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.

Yesterday it became quite clear that she was never in danger of becoming a foreign policy non-interventionist like Paul.

From CNN:

Palin published a note on her Facebook page Tuesday that encourages President Barack Obama to grant a request for the tens of thousands of additional troops reportedly requested by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in the country.

“Now is not the time for cold feet, second thoughts, or indecision,” Palin wrote on the site. “It is the time to act as commander-in-chief and approve the troops so clearly needed in Afghanistan.”

Noting the possible consequences of not helping to build up Afghanistan’s institutions, the former Alaska governor also wholeheartedly endorsed McChrystal’s counterinsurgency approach to continued U.S. military presence in the country.

“We can win in Afghanistan by helping the Afghans build a stable representative state able to defend itself. And we must do what it takes to prevail. The stakes are very high. The 9/11 attacks were planned in Afghanistan, and if we are not successful there, al Qaeda will once again find a safe haven, the Taliban will impose its cruelty on the Afghan people, and Pakistan will be less stable.”

She is just confirming that she never was and never will be a libertarian, especially when it comes to foreign policy. Don’t let the new designation (or Eric Dondero) fool you. The Palin-Cons are the same old Neo-Cons.

Fox News legal commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano’s Internet program Freedom Watch is one of the most fascinating phenomena in the history of the libertarian movement. There’s never been anything like it and if it were to break out to the Fox News television channel, it would constitute nothing less than a revolutionary development in American politics.

Take a look at the guests that Napolitano has been having on his show: Lew Rockwell, Bob Higgs, James Bovard, Paul Armentano, Ron Paul, Roger Pilon, Tom Woods, Pete Eyre, Nick Gillespie, David Boaz, Peter Schiff, Walter Block, and many more. Every one of them is a major figure in the libertarian movement. I myself have been on Napolitano’s show twice.

How many times have you seen any of these guests on the mainstream television talk shows or even on the cable television talk shows? My hunch is that your answer is “Rarely, if ever.”

For years, conservatives and liberals have played their little games of pretending to have debates over policy, acting as if there were fundamental philosophical differences between the two. In actuality, the debates have always been over which form of statism is preferable — conservative statism or liberal statism.

Read the rest here.

I attended a FFF sponsored event at George Mason University last night. Robert Higgs delivered one of the best speeches I’ve heard yet. He compared and contrasted the Great Depression with our current economic woes. Look for the video later this week. You don’t want to miss it.

As for the content of the program, Stossel states:

In my new job, I want to dig into the meaning of the words “liberty” and “limited government”.  ABC enabled me to do some of that, but Fox offers me more airtime and a new challenge.

I’m still considering what I will do with my own show, one hour each week.   Economics certainly.  Exercises in understanding libertarianism.  My “take” on the issues of the day.   Kind of like this blog.  In fact, maybe we’ll call it, Stossel’s Take?

In fact he asks for your ideas if you care to submit them.  I look forward to his program, since it appears he won’t be hampered as much by the whims of the ABC editors and producers.  At least, his new program will be less likely to be pushed out by Michael Jackson news.

He is also scheduled to be on with Glenn Beck this morning on Beck’s radio show.

I’ve said this before, but the more I see and hear Rand Paul the more I like him and think he’d be a wonderful addition to the U.S. Senate. Don’t forget to pledge and donate during the RunRandRun money bomb on August 20th.

Here is his announcement on Fox News Channel with Neil Cavuto:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGWy-dPATRM

Here is his appearance on Happy Hour:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9rtlL4nq3c

And if you’d like a more in-depth interview see this interview with Rand’s local ABC affiliate:

http://www.wbko.com/video/?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=4018317&flvUri=

The power culture in DC ignores the Constitution because it is in their best interest to do so. Perhaps our founders were stupid for expecting a unit of law-making force and power (the government) to remain restrained by a document (the Constitution) that those (the citizenry) who are bound by the laws are supposed to enforce. No, it’s not perfect, but it has worked, more or less, for over 200+ years. The big question of the current generation seems to be how do we keep it from slipping away completely? Will America be America in 10 years? The writing on the wall says ‘no’, but it is our duty to do everything in our power to change that writing to say ‘yes’.

