“I just don’t think she possesses the mental capacity to be the President of the United States. She’s a goofball!”

So everyone’s favorite host of Freedom Watch has weighed in on Sarah Palin. To me, she’s a completely divisive figure. People seem to either idolize her or loathe her. I don’t think she has much chance of being the next POTUS. In fact, I’d be surprised if she did better than Giuliani did in the GOP primaries of 2008.

For more about what lead up to the Judge’s “straight talk” listen to the audio:

(Thanks to Media Matters for the audio)

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

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.

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.

The Constitution imposes on the government numerous burdens that we as individuals do not have. For example, I can tell my nephew to keep quiet at the dinner table because I don’t like what he said about grandma, but the First Amendment prevents the government from keeping him silent on a street corner when he criticizes it. Similarly, I can give a gift to some of my nephews and nieces because they are great kids, but I don’t need to give gifts of equal value, since I can spend my money on gifts however I wish. But the government has some burdens here that individuals do not. The Constitution requires that the government treat all persons similarly situated in a similar manner. This is the essence of “Equal Protection,” which the Constitution requires of the states and the federal government.

Napolitano goes on to cite case-law in which the Supreme Court has ruled that states may not deny people the right to an education based on citizenship status, and undoubtedly  “an education is in the same class of social benefits as providing health care.”  He points out that Obama with all his collegiate accolades certainly must know this.

Can anyone really suggest that the Harvard Law School-educated University of Chicago-employed professor of constitutional law did NOT know the law when he contended that the Congress can keep universal health care away from illegals? He must have known that, short of amending the Constitution to re-define “persons” and “Equal Protection”, whatever the Congress makes available by way of social services to the general population, it must make available to all persons.

There is no question that under the present law, Congress simply cannot pick and choose which “persons” to whom it will afford social benefits and to which “persons” it will not. How could the president not have known that?

Read Judge Napolitano’s article at FoxNews.com.

James Madison, who argued that to regulate meant to keep regular, would have shuddered at such circular reasoning. Madison’s understanding was the commonly held one in 1789, since the principle reason for the Constitutional Convention was to establish a central government that would prevent ruinous state-imposed tariffs that favored in-state businesses. It would do so by assuring that commerce between the states was kept “regular.”

The Supreme Court finally came to its senses when it invalidated a congressional ban on illegal guns within 1,000 feet of public schools. In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Court ruled that the Commerce Clause may only be used by Congress to regulate human activity that is truly commercial at its core and that has not traditionally been regulated by the states. The movement of illegal guns from one state to another, the Court ruled, was criminal and not commercial at its core, and school safety has historically been a state function.

Applying these principles to President Barack Obama’s health-care proposal, it’s clear that his plan is unconstitutional at its core. The practice of medicine consists of the delivery of intimate services to the human body. In almost all instances, the delivery of medical services occurs in one place and does not move across interstate lines. One goes to a physician not to engage in commercial activity, as the Framers of the Constitution understood, but to improve one’s health. And the practice of medicine, much like public school safety, has been regulated by states for the past century.

Read the full article here and be sure to tune in to the Judge’s now daily show, Freedom Watch, which runs Monday through Friday. The show is posted each evening at Foxnews.com/FreedomWatch and FreedomWatchOnFox.com. Today’s guests are Ron Paul, Tom Woods, and Walter Block.

Following the monologue Ron Paul was brought in to discuss the topic further. I enjoy these types of discussions because they steadfastly refute all of the completely inane and idiotic charges that Ron Paul is a “racist”. Anyone who refuses to allow emotional “arguments” cloud their reasoned judgment should understand that Ron Paul is completely opposed to any kind of racism or collectivism.

Unfortunately, most people don’t do their homework. They drool through life digesting all the news they can about the latest Michael Jackson-type death of the day. Ignorance is not bliss, ignorance is willful neglect. It should be our responsibility to know that our country of birth is fundamentally moving away from the principles of its founding. With that responsibility should come individual action.

I find it humorous that they call themselves “progressives”, as if advocating a return to the principles found in the Constitution makes one a “regressive”. No, it appears to me that so called “progressives” want to return to a time before the American Revolution, a time of empire and tyranny. If we want to have “progress” in this country it should mean restoring the rule of law found in our Constitution not continuing the practice of ignoring it.

Check out the latest episode of Freedom Watch below. Other than Ron Paul, the Judge welcomed Mary Ruwart, John McManus, David Bruckner, and Jim Babka to the show.

The former president of Merrill Lynch, John Thain, is not happy that he was fired from B of A, even though he left a very wealthy man. He does not refute Ken Lewis’ statements. He only argues that Lewis and the B of A folks knew what Merrill Lynch was worth when they bought it. He may have inadvertently opened a new can of worms for himself: Did he knowingly sell an asset to a public company, which had received a huge federal investment, for $17 billion less than he knew it was worth?

