ANARCHOLIBERTARIANISM

2011-01-23T23:56:00.002-05:00

Our wonderful "justice" system!

"Former police officer Jon Burge was sentenced to 54 months in prison today for obstruction of justice and perjury, in what his critics and supporters all describe as the closure of a saga that has come to symbolize police-community relations and race relations on Chicago’s South Side."

He tortured young men into to admitting to crimes they didn't commit. Hundreds of them sit in prison today because of his misconduct, but the legal recourse for the people he put into prison is woefully limited. Any conviction that he had any hand in should be immediately overturned, and his victims should be compensated. His 4.5 year sentence for his crimes isn't justice, since many of his victims are spending life behind bars.

He is a prime example of why you should NEVER trust the police.

2011-01-21T18:35:00.002-05:00

Do you remember the police shows from the 60s-early 80s? The cops were always shown as righteous, and the exceedingly rare "Corrupt Cop" episode was controversial. By 1990 a dramatic reversal was underway, and in popular media the corrupt cop was often central, even though "Good Cops" would inevitably bust the rogue.

The same shift is now apparent in the real world. Most people look at the police with a wary eye, and would rarely interact with them unless the situation seemed to warrant it. Even then, the results could be fatal for the person that engaged them for help.

Yes, this is what our police force has become.

Detroit — An alleged car thief got more than he bargained for when three women yanked him out of the vehicle he was trying to steal, held him down and made a citizen's arrest.

But when the women repeatedly called Detroit Police, they said nobody responded, so they decided to walk the man to the nearby Central District police station. On the way, they said they encountered a Detroit police officer — who they claim refused to take the man into custody.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110121/METRO01/101210376/Detroit-women-get-no-help-in-arrest-of-alleged-car-thief#ixzz1BiUfP5ys

2011-01-17T23:58:00.003-05:00

The prospects for the euro just got bleaker, even though the mainstream financial press seems oblivious. Zero Hedge has an interesting analysis of Ireland's apparently unilateral decision to print 51 billion euro- around 25% of the Ireland's GDP- and give them to their banks to recapitalize them, in violation of spirit (if not law) of the EU treaties. If they do so without repercussion, then I don't doubt Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal will soon follow suit in a vain attempt to save their own ailing banks and underfunded governments. Such (hyper)inflationary tactics will exacerbate the already high tensions the PIIGS have with the rest of the EU nations, especially Germany.

I've been wary of the prospects for the euro since the beginning, but the current crisis seems to be revealing the fiat folly faster than anyone could imagine. Massive printing of euros by the struggling PIIGS would no doubt bring chaos to the economies of the (somewhat) more responsible northern nations, and could catalyze calls by currently marginalized segments of the population for withdrawal from the common currency. Germany already has a sizable minority of euro dissidents, and without Germany the euro would collapse. The actions of Ireland, if repeated by the other struggling nations, would undoubtedly galvanize the thrifty Germans and lead undecided citizens to call for a return to the deutschemark.

Here are 2 snips from the article-

"The Irish Central Bank has crossed the Rubicon in European Union currency terms. They have printed up about 25% of their GDP in electronic credits, and stuffed those credits into their banks. These deposits, if you will, do not have new debt issued behind them."
--------
"While this has happened before in history, it has not happened in the Euro currency project officially before today. This act is going to move the monetary policy of the union, to the individual capitals. The capacity to print electronic credits, with out the creation of cash currency or debt, is a new wrinkle in the economic landscape."

2011-01-16T00:22:00.002-05:00

I just finished watching "Toy Story 3" and I have to say that it is one of the most moving, well-directed, superbly acted, visually stunning and heartfelt movies I've seen in years. Kudos to Pixar for crafting another masterpiece in the "Toy Story" oeuvre. The first two are wonderful, but this one is simply sublime.

How does this relate to liberty? Well, the "Barbie" character gets this memorable line- "Authority should derive from the consent of the governed, not from the threat of force!"

No matter, it is a masterpiece, and if the Academy hadn't created an "Animated Film" category a few years ago (which this film will win) it would be a strong contender for Best Picture at the Oscars. It is THAT good!

2011-01-15T08:34:00.003-05:00

The Atlantic, a quintessential Power Elite mouthpiece, must be worried about the ascendancy of Ron Paul to a position with the power to directly challenge the power of the Federal Reserve. In a hilariously inept article attacking Dr. Paul and his book "End the Fed", columnist Daniel Indiviglio regurgitates FED talking points about the necessity of the institution without bothering to read , as Robert Wenzel explains-

"Yes, Daniel Indiviglio has pronounced that we do indeed need the Fed. He reached this conclusion by, uh, asking the Fed."

"It is not clear that Indiviglio has ever read the book ("End the Fed"), or that he even has it in his possession, since in telling us about his conclusion that we need the Fed, he does not address any of the issues raised by Congressman Paul in his book as to why the Fed should be ended. Zero."

The banksters at the FED must be shaking in their Bruno Magli loafers.

