Quote of the Day: One Libertarian's Thoughts

I can't take any more media, be it mainstream or social or any other kind, because the general noisy emotional overdrive and hyperreaction over Trump's inauguration from both supporters and opponents alike is giving me a headache. It's gotten to the point that I am half-expecting febrile friends of mine both on the left and right to start yelling at me because I haven't been posting excitable effluvia nonstop online. 

So I give you one libertarian's bemused thoughts:

It’s been a weird couple of months. I’ve seen more people unfriend each other on FaceBook than in the past few years combined; There have been several reports of both Trump supporters and minorities being physically attacked; I’ve been asked to wear a safety pin to proclaim to the world that I am not a racist, because the presumption now is that everyone is a racist and you have to (secretly - only not so secretly) announce to everyone if you’re not; and the senior editor of ThinkProgress is afraid of his plumber. (This, based solely on whatever profiling techniques they use over at ThinkProgress - “… a middle-aged white man with a southern accent who seemed unperturbed by this week’s news.” - rather than anything resembling a conversation with the man.) 

Here’s the thing: I’m a libertarian. I’ve been surrounded by people who don’t agree with me for as long as I can remember and it has never occurred to me to isolate myself from everyone because of our political differences. Certainly not to assault them. Nor am I filled with anxiety by the thought that people who work in my home might have different political views than mine. To me, you’re all a bunch of fascists. But I’ve somehow learned to live with you.

Heh!  Seriously, though, later the writer says, "For me, watching people unravel over this election has been instructive," and what ultimately follows is not unlike what I've said about why an overly powerful executive is a Very Bad Thing and that it's still a Very Bad Thing even if (and maybe especially if) a guy you happen to like is sitting behind the Resolute desk. Just imagine someone you hate and fear having those same powers. You don't like that? Then maybe those are really stupid, dangerous powers that nobody should have, period.

Oh, one more thing. I've heard plenty of Obama-love over the last few days ranging from the classy to the completely deranged, but the one I remember the best is this: someone I know actually said that s/he wished Obama were a king so he could stay in power forever and we wouldn't have to deal with Trump. Yes, you read that right. Wished Obama were a king. Criminy, this actually happened in earnest. I half-expected the ghost of George Washington to appear on the spot and slap this person into next week. You've missed the entire point of the American Revolution.

I am so tired.

Quote of the Day: Hey, Limited Government is Hot Again!

Via Samizdata comes this thought:

"It has been delightful to wallow in the grief of triggered leftists. Yes, their candidate lost. And no, they have neither self-awareness nor irony and that is bloody hilarious. But for classical liberals/libertarians or even smaller state Conservatives, the man who won is by no means our guy.

... I am far from depressed by Trump’s victory, though I agree with him in so few respects. Not least because our statist foes are about to relearn a proper fear of excessive state power and in particular of such undemocratic and unconstitutional devices as presidential executive orders."

We Have a Finalist For Stupidest Op-Ed of the Year

Via Power Line comes the link to this amazing utterance: "Libertarians are the New Communists."  That's right, folks: libertarians are fearsome power-hungry tyrants who want to ... leave you alone!

"Libertarian." You keep you using that word ...

Libertarians In Spaaaaaaaaaaaace

Couch Potato Chronicles: Libertarian "Firefly"?

Thoughts on one of my favorite TV shows ever.

Another Reason (or Two) to Love Jeremy Irons

Aside from being a fantastic actor with a gorgeous voice?  He's a libertarian who just dumped on Bloomberg and nanny statism.

Perspectives on the Rand Paul Filibuster

I was trying to write an honest-to-goodness analysis of the filibuster (I meant to include links like this, this, this, this, this, and this in my discussion of how even though I don't agree with Rand on a number of things in general, I was overjoyed to see him "hack" politics and bust out of the business-as-usual DC opacity to engage a much wider audience ... When was the last time you watched C-SPAN in delight while social media exploded as a conversation about civil liberties took off?  Be honest.  Never), but in the end, my congenital inability to resist a joke has overpowered me.  You may enjoy a rather more visual explication, gentle reader?

