Replacing the Nolan Chart BUMPED - UPDATED Spectrum

[orig post 11.26.16 1pm]

I've hated the Nolan Chart for as long as I can remember.

The Nolan Chart is one of the most recognized political spectrum images on the subject.  It is also misleading, outdated, and is due for a replacement.

It's only use lately has been as a recruitment tool for the Libertarian Party.  And judging by their dismal performance in recent elections, they should be ready to scrap it too.

Flaws to be corrected:

• The Libertarian block is the same size as the others, yet Libertarians have only achieved 1-3% in recent national elections.
• The Libertarian block is at the top, and can mislead newcomers to the topic of politics that it represents a superior ideology.
• The Libertarians cover both right and left in the chart.  True in the past, but not in 2016.  The left Libertarians voted for Hillary, Jill or Gary.  Some were likely Bernie supporters during the primaries.  The right Libertarians are more likely to identify as Alt-Right now. 
• Left Wing and Totalitarian are mostly one block of voters now.  Obama enjoyed support from moderates as he also received endorsements from several socialist and communist organizations including the Communist Party USA.
• The Moderate block is too large for the politicized environment of 2016.  

The Nolan chart “divided political opinions into two vectors – economic opinion and personal opinion.”   I don't think these are relevant anymore.  Not a single Hillary voter cared about the $20T debt nor the decline in family and religious values in America.  And not a single Trump voter was trying to extend EBT benefits for themselves or halt gay marriage with their vote.

I think a return to a two-dimensional spectrum is in order.  And with the popular vote numbers now available, we can map it out with some accuracy.

With each square representing one million votes, here is my view of America's current political alignment, based on the 2016 popular vote:

The only question now is how extreme each electorate has become.  I think both sides are heavy on the ends.  I think the Democrats are stretched into a very extreme orientation.

Your thoughts?

UPDATED 11.27.16 5:30pm:

I've received some great suggestions both here and on FB.  One change that I feel compelled to make is to identify the illegal alien votes on Hillary's side.  One fraud-watch group puts the number at 3 million, or three squares on the chart above.  I'm going to give it a few days in case there is a more accurate estimate.

Trump tweeted today:

In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.

BUMPED 11.28.16 3:45pm:

Two sources put the illegal vote estimate at 3 million.  I've updated the Spectrum image with this information.  I assume only a few of these are radical 'La Raza' types, while others just want a piece of the 'Free Stuff' and prefer amnesty over the legal route to citizenship.

Sources:

UncleSamsMisguidedChildren: How many illegals voted in the 2016 Presidential Election?  Their source: TrueTheVote.

InfoWars: Report: Three Million Votes in Presidential Election Cast by Illegal Aliens.  Their source: VoteFraud.org.

In the past I would hesitate to use these sources.  But 2016 has shown these sources are far more reliable than any of the old-media outlets.

Say It!

It is 10pm on election night.

Me and Sam are calling it.

You can keep watching the MSM tonight if you like to have your time wasted.

I'm only watching the MSM for the tears.  The tasty, tasty tears.

A special THANK YOU to Gary whatshisface for pulling liberal voters from Hillary.  As much as 2-4%!  Gary was key to Trump's success in 2016, and he negated the traitorous #NeverTrump effect.  Those f**kers.

Congratulations to President-Elect Trump.  Great job, sir.  You beat them on the issues.  You beat their voter fraud efforts.  You beat them on all fronts.  I look forward to helping you Make America Great Again.

We have a lot of work to do.  Now let's get started on that wall!

UPDATED 11:30pm:

Meme of the day:

HA!

UPDATED 1am EST:

MarketWatch:

Tomorrow looks to be quite a day on the market.  Gold is up $59/oz!

UPDATED 11.9.16 8:30am:

Quote of the Day, by yours truly:

You know you won the election when the other side wants to wait for the ballot count in Guam.

A rare Ushanka prediction:

I will smoke at least one cigar today.

UPDATED 11.11.16 10pm:

Precious Metals News

In my last Precious Metals Investing video I described two scenarios where a dip in the supply of gold could happen.  Author James Rickard mentioned in his latest book, The New Case for Gold, that his contacts in the industry were reporting shortages, and that shortages would in turn drive the price of gold up.  Here is my review of his book.

One scenario would be at the consumer level and would be a signal, albeit a minor and temporary one.  We saw that happen three times with Silver, where the US Mint could not keep up with demand for Silver Eagle coins. It was news for a few days, then supply returned.  I suggest this should be ignored because of logistical and other factors rather than supply.