2011-01-14T22:37:00.002-05:00

The seeds of revolution are planted in the most unlikely places, and and take root in unusual circumstances. This simple blog post from the LewRockwell.com blog is innocuous in isolation, but in the context of a government that ignores and tramples "the people", it is illustrative. How long until some seemingly small slight, almost inconsequential to the majority, causes insurrection? What if the people of the town refused to put their mailboxes back up, and protested- loudly- until the offending government parasites provided restitution? In this case, it would be small. But, the "small, inconsequential" slights are coming faster and more furiously, and in the climate we live in I believe the day rapidly comes where "the people" say ENOUGH!

That will be a scary, glorious day.

2011-01-11T19:55:00.002-05:00

Glenn Greenwald of Salon is one of the few honest investigative journalists in the world, IMHO. This amazing article illustrates the fearlessness he has in asking the tough questions. If Wikileaks is a terrorist organization, then so is the NYTimes. I wish all liberals were as principled and honest, and cogent of the duplicity of government!

2011-01-11T14:20:00.001-05:00

Cute video about how some people, even when presented with clearly superior alternatives, still seek out the trendiest and most socially accepted.

2011-01-11T13:42:00.002-05:00

Here is a great article from Zero Hedge titled "Virginia Creates Subcommittee To Study Monetary Alternatives In Case Of Terminal Fed "Breakdown", Considers Gold As Option" with some healthy discussion in the comments.

2011-01-11T13:41:00.002-05:00

I've been thinking about this blog for a few days, and decided to restart it. Hope that I can grab a few readers with my keen and insightful observations!!!

2007-09-13T23:25:00.000-04:00

I hooked up with a MeetUp.org group tonight and we stood at a very busy intersection and held up signs and handed out fact sheets on Ron Paul. It was so much fun, and we got a lot of positive feedback from drivers. There were about 20 of us in all, and everyone was very enthusiastic. Great fun. I held a "Who Is Ron Paul?" sign, and got a lot of people stopped at the red-lights asking me for more information. Of course, we got cursed by a few drivers, but most people were very nice.

Activities like this are what will make it possible for Ron to win in 2008, so go out and try to do the same thing in your town!

2007-09-11T15:27:00.000-04:00

GREAT YouTube video about the lies that the administration told to sell the invasion of Iraq to the American people. It compiles multiple media appearances from before the invasion and juxtaposes them with post-invasion videos to vividly illustrate the outrageousness of the prevarications used to justify invading Iraq. Lies, lies, and more lies.

2007-09-11T15:02:00.000-04:00

DailyKos may be a "liberal" website, but it sometimes has some great content, like this article discussing the parallels between the fall of the USSR and the current state of the US. Although the differences between the US and the former Soviet Union are vast, some aspects are similar enough to lend credibility to the analysis.

Some excerpts-

"...(Todd's) economic and historical analysis seems trenchant, and he predicts that in the relatively near term America's financial indiscipline and runaway consumption habits will result in a crash leading to a necessary 15 to 20 percent reduction in American living standards. Todd reasons that the U.S., despite its military prowess, simply lacks the power to enforce its hegemony everywhere it wishes and that its increasingly fragile, debt-dependent economy cannot sustain for long such an overreaching imperial policy.

Todd describes the U.S. as a "superpower living hand to mouth," led by a ruling class "even more rudderless and clueless than its European counterparts," and incapable of achieving its global aims through repeated applications of "theatrical micromilitarism." Todd argues that the disintegration of American hegemony already is in full swing, and he predicts that the Bush American Administration and its neocon theorists "will go down in history as the gravediggers of the American empire."

...

"The more the U.S. seeks to assert its will through diktat and unilateral military force, the more it ensures that the other major players will find it increasingly in their best interests to collaborate more closely with one another to deflect and frustrate the American imperium."

...

"The collapse of the American Empire is not over the horizon--an event lurking around a distant corner a few decades down the road. We are already in the very midst of it. It is like a staged train wreck unfolding frame-by-frame as we reflect in head-shaking disbelief on each day's news and on each new blunder by the Bush Administration.

Can the U.S. navigate its way to become a post-imperial, normal country--working responsibly as one great power among several rather than quixotically striving to be the sole global hegemon? Can it do so while avoiding further military disasters and a debilitating financial and economic collapse?

Or will the decline be precipitous and disorderly, accelerated by corrupt, clueless, inept, and rigid leadership, as was the Soviet Empire's collapse?"

2007-09-11T14:58:00.000-04:00

Here's a great piece on our man from "The Bulletin" in Philadelphia.

Some excerpts-

"Despite the fact that Paul's campaign has shown more momentum than any other second-tier - or even first-tier - candidate, the media continues to treat Paul as the Ross Perot of 2008. Paul has more money on hand than McCain, more charisma than Giuliani, is more genuine than Romney and has a stronger vision than Mike Huckabee, yet his campaign, as well as his message, is regulated to the back of the bus.

Paul is not of Wall Street, but Main Street. The Texas congressman is a champion of the individual, not the ivory tower, and he believes in abolishing the IRS, the Department of Education and the CIA. He argues that government is too bloated and is ready to introduce it to Jenny Craig and Kirstie Alley.

