The Libertarian Popinjay

Rick Santorum v. Individualism

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 20:32:00 +0000

A nice catch by Jim Hoft over at Gateway Pundit of some Santorum remarks to NPR in 2008:

This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don’t think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues.

That is not how traditional conservatives view the world. There is no such society that I’m aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.”

Sorry folks, but that's a deal-breaker for me. Maybe other candidates I've voted for in the past felt the same way, but they were a lot better at hiding it. Santorum has been making in clear that he is an implacable enemy of libertarianism. That's his right but I'm not going to vote for it. No promises but if he is the nominee in November I might have to pull the lever for Gary Johnson. But like I say, a second Obama term would be so damaging I might have sell part of my libertarian soul.

What a freakin' mess.

Rick Santorum, Matt Drudge and Rush Limbaugh Walk Into A Bar

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 23:27:00 +0000

As stated in my previous post, there are no Democrat scandals anymore, but there are certainly Republican ones. While this is hardly a "scandal" it might meeting the proverbial "Watergate" criteria for Rick Santorum.

Drudge is the nation's editor. What's on his page is what's talked about. Some have accused Drudge of doing Romney's bidding. I don't think Drudge takes order from anyone. However, the fact that he's headlining this story about Santorum's comments on the USA and the devil from a few years back is intriguing.

But where it really gets interesting is the comment from Rush Limbaugh as Allahpundit explains:

Rush Limbaugh defended him half-heartedly on his show today, noting that the media thought it was cutesy-poo when evil clown Hugo Chavez compared Bush to the devil a few years ago but conceding that Santorum will “have to deal with it. He’ll have to answer it. I don’t know. It’s just not the kind of stuff you hear a presidential candidate talk about.”

If you're making Rush cringe, you've got a problem. This may turn out to be a big nothing, but I suspect if Santorum starts to sink, this might be where it starts.

And if this post doesn't annoy Santorum supporters, this post from Erick Erickson surely will.

The MSM Monopoly On Scandal

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:11:00 +0000

So I'm going through Real Clear Politics this morning and one of the headlines is from the American Spectator's Jeffrey Lord: Is Media Matters Obama's Watergate?

If you haven't heard, the Daily Caller has done an excellent investigation into the left-wing media watchdog group Media Matters and how they coordinate their attacks with the White House, all with tax-exempt status.

However, reading articles like Lord's and others have a fill in the blank quality. "Is ________ Obama's Watergate?" You can fill in Fast and Furious, Obamacare, Contraception mandates, and on and on. My answer to this question in all of its forms is "No, the media won't allow it."

So powerful is the Mainstream Media that we cannot have scandals within a Democrat administration any longer. When these stories come out, you wait for the public to be outraged, but nothing ever seems to happen. Fast and Furious would have destroyed a Republican administration, literally destroyed. Hell, they tried to take down Bush for doing what all Presidents legally do: firing U.S. Attorneys.

So when I hear the words "Obama" and "Watergate" I can only laugh and shake my head. Most people still get their news from newspapers and the nightly news on TV. We in the Blogosphere can kid ourselves about the inroads we've made, but it's simply not enough. There's a media war going on and while we've made strides via Breitbart and O'Keefe, we're still a small rebel alliance against a vast empire. Gonna take a lot more to make a difference.

The election this November is going to be big. If Obama wins another term, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to stop the authoritarian tide. The election has to be about Obama and his failures. If the media manages to make it otherwise, we're done.

Sunday Night Music

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 02:24:00 +0000

Final track from the Tom Waits concert film "Big Time."

Free Speech For No One, Chicks For A Fee

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:21:00 +0000

The only thing surprising about this is that it took this long:

It may be a classic rock song but 26 years after it was first released Dire Straits hit Money For Nothing has been banned from radio.

The song was ruled too offensive for the airwaves in Canada because it contains the word ‘f****t’ and can now no longer be played in its original form.

Any station that wants to play the song will have to edit it or disguise the word, according to a ruling by the Canadian Broadcasts Standards Council.

The decision came after a listener complained that the broadcast of unedited version of the song – which mentions the word three times – was ‘extremely offensive’ to gay, lesbian and bisexual people.

