Ted, where were you and your friends while this was happening under Obama?

Now that Donald Trump is President of the United States some of my Democratic Party political friends have suddenly woken up to the horrors that have continued from the Barack Obama administration. This past year, Democratic leaders have put forth their political theater shenanigans by displaying feigned outrage over government spending, loss of freedoms, and loss of privacy protections for their American brethren. Where were you over the last several years? Why did you not voice this outrage while your party leader was our President?

Most Dems remained silent as Obama’s administration bombed the hell out of various countries around the world, killing and maiming countless innocent lives. Most Democrats remained silent as their leaders have caused our nation to rack up crippling debt and our privacy protections have eroded. Most Democrats championed Obama when he simply wrote a “memo” which they thought was going to end the “War on Drugs.” Obama could have easily gone much farther to end the pain, suffering, and increased the freedom of millions of Americas by truly ending the “War on Drugs” but stood by as its Commander in Chief.

For the few that remained vigilant, I applaud you. For those who ignored the travesties, I welcome you to the Libertarian mission to maximize the freedom of Americans and hope you are not just acting because someone you dislike or hate is occupying the White House.  As a Libertarian, it does not matter to me if a Democrat, Republican, or Libertarian is our president. If freedoms are lost, then we cannot stand by and let them be taken. We must fight back regardless of our political affiliation, regardless of which “team” has control of Congress. If you are sick of the political theater put on by your political party, perhaps it is time to change your voter registration to Libertarian and vote for Libertarian Party candidates. It is within the Libertarian Party where you will find the true #Resistance movement.

So, pardon me if I seem a bit cynical by this most recent statement from our Democratic Party leaders who have recently “discovered” the abuses of our federal government on innocent Americans. You see, all of Florida is within a 100-mile immigration inspection zone. There was an incident last week in Fort Lauderdale which got nationwide attention and properly enraged many Americans. It involves innocent Americans being questioned on a bus about their citizenship by federal authorities. But this has been going on for years — literally. Started in 2006 as a small program, it ballooned over the Obama administration. Not only have federal officers been boarding buses and trains en masse we now have “do nothing” immigration checkpoints well over 50 miles inside our borders. Libertarians have been voicing our opposition to this practice for years which fell on deaf ears.

This week, Ted Deutch and a long list of Dems issued the following statement:

“We were appalled to see U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents abusing their mandate and authority to arbitrarily board a bus to demand that all passengers produce identification and documentation.

“We support strengthening our border protections against external threats and bolstering our officials in their work to keep Americans safe. However, arbitrary and disruptive enforcement actions like this do not make our communities safer. Rather, they waste taxpayer resources, cruelly dehumanize people who have not committed any crimes, and erode our fundamental rights. Identification is not required to ride a bus from one Florida city to another.

“While the law gives U.S. CBP officials the authority to conduct transportation checks within a reasonable distance from the border, this event and others like it across the country show that Congress must conduct a comprehensive review of what ‘reasonable distance’ means. The 100-mile border zone established by U.S. regulations arbitrarily extends CBP jurisdiction and undercuts the rights for citizens and legal residents to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. In Florida, this arbitrary zone puts everyone in the state under constant threat of stops, interrogations, and searches without even the most basic due process protections.

“We regret that visitors to Fort Lauderdale were subjected to this raid, and will work together to push for reasonable limits on border agent authority that protect our civil liberties.”

constitutionfreezonemap

Advertisements

Most Americans find country on wrong track, opens door for Libertarians

lp-logo300x300

A poll released yesterday, November 30, 2015 has found that a growing number of Americans feel the country is on the wrong track. This has been a growing trend since February 2015. Rasmussen Reports released a report yesterday showing only 28 percent of Americans who are likely voters feel the country is on the right track. The poll confirms the average of other surveys and polls showing 64 percent of Americans feel the country needs to go in a new direction. This could open the door for candidates with the Libertarian Party to shine in 2016 elections as the country questions the political theater of the Democratic and Republican parties.

READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE HERE

Martin O’Malley who? It is the media who crowns the king

Democratic presidential candidate Martin O'Malley (left).
Democratic presidential candidate Martin O’Malley (left).

I recently conducted an unscientific survey of “everyday Democrats” (those not strongly involved in politics) to try and gauge how accurate was the polling for support of Democratic presidential candidates. Once a conversation would arise with someone identifying themselves as a Democrat, I asked them a simple question, “What is your opinion about Martin O’Malley?” Unless the person was from Maryland, invariably, I would get a near universal response of “Martin O’Malley who?”

And so it goes. The political Catch-22 system of politics in America. If a candidate does not raise enough money quickly enough, then that candidate is not seen as being viable. But often the reason a candidate does not raise enough money is because the media does not cover them fairly. Likewise, since so few people know O’Malley’s name due to media exclusion, he is not doing well in the polls.

O’Malley’s predicament is similar to what faced 2012 Libertarian Party presidential nominee, Gary Johnson. Both are interesting, qualified candidates that the public would likely love, but for one reason or another, are excluded from gaining any real traction due to media exclusion. In 2012, it was clear to anyone paying attention, which the mainstream media are paid to do, that Johnson was not only qualified but was the most interesting person to cover. His positions were also, most in line with the general American public; however, the general media refused him regular and equal coverage. The results of which, was no one knew who Johnson was and was not going to vote for him. The media failed in journalism 101 — informing the public in an unbiased fashion.

