PPS School Board PAC

https://www.pghcitypaper.com/pittsburgh/new-pac-focused-on-racial-equality-in-education-endorses-pps-school-board-candidates/Content

Not sure what this means?

Wondering if there are people who run for school board as a stepping stone? 

George, get a grip. The media needs to do its job in a much better way if this country is to heal

Fwd: The civilization wreckers' next target

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tom Woods

May 8, 2018 View this email in your browser Connecticut just became the tenth blue state to pledge to cast its electoral votes for whichever presidential candidate wins the popular vote nationally. Why? Because according to the measure's proponents, the electoral college -- along with everything else that's more than 10 minutes old -- is backward and stupid. Here's one more step toward making the United States into a giant, undifferentiated blob, as opposed to the collection of distinct societies it was originally intended to be. The Constitution refers to the United States in the plural every time, and the way the Constitution and the Union were originally understood, the "popular vote" was an irrelevancy. During the World Series, for example, we don't add up the total number of runs scored by each team over the course of the series, and decide who won on that basis. We count up how many games each team won. Thus: Game 1: Red Sox 10, Mets 0 Game 2: Red Sox 15, Mets 1 Game 3: Red Sox 5, Mets 2 Game 4: Red Sox 1, Mets 2 Game 5: Red Sox 0, Mets 1 Game 6: Red Sox 2, Mets 3 Game 7: Red Sox 3, Mets 4 In this imaginary series the Red Sox scored 36 runs while the Mets scored only 13, yet everyone would acknowledge that the Mets won the series. Not a single sports fan would be running around demanding that we count the total number of runs instead, or insisting that the way we determine the World Series winner is sinister. But I think this is the correct analogy with the electoral college. How many games — e.g., how many political societies, albeit weighted to some degree by population — did you win? Also, the electoral college puts an upper bound on how much support you can earn from any one state. Even if your whole campaign is geared toward taxing the rest of the country and handing the money to California, you still can't get more than 55 electoral votes from that state. So to some extent, the electoral college forces the candidate to run a national race more than would be necessary otherwise. A group called National Popular Vote, which seeks to abolish the electoral college, claims that "presidential candidates have no reason to pay attention to the issues of concern to voters in states where the statewide outcome is a foregone conclusion." But this problem becomes much worse without the electoral college. If there is no limit to the support I can get from California and New York, then I'll campaign in those states like a madman. At least the electoral college puts something of a brake on this kind of strategy. A brief note about Trump's defeat in the popular vote: had the election been decided on the basis of the popular vote, Trump would have campaigned differently in the first place. Also, more people in, say, California would have bothered to vote for him. So we can't know that he would have lost the popular vote had those been the rules. What we do know is that every step toward making the U.S. into a giant blob instead of a decentralized collection of societies is a step toward more centralized, bureaucratic management of society, and away from liberty. We're not taught to think this way in school, of course. You know where you do learn this stuff?   http://www.LibertyClassroom.com Tom Woods Share Tweet Forward to Friend Copyright © 2018 Tom Woods, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in at yourfriendsarewrong.com, tomwoods.com, bernieiswrong.com, contrakrugman.com, or nostateeducation.com, or you received a free eBook by texting various words to 33444. Our mailing address is: Tom Woods PO Box 701447 Saint Cloud, FL 34770 Add us to your address book

Vote for Catherine for AAA President

 https://rauterkus.com/election-for-ame…iology-president/

Voting has started.

Thread of Paul of KDKA on FB

Mark Rauterkus posted: I do not remember the KDKA hosted debate among ALL the candidates on the ballot for the recent election for US Congress. Remember when the corporate media in town did the freeze out of the Libertarian who was not spending millions in advertisements for a 6 month job. That's pay to play folly that KDKA was a big part of promoting. Yet the margin of difference between Coke and Pepsi was twice as great with the third choice. Woops. 

Corporate bean counters at KDKA have a hard time counting to three when it comes to choices to offer the voters in terms of debates. Or, just don't do any at all.

Paul Martino Kdka: The standard in most of these debates is...if a candidate is polling less than ten percent, he or she is a fringe candidate with virtually no chance of winning. Therefore it makes sense to focus on the legitimate candidates who will be the eventual winner.