Alright, let me give the usual disclaimers for folks new to this blog. I have no problem with gays. I'm okay with civil unions and I think the Log Cabin Republicans should be a integral part of the GOP.

That being said, art is art. Words are just words. If you're offended by the word "faggot" (no asterisks!) that's a you problem. The Gay lobby is trying to make themselves a special-interest victim group to go along with all the others in North America. Good luck with that. Keep voting Democrat (or Labour) and see where you're at in 50 years. Just ask you know who.

So if Canada wants to maintain consistency and prove to me they're going to protect everyone's feelings, they must ban all music from the 90's rock band "Cracker."

Extremely offensive.

Daily Caller Nails Media Matters

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:31:00 +0000

Erratic behavior, enemies lists, White House coordination: this story has it all. The Daily Caller just sits there quietly, blending in with the rest of the Blogosphere and then once in a while, BANG!, they hit us with some killer stuff.

In short, Media Matters for America is an organization led by an obsessed, very disturbed individual bent on the destruction of his enemies. A lot of us already knew that, but now we have the goods thanks to the The DC.

And now, ladies and gentlemen, if you will indulge me for just a moment as I quote myself from August 21, 2006:

The war of this century is not the war on terrorism, or even the culture war. The war of this century is the battle to control information.

Whitney Houston Dead

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:13:00 +0000

Forty-eight years old, but unfortunately not a shock. What was really shocking about her life is how she, ahem, "had it all" and then went into the abyss. Maybe we're too used to thug musicians who've been through their first rehab before their first hit single. She was a rainmaker...then she met Bobby Brown. Regardless, as we live in an age where our National Anthem is assaulted like a girl in an Occupy Wall Street tent, we'll remember her performance at the Super Bowl as they way it's supposed to be done.

Democratic Congresswoman 'Regrets' Obamacare Vote

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:55:00 +0000

There's so many "I told you so's" in this story they'll overload your brain. (Emphasis mine)

Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the "week-after" pill "ella" that can induce early abortions.

Oh my G-d. Anybody remember that old chestnut "read the bill" we on the right kept throwing out there?

Oh, that's right, we were told that was a stupid argument.

"Who could possible read a 1,000 page bill?"

"Okay, why does it have to be 1,000 #$%!-ing pages??"

"Shut up you racist!"

And with that, we got Obamacare.

Stupak, Dahlkemper, and a handful of other Democrats who held back on voting for final passage of Obamacare eventually voted for the exact same language in the Senate bill because the president signed an executive order saying the law wouldn't fund abortions.

But the executive order signed by President Obama did nothing to prevent the subsidized health care exchanges from covering elective abortions.

Now some may argue what the Obama Administration is doing now is executive action that's not in the bill, so reading it wouldn't have mattered in Dahlkemper's case. If we accept that, it means she's a bigger fool than previously thought. What did she think an ideologue like Obama would do in the end?

Everything, and I mean everything that's was argued by the opponents of Obamacare has come true. Sadly, we have to pray that Anthony Kennedy bails us out. A serious lack of cojones in D.C. will prevent it from ever being completely overturned.

What Justice Ginsburg Should Have Said

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:15:00 +0000

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg caused quite a still last week in the Blogosphere (since the MSM won't touch the story) over remarks she made about the U.S. Constitution:

“I would not look to the U.S. Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,” Ginsburg said in the interview, which aired on Jan. 30 on Al-Hayat TV.

The subject of the interview being Egypt. Now I would agree with Ginsburg if she had said the following:

"Do not look to the U.S. Constitution as a guide. The document is loaded with vague clauses that allow someone like me to sit on the high court and actually make law. Hell, I don't have to follow the Constitution at all...I just decide what I would like it to say and judge accordingly. It's actually a pretty sweet deal, but if you're looking to set up a true democracy that isn't ruled by a tiny elite, you should probably keep looking elsewhere. And even if you're able to author such a document, people like me will find ways to render it meaningless within a few generations. So, you know, don't knock yourselves out."

JFK's Teen Lover Gives Up The Goods

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 22:03:00 +0000

So one of JFK's mistresses has broken her silence with a new book. Once Upon a Secret is written by Mimi Alford, an intern in the press office during the Kennedy presidency. JFK took her virginity and used her as his play-thing whenever Jackie was away.