How Twitter, Facebook, and social media responded:

How Rand Paul fans see him and the filibuster:

How John McCain and Lindsey Graham see Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and everybody else who rallied to Rand:

How McCain and Graham see themselves:

How Rand Paul fans see McCain and Graham:

How C-SPAN sees Rand Paul:

How libertarians hope this conversation about civil liberties, limits of executive power, and government overreach turns out:

How Mad Minerva treated the filibuster as it happened:

Dare We Hope

... that somehow out of the filibuster we might get a new GOP that focuses on freedom, liberty, limited government, and American optimism?  that presents a shining vision of America in opposition to the miserable pettiness of the status quo and its power-grubbing mandarins? OHGODPLEASE.  Paul, Rubio, Cruz, et al are making me dare to hope a little.  It's terrifying and exhilarating all at once.  Let it start here with the pushback against the abuse of power.  As Rand Paul just said, this isn't about Republicans or Democrats, but about executive power and the US Constitution.

UPDATE: It's 11:40 PM, and we're all still up and a-filibusterin'.  How much longer can everyone keep going? Honey, grad students don't sleep as a matter of course.  We're in for the long haul (while doing schoolwork, natch).  (Meanwhile, I note that a bunch of other people are finally showing up on the Senate floor to jump on Paul's bandwagon.  Shamed into action, eh?  GOOD.  Do the right thing for the wrong reason, eh?  So long as the right thing gets done in a snakepit like DC.)

Tweet of the Day on Raul Paul's Filibuster Against Drones

The spectacle of Rand Paul's filibuster today (still going as I type, with 10 Senators involved now!) has been eating up the news, so I'm not going to babble much about it here other than to say that it's pretty darn awesome.  It was high time somebody poked the establishment in the eye about this.  I think you all might also appreciate this observation that just appeared via Twitter:

That awkward moment when your Nobel Peace Prize-winning President won't promise not to kill US citizens. #StandwithRand
— Jary (@Jary798) March 7, 2013

Oh, heck with it. Here's the beginning of the whole thing: 

Watch More News Videos at ABC | Technology News | Celebrity News

“I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA. I will speak until I can no longer speak. I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court, that Americans could be killed in a cafe in San Francisco or in a restaurant in Houston or at their home in Bowling Green, Ky., is an abomination. It is something that should not and cannot be tolerated in our country.”

A Producer's Thoughts on Hollywood, Politics, and Policy

An interesting glimpse into one producer's (eclectic) outlook.

Quote of the Day: Axes to Grind

From some useful thoughts on civil discourse and trying to see where the other person is coming from:

My hypothesis is that progressives, conservatives, and libertarians view politics along three different axes. For progressives, the main axis has oppressors at one end and the oppressed at the other. For conservatives, the main axis has civilization at one end and barbarism at the other. For libertarians, the main axis has coercion at one end and free choice at the other.

Of course, these are just guidelines. I'm inclined to see coercion in its most flagrant forms as a kind of barbarism.

Libertarian or Bust

I know I keep harping on this, but hey, this is my blog, and I'll harp if I want to.  Anyway, Nick Gillespie's latest take on why Romney lost is worth reading.  Never mind that I'm linking to it because it's pretty much what I personally think, but whatevs, right?  Blurb:

... the GOP, despite its endlessly repeated mantra of limited government, is wildly out of touch with the majority of Americans who consistently say they want the government to do less, spend less, and not enforce a single set of values.

Well, DUH!  Maybe the GOP establishment will finally stop looking at libertarians as though we were insane, shiftless loose cannons with no morals at all.  (Or NOT, probably not, but a girl can dream ... and, believe it or not, I actually dream of limited government and individual rights more than I dream of Ryan Gosling and Jensen Ackles.  I'll swear on a stack of Bibles!)

More blurbage after the fold so you can skip it if you're tired of my cheerleading for libertarians, sweetie pie.

