Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 ... 13   Go Down

Author Topic: Idaho  (Read 128214 times)

glen

  • Guest
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #90 on: March 17, 2003, 01:14:13 am »

The military presence in Idaho appears to be limited to one Air Force Base in Mountain Home. If I remember right, it is a Tactical Air Command base which primarily supports fighter aircraft. I am not aware of any other military bases.

By contrast, The Air Force Bases in downtown Cheyenne, WY and outside of Great Falls, MT are Strategic Air Command bases which support long range bombers and nuclear tipped missiles.

No doubt that the FSP is already on a federal terrorist ‘watch list’ of some kind. My guess is that if Idaho is selected as the free state, the feds will be measurably less concerned about what we are doing than if Montana or Wyoming are selected.

Logged

exitus

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • To face freedom, turn 180º from tyranny.
    • Mercados libres y paz: El Cato Institute
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #91 on: March 17, 2003, 10:40:28 am »


My guess is that if Idaho is selected as the free state, the feds will be measurably less concerned about what we are doing than if Montana or Wyoming are selected.


This is also a good argument for Vermont, with no military bases; but no matter which way you look at it, however, every state has its own complexity in dealing with the federal government.
As to the presence of military bases and concern over the FSP by the feds, I don't think that we present any strategic concern in the mind of any reasonable military planner just because we believe in limited government.

It would be interesting to find out how much the political leanings of the populace influence the size and scope of military bases.  I'm sure the people of Alaska has little choice in the matter, being as where that state is strategically located.   But I wonder if the large presence of Vietnam War "draft-dodgers" in Vermont played any role there, or if the large number of anti-UN, paleoconservative John Birchers in Idaho keep that state's military role to a minimum.

Logged
". . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtue” -- U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address

exitus

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • To face freedom, turn 180º from tyranny.
    • Mercados libres y paz: El Cato Institute
Education in Idaho
« Reply #92 on: March 18, 2003, 05:58:28 am »

The Idaho Statesman's Education in Idaho series
A five-month study of education spending in Idaho conducted by The Idaho Statesman newspaper.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/education/story.asp?ID=30315


One of the reports I found interesting:

SCHOOL FUNDING 101: How Idaho compares, from the IdahoStatesman.com website

Idaho is fourth from the bottom of all states in spending per child, and spends the least amount of money per child out of all of our candidate states.  On the other hand,  Idaho (at $39.83 per $1,000 gsp) is in the top third of all states in education spending, but still distantly less than #1 big spender, Vermont  (at $52.36 ), Maine ($48.76), Montana (47.04), and Alaska ($45.19).  

Idaho ranks low nationally in terms of how much it spends per child on education, but ranks relatively high in how deep the state digs into its pockets to come up with what it does spend:

Can anyone else besides me see the political potential in a situation like this?

Logged
". . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtue” -- U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address

glen

  • Guest
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #93 on: March 18, 2003, 10:25:50 pm »

I’m not very good at statistics so you’ll have to spell it out for me.
Logged

glen

  • Guest
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #94 on: March 20, 2003, 12:38:21 am »

If you have not been totally sucked in by Mr. Bushes war propaganda you will have noticed that killing Islamic extremists never works. Just ask Israel.

I started the following thread with the intent of showing how vulnerable the eastern FSP states would be to a ABC attack (atomic, biological, chemical).

The argument works the other way too. Northern Idaho and NW Montana are about the safest places possible in this new world order of suicide bombers and political assassinations.

http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=371&start=0
Logged

DanTheTileMan

  • FSP Participant
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 71
  • Scorpion King!
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #95 on: March 22, 2003, 11:03:32 am »

No argument here!  I am now living in Maryland, north of Baltimore, near Aberdeen Proving Grounds.  I heard all kinds of bombs going off over there for the past couple of weeks.  I passed an Abrams? tank on I95 last Sunday night.  I don't feel very safe around here.  I think Baltimore can be just as much of a target as D.C.  Kamiah, Idaho is looking better every day.
Logged
To win without risk, is to conquer without glory - Unknown

exitus

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • To face freedom, turn 180º from tyranny.
    • Mercados libres y paz: El Cato Institute
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #96 on: March 24, 2003, 06:14:25 pm »

Thanks for that insightful research, Joe.  I am embarassed that I didn't even spend the time to find out that was a survey of candidates.   :-[   I only read the heading that said,   "Look up your Legislators . . ." and figured that was self-explanatory.


