Scared Sheep? Or....?

When people run into my ideas unprepared they get frightened. They call me a wacko, insane, loony, nut case, a weirdo, "Krazy Kent", and a variety of other creative names. They suggest I go back to smoking my crack pipe and leave opinions to the traditional statists. The really funny thing is a lot of this comes from people who take the Presidential Candidate Selector and find that I am their top-scoring (former) candidate.

I really don't understand this reaction. Do people think so little of their own opinions that they secretly think they are crazy? Do they fear anyone who voices these things out loud? Or do they read only snippets of what I have to say, and then take them out of context. Surely that is the only way they could be exposed to my brilliance and be unconvinced. (<---- a joke)

Claire Wolfe Time

Claire Wolfe, in her book 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution, made the statement "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."

The question constantly arises, "Is it time, yet?" Yes, it is time. It has been time since the dawn of humanity. Look back at history and you will see there has never been a time that fighting against oppressive rulers was the wrong thing to do. If our species had always remembered that fact, and exercised it, we would not be in the situation we are in now.

Our problem is that we abdicated our responsibility when it was easy to fulfil. We thought that the tyrants were not too bad; besides we knew them personally. Now the rulers have erected a huge wall of "laws" designed to ensure their "continuity of government". People with a blind sense of "lawfulness" will point to those laws and say that it is wrong to fight back against the evil rulers. Only if you look at it through the eyes of the tyrants themselves is it "wrong". Of course they will forbid fighting back. Tyrants always do.

Before anyone gets worked up, I'm not advocating any actions here, I just want you to realize that regardless of whatever "laws" the tyrants erect around themselves, fighting against tyranny, with whatever you have, is never wrong.

Safety Nets?

I know some people (OK, a LOT of people) feel that modern society owes some sort of "safety net" to the poor, sick, or disadvantaged. I don't think it is a case of "owing a debt", but I do think that a civilized society will provide something to assist those in need. In fact, just about every society always has. Where I have the problem with a "safety net" is when it is financed through theft. Government runs on theft and is not legitimately responsible for taking care of anyone. Private charities (or even "private charity" as in "personal kindness") are not coercive and are more able to adapt to the individual situation. They are also more likely to detect those who abuse "the system" and become parasites. "Kindness" does not then attempt to take possession of the lives of those it helps. "Safety nets": another empty excuse by people who fear freedom and do not trust themselves to do the right thing if no one is holding a gun to their head.

Legitimate Government

What is the legitimate purpose of government? From my radical libertarian perspective, the only legitimate purpose of any government is to protect the rights of the individual from being violated. This is what The Declaration of Independence was talking about. If the government fails in this it has to go. If the government becomes the main culprit violating individual rights it has negated the very reason it had for existing in the first place. Therefore in order to fulfil its duty to protect the rights of the individual it is necessary for that government to abolish itself.

Every government sooner or later, usually sooner, becomes the people's worst enemy.

My Neighbor's Nuke

The right to own and to carry any weapon is often belittled using the extreme scenario of your neighbor having a nuclear bomb in his garage. Forget for a moment the fact that extreme cases make for really bad laws. If you have an absolute right to own any weapon, what can you do if your neighbor has a nuke?


If my neighbor had a nuke, and I thought he was that much of a danger to me, I would try to destroy his bomb or shoot him before he had a chance to use it. Then I would take my chances with a fully informed jury. "Self defence" applies here, as it does in any instance of imminent danger. My neighbor would also be able to claim "self defense" if he shot me when I tried to get him, so it would probably be better to try to reason with him first. If I felt he was so mentally unstable that reason would not get through to him, then I'd take my chances.


What I would not do is use this case to argue that since my crazed, nut-case neighbor wanted to threaten my life, and the lives for miles around, by keeping a nuclear weapon in his garage that government should ban me from owning guns or ban children from having and using rubber band guns. That is insanity.

Help Red's Trading Post

Red's Trading Post is the oldest gun store in Idaho. The thugs from BATFEces are trying to shut it down. There is a lot of background information at War on Guns Blog about this case and today there is a suggestion on what YOU can do to help.

It's a Protest Vote - Really

I realize that any write-in votes for me won't be counted by "election officials" because I am not willing to jump through the hoops to become "legitimate" as far as the feds are concerned. I am a write-in candidate only as a protest; just like if you write in "Bart Simpson" or something. The difference is that I stand for something. If you tell someone that you wrote in "Kent McManigal", they can Google me (if they can figure out the spelling) and see exactly what I am all about. I think we all know Ron Paul doesn't have a chance of being the Republican nominee; not the way the system is rigged. (If he did become the nominee, I would need to question whether the system is rigged like I think it is.) A Libertarian has even less chance of winning the election than Ron Paul has of being the Republican nominee. If you still feel that not voting is shameful, then you can write-in my name, knowing the Powers-That-Be will not count it, but still sending a message, just the same.

Domestic Enemies in Black Robes

When elected officials take office they pledge to protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Then they immediately break that oath by not recognizing that almost every thing the federal government does is in direct violation of the Constitution, and trying to stop it. In direct violation, but sanctioned (wink-wink) by federal courts.

How can you protect the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic when some of the worst domestic enemies have placed themselves in charge of deciding what the Constitution means? Whether or not the Constitution is worth defending is another matter. As has been said, either it established this governmental monstrosity we now suffer under, or it did nothing to stop it. Fortunately "freedom" does not depend on a piece of paper, but on each of us as individuals. Freedom is ours to take and live, if we will only do it. Pay no attention to the black-robed gremlins of the court. Let them paint themselves into a corner with their pronouncements-from-on-high. Just get on with the business of living free from coercion.

Leaders or Rulers?

Leaders can be a good thing. They lead by showing the rest of humanity the trail, and then striking out along that path, alone if necessary. If you trust the Leader, you follow him. If not, you find your own path.


Rulers dictate which path you will follow, often times from the safety of their fortresses. A Ruler may send an envoy in front of you as a decoy to make you believe you are following the Glorious Leader. You are given no choice whether to follow the path the Ruler chooses for you. A set of imaginary rules will be enacted to show you that the Ruler's way is the only right way.


Is the President (or governor, senator, etc.) a "Leader" or is he a "Ruler"? If you have a Leader and he begins leading you astray, you are free to stop following. If he threatens you or forces you to continue following him by dragging you along, he is no longer a Leader, but a Ruler. The Rulers in the US claim we are free to follow them or choose another "Leader" in the next election. We will be dragged along unwillingly until that time, of course. The "Leaders" insist we are not free to say "No thank you. I don't need a Leader".


Leaders lead; governments drag. Which situation seems more like America in 2007?

"Bill of Rights" or Simply "Rights"?

A group I belong to, JPFO, is working to educate people everywhere (not just in America) about the Bill of Rights; advocating what they call a "Bill of Rights culture". I would like to live in such a culture, but I don't think it goes far enough. People need to be reminded that rights were not created by the Bill of Rights. Some of the founders of America were afraid that if a Bill of Rights were written, government would try to claim that those rights mentioned were the only ones held by the people. Even though the 9th and 10th Amendments were adopted to try to avoid this, it has still occurred. Plus the government has "reinterpreted" away any protection of rights enshrined in the document.

Instead of a "Bill of Rights culture" I think we need a "Rights culture". A deep understanding that rights exist regardless of government attitudes or usurpation; are inseparable from responsibilities; are inborn in every person everywhere; do not come from "Bills", government or anyone else; are not additive or divisible; are absolute and not subject to restrictions; are the opposite of privileges; and are worth defending to the death.

The Bill of Rights was a good idea, but learning that actual Rights exist with or without government permission is more empowering. At least it has been for me.

