I’ll open up with what I thought was the best thing I read all week. Zach Foster described how modern libertarians suffer from Back to the Future fantasies so much that they forget that they’re winning the argument:
At the present time we’re faced with the great tasks of taking over the Republican Party, seizing the reigns of the State, and rolling back the size of government while restoring Constitutional liberties and a free market. We can run away to 1920s Paris or we can make the best of the cards we’re dealt and have the courage to face our problems and undertake the tasks ahead of us. Paris is just as beautiful in the rain today as it was in the 20s. So is Washington D.C. I could travel the world and visit every monument but I’ll always love my home town more.History will look well on us when we accomplish our great tasks. We might even have future generations approach us in our old age and say “Wow! It’s really you! I only wish I could have lived in your time and been a part of the Ron Paul Revolution!” To them my response would be “You little cretin! Do you not see the abundance of individual liberty and economic prosperity surrounding you? Heaven forbid you should enjoy and fully appreciate what we worked so damn hard to bring you! Get out of my face!” Well, I might not be quite as harsh…I love Midnight in Paris. It reminds me that, while the hard times distract us, there are wonderful things all around us that we take for granted. Life is beautiful.
Jack Hunter, co-author of The Tea Party Goes to Washington and Ron Paul spokesman, talked about his participation in a panel discussion on Glenn Beck’s The BlazeTV:
If someone was trying to pass off big government Bush-style conservatism as libertarianism, I’d be the first to go on the attack. But that’s not what’s going on with Beck. He attacks that era and the Republicans who screwed up the country. He says he was completely wrong in his former support of the Patriot Act (when does a national talk host ever say they are wrong about anything?). He says we can’t police the world. He’s even said that the answer to the same-sex marriage question is to remove the state from the equation altogether.
He says he absolutely loves Rand Paul.
Now, he can possible say other, less liberty favorable things as well. But if the liberty movement does not have the desire or tolerance to encourage people who are coming our way, who want to come our way, who want to build bridges, we will forever be stunted as a movement. The entire Ron Paul movement was millions of people coming his way. Now that we have this movement, we should hope that millions more come our way. That’s the entire point.
East County libertarian Heather gets this too:
We shouldn’t have to make anyone ‘atone’ for being sick of the establishment GOP, we should welcome these people with open arms. Hell, throw them a party. You understand that when more people in the position as Beck, who have millions of listeners a day talk about Libertarianism and lesser government, the more people will turn onto it.
So next time you get frustrated with a former RINO now taking your side remember: You used to be a liberal-or if you didn’t used to be a liberal (okay, perfect),. You used to have a lot of beliefs that you once held dear and (with time and experience) have surpassed your meaningless ideologies and traded them with intelligent thought. Way to go you.
Jack Hunter and Heather are absolutely correct and this bears mentioning–libertarians might actually fear that their ideas are becoming mainstream because those ideas may be distorted into some bastardized policy which does more harm than good. I get that but to shun someone, who wants to promote 85% of your ideas, and claims to be trying to figure out the other 15%, is simply a defeatist mentality. If Nancy Pelosi decided to cut federal spending by 50% or more, she’d get a full-throated endorsement of that policy from me. I subscribe to Milton Friedman’s idea, to make it politically profitable, for the wrong people, to do the right things. Good on Glenn Beck…and Jack Hunter,,,and Heather.
First, our government should issue work permits quite freely to anyone who wants them. The process will simply require the payment of an appropriate administrative fee and a background check to be run for criminal, disease and mental health problems. In addition, if the applicants can show that they can provide financially for their family members, they can bring them too. But no one here under this system will qualify for things like welfare, non-emergency medical care, etc.
Second, everyone who is issued a work permit, and their family members, will be furnished an identification card that cannot be counterfeited. Technology now easily makes this possible through fingerprints or the iris of one’s eyes.
Third, any company or person that hires anyone that is not a citizen, or holder of a valid green card or work permit will be subject to prosecution. Today’s system of identification is so filled with holes and fraud that it is inappropriate to punish employers for non-compliance. But the new system will change that situation.
There will be a phase-in period, maybe a year, for everyone to adjust to and comply with this new system. This would allow the “bugs” to be worked out, and also allow time for everyone concerned to see that the new system is fair and equitable for all. But thereafter, anyone present in our country illegally will face permanent banishment.
Judge Gray is not advocating a pure “libertarian” position but he is proposing a constitutional one. The federal government does have authority for immigration and should develop and enforce immigration policy. While Gray’s proposal encourages more government intrusion, it recognizes that our illegal immigration problem is the fault of Americans rather than Mexicans. Only protectionists could argue against the first point of his proposal. His second point scares me inasmuch as its a bridge to a national ID card but, but nations do have borders and should police foreigners within those borders. I don’t care for his third point. It’s bad enough that we’ve made retailers state revenue agents and I see no reason to deputize business owners as border patrol agents. I much prefer the voluntary approach to e-Verify that businesses like Souplantation employs.
Finally, the charming Julie Borowski tells us why we shouldn’t fear sequestration in less than 90 seconds. As usual, she drives the point home with humor. My take is that sequestration is like limiting a drunk to 23 beers instead of a case of beer–it ain’t gonna do much but it’s s a start…and it’s certainly no reason to panic.