The failure of the president of B of A  to have revealed the risks of the acquisition to shareholders, as the law requires, and his failure to exercise the MAC clause were acts of fraud and directly violate laws enforced by the SEC. As for Paulson and Bernanke, they were participants in a criminal conspiracy to defraud B of A shareholders. We also now know that the Fed in DC and its regional bank in Richmond threatened to fire Ken Lewis and his management team if B of A did not follow through with the Merrill Lynch acquisition for the full $50 billion.  This is EXTORTION. It is the threat to perform a lawful act in order to compel a person to exercise his free will adverse to his own interests or his fiduciary obligations.  Unfortunately for Ken Lewis, “the government made me do it” is not a defense to a criminal indictment. Ken Lewis, Henry Paulson, John Thain, Ben Bernanke, and Jeffrey Lacker, the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, should all be prosecuted for extortion, conspiracy to extort, criminal fraud, and theft of honest services; and they should be imprisoned if convicted.

This post will be a hodgepodge of random thoughts I’ve had over the past week (or so) that never made it into an “official” article.

The topic of torture has been in the news and I find it fascinating because there are so many levels of arguments to the debate. No one put it more succinctly than Shepard Smith on a recent episode of Freedom Watch. The main arguments can be highlighted with a series of questions:

1. Is enhanced interrogation truly torture?
2. Is torture against the law?
3. Does torture work?
4. Is torture morally wrong?

Here are the answers:

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Not really, and it doesn’t really matter because…
4. Absolutely

I used to think everyone hounding me to “get on Twitter” was torture (wow, poor segue I know). Now that I’ve done so I wouldn’t say that I’m addicted necessarily, but I’ve certainly discovered a new world (in 140 characters or less or course). Most of our articles are automatically “tweeted” right when they are published. So feel free to follow me/us at @LibertyMaven and start using this social media tool to help spread the freedom message.

Speaking of Twitter (damn I’m good at these transitions), Rand Paul is on Twitter sending his followers updates about his potential Senate run. His father Ron is not. In fact it wouldn’t surprise me if someone were to ask Ron Paul if he twitters, he’d answer, “No I exercise daily and am in very good health.”

His organization, The Campaign For Liberty is on Twitter though. Check them out at @C4Liberty.

I hear that Freedom Watch may be on the verge of cracking the Fox News Channel lineup. Judge Andrew Napolitano is on Twitter. Check him out at @judgenap. One of his regular guests, Lew Rockwell, has also been known to tweet from time to time.

Yesterday morning I read the news about 4 people being arrested in a plot to bomb synagogues in New York. The arrested were apparently highly angry about the U.S. action in Afghanistan and wanted to conduct a bit of a jihad on their own. The reason I’m mentioning this is because of the idiotic comments from people like Mayor Bloomberg:

“This latest attempt to attack our freedoms shows that the homeland security threats against New York City are sadly all too real and underscores why we must remain vigilant in our efforts to prevent terrorism”

I’m certainly happy they caught these bastards. Perhaps they wouldn’t have dreamed of doing something earning that moniker if the U.S. actually focused our efforts targeting those who attacked us on 9/11. Instead, we invaded and are now occupying entire countries. No wonder these bastards became bastards. If China or Russia chose to invade and occupy Texas or Florida I’d imagine we’d be quite bastard-like ourselves.

Recently, Congress (lead by Democrats) voted to refuse funding for Obama to close Gitmo. A part of me wonders if this was the plan all along from the Obama administration. This way he doesn’t get fully blamed for not being able to close Gitmo by the end of the year. Or is this too conspiracy theory-ish?

I’ll end with a few of my own random thoughts. I tweeted these during the past couple weeks:

• What is more harmful to our Republic than the 2 party de-facto duopoly increasing State tyranny in the name of bipartisanship?

• Legalize, tax, and regulate prostitution? Sure, let’s turn something fun and exciting into a trip to the DMV. (actually a Mike Miller, @LibertarianMike re-tweet)

• A girl once told me that the term “states rights” is racist hate speech. Little did I know she’d be running the DHS one day.

• If I had a dollar for every year of the 96 years since the Fed was created I’d have an inflation-adjusted $4.57 now!

• Spreading democracy at gunpoint is an absurdity. Such attempts result in socialism, fascism, or elements of both

• Does being anti-Fed mean you are pro-anorexia? (some people didn’t get this, perhaps it’s too off the wall)

That’s all for this week. Enjoy your Memorial day weekend!

Ron Paul and Daniel Hannan united in a one two punch fighting for liberty. They spoke about nullification, secession, and then compared Europe and America on the road to socialism. Another topic that they and the other guests discussed was protectionism. Peter Schiff seems to believe the U.S. need not worry too much about protectionism. Tom Palmer disagrees. Woods and Rockwell delve into the prospects for liberty in our lifetime.

Another excellent show. Watch it below.

The Judge, at one point asks, what is the free market solution to health care?

Listen to the 11+ minute interview below to find out Paul’s answer.

Download audio file (ron_paul_on_brian_and_the_judge_20090512.mp3)

Or if you prefer to watch the whole darn show (and why not?) watch it all below.

Lew Rockwell, 2010 liberty loving candidate RJ Harris, Cody Willard, Free State Project founder Jason Sorens, Peter Schiff, and twitter-maven Shelly Roche also join the Judge.

Remember, all episodes are posted at http://freedomwatchonfox.com/ as soon as they are available. You can also find upcoming guest and topic lists as well as the latest news about the show there.