Michael Maresco has done more than most in this effort. Last week he completed his most recent journey across America via bicycle in an effort to raise awareness about America’s road from freedom to fascism. To me and many others he is the ultimate liberty hero. People like Michael give me hope. Please check out the site dedicated to his ride. Read through his travel log, look at the pictures, and be inspired by what you witness. He shows us all what is still great about America through the people he met and the places he’s seen. See LibertyRider.com.

Now a quick note on the name of this web site. I want to make it clear that I never intended to be dubbed THE Liberty Maven. I’ve been called that and I get uncomfortable every time it happens. The truth is that the domain name was available when we (Mike Miller and I) were trying to come up with a name for the site and it sounded good, so we got it. The intent of the name is to let everyone know that it is they who need to become liberty mavens. Having a country of liberty mavens is the goal. That goal may not be attainable, kind of like the “pursuit of happiness”, but always reaching for it is the important thing. I also want to thank you for continuing to read Liberty Maven. We don’t thank our readers enough. It is because of you that the site still exists and remains a passion for me and our other contributors. Thank you.

Now let’s talk about money bombs and 2010 elections. Peter Schiff needs to be  shown some love in the form of monetary contributions to his exploratory committee. If he’s going to run against Chris Dodd he’s going to need a lot of money. In light of that various freedom loving people have pooled together for a week long money bomb event dubbed the Schiffathon. It culminates with the money bomb day on August 7th. Check out www.Schiffathon.com for details. There is no better candidate to unseat Dodd than Schiff. Please show him that he has our support by donating on August 7th. His campaign website is www.SchiffForSenate.com. If Schiff should decide not to run all exploratory donations will be refunded.

Ron Paul’s son Rand is also readying himself for his own Senate campaign in Kentucky. He stated all along that if Jim Bunning were to not seek re-election then he would run. Well, this week Bunning announced he would not be seeking re-election so that obstacle is out of the way. I imagine we’ll find out fairly soon that Rand has officially joined the race. At this point it is just a formality. His primary opponent will be establishment-loving Republican Trey Grayson who has raised over $600k for his own exploratory committee. Rand has raised over $160k.

All eyes are going to be on Rand Paul’s own money bomb on August 20th, his father’s birthday. The goal is $1 million, which would be an amazing feat. If that goal is met it would likely cause a lot of press, probably even national press. It would also immediately make Rand Paul a formidable opponent of Grayson to more than just the Ron Paul faithful. Please pledge at RunRandRun.com to help him toward the $1 million. Rand Paul’s campaign site is RandPaul2010.com.

People always wonder, “what can I do to help bring change to DC?”. Well, donating to both Peter Schiff and Rand Paul is a great start.

And now some random thoughts, quotes, and tweets:

• The size of government keeps getting blown up like a balloon that people think will never pop. People are wrong.

• The government paid me to do it, but I worked for the Constitution. – Judge Andrew Napolitano

• Those who surrender Liberty for goverment health care deserve neither. – @RUQRU on Twitter

• Did you hear the good news? We’re in the middle of a jobless recovery. Apparently, it’s similar to a cropless harvest. – @aristoddler on Twitter

• Socialism turns innovative dazzling dreamers into lazy apathetic cynics. Capitalism makes dreams possible.

• It’s time to “Clockwork Orange” Congress. Make them deathly ill when they attempt to vote for more spending.

