Liberty Maven

Quote of the Day: “The problem isn’t the abuse of power, it’s the power to abuse.” — Michael Cloud

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is urging people to call the White House TODAY, and urge President Obama to veto any Patriot Act renewal that doesn’t contain civil liberties protections.

We agree. This is a good opportunity to remind the President that he promised to reform the Patriot Act when he was a candidate.

You can learn more at the EFF website, and we borrow some language from here in our letter below.

But we need to maintain our pressure on Congress too . . .

* Tell Congress you want them to REPEAL the Patriot Act outright
* Any renewal must contain the strongest possible civil liberties provisions

Please tell Congress what you want.

The hardwired message says, “Repeal the Patriot Act. Do NOT renew any of its provisions.”

You may borrow from or copy these additional comments . . . Read More »

Marriage is and has long been a cultural, social and wedge issue in American politics. One of the more dramatic turns of defining marriage came in the landmark 1967 Supreme Court decision Loving v. Virginia in which the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that bans on interracial marriage were unconstitutional. Some forty years later, interracial marriage inspires little debate and has mostly been seen as an acceptable definition of marriage. However, as the twenty-first century dawned and developed, the issue of marriage definition has again come into American politics.

In 1996, President Clinton signed the federal Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA into law. DOMA, which President Obama has recently (and unconstitutionally) declared unconstitutional, said that the United States federal Government recognized marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman. It also said that no state would have to recognize the gay marriage of another state. Thus, an Alabama gay couple could not be married in Massachusetts and return home as newlyweds.

In 2008, Californians passed Proposition Eight, a measure barring gays from marrying in the Golden State. The proposition had passed narrowly in the general election and was later struck down by federal judge Vaughn Walker. A similar measure had previously been declared unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court.

Still, all the talk about how government defines marriage begs another question: should the government define marriage?

In several interviews, former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura has expressed the idea that “love is bigger than government” and argues that government should recognize civil unions between any two consenting adults and that the term “marriage” should be saved for churches and the private sector.

This is an idea that Libertarians should embrace. Americans have become hung up on the term “marriage”. Still, public opinion poll has showed time and time again that the vast majority of Americans support basic rights for gay and lesbian individuals including legal and sometimes financial benefits. Granting every adult, consenting couple a civil union would allow all citizens the rights they deserve as far as their partners are concerned. Additionally, it would continue the support of separation between church and state.

For too long, the American People have allowed their government to define what is and what is not marriage. A couple who love each other shouldn’t need the State’s permission to bind themselves legally and equivalently together. Civil Unions would grant equality to law abiding citizens and would promote freedom for all individuals regardless of their political, professional or marital positions.

by Michael Pento, Senior Economist at Euro Pacific Capital (www.europac.net)

By its very definition, fiat money is something created out of thin air: the word ”fiat” is Latin for ”let it be done” (as in, by decree). But the convenience that such a currency system offers central bankers is paid at the expense of savers. With nothing of real or lasting value on which to anchor, the value of fiat currencies can always blow away like ashes on a windy day.

For the past 40 years or so, every country on the planet has relied on fiat money. To a very large extent, this means that the national economies are far more exposed to the whims of their central bankers than they have been in the past. So, if central bankers go off their meds, the danger to the currency becomes profound. Unfortunately, at America’s Federal Reserve, it seems the inmates are now running the asylum.

We are being led to believe that falling prices are evil, and that only an increase in inflation can save our economy. From the moment the financial crisis took hold in 2008, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has looked to lower the dollar’s value and cause asset prices to rise – especially in real estate. But his pitch is wildly off the mark. The Fed can’t control the exact rate of inflation, nor can it direct where inflation will be distributed across the economy. In other words, inflation is like a knuckleball: once you let it loose, you’re never really sure where it’s going to go. And Bernanke’s pitches are so wild it would make Tim Wakefield jealous.

Read More »

DownsizeDC.org was the first organization to protest the REAL ID Act, six years ago.

Thankfully, countless other groups took up the charge, and secured nullification in 24 state legislatures.

Because of all that pressure, the Dept. of Homeland Security is once again extending the deadline for states to implement REAL ID.

Let’s build on the momentum. Tell Congress to kill REAL ID.

You may borrow from or copy this letter . . .   Read More »

Quote of the Day: “. . . entitlement to Social Security benefits is not a contractual right” — The U.S. Supreme Court, ruling in Flemming v. Nestor (1960).

The feedback we received about our Social Security campaign makes it obvious that many people have been seriously misled by political saviors. What follows is for those who prefer fact to fantasy . . .

The story of one person can tell the whole story of Social Security.

Ida Fuller, a law secretary from Vermont, was the first person to receive monthly Social Security checks.

* Her first check came on February 1, 1940.
* By the time she received this check she had paid a total of $24.75 into the Social Security System.
* Her first check was for $22.54.
* By the time Fuller received her second check she had already received more than she had contributed to Social Security.
* She lived to be 100 and collected a total of $22,888.92.

It should be perfectly clear to anyone who can handle basic math, that Ms. Fuller’s benefits did NOT come from amounts she had contributed into a trust fund. Instead . . .

Ms. Fuller’s benefits came from the Social Security taxes paid by her children and grand-children over the remaining 35 years of her life. In other words, the taxes WE pay go to fund the benefits of previous generations, NOT our own benefits.

The way Social Security functioned for Ida Fuller is how it still operates today.

Read More »

The “library records” provision of the so-called Patriot Act could also be known as the “gun records” provision, because it also allows the FBI to seize the forms you use to buy guns.

This infamous provision, Section 215, is a direct assault on your Fourth Amendment rights because it allows the FBI to obtain personal information about you, without a warrant and without your knowledge.

Section 215 is set to expire in May, along with two other provisions. But Congress will probably renew these provisions unless it hears from YOU.

Tell Congress to repeal the ENTIRE Patriot Act, and renew NONE of its provisions.

You may borrow from or copy this letter . . . Read More »

Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, and host of The Peter Schiff Show, broadcasting live from WSTC Norwalk CT from 10am to noon Eastern time every weekday, and streaming at www.schiffradio.com

One of the immediate financial consequences of the catastrophic Japanese earthquake is that Japan needs to call on its huge cache of foreign exchange reserves to rebuild its shattered infrastructure. To pay for domestic projects, Japan will require yen - not dollars, euros or Swiss francs. As a result of these conversions, the yen rallied considerably after the quake struck.

But a surging yen runs counter to the macro-economic currency plans favored by most global economists. In order to maintain Japan’s position as a net-exporter of manufactured goods and net-buyer of US debt, the yen needs to stay down. So, the G-7 group of the world’s leading economies has intervened in the foreign exchange market by selling yen holdings, thereby pushing the currency down. In the short-term, their efforts appear to have been ”successful,” with the yen dropping sharply today.

Theoretically, this action is being taken to preserve export earnings, but this is only a secondary effect. Primarily, in making this move, the G7 is saying that the key to rebuilding Japan’s earthquake-ravaged economy is to raise the price of everything it needs to buy.

After all, absolute purchasing power is far more important than nominal export earnings. When the yen gains in strength, Japan earns more dollars from its exports, which could now be used to purchase the raw materials necessary to rebuild its infrastructure. However, by weakening the yen, Japan earns fewer dollars for its exports, increasing the economic burden of reconstruction.

Conventional wisdom is that a weakening currency is a boon for economic growth and exports; however, history does not support this view.

Read More »

Quotes of the Day

“No Intervention!” banner displayed by Libyan insurgents

“We have to get him ourselves.” – Libyan demonstrator

“Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her (America’s) heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. – John Quincy Adams, then-Secretary of State, 1821

We are inspired by the desire of the Libyan people to overthrow Muammar Qadhafi. Sadly, Qadhafi has reacted violently to their protests, and a civil war is now being waged.

We hope the insurgents are committed to freedom, and if so, we hope they will prevail.

But they must to do it without our help. This is THEIR struggle, not ours. As the letter below shows, a U.S. military presence may only undermine the insurgency, not help it.

The good news is that the Obama Administration has shown skepticism toward intervention.

The bad news is that the advocates for intervention are prominent and vocal.

To counter their pressure, we need more members of Congress to speak out in opposition.

Read More »

by Michael Pento, Senior Economist at Euro Pacific Capital (www.europac.net)

A few months ago, the chorus sung by the recovery cheerleaders reached a crescendo when expanding consumer credit statistics and surging US trade deficits provided them with “evidence” of an economic rebound. In declaring victory, they overlooked the very nucleus of this past crisis: namely, the enormous debt levels and bubbling inflation that created fragile asset bubbles. If they had recognized the original problem, they would have remained silent. In reality, only a reduction in US debt levels or increase in the value of the dollar would have signaled a budding recovery; but, thanks to the Federal Reserve and Obama Administration, there is virtually no way those results will ever be seen.

Quote of the Day: “He (the King) has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.” – Declaration of Independence

Our name describes our goal. We want to downsize the Federal State. But the little states need dramatic downsizing too. For instance, Michael Hodges shows that . . .

* There would be 12.4 million fewer state and local employees if the number hired had remained proportional to population growth since 1946.
* The cost of state and local government went from 6% of GDP in 1946 to 18% today
* If state and local spending was proportional to 1946, the taxpayer would save $4,600 this year alone.

Even worse, all the extra spending at the state and local level seems to be buying you more corruption, more incompetence, and more abuse . . . Read More »