tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28803959757262877592024-03-12T19:28:37.895-05:00Concho LibertyA blog for the Libertarians in the Concho Valley.Jim Turnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03413663900509725906noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-48492946954191266892012-05-04T21:47:00.000-05:002012-05-04T21:47:30.961-05:00San Angelo Voting LocationsVOTE !!! The following list is copied from the County Elections website. This is to help you find the proper place to cast your vote in the San Angelo City Elections next week. I only apologize for not posting it sooner. So, participate in your government and VOTE!!! <br />
<br />
(Anyone can vote early at any of the Early Voting Branch locations.)<br />
<br />
<u><i><b>Early Voting Branch Locations Open on May 8, 2012 from 7:00am to 7:00pm.</b></i></u><br /><br />Main Tom Green County Elections Office, 113 W. Beauregard, 2nd Floor (Keys Bldg)<br />EV1 River Place Senior Apartments, 501 S. Irene (at Mayse)<br />EV2 Disability Connections, 3184 Executive Drive (near Am. Comm. College)<br />EV3 Assembly of God Church, 1442 Edmund Blvd (South of Kirby Park on 29th)<br />EV4 Plaza del Sol Apartments, 4359 Oak Grove Blvd (west of old K-Mart)<br />
<br />
<br /><u><i><b>May 12, 2012 Election Day Polling Locations Open from 7:00am to 7:00pm:</b></i></u><br /><br />1. Precincts <b>106, 107, 114, 124, 137, 144, and 146</b> will vote at either one of the following locations on Election Day (May 12):<br /><br />Pct Location, Address<br />144 Belmore Baptist Church, 1214 S. Bell St. (at Medina)<br />146 Baptist Memorial Hospital, 902 N. Main (N. of Houston Harte)<br /><br /> 2. Precincts <b>215, 230, 241, 228, and 243</b> will vote at either one of the following locations on Election Day (May 12):<br /><br />Pct Location, Address<br />230 Southgate Church of Christ, 528 Country Club Rd. (at US 87/US 277)<br />241 Sierra Vista United Methodist Church, 4522 College Hills Boulevard (at Timber Ridge)<br /><br />3. Precincts <b>304, 305, 306, 319, 327, 348, and 351</b> will vote at either one of the following locations on Election Day (12 May):<br /><br />Pct Location, Address<br />304 Lakeview Bible Church, 4825 Grape Creek Rd (W of the Coliseum)<br />319 Heights Southern Baptist Church, 4512 Sherwood Way (Across from Outback)<br /><br />Precincts <b>401, 402, 420, 421, 434, 435, and 436</b> will vote at either one of the following locations on Election Day (12 May):<br /><br />Pct Location, Address<br />421 Plaza Del Sol Apartments, 4359 Oak Grove Blvd (West of old K-Mart)<br />436 MHMR, 1501 W. Beauregard (at Madison)<br /><br /><br /><br />Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-17765261950073734462012-03-15T19:02:00.000-05:002012-03-15T19:26:04.567-05:00The Need to Pay AttentionThis is what happens when we don't pay attention.<br />
<br />
The President signed H.R. 347/S. 1794 into law on 3/8/12. Public Law 112-98 is the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act. It is also in <b>direct opposition</b> to the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.<br />
<br />
To see the text of the legislation, go to "<a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/">http://thomas.loc.gov</a>" and search for H.R. 347.<br />
<br />
The short version is that any protest of national leaders (being protected by the Secret Service) can result in a felony conviction. If the President is moving from "a" to "b", and you are on the other side of the street, and you are holding a bullhorn and expressing negative feelings towards one of the President's many bad policies, you can be arrested and charged under this new law.<br />
<br />
Someone needs to inform our local "representative," the Honorable Mr. Conaway, that his vote in favor of this anti-Constitutional piece of, er, legislation will be his undoing. Let us not forget that Mr. Conaway is in a primary contest this year with Chris Younts. Those "little L" libertarians out there that are "big r" Republicans can do your country a great service, and get rid of the Washington-based politician by voting for a small-government, true conservative alternative -- Chris Younts.<br />
<br />
Contact Mr. Conaway and let him know we're tired of him selling us out for a committee position.<br />
<br />Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-7637071530210330362011-08-05T17:32:00.005-05:002011-08-05T17:39:42.019-05:00August 8 General Meeting Agenda<em>Meeting will come to order promptly at 7:00pm</em><br /><br /><strong>Why are we here</strong>?<br /><br /><strong>Old Business</strong><br /><br /> Last Month's Minutes<br /> Treasurer's Report<br /> Gun Show Booth in October<br /><br /><strong>New Business</strong>:<br /><br /> Texas Constitutional Amendments (November elections)<br /> Pat Dixon to visit and speek at September meeting<br /> State Executive Committee meeting in San Angelo in October<br /> SB-100 Issues<br /><br /><strong>What's on your mind</strong>?<br /><br /><em>Meeting adjourns</em>Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-65335485594441338502011-07-10T20:04:00.002-05:002011-07-10T20:04:55.170-05:00July 11th Agenda<div align="center" class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-align: center;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">JULY 11, 2011 AGENDA</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Call Meeting to Order</span></span></u></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">Prayer/Pledge: (Ken Barton)</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><u>Old Business:</u> (Wes Heflin)</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Meeting minutes</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Treasurer’s Report</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Committee Reports (N/A)</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><u><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">New Business</span></span></u></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Growth: Ken Barton</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Libertarian Party “reactivation” <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">(Ken Barton)</b></span></span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l1 level2 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Courier New';"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">o</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">Volunteers (door hangers, personal outreach)</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l1 level2 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Courier New';"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">o</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">Letter Writers/Bloggers</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l1 level2 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Courier New';"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">o</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">August/September Events</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l1 level2 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Courier New';"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">o</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">October Gun Show <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">(David Benton)</b></span></span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Fundraising <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">(Ken Barton)</b></span></span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l1 level2 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Courier New';"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">o</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">T-shirts/hats, brisket sale, etc.</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; mso-list: l1 level2 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: 'Courier New'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Courier New';"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">o</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">Other fundraising Ideas?</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Barbara’s Visit with Texas Libertarian Party Leadership (Barbara Pratt)</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Barbara’s Visit with the Tea Party (Barbara Pratt)</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">When</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">Where</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">What</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Speakers/Entertainment/Presentations: (Jim Turner)</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">What areas of interest?</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">Who would we like to hear (other than Ron Paul)</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Introduce SB-100 Issues: (Jim Turner)</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">City Council/School Board Decisions</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">Convention Dates</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">·</span><span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Tahoma; font-size: x-small;">Deadlines</span></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;">What’s on Your Mind?</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;">Next Meeting: Aug 8<sup>th</sup>, Social hour at 6:00pm, Meeting at 7:00pm.