"The Official Portrait of Miss InDiana"

"The Official Portrait of Miss InDiana"
aka "Miss Victory"

Tuesday, March 4, 2008

NOW that I've got your attention...

I knew yesterday's editorial would get you all unglued and uncomfortable and that was my goal. Thanks for all the comments. I love them! Unfortunately getting unglued and uncomfortable is sometimes what is necessary to get people to consider new ideas and take action in new directions. Sorry, if you think it is "dark" there. It really isn't. It's just scary to you because it is new. I promise it won't hurt a bit.

Libertarians don't hold national office because people are afraid to go down new paths, they don't pay close attention to the issues, and it takes a lot of energy (money) to educate the masses to try new paths. It also doesn't help that there is great opposition out there that doesn't want to let go of power. Good thing George Washington did not think that way or we would be living in a monarchy.

But you know what? The Libertarians are not going away, are not going to be bullied, and they will get more and more votes in Indiana with each election because each day more and more people wake up to realize that the Libertarians really are principled. The most conservative among the Libertarians tolerate and accept even people like me.

Just because something isn't happening yet, does not mean that thing that is not happening is not good for us. For instance, because powerful people that control the fossil fuel industry don't want to give up their power, we don't get the abundant free energy all around us because they block the technology every way they can. The technology exists. There is even infinite free energy from the vacuum. Because we are still hooked on fossil fuel, does that make it the best path for us?

I think Elrod is a great guy. I like listening to him talk. I like his sincerity. I genuinely really like everything I've seen from him. And I also think Elrod is selling us all out.

If Elrod is elected to Congress, we are NOT going to have his vote in the statehouse during the last week of the the legislative session when the big things get done. And that's lousy for me, the taxpayer, because he is a pro-repeal fiscal conservative, social moderate and that's the voice I want heard doing my business at the statehouse.

There is nothing dark at all about what I wrote, for it is the truth. How can truth be dark? The real dark and lonely place is the closet! There ARE a lot of closeted people inside the statehouse that cannot live true to who they are as individuals because of the overwhelming fear of judgment. That's not healthy. And if there is anyone out there that knows about judgment, I do. I also understand that most people never self-actualize because of the judgment of others and never advance out of the esteem needs within the hierarchy of human need. This means that their ultimate human need to actualize, is threatened.

Yes, people are losing their homes. Our government is threatening our physical needs of shelter and our safety needs which are the most vital of human needs. My position is that our politicians' policies should not hinder the ability of the individual to self actualize by threatening any of our human needs on our path to ultimately create and experience our actualization.

We need Elrod in the statehouse to make sure he's doing all we can to protect our physical need for shelter. We need the republican party to refuse to let religious zealots hi-jack the party, who via condemnation and judgment, force people to live in closets of fear and shame, petrified to express their true selves for fear of losing their entire life. Let the zealots start their own party if they want government and religion mixed!

These crusading judging zealots aren't converting people to Christ with their policies or protecting Christians. Politicians use religion in government because they seek power and for no other reason. That's why I was used by Bart Peterson, so that he could maintain power...even at the expense of my well-being, my livlihood, my privacy, and my property. The politician Bart Peterson severely threatened every level of my basic human needs on December 1st 2005.

My work on this planet is about advancing the actualization of the individual. So whether I see physical needs attacked or esteem needs attacked by giant forces, I speak up. That's the great thing about living in America, I can do that.

Don't not vote for the Libertarian because of what I say. I'm simply giving you my take on things from my experience. There's room for all freedom minded, fiscal conservative, constitution lovers in the Libertarian movement, even devout Christians like Andy Horning and dominant women like me.

Make up YOUR own mind about each candidate based on what you hear in the debates. I'm not part of the Libertarian's campaign nor is what I think, write, and do endorsed by Sean Shepard.

If you truly feel Elrod is the best qualified, and you don't mind missing out on his fiscal conservative vote during that critical final week of the state's legislative session, then vote for him.

If you want to support Carson and like the idea that his campaign is paid for by union special interest money he accepts from outside the 7th district, that he wants to force a minimum wage on employers to $12 per hour, that he's endorsed by Louis Farrakhan, that he accepted a marketing position with municipal contractor Cripe Architects right after getting on city council, that he graduated 88th out of 89 in his law enforcement training class, or that he went along with covering up his late grandmother's illness leaving us without representation for months, then vote for Carson.

