I turned 18 in 1989. Like many young people I had been taught that the government was there to help people. I called myself a Democrat. I didn’t understand the consequences of big government. I didn’t understand taxes.
It didn’t take long for me to learn these things. The first presidential election I voted in was 1992. I supported Paul Tsongas in the Democratic primary. I didn’t like Bill Clinton much, but I disagreed with the Republicans the most. So in the general election I voted for Bill Clinton. Between 1992 and 1996 I read “Atlas Shrugged” By Ayn Rand. It changed me. I already had the foundation of a fiscally conservative, socially liberal world view with my support of Tsongas. After reading Ayn Rand and discovering the Libertarian Party and with it Harry Browne, my conversion was complete.
After voting for Harry Browne in 2000 I became disinterested in politics. I voted for Michael Badnarik in 2004, but I never felt the same kinship with him as I had for Harry Browne. In early 2007 I read that Ron Paul may be running for President. I knew of Ron Paul as the most libertarian Congressman, but I didn’t know the details of his positions at that time. After research it seemed I agreed with him on most things with the exception of immigration and abortion. I decided Ron Paul would get my vote.
Then the movement started and I was swept up in it. Probably the single event that did it for me was watching the video of his speech on the floor of the House about a year ago called, “In the Name of Patriotism (Who are the Patriots?)” [VIDEO]. I got chills listening to it. I was amazed to hear such wonderful rhetoric from a politician. The fact he was saying it on the floor of the House of Representatives filled me with awe at his political bravado.
I was skeptical at his reach with the American public, but he certainly struck a chord and his liberty message spread in spite of limited media attention. If the media treated him as a candidate equal to the others I firmly believe his appeal would have been even wider. Unfortunately, to many Republicans he did reach, he was deemed crazy.
Then I heard that Bob Barr may seek the Libertarian Party’s nomination. I had heard that he joined the Libertarian Party awhile ago and thought it was odd. After all, I knew him because of his neo-conservative roots during the 1994 “Contract With America” that was well intended, but never materialized. I did some research and discovered Barr and Ron Paul were friends, worked on legislation together, and agreed on many of the issues.
The red heart placards being hoisted above the heads of the Mary Ruwart supporters at the Libertarian National Convention last weekend were a perfect representation of her purist libertarianism. She is, some say, a radical libertarian. Her positions reflect the hearts of libertarians. Her positions are my positions. The libertarian beliefs I hold close to my heart.
Bob Barr’s supporters held the standard “politician” signs we see during every convention and campaign. They represented the moderate pragmatic views within libertarianism. This is a perfect description of Bob Barr’s platform. His positions are my positions, but his positions are closer to my mind than my heart.
The Ron Paul presidential campaign started its sky high trajectory about one year ago. Much has happened since then. A few major fund raising “money bombs”, countless rallies, several magical debate moments, and how can anyone forget the Ron Paul Blimp? The true believer grassroots supporters have lived and breathed all Ron Paul for the past year.
Now that the realization has dawned that Ron Paul will not be on the ballot in November what are they to do? Who will they support? Ron Paul is a unique icon of anti-establishment truth. There is unlikely to be a candidate like him ever again. Sure there may be a candidate who jumps on his coat tails and rides along in an attempt to get monumental support, but Ron Paul supporters can smell faux candidates a mile away. Even if they couldn’t, many are so married to Ron Paul that they may be blinded by their adoration of him. For me, before there was Ron Paul there was Harry Browne. Browne was the Libertarian nominee for President in 1996 and 2000. He introduced my young mind to liberty. He made me a libertarian. Ron Paul’s message of 2008 was Harry Browne’s message of 1996 and 2000.
The freedom message existed prior to Ron Paul. It will exist post Ron Paul. What makes Paul so unique is his historical honesty and integrity. You have to look very hard to find any level of “flip flopping” in his political career that dates back over 30 years. To find such unwavering truth in a human being you must look outside of politics. Even then you’d be hard pressed to find an equal. It is this reason he is able to attract so many supporters with such wildly varying backgrounds and ideologies. Anarchists cheer along side Socialists at his rallies. As do Democrats and Republicans. No matter what political beliefs you hold it is difficult not to be attracted to the aura of purity Ron Paul exudes.
Judging by some of the heroic worshiping rhetoric found here and other pro-Paul areas of the media world one would get the impression that Ron Paul is perfection personified. Unfortunately he has flaws. Most are of the perfectly imperfect variety. Indeed, flaws are a matter of perception.
In an interview on a Pittsburgh radio station last night the host implied that being honest with the American people is a doomed campaign strategy. I’m not sure if there is a sadder hard truth than that. It is almost as if many Americans beg to be manipulated by our politicians. It is the public discourse equivalent of a wife asking her husband, “Does this dress make me look fat?”. Meanwhile the wife is five foot four and weighs 210 pounds. If Ron Paul were to answer he’d say, “No, your large body makes you look fat. Your clothes are totally irrelevant.” It’s hard to win an election with honesty like that.
