas, NM, too. Just to be safe.

I'm sure you can think of some more good candidates.

Confusement

Twice this year this blog has been described as 'right wing,' once in print and once on-line. No, I won't provide a link, as I'm sure it's just an oversight.

I'm a libertarian. If you really think libertarians are right wingers, or conservatives, it's probably a reflection of your own view of the world, as if anyone who isn't on the left side of the political spectrum must be on the right.

Here's a handy, wallet sized guide for distinguishing conservatives and libertarians.

-Conservatives believe society needs moral guidance from government.

-Libertarians think government is ill-suited to provide moral guidance to anyone.

-Conservatives like government to protect and sometimes fund societal institutions, such as schools.

-Libertarians say we can do just fine on our own, thank you.

-Conservatives see no problem with individuals being forced to serve society, if government thinks it's necessary.

-Libertarians hold that individuals shouldn't be legally obligated to serve society.

If you read these points you may conclude that both major parties in the U.S. are conservative, and you might be right. That's a discussion for another time. Instead of looking at political differences as a single left-right dimension, it's helpful to add a second measure. That's what the famous Nolan Chart does. You can find that here, along with a little quiz to help explain the differences between political points of view.

Funny Pages

This Guardian correction must have set some sort of record:

In our report, Life after Living Marxism, page 10, July 8, we referred to the Reason Foundation and said its "leading writer, the syndicated columnist Sandra Postrel, is author of the libertarian book The Enemies Of Freedom and frequently talks at the Hudson Institute". The Reason Foundation points out that no one of that name works at the Foundation or for Reason Magazine. The editor-at-large and former editor of the magazine is called Virginia Postrel. She is a columnist for Forbes and the New York Times but not a "syndicated" columnist. Her book is not called The Enemies Of Freedom. It is called The Future And Its Enemies: The Growing Conflict Over Creativity, Enterprise and Progress (Free Press). The Reason Foundation says Ms Postrel has never been to the Hudson Institute and has no connection with the organisation.

Stolen shamelessly from Samizdata, because it was too funny to ignore.

Go Get 'Em

My friend Chris Leinster sends this E-mail:

Please join me on Thursday, April 15th, in front of the Main branch of the Denver Post Office, 951 20th Street, at the corner of 20th and Curtis.

I plan to be there all day, but let’s rally from 3PM to 7PM to grab the attention of the last minute filers and hopefully get in front of the cameras for the evening news.

So in case you had nothing to do that day, now you have a plan - go tell everyone how you feel about the income tax. I don't know if i'll make it, after all, some have to work yet to pay their taxes.

Notice how you never see pro-tax demonstrators out on April 15? They could hold signs saying 'We burn more money in an hour than you make in a lifetime, chump!'

We're From the Government, We're Here to Help

Where would we be without the alphabet soup of federal agencies to protect us from evil industry? Evil industry like Creekstone Farms, a beef producer which would like to test each head of cattle for mad cow disease?

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has rejected one meatpacker's plan to test all its cattle for mad cow disease, signaling that it won't allow private tests for the deadly affliction.
[...]
Creekstone said it already set up its own private testing facility that would incorporate a test from California firm Bio-Rad and sent employees to France to learn how testing is done there. In the past few weeks, the USDA has approved four tests for mad cow; all but one were previously approved for use in other countries.

"Here when you have the market asking for something, you're saying no — with an approved test, no less," said microbiologist Michael Hansen, who studies animal diseases and food safety at Consumers Union.

Lovely. It seems that larger beef producers don't like the implication that all cattle should be tested, and the USDA is siding with them. I guess the consumers must be saved from themselves.

Via The Binary Circumstance, where Chip Gibbons notes it's all about a government agency preserving its own monopoly.

Update: Marginal Revolution has more, including some history.

No Choke Here

Can't handle the pressure? Feh.

Update: Ivan Maisel:

If we had only known that Mickelson would win the 2004 Masters with a thrilling back-nine comeback to overtake one of the best players in the world, we all would have waited patiently.

If he had only let us know the amount of sheer joy he would deliver[...]

Saturday Reading

If you have time to read but one thing today, I'd recommend this.

It's a post written by a woman who calls herself Ginmar, blogging here. She's a soldier in Iraq.

