The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets

I'll believe it when I see it...

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Oh this is terribly rich -- and funny.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Two years ago, Augustus Sol Invictus walked from central Florida to the Mojave Desert and spent a week fasting and praying, at times thinking he wouldn't survive. In a pagan ritual to give thanks when he returned home, he killed a goat and drank its blood.

Now that he's a candidate for U.S. Senate, the story is coming back to bite him.

The chairman of the Libertarian Party of Florida has resigned to call attention to Invictus' candidacy in hopes that other party leaders will denounce him. Adrian Wyllie, who was the Libertarian candidate for governor last year, says Invictus wants to lead a civil war, is trying to recruit neo-Nazis to the party and brutally and sadistically dismembered a goat.

It's an awkward situation for the small party that's trying to gain clout.

Hahahaha.... oh that's why Adrian resigned eh?  C'mon Adrian, cut the crap.

This is the well-justified comeuppance for a party that lost its view of what it really stood for quite some time ago.  I ought to know -- I was part of it for a while and resigned in disgust after the state party endorsed Gary Johnson for President, a man who wasn't very Libertarian and who famously stated nobody committed any crimes when it came to the financial crisis.

Oh really, nobody committed any crimes eh?  At the time I put forward a scrolling list of crimes.

Of course the so-called Libertarian Johnson did more than just that.  He also refused to engage on the medical monopoly issue, despite the fact that there are even more crimes found there!

It may be true that the Republicans and Democrats have no principles that matter; they simply run whatever puppet is convenient.  But the Libertarians try to claim they're different; sadly, they're not.

What Sol Invictus has done is thrown this in the party's face in such an outrageous and blatant fashion that it exceeded any thinking individual's tolerance.  But the seed of this disease in the Florida Libertarian Party goes back a hell of a long time, far longer in point of fact, it appears, than the 2012 campaign.

I left the party after attempting to put a stop to this crap by insisting that the party live to its principles and failing to carry the day in that regard.  Adrian himself got involved in his own little game of not really Libertarian, in my opinion, with his driver license screed in which he "refused" to renew his license over Real IDinstead of arguing that he had a right to travel and one cannot force licensing of a right.  There's actually case law precedent on this point, albeit very old case law, but to my knowledge it has never been cited and then overturned.

Instead Adrian did the politician thing and argued that it is "unjust" (e.g. unconstitutional) to be forced to positively identify oneself to obtain said "license."  As I pointed out to Adrian at the time this was a stupid line of attack because if one accepts that the government may license travel by the means common in the present day for non-commercial personal conveyance of one's person and effects, in other words that is not a right but a privilege that the government may grant (because it owns that right and thus may delegate it as it sees fit), then you lose instantly because there is a compelling state interest in being able to prove that only persons eligible to exercise said privilege are granted said license!

In short as I've argued many times a right cannot be subject to license or permit; the two are polar opposites.  You are granted a license or permit to do a thing otherwise prohibited.

The Libertarians have utterly failed in this regard in that their statement of principles and alleged party platform are clear yet they use mealy-mouth words such as "should" instead of "must" and "shall."  This in turn gives rise to the sort of twisted argument-by-expedience, and thus a refusal to demand that candidates adhere to the party principles or be disavowed.

It is a fact of law that one has only one means by which you can prevent someone from running on a given party ballot in this state, and that is to primary said person and beat them.  If you cannot manage to muster enough people, enough money and enough support to do that then anyone can show up on your ballot whether you like it or not, and that's exactly what happened.

The party got what it had coming to it in the form of Sol Invictus; sometimes it takes a while for the cosmic wheel of karma to come around, but it nearly always, given enough time, does.

Goodnight Gracie.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

2015-10-06 10:04 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 309 references

This is an outrageous story:

The travesty imprisonment of Orville “Lee” Wollard will continue, with the blessing of Gov. Rick Scott. Last week, Scott cast the decisive vote to keep Wollard locked up for firing a warning shot after being attacked in his home by his daughter’s boyfriend. Police said the boyfriend ripped the surgical stitches from Wollard’s abdomen.

The 60-year-old first-time offender has already served about seven years of a mandatory 20-year term. A Polk County jury had convicted him of shooting into a dwelling and aggravated assault with a firearm.

A charge of child abuse was included because the boyfriend of Wollard’s daughter was 17 at the time of the incident, in 2008.

Curiously, the same prosecutor who’d originally offered Wollard a deal of five years’ probation (with no prison time) told the state clemency board on Wednesday that Wollard should stay behind bars after all this time.

So let's look at what we have here.

A man was attacked in his home by his daughter's boyfriend.  That alone is sufficient, assuming he believed the threat was credible (and it appears he did), to shoot him dead.  Indeed, the record shows that the boyfriend did inflict serious bodily harm (the threat thereof being the threshold for the use of deadly force.)

Instead of shooting the boyfriend he discharged the weapon into the wall.  For this he was charged with use of a firearm in the commission of a felony (shooting in/into an occupied building) and child abuse (since the daughter was not 18) and under Florida's mandatory sentencing law for firearms offenses he was incarcerated for 20 years (since he discharged the weapon.)

The stupidity of the way this law was applied is obvious on its face.  Nonetheless, this is what the law allowed at the time (it has since been fixed, incidentally, however that fix was not retroactive.)

Governor Scott just confirmed that he lacks the mental acuity of an ant, as the law was clearly misapplied in this case.  Florida's 10/20/Life law is a good law in the general sense, but that doesn't mean it cannot be misapplied.  All laws can be misapplied; we would hope that when legislators write them they avoid that through careful construction but since laws are made by men and passed by men this sort of error does occur.

Enter two groups of people who are supposed to prevent this.  The Prosecutor is the first one.  Where are the people in this county and why aren't they picketing that bastard's home and office?

Second, however, is the jury.  Despite what you are told when you are called to Jury Duty your job is to judge the totality of the situation before you.  That's why we have juries in the first place; there is no need to weigh evidence when it is incontrovertible, and often it is.  Indeed, in today's world of cameras and audio recorders it is frequently the case that there is no dispute over what happened at all; there is in fact a record of it in a form that, absent tampering, is known with a fair degree of certainty.

The fact is that your job doesn't end there as a juror despite what the Judge will tell you.  Your job includes judging whether the charge leveled against the defendant is appropriate given the circumstances of the alleged offense.

In other words your job is to determine if a breach of the peace has occurred, not simply if a violation of a "law" has occurred.

Laws are made by men.  Men commit errors.  They commit errors both in declaring something illegal that is not because it violates one's unalienable rights (which no man, and no government, may rightfully infringe) but also in applying a law that was written for one purpose to another either through ignorance, stupidity or malice.

This prosecutor disgusts me.  But what's equally disgusting, if not more-so, are the citizens of Polk county who condemned this man to prison for what appears to be a facially-incorrect application of a law intended for violent criminals to a man who was being attacked in his own home.

Do you live in Polk County?  If so then you have a responsibility to right this wrong.  You are responsible for this Sheriff (you elect him), you pay the taxes that support this county government including the prosecutor's office and you imprisoned this man unjustly.

You did that.  He didn't do it, you did it.

It is your responsibility to fix it and that responsibility rests in each and every one of you.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Now about those so-called "scientists" that want those who do not believe the "climate narrative" prosecuted -- can we go after them under 42 USC 1983 and 18 USC 242 for attempting to deprive persons of their rights under color of law?

A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.
A former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.

He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.

He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climate’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.

It turns out the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.

Do you know why science requires (1) the publication of your raw data, (2) the publication of all the manipulations, constants, formulas and other transformations you do to your data, (3) the publication of your methods (that is, your means of collection of data, how you decided what data to collect, etc) and your analytical process?

It's for exactly this reason -- and what's better when the IPCC models are re-run with this clear error repaired the lack of correlation with the prediction and actual results disappears.

And guess what: Global warming now looks to be caused by.... exactly what I have been saying was the cause.

So, the new improved climate model shows CO2 is not the culprit in recent global warming. But what is?

Dr Evans has a theory: solar activity. What he calls “albedo modulation”, the waxing and waning of reflected radiation from the Sun, is the likely cause of global warming.

Yes, which was something that I noted immediately when I started looking at the actual data: global temperatures had a very high correlation with observed solar activity which we have a very good record of going back hundreds of years because it was very easy to observe without modern scientific equipment.  We thus have direct observations of same and records of same.  They correlate, with a fairly deterministic (that is, fixed) lag time, to global temperatures.

CO2 does not which means you need to postulate a model that does not square with what we know about the physical properties of carbon dioxide.


View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Seriously. Unless you have $500 to blow on a speculative emergency item, you should die.

Note that the purchase is speculative because (1) the drug expires, and (2) you don't know if you'll need it.  But if you do need it, and don't have it, you're ****ed.

Now here's the ball-buster: These pens were $18 a year ago.

Most people (even the very poor) can scrounge up $18 for a speculative purchase such as this, especially when it might save their life if they need it.  Yes, it's low odds you will need it but if you need one of these you need it now, not in a few minutes or hours.

So how did this happen?  The drug in these things is not on patent, but our system of government has made it possible for a handful of manufacturers to form an effective monopoly and then raise the price by 2,500% -- 25 times what it used to cost just a year ago.

Oh by the way, if you are an EMS department you can still buy a vial with 1mg of the drug (3 doses, approximately) for $4.13.  A syringe costs pennies (diabetics use them daily.)  So why can't you simply buy both and keep them around?  Because of the scammers in the medical industry that advocate for, and got passed, laws that make it illegal for you to do so.

Why isn't this the issue in our political system right now?  Why isn't everyone involved in this crap under indictment for violations of the Sherman and Clayton Acts?  Why aren't you in the streets insisting that this garbage be stopped across the board and those who refuse or resist be indicted, prosecuted, convicted, imprisoned and asset-stripped to their underwear.

Come talk to me about all the other things you want to argue over in the political realm when -- and only when -- this has been addressed.  This (monopoly-related pricing in the medical industry) is the only issue that bears on the budget, the issue that bears on your household disposable income and the issue that will, if we don't address it, destroy this nation economically within the next couple of decades -- after it destroys you economically within the next five to ten years.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:

Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access

Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.


The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be reproduced or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media or for commercial use.

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.