I've gotten tired of explaining why supply-side economics -- i.e., voodoo economics -- don't actually work. So I've decided to write up a quick-and-dirty version that I can just link to as necessary. This is not meant to be a definitive statement on the subject. It's not even an air-tight argument of the principles being espoused. It's just me pointing at some pretty fundamental absurdities in voodoo economics and saying, "Hey! Look! Have you even thought about this? It doesn't make any sense!"

Libertarian Presidential candidate Bob Barr visited St. Louis this past week-end to raise a little money and make a little news.  STL Today (St. Louis Post Dispatch online news outlet) covered his visit.

Barr rejected claims that he is a 'spoiler'.

Libertarian presidential nominee Bob Barr on Sunday rejected critics' assertions that he could be a "spoiler" in November, shifting votes away from Republican John McCain and possibly aiding the election of Democrat Barack Obama.

"It's an awfully weak argument for Republicans to make," Barr said, while predicting that the GOP may be facing a defeat of "tsunami" proportions.

People often ask me how I would describe myself politically - actually, not so much people these days, as places such as Facebook, etc. I don't like labels. But I've recently begun to list myself, when I can write in rather than a choose from a group of options, as a "progressive libertarian".

Here, for the blogospheric record, is why:

1. I'm a libertarian. I agree completely with Thomas Jefferson that the greatest threats to our freedom and well being come from government, democratically elected or not. Certainly Hitler and Stalin tragically proved that. I think the Constitution in general, and the Bill of Rights in particular, must be strictly adhered to. Of course, not all the Amendments are exactly the same in what their wording prohibits. The First Amendment's provision that "Congress shall make no law" abridging freedom of speech and press means just that - "no law," period - in contrast to the Second Amendment's provision that the right to bear arms "shall not be infringed," which I take as meaning laws regulating weapons are constitutional, as long as they do not "infringe" on lawful citizens who bear arms. The Fourteenth Amendment, and its provision that all limitations on the Federal government in the Constitution apply to the states, municipalities, etc., is also crucial.

Today the Barr Campaign released a video of Bob talking about John McCain’s ‘Maverick’ credentials. Bob Barr is no friend of progressives, and was certainly the bane of Bill Clinton’s existence for eight long years.  But sometimes the enemy of one’s enemy is one’s friend.  Barr’s appeal to true Libertarian’s cannot be denied.  In many ways, Barr is the thinking-person’s Ron Paul.  More importantly, Bob Barr could very well be the Ralph Nader of 2008 and be forever reviled by Republicans as a result.

The short definition of libertarianism is "liberal on social issues, but conservative on fiscal issues." The trouble is a large number of libertarians I know, are not terribly liberal on social issues.  They interpret "liberal on social issues" to mean something along the lines of "I don't care what anyone else dose in their personal life, as long as it has no impact on me," or something along these lines. But if you take this stance and you live in, for example a very homophobic culture, gay people will still suffer from strictly legal forms of social and financial ostracism. Habitual hatred of gays could lead to violence. It's just no good.  In this, and other similar cases, I think that a person has a moral, or social responsibility to promote tolerance and equality. I'm ambivalent about government intervention,  but it is very clear to me that such issues can't just be ignored. I can't just say "that's not my problem." It is my problem. We all live together. To be truly liberal on social issues one needs to at least recognize this and recognize that these problems are real. (How we address them can be a separate question.)

Sorry for the break from Obama, McCain, Democrat, Republican and I know this isn't really the appropriate place on the internet BUT

Usually, I spend enough time reading and trying to comprehend American Politics. However, over the last few days, I've dabbled in some fairly extreme political theory, realizing I am even stupider than I previously thought. Essentially, I have two major questions.

Did you know some "libertarian" jerk in college who won’t shut up about Ayn Rand and thought his personal empowerment was the most important thing in the world. Or these days, have you met lots of "libertarians" who are really just NeoCon retreads looking for a new brand name. These faux libertarians make us real libers look like a bunch of crypto-Republicans and grumpy old men.

But if that's all we are, why would we hang out of a progressive blog dedicated to electing Democrats? Maybe we're just the world's least effective concern trolls.

Or maybe libertarians and progressives share many of the same goals and we could work together to better achieve them, if we just understood each other better.

You know, rants come from some pretty darn odd places sometimes. (Fair warning: this is totally a rant.) I was reading some reviews on The Dark Knight, and I came across an odd one in the economic blog of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, the self-proclaimed "research and educational center of classical liberalism, libertarian political theory, and the Austrian School of economics." The review (which you may not want to read if you haven't seen the film - he doesn't warn you, but there are totally spoilers) examines - and mostly praises - the film's treatment of The Joker as the embodiment of evil and yet not of sin. It also discusses The People's ability to work together for the common good.

Then things took a very weird, oddly libertarian slant (at the time, I didn't know it was a libertarian blog).

It's becoming increasingly clear that being called a Republican is more than some people can take. Even for the registered Republicans.

So now many of Bush's former vocal cheerleaders have decided they're not really Republicans. The Party nowadays doesn't speak for them. No, they'll tell you, they're actually Libertarians. World of difference, they'll say. Libertarians are nothing like Republicans.

Don't tell Ronald Reagan that! More, below the fold...

The grassroots rebelion which organized around Ned Lamont was a thing of beauty.  It is time for another netroot rebelion.  
I have made so many phone calls regarding FISA that I lost count.  The fake Democrats are counting on us to forget their votes by the time they are up for re-election and most of us probably will forget. Mentally we will move on to outrage over the next Right that they sell off to the highest bidder.  Today's FISA vote is so wrong.  Everyone who voted against the immunity amendments needs to be removed.... but as the ringleader Steny Hoyer should be the first target.  We cannot wait for the next primary.  

The other day, a little bit of a screaming match broke out when I published a diary that poorly articulated how I felt about the practice of abortions and the general debate about them.   Therefore, after some thought, I have decided to refine the explanation of people who share my position.   It sort-of-is and sort-of-isn't a position within the pro-life camp, depending on how you define that camp.   It sort-of-is and sort-of-isn't part of the pro-choice camp.  As some people have pointed out, my position is really the pro-choice  position; and then proceeded to call me sexist.

Why oh why does this man irritate me so?  Now don't get me wrong, John Stossel is probably a nice man.  But for a man who can garner audiences, he is "dangerous" (well not really, but the guy's on TV and he is on the ra-ra free market Right's side promulgating this crap) with his half ass grasp on our economy.   Recently, on Daily Kos's evil twin, he wrote up a piece on how the economy really isn't doing bad.  That it was all media hype.

"Certainly, [US Representative Todd Akin, R-MO] seems as safe as any Republican can be in an otherwise bleak atmosphere for the GOP," writes Deirdre Shesgreen in today's St. Louis Post-Dispatch. "The 2nd Congressional District includes the high-income, reliably Republican suburbs .... Akin won the seat in 2000, squeaking through a five-way GOP primary by 56 votes and then winning easily in the general election. He has coasted to re-election ever since."

Appearances can be deceiving. Todd Akin's seat isn't nearly as "safe" at it looks.

The reasons why we should advocate on Barr’s behalf are obvious and compelling:
• Disguised as Democrats, Republicans trolled with a vengeance on Hillary’s behalf (led by goon’s such as Rush Limbaugh)
• Posing as pro-Hillary dead-enders, they’re still causing mischief on the internets via  blogs and comment threads
• Bob Barr’s success is directly related to Obama’s
• The magic of seeing Obama’s head, on CNN’s election night coverage, juxtaposed with the state of Georgia and a big blue checkmark
• Ralph Nadar

How to Barrvocate across the fold...

Copyright Eyesonobama.com

By Chasing America from Eyes on Obama:

Bob Barr has a record littered with his support of issues that could carry immense appeal with the disillusioned conservative values base of the Republican Party. Barr supported gun rights at every turn and was opposed to lax drug laws. So, Barr has a lot of magnets to attract the Republican voter away from John McCain in November.

Why? Because Bob Barr, or even dead-enders for Ron Paul, can swing Nevada for Obama, big time.

Let me tell you a story.

In January, I traveled to Nevada for three days to Get Out The Caucus for the Obama Campaign. At that time, I was fully engaged in intra-party warfare, so the Republican contest was little more than an amusing sideshow (and what a sideshow it was, am I right?).

While it was supremely gratifying that in the early contests Ron Paul bested Rudy Giuliani, I never thought that his "revolution" would ever pull more than 5%.

Then, as I was coming over the SIerra Nevadas into Reno, I saw a giant mountainside billboard reading "Ron Paul", and I realized that Nevada Republicans are, well, a little different.

How different? Follow me over the jump and I'll show you what I mean.

Ron Paul sort of ends his bid.
Narrative ensues. 'Rift' spoken, all over the place.

Does it have traction? Barr is from GA. How much effect will it have not only on GA, but other States in the Southeast? Obviously, Florida especially is a key part of this question.

http://www.boston.com/...

"Paul, Barr throw each other bouquets"

http://thirdpartywatch.com/...

Ron Paul supporters plan Bob Barr money bomb

http://www.thebulletin.us/...

Paul Gives Barr A Pseudo-Endorsement

http://rawstory.com/...

Ron Paul rejects McCain ‘values,’ praises Libertarian Barr

This snippet from the Washington Post caught my eye:

"The presidential campaign was Phase One," said Jesse Benton, Paul's spokesman. He said Paul is forming a non-profit organization that will tap into the activism and fundraising energy that was created by the Ron Paul Revolution during his bid for the Republican nomination.

Given his plans for a rally at the Republican Convention, this looks to be a major headache for Republicans in the future.