Skip directly to content

Lynn and Roger Bloxham's blog

Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

Most Important Election Ever

on Fri, 11/02/2012 - 23:06

Interesting facts about important races in which Libertarian Party members are involved. Note how many with just 2% of the vote would gain Ballot Access. The R's and D's have done everything they can think of to limit and annihilate any other party from appearing on the ballot. For this reason alone, I could NOT under any circumstances vote for Romney.  

I agree partially with some of the Republican and Tea Party lip service, just as I agree partially with some of the Democrats favorite rhetoric about civil liberties and anti wars. But there are too many inconsistencies and most important actions once in elected office. Compare what Romney did as as governor. Look at what he did.  Then, compare that to two term Gov. Johnson. Look at Obama's rhetoric before being in office. A real civil libertarian until he got power. 
As I have said before, this election shows the dark side of both Obama and Romney. But let's analyze Romney as so many believe he is the lesser of two evils or maybe they hope he is a really god guy.  Well both men are probably good with their family. So were the Mafia Dons. 
Romney's complicity in absolute, no question about it, cheating on ballots tells me all I need to know about his character(he is willing to cheat and lie) and philosophy (pragmatism: the end justifies the means). Meanwhile the Dems are faulting him for all the wrong reasons; they love Romney Care and criticize him for Outsourcing. Idiotic. As they are pragmatists also,the Dems will not criticize Romney for the absolute skull duggery against Paul. They do this type of thing all the time. They are experts. They wrote the playbook the Republicans have begun to use more and more. the Democrats wrote it long ago Chicago.
The worse thing is that if Romney wins and when his policies are instigated, they will be almost the same as Obama's but all the while people will be calling them "free market"  When the economy has problems, the free market and a lack of regulation will be blamed. It happens every time. 
Romney has revealed his loyalty to the expansion of belligerence against and  invasion of other countries with his agreement of sanctions against Iran, the NDAA and the use of Drones. 
Most odd is Romney's evidently formal agreement to stand down and  stay silent regarding Benghazi. If we are so foolish to leave people there, why abandon them when they are being attacked and slaughtered. Very peculiar that Romney by his silence is literally agreeing with Obama that help should not have been sent.
Romney shows the same ignorance on economics when his remarks parallel Obama's on Health Care and China. He is showing that he believes in a mixed economy by his remarks that he wants national health care, but just not quite ObamaCare. ObamaCare Lite=Romney Care. He exhibits a lack of understanding of real free and voluntary markets when he will not better defend outsourcing and the right of any business to do so. When he does not want labor to move freely and cannot defend immigrants, but wishes they would return from whence they came. His attacks on China are definitely a play for the protectionist crowd.  Republicans are so blinded by the label of Republican he wears they cannot see he is only slightly different in actions and not much better than Obama.
Republicans had hopes for Ryan but he is definitely not a free market person nor does he understands Ayn Rand or the Austrian Economic positions. Rather Ryan has decimated the average person's understanding of Ayn Rand which is a prime example why pragmatists cause more harm than good. 
Every election since 1972 I have heard that this is the most important election and we must not vote third party and throw away our vote as the Dem is so bad. Well, I hardly think Nixon, Reagan, Bush 1, Bush 2,were better and certainly Mc Cain would not have improved things.  

I remember Neal Boortz using this idea on his radio show; "This is too important an election. I am a  Libertarian but "just this time" we must vote for the Republican". I cannot remember which election it was, but right after he pounded on this on his radio show Roger and I  went to the National Convention. Roger was at the front and center dinner table with Nolan, Boortz,  Bergland etc.  Boortz's feeling were hurt because he could not understand why the party was angry with him. Afterwards (I was not at the table during dinner) I tried to nicely explain, but wish now I had been more emphatic with Boortz.  

Given that voting for someone who may say they are peaceful, but decide to use force against others,turns voting into an  immoral act (Use of force by proxy). This  makes voting  bad enough. But voting for someone who clearly states, as Romney does,  they will use force, continue military adventurism all over the globe,  and thinks higher taxes, more drug war, more roundups of immigrants, Patriot Act and NDAA etc are Jim Dandy means it is even more immoral. 