</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Tahoma;">Adjourn</span></span></b></div>Jim Turnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03413663900509725906noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-71074699136657718932011-06-22T08:00:00.000-05:002011-06-22T08:00:00.472-05:00The Wisdom of the ConstitutionThere is a question on the table that strikes at the core of every American who cares about the future of this country. And left unresolved, this quandary may result in the failure of our nation to heal its chasmic ideological division. Is the Constitution of the United States of America a living document? <br /><br />Does it possess the ability to evolve without regard to the self-imposed restrictions listed within its very text? Quite simply, and for the record, I say no. <br /><br />Make no mistake, it is not my intention to imply I am a Constitutional expert or that anyone should take my word for it. But in my opinion no, it does not possess this aforementioned ability, it never has and it never will.<br /><br />Furthermore, I think it is much easier to arrive at this conclusion than those who disagree would have us all believe. One need not spend years studying the Constitution, the complete written doctrine of each of the Founding Fathers, and every applicable ruling of the Supreme Court to intelligently discern for oneself this pleasantly simple truth. <br /><br />It merely requires the acknowledgement of the fact that the Founding Fathers did not write the Constitution in an effort to create something new; they wrote it to prevent something old.<br /><br />The Founding Fathers studied history and the abundant failures of nation after nation throughout, many of which came into existence under the guise of good intentions. Coupled with the experience of having been ruled by a selfish tyrant, they resultantly came to a simple and categorical conclusion; these countless governments had fallen because they failed to enact and enforce a set of strict limitations on their own power. They had declined to preclude man's fickle tendencies from overcoming the steady wisdom of logic and forethought.<br /><br />One could easily surmise that the Founding Fathers were as versed in the inevitable tendencies of human nature as anyone in their day. Through this understanding they were able to bestow upon us a plan by which we could preempt these self-serving inevitable tendencies.<br /><br />They understood that the irresistible allure of power was sure to invite malicious intent born of greed and disguised as false altruism. They knew man had been man for an immeasurable period of time and would remain so equally as long. Thus a clearly defined standard must be deliberately enacted, inexorably enforced and tirelessly defended as long as these inevitable tendencies of human nature persisted.<br /><br />This standard is the Constitution of the United States of America. And nowhere in it will you find it written, implied or intimated that each generation of Americans is at liberty to reestablish its meaning or redefine its intentions.<br /><br />The inimitable wisdom of the Founding Fathers did not end at their recognition of the potential for malice inherent in mankind. They foresaw the possibility for the birth of ideas and intentions which, appropriately adopted as part of this standard, could serve to further its sole intent of preserving Liberty and Freedom for all.<br /><br />If you wish to term the application of Article V as the mechanism for evolution of the Constitution than I will enthusiastically join you. But if you try to tell me there is any way outside these strict guidelines by which the governance defined in this document can be altered, changed or otherwise reformed then you are not only on your own, but sadly mistaken.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-69477930796934750592011-06-21T16:34:00.004-05:002011-06-21T18:08:11.560-05:00The Problem with TaxesIn a free market economy, individual people get to choose winners and losers. We do this by purchasing goods and services at specific privately owned businesses that provide us a good product at a good price. Businesses that do not provide that aren't patronized, and eventually go out of business. Businesses that cater to their customers grow.<br /><br /><strong>It is this free interaction between individual citizens that makes the system work -- through millions of individual interactions every day.</strong><br /><br />No private business can force individuals to purchase their product or service, nor can the business force anyone to work there. Their product must be something both affordable and desired. Likewise, employment at a private business is an individual contract between the employee and a representative of the business owner to perform specific tasks for a set fee.<br /><br />The individual wanting the job must decide how much the portion of his/her life he is giving to the employer is worth, while the employer must decide what that person's experience, skills, and effort is worth to the business. If one or the other decides it is not worth it, they go their separate ways.<br /><br /><strong>The individual holds all the cards under the free market.</strong><br /><br />Government businesses and services are different. Doing business with the government means you have no choices. They can force you to pay for a product or service regardless of whether or not you use it. It is able to seize a portion of your life in payment for services you don't even receive.<br /><br />We are not forced to send our children to local schools. We are allowed to personally pay for our children's education at private schools or to teach our children ourselves.<br /><br />However, home owners are forced to pay for the education of the masses, regardless of whether or not they use that government service.<br /><br />Government holds a near monopoly on primary education in San Angelo. They don't have to turn a profit. They can charge whatever they believe they can get away with, as they can force people to pay for an inferior service. They can lavish employees with benefits not found in private businesses, such as free health care and defined benefit pensions. Their budgets never take into account economic fluctuations that private business has to consider.<br /><br />When government competes directly with private business, private businesses generally lose. The government doesn't have to turn a profit. When government holds a monopoly on a product or service, they have all the power.<br /><br />The worst part is that <strong>every dollar seized by government is a dollar that cannot be spent by the individual in the local economy.</strong> It is largely a "zero sum" game.<br /><br />When the local government (or government school district) raises taxes, that money can no longer be spent in the local economy. Writ large, the federal $800 Billion "Stimulus Package" failed precisely because most of the money went to state and local governments. That provides very little impact on the economy, which <strong>depends on individuals, not government, having the money</strong>.<br /> <br />The government's role in the economy is the same as it should be in other aspects of one's life: <strong>to protect the individual from those who would infringe on their rights by force or fraud.</strong><br /><br />Nothing more. Nothing less.Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-75336374810735732962011-06-17T07:38:00.002-05:002011-06-17T07:41:17.477-05:00Agenda for the June 20th Meeting<div xmlns=""><div style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: center;"></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The next regular meeting of the Libertarian Party of Tom Green County will be held June 20 <sup>th</sup> 2011 at Hidalgo's West on Sherwood Way.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The meeting room will be available at 6:00pm for dinner and socializing before the meeting and the meeting will start at 7:00pm.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> </div><ol><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Future Meetings</div><ul><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The July meeting will be held on July 11 <sup>th</sup> 7:00pm at Hidalgo's West. Future meetings will be tentatively scheduled for the 2 <sup>nd</sup> Monday of each month at Hidalgo's West.</div></li>
</ul></li>
</ol><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> </div><ol start="2"><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Introduction of the executive committee</div><ul><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Each member of the executive committee will give information on their involvement with the party. Volunteers to fill a vacancy on the committee will be recruited.</div></li>
</ul></li>
</ol><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> </div><ol start="3"><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Preliminary goals for the local party will be discussed. These include</div><ul><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Running for and winning local offices.</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Lobbying for City Council meeting times that are friendly to citizen work schedules. There should be evening and weekend meetings to encourage greater participation in the process.</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Engaging younger audience, especially at ASU.</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">More letters to the editor by Libertarians and from a libertarian point of view.</div></li>
</ul></li>