Paul is also an advocate for life - all life. Paul, however, is different than the other pro-life candidates with whom he shared the stage last Wednesday, for his definition of the right to life is all-inclusive."

It concludes with this-

"When Paul won Fox's text messaging poll asking who was victorious in Wednesday's debate, Hannity quipped, "He's having all those 3 percent of people call in." Now that's professionalism. It is clear that Paul is not of this political world, and because of that he will be hated by those he threatens to dethrone. It is up to the grassroots to cut through this campaign of misinformation and finally take the mainstream media, and the country club GOP mindset, to the woodshed."

2007-09-07T23:30:00.001-04:00

I sent this email to everyone in my address book yesterday, from an article by Johnny Kramer off of LewRockwell.com. Copy and paste it and do the same-

I admit it, I cried as I read this. Dare to dream, people! If Ron Paul
becomes the next president, the world will celebrate, and the future will be
much brighter!!!

Ron Paul's Inaugural Address, by Johnny Kramer.

Johnny Kramer wonders what it might look like.

The Ron Paul campaign has excited libertarians, but many people wonder what
he could accomplish as president, facing a contrary Congress. While some of
this is speculation and it's not my intention to put words in Dr. Paul's
mouth, his inaugural address might sound something like this:

January 20, 2009

"My fellow citizens:

"On November 4th of last year, you, the American people, overwhelmingly
rejected the erosion of liberty that has occurred in this country during the
20th Century and into the 21st.

"You rejected having your money stolen through taxes and the inflationary
fiat money of the government's central bank.

"You rejected deficit spending.

"You rejected corporatism – the suppression of competition by government, at
the behest of politically-connected businesses and at the expense of their
competitors and of you, the consumer, under the guise of 'consumer
protection;' forced cartelization of industry; and of businesses profiting
through the theft of being financed by tax dollars.

"You rejected government healthcare.

"You rejected nation-building and wars of foreign aggression.

"You rejected the erosion of your civil liberties under the guise of
fighting 'terrorism.'

"I know this because I promised, backed by a 30-year record of honesty and
integrity, to do my best to put a stop to all of these things, and more, if
you elected me to serve as your president. You had a choice to make that
day: My agenda or the status quo. You chose my agenda. I humbly thank you,
and I hope to repay your confidence during the next four years.

The Budget

"Last year, the federal government spent $3 trillion, which is more money
than it spent from 1787 to 1900 combined, in 2007 dollars.

"In 1963, John F. Kennedy was concerned when the budget hit $99 billion,
because he didn't want to be the first president with a $100 billion budget.

"In 1980, when Ronald Regan promised to get government off of our backs, the
federal budget was $500 billion.

"In 1990, just half a generation later, the federal budget had more than
doubled, to more than $1 trillion.

"In 1995, when the Republicans took control of Congress, the federal budget
was $1.5 trillion.

"In 2000, leading into the previous administration, the budget was $1.8
trillion.

"The budget last year was $3 trillion.

"In short, the budget has doubled in just 13 years. It's six times what it
was in 1980, and 20 times what it was in 1960.

"What happened in 1995, 1990, 1960, or even 1900, with a much smaller
government? The sky didn't fall, California didn't break off into the ocean,
and people weren't starving in the streets.

"There's no question that our standard of living today is much higher than
in previous years, but that's in spite of government spending and
regulation, not because of it.

"Today, thanks to the degree of capitalism, liberty and property rights that
remain in this country, the poor literally have a higher standard of living
than the richest person in the world did less than 150 years ago. Consider
that the wealthiest of the wealthy in the 19th Century didn't have indoor
plumbing, electricity, central heating or air-conditioning, or life-saving
antibiotics and other life-saving medical technologies of 2009, much less
cars, airplanes, computers, televisions, telephones, cell phones, and on and
on.

"Where did these things come from? Who makes life better for you: The
private sector, or government?

"The standard of living we would enjoy without government boggles the mind.

"In contrast, what is the federal government giving us for our $3 trillion a
year? It steals our money, through taxation and inflation, as the price of
earning a living and attempting to save some of it. It tells us what we can
buy and what we can sell, whom we can hire and whom we can fire, and with
whom we can associate and with whom we cannot, as well as other impediments
to the peaceful, voluntary interaction that makes civilization possible. It
runs up the prices of the goods we buy and holds down the wages we earn. It
keeps life-saving medicines and other products from us under the guise of
'consumer protection.' And that's just for starters; I don't have time today
to even begin detailing the ways in which government abuses us.

Budget Breakdown

"On what does the federal government spend the $3 trillion it extracts from
the economy yearly?

"In 2007, the budget broke down as follows:

* $699 billion (+4.0%) - Defense
* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government
* $1.1 billion (+47.6%) - Energy

"And all of these figures represent increases over the previous year's
budget." (Figures in parentheses show increase.)

"The income tax accounts for $1.1 trillion, which means if it were repealed,
the federal government would still be roughly the size it was in 2000, just
nine years ago,

"The interest in the debt accounts for roughly 8% of the budget, so that
could be eliminated with a balanced budget.