So if you have not yet voted please
Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

Nolan Chart History

on Tue, 07/24/2012 - 15:27

Lynn Bloxham has had an article published over on the American Daily Herald site. It goes over the history of the Nolan Chart.

Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

A Dose of Principle

on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 16:29

In reference to: Regulate marijuana like wine.

The measure of a person's value of liberty is not how much liberty one desires for oneself, but how much liberty one is willing to allow others.


We of the Libertarian Party are certainly supportive and proud of Judge Gray. Before anyone knew who he was (outside the legal profession) Roger Bloxham as Orange County LP Chair, invited Judge Gray to be our guest speaker at the monthly meeting of the LP of Orange County. So many people showed up they stood on the lawn outside and we opened the windows so they could hear. I think about 200 showed up and room was crowded at 50 so it made quite an impression on the different press members attending. I believe and as I remember, Alan Bock introduced him and then David Nolan did the wind up thank you to Judge Gray for his courage in taking such an unpopular stand. Hard to believe both Alan and Dave are gone now. Many libertarians feel the void, but know they both would applaud Judge Gray's continuing courage. 
Libertarians can be immensely proud of the principled stand we and the few dedicated organizations who have focused so long on these issues, have steadfastly held. We took the moral high ground and stood firm even in the face of ridicule, and non support from the other political parties. Libertarians held firm while others have cared more for political popularity and were too narrow, cowardly and blind to see the unethical ramifications of their position.
Further, the libertarians have stood almost alone on the issue of self ownership and self determination that the federal policy destroys. Of course, in spite of a great amount of foresight on the future dangers of the War on Drugs, even libertarians could not foresee the enormous number of incarcerations here and the convoluted world wide damage this "War" has caused. Enormous praise to all those who have stood tall against this travesty and especially to all the libertarians and the LP for being the voice of reason and justice.
Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

Your Papers?

on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 16:38

This was the moment he had dreaded more than any other. Not the final digging and the worry he might have miscalculated and they would not emerge beyond the perimeter of the fence. Not the crawling for almost an hour on their bellies when every fiber in him strained to stand and run as fast as possible. Not the fear that they had the wrong farm house. Not even the long walk into the town, listening to every sound and hiding quickly when anyone passed who might be suspicious of two strangers. He did dread the further splitting up again as each must take a different route. But no, no moment was as dreaded as the command to present the official papers. Look calm, he mentally commanded. He deliberately relaxed his shoulders and feigned an air of indifference while the officer examined the forged documents. He felt the almost acid sweat on the back of his neck and the urge to wipe at it was almost overwhelming.

Though he looked more German than Bud, his German was poor, the accent not believable. Bud's German was better, so they each played a part. Bud jerked his head toward him and said to the guard in German, “Stutters bad, not too smart, but he works hard.” The guard glanced at him again. Joe smiled and nodded. Then he slouched a little and yawned. He hoped he looked as if his only concern was being bored and tired after a hard day's work.

While he waited he willed his mind to dwell on pleasant things as he had done so many times these past two years, in battle and in the prison camp. He thought of home and his wife Sue, Susie to him. Home, America. No pompous guards, no authoritative demands for papers, no prison camps. Joe and Bud had both noticed how the old farmer had trembled every time he glanced at the door. Then they noticed the door had been repaired. No, no more suspicious police, breaking down your door. No guards at every town road. No papers! Free to go across the whole of America if he damned well pleased! Home! Soon. Soon.


For those who remember the World War II era, we could hear the terror in people's voices as they related their frightening experiences. We watched movies, read the letters, post cards and books which made real to those who were spared that surreal time. We were horrified at the idea of the control the police and military “over there” exerted on the populace. (Many Americans did not realize the extent or even know of the Japanese internment camps). We knew of  some of the tragedies others experienced.

Even as children, we understood when guards asked for a person's “Papers” something dreadful could happen. Several generations of Americans held the memories of the horrors of totalitarian regimes and those memories became a part of our common heritage. This made the very idea of a National Identity Number and authorities with the power to demand one present papers, anathema to most Americans. So why are so many suddenly in favor of the idea? Why? Are the reality of those travesties no longer a part of our memories.

Those who normally want the State to stay out of the economic affairs of people, suddenly desire the most authoritarian implementation of control. The State has already accumulated an amount of power unimaginable to someone in the not too distant past. The encroachment of people's freedoms to move about, travel, drive, fly, is already highly restricted. Control over ingress is vaunted as desirable forgetting that walls limit everyone's egress as well.

