Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stand up to unchecked federal power
eastvallytribune.com ^ | 25 August, 2009 | Earnest Hancock

Posted on 08/25/2009 8:33:35 PM PDT by marktwain

Libertarian activist and radio host Ernest Hancock fired up concern about right-wing extremism around the country last week after he revealed to CNN's Rick Sanchez that he had planned the interview with someone who carried an AR-15 rifle to the protests outside of President Barack Obama's Aug. 17 appearance at the Phoenix Convention Center. At the Tribune's request, Hancock explains his motivations.

Ernest Hancock

In 1994, I learned that holding a sign, "Legalize Freedom ... Register Libertarian," at a Janet Reno speaking event would get you arrested by Phoenix police. I was quickly released with no charges and returned to the event, but it was clear to me as a young man that we were on a very dark path.

One tool to illuminate this dark path was the filing of ballot initiatives that would inject into the political discourse some concepts, such as Second Amendment rights, otherwise ignored during election cycles. One of those 1994 initiatives was "unrestricted concealed carry of firearms," which evolved into Arizona's permit system. SAFE (Second Amendment is For Everyone) was the political action committee that was created in support of this initiative.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio called to inform me that SAFE and I were at the top of a state-by-state listing of militias created by the Southern Poverty Law Center that had been sent to every local law enforcement agency in the nation. Fortunately, Arpaio knew me well enough to know I was not a danger. Ironically, it was after this that I bought my first gun.

Then, I saw a very close friend incarcerated for more than five years in the infamous "Arizona Viper Militia" case of 1996. Those of us who knew the defendants knew they were an easy target because their views were considered too far out of the mainstream. But it would take lies and a willing media to accomplish the demonizing, and conviction, of a friend we knew to be peaceful.

The "Viper Reserve" was created to document the case and to archive it on the Internet. This included a $5 million lawsuit in 1998 against Janet Napolitano for her role as prosecutor in the case. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed by a federal judge.

William Kostric's decision to bring a firearm to a protest outside of President Barack Obama's Aug. 11 health care town hall in New Hampshire was enough of an opportunity for the same people surrounding the "Viper" case in Washington, D.C., to repeat the rhetoric of "threats" from the Arizona militia. Rahm Emanuel was a senior adviser to President Bill Clinton at the White House from 1993 to 1998, and Napolitano (now head of Homeland Security) was the "Viper" prosecutor. The Southern Law Poverty Center made a Phoenix visit recently, and I was getting a very strong feeling of deja vu.

When making my plans for Obama's Phoenix visit, these recent events prompted a call from me to the Phoenix police's "Confrontation Prevention Squad." People I respect in the Phoenix Police Department understand why I would be concerned about the same rhetoric we all experienced 13 years ago - with the same people, in even more powerful positions of government, with new unchecked powers. Our respect for each other has improved over the years, and we have come to understand each other's concerns.

I would bring my personal firearm to the planned protest outside of the Phoenix Convention Center, broadcast my radio show live, and the Phoenix police would protect my right to do so. This inspired others to do the same, including a peaceful young black man with an AR-15 who wanted to make it clear that the increasing financial enslavement of his generation would eventually be resisted.

As expected, the "Viper Militia" case was resurrected, and for all of our protection it needed to be. And the perception that local law enforcement and individual rights are now on the same side makes us all more secure.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ar15; az; banglist; donttreadonme; earnesthancock; lping
Now we get some information from a source at the center of the protest who is not part of the MSM.
1 posted on 08/25/2009 8:33:35 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

This is the Second Revolution (peacefully, of course). We will not give up until the liberals are in fast and furious retreat! Be in D.C.!

http://pushbackuntil.com


2 posted on 08/25/2009 8:37:51 PM PDT by DennisR (Look around - God gives countless, indisputable, and unambiguous clues that He does, indeed, exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Libertarians always claim the high ground. “We are independent. We love liberty.”

But, they always have an affinity for the lefty side of the equation. Over the past 20 years, I bet Libertarians have voted Democrat 90% of the time while claiming all the while that they are strictly impartial. Well, la dee dah.


3 posted on 08/25/2009 9:13:46 PM PDT by Rembrandt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I will defend your right to free speech.
Will YOU DEFEND MINE?


4 posted on 08/25/2009 9:19:43 PM PDT by steveab (When was the last time someone tried to sell you a CO2 induced climate control system for your home?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt

You know the identity of a libertarian is difficult. That is because Statist impulses exist on both the left and the right. On the right, law and order republicans demand tougher laws and penalties, demand a zero risk environment, a highly controlled and predictable society, and will demand that at the point of a gun (a police officer). The lefty statists want a strong aggressive government to carry out their wacky and misguided aims, again, at the point of a gun. So where does that leave your basic libertarian? He does not not want to transfer risk to others, but rather to assume risk in return for freedom. So who is on his side?