"Within 30 days, I will send Congress a budget for the new fiscal year that
cuts federal spending by 50% immediately, repeals the income tax and
replaces it with nothing, and requires that the budget be balanced. I'll let
them figure out what to cut; most of this spending is blatantly
unconstitutional and destructive to the average person's standard of living
anyway, so overall I'm unconcerned with where the cuts will come from.

"If the budget they send back is one penny more, I will veto it.

"If they override my veto an enact their budget, then the battle will
finally be joined and you will know exactly where your Senator or
Representative stands on the issue of your liberty, and you can vote
accordingly in the future.

"If at least one-third of one house stands up for liberty, we will reach an
impasse and most of the government will be shut down. That will put no
pressure on me, as I'm trying to shut most of it down – permanently. I will
hold out for as long as it takes for them to pass my budget – not their
budget.

Vetoes

"Today I will begin a policy of automatically vetoing any bill which allows
the federal government to do anything not authorized by the constitution.

"As a former Congressman, I know that Congresspersons and Senators often
vote for bills which they haven't read. I also know that bills are typically
thousands of pages long; they receive votes based on their virtuous-sounding
titles, which usually have nothing to do with the contents of the bill,
which is usually full of pork and hidden tyrannical authorizations.

"Based on this, I will also automatically veto any bill if I'm not convinced
that every Congressperson and Senator has read it and knows what's in it, or
if it's too long for me to read in one hour.

The Military

"I urge Congress to make the military budget a large percentage of the cuts,
as it's the cost of empire and policing the world and is bankrupting us.

"Toward that end, as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, today I will
order the complete, immediate removal of all U.S. troops from foreign soil.

"I sincerely hope that another budget cut Congress chooses to make will be
the complete repeal of all foreign aid, which accomplishes little but to
prop up thugs, dictators and brutal, oppressive regimes.

"And, freed from the income tax, individual Americans will have the
resources to send money to causes they support; if they wish to send their
money to suffering foreigners, that's their business. But it has a much
better chance of doing good, rather than evil, traveling through private
channels.

"I want the United States to adopt a position of armed neutrality, able to
defend herself, but aggressor against none; friend and trading partner with
all. We are probably the most geographically-blessed nation on earth, with
thousands of miles of ocean to the east and west, and friendly neighbors to
the north and south. Why must we police the world?

"Beginning today, the U.S. armed forces will exist to maintain a border and
shore patrol to repel an incoming military invasion and to maintain a
missile defense, once one is developed.

"Regarding a missile defense, anyone who understands economics knows that
the best way to accomplish something is through the profit motive, while the
worst way is through a government bureaucracy. To that end, today I am
offering a $100 billion reward to the first private company that can produce
a working missile defense.

Osama bin Laden

"On September 11, 2001, the United States was hit with a brutal, devastating
terrorist attack. While I sincerely believe that the attack was blowback for
50 years of U.S. government meddling in the Middle East, it was still a
despicable, unacceptable criminal act.

"A criminal act – not an act of war. To respond by killing innocent
civilians in Afghanistan and elsewhere is no better than the terrorists
responding to U.S. foreign policy by killing innocent Americans.

"It is widely believed that former U.S. ally Osama bin Laden was responsible
for 9/11. Yet in over seven years since the attack, he has been neither
caught nor punished, largely because our government was too busy
nation-building and policing the world.

"I will be reviewing the evidence for bin Laden's guilt with my Attorney
General and his staff. If they agree that the evidence is strong enough to
get an indictment in a normal criminal proceeding, and if the networks and
cable news outlets will be so kind as to give me some time, I will go on
television, lay the evidence out before the world, and offer a ransom for
anyone who can deliver bin Laden, and any accomplices the evidence indicts,
alive to U.S. custody. If you kill any of them, you won't get a dime; we
don't execute people without trials here.

"If they are captured, they will receive fair public trials, with all of the
habeas corpus and other rights that would be afforded to any American
citizen. I want America to be an example to the world at all times, even
trying times such as these.

The War on Terror

"Regarding the overall War on Terror: Terrorism is a tactic, an abstraction;
you can't have a war against an abstraction. Terrorism is not a person who
can surrender, or an organization or nation-state with a leader who can
surrender. The concept is inherently nonsense.

"And the evidence is overwhelming that America's aggressive, proactive War
on Terror has significantly increased, not decreased, terrorism.

"There's no way that the government, or anyone else, can possibly anticipate
every possible place and every possible way that a terrorist could strike,
especially in a country this size. If it's going to happen, it's going to
happen; foil one plot, and the terrorists will just hatch another. It was
the government that failed to protect us on 9/11; why should we look to them
now? The best defense against terrorism is armed neutrality and not giving
anyone a reason to hate, fear or want to attack us.

"Yet the government constantly tells us that we must trade our civil
liberties for safety. As Benjamin Franklin said, "He who sacrifices freedom
for security deserves neither." As president, I will immediately begin
pressuring Congress to repeal all so-called anti-terrorism measures enacted
since 9/11 that infringe on civil liberties, including the Patriot Act and
the Real I.D. Act.

