Archive for the ‘drug war’ Category

Express Yourself, New York

September 10, 2012 2 comments

Conventional wisdom says a vote for a third party candidate is a wasted vote.  The Free Agent posits that in New York this November, the only way your vote will count is if it’s cast for a third party candidate.

The Free Agent probably shouldn’t say this, spokesmodel that she is for the Manhattan Libertarian Party, but this November, New York will cast its 29 electoral votes for Mister Obama.  The city of New York in particular absolutely adores him.  Gothamites will pay forty thousand dollars just to watch the man chew groceries.  The poor, immigrants, lower middle class, middle middle class, young people, old people, they not only love Mister Obama, but they are thoroughly conditioned to believe they are incapable of renting an apartment, seeing a doctor, or selecting a beverage without a politician’s guidance and a lawyer’s business card.  Mister Obama will carry New York.  If you vote for him, your vote is wasted.

If you don’t want Mister Obama to renew his lease on the Executive Mansion, you might be tempted to vote Republican, but a vote for Mister Romney says nothing.  Are you demanding X% or X+10% growth in the defense budget?  If you favor the repeal of Pee-Pee Ca-Ca, with no replacement, Mister Romney has promised he will replace it, presumably with the not-uncoincidentally named Romneycare.   Do you want an end to federal attacks on legal marijuana producers?  Would you have the USA Patriot Act repealed?  Would you like to see business and state as separate as church and same?  Your vote for Mister Romney communicates none of that.  Your vote is wasted.

The Free Agent suggests New Yorkers choose one of two candidates whose votes will actually communicate your desires (if anyone bothers to count votes in New York, which they don’t always do).  A vote for Socialist Party USA’s Stewart Alexander loudly proclaims Mister Obama has not been aggressive enough in demolishing the constitutional limits to federal power, while a vote for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson  says you want the federal leviathan poked back into its constitutional cage.

You know The Free Agent will urge you to vote for Governor Gary Johnson, a candidate she has supported both with her limited resources and her shoe leather.  A vote for Mister Johnson could not be more unequivocal—your vote says you demand an immediate end to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (or did every single soldier return home by last Christmas as the current Commander-in-Chief promised?) as well as the devastating war the US has been fighting against its own citizens dubbed by Richard Nixon, the ‘War on Drugs’.   Your vote will acknowledge that a third of the federal budget must be cut, and accept that many lives will be disrupted, but that living on borrowed money is passing unearned consumption of today onto non-consenting taxpayers of the future.  Voting for Mister Johnson communicates that you jealously defend your rights and the rights of others, and want the natural consequence of those rights—peace and prosperity.

Still, The Free Agent would rather you vote for the Socialist than either of the major party candidates.  If what you want to say is that all humans are part of one collective, that we should all reap the same rewards regardless of our ability to pay for them, if you favor “putting workers and consumers in control of the economy” and—to be fair—repealing the USA Patriot Act—if you consider Mister Obama a traitor to the march of history for failing to create a political health-care monopoly, say it with a vote for Mister Alexander.

Can’t bring yourself to vote for either a Libertarian or a Socialist?  You still don’t have to vote for a Republicrat.  Tick or write in ‘None of the Above’, and your silence will speak volumes.


The Future of Tomorrow Today

March 5, 2012 1 comment

The Free Agent likes keeping her finger on the pulse of youth, so she almost perspired at the opportunity to speak to a group of political science students at Manhattan’s alternative City-as-High-School.  Their instructor cleared the path by passing on a list of the students’ concerns, along with the caveat that they were just beginning to learn about politics and knew nothing about economics, so please to keep everything basic.

“You’ll hear Libertarians refer to the Constitution frequently,” The FA began, “because the people who started our party were grappling with the same problems as the Founders.  They both decided there was the business of government and the business of society and when they get confused, bad things happen.”  From then, as the neophytes say, it was on.

