KHF #2 In The Can

Just finished recording the second edition of the Kole Hard Facts show for Indiana Talks. It will probably air on Wednesday, as the first is still in a rotation.

Topics? Gun control, Piers Morgan deportation petition, importing Coca-Cola from Mexico, the fiscal cliff, the Colts make the playoffs, holiday sports TV viewing, sports gambling, NHL's cancelled Winter Classic, and holiday traditions.

A lot for one hour? You bet. It's chock full!

Best Protests Money Can Buy

If I ever open a chain of businesses, I think I'll take a controversial stance on something as fast as possible. Chick-Fil-A has two lines running long today: the protest lines, and the drive-thru's. From CNN:

Former GOP presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum encouraged people to show their support for Chick-fil-A by buying food there Wednesday. Huckabee dubbed the day "Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day" and touted in his TV and radio shows and online.

Over 550,000 visitors to Huckabee's event page on Facebook have responded that they will participate. The action enjoys the support of the Rev. Billy Graham.

Proponents of same-sex marriage have organized a simple counterprotest for Wednesday, asking people to donate the approximate cost of a Chick-fil-A meal, about $6.50, to gay and lesbian rights groups, according to the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD).

I've never eaten at Chick-Fil-A in my life. I'm not in any hurry to start. But I can't help but notice how it's been more free advertising for a business than I've seen in a long time.

The dialogue is all good, far as I'm concerned. The only real danger is when cities like Boston or Chicago threaten to either not approve future expansions in their cities, or threaten to ban them outright. It's one thing for individuals to act upon their consciences, but quite another for municipal governments. There's no such thing as a collective conscience- or if there is, there is no such thing as individual freedom of speech.

Update: The Indy Star (yeah, yeah) covered the long lines at Chick-Fil-A stores around the central Indiana region.

No More Free Speech for Philly

Got a blog in Philadelphia that maybe runs some Google ads for chump change? Then the city wants you to pay $300 for a business license. From the Philadelphia CityPaper:

For the past three years, Marilyn Bess has operated MS Philly Organic, a small, low-traffic blog that features occasional posts about green living, out of her Manayunk home. Between her blog and infrequent contributions to ehow.com, over the last few years she says she's made about $50. To Bess, her website is a hobby. To the city of Philadelphia, it's a potential moneymaker, and the city wants its cut.

In May, the city sent Bess a letter demanding that she pay $300, the price of a business privilege license.

This blog has never earned a penny. It is a hobby for me. If I were sent a bill, I would probably do one of three things- close the blog, ignore the bill, or build coalition with every other blogger or any stripe to go on the attack against the City on 1st Amendment grounds.

Yeah, the latter. Business licensing is plain wrong, and this case illustrates it as well as any. Who is protected by running out small-time blogs? Yeah, local governments.

(h/t: Josh Gillespie)

Gun Owners & Sex Offenders

Sex offenders have their home address information made public thanks to Megan's Law, with the idea being that people who have children have a right to know. That idea is controversial for some people, on the grounds that those who have served their time should not have to wear the Scarlet Letter after completion of sentence.

Along comes the Bloomington Herald-Times, with this announcement:

"This week, HeraldTimesOnline.com will launch its new gun permit database. You'll be able to search gun permit records by county, city or town and street."

Why should gun owners be treated on par with sex offenders? What compelling interest does the public have in knowing who has legally registered a firearm? Who is it that the Herald-Times hopes to help?

One who might benefit from such info? A would-be robber. "Not going to Kole's house, but I see that on his street there is a string of five houses in a row without firearms. Hmm. Think I'll hit the middle one, as far from armed residents as possible."

Maybe if we're publishing the names and addresses of people who legally enjoy the 2nd Amendment, we can publish the names and addresses of people who enjoy the 1st, such as newspaper journalists. Well, no. That's just a knee-jerk reaction towards serving one a dose of his own medicine. It would serve them right, but wouldn't serve liberty too well. *sigh*

(h/t Libertarian Party of Indiana, Duncan Adams, Sean Shepard, Andy Horning)

Free Speech Under Attack

The wolf comes wearing sheep's clothing. American newspapers are faltering for their refusal to evolve (covered in this previous post), and here comes a US Senator, offering to 'help'. From Reuters report:

With many U.S. newspapers struggling to survive, a Democratic senator on Tuesday introduced a bill to help them by allowing newspaper companies to restructure as nonprofits with a variety of tax breaks.

"This may not be the optimal choice for some major newspapers or corporate media chains but it should be an option for many newspapers that are struggling to stay afloat," said Senator Benjamin Cardin.

A Cardin spokesman said the bill had yet to attract any co-sponsors, but had sparked plenty of interest within the media, which has seen plunging revenues and many journalist layoffs.

Cardin's Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to operate as nonprofits for educational purposes under the U.S. tax code, giving them a similar status to public broadcasting companies.

Under this arrangement, newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements. (Emphasis supplied.)

From time to time, I feel the need to remind readers that I am a former Democrat. This becomes necessary because I so frequently write about things economic, and because I defend the free market as generally the best solution to issues surrounding exchange, I get pegged as a Republican of some sort.

No, I was a Democrat. My biggest issue was the 1st Amendment. So, the first big doubts I ever had with the Democratic Party came in the late 1980s, when Al Gore's wife, Tipper Gore, began railing against music with salty lyrics. It hit me like a total betrayal. I was always told by my fellow Dems that it was the Republicans who had fascistic tendencies. So, how to explain Tipper Gore?

So, this just looks like part of a continuum to me. Just as Republicans love to enjoy the reputation of being free marketeers and friends of smaller government, but aren't, Democrats love to enjoy the undeserved reputation of being steadfast defenders of free speech.

In either case, D or R, the commitment is to government control. This bill is an attempt to worm control into the newspapers, as government worms into anything- slowly, and in the guise of 'help'.

I'm glad there are no co-sponsors to date.

Note to my Democratic friends: Your party is becoming just as drunk with power as the Republicans were after the 2002 elections. Be on guard! You need to smack your party down, lest they go the way the Republicans went, crossing their base over and over again, especially on the things the base is correct about, to the extent that you eventually lose the entire middle.

Here's the text of the First Amendment, for those who need the refresher, including Senator Cardin:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (Emphasis supplied.)

Pretty simple.