Vices

"An issue of great concern for many Americans today is vices, such as
illicit drugs.

"The constitution gives the federal government no jurisdiction over vices.
Yet the federal government continually wastes billions of dollars, and
destroys thousands and thousands of lives, trying to stop peaceful,
voluntary activities.

"A government is not the arbiter of morality; it's nothing but a group of
people who grant themselves a legal monopoly on the use of force within a
certain area. Governments routinely engage in behavior that would be
universally regarded as criminal in the private sector.

"Liberty is the condition of being legally free to do as you choose, so long
as you're not forcibly intruding on anyone else's body or property.

"Naturally, a great deal of peaceful, voluntary behavior that falls within
the guidelines of liberty is personally destructive. But, if it should be
illegal to buy, sell or ingest certain drugs, for example, why shouldn't it
be illegal to smoke, drink too much, eat a bad diet, go into too much debt,
marry the wrong person, not get an education, or choose a career for which
one is ill-suited? If personal harm is the standard for illegality, we
should all be in prison.

"It may shock many to hear, but 100 years ago, there were no drug laws in
this country, not even prescription laws, and a 10-year-old child could walk
into a drug store and buy marijuana, cocaine or even heroin. In fact, Bayer
– the same company that makes Bayer aspirin today – used to manufacture
heroin, and even introduced heroin to the market the year before they
introduced aspirin, in the 1880s, because they believed at the time that
aspirin was the more dangerous drug. Heroin was sold as a pain reliever and
sedative and was perfectly safe; it only became a deadly, toxic substance
once it was outlawed, much like gin became a deadly, toxic substance during
Prohibition, when it was produced in people's bathtubs instead of in
legitimate distilleries.

"Please understand that I am not condoning recreational drug use. As a
medical doctor, I have seen the destruction to lives that drugs can cause.
But most of that destruction, such as high prices requiring theft to support
the habits, drive-by shootings, gang warfare and pushers on schoolyards, is
caused by the black market created by illegality, not by the drugs
themselves.

"Nor am I saying that some people won't still take drugs if they're legal;
of course they will. I live in the real world, not the ridiculous "Drug Free
America" utopia that the government is always promising – and failing
miserably – to create. But I sincerely believe that drug use, and its
negative effects on society, will be minimized with a free, legal market.

"In a free society, people should be free to make their own mistakes, harm
themselves, even harm their loved ones indirectly through their behavior,
and pay the consequences that naturally follow from their actions. The legal
system should only get involved if the behavior forcibly violates another
person's body or property.

"And, again, the constitution gives the federal government no jurisdiction
over drugs or any other vice.

"So today I will grant a full, unconditional pardon to anyone who has been
convicted of a federal, non-violent drug offense. I will order them all to
be released from prison within 90 days – unfortunately, there are a lot of
people to process and it will take some time, and I will restore their full
civil and voting rights.

"The constitution only allows three federal crimes: Treason, piracy and
counterfeiting. So today I will also begin granting pardons to anyone
convicted of any other federal, victimless crime, such as non-violent gun
control offenses, federal tax charges, and insider trading.

Executive Orders

"Today I will issue an Executive Order, temporarily freezing all previous
Executive Orders and regulations put in place by previous presidents until I
can review the constitutionality of each one. If I deem one to be
unconstitutional, I will issue another Executive Order, repealing it.

The Federal Reserve

"In 1913, the Federal Reserve system was sold to the American people as a
way to 'stabilize' the banking industry and avoid bank runs and panics.
Since then, the Federal Reserve has presided over a decade-plus depression,
numerous recessions and near-constant inflation. A 1913 dollar is now worth
about four cents. Inflation is a hidden tax by the wealthy against the poor
and middle class.

"Fiat money and the artificial expansion of credit also causes the
boom-and-bust cycle, such as the stock market bubble in 2000 and the housing
market bubble today. Many poor and middle class Americans have had their
standards of living significantly damaged by this cycle, which wouldn't
occur in a free market with sound money.

"Today I will begin urging Congress to amend banking regulations to allow
for a much more competitive, freer market in banking, including the
legalization of private money to compete with fiat Federal Reserve Notes.

Health Care

"Another important issue today is health care.

"Despite its flaws, and despite propaganda to the contrary, America's health
care system is still the envy of the world. Stories abound of people from
countries with socialized healthcare, such as Canada, traveling to the U.S.
for live-saving procedures either the bureaucrats in their own country had
denied or to avoid a many-month or many-year wait.

"Unfortunately, there is only one way ration scarce resources: By price. The
alternative is forced rationing and waiting lines; governments cannot create
resources out of thin air. In a free market, competition and innovation
drive prices down, and charity exists for life-and-death services for those
who need them and cannot pay.

"And there is nothing compassionate about forcing people at gunpoint to wait
in line for treatment, to put life-or-death decisions about their health in
the hands of bureaucrats, or to create a dangerous black market in health
care, which is the market's attempt to circumvent the government's failures.

"Some say that essential services, like health care, should be beyond
pricing and profit. This is nonsense; there is no such thing as a right to
something for which someone else has to pay.

"Furthermore, unless someone has an immediately life-threatening injury or
illness, food is more essential for life than healthcare; by this logic,
people should have a 'right' to 'free' food too.

"If this seems like a good idea, consider that in countries that have
preached such beliefs and forcibly nationalized food production and
distribution, there was mass starvation on a scale that Americans cannot
begin to comprehend.

"But, in countries like the U.S., where people are 'exploited' by greedy,
selfish food manufacturers, supermarkets and restaurants, even the poorest
people have more food than they can eat, and the government still makes food
more expensive than it would otherwise be, though things like farm
subsidies.

"And health care is technology-driven, so people should also consider how it
is that things like cell phones, DVD players, plasma televisions and
computers have fallen 50-90% in price over the past 10 years, even while the
quality goes up, while health care continues to get more and more expensive.

"Health care is one of the most-regulated industries in America today. It
began in earnest in the late-19th Century, through the forced cartelization
of the industry through things like licensing laws. As a medical doctor, I
know that these laws were not enacted to protect the public; they were
enacted at the behest of the health care industry, to artificially inflate
their incomes by restricting the supply.

"Government regulation of health care and insurance has continued unabated
throughout the 20th Century.

"As recently as the mid-1960s, a one-week hospital stay for an average
surgical procedure was $1,000 in today's dollars – and that was the total
bill, not what remained to be paid after insurance paid its part. And health
insurance was cheaply available to all who needed it.

"By the government's own figures, health care costs seniors twice what it
did before Medicare, even after adjusting for inflation.

"The FDA approval process drives up the prices of drugs and delays their
arrival on the market for years. The FDA has killed more people by keeping
life-saving drugs off the market for too long than it has saved by
preventing potentially dangerous drugs from being sold. It's common sense
that it's not in the self-interest of a pharmaceutical company to poison its
customers.

"HMOs became powerful because of legislation enacted on their behalf in the
1970s.

"There are many other ways government impeded health care, and I don't have
time to detail them all today.

"But rest assured that, as president, I will urge Congress to repeal all
federal regulations on the health care and insurance industries.

Social Security and Medicare

"Two other pressing issues are Social Security and Medicare.

"Unfortunately, several generations of Americans have been conditioned to
look to the government as their provider, and now many people, especially
seniors, are dependent on government for their survival. While I sincerely
believe that these programs never should've been started, I want to assure
seniors that I have no intention of cutting off their benefits without
making provisions for them.

"When Congress debates my budget proposal, I will urge them to make
provisions for Social Security and Medicare for the next fiscal year. And I
will urge them to alter how Social Security operates, to change it from a
Ponzi Scheme where the incoming money is spent immediately, to a program
where the money is saved.

"I will also push for people who are not already collecting Social Security
to be allowed to opt out of it, to be freed from the 15% tax in exchange for
renouncing their claim to any future benefits. Unfortunately, the money
they've already paid into the system can't be refunded, because the
politicians already spent it.

"If my other health care proposals are enacted and the market is freed,
health care should become so inexpensive that the need for Medicare will
evaporate and it can eventually be repealed, but it may take a few years.

"Later in my term, I hope to explore alternatives for completely privatizing
Social Security, such as buying lifetime annuities with private insurance
companies for everyone who's already collecting, or will be within the next
10 years.

Congress

"Finally today, let me address the issue of Congress.

"There are a lot of people in Congress who believe in the State, in the
virtue of using force to remake society.

"Many expect Congress to fight me tooth and nail. They may, but I want to
warn them that they will be taking an enormous political risk if they defy
me. Again, the American people had a choice to make last November, and they
chose the agenda I've outlined today.

"I ask the American people to contact their Representatives and Senators and
urge them to help me restore liberty to America.

"To the Congress, I say that, if you fight the work I have been sent here to
do, I will ask the American people to begin sending me better people to work
with in next year's mid-term elections. I hope, instead, that you will
choose to work with me.

Thank You

"We face many challenges today, and of course I have not addressed them all
But I do believe I've outlined an excellent start.

"I want to humbly thank you again for choosing me to represent you for the
next four years, and I again promise to do my best to repay your confidence
and to make this a free country again."

2007-08-31T23:07:00.000-04:00

Here's something to think about- Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert have both been nominated for numerous prestigious awards. By their own confession they are "fake" journalists. They make no pretensions about their intent to entertain and make people laugh. At the same time, people trust them, and for good reason- they tell the truth about the world of politics. They shine a light on the dark corners of Washington DC, and show the absurdity of it. They openly mock it. The people who watch their shows are among the most politically aware people in the country. They know that these 2 are not going to lie to them, or whitewash the facts (although a little embellishment may occur occasionally...) and that they can be trusted to give them real information. Not bad for a pair of "fake" news shows.