Mark Rauterkus That is a top-down standard that is shameful. It is a corporate policy that is undemocratic and not what we urge you to do. The standard is also that the super-majority of the voters do not even go to the polls because of BS standards such as that.

The real standard is set when the election department puts who is ONTO the ballot. If the person is on the ballot, the standard is achieved. 

We don't need some newsroom, corporate, suit wearing person with power telling citizens who is fit to be on the stage because they didn't pay the advertisement dollars for air-time nor hire the polling corporate buddies to tell you what to do. 

If you really feel strongly in what you post, you should retire. There is no hope for being a journalist then. 

In the real world, the third party person had twice the difference as to who won. In the real world, the third party person is the one who moves the policy for the future. In the real world, a bulk of the Ds and a bulk of the Rs are not going to change their minds and vote a different way because of the debate. Meanwhile, the third party person who is a voter -- a THIRD of the voters these days are INDIE, L, G, S, C, and Unaffiliated, are going to decide who wins. 

People vote with their feet. The region and the city is in decline, still, due to the bias against the individual, perfectly illustrated with this corporate policy. 

You've made Sinclair speak sound like the the song of angels.

Mark Roberts: Mark Rauterkus Sorry. Not everyone can play.

Paul Martino Kdka: Mark Rauterkus the League of Women Voters uses a standard similar to this. Has there ever been a libertarian candidate in the state to receive ten percent of the vote or more?

Mark Rauterkus: Paul Martino Kdka I did.

Mark Rauterkus The League of Women Voters are part of the problem too. The non-voters are crushing them too.

Judy Haluka" This has been true forever. It is called efficient use of resources. Why would you spend vakuable resources on a candidate that has no hope at all?

Mark Rauterkus: Because it is STUPID to think with only HALF A BRAIN. 

BECAUSE it is not efficient to to discount / ignore / prison / embargo / freeze-out / and frustrate a rather large segment of the citizenship. 

The third party candidate represents the 1% or 2% of that minor party as well as the greater majority, 40-60% of the citizens who choose to NOT VOTE AT ALL. 

And most of all, how EFFICIENT are the USE OF RESOURCES so as to SPEND more than $5-million for a job that lasts 6 months (as the term is going to end in 2018) and pays less than $200K annually? The entire efficient use of resources is a total joke because these other candidates in this case BURNED MONEY. They are the definition of INEFFICIENT resource squandering. Did it cost them $200 per vote received? The Libertarian in this case got people to vote for his campaign at $.50 each. Who is efficient, really? Why are the big-spenders the one we want to go to congress and have influence over treasury, taxes, and constitutional matters?

This is not an April Fools Joke, but it is extremely dangerous to our democracy

Gladfly talks about how to oppose without becoming a monster

Another blogger, "Gladfly" wrote something that is a bit odd with this statement:

If we tolerate the intolerant, if we give them equal time to offer their point of view and don’t aggressively counter their views, they will inevitably resort to violence and wipe our side out.

The KEY, IMHO, is the "EQUAL TIME" part. Of course, EQUAL TIME has at its root an AGGRESSIVE COUNTER.

There is a lot of value to EQUAL TIME. If equal time was much more prevalent, then we'd have less troubles. It is much like an escape value.

So, when the race for the US Congress #D18, had closed debates with only Saccone and Lame, the R and the D, but did not include the L -- BIG PROBLEMS. The hope of equal time vanished. The media freeze out of the third party means that the 1-on-1 race can get overly negative.

Furthermore, the folks on the fringe see that the democratic process is hopeless.They don't vote.They further depart normal society. They have grounds to be unto themselves, festering -- and that can easily lead to violence.

Screw you WTAE, KDKA, WESA. The PG too. What they did is not at all close to equal time. Even CNN didn't put the 3rd party candidate's name and vote total on the screen in its election night coverage until that vote total was 2x the margin between the D and R. #FAIL.

Source: https://gadflyonthewallblog.wordpress.com/2018/03/17/how-to-oppose-white-supremacists-without-becoming-a-monster-yourself/comment-page-1/#comment-15498 

Hold the phone. The Ethics Hearing Board did not start in 2016

What?


The Post-Gazette is reporting something that can't be true.


