From the AP:

Sen. John Kerry on Monday proposed requiring all Americans to have health insurance by 2012, “with the federal government guaranteeing that they have the means to afford it.”

So what if I don’t want health insurance? It won’t matter, as Kerry is proposing health care at the point of a gun:

The senator said his plan will lead to universal coverage by 2012, “but if we’re not there by 2012, we will require that all Americans have health insurance, with the federal government guaranteeing they have the means to afford it.”

So what if I don’t wish to pay for other people’s poor health choices?

Kerry proposes to pay for the program by repealing tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration that benefit those earning over $200,000 annually.

So what if soaking the professionals, small business owners and others who hire people rich doesn’t generate enough income to pay for Kerry’s ludicrous program?

He did not immediately elaborate on how he would enact his insurance mandate, but one aid said he would do so with a requirement written into the legislation spelling out that the government covers anyone who is uninsured.

The way I see it, there would be one of two choices to pay for the proposed socialized system if the “rich” can’t cover the entire tab: tax everyone or decrease (ration) services.

Do the Republicans have a better idea?

The Republican National Committee, which typically responds to political criticism of the president, said Kerry’s critique ignored the prescription drug program enacted by the Bush administration.

“It’s unfortunate that John Kerry’s bitterness over losing the election clouds his ability to recognize the president’s prescription drug plan is providing millions of seniors with more affordable medicine,” said RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt.

Whatever his criticism, Kerry faces the reality that the governor of his home state - Republican Mitt Romney, himself a potential 2008 presidential candidate - has not only talked about but enacted a sweeping health care overhaul designed to bring universal coverage to Massachusetts. Last week, Michael Leavitt, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human services, called the program “a model” for the nation.

So the choices the two parties provide are Democrat socialized healthcare or Republican socialized healthcare. Frankly, I’d prefer to pass - but what they’re offering is “The Healthcare Plan You Can’t Refuse.”

From US Libertarian Party

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom

Stephen Colbert kicks the morning news shows squarely in the nuts over the flurry of coverage that spawned from his interview with incumbent without a challenger Robert “I enjoy cocaine” Wexler:

Colbert: This show is the news. Not only is this show “the news,” evidently, it is news.
Meanwhile, the Today Show is bringing you stupid pet […]

From Hammer Of Truth

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom

When they are taking their August recess, congressional Democrats will be emphasizing the federal minimum wage and stem cell research, according to the Washington Times.

This is part of the Democrats’ strategy of highlighting issues they feel appeal to middle-class voters.

On the other side, Republicans are taking a different direction (via Washington Times):

By contrast, Republicans next month plan to highlight a need to strengthen the porous borders and to keep the conversation either on local issues or security matters, such as terrorism.

Democrats criticized Republicans for having “misplaced priorities.”

Here’s what one Democratic Senator had to say:

“The Republican leadership doesn’t get it in the House or the Senate,” Mr. Schumer said. “They keep going back to the old chestnuts, and they just don’t work anymore. This is a different world in 2006 than it [was] in 2004.”

This statement is ironic coming from a Democrat. The issues they are highlighting during the August recess are the Democrats’ same “old chestnuts” - pour more money into failed government programs (Medicare), promote government interference in private business (federal minimum wage), and have the federal government be involved in unnecessary areas (stem cell research).

From US Libertarian Party

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom

From Sploid:
A Philadelphia man is free just days after local cops humiliated themselves by unlawfully arresting a man for taking pictures with his cell phone.
Neftaly Cruz, a 21-year-old senior at Penn State, was at his parents home Wednesday night when he heard a ruckus outside. He stepped out of the house and saw a line […]

From Hammer Of Truth

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom

Last week Russell Kanning was arrested by federal DHS/ICE agents for trying to hand a flyer to an IRS agent in Keene, NH. Russell refused to show up for court the next day. This morning, federal thugs raided the Kanning household, threw him to the floor, and arrested him. He is to […]

