AnarchoCatholic

The Ron Paul of Transportation

Thinking people on both sides of the left-right puppet show agree that Ron Paul is a great choice. His fidelity to liberty and small government principles are second to none. Most would also agree that he has a real chance at winning, albeit a small one. Can those same attributes - personal liberty, small government, and a real chance to affect fundamental change - be applied to SkyTran as well?

UPDATE: The most thorough criticism of SkyTran that I was able to find is here. For every criticism offered I was able to immediately think of at least one feasible response, so it seems that there is plenty of Kool-Aid, as it were, sloshing around on both sides. A common allegation is that SkyTran and other PRT projects are funded by the highway/automobile industry to disparage Light Rail, which is ironic considering the best criticism of PRT that I could find was at "lightrailnow.com."

And WTF still has yet to offer his second two-cents, his first two-cents being more like two pesos.

Questioning Dear Leader

This afternoon I had an exchange on Facebook with a fellow law student. We'll call her Jenna. She posted a link on facebook, to a Kengor piece on NRO:

Jenna posted a link at 10:11am Oct 25
Paul Kengor on Rudy Giuliani & 2008 on National Review Online
"Yes, yes, I know: A President Hillary Clinton would be Armageddon to the pro-life movement. There is no candidate — none — in the history of presidential politics as radical as Hillary Clinton on abortion. To pro-lifers, she absolutely must be defeated."

For those of you who are leaning towards voting for Giuliani even though he is pro-choice.

Kengor rambles on about how necessary a pro-life president is, and how it will take so long to end abortion, etc., the usual Republican puffery to get pro-lifers on board. I commented - oops. The exchange follows.

Abortion: Irrelevant in 2008

Vox Day writes:

Except for the unexpected Paul irruption, this entire campaign [2008] has been a charade on both sides of the aisle. As I predicted literally years ago, the whole point of nominating a Giuliani or a Romney is to permit the GOP to take a dive for Hillary. If you still believe there are two different political parties in the United States of America, you have been paying attention to the style of their pre-election promises rather than the substance of their post-election actions.

Sure, the Democrats are the "party of abortion," as faithful neocons frequently remind us.  That would make the Republicans the "party of doing nothing about abortion," despite big promises. Abortion is a non-issue in this election, just like in 2004. Neither "party" is interested in fundamental change regarding abortion. Both "parties" use the issue to stir up their followers. Eight years - almost a decade - of allegedly pro-life Bush and his allegedly snazzy court appointments (Harriet Miers notwithstanding) and what result? The Partial Birth Abortion Ban is upheld by the Supreme Court. Is this significant progress or a sop to placate the base? You decide - I had hoped for better.

Even with Brownback in the race abortion was a non-issue, since he had less of a chance than Ron Paul from the beginning. With Brownback out, Ron Paul is the only candidate truly interested in ending abortion (or interested in doing something about it), with the only policy ideas that will substantially decrease the number of abortions in this country. Further, he is the only candidate that can beat Hillary, because he is the only candidate not like her. Brownback was a noble candidate to support, but now that he is gone, Ron Paul is the only logical option for a dedicated pro-lifer. All else is empty rhetoric.

 

JMM

UPDATE: Brownback considers selling out, endorsing Rudy
Doing so would demonstrate considerable political naivety, disappointingly prove the death of the Republican Party as an independent entity, and remove any future credibility.

Gov't Takes Credit For SoCal Affluence

Yuppies (don't) riot:

Aggressive efforts by disaster-response officials to bring supplies helped ensure civility. A heavy police contingent and National Guard troops with automatic weapons stood by just in case.

The New Orleans evacuees had dragged themselves through floodwaters to get to the Louisiana Superdome in 2005, and once there endured horrific conditions without food, sanitation or law enforcement.

But these evacuees drove to the expansive parking lots in the San Diego suburbs. The worst that most endured in their exodus was heavy traffic and smoky haze.

The New Orleans evacuees were of substantially different demographic. They were poor. SoCal is, as far as places like Poway,  La Jolla, and Rancho Santa Fe (map), not poor. If civility reigns in San Diego today, it's because so many of the evacuees are relatively affluent and are being supported in their time of need by local merchants eager for this support to be remembered when the fires go out. Rich folks helping rich folks - here's a free massage, and my card.

In the meantime, as the Governator strolls through the crowds of evacuees and the completely unnecessary federal troops stand guard outside, the state takes all the credit. Of course, the troops were absent after Katrina - no photo ops, no credit to be taken there, just poor people at each other's throats. The state sure takes care of the little guy, doesn't it?

JMM

Two Wings of Totalitarian Statism

I have a thesis which I would like to test with the help of this blog's authors and reader(s).

America's current two-party" system consists of one "party," the global statists. Perhaps another appellation would be more accurate, like "establishment," but you get the idea. This party has two "factions," neoconservative Republicans and socialist-liberal Democrats. This much is obvious for those with eyes to see. However, many people refuse to believe this because, as they say, "the parties are so different." I believe I have come up with a clear dividing line based on the main issue of each faction which shows their common root.

The Market for Hope

Cyd Malone writes an interesting piece about the "Anatomy of a Ron Paul Nation."  He asked a friend why had he given so much to the Ron Paul campaign, knowing the odds of success are slim to none.  His friend's answer is genius,  "'I'm buying hope,' he shrugged."

Malone continues: "As Carl Menger would agree, hope has a price, too. Water can be more costly than a diamond under the right circumstances, and so can hope."

CK

The Good Fruit of Satan's Tree

A Maine school will now be offering contraception, birth control, to 6th graders. One could be simply aghast that such young girls are being offered something through an organization of the state, "gasp!" However, the larger point is that this development is just a step along the slippery slope of further giving over our rights as parents and families to the state. Here's the link. See the excerpt from a supporter of the measure below.

A supporter, Richard Verrier, said it's not enough to depend on parents to protect their children because there may be students who can't discuss things with their parents.

SBW

Drowning in the Silver Tsunami

The first baby boomer, Kathleen Casey-Kirschling, has begun claiming Socialist Security benefits from my paycheck and yours.

An estimated 10,000 people a day will become eligible for Social Security benefits over the next two decades, Astrue said. The Social Security trust fund, if left alone, is projected to go broke in 2041.

Casey-Kirschling said her generation won't let Social Security fail.

"I think the baby boomers will want to get this fixed," she said. "They're going to want to take care of their children and their grandchildren."

Sure. Just like they took care of those children under the power arrogated to themselves under Roe v. Wade, right? Color me skeptical of the baby boomers' good intentions for "fixing" Socialist Security. Never mind that it wouldn't be broken if they hadn't murdered, or enabled the murder of, 40 million of the then-future wage earners who would pay into the system. Never mind that it was an absurd idea from the start, or that statistically, most of them will be dead before 2041 anyway.

JMM

Fr. Schall on Regensburg

Zenit is posting an interview with Fr. James Schall, a political philosopher from Georgetown. Below is an excerpt that is completely misunderstood or unknown to the establishment Neo-cons and their penchant for waging wars. The interview will be posted over three days, so visit the site for full coverage.

The Threat of "Islamofascism"

I confess that the only concern I have for the rise of "Islamofascism" is that it will be because of the ongoing occupation of half the Muslim world by western interests, not in spite of it. "Islamofascism" is a specter conjured up by neocons to support the war on terror; the Muslim world inherently has no power to destroy the west without a unifying leader as Belloc pointed out in "The Great Heresies," and this has not been a concern since the fall of the Ottoman Empire.