I suggested the sign to watch for - scenario two - is when a gold order by a government goes unfulfilled.  These suppliers deal in large volumes and are aware of the pace of mining operations.  They are directly connected to the supply, or lack of supply, of gold.  If this were to occur, it would be the signal that Mr. Rickards' predictions of a run on gold were coming true.

ZeroHedge has posted two articles in as many days on a middle scenario I hadn't considered.  I'll call it the Institutional Level.

Articles:
Deutsche Bank Refuses Delivery Of Physical Gold Upon Demand
Deutsche Boerse Responds To Deutsche Bank's Failure To Deliver Physical Gold

This summary is based on how I understand it (which means go read those articles yourself):

Apparently there is a bank, Xetra-Gold, in Germany that, for a fee, sells vouchers for physical gold.  A voucher is sold, the equivalent in gold is added to the bank's vaults.  Moreover, voucher owners may claim their physical gold rather than sell their vouchers for cash and the bank will deliver the gold.  The voucher fees cover both the storage and, if requested, delivery of the gold.

In my Gold Standard studies I learned this bank would be called a Deposit Bank.  A name for a deposit bank in the US could be: "First Libertarian Bank of the United States."  Or, "Ron Paul Deposit Bank."  The Deposit Bank is the banking model Libertarians want for banking in the US.  We'll never know what the name would be because a deposit bank would never fly in the US - so long as we have the Fractional Reserve Banking.  Fractional Reserve Banking may be a misleading dishonest model as few people are aware that when they deposit money in their bank, it legally becomes the bank's money. And if bad times come, the bank will decide how much of their money they will give to their customers.  People are used to free, or near free, banking services because our banks use the deposits to fund loans.  How could a deposit bank, which charges for everything, compete with that?  Hence no Libertarian banks in the US.  Yet.

So Xetra-Gold is backed by Deutsche Bank.  And 900 Xetra-Gold customers have, over the years, requested and received delivery of a total of 4.5 tonnes of gold.  But #901 recently made that request, and he was told to pound sand.  Not by the bank he contracted with, but from the bank behind the bank - Deutsche Bank.

Deutsche Bank breaks their contract with Xetra-Gold without telling Xetra-Gold.  And Xetra-Gold essentially breaks its contracts with its customers because delivery can't occur without the cooperation of Deutsche Bank.

And we're not supposed to notice?  A Google News search shows this story is only in the blogs at the moment.

Is the Xetra-Gold story a gold supply issue?  If so, I'd say it is at the Institutional Level as it concerns a mojor bank and big-dollar investors.  If so, this is a significant signal and one I would consider in line with Mr. Rickards' prediction.

But it may not be a supply issue.  Did you know that Deutsche Bank is not carrying its required reserves?  Did you know there are suggestions that Germany nationalize Deutsche Bank to 1) provide the reserves required and 2) continue the illusion that all is well?  A merger with Germany's other large bank has also been suggested.

We'll know soon enough.

---

In other news, Rickards posted on his blog a few days ago that he now predicts the price of gold to reach $10,000.  (Up from $5000)  Up until now, only old men trying to get media attention, or people trying to sell gold or gold-related services have suggested that number.  And year after year they have been completely discredited.  (See my video about Peter Schiff)  Since Rickards' post shows no real math or other factors other than Brexit(!), I'm afraid he may be joining the others in discreditland.

UPDATED 9.2.16 8pm:

ZH reports that Deutsche Bank has responded to this story with no actual response.  It is if Hillary's attorneys wrote the statement for the bank.  Let me know if you can figure it out:

And so another non-response, because in the same press release Deutsche Bank both admits that it has an obligation to deliver the gold "as a matter of course", and then tacitly confirms that it failed to do so, by first saying that it evaluates the "economic efficiency of physical delivery", something it should have no right to do since the Xetra prospectus explicitly mandates that it should release gold on demand, and then adds that "should an investor’s request for the handover of physical gold not have been complied with immediately in individual cases, this will be reviewed and an individual solution will be found with the client."

A Shakeup?

Check out NPR's headline today:

OMG!  A shakeup?!

I have so many questions!  Who got fired?  Is the Trump campaign in disarray?  Can it be salvaged by November 8th?  Should I vote Libertarian to feel good about myself?

Answers:  Nobody. No. N/A.  Don't be stupid.

This is journalism in 2016: the year of the death of the Democrat Party and their walking-dead nominee.

Consider the following:

If California had a 7.5 earthquake today, the MSM would have to report a 7.5 earthquake.  Right?

If a plane piloted by Muslims took out a skyscraper in New York City today, they'd have to report the lost tower and the reason (a plane).  Of course they'd tell us the details are fuzzy on who did it, or why, but everybody - and I mean everybody - has learned to see through that BS.