• Liquidity is a lot like liquid, it’s a lot easier to spill than to un-spill. – Peter Schiff

• If the government program you’re proposing is really such a good investment, why is it that only the government is willing to make it? – Harry Browne

And my own favorite quote of the week:

• Some people say Libertarians want anarchy. But anarchy is what we have now. Our cities aren’t safe, our schools are centers of violence and the politicians have turned the rule of law into a chaotic web of regulations and mandates. Libertarians want to restore order by removing the destabilizing influence of government. – Harry Browne

Have a freedom-filled weekend!

So afraid was I that I’d fall into that tired Republican claptrap about a “weak America” that at first, my reaction was, “Great! We and Russia can lead by example in reducing our nuclear arms, hopefully lending other nations to relax their nuclear programs.” But was that reaction correct?

As Libertarians, we take the Constitution seriously. We understand the importance of the Second Amendment:

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

But does this apply to our government and the protection of us as a nation? I thought I might find a rebuttal in Article I, Section 8 somewhere, regarding standing armies and such, but none of those apply, in my opinion.

As a nation with a strong military, we should keep weapons for defense. But should we keep nuclear warheads capable of killing millions in one swoop? Is there a caveat to the Second Amendment that excludes WMD’s? Even if we never had any intention of using them, even in self defense, why would we not keep them?

They seem to provide at least an adequate means of deterrent for would be enemies. Or, are they seen as antagonistic, encouraging enemies and combatants to develop nuclear warheads for their own defense? Would enemies even be enemies were it not for an “antagonistic” weapons program?

I have an easier time defending the first point, that we should keep them as they act as a deterrent, and make sense given the Second Amendment. It is harder to defend the second point, that they are seen as antagonistic. Even if they are seen that way, I would certainly say that any military installations we have overseas are far more antagonistic than simply holding a weapon.

I think in this respect, Obama missed a fantastic opportunity, yet again, to bring all of our troops home. Instead of concentrating on the first line of defense, he is focusing on the last resort.

But still, a Libertarian needs some help here!

While everyone else is celebrating the “4th of July” I’m celebrating Independence Day. On this Independence Day I’m celebrating by remembering the man that spoke with my voice before I knew what my voice was. Browne wrote an article on July 4th, 2003 (3 years before he died) called, “Uncelebrating the 4th of July“.

The article sums up perfectly how I feel about Independence Day right now. As was so often the case, Harry Browne was years ahead of his time.

I remember around that same year (2003) I was one of those libertarians that supported the Iraq war. I was a libertarian-in-progress or maybe some today would have called me a “Wayne Allyn Root” libertarian. I wrote an email to Harry Browne giving him my opinion about the war and asking him what he thought of my reasoning. He didn’t think much of it.

I was surprised to get an almost immediate reply from him. I wish I saved it but I remember it very well. He more or less told me that he respected my opinion but he disagreed. He was always very considerate even in disagreement. He reminded me a lot of Ron Paul that way. He went on to tell me that he was sorry I didn’t see it his way and that in the future I would likely come around to his way of thinking. Needless to say, I did.

So on this Independence Day I will watch the fireworks and look beyond them to the stars and think of Harry Browne. I will then look into the eyes of my children in the hope that I will still be able to teach them what freedom truly means in an increasingly unfree world.

Please take time on this libertarian holy day and think about our Founding Fathers without prejudice. Think WWTFFD? Would they support government health care? Would they support Cap and Trade? Would they support government-run automobile companies? Would they support using taxes to prop up private industry? For that matter, would they support taxes at all?

You know the answers. Now honor our Founders by acting accordingly.

Harry Browne’s “Uncelebrating the 4th of July”:

Unfortunately, July 4th has become a day of deceit.

On July 4, 1776, the Continental Congress formally declared its independence from Great Britain. Thirteen years later, after a difficult war to secure that independence, the new country was open for business.

It was truly unique — the first nation in all of history in which the individual was considered more important than the government, and the government was tied down by a written Constitution.

It was the one nation where you could live your life secure in the knowledge that no one would ask for your papers, where you weren’t identified by a number, and where the government wouldn’t extort a percentage of your income as the price of holding a job.

