Liberty Maven

The highly acclaimed Fox film adaptation of Ayn Rand’s New York Time’s bestselling novel, Atlas Shrugged, will be made available on DVD and Blu-Ray on November 8. The messages are vitally important in regard to the 2012 election as individualism, encroachment on the free-market, socialism and anarchy are explored in this timely and influential film.

The movie is set in 2016 as the United States is on the brink of economic disrepair, eerily paralleling the current U.S. economic crisis. Young executive, Dagny Taggart, runs one of the largest remaining railroads. To save the railroad from financial ruin, Dagny seeks out entrepreneurial industrialist Henry Rearden, whose super-strength metal holds the promise of the future.  As government interference cripples economic growth, the country’s most competent and productive workers systematically disappear, expanding the realm of government influence and control. Dagny fights back against the growing influence of socialism.

Below you will find a short Q&A with Harmon Kaslow, producer of the film: Read More »

It occurs to me (and many others) that if the GOP wants nothing more than to just beat Obama then Ron Paul is the most viable candidate in the Republican field. I’ll make a prediction. If any other candidate is the GOP nominee then Obama will be settling in to the Oval Office for “4 more years” in 2013. That is of course if the world doesn’t end in December of 2012… oops… did some “crazy Ron Paul supporter” juice just leak out of me by mistake? Maybe.

There are Republicans that will only vote Republican and stand behind the nominee no matter who it is.

There are Democrats that believe in unicorns, double rainbows, and “Yes we can!” that will vote for Obama no matter how much his actions suggest “Oh no we didn’t!”.

Then there are the the rest of us who will vote for the guy (Sorry Michele and Sarah but you gals don’t have a chance… how’s that feel coming from a Ron Paul supporter?) that actually agrees with us on approximately 80 to 100% of what we believe in.

If Ron Paul were the GOP nominee Obama would be forced to attack from the right on foreign policy, alienating those liberal voters who are ignorantly sympathetic to the drone-bombing fetishist, Nobel Peace Prize winner. Obama would be compelled to “let-me-be-clear” his way out of not being very clear on why there are still troops in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and maybe Syria and “Pock-ih-stohn”.

Now where would those voters turn after being stabbed in the back by their warmonger-in-chief? That’s right, the only other candidate in the race with years of truth and integrity spilling out of him: Ron Paul.

Nearly every question Paul received during the debate last week on MSNBC was obviously aimed at scaring people who have become dependent on the federal government. Even the CNN “Tea Party” debate earlier this week had some of this as well. Don’t fall for their magic markers. Paint your own picture of who Ron Paul is and what he believes (this video is a great start).

Newsflash: Hey MSNBC viewers, everything you despise about FOX News is exactly what MSNBC does except the paint dries blue, not red.

You have to take the crazy out of yourself before you will notice that Ron Paul is just not crazy. He is the candidate with the most common sense. I’m sure that one of Paul’s trusted advisers said to him prior to the debate, “Ron, if you look at the rest of the candidates on that stage, and you can’t find the sane one, then YOU are the sane one.”

It is said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results. We keep electing the same clowns over and over again and expect different results. But here is Ron Paul, once again, offering America new solutions to ancient problems.

He’s the only one that can truly beat Obama. Do you want four more years of recession, desperation, broken promises, and apologies? Vote Perry, Romney, Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrich, Huntsman, or Obama.

But if you want four years of prosperity, integrity, honesty, liberty, and peace. Vote Paul. He’s just the kind of crazy America needs.

Recently, one of my classes took time to discuss John Stuart Mill’s “On Liberty”. It was a nice deviation from the week spent on the joys and frustrations of Communism. It didn’t take long before one of the most prominent issues in the writing, victimless crimes, or the right to do things that may affect you but not others, was brought up.

“I don’t think my friend should be able to kill herself,” pontificated a fellow classmate. “Because then I will be sad and this will affect me negatively.”
For whatever reason, the concept that one can do something to themselves but not others was ungraspable for many of my fellow students. Mill argued that people must have control of their own lives and be free to do whatever they wish with it as long as it does not hinder the rights of others to do whatever it is they wish with their lives. In a society that is becoming increasingly collectivist, it may be surprising to some people that victimless crimes actually exist. They include prostitution, smoking marijuana, not wearing a seat belt among others.

In his address to 2008’s Campaign for Liberty, former New Mexico Governor Gary E. Johnson joked, “When I go out on my motorcycle, I wear protection from head to toe. However, if someone doesn’t want to wear a helmet when riding their motorcycle, that should be their choice. There is a donor shortage in this country.”

The idea behind victimless crimes is simple. You have a right to your life. You have a right to make decisions, and yes even obviously stupid ones, because it is your life and yours alone. The idea that government intervenes on your behalf even with the best of intentions is a tragic and corrupting suggestion and one that should be abandoned. Only when you do something that would hinder the rights of others should the law involve itself.

The most important figure in the libertarian movement is the individual. If collectivists are allowed to control aspects related only to the individual, even in an effort to good on the part of the individual, than libertarianism has no chance at surviving and flourishing. Mr. Mill understood the benefits of individual liberty and warned in his timeless manuscript that if victimless acts are allowed to be crimes, than the individual, for all other factors of liberty, cannot be free.

About half-way through Rand Paul’s new book, “The Tea Party Goes to Washington“, makes me realize that he is trying to really put liberty back into the Tea Party as it was meant to be from the beginning. Making the media rounds yesterday and today, he is spreading that sweet message of freedom like his father. He is scheduled to be on Late Night with David Letterman tonight as well as Hannity’s TV show. Yesterday he was on ABC’s Good Morning America, Nightline, and Hannity’s radio show.

Here is his GMA appearance:

Here is his interview with Hannity on the radio:

Go, Rand, go.

Here is Ron Paul’s appearance discussing his CPAC straw poll victory on CNN’s “American Morning” this morning. Note that the youtube video does cut off a bit at the end, but the full video from CNN is posted below that.

Here is the CNN embed with the rest of the interview:

There are cerebral strategists and balls-to-the-wall activists in the tent of Ron Paul. Both were evident at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) today. Prior to Rand Paul’s stellar speech the surprise speaker was Donald Trump. Many of us in the audience had come to get our seats to see The Rand instead of The Donald, and things got a bit ugly.

During Trump’s speech there were some vocal activists shouting out Ron Paul’s name, among other things. At one point when Trump mentioned there were no good GOP candidates the shouts of Ron Paul became too much for him. The video below shows what happened:

Yes, the out-of-touch celebrity with lots of money reacts by telling the crowd that Ron Paul has zero chance of winning. I immediately said something that was later echoed by Rand Paul, “Trump has an even less of a chance of winning than Ron Paul”. That was only the beginning.

Read More »

During his 2008 presidential campaign, Ron Paul, never failed to mention the importance young people played in his hope for a better future for America. In every one of his speeches and interviews he would always use the words, “and especially the young people”. Paul has stated that it is a key strategy because young people tend to be more open-minded and aren’t so stubborn to cling to outmoded establishment beliefs. This is where the Young Americans for Liberty and their new initiative, “Year of Youth” can be essential.

The stated goal of the “Year of Youth” is:

…to identify, train, and mobilize thousands of youth activists for a massive wave of youth campaigns across America in 2012.

• IDENTIFY: recruit 25,000 constitutionalists
• TRAIN: teach 1,000 committed activists
• MOBILIZE: endorse 100 campaigns in 2012 (through a YAL affiliated PAC)

This is a lofty but totally worthy goal. Please take some time to check out the “Year of Youth” web site and help out the project in any way you can.

We told you on Monday that the Senate violated Constitutional procedures when they passed S.510, the dangerous “food safety” bill.

To get around this, House Democrats plan to add the text of this bill into a “catch-all” budget bill.

Please tell Congress to oppose ANY bill that includes food safety legislation.

You may borrow from or copy this letter . . .

Gregory Conko (http://bit.ly/dVv8cZ) and Mike Adams (http://bit.ly/g3DUJl) provide many reasons you should oppose S.510. Here are just seven:

1. Increased inspections and paperwork won’t actually detect microbial pathogens
2. Costly risk-reduction rules (HACCP) are outdated and will stifle innovation
3. Even if the smallest producers are exempt, S.510 will still crush tens of thousands of small and mid-sized farms
4. By replacing the words “credible evidence” with “reason to believe,” S.510 gives the FDA power to outlaw foods based on opinion rather than science
Read More »

Here’s Ron Paul, again showing his justified outrage at the TSA with Neil Cavuto earlier today. They also discussed tax cuts and public ownership of GM.

Leave it to the federal government to come up with a way to liven up cigarette sales in America. Beginning in September 2011, the Food and Drug Administration will require cigarette manufacturers to put graphic warning labels that depict the horrors of smoking. The pictures will have to cover half a package’s front and back and will feature diseased lungs,‭ ‬corpses, and a man smoking a cigarette through a tracheotomy tube.

Let’s face it, cigarette packaging has become a tad too stodgy what with basic lettering, models holding cigarettes, camels, and smiling people. These new visually-stunning graphics should help spark sales and, finally, we’ll have packaging worthy for other uses other than being tossed into the recycling bin.

And while the FDA’s at it, why not do something about those dreadfully dull names cigarette companies slap on their products, names like Kool, Winston, Camel, Marlboro. What’s that about? If you want to get sales a-popping throw in a little danger. Fill those store shelves with brands like Death Stick, Lung Destroyer, Widow Maker, Cancer Maggot, and so on. Now that’s something worth asking for at your local grocery store, a whole lot more exciting than asking meekly for a pack of Benson & Hedges.

But why should the FDA stop there. Hell, if you’re going to run the entire retail system in this country, make McDonald’s put an x-ray of clogged arteries on the side of their Big Mac box; stick a coffin photo next to the mileage tag of every Smart Car waiting to be sold; affix a drawing of a retching man on Budweiser bottles; etch a broken toe graphic onto bowling balls; put baby pictures on condom packs; and, finally, place a picture of a dewy-eyed horse on every hot dog package sitting in grocery store coolers in this country.

Will sales go through the roof or what?

While many may think of this activity as nagging adults, in reality this is nothing more than plain, old-fashioned concern, the kind of concern you would have heard in your mother’s voice as she would shout out at you in your youth: “Get off that fence, you’re going to fall off!”, “Let that dog go, he may have rabies!”, “Stop playing with those matches!”, and the one that always got my attention as a boy, “Quit playing with your father’s loaded gun!” Our government is really an anxious mother looking out for its head-strong kids.

If this isn’t a brilliant stroke of genius coming out of the Obama Administration to get the economy going, to put Americans to work, to create an unending stream of new jobs, well I don’t know what else it could be.