She credits her creation of the city's Ethics Hearing Board as one of her proudest accomplishments. The nine-member board formed officially in 2016 to regulate compliance with the city's code of ethics, including the filing of campaign finance forms and gift disclosures.


The city's Ethics Hearing Board was a toothless body for a number of years before her arrival.

Correction or clarification required from jrouth@post-gazette.com.


Same news from the Trib.

Fwd: Two must read articles

From John H

Attached are two "must read" articles both of which deal in one way or another with the future of American "democracy".  The first, by eminent historian Jackson Lears.  It is perhaps the best I have encountered anywhere concerning the Russian hacking story and what it means for the ability of the American people to regain our democratic institutional processes which are rapidly being discarded and destroyed by the exclusion of dissent and the envelopment of society in a neo-McCarthyist mindset. 

The second brief article by Norman Solomon follows on with some comments about how Americans concerned with these processes should respond to the neoliberal/neoconservative nature of the Democratic Party elite which has shown no interest whatsoever in modifying its pro-corporate, pro-Wall Street, pro-military interventionist policies in order to focus on the real needs of the people it claims to represent.

I strongly encourage you to read both.

John

Articles:

• What we don't talk about when talking about Russian hacking
• This is what Pseudo-Democracy looks like

Incline covers today's ballot question

City employees as coaches

source: https://theincline.com/2017/11/03/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-yes-or-no-questions-on-tuesdays-ballot/

Pittsburgh city employees currently cannot coach a sports team for Pittsburgh Public Schools and get paid for it. But the ballot question before city voters asks if that should change. Here’s what you’ll see on the ballot:

Shall Section 707 Multiple Employment Prohibited, of the Pittsburgh Home Rule Charter be amended to permit a compensated City employee to hold a compensated position as a part-time athletic coach in a public school system or a compensated part-time educational position at a public institution of higher learning, as more fully described in Pittsburgh Ordinance 36?

City employees can have one paid job with the city. They can’t have a second paid job with other public entities, including schools or public universities. According to the city’s Home Rule Charter, exceptions include:

• Member of the Pennsylvania National Guard or federal reserve
• The city controller and deputy controller can have the same roles for Pittsburgh Public Schools.
• A city treasurer can also be a treasurer for PPS.
• Member or employee of a sinking fund commission or pension board
• PPS employee from May to September

If approved, more exceptions would be added to the list — like the ones on Tuesday’s ballot.

Since this is part of the Home Rule Charter, changing it required a ballot question. Legislation authorizing the ballot question was first introduced to city council in May and signed by Mayor Bill Peduto in July. The legislation specifies: “For each exception, the Department of Personnel shall develop a strict multiple employment policy and enforcement procedure to ensure employee integrity and compliance.”

Council Member Corey O’Connor, who sponsored the legislation with Natalia Rudiak and Bruce Kraus, stressed that when it comes to coaches, school employees are always given first preference. But if there’s an opening after that, this change would allow a city employee to apply, he said. City workers could also apply to teach a class at a public university or community college.

Rudiak said she heard from constituents that there was a need for coaches in the public schools, so the legislation started as a way to make city employees eligible for those part-time jobs. City employees can already teach or coach at private schools, Rudiak pointed out.

City employees also showed interest in being able to teach in higher education, she said.

The rule prohibiting multiple employers was likely designed to prevent city employees from collecting full-time paychecks and other benefits from two entities funded with public dollars, O’Connor said. But coaches don’t make much money, he said.

“You’re not getting paid thousands of dollars here,” O’Connor said.

Conservative foil: Sue Kerr of Pgh Lesbian Correspondents

Conservative foil:Sue Kerr of Pgh Lesbian Correspondents

Let's ponder the definition. “Conservative” is holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.

Sue Kerr, a blogger, (I am a blogger too) is playing the role of a conservative and asking people to vote “NO” to the City of Pittsburgh ballot measure that I have championed because:

- She has not found anyone with actual facts, however, she refused to answer my friend request on Facebook and refused to discuss this with me despite my repeated approaches to her. So, her seeking is more like planned avoidance. Come on Sue. Why can't we be friends? One of my central themes as a coach and advocate for better government is “playing well with others.”