</ol><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> </div><ol start="4"><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Volunteer Training</div><ul><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">If there is enough interest, we would like to conduct a short letter writing class with some simple reference materials.</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Let us know what other training our local Libertarians would find useful.</div></li>
</ul></li>
</ol><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> </div><ol start="5"><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Request for Ideas and input</div><ul><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">We plan on ending future meetings with ideas, input, and feedback from the people at that meeting. We especially need to update our statement of principles. Please let us know what you expect, what you hear, what you see, and what you need.</div></li>
</ul></li>
</ol><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
Hope to see you all there. </div></div>Jim Turnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03413663900509725906noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-4239590421476082102011-05-27T09:01:00.002-05:002011-05-28T17:12:58.485-05:00June Libertarian Party MeetingThe next meeting of the Libertarian Party of Tom Green County will be at Hidalgos West on Sherwood way on June 20th at 7:00pm. The room is reserved from 6:00 so come early, socialize, and enjoy a good meal before the meeting.<br />
<br />
Hope to see you <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps/place?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=hidalgo%27s+restaurant+sherwood+way&fb=1&gl=us&hq=hidalgo%27s+restaurant+sherwood+way&hnear=0x8657e583a53b7191:0x827e3d0b3754c742,San+Angelo,+TX&cid=11894806216588448450">there</a>.Jim Turnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03413663900509725906noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-54066322422323651382011-05-08T15:03:00.001-05:002011-05-08T15:04:30.319-05:00Next TGC LP MeetingThe Libertarian Party of Tom Green County will have another meeting on May 16th, 6:00 PM at Cheddar's. We will be discussing local issues, like the garage sale ordinance that will be on the agenda of the May 17th City Council meeting. After this meeting, we will try to settle down to monthly meetings. <br />
<br />
Hope to see you there.Jim Turnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03413663900509725906noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-13530492397906873882011-05-03T21:09:00.004-05:002011-05-03T21:18:55.746-05:00Are Libertarians Anarchists?Libertarians believe that a smaller, efficient government best serves our city, county, state and our nation.<br /><br />Libertarians seek to reduce government to a size necessary to efficiently support its constitutional responsibility and get rid of unnecessary programs and agencies. Libertarians support balancing the budgets at all levels of government by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.<br /><br />As government debt, unfunded obligations, and unnecessary spending are eliminated, the generated savings must be returned to the people of Texas in the form of lower taxes.<br /><br />Libertarians want government limited to it's primary functions: to protect your freedom and your constitutional rights of Life, Liberty, and Property -- all crucial rights for building a free and prosperous society.Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-43038826749826869032011-04-29T12:31:00.000-05:002011-04-29T12:31:43.623-05:00Libertarian Party MeetingYou will have a chance to meet the new Libertarian Party of Tom Green Party Chairwoman at Cheddar's Casual Cafe on May 3rd at 6:00pm. We will probably be on the patio unless it rains. See you there.Jim Turnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03413663900509725906noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-36655032388486092011-04-27T18:07:00.000-05:002011-04-27T18:07:06.165-05:00Libertarian Party County Chair<h3 class="UIIntentionalStory_Message" data-ft="{"type":"msg"}"><span class="UIIntentionalStory_Names" data-ft="{"type":"name"}"> </span><span class="UIStory_Message" style="font-weight: normal;">We now have a new Libertarian Party of Tom Green County Chair: Barbara Pratt. She will be on facebook soon. Read here <a href="http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2011/apr/27/a-call-to-join-the-battle-against-big-government/">first article</a> and make her feel welcome. She has a tough job ahead of here and she will need all of our support.</span></h3>Jim Turnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03413663900509725906noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-31174941623434753002011-02-10T18:36:00.002-06:002011-02-10T18:49:48.919-06:00The Proper Role of Government – Libertarian StyleToday marks a sad day in, as I like to call it now, <I><B>San Franangelo</B></I>. The Smoking Ban has gone into effect city wide, and marks the codification of a loss of property rights here. The ban basically tells private business owners that they can no longer allow a certain legal activity in their own private businesses. This not only affects private businesses that depend on public patronage, like bars and restaurants, but also to manufacturing and other service related businesses. If a business has more than one employee, smoking is banned at that business <B>at all times</B>. So, even after all the employees go home for the night, the owner is forbidden by law to light one up on his/her own private property.<br /><br /><B><I>Let’s see how a libertarian government would have handled the issue.</B></I><br /><br />A small group of San Angelo citizens get together and decide to petition the local government to instill a ban on smoking in private businesses. They enlist the aid of other like-minded groups from across the state and nationally for financial, legal, and logistical support. They begin a publicity campaign, and have the support of the local media.<br /><br />They finally follow established procedures, and the proposed ordinance is placed on the ballot. 10,000 of San Angelo’s 80,000 citizens vote in favor of the ordinance and it is approved by the voters. By procedure, it then goes to the city council for final approval and implementation.<br /><br />The libertarian city council considers the ordinance in which a small number of citizens are asking to usurp the private property rights of private businesses owners to allow or disallow a legal behavior. As the petitioners have no fungible rights to the private businesses, enacting the overreaching ordinance would infringe on the private business owners rights by using the force of government. Further, the undue influence of monetary donations and other logistical support by non-citizens in the ordinance is also considered. The city council realizes it is bound to protect the rights of their constituents from this outside influence as well.<br /><br />The council does not approve the ordinance, stating <B>the proper role of government is to protect the individual property rights of citizens against those that would interfere with the rights of others by fraud or force</B>.<br /><br />Many business owners in town, noting the large voter turn-out and wishes of that portion of the population, choose to disallow smoking in their business while others continue to allow smoking. In this, the rights of business owners to allow legal activity in their businesses are not infringed. Both smoking and non-smoking establishments are allowed to continue business as desired by their owner, and flourish. Further, the city council gains the respect of all informed citizens, as the citizens are no longer worried about what individual or property rights will be taken away next.<br /><br /><B><I>Conclusion</I></B>:<br /><br /><B>The proper role of government in a libertarian view is to protect the individual’s rights from others who would infringe on those rights by fraud or force</B>. That includes government force.<br /><br />That’s not what happened in this case. The <B><I>San Franangelo</I></B> city council decided that majority (mob) rule was more important (to their reelection efforts) than individual rights and the rule of law. They allowed a small group, supported by “carpetbaggers” from outside of San Angelo, to usurp the rights of <B><I>San Franangelo</I></B> citizens. Not the right to smoke, as there is no such thing. It is the right of a private business owner to control his/her private property.<br /><br />Our council <B>failed in their role as protectors of individual rights</B>.Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-70349806005565946842011-01-16T06:34:00.003-06:002011-01-16T06:40:56.807-06:00New Years thoughts from Face Book<div xmlns="">We had an interesting little discussion on Face Book just after New Years. The discussion went something like this. Names have been replaced with nick names.<br />
<br />
"I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes; believe me, these are false hopes. Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women. When it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it. No constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it."<br />
Judge Learned Hand in New York’s Central Park on May 21, 1944<br />
<ul><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Ed</u> Your point is well-taken, but I'll respectfully disagree with at least part of this premise. Do you think liberty is NOT in the minds of people, in other countries, who DON'T have a Constitution to guarantee it? People who yearn for the 'freedom' that we enjoy (and have squandered)? Lately, I happen to have more faith in our Constitution than I have in my fellow citizens.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Wes </u>I've alway thought of the written Constitution as a forceful guideline to liberty limiting those who don't naturally understand the concept of liberty.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Jim</u> Put this up to get people thinking. Off to a good start. <br />