The first question was from a self-described “Ron Paul Republican”, “How would the Libertarian Party address unemployment?”  Grateful for such a softball, The Free Agent replied, “Repeal all employment laws.”  She then discussed the most catastrophic law affecting high school students, minimum wage.  The FA could write a book on how 1937’s Fair Labor Standards Act is the depression that keeps on giving, but she had realized that apart from foreign policy, all the students’ concerns had to do with black markets of various sorts, so she made that her leitmotif.  “If you want to do work for five dollars an hour, who am I to stop you?  You own your own bodies, you’re not slaves, you have the right to work or not work however you choose.  You’re concerned about immigration, one reason we have illegal immigrants is minimum wage creates a black market for lower-paid labor.   That kills two birds with one stone, no minimum wage.”

The Free Agent has never had the misfortune to live in a violent neighborhood like the students she met.  Unlike theorists, their experience and common sense applauded when The FA said Libertarians would end the drug war and defend gun rights.  Being something of a humorist, The FA is used to her speeches being punctuated with laughter, but she wasn’t going for the belly laugh she got when she drew parallels between the drug war and other flavors of prohibition.  “We’ve tried everything, every idea everyone can think of, for thousands of years, and we haven’t figured out a way to get people to not want sex.  For a hundred years, we’ve tried everything we can think of to persuade people not to get high.  Remember the area where government belongs and the area where it creates more problems than it solves?  This is the biggest reason your neighborhoods are unsafe.”  Unschooled they may have been, but no one in that room was so impoverished of common sense as to suggest that perhaps just one more moonlight basketball league would turn the tide.

One could rightly observe that The Free Agent wasn’t asked to confront the bread and butter issues of these students’ lives, such as how they will be required to pay off the federal debt and could not look forward to seeing a dime of the earnings which will be withheld for their retirement.  (Although when asked what the government’s role in healthier diets should be, she asked how the school lunches at City-as-High-School were.  “They suck,” came the economical reply.  “That’s what the government feeds you when it has complete control,” she pointed out.)  For now, they do not see that cloud on their horizon.  Just in case there was a patch of fertile ground, however, The Free Agent could not resist planting a seed.  “You wouldn’t pay off your crazy crack cousin’s credit card until she got off the crack, would you?” she said.

And thus for two hours, staring down the barrel of the future, was The Free Agent educated.

Paula Gloria and Joe Barton on marijuana laws: Off with its head.

August 2, 2011 1 comment

Apparently the cops had no warrant when they busted down Joe Barton’s door.  Of course Libertarians would be outraged. But Joe Barton and Paula Gloria aren’t really Libertarians – at least not the big L type.  Most people aren’t as radical as Libertarians on Marijuana laws right?  Well perhaps you haven’t been far enough down the Rabbit Hole.

Note: Paula Gloria and Joe Barton will be the guest speakers at the Manhattan Libertarian Monthly Meeting, Next Monday August 8th, 2011.  The meeting is free and all are welcome to attend.  More Info here.

Here are some excerpts from my recent conversation with Paula and Joe.

Q: Please introduce yourself and tell us why Libertarians should be interested in your talk on Monday.

Paula:  I’m actually not informed enough about Libertarian positions. I can make some comments about medical marijuana. We are for freeing all the prisoners. We are for upholding the Constitution. We are for due process. To have a grand jury indictment you should have a victim of a crime.  Somebody should be able to say they have been hurt.  We are the People.  We are sovereign. We can do anything we want as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else or prevent anyone else from exercising their rights.

Q: Can you give us a little background and tell us what the title of your talk means?

Paula: I’m the host of a show called “Farther Down The Rabbit Hole” which comes out daily at 12 noon on the community affairs channel on Manhattan Neighborhood Network.  It goes to about 600,000 households. Four years ago I started posting some of the shows on YouTube and because of that I was able to get a lot of feedback from people. Blogging is a really exciting way to develop our understanding and become good members of society and in particular I started to learn about the power of our Constitution and the importance of our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

On Monday we will talk about “How to stand up vs run into machine gun fire”.  The importance of standing up versus walking into machine-gun fire means if you’re trying to do something that’s very difficult to do and you have opposition like a police state you want to make sure you have the best power behind you. We feel we have the Constitution behind us and if people understand the Constitution and understand the importance of God-given inalienable rights, that power can transform machine-gun fire. It can convince people who are trying to fight you, that they really should be with you. We are all Americans. We may have different ways of exercising our rights which is how it was meant t be as long as they don’t hurt other people.