- Then she writes, “the narrow exclusion would only benefit a few people.” Really? You really want to put hardships on super-minorities? You think that because only a fraction of the population is (insert letter of your choice) that they don't deserve the rights of others? What about protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity? Hey, that is a “narrow” and those protections only benefit a few people. So, let's let things as they are. So conservative of you.

Pittsburgh passed a law with sexual orientation protection and that benefits few – and I'm proud to have that as part of the fabric of our city's legacy. Helping a few people helps us all be better, be stronger, be more whole. At its roots, the ballot question is about non-discrimination. I don't like discrimination, even for a few, and I'm puzzled why you favor it.

- Vote no, posts Sue, “because some are already coaching and teaching in public universities as adjunct faculty (just Google a few names.)” What? Who? Name names! I know of none. Should we google the entire city payroll? And, what might that uncover? I don't have the names of all the city workers. Sue, why don't you send this posting to Michael Lamb, city controller. Does your partner work for CCAC? I don't know what to think. I lost my decoder ring anyway. And, let's say it is true in that perhaps there are a few workers in the city who are already working another part-time job, against the norm and city charter's stipulations, for CCAC and /or Pittsburgh Public Schools – then what? Do you want to whistleblow? Or, would you just forgive them and not allow others the same opportunities? Then vote YES with me. Or, are you just without any logic and wishing to spread fog and doubt?

- Since, as Sue posted, “enforcement of this ban has certainly not been consistent” then it makes sense to vote YES and be done with this opportunity for meaningless rule-breaking. All should know that I championed this ballot question because last year a newly-hired coach was forced off of the PPS job because of his city employment with the department of public works. Real work actions, to my knowledge, have been fully consistent and ethical. He should not have worked last year – and he didn't. But, he should be able to work as a coach next week if we change the charter. And, I hope he applies, gets hired and takes another coaching job as soon as possible.

- Sue thinks a no vote is wise because of a lack of an informed perspective. Wrong. The matter before the voters in the election is for part-time employment. Part-time employment for public-school coaching and adjunct teaching at CCAC is different. The charter's authors didn't visualize every possible situation under the sun for the future of our city. This is an enhancement. Be progressive.

The quote from Mr. O'Connor of city council speaks against a broader exemption as being problematic, but this ballot question is specific and NOT A PROBLEM.

Ms. Rudiak of city council defends the ballot question too. The change is what it is. It is not an exemptions for all types of government side work. It is a question with focus. Perhaps Sue likes uncertainty and sinister plots within her ballot questions. I don't.

- Sue goes on to slam Natalia Rudiak for leaving office at the end of her term. She didn't seek re-election because she is moving on to other chapters in her life. “Who would champion such a thing?” is a direct question from Sue. Answer: A reasonable person who listens to citizens' concerns and does her job while she is hired to do her job. I'm happy that Natalia has not been a lame duck for an entire year.

Sue attempts to throw stones now at the messenger and not the message, a childish ploy.

Sue then plays the not forthcoming victim yet won't converse with me. Joke is on Sue.

Sue gets it wrong again when she posts that the goal is to create more employment and side income opportunities for City employees. Wrong! That is not the goal. Sue knows what the goal is, as the first line of her blog post reads, “… I think students in Pittsburgh Public Schools (PPS) deserve good coaches.” That's the goal. We had a good coach knocked off of a part-time coaching job opportunity because of a city-charter provision that worked AGAINST good coaching. Here is the formula from 2016-17 season on the PPS pool deck: 2 coaches, minus one, equals less coaching. That's bad. Help fix it.

- Sue asks a question for another day and another referendum, “Why not allow employees to do holiday temp work with the postal service?” That's not the issue. Your thinking that voters should pick “NO” because this ballot question is not going to help the postal service is crazy talk. I'm happy Sue thinks coaching is important. No amount of her lengthy googling should get in the way of a YES vote on this simple measure.

- Sue asks: Is it reasonable to amend our City constitution to address select employment vacancies in PPS? Isn’t that the responsibility of PPS? NO! The sticking point is the city, not PPS. The problem is with the city's charter, not PPS. When fixing a problem, go to the source of the problem. Victims are not to blame.

We’re talking 3,100 people who would be ineligible out of the whole population of the City. Is that a reason to change the constitution? YES. Vote yes. Problem fixed. Changes made. No blood required. This is not a drastic measure. I hate to write such a drastic blog post too.

The 3,100 people who work for the city account for the second largest block of employed people in the city. If five great coaches come from the ranks of the city's work force, they could impact hundreds of kids a year. Whole schools and neighborhoods could change. Teen violence might reversed itself. I know that I help to teach about 200 kids how to swim and swim better every year. In the course of my career, more than 10,000 kids have called me “coach.” The impact of a few coaches can be tremendous. I think that some of the folks who work in the city should have the same opportunities to contribute to the community in meaningful ways as I have had the good fortune to do as well.

I've been known to recruit coaching help for employment needs anywhere and everywhere. Even at UPMC and at AGH. Last year, an kid of an AGH employee was employed with our Summer Dreamers Swim & Water Polo Camp. Furthermore, it is HARD to find qualified candidates to coach in part-time positions. There is a world-wide shortage of lifeguards. Coaching shortages are, well, just google it yourself, Sue.

Sue says that this proposed change will disproportionately benefit men. Sue, ever hear of Title IX? There are not fewer opportunities for women coaches. And, women and men make the same money in coaching with PPS as it is a union-negotiated amount. Double-wrong.

OMG Sue, here is my answer for your absurd question that follows. Yes. Anyone can sue anyone at any time. Sue's Q: “Does this set up the possibility for excluded employees to sue the City because they are not able to pursue a sorting gig with the USPS over the holidays?” No one answered that question – except me.

Only a conservative crank would use the lack of a robust research process on the charter provision’s history – paralysis by analysis – as an excuse for a no vote.

Coaching is a privilege. I am privileged. I coach boys and girls. Title IX insures that the boys and girls get equal treatment.

I do not want to see our police union in Harrisburg at the PA Supreme Court in litigation seeking rights to move their homes and their kids into school districts that are out of the city. Rather, I'd be more willing to permit employees of the city, such as those on the police force, to be permitted to coach their sons and daughters and their classmates in the city's schools programs of sports, music, chess, drama, debate – with part-time jobs. For some, being engaged in the lives of their children is important. And, it is important enough that if my city prohibited that from happening, moving out of the city makes great sense. Let's keep those people here.

And you'd rather have a volunteer coach from the ranks of city employees – for further hardships on families. A volunteer coach isn't accountable. A volunteer coach has no standing with the district and can be flicked aside by the PFT in a heart-beat. Clueless odds are high. I do not want evenly applied coaching employment. I want talented, inspiring coaches. You seem to want to keep employees of the city within financial distress.

Your commending of the city employees who put forth this suggestion is misplaced too. A city resident and a PPS coach, acting on my own, seeing the reality of situations, put forth the ballot measure. The city and the district have been reserved. Let's all applaud people who act with integrity and let's all fix flaws, together. Both big and small flaws count. Don't get in the way of progress because it has always been done in another flawed way. This is fair. This is complete for what it is. If you want utopia, put it on the ballot yourself.

A good reason for you to block this YES vote is because a women helped get it in front of the voters and she is quitting. We are losing women in elected roles so we should not pass measures that they help to advance. Come on.

You, Sue, can write the post-office ballot measure for 2018. Go for it.

By the way, off of society's needs can't be put into one YES or NO ballot measure. By voting YES, the citizens of Pittsburgh get to side-step and fix a WORST-PRACTICE clause in the city's charter. It isn't about “best-practices” – but rather about making improvements.

BOOK PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION: Nov 14, 2017

Tuesday, November 14, 2017

6:30 p.m.

Letter Carriers Union Hall, 821 California Avenue, 15212

THE PLOT TO SCAPEGOAT RUSSIA by Dan Kovalik

How the CIA and the Deep State Have Conspired to Vilify Putin, while continuing their policy of permanent war

“A powerful contradiction to the present US narrative of the world… As shown here, fake news is thriving in Washington, DC.” —OLIVER STONE

Dan Kovalik is a union lawyer with the United Steel Workers (USW), and an internationally-recognized Human rights activist and attorney, having travelled more than 30 times to Columbia and Venezuala, as well as to the Congo, Iran and other hotspots around the globe. His firsthand accounts and union perspective are critical contributions to understanding US military activity around the world.