<br />
Look at history. There are many constitutions that are patterned after ours. Guarantees of freedom of speech, due process, life, liberty, property, pursuit of happiness, etc.. Many of them in the old Soviet block. Their constitutions protected them from little. <br />
<br />
Our constitution gives structure to the yearning for liberty that was in the hearts of our founders and is still in the hearts of many. It is a codification in compact form what they had fought a war for before it even existed. Even before the convention in 1787, we were setting new standards for liberty and freedom. <br />
<br />
The constitution is a framework, a tool through which liberty can be protected. It can only be effective through the actions of those with liberty in their hearts who protect and defend it. <br />
<br />
That should keep the thinking going.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Jim</u> Wes, the constitution can only be forceful if it is protected and defended forcefully. Doesn't have to be violent, but it has to be forceful. Has to be done by those who have read and understand it. <br />
<br />
Also, need to be careful calling it a guide. It's not. A guide is a set of good ideas you can get away with ignoring now and again. Far too many of our lawmakers and bureaucrats call it just a guide. Think unfunded mandates, any big government program and infringements in the name of security. <br />
<br />
The constitution is, among other things, a set of legal boundaries on what the governments can and, more importantly, can not do. Kind of like the boundary between 2 properties. The fence line if you will. For several decades, the Federal government has been moving the fence line and encroaching on liberty. By adverse possession they have slowly taken away many rights that our ancestors took for granted. Time to move the fence back to where it belongs.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Ed</u> Agreed, but placing less hope, faith, value and importance in/on our Constitution is exactly what its enemies wish for. It can only be beaten when we stop caring for it.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Wes </u>All government limits liberties; it's the very nature of government. If everyone had "liberty in their hearts" there would be no need for government. The trouble with "absolute law" is that it is inflexible. For example, the "no throwing balls to and fro" ordinance in the city charter. If law is "absolute", then the enforcers must choose to either enforce it or ignore it. There is no "middle ground." <br />
<br />
I agree with your fence line analogy, and I don't believe the Constitution to be a "living document." <br />
<br />
But, the 16th Amendment, for example, says it is constitutional for the government to seize 100% of earnings. But it also abosished slavery in the 13th Amendment. One could argue that forcing one to work without benifit of earnings is slavery. In that respect, the "absoute law" of the Constitution is at odds with itself. The 14th Amendment provides for equality under the law, but the income tax system discriminates based on income, with higher taxes for higher incomes. This is not equality under the law. <br />
<br />
Which "absolute law" do we follow?</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Jim</u> Don't stop caring for the Constitution. But don't rely on it's mere existence for your salvation. It's not magic. <br />
<br />
People need to realize that the constitution is a lot like a gun. It's only effective if you're know how to use it and are ready and willing to do so when necessary. And you need to know how to use it effectively. You have to practice and train to use either one effectively. You can't wait until the doors are being broken down to learn how to lock and load and get a good sight picture. <br />
<br />
Our enemies also win if we put so much faith in the mere existence of the Constitution that we forget the fundamental reasons of why it's there and how to use it. They will be happy to have us quote it on our way to the gulags.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Jim </u>Who said the constitution was absolute law? Don't confuse that with supreme law of the land. There is a difference. It may be the highest law in the land, but even the founders realized it would have flaws and relied on men so they put in the amendment process. <br />
<br />
Also don't confuse the law with the punishment. We don't have, and wouldn't allow, firing squads for playing ball in the street. Punishment should rely on rational judgment as in by human judges. We have gotten so used to cookie cutter sentencing and mandatory minimums that we forget that the punishment should fit the crime. <br />
<br />
The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment is a starting point for sanity in punishment.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Wes</u> I was trying to reconcile your position that my use of guideline was inaccurate. I never went anywhere near punishment. <br />
<br />
The Constitution puts limits on government. It specifically details the authorized activities of government. It provides for a specific method for changes. It's purpose was to foster liberty of the people within a framework of governace. <br />
<br />
In my opinion, it is either absolute law, or it is not. It's akin to being pregnant. Either you are, or you are not. You can't be a "little bit" pregnant. For a more local example, if I am tossing a ball "to and fro" in the street in this town, I am breaking the law, whether or not I am arrested or punished for it. <br />
<br />
It's when there are so many "laws" on the books that it is impossible for a citizen to know when he/she is in compliance that liberty is forfeit.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Jim</u> Guideline gets used so frequently when discussing the Constitution that I challenge it. Many so called constitutional scholars and experts when justifying their latest excess or infringement throw in something to the effect that the Constitution is only a guide. It's much more than "a guide." A recipe book is a guide. Rand McNally is a guide. <br />
<br />
Law is not binary. Is freedom of speech absolute? Should you be able to yell fire in a crowded theater when there is none? Does freedom of speech trump laws against fraud? <br />
<br />
This is not like being pregnant. This is more like being injured. There are differences between a paper cut and a sucking chest wound. <br />
<br />
How do you handle the safety concerns of playing in the street? And where do you draw the line? Is flag football on loop 306 Ok? How about Bryant or Chadbourne? <br />
<br />
I have to agree there are way to many laws. Don't you think that's on purpose? You have read Atlas Shrugged haven't you?</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Jim</u> From Atlas Shrugged "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." <br />
<br />
That's why we have so many laws.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Wes</u> Point taken. My issue is where the lines are being drawn. And, while it is probably sacreligious to say so, I have not yet read "Atlas Shrugged". It's on my "to do" list. <br />
<br />
If I have to have a law to keep myself from playing football on loop 306, I should be in a padded cell somewhere. The individual is no longer being held accountable for their actions, and we're teaching our young ones not to be responsible for them. Almighty government will tell you what's OK and what is not -- for your own good. <br />
<br />
And some are OK with that. I am not. <br />
<br />
It may seem like common sense to outlaw "fire" in a crowded theater. But the same principle is being used to outlaw other speech without the same obvious "safety" issues. Think "hate speech," which is the biggest load of crap ever to fall upon the American people. Once the principle that there is "some" speech that is not free, it means that NO speech is really free.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Ed</u> Jim, I'm all discussed out on this issue, so here's a little homework for you and anyone else who cares to give it a try. Find any law, or even an Amendment, past the Bill of Rights, that has given additional liberties to ALL citizens.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Jim</u> Hate speech and hate crime in general is just a new take on the 1984 thought crime. <br />
<br />
We have managed to train a large segment of humanity that the only measure of right or wrong is the law. If it's not illegal, it must be right. If we think it's wrong, we must make it against the law. This misguided meme crosses all political boundaries.</div></li>
</ul><ul><li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Jim</u> Ed, common mistake. The Bill of rights gave no liberties to citizens. The liberties were pre-existing. The BOR was there to protect them. Closest might be 13th amendment which eliminated slavery and involuntary servitude. <br />
<br />