So how come the fiction when it comes to political news?

The Democrat Party nominee has not a single success in her past other than marrying a slippery politician, appears to break the law at every turn, has a trail of dead bodies as far as the eye can see, and is delinquent in using a walker.  Any one of these could drive major ad revenue and desperately needed credibility to the MSM outlet(s) that reported on it.  But instead, the MSM manufactures a "shake up" on the Republican side. 

So what is the "shake up?"

• Manifort stays on as Campaign Chairman.
• Trump hires Stephen Bannon as Chief Executive.
• Trump promotes Kellyanne Conway to Campaign Manager.

 Keep trying MSM.

UPDATED 8.17.16 2pm:

Today's WSJ shares the groupthink:

And Trump team member, Michael Cohen, gives it back to CNN.  Good job.

What I Like About Libertarians

In this one post at Imgur:

Just in case the Democrats think they've indoctrinated every millennial...

Merica!

Stumping the NeverTrumps

I'm back from the DNC Convention.  See my convention posts and videos here.

The latest Stump the Trump video, with powerful clips (starting at the 6:35 mark) from the nominee's convention speech.




Here is a list of BitterCruzingers and NeverTrumpers who did everything they could, including burning their credibility on the alter of "My opinion is super important" or "Do as I say or you're not a conservative" or "Hillary will crush him," to keep us from hearing that speech.  Bad judgement and selfish behavior, one and all:

Rush Limbaugh

Mark Levin

Glenn Beck

Erick Erickson

Bosch Fawstin
David Boaz (NRO)
L. Brent Bozell III (NRO) 
Mona Charen (NRO) 
Ben Domenech (NRO) 
Steven F. Hayward (NRO)
Mark Helprin (NRO)
William Kristol (NRO)
Yuval Levin (NRO)
  Andrew C. McCarthy (NRO)
David McIntosh (NRO)
Michael Medved (NRO)
Edwin Meese III (NRO)
Russell Moore (NRO)
 Michael B. Mukasey (NRO)
Katie Pavlich (NRO)
R. R. Reno (NRO)
Cal Thomas (NRO)

Diann (Patriot Retort)

Doug Ross (DirectorBlue)

John Hawkins (RightWingNews)

Dave Blout (MoonBattery)

Michael Reagan

PJ Media

Thomas Sowell

The Federalist

Mitt Romney

John Hinderaker

Bill Whittle

Andrew Klaven

Katie Pavlich

Bob Owens

Steve McCann

Dana Loesch

Matt Walsh

Victory Girls Blog

Robert Zubrin

Members of Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum Board:
Eunie Smith, Anne Cori, Cathie Adams,
Rosina Kovar, Shirley Curry, and Carolyn McLarty.

John Podhoretz (Commentary Magazine)

William Jacobsen (Legal Insurrection)

Steve Berman (The Resurgent)

Ben Howe (RedState)

Charles Krauthammer

Bret Stephens

Flopping Aces
George Will

Ted Cruz

John Kasich

Comrade Chapin, explaining "Why Trump?" from a rare Libertarian perspective to those who still don't get it:




IMO, why Libertarians won't be a concern in 2016:

a) Their anarchist impulses are satiated by Trump, who has turned the GOP on its head,
b) The Libertarian ticket has an open-borders pot-head presidential candidate and a gun-control VP candidate - hardly "Libertarian," and
c) Trump's crossover voters, if they hold, will overcome any spoiler attempt from fringe third-parties.

U/T: Comrade Zukov

Quote of the Day UPDATED and BUMPED

[orig post 5.19 10pm]

From Kenny, a principled Libertarian among unprincipled Libertarians:

Fuck ’em both and fuck the Libertarian Party.

In response to today's announcement (RT):

I am having the best year ever!! 

First, Trump wins big in the primaries.  Second, Super-Delegate favorite and presumptive nominee, Hillary, is discredited with multiple losses to Bernie.  Third, the Cubbies have been doing well (except in Milwaukee).  And now the champion of Libertarianism, Gary Whatshisface, who only got 1% when he ran in 2012, picks a gun-control guy as his running mate.  Because money. 

I'm going to test a hypothesis tonight.  I'm going to see if it is possible to fall asleep while laughing.  If it works, expect many more posts on the inner workings of America's Libertarian Party.

UPDATED and BUMPED 6.1.16 8pm:

Karl Denninger of Market-Ticker shares Kenny's opinion of the 2016 Libertarian ticket.

Just don't.

Gary Johnson is once again the allegedly Libertarian candidate for President, along with Bill Weld.  This occurred at a "convention" during which a candidate for national party chair literally stripped to his underwear on-stage.

Super Tuesday #2

I voted in Ohio today.  I won't say who I voted for. . .

Apparently, many of the Cruz folks are voting for John Kasich here today.  Ohio is a winner-take-all state and they like the idea of keeping Ohio's 66 delegates away from Trump.

That means there are two types of voters today.  In the Ohio primarily, but elsewhere too:

1) Voters who vote for the candidate who they think best represents them, and

2) The voters who don't stand for anything, but stand against Trump.

In other words, the Kasich voter may not stand for amnesty, gun-control, or obamacare as Kasich does.  The Kasich voter stands against Trump.  I have an Ohio FB comrade who shared this from today.  He felt good about his vote.

If you stand against Trump, you must dislike headlines like those on Drudge today.  We don't want China to be worried about who we elect, right?  We don't want George Soros upset at us for electing Trump, right?

Here are a couple more screenshots from FB comrades today.  The first is from a voter in Florida, the second from Ohio.

I just listened to an interview with C. Steven Tucker, a FB comrade.  He is an outspoken leader in the health insurance industry and a popular activist.  He posted this interview where he discusses the healthcare plans of both Cruz and Trump.  It is only 22 minutes - too short in my opinion - but I learned a LOT.  Comrade Tucker is my go-to guy for the healthcare debate.  Take a listen!

Last, an amazing thing.  Have you heard of Libertarians for Trump?  Walter E. Block writes at Lew Rockwell, where he makes the case that Libertarians should consider voting for Trump in 2016.  I have said before that Trump's GOP insurgency, his 3rd party run from within, shares many of the same traits that I've detected within Libertarians.  The anger, the common sense and the energy are three that come to mind.  He's looking for people to join him with the hope LFT can become a sizable block of voters that may steer Trump even more into their corner.

But, the perfect is the enemy of the good. It is our goal to throw our weight behind the candidate who has a reasonable chance of actually becoming President of the United States whose views are CLOSEST to libertarianism.
—
I ask you to do this [join LFT], rather, because it is the right thing to do; he is, of all the major candidates for the office of President of the United States, the one most closely, albeit very far from perfectly, aligned with our beloved libertarian philosophy.

UPDATED 3.17.16:

Bitter Cruzinger Hawkins posted this before the results came in Tuesday.

The Real Trump and Hitler Similarity

The current pulse of FB's angry Cruz supporters: "Stupid" is out, and "Hitler" is in.  It is a stretch to say that if Trump and Hitler have the same popularity, that 6 million more Jews will die.  But if your candidate is in a strong second place, you have to come up with something to knock #1 down a bit.  Explaining all the positives of your #2 is far harder to do than posting one-word insults on social media and trying to use peer pressure to get your friends to change their vote.  No?

The Hitler comparison is not only lazy, but it is historically wrong.  Hitler was a loud-mouth nuisance with a 1% following when he entered the political arena.  Think Gary Whatshisface running as the Libertarian candidate.

Who?

Exactly.

In fact, It took Hitler years to gain a following, and he only did so because he spoke to a deep and painful resentment from the Versailles Treaty that closed WWI.  In other words, Hitler understood better than others what people wanted from a political leader.

I am reading a fascinating 1979 book called A Noble Treason by Richard Hanson.  It is about a brother and sister in WWII Germany who disagree with the Hitler regime.  They put their thoughts in several leaflets, under the name The White Rose, and are eventually caught and executed.  I will post my review here soon.  And I will recommend this book.

What Trump is doing to the GOPe in his campaign, and to the old-media with his absence in tonight's FoxNews debate, is nothing short of refreshing.  Watching the early angst in these two obsolete groups is exciting, and I anticipate fun days ahead if Trump can keep his momentum. 

So where am I going with the Hitler comparison?

The first signs of Nazi failure created a ripple which grew to a tsunami within the Nazi regime.  

I think we are seeing something similar in the GOPe and old-media groups - both with decades of dominance now in question.

A diary entry from January 1943 by German Theodor Haecker records his view of the Nazi Regime's new desperation as their Russian expedition in the East is showing signs of failure, and the Allies are preparing for the mother of all invasions from the West.  This desperation is exactly what I see in the GOPe and old-MSM today, thanks to Trump, and Trump alone:

One can already hear the howls and whines of the demons more clearly in their dread-filled phrases.  It is the last gasp of the crazed man who runs amok, just before the end.  An official call to hate!  The hate will certainly be found, all right, but it will not be the hate they intend, and want, today.  It will be different . . . 