Both of those links via Jim Henley.

We Pay

According to the Tax Foundation, Colorado residents pay an astonishing 9.1% of their income to state and local governments. This still after the TABOR amendment has slightly slowed the growth of government for the last few years.

It's even worse elsewhere. The national average is 10%, so Colorado is actually one of the lower taxed states. Alaska averages 6.3%, which almost makes that climate worthwhile.

New York weighs in at 12.9%. That makes them very proud, I'm sure. Hey New Yorkers, do you think you have the best local government in the Union? 'Cuz you sure are paying for it.

See the entire list of states and their tax rates here.

...Comes Back to Bite (Or a Big, Fat 'I Told You So')

Parts of an e-mail from Jim Babka of RealCampaignReform.org:

Life is interesting, isn't it? Why, just a few months ago,
liberal groups were joining hands and singing folk songs,
hailing John McCain, Russ Feingold, and the other
incumbents for "saving democracy from the clutches of
special interests" with the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
of 2002 (BCRA). MoveOn was one of those groups.

But now, MoveOn has a new problem. And a well-written and
highly accurate essay, written by the FEC Working Group and
published by MoveOn illustrates how awful this new problem
is.

For reasons that will become obvious in a moment, "I feel
their pain."

OK, to be fair to them, they didn't really expect the
Republicans to actually ask the FEC to use this newfound
power in such heinous ways. After all, whatever happened to
free speech and free press?
[...]
But now, MoveOn wants to rewrite history. Here's a direct
quote,

And I should know. In addition to being a plaintiff in the
BCRA case, RCR built the most comprehensive web-site on the
worldwide web for the pro-1st Amendment side in the area of
campaign finance reform. We filed two amicus briefs with
the U.S. Supreme Court arguing for Free Press rights. We
lobbied the U.S. House when they were debating their
version of this law - Shays-Meehan - generating over 3,000
letters to Congress.
[...]
The left-wing McCainanites (money in politics is the root
of evil crowd) argued that there was a Hydraulic Principle
in campaign finance. The Hydraulic Principle is that water
will seep out of a crack on a hydraulic cylinder.
Similarly, if limits are placed on political parties (Title
I of the law), then it would seep to other places,
including non-profit groups (like MoveOn).

For three years RCR pointed out over and over, that there
would be what MoveOn is now calling a "chilling effect" on
free speech in campaigns.

It's the old Law of Unintended Consequences. The Left loved campaign finance reform until their guy was no longer running the Executive Branch, and -gasp- they never thought their own law stifling political speech would be used against them!

To be fair I don't know that MoveOn itself existed back when McCain-Feingold was first being hashed out, but it was their boys (and girls) on Capitol Hill who foisted this thing on us.

This is another example of my pet theory, yet unnamed, that activists on the Left and the Right would be much less eager to promote new regulation if they would just stop to consider what it would look like with their political opposition running the government.

It sounds like this - if you like the idea of universal healthcare just imagine that giant new bureaurocracy with John Ashcroft in charge, deciding what treatments get how much funding, and who has access to your medical records.

And if you like expanded homeland security measures to restrict the rights of suspected terrorists, imagine that Hillary Clinton is in command, deciding who is or isn't a suspected terrorist.

If those two images don't give you pause...

(Read on only for the full text of the e-mail)

Full text of Jim Babka's message:

RealCampaignReform.org - Fighting the Good Fight

|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|

Liberals up in arms: McCain-Feingold not working out like
they intended

by Jim Babka

Life is interesting, isn't it? Why, just a few months ago,
liberal groups were joining hands and singing folk songs,
hailing John McCain, Russ Feingold, and the other
incumbents for "saving democracy from the clutches of
special interests" with the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
of 2002 (BCRA). MoveOn was one of those groups.

But now, MoveOn has a new problem. And a well-written and
highly accurate essay, written by the FEC Working Group and
published by MoveOn illustrates how awful this new problem
is.
http://www.moveon.org/news/fec-gag.html
{You'll want to scroll down to the EXAMPLES section}

For reasons that will become obvious in a moment, "I feel
their pain."

Here's their problem. They have a $5 million donor. He's
helped them finance a bevy of anti-Bush ads. But thanks to
McCain-Feingold, they're seeing their rights trimmed by a
proposed set of rules coming from the bureaucracy empowered
to oversee the BCRA - the Federal Election Commission
(FEC).