Joe:  We believe we are becoming a police state. But rather than confront the police we prefer that people start taking their grievances to the courts and stand on constitutional issues. We are into supporting anybody who is standing up and protecting and defending the Constitution in court.

Paula: We support all marijuana reforms whose priority is to free the non-violent prisoners. We believe that the so-called marijuana laws are not even constitutional and if people understood how to argue in court they would win and the courts would do the right thing and uphold people’s inalienable rights.

Joe : the Constitution guarantees us the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness and according to the Constitution only a crime that has a victim is really a criminal offense. Our legislators have gotten so out of hand, they’ve made so many laws that our prisons are full right now of citizens convicted of crimes with no victim. We need to wake people up and liberate our country. We need to take back the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and stop filling our prisons with nonviolent people who were convicted of victimless crimes. How can you have a crime when there’s no victim?

Q:  What about court cases that support the federal government’s right to interfere in medical marijuana states?

Joe : Every person who goes to court should take a stand, and  more people should support the people going to court. Go to court with them. Give publicity to anybody who is really taking a stand.  As far as the rulings, what we need to do is have enough people wake up and speak up and even start writing to the Supreme Court.  If a nationwide letter campaign was written by the American people, which the Libertarian party could probably get behind, get everybody to write letters to the Supreme Court saying “We are We The People and you work for us. You are giving away our rights. You are selling out to big business. You took an oath to defend and protect the Constitution and we expect you to do that.  You aren’t doing that when you protect government and corporations against the people.”

Paula: We fear that the medical marijuana laws are actually going increase regulation and if you increase regulation you have more government. We want less government and to free the prisoners.  Half a million people are in jail now unconstitutionally. A felony is a very serious, horrible thing. The founding fathers understood that it would be an extreme case that you arrest somebody and that you would put somebody in prison, so when you start looking at false arrest and imprisonment you begin to see what’s happened is an atrophying of the Constitution. Special interests have raided the country. If people don’t understand their rights they can’t stand up for them in a timely way. You have to call the court’s attention to the fraud. Until you call fraud to the core court’s attention the court is not obliged to do anything. Once people understand their powers and our constitutional principles they can stand up and say  “hey you judges, you swore and oath to protect our rights, you work for us, protect our rights”.

Q: Would you comment on Federal interference in medical marijuana states?

Joe: the Democrats and Republicans, all they do is pass power back and forth and the people keep losing more and more rights. Over the years Libertarians have asked me to help support them and the Green party asked me to support them. But one of my problems with all the politicians is the Republicans and Democrats are power mad and the Libertarians and the Greens really have no balls. They’re afraid to really go out on the edge. If the Libertarian party really wants to do something it’s got to get much more in touch with the people and much more radical. I don’t mean wild radical. I mean radical as far as taking on the Democrats and Republicans and really bringing the issues up. Don’t half step. Come out and say it.

Paula: You have the Constitution behind you there’s a great case,  Shuttlesworth v Birmingham  . If the state turns a liberty into a privilege, a citizen can engage in the right with impunity. One of the charges against Joe was growing marijuana without a license. A lot of people might say this is New York there is no license for growing marijuana.  But our concern is, and we cite case law again, Murdoch v Penn  , where the First Amendment right was upheld. The Supreme Court determined the state cannot convert a liberty into a privilege, license it and attach a fee to it.  So Joe in arguing his case, is not saying give me a license. He is saying you don’t need a license to grow marijuana.  And anybody has a right, in this case the right to grow marijuana under the right of a freedom of the pursuit of happiness.  You can read all of our arguments.  So these statutes that are not constitutional – the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.  But the citizen has to know how to stand up in a timely way in court and not be tricked out of giving up his rights.  Mostly when the courts uphold special interests over We the People, they do it through trickery and getting you in different jurisdictions.