And so each year July 4th has been a commemoration of the freest country in history.

But the America that’s celebrated no longer exists.

Read the rest of Hary Brown’s excellent article here.

If you missed it the chat transcript is available for your reading pleasure.

Stossel is quick-witted and brutally honest. He’s a refreshing libertarian voice in the media wilderness.

Also, check out his new frequently updated blog for more raw Stossel.

—————————————

I’ve gotten some feedback on the subject of deregulation, and the effect of greed.  Many are quick to demonize it, but I think we all need to slow down and take a look at what greed really is, before we admonish the “greedy”.

Interestingly, greed, is one of the 7 deadly sins, so we should strive to not be greedy, right?  Well, greed is defined in several different ways, but the most unbiased true definition (not relating to material wealth – I’ll explain why this is important in a moment) of greed is: An eager desire or longing; greediness; as, a greed of gain.  Is this not merely an extension of self interest?  What is self interest?  Self interest is defined as personal interest or advantage.  Everyone acts in ways of self interest, some more than others.  The reason is because life is a competition, like it or not.  You cannot beat the self interest out of anyone, and that is the paradoxical nature of self interest, i.e., greed.  To clarify my point, allow me to give several examples.

1. Early in life, we play games.  The object of a game is to win.  The desire to win is an act of self interest.  Yes it is fun to play, but winning and losing is part of the game, and the desire to win is part of human nature.  If the true object of the game is only to have fun, why do we keep score?  Why do we play at all?  Can we not find more fun and productive things to do if the object is “fun”?

2. When we go to school, we get graded on our performance.  We strive to get good grades based on our performance, and to gauge how we are faring against our peers.  Some learn faster, or in different ways, than others.  It is in our self interest to get the best grades possible, so that we not only know we are learning, but to ensure that our future will be bright, by being accepted into higher educational facilities which boast better educational practices than others.

3. When we are done with school, we hope that we’ve learned what we needed to, and that we have the skill set necessary, for a particular job.  It is in our self interest to get the best job possible (best environment, best pay, best benefits, etc) that most closely fits our needs.  We hope to climb the ladder (if we work for someone else) because we bust our humps every day to try and prove that we are worthy of higher pay, better benefits, better environment, more responsibility, etc.

4. If we open our own business, it is in our self interest to ensure the business survives so that we can support ourselves and our family, so that we do not go on the government doles, which brings me to my next point.

5. Those on welfare also act in self interested ways.  Some would say that they are selfish, others would say greedy, and I can certainly see that point.  This is not to say that I think we should not help anyone, we should be able to help those that cannot help themselves (disabled, physically or mentally, children with no family and cannot fend for themselves yet).  A hand up, not a hand out.  For those that can help themselves, they are simply acting in a self interested way to “get something for nothing”. It is far too easy to “game” the system.  Want more money?  Have another kid.  Get hurt to collect disability also, etc.  Getting a welfare handout check is acting not only in a way of self interest, but it is also at the expense of others.  Does anyone seriously believe that the government can make the poor “rich” by “spreading the wealth around”?  Where is the incentive to work?

6. Politicians act in self interested ways.  It may not be for money, but for position and power.  If you think that those you elect to office, no matter D or R, really want to “help” the little guy, you are sadly mistaken.  Politicians are no different than the public.  George Carlin said something like, if you have a greedy, ignorant population, you will have greedy, ignorant politicians.

7. People who vote do so in self interested ways.  What will my politician do for me, or my group?  As if we’re all oppressed, right?  Many seem to have forgotten how friggin awesome our country is/was because of our Constitution and it’s limits on government, and the personal freedoms our Bill of Rights protects.  It only ever has been, and always will be, the other guy who was at fault, right?  As I’ve pointed out before, when the government gives someone something, it has to do it at the expense of someone else.