We still have too many people that want to treat the BOR as an enumerated and exclusive list of the ONLY protected rights and liberties. That was never what was envisioned.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Ed</u> Jim, not a mistake. Given/guaranteed are thought of, by me, anyway, to be one in the same, with regard to legality.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div></li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><u>Jim </u>Your legal meaning of give is not the same as the meaning and usage of give in other situations and that causes confusion. That leads to the proposition that if the Constitution can give us the right to free speech and religion why can't it give us the right to employment and health care? More clearly stated, the Constitution protects and guarantees freedom of speech and religion. It is not able to provide health care or employment.</div></li>
</ul><br clear="left" /></div>Jim Turnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03413663900509725906noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-60677740451492807282011-01-13T18:33:00.003-06:002011-01-13T18:46:00.807-06:00More Basic Principles of LibertarianismSo, what are the basic principles of libertarianism (quotes from the <a href="http://lptexas.org/content/preamble-and-statement-principles">Texas Libertarian Party</a> website)?<br /><br />"<I>The Libertarian Party of Texas, following the footsteps of our nation’s founding fathers, seeks full respect for the constitutional rights of all people without hindrance from any person or entity."<br /><br />"Every human being is inherently free to live and act as he or she sees fit, pursuing his or her happiness as long as they respect other’s rights to do the same.</I>"<br /><br />Current political thought is that the citizen is just one part of a larger group. In the progressive perspective, you are to act for the "common good," even if that short changes you. The conservative movement, while certainly more individualistic than the progressive movement, want to control your actions as part of a "societal norm," generally towards a classical moral norm.<br /><br />Personally, I am a Christian, and I try to live my life by Judeo-Christian values. However libertarianism is individualistic - no one has the right to force their values on another. It is one important aspect of our Constitutional government that seems to have been lost. <br /><br />Now, I'm no anarchist. There is a <B>specific and limited purpose to government</B>.<br /><br />"<I>Government’s principal role is to protect your freedom and your constitutional rights of Life, Liberty, and Property, all crucial rights for building a free and prosperous society. Government should be the necessary size to efficiently support this constitutional duty and effectively maintain the rule of law.</I>"<br /><br />The United States is not a democracy. Democracy is mob rule. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner. <B>The U.S. is a Representative Republic under the Rule of Law (Constitution)</B>. This is the only way to guarantee the rights of the minority against the tyranny of the majority.<br /><br />Against my own better judgement, let me give you a local example. Smoke Free San Angelo recently got an ordinance passed that takes away property rights of private business owners. The election approved the ordinance by about a 60-40 margin of voters. It has been approved by the City Council, and is now to be implemented in about a month.<br /><br />Many people, even those who voted against the ordinance, feel that since the voters approved the ordinance the city council was duty bound to enact it. I argue that the city council, nor the "majority", have the right to tell an individual what that individual can allow in their private business. In my opinion, the city council, in their duty to protect the rights of ALL CITIZENS, should not have enacted the ordinance as written. It enacted an ordinance that took away rights from one group of citizens with a vested interest in their business in favor of another group of citizens without.<br /><br />Whether or not you agree with the smoking ban, the principle that a small group of people can use government to make others give up their own rights is plain wrong. Just because a majority decides "x", doesn't mean that it should be enforced.<br /><br />So, what is government supposed to be doing?<br /><br />"<I>The protective force of government must only be used in response to attack, fraud, or other initiation of force against an individual, group or government by another individual, group or government."<br /><br />"Government was not conceived as an intermediary for voluntary and contractual relations among individuals; it should only be concerned with the prevention or rectification of acts of fraud. Nor was one of its purposes to redistribute wealth or provide special privilege to any group. All people are equal under the law, free to deal with one another in a free market system, respectful of individual rights.</I>"<br /><br />Our current form of government has veered so far away from the initial intent of the Constitution that many people may not even believe the above statement. It certainly doesn't resemble the current state of affairs.<br /><br />Government's job is to keep us from screwing with other people. It's job is to ensure a fraud and force free arena for individuals to consensually interact with others for our own mutual benefit. It is there to protect us from external threat and from fraud. That's pretty much it. In Article I, Section 8, the Constitution lists the enumerated powers of the federal government. There are about 19 specific powers listed. Section 9 defines specific limits on the powers of the federal government.<br /><br /><B><I>Homework assignment: Lets all take a little time over the next two weeks an rediscover the <a href="http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/overview">Constitution of the United States</a> as amended.</I></B><br /><br />((Next time, we'll get more in depth into the platform issues of the Libertarian Party.))Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-55380982562204780472011-01-03T16:58:00.003-06:002011-01-03T17:06:51.575-06:00The Basic Libertarian PrincipleHappy New Year!<br /><br />In an effort to educate interested persons about the Libertarian party and their principles, I'm going to try and tackle the positions of the Libertarian party in pieces. It's my hope to find local applications to these principles, and perhaps get some discussions on how they may apply to local issues, and how we can use libertarian principles to guide our elected leaders into a more libertarian style of government in the Concho Valley.<br /><br />The <a href="http://lptexas.org/content/our-platform">Libertarian Party of Texas 2010 Platform</a> begins with a preamble that sets those principles in motion:<br /><br /><I>"As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their lives and no individuals are forced to sacrifice their values for the benefit of others."</I><br /><br /><I>"We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be eliminated from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized. Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest."</I><br /><br />We clearly have our work cut out for us, as the current use of government in the United States, and to an extent locally, is far from a libertarian ideal. <B>Individual rights, small government, and personal responsibility</B> are the key ideals of libertarian thought. Group rights, large nanny-state government, and no responsibility are the marks of our current governmental situation, both liberal and conservative. The only difference between the two national parties is who gets the largess of federal funds: individual moochers or corporate moochers.<br /><br />How do we, as individuals or even as a group, affect change to our government to more align towards libertarianism? I would suggest the following as a starting point:<br /><br /><U>Get Informed</U> - keep up with local politics and council activities; read the local paper and article comments; check local political-leaning blog sites and social media; go to a council meeting.<br /><br /><U>Get Involved</U> - register; vote; step up and speak your mind at council meetings; contact your city/county/state/federal representatives and tell them what you think.<br /><br />What other ideas do you have? Please leave a comment if you have more to offer.<br /><br /><B><I>2011 is the year of "tilting windmills" for me. On the national level, politicians are on notice -- and our local politicians should be as well. They work for us, not the other way around, and it's time they get the message.</B></I><br /><br /><br /><I>((Next week, we'll look more into the basic principles of the Libertarian Party.))</I>Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-87183614776226501202010-11-30T20:11:00.002-06:002010-11-30T21:13:21.174-06:00Speaking of Bad DaysI was wrong. As was so eloquently pointed out by my predecessor, the current combined city/county/state sales tax is already at the maximum allowed by current state law. Mea Culpa.<br /><br />I do wonder how the State is planning to handle their budget overrun, not to mention what will happen with all of the cities in Texas that are in budget crunches themselves due to promises of unsustainable salaries and pensions. I suppose the state will have to get a second job? It's not like they can legislate themselves more money through changes to the tax code and additional "fees," right?