Who Might Get My Vote in 2012

I'm looking for leadership. Someone that can crystallize the disparate, visceral energy erupting all over the country. It must be someone David Brooks and Peggy Noonan would disapprove of if they are able to win.

Let's start with who will have a tough time getting my consideration.

Tim Pawlenty - McCain moderate - toast
Mitt Romney - Romney care continues to be an example of why we don't want Obama care
Mike Huckabee - Pretty weak on immigration and he's an economic populist

Next, a group that gets closer

Ron Paul - a little quirky but hones in well on economic arguments (I am an Austrian too)
Sarah Palin - The brightest star and tough too. Economic populism is a problem

Politicians that get it and whom I would vote for today. Two of these haven't even been given consideration by anyone except me.

Michelle Bachmann - Potential Palin like star power and she gets it!
Bobby Jindal - Absolutely gets it, can articulate it and has made it work. Presence?
Jim DeMint - I am having a hard time understanding why he's not the leading contender!

What say you?

The Runaway's Natural Rights

Chattel slavery in America produced the apotheosis of the "runaway." The best known of these freedom seekers were Frederick Douglass and Kunta Kinte, the mythologized ancestor of the late Alex Haley, author of Roots. If slavery is America's "original sin" or the contradiction that detractors of America's founding principals say makes specious the arguments of Locke, Madison, Adams, Jefferson, Hutcheson, Montesquieu, et al, then examining the motivations of the most esteemed slaves has relevance since they were at the brunt end of the despotism.

Were runaways unconcerned with the plight of the downtrodden? Were they advocates of forced labor? The murder of innocents? What were their motivations? What drove them?

According to Haley, Kunte Kinte was from the village of Juffure in what is now the state of Gambia in West Africa. He had known freedom. He was not opposed to common effort, he grew up with it and saw its benefits. He grew up under the authority of a father, mother, grandmother and village elders and was subsumed in a culture where effort was shared. It was however, voluntary! The movie makes clear that the young Kunta did not have to follow the wisdom and guidance of his elders but he would be allowed to suffer the consequences as he approached maturity. He grew up in liberty.

Would he and Douglass have agreed with Hutcheson that all men are created equal? In a memorable line in the movie Roots, Kunta Kinte lifts his infant daughter Kizzy to the star spangled night sky and says to her "Behold the only thing greater than yourself." What was that "thing?" Roots makes it plain that Kunta was a devout believer in God. As Douglass put it, "One and God make a majority." Is it safe to assume that Douglass and Kinte would have agreed with Hutcheson that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights - not those bestowed or negated by man?

What is it that the slave wanted? To be cared for? Wasn't it in the slave owner's interest to care for their slaves? Of what use was a slave that was hungry, sick or vulnerable for lack of shelter or clothing? So, according to those who oppose America's founding principals, shouldn't the slave have been content with the owner's care in exchange for their labor? Why should the slave desire to own themselves and the result of their effort when all that they needed was provided? The slave had to be at odds with John Locke, if we are to believe those who dismiss the relevance of natural law to the success of the American experiment. Locke's argument that all men are entitled life and property which secured their right to liberty, should not then be desired by the slave.

Let's be clear, not all slaves desired to leave their captivity or bondage. Given their upbringing, many were conditioned to fear life beyond the influence of the oppressor, which is understandable. What about our heroes, why wouldn't they desire the comfort of the the master's housing, health care, food, etc? What was the difference between their state and the state of their owners? The slave had no right to control their being or what they produced. What guaranteed that right to their owners?

Locke in looking at two forms of government saw tyranny in monarchy or executive government that retained all sovereign rights to itself, granting rights at the discretion of the ruling elite. The slave owner, in contrast to the slave had the right to own. Marx didn't go any further than this relationship in his historical analysis where he concluded that the history of man is the struggle between classes. Because he stopped at these relationships and dug no deeper, he failed to understand why the relationships exist and therefore, everything that followed his flawed premise was in complete error.

The very thing at the heart of what Marx wanted was to eliminate the very thing that would free the slave and secure his ability to exist as an equal; private property rights. If the primary objective of government is to protect life and property rights, then liberty is secure. The slave owner was free to dispose of his property. The slave was capable of no such disposition because he had no rights with respect to ownership.

Would Frederick Douglass voluntarily exchange 63% of his labor in exchange for promise from his master for shelter, clothing, food and medical care? Would Kunta Kinte voluntarily give up 63% of his time to his master because his master made some claim about his labor making the earth hot? Would either of them voluntarily give up time or labor to benefit those, who like themselves work but were required to make no such sacrifice? Would the runaway support a government that coerced its people at gunpoint or would they support a government that ensured that all exchanges were voluntary?

White House Approved Defenses of Obama's Performance

Though not official, a pattern is emerging in the defense of the president's performance. Press Secretary Gibbs and his surrogates at the New York Times and their down the line distribution in the broadcast media have taken up what seem to be 3 consistent themes: 1) the all inclusive Obama Derangement Syndrome, 2) it's George Bush's fault and 3) the once reliable trump card of racism.

There are of course derivatives of this. An offshoot of the "it's George Bush's fault" strategy is the "failure of capitalism" strategy. Of course, George Bush, that bastion of free market capitalism is the president that socialized the losses of big banks, AIG and the big investment banks. Bush is also the one that used TARP money to bail out the UAW but that's their media strategy and they're sticking to it.

Obama Derangement Syndrome can include what are leaked to be staff failures (none of which accrue to the black woman Valerie Jarrett), Mayor Daley pressuring him or squabbling at the USOC. It can also include blame they want to assign to Blue Dogs, the Congressional Budget Office or insurance companies wanting to maintain the status quo.

