Liberty Maven

Republicans displaying their “Red State pride” following the results of Tuesday’s elections need to face reality. The two GOP gubernatorial election victories in Virginia and New Jersey were unsurprising and expected. Now if a true limited government conservative beat out Bloomberg in the New York mayoral race there would be a reason for celebration.

The reason Bob McDonnell beat out Creigh Deeds in Virginia was not because McDonnell represents some new style small government Republican. McDonnell won because Deeds made campaign mistakes. McDonnell made none. Deeds lost the race more than McDonnell won it.

The same is true for the New Jersey race. Corzine, a former chairman at Goldman Sachs, easily became a scapegoat for a failing economy and political corruption. So, he lost.

What Tuesday’s election results really demonstrated was a lack of conviction for either Democrats or Republicans. When the political spectrum shines red, then blue, then red, then blue, over and over again something tangible comes to light:

America is not rooting for either party to win. America is rooting for the underdog.

Read More »

Allow me to apologize in advance for my continued adoration of the great Robert Higgs. In his latest piece he details the reasons why he is hesitant to champion “solutions” to the tyranny of State power. Higgs is a modern day H.L. Mencken. Sure, he’s a cynic and some may consider him a pessimist, but he’s always thought-provoking and entertaining for freedom-loving readers.

Here’s an excerpt:

I trust that by this point I need not belabor my point at greater length. To recapitulate: “solutions” to the ongoing growth of government are available for a dime a dozen. I have a bag full of them myself, and every one of them is utterly worthless as a means of achieving the ultimate goal. Every genuine solution must be carried through, and any serious solution will require enough people and money to carry out the activities necessary to bring it about. Marshalling people and money may in turn require ideological conversions on a substantial scale, which themselves may require a great many people and a great deal of money, if such conversions are possible at all, given the existing configuration of vested interests (broadly construed).

Moreover, another potent constraint always lurks in the background. Although we need not spend much time at present in dwelling on this issue, the fact remains that if any truly effective measures were approved to rein in the government, the rulers in all likelihood would resort to whatever legal or illegal violence proved necessary to prevent those measures from taking effect. Thus, I am quite sure, for example, that if Ron Paul were ever, by a miracle of miracles, to be elected president, he would not live to take the oath of office. Opponents of the government’s ongoing growth must bear in mind that we are dealing with violent, heavily armed, utterly unscrupulous people who, if pushed to the brink, will stop at nothing to retain their power and privileges.

Take time to read the entire article here.

The House Democrats released their latest attempt at a health care bill yesterday. Feel free to read all 1990 pages of it here in PDF form. I’ve been perusing it all day long because I, apparently, enjoy pain. So much pain that I’m starting to feel sick. Man, they better pass this bill soon or I may die.

Well, that’s what they want you to think. I want to know why the debate is now all about whether or not there should be a public option and little else? This shows us how Obama and his fellow looters are now firmly in the lead on this debate. The argument is no longer about whether we should have the government more involved in health care, but whether the government should provide health care.

The question is no longer “why are we doing this?” Instead, the question is “how do we do it?”

If Pelosi has her way, this is how:

The new House proposal is similar to one drafted by Democrats months ago. It requires Americans to buy health insurance by 2013 or pay a fine, creates a government-run program similar to Medicare to compete with private insurers and lets 15 million additional people enroll in Medicaid by easing eligibility requirements.

But in an effort to make the bill more appealing to moderates in her party, Pelosi altered some of the fine print. The proposed government-run “public option,” for instance, would negotiate for how much to pay doctors and hospitals rather than relying on government-set rates, as Medicare does.

Echoing concerns raised by his Republican colleagues, Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan said the bill’s heft, at 1,990 pages, indicated how it would expand the government’s role in health care: “Families will face higher taxes,” he said.

Replacing the above word “higher” with “astronomical” would be more honest. One need not read past page 4 (3d) to find the most offensive words to free market liberty loving Americans:

“initiates shared responsibility among workers, employers, and the Government; so that all Americans have coverage of essential health benefits.”

The word “initiates” should be replaced with the more honest word, “forces”. This phrase is a pure unadulterated call for socialism. When you force someone to share, it’s no longer sharing. It is theft, well-intended theft, but theft nonetheless.

Why do we get put in jail if we steal money to give to the poor yet it is perfectly fine for the government to do it without repercussions? I suppose the answer is: they own the jails.

Why do we get put in jail if we murder someone yet it is perfectly fine for government troops to kill people?

Are government humans more special than civilian humans? They seem to be able to operate outside the scope of morality.

The bill would establish a new federal government department inappropriately called the “Health Choices Administration” with the “Health Choices Commissioner” at the head. I can’t wait for their ad slogan to come out: “The Health Choices Administration: Be Nice, we can choose whether you live or die!”

Under this bill the Health Choices Commissioner has the power to regulate a new “market” they call the “Health Services Exchange”. This is the so-called new “free market” where the government public option health care is to compete with private health insurers. Yet somehow this is supposed to allow private insurers to compete on a level playing field? Please.

This bill becoming law would signal the end of private health insurance. It is only a matter of time before the public option will be the only option.

The government owns the jails now. The government tells you what you can put in your body. With socialized medicine the government is just continuing its assault on individual liberty. There is no “I”, only “We”.

Ron Paul appeared on Larry King Live tonight following Michael Moore to refute (and agree) with some of what Moore said. It was a very good appearance by Paul. He spoke about health care, foreign policy, and the difference between capitalism and corporatism.

Check it out below.

Ron Paul questioned Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner today on Capitol Hill. Both men seemed to be talking past each other a bit. Geithner reminds me of a friend who never gives you a concrete answer; thus, he is perfect for his position as tax collector. I cannot resist asking the question… what is going on with his hair? Did it always look like that or is it just due to poor video quality?

The neo-conservative principles found in much of today’s establishment Republican Party are purely Machiavellian. They will lie, cheat, and steal to maintain power or stomp on anyone in their path. This has me concerned about the Rand Paul vs. Trey Grayson Kentucky GOP primary. The war of words are beginning to fly between the candidates. A potential larger problem is brewing though that has little to do with the campaign. It has to to with the election itself.

No, I’m not talking about the voting machines. What I’m talking about is this:

This is what we find at the top of Kentucky’s State Board Of Elections web site. Rand Paul’s opponent in the primary is the Chairman of the Board of Elections. I’m not familiar with Kentucky law, but I can only assume that this position is automatically filled by the Secretary of State.

Trey Grayson is Kentucky’s Secretary of State.

By pointing this out I’m not suggesting that Grayson will commit some kind of voter fraud and “adjust” the election result numbers to his own benefit. In fact, I doubt he could get away with it. What I am suggesting is that if Grayson ends up winning by a small margin things could get quite ugly. Accusations from the more “vocal” Ron Paul / Rand Paul supporters would likely follow, perhaps even a lawsuit or two.

Read More »

Immediately after Barack Obama won the election last November I published an article revealing my own rather cursory investigation of former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. I wanted to know more about him because I thought he had the potential to be a viable liberty-loving Presidential candidate in 2012. While I did discover some potential chinks in his armor, I concluded with the following:

It would be very difficult for me to not support Johnson if he were to run for President in 2012. As of right now, In my view he is the best positioned candidate to carry forward the message of liberty within the Republican Party. He may not be perfect on specific issues here or there, but Ron Paulians would be hard pressed to find another Republican candidate with his record and political viability. He served as a Governor for eight years. He didn’t raise taxes as Governor once. He promoted private business and free markets over government corporatism and regulation. Finally, and perhaps most pertinent, he enthusiastically endorsed Ron Paul for President.

There has been very minimal evidence for a Johnson 2012 bid until now. Jason Pye at UnitedLiberty.org reports that Johnson has formed a PAC and is set to release a book in December entitled “Seven Principles For Good Government”.

A few web sites have been set up by supporters in an effort to coax Johnson into running for President such as JohnsonForAmerica.com.

With this latest news it appears that Johnson is warming up to jump in the fray. I can see it now at the first GOP primary debate sometime in 2011:

Fox News Debate Moderator: Governor Johnson, you’ve been an outspoken critic of the drug war and support the decriminalization of marijuana. These positions don’t seem like Republican positions. This raises questions about your electability. Do you have any sir?

Gary Johnson: Who am I, Ron Paul?

Let us hope so, but this time, let us hope he wins.

Ron Paul is a hypocrite on health care along with 54 other Republicans, according to House Democrat Anthony Weiner (NY).

WASHINGTON, DC—A new study by Representative Anthony Weiner (D – Queens & Brooklyn), member of the Health Subcommittee and Co-Chair of the Caucus on the Middle Class, revealed that 151 members of the House and Senate currently receive government-funded; government-administered single-payer health care – Medicare.

On the list of recipients are 55 Republicans who have steadfastly opposed other Americans getting the public option, like the one they have chosen.

Weiner said, “Even in a town known for hypocrisy, this list of 55 Members of Congress deserve some sort of prize. They apparently think the public option is ok for them, but not anyone else.”

And Ron Paul is on his list. Why?

It is extremely difficult for me to believe that Ron Paul’s name appears on this list legitimately. According to many sources he refused to accept Medicare while practicing medicine. He’s known as a man with integrity who practices what he preaches. I could find no other sources refuting and explaining why Paul’s name appears on the list, but admittedly, I didn’t look very hard.

I’m curious if there is a reasonable explanation from Paul such as the argument he uses for putting in earmarks for his constituents and then voting against them. Or maybe Weiner’s “study” is the equivalent of quoting people out of context and Paul doesn’t accept Medicare at all. In any case, I think an explanation is warranted.

What is hiding in plain site about Weiner’s argument though, is that he is making the assumption that the health care public option is equivalent to Medicare, which is broke. Yet they also argue that the public option will lower health care costs. Hypocrisy is an epidemic in the halls of Congress.

Well, it was only a matter of time before this happened. Actions such as these are the reason the word “cynic” was created. Ron Paul’s HR.1207 (S.604 in the Senate) which would require a complete audit of the Federal Reserve has 303 cosponsors in the House and 30 in the Senate. Yesterday, a new bill was introduced by obviously bought and paid for lawmakers that is a “waterboarded” version of Ron Paul’s bill.

“The Federal Reserve Accountability Act” was introduced by Democrat Jeff Merkley and Republican Bob Corker yesterday. The bill takes the cake out of Paul’s bill and leaves nothing but the frosting.

The bill avoids review of the Fed’s regular lending programs, such as the longstanding discount window, and its interest-rate decisions.

So, it excludes the fundamentals, the very actions 75% of the American people say they want to know about. The attitude of these so-called representatives is reprehensible.

I’m willing to bet that Merkley and Corker have some large donors in the banking industry.

This may be expected, but it doesn’t mean those of us that support a full audit as outlined in Ron Paul’s bill should just lay down. If anything, the fight has just begun. Please call your representatives and make sure they understand the difference between the full audit and the waterboarded audit introduced yesterday. Tell them that you will not accept anything other than a full audit. It is time to take off the gloves and fight. It’s going to get dirty in DC. Well, more dirty than it already is.

Here is a PDF of the new bill.

Here is a Press Release from the Campaign For Liberty about the bill.

This morning Ron Paul appeared for an interview on the state of the economy and the Goldman Sachs “bailout” on CNN “American Morning”.

As usual Dr. Paul defends the free market even when asked rather convoluted questions about “how much” the government should support the market. I found the interview a bit odd. In that both the host and Paul were trying to find some kind of middle ground between a government managed economy and a free market position. The common point implied that the government shouldn’t be bailing out these big Wall Street firms like Goldman Sachs yet they continue to use tax payer money to do so.

Check out the video below. NOTE: The audio/video sync appears to be off as is custom on some videos processed by Youtube.