The Weekly Sedition

Saturday, 4 June 2016

Quote of the Day for Saturday, 4 June 2016

Filed under: Politics, Principles, Quote of the Day — Tags: , , , — mikewb1971 @ 6:26 AM

“Governments can create the climate for economic growth . . . [but] only the private sector can produce a peace that will endure.”

Former U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher,
(1 December 2004). Prosperity in the New Middle East: Building the Structures of Peace, remarks made at the 1994 MENA Economic Summit. Casablanca, Morocco.


NOTES

  1. Reposted –
    1. Libertarian Party –
      1. New MexicoLPNM Blog / LPNM Official Facebook page / LPNM Official Facebook group
      2. Bernalillo County, New MexicoLPBC Blog / LPBCNM Official Facebook page / LPBCNM Official Facebook group
    2. Extropy UnboundFacebook / WordPress

Copyright © 2016 Libertarian Party of New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with medit and Notepad++.

Tuesday, 8 March 2011

Albuquerque’s Own Mad Dog Party

Filed under: Comedy, Economics, Entertainment, Politics — Tags: , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 10:31 PM

Current mood: amused, cynical

Recently, I wrote an article about the recent public-employee-union protests against government spending cuts, labelling them the “Mad Dog 20/20 Party.” So far the Wisconsin protests have been the most striking example of this sort of behavior. Well, on Wednesday, 2 March 2011, the Mad Dog 20/20 Party came to Albuquerque.

I first found about the event here in Albuquerque when I saw a call for a counter-protest on Craigslist:


Click the picture to enlarge

So that morning, I went down to the intersection of 5th and Lead SW, as specified in the posting copied above. I arrived at 11:00 AM, figuring that there would be lots of people there, as with the 2009 and 2010 Tea Party rallies in Albuquerque. Wrong – the intersection was deserted, so I killed 45 minutes with a fruit cocktail (non-alcoholic) and iced tea at the Cafe Green, while reading this month’s issue of Analog Science Fiction and Fact.

At 11:46 AM, I left the Cafe Green and went outside. The Cafe Green is on the northwest corner of the intersection. On the southwest corner of that same intersection is Albuquerque’s Social Security Administration building, complete with concrete buffers along the curb to stop any potential Timothy McVeigh copycats from parking too close. At around this time, the Mad Dog Partiers started arriving in ones and twos (mostly just ones at this point). By 11:53 AM, there were all of 17 people in attendance. One guy in a light blue shirt and dark brown tie spent a good bit of time on the cell phone, one hand holding his sign, the other holding the phone to his ear.


Click the picture to enlarge

At 11:58 AM, some guy wearing a tan shirt with the SSA logo on the front came up to me and asked “Who are you?” He identified himself as a “retired SSA employee” after I told him that I’m a freelance writer (true – unless someone wants to give me money for this? Hint, hint – I’ll be happy with Federal Reserve Notes). He asked me if I wanted any “facts and figures,” I told him “No,” and he told me to “make it good.” Ha Ha Ha.

Anyway, this guy told me that of 500 people who are employed at this particular SSA building, 80 had signed up to be present for this event.

I should point out that although the Craigslist post called for a counter-protest, complete with signs, I was the ONLY person present there who was so inclined – thus I stayed on the north side of Lead Avenue and didn’t raise any stink – there was ONE of me, about 80-100 of the Mad Doggers by 12:15 PM, and well, the union crowd has been known to be physically aggressive at times[1].

There were a few signs for the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), the New Mexico Federation of Labor (NMFL), and one or two from the Communications Workers of America (CWA). I didn’t see any signs from Carter Bundy’s AFSCME, nor any other unions that have local affiliates in Albuquerque.


Click the picture to enlarge

On several occasions, vehicles painted in the colors of the “Federal Protective Service”, operated by the Heimatschutzministerium der Vereinigten Staaten, passed by on what appeared to be routine patrols. Funny how they didn’t seem to mind me (or anyone else) taking pictures and making video recordings of the marchers – they’ve established a bit of a reputation for arresting people for doing just that, and being rather obnoxious about it, to boot[2].

Or maybe such photography didn’t constitute a “security threat,” however they make that determination (outside of whatever’s convenient for the U.S. Attorney’s Office?) – there was a guy with a professional-grade camcorder and matching tripod who set up his gear for several minutes, and went about his business unmolested. Or maybe this demonstration had the under-the-table support of the GSA and FPS supervisors?