In regards to my opinion of Southeast Idaho, this is one more example of how we should be careful with depending on perceptions alone.   I spent 9 days touring the Idaho Falls area back in 1999 and what I found were people that seemed very much of the live-and-let live attitude,  trucks with rifles hanging-up in the back windows , friendly people, no apparent sign of up-tight neighbors, with farm equipment driving down the road with no escorts; not too much sign of land-use planning; I found two different talk-radio stations on the AM dial that had lively discussions of the Constitution, the bill of rights, etc.  --and that was even in competition with the Rush Limbaugh program on another station!  Then I visited Pocatello and saw signs advertising "live nude girls", openly advertising gay bars and so forth.  . . .

Well, what I came away with were some perceptions of a very libertarian culture, but when I look at the numbers, look at who actually gets elected, and so forth, the numbers tell me that my perceptions were just that, perceptions, though they paint a picture of what is there, things aren't exactly the way they appear.  . . .

I guess some of my perceptions are in the same boat as those who say, without the numbers to prove it, that they know their favorite state is best, i.e., the Maine and Montana supporters, to name a few, because of what they perceive in their experience alone.

« Last Edit: March 24, 2003, 06:15:59 pm by exitus »
Logged
". . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtue” -- U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address

cathleeninsc

  • Guest
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #97 on: March 25, 2003, 10:15:55 am »


One would think we have no zoning or building codes, or trash ordinance or dogs-at-large law or laws against high weeds or fireworks or operating a home business.
Wrong! All of the above are illegal or regulated to the degree the enforcers can get to 'em or meddlesome neighbors complain. You would think, and I had thought, that repealing or at least softening these ordinances would be a slam dunk because of the widespread continuing ignoring of these laws. Again -- wrong!  


These people don't want to be bothered with regulations but don't even suggest taking away their ability to deal with undesirables.

Maybe this is why there is little equity in what gets passed or in how it is enforced. If wiping these off the books is difficult, would introducing equity tests be any easier? If a blanket enforcement makes people mad enough, will they then approve removal?

Cathleen in SC
Logged

exitus

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • To face freedom, turn 180º from tyranny.
    • Mercados libres y paz: El Cato Institute
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #98 on: March 27, 2003, 04:42:52 pm »

The military presence in Idaho appears to be limited to one Air Force Base in Mountain Home. If I remember right, it is a Tactical Air Command base which primarily supports fighter aircraft. I am not aware of any other military bases.

By contrast, The Air Force Bases in downtown Cheyenne, WY and outside of Great Falls, MT are Strategic Air Command bases which support long range bombers and nuclear tipped missiles.

No doubt that the FSP is already on a federal terrorist ‘watch list’ of some kind. My guess is that if Idaho is selected as the free state, the feds will be measurably less concerned about what we are doing than if Montana or Wyoming are selected.


Glen,
I thought of these words of yours recently while looking-up some info on political activism when I came across this statement in the Las Vegas Mercury newspaper from a protestor who was trying to stop the permanent approval of the Yucca Mountain Nuclear "Test" Site near Las Vegas, Nevada.
 
"Do you think it's coincidence that Idaho was never even considered for nuclear waste? Really, the feds know that if they go into Idaho...they're gonna get shot."

Provacative, yes, but I wonder how much of that reputation for the people in Idaho is real and how much of any part of that affects the political climate in Idaho and things like what that protestor stated and what you put forth. hmm. . .
Logged
". . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtue” -- U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #99 on: March 28, 2003, 02:11:44 am »

"Do you think it's coincidence that Idaho was never even considered for nuclear waste? Really, the feds know that if they go into Idaho...they're gonna get shot."

Whether what this protestor says is necessarily true or not, I would suspect that Idaho was probably not considered for nuclear waste because the government realized that it would run into heavier opposition in a state that is known for its beauty - as opposed to Nevada, which most people picture as a wasteland.

Just going on popular perceptions here.   ;)

glen

  • Guest
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #100 on: March 30, 2003, 01:30:48 am »

Here is a link to my thread on lone wolves.

I suspect that the lone wolves will be a PR problem for the FSP as they often flout the laws of men and the gods and will use any handy excuse to justify their actions.

http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=350
Logged

glen

  • Guest
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #101 on: April 04, 2003, 01:03:18 am »

Pax Americana?