New burdens on business are being encouraged, no, more accurately, some are begging the State to institute sweeping controls on private businesses with E Verify. Worse are the penalties and punishments for any business who even mistakenly hires an illegal. Businesses are raided and people rounded up like cattle and deported or held in internment centers with little concern for their well being. People who have said they stand for individual liberty, the sanctity of each human, the ideal of freedom that sets America apart, these very same people are clamoring for E Verify.

Make no mistake, E Verify is the same tactic used  to instill fear and obtain control upon which every authoritarian regime has solidified their power. It does not matter whether our “officials” are police, military or mild mannered women and men at one of the many Administrative Agencies. Neither does it matter if our papers are actually filed electronically and accessed by a small card all will be required to carry. The critical impact is the same; peaceful people are no longer free to go when and where they please without permission.

Those who claim they want to live in a country with a free market, where each person makes his own decision on buying and selling, working for a company or for themselves, are nodding yes to E Verify. When contradictions exist, check your premise suggested Ayn Rand. A Free Market must mean each employer makes the decisions to hire and fire and not the State.

Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

Public Schools: A System Too Big to be Salvaged

on Mon, 10/10/2011 - 14:52

While libertarians have many arguments against the core assumption that the state should determine how ones child is educated, something bigger has developed. The giant dinosaurs is now  past the point where its brain is big enough for its size.  The writing is on the wall for Internet and small personalized groups, all variations of home schooling and puts the responsibility back in the parent's lap. Exactly where it should have always remained.

Pulling so much power to the federal level, while consolidating more and more smaller schools into huge ones, may look good on the surface, but they have created a bureaucracy of huge proportions. Now this behemoth is unresponsive to the local administrations, dedicated teachers, concerned parents and worse, the student's obvious problems. The justification of consolidation was given that the larger entities provide greater opportunities. In reality there  are many avenues for children to get many opportunities and experiences and reap the benefits of the larger geographical area without the full time responsibilities of a huge enterprise funded by the taxpayer.

Though these monstrosities are unequivocally dysfunctional, those who desire a nationally controlled top down system, are ginning up the rhetoric against anything that changes the public education dynamic. They are positioning smaller neighborhood schools as racist. However, that is the direction things are edging toward anyway, and has nothing whatsoever to do with racism. Rather the return to smaller scale and more parental assumption of parental responsibility reflects the realities of cost, safety, administration difficulties, public sector unions and most important, obvious educational failures. The enormous impact and influence of Internet support for learning cannot be discounted. Soon parents will realize the huge school with a rigid schedule is simply not needed nor practical.

Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

Crossing the Line

on Tue, 09/20/2011 - 00:46

Perhaps like me, you also talk with many conservatives and find areas of agreements on Taxes, deficit spending, budgets etc. Also we usually have commonality on the Second Amendment and, most important, partial agreement on Property rights.

I am astounded, however on the positions many conservatives take on personal rights. About 15 years ago I rather accidentally stumbled on information that shocked me as to who was really pulling strings on anti immigration rhetoric, using falsified statistics and generally attempting to saturate the conservatives with anti immigration ideas. These manipulators are succeeding, and in the process Conservatives are harming their reputation and credibility. Worse because they claim to agree with libertarians on some issues, their anti immigration position harms us also, simply by association. Worst though of all is the damage done to hard working immigrants who come here to work, live, trade and live normal lives.

There are many more arguments I will be making in this series of articles and I have extensive information, from all the speeches and the radio shows I did earlier. However, if you have immigration information to add, I would appreciate it. This furthers my suggestion idea that we divide and conquer(not people but the amount of educational work ahead) each of us not trying to do everything, but choosing one area and becoming well grounded and spending the time to handle it well.

I had the opportunity to submit a series of articles, to an immigration sympathetic conservative editor to present the pro immigrant position to counter the other authors and most of their reader base. They accepted my articles. So, with my friend Becky Akers the two of us will attempt to offer, explain and perhaps persuade toward the freedom of movement which libertarians hold as a primary essential for this particular Ezine.

I hope you will not only go to the site but forward the link to friends who are sympatheitic to the libertarian positition...or even opposed to it.

Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

Center for Competitive Politics

on Fri, 08/19/2011 - 22:14

Taking advantage of the  opportunity of an out of town guest speaker who was in San Antonio for another event (and in spite of surgery) our energetic membership chair, Gil Robinson,  pulled together a stellar meeting. 

The president of Center for Competitive Politics, Sean Parnell was brimming over with pertinent information on First Amendment  battles.  The mission of the Center for Competitive Politics addresses challenges to political speech, assembly and petition. Though the Center is non partisan, libertarian's interests are closely aligned. 
The right to speech of all types, but certainly political speech has suffered greatly in recent years.  The right to political speech, assembly and petition appear many times,  to libertarians, to be ignored or even denied. Too often libertarians notice the  other parties and groups who should be defending these important rights, are trying to negate them.    Mislabeled causes, such as the "Fairness Doctrine" are supported by people who have not analyzed the issues  and weighed them against the First Amendment.   
In the face of immense unpopularity the Center has pressed forward to prevail in several major cases and been a consistent voice for the  importance of political speech. Ongoing efforts are to provide expert testimony to Congress and state legislators,  opposing efforts to limit campaign contributions and standing against  schemes for taxpayer funding of campaigns.  
They successfully represented in a major challenge to campaign finance restrictions. and stopped a congressional effort to limit grass roots advocacy.  
Recent legal efforts included filing amicus briefs in  major campaign finance cases such as McComish v. Bennet, Sampson v. Buescher, Citizens United v. FEC, Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc., San Juan County v. No New Gas Tax.

Writing, research and advocacy is on going in presenting the defense of  political speech.  

The informal dinner gave the attendees valuable information and a better understanding of the importance of current attacks on political speech.  It was also an opportunity to show appreciation for all the important work the Center for Competitive Politics accomplishes in  protecting political speech.
The Center for Competitive Politics
As a 501(c)(3),  donations are tax deductible. 
Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

Last Meeting

on Fri, 08/19/2011 - 18:13

Libertarian members and  guests were treated to two interesting speakers at their regular "Third" Tuesday meeting at the Lion and Rose.

Treasurer Bill Grisham presented what one could characterize as  a college course outline on libertarian political, economic and philosophical principles. He briefly covered each area and gave pertinent quotes from historical and present day thinkers and authors. Each area could have been a good springboard for extensive discussion. Those  who were unable to attend missed a thought provoking and well summarized talk.  
The busy night's agenda  also included guest presenter and Tea Party Member, Sharon Hall.  She spoke on the necessity of more involvement in the election day process. Mrs Hall  emphasized the necessity of poll watchers and judges for polling places. These poll watchers and judges perform a vital function. Their efforts lend oversight and encourage honesty on Election Day.  More poll watchers and judges are always needed. Though a small stipend is paid, basically it is a volunteer position.   Anyone can take the training  and then assist on election day with the various questions and problems that might arise.  Training classes are available.

After the formal meeting visitors were welcomed and introduced themselves to those gathered.  Certainly everyone enjoyed the after meeting conversations and the good food and drink. 
Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

Drug Re-legalization

on Wed, 08/10/2011 - 16:30

Tibor Machan and Mark Thornton have written a clear and concise article in support of drug re-legalization. They cover several areas that  should answer the  questions that are often raised when the subject of "The War on Drugs" is raised.  

Roger knew Tibor when he lived in California and enjoyed his unique take on many subjects back when "Libertarian Thought" was considered a part of the real fringe. I enjoyed meeting him, later, at several International Society for Individual Liberty conferences and had read his books so I was familiar with his perspective. I had enjoyed his wit on serious subjects and his ability to sometimes throw a curve ball at the end to stimulate thinking. 
In honor of Tibor's curve balls or unique twists in argumentation, I will throw out a curve ball. I will confess, here, publicly, that I have a terrible addiction.  
People rarely suspect it as I appear very normal and well past the age where people even suspect I have a  drug addiction. Yet my drug use  has often caused me problems and is quite damaging to me. I have tried will power, I doubt if the Betty Ford clinic will accept me, and worse, the price of my drug of choice is rising.  But as frugal as I am, I will spend our hard earned money to purchase my drugs.
I will even seek out my drug  when traveling and do not have my safer, familiar sources. I have  bought  some quite bad drugs that really made me sick. Did I  buy my drugs from seedy looking people doing business in less than desirable businesses and neighborhoods. Yes. Did I, in my eagerness to buy my drug do business in less than the clean and reputable places I would normally choose for my less guilty pleasures. Yes.
No one is very helpful as all my friends offer my drug to me... which I always accept gladly. I realize they are not responsible for my choices and I cannot blame them for my addiction as they do not realize they are enabling me. However, I am fortunate.
Coffee is not (yet) illegal.
Lynn and Roger Bloxham's picture