I am reminding you though that the two party system made decades of decisions that resulted in bankrupting our nation, our state, and our cities. The Libertarian candidate is the one that told you that our federal debt puts each Amercian household $450,000 in debt and it is growing daily. If you want to stop the bleeding, then we have got to take a different path and we have got to take it now or we shal get even more of the same.

I ask you to consider long and hard doing something different, just this once, to see what happens in the next nine months. Give yourself permission to experiment and see what happens in this country when we send in a Libertarian for the first time. I promise it will not be earth shattering, afterall we're all still here even though the 7th district has not had representation for more than six months.

Won't it be exciting to watch what happens when Indiana is first to send in a Libertarian? It's our big chance to shake up the status quo that is grossly failing our beloved nation.

Send this message to 10 friends, please. And express yourselves freely in the comments section.


Anonymous said...

So your previous entry about a gay guy and elrod was just an attention getter? That's just plain manipulation at other's expense. No one is taking you seriously with these ramblings of a twisted Libertarian philosophy and you've done a disservice to those campaigning as a Libertarian. If Shepard, Kelter, and Horning are as twisted as this, for pete's sake...sound the alarm and vote for Rs or Ds. what happened about the issues of 'fair tax'.

Anonymous said...

Libertarians would have been better served by not trying to pressure voters to accept a political party, when actually it is a movement of ideas of liberty. Better to integrate into the 2 party system and change from within through ideas instead of taking decades just to get there with a third party. We don't have that kind of time. Best of luck

Anonymous said...

9:54...what's twisted? What's manipulation. I'm shaking you from your sleep.

If we do nothing, we get nothing.

One of many reasons I want Sean Shepard to win this election because he IS going to co-sponsor HR 25 (The FairTax) and is very knowledgable on the subject since he was one of our FairTax directors.

Of all the candidates, Sean Shepard represents most what this blog represents. Never forget, when he found out I was organizing people for a press conference on the 4th of July...Sean was right there to help channel the anger into discussion about SOLUTIONS!

Sean poured over outdated state budgets (which is all he could get at the time) and spent countless hours crunching numbers to see how different taxation methods could work.

Sean even helped us get a copy of an economic study to implement a version of the FairTax in Indiana to the Governor BEFORE that first press conference rally on the July 4th.

Where were Elrod and Carson?

This is history you need to know about Sean Shepard if you care about the REAL issues!

I am ALARMED that only one media outlet showed up when Sean Shepard held a press conference to talk about the very serious issue of David Walker's resignation as comptroller of the U.S. and the FDIC's announcement that at least 100 U.S. banks are going to fail in the next year.

So, if in order to get you guys to look at these hyper-critical issues facing our nation, I have to first talk about something sensational to get your mainstream-media-trained-attention, then so be it.

There are worse things...like losing your home to government abuse of taxpayers.

Anonymous said...

She's got a point about integrating into the 2-party system. The R's did allow the religious right to hi-jack things and created an environment of distrust. They did not choose to prevent it. They let Karl Rove have his way so the republicans could give us George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Rumsfeld.

We weren't in too bad of shape until those Republicans controlled things federally for 8 years.

Anonymous said...

If Elrod wins we lose his vote in the general assembly.

Anonymous said...

i like to be shaken, not stirred

Anonymous said...

Melyssa has a point. We have everything to gain and nothing to lose by electing Sean Shepard to go to Washington for us for the remaining nine months of this term.

I am curious if this election will continue to push the American political landscape toward reform.

I heard no one say Shepard is not the best candidate and that is because no one in good conscience can say that.

I'm going to vote for Shepard and rethink Elrod for Congress again for the November election.

Anonymous said...


I think rather that third party candidates rarely hold office because our system of voting precludes almost any other outcome.

The two party system is well entrenched and is not likely to go away anytime soon. There are reasons for that, which seem to have been stronger than the founders' aversion to having political parties. Except for a very specialized exceptions, that will likely mean that Libertarian candidates will fail to acquire offices in most cases into the foreseeable future.