New CafePress Products

Check out my new "Government is Evil" and "Live Free Today" products on CafePress. Straight to the point, don't you think?

Consistent Liberty

Freedom is not "pick and choose". I can't acknowledge that government in all its incarnations is evil while begging government to "keep out the foreigners" or to punish "hate speech". If freedom is a good thing for me, then it is also a good thing for my enemy. I must be consistent. I can't turn to government for help when something happens that I couldn't stop. If I can't stop it, then neither could government, at least not without violating someone's rights. You must live up to the principles of freedom even when it makes you uncomfortable.

"The Gang" from JPFO

The JPFO documentary "The Gang" is now available ($29.95). This film details the history and the abuses of the BATFE, one of the most vile and disgusting of all the criminal organizations inside the US government (my words; not theirs). Beat me to the draw and get your copy before I get mine!

Forum 21

There is an interesting forum that I have joined. It is called Forum 21 and is run by Phil Defer. It is based in France, but they have started a thread about me in English. Phil asked for an interview and I explained that I am not actively campaigning anymore, but answered his questions anyway. He invited me to join his forum to answer the participants questions, so I did. I find it interesting to see how other cultures view "liberty". Go on over and take a look around. If you can't read French, use Babel Fish to translate. You can even ask me questions there, too.

The Abusive Relationship

Do people enjoy abuse? Do we seek out or stay in abusive relationships because somewhere, deep down, we like being miserable? I know people who seem to. Government is like an abusive partner. It steals from our bank accounts and wants more, claiming ownership of all our possessions while contributing nothing of value. It sets bizarre, arbitrary rules with extreme punishments for even accidental infractions. It demands to know every detail of our private lives "for our own good" as if we are stupid children needing constant supervision. It claims moral superiority over us while behaving like a drunken lecher. It warns us of dire consequences if we ever dare to tell it to hit the road. "You'll be sorry! You are nothing without me! You'll never make it on your own! Everyone will kill each other without me to make them behave!" Yet we keep defending its indefensible actions, and behaving like it really does have some claim on our lives. Kick the bum out. If it resists, you know what to do.

Pragmatic Perfectionism

"The perfect is the enemy of the good". I hear this quote a lot in libertarian circles. Usually quoted by the "pragmatists" and directed at the radicals (like me). They are wasting breath because I already know this fact. I think on a personal level it is a good thing to remember. Don't waste your life spinning your wheels with your bumper against a brick wall. On the other hand, why bother at all if you don't have "perfect" as a goal? Don't ever forget: all government is totally evil. With that in mind, it exists, and probably will all of your life, so use it against itself if you can. Don't use government against individual people unless they are an instrument of the state. "Live by the state; die by the state" you might say. Work toward Libertopia within the current system when you must, and outside the system when you can. Acknowledge that nothing will ever be perfect, but LIVE free now, and never stop striving.

What Kind of "American"?

I am a human being who lives in America. Beyond that, I hold the values that were apparently espoused by the founders of America in high regard. I believe that each person is a sovereign individual who owes nothing to anyone else other than to not aggress against them. I am not a "Soviet American" such as runs the government and fawns over the institutions of tyranny. I support freedom of speech; not laws against "hate speech" and Free Speech Zones which protect the President from hearing dissent. I do not support government spying on Americans under the pretense of trying to catch terrorists plotting. Torture is evil no matter who is doing it and no matter what you call it. You do not protect freedom by torture. You do not increase Liberty by restricting Liberty. Outlawing self defense and the tools which facilitate it is plain wrong. I do not support government programs or agencies which label as "domestic terrorists" anyone who believes the same things that the founders of America believed. I do not seek Liberty for myself and then use the bludgeon of government against those who irritate me. I believe that the US is the worst threat America has ever faced, and I don't know if America can survive the threat.

