Liberty on the Rocks™ Denver

A Grassroots Freedom Movement

Liberty on Film Presents: The Cartel

amanda | April 28, 2010

The Independence Institute and Liberty on the Rocks invite you to join us for an unforgettable movie event featuring The Cartel on Tuesday, May 4, at 7 PM, at Denver’s Chez Artiste Theatre.
Watch the trailer here: http://bit.ly/p6lWI
A new, award-winning documentary, The Cartel focuses on New Jersey to offer a fresh inside look at the K-12 public [...]

Post Party Summit with American Majority – in Denver!

amanda | April 23, 2010

Liberty on the Rocks is proud to co-sponsor this great event that is coming to Denver at the end of April. Sign up today!
The Post Party Summits: Organizing for a Free America, a collaboration by American Majority, The John Hancock Committee for the States, SmartGirl Politics and RedState.com, will educate concerned citizens concerning the most [...]

Haggis or tripe today, sir?

David K. Williams, Jr. | April 22, 2010

Jonah Goldberg has offered his take on where the Tea Partiers where while George W. Bush was expanding government and spending money he didn’t have. (See “Tea parties a delayed Bush backlash.“)

Concerning W’s Big Government Republican proclivity, Goldberg wrote:
Conservatives didn’t necessarily bite their tongues (remember the Harriet Miers and immigration fiascoes), but they did prioritize supporting Bush — often in the face of far nastier attacks than Obama has received — over ideological purity. Besides, where were conservatives supposed to go? Into the arms of John Kerry?

This perfectly illustrates the problem. With our two party system, we are given two bad choices: Expand government a lot, or expand it slightly less.
As long as we accept two bad choices, we’ll keep getting them. If you keep buying tripe for lunch because the only other option is haggis, guess what you’ll keep being offered? Tripe.
You can gag it down while you tell yourself, “well, it sure beats the hell out of haggis.”
We need more options. We need to be creative. The two party system ain’t in the Constitution. Neither is plurality voting. My immediate suggestion is adoption of approval voting.
I’m open to ideas. I’m begging for ideas! Bring me ideas!

The Vacationing Board- Brave New Welfare

infinity3 | April 20, 2010

Feeding my drudgereport.com addiction, I was checking the site for updates and saw this article and thought surely, this is a spoof, a joke, a satire story you’d see in the Onion, but from what I can glean, it seems like the European Union is serious. The Ottawa Citizen headline reads “Vacationing a human right, EU Chief Says.” I kept thinking this can’t be a real news story, it just can’t.

The EU proudly boasts travel as a universal human right and proposes to subsidize travel throughout the EU with taxpayer money. Daddy Warbucks, I mean, the EU (entitlement union) is proposing this as a compassionate strategy to increase the quality of life for those who go without vacations due to financial hardship or have an inability to read maps or just like to stay home. The EU says the motivation behind this is to promote cultural appreciation, and increase the quality of life of its people. As an added bonus it will also prop up the tourism industry.
It reads as follows, “taxpayers footing some of the vacation bill for seniors, youths between the ages of 18 and 25, disabled people, and families facing ‘difficult social, financial or personal’ circumstances.” So I say to myself- well, today was hard, I think I’m having a personal hardship, time for a government-sponsored road trip! Don’t kids 18-25 need a job instead of a holiday and then they can pay as they go?

Would a workaholic desk jockey who slaves in his cubicle day in and day out without time off be a human rights violation?? How do the refugees in Darfur feel about that? Is the EU going to force you to take vacation? Is tourism going to be the only productivity coming out of the EU? Should we short the euro now or later? Perhaps the EU will devolve into its former nomadic culture and become a vast wasteland of vagabonds who are now free to indulge their wanderlust.

I’m still flabbergasted at the whole concept of the EU granting its people the right to be a tourist, not just basic welfare programs, but now holidays. It gives the phrase, tourist trap, a whole new meaning. My question is – when do the announcements of new human rights stop? Why don’t they keep going and grant each person an Italian villa for a holiday escape. How about vouchers for activities, such as gondola rides, tourist trinkets, postcards, a per diem per se. Basically it sounds like an all-expense paid trip to get out of town. The article continues that they advise the northern Europeans to travel to southern Europe and vice versa. What if they want to go to Vegas or Dubai? Wouldn’t the EU be infringing their on their right to play tourist if they restrict travel only to certain approved areas? What the EU giveth, the EU taketh away.

How do you think this all got started? When a governing body starts granting rights to services, like health care and vacations and a laundry list of things are rolled out to entice a citizen to comply with a government’s rules to play along, one becomes an automaton to be controlled. Instead of a short-lived video game, the government’s game is for keeps.

HB 1351 – Payday Lending in Colorado

David K. Williams, Jr. | April 20, 2010

Colorado HB 1351 would limit the interest rates “payday lenders” can charge. The bill made it out of the House, and now moves on to the Senate. Representative Mark Ferrandino, D-Denver, supports the bill. According to the Denver Post (Payday-loan bill passes in House), Rep. Ferarandino said

“This is about the cycle of debt people find themselves in with payday lending. We’re allowing people to overleverage themselves, causing bankruptcies.”

In other words, we are allowing adults to make their own decisions. Rep. Ferrandino and the supporters of this bill believe they are smarter than the patrons of payday lenders, and want to stop these people from exercising their own judgment.

Oppose this bill. Support freedom.

Is the Economy Recovering?

amanda | April 19, 2010

The stimulus is supposed to save the economy from depression, right? Isn’t that why the Obama and Bush administrations spent trillions of our hard earned dollars? But has the economy been “stimulated” (sounds dirty, doesn’t it?), or has it simply been propped up, only to fall apart again as soon as the money runs out?
To [...]

A common disconnect among statists

David K. Williams, Jr. | April 18, 2010

Denver Post columnist Susan Greene is one of my favorite progressives. Her columns are uniformly thoughtful, even when I disagree with one of her statist positions.

In her column today, “Apathy adds insult to injury,” she calls out the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) for its, well, let’s just call it ineffectiveness. (A blogger less polite than me might have used the word incompetence.)
Greene describes how the state agency has “stonewalled” a legitimate complaint, “failed miserably to offer any recourse” and mocks DORA’s claim that “consumer protection is [its] mission.”
Once again she thoroughly and effectively describes the uselessness of a government health agency. Somehow, however, she still favors government takeover of our health care system (see “Health care cruel even to those who do everything right.”)
I can not see this as anything but a complete intellectual disconnect of a very smart person between (1) the recognition of the ineffectiveness of government programs and (2) the desire for more government programs.
Statists of every strip – “progressive” to “conservative” – regularly display this disconnect.
Greene demonstrates a “progressive” example. Some “conservatives,” however, regularly lambaste the government for its ineffectiveness when it comes to social programs, then jump into the government’s lap when it comes to issues like the Patriot Act, expanding police power to search citizens, warrantless wiretapping and the regulation of private consensual acts of adults.
Classical liberals (modern libertarians) understand that the state should have less power over the individual and not more – in every single solitary instance.
Classical liberals understand that individuals are imperfect – but that the state forces imperfection upon them.

The script for my “robo-call” to AFP members – See you all Monday.

David K. Williams, Jr. | April 17, 2010

Thousands stood up at Tea Parties across Colorado on Thursday to send a message to our elected officials that November is Coming. Unfortunately, President Obama is not going to wait to push his big government agenda,

Hi, this is David Williams, Denver Director of Americans for Prosperity. Join me on Monday in Denver on the West Steps of the Capitol at 5:00pm to learn about the intrusive global warming regulations that the administration is trying to force on the American people through the EPA…without a vote of Congress.

Bring out your family and friends for great speakers and dinner and send Senator Bennet a message: Stop the EPA Power grab or we will hold you responsible for the lost Colorado jobs and higher prices!

Press 1 now to let us know you’re attending this free event tomorrow night in Denver. Or Go to regulation reality dot com to register. That’s regulation reality dot com.

Paid for By Americans for Prosperity

Denver Tax Day Tea Party – 3 of 6 – David Williams, Libertarian Party – …

David K. Williams, Jr. | April 17, 2010

Tea Parties, Jane Norton, Ken Buck and the GOP

David K. Williams, Jr. | April 16, 2010

For U.S. Senate, I will be voting for whomever emerges the winner of the primary between Libertarian candidates John Finger and Maclyn Stringer.

Looking at the Republican primary, however, is interesting. The contest, for practical purposes, is between front-runners Jane Norton and Ken Buck. I could not support Norton. She supported Referendum C as Lt. Governor of Colorado and she has John McCain’s support. She is a certified Big Government Republican.
Buck says all the right thing concerning small government. I hope he has the fortitude to back up his words. The problem is, however, he does not have a record to critique like Norton does. He is a District Attorney, not a legislator. He has not had to make tough votes on tough issues. He can make promises, but he has no small government resume. As a DA, he has not had the opportunity. That is not his fault, but it is a fact.
I am generally wary of DA’s in political office. They come from a “law and order” background, and tend to support government intrusions into our Constitutional rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. There is a tension between the peoples’ Fourth Amendment rights and the government’s legitimate need to preserve order. I personally would like to see the tension resolved in favor of the Fourth Amendment. Law enforcement types generally – and I said “generally” – do not.
Buck has lots of Tea Party support, and I understand why. He talks the talk – but he’s never had to stroll the stroll. Forgive me for being cynical about another Republican making small government promises. Talk is like Ramen Noodles: Cheap and unfulfilling.
Republicans have not been faithful to their purported love of liberty. Republicans have betrayed liberty more frequently and with more partners than Tiger Woods has betrayed Elin. I will no longer be a cuckold.
Others are willing to believe that, this time, the Republican candidate actually means it when he promises to be true. I hope Buck is up to the task of resisting the temptation.
Unfortunately, it probably will not matter. The Big Government Republican Politburo has annointed Norton the candidate – and she will be annointed. Buck outnumbers Norton in grassroots activists by a lot. Norton, however, outnumbers Buck in bucks. According to the Denver Post, Norton has four times the campaign money that Buck has.
The power of the politburo’s pocketbook will prevail. This is part of the systemic problem with out political process. We do not need “campaign finance” to keep people (including the people that form unions, corporations and other organizations) from making donations. We need a new voting system. We need to strip the two-party duopoly of its power by giving people more than two choices for such important offices.
Approval voting meets both of these goals. With approval voting, small government candidates would not be forced, as a practical matter, to run under the Big Government Republican banner.
Under our current system of plurality voting, Buck is going to lose the Big Government Republican primary. Buck supporters will then be told by the politburo that they can either vote for Big Government Republican Norton or the Democrat. Any system that results in such a choice is not worthy of existence.
I invite all the Buck supporters to abandon the Big Government Republican Party once Buck is officially discarded by the politburo. Yes, that will help the Democrat win. But we have to look beyond 2010. We have to look ahead to the next generation and the next. If we really want our grandchildren to live under a free nation, we must reject the current failed system and its process. We can, and must, replace it. We can not enable the process, even if the withdrawal might be painful
If we enable the current broken process, we are part of the problem. In fact, anyone that votes for another Big Government politician just because they have an “R” by their name IS the problem. You will have given your sanction to Big Government by voting for a Big Government candidate.
Don’t waste your vote like that.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” –John Quincy Adams
===

The same analysis applies to the Tea Party support of Dan Maes for governor. The Big Government Republican politburo has annointed Scott McInnis. McInnis will be the Big Government Republican candidate.