Truth be told, most anti-smoking laws have no place in a country that truly values freedom and individual responsibility, but then again American isn’t such a country and hasn’t been for generations. Across the country, states and local governments have fallen all over themselves in a mad rush to bar smoking from just about everywhere, save the lunar surface. These measures have ostensibly granted local law enforcement the authority to dictate how private firms manage their businesses. Most of these anti-smoking laws, banning smoking from places like private restaurants and bars have removed any semblance of adherence to a free market approach to such problems

The latest anti-smoking initiative comes from the states like California, Arkansas and Louisiana, which have decreed that foster parents cannot smoke in their homes or in their cars in the presence of a foster child. This move has been taken because of the obvious danger to a child’s health posed by second-hand smoke. For once, the anti-smoking crowd are 100% correct. While an adult can decide whether or not they want to be in the presence of a smoker, and hence banning smoking from restaurants that non-smokers choose to patronize is outrageous, a child has no such freedom. A parent or guardian has a responsibility to protect their children from harm. A child, because of their youth are especially susceptible to the dangers of smoking and those who smoke in the presence of a child, especially an infant, are committing child abuse.

It is quite fitting and proper for the state to mandate that adults should not smoke in the presence of a child, just as other forms of child abuse are illegal, so too should smoking be illegal. Privacy and Smokers Rights advocates complain that this is a threat to privacy and will empower the local police with Gestapo like authority to barge in to homes looking for smokers. While certainly, police should not be searching people’s homes arbitrarily, the simple fact that a practice occurs behind closed doors should not absolve a person from certain behaviors, when those behaviors threaten others will no recourse to protect themselves. No more than an adult would be freely allowed to pour boiling water on a child in the privacy of their home or rape a child in the privacy of their home, should they be allowed to slowly kill their children by smoking in their presence.

While most libertarians would agree with a policy of limiting government involvement in our daily lives, presumably most would also agree that government has a responsibility to protect citizens from having their rights infringed upon by others, hence the need for courts and law enforcement. Smoking in the presence of a defenseless child is an infringement upon that child’s rights to live a healthy life if they so choose and should fall under the duty of the state to protect those rights when parents and legal guardians fail to do so.

Link to Indy Star article

According to a recent study contacted by actual employers around the country, many high school students lack the essential job and life skills necessary to succeed. The “Are They Really Ready to Work” Study revealed numerous deficiencies for most US high school graduates.

According to this study, graduates lack many essential skills, most of which would be categorized as encompassing the realm of basic education. Among other things, the study found that some 72% of graduates are deficient in writing and a staggering 53% are deficient in math. Even among 2 year college graduates, students lack many basic skills in writing, spelling or in simply communicating.

Such news is a harbinger of limited competitiveness this country faces in the future. Yet we continue to hear from school choice opponents that our schools are progressing, that schools are improving and choice will do more harm than good. On the contrary, as long as students remained tied to an obviously failed model, our country will continue to stagger behind the rest of the industrialized world.

Given the deficiency in skills found in a growing number of today’s work force, it comes as no surprise that more and more employers have turned to foreigners to fill high skilled jobs, particularly in the high tech and engineering fields.
http://www.thejournal.com/articles/19491

Unless you have been hiding under a rock during the Thanksgiving holiday, you have no doubt heard of Michael Richards’ racist tirade at the Laugh Factory in Los Angeles last week. Richard’s liberal use of the N word spread across the internet faster than news of the latest Paris Hilton snafu. Richards is a racist, of that there is no question, after all words like that don’t just “slip out.”

Regardless of Kramer’s racism, the latest actions of his supposed victims are in no way justified. Reportedly, the two targets of Kramer’s N bomb have retained an attorney with plans to sue for $10 million, apparently being the victim of racial slur entitles you to a financial windfall. If a racial slur is worth is worth millions, perhaps an ordinary insult, like “moron” or “imbecile” is worth a few hundred thousand.
http://www.etonline.com/celebrities/news/37878/

Last night three plain-clothes Atlanta police officers broke down the door of a 92-year-old woman. The officers entered the home with a warrant, based on the contention that undercover officers suspected the home was a drug house.

Needless to say, when the officers broke down the door of Kathryn Johnston, they were met by a geriatric armed with a hand gun, who immediately began to fire on what she thought were three intruders. Ms. Johnston wounded all three of the officers who promptly returned fire, killing the woman.

The police and the district attorney argue that Ms. Johnston’s death, while tragic, was justified on the grounds that undercover officers had purchased drugs from the home earlier in the day, a charge refuted by Ms. Johnston’s family.

These are the consequences of an ill conceived drug war that allows local police to employ Gestapo style tactics to gun down innocent old women without cause. Is it justified to enter a person’s home by force, without so much as a “this is the police” and not expect the residents of said home to be alarmed perhaps even armed?

Wouldn’t an ordinary citizen be justified in firing on an intruder who entered their home by force? The war on drugs has led to countless billions being thrown down a rat hole and now police consider themselves justified in killing old women, with no recourse.
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2006/11/22/1123metshot.html

On a recent visit to the local county tax office, a certain Phalanx editor spotted the following chart, showing just exactly where our property taxes go...naturally any libertarian would be aghast at what the chart shows...roughly 3/4 of the exorbitant taxes levied on the good people of a certain Atlanta suburb are geared toward "education." And what does that mean? It means the people of Atlanta, like most every other community across America, have thousands of their tax dollars taken from them every year with no voice or input in how that money is used. If a parent, like a certain Phalanx editor, wants to send their child to a private school, they must forfeit these taxes or send their child to a mediocre state run institution of indoctrination, so much for the principle of liberty in America.

According former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, it is impossible for the US to achieve military victory in Iraq. Is he right?

The answer to this questions depends on your definition of military victory. If it is the goal of the United States to develop of strong indigenous Iraqi security capability, with sufficient resources and resolve to tackle the threat from Islamic extremists, while no longer relying on the military capabilities of the US military, then the answer is yes, military victory is most certainly possible.

If victory is defined by whether or not the US can completely pacify Iraq and destroy the Islamic insurgents, then Dr. Kissinger’s assessment is 100% accurate. There simply is no way the US military can win a war of attrition against an enemy who places no value on human life, as our enemies due. Even with resources and technological prowess of the US, the American people have not nor will they stand for a grueling decades long war to wear down an extremist enemy.

At this point the Bush Administration and our military commanders should focus their energies and making way for a successful transition of power and security responsibilities in Iraq. Far too much money has been spent propping up the Iraqi government, with no hope of repayment (regardless of those assertions to the contrary). The Iraqi government must now either take responsibility for their own security or fall to the insurgents, but we cannot expect to US to remain in Iraq indefinitely as they did in Germany and Japan.
Link to Washington Post article

If there ever were a reason to vote Libertarian, one needn’t look any further than the state of Utah. There, and in many other like-minded communities, citizens and politicians alike bemoan the entirely accurate Supreme Court decision forbidden school organized prayer. Prior to that landmark Supreme Court decision striking down school prayer, it was not uncommon for the school day to begin with a prayer led by a teacher or school administrator. This took place in spite of the fact that it runs contrary to the spirit and letter of the first amendment to the US Constitution, which expressly forbids state sponsorship or endorsement of religion.

For some reason the proponents of school prayer (the theocrats) view the constitution more as a set of guidelines rather than the law of the land. As such, these theocrats see nothing wrong with using the power of government to compel others to embrace (or submit) to their point of view, not unlike the equally un-Christ-like mullahs of Islam.

Now the battlelines have been drawn again in the state of Utah as the state legislature may soon consider a new “freedom of religion” bill. According to Utah Senator Chris Buttars, there is no basis for the Supreme Court’s 40-year-old ruling. By Buttars’ reckoning it is the duty of the legislature to restore “freedom of religion” to schools. One cannot help but wonder about the motivations of these extremist politicians who view it as the duty of the state (and not parents) to enlighten children on matters of faith.

It is unlikely this bill would pass judicial muster, but the mere fact that such legislation is even under consideration is disturbing to say the least. Is it too much to expect people intent on giving their children a religious education to send their children to a religious school? Or perhaps it isn’t their children they are concerned about, perhaps their true intent is to indoctrinate the children of others on matters face.

Forgive my ignorance but was it not Christ’s primary goal to lead by example rather than to impose his will on others, but then again perhaps we were absent from church when we learned how Jesus marched on Jerusalem with an armed band of followers and forced tens of thousands of unsuspecting Hebrews to convert by force.
http://kutv.com/local/local_story_318205100.html

The Marine’s Toys for Tots program has rejected an offer from the Beverly Hills Teddy Bear Co. to provide 4,000 talking Jesus dolls for their annual Christmas season toy drive. According to the Marines it would be inappropriate to accept the dolls because there would be no way to determine the religions of the doll recipients.

Has their ever been a story more peculiar? Why is it that non-Christians are celebrating Christmas in the first place? How often do we hear of Jews celebrating Ramadan or atheists celebrating Rosh Hashanah? But then again why would any Christian want a talking Jesus doll? Isn’t that an idol?

Oh silly Phalanx, it isn’t the Christmas season…it’s the holiday season…what holiday is it again…oh yeah its Christmas.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-11-14-jesus-dolls_x.htm

At the dawn of the 21st century, America, like many post-industrial western nations, is faced with many problems, including a burgeoning federal debt, the impending meltdown with Social Security and Medicare, the ongoing assault on private property and so on, but perhaps the greatest threat facing this country is the state of public education, or shall we say, the lack of education. The US lags behind most every other industrialized country in terms of the academic prowess of our young people. For over two decades, politicians have offered the same tired solutions for this educational deficiency: more money. Today the US spends nearly $8000 per year per pupil, far more than most every other country on Earth with little to show for it.

Public education in America is a colossal failure, a failure that is perpetuated by corrupt pandering politicians who deny their constituents the one option that would stem the festering decay in America’s public schools: choice. Rather than considering choice, government bureaucrats, teacher’s unions and leftist politicians warn that choice would leave America’s public schools gutted with little money to support their mission of educating children. As result we must endure a Soviet style educational bureaucracy in which the government plays the role of parent, dictating what schools children must attend, regardless of quality or merit. These same politicians argue that they are working to improve education in America, by allocating more money and resources, but what happens in the mean time? Our children become guinea pigs while our political leaders throw money down the rat hole that is the nation’s public school system.

Competition is one of the hallmarks of capitalism. Competitive forces inevitably lead to greater choice, greater quality and lower costs for consumers. Yet competition is noticeably absent when it comes to public education. Even in Europe, the hotbed of socialist experimentation, parents and students are afforded the luxury of choice. In many European countries parents have the option of choosing a state school, a secular private school or a religious school, on the government’s dime. Europeans, however, aren’t the only ones who surpass the US and also embrace school choice. Hong Kong has fully embraced the spirit of capitalism, including education.

Why is school choice such an unacceptable proposition for the American left when their socialist cohorts in Europe have embraced the notion? Perhaps the reason lies in the fact that while most Europeans have been fully indoctrinated into the state centric cradle-to-grave, welfare state mentality, many Americans stubbornly cling to an independent streak drawing back to before the American Revolution. Many Americans foolishly believe that they needn’t rely on government to meet their every need (yet), this foolish oversight can only be corrected through government sponsored education and thus the premise of school choice runs counter to this objective and must be opposed at every turn. Perhaps if American schools embraced rigorous standards and were committed to academic excellence, then perhaps the matter of school choice would not be such a great concern, though it would still be desirous in a freedom loving country, which we claim to be.

Whatever the reason for the rejection of choice in the US, the result is the same, America is drifting further and further behind and closer and closer toward serfdom.
Link to Hispanic Business article

With the mid-term elections in the past, one can’t help but marvel at the transformation of the two major parties, at least in the short-term. The GOP has been portrayed as the party of big government, while the Democrats are now seen as the party of budgetary restraint and fiscal responsibility. The truth, however, is far more complex. The left may very well embrace fiscal responsibility, in the short come, but that responsibility will come with massive tax increases to offset the anticipated increases in social spending.

The Dems have claimed that they will move to reduce excess spending in order to balance the budget. In reality, the Dems will reduce military spending to increase spending on education, healthcare, welfare and other social programs and every other program with a failed track record.

Already we have heard rumblings of the return of Hillary-care, we have heard grumblings of tax increases and a raise in the minimum wage, a perfect trifecta of the same economy wrecking tactics the Dems have used with reckless abandon for generations. Under such circumstances all hope of fiscal responsibility is all but lost.

With the looming threat of social security insolvency, and an abhorrence to the principle of privatization, tax increases for the rich (i.e., everybody) is all but certain. Indeed the Democrats, and their misinterpretation of last week’s electoral victories, may be the best for the GOP if they can ever hope for a return to power. Last week’s election’s were not an endorsement of leftist dogma, so much as it was a repudiation of GOP incompetence. A sizable number of Americans support limited government and no more support the GOP’s efforts to legislate “traditional values” than they support leftist efforts revive their socialist agenda.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-11-12-budget-deficit-analysis_x.htm

Presumably, those voting machines aren't the spawn of Satan after-all…at least when you win.

And what of those much feared efforts to suppress the votes of the  poor, minorities and other likely Democratic voters? Apparently that was so much hooey as well…again, so long as you win.

Woe to the country had these many narrow races been decided in the GOP's favor, because for anyone but a leftist to win it is clearly fraud, just as it is clearly fraud and duplicity for someone to become wealthy, hard work is never a factor, right?

With the expected Democratic victory in the House of Representatives now a reality, what can we expect? For the time being very little, after all the Dems need control of both Congress and the White House before they can institute real change, but in the intervening 2 years before that occurs the Democrats will begin to sow the seeds for the inevitable takeover of both branches of government.

As Nancy Pelosi pointed out, the Dems intend to take the country in a new direction. In reality the direction is not so new, its the same direction they tried to take the country in previous years, one highlighted by more redistributive wealth programs, higher taxes, an increase in the minimum wage and other socialist inspired programs that lead to stagnate economic growth and higher unemployment in the spirit of France. We can say goodbye to reforming the tax code or social security reform, but then again the GOP was never serious about these matters in the first place.

Far from being denigrated, the Democratic should be commended for being excellent politicians who capitalized on the fundamental weaknesses of the GOP and extracted a sweeping electoral victory. Had the GOP remained true to their convictions perhaps the results would be different. Had George Bush, offered a clear voice and given the American people a better understanding of the issues at stake, in terms of limited government and economic opportunity, perhaps a socialist revolution would not be at hand.

Ultimately, a Democratic victory this fall was predestined. Sooner or later every nation will swig irreversibly to the left. Why? Human nature. The vast majority of people are averse to hard work, the vast majority of people (not just Americans), want others to make the hard decisions for them and the vast majority of people are envious of what they don’t have and blame others for their failures. This is a perfect prescription for Democratic socialism.

Many Americans are content to watch their football games and avoid making necessary sacrifices. For the poorest among us it is seen as the duty of the state, not themselves, to raise their children and provide other social safety nets. Indeed as the short-lived fight over social security has proven, many Americans purposely avoid personal responsibility like the plague, gladly surrendering such tasks to the state. In such an environment can we truly be surprised, as our country swings ever leftward? The GOP’s reckless spending and Big Government tendencies are but the latest signs that personal responsibility is dead in America, just as such sentiments have long been dead in most of the Western world.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6127216.stm

Twas the night before the elections and all through the land…

Today hack politicians, demagogues, and the irresponsible are clamoring for a dramatic takeover of the United States Congress. The Democrats are giddy with joy at the prospect of ushering in the second coming of the neo-socialist agenda. Given the GOP record over the last decade, such a Democratic revolution should come as no surprise, and is probably long overdue.