The main tidbits of note:

-JFK told her during the Cuban Missile Crisis: “I’d rather my children red than dead.” That's interesting considering Kennedy was something of a cold-warrior but when faced with the possible death of millions I suppose that's a thought that would enter anyone's brain (no, that's not an assassination joke). Still, it's something for historians to chew on.

-JFK had her "relax" some of his friends including Dave Powers, but she wisely passed up the chance to "relax" Ted Kennedy. If I were her, I'd consider this the best decision I ever made.

-At one point, Mimi thought she was pregnant and the Kennedy team was working on setting up an abortion which at the time was illegal. The social conservatives will no doubt want to bat this one around.

Ultimately, it's just not what it used to be. It's 2012 and finding out about more JFK affairs is like finding out how Julius Caesar took his coffee. We're pretty much past the point of caring.

Mitt Romney Wins Nevada Caucus

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 03:52:00 +0000

Romney seen here with the future Ambassador to Antarctica.

Big Shock: Senate Votes Down Earmark Ban

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 21:44:00 +0000

I've always loved the argument that earmarks are "just a drop in the budget bucket so what's the big deal?" Okay, if that's true then you won't even miss them, will you?

"Wait, wait...they're, uh, a vital source of funding for much needed state projects." Okay, if this money is needed in certain states why are we taken money from those states, laundering it in D.C. and then sending it back?

The next election doesn't matter. This country can't be saved.

Just for giggles, here's the list of the Earmarxists :

Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)

Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)

Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Shelby (R-AL)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-NM)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)

Indiana Frees Workers From Union Thuggery

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:22:00 +0000

(With a hat tip to Ace) Indiana's Republican legislature and Republican governor has passed/signed a right-to-work bill into law. Oh wait, I was supposed to put right-to-work in quotes according to my Reuters style-book. Or as the Indianapolis Star requires, put the old semantic warhorse "so-called" just before "right-to-work" to make sure people don't get the idea that the words mean what they say.

To clear up this confusion, here's the story filed by the Oblique Popinjay Press (Ya down with OPP?):

Gov. Mitch Daniels signed a "right to work without having to pay off union thugs and fund the Democrat Party" bill this afternoon without ceremony making Indiana the 23rd state in the nation with the law, Daniels and other Republican supporters characterized the measure as needed for Indiana to attract jobs.

The aptly-named “right to work” law was approved by the Indiana Senate 28 to 22 today, as thousands of union thugs packed Statehouse hallways shouting their disapproval, with thousands more lined-up outside waiting to get in and demand more government and less freedom.

Now I need just one more thing from you folks in Indiana. Please retire Dick Lugar from the Senate so he can live out his remaining years in his home state of Virginia.

MORE: Been thinking about this some more. I am so burned out reading screed after screed of how the GOP field for President has been terrible; how each candidate is going to mean the end of the Republican Party and on and on and on and on. As I've said before, the crying towels are in the closet down the hall. It's time to buck-up buttercup.

Anyway, the larger point I want to make is look at Indiana. Despite three years of Obama and a economic downturn, recession, whatever you want to call it lasting close to four years, Indiana found a way to thrive with low unemployment and groundbreaking political action like that described above. Just because we have a socialist in the White House and may end up with socialist-lite after the next election doesn't mean changes can't be made on the state level. There's more on the line here than the brass-ring in D.C.

Building The Perfect Candidate

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:40:00 +0000

Michelle Malkin has officially endorsed Rick Santorum for President. I, however, cannot. He's just too out there on the social conservative side for my taste. He also has some iffy stands economically as sadly all the candidates do except for Ron Paul. Then you have Ron Paul's foreign policy. Yeesh!

As Michelle points out:

I have no illusions about Rick Santorum. I wish he were as rock-solid on core economic issues as Ron Paul.

And I wish Ron Paul was not the far-out, Alex Jones-panderer on foreign policy, defense, and national security that he is.

If Ron Paul talked more like his son, Rand Paul, about the need for common-sense profiling of jihadists at our State Department consular offices overseas and if he talked more about the need for strengthened visa screening and airport security scrutiny of international flight manifests, I might have more than a kernel of confidence that he would take post-9/11 precautions to guard against jihadi threats and protect us from our enemies foreign and domestic. But he doesn’t, so I can’t support Ron Paul.

Agreed. Ron Paul makes my heart ache. If he just understood that Islamic jihadists are a threat he'd be my perfect candidate. And while I don't expect a perfect candidate, Paul's imperfections are too large to ignore. If he actually became president and stuck to his foreign policy positions, the Joint Chiefs might be forced to carry out a military coup. I'm not joking.

We've reached the point where we have to forget about perfection or the Republican version of a "Messiah" like the Dems have with Obama. Mitt or Newt will do in a pinch. Flip the Senate and then regroup. It's out best option right now. The time for crying about it is over.

Obama Shows Hurt Feelings To Jan Brewer

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 23:53:00 +0000

No doubt as more details come out they'll be plenty for both sides of the political spectrum to point fingers at, but think about this for a second. The President of the United States has his feelings hurt by something written in a book by one of the nation's governors and he brings it up during a meeting with said governor.

I can't find a link but I seem to recall early in George W. Bush's first term Jimmy Carter said some nasty things about him. When they next met, Carter sheepishly said he was sorry about that and Bush's reaction was akin to "Dude, don't worry about it."

Stark contrast.

UPDATE: Ace's take.

Economic Recession Is Over!

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 22:01:00 +0000

Normally I don't like to soil my blog with images of Stalinists, but I'm making an exception today due to the great news. Did you hear? America is back. We're in great shape.

All this yakkity-yak about high unemployment and crushing debt, the housing market woes? Food stamps? Meh! President Obama and Senator Schumer have assured us that the state of the Union is strong. Hell, it's so good we don't even need a budget. In fact, maybe after 2012 we won't have to "pass" a budget through Congress ever again. You get me? Huh? You know what I'm talkin' 'bout. But rest assured, government loves you.

Seriously though, many will say that things actually are better and getting better. After all, unemployment is down to around 8.5%. That's progress right? Wrong. What Obama and Schumer are doing is creating a new normal. Thousands leave the employment market and so things look a little better. Gas may go down a few dozen cents and so things look a little better. Before you know it, as the economic conditions ebb and flow, you forget what things were like in 2006.

Barack Obama is not delusional, he knows exactly what he's doing, and when he retires either next year or in 2017, he'll raise his glass to the destruction and the fact that America has been taken down a notch. That's always been the goal. America, in his mind, is immoral and a mistake. It can't be destroyed but it can be weakened.

This is a big reason I'm not as animated as most folks about the choice between Romney and Gingrich. Either one would solve 50% of the problem we have now by simply taking the oath of office. The concerns people have with both candidates are nothing compared to the consequences of not having either man in office come 2013. Bain Capital; individual mandates; affairs...any other election year these issues would be huge or at least worth considering, but right now they mean nothing. Romney and Gingrich are both on the right side of the only issue that matters in this election: love of country.

Saul Alinsky Makes Appearance At White House

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 00:05:00 +0000

In the form of a question from Fox News reporter Ed Henry. Spokescreep Jay Carney was asked if there's a portrait of Alinsky hanging in the White House. Not surprisingly, he got a non-answer.

This arose from Newt Gingrich bringing up Saul Alinsky in a recent debate. This is good. The more Americans that hear the name "Saul Alinsky" and investigate who he is the better chance we have that the electorate will be at least somewhat informed come November.

This will get you started:

The MSM Hates You

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 19:29:00 +0000

Caught a little bit of Rush Limbaugh's opening monologue yesterday and it was epic. Rush talked about the opening of the South Carolina debate where John King asked Newt Gingrich about his ex-wife's recent claims that he wanted an open-marriage and other tawdry details. Here's the clip in case you haven't seen it:

Now this is where Rush is valuable because he sees beyond the obvious and gets to the heart of what's really going on. Every American who considers themselves a conservative, libertarian or even just a moderate Republican needs to hear this:

RUSH: The audience is eating it up! They're eating it up off the floor. They're sucking it up with straws! They love it! Now, let me tell you one thing here, folks: You cannot shame the mainstream media. If any of you are thinking that the media learned a lesson -- if any of you believe that the media finally had it handed to 'em, if you believe that the media had their eyes opened and they are fully awake now and they understand what they're dealing with -- forget it. John King is proud of what happened last night. John King is a hero in the Main Street media because he didn't back down, because he continued to illustrate how it is that the media does really control the agenda. That was a demonstration of the power they hold over every public figure's head, that they choose to hold like a guillotine.

