Libertarianism

Interview with the Patriot Act

This entry was posted in Constitution Domestic Terrorism Humor Libertarianism Patriot Act US Politics War on Terrorism on by

Dong Resin interviews the Patriot Act:

DR: Right, yeah. Now, I thought your name was an attempt to sell you as, you know, “good for American citizens”, yet another big pander from the current administration, as in”no child left behind.” Not the case?
PA: Yeah, a lot of people have taken it that way, but really, if you think about it for even half a second… exactly who needed to be sold? Where was the big scary resistance that I had to push through?
Face it, I could have been named “The Let’s Knife-Rape Dakota Fanning For Satan Act”, and no one would have twitched. I passed though congress like greased shit through a goose with nary a peep. Nobody really had the stones to open their cry-holes after 9/11, did they.

There is more. Laugh or cry as it suits.
Via Gregory Harris at Planet Swank.

End it Now

This entry was posted in Constitution Domestic Terrorism Drug Laws Law Enforcement Libertarianism War on Terrorism on by

Another reason the war on drugs is stupid. And folks like Principal George McCrackin need to be fired:

The school’s principal defended the dramatic sweep.
“We received reports from staff members and students that there was a lot of drug activity,” said George McCrackin. “Recently we busted a student for having over 300-plus prescription pills. The volume and the amount of marijuana coming into the school is unacceptable.”

They did not find any drugs in the raid and made no arrests.
Terrorism in our schools in not acceptable.
Via Talkleft.
Update: Via Catallarchy is this CBS News article and this picture. I’m getting angrier.

ashcroft: once a civil libertarian?

This entry was posted in ashcroft Constitution Domestic Terrorism Drug Laws Federal Government Internet Libertarianism Patriot Act on by

The American Bar Association Journal has an interesting article on Cyber-Libertarians which focuses primarily on EPIC, the Elecronic Privacy Information Center.
I was somewhat surprised by this comment by David Sobel, EPIC’s co-founder and general counsel:

�We were actually guardedly optimistic when [Ashcroft] became attorney general,� says Sobel. �As a senator he used some of the most stridently anti-federal-law-enforcement rhetoric I�d seen come out of the Senate�just a step short of calling them �jackbooted thugs.� �

Talk about power corrupting someone. Or maybe he hasn’t changed at all and it is ok if they are his ‘jackbooted thugs.’
I suspect the latter is the case. In answer to the opening question: probably not.
Via beSpacific.

Secret Trials

This entry was posted in bush CAPPS II Constitution Democracy Domestic Terrorism Judiciary Law Libertarianism Patriot Act War on Terrorism on by

What is the justice department hiding? It is inconceivable to me that there is anything that justifies completely hiding a legal proceding from public scrutiny:

Yet this seemingly phantom case does exist – and is now headed to the US Supreme Court in what could produce a significant test of a question as old as the Star Chamber, abolished in 17th-century England: How far should a policy of total secrecy extend into a system of justice?

Dan Gilmour argues:

If the Supreme Court rules, as I suspect it will, that the White House is free to tear up the Bill of Rights under the guise of fighting terrorism (or fighting illegal drugs, the pretext that was used to basically destroy the 4th Amendment under previous administrations), then no one is safe from the predations of a rogue government in the future

Hmmmm, what about a rogue government in the present?
Via Secrecy News.

Taking Tests

This entry was posted in Capitalism Domestic Terrorism Education Libertarianism on by

Kevin White at Catallarchy is learning the basics of test taking:

Today we had an exam. This was very easy, once I accepted that the professor thinks a “certain way” and expects the highly subjective questions to be answered from that perspective.
This one caught my eye:

True or False: Business leaders have an obligation to see that everyone, particularly those in need, benefit from their firms’ actions.

The answer, in the real world, is so obviously False that it hardly bears discussion. However, within the class, the answer is so obviously True that one scarcely has to stop to consider it.

The basic lesson here applies both inside and outside the classroom. To be successful, and sometimes to survive, you need to understand the perspective of the professor or perhaps the inquisitor. Of course, that does not mean you have to agree with their perspective.