Sunday, August 24, 2008
The Meaning of Words
Words like liberal, conservative, progressive, change over time. Parties like Democrats and Republicans change their principles over time, sometimes by takeover by stealth, sometimes by natural evolution. The main lesson for us plain folks is to never get married to the name of a philosophy or a party, blindly following it after it has abandoned the principles that brought us to it in the first place.
I decided that I was a conservative in 1964 when Barry Goldwater ran for president. I recognized that, despite what I was told during my upbringing in New York City, it was not a good idea for poor folks to be Democrats and liberals. What was best for everyone was a small, unobtrusive government that let you keep the fruits of your labor. I registered Republican at the first opportunity (age 21 at that time). Today, I have noted that the Republican Party that nominated Barry Goldwater does not exist any longer. It has drifted into something very different.
A lot of folks who spent their lives saying they were conservative apparently did not notice when a group that called themselves neoconservatives took over their movement and changed it drastically. Today, when you say you are conservative, people don’t think of a freedom lover. Today, to be recognized as a conservative, you need to support the Iraq war and future wars that the neo-cons think is right and proper. You must stand silent to the violations of due process that are everyday doings of the Bush administration. You must be in favor of government interference in interpersonal relationships. Today, if you are against the war, you must be a liberal. If you think that the government should not tell people whom to love, you must be a liberal. And you certainly cannot be a conservative, if you think that sick people can use that devil weed, marijuana to ease their suffering.
Well, I am against the war and I am not a liberal (as currently defined). I believe that the most important value of this nation is its tradition of individual freedom. We have a constitution that protects that freedom. I will support a candidate who supports individual freedom and is obedient to the constitution, no matter what his party label. I will not support a candidate who thinks that obeying the constitution is optional, no matter what his party label.
I am a Libertarian now, because it is the only party that actually takes individual freedom seriously. To prevent long term drift of the party away from this basic principle, We require a simple pledge of new members-
I certify that I do not advocate the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals.
We also have a statement of principles that requires a 7/8 vote at convention to change. We are well aware of the danger of drift and infiltration and have taken steps to slow or prevent it. Apparently the Republicans did not.
I supported Ron Paul for president and I have joined The Hope for America Coalition because these actions help to further my desire for a restoration of the individual freedom that used to by the primary feature of this nation. I care about this because I want my kids to spend their lives in freedom, not in tyranny.
I urge you all who are conservative, to ask yourselves if the Republican Party deserves your support any longer. Please don't answer that the Democrats are worse. Choosing the lesser evil, election after election, gets you the evil that is happening today. Open your mind to the Libertarian Party and its principles.
I decided that I was a conservative in 1964 when Barry Goldwater ran for president. I recognized that, despite what I was told during my upbringing in New York City, it was not a good idea for poor folks to be Democrats and liberals. What was best for everyone was a small, unobtrusive government that let you keep the fruits of your labor. I registered Republican at the first opportunity (age 21 at that time). Today, I have noted that the Republican Party that nominated Barry Goldwater does not exist any longer. It has drifted into something very different.
A lot of folks who spent their lives saying they were conservative apparently did not notice when a group that called themselves neoconservatives took over their movement and changed it drastically. Today, when you say you are conservative, people don’t think of a freedom lover. Today, to be recognized as a conservative, you need to support the Iraq war and future wars that the neo-cons think is right and proper. You must stand silent to the violations of due process that are everyday doings of the Bush administration. You must be in favor of government interference in interpersonal relationships. Today, if you are against the war, you must be a liberal. If you think that the government should not tell people whom to love, you must be a liberal. And you certainly cannot be a conservative, if you think that sick people can use that devil weed, marijuana to ease their suffering.
Well, I am against the war and I am not a liberal (as currently defined). I believe that the most important value of this nation is its tradition of individual freedom. We have a constitution that protects that freedom. I will support a candidate who supports individual freedom and is obedient to the constitution, no matter what his party label. I will not support a candidate who thinks that obeying the constitution is optional, no matter what his party label.