Rhetoric vs Principle

on Mon, 08/01/2011 - 15:29

Several friends of various political persuasion have frequently mentioned to us that there seems to be a similarity between libertarianism and the prevailing Republican and Democrat rhetoric. While libertarians do seem to bend over backward sometimes to point out differences in our philosophies, certainly  libertarians  would agree there are also similarities. 

Going through some "Conservative" Tea Party writings and some "further out than Democrat Party" blogs, there definitely are similarities between the Democrat's view of "the man behind the curtain" and the various Tea Party ideas of controlling banking cabals which certainly do exist. 

Though similar to libertarians ideas, libertarians are usually more concerned with exploring root causes of how and why these entities have gained power and how we can suggest these controlling entities can be made impotent. Most important would be reaching agreement with as many people as possible on the crucial issues we as libertarians think are paramount.
But first, the differences, particularly in rhetoric. The difference might be characterized as applying a broad brush vs. the specific. For example, many Democrats in their writings and speeches, are quite prone to characterize as evil any who protest their programs. They frequently expect acceptance of large government spending, high taxes and much larger government programs as highly desirable. In so doing the Democrats are looking at any problem and immediately default to advocating and expressing a  strident desire for a  strong government; a powerful state apparatus.
Similarly (from the libertarian perspective) the Conservatives and Tea Party people are usually strong on removing the state from the economic sector until they falter on two points. Many advocate, indeed accept without question, support for a large military with America serving as the world's policeman and are agreeable to many encroachments on personal freedoms in the name of security from "enemies."  Equally as disturbing to libertarians is that many seem to believe it is desirable and necessary for  the state to have the power to control individual personal decisions.
The Austrians and libertarians have a different take from the broad grouping of either of the two major parties. But as there is hope for a better grasp of issues, libertarians need to keep communicating. Three factors may encourage politicians and others to improve what libertarians think is a misreading of the issues and better all of us in our  understanding of the issues: 
  1. the availability of the internet for extensive self education and a wealth of information.
  2.  informed debate and increasingly  sensible people being heard in major media outlets.
  3. and the fact that it is becoming obvious that the libertarians have been "spot on" about issues for many years. 

Agreed that we libertarians sometimes find it difficult to be polite and patient with those who do not have logical thinking skills and who frequently suggest remedies that would be more damaging than the problem they desire to solve.  Though that does sound pompous, perhaps it is but, just maybe,  there is a justification for it.  

Many libertarians have been aware of the impending economic, social and international problems for years.  Even new libertarians are aware of the immense body of libertarian thought which has evolved for over a hundred years. Suddenly, these problems and concerns are in the news. And, just as suddenly, everyone is an expert and hastily forms an opinion. 

If one listens critically to most libertarians discussing political and economic issues a different tone and mind set usually becomes apparent. It is highly likely one will hear rational, logically constructed and carefully presented  observations and suggestions. 
Libertarians usually use a more thorough understanding of economics, history and philosophy to evaluate and weigh their ideas.
Rather than attack individuals or rail against particular wealthy supporters or corporations, as Democrats do  ad nauseam, or approve of further encroachments on individual liberty and expansions of the U.S. "Empire" as Republicans are prone to do. Libertarians draw a definite line between what is proper for the state to do (very, very little) and what should be within the sole purview of the individual.

Libertarians are concerned with the use and abuse of power. They analyze proposals in terms of whether they are consistent with honesty, justice and individual rights. Our non aggression principle and emphasis on the individual rather than the collective, volunteerist approaches rather than the use of force, assists us in seeing problems in a more objective perspective. We have been on this path for years and years.  Now our ideas are gathering momentum; there is no need to be strident.