Thanks to all two readers who have sent concerned emails asking if I am ok.

I am fine and just very busy with two new projects that are leaving me with very little time for browsing the blogosphere and offering my three cents here on E!!

The first project – RFC Radio – is the brain child of my All American Media business partner and dear friend Andrew Riley.  Ideally, he would do all the work and I would reap the benefits.  Alas, he says he needs me to help with the To Dos.  And check his spelling.  And help make Duane feel guilty for missing our conference call last week.  (there, I did it)

The second project is Nevada News Platoon. Apparently, in a fit of extreme congeniality during which I hallucinated that I have spare time and that I am independently wealthy and do not need to paid for my work, I agreed to be the volunteer editor of this soon-to-launched grassroots news and blog site.

The gist is that we will cover news and politics in Nevada from an openly conservative and/or libertarian perspective.  We will not advocate for political parties, but we will unapologetically promote free-market, small government policies.  And provide valuable information to Nevada citizens who would like to Do Something about the current sad state of affairs.

February 5th is the “soft launch” (that’s New Media talk for all you greenies) and then the ”hard launch” and related fanfare will be sometime in March.

If anyone wants to help, here’s what I need from the conservative and/or libertarian citizens, activists, bloggers, writers, media-gurus, and leaders in Nevada (choose the one that fits):

- Commit to visiting the News Platoon site weekly and signing up for our news briefs

- Comment on our blog posts and stories so we know what you think

- Forward select Platoon news items to help spread the word (at your discretion)

- Send me news tips and story ideas (now and on an ongoing basis)

- Keep me informed of all your interesting political and business activitites (this is your opportunity to share info or expertise that only you have and maybe shed light on things for the public)

- Write letters to the editor (me) when you are upset about something going on in NV

- Refer bloggers and citizen journalists to me as potential contributors

- Tell anyone who’s not reading us that they Should Be

I think that about covers it.

Oh - and if anyone figures out how to squeeze more hours out of the day, please let me know.

I’ve taken the Pew Research Center political spectrum test and others in the past, but this one is a little different.  This not only shows you where you are on the Left/Right axis but also charts you on the spectrum between Authoritarian/Libertarian.  (You’ll see what I mean after you take the test and have your “dot” plotted.)

You can also see where other famous and notorious persons fall on the chart, which is interesting in and of itself.  (For example, I would have thought I was sort of a Maggie Thatcher type, but it turns out I am way more libertarian than she.  I am at exactly the midpoint between the two extremes; she was more to the authoritarian side.)

I’d love to hear where everyone ends up (especially those of you I know either personally or via the blogosphere).  Takes 5 to 10 minutes to answer the questions and the results are instant.

UPDATE:  Getting lots of feedback that people are dissatisfied with the quality and/or clarity of the questions in the test.  The Venerable Mr. Crum says he came out a “centrist” on both the “x” and “y” axis – but rightly points out that on the issues he is often more to the right than me (who came out 6 squares right of center).

At a recent meeting of Nevada conservative and libertarian leaders it was interesting to note that although we each came from different points on the political spectrum and disagreed on some things, we found one general policy area in which we all agreed:  fiscal policy.  Namely:  free market, small (and transparent) government, low tax, balanced-budget approaches.

Stephen Spruiell blogged today from the Ron Paul festivities in Minneapolis-St. Paul.  He reported that after eloquently defending the 2nd Amendment (well worth defending), Jesse Ventura broached a controversial topic — “something that when I discuss it, I get attacked,” he said. “Something called 9/11.”

From all accounts, at every Ron Paul event this year, there have been a lot of people from this so-called 9/11 Truth movement.  Apparently today was no different. When Ventura brought up 9/11, these folks starting cheering and clapping. “ Why is it that when you ask questions about 9/11, it’s out-of-bounds?” he asked. “Why has the U.S. Department of Justice not charged Osama Bin Laden for 9/11?”

As Ventura continued to “ask questions” about what “really” happened on 9/11, Spruiell said the crowd started chanting, “9/11 was an inside job.” At one point, Stephen said it got so loud that Ventura had to pause for a few moments before going on. Many in the crowd were applauding Ventura throughout his talk on 9/11 (and to be fair some were looking on with dismay).

9/11 was an “inside job”………..?   Does any sane, rational person really believe that?  Are they all off their meds?  Or are they so paranoid and delusional that they are simply beyond the reach of modern psychiatry?

Message to 9/11 Truthers:  Put. The. Crack. Pipes. Down.

If Ron Paul actually believes this nonsense, or even if he just allows it preached at his parties for Effect and to please the lunatic fringe, I must say I have very little use for him.  Or for Jesse Ventura, either.  There is no place in our national dialogue for such Complete and Utter Nonsense.

(What a bunch of Noodles.)

Let’s be clear. This is a “movement” that originated at the highest level of powers in Washington. It’s a movement that, if successful, would benefit large oil companies and their rich executives far more than the average American consumer. It’s a movement with protests populated by paid staffers from industry-funded organizations. In short, there is nothing “grassroots” about it.

ROFL

Anyone who knows Eric “the Libertarian” Odom knows he is as anti-establishment as it gets.  He isn’t In with the Insiders in D.C. in any way, shape or form.  I’ll grant that Eric’s day job is a paid consultant for Sam Adams Alliance, but Eric blogs and Twitters on the side (and only WISHES he got paid to do it). 

Eric and Allen are two very enterprising individuals who threw up the Twitter tag, purchased the two #dontgo-affilliated domain names and built the dontgomovement.com website on their own dime and on their own time.  They were not paid by Big Oil fat cats, mythical “industry-funded organizations,” or Newt Gingrich.  The huge influx of Twitterers and bloggers happened because a lot of good citizens are angry about the lack of Congressional action on energy and were/are interested in what was/is happening on on the House floor…and the Twitter feed was/is the best way to follow the play-by-play.

Isn’t it interesting that the Left just cannot FATHOM the concept of a committed activist who isn’t getting paid and/or receiving some personal benefit for championing a cause?  Seems to me their accusations and protests are very revealing.  One wonders how many staffers at Open Left, Progress Illinois, or MoveOn.org would spend their own time and money trying to get something worthwhile done.  Not too many, I’m guessing.

So, anyhoo, just know that Progress Illinois got the story Wrong.  Not surprising, considering they never bothered to contact Eric and took their talking points from an outdated, debunked post on Open Left…which, by the way, continues to get the story wrong.  To borrow Open Left’s oh-so-sophisticated Slam-fest sum-up which simultaenously insists #dontgo is (1) backed by “the highest levels of power in Washington” and (2) “insignificant”:  whatever!   If Dontgomovement.com is so insignificant, why is the national media all over it – and why are you guys still writing about it?

(For those of you who do not know the whole back story, you can read my post from yesterday and/or catch Mary Katherine Ham’s piece in the Washington Examiner.)

Two Fridays ago, Madame Pelosi ajourned the House over GOP objections.  Dems sprinted for the door like kids on the last day of school.  The mics were silenced; the lights were unlit; the CSPAN cameras were killed.  Even so, a few GOPers who wanted a vote on offshore drilling refused to leave the Floor.  Rep. Culberson (R-TX) and Rep. Hoekstra (R-MI) started Twittering (mini-blogging) while Rep. Boehner (R-OH) addressed those still present and Rep. Blunt (R-MO) talked to reporters in the press gallery.

Meanwhile, back in Chicago, a couple of regular guys – Eric Odom and Allen Fuller - threw up the Twitter tag “#dontgo” so the mini-blog reports and emails coming in could be easily searched/tracked.  The tag was chosen to support the GOP hold-outs, as in “don’t go until something is done on energy.”  Reps and staffers started using #dontgo to call the action.  Though the CSPAN cameras were dead, some video of the goings-on was captured on Rep. Culberson’s cell phone and broadcast on qik.com. 

Word began to spread.  MoveOn.org got wind of the Twitter feed and started spamming with irrelevant messages – but rather than jamming #don’tgo, all the spam pushed the tag to the top of Twitter’s list.  (Rob Neppell has since created a low-on-spam version of the Twitter Stream so it is virtually spam free.)

As the Twitter community chirped on, Fuller purchased the domain name dontgo.us; Odom installed WordPress, created some graphics, and wrote some copy and petition (sign here!); and the two took the site Live and began sending out links.  Media forces like Media Lizzy helped Eric and Allen spread the word.  On Tuesday morning, encouraged by the momentum, the duo threw up a jazzier replacement website called Dontgomovement.com to serve as hub.  Thousands of hits started coming in and within a few hours, Eric was contacted by reporters from several major media outlets, including CNN.

The CNN story went live just after the site was opened up, and the story was followed by The Next Right, Red State, Politico, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, Washington Examiner, and scores of bloggers. This wave of attention sent more than 60,000 unique visits to the new site within 24 hours.  Eric has been swamped with emails and already has a good-sized (10,000) mailing list compiled.  The e-mail RSS subscriber list is about 1,200 strong and the #dontgo Twitter Army marches on.

And so it came to be that a couple of fast-on-their-feet guys planted a Twitter tag on Friday and by Wednesday, their new website had been slingshot into national media attention.  Bloggers and Twitterers and web publishers should take a page from that playbook.  This is the “New Media” at its best:  alert, agile and ready to fight the Giants.

 http://www.liberty-watch.com/volume04/issue04/trueconservative.php

I think we must stick with the traditional ingredients of cold-filtered Conservatism and persuade people - through the intelligent and passionate presentation of facts and ideas - that it is well worth preserving.

I’ve never bought into that “spoiler” rhetoric. More choices are better than less, no? 

Individuals ought to vote for the candidate they believe best represents them. A vote is a reflection of one’s values. Utilize the full range of potential choices in order to affirm what is closest to your values.

Movements are long-term.

More choices are better than less.  But is it really a “choice” when we don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of actually getting what we chose?  If a vote for Barr or Paul still gets us McCain or Obama, as we all know it does, what good was our principled selection?

And is the spoiler argument really just rhetoric?  In the Bush/Gore contest, Gore lost Florida (and the whole enchilada) because of the votes that went to Nader.  No doubt the Naderites were “voting their values.”  But what about the prudence of picking what’s better when you can’t have what’s Best?  I’d sure like to ask those Nader voters what they’d choose if they had a Do-Over. 

The argument that gives me greater pause – i.e. that I think is more compelling – is that of long-term vs. short-term thinking.  As we consider the coming decades, what will best stop our slide to the Left and the disturbing hyper-expansion of the State? 

Do we stand on principle and vote ultra-conservative or libertarian every two years, win or lose, with the hope of steering the GOP to the right and/or bolstering what might someday become a viable Third Party?  And if we don’t, what will compel anyone to consider our cause?

Please chime in and pass along this post so we can hear from more folks.  I’ll post the best remarks up front to spark further discussion!