I am a Libertarian now, because it is the only party that actually takes individual freedom seriously. To prevent long term drift of the party away from this basic principle, We require a simple pledge of new members-
I certify that I do not advocate the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals.
We also have a statement of principles that requires a 7/8 vote at convention to change. We are well aware of the danger of drift and infiltration and have taken steps to slow or prevent it. Apparently the Republicans did not.
I supported Ron Paul for president and I have joined The Hope for America Coalition because these actions help to further my desire for a restoration of the individual freedom that used to by the primary feature of this nation. I care about this because I want my kids to spend their lives in freedom, not in tyranny.
I urge you all who are conservative, to ask yourselves if the Republican Party deserves your support any longer. Please don't answer that the Democrats are worse. Choosing the lesser evil, election after election, gets you the evil that is happening today. Open your mind to the Libertarian Party and its principles.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
Group Guilt
In the last few weeks I have met two different people with the same fantastic opinion. They both stated proudly and loudly, with no shame, that it is right and proper for us (the United States) to kill millions of Muslims. They believe that the attacks of 9-11 and all the insurgent activity in Iraq and Afghanistan are caused by religious zealots and that this justifies our killing them by the millions.
In their opinion, it doesn't matter that only a few hundred crazies were responsible for the 9-11 attacks and the prior attacks on the WTC, the USS Cole and the various embassy bombings. It doesn't matter that the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan are merely getting revenge for the deaths of their relatives at the hands of our military invasion and occupation forces.
Mass murder based on group guilt spread liberally without cause to all Muslims is just fine by them. This is mass murder, no different in kind from what Hitler had the German army do to the Jews and Gypsies during WW2. Again there, a whole religion or ethnic group was judged guilty for the crimes of a few.
How can this happen? How can Americans go along with this. It is massively evil and shameful! Yet they do not see this.
So, the next time you are thinking about the Holocaust and wondering how it happened, how the German people let it happen, you will know the answer. With sufficient propaganda and a sufficiently dumbed down populace, you can sell anything. You can convince a strong and powerful nation that they are in mortal danger from a few hundred crazies with minor weapons. You can attack a nation without cause and thereby create new enemies and use their revenge tactics as a causus belli for the next advance in your war plans and get away with it.
I just want to remind those advocates of mass murder that Germany was defeated and was forced to admit their horrible and evil wrongs and pay massive reparations. The world looks upon that period of history with horror and disbelief. Do you really want to try it again? This time against a target religion not of a few million like the Jews but a few hundred million Muslims.
In their opinion, it doesn't matter that only a few hundred crazies were responsible for the 9-11 attacks and the prior attacks on the WTC, the USS Cole and the various embassy bombings. It doesn't matter that the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan are merely getting revenge for the deaths of their relatives at the hands of our military invasion and occupation forces.
Mass murder based on group guilt spread liberally without cause to all Muslims is just fine by them. This is mass murder, no different in kind from what Hitler had the German army do to the Jews and Gypsies during WW2. Again there, a whole religion or ethnic group was judged guilty for the crimes of a few.
How can this happen? How can Americans go along with this. It is massively evil and shameful! Yet they do not see this.
So, the next time you are thinking about the Holocaust and wondering how it happened, how the German people let it happen, you will know the answer. With sufficient propaganda and a sufficiently dumbed down populace, you can sell anything. You can convince a strong and powerful nation that they are in mortal danger from a few hundred crazies with minor weapons. You can attack a nation without cause and thereby create new enemies and use their revenge tactics as a causus belli for the next advance in your war plans and get away with it.
I just want to remind those advocates of mass murder that Germany was defeated and was forced to admit their horrible and evil wrongs and pay massive reparations. The world looks upon that period of history with horror and disbelief. Do you really want to try it again? This time against a target religion not of a few million like the Jews but a few hundred million Muslims.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Sound Money
Dr Ron Paul has been advocating a return to sound money. If you don't want to be paying a continuous inflation tax, you should want sound money as well. Historically, the only way to prevent inflation is to strictly limit the amount of money in circulation. How do you do that? Why you make the money warehouse receipts for some commodity. That way, there can be no money printed that is not matched by stocks of the monetary commodity available at all times for redemption of the paper money.
Again, history teaches us that gold or silver have been the best commodity to use as a medium of exchange. They each have intrinsic value because of their usefulness (jewelry, electronics, chemistry) and can easily be made into coins and subdivided endlessly. The key to sound money is the concept of a commodity that is interchangeable with the paper money. It is less important what the commodity is, so long as there is a limit on the issuance of paper money (or its electronic equivalent).
Today, the Federal Reserve Bank can create new money at whim to lower interest rates, bail out defaulting financial institutions, buy votes or finance wars. The result of this money creation is exactly the same as when Uncle Vinnie down the block prints up his really good counterfeit $50s. The money supply goes up and all the money becomes worth less. Did you get that? There is no difference to you whether the Fed issues the money or Uncle Vinnie issues the money. The effect on the economy is the same.
It only makes a difference to the guy who gets to spend the money the first time. Either Uncle Vinnie gets to buy his new car or the political cronies of the Fed get the money. Either way, after that first spend, it is just more money in circulation.
So now let's look at some evidence to back this up. Oil has gotten very expensive lately. It is running between $90 and $100 per barrel. But that is when you measure it in terms of dollars. If you measure it in terms of gold, it is still about 1/10 ounce of gold per barrel-mostly unchanged. So the price increase you see is really the lower value of the dollar caused by all that counterfeit money, mostly from Uncle Fed.
So next time you hear some media expert laughing at Dr Paul for advocating the gold standard, you give him a good laugh. He is the idiot!
Again, history teaches us that gold or silver have been the best commodity to use as a medium of exchange. They each have intrinsic value because of their usefulness (jewelry, electronics, chemistry) and can easily be made into coins and subdivided endlessly. The key to sound money is the concept of a commodity that is interchangeable with the paper money. It is less important what the commodity is, so long as there is a limit on the issuance of paper money (or its electronic equivalent).
Today, the Federal Reserve Bank can create new money at whim to lower interest rates, bail out defaulting financial institutions, buy votes or finance wars. The result of this money creation is exactly the same as when Uncle Vinnie down the block prints up his really good counterfeit $50s. The money supply goes up and all the money becomes worth less. Did you get that? There is no difference to you whether the Fed issues the money or Uncle Vinnie issues the money. The effect on the economy is the same.
It only makes a difference to the guy who gets to spend the money the first time. Either Uncle Vinnie gets to buy his new car or the political cronies of the Fed get the money. Either way, after that first spend, it is just more money in circulation.
So now let's look at some evidence to back this up. Oil has gotten very expensive lately. It is running between $90 and $100 per barrel. But that is when you measure it in terms of dollars. If you measure it in terms of gold, it is still about 1/10 ounce of gold per barrel-mostly unchanged. So the price increase you see is really the lower value of the dollar caused by all that counterfeit money, mostly from Uncle Fed.
So next time you hear some media expert laughing at Dr Paul for advocating the gold standard, you give him a good laugh. He is the idiot!
Saturday, December 08, 2007
Why I Support Dr Ron Paul for President
What follows is a transcript of a speech that I gave on 12/07/07 at a caucus held under the auspices of the National Presidential Caucus. It was designated as a Republican Caucus for Johnson County, KS
Dr Paul is the only Republican candidate who is unequivocally against the Iraq War and who pledges to bring the troops home with all deliberate and safe speed. He understands that the war in Iraq was pointless, illegal, unconstitutional and a moral horror.
The vast majority of the US public agrees with this. What chance does any other Republican candidate have to beat the Democrats while arguing for continued war?
The war has brought us only bad. We have lost roughly 4000 US soldiers, killed Iraqis totaling close to a million and displaced more than 2 million. This has won us no hearts and minds. Rather it has made us new enemies. Every dead Iraqi has an extended family who wants revenge.
How do the other Republican candidates, who wear their pro-life credentials proudly when it comes to abortion, have no problem with killing innocent Iraqis?
We have increased our national debt by almost $1 trillion to achieve these dubious results. This huge increase in the debt, coupled with runaway spending at home, has placed our economic future in grave peril. The dollar is collapsing before our very eyes. The Federal Reserve is out of options. Their trick of creating new money out of thin air doesn’t fool the suckers any longer.
Dr Paul understands that money only works as a store of value if it is commodity based. Fiat money, like we have now, has a 100% historic failure rate. It always, eventually, inflates away to nothingness.
Conservative Republican candidates always tell us they want a small government and strict constructionist judges. This is their talk, but that is not their walk. Violations of the constitution are an every day event.
Where in the constitution does is say that:
• The president can lock people up without charge or trial
• Wiretaps can occur without search warrants
• People can be kidnapped from one country (without extradition) and sent to another for torture
• The Federal government can have anything to say about anything not on the short list of functions in Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution
Our freedom is melting away as we look. We are significantly less free than 6 years ago. We can not stand idly by. We owe it to our children to give them as much freedom as we inherited from our parents. The only candidate who will help us get that freedom back is Dr Ron Paul.
Dr Paul is the only Republican candidate who is unequivocally against the Iraq War and who pledges to bring the troops home with all deliberate and safe speed. He understands that the war in Iraq was pointless, illegal, unconstitutional and a moral horror.
The vast majority of the US public agrees with this. What chance does any other Republican candidate have to beat the Democrats while arguing for continued war?
The war has brought us only bad. We have lost roughly 4000 US soldiers, killed Iraqis totaling close to a million and displaced more than 2 million. This has won us no hearts and minds. Rather it has made us new enemies. Every dead Iraqi has an extended family who wants revenge.
How do the other Republican candidates, who wear their pro-life credentials proudly when it comes to abortion, have no problem with killing innocent Iraqis?
We have increased our national debt by almost $1 trillion to achieve these dubious results. This huge increase in the debt, coupled with runaway spending at home, has placed our economic future in grave peril. The dollar is collapsing before our very eyes. The Federal Reserve is out of options. Their trick of creating new money out of thin air doesn’t fool the suckers any longer.
Dr Paul understands that money only works as a store of value if it is commodity based. Fiat money, like we have now, has a 100% historic failure rate. It always, eventually, inflates away to nothingness.
Conservative Republican candidates always tell us they want a small government and strict constructionist judges. This is their talk, but that is not their walk. Violations of the constitution are an every day event.
Where in the constitution does is say that:
• The president can lock people up without charge or trial
• Wiretaps can occur without search warrants
• People can be kidnapped from one country (without extradition) and sent to another for torture
• The Federal government can have anything to say about anything not on the short list of functions in Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution
Our freedom is melting away as we look. We are significantly less free than 6 years ago. We can not stand idly by. We owe it to our children to give them as much freedom as we inherited from our parents. The only candidate who will help us get that freedom back is Dr Ron Paul.
Labels:
Libertarian Principle,
Politics
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Ron Paul vs the Establishment
We are seeing some interesting politics these days. It will be something to tell our grandchildren about. After decades of the two party system handing us a pair of really bad candidates, over and over again, so bad that sometimes we really could not discern who was the lesser evil, we finally have a potential candidate who actually knows the rules.
Ron Paul has apparently read the constitution and knows what the federal government is not supposed to do. Unfortunately, if he wins, he will upset quite a few apple carts. There are many special interests that have made careers and fortunes from the idiotic and tyrannical (not to mention unconstitutional) actions of the government. This has been going on for so long that the average Joe cannot conceive of the nation operating without all these expensive and wasteful federal programs. I guess that multiple generations of public schooling is part of that problem.
Folks-When the government takes money from you in the form of taxes approaching 50% of your earnings and promises you benefits in exchange, do you really think this will be beneficial to you in total? Do you think that someone else will pay for your benefits and you will profit? You know that is not going to happen! The average Joe will surely lose on that deal. The majority will surely lose on that deal. You will lose control of how your money is spent.
