By: Frank Levine at PSLweb.org:
Private prison corporations sought increased profits for jailing allegedly undocumented immigrants
Arizona’s barbaric anti-immigration law SB 1070, now facing federal court challenges, was created [read more]
Via IPR comments,
The idea for the Rent is Too Damn High Caucus started during a discussion on IPR. The purpose of the caucus is “to try getting the LP HQ moved out of the Watergate & into a cheaper office.” The caucus may also look into other ways the LP can save money and/or more efficiently use member dues & donations.
If you wish to join the discussion group for the caucus, you my do so at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rentis2damnhigh-lp.
In Peace, Freedom, Love & Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry
Perry is the national committee chair of the Boston Tea Party, but he is also a life member of the Libertarian Party and was a delegate at its most recent national convention. Perry is planning on seeking the presidential nomination [read more]
In IPR comments on a previous post, Dr. Tom Stevens writes
In light of the continued failure of the LP in New York, the Personal Freedom Party will be giving it a shot in 2014. They just adopted a platform which you can see at:
This assumes that the LPNY in fact failed to obtain the 50,000 votes in the race for Governor that are required to obtain ballot status. However, in IPR comments both Richard Winger and LPNY chair Mark Axinn have pointed out that this won’t be known until December, and that the [read more]
Excerpts from an article by Matt Welch of Reason:
New York Times columnist Frank Rich accused the Kochs of plotting “a billionaires’ coup” to secure “corporate pork,” tax cuts, and a blank check for Wall Street bailouts. “What the Koch brothers have bought with their huge political outlays,” opined Times columnist Paul Krugman, “is, above all, freedom to pollute.” The New York Observer’s Yasha Levine concluded that the brothers are “not very” libertarian, as evidenced by their fondness for “using government subsidies to maximize their own profits.” The Democratic National Committee hammered Koch Industries for laying off 118 workers at a North Carolina plant: “The question for the Kochs is instead of spending money on secret campaigns to fill the government with candidates that will enact their special interest agenda, why aren’t they spending that money on saving those American jobs?”
If these attacks appear to lack a consistent theme, it’s because Democrats need the Koch bogeyman to accomplish so many political tasks. The narrative that emerged after the Mayer article, which became a kind of pre-election Rosetta Stone for Democrats trying to decode why they were going to lose in 2010 and maybe 2012, boils down to a strained four-part theory: 1) The ruthlessly powerful Kochs are “covertly” waging a war against Obama on behalf of right-wing Republicans; 2) they are doing so chiefly out of their own corporate self-interest (mostly to pollute) and a general “pro-corporate” agenda; 3) they are creating and/or co-opting populist anti-government sentiment they don’t necessarily believe in; and 4) this is all a direct effect of the Citizens United decision, in which the Supreme Court lifted restrictions on political speech by corporations (though wealthy individuals such as the Kochs have always been free to spend their money on political messages).
What a long, strange trip it has been for the Kochs. In 1980 David Koch was the vice presidential candidate of the Libertarian Party, when he and Ed Clark (a self-described “low-tax liberal”) ran on a platform that included abolishing the CIA and FBI. Not long before that, according to Senior Editor Brian Doherty’s definitive history Radicals for Capitalism, Charles Koch had openly considered buying the progressive opinion magazine The Nation before helping to launch Inquiry, which published such writers as Noam Chomsky and Marcus Raskin. The conservative flagship National Review beat The New Yorker by a solid 31 years with its cover-story shocker that “anarchists, backed by corporate big money” were “infiltrat[ing] the freedom movement.” Horrors!
He concludes: [read more]