I was on Ron Paul Revolution radio today on the “Wake Up America” show with Kurt Wallace. Wallace has interviewed several of the greats like Judge Andrew Napolitano, Peter Schiff, and Murray Sabrin. I am by no means putting myself in their category. I was just happy for the opportunity to be on his radio show today to talk a bit about Liberty Maven and Ron Paul. I captured the audio here. I hope to get the opportunity to go on his show again in the coming weeks.
NOTE: In this interview I mention Vern Mckinley’s opponent Frank Wolf coming in to Congress as part of the “Contract With America” which was 1994. The reality is he came in to congress in the early 1980’s with Reagan in office. In any case he still “breached” his contract as Kurt said in the interview.
The latest DownsizeDC.org dispatch contains scathing commentary on the traitors in Congress. (NOTE: the word “traitor” is my word — I consider anyone who takes an oath to defend the Constitution and then does the opposite is a traitor to this country). Please take the time to read what’s been going on, and then contact your representatives to tell them how you feel.
Do you know the date of the first law ever passed by the United States’ Senate? It was May 5, 1789.
Do you know the subject of that law? It was the “Oath Act.” It’s purpose was to provide specific wording for the oath the Constitution requires Senators to swear upon taking office.
Strangely, the Constitution actually provides the specific wording of the oath the President is supposed to take, but it does not do so for Congress. Instead, the Constitution simply stipulates the following in Article VI, clause 3:
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
The lack of specific wording meant that Congress had to create the wording. The oath they created as their first order of business, was very simple . . .
“I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States.”
Of course, later politicians have been increasingly fond of complexity, causing the oath to mutate into this . . .
“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.”
The result remains the same. And please notice that members of Congress do not swear an oath to support or defend the nation, the country, or the government. They swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution, specifically. This is very important . . . Read More »
Ron Paul is interviewed by Mike Maloney of GoldSilver.com. If it hasn’t become obvious already the subject matter in this interview is Ron Paul’s life’s passion. I’ve said before that Harry Browne made me a Libertarian, but Ron Paul made me an economist. This interview exemplifies that statement. Of course, I’m not truly an economist. I’m merely an amateur trying to learn as much as I can about economics. The interview is about 38 minutes long. Everyone should watch this.
Here is a video recently posted on Google Video containing 5 commercials and the infomercial he had produced during his Presidential campaign in 2000. Harry Browne is responsible for my political views today. Outside of Ron Paul he is one of my true heroes.
The phrase “leader of the free world” is often used to describe the President of the United States. It has become a generally accepted phrase. This is troublesome to me because of the implication. It says that America is the policeman of the world. It says we are a spreading empire.
Before Ron Paul I never really considered this phrase. I assumed its truth. Now that Ron Paul speaks of non-interventionism I find the phrase offensive as an American. Simply put we should spread liberty by example, never force and only attack when we are attacked. As Harry Browne used to say, “They call it the national defense, not the national offense.”
This is yet another layer of false group think that Ron Paul must overcome in his effort to sway voters minds back to the principles upon which this country was founded.
On this day 3 years ago the late and great Harry Browne was asked, on his radio show, to look into the possibility that the U.S. government was a participant in the 9/11 attacks. Here is the audio of the caller and his response.
For those that do not know Harry Browne was the Libertarian candidate for president in 1996 and 2000. He passed away from ALS (Lou Gehrig’s Disease) in 2006. He is the man responsible for me becoming a libertarian minded individual.
In the first clip the caller builds up to and then asks his question. Harry begins to reply that he thinks there are bigger issues to spend his time on. The clip ends with Harry going to commercial and the caller saying “shame on you” repeatedly.
In the second clip, back from the break, Harry Browne goes into an eloquent talk on the subject for about 8 minutes. I couldn’t agree with him more. Logic and calm always seems to be at his side when making his argument.
He even suggests the possibility of a candidate running in 2008 or 2012 to champion a non-interventionist foreign policy. He believes this is the real issue. He must be smiling from beyond because his wish was granted with the candidacy of Ron Paul.
Liberty Maven
I turned 18 in 1989. Like many young people I had been taught that the government was there to help people. I called myself a Democrat. I didn’t understand the consequences of big government. I didn’t understand taxes.
The red heart placards being hoisted above the heads of the Mary Ruwart supporters at the Libertarian National Convention last weekend were a perfect representation of her purist libertarianism. She is, some say, a radical libertarian. Her positions reflect the hearts of libertarians. Her positions are my positions. The libertarian beliefs I hold close to my heart.
The Ron Paul presidential campaign started its sky high trajectory about one year ago. Much has happened since then. A few major fund raising “money bombs”, countless rallies, several magical 
Follow LM on Twitter