In the case of the medical marijuana laws life might be given to somebody, a medical patient who otherwise without marijuana wouldn’t have life. But what about a law where you are taking the marijuana away from people who are illegally busted in order to provide that medicine? On one hand you’re saying it’s a crime (to have marijuana) and on the other hand government is confiscating marijuana with the intent to sell it to medical marijuana patients, which is stealing from growers so the government can profit. If government can distribute or license pharmaceutical companies government is stealing from the people for pharmaceutical profits and when they license pharmaceutical companies they incarcerate We the People for not having licenses.  This is arbitrary, regulation against the people in favor of big business by gathering what supposed to be criminal to give it away to patients.  Not give it away – I’m sure governments will have a big fee attached to it.

Q: Joe, what’s the status of your case?

Joe: there are two court cases. In the first one they came in with a knock warrant but they busted down my door anyway! The police trespassed on two occasions. After coming up a half mile driveway posted with many no trespassing signs, they came up on my porch and were looking in my window and sniffing at my door to try to smell marijuana so that they could get a warrant which is illegal.  That case is on appeal right now.  Then they came back again three years later.  The police officer met my son on the porch said he smelled marijuana again and forced his way into the house without a warrant. We are going to court right now on that.  When my son stepped out on the porch he told the cop you need a warrant but the cop forced his way in any way.  They had us there for two hours out in the car in the winter with no coats on.  Then they brought us to the police station for eight hours while they went and got a warrant to try to make good on coming in without a warrant, which under our Constitution is illegal.

Q: Do you see anything improving or any progress on the anti-prohibition movement?

Joe:  The American people are so squeezed and the politicians have sold us out to big business and corporations. Look how many people are losing their homes while we bailed out the banks. We give billions of dollars to the banks while people are evicted, American citizens, from their homes.  I see within the next year to two years you’re going to see the American people rise up like they never rose up before.  Unless the Libertarian party really comes out and takes a real stand and is very active they are going to be left behind.

Paula:  Let me read this from Norton v Shelby County .

“While acts of a de facto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law and existing are often held to be binding from reasons of public policy, the acts of a person assuming to fill and perform the duties of an office which does not exist de jure can have no validity whatever in law.  An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed”

When my husband was talking about being radical the actual term is being constitutional. In a way the Constitution is a very radical document if you look in world history.  Can we be great enough today so we can maintain it? That’s what I’m saying.  When I read the case law that’s the Supreme Court in legal contemplation.  It’s not the spin factor or hype, it is what our country is founded on.

Joe:  When you talk about legalization,  the government will legalize drugs and then they will say well you can’t get it on the street. The medical thing is a phony thing.  The people will push for medical marijuana and the government will say you can’t consistently deliver the dosage. Then they will license it to pharmaceutical companies and anybody growing on their own will still be illegal and growing without a license and we will still have the prison state. So we want repeal of an unconstitutional law. Let it go back to what it was like before the law ever existed where anybody could grow it and it wasn’t regulated. Look at what is happening in Canada.  Canada has medical marijuana but the medical marijuana patients we have talked to say the marijuana they get from the government is crap and doesn’t  work in relation to their illnesses and they still have to go out on the street and buy so called “illegal” marijuana which works. If the marijuana laws were repealed the free market would produce the best quality.

The government says that people who grow or are selling marijuana are dealing drugs and they are criminals yet the government wants to license pharmaceutical corporations to deal the very same drugs which gives corporations rights and takes them away from the people and even on the statutory level violates anti-trust laws.  The government protects corporate interests by violating the rights of the people which is clearly unconstitutional.

A flesh and blood human being with inalienable rights always trumps a corporation in court if the violated party stands up to become the belligerent claimant.  We don’t trust the government to do what is best for medical patients or the people who grow marijuana.  Here is an example, the mafia used to run numbers the government called them criminals and said they were immoral lock them up put them in jail.  Then once the number runners were out of business the government started lotto saying that the profits would go to better schools.  Here is how that turned out when you bet with the mafia if they said they would pay a hundred dollars they paid a hundred dollars.  Now that the government is running numbers if they say you are going to win a million dollars they then tax it and they don’t pay a million dollars.  As far as the lottery money going to schools our schools are worse now then ever before in spite of billions of dollars taken in by the government from lotto. Where has the money gone?  We should have the best equipped schools in the world.  Government created criminals out of the mafia who honored the rules of the game yet government pays half what they claim and the money doesn’t go to schools.  Who is scamming who?



Related Legal Documents:

Memorandum of  Law



Please join us Monday August 8th for Paula’s and Joe’s talk with the Manhattan LP.  The meeting is free.  All are welcome.  More info here.

deLISH® Brand Heroin

November 3, 2010 Leave a comment

You would think that speaking to a ballroom full of libertarians about ending the war on drugs would be like trying to talk the AARP into senior discounts.  Even as she dipped into her pear-cinnamon-chocolate mousse parfait, The Free Agent mentally donned her choir robe and prepared to be preached to.  But the speaker, The FA’s friend, linguist John McWhorter, found a way to wake up the wine-becalmed gathering by shooting at the target from behind that tree way, way over there—he said we will never move beyond racial division in this country until you can buy heroin at Duane Reade.

To summarize John’s argument would do him an injustice; you can read his excellent article here.  He got The Free Agent thinking though, about what a heroin-vending Duane Reade world would look like.

A question that has come up more than once since the speech has been should heroin (and for simplicity’s sake, let’s use heroin to represent any drug for which there is currently a black market) be given out free or sold.  One way to answer is if that’s the only sticking point, let’s repeal prohibition and settle the details later.  But The Free Agent’s challenge is to think of heroin as any other consumer good.  If we want the tastiest, most satisfying, and safest heroin to be produced, the best model we have is a competitive free market.

First of all, why would Duane Reade get into the heroin biz in the first place if not for the potential profits?  Sure, they profit from munchie sales, but there’s more where that came from.  Secondly, who else but junkies should pay the cost of their drug?  Even libertarians might choose mass incarceration over tax-sponsored addiction.  In lieu of private sponsorship, and please invite The Free Agent to your fund-raiser, High Times Foundation!, justice requires consumers pay for what they consume, as The FA does her drug, Sauvignon Blanc.  (McWhorter’s answer to the profit question was that the shopping experience at Duane Reade has to be so good/inexpensive that the black market couldn’t compete.  Something to keep in mind for those who advocate high taxes for OPD—other people’s drugs.)  At least at the pharmacy, heroinistas could use debit cards and earn FlexRewards points.  And there is no reason to remove a natural barrier to entry for the casual lookie loo.

As the market develops, competitors will be attracted.  Across the street from Duane Reade’s deLish house brand smack, you might find Target’s Bullseye, and over at Walgreens, well, Walgreens brand.  These establishments also care about not selling adult products to children.  Poppy Joe on the corner has a  much more liberal view of his market.   Branding, profits, and liability laws will make drug stores the most responsible pushers imaginable.

Or maybe none of those brands will exist.  In a competitive market, safer products could be developed, effective addiction treatments popularized, or heroin might fall out of favor.  You can’t sell heroin to any adult who wants it but continue to require a prescription for oxycontin, for example.  That’s the imbalance between supply and demand the black market lives to solve.

We don’t really know what ending the drug war would look like.  (Here’s where the alcohol prohibition example isn’t helpful; repeal was a return to the normality of routine consumption.)  But it’s reasonable to expect that starving the black market will also starve the pipeline that has channeled at least half a million people into American prisons for drug offenses.  Or rather, for the offense of choosing the wrong drugs.