For those involved in important domestic fights, such as healthcare, the environment, labor rights and union drives, immigration, discrimination, upcoming elections, etc., the US military wars and fronts around the world, as well as the yearly increasing already bloated military budget for these adventures, will greatly impact budgets and available funds, domestic programs and every struggle down to the local and community level. We hope you will attend this important presentation and discussion.

Wanted: Running Mates and places to run to!

Time to hit the road to share insights about this ballot question for city voters in the 2017 general election.

Who wants to help spread the word?

Where and when are the meetings being held? 

Who can we talk to about getting an invite to speak to the audiences -- for only a couple of minutes.

Fwd: Time to end the silence!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John H

This is an article worth reading, time to stop whining and to start networking groups together – this is the fight of our lifetimes and if we lose it all humanity loses.

John

Article: The Silence of the Good People (PDF, 483K)

Fwd: Neoliberalism is opposed to people

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John H

Neoliberalism is a market centered ideology which is opposed to all government social programs focused on people, but supportive of government programs supportive of and for subsidizing corporations.  It is not for 'free enterprise'.  Rather it encourages and rewards monopoly power.

John

Link: Neoliberalism Is Real and Fundamentally Opposed to Left Principles

Fwd: Threats abound

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John Hemington 

These days it seems as if threats of various enormity abound almost everywhere.  Cable news seems never to stop selling fear and loathing – regardless of which political agenda is being cast as the evil one.  But there is one very real threat that few media of any stripe are reporting and it may be, in many respects, the most serious of all.  That is the accumulation derivatives by the four major Wall Street mega-banks as detailed in the attached article by Pam and Russ Martens of Wall Street on Parade.  One bank, Citi, holds derivatives with a notional value of $54.8 trillion dollars.  To get an idea of just how problematic this is, the global GDP of all nations is estimated to be only $75.6 trillion in notional value.  As stated in the article, there is no way that there could ever be sufficient counter-parties to cover this in the event of another financial crash.  More importantly, little or nothing has been done since the Great Financial Crisis of 2008 (GFC) to correct the problems in the financial industry which led to the 2008 crash.  Dodd-Frank when passed was too little, too late and it has since then diluted and de-toothed at the behest of these financial titans.  When the next crash comes, and it almost certainly will, since the same basic players remain in charge both in and out of government, it is likely to be far more devastating and destructive than the one which preceded it.

If there was not a sufficient threat from nuclear war given the insane policies put in place by the Trump administration, not to mention the two previous administrations, cataclysmic financial crises almost always lead to global warfare.  We got lucky in 2008 because the financial bleeding was stopped, but the non-financial victims were never made whole as were the bankers who got to keep all of their ill-gotten gains as well as all of their power to continue operating multi-trillion dollar gambling operations – which is what derivatives really are.  Unfortunately, the main stream media will almost never pay attention to the criminals in high places and instead focus on crime in the streets.  As a result, it is likely that, as before, the crisis will almost certainly find most Americans unprepared (though it is certainly difficult for one to know how to prepare for such a collapse).   Because the victims of the 2008 GFC have never been made whole and have since been ignored and/or denigrated by both major political parties, we have the rise of right-wing nationalism and the election of a very dangerous president with little capacity for restraint or for rational decision making.  As such these are extremely volatile times in which almost any event can lead to catastrophic consequences for us all. 

John

Link:

• Why Wall Street Should Be Viewed as a Major National Threat

Fwd: Propaganda 101

From John H

For those of you who depend upon The New York Times for establishing a connection with the 'real world' should read and pay special attention to the attached article.  The most powerful propaganda effort ever waged is now in place and being managed by plutocracy through the main stream media.  And for those of you who believe heart and soul in the Democratic Party should absolutely watch the Real News Network interviews at the Peoples' Summit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvQtXwVdbHU, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJnXLyzqniE, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-pLAbR8PSs  and for a special treat watch this replay of a Jimmy Dore Show discussing Rachel Maddow.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t75EhlBy9Sg

John

Link

• How to write propaganda for the NY Times, PDF

Getting more people eligible to coach in Pittsburgh Public Schools requires a change in the city's charter

Becoming a Libertarian

Nice read.

https://fee.org/articles/how-penn-jillette-became-a-libertarian/

Political Songs are Fun.