Matt S.'s Comments

Enter Fred Thompson. Cue SLOW CLAP... by Rebecca L.

Jun 30, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 5

Matt S. Jul 30, 2007, 5:02pm EDT

Now I know what's missing in my life -- I have never had a SLOW CLAP moment!

I will try to learn how to induce such a moment by observing Fred Thompson next time he visits New Hampshire.

Oh, Elizabeth, just ignore her. by Rebecca L.

Jun 27, 2007 | rating: 9.7 | comments: 39

Matt S. Jul 30, 2007, 4:57pm EDT

"Coulter is the Lindsay Lohan of political commentators.....except there's no rehab for her particular predilection."

Just checking back in, Rebecca, and happy to see you're doing such a great job with the blogs! This comment is so deadly accurate that I'm sure to quote you on it. Well, I'll get back to my reading....

Homogeneity....the new Diversity. by Rebecca L.

Jun 7, 2007 | rating: 9.1 | comments: 38

Matt S. Jun 7, 2007, 6:43pm EDT

Rebecca,

Wow, this is a great article. As an independent/libertarian, I've often felt like an outsider in "normal" political discussions, but by Tuesday night I was truly impressed with the open-mindedness of my fellow bloggers. I suspect we really do want almost all of the same things -- we just disagree on whether or not government is the best mechanism to produce the desired social ends.

I'm incredibly glad to see people realizing how much similarity there is between the establishment of both parties. I used to be a "progressive" (until I started really studying economics and history), and I am all about building coalitions that unite progressives and libertarians against the excesses of government, like this one: nhcommonsense.org

Crap, now I need to write another article. :)

Does the Government Tell us What Language to Speak? by Matt S.

Jun 5, 2007 | rating: 7 | comments: 9

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 8:15pm EDT

Um... if the government passed a law saying we had to speak a certain language, would that have any effect whatsoever on what language you actually choose to speak?

I think it's just dumb to have a government-mandated official language. Naming English the official language (or not doing so) would have zero effect on any individual's life. The government is not there to tell us what words to use.

Infowars reporter arrested; Media blackout by Chris Caesar

Jun 6, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 33

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 7:23pm EDT

Nothing personal, by the way -- one reason this irks me so much is that it looks like some of these same guys are trying to hijack the Paul campaign with their "9-11 truth" message. Paul has never taken these radical positions -- he has merely criticized the government for withholding certain information, period.

Infowars reporter arrested; Media blackout by Chris Caesar

Jun 6, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 33

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 7:17pm EDT

Chris,

Have you looked at Lepacek's evidence? If not, why not investigate his claim instead of jumping to his defense? If his evidence is bogus, there is no excuse for supporting his right to harass a campaign staffer.

Legally, I'm not sure who had the ultimate right to revoke a person's press credentials. I heard CNN didn't want him arrested (understandable for PR reasons), but I'm also pretty sure they would support having him removed, especially after seeing the tape.

The Spin Room is only open to media who have the privilege of being granted press credentials. Nobody has a right to be there, only a privilege which can be revoked.

On the other hand, Goeas (no matter how big a jerk he is) does have the right to refuse any question at any time, just as infowars has every right to publicize that refusal. At the end of the day, voters decide.

Infowars reporter arrested; Media blackout by Chris Caesar

Jun 6, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 33

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 6:11pm EDT

I get what you're saying, man, but I'm sticking with my one limited assertion: Lepacek's First Amendment rights were not violated. (And that's coming from a libertarian).

Goeas did answer the question. He said he didn't know what the hell they were talking about, and that Lepacek should provide documentation for his question. Lepacek does not have a right to dominate the interview when there's a throng of reporters trying to ask their own questions.

There are legitimate ways for the 9-11 truth squad to raise their issues into the public consciousness. Harassing a campaign staffer in a room full of national media is the tactic this guy chose, and he deserved his fate -- which conveniently gives him something to scream about. I'm not jumping on the Matt Lepacek pity wagon -- he appears to be just another jerk trying to be a hero.

Infowars reporter arrested; Media blackout by Chris Caesar

Jun 6, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 33

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 5:11pm EDT

The guy succeeded in making his point, and will get attention for his issue, but Chris I think you are misinterpreting the First Amendment.

Lepacek had every right to ask the question, but once Goeas made it clear he wasn't going to answer, Lepacek did NOT have the right to intentionally cause a big scene in the press room. Once he started doing that, he was interfering with the many other reporters who were also asking questions. A press pass entitles you with the privilege of asking questions, not the right to harass somebody on private property where you are a guest. The police acted quite appropriately to remove him once it was clear he wasn't going to back off. Like it or not, Goeas has every right to decline to answer any question, just as infowars.com has every right to gripe about being declined.

As for the major media not covering the altercation, yeah, that's typical for any issue they don't want publicized. Fortunately, the internet has done an incredible amount to undermine corporate media in the last decade. Usually, the real bias isn't so much in the reporting itself as it is the selection of what is and isn't news.

(We have 2.3 million people in jail in this country, roughly half of whom haven't hurt anybody else, but that apparently isn't news...)

My Original Sin: I have a crush on a Republican by Rebecca L.

Jun 5, 2007 | rating: 9 | comments: 43

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 2:38pm EDT

Geez, why can't we post a link properly in a comment thread? I mean, would that be too much to ask?

My Original Sin: I have a crush on a Republican by Rebecca L.

Jun 5, 2007 | rating: 9 | comments: 43

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 2:36pm EDT

Paul can't hide from the fact that he was the Libertarian Party candidate for president in 1988 -- the fact that wins election after election in a conservative Texas district ought to demonstrate something... (BTW, Howard Stern is rarely mentioned in libertarian circles -- most of us think he's a pretty big flake).

If Paul manages to win the nomination, it will be because independents and especially "fed up" non-voters turn out to vote for him. 70% to 80% of Republican voters are still buying the whole "War on Terror" thing, so Paul's votes will have to come from outside the party base.

My recent column on one aspect of this subject: http://sendtherightmessage.com/ron_paul_explains_how_anti_prohibitionists_can_win_elections

Huckabee: Great Comeback to an Unfair Question by Matt S.

Jun 5, 2007 | comments: 3

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 2:23pm EDT

Chris, I don't support Huckabee -- just trying to be objective for a change. ;)

He's made a lot of strong statements on states' rights, so I can't wait to ask him what he'd do as president if a state voted to end Marijuana Prohibition (Nevada came close in 2006 with 44%, but national media deliberately ignored it).

Anybody interested in drug policy issues ought to check out my newest website at SendTheRightMessage.com

Does the Government Tell us What Language to Speak? by Matt S.

Jun 5, 2007 | rating: 7 | comments: 9

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 2:17pm EDT

Prison overcrowding?

My Original Sin: I have a crush on a Republican by Rebecca L.

Jun 5, 2007 | rating: 9 | comments: 43

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 1:59pm EDT

Rebecca, I can't tell you how happy I am to see this article and thread. (Nice meeting you, by the way).

As a Democrat, I expect you probably don't agree with reducing the size and scope of government (the essence of libertarianism), but I'm glad to see it isn't just fringe radicals who appreciate true principle in politicians.

FYI, over 200 people packed Murphy's Taproom to meet and cheer Dr. Paul after the debate. I've been around libertarian politics for a long time, and I've never seen anything like this level of excitement over a pro-liberty candidate. The message Paul brings has been nibbling at the edges of the American consciousness for quite a while now, but Paul's 7 minutes on The Daily Show was worth probably the equivalent of $10 million in campaign spending for the Paul campaign. (Not to mention it will surely help with fundraising...) And finally, with major help from the internet, a vehicle for libertarian ideas has finally broken through the media blockade:

Daily Show link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwzYLc5Bjis

Link to the home for Ron Paul excitement in NH: http://ronpaulhq.com/

Did Rudy Mean to Say Iran Shouldn't Create Electricity? by Matt S.

Jun 5, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 2

Matt S. Jun 6, 2007, 1:34pm EDT

Yeah, Rich -- right on.

My Mid-debate Interview with WMUR by Matt S.

Jun 3, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 3

Matt S. Jun 3, 2007, 11:38pm EDT

My pleasure, Arlene... but apparently I didn't even give them a usable quote in the interview, which didn't make the news. Oh, well... I always go for the homerun.

War, War, War... by Matt S.

Jun 3, 2007 | rating: 10 | comments: 2

Matt S. Jun 3, 2007, 11:27pm EDT

There's really no other way to slice it, Chris. I looked at Hillary Clinton tonight and saw a person I really don't want to be president. Not that this is a new feeling for me, but the strength of it tonight was new...

WMUR Blogging Competition Enters PHASE TWO by WMUR Moderator

May 21, 2007 | comments: 11

Matt S. May 30, 2007, 5:18am EDT

Dear Mod,

I couldn't resist the opportunity to edit a stray apostrophe from one of my two entries -- I should have known that would cause it to disappear from the WMUR group. Can you restore it?

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977004445

Thanks.

War on Drugs: The Next Big Campaign Issue? by Matt S.

May 19, 2007 | rating: 7 | comments: 19

Matt S. May 26, 2007, 9:18am EDT

What would we do with the revenue? Pay off the national debt, or start another war or three?

The way our government spends its money, I'm skeptical about giving it any more revenue. ;)

War on Drugs: The Next Big Campaign Issue? by Matt S.

May 19, 2007 | rating: 7 | comments: 19

Matt S. May 25, 2007, 7:31pm EDT

Polar opposites who are cosponsors of the 2007 Industrial Hemp Farming Act, polar opposites who have opposed the War in Iraq since long before it started...

Did you happen to watch the hour-long special with Ron Paul and Scott Spradlin on WMUR? Ron Paul told the studio audience he considered Kucinich a good friend of his, and that he greatly respected him.

I think the two are a very good model of how progressives and libertarians should work together when they agree, and seek to understand each other when they don't.

War on Drugs: The Next Big Campaign Issue? by Matt S.

May 19, 2007 | rating: 7 | comments: 19

Matt S. May 24, 2007, 9:14pm EDT

Good posts, James and Steve!