The author adds:

The crazed man who was running amok was, in fact, far from his last gasp, but he was beginning to pant where before he had only bellowed.  The difference was readily sensed by those who were waiting for any sign or symptom of a change.

Indeed.

The Libertarian Struggle of 2016

As a Cubs fan... I can sympathize with Libertarians when yet another election season passes them by without a chance at the championship.  "The next election is the one!" they'll say.

Rand Paul is done.  He was always at the fringe of the GOP race, and here he is (above) after failing to meet the criteria for yesterday's debate.  Carly Fiorina was also disqualified from the debate, but she spun it with statements about why she is different than the seven on the debate stage.  That is about the best one can do at this point.  (Had Fiorina been a serious candidate, among other things, she would have had an Issues tab on her website with bold policy goals and promises.  Instead, she surrendered that leadership to others, then came in late to say "I'll do that too.")

Rand Paul was the Libertarian favorite in 2016, despite his pro-life position.  He is exceptional on the constitutional matters, the Fed, communicating common sense policy changes, and many other important issues.  I would have gladly voted for him if he were nomiated.  But he didn't catch on.

Libertarians are upset.

ReasonTV - the Libertarian champions of YouTube - posted this Trump hit piece today.  I have no proof, but I am convinced this has more to do with Rand washing out than anything to do with Trump.




You may have missed the news from last week: Gary Whatshisface has announced his 2016 candidacy for president for the Libertarian Party. 

My prediction:

ReasonTV will soon release a [another] Gary W. interview.  It will be ahhhmazing.

Gary W. will have all the answers, and he will be patient with us, and Nick Gillespie, as he explains that both parties equally suck.  ReasonTV's interview will convince the refined, objective, intellectual viewer that they too have superior "reasoning" skills beyond those stupid people who plan to vote Democrat or Republican.

Of course, if that is you, and you decide to join the 2% who will vote for the presidential candidate who has never been at a presidential debate and whose top priority is the full legalization of pot, then you will join the "smart" people.

Back in 5 . . .

Taking some time away from the hat factory.  Back soon.

Complements FB Comrade Ben:

Tab Clearing

Of the 7 articles I captured last week, here are the ones I'd recommend:

  Comrade Aaron Clarey posted this one at his blog, Captain Capitalism:  How Socialism Makes Women Barren.  Another excellent post about the demands of society of our youth, and the costs of those demands.  He asks women:

...before you get all angry at me for being the messenger telling you biological truths, you need to look back and ask who and what made it so it was basically impossible for you to have children and raise a family in today's society.
---
Who predominantly controls academia and benefits from you postponing your life another 4-6 years?
---

It's the left.

It is the left who wants to enslave you at a school where you learn nothing till you're 18.

It is the left who mandates you into thinking you need a college education to have any worth in this society.

It is the left that tells you you are oppressed and need to be freed, replacing your family with a career.

It is the left that convinces you to ignore the biological programming and demands of the (necessary) half of humanity needed to bring and raise children in this world.

And it is the left that tells you you need to spend money on stupid crap to have fulfillment in life.

The libertarian at Free-Man's Perspective criticizes us who "pour their time and money into the sewer of politics, to be lost forever" by writing a 4 page rant on said topic.  The title, It’s 460 AD in Rome: This Won’t Be Fixed," suggests the article will show parallels of one failed state with America.  Quite a valuable exercise for those of us wondering if America can recover from its recent decline.  He offers some excellent quotes from a Roman citizen, Salvan.  But he then spirals into Hillary and Chelsea Manning, names that do not belong in a 4-page post on the end of America.  He closes with suggesting we "start building something better."  Maybe he'll tell us what that is in a future post.

Francis W. Porretto at Liberty's Torch has a better post on the topic: “Let It Burn:” After The Conflagration, Then What?

The number of revolutions that were followed by a state of affairs freedom lovers found preferable is very small.
--- 

Unless what collapses the existing regime also eliminates 98% to 99% of the population of this country, such men will still exist, and will strive to continue the substance of what came before. There may be a change in form, possibly a quite dramatic one. A change in substance is far less likely.

However firm you may be in your conviction that the status quo cannot be repaired by conventional means -- that it simply must fall to make room for something better -- don’t root for it. Especially, don’t work actively to collapse it in perfect confidence that what follows simply must be superior.