When there's no other way out, the fall back defense is racism. You know, the racism that was so prevalent as he beat first Hillary and then McCain. The same racism that had his approval rating near 70% immediately following his inauguration.

So liberals, don't be silly or sit idly by while the president is criticized for his positions, actions or inactions, use these approved defenses alone or in combinations. Get creative as you beat back the frontiers of conservative ignorance, hatred and racism. Don't concern yourself with Obama's . . . uh, setbacks. Go forth with confidence in your man and work for the Change He Hopes You Can Believe In! No, I mean the hope for spare change in your pocket when he's done. Sorry, that's not it either, well, you know what I mean. . . . don't you?

Robert Higgs on Barack Obama as Herbert Hoover

Robert Higgs on Barack Obama as Herbert Hoover’s True Heir

Posted using ShareThis

A Story About My Grandfather

This from a 71 year old contemporary of my father, John Stahlman.

Even though I grew up “an East-Ender,” so did about half of the African-American community. All East Enders lived east of the railroad tracks of the Missouri-Illinois Railroad, but the boundaries between black and white neighborhoods were not very rigid, distinct, or permanent. Going east on Church Street, the first residence of a black family was in the 500 block, the last house on the south side of the street, at the corner of Church and Miller. The Alexanders lived there.
Mr. Alexander was some kind of law-enforcement officer and was authorized to keep a gun. He showed my friends and me that long-barreled pistol and his shiny badge one day for no reason I ever knew. Sixty years later, all my imaginations about his reasons are surely influenced by the events of the intervening years. Whatever his reason, knowing that he had a pistol supported my parent’s judgment that he was a good colored person.
Gilbert and Emma Holmes both taught in Vernon School, the colored grade school, and were respected and admired by everyone. The two colored barbers of Sparta were Ed Mischeaux and “Kiddo” Feaman. “Cheese” Collins owned a bicycle repair business that operated out of an former blacksmith shop as well as a scrap yard where he bought old iron and stacks of newspapers as his part in World War II. “Lightin Willie” was Sparta’s most available bachelor who drove a Model A Ford that never gulped more than a quarter’s worth of gas from the Phillip’s 66 filling station. When “Lightin” drove up Church Street, the cloud of blue smoke that trailed him was as close as Sparta ever came to a mosquito spraying program. “Cubby” Covington shined shoes in Ed Mischeaux’s barbershop and played drums on the weekends with the Seven Aces, King, and Queen at the roadside dance hall, Skunk Hollow, situated on the curve on Route 154 west of Sparta.
I’ll never forget the Bardo family, not so much because they were unique but because they were so typically “Sparta People.”
I was 14 and my dad had already taught me how to drive his brand new, blue, 1950 International, ¾-ton pick-up truck. My parents would allow me to get some practice driving by allowing me drive the truck to run errands in the neighborhood. I often volunteered to run errands much to the delight of my mom and consternation of parents who wisely kept their sons from driving until they turned 15 and eligible for a license.
“Mom, can I take the truck?”
“Yes, if you promise to be careful.”
I always made the qualifying promise and then quickly drew an imaginary map in my head that would extend the route to complete the errand. I just loved driving! Just in case my mother was watching from the kitchen window, I consistently left the driveway at a very cautious speed and made a full stop at the corner of Bottom and Church Streets. After I escaped my mother’s line of sight, I aimed the truck at any destination where teenage girls lived or might be waiting for a cool cat like me to drive by.
North St. Louis Street was just blocks away and it was the preferred route for teens walking between high school and downtown and was the neighborhood of Marilyn, Marcia, Patti and Audrey. St. Louis Street was also home to grandparents of Elizabeth and Frances. As I was heading north on St. Louis Street I spotted a lone girl walking south on the sidewalk in front of the Eiker Funeral Home. Closing in on the target, I recognized the lone damsel as Frances Rapp, the granddaughter of George Eiker, the mortician.
With one elbow hanging out the window and one hand on the steering wheel, I was ready to honk and wave on my chance meeting with Frances. Just as I was even with her, she waved. Wow! She recognized me as the driver! When I was few yards past her, I thought I saw her turn so her eyes could follow the sight of this dashing sport in his dad’s truck.
I slammed on the brakes, pushed in the clutch, and jammed the shift level into reverse. With just a glance in the side view mirror, I hurriedly backed toward where Frances was standing, but just before I reached her, I heard this crashing sound and felt my head jerk back and then forward.
Oh my God! I had rammed into a Chevy sedan, maybe a 1949 model, parked on the street. By the time I got out of the truck, Harold Bardo, the Chevy owner, had run across the street to see who had banged in the trunk of his car with that blue truck.
It was Mr. Bardo, a man who lived on my West End Globe-Democrat newspaper route. He recognized me and I wondered if that was good news or bad. He looked at me and said, ”Should I call your dad or do want him to call me?” Either way, I knew I was in trouble. After apologizing like I was in a confessional booth, I thought it would be better for me if I were the one who told Dad. Mr. Bardo’s simple response was, “I’ll wait on your dad’s call.”
I must have lost consciousness then because I can’t remember what, if anything, I said to Frances, what route I took home, how I told my parents, how many papers I had to deliver to cover the cost to repair the Bardo Chevy.
Two things I do remember about the incident. Mr. Bardo did not holler and scream at me, nor did he slap me or shoot me. But best of all, he trusted me to tell my parents and he was confident that Oscar Stahlman would do the right thing about repairing his car.
I think maybe that was one experience that made it easy for me to know what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was talking about when he dreamed that one day his children would be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

If You Need Peace . . . .