More Thoughts on Libertarianism

Good stuff by Randy Barnett and Nick Gillespie.  Here's a bit:

The libertarian vote comprises somewhere between 10 percent and 15 percent of votes. It's remarkably reliable and consistent in that it supports candidates who believe the state should not enforce a single set of moral values and should stop doing things that individuals and businesses can handle better. That vote can swing any election and it will cozy up to whatever party takes it seriously. If the Republicans want to win the libertarian vote, all they have to do is ... change a little bit. Ironically, all the party has to do is start pushing what it says it believes in: Individual rights and limited government. ... GOP politicos and analysts have known this for well over a decade-plus, but they have been painfully slow (or maybe just stupid) to acknowledge libertarian sentiments in their party's policies or priorities. 

An entrenched old-school political establishment being unable or unwilling to think even a teensy bit out of the box?  Quelle surprise!

Never Too Soon

Last night I was just noting to a friend that Ryan/Rubio 2016 could possibly be the hottest GOP ticket ever.  I was mostly just making a quip (the boys are undeniably cute, though - hey there, female demographic!), but maybe it's not such a bad idea to start thinking ahead.  The GOP old guard has had its shot; it's time for the new generation - my generation - with fresh approaches to have a go.  The 2016 election is in only 1,459 more days, heh.

Apparently I'm a Cold, Calculating, Unsympathetic ... Guy

This article about "the cold, calculating libertarian mind" made me laugh, especially since it also claims that libertarianism appeals more to guys than girls ... and almost every libertarian I know is a girl, and we're all (if I do say myself) decent warmhearted folks.  Oh, and when Alessandra got wind of this piece, she messaged me with "you cold libertarian biatch!"  LOL!

Anyway, this seems to sum us up pretty well:

These are people who often call themselves economically conservative but socially liberal. They like free societies as well as free markets, and they want the government to get out of the bedroom as well as the boardroom. They don't see why, in order to get a small-government president, they have to vote for somebody who is keen on military spending and religion; or to get a tolerant and compassionate society they have to vote for a large and intrusive state.

I personally don't object to military spending in the way that some others do (I've read too much history - unilaterally disarming is a greeeeeeat way to invite people to assault you), but the rest of that block quote applies.

Satire Alert: Libertarians Perceived

Quote of the Day: Libertarianism and Ron Paul

Obviously you don't have to agree, but here's a hilariously snarky quote:

 If you were an evil genius determined to promote the idea that libertarianism is a morally dubious ideology of privilege poorly disguised as a doctrine of liberation, you'd be hard pressed to improve on Ron Paul.

I'm not a fan of the man.  You'll remember how I summed up Paul at the first GOP debate.  He makes libertarianism look ... well, weird.

Quote of the Day: Big Government

Hmmmm:

Has the staggering growth of the federal establishment made America a better, more humane, more optimistic place to live? Obviously it is possible to single out this or that law or regulation or expenditure and show that it has been beneficial. Not even the most ardent libertarian disputes the need for federal governance of inherently national matters -- and the Constitution itself makes clear that Washington has a role to play in guaranteeing civic equality and political liberty. Yet in crucial ways, the flow of power upward to Washington has impoverished American culture and weakened civic society. [My emphasis -- MM]

My feelings can be summed up by my favorite ill-tempered Browncoat captain's sarcastic view of big government: "That's what governments are for -- to get in a man's way."  And to turn self-reliant citizens into dependent sheep and social engineering projects.  No, thanks.

Island Getaway, Libertarian Style

La Parisienne and I have been dreaming about doing just this very thing for years ... though, alas, we haven't the bajillions of dollars necessary.  

Yes, yes, I know that every two-bit sci-fi dictator wannabe has an island lair as a base from which to launch their takeover of the world.  What makes us any different?  For one, we don't want to take over. We just want to be left alone by assorted meddling, nosy do-gooders, some of the worst of which  may or may not be genetically related to us in the matrilinear line (but that's another story).  The thought had occurred to us that if we had our own island, we could more or less control who gets to come to said island -- and wouldn't that be delightful! 

Petty Tyranny Is Still Tyranny

BLERG.  Also: It's the incrementalism, stupid!  It's like Lilliputian annoyances that add up.  It's like being pecked to death by ducks.