Vanderleun at American Digest has an excellent proposal to remind the world of the destructive capabilities of nuclear weapons: set one off.  I second the proposal, endorse his reasoning, and would even add another reason: it'd be an opportunity to test older components and verify EMP and other effects that have only been modeled on super-computers.  Hiroshima Day - or- Nukes: Time for a Live Demo:

What we need to do this is: "The Live Demo." By this I mean we need to find a small island or deserted space somewhere on the planet and sacrifice it for the greater good by setting off one, just one, low-yield thermonuclear device in the atmosphere for all the world to see.
---
I can assure you that having the entire world tune in for "The Live Demo" -- and the whole world will tune in -- shall give the entire planet pause. It's not enough for humans to be told about nukes. Every so often, we need to see to believe.

Related: Check out NukeMap.  Place a 'small' detonation on your home town, or 90 miles SW from your home town, and see what happens. 

Quote of the Day

Scott McKay at Hayride has a great post on his transition from "choice" to "life".  I'd call it very mild, and very respectful - far more so than anything I'd write on the Planned Parenthood's current scandal.  It is also very thoughtful and thorough.  Having said that... I really liked these two passages:

That’s what that industry is about. They kill kids, and they lie their asses off about it. At some point you’ve got to stop and recognize this industry for what it is.
---
And now we have these videos, which don’t really tell us anything we didn’t already know about Planned Parenthood. That’s an organization begun by a genocidal racist which has deliberately preyed on minority communities, and it tells the kinds of lies your standard lefty only fantasizes about evil Wall Street corporations telling. Now we know, with pretty difficult evidence to contradict, that what Planned Parenthood really amounts to is a criminal billionaire outfit which takes hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to dupe women into killing their kids for spare parts they’re selling. And when someone comes along to show this to the American people, the Democrat politicians that criminal billionaire outfit has bought turn around and begin a criminal investigation into the whistleblowers.

It is nice to see Scott coming around. Better late than never.  But I doubt many are joining him.  The "choice" people long ago rationalized the act of abortion - the act of killing a baby.  In Hillary-speak, I have to assume they would ask: What difference does it make what they do with the baby's body afterwards? 

Embarrassed?  Yes.  Permanently shifting to pro-life?  Wishful thinking.

Scott links to another great write up from Matt Walsh on FB.

Greg, a self-identifying Libertarian, makes a good point I haven't heard elsewhere:




Another point I haven't seen anyone take up yet: How does, or will, the Planned Parenthood scandal impact the campaigns of pro-choice GOP'ers? 

There are Republican voters who vote on other issues who are getting fired-up about the baby-part black market, and candidate's positions on abortion may become more important than originally expected.

Fiorina has been the most vocal on this scandal, but I think she is pro-choice.  So is her outrage genuine, or is she taking the offense with the hope she'll avoid having to take the defense?

Pop quiz: Who was the last pro-choice Republican president?

No, We Are Not

MarketWatch:

This is horrible news for the Rand Paul campaign.  I've said several times already: he only has a chance at the nomination if he can keep quiet on the drug legalization topic.  He will flame-out the moment he is tied to this, as his other priorities will soon be forgotten.  If it hasn't happened already, then wait.  Watch.  And see.

The Libertarian movement is made up of two frustrated camps: conservatives and liberals.  They can't acknowledge this unstable state, or their movement would explode like a Helium atom holding onto 25 electrons.  The glue that holds them together: "Both Parties Suck!" 

I've ventured down the trail that leads to Libertarianism.  I am more sympathetic to their origins than they will give me credit for.  But on that trail, I took the fork in the road that turned away from the cliff. 

This doesn't mean I don't pay attention.

Ask a Libertarian to tell you his (they are almost exclusively male) top priority and you'll learn his true ideology.  "End the Fed," or "Limited Government" will come from my allies, the conservatives.  "End the Drug War," or "Release Non-Violent Drug Offenders," or "Legalize Pot/Meth/Heroin because Personal Responsibility," or "End Foreign Wars and Disband the Military Industrial Complex," and you have a disgruntled hippie Democrat who, like all liberals, is anxious to dilute this nation's family and religious values.

Each side can articulate and defend the other side's arguments, but their top priority will tell you what they really are.  And if a Ron Paul-type were to somehow get elected, these divisions would come out on day one of his administration.  And 4 years later none of the Libertarian priorities would have been accomplished.

I think Rand Paul is a solid guy overall.  I will vote for him is he wins the GOP nomination.  But I don't even consider him because he won't get past his socially-liberal flaws in the GOP.  Maybe he could in another time, but not after 8 years of Obama. 

I'd advise anyone who cannot see the difference between the Democrat Party and the Republican Party in 2016, nor the stakes in this coming election, to step away from the bong.

My $0.02.

Why Would I Diss Myself?

Hillary is not happy about us.

Apparently she is still alive.  And running for office too.

I don't diss the government.  Libertarians do that. 

I'm a Republican conservative that votes Republican.

I diss the people attracted to work there, and those useful idiots who think it is a solution rather than a tool for tyranny. 

My dissing is personal because Hillary will promise people my money in exchange for votes. 

That is the sum of her 2016 campaign.

My dissing is directed at Hillary and her fellow liberals progressives communists.

Get used to it.
Take me offline.
Throw me in jail.
Or take to Fort Marcy Park.

Contagion. aka: OMG, The Sky is Falling!

Zerohedge and many other doomsdayers frequently use the word "Contagion."  They use it to either:

1) describe an international domino effect of one economic disaster triggering chaos in other economies.  Their thinking: we are a world economy now, all interconnected, and thus an economic downturn in one economy will trigger unforeseen downturns in others.  Or, 

2) to describe the national economic turmoil within a single collapsing economy.  This UK Telegraph article, linkied by Drudge today, is doing exactly that.  Their "contagion" is the crisis the Greek citizens are feeling at the ATMs - some out of cash and some with reduced withdraw limits. 

I've seen "contagion" enough from these sources that I thought I'd go look up the definition.  Here it is - Dictionary.com:

As you can see, there is nothing about economic crisis in the "contagion" definition.

N O T H I N G.  

Yes, we can all agree on what these doomsdayers mean by using the word: that bad economic decisions lead to suffering and often more bad economic decisions.  We can also agree that this intended meaning is appropriate for the current problems in Greece.

But can we all agree they are using the word "contagion" incorrectly?

From this point on, I will tune-out when I hear this word.  It is a fear word, not a descriptive word.  Those using it are using it to create fear, or to somehow convey some worldly knowledge or expert economic wisdom.  This is no different than President Obama using the word "Stimulus" to describe a jobs program when, in fact, it was a near-trillion dollar gift to labor unions and other political allies that led to zero new jobs.

The only "contagion" we need fear is crabs from hookers (if you're into that), HIV from homosexuals (if you're into that), tuberculosis (TB), Chagas disease, dengue fever, hepatitis, malaria, or measles from our new 'citizens' from Mexico and Central America, and Ebola from those coming across our open borders from Sierra Leone.

Here are some suggested words that we can use in place of "contagion:"

Turmoil - a state of great commotion, confusion, or disturbance; tumult; agitation; disquiet.

Bedlam - a scene or state of wild uproar and confusion.

Chaos - a state of utter confusion or disorder; a total lack of organization or order.

Commotion - violent or tumultuous motion; agitation; noisy disturbance.  Or, political or social disturbance or upheaval; sedition; insurrection.

Maelstrom - a restless, disordered, or tumultuous state of affairs.

Pandemonium -  wild uproar or unrestrained disorder; tumult or chaos.  Or, a place or scene of riotous uproar or utter chaos.

Disturbance - an outbreak of disorder; a breach of public peace.

Strife - vigorous or bitter conflict, discord, or antagonism.

Disorder - breach of order; disorderly conduct; public disturbance.

As a product of the public school system, I should NOT be the one trusted to make these observations and corrections. But this is my burden.

As a platoon sergeant once told Pvt Karl: "If you see something wrong and don't fix it, you've just set a new standard."

A Liberal's Criticism of Libertarians

Liberal Kevin Drum at Liberal Mother Jones weighs in on the Libertarian phenomenon.  As to the movement's unusual majority of men, I can't comment.  But I appreciate, and agree with, his general criticism of the movement:

Hardcore libertarianism is a fantasy. It's a fantasy where the strongest and most self-reliant folks end up at the top of the heap, and a fair number of men share the fantasy that they are these folks. They believe they've been held back by rules and regulations designed to help the weak, and in a libertarian culture their talents would be obvious and they'd naturally rise to positions of power and influence.

Most of them are wrong, of course. In a truly libertarian culture, nearly all of them would be squashed like ants—mostly by the same people who are squashing them now. But the fantasy lives on regardless.

It is nice to see the other side as frustrated as I am.  The Libertarian movement, while passionate and dedicated, only has a potential spoiler role in American politics.  They are a threat to both parties in a close race.

No doubt Kevin still burns from Nader's wonderful job of spoiling Al Gore's chances at destiny in 2000, and he doesn't want to see that happen again. 

(Yes, I know Nader wasn't a Libertarian.)

Thursday Tab Clearing

Selected articles were piling up faster than I could read them.  This post is more defensive than it is informative!

Here are a few I'd recommend for this weekend's reading.  You may see all the articles - 40 pages worth - at this Google Doc.