John King... There may even be some jealousy and envy within the journalist ranks (well, not journalists; within the Democrat Party ranks) because John King is a guy that got in Newt's face, stared him down -- and the fact that Newt told him off? It's a badge of honor. If you are thinking that John King was embarrassed and ran away with his tail tucked between his legs and learned his lesson and it'll never happen again? Ah, ah, ah, ah. You cannot shame the mainstream media. They are proud of this. They delight in their power to destroy candidates that they don't like. They revel in the fact that they can keep so many conservatives from even thinking about getting into politics. A lot of the so-called journalists watching this probably were pumping their fists.

A lot of the journalists watching this were doing the Obama cheer: "Yes, we can! Yes, we can!" and do not doubt me. If you think King was embarrassed -- if you think he was suffering from an elevated heart rate during the middle of this, if you think he felt shamed, if you think, "Oh, my God, Newt's beating the crap out of him" -- you are dead wrong. He got exactly what he wanted out of this. Do NOT doubt me. At the end of the day the message to every conservative who hasn't run for office is: "You want a piece of this? You want some of this? You want Brian Ross hounding you and your ex-wife and then you want me asking you about it on national TV the next night? Come on in. We're ready." That's the message from John King and CNN last night, and do not doubt me on this.

That's exactly right. Rush is the father of the fight that Andrew Breitbart is fighting, that James O'Keefe is fighting, that NewsBusters is fighting and I (in a very small way) am fighting. The Fourth Estate is really a Fifth Column. This is never going to change unless politicians stop playing by the MSM's rules. It's time for a media revolution.

Free Speech WiFi

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:34:00 +0000

Fascinating stuff over at Volokh Conspiracy about a police investigation into the NAME of a personal WiFi network:

A bigot named their WiFi signal “F— All Jews and N—-” — and now cops are investigating.

The hateful signal I.D. popped up on the iPhone of a 28-year-old mom inside a Teaneck, N.J. recreation center, where her 3-year-old daughter was attending dance class....

The Teaneck Police Department Juvenile Bureau and the Bergen County Prosecutor’s Office Computer Crime Unit are investigating it as a “possible bias crime,” Wilson said.

Eugene goes into the possibilities of this being punishable as either obscenity or so-called "fighting words." (Hint: it's not.) Ah, Cohen v. California...it's been a while.

Anywho, while I would have no interest in naming my WiFi at home something racist, this does make me realize that I'm missing a golden opportunity to spread some of my own propaganda and screw with my neighbors. So instead of the boring name I have for it now, I could call it "NOBAMA 2012" or "Meth Lab? What Meth Lab?"

It's the little things in life.

How Do You Solve A Problem Like Newt?

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:43:00 +0000

Well, the revelations on Newt Gingrich from his second ex-wife/first ex-mistress aren't exactly earth-shattering in my mind. It's always amusing to hear the complaints of Mistress #1 about Mistress #2 and so on. Bill Clinton has to be laughing himself silly right now.

I think most Republican voters were fairly familiar with Newt's marriages and the chicanery therein, but who knows, this might piss off a devout Christian or two. It's not a big deal to me as my first priority is that the new president removes the boot from our throats. ABO folks, AB-freakin'-O!

I guess at this point it wouldn't hurt to restate my prime directive for this election. Whoever gets the nomination is not going to be perfect. There were no great candidates this year with Rubio, Ryan, West and others sitting it out. (Perry was the closest we had to a Great Conservative Hope until we found out he was the second-coming of Jack Kemp, debate-wise.) Flipping the Senate has to be just as high a priority as flipping Obama. The new president will want to roll with the tide...so we (Tea Party, economic libertarians, strong defense-types) need to be the tide.

Until then, keep grabbing at those moonbeams.

SOPA/PIPA Makes For Strange Bedfellows

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:56:00 +0000

And that's a good thing.