Be that as it may, a Libertarian party might begin to become influential only when it might find a way to replace one of the existing parties.

If the Libertarian party wants to change the status quo, then they need to devise some strategy to take advantage of splintering in existing parties. If there is an issue that citizens are drawn strongly to, and one that tends to divide an existing party (or better parties) into irreconcilable factions, and is an issue that Libertarians also feel strongly about, then the Libertarians need to take advantage of that and convince a faction that it is the Libertarians who can best address said issue.

If the Libertarians could argue successfully, then one of the existing parties will fracture and the Libertarians would become one part of the two party system. Currently, it appears that the Republican party would be a likely target for an attempt at such a strategy. Limbaugh telling his listeners to vote for Hillary is a fracture, or a sign of the Apocalypse. Whether or not Libertarians are able to take advantage of this on a national level is debatable, especially if they woo the wrong faction. Historically, third parties have to overcome both natural human resistance to change and the inevitable storm of criticisms that would surely be leveled by those in jeopardy of losing their own political base of power.

Nice person, "best" candidate, or whatever other label one might wish to apply doesn't matter so much, if that person isn't part of the existing political structure. The US system simply doesn't account for it, and hoping that it will seems to me to simply be wishful thinking.

Anonymous said...

Varan...You know I think you are one smart cookie. And you have a good strategy.

However, that takes a long time and this country doesn't have that luxury.

I'm approaching it the only way I know how and that is by directly confronting people with their fear of change by walking them straight into their perception of their limits with a promise that nothing bad will happen.

Anonymous said...

"Our patience will achieve more than our force."

Edmund Burke

Anonymous said...

to: varingan
you might agree with the earlier comment 10:07 am.
I agree with you. better to take reform ideas to washington DC thru the vehicle of an existing party, instead of trying to convince people already apprehensive of another party. The LP was established 35 yrs.ago and is successful in several local offices, due to the persons themselves; not the party. People are spending wasted energy on trying to convince other people of something short on substance and long on rhetoric. reminds me of obama. The quickest way to bring back constitutional ideas is to work with colleagues to change their way of thinking. You can't do that if you forfeit the usual way there. If you want to visit outer space, go in a traditional rocket, or spend the rest of your life building a flying saucer and never getting there.

Anonymous said...

Give yourselves permission to get outside the box for just a quick look around by doing something different than you usually do in this "special" election.

Remember how much fun it was when we worked together and got Ballard into office. We made national news and accomplished what everyone said was IMPOSSIBLE!

Don't you think we can do the "impossible again"? Have you so little faith in yourselves?

Imagine if Bill Gates, Thomas Edison, Einstein, or a host of others with enlightened new ideas did not experiment outside the box to see what would happen.

This election is only for nine months...the same nine months we would have been stuck with Julia Carson anyway.

Don't scare people into thinking that the world is going to come to an end if we vote for Shepard, the best candidate. It simply will not stop spinning.

If it should happen that Carson wins, we can collectively get rid of Carson once and for all...TOGETHER...in the fall just like we took care of things last November.

We did it by working TOGETHER.

The Libertarians feel they deserve this win and are not going to stop. There are things being done behind the scenes that are moving lots of votes to Sean that don't blog. People that aren't even on your radar.

The best choice is to vote Libertarian, for if you do not, then you stealing votes from Sean Shepard who should win.

Had it not been for the Libertarians (me, Rutherford, Shepard, and Horning) who started the tax protests in Meridian Kessler, and subsequently campaigned so hard for change by supporting the Republicans, do you think the council would have changed to Republican majority and we would have Ballard today?

The Libertarians deserve this win for a couple reasons. We created the protest platform, the contentious city council protests, and helped to sell the idea of new leadership in Indianapolis and wildly succeeded.

We also deserve this win because we have the best candidate.

But most of all, the people deserve a breath of fresh air and hope...hope who is beholden to no one but the people and the constitution.

Give yourselves permission to have the impossible again. Just do it and see.

Diana Vice said...

Don't let any of the negative comments discourage you. You've done so much to defend taxpayers against government waste and abuse, and you've been such an encouragement to others. Keep up the good work! We can't get distracted with petty disagreements. There's too much at stake.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote:

"We weren't in too bad of shape until those Republicans controlled things federally for 8 years."