Maureen Callahan has a review on Joseph Kim's new book, Under the Same Sky.  Joseph is a N. Korean escapee who lived through the famine of the mid-90's.

Kim’s father sold half of the house for a week’s worth of cornbread, and after that ran out, he walked six hours to beg a cousin for food. The cousin refused.

That was the end for Kim’s father. He began decompensating rapidly, screaming all day and all night in agony. Doctors were selling their meds on the black market, and they wouldn’t treat patients unless they were given a full meal.

Comrade and hat owner Aaron Clarey concludes were are approaching Idiocracy in his Captain Capitalism post, School is No Longer Conducive to Human Biology.

People will want to have families, but they're not going to because society, the labor market, academia, and American employers have made it financially and time-wise impossible to.  So there will be a lot of late marriages and a lot of sex, but a lot of birth control, and thus a lot of childless families. 

Hat owner Ann Coulter blames the liberal progressive communist media for ignoring the greatest damage ever accomplished by our liberal progressive communist leaders: Illegal Immigration.  She puts the real total at 30 million, not the oft-mentioned 11 million.

. . . the media will never tell you about Mexicans gang-raping a lesbian in Richmond, California, an Indian immigrant in San Francisco importing 12-year-old girls he bought from their parents for sex, or three children being beheaded by Mexicans in Baltimore.

Don't Americans have a right to know about the cultures flooding into our country?

Libertarian Lily Goldberg slams the movement's men in, Dear Anarcho-Capitalist Guys: No, We Will Never Sleep With You.  Ouch.  This is a funny and sad article about "Neckbeard McGoldBug."  I don't have a dog in this fight - and I feel sorry for those who do - but I do appreciate a few of her suggestions to her fellow Libertarians, such as this:

Now, if you think about it, it’s actually not surprising that anarcho-capitalism has an innate appeal to these sorts of guys. The State, besides being legitimately terrible in all the ways we agree on, survives because it does everything they can’t. In fact, the State’s kind of the perfect sociopath. Its leaders prey on peoples’ emotions under the pretense of caring about them, commit violence and then make people think it was the victim’s fault, and never give up trying to control everything you do under the pretense of caring. And yes, I agree with the anarcho-capitalists that this sucks, but the fact is that it works and you need to be able to beat the State at its own game if you want to get rid of it.

 
Liberal Lee Siegel suggests you should join him in defaulting on your student loans.  Read this NYT article and see if you ask the same questions I did:

Did you sign an agreement to repay your loans? 
Do you know whose money you borrowed?
Did you know the average salary of your chosen "vocation" before going to college to become a writer?
Did someone actually offer to hire you for that job you "didn't want in order pay the huge debt?" If so, what skill would they have hired you for?
Will you live your entire life blaming others for your failures, or is this just a phase?
The Communist movement in the US is based on resentment and envy.  Lee, are you now or have you ever been a communist?  If not, why did you say this:

I have found, after some decades on this earth, that the road to character is often paved with family money and family connections, not to mention 14 percent effective tax rates on seven-figure incomes.

Richard Larsen posted BALTIMORE: Liberal City of the Future at Comrade Doug's site.  He blames Democrats for the recent unpleasantness.  As do I.

The greater tragedy is the destructive policies of over fifty years of liberal governance, which created the environment of disparity, poverty, and victimhood.

Officials raised property taxes 21 times between 1950 and 1985...

...an estimated 16,000 vacant buildings and over 14,000 vacant lots.

The ideology which has governed Baltimore, Detroit, Illinois, California, and the nation for the past several years, has always been to create a new policy or social program, or additional taxes and spending (aka “investments”) to address our socio-economic ailments. It’s not “school reform,” “job training,” or “investments in infrastructure” that elevate and strengthen communities, it’s a thriving economy. And nothing douses entrepreneurism and economic growth like the massive taxing and regulatory burdens the leftist ideology is so totally invested in.

Sundance slams the McKinney parents (single, black) and suggests "Sexual exploitation is the real story being concealed" in his post, McKinney Pool Party Organizer, Tatyana Rhodes, Lawyers Up – Likely Trying To Avoid Civil Liability…

. . . there exists today a sociology of thug-life and culture that accepts behavior historically defined as lacking virtue or morality.

Erick Erickson warns us about Ohio governor John Kasich's likely 2016 campaign strategy - a strategy of backstabbing and stepping on others to get a leg up.  I hope Erick is wrong, and Kasich runs on his record and with honor.

. . . one does not run for President in the Republican Party by hiring consultants who hate the Republican base . . .