Consider a single segment of socialism to see that is cannot be good on balance. Let us say that the government takes on the job of every one's health insurance company. They do not charge actual premiums but rather raise some tax to cover the cost. Now federal medical spending becomes a matter of congress passing budgets. Let us suppose that in some future year, they want to fight another pointless war to profit some contractor friends. They decide that the risk from the current demon is so great that we have to cut health spending to pay for it. They set up rationing such as waiting lists for expensive operations. Maybe they decide that folks over age XX have very little life left anyway, so why waste the government's money on them. Let them languish on the waiting list till they die. So now that older person, who paid plenty of taxes toward health care has no control over that money that he needs to save his life. It is now the government's money, not his.
Nevertheless, after a few years of that program, people will get used to it and be unable to conceive of medical care without the government as intermediary.
Most everything the government does for you could be better done for yourself if you had control of the tax money back.
If Ron Paul wins, we will start the long process of ending these programs, which are doomed in the long term in any case.
I have heard people say but what about medical care for the poor. Do you how many fewer poor there would be if there were no income tax? How much better every one's standard of living would be without the income tax and the inflation tax?
Support Ron Paul for president if you want:
Ron Paul has apparently read the constitution and knows what the federal government is not supposed to do. Unfortunately, if he wins, he will upset quite a few apple carts. There are many special interests that have made careers and fortunes from the idiotic and tyrannical (not to mention unconstitutional) actions of the government. This has been going on for so long that the average Joe cannot conceive of the nation operating without all these expensive and wasteful federal programs. I guess that multiple generations of public schooling is part of that problem.
Folks-When the government takes money from you in the form of taxes approaching 50% of your earnings and promises you benefits in exchange, do you really think this will be beneficial to you in total? Do you think that someone else will pay for your benefits and you will profit? You know that is not going to happen! The average Joe will surely lose on that deal. The majority will surely lose on that deal. You will lose control of how your money is spent.
Consider a single segment of socialism to see that is cannot be good on balance. Let us say that the government takes on the job of every one's health insurance company. They do not charge actual premiums but rather raise some tax to cover the cost. Now federal medical spending becomes a matter of congress passing budgets. Let us suppose that in some future year, they want to fight another pointless war to profit some contractor friends. They decide that the risk from the current demon is so great that we have to cut health spending to pay for it. They set up rationing such as waiting lists for expensive operations. Maybe they decide that folks over age XX have very little life left anyway, so why waste the government's money on them. Let them languish on the waiting list till they die. So now that older person, who paid plenty of taxes toward health care has no control over that money that he needs to save his life. It is now the government's money, not his.
Nevertheless, after a few years of that program, people will get used to it and be unable to conceive of medical care without the government as intermediary.
Most everything the government does for you could be better done for yourself if you had control of the tax money back.
If Ron Paul wins, we will start the long process of ending these programs, which are doomed in the long term in any case.
I have heard people say but what about medical care for the poor. Do you how many fewer poor there would be if there were no income tax? How much better every one's standard of living would be without the income tax and the inflation tax?
Support Ron Paul for president if you want:
- To get our freedom back from the rapidly expanding police state,
- To end the idiotic war in Iraq and prevent an even more idiotic war in Iran
- To stop the debasement of the dollar and return to a sound currency
- To stop imprisonment without trial
- To stop torture in our name
- To stop extraordinary rendition (outsourced torture)
- To stop wiretapping without warrant
- To stop the empire from bankrupting us
- To ensure a future of freedom rather than tyranny for our posterity
- To stop some horrible civil liberties violations just too numerous to list here.
We find ourselves at a key turning point in the history of our nation. For many decades, we allowed the government to grow in power and take much of our wealth to support welfare programs. It has been a continual loser for us but many of us know nothing else and cannot conceive of freedom. But we owe it to our posterity to preserve and restore freedom. Otherwise they will curse us for our apathy, for putting them in the position of having to physically fight for their freedom back. We can still get it back with a vote. Let's not pass this opportunity by. We won't have another in our lifetimes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