And wasn't it Bill Clinton who signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law? Yes, yes, I'm certain that's true.

Oh, and wasn't it the same Bill Clinton who said that, as President, he would end the ban on gays in the military, only to turn tail and instead give LBGT soldiers "Don't ask, don't tell?: Yes, yes, I'm certain that's true.

Please, continue with how Republicans did all this without the assistance of the Democrat president.


Anonymous said...

this idea of personally claiming credit in nearly every blog entry is self indulgent. you've lost yourself outside the issues. you must have low self-esteem. did you hear the abdul channel blasting you this morning?

Anonymous said...

AR you continue to twist history. Clinton generated surpluses, and was erasing the deficit. Tax rates on the very wealthiest were higher, and somehow, business boomed. So much for your voodoo, errrrr.... supply-side (sorry) economics. The country was in much better shape under a Democratic president even with an obstructionist Congress than it is after 8 years of a disgraceful Republican president.

Anonymous said...

This blog has turned tabloid. Not one comment, including this one, has anything to do with the issues of homeowners risking the loss of their property. Arguing over philosophy and with each other is counterproductive. We need a new blog to get back to the issues. If this is the way Libertarians behave, count me out.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote:
"AR you continue to twist history. Clinton generated surpluses, and was erasing the deficit. Tax rates on the very wealthiest were higher, and somehow, business boomed. So much for your voodoo, errrrr.... supply-side (sorry) economics. The country was in much better shape under a Democratic president even with an obstructionist Congress than it is after 8 years of a disgraceful Republican president."

I didn't twist anything. What did I write that was factually or historically inaccurate?

I'm waiting.


Anonymous said...







Anonymous said...

good for you. don't manipulate the rest of us. keep society free.

Anonymous said...


You responded to the charge: "We weren't in too bad of shape until those Republicans controlled things federally for 8 years." You gave two examples of mistakes President Clinton made. If that's all you have, you don't got squat.

Anony was right: we were not in too bad a place. Who would not want to go back to 1999 if we could and replay these last 8 years?

Your boy W destroyed thousands of American lives, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, our international reputation, our economy, the surpluses of the Clinton years, our civil rights, undermined our Constitution and the rule of law. etc. etc.

And you go to the Clinton on don't ask don't tell card and you think we're better off now? Your anger is blinding your thought. Think it over. You're welcome back to the Democratic Party anytime. We'll keep waiting.

Anonymous said...

boo hoo. get out the crying towel.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote:
"And you go to the Clinton on don't ask don't tell card and you think we're better off now? Your anger is blinding your thought. Think it over. You're welcome back to the Democratic Party anytime. We'll keep waiting."

Let me put it another way: our nation's men and women who wish to serve, and potentially die for, our country, ought to be able to serve openly. Period.

As I recall, when Clinton had the chance to get bin Laden, he didn't. When our embassies were atacked, when the Cole was attacked, what did Clinton do? Not much, as I recall - perhaps a few missiles here and there.

You talk about the great economic stuff he did. That would not have happened without the assistance of the Republican controlled Congress from 1995 through the rest of his term. And when he had a Democrat majority his first two years in office, he wasn unable to get universal health care.

Please, spare me how great and rosy everything was with WJC was president. Yes, the current president indeed has many deserved negatives - no question here. But he isn't the anti-Christ you all make him out to be, nor is WJC the saint you would claim he is.

And, for the record, I'm not a Democrat. I've never been a Democrat and, frankly, can't ever see myself becoming one.


Anonymous said...


You think W's been good for the country? are we better off now, in his last year, than we were in Clinton's last year? And *nobody* said Clinton was a saint. But somehow he steered the economy -- at higher tax rates -- through tough times, and built a long bull market. And Americans were not dying and killing (with some very important exceptions) in foreign lands.

Face it: the last 8 years, with W at helm, have been one long national nightmare. He's made the worst foreign-policy blunder in our nation's history. It will take tens of years to undo the damage he has wrought. He has no respect for the civil liberties upon which our country was founded, and has said so.

From the sounds you make about gays in the military, your home is in the party that is committed to non-discrimination: the Democratic Party. It's your ideological home, even if you don't realize it. It's the authentic big-tent party. And we'll wait.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote:
"From the sounds you make about gays in the military, your home is in the party that is committed to non-discrimination: the Democratic Party. It's your ideological home, even if you don't realize it. It's the authentic big-tent party. And we'll wait."

I subscribe to Goldwater's theory: you don't have to be straight to shoot straight.

I'm a Republican. I have been my entire life. Moderate, yes, but a Republican nonetheless. I subscribe to the principles of the party before conservative Democrats took over it. Liberty. Freedom. Government out of the bedroom. Protection against discrimination.

Democrats are the big tent party? I seem to recall Democrats being the ones who opposed civil rights legislation in the 1960s. I'm also sure it was a Democrat governor who stood on the steps of the school to prevent integration.

No, I'm no Democrat.


Anonymous said...


You can't seem to get the idea that parties shift over time. Southern Democrats did oppose the Civil Rights Movement in the 50's and 60's. Northern Democrats championed it. Conservatives opposed it. And Conservative Democrats didn't take over the Republican party: religious ideologues did.

Conservatives still oppose equality for GLBT's in the armed forces and beyond. And their home is the Republican party. Look at the SJR7 debate and the religious fundamentalists. You pine for a Republican Party circa Lincoln. It still exists: it's the Democratic Party of today.

At the end of the day, how can you support a Republican party that is so hostile to the values to which you profess to believe?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote:
"You pine for a Republican Party circa Lincoln. It still exists: it's the Democratic Party of today. "

Yes, I do, because the party of Lincoln is the true Republican party, not that bastardized version that Jerry Fallwell, Pat Robertson, Ralph Ralph Reed, and Eric Miller have given us.

But to see that the Democrat party is really the party I long for is a gross misstatement. When you quit trying to take more of my tax dollars, maybe I'll listen to you. I'm all for helping give a little to (a) fund the government and (b) help those who need it. But the Democrat party wants to punish success, and that is NOT a virtue of the Republican party for which I "pine."


Anonymous said...

AR: it's easy to see why you're angry. Angry that the Republican party has morphed into the Democratic party, despite your entreaties.

And the Dems don't punish success. They want a fair, open, society, where people don't die in the streets. Services cost money: police, prosecutors, defense attorneys, lights, water, streets, national defense, schools, etc. etc. You're fine paying some taxes, apparently. You just -- like lots of other selfish types -- don't like how much you're paying. Get over it. The only Republicans these days are country club types, religious fundamentalists, and dupes. Which are you?

Anonymous said...

I work two jobs. My wife works one. Collectively, we make less than 100,000 a year. We have two children and live in a reasonably modest home.

Are we considered wealthy? The Bush tax cuts benefit us - but are we wealthy or upper class? No.

Why am I paying taxes to give subsidies for spinach farmers? Why am I paying taxes so someone can propose using them to create a Woodstock museum?

It isn't about "getting over it." And I am not any of the Republicans you have mention.

You have failed to address the issue of taxes; your only defense is to "get over it." That, sir or madam, will not advance your argument.


Anonymous said...

Yes you are: you're a dupe. You believe in the Rep. rhetoric, and you refuse to admit the cost of living in a free society.

What's that slogan your party-mates (and video games) sling around? "Freedom isn't free"?

And aren't you a government employee? Don't believe schools should be funded?

Face it: it's in your economic self-interest to vote Dem. You're ideologically a Dem. Lincoln, if alive today, would be a Dem. But you drank the Kool-Aid. Pat Robertson prays for more like you. Wall Street chuckles at you and your ilk, and prays you don't wake up.

(please, wake up)

Anonymous said...

To 5:31 AM,

No, Lincoln would not be a Democrat of today. George B. McClellan would, but then he was a Democrat then too.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote:
"Don't believe schools should be funded?"

Yes, I do. I never suggested otherwise.


Anonymous said...

redistribution? I'm shocked, shocked, that you A'est of R's, would go on the record for such a socialist plan.

Schools should be funded. So should police. Fire departments. Roads. BMV. etc. No doubt you can find some governmental waste -- but it's better than the anarchic alternative.

Keep voting with Pat Robertson. Way to think it through.