8. Even religion and clergy act in self interested ways.  They always want a little more.  The church needs an addition, they need to grow their congregation, etc (and notice how it’s almost always tied to “you need to give more to the church”).

Here’s my point.  We cannot prosecute or persecute people for acting in self interested ways, and so quickly take it to the level of “greed”, because we all do it.  If you think you do not act in greedy ways, you are kidding yourself.  I only cherry picked the most politically palatable examples above.  Really, make an honest assessment of your actions and see how many you can classify as acting only in the interest of others.  There was a Friends episode (unbelievably) that dealt with this.  Even when you give your time and / or money to a charitable (by your own free will, by the way, not by government mandate) organization, it still makes you feel good, so even it is not completely selfless.  Put yourself in the position of others who you classify as greedy.

Take a corporate CEO for example.  You think they make too much money.  Compared to what, the average worker?  Do you have any idea the kind of pressure they are under on a daily basis?  Do you really know how much they sacrifice in regards to a truly coherent family life because of their work?  I highly doubt it.  They are generally in the spotlight more than they’d like, and have to put up with the stress of the livelihoods of hundreds, or thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or demanding employees, stockholders, boards of directors, and the general public.  Do they create that much wealth for the company and for the stockholders?  Maybe, maybe not.  But you cannot, and should not, demonize them for what they make.  If you were in their position, I seriously doubt you would turn down a luxurious contract.  And besides, there are free market mechanisms in place that deal with this already.  Boards of directors hire and fire CEO’s.  Stockholders elect the boards of directors.  If you don’t like the company, or think the CEO makes too much, don’t buy the stock of the company.  Don’t buy products the company makes, nobody is forcing you to buy what they sell .  If you own their stock, elect a board, or appeal to the board, that will act in your interest (aha, there’s that caveat again – self interest of the best stock price possible – oops).  If they are truly incompetent managers that don’t deserve the pay, the company will go bankrupt.  If you don’t buy the product they sell, or have stock in the company, why do you care at all?  Why do you want to control them?  What gives you that right?

Now here’s where we’ve really jacked up.  The politicians we’ve elected are not allowing this to happen.  The free market mechanism that deals with incompetence (bankruptcy) is not being allowed to function.  Is it in my interest to bail out a car company?  No, but I’m being forced to pay for it anyway, for the “greater good”.  Sooooo, now I’m technically paying for cars with my, yes, my, tax money (or eventually, inflated fiat currency), but I’m not actually getting a car?  That’s wrong.  How can anyone justify that to save some jobs in the short term?  Why doesn’t the government just start their own car company?  They know what’s best for us, anyway.  They’ve already appointed a car Czar.  Welcome to Communist Russia, we’d be glad to sell you a Trabant.  It only costs $99,999, but with tax incentives, the cost to you (that you can see) is only $29,999!  (You will actually pay the full $99,999, but we’ll tell you that we’re taxing those “greedy rich” more).  Isn’t that great?!  You are supporting American workers, and inflated, over powerful unions!  Everyone is happy!  Until they’re not.

This almost always comes back to regulation, and deregulation.  The real job of the government is not to regulate the hell out of everything, it is arbitrary.  Prosecute fraud, yes.  But they should not dictate what people should make.  You vote with your dollars every day.  You vote for politicians every 4 years.  Do the math.  The market is absolutely, unequivocally, the most efficient and best resource for regulating the market.  The government is always a step behind.  Derivatives of mortgages blew up, so we need to regulate derivatives.  Uh, you don’t need to, Barry, the market has, or is trying to, learn it’s lesson and cleanse the mess of derivatives by bankrupting the businesses that engaged in it.  Miring us in propagandist nonsense that a company is “too big to fail” is utterly farcical.  I think that it is simply meant to paper over the real reason they failed, trying to make a profit (ooohhhh, greedy) in an over-regulated, ever changing regulation, and over-taxed environment, with governmental decrees on how to conduct business.  Here’s the slippery slope argument.  If the government thinks they can do everything better, why don’t they just do it and take over everything?  Oh, that’s right, I’ve said it before, it’s because socialism doesn’t work.  Liberty and freedom work.