By 12:09 PM, there were about 60 people in attendance. Some of those driving through honked their horns. Around this time, the guy with the camcorder went over to them, chatted a bit, got some close-up shots, that sort of thing. My first guess is that he was from one of the local TV stations, but don’t they usually show up with a vehicle painted with the station’s name and logo on the side? Yet nothing has shown up on the web about this event, aside from this short PR piece from the AFGE.


Click the picture to enlarge

At 12:11 PM, some of the gathered started singing “Solidarity Forever.” [YAWN] Again, no visible counter-protest was evident – I was it where those supporting limited government and fiscal responsibility were concerned.

Some of the signs held up by the protestors included:

  • R U 1 OF THE 80 MILLION WE SERVE

    No, I’m one of the 230 million who get ripped off to pay for this racket.

  • Hands OFF My Check!!

    Hey, toots, how about YOU get your hands off MY check for a change?

  • Keep us working!

    What were these people supposed to be doing besides standing outside this building holding signs? Did this have the support, overt or under-the-table, of their supervisors? If they did, does this constitute tax-supported activity?


Click the picture to enlarge

At 12:20 PM, two teen-aged skateboarders were passing through the Cafe Green’s parking lot and were accosted by the Mad Dog Partiers. The kids responded with “Get the fuck outta the way.” So there IS hope for the up-and-coming generation, after all.

At this time, they started chanting, “Workers – united – will never be divided,” a few times, before splitting up into groups and going around the SSA building. [YAWN]. Was lunch time over? I left at 12:23 PM, as another round of chanting was dying out.

QUESTIONS

  • Were these people off or on the clock while conducting this picket?
  • Why weren’t the roving FPS patrols harassing and arresting myself and the guy with the camcorder? After all, the event was in front of a federal building.
  • Did this event have any kind of official support? Did they use premises of the SSA building to organize it?
  • Did they have the proper permit from the City of Albuquerque? Back on 17 July 2009, Albuquerque Police Department chased the Tea Party away from the curb outside Tom Udall’s office on 3rd and Central for “not having the proper permit.”
  • Since it seems that this event didn’t merit any media coverage, nor any coverage amongst the local unions on their sites[3], what was the point of it all?


NOTES


  1. Union thug at Atlanta moveon rally 2-26-2011
    MoveOn.org Protester Teamster attacks Tea Party member 2-26-2011 at Sacramento Capitol
    Madison police detain union operative who tried to destroy Tea Party sound system


  2. Upholding the Law: Photography Rights are Routinely Ignored
    Photographer and Civil Liberties Group Sue Department of Homeland Security


  3. Google search: SSA protest Albuquerque
    Google search: “SSA protest Albuquerque”
    Google search: “SSA protest”

  4. Reposted –
    1. Personal blog
    2. KCUF Media
    3. Tyranny Response Team of New Mexico
    4. Darth Mike
    5. New Mexico Liberty
    6. Patriotic Resistance


Copyright © 2011 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++

Coffee, Tea, or Mad Dog 20/20?

Filed under: Comedy, Economics, Entertainment, Politics — Tags: , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 3:39 PM

Current mood: amused, cynical

First came the Tea Party movement[1], sparked by massive, peaceful protests in American cities. (2009 / 2010) The name comes from the Boston Tea Party of 16 December 1773, where the Sons of Liberty “disguised” themselves as Indians, boarded British cargo vessels docked in Boston Harbor, and threw the tea in those ships’ holds into the harbor.

What are the Tea Party principles? Here they are, as best I can determine:

  • Individual rights
  • Constitutionally-limited government
  • Fiscal responsibility in government
  • Free market economics

That sounds familiar! Wait a second here – Bill Koehler and I have been pushing the very same ideas on The Weekly Sedition since 1998. That’s thirteen years, off and on.

In response to the “unseemly” and “disrespectful” tone that many Tea Party protestors showed towards Congresscritters who supported ObamaCare, the “Coffee Party USA” was started. Its stated premise was (still is?) that “government is not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges we face as Americans.”

If there’s any doubt that “Coffee Party USA” is the Obamaton answer to the Tea Party groups, feel free to check out their mission statement or their “about us” page.

I don’t know about you, dear readers, but that sounds like Borg-speak to me – “Resistance is futile” and “Freedom is irrelevant. Self-determination is irrelevant.”