Here's the part that should make you feel hopeful- in ten years, if they stay on the same path, these guys will be two of the most trusted names in news reporting. Think about that. The people that are in their teens, twenties and thirties that watch TDS and TCR now will be a formidable voting bloc a decade from now, and these two guys will be who they turn to and trust for news. In fact they tolerate NO bullshit from the political establishment today (see Jon Stewart's wonderful attack on the "Crossfire" idiots last year for a glimpse of the "real" Jon Stewart, who even though he is being "humorous" as he delivers his attack, his sincerity comes through clearly) and reveal the naked stupidity of the "mainstream media" with every episode that they create. It's obvious to me that Stewart and Colbert are far more qualified to be anchors for the evening news than Couric, Williams or whoever the hell hosts the ABC evening news. The only reason they aren't is because they SCARE THE HELL out of the "powers that be" because they actually tell the truth!

These guys will continue to be shining lights of truthiness in a world of prevarication and propaganda, and we should support their efforts.

End rant.

2007-08-28T17:20:00.000-04:00

I've been a lousy blogger lately- school, a new job, and travel have kept me busy.

Today while I was on campus I saw that some enterprising soul had written "Want Freedom? Vote for Ron Paul" in chalk on the sidewalk. I decided to walk around a bit, and the "sidewalk blogger" had hit several spots on campus. Good for them!

2007-08-18T13:02:00.000-04:00

I love the chant in this video from the Illinois Straw Poll- "Ron Paul Revolution- Legalize The Constitution!"

Check out the end of the video- IL State Senator Dan Rutherford (Romney's campaign chair for Illinois) takes one person's Ron Paul sign and STEPS ON IT! Asshole. This just goes to show the level of fear and desperation in the Romney camp. Send him an email and let him know that such behavior only serves to energize Paul's supporters.

Here's the email I sent to him- you can contact him at danrutherford@danrutherford.com

Why do you hate America? Why are you so scared of liberty? I saw you in a video from the Illinois straw poll where you stepped on the Ron Paul sign. Is that the level that you guys are sinking to? I can smell your fear. Your desperation. You're scared that Ron Paul is going to whip Romney in the primaries, aren't ya? You know that Romney is just another empty suit who will continue to destroy all the things that makes America great, while Ron Paul is a real statesman and patriot. You are truly pathetic. Ron Paul is going to be the best president that this country has had in 200 years, and there's nothing that you and your mindless thugs can do to stop the Ron Paul Revolution!

2007-08-14T17:51:00.000-04:00

Traffic to the Ron Paul official website was up nearly 67% this month, an incredible surge. The word is spreading, and people like what they hear!

2007-08-14T17:47:00.000-04:00

Here's the assessment of the fiscal health of the country from the Comptroller General of the US. Pretty bleak analysis.

Learn from the fall of Rome, US warned

By Jeremy Grant in Washington

Published: August 14 2007 00:06 | Last updated: August 14 2007 00:06

The US government is on a ‘burning platform’ of unsustainable policies and practices with fiscal deficits, chronic healthcare underfunding, immigration and overseas military commitments threatening a crisis if action is not taken soon, the country’s top government inspector has warned.

David Walker, comptroller general of the US, issued the unusually downbeat assessment of his country’s future in a report that lays out what he called “chilling long-term simulations”.

These include “dramatic” tax rises, slashed government services and the large-scale dumping by foreign governments of holdings of US debt.

Drawing parallels with the end of the Roman empire, Mr Walker warned there were “striking similarities” between America’s current situation and the factors that brought down Rome, including “declining moral values and political civility at home, an over-confident and over-extended military in foreign lands and fiscal irresponsibility by the central government”.

“Sound familiar?” Mr Walker said. “In my view, it’s time to learn from history and take steps to ensure the American Republic is the first to stand the test of time.”

Mr Walker’s views carry weight because he is a non-partisan figure in charge of the Government Accountability Office, often described as the investigative arm of the US Congress.

While most of its studies are commissioned by legislators, about 10 per cent – such as the one containing his latest warnings – are initiated by the comptroller general himself.

In an interview with the Financial Times, Mr Walker said he had mentioned some of the issues before but now wanted to “turn up the volume”. Some of them were too sensitive for others in government to “have their name associated with”.

“I’m trying to sound an alarm and issue a wake-up call,” he said. “As comptroller general I’ve got an ability to look longer-range and take on issues that others may be hesitant, and in many cases may not be in a position, to take on.

“One of the concerns is obviously we are a great country but we face major sustainability challenges that we are not taking seriously enough,” said Mr Walker, who was appointed during the Clinton administration to the post, which carries a 15-year term.

The fiscal imbalance meant the US was “on a path toward an explosion of debt”.

“With the looming retirement of baby boomers, spiralling healthcare costs, plummeting savings rates and increasing reliance on foreign lenders, we face unprecedented fiscal risks,” said Mr Walker, a former senior executive at PwC auditing firm.

Current US policy on education, energy, the environment, immigration and Iraq also was on an “unsustainable path”.

“Our very prosperity is placing greater demands on our physical infrastructure. Billions of dollars will be needed to modernise everything from highways and airports to water and sewage systems. The recent bridge collapse in Minneapolis was a sobering wake-up call.”

Mr Walker said he would offer to brief the would-be presidential candidates next spring.

“They need to make fiscal responsibility and inter-generational equity one of their top priorities. If they do, I think we have a chance to turn this around but if they don’t, I think the risk of a serious crisis rises considerably”.

2007-08-13T19:40:00.000-04:00

I got this via email from Whiskey and Gunpowder, an investment newsletter to which I subscribe. I haven't seen the movie (I'll probably wait 'til the DVD) but I thought it was a great review of the movie and the message. Contempt, barely veiled, is the norm when it comes to talking about the government. The words "honest politician" are considered oxymoronic even by the most liberal of citizens. Ron Paul is the only exception that I can think of!

How Great Thou, Bart

“By their own follies they perished, the fools.”
— Homer, The Odyssey

“Operator! Give me the number for 911!”
— Homer Simpson, The Simpsons

I’m far from alone in taking The Simpsons seriously as a force to be reckoned with in American culture. After 400 original episodes over 18 full seasons — the longest run by far of any sitcom in U.S. television history — a star on Hollywood’s Walk of Fame, a dubbing by Time magazine as the “20th century’s best television series,” and a new, rave-reviewed box-office smash motion picture, The Simpsons is anything but obscure and avant-garde nowadays. It’s downright mainstream.

College courses are taught about The Simpsons. Modern philosophers have waxed existential about what the fictional family means for humanity. Social and political pundits have opined about the series’ relevance and impact on American culture for years. Even our language has been forever changed by that dysfunctional Every-family from Springfield, U.S.A. — in 2001, the Oxford English Dictionary added Homer’s trademark exclamation “D’oh!” to its comprehensive catalog of the lingo…

In fact, so many articles — more than 300, as an educated guess — have been written about The Simpsons since their first TV appearance more than 20 years ago (as a comedic sketch on The Tracey Ullman Show ) that I had trouble coming up with an original title for this essay. Options I labored to come up with that were already in print included gems like “Homer’s Odyssey,” and “The Tao of D’oh!” Both have been used, multiple times.

But all this is beside my point. What I want to talk about today isn’t that The Simpsons has become a staple of American TV and a permanent fixture of Americana itself — or even whether or not it’s a good influence on the culture. My goal is to reveal just how IMPORTANT Homer and company are to America’s freedom.

Yes, that’s right: The Simpsons play a vital role in the preservation of our liberty.

Homer’s Homer of a Flick

Everyone who’s ever seen The Simpsons on television knows that — at least on the surface — the show is largely pointless. Like an animated Seinfeld, the storylines are basically vehicles for the writers’ creativity and barbed (yet remarkably clean) humor. It doesn’t aim to be the social conscience of a culture or to reflect the zeitgeist of an age. Nor does it attempt to preach at us like some animated after-school special for adults.

Therein lies The Simpsons’ beauty and genius.

Because its fundamental goal is to spread laughs instead of lessons, the show’s writers are free to skewer everyone and everything in America without fear of undermining any overarching agenda. And this they do — gleefully freed from the shackles of political correctness by their two boorish bards, Bart and Homer Simpson. In fact, The Simpsons is such an equal-opportunity heckler of the American condition that it’s really the only thing on the Fox network (or any network) that truly approaches “fair and balanced.”

True, if one looks really hard, the slightest suggestion of a skew to the political left can be detected in The Simpsons. But it’s so light-handed as to be almost irrelevant — and it tends to highlight general issues (chiefly, the environment) more than any particular political party. In fact, recognizable caricatures of politicians from both sides of the aisle get roasted regularly on The Simpsons.

In my opinion, the fact that there are no sacred cows in Springfield is one of the reasons why the show is still running strong after 18 seasons. What’s lampooned mercilessly in one episode (like organized religion) might be glorified in the next. In simplest terms, The Simpsons is like that box of chocolates in Forrest Gump. You really never know what you’re going to get in the way of satire. And as you’ll see in a minute, this is integral to the show’s relevance as a beacon of freedom…

However, even more important than this satirical even-handedness is that year in and year out, the show’s primary gag-fodder isn’t political movements, pop-culture icons, or high-profile figures in the news or current events (though all of these make occasional cameo appearances) — but rather, the media, big business and government. And specifically, the hypocrisy and corruption rampant in these institutions.

I was afraid that, in the movie version of The Simpsons, these elements would be diluted or tempered in pursuit of the wide-reaching mega-appeal summer blockbusters strive for. I needn’t have worried. This dissenting spirit is not only alive and well on the big screen, but applied with such alternately brutish and near-subliminal expertise that, in my humble opinion, The Simpsons Movie sets a new American cinematic benchmark (not to mention sounds a new wake-up call) for the criticism of government, Big Business and the major media in this country…

But especially the government.

In fact, the entire premise of the movie casts government as the antagonist. Basically, the plotline is that after the town lake becomes hopelessly contaminated with all sorts of pollutants (Homer himself administering the toxic coup-de-grace), the Environmental Protection Agency seizes control of Springfield. In short order, the entire town is wiped off maps and GPS grids by the government, then sealed under an impregnable glass dome and left to implode into an anarchic, