Hello, Liberty Nutcase here.
You can find my current rantings at My Weblog.
Some of my older writings are still available and I will update some of them as I see fit.
You may catch my babble at one of the Forums at the Nation of Political Conservatives (and Libertarians.)
I recommend that you start by taking The World's Smallest Political Quiz. It will show your political leanings quickly, accurately and with no fuss. The results may surprise you.
The long drawn out brouhaha over whether Sultaana Freeman (FKA - Sandra Kellar) should be allowed to wear her veil in her driver's license photo.
Even though she has admitted that she has had her unveiled picture taken several times since her conversion to Islam including the following mugshot in 1998.
The Freemans claim that there religious rights are at stake. But a state attorney countered that Islamic law has exceptions that allow women to lift their veil and expose their face if the action serves a public good. Assistant Attorney General Jason Vail said arrangements can be made to have Freeman photographed only with women present to allay her concerns about modesty.
Well, here's my take:
Driving is a privilage, not Right, and if the rules and regulations governing this privilage interefere with your rights, than you have the right to refuse participation in said privilage, or any other for that matter.
Honestly does the veiled woman resemble the unveiled one?
Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks is getting exactly what she deserves. Freedom of speech gives people the right to say what they think; it does not protect them from the consequences of said speech.
The radio stations also have the right to play whatever songs, by whichever artists, they want. The fact that they are not playing Dixie Chick music because of what Ms. Maines said is a consequence she should have thought of before she opened her mouth.
People today seem to forget that words mean things. If a person has the intestinal fortitude to say or do something that is against popular opinion, then that person had best be ready to deal with the consequences.
With the walk-out in WV by the medical profession over the escalating costs of liability insurance, it renews the debate for Caps on Monies awarded by Juries to the allegedly victimized.
The AMA Claims that run-away Jury Awards in the Litigation Lottery have extracted their toll on the Insurance Industry driving up Liability Insurance Premiums.
Mary Alexander, president of the , Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA), counters with "Twenty-five percent of their (Insurance Companies’) investments are in stocks, so when the stock market goes down and they lose a quarter of their profits then they turn around and put it onto doctors and therefore patients." [Click for source]
On Fox News Live, Sunday, January 05, 2003, with Tony Snow a representative from the American Medical Association (AMA) dispelled that assertion with the Claim that OB/GYN Physicians in California, which has a Cap on Medical Malpractice Awards, costs $50,000 per year where as in Southern Florida, the same annual policy costs in excess of $210,000.
“Now Nutcase,” you the reader might say. “Doesn’t the Libertarian Philosophy of a less intrusive Government go against Tort Reform?” I disagree wholly on the notion that with-out some type of Tort reform, the quality of life of Americans as a whole will be lessened. Your average American is tired for involuntarily paying for these and all run-away lawsuits.
How do I figure?
Insurance Companies pass on the costs of these Multi-Million Jury awards to the insured (Physicians) as higher Premiums.
Physicians pass on the costs of higher premiums onto their consumers (patients) as higher fees which we, the General public, pay through the nose for as Higher Health Insurance Premiums, Higher Co-Pays, Greater Limits on Medical Procedure Coverages and higher tax burden for you as your State picks-up higher medical costs for Medicare, Medicaid, Medical Assistance and other programs for the uninsured.
For more information, See the Official LP plank on Health Care & Health Costs.
What’s wrong with this Government? One minute they're giving out how they were going to kill Hussein, the next moment we’re finding out that we caused his problem in the first place. Okay, this was just a hypothetical situation but sounds quite in-line with the whole handling of this situation. I have finally lost all faith in the UN. What took me so long? My age… After all, I’m so young that I don’t remember when Reagen was president. Which makes it that much that much worse when I can see the problems this world is going through. Here is my points concerning the recent reopening of Iraq to weapons inspectors.
Why don’t they train these guys better? According to most reports they couldn’t tell the difference between a SCUD missile and pencil sharpener. Maybe it’s a conspiracy to start a war with Iraq. But wouldn’t it look better if the inspectors found something, were taken hostage and the UN declared war in order to save those “men.” I use the word men lightly, more on that later.
With UN backing the Government can use the "I hate Iraq Generation" to their heart's delight. As I’ve pointed out earlier, I don’t remember Reagen. So, my peers and I have grown up around all the propaganda against Iraq. The embodiment of this is a newly released video game in which your main aim is to kill Sadaam Hussein. It’s similar to almost every other living American’s hatred towards Communism. You guys fought 2 major wars, 1 minor and numerous missions against the “Red Tide” since 1919. We’re in a similar position and now my generation is in the army. God Help us sinful children.
The problem with the inspectors is that they don’t have any determination, courage, chutzpa, or any of those other things required to be in the military. Oh wait, they’re not in the military, are they? The Military would be better to handle something like this. Not convinced? How about a pro - con list?
It’s a close one but I feel that the military would be the only ones who could satisfy all the mission parameters fully.
I’m done now, the world situation is starting to make me sick.
The difference between then and now:
Then - we were liberating Kuwait and protecting Saudi Arabia.
Both of these countries are allies of the US. We had every right to defend Saudi Arabia and kick the Iraqi invaders out of Kuwait. It was imperative that we defend our friends and keep open the flow of Oil to the America. It was not about Saddam Hussein. It was about allegiances and American interests. As Imperialistic as it may sound, America is dependant on Petroleum and needs to protect its sources.
Many Middle East countries were in accord with our thinking and were afraid if we didn’t kick Iraq out of Kuwait, they could be next. Hussein needed to be told to get out, sit down and be quiet.
This is what we (the USA) set out to do and it is what we accomplished, End of Story.
Side bar – for all of you “No Blood for Oil” anti-war, sixties wannabe protesters, have you sold your Car yet? Are you riding your bike instead of the bus?
Now - we are striking against a perceived threat.
Kurds – You know we should be aligning ourselves with Iraq. They want to stamp out terrorists as much as we do. I refer to the Kurds. They live in Northern Iraq and Southern Turkey. They are a thorn in Turkey’s side with their constant terrorist acts to support their extreme Muslim fundamentalist views against the more relaxed views of the Turkish Government. The Kurds fundamentalism and their outward aggression to bend others to their will is what caused Hussein to attack them in the first place.
I don’t condone his methods he used, but he demonstrated tactical knowledge of the threat that they posed. In our backwards attempts to subdue Hussein as a Major Player, we decided to protect these terrorists from the Satan Insane (FKA as Saddam Hussein.) In establishing the Northern No Fly Zone in Iraq, we have created a safe haven for Terrorists. They attack, at will, both Iraqi and Turkish sovereignty in the name of Muslim Fundamentalism.
Instead of threatening Iraq with yet another war, America should sit down at the table with Iraq and discuss a combined effort against Terrorism. We can tell Saddam we understand that he harbored anti-American al-Qaeda Terrorists because we harbored anti-Iraqi Kurdish terrorists. If we combined our resources and intelligence, we could help the Iraqis suppress the fringe element of the Kurds with-out using chemical weapons (or other weapons of mass destruction) and Iraq could help us cut the heart out of the Al Qaeda network.
Think of the implications that this would mean for Turkey. We would also not only be helping them to suppress the Kurdish Terrorist fanatics in Turkey, but we would eliminate the safe harbor that they have in Northern Iraq as well. I refer to the safe harbor that we have created for Kurds as a whole.
Saddam Hussein knows that it is only a matter of time before al-Qaeda comes after him. This was made apparent by an al-Qaeda spokesman made reference to him as dictator of an infidel regime.
In Sunday's (8 Dec 2002) statement, the al-Qaeda spokesman, who was stripped of his Kuwaiti nationality in 2001, singled out growing US war preparations against Iraq as a particular target for the group's operations.
But alas, this will never happen. Why? Because our little dictator friend won’t be an American Puppet. We love our little dictators as long as they answer to US (us). Think of the Shah (Iran), Batista (Cuba), Somoza (Nicaragua), etc.
We were supporters of Iraq when they attacked Iran. But when Saddam Hussein refused to don our puppet strings, the US turned against him. Similar to how we went after our boy, Manuel Noriega (Panama) when he refused to obey us.
Since we’re on Noriega, he was once a CIA operative much the same as – Osama bin Laden.
Check-out the Archives