Drugged Drivers

I know of someone who is suffering from injuries received in a car wreck a year ago. The driver of the other car was at fault, and was on drugs. Now my friend will probably suffer pain from nerve damage for the rest of her life, and need powerful pain medications in order to function. This fact has made her question her libertarian opinion as to drug prohibition.

I can understand her thoughts. No one wants impaired drivers careening into them out of nowhere. On the other hand, driving while impaired or even distracted is already illegal, and yet things like this still happen. The current War on Drugs destroys freedom on a massive scale and yet doesn't prevent things like this from happening, so what can we do? Is there a real solution? Or do we simply accept that tragedies will always happen as a part of life?

Memorial Day: Remembering Our Past, Considering Our Future.

JPFO ALERT:

Memorial Day: Remembering Our Past, Considering Our Future.

Each year on Memorial Day, JPFO reminds our readers to honor those who died in America's wars. We mourn for them and we thank them.

But we also remind you that as the United States becomes more like the brutal police states we once fought, we must mourn as well for the loss of our freedoms. We mourn the loss of the great promise that once was America -- now betrayed by politicians, bureaucrats, thuggish enforcers, and uncaring citizens.

We've been heavily advertising our new documentary The Gang because it showcases the BATFE as a supreme example of this betrayal. Corrupt, inept thugs enforce not just unconstitutional laws but arbitrary bureau "policies" against honest citizens. And no one speaks up ... because they could be next.

Recently, the television show "Boston Legal" aired an episode entitled "Stick It". You can read a summary at http://www.boston-legal.org/19-stickit/ep19-stickit.shtml . More importantly, you can watch the video (or read a transcript) of a closing argument by one of the show's characters (scroll down to "Alan Shore's Closing Argument").

This speech is probably one of the most eloquent, timely, and terrifying recitations of the dark turn our country has taken over the last few decades. It concludes with the statement, "I know we are all afraid, but the Bill of Rights -- we have to live up to that. We simply must."

Indeed.

On this sad holiday, we urge you to take a moment to consider not only what we've lost, but why and how we've lost it. Consider, too, how we might get it back. There are 100 million gun owners in this country, and only 2300 agents. So why are we putting up with this treachery?

We can start by abolishing the BATFE and all federal control and regulation of firearms. Ultimately, though, we must attain a Bill of Rights Culture.Let's make it happen.

- The Liberty Crew

PS: The day after JPFO aired our "Talkin' to America" interview with Ryan Horsley, owner of Red's Trading Post, he was visited by THREE BATFE agents, including an area supervisor. Read Ryan's update at www.jpfo.org/redsupdate2.htm . Yet another example of the BATFE's vindictive actions against honest American gun owners. By allowing this activity, we are allowing the deaths of our fallen soldiers to be in vain.

Mr. Wood

A few blogs ago, I mentioned the high school teacher who was instrumental in teaching me to think critically about what I was being "fed". Mr. Bill Wood taught Physics, Chemistry, and a "special" class. After spending two years in his classes, he is to blame for a lot of who I am. I would skip other classes to sit in the library and read; but I never skipped his classes. That was the only class time, since first grade when I learned to read, where I learned anything important.

During my high school years there was a big creationism uproar occurring statewide. He even testified in the court case. He encouraged us to look at the issue critically from all sides. He never hid his opinion, but had his students on both sides attempt to defend our own position coherently during discussion. He also led us in a study of advertising and the ways it influences our thoughts. I was always dreadfully bad at math, but he often gave me credit for being the only person in his physics class who understood the concepts being discussed. Even if I never got through a calculation without an error during the entire year. The main thing I remember from all his classes was this: while other teachers told us what to think, he emphasized how to think.

I heard through hearsay that he quit teaching within a couple years of my graduation. The politics of the "education system" are an obstacle to education, screening out the best teachers. Just another reason for the separation of school and state. Mr. Wood was the best teacher I ever had.

When I think of him I feel that he would be disappointed in me today. After all, I never made anything of myself. He would have told me I could do better.