<br /><br />Even in San Angelo, we are in the middle of a massive recession, but I'm not sure our town knows it. Our city council has just announced a brand-spanking new holiday for city workers, giving them one more holiday than even the bloated federal government. The small percentage of citizens that bothered to vote earlier this month passed permanence on the 1/2 cent sales tax so that we can pay to get another water source "for the future," even though we've already paid for this one once. Two or three years ago our water fees doubled to replace the water and sewer lines that were supposed to be being maintained by the extant water fees we had already been paying. While not directly city controlled, there was also the increase in property values (up as much as 500% in some areas) by the "non-city government" assessment district, so that we are now paying more in property taxes even though the tax rate officially "decreased."<br /><br />Historically, the city council of San Angelo has a poor track record of keeping it's word on infrastructure issues. It also has a history of making ordinances that lessen individual freedoms (one example is the "garage sale" issue just weeks ago), but then don't bother to enforce existing ordinances that would probably preclude the new issues in the first place. In contrast, they will enforce obscure, ancient ordinances if it suits their purposes ("no tossing a ball to and fro on city streets", that is if you happen to be suspected of being a drug dealer).<br /><br />Pardon me if I don't trust the city council and local government to be looking out for the best interests of the individual San Angeloan. The city is looking out for the city government's best interest. That's how bureaucracy works -- its purpose is to decentralize decision making (to cover bureaucratic butts) and to expand to fill available space. While everyone else is having to cut corners and spend less, it's business as usual for government.<br /><br />That's why I "joined" the libertarian party. I was looking for like-minded individuals who would work for the REVERSAL of government spending and handouts, commercial or private; people who would stand up to the local governments to prevent them from stepping on the individuals of San Angelo, not just watch them do it.<br /><br />Perhaps ConchoInfo was right. Maybe I shouldn't have been the one to take over this blog. I tend to say what's on my mind. But I was the only one who would step up, and I will keep it until directly asked to leave. Funny thing about libertarians: individuals tend to be, well, individual.<br /><br />In the coming weeks, I'm going to try and get back to what I wanted to do in the first place, and explain in layman's terms what libertarianism really means, and how it can be used at the local level to improve citizen government of themselves. It's about protecting individual rights and the limitation of government intrusion on consensual human interaction.<br /><br />We really can have that in San Angelo. If we try.<br /><br />SnSSmoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-52729820746166229272010-11-03T18:57:00.003-05:002010-11-03T19:40:49.574-05:00Good Days and Bad DaysToday is a good day to be a Republican. Republicans have taken over control of the House of Representatives. Hopefully, they have learned a lesson from the massacre of 2008. The "Tea Party" movement had a so-so night, but most of the Republicans took notice of them anyway. The most likely Speaker of the House mentioned smaller government, lower taxes, personal responsibility. Sounds like a good plan. I hope they stick to it.<br /><br />Today is a good day to be a Democrat. They held onto the Senate (and the Presidency, which was not up for grabs). They don't have a filibuster proof majority any longer, but the Majority leader won his race, and the hard-core leftists are still with us. (It was mostly the moderates that got creamed last night.) So, we'll have to see if the Democrats in the Senate can work with the Republicans in the House to get work done in Washington D.C.<br /><br />Today isn't a good day to be a Libertarian, at least not locally. The "majority" (actually about 1/6th of registered voters) in San Angelo decided that private property rights just aren't that important anymore. The most restrictive smoking ban in the state will begin on January 1st right here in Monterey East.<br /><br />To make it worse, the 1/2 cent sales tax has now been made permanent. Looking into my crystal ball, I see a rise in the 1/2 cent tax to 3/4 cents in a couple of years, later to be replaced with the 1 cent sales tax. The only way they had a chance to raise the limit was to make it permanent first.<br /><br />On the bright side, my children and grandchildren won't have to worry about paying the extra taxes. Neither one can find a decent job here in town, even with the economic slush fund (funded by the 1/2 cent sales tax, no?). They'll move on to greener pastures, where perhaps, just perhaps, they can open a business without "good ole boys" getting into their business.<br /><br />"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." -- Frederic Bastiat<br /><br />SnSSmoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-19793688392861976932010-10-29T16:13:00.000-05:002010-10-29T16:14:44.566-05:00THROW AWAY YOUR VOTE WITH MEIn the past month or so, as I have been reading the comments in the on-line version of the Standard Times, I have noticed an unusual amount of libertarian thought being expressed by people who are both Democrats and Republicans. Many have expressed a desire to vote for the Libertarian candidate Kathie Glass for Governor. Unfortunately, these expressions are usually followed by "but I would be wasting my vote," or "a vote for Kathie Glass is a vote for Bill White."<br /><br />I feel that Texas needs a new governor. Unfortunately for us all, the Republicans would only put up two political class participants for the run, and then they held their noses and voted to run the Emperor again. While the ‘Tea Party’ force is strong in this state, even they were not able to put up a viable fight against Perry. The Democrats, having a prime opportunity to make hay by moving towards the center, picked a left-leaning, sanctuary city loving statist with Clinton baggage (endorsed by the Standard Times) to oppose Perry. Now, they expect us to choose between those two.<br /><br />Kathie Glass is a better choice. We will not only be making a statement to the political class, we could be giving Texas a governor that does not want to rule Texas, but to lead Texas through these tough times. Kathie Glass will look not to massive government and regulation to “stimulate” us into bankruptcy, but will start to get government out of our way so we ourselves can stimulate the economy.<br /><br />If you go to the polls, and hold your nose and vote for your "party," you are telling the political class in this state that it's "business as usual." We poor "chattering class" of people would be stating with our votes that we do not have the power to affect change in the political system.<br /><br />I hope that the people who are as fed up as I am with BOTH political parties would join me in throwing away our votes for Kathie Glass for Governor.Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-265513396298178872010-10-15T19:15:00.001-05:002010-10-15T19:16:51.537-05:00It's Not About Left and RightWhat, exactly, is a conservative Democrat in this congress? They've voted, in masse, for every far-left liberal hair-brained scheme of every liberal wet dream for two years, and spend over a Trillion dollars over what they brought in. That's not "conservative" in any way.<br /><br />This isn't about "left" and "right," as much as the press and current administration want everyone thinking it is. It's the "statists" (big govenment, higher spending/taxes) and "libertarians" (little "L", small government, lower spending/taxes) that are duking it out. And the statists, both Democrat and Republican, are getting their rear ends handed to them. That's what is going on this election.<br /><br />The current Democrat Party has swung so far left in the past four years that even it doesn't recognize itself, let alone the Republican party. The fringe far-left is in charge of the Democrats.<br /><br />Some in the Republican party have been trying to pull it to the left as well (Mr. Bush, Mr. McCain). But the Republican base, largely conservative, is beginning to fight back.<br /><br />The people in "flyover country" are still "middle-right/slightly libertarian", where they have always been, and their wishes are being completely ignored by the political elite.<br /><br />Now they're fed up.<br /><br />SnSSmoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-37552197993212056402010-09-19T13:12:00.002-05:002010-09-19T13:21:21.508-05:00Constitution DayThere was a <a href="http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2010/sep/15/living-document-amendments-judicial-rulings-to/">letter</a> published in the Sub-Standard Times recently by a professor of Political Science at Angelo State University. I don't know what I find more disgusting: Either this professor is blindly spouting a political philosophy that he doesn't believe for the sake of his party, or he really believes this drivel.<br /><br />The "complex" issues and situations we are facing today were certainly imagined by the Constitution's framers. They warned us about tyranny. They warned us about <br />charlatanism. They warned us that the tree of liberty, from time to time, must be watered by the blood of tyrants. They warned that a free press (not the dog washing, cheer leading "mainstream" media) was essential to freedom. The only thing that they didn't foresee was the complete collapse of freedom of thought and unbiased education in the United States.