If, as this article claims, the Bush Administration is on track to building the next world empire, we shouldn’t have too much trouble attracting enough libertarian and classical liberal minded people to the future free state.

The danger for us is in thinking too small. Bigger is better. And safer.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2319.htm

Logged

phylinidaho

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 161
  • Friend of the FSP
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #102 on: April 04, 2003, 06:52:47 am »

Pax Americana?

If, as this article claims, the Bush Administration is on track to building the next world empire, we shouldn?t have too much trouble attracting enough libertarian and classical liberal minded people to the future free state.

The danger for us is in thinking too small. Bigger is better. And safer.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2319.htm


This thought has been on my mind since I first heard of FSP, which is why I have firmly opposed any proposal to locate outside the continental US. In worst case scenario we will need a large geographical territory in which to grow strong.
Logged

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5723
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #103 on: April 04, 2003, 10:39:14 am »

Would anyone like to write a second Idaho report for the website?  So far we have Phyllis' report, which is great, but several states now have second reports, and another perspective on Idaho would be advantageous.
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

exitus

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • To face freedom, turn 180º from tyranny.
    • Mercados libres y paz: El Cato Institute
Re:Idaho Free State .com
« Reply #104 on: April 04, 2003, 11:11:37 am »


The danger for us is in thinking too small. Bigger is better. And safer.

Glen, I really know what you mean in thinking of Idaho as a safe place of refuge.  If we were all looking for a friendly place of abode for libertarians and their children to go and await, Idaho is that place  . . .as already do a huge contingent of survivalists, mostly of a libertarian-leaning paleoconservative variety who have already moved there and are rapidly bringing in more, as already do a Basque Separatist community in Boise of over 10,000 who have found refuge in Boise who have a reputation for being productive members of society and politically active and freedom-friendly.  And many other different peoples who have gathered to Idaho, unfortunately, even white separatist groups considered Idaho first as a refuge, although it must be emphasized that they miscalculated the support they thought they would receive.

The point is, however, if the attainment of a free state is to be obtained through a long campaign of highly-visible political action and eventual political dominance, it seems like in Idaho we might be drowned in a sea of other voices.

Although in Idaho there seems to be mostly friendly voices.  Idaho is by no means a libertarian state, but considering what we have to work with among all the people of the U.S.,  Idaho does have the highest number of liberty-friendly voters among our candidate states and highest percentages who vote against big government in the whole nation, as measured in the Idealogy of the States report, and by who they have been sending to Washington D.C., as measured by the RLC over the last ten years and also by the strong Libertarian vote in that state despite the odds of a seemingly bumbling, divided and mostly non-viable LP that is there.  And if Frank Church's fight against the CIA and George Hansen's fight against the IRS are any measures of what kind of people Idaho has sent to Congress, they are impressive enough on that alone!

In regards to looking at a smaller state, a very good point was made by Bruce P. Foreman that Jason Sorens posted on the Comments from a Wyoming rancher thread, and that was this in this statement,"And you also need to take great care, because if the government wants you out, they can EASILY do it, based on the way you have structured things. Wyoming's livelihood comes from its natural resources. All they would have to do is to tell Marathon Oil to shut down a few of its facilities, and unemployment would skyrocket, and FSP would be blamed (and with the liberal media coming from Denver, you can count on that). "

The population question really is a two-way street.  If our goal is to get noticed right away and start with a strong base of influence, such as in a third party, then the smaller the state, the better.  But the benefits of a small state can work both ways, if not done carefully, a small state is can be detrimental.  If our goal is to to be content to be the leavening in a big batch, or the small catalyst in a large culture shift, the mere tug-boat against an oceanliner and thus be willing to let larger forces than ourselves drive the change, then a larger state that has more to offer to more people may be more the ticket.

If we were counting on 20,000 experienced and remarkable champions of liberty in the FSP or even twice our numbers of friends to assist as activists once we got there, is there any doubt that Idaho would not be the best choice for us and our children?

And speaking of children, Idaho has the absolute best homeschool laws in the country, the absolute lowest state-sponsored kidnapping ratios, and the best weather to raise children.  .  .
Logged
". . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtue” -- U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 ... 13   Go Up