According to The Telegraph, it looks like the North Korean government is making plans to launch missiles at Austin, Texas, as well as some other American cities.
This probably isn't something to get too nervous about, but it does make you scratch your head: Why all this hostility from a country that's so far away?
Former congressman and Libertarian presidential candidate Ron Paul said recently, "...one reason North Korea is isolated is the isolationist policies of the US government. It is isolationist to impose sanctions, to prohibit Americans from doing business, to impede or forbid travel by US citizens to countries with which the US government disagrees. North Korea is isolated in part because our government has isolated it."
Ron Paul is right. Let's get the U.S. military out of South Korea, and let's start allowing Americans to interact with Koreans, whichever side of the DMZ they live on. That's what Libertarian officeholders would do.
The Dallas Morning News reports that Republican Texas Governor Rick Perry has asked the Texas Department of Transportation to pay for air traffic control at 13 small airports, since the federal sequester has cut FAA spending.
But why the heck are taxpayers paying for air traffic control? Why do we even have the FAA?
Air traffic control should be funded by airlines and private pilots. Likewise, we should get rid of the FAA. Airspace should not be under perpetual government control.
It's hard to say whether these small regional airports would survive without taxpayer support. But if they wouldn't, then they shouldn't.
According to the Quorum Report, Republican Texas Senator Craig Estes wants "to lure gun makers to Texas or encourage them to stay here by using the Texas Enterprise Fund, tax breaks and other economic incentives."
Once again, we see that Republicans want more government. They want to pick winner and loser industries, and they want to increase the overall tax level in order to give handouts to the specific businesses they like. That's nice for the people who get the handouts, but it makes Texas more hostile to business in general.
Apparently, since gun makers are super-popular with Republicans, it's OK to give them handouts.
How about getting rid of corporate welfare like the Texas Enterprise Fund? How about a tax code that treats everyone equally? That's what Libertarian legislators would support, because Libertarians want less government and more freedom.
The U.S. Supreme Court is going to hear some big cases regarding same-sex marriage.
But why does anyone care about the issue?
The reason is that government discriminates -- heavily -- on the basis of marital status. It matters a whole lot to Uncle Sam (and to your state government) whether you're married or single.
When you get married (or divorced), it changes your tax rate, has a huge effect on government benefits, and causes the government to treat you differently in other ways too. In many cases, a marriage certificate means you and/or your spouse get lots of new government benefits. No wonder people want the government to accept their marriage!
But that's all wrong. Government should not discriminate on the basis of marital status. In fact, government shouldn't even know (or care) whether you're married or single.
Marriage should be a totally private affair. If you want to sign a binding marriage contract with another person, feel free. You get to decide the terms of that contract.
Is it wrong for homosexuals to marry each other? For that matter, is it wrong for heterosexuals to marry? What does marriage mean? Those are matters of individual opinion, not state enforcement.
If government stopped discriminating on the basis of marital status, this whole issue would basically go away. We wouldn't need lawsuits and voter initiatives. People wouldn't care whether the government called you "married" or not, because it wouldn't matter. What would matter is what you think, what your friends and relatives think, and what you put in your marriage contract. That's how it should be.
According to the Austin American-Statesman, conservative Republican Tom Pauken plans to run for governor against Rick Perry next year. We'll probably hear him say he wants to fight for less government, but don't believe it for a minute.
The Statesman says, "Pauken is an old-school conservative, the type for whom Goldwater and Reagan are good." If he likes Ronald Reagan, then he likes big government.
Apparently Pauken helped "administer first lady Nancy Reagan’s signature 'Just Say No to Drugs' campaign." Kids should just say no to drugs, but grown-ups should just say no to the War on Drugs.
When it comes to education, Pauken doesn't want to get government out of it. He wants more "attention to vocational training."
The Statesman says, "He worries that the Republican Party has become unmoored from its conservative roots." No, Tom, the Republican Party is plenty conservative. The problem is, conservatives love big government.
People who want less government don't need more conservatives, Republicans, or Tom Paukens. If we had one Libertarian in office for every ten conservative Republicans, we'd be a lot more free.
According to the Texas Tribune, both houses of the Republican-controlled Texas legislature have passed two-year budgets of at least $194 billion, a big jump from the previous two-year budget of $174 billion.
And the article notes that "the final product is likely to be larger than what either side has proposed."
When Republicans talk about cutting spending, they're lying. In reality, they almost always increase government spending.
We need to cut, not grow, the state budget. That's what Libertarian legislators would do.