<br /><br />It is the <span style="font-weight:bold;">FOUNDING PRINCIPLES</span> contained in the Constitution that the liberals are trying to change. Those PRINCIPLES are non-negotiable in a free society. That's why people are so angry. It's not about the Democrats being "in charge." It's not because the President is black (or, half-black to be honest for a change). It's because the liberal left has chosen now to try and <span style="font-weight:bold;">FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE</span> (President's words) this country.<br /><br />You see, it doesn't matter that the founders didn't know about Twitter or Facebook, only that the right to free speech should still be unencumbered, regardless of the means.<br /><br />The <span style="font-weight:bold;">FOUNDING PRINCIPLES</span> are found in the preamble to the Constitution:<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">We, the People of the United States</span>: All of us. Not the nobles, or the upper class, middle class, or the poor. ALL OF US. The people are establishing this constitution to limit what other of our citizens may decide to do to us at a later time. The Constitution is about control; control of those who would govern the rest of us. Control by the people over the government they are creating.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">In order to form a more perfect union</span>: The Articles of Confederation just wasn't working. The founders felt there was already a "union" of like-minded people looking towards a common purpose. They were trying to make it better.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Establish justice</span>: all people treated equally. No special favors for a perceived elite, nor special treatment of a perceived "under-served" or "disadvantaged". A man's worth is his own.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Insure domestic tranquility:</span> the Federal government needs the power to squash rebellion and smooth tensions between states.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Provide for the common defense</span>: This should be self-explanatory. It really would be nice if the jokers in Washington would bother to actually do this.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Promote the General Welfare</span>: <span style="font-weight:bold;">General<span style="font-style:italic;"></span></span> welfare, not the seizing of one person's property or life in order to serve another. There are numerous historical events which back up the fact that the framers, and most congresses and administrations through the liberal/progressive insurrections of the 1920s, knew that the federal treasury was not to be used for charity. Now under the charity clause, er, I mean general welfare clause we have TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS in individual handouts (meaning taking money from person "A" and giving it to person "B"), Medicare, Medicaide, OBAMACARE, Social Security, etc, etc, etc. Over HALF OF THE FEDERAL BUDGET is in handouts.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Secure the blessings of liberty</span>: There are over 140,000 FEDERAL LAWS that you could be breaking right now. Do you know even 1% of them? This nation is so completely overwhelmed with regulation that it is nearly impossible to do anything. This government was supposed to be limited in its purpose. We were supposed to be free to do as we desired, so long as our desires did not deprive other citizens of their rights or property.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">To ourselves and our posterity</span>: All we've done is screw our posterity with debt and regulation.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America</span>.<br /><br />It's the principle of the thing.<br /><br />SnSSmoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-70654927282365571102010-06-01T20:42:00.002-05:002010-06-01T20:48:26.290-05:00Smoke "Free" San AngeloI’m wondering: Is “Smoke Free San Angelo” worried about our collective health? Or are they worried about their own?<br /><br />I would like to know why these 4,500 people (those who signed the petition) really want to go to The Lone Wolf, or the Saddle Bronc. Maybe it’s La Casa or the Horseshoe Lounge. I’m not sure, but they are demanding that those establishments be smoke free in case they want to take their children there.<br /><br />Or, perhaps they are really concerned about the patrons of those places. After all, bars and taverns would otherwise rival fitness clubs for health if they just wouldn’t allow SMOKING. It’s not like alcoholics driving home have ever harmed anyone.<br /><br />So, what’s next? How about a city ordinance that mandates the use of condoms for any and all sexual activity? That is another pleasurable, personal choice that people make that may harm others. And why not? If 4,500 people can demand that the other 96,000 people bend to their will, it will only be a matter of time until they outlaw other behaviors they find distasteful. I sure hope they aren’t of a particular denomination…<br /><br />Maybe my personal pet peeve will be next on the “ban” list: driving while distracted. I’m sure these soccer moms are really personally counseling the U.N. on world peace just after dropping off their spawn at the local no-one loses activity, but I seriously doubt it. I cannot think of a single reason to call anyone while operating a motor vehicle. Let’s ban that next.<br /><br />OK. Enough childish venting from me; I’ll never be able to compete against the smoking banners in that department.<br /><br />Instead, I’ve got a personal challenge to “Smoke Free San Angelo” to see if they are a reasonable group, or if they are just self-important, self-appointed former hall monitors wanting to control other’s behaviors:<br /><br /> Option One: Request the proposed ordinance be dropped. Get your people together, get with the local restaurant association, and petition them to ban smoking in their restaurants. If the business owner wants your business, they will comply. That is the way community activism is supposed to work. The business owners would be allowed to choose. This would mean losing your control over the lives of people, but it would mean that you can go to a restaurant – even a restaurant that serves alcohol, without having to deal with the “evil smokers.” They can continue to pollute their lungs in other places. <strong>Caution: this will anger your corporate sponsors.</strong><br /><br /> Option Two: Modify your proposed ordinance to exclude any business that carries the “51%” sign. Those businesses make more than 51% of their revenue from the sale of alcohol. All of those establishments cater to adults, and generally aren't known as fitness establishments. This option would show that, while you still want to control other people’s behavior, you understand that there are individuals who do not share your values. That ordinance would probably gain more popular support, as there are even smokers (as evil as they are) who do not smoke in restaurants. They don’t even have to have statists (look it up) tell them not to. <strong>This is known as a compromise: it means everybody loses.</strong><br /><br /> Option Three: Continue operating as you are. Your group’s demeaning, belittling, and emotion-based arguments will only persuade more people who are fed up with government to fight against you and your trumped up cause. Come November, you will actually lose in the election, and will have to put up with those evil smokers in the city parks that were built by other’s money JUST FOR YOU and your little overprotected liberal spawn. Maybe then you can petition the City Council to just do it on their own. <strong>This is known as the power of government over the will of the people.</strong><br /><br />I look forward to hearing from the “San Angelo Banners” on this matter. There are other ways to get their desired results. Forcing people to do what you want is childish.Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-47713729987649699382010-04-20T21:43:00.000-05:002010-04-20T21:52:08.047-05:00How Much is a Man Worth?Here it is, Tuesday again. I had previously prepared a nice little primer on the Libertarian Party for this week’s post. However, having parted with over $5,500 of my hard earned dollars last week, I thought that maybe I’d tackle another issue instead.<br /><br />When I added it up this year, with Federal Income Tax, Social Security, Medicare, and local property taxes (not including sales tax), I was taxed at an effective rate of 32%. So, at 11:12 AM on Thursday, I stop being paid for the rest of the week. Or, to look at it realistically, I don’t start getting paid until about 1:00 PM on Tuesdays. Mondays really suck. <br /><br /><strong>A man’s work is his life</strong>. I don’t mean that figuratively. It is an exchange of a portion of his life for something of value to him. In colonial times, a man bartered and exchanged the product of his labor for other necessities. Soon coins were used for the same purpose, in addition to the bartering system.<br /> <br />Later, coined money became the main means of purchase. A man exchanges his labor for a piece of gold or silver, and exchanges that piece of gold or silver for the things he needs. It was basically the same arrangement as before, but it made life a little simpler. Instead of taking a cow to the market and exchanging it for 20 bushels of corn that had to be stored, you could just sell the cow, and buy the corn as you needed it. Local, private banks were the norm. The U.S. went on the gold standard in 1873. The Federal Government’s role was to make the exchanges “regular” and fair.