5 posted on 08/25/2009 9:24:37 PM PDT by DariusBane (Even the Rocks shall cry out "Hobamma to the Highest")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DariusBane

“You know the identity of a libertarian is difficult. That is because Statist impulses exist on both the left and the right. On the right, law and order republicans demand tougher laws and penalties, demand a zero risk environment, a highly controlled and predictable society, and will demand that at the point of a gun (a police officer). The lefty statists want a strong aggressive government to carry out their wacky and misguided aims, again, at the point of a gun. So where does that leave your basic libertarian? He does not not want to transfer risk to others, but rather to assume risk in return for freedom. So who is on his side?”

Lots of words are pretty, yours included. But let’s cut to the chase. How many Libertarians have you known who have voted R vs. L? What’s the percentage? IMHO, they’re all just disguised lefties, late to the party. Worse than Dims. Scum suckers.


6 posted on 08/25/2009 9:36:24 PM PDT by Rembrandt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt
How many Libertarians have you known who have voted R vs. L?

In my state, most of them. Do you think Libertarians are incapable of being practical?

7 posted on 08/25/2009 9:48:49 PM PDT by sockmonkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt

My problem with Libertarians is their candidates in several key instances have cost the Republicans victory. Although I was no fan of McCain, Bob Barr running as a Libertarian cost him Indiana and North Carolina (not enough to change the outcome, but enough to get it closer in the EC). Sens. Tim Johnson (D-SD) & Jon Tester (D-MT) won narrow victories because Libertarian candidates deprived the Republicans a victory (and in Tester’s case, that was the difference between the GOP tying control of the Senate in ‘06 and losing control).


8 posted on 08/25/2009 9:51:25 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

Another way to describe the outcome of the election is to say that if they could have convinced the voters of their libertarian creds, they would have won. Why are you blaming the libertarian voters instead of the R’s who failed to sell themselves as libertarian enough?


9 posted on 08/25/2009 11:13:16 PM PDT by Still Thinking (If ignorance is bliss, liberals must be ecstatic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

I’m stating that in close elections, the presence of a Libertarian only tends to serve that of the Democrats. Absent the presence of that one single Libertarian candidate in MT opposing Conrad Burns, it would’ve changed the outcome of power in the Senate. Did that one Libertarian candidate think he was doing the country a favor by putting the Democrats in charge ?


10 posted on 08/25/2009 11:18:48 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

The way things are looking lately, we may be fortunate McCain lost. For that to remain true, more conservatives and libertarians that actually follow their principles have to become activists.


11 posted on 08/26/2009 12:14:31 AM PDT by TheThinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TheThinker

Quite so.


12 posted on 08/26/2009 12:27:24 AM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; akatel; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Alexander Rubin; Allerious; ...



Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
(View past Libertarian pings here)
13 posted on 08/26/2009 6:11:46 AM PDT by bamahead (Avoid self-righteousness like the devil- nothing is so self-blinding. -- B.H. Liddell Hart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Why the Tenth Amendment? (The line in the sand)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2324438/posts


14 posted on 08/26/2009 6:13:53 AM PDT by listenhillary (We became community organizers and Obama and the Statists get p*ssed off at us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt

Maybe the Libertarians you hang out with are deformed in some way.

My experience differs greatly.


15 posted on 08/26/2009 6:14:55 AM PDT by listenhillary (We became community organizers and Obama and the Statists get p*ssed off at us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt

That’s subjective as hell. It all depends on the candidates. Would the average libertarian vote for a blue dog dem (pro life, anti-gun control, anti-police state, ect) over a neoconservative or overmilitant Repub? Probably. But that same libertarian would take a paleoconservative over the blue dog ever time out.


16 posted on 08/26/2009 6:18:20 AM PDT by RAO1125 (Neoconservatism:Failed. Socialism:Failing (again). Next up: Libertarianism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

Considering the damage (perceived and real) the Republicans did to American freedom in the name of fear and security, perhaps the Libertarian figured the Dems couldn’t do much worse. Of course, what he got was a different flavor of crap.


17 posted on 08/26/2009 6:19:58 AM PDT by RAO1125 (Neoconservatism:Failed. Socialism:Failing (again). Next up: Libertarianism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt

I always thought of libertarians who wanted a strong constitution, carried out to the letter.

Do you disagree with this premise?

Am I missing something?


18 posted on 08/26/2009 7:17:09 AM PDT by Munz (All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt

Pretty words?