Recent legislation in the forms of SOPA and PIPA have united the most unlikely of allies in the form of RedState, Wikipedia, Google, UbuWeb, Dana Loesch, and many others on the Left and the Right. PIPA co-sponsor Marco Rubio has heard the arguments and has decided to give the legislation a big rethink:

In recent weeks, we’ve heard from many Floridians about the anti-Internet piracy bills making their way through Congress. On the Senate side, I have been a co-sponsor of the PROTECT IP Act because I believe it’s important to protect American ingenuity, ideas and jobs from being stolen through Internet piracy, much of it occurring overseas through rogue websites in China. As a senator from Florida, a state with a large presence of artists, creators and businesses connected to the creation of intellectual property, I have a strong interest in stopping online piracy that costs Florida jobs.

However, we must do this while simultaneously promoting an open, dynamic Internet environment that is ripe for innovation and promotes new technologies.

Earlier this year, this bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously and without controversy. Since then, we've heard legitimate concerns about the impact the bill could have on access to the Internet and about a potentially unreasonable expansion of the federal government's power to impact the Internet. Congress should listen and avoid rushing through a bill that could have many unintended consequences.

Therefore, I have decided to withdraw my support for the Protect IP Act. Furthermore, I encourage Senator Reid to abandon his plan to rush the bill to the floor. Instead, we should take more time to address the concerns raised by all sides, and come up with new legislation that addresses Internet piracy while protecting free and open access to the Internet.

Ed Morrissey takes it home (emphasis mine):

No one disputes the need to protect and defend copyrights. Most of the websites participating in this protest have an interest in battling piracy. The need to protect copyrights, however, does not outweigh the need for checks on prosecutorial power and due process for the accused. Rubio has belatedly gotten it right — Reid needs to pull back PIPA, the House needs to scratch SOPA, and both need to start over again in those efforts.

Stopping foreign piracy is necessary, but if this isn't done exactly right, our government will run roughshod over "fair use" rights based on the latest political whims. (Can you say "Righthaven times-10?") We have to be vigilant in the defense of the free and open Internet. FCC Chairman Julius "Caesar" Genachowski has been attempting power grabs under the banner of "Net Neutrality" for the past three years. Give them an inch, they'll take a mile.

SOPA Dead For Now, Lessons Abound

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:19:00 +0000

I had a college professor once say, "Don't get mad, get better." This turn of phrase applies to more than meets the eye.

It's often been said by libertarians like myself that the only way to fight bad speech is with more speech. In other words, you don't try and stop people from speaking, you simply make a better argument rendering their bad speech impotent.

The same is true with technology. A bill in Congress getting a lot of ink is SOPA which stands for "Stop Online Piracy Act." As with most if not all Congressional bills, the name is as such that you couldn't possibly disagree with the wording. They should really just add "And Feed Starving Children" to the end of every bill thus rendering any vote against it a crime against humanity.

Regardless, the SOPA bill is, surprise surprise, not what it's cracked up to be. It's intent (they say) is to have Google and other online search sites stop linking to file-sharing sites and require ISPs to block these sites. Obviously this is something that Hollywood and the music industry are pushing, but opponents say this goes against what has been a free and open Internet and requires too much policing by the ISPs and search engines. There's also the fact that if given this power it's just a gateway to more power for the government.

One of Steve Jobs' first inventions was a device that would trick phone lines into giving you free long distance. What happened after that? The phone companies developed new technology to work around such devices. In other words, they didn't get mad, they got better. (Well, they did get mad actually, but they also got better and the delicate dance between hacking and innovation continues.)

The same can be said here. Instead of trying to stifle the free flow of the Internet, the movie and music companies need to find ways to make the current technological situation work for them. An example of this was recently showcased by, of all people, comedian Louis C.K.:

Days after comedian Louis C.K. launched his content and distribution experiment, the results are in, and it appears that he may have inadvertently kicked off a new era of celebrity-controlled Internet content.

On Dec. 10, C.K. offered his one-hour "Live at the Beacon Theater" show for streaming or download for $5, free of any digital rights management (DRM). The move received a lot of attention via traditional and social media, but the main question on every one's mind was: How will a show delivered directly from a niche comedian do when offered without the marketing muscle and distribution controls of a major company like HBO or Comedy Central?

According to data posted on C.K.'s Web site, the experiment pulled in a $200,000 profit.

This is the future. While the big entertainment companies are certainly within their rights to try and stop piracy of their intellectual property, running to the government isn't the solution. If you make your product inexpensive and easily accessible then online pirates will be banished to Davy Jones' Locker.