OK, to be fair to them, they didn't really expect the
Republicans to actually ask the FEC to use this newfound
power in such heinous ways. After all, whatever happened to
free speech and free press?

Good question!

I feel their pain because I was president of
RealCampaignReform.org (RCR). RCR challenged the BCRA all
the way to the US Supreme Court (Paul v. FEC). We failed to
overturn the law. But our plaintiff group took the most
principled stand (of the 11 total groups). It appears we
have influenced some of the Justices, resulting in some
wonderful dissenting opinions. Perhaps some future Court
can use these inspired dissents to correct this abhorrent
ruling.

But now, MoveOn wants to rewrite history. Here's a direct
quote,

"Nothing in the McCain-Feingold campaign reform law or
the Supreme Court's decision upholding it provides any
basis for these rules. That law is only about banning
federal candidates from using unregulated contributions
("soft money"), and banning political parties from doing
so, because of their close relationship to those
candidates. It's clear that, with one exception relating
to running broadcast ads close to an election, the new
law wasn't supposed to change what independent nonprofit
interest groups can do, including political
organizations (527's) that have never before been
subject to regulation by the FEC."

That's just not accurate.

And I should know. In addition to being a plaintiff in the
BCRA case, RCR built the most comprehensive web-site on the
worldwide web for the pro-1st Amendment side in the area of
campaign finance reform. We filed two amicus briefs with
the U.S. Supreme Court arguing for Free Press rights. We
lobbied the U.S. House when they were debating their
version of this law - Shays-Meehan - generating over 3,000
letters to Congress.

But don't take my word for it. Let's flash back a wee bit.
Senator John McCain (sponsor of BCRA) and his allies in the
Senate wanted an end to what they called "sham issue ads."
These were ads by independent groups, like MoveOn, that
criticized incumbents. That was Title II of this law.

And what was the alleged justification for Title II as
argued by the McCainanites? Non-profit groups serve as
"conduits" for getting around hard money limits.

The left-wing McCainanites (money in politics is the root
of evil crowd) argued that there was a Hydraulic Principle
in campaign finance. The Hydraulic Principle is that water
will seep out of a crack on a hydraulic cylinder.
Similarly, if limits are placed on political parties (Title
I of the law), then it would seep to other places,
including non-profit groups (like MoveOn).

The Court explicitly stated that such an assumption was
"reasonable."

For three years RCR pointed out over and over, that there
would be what MoveOn is now calling a "chilling effect" on
free speech in campaigns.

But MoveOn is about creating utopian visions through big
government. Their response was predictable. They're asking
the FEC bureaucracy to enforce the law in the utopian
method they had intended for it.

THE DICTATOR FALLACY

But as David Bergland said, "Utopia is not an option."
MoveOn has fallen for the Dictator Fallacy.

The Dictator Fallacy is the belief that the law will be
implemented in just the way you intended. But this is just
plain silly.

First, the legislative branch is going to haggle and your
perfect bill is going to be modified - perhaps
dramatically. There might even be a federal building for
Senator Foghorn in the deal.

Then the executive branch will get a hold of the law. They
will have every incentive to expand their power (more on
that in a minute). And the Courts may even get in on the
act, doing some unwelcome tinkering with your plan.

On top of that, people will begin living under the law. It
should come as no surprise that Republicans, most of whom
opposed the law, have seized the opportunity to use it to
bludgeon their opponents. If you can't join 'em, beat 'em.

As if that's still not enough, the law will have a set of
unintended consequences - a boomerang effect. For example,
laws to curb drug use increase their spread to children.
Laws to restrict gun ownership increase burglaries and
assaults. And all this happens no matter how well-
intentioned the backers of the law are.

MoveOn may be content to call what they deem "shocking"
behavior by the Bush Administration "unintended"
consequences. But it's gotten to the point where _the one
thing_ we can _always count on_ when politicians attempt to
solve some problem -- like special interests in politics --
is unintended consequences.

To make matters even worse for our utopian friends, "The
power you give a politician you like today to do something
you want done is the same power that will be used tomorrow
in ways you would've never imagined or approved of by
politicians you hate."