How about the essense of the argument. I can’t call myself a Republican, but I have always voted that way. I am registered a republican and have been for 22 years. But I am tired of driving through swarms of cops to get to the grocery store. So what does that make me? I would call myself a Thomas Jefferson republican.


19 posted on 08/26/2009 7:26:10 AM PDT by DariusBane (Even the Rocks shall cry out "Hobamma to the Highest")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sockmonkey

“Do you think Libertarians are incapable

of being practical?”


I think they are well-intentioned (who does that sound like?) and I think they are afraid to take a firm position for fear of criticism.


20 posted on 08/26/2009 8:35:41 PM PDT by Rembrandt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: listenhillary

“Maybe the Libertarians you hang out with are deformed in some way.”

I avoid Libertarians when I can; I like people who can enunciate a firm position and defend it. I don’t hang out with them.


21 posted on 08/26/2009 8:39:11 PM PDT by Rembrandt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RAO1125

“That’s subjective as hell. It all depends on the candidates. Would the average libertarian vote for a blue dog dem (pro life, anti-gun control, anti-police state, ect) over a neoconservative or overmilitant Repub? Probably. But that same libertarian would take a paleoconservative over the blue dog ever time out.”


Your comment is subjective as hell.


22 posted on 08/26/2009 8:40:40 PM PDT by Rembrandt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Munz

“I always thought of libertarians who wanted a strong constitution, carried out to the letter.

Do you disagree with this premise?

YES, I DISAGREE. I BELIEVE THAT LIBERTARIANS LIKE A NICE COMFY MODERATE POSITION SO THEY WON’T BE CHALLENGED AND REQUIRED TO TAKE A DEFINIT POSITION.

Am I missing something?”

CHECK YOUR PURSE.


23 posted on 08/26/2009 8:43:34 PM PDT by Rembrandt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: DariusBane

“I am registered a republican..”

Then you aren’t a Libertarian, you’re a Republican. Maybe you’re a moderate Republican, but you’re not a Libertarian since you decided you wanted to make a declaration of WHO and WHAT you were/are!


24 posted on 08/26/2009 8:46:16 PM PDT by Rembrandt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt
But, they always have an affinity for the lefty side of the equation. Over the past 20 years, I bet Libertarians have voted Democrat 90% of the time while claiming all the while that they are strictly impartial.

I don’t hang out with them.

So you are basing your statement on what experience? I would bet the opposite that they vote Republican 95% of the time. Without property rights, there is no Republic. Which party is hell bent on redistribution of wealth which is the gutting of any semblance of property rights?

25 posted on 08/26/2009 8:47:34 PM PDT by listenhillary (We became community organizers and Obama and the Statists get p*ssed off at us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt

Your mother is subjective as hell. Sorry, just always wanted to do that.


26 posted on 08/26/2009 9:19:40 PM PDT by RAO1125 (Neoconservatism:Failed. Socialism:Failing (again). Next up: Libertarianism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt

“Libertarians always claim the high ground. “We are independent. We love liberty.”

But, they always have an affinity for the lefty side of the equation. Over the past 20 years, I bet Libertarians have voted Democrat 90% of the time while claiming all the while that they are strictly impartial. Well, la dee dah.”

I always vote for someone who is fiscally conservative and a defender of the Constitution. So I have never voted for a democrat.


27 posted on 08/26/2009 9:19:53 PM PDT by digital-olive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: listenhillary

“Which party is hell bent on redistribution of wealth which is the gutting of any semblance of property rights?”

And the answer is?


28 posted on 08/26/2009 10:06:53 PM PDT by Rembrandt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt

i am far from moderate... Lets define:

1.strict adherence to enumerated powers: my value, but not a Republican party value.
2. At a local level, defund city hall, make the bastards live in tents. Not a Republican value
3. Strong Military. Overwhelming military power with the ability to project it around the world. That at least used to be a Republican value
4. End Abortion. That used to be a Republican value.
5. End the use of the interstate commerce clause to regulate and tax everything. Not a Republican value.
6. Starve all levels of government so that they barley even function. Not a republican value.

So there you go... What does that make me? A member of the nihilist wing of the Republican party I suppose.


29 posted on 08/26/2009 10:20:45 PM PDT by DariusBane (Even the Rocks shall cry out "Hobamma to the Highest")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DariusBane

“So there you go... What does that make me? A member of the nihilist wing of the Republican party I suppose.”

Perhaps it makes you Darius Birch.


30 posted on 08/26/2009 10:34:49 PM PDT by Rembrandt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt
or ... Darius Ron Rand Paul Birch.
31 posted on 08/27/2009 9:02:37 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson