:: walterindenver ::

Walter rubs two sticks together, makes blog
:: welcome to walterindenver :: bloghome | Comment ::
Listed on BlogShares
[::..archive..::]
[Neighbors and Allies]
:: libertarian samizdata
:: vodkapundit
:: Dean Esmay
:: Matthew Edgar
:: Andrew Olmsted
:: Colorado Freedom Report
:: worldwiderant
:: Fusilierpundit
:: Arthur Silber
:: Glenn Reynolds
:: Roverpundit
:: TalkLeft
:: Resurrection Song
:: Jay Solo
:: Cal Ulmann
:: Reason's Hit and Run
:: Jim Henley
:: Dave Cullen
:: Soapbox Canyon
:: Glen Whitman
:: Random Act of Kindness
:: Colorado Compound
< ? Colorado Blogs # >

:: Thursday, November 28, 2002 ::

Debate? ...II

I've been mulling this post at Shadow of the Hegemon for a few days now.

Glenn says that weblogs solve the "problem" posed by Republic.com, the book: that the Internet creates conversation only among people who agree with each other.
Weblogs point joyously to those with whom they disagree.
You have got to be kidding, Glenn. They aren't the refutation or the solution of the problem posed by Republic.com...
they're the embodiment of it.


As I wrote below, one of the prime benefits of a blog is the ability to debate, to engage the opposition in verbal combat. Some are more willing to do this than others.

Now comes this. One blog delinks a second blog, and takes the further step of banning him from commenting, because he belongs to the wrong political party.
The word 'censorship' gets thrown about a lot in some of the comments floating around the blogosphere relating to this little tiff. But censorship is not the problem here. It's the way debate is avoided. There's not much sense in having political discourse if there's no chance of changing anyone's mind, and that won't happen if there's no interaction between people of differing political views.
I'm not trying to say that all views have equal weight. On the contrary, in a debate one side is usually wrong, and sometimes both sides are wrong. The best way to point out wrongness, or falsehood, is to tackle it head on. Debate, compare, contrast. As I said, "By refusing to engage one gives off the impression of either arrogance or inability to refute his opponent."
The banning blog in this case, is Jennie Taliaferro's Greatest Jeneration. She's a rightie, the banned Wilde is a leftie, the opposite dynamic of the Rittenhouse vs Little Green Footballs incident last week. Seems this problem doesn't have much to do with ideology.


:: Walter 1:44 PM [+] ::
...
Taking Inventory

Let's see, there's me, Mrs. Indenver, Edgar, (a malamute) and Natasha (mostly malamute). The guest of honor; a 20 (!) lb turkey. Who gets the lion's share? The line from Vegas goes like this:

Edgar 1 - 1, even odds.
Natasha 2 - 1
Me, 4 - 1
Mrs. 10 -1

Place your bets now.

:: Walter 1:34 PM [+] ::
...
:: Monday, November 25, 2002 ::
Thieves Funding Campaigns

Kevin Raybould at Lean Left celebrates candidates who won elections while spending only public money.

Want to end the corrupting influence of money in politics? This is the way to do it. And, as an added bonus, you end up with people from all walks of life in the legislature. There are simply no losers in this scheme - except incumbents and money men, which is why getting this adopted has turned out to be so hard.

Not quite. You forgot about some other people who lose with this scheme. Public funds don't just magically appear, that's tax money you're talking about. That means no matter which raving loony gets elected, you helped. When some David Duke clone manages to win office, you'll have the pleasure of knowing that you spent some of your hard earned cash to fund his election. Taxpayers lose.

A bigger issue is the gatekeeper problem, as in who decides which candidates are eligible for public funding. That likely will be the people already holding office. Think about that, as laws get closer to outlawing private financing altogether. Want to run against the incumbent? He might be one of the people deciding how you'll qualify for campaign money. Want to run a campaign outside the political establishment? Start a new political party? Good luck! You may well find it's illegal to raise money. Public funding of elections is one more step toward consolidating power in backrooms at major party headquarters. The biggest loser will be grassroots politics.

:: Walter 11:48 AM [+] ::
...
:: Sunday, November 24, 2002 ::
Debate?

James Capozzola, writing on his blog, the Rittenhouse Review:

I can no longer in good conscience include on the Rittenhouse Review’s blogroll any weblog that has provided a permanent blogroll link of its own to the site known as “Little Green Footballs” or “LGF.”
It is with great regret and considerable lament that I have adopted this position -- or been forced to adopt this position -- as I am normally a passionate advocate of an author’s right to choose his associates and to establish and maintain her own chosen associations.
However, it has become painfully clear, to the extent it wasn’t already, that the hosts of LGF, while preciously coy about their own political persuasions, all too willingly and not without satisfaction have allowed their site to become a vile cesspool of racism, bigotry, prejudice, ignorance, and hate.
Little Green Footballs, its readers, and what can in fairness only be described as its many contributors, have long since moved beyond the realm of civilized discourse.


How about some examples of that racism, bigotry, etc.?

LGF is not a regular read for me, so after reading the above I hastened over to LGF to find some nastiness. What I found was a whole bunch of people really unhappy with Islamic terrorists around the globe. News items culled from mostly foreign press sources are reprinted and linked to highlight the terrorists as generally bloodthirsty and backward. I think it's safe to say they don't like the way Islam has spawned violence. That's a politically incorrect position to be sure, but is it bigoted? Is it unfair? Well it might be, but the burden falls on the accuser to prove his case.

Mr. Capozzola instead opts to avoid debate, and to refuse to engage LGF at all, saying it's a matter of 'conscience' for him to avoid LGF, even anyone who links with LGF. If one wants to claim the moral high ground, he must first establish that he stands on morality while others don't. This blackballing goes against the spirit of blogging. The strength of a blog is the ability to engage the opposition, to debate, and to fact check. By refusing to engage one gives off the impression of either arrogance or inability to refute his opponent. Certainly that isn't what Mr. Capozzola intended.

LGF responds to the Rittenhouse Review here.

:: Walter 2:49 PM [+] ::
...
:: Friday, November 22, 2002 ::
Chili/e

A week ago I made an offhand comment saying chili should contain no ground beef. That got Jim Henley to say, rightly, that it should have no beans. That set off a blog flurry of comment, and I was compelled to clarify my position in an e-mail I sent to him.

Since I started this no beef/no bean thing I feel I should clarify what I meant.
Chili/e should be green and contain pork. (Chile con Carne) Sometimes this is referred to as New Mexico, or green, chili/e. This contains no beef, beans, or tomato. Red chili has tomato in it and normally contains no meat at all. This is used as a sauce, often on enchiladas. (Spanish word for 'in chile') The thing that most in the US are used to is Texas chili, a beef and bean concoction that while pleasant enough, isn't a Mexican food. I was referring to Mexican chile recipes.


I hope that helps.

:: Walter 8:09 PM [+] ::
...
Da Blogroll

I've replaced a couple of off-topic or dormant links on the left over the last week or so. New-ish; Arthur Silber and Dean Esmay. I'm looking to add a (very) few more. If you have a blog that you think I may have overlooked feel free to hit the 'comments' button above and tell me about yours. If you're already getting a thousand hits a day then I'm probably already aware of your blog. If you have an obscure corner of the blogosphere, like mine, that you think deserves more attention, then tell me about it. Your political orientation isn't too important. A current events or public policy emphasis is what I'm looking for.

:: Walter 6:24 PM [+] ::
...
:: Thursday, November 21, 2002 ::
Homeland Security and Data Mining

If you're not scared of the Homeland Security Dept. yet, (and where have you been?) then you should read what Kim du Toit has to say. Appearantly this is his field of expertice. It's a long but worthwhile piece, it ends this way:

Folks, this is the final frontier of our personal freedom in the United States. I am uncharacteristically somber when I say this, because it happens to be the truth. When you have no secrets left, you are completely helpless, and depend on the goodwill of the person who knows them all.
It's far worse when that "person" is the State.


Read the whole thing.

:: Walter 5:33 PM [+] ::
...
:: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 ::
Matthew in Denver (or some tranquil suburb thereof - edit)

Matthew Edgar responds to some stuff written on this site.

Walter has a lot to say about the difference between Republicans and Libertarians. I am not a partisan R or a partisan L. In the last election I did in fact vote for some Republicans. I voted Mike Coffman for treasurer for example. For my local house district I voted for the Republican (Rob Fairbank). Why? Coffman has the right ideas. He is anti-tax. He is anti-cigarette taxes, but he can do nothing about it. As treasurer, he has no other job than watching the money.

I'm stunned that Matthew voted for Coffman and against my favorite candidate, Gaar Potter. Gaar is the only person on the ballot, any ballot, who once appeared on the cover of Modern Drunkard, a hilarious magazine devoted to, well, you know. I keep hoping Gaar will get his own blog and the whole world will get to read his work, instead of a lucky handful here in Colorado.

Rob Fairbank has done some things I disagree with, but ultimately I agree with him 70% of the time. (Well, in that race, no L ran.) Partisanship is ultimately a bad thing as it creates a good deal of uneeded hostility to other parties, some of which might have the right ideas. More than that, it makes a party, which should be merely a tool to get elected, into a religion.


Well, it would be much easier to build a successful religion than a successful Libertarian party. More lucrative, too, I imagine. The question I ask before voting in any election is, 'what choice will best promote liberty?' I'm willing to vote for anyone who best answers that question, regardless of party affiliation. My argument is that Republicans normally do more to harm liberty than help the cause. There are some rare exceptions, and they have my support.

UPDATE: Matthew has more!

:: Walter 8:26 AM [+] ::
...
Unqualified Offerings

On the Republican vs Libertarian debate, Jim Henley gets it:

But the Republicans! Their offense is not disagreement. Their offense is much worse. They appropriate our rhetoric, drawing the support of many who appreciate our principles - small government, voluntary exchange, self-defense and free enterprise, responsibility and liberty - but they besmirch those principles by their actions. Instead of free enterprise, corporate welfare. Instead of small government, trivial nips and tucks calculated to annoy no crucial interest group, instead of free trade, price supports and tarrifs, instead of responsibility, drug wars. Republicans traduce our ideals, and the public comes to associate their practice with our principles. It's not fair, but it's the way the mind works.

:: Walter 7:53 AM [+] ::
...
:: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 ::
Criminal Activity at the Fed's Drug Office

Fed drug czar John Walters toured the country in the last year campaigning against various drug decriminalization ballot initiatives. It looks like there may be a lawsuit in the works. You see, using federal funds for campaigning is usually illegal.
Poetic justice = John Walters behind bars for criminal activity. But, I doubt the judiciary would let that happen.

Link via (who else?) Dale Amon at Samizdata.

:: Walter 8:38 PM [+] ::
...
A New Adjective

Evan McElravy, debating with Jesse Walker on some point of ancient Greek literature/philosophy, creates a new modifier:

...to be fair to Hanson, that's not much of a distortion, let alone on a Bellesilian scale.

A-ha. Major distortions are Bellesilian. Minor distortions are what, Clintonian? ('I supported welfare reform.') Bellesilian. I like it. How do you pronounce it?

:: Walter 8:04 PM [+] ::
...
:: Monday, November 18, 2002 ::
More on Republicans vs Libertarians

Jim Henley writes about neolibertarians who rejoiced in the Republican victory:

The other thing that's alarming the otherwise pro-war folks mentioned in the first paragraph is the swift passage of the Homeland Security bill. Glenn Reynolds has been in the forefront of hoping this monster would die of gridlock, but he's had company from many like-minded fellows. (On this issue, UO definitely counts as a like-minded fellow.)
Really, guys, what did you expect? Bush proposed it, Bush campaigned for it, Bush insisted the day after the election that the newly Republican congress pass the thing as submitted, and here it is. You mostly cheered the end of the gridlock that was all that kept this turkey in the freezer. Now we get the HSD and the IAO...


Any libertarians, neo- or otherwise, who voted Republican should have expected this result. I'm sure they expect the GOP to deliver something, a big tax cut, Soc. Security privatization, something, but I'm far from convinced that the cause of liberty will be advanced at home in the next few years.

:: Walter 9:12 PM [+] ::
...
:: Sunday, November 17, 2002 ::
Google

Walter in Denver is the # 6 site found for the search "Ed's Funky Diner." There's not much cooler than that.

:: Walter 8:03 PM [+] ::
...
GOP vs LP

There's been much debate lately (like here, and here) about the Libertarian Party's effect on Republican election results in the past election. The assumption made by some is that LP votes would go to the GOP if there were no LP candidate on the ballot. That may be true in some rare cases, including the South Dakota senate race, but LP voters that I know, and I know lots, made a careful and reasoned decision when they left the GOP. That's assuming they ever were with the Republicans, many were Democrats or split ticket voters before they saw the light. Most of us are painfully aware that voting GOP is voting for stuff like this: (found at TalkLeft)

Once again we see how federal sentencing decisions lie not in the hand of judges, where they belong, but to prosecutors under the federal sentencing guidelines. Prime example, in today's news: The U.S. Attorney in Boston is seeking much longer drug, gun sentences...
Already in Colorado, according to our sources (and recent clients' charges) pot growing cases of under 100 plants are now being brought in federal court. The Assistant US Attorneys are not happy about having to prosecute these small cases, but we've been told (and not from an AUSA) that this is happening at Ashcroft's insistence.


This sort of thing (and many other reasons) is why LP members take delight in voting against Republicans, and even try to spoil Republican results. As long as partisan Republicans are blind to this there will be no winning over LP voters.

:: Walter 10:39 AM [+] ::
...
:: Saturday, November 16, 2002 ::
Blog News

Local columnist Linda Seebach writes about blogs today. She has a pretty good grasp on the phenomonon, but she only mentions something about a site called Instapundit, instead of some other blog right in her back yard. Sheesh.

:: Walter 7:28 PM [+] ::
...
:: Friday, November 15, 2002 ::
A Few Odd Things

Inspired by Dean Esmay, a few odd things I believe:

- Whichever nation can best guarantee the rights of its citizens is the nation that will enjoy the greatest long term economic success. I think history proves this.

- Real chili contains no ground beef.

- No country has ever been too free, as long as it maintained the ability to effectively prosecute criminals.

- Fast food drive-throughs that can produce fresh hot food in less than three minutes are marvels of modern logistics.

- The single basic human right is the right to personal property. From this stems the rights of free speech, self defense, freedom of religion, and any other human right you can think of.

- If more people knew about the climate in Denver even more would move here. So I'm not telling.

- Other, poorer countries educate their children in eight years as well as we do in twelve. And that's not all bad for us.

- Most conspiracy theories are wrong, proved by the simple reason that people in charge are not bright enough to pull of large scale scams like fake moon landings, etc.

- The desire to be intoxicated is embedded in even the basest life forms. Like everything else in creation, there's a reason for this. But don't ask me what it is.

- I'm much better informed of current events since I began reading blogs a few months ago.

- Republican control of the federal government will not lead to a reduction in the size of said government.

:: Walter 8:11 AM [+] ::
...
:: Thursday, November 14, 2002 ::
Easy Target

Michael Moore is intellectually lazy and mean. In other words, making fun of him is like shooting fish in, well you know. It's still fun, though!
More Moore Here!

:: Walter 8:04 PM [+] ::
...
:: Monday, November 11, 2002 ::
Today

Kurt Vonnegut, George Patton, Jonathan Winters, Daniel Ortega, Fuzzy Zoeller, Marshall Crenshaw, Demi Moore, Leonardo DiCaprio, and me.

Do you need any further proof that astrology is crap?

:: Walter 8:46 PM [+] ::
...
:: Sunday, November 10, 2002 ::
ILTE of the Day

Dave Brown of Jefferson, CO. has a letter in today's Denver Post commenting on the Republican vistories in last week's elections.

"Emperor George" conquered America.
I'm elderly, almost drawing Social Security and gay. I'm not sure if I'll get used to eating dry dog food, but from now on, I'm sleeping with one eye open and my shotgun close at hand. And I'm definitely cleaning up my 40-year-old bomb shelter.


Hmmmm.
UPDATE: The same letter ran, verbatim, in today's Rocky Mountain News! (Monday, 11/11)

:: Walter 9:15 AM [+] ::
...
:: Saturday, November 09, 2002 ::
Spooky Post-Halloween Stuff

I don't often ask much from my readers, but please read this. (Look at the whole thing, it's in reverse chronological order, like a blog.)

Creeped out yet?

For more info, look here.

I'm hoping Diana will get a tip jar on her website so we can contribute to her legal defense. Any other bloggers or media types who come across this, please spread the news.


:: Walter 7:52 PM [+] ::
...
:: Thursday, November 07, 2002 ::
A Libertarian Take On the Election

A great election cycle for the Libertarian Party. Here in Colorado the LP won two county-wide partisan elections by landslide proportions. Additionally, one race took over 50,000 votes in a single county in a losing effort.
Nationwide, some high profile candidacies were disappointing. Carla Howell managed only 1% in the race for Mass. governor. At the same time her ballot initiative to end the state income tax won over 45% of the vote. That was more than 10% better than the polling numbers predicted. It's hard to understate the significance of that vote in a leftist leaning state like Mass., and in spite of universal opposition from Republican politicians. Safe to say, similar ballot initiatives will be coming to a state near you, and soon.
The best news of all were the unexpected Republican victories, taking control of the federal legislature. It seems they took a page from the Democrats by bringing out the vote in a highly organized election day effort. I don't think there's so much of a shift in mainstream philosophy as simply a better organized Republican party. Democrats assumed, naively, that the electorate would be incensed by the Republican 'theft' of the 2000 presidential election and vote against them this time around. The truth is that the Republicans and independents felt even more strongly that the Democrats made an attempt to circumvent the legal process in Florida.
So, why do I, a partisan Libertarian, see a positive in Republican victory? After all, gridlock is the next best thing to libertarian government. It's because the minarchists in the Republican Party have nowhere to hide. They'll have to put up or shut up.
I'll make a few easy predictions; under Republican rule, the federal government will continue to grow, probably at a faster pace than ever. Government intrusions on a personal level will become more egregious. Small government advocates will have no place in the Republican Party.
Coming elections will provide fertile ground for libertarians of both the large and small 'L' varieties.

UPDATE - Dale Amon touts the Mass. results.

:: Walter 11:16 PM [+] ::
...
:: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 ::
Big Night

The blogosphere is hyperactive tonight, with commentary on election night. I'd stay and join the fun but I'm on my way to a Libertarian Party victory celebration. Mrs. In Denver will be signing copies of her pinup calendar. She's miss December. Order one now, it's for a good cause.

Yes, I did say Libertarian Party victory celebration.

:: Walter 5:34 PM [+] ::
...
To Vote or Not to Vote

Dean Esmay advocates not voting, for all the right reasons:

Indeed, if you don't take the time to inform yourself on the issues, and make a rational choice based on that, I'd like to suggest that it's your duty as a citizen to stay out of the voting booth. I really mean that. If you do not follow the news, the issues debated, and the people involved, please do not vote on Tuesday.

Likewise, I'm tired of public appeals for people to get out and vote. It is certainly not your duty to vote. Better yet, stick to the candidates and issues you know. Don't be afraid to leave blank spaces on the ballot.

Arthur Silber also recommends not voting. I can't quite agree with his reasoning, which I've heard from other libertarians before. Vodkapundit doesn't agree with him, either.

:: Walter 3:01 PM [+] ::
...
Surfing

I was getting away from politics for a few moments this morning, reading an innocent article in the Albuquerque Tribune about on-line fan sites. These are places where college sports fans go to share opinions on their favorite teams, trade gossip, typical internet noise. Then I come across this:

"A lot of (fan-sites) are just gripe boxes," UNM Athletic Director Rudy Davalos said. "This is a free country and everybody can do what they want to do. We have a loose situation in what people can say in terms of profanity and nastiness."
Davalos continued: "The only scary part of it is that the government would allow people to analyze and not have any credibility. The problem is being scared for our country that they allow this."


That's right, someone in a responsible position at the University of New Mexico thinks the government should do something about this pesky internet thing.
I wonder if there's someone at the University to follow Rudy around and keep him away from sharp objects. Seems prudent.

:: Walter 7:05 AM [+] ::
...
:: Monday, November 04, 2002 ::
SNOW!!

Arapahoe Basin got hit with 45" in October.It looks like more than they got all last year, and they won't even open for a couple of weeks yet.

:: Walter 7:02 AM [+] ::
...
A Quiz I Like


Well of course I would like that. None of it's true, you know.

:: Walter 6:56 AM [+] ::
...
:: Saturday, November 02, 2002 ::
ILTE of the Day

This letter from C. DeMarco is found in today's Houston Chronicle, asking for voters to approve more money for the local school district. Excerpt:

I know $808.6 million seems like a lot for the Houston Independent School District to be asking for, especially since Houstonians just passed a $678 million bond issue in 1998. But before voting, please consider that HISD has shown it can be fiscally responsible with taxpayers' money.

This problem is not confined to Houston, school districts around the nation ask for similar budget increases on a regular basis. So I looked up the Houston school budget numbers (pdf file) and found the predictable figures.

Students : 210,670
Expenditures for 2002: $1,410,428,699.

As in 1.4+ BILLION dollars. That works out to $6694.96* per student. You don't often see school district spokespeople trumpeting those kind of numbers when they agitate for tax increases.

The sad fact is that the typical U.S. school district is overfunded while it underperforms.

* That's slightly under the Denver school district budget numbers, per pupil. Denver boasts a higher cost of living. And a similar crummy school system.

:: Walter 8:04 PM [+] ::
...
Happy Birthday to Sammy's Data

Hard to believe that the blogging phenomenon is only a year old. Head on over there and toast to their continued success. Which is what I'll do, too.

:: Walter 6:48 AM [+] ::
...

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?