Anyway, see just how the “Coffee Party” takes America by storm!

In a civil, non-confrontational manner, of course.

And then there’s the last protest movement to arrive on the American political scene. This one hit just recently, as public employee unions get all worked up over possible pay cuts, layoffs and furloughs due to budget shortfalls. Let’s call this one, for lack of a better name, the “Mad Dog 20/20 Party.” It’s named after the infamous low-end fortified wine named, of course, “‘Mad Dog’ 20/20.”

After all, they’re getting upset because the never-ending gravy train that they were promised seems to be running out of steam. More precisely, it’s running out of piles of FRNs, taxed away from Productive Class private citizens, that can be thrown willy-nilly into the “boilers.”

The difference here is that when some private citizen chugs a bottle of good ol’ Mad Dog, only one person gets drunk. But in the current situation with the public employees, while they get to run amok like drunken sailors (I know – I’m defaming drunken sailors, who only blow their own cash), it’s the rest of us that get that reeling, room-is-spinning feeling as we see the public debt (that somehow we are expected to repay?!) explode to new heights, and the value of each FRN these clowns leave us with drops correspondingly.

The most disgusting thing about the Mad Dog 20/20 Party is that some of its crowd have had the nerve to refer to themselves as being akin to the protestors in Egypt, who recently caused the resignation of Hosni Mubarak. Let’s see – the Egyptians were protesting about police brutality, corruption in government circles, election issues, and the economic malaise caused by the Mubarak regime.

In contrast, the Mad Dog 20/20 Party complains that they might be out of work, and after all, who will process the welfare handouts while they’re off the job? That’s when they’re not protesting possible cuts in pay.

I think that We the Taxpayers would make out much, much better if these people were actually drinking massive amounts of cheap alcohol on the job, as in they wouldn’t be as able to intervene in the economy as much, and there might be some “leftover” FRNs at the end of the year.


NOTES

  1. Often confused with the Boston Tea Party, established in 2006, re-established in 2008.
  2. Reposted –
    1. Personal blog
    2. KCUF Media
    3. Tyranny Response Team of New Mexico
    4. Darth Mike
    5. New Mexico Liberty / Patriotic Resistance


Copyright © 2011 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++

Tuesday, 2 November 2010

More from EconStories — Hayek and Keynes, Part II

Filed under: Economics, Entertainment, Music, Politics — Tags: , , , — mikewb1971 @ 6:42 PM

First, there was “‘Fear the Boom and Bust’ a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem,” which has racked up over 2,000,000 views on Youtube.

Now, we have something of a sequel to the original piece. Billy and Adam resume their roles as Hayek and Keynes for a bit, followed by commentary by economist Russ Roberts and director John Papola.


bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Tuesday, 7 September 2010

LP Monday Message: High Unemployment on Labor Day

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , — weeklysedition @ 10:54 PM

September 6, 2010

Dear Friend of Liberty,

It’s hard to celebrate Labor Day when unemployment is 9.6 percent.

Government interference is the single biggest cause of unemployment. Minimum wage laws, OSHA, ADA, etc., etc., make it difficult both to hire and to fire workers. (And when it’s difficult to fire workers, it’s much less likely that they will be hired in the first place.) To reduce unemployment, we need to start repealing laws!

Section 2.7 of the Libertarian Party platform states: “We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.”

I read today that President Obama wants another $50 billion in Keynesian stimulus spending. Stimulus supporters think that government spending creates jobs. What they don’t seem to understand is that the money is taken out of the private sector, which decreases private sector spending and investment, and that destroys jobs. I believe that stimulus spending destroys more jobs than it creates. We’d be much better off with the laissez-faire policies advocated by Austrian economic theory.

It makes me mad to think of all the ways the Republican and Democratic congresses, and presidents Bush and Obama, have hurt the private sector with all their stimulus and bailout programs. (Remember George W. Bush’s 2008 “Economic Stimulus Act” with all the $600 “rebate” checks?)

If you’d like to help fight them, please participate in Quiz Across America.

Sincerely,

Wes Benedict
Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee

P.S. If you have not already done so, please join the Libertarian Party. We are the only political party dedicated to free markets and civil liberties. You can also renew your membership. Or, you can make a contribution separate from membership.


NOTES

  1. Reposted —
    1. New Mexico Liberty / Mike Blessing for State Representative / The LPNM Blog
    2. Yahoo! Groups — [LPNM-discuss] / Personal email archive

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Thursday, 15 November 2007

A Cop Says “Legalize Drugs”

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , , , , — weeklysedition @ 2:46 AM

Case for Legalizing Drugs

Getting them where it really hurts – in the wallet!

By Matt Berger

Originally published in the November 2007 issue of Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement

In the May issue, Dave Street made a compelling argument for maintaining the prohibition of illict drugs. Street was absolutely accurate in his depiction of the downward spiral of the drug user / addict, and the ravages of drugs upon individuals and society. Most likely, Street’s moral convictions are a large part of his desire to see drugs remain illegal, and again, I agree with him. I find recreational use of narcotics morally reprehensible, and have nothing but contempt for such behavior.

The problem, as I see it, is that we’re letting our beliefs get in the way of a pragmatic, effective solution to “the war on drugs.”

The drug trade is an extremely lucrative big business, with returns so high that legions of people are willing to risk life and imprisonment to pursue a career in the supplying of drugs. They are willing to be ruthless, to murder, and even to corrupt governments to carry out their business. On the user level, they are willing to steal, rob, burglarize, and worse, just to keep their supply flowing.

The profits fuel drug cartels at the top, filtering down to dealers and gangs, with endless capital with which to carry out their deeds. Worst of all, it breeds crime, both violent and deadly violent on the streets.

But what would happen to these cartels, dealers and gang-bangers if we were to dry up their financial infrastructure overnight? Surely, they would be reduced to petty thieves and stick-up men without the pay-off.

A quick reference to history will turn up a very close analogy, the heyday of the mobsters during the prohibition years. The mob was at its apex during these years with the money-making machine of supplying illegal booze. When the Volstead Act was repealed, the money dried up, and the Mob was never again to return to its former glory. But then came drugs.

If drugs were legalized, they could be closely regulated and taxed. Prices would be driven down, and the junkie could simply walk into his neighborhood drug store with a script, instead of burglarizing your home, dismantling your air conditioner for copper, carjacking you, or sticking up the liquor store to pay for his habit. The passing around of dirty needles be curtailed. The violent gang-banging dealers in your town would have to subsist on a meager income of low-level crime, and the guns for their drive-by shootings, and the purpose behind them, would wane. The cartels and corrupt governments that thrive on overly inflated cost of drugs brought on by illegalization would also dry up and blow away.

Think about it: The local gang-bangers you stop on a daily basis, rolling in Escalades with wheels and stereo equipment that cost more than the boat you dream of owning when you retire. How do these punks who pay no taxes and punch no clock afford such a lifestyle? It’s because of the multi-billion-dollar enterprise that is the drug trade. No intelligence, education or any other qualifications required, just a willingness to break the law, and hurt and kill people as a price of doing business.

In a perfect world, we could lock up all of the bad guys for as long as they deserved, but we all know cell space is at a premium. Because of this, rapists, pedophiles, robbers and even murderers are getting out in record time to allow for the mandatory sentences of droves upon droves of drug traffickers. We could free up that space to keep the killers, rapists, molesters and the like behind bars, where they belong.

So, would half of the population become junkies? Of course they wouldn’t. Sure, a very small percentage of people would experiment, but for the most part, those who want drugs are getting them now, and those who don’t, aren’t and won’t, just like drinkers and non-drinkers during the prohibition years. That won’t change.

In the end, we can’t stop the users. What we need is a more effective way to end the crime and violence surrounding this insidious culture. We can stop the suppliers and dealers, their guns and violence, and their killing. Perhaps we need to stop thinking in terms of “throwing in the towel” on our moral convictions, and start thinking in terms of reducing crime.

[ Yeah, I know that advocating “we can tax and regulate the stuff” as a rationale for ending Drug Prohibition is pretty piss-poor for anarchist-leaning libertarians. Still, remember that this opinion piece wasn’t published in The Libertarian Enterprise, but in a magazine generally geared to those who are on the “front lines” and actively engaged in fighting the “Drug War” — these are the people who are tasked with arresting you for “possession” and “possession with intent to distribute.” If these folks aren’t willing to continue the fight, then it falls to the admin pukes and finally the Congresscreeps who write these asinine statutes to enforce those same statutes, and we know that most of them are above getting their hands dirty and risking their lives.

For more information about cops opposed to Drug Prohibition, check out the Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) siteMike Blessing ]


Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack