Sunday, June 26, 2005

Von Winkle Refuses to Leave New London, CT Homes

Of course, you've all heard about the extremely disheartening Supreme Court decision regarding eminent domain. Here's a story on Yahoo news with an overview:

The hopeful part, though, is at the very end:

"It's a little shocking to believe you can lose your home in this country," said Von Winkle, who said he would battle beyond the lawsuits and fight the bulldozers if necessary. "I won't be going anywhere."

Atleast one homeowner is refusing to leave at all costs. If he goes through with his plan, will the local authorities simply shoot him? Or bulldoze him in to the ground along with his properties?

Americans do not own anything. Our lives, our bodies, our property - it all belongs to someone else. We are slaves and the chains are getting tighter.

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Free Speech at UNCG?

Here's an LTE Paul Elledge wrote in to the Rhino and the N&R:

Dear Editor,
I don’t know whether or not you guys at The Rhino knew about the so-called “free-speech zones” at UNCG, so I thought I’d tell you about my experience there on Thursday, June 9 – that my friend and I may get arrested for exercising our rights to free speech and to petition the government. This seems like the sort of thing you’d like to do a story on. Here’s the quick write-up I posted to my blog:
Free speech does not exist at UNCG, a public university, at least according to the delusions of whoever sets university policy. While gathering petition signatures there yesterday to get the Libertarian Party on the ballot in North Carolina, a friend and I had an encounter with UNCG staff. They told us that we couldn’t stand outside in front of the Elliott University Center because it’s not a free-speech zone. We refused to leave and told them that wherever we happened to be standing is a free-speech zone, as long as it’s on public property, and that we were exercising our rights to free speech and to petition the government as protected by the First Amendment.
They didn’t buy it, but they didn’t try to have us arrested either, as I suspected they would. Instead, they asked us to come to a conference so that they could explain the “rules” to us. We decided to humor them. That way we’d know exactly what they believe the rules to be, giving us more information on how best to sue them if it comes to that.
Here are the rules that UNCG thinks it has passed:
There are two free-speech zones on campus. Within these zones, people may speak as they wish and distribute literature, as long as they let UNCG know 48 hours in advance. (Of course, that means that even in that case, it’s not free speech, because you have to get permission two days in advance.) You may not gather petition signatures in the free-speech zones, however, because that’s soliciting, not speech.
You may gather petition signatures on campus if you belong to a student group and if you reserve a table in one of two spots on campus. Otherwise, it’s prohibited.
We will first try through diplomatic means to get UNCG to repeal these rules. If diplomacy fails, we will seek aid to bring a lawsuit against UNCG. I look forward to it. In the meantime, we will continue to petition at UNCG wherever we please.
Paul Elledge

The "friend" was me, of course. The Rhino published this letter in last week's edition, and the N&R should be doing a story on it sometime soon. A free speech "zone" on public property with required notification is absolutely the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while... and to see all those faculty members tell us that with a straight face...

Sunday, June 19, 2005

another voter

Two nights ago I ran in to a high school friend I had not seen in many years and he told me that he voted for me... both times ('02 and '04). This happened just about every day right after the election and now its with less frequency, but I'm still always surprised. Who cares how many votes I got? In the end, that is of no consequence. The real success is that all of these people know a Libertarian candidate personally. Now the Libertarian Party is not an isolated group of wackos (well, unless of course they've always known I was a wacko, which is entirely possible). Now their friend or acquaintance is a representative of the Libertarian Party and I know for a fact that most of those people knew very little about the party principles when they voted for me on November 2nd. That may seem a strange thing to be happy about, I know. But what it means is that now most of those people DO know what the party stands for. They saw my name, they voted for me, and then (hopefully) they went home and did their research. At the very least, they pay more attention when libertarianism is mentioned ("hey.... I know a Libertarian, in fact, I voted for one!"). If they weren't already, now they're all a little more familiar with the Libertarian Party - all 759 of them. And that makes me very happy.

Friday, June 17, 2005

Take Back Our State!

Don't miss the Take Back Our State rally being organized by American for Prosperity, a libertarian-minded group. Check out the details at:

Wednesday, June 15, 2005

Patriot Reauthorization Act a Danger to Liberty

June 14, 2005

Patriot Reauthorization Act a Danger to Liberty
Libertarian Party Calls on Congress to Show Common Sense and Vows to
Fight for America

(Washington, D.C.)  In a closed session last week, the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence voted to reauthorize and expand the USA
PATRIOT Act, which came into law weeks after 9/11.  Originally, the
Patriot Act was set to expire after five years but the Bush
administration and Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez are seeking to
make the law permanent while expanding its reach and scope.

In its current form the Patriot Act violates at least six of the
amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights.  Under the act, law
enforcement may conduct no-notice searches of residences and
businesses; conduct roving wiretaps; or seize personal files such as
medical, financial, employment and even library lending history.
Additionally, the PATRIOT Act has led to peaceful community groups
being investigated as terrorist cells.

While President George W. Bush credits the PATRIOT Act for securing
over 200 convictions, the majority of those convictions have little to
do with terrorism.  The PATRIOT Act, originally crafted to protect the
nation from terrorists, has been used to fight corruption in Nevada
strip clubs; was used to track those responsible for computer crimes;
and has even been effective to foreign countries in fighting groups
such as HAMAS.  Generally, the PATRIOT Act has been a failure within
its defined purpose.

The new version of the PATRIOT Act, already approved by a Senate
committee, will expand the reach of the FBI by giving individual
agents "administrative authority" to create and approve their own
search warrants.  With no checks in place to prevent abuse, violations
of the law would go unnoticed under the expansion of the already
ineffective law.

"The Libertarian Party urges members of Congress to vote against the
Patriot Reauthorization Act" stated Joe Seehusen, executive director
of the National Libertarian Party.  He continued, "If the PATRIOT Act
is made permanent and is expanded, the Libertarian Party will
continually fight to uncover abuses of the law and will assist in
protecting the privacy and civil liberties of all Americans."

Sunday, June 12, 2005


check out the clever goods for sale at the official store for the Prometheus Institute:

I especially like the t-shirts for the federal reserve ("Creating depressions and recessions since 1913!"):

and the transportation security administration ("With us, you're more than a traveler. You're a potential terrorist!" ):

Tuesday, June 07, 2005

Patriot Act here to stay?

here's a good article on the recent secret meetings to discuss the reauthorization of the Patriot Act. if they fail to tack on any sunset provisions, that means the Patriot Act is here to stay.