From Hammer Of Truth

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom

Today in the Washington Post, Sebastian Mallaby pens a screed called The Wisdom of Retreat. He suggests that while retreating from our hawkish stance supporting Israel may not be a good option, it just might be the least bad:
If its diplomacy fails, the Bush administration will have to face the dilemma that it’s now […]

From The Liberty Papers

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom

From NOLA.com:
“It is a pathetic and shameful state of affairs the criminal justice system finds itself,” Judge Arthur Hunter ruled from his bench at Criminal District Court on Friday after a hearing that Gov. Kathleen Blanco declined to attend, despite having been subpoenaed.
Governor Blameco Blanco refused to appear in court after being subpoenaed to […]

From Hammer Of Truth

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom

A man walked into a bar and offered to show the bartender a trick in return for a free drink. The bored bartender agreed, so the man pulled a frog out of his pocket and set it down on the table. The frog proceeded to play the best jazz the bartender had heard in years, so he gave the guy his free drink. The man then offered the bartender another trick in return for another free drink.
The bartender agreed, saying “If it’s anything like the trick you just showed me, you can drink the rest of the night for free.” So the man pulled a rat out of his pocket and the rat began to sing. The bartender gave the guy as many drinks as he could manage. Two hours later, an agent walked into the bar and watched the performing frog and rat. He asked the bartender, “Who owns that act?” The bartender pointed to the guy, by then asleep on the floor.
The agent woke him and said, “That’s the greatest act I’ve seen in years. I’ll give you $100,000 for that act.” The man said “They’re not for sale.” “Right,” nodded the agent, “then I’ll give you $50,000 for the singing rat.” “It’s a deal,” the man agreed, so the agent gave him the money and left with the rat.
“I can’t believe you! You had a million dollar rat there you just passed it up for a measly 50 grand,” exclaimed the bartender. “Relax,” the guy told him, “The frog’s a ventriloquist.”

From Adam Smith Institute

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom

The Sunday Times reports that Tony Blair has been pushing for a change to the copyright laws along the lines that Cliff Richard has been campaigning for recently.

In the midst of such high-profile issues as the liberalization of the Post Office and public apathy to elections, Blair “addressed concerns” about copyright laws “whereby Cliff Richard and the Rolling Stones only receive 50 years’ protection compared with 70 years in the rest of Europe”, according to one member’s detailed written record.

Yes, The Great Leader has been known to holiday at the Barbados home of Sir Cliff. Not the first, and I’m sure it won’t be the last, time that the concerns of those known to the Prime Minister (of any party or faction) get closer attention than the concerns of the general public. The important question though is whether the change in copyright laws would be a good idea or a bad one:

Last December the government appointed Andrew Gowers, the former editor of the Financial Times, to review copyright laws. His terms of reference included examining “whether the current 50-year term of protection on sound recordings is appropriate.”

This isn’t about songwriting (or authorship) rights which now last for 70 years after the creator’s death. No, this is purely about the actual sound recordings themselves, the right to reproduce them or not without paying royalties, rights which currently last for the above 50 years.

Which brings us to the whole point of copyrights (and patents and so on). They are indeed a monopoly enforced by the government: the question is, do such grants of monopolies increase creative output? If they do, what is the optimal length for them to exist? When a pharmaceutical patent, which might cost $800 million to produce, is protected for 17 years, might not a sound recording be perhaps over-protected at 50 years?

Looking at the world around us it doesn’t appear that the current 50 year limit reduces creative output: every studio in the land is packed to the gunwales with bright young things making recordings. MySpace and Livejournal are awash with home produced music. Indeed, the 50 year limit didn’t stop Cliff Richard himself all those years ago (more’s the pity, given some of his output).

It’s very difficult to see that an extension of such copyright protection will call forth further effort from the musicians of today, which is the only possible justification, so there appears to be no reason to do so. Unless that Barbados mansion really is very nice indeed.

From Adam Smith Institute

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom

Peter Mandelson was concerned to get his spin on air, blaming an alleged US intransigence for the collapse of the Doha round. But Irwin Stelzer Adam Smith Institute

Tags: Libertarian, Politics, Liberty, Freedom