What Does Rand Pauls Primary Win Mean?

Rand Paul won. Does that mean that political America is going to actually read and apply the Constitution? Likely not. It does mean that there is a new demon for the news media to attack. It also means that you cannot have a rational discussion of the pros and cons of the civil rights act of 1964.

Maybe it means that crooked pols won't get paid off by special interest groups to lean one way or another? Not hardly.

Rest assured that the beltway bs will continue unabated in spite of rational thought and common sense. There will still be scandals and good reason for political cartoons.

What it means is that we will continue as before. The tea party will still be seen as a new third party that isn't. Libertarians will be seen as a fringe group. And, if some pigs are more equal than others it's because they bring home the bacon.

FTFGIMAD
Technorati Tags: Rand Paul, Primary, Election 2010, Libertarianism

Are you a Sovereign Citizen?

"By any chance are you in any way associated with anything even remotely associated to the "sovereign citizen" movement?" I got that question on a thread at Change.org while participating in a discussion of taxation. The writer wasn't happy with some things I said. It didn't take long for manners to be restored and discussion resumed. However, I'd never heard of that movement and on the surface, at least the name sounded interesting. After all I advocate Rational Thought and would love to see the Federal Government minimised. By minimised I mean that I want the .gov to follow the letter of the Constitution and get out of your or my business. So, to make a long story short, I asked for a link. She sent three. This blog post is the result of reading the links and trying to apply a Realist view with some rational thought.

For starters, I am not a Sovereign Citizen supporter. These folks appear to believe that they are not subject to US Law etc. Nothing could be farther from the truth. We are very subject to the laws of the land. I just don't like the intrusive nature of a lot of the laws. It isn't any of Uncles business who I date or otherwise associate with. In fact, I don't believe that the fed has any business getting involved in domestic matters such as marraige. Why? Because the Constitution is silent on the issue. And, the nature of the Constitution is that silence means it is not the purview of the fed. Of course, try to tell that to virtually anyone. We are so accustomed to the big brother or nanny mentality that the concept of "leave me the hell alone" simply doesn't compute for most.