The only two people Democrats (or the general public) hears about on the Democratic side are the names of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Sanders is treated more like a gadfly than a real presidential candidate by the political media, something I am sure O’Mallley wouldn’t mind at this point as he fights to gain traction with the mainstream media. With 15 or 16 Democratic presidential candidates who have officially declared, it is hard to decide who gets coverage and who does not. But, O’Malley has been a popular Governor of Maryland since 2007, one would think he is qualified and should share equal coverage with Clinton and Sanders. But nope! The mainstream media is not having anything to do with him — evidenced by no one knowing who he is.

Sure, they’ll give O’Malley  a quick five minutes here and there, but certainly not enough for people to remember his name. And name recognition is 97% of the battle to getting elected in America, or at the very least to become a final contender. Even with Bernie Sanders speaking to a crowd of 10,000 supporters last week garnering him some media coverage, it is almost as if the 2016 general election ballots have already been printed and Bernie’s name is nowhere to be found. Sorry Bernie, the media has made its choice.

Clinton, who has done everything she can to piss off the press, still remains Queen in their eyes. It seems as if there is nothing Clinton cannot do to derail their enthusiasm for her candidacy. And there is the danger. Because she gets the overwhelming bulk of media coverage on the Democratic side, she is all the public hears about, so when pollsters ask the question, Hillary’s name comes up because it is all they know.

Rather than educate the public as to who the candidates are and what they stand for, the mainstream media chooses to mention Clinton’s name far more often than any other candidate. It is the media who crowns the king.

Martin O'Malley who? It is the media who crowns the king

Democratic presidential candidate Martin O'Malley (left).
Democratic presidential candidate Martin O’Malley (left).

I recently conducted an unscientific survey of “everyday Democrats” (those not strongly involved in politics) to try and gauge how accurate was the polling for support of Democratic presidential candidates. Once a conversation would arise with someone identifying themselves as a Democrat, I asked them a simple question, “What is your opinion about Martin O’Malley?” Unless the person was from Maryland, invariably, I would get a near universal response of “Martin O’Malley who?”

And so it goes. The political Catch-22 system of politics in America. If a candidate does not raise enough money quickly enough, then that candidate is not seen as being viable. But often the reason a candidate does not raise enough money is because the media does not cover them fairly. Likewise, since so few people know O’Malley’s name due to media exclusion, he is not doing well in the polls.

O’Malley’s predicament is similar to what faced 2012 Libertarian Party presidential nominee, Gary Johnson. Both are interesting, qualified candidates that the public would likely love, but for one reason or another, are excluded from gaining any real traction due to media exclusion. In 2012, it was clear to anyone paying attention, which the mainstream media are paid to do, that Johnson was not only qualified but was the most interesting person to cover. His positions were also, most in line with the general American public; however, the general media refused him regular and equal coverage. The results of which, was no one knew who Johnson was and was not going to vote for him. The media failed in journalism 101 — informing the public in an unbiased fashion.

The only two people Democrats (or the general public) hears about on the Democratic side are the names of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Sanders is treated more like a gadfly than a real presidential candidate by the political media, something I am sure O’Mallley wouldn’t mind at this point as he fights to gain traction with the mainstream media. With 15 or 16 Democratic presidential candidates who have officially declared, it is hard to decide who gets coverage and who does not. But, O’Malley has been a popular Governor of Maryland since 2007, one would think he is qualified and should share equal coverage with Clinton and Sanders. But nope! The mainstream media is not having anything to do with him — evidenced by no one knowing who he is.

Sure, they’ll give O’Malley  a quick five minutes here and there, but certainly not enough for people to remember his name. And name recognition is 97% of the battle to getting elected in America, or at the very least to become a final contender. Even with Bernie Sanders speaking to a crowd of 10,000 supporters last week garnering him some media coverage, it is almost as if the 2016 general election ballots have already been printed and Bernie’s name is nowhere to be found. Sorry Bernie, the media has made its choice.

Clinton, who has done everything she can to piss off the press, still remains Queen in their eyes. It seems as if there is nothing Clinton cannot do to derail their enthusiasm for her candidacy. And there is the danger. Because she gets the overwhelming bulk of media coverage on the Democratic side, she is all the public hears about, so when pollsters ask the question, Hillary’s name comes up because it is all they know.

Rather than educate the public as to who the candidates are and what they stand for, the mainstream media chooses to mention Clinton’s name far more often than any other candidate. It is the media who crowns the king.

Carly Fiorina officially declares 2016 presidential run – along with six other women

Yesterday, May 4, 2015, Republican Carly Fiorina officially declared she is running for president in the 2016 general election. This brings the total women who have officially declared their presidential run to six in a widening field for the office.

Fiorina and Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, are the two most talked about women in the mainstream media. There is also the highly qualified Jill Stein from the Green party and three other female candidates running without a political party. The independents are Tami Stainfeld, Samm Tittle and Lynn Sandra Kahn. Although the Libertarian Party has had female presidential candidates seek the party’s nomination in the past, we have not yet seen any officially announced.

Hillary Clinton may face three other women for a Democratic Party showdown of estrogen at the 2016 primaries with potential female candidates Clare McCaskill, Amy Klobuchar and/or Janet Napolitano. Jill Stein may have competition with Cynthia McKinney who is another female considering a run for the Green Party’s nomination.

READ THE REST OF THE STORY HERE!