The Dictator Fallacy means that you have no matter how well
intentioned you are, no matter how good you think your idea
would be, your new law to solve the problem won't be passed
by you; won't be administered by you; won't be adjudicated
by you. But you might get stuck living with your
Frankenstein creation - just like MoveOn did.

BLIND SPOT

What are the likely effects of the proposed FEC policy?
MoveOn has hit the nail on the head.
http://www.moveon.org/news/fec-gag.html

They're alarmed, up-in-arms. And they should be.

But when you get down to the Talking Points section, you
can revel at the naïve nature of these big government
liberals who are surprised that a bureaucracy is taking the
ruling of the Court to its logical and ultimate conclusion
- surprised that Republicans who opposed this law (the RNC
was also a plaintiff) are now using it like a club to beat
their opponents over the head.

Is it fair to call them naïve? Well, since when did
executive branch bureaucrats hem their own power? They
usually take opportunities, like this new law, to expand
it.

And why do they do so?

* This new law makes the bureaucrats more powerful, and
that's intoxicating to them.

* Taking full advantage of their powers keeps them out
of hot water when Congressman Busybody calls them
before some commission asking why they weren't doing
more to prevent something bad from happening.

SOWING THE SEEDS OF WAR

In this case, we're all left to reap the bitter harvest of
campaign finance reform - in reality, a scheme to protect
incumbents. It's simple sowing and reaping.

MoveOn understands that the war in Iraq is wrong. I'm
guessing most of their minions think the insane War on
Drugs and the war on civil liberties (the Patriot Act) are
wrong as well.

Why do they refuse to understand that politicians love
wars?

The campaign finance act was government's war against
corruption in the Nixon era. By the turn of our new
century, campaign finance reform became government's war
against so-called "special interests."

Politicians are always "at war," and the collateral damage
will _always_ include your rights.

MoveOn is crying over milk they spilled. There's only one
consistent, just, and positive solution - Downsize DC.

HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO US?

A friend of mine recently wrote saying that we had
overstated our case for re-organization (for the new
Downsize DC). Everyone else was working around the
government rules, he said, like they always had. But as
you'll be able to read from MoveOn's report, we're not
guilty of overstatement.

If anything, we've understated because even the plan we're
implementing is only phase I. To truly overcome the
hurdles, we'll need to grow. We need to continue to evolve
at least one new entity and one additional project focus to
really overcome the hurdles the IRS and the FEC are placing
in our way.

But it starts with our new reorganization plan. And it
starts with you.

I'd like to take this opportunity to remind you of our
exciting new plan. It involves supporting good work on
Capitol Hill, like Congressman Ron Paul does. It involves
giving you a voice that can counteract the pressure put on
members of Congress by lobbyists and their party
leadership, like happened in the Medicare vote. It involves
using new tools and technology to do the most important
thing of all - persuade, convert, and recruit more
libertarians.

You can read the plan by clicking here:
http://www.realcampaignreform.org/trans.htm

If you would like to skip it and make a donation, please
click here:
http://www.realcampaignreform.org/donate.htm

Bill O'Reilly, Self-Aggrandizer Extraordinaire

Who'd have thought?

Congrats

My friend Joe Johnson, as Libertarian as they come, won an election today. He was elected to the Frederick, CO, Board of Trustees with a whopping 67% of the vote.

Partisan affiliation in a two party system is a funny thing. When Libertarians run in partisan races they rarely do well. Voters hesitate to vote for the 'L' in a race when there is a 'D' or an 'R' to choose, no matter how lowly the office. Other minor parties have the same problem. But take away the party labels and the same voters will vote for the Libertarian. Joe probably met most of the voters face to face, and they found him to be a reasonable choice. He didn't moderate his politics at all, and they loved him.

Good luck, Joe.

This Way, Please

The most recent Rocky Mountain Blog Roundup is here.

Or just keep reading.

Belly Laugh

Quick, while it's still up, go over to Max's place and check out the picture at the top.

Update, 10:20AM: Just that quickly, it's gone. Maybe someone saved a screenshot...?

Marijuana As Medicine

Something astounding happened this past Thursday. The U.S. Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources held a hearing on the topic "Marijuana and Medicine: The Need for a Science- Based Approach." The irony being that this committee is one of the leading forces obstructing scientific research of the subject.

