Taxes

If some mugger comes up to you, shoves a gun in your face and demands money, that is wrong. If a government demands money from you, and you refuse to pay, what happens next? The government will raise the stakes. First will come threats. Then government will begin trying to take things from you by force of "law". If you keep resisting at each step of the process, there will come a time when government agents will come to your house with guns drawn to arrest you. Resist at this point, and they will kill you. How is this any different than the mugger? Morally, it is not any different. "Pay us or we will kill you" is the implied threat that keeps most Americans paying taxes of one form or another. Name one government program that is worth killing for. If you can, I would need to be convinced.

It really doesn't matter how many "laws" are passed to authorize this tax or that. Governments could pass laws allowing all people with red hair to be burned at the stake, but it would still be wrong. Theft is wrong; taxes are theft-by-government; taxes are wrong. So, how would government programs be paid for? First off, I will say I do not believe government should administer ANY programs, but for the sake of argument we will pretend. User fees would be a much more fair way to pay for the programs. If you refuse all dealings with government, you would not pay fees to support government. Remember: government programs are never really free. You pay for them, and pay much more than you would for the same "service" if it were provided by a private company or individual.

Follow your conscience where taxes are concerned, but if you don't pay up, do not be surprised when government throws everything it has into bringing you down. Judges know where their paychecks come from, so will rarely do what is right in these cases.

"Crazy for Liberty" Candidate Questionaire

Here is the "Crazy for Liberty" candidate questionaire. Presented for your amusement and enlightenment. I view these things the same way I view polls: entertainment. It is almost impossible to get a real feel for a candidate through a questionaire. I don't mind answering them, I am just not sure how useful they are. If you want to know how I feel on particular issues, either ask me here or email me privately at dullhawk@hotmail.com

Immigration

Guess what. I don't have the answer to "the immigration problem". All I have are some comments concerning what I think about the topic. So here goes.

Everyone has the right to prevent trespassing on their property. By anyone. So, if you do not wish to have aliens, or cops, or census takers, or me on your land, that is your absolute right. So if you owned all of America, you could keep anyone out that you didn't like, for any reason or no reason at all. No one owns all of America; certainly NOT the US government. So for the feds to pretend that they have any authority on the issue is a lie.

Why do people risk so much to come to America?
Part of the reason is the freedom that we are rumored to have here. The US government is working as hard as it can to remove this incentive for immigrants.
Another reason is welfare handouts. Since it is wrong to steal from people to finance any government program, the reasonable thing to do is to end welfare. No longer would anyone come here for government handouts. This would end the injustice of stealing from some people and giving it to others who did not earn it. At least for welfare. There are other taxes that still need to be dealt with, but that is another topic.
Jobs are another reason. The job culture is a screwed up mess, but if someone wants to work for another person, they have the right to do it. I do not believe that anyone is entitled to any particular job. You want a job, then earn it. If an immigrant is willing to do a job for less pay, or a job you do not wish to do, why should you whine? Either agree to work cheaper or look elsewhere. Or go the extra mile for your pay to make yourself worth more to the employer. Some immigrants go on to start a business of their own. This benefits us all. How does this threaten America in any way?
I hear people complain that immigrants do not adopt "American culture" as their own when they come here. Do these complainers live in a tipi or a wikiup? Do they speak the language of the nations who occupied this land before their cultures were overwhelmed by the immigrants who gave birth to most of us? Why not? If it is good enough to demand of immigrants now, why shouldn't it have always been the right thing to do?
All cultures have something to offer. Some more than others, but mixing with those who are different can be a very enriching experience. I do not wish to live in a land where a wall keeps out immigrants (and keeps us inside). I do not want to be required to carry proof of "citizenship" and produce it at the whim of enforcers. Closed borders seem to me to be the opposite of freedom and liberty. You are welcome to disagree, of course.

War

A recent misunderstanding demonstrates to me how wars can get started if the parties involved are not as calm and deliberate as people with "power" should be. I had found some mention of myself on a webpage where the comments seemed to be ridiculing me for the way I dress. I thought that they really didn't like me. I posted a comment simply pointing out that I had seen the posts. The person who had first mentioned me thought I was angry about the comments. After a few messages back and forth, we both cleared up the misunderstanding and I have great respect for that person as a result.
Why can't our "leaders" do the same? Why do we allow our country to be used as a weapon of retaliation by the government? I am a firm believer in true militias. Every person is a member of their local militia whether they accept the responsibility or not. The founders of America did not trust armies under the control of government. They had just endured a war with the most powerful government army on Earth, and did not wish to see that happen again. Army under government control is subject to be used for evil purposes which have nothing to do with defense. Personal vendettas become excuses for traveling to distant lands which were no threat to us, and killing innocents. In the process creating a new generation of people who hate the invaders and who will find ways to strike back. No one in the world "hates us for our freedom". They hate our government and mistake it for America. They hate it for meddling; for killing their fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, and neighbors. For telling them how they must live.
Militias do not travel to foreign lands. Militias simply defend their homes and neighborhoods. Militias are not under the control of a megalomaniac. Or if one arises, he gets ditched and a sane leader is chosen. Militias can come to the local defense against governments gone bad as well. This is why governments try to distort the image of the militia. Make them out to be terrorists. Government needs to look in the mirror, but like Dracula, it has no reflection. Terrorists strike civilian targets to cause fear. Strikes against government drones and facilities are not terrorist acts. When government uses human shields to protect against strikes, it becomes the terrorist. I do not condone killing except in self defense, but we need to be clear on what terrorism is and what it isn't. In its current course of action, the US federal government has become the world's largest and most dangerous terrorist group, at home and abroad. Period.

Occupied America

I have said before that the United States is the greatest threat that America faces, but I think it bears repeating. In my view America is the country that we live in. It is a country defined by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It guarantees "liberty and justice for all" and says that the government's purpose is to secure "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". The United States is the government that currently rules the country of America. It is a government defined by the beaurocracies and the "laws" it tries to force upon us, almost all of which are in direct violation of the aforementioned Constitution and Bill of Rights. It actively denies us our lives, liberties, and forbids the pursuit of happiness if ours pleasures are unpopular, politically incorrect, or "bad for us". When politicians are "sworn in" they pledge to uphold the Constitution, and then immediately break that oath. Their true loyalty is not to America, but to the US. Any politician who breaks that oath (and not necessarily as defined by the rogue "Supreme Court") must be immediately removed from office and never allowed to hold office ever again. Anywhere. Treason is serious.

Clarifications

I have read a few sites which refer to me as a "newcomer" to this race. For the record, I announced my candidacy on November 3, 2004. I chose to begin slowly and build on that foundation.

On another subject; I have noticed that some people are criticizing my style of clothing. If you cannot support me because of the way I dress, I understand. We can go our separate ways with no hard feelings. If, however, you understand that there are real issues, join me and wear whatever you want, for I will do the same. I am different than anyone who has ever run for president. I assure you, this is a good thing. We all need to laugh at ourselves sometimes, and if I can amuse some folks, then my life has not been a waste.

Political Prisoners

Speaking of counterfeit "laws".... How many of us know someone who is in jail or prison for violating some counterfeit law? I would guess most of us do. How many of us have been fined for some imagined infraction? For crimes of force, jailing the violators is usually necessary. For crimes of fraud, restitution would be much more sensible. Everyone else in prison is a political prisoner. They are guilty of nothing other than living independently of the edicts of government stooges. For violators of counterfeit "laws" immediate release is the first step in finding justice. The next step is punishing those who kidnapped the victim of government. Using the real laws against force and fraud, anyone who arrests, fines, jails, harrasses or kills anyone who violates a mala prohibita law becomes the aggressor and therefore is subject to the consequenses. The third step is restitution where possible from the government criminals. From their OWN pockets, not from mythical "public funds". Anyone who assumes "authority" over another must be held to a higher standard, and must be extremely careful to avoid any violation of rights. If they are not willing to pay the price of their transgressions, they need to get a legitimate job.

Counterfeit "laws" include, but are not limited to, laws regarding: guns, consentual sex, drugs, licenses and permits, private property uses, consentual commerce, taxes, broadcasting, unpopular speech, marriage, free travel, etc.

Property taxes

When I was around 10 years old I had already developed a sense that I wanted a cabin in the mountains where I would hunt and gather my own food, make my own buckskin clothes, and just be left alone when I wanted (much to the eternal distress of my conventional parents). I had it all figured out ... until my parents informed me that if I didn't pay property tax on the land, the government would take it away from me. Even at that age, I knew that was ridiculous. If you own something, you OWN it. You don't have to pay a yearly ransom to keep it!

I think property tax is fundamentally more evil than other taxes. ALL taxes are theft-by-government at gunpoint and not justifiable. Consider this: If you do not want to pay sales tax you could theoretically barter and trade for all the good that you couldn't produce for yourself. Hate the income tax? Do what I did and reduce your income to zero. But how to have a HOME and not have property tax? You could be a squatter. You could rent. You could be a permanent tourist. These strategies work for many people. Unfortunately the desire to have a homestead is one of the strongest urges for humans. We are very territorial creatures. How many wars are being fought today because of someone violating someone else's territory?

Counterfeit "laws"

How many people do you know who claim that murder is OK? How many would argue that rape is a good thing? Or that "armed robber" is a good career choice? What about someone who scams elderly people out of their life savings? Just about every person would agree that these things are wrong. It does not matter whether a "law" is passed to say it is OK or if the death penalty is applied if you do one of these things. Wrong is wrong. This is called "mala in se".

Then there are other actions that people are divided in their opinion of. Is it wrong to smoke marijuana? Do you deserve to go to jail for hiring a prostitute? What if you don't choose to wear a seat belt? Is is good to have laws to punish you for these things? Once again, it does not matter if the "law" says these things are OK or not. These are things that are only "wrong" because the law says they are bad. This is called "mala prohibita".

I think there is even a simpler way to describe mala prohibita laws: they are counterfeit. A law is counterfeit when it prohibits, regulates, or controls something other than actual force or fraud. No one has any moral obligation to obey counterfeit "laws". I choose to wear a seat belt. I feel more secure that way. Other people feel trapped by them. That is OK. That is personal choice using YOUR best information. No "law enforcement officer" is justified in punishing anyone for violating any counterfeit "law". Once they do, THEY become the criminal. Real laws do not need enforcers. Would you intervene to stop a rape? Me too. Would you hold a person at gun-point while calling for back-up if you see him sitting in traffic without his seat belt on? Of course not. Only a mindless drone of the state would do something that evil.

A very good Gun Rights group

I recommend The Gun Rights group Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership very highly. You do not need to be Jewish to join. They are working on a campaign to expose the BATFE's criminally abusive behavior against gun owners. JPFO also has many very good publications such as their "Gran'pa Jack" series of booklets, and the book Hope by Aaron Zelman and L. Neil Smith. Hope is almost a blueprint of what a good libertarian president would do. They also have documentaries such as Innocents Betrayed (which I appear in), and BATFE Fails the Test.

There are still others that also offer better choices than the NRA (which always seeks to compromise away our guns). Gun Owners of America and the Pink Pistols are two that come to mind.

...to Own and to Carry any Weapon...

Those of us who are interested in owning firearms and other defensive weapons put up with a lot of abuse at the hand of government. Do you realize that the Second Amendment does not give you the right to "keep and bear arms"? It recognizes a right that is yours simply because you were born Human. No part of the Bill of Rights even applies to you unless you work for government; then it tells you exactly what things you are absolutely prohibited to do. The rights existed before government; they will exist long after government is in the compost pile of history. Any politician or bureaucrat who violates any part of the Constitution or Bill of Rights has committed treason. Pass a gun law; go to prison. Kill a person while enforcing a gun law; die in prison. I will have more on counterfeit laws later. These are any law which prohibits or regulates something other than force or fraud. Almost all US laws are counterfeit. Real laws do not need to be "enforced". Counterfeit laws must NOT be enforced.

The "Time's Up" Flag

We have all seen the wonderful old Gadsden Flag with the coiled rattlesnake proclaiming "DONT TREAD ON ME". For hundreds of years it has warned enemies of freedom that we should not be provoked. For those same "hundreds of years" we have tolerated crimes by government without striking back, with a few notable exceptions. After all these years of being poked with the stick of government and stomped with jackboots, the snake has had enough. That is why I designed the "Time's Up" flag. It is the new flag of the resistance.

Blaming the Victim

I'm sure you have noticed, as have I, that frequently when we hear of a murder, rape, or other crime of violence, people say "if he hadn't been in the wrong part of town..." (whatever that means), or "if she wasn't wearing that_____...", or "you shouldn't flash money around that way", or some other drivel. This is called "blaming the victim". It is a psychological defense mechanism that allows us to delude ourselves that if only we behave a certain way, bad things will never happen to us, personally. I see a similar phenomenon in libertarian thought on occasion. Instead of blaming the heartless cop who is "only enforcing the law", or the soulless reavers of the IRS who steal the livelihood from our friends and neighbors, or the mindless bureaucrats who take up valuable space, we blame their victims. We insist that others fight back as WE believe they ought to, instead of seeing that they may have too much at stake to make a scene at this time. Or they may simply have other priorities. If you refuse to submit to a "driver's license", ignore income taxes, reject a Social Security Number, build without a permit, carry a gun without government permission, or any of the other nice ways we can fight back, then that is wonderful. I support your defiance 100%. Just do not despise your neighbor whose family would not survive if she went to jail for refusing to cooperate with the government criminals. She is not the problem; she is the victim. Blaming the victim is a mental defect that hides reality from your conscious mind.

Roads? Where we're going, we don't need ... roads!

Building onto the Eminent Domain theme has me thinking about roads. I am frequently asked how we will have roads if there is no government road program or fuel taxes. I think that all roads should be privatized. Everyone would own the road that runs through their property. Or if it runs along a boundary, they would own half of the road there. Now, If I owned half of the road in front of my property, would I want the bother of maintaining it, and the liability if someone was driving on it and was in an accident? No I wouldn't. Would I close off the road to travelers? I wouldn't, but I am sure some folks would. Would there be any profit in keeping the road open? Yes. No one, including me, wants a stupid toll-booth every hundred feet or so. So what would happen? I think that the market would soon find a workable solution. My hunch is that companies would form which would buy or lease roads from land-owners, taking on all costs and liabilities, but also most of the profits. These companies (not "corporations", which are a government creation)would probably sell a form of travel insurance or something of the sort that would permit travel upon their roadways and also guarantee against road hazards, and maybe even mechanical problems. They could also sell business locations along the shoulders. If you think this sounds unreasonable, go back to the title of this post. What would stop inventers from creating vehicles that don't use roads? The biggest stumbling block along this line has been (for over 50 years) the government regulations which cripple innovation. Does the FAA sound familiar? So you will have a choice: use the roads and pay a fee which would undoubtedly be less than the fuel taxes you pay now, or leave the surface entirely.

Eminent Domain

This is just a fancy way of describing theft by government. I realize this is a long-established practice, but it is still wrong. If you or I desperately want a certain piece of property, we must come up with the owner's asking price or find another piece of land. Disappointment stinks, but that is reality. Government should not own land, much less steal it. There is no such thing as "the common good" so using that excuse for theft is empty.

Reflections

I was reflecting today on the sad news of the death of the "Crocodile Hunter" Steve Irwin. It is said he died "doing what he loved". That poses a question. Is it better to die doing what you love, or to live doing what you hate? I think every person finds that answer for themself. I know my answer.

On the "radio" with Gene Chapman

Give it a listen. Click Here Episode #25

OK. I think this blog is a "go".

As far as I can tell, I have gotten everything fixed now. I sure hope so. I am ready to start getting to the meat of the blog, and stop worrying over the technical details.

Oops!

I was told that I had disabled "comments". I think I have fixed that now. If not, write me at my email and let me know, but save the insults and personal attacks until they can be added to the blog publically. Just kidding! Seriously, your comments will let me know what you are thinking. Who knows, you may even change my mind about something.

Hello

Being new at this blogging thing, I am not sure what to say. I would ask that you go to my webpage and read my positions on the issues. Click on all the links, too. I am on a weekend vacation at the moment, with the family, so I will write more later.

I will let you know now, I am not a typical candidate. I do not "live and breathe" politics. Life is too important for that. There are things that get me worked up, though. Thanks for visiting!