The Republican Party has been a dismal failure on a number of issues, including: spending, social security reform, tax reform, and Iraq, not to mention a number of extra-constitutional endeavors to usurp the powers of the states. By almost every measure the GOP deserves to fall in defeat Tuesday, yet the prospect of a Democratic victory in Congress will spell certain doom for many cherished American principles such as private property.

With the leftists in command of Congress can it be much longer before we see the birth of socialized medicine and a new round of tax increases and rejuvenated efforts to redistribute the wealth of the most productive and successful Americans? Can it be much longer before the emboldened Islamic terrorists maneuver to strike deep into the heart of America?

On second thought…could an inevitable Democratic victory improve the fortunes of those who cherish ethical and responsible government? Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely and this has certainly proven true for the GOP, just as it was true for the Democrats during their 40+ years in control of Congress. In the mid 1990s with a Democratic President and a Republican Congress, we reduced spending and expanded the economy. Perhaps, with the return of divided government, there may be a return to a more efficient and ethical federal government, one not plagued by incessant scandal and wasteful government spending.

Only time will tell what the future will hold, one thing is for certain, however, change is around the corner…

In the mind of the leftist the single greatest act of treachery is success. Success, be it an institution, an individual or nation breeds, contempt an envy and those who are successful are vilified. In the leftist mind it is inconceivable that someone can be successful through the merits of their hard-work and industriousness, for the leftist, success only comes from duplicity and fraud. This is a defense mechanism created by those failures in society to justify their lack of success and poor decisions. No corporate entity, with the possible exception of Microsoft, has experienced this phenomenon more fully than Wal-Mart. As the nation’s largest retailer, Wal-Mart has been consistently targeted by the Neo-Socialist Party for wages, healthcare, etc…Their latest attack, Wal-Mart’s policy of penalizing workers who are consistently tardy. Wal-Mart in some ridiculous notion that its employees should fulfill their work requirements and responsibilities has been punishing workers that fail to show-up for work when expected. To make matters worse, some of the most habitual violators have been terminated. No wonder the Neo-Socs are up in arms, Wal-Mart’s efforts to maintain an efficient and responsible work force is the work of the devil, pure and simple. Clearly employees who can’t fulfill their duties should be retained in a bid to create a private welfare system. Shame on you Wal-Mart…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061102/ap_on_bi_ge/wal_mart_attendance


This week, after over 2 days of stonewalling and distractionary retorts, the esteemed Senator from Massachusetts finally issued an apology (of sorts) for asserting that the military was the refugee for the uneducated and academic dunces of American society. John Kerry, perhaps taken aback by the reaction, vigorously asserted that his remarks were intended for president Bush, a “botched joke,” if you will, a nonsensical argument for anyone who heard Kerry’s remarks, and further refuted by Kerry’s longstanding vilification of the US military going back over 30 years. Kerry’s comments are also somewhat perplexing. Somewhere along the way, the C Student John Kerry, gained a reputation as an intellectual and scholar of the Democratic party, fascinating, considering his academic record fails behind another that of another academic lightweight, George W. Bush. Perhaps in the Neo-Soc lexicon, one who embraces socialist dogma is clearly an intellectual superior. Later this week Kerry gave a half-hearted apology, in which he essentially told those in the military and vets across the country that he was sorry if they were offended, while still refusing to apologize for his words. Kerry’s initial words fly in the face of the facts. Indeed, over the past 6 years, the proportion of the military’s enlistees who hail from poor families has steadily declined while a greater number of enlistees hail from the wealthy. But do facts matter for today’s socialist party?
Link to Chicago Tribune article


Perhaps it may never be proven scientifically but it certainly seems like the most virulent anti-gay firebrands are actually gay themselves. In the most recent case, Ted Haggard, President of the National Association of Evangelicals, has been implicated in a 3-year tryst in which he paid a male prostitute for sex and drugs. Oh how the mighty, and hypocritical, have fallen. When these allegations first came to light Haggard was vocal in his denials, as he has been vocal in supporting extra-constitutional gay marriage bans. Now its seems Haggard’s tune has changed. Given Haggard’s secret life one has to wonder about the likes of Pat Robertson and the fascist Fred Phelps.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2625645