Leftists say that those on the “right” (this includes me, as I’m a Libertarian, limited government kind of guy) are always the nay-sayers.  The party of “no”.  I say, that is separatist nonsense.  When I say no to bailout, I say yes to market consequences for poor decisions.  When I say no to over-arching government programs, such as the poorly run Department of Education, I say yes to private schools, like Charter schools and Montessori, and I say yes to variations in the education of our children.  Because I do say no to everyone thinking, acting, and feeling the same way.  When I say no to the regulation of food products and safety on a national scale, I say yes to victory gardens, community gardens, and farmers markets. I therefore, by extension, say yes to limitations of the contamination of the food supply, as large scale regulation increases the incentive for farmers to become huge corporate conglomerates that spray our food with herbicides and pesticides that have been proven to cause cancer, heart attacks, brain aneurysms, and myriad other health issues.  When I say no (by repeal) of all Presidential Executive Orders, I say yes to the true checks and balances nature of our three branch system of federal government.  I don’t want a dictator.  If I did, I’d move to Cuba, or Venezuela.  (psst, that’s why refugees flee those countries, because of the dictators)  When I say no to ethanol subsidies, I say yes to lower food prices.  When I say no to government spending, I say yes to sustainability without the destructive debt loads for the entire country!  And finally (for this rant) when I say NO to the Federal Reserve Bank(!) I say YES to sound and honest money.  Sound money is the foundational pillar of keeping our government and our markets honest.  Restore that, and most of these niggling regulatory issues will be solved.

“Permit me to issue and control the money of the nation and I care not who makes its laws.” — Mayer Amsched Rothchild

It’s a rigged game folks, and we’re bickering with each other over whether the ball should be pigskin or cowhide.  Here’s another great quote:

“There are a thousand striking at the branches of evil for every one who is striking at the root.” — Henry David Thoreau

I read a quite sobering article by Chris Hedges earlier this week entitled, “The American Empire Is Bankrupt”. After reading the headline I said to myself, “well, duh!” But the first paragraph of the article shocked me out of my “duh-ness”. It reads:

This week marks the end of the dollar’s reign as the world’s reserve currency. It marks the start of a terrible period of economic and political decline in the United States. And it signals the last gasp of the American imperium. That’s over. It is not coming back. And what is to come will be very, very painful.

Hedges directs the ultimate economic horror movie, something I’ve tried to prepare my family for after watching Chris Martenson’s excellent “Crash Course” last year. I find myself asking the same question over and over again. Are the doomsayers like Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, Jim Rogers, Chris Martenson, Chris Hedges, and Gerald Celente right?

If they are, I know I’m at least partially prepared now and am trying to become more prepared every day. That is, of course, without going completely into the commando-survivalist realm. If I did that, I’d likely have to survive a divorce before I’d get to use any of my newly acquired skills.

A big deal was made this week over Obama murdering an innocent fly with his bare hands during a CNBC interview. As if all of the human Obamatons frozen in O-face since our long national Obamagasm began on January 20th wasn’t enough. He is now the lizard king. He fellates humans with his sharp tongue and strikes down insects with his bare hands. Is there anything this  Superhuman-in-Chief cannot do? Removing his teleprompter seems to be his only kryptonite….  or is it?

It seems there may be something to these Tea Parties after all. Well, at least those that are not being co-opted by the same old and tired Republican leadership. In a recently-released, extensive 165-page survey from the Pew Research Center we see evidence of a movement away from the two party system.

This is evidence that President Obama’s election does not represent a liberal ideological mandate, as House Democrats have claimed. It also shows continued rejection of the Republican brand.