Rasmussen: Bain Bombs

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:43:00 +0000

As you may have read on my Twitter feed, I did an unscientific poll of a handful of Republicans this past Friday night over pints of ale. The consensus was that the Bain attacks on Romney, if anything, make them like Romney more than they did before which was not much.

Now for something more scientific via Rasmussen:

Voters are closely divided over whether Mitt Romney’s business career is a plus or a minus, but most Republicans see it as a plus. Additionally, a plurality of all voters think he would do a better job than President Obama dealing with the economy.

As Saturday’s critical South Carolina Primary approaches, it appears the criticism of Romney by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Texas Governor Rick Perry, in particular, is not resonating with Republican voters nationally. Fifty-five percent (55%) of those voters believe Romney’s record in business is primarily a reason to vote for him versus only 20% who see it as a reason to vote against him.

This presents an interesting problem for Obama as I'm sure he was prepared to pick up the vulture capitalist ball and run with it. Of course, this poll could explain why the President has begun paying lip-service to the idea of merging government departments and cutting government jobs.

And I say "lip-service" because:

Obama’s proposal to merge and reorganize government departments has come under fire from some members of Congress and business groups because it aims initially to cut only 1,000 to 2,000 from the 2.1 million federal workforce, and because these job cuts would be achieved mainly through attrition.

At this point, Romney might be well served to trumpet his Bain days. Damn the ~~torpedoes~~ consultants, full speed ahead!

Cowards And Phonies

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:26:00 +0000

Barry Rubin has an excellent column today on death of political discourse. Read the whole thing but here's the heart of the text:

We are facing something truly remarkable. A system in which those on one side — and obviously this applies to far more than just the Israel issue — can simply wave aside any logical argument and ignore any evidence. All that’s needed is a category of denunciation: racism, hate speech, Islamophobia, etc., along with other catchwords like “fair share,” “one percent,” “global warming deniers,” and down the list.

Where did this come from? How was this remarkable weapon developed? One can mention the Frankfurt School or Saul Alinsky but clearly we are dealing with one of the most amazing and effective inventions in the modern history of political debate and struggle. It is the magic wand that turns terrorists into victims and victims into terrorists.

And sadly, it's a tactic that even the GOP has embraced.

Pop Culture "Ran Into A Door"

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Rose) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:29:00 +0000

I love the website Big Hollywood, but sometimes reading it makes me weep for all of mankind. No, that's hacky. It's more like it makes me want to smack mankind around while shouting "you made me do this!"

Anyway, some fun headlines:

1) Actor Beau Bridges speaks out for stricter gun control laws. What a novel idea! Has anyone else thought of this? I mean, the genius of it. Think of what crime would be like if we had only thought of this 50 years ago after the Kennedy assassinations. Whaaaat? You mean we already have enacted countless gun control laws? Criminals are still getting weapons while law-abiding citizens have to wait 3 to 10 days to get their guns? What the hell happened?

2) Lady Gaga toasts Tebow on Twitter. Just how big is Tim Tebow right now? He's so big that Lady Gaga, the queen of corporate-generated pop culture feels the need to step into his spotlight. Kind of the Twitter equivalent of Ariana Huffington knocking over Schwarzenegger's mic stands. John Lennon said the Beatles were bigger than Jesus and he may have been right at the time. Tebow could make a similar claim but he isn't that type of guy.

3) Report: Beyonce, Jay-Z Baby Security Prevents Man From Seeing Newborns in Hospital. Not much to say here really. The rich and powerful get what they want and the rest of us can suck it. Of course, the Hollywood elites will always speak out against corporate greed and for the little guy, as long as they don't have to consort with the little guy or think about the fact that some big smelly truck driver who voted for Bush twice is a vital part of making sure their foie gras is on their dinner table. I have a fantasy where I get to sit in a fancy restaurant with someone like Barbra Streisand and tell her all about the unclean steps that lead to her meal and how "going green" will make it that much harder for her duck a l'orange to keep that level of succulence. What else do we have if not dreams?

4) Snoop Dogg busted for marijuana possession. Also from the news desk, Tim Tebow loves Jesus.

5) Paging Steve Guttenberg: 'Police Academy' reboot in the works. I repeat: "You made me do this!"