Liberty Maven

“All Warfare is Deception… There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited.” – Sun Tzu, circa 250 BC

Originally published on November 14, 2009, at http://towneforcongress.com/platform-issues/afghanistan-war

While Republican Bush II once famously claimed he was “the decider,” the ‘Change We Can Believe In’ promised by his replacement, the Democrat Obama, is hardly any different in regards to the Afghanistan and Pakistan wars.  The media and American people breathlessly await the President’s decision on how many troops to send into the war zone.  With spines made of jelly, Congress is as toothless as a bunch of newborns as they delegate their responsibilities to represent the American people to a single man.  What could they ‘Change’ instead?

Congress could refuse to approve spending to extend this unconstitutional war of aggression against Afghanistan and Pakistan.  Congress should instead pass a resolution for a rapid, immediate, and orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan and redeployment to protect America’s sieve-like borders.  Congress could increase the reward for the capture of Osama Bin Laden forty times from $27 million to over $1 billion.  Congress should also issue constitutional letters of marque to bring indicted terrorists to justice in a court of law.

To support this stance, I offer the following four key points: First, elected officials must begin behaving like the United States is a nation of laws, not a collection of rogues who delegate their gravest responsibility and immaturely fail to follow the supreme law of the land and declare war. Second, America’s historical foreign policy actions in Afghanistan and Pakistan must be understood, which contain the true reasons why terrorists attacked the United States in 2001. Third, a sober look at the eco-politics of the area, such as opiates and oil pipelines, must be taken. Lastly, we should contain the problem by securing our borders, and with all of the economic unrest, now is no time to be nation-building and quartering troops in foreign lands.    Read More »

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

We provide their responses here.

The politicians’ ignorant, arrogant, and contemptuous answers underscore the need for the Enumerated Powers Act (EPA). EPA would force Congress to demonstrate its Constitutional authority for each bill it passes. Over the past four weeks the Enumerated Powers Act has . . .

• Gained two more co-sponsors in House, bringing the total in that chamber to 54. Check here to see if your Rep. is one of them.
• Remained at 22 co-sponsors in the Senate. Check the status of your Senators here.

Let’s increase the number of co-sponsors! Please write a letter demanding that every member of Congress sponsor the Enumerated Powers Act.

This is what I wrote in my letter . . .    Read More »

When all the high-fives, handshakes, and hip-hip hoorays finish dying down a bit of reality overcomes the Ron Paul, anti-Fed faithful. In order for Ron Paul’s full Federal Reserve audit to become law it requires Paul to swim in uncomfortable waters. He must compromise his principles. So the celebrations must be tempered with the hard truth that is DC politics. It is indeed a bittersweet symphony.

Ron Paul’s efforts at having HR.1207 voted on as a standalone bill never really had a chance. Instead, it will arrive to the House floor attached to Barney Frank’s little boy, his comprehensive financial regulatory reform bill. The draft legislation grants new powers to the Federal Reserve and creates more regulatory controls over the market. If the free market is god, this bill is the devil. However, the bill will now have something good attached to it now that HR.1207 was added to it as an amendment.

Ron Paul makes a name for himself by always considering the Constitution while weighing his votes. Should Paul supporters expect him to don his Dr. No mask when his 30+ year fight against the central bank finally comes to a vote on the House floor? Will Paul vote against auditing the Fed because it is attached to an obviously unconstitutional bill? The libertarian purists among us may expect him to do so, but I expect him to vote for the evil to get the good. In fact, I would expect most if not all Paul supporters will give him a pass on this one. Tell us what you think in the comments section to this article.

He has already indicated what he will do in his press release covering yesterday’s committee vote:

“While HR 3996, if passed, will grant sweeping new powers to the Federal Reserve, at least with this amendment attached, it won’t be acting in secret anymore. This is a major victory for Federal Reserve transparency and government accountability. I am very grateful to Congressman Bachus and all the other Members who were so supportive and helpful in this effort,” stated Congressman Paul.

An argument could be made (and Paul seems to be implying it by his quote) that the financial regulatory reform bill is going to pass anyway and with Paul’s audit included in it, the bill’s attack on the free market will be softened. If they gut Paul’s amendment (like Mel Watt and Barney Frank tried to do in committee) as it moves closer to a floor vote it wouldn’t be shocking to see Dr. Paul morph into Dr. No once again.

So it is certainly bittersweet, but at least it’s not all bitter and no sweet.

——————————————-

UPDATE: It looks like Paul will still push for a separate vote on HR.1207 as a standalone bill. I don’t think those in power will let it happen, but I never thought his bill would get as far as it has already, so we’ll see.

Each time a new member of the U.S. House Representatives is sworn into office, he or she is administered the following oath:

I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Similarly, each new Senator must submit the following oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Despite this, almost none of the 535 members of Congress take this oath seriously.  Either they are atheists who do not care about the religious and humanistic consequences of violating these oaths, or they have subscribed to the faulty notion that the Supreme Court’s misinterpretation of the Constitution somehow trumps the words of the Constitution itself — which of course is impossible because it’s the Constitution that gives the various parts of government, including the Supreme Court, its powers, not to mention the fact that this governing document declares itself the Supreme Law of the Land.  Indeed, Article VI of the Constitution explicitly states:

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

So given the clear fact that the Constitution, as written, is the ultimate rulebook, and members of Congress swear to “support and defend” the Constitution, it certainly gives a rational person pause when the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives not only pushes a blatantly unconstitutional bill (in the form of health care “reform”) but virtually laughs in the face of a reporter who asks “Where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?” Without blinking, Pelosi’s immediate reply was an incredulous, “Are you serious?”

Walter E. Williams explores this exchange in his latest commentary entitled, “A Minority View: Constitutional Contempt”:

…Later on, Pelosi’s press spokesman Nadeam Elshami told CNSNews.com about its question regarding constitutional authority mandating that individual Americans buy health insurance. “You can put this on the record. That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”

Suppose Congress was debating a mandate outlawing tea-party-type protests and other large gatherings criticizing Congress. A news reporter asks Nancy Pelosi where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to outlaw peaceable assembly. How would you feel if she answered, “Are you serious? Are you serious?” and ignored the question. And what if, later on, someone from her office sent you a press release, as was sent to CNS News, saying that Congress has “broad power to regulate activities that have an effect on interstate commerce,” pointing out that demonstrations cause traffic jams and therefore interferes with interstate commerce?

Continue reading Walter E. Williams’ article here.

“Soldiers’ supreme wish is to avoid war, for the costs are inevitably paid with their blood and brains.“ – Jake Towne

November 11, 2009 11:11 AM

Today, many Americans take a moment to remember the veterans that have fulfilled their oaths to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies foreign and domestic.”  All too many have paid the ultimate price, many defending their fellow soldiers, and many believing they were defending their countrymen.  I am sure that this year the all-too-fresh Fort Hood tragedy will be on the minds of all veterans.  As I stated in the campaign’s veterans plank:

“Service members shoulder a heavy burden when they volunteer to risk their lives in defense of our country. They perform a necessary function in our society and for their service veterans receive deserved benefits and gratitude. However, the greatest way to honor them is to keep them out of unnecessary conflict. The only just war is one carried out in self-defense, as a non-aggressor, and as a last resort.

“It’s important that we have a strong military to deter attacks against the our country and protect it when attacked. However, asking our young men and women to participate in unjust war is a moral abyss that we as a country should never leap into. If we aspire to be a just nation ruled by laws we must resolve to never ask our military men and women to engage in unconstitutional warfare and nation-building missions.”

Honor our soldiers abroad by bringing them home to protect our borders.  Never EVER accept the shipping their bodies and brains to a war zone without a constitutional declaration of war.  Read More »

Judge Andrew Napolitano was the guest host on the Glenn Beck show again today, and he really knocked it out of the park with his introductory monologue.

Directly following his monologue he talks with authors, Tom Woods and Kevin Gutzman regarding the Constitution, enumerated powers, and nullification. This show is a must-see for all of us.

Watch the entire show below, but if you don’t have time then take 10 and watch the first segment. It makes me happy that Beck has obviously given the Judge near free reign about what guests appear on the show and the topics that are discussed.

When the Judge is host of the Glenn Beck show, the show is no longer the Glenn Beck show. It becomes Freedom Watch, the Judge’s current online only show.

Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6

Yesterday I gave a fast-paced lecture on constitutional money and the Federal Reserve to the Lehigh Valley Tea Party.  The playlist can be found below, and the PDF of the presentation here.   I am also available to present this material at a much slower rate, with plenty of time for Q&A to groups.  Monetary economics is very crucial to understand as it underlies EVERYTHING that is going on with the economy.

There is also a lot more to learn about, like the suppression of the gold price.

Hope to see many attend the Constitution rEVOLution Tea Party on November 22nd at Philadelphia’s City Hall and at the FED.  I will be giving a campaign speech at the gates of the FED this time around, and you won’t want to miss it!!

Read More »

Originally published October 31, 2009 at http://towneforcongress.com/economy/jake-towne-on-foxs-freedom-watch-with-judge-napolitano-1

On Wednesday, October 28th, I traveled down to the Drexel University campus to appear on FOX New’s Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano, Drexel’s Student Liberty Front, Pennsylvania State Representative Sam Rohrer, and Jacob Hornberger of the Future of Freedom Foundation.  I was a panel member for the first two sessions covering the concept of “just war” and also the current “financial fiasco” which can be seen below, or watched on this playlist link.

On the first session, my plank on the Iraq War can be read here, and the “War is a Racket” essay by USMC General Smedley Butler can be read here.  In the second session, my plank on the Federal Reserve is here, and I highly recommend “Fractional Reserve Banking in Pictures” to understand the current fraudulent monetary system.

Read More »

Earlier today Judge Andrew Napolitano was the guest host on the Glenn Beck show. Four liberty-loving guests appeared on the show with the Judge. Peter Schiff, John Stossel, Ron Paul, and Rand Paul all appeared. When the Judge hosts Beck’s show it almost turns into an episode of Freedom Watch.

If you don’t know what Freedom Watch is then please check out http://freedomwatchonfox.com/. It’s an online only show hosted by the Judge catering to freedom-loving people everywhere.

Check out the excellent discussions from the show today below.

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

The bill is an unprecedented attack on personal liberty.

Please send a letter to Congress demanding they oppose Pelosi’s bill.

Here’s what I wrote:

HR 3962 will hamstring our finances. But it’s also full of blatant attacks on individual liberty.

For instance, chain restaurants and vending machine owners will be forced to publish calorie information on their menus. That’s not interstate commerce… unless the state line cuts through a McDonald’s counter. Congress can’t order private property owners around this way, and the Free Press clause of the First Amendment also clearly forbids this mandate. Calorie reports may be nice, but that’s outside of the government’s lawful scope.

HR 3962 also violates the broad 9th Amendment protection of individual liberty, and the 10th Amendment’s requirement that federal power be limited to only those functions listed in the Constitution.

Even though the Supreme Court has blown a gaping hole through many Constitutional protections of economic freedom — and blamed their lawlessness on the Commerce Clause power to regulate interstate commerce — it’s apparent that even this wide hole is too small for Congressional ambitions. Does anyone on Capitol Hill even know what interstate commerce is?

Read More »