-
I always enjoy reading the polls in the Clovis News Journal, but I rarely answer them. I can't. They don't offer an option I could choose.
The current question as I write this is: "If an airline offered passenger service to Dallas-Fort Worth would you be more or less inclined to fly directly from Clovis?"
I am offered the options of "More", "Less", or "Depends on the cost".
How about "None of the above"?
Taken in a vacuum, I could say I would be more likely to fly if there were direct flights, if the cost were affordable, and if I ever had any reason to go to Dallas or Fort Worth, but that would give a false impression. The truth is I won't ever fly again unless it is a life or death situation, or unless the airport security silliness which is currently forced upon airline passengers dies a well-deserved death.
Yes, I will be "inclined to fly" again once the TSA and its security theater dog and pony show have gone the way of the dodo, have not been replaced by anything, and I am allowed to fly while appropriately armed. And no, a bullet hole in the skin of a plane will not cause a catastrophic decompression as movies would have you believe, but if you (or the airline) are concerned about it anyway, there is always "frangible ammunition".
Back to the subject of polls, I have noticed that there is rarely an option that provides for the absence of regulatory or confiscatory action, along with the ever-present threat of enforcement, by The State.
I am asked what level of taxation I agree with, or how I want to see tax money spent, but not whether I want my friends and neighbors' money left with those who earned it rather than being taken from them under some pretext.
Or I am asked "Have you signed up with the New Mexico Health Insurance Exchange?" Where's the "I won't" option? Once again, "None of the above" would suffice.
As in all things political, I am given the option to choose between statist choice A or statist choice B, while the option to choose liberty is never offered. Fortunately, no one needs permission to begin to exercise their liberty- just courage and determination.
This is why I have been informed I am an "outlier", and my opinions- the only opinions which actually respect your inalienable human right to control your own life and property- don't count in the political arena and are hidden from view to avoid confusing the people.
The current question as I write this is: "If an airline offered passenger service to Dallas-Fort Worth would you be more or less inclined to fly directly from Clovis?"
I am offered the options of "More", "Less", or "Depends on the cost".
How about "None of the above"?
Taken in a vacuum, I could say I would be more likely to fly if there were direct flights, if the cost were affordable, and if I ever had any reason to go to Dallas or Fort Worth, but that would give a false impression. The truth is I won't ever fly again unless it is a life or death situation, or unless the airport security silliness which is currently forced upon airline passengers dies a well-deserved death.
Yes, I will be "inclined to fly" again once the TSA and its security theater dog and pony show have gone the way of the dodo, have not been replaced by anything, and I am allowed to fly while appropriately armed. And no, a bullet hole in the skin of a plane will not cause a catastrophic decompression as movies would have you believe, but if you (or the airline) are concerned about it anyway, there is always "frangible ammunition".
Back to the subject of polls, I have noticed that there is rarely an option that provides for the absence of regulatory or confiscatory action, along with the ever-present threat of enforcement, by The State.
I am asked what level of taxation I agree with, or how I want to see tax money spent, but not whether I want my friends and neighbors' money left with those who earned it rather than being taken from them under some pretext.
Or I am asked "Have you signed up with the New Mexico Health Insurance Exchange?" Where's the "I won't" option? Once again, "None of the above" would suffice.
As in all things political, I am given the option to choose between statist choice A or statist choice B, while the option to choose liberty is never offered. Fortunately, no one needs permission to begin to exercise their liberty- just courage and determination.
This is why I have been informed I am an "outlier", and my opinions- the only opinions which actually respect your inalienable human right to control your own life and property- don't count in the political arena and are hidden from view to avoid confusing the people.
.
Lol. I feel your pain. I remember arguing over what the newspaper would and wouldn't print. Their policy explicitly states that their reading public are idiots who don't want hard hitting truths, but pant after stories of unicorns and rainbows. I think they might have that backwards.
ReplyDeleteI think this was more a case of it being seen as biting the hand that feeds me.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, I was also told that to accommodate my wishes, each question would need to have thousands of possible answers, always including "The government must be overthrown" or something like that. I'm thinking my suggestion of "None of the above" covered that nicely with only one addition...
Now we see the wonders of public schooling and government propaganda. Of course the choices are between statist choice A and statist choice B. Go to josietheoutlaw.com, scroll down to "more videos" and click on it, after it loads, scroll down to "a prison by any other name." It's quite a good presentation of how we are taught to obey and not question.
ReplyDeleteThe fiasco with the FCC this week speaks volumes . . .
ReplyDeleteLocal rags, expecially in small tons such as mine (like Clovis), simply will not risk upsetting their big-dollar contributors. They are beholden to other rather than the plain truth, and as such, are hardly a "free press" whatsoever.
Pax - jb
"the only opinions which actually respect your inalienable human right to control your own life and property"
ReplyDeleteI note the irony that freedomistas stand up for other people's lives, better than they themselves do. Sometimes that can be frustrating. But hey, if rational people are to be free, then irrational people must be too.
This got rejected?? You have written all sorts of things that I would have thought we tougher on statists and gubment agencies... I am sort of laughing as of course your column is an opinion piece, but as with almost any media these days, your "opinion" better fit within our "limits."
ReplyDelete