Election day is tomorrow

November 1, 2010 1 comment

Election day is tomorrow and we have more and more evidence that our message of  “stop wasting money “ is resonating with the voters.  Warren Redlich  polled 7% in a recent Rochester Business Journal poll.  Though you can never count on polls it is reason for optimism. Our opponents have noticed and they are running scared.  So much so that they have gone negative with a number of incredible lies and misrepresentations.  This is exactly why we need new faces, new ideas  and an end to the dirty-business as usual in Albany. Despite the desperate actions of our opponents our campaign is staying focused on a positive message of fiscal responsibility, honesty and plain old common sense.

We have every reason to be optimistic that we will achieve our short-run goal of 50,000 votes and automatic ballot status. However, WE MUST NOT BE COMPLACENT.   We have been surprised and disappointed so many times in the past.  Every one of us needs to double down and do everything we can to seize this opportunity.  We will have no one else to blame if we let this historic opportunity slip away. Every one of us can help make history in the next 36 hours.

Here are some things you can do right now:

  • Email your friends and explain why it’s critical to their future that Warren Redlich gets at least 50,000 votes and automatic ballot status for the Libertarian Party.
  • Send your friends Warren’s campaign videos. There are links below.
  • Sign up for Warren’s Facebook group
  • Call talk shows and tell them you support Warren Redlich’s campaign because we need new choices and an end to business as usual in Albany.

Here is what you can do tomorrow:

  • Vote for Warren Redlich and all the Libertarians on Row H
  • Print out some of  Warren’s flyers  and hand them out at the polls. Be sure to cooperate with the polling place officials and stay the legal distance (100 feet) from the poll entrance.

50,000 people will make history tomorrow. Will you be one of them?

Tour of Jury Duty

October 27, 2010 3 comments

Where she grew up in the Midwest, The Free Agent knows many people who have lived out their natural life spans without ever having been called to jury duty.  Because she chose to settle in Coastopolis, however, the FA gets a summons about as often as she does birthday cards.  Well, as often as she votes for members of Congress, anyway.

She has now done her duty to her New York compatriots for the next eight years, a task she takes seriously.  The Free Agent recognizes that trial by jury is the one Constitutional right it costs time and money to exercise, and she knows that when her many powerful enemies figure out how to charge her with sedition, it will be a jury of her peers who can set her free.

On the other hand, a jury summons can feel more like conscription into the drug war, as was the case this week, when her defendant, ‘Joe K’, was accused of possession of a pistol and a Ziploc® bag of marijuana.

The fine folks of FIJA were not available to pass out information on jury nullification, but Kings County spilled the beans, probably inadvertently.  A video shown in the jury corral depicts the trial of William Penn, accused of disturbing the peace.  Despite direct instruction from the judge, Penn’s jury repeatedly voted him not guilty.  The judge sent Penn, his co-defendant and the jurors all to jail, but the jurors were freed on a writ of habeas corpus.  The moral, according to the movie’s narrator, is that we can’t be punished for our verdict.

But Penn’s story, known as Bushel’s Case, is more famous as an exemplar of jury nullification.  Penn was probably guilty under the law as written, but his jury stood between the tyranny of the crown trying to suppress religious practice and their countryman.  (And if you’ve ever been to a Quaker service, you know there is no more peaceable assemblage.  The service may go for hours without a word being spoken.)  The Free Agent cackled inwardly, believing The People could not object to her discussing nullification in deliberations in the context of the court’s own movie.

The other chapter in legal history in the video described medieval trial by ordeal, in this case, a fellow accused of witchcraft was thrown into the river and sank, proving his innocence.  (The Free Agent got to thinking that a someone must have inferred a connection between obesity and witchcraft following a few of these dowsings.)

The Free Agent got to  musing, how did the accused witch’s experience of his trial compare with Joe K’s?