On virtually every policy issue, independents are situated between increasingly polarized Democrats and Republicans. They more accurately reflect centrist national attitudes than the 11% of Americans who describe themselves as liberal Democrats or the 15% who call themselves conservative Republicans.

Independents are nonideological problem-solvers, but they do not have a split-the-difference approach to politics. They are fiscally conservative but socially progressive, with a strong libertarian streak. It’s on fiscal issues that independents are putting the Obama administration on notice.

Will 2012 be the year of the Third Party? For America’s sake, I hope so.

The aftermath of the recent pseudo-election in Iran is fascinating on various levels. The bottom line is that the President of Iran is more or less a figurehead without much power. Most of the power in Iran is in the hands of the unelected (by popular vote) Supreme Leader. The current Supreme Leader of Iran is Ali Khamenei.

The mass protests and bloodshed regarding voting irregularities in Iran are in response to the recent Presidential election. I wholeheartedly support the people of Iran who dream of being more free. Unfortunately for them, even if their reform candidate were elected, freedom would not be within grasp.

Given this, it seems to me that it is in the Supreme Leader’s best interest to have a “do-over” election with independent election monitors and a vote verification system to ensure a proper election has taken place. It shouldn’t matter that much which candidate is elected President in Iran. What should matter to the Supreme Leader is quelling any agitation toward a revolution. Mucking around with election results does just the opposite, which should be quite obvious to him by now.

And now some random thoughts for the week:

• I was walking in DC yesterday, saw some trash blowing by and picked it up-turns out it was the Constitution. Sad.

• My future nightmare: “I’ll be your government-provided brain surgeon today. If you live, it will be FREE!!!”

• When will our long national Obamagasm be over?

• The urge to save humanity is almost always a false-face for the urge to rule it. – H.L. Mencken

• The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks. – Lord Acton

• The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts. – Edmund Burke

That’s it for this week’s version of Quick Hits. Enjoy your weekend.

I apologize to the wonderful Free State Project for bastardizing their efforts with such a suggestion, but I am quite serious. Instead of putting energy into calling the Obama administration socialists why not abandon the petty, kindergarten-style, partisan bickering and look within? Come up with a new 1994-style “Contract With America” but this time don’t renege on the contract. It should not be called anything similar to “Contract With America” though. Yes, that bad taste is still lingering.

Dubbing it “The Free Country Project” and making more than a half-assed effort to bring libertarianism back into the GOP could be a winning formula. Of course, many will have to tuck their neo-con tails between their legs and embrace Ron Paul and his libertarian friends. I’m not talking about a macho homophobic half-hearted embrace here. I’m talking about a full-on bear hug that will make gawkers worry about dropping the soap in the GOP country club shower.

The principles that should go in The Free Country Project are quite simple to find. In fact those principles were codified into a rulebook that every lawmaker must take an oath to uphold. Yet once most of them set foot on DC soil they begin thinking, “What oath?”

The Free Country Project should be a promise to restore the Constitution as the “supreme law of the land.” If that promise is made and the GOP begins behaving like grown-ups again the sky is the limit. It may take a long time to touch the clouds again, but at least there will be an upward trajectory.

So here are my humble recommendations for successfully restoring the GOP, the five guiding principles of  The Free Country Project:

1. Promise to follow the Constitution and do so.
2. Behave like grown-ups.
3. Watch what Lindsey Graham does and do the opposite.
4. Listen to what Lindsey Graham says and say the opposite.
5. Fear the soap.

Do all of this and the GOP may be able to declare the Obama honeymoon over right before socialized medicine starts killing off old people to ease the Social Security burden.

NOTE: Another name considered was “The 9-13 Project”. If I can steal from real libertarians (Free State Project) then I can certainly steal from pseudo-libertarians like Glenn Beck (9-12 Project). If Glenn Beck and I were contestants on the Price Is Right I would amuse myself silly by bidding one dollar more than him every time. And Beck being Beck, it wouldn’t shock me if he ended up crying about it on the air.