Somehow Rob Kampia, director of the Marijuana Policy Project, was invited to testify. That was a big mistake on the part of the Subcommittee. As Pete Guither said, Kampia "[t]ore them a new one."

Here are some bits from Kampia's testimony:

With respect to the title of this hearing, “Marijuana and Medicine: The Need for a Science-Based Approach,” I would like to say upfront that the Marijuana Policy Project welcomes a “science-based approach” to this subject. In fact, we would celebrate such an approach because it would undoubtedly bring an end to the unnecessary and immoral federal attacks on doctors, patients, and caregivers who are acting legally under state law.

Unfortunately, current federal policies are not based on science; rather, they are based on myths and lies. Worse yet, the federal government is currently blocking scientific inquiry into the therapeutic benefits of marijuana. This collusion in support of delusion is an outrage and must be stopped. State medical marijuana laws must be respected, and research into the therapeutic
benefits of marijuana must be allowed to proceed expeditiously.
[...]
Opponents of medical marijuana claim that marijuana has no medical benefits. The chairman of this subcommittee gave a typical demonstration of this tactic in July 2003 during a debate on the House floor. During that debate he said that marijuana “does not help sick people. … There are no generally recognized health benefits to smoking marijuana.”
The chairman, and those who agree with him, could not be more wrong.

It doesn't look like Mr. Kampia was trying to win any friends on the committee. Read the rest of his testimony in this PDF file. What the chairman, Rep. Souder, said is akin to claiming the world is flat. Here's a list of some of the properties of marijuana.

-It's a powerful anti-nausea drug

-It's an effective pain reliever.

-It's an effective anti-stress medicine

-It has a very low level of dangerous side effects, especially compared to other drugs of comparable effect.

-It's inexpensive to produce.

Nothing on the above list is particularly controversial. In fact, if any of those points were proved false it would be quite a suprise to the medical community. That's precisely why the drug warriors are trying so hard to suppress any large scale research.

Sadly, any argument pro marijuana invites a standard template of criticism of the arguer, so here's my standard disclaimer. I don't smoke the stuff. I don't have much interest in doing so.

I do have an interest in having it easily available if I or any of my loved ones should ever become seriously ill.

Day By Day

Seems everyone in the 'sphere has linked to one of Chris Muir's cartoons at one time or another. I like today's.

Jay & Deb

You all should know about these two. Welcome to the fertile bloggers club! While I was visiting I took this quiz....

You are a GRAMMAR GOD!


If your mission in life is not already to
preserve the English tongue, it should be.
Congratulations and thank you!


How grammatically sound are you?
brought to you by Quizilla

Right, I just prefer to use more earthy grammatical constructions on this blog.

Colorado Budget Under TABOR

The lege is wrapping up the state budget, amid the usual caterwauling about the TABOR amendment. [Out-of-staters might not recall that's the state constitutional amendment restricting state gov spending.]

Compare the differences in tone between these two articles.

The Rocky:

State agencies and service providers are reading the proposed $14.2 billion budget this week and doing something they haven't done for a long time: sighing with relief.

This week has been remarkably quiet after the announcement that the budget could see an increase of 4.4 percent over last year. Most people are just grateful to be funded again at levels they haven't seen for a couple years.

The Post:

The budget committee recommended about $70 million in cuts for the next budget year, which begins in July. It was unclear late Thursday how much that number had been changed.

"This is pretty heartbreaking, pitting sick kids against illiterate kids," said House Minority Leader Andrew Romanoff.

This one of those Rorschach test moments - your reaction to the state budget probably depends on how you feel about the role of government in general. But some of what you read is severely slanted by different sets of facts. Note how the 4.4% potential budget increase reported by the Rocky becomes $70 million in budget cuts in the Post.

It sounds like the old budget forcasting trick. Propose a $300 million increase for a future year and when you get a $230 million increase complain that $70 million have been 'cut.'

Unexpected

There's very little written about the war these days that I might label as important, but this Jim Henley post might be one.

Not that I agree with all of it, but it is thought-provoking.

Update: Protein Wisdom has very important things today, too. [Scroll up from link]

More: If Henley's prank got you'll feel better if you read the comments to this Atrios post. Hook+line+sinker.