The medieval witch probably didn’t know what he’d done wrong until he was accused.  Joe K. (for argument’s sake, let’s assume that he did what he was accused of) knows what he did was illegal.  The accused witch probably doesn’t believe was doing anything to harm his community, but he believes that the trial will reveal the truth.  “I wonder if I am a witch?  This will be interesting,” he might think as he sinks beneath the current.  Joe K’s perception, on the other hand, has to be one of injustice.  He didn’t injure anyone, his community demands his services, and he would have weighed the risk of not being able to defend himself versus the possible penalty for carrying a gun, engaging, as he does, in a cash business.  And he knows many other people have done exactly what he did without consequence.

If the witch sinks, assuming he’s resuscitated in time, he and the village are all satisfied with the triumph of justice.  As for Joe K., well, The Free Agent was not selected to serve on his jury.  He may be convicted, but he is not guilty.

Redlich and the Rest in Saturday WSJ: Where’s the Beef?

October 16, 2010 Leave a comment

Of course, it is great news that the Wall Street Journal covered the alternative candidates on the eve of the NY State Governor’s Race debate.  I applaud the Journal and Erica Orden  for recognizing that New Yorkers are capable of processing information beyond the dumbed-down  drivel  that comes from most of the political class mainstream media.   Apparently Orden and WSJ understand why the voters are running screaming from the incumbent parties that got us into this mess.  That’s a big step toward a real dialog on the issues.  I only wish there was enough space to address some of the actual issues that separate the alternative candidates from the incumbent parties and from each other.

So let’s  do that here.

The dumbed down version of the political spectrum would have us divide the candidates along a left-right, liberal-conservative line.  The left side of that line includes Green, Working Families, Democrat and  Freedom Party Candidates.  The right side includes Conservative, Taxpayer and Republican Parties.   The left is usually associated with more social freedom but less economic freedom.  The right is usually associated with more economic freedom and less personal freedom.  The problem is that today’s incumbent Republicans and Democrats both support more war, more welfare ( corporate and personal) and more limits on personal freedom via laws like REAL ID, the PATRIOT ACT.  In short the incumbent parties are both for more big government when that big government works for them and against those other people.

I left out the Independence, Libertarian and Anti-prohibition parties.

 I have to put the Anti-prohibition Party on the left because they support legalizing marijuana, prostitution and gambling – great ideas in support of more social freedom,  but  they support extraordinary taxes on those activities – a bad idea that reduces economic freedom and funds more and more bigger government.   Much as I applaud the APP’s refreshing positions on victimless crimes , unfortunately, the APP is for the most part, a single issue party without any history or much to say about dozens of other important issues.  It’s also interesting that Kristin Davis the APP’s candidate for Governor also opposes the Ground Zero Mosque.  It’s hard to understand how Davis can see the issue of victimless crimes so clearly and completely miss the point on issues of economic and religious freedom.

The Independence Party sits squarely in the middle exhibiting no actual discernable principles of any kind.

But what about the Libertarians?   Libertarians are a diverse crowd but for the most part they are fiscal conservatives who support lower taxes, lower government spending, less regulation and generally more economic freedom.  But the Libertarians don’t really fit in on the right because we also support more personal freedom and typically left positions.  We support Civil Rights and we oppose  war , corporate welfare, the PATRIOT Act and REAL ID Act, and laws against victimless crimes such as the Drug War.

So how do we vote for a future for New York with religious and social freedom, a sane policy for victimless crimes and an economic climate conducive to job and income growth?

 You reject the Democrats and Republicans immediately because they are the ones who got us into this mess. Hoping it will be different this time is really deluded.  

Thinking people will reject the Left if they ever hope to retire or if they have children or even a basic sense of fairness.  The Left has nice dreams but no way to pay for them.  Putting your economic future in the hands of corrupt politicians is truly irrational. We should have learned that lesson in the last 100 years or so.

So what remains is the obvious choice.  You can choose to vote for personal freedom and economic freedom.  You can choose to vote against war, against the drug-war, against corporate welfare and against intolerance based on religion, race and gender-identify.  At the same time you can vote for a healthy economy where free people benefit from their own hard work and where there are jobs for those willing to work and honest business is something we admire again.  You could vote Libertarian.