<br /><br />Then, in 1913 things changed. The Federal government amended the constitution to tax your labor. They also established the Federal Reserve System to standardize paper money. In 1914, the Federal Reserve note was the standard of payment, and was backed by gold. But no longer was the exchange between just people. Now the Federal government was involved. It was only 1% for most people; only the rich had to pay 6%. In one fail swoop, the federal government reduced a man’s life by 1%-6% annually. It had taken the political class 122 years to undo the Constitution, and forever change the balance of power from the producers to the moochers. And our great-great-grandparents let them do it.<br /><br />Once they had their foot in the door, it was only a matter of time. Who could complain about 1%, right? Then it became 2%, and then higher. They taxed everything. They taxed your income, the products you bought, and the services you used. They taxed your property and your investments. And our great-grandparents let them do it.<br /><br />Next, in 1933, they took the paper money off of the gold standard, and in 1964 they were taken off any precious metal standard. The paper money was now only as good as the “full faith and credit of the U.S. government.” The paycheck soon became the standard method of payment. But the government had already gotten their cut before the worker. It was only fair, since it’s the government’s money, right? And our grandparents let them do it.<br /><br />Now, most don’t even get the paper. It has been reduced to numbers on a computer. And the Federal government takes its cut before you even know you earned it. They tell us that the people who make more money don’t really earn it, they’re given the money. They are just more fortunate than the rest. And too many of us have bought that crap.<br /><br />But, in essence, work is still the same. It is still <strong>an exchange of labor for goods</strong>. It's just that now, a man's life is worth less, and the Federal government gets a cut of your labor – and your life - first. They decide how much of our own money we get to keep. The rest, they spend and give away as they see fit. And we are supposed to be thankful to them. Trust me, our children will care when it’s their turn. And they will hate us for it. <br /><br />At least, that’s the way I see it.Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-33701687251386922612010-04-07T16:10:00.000-05:002010-04-07T16:24:31.963-05:00What is Libertarianism ?There are no "Democratic" ideals, nor are there "Republican" ones. The main philosophies of the two parties are generally liberal (left) and conservative (right), but there are both conservatives and liberals in each party. What we normally hear about the political spectrum is that there is a "left" and a "right." Anywhere in between is called "centrist". The fact is that the political "left" and "right" that we hear so much about only concerns government actions towards economics and "personal" issues. There is more to government, and life, than that.<br /><br />There are many other political philosophies. If you only get your information from the main-stream media and government education (AKA "public" schools and universities), you may think there are only two viable philosophies: conservatism and liberalism. There are many others. Of note, there is <strong>libertarianism</strong> (individual rights and responsibilities) and statistism (big government) that cover the same left-right spectrum, but also add the specific role of government in society. There is also democracy (mob rule), socialism (income redistribution, government ownership of business or "far left"), communism (government ownership of everything, including government control of the economy, or "extreme left"), and fascism (private ownership but government control of business and the economy, which is still on the "left") to name a few. There is also a 'laissez faire' or largely unregulated economics in the "far right" column. Let's not forget authoritarianism (theocracy (religious rule), absolute monarchy, and dictatorship, or "extreme right") and anarchy (chaos, no government) as well. Most all have been tried, and all have largely failed over other, more representative types of government.<br /><br />Libertarianism, as a philosophy, believes in the primacy of the individual -- <strong>personal rights; personal responsibilities; personal property; small and limited government</strong>. That's the simplicity of libertarianism. In this philosophy, the government exists only to protect individuals from external harm (foreign invasion), and protect individuals from other individuals in cases of fraud and deceit. Individuals are free to interact peacefully as they wish, with little government involvement or regulation of those consensual, peaceful interactions. You have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (where have I heard that before?) as long as your pursuit doesn't interfere with the rights of others to do the same. Both the Conservatives and Liberals want to control aspects of your life. The Libertarians want you to be responsible for your own life.<br /><br />While libertarianism allows for individual rights, individuals are also responsible for the results of these consensual interactions. We are all products of our individual decisions. Decisions used to have consequences. Now, government has imposed itself to assist those who make bad decisions. Instead of learning from the negative consequences of bad decisions, they can continue to make bad decisions without negative consequences. People become "victims" of their own mistakes. Or they are "disadvantaged" because they continue to make them. Libertarians would rather be allowed to succeed or fail on their own. Charity is an individual virtue, not a government program.<br /><br />Finally, libertarianism is more than a political affiliation. It is a philosophy and a way of life. We are all libertarian by birth. It has to be trained out of you, which the current educational system in the U.S. is designed to do. Libertarianism is human nature. Libertarians believe that the fruits of our labor belong to us, to retain or give away at our desire. We all believe that we are the masters of ourselves. Libertarians believe that interactions between consenting, peaceful individuals need no governance, oversight, or regulation. We should all believe that we have no right to someone else's property or services.<br /><br />I believe government is the opposite of liberty. While there is a need for government in society, the government should be limited in scope and responsive to society -- not an overlord of society.<br /><br />So where do you fall in the political spectrum? It might surprise you. As a start, I suggest you take five minutes and try the “<a href="http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html">World’s Smallest Political Quiz</a>” at http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html. There are only 10 questions, and, if you answer honestly to them all, the chart will show you where you really are politically.Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2880395975726287759.post-21246120712109950802010-04-04T17:18:00.000-05:002010-04-04T17:32:40.991-05:00Introductions<strong>F</strong>irst off, I'd like to thank Jim Turner for his service to San Angelo. I had to chuckle a bit at the thought of trying to organize Libertarians for anything. That seems to me a lot like herding cats. Libertarians, by nature, are individualists, and the task of organizing a group like that can be overwhelming. While I am certain Jim will be commenting from time to time, I hope he will continue to contribute on this blog as well. There is no better source of real, unbiased information on Tom Green County and San Angelo city politics and day-to-day functioning as the Concho Info blog. Keep up the great work. And thank you again.<br /><br />Second, a bit about me. I was born and raised near Houston, Texas. I served in the Marine Corps, in the U.S. and overseas, in peace and war, for over 24 years before retiring in 2006. I moved to San Angelo, and began working for a defense contractor training soldiers at Goodfellow AFB. My nickname comes from my dogs, Smoke and Shadow. If you need to, please call me "Top."<br /><br />I'm <strong>libertarian</strong> by nature; <strong>Libertarian</strong> by choice.<br /><br />Finally, I've offered to contribute to this blog in the hopes I can help explain libertarianism and to garner support for libertarian ideals and participation in the political process in Tom Green County. As Tip O'Neal has been often quoted, "All politics is local." San Angelo and Tom Green County have long been afflicted with apathetic voter turnout and a long-standing tradition of "good-ole-boy" politics. In one place of agreement I have with President Obama, it is a time for change. Let's see if we can.<br /><br />I hope to provide interesting topics for discussion between all people of any political affiliation. I do not intend for this blog to become merely a mouthpiece for the Texas Libertarian Party. My postings are mine alone; I have received no guidance from anyone. I hope for robust discussions in the comments to each article. I only ask that, when the inevitable disagreements begin, everyone try to POST TO THE IDEAS presented, and NOT TO THE INDIVIDUALS posting the ideas.<br /><br />I'll get things started very soon. I plan to post every other Tuesday for now. Until then, have a nice day -- if you are so inclined, of course ;-)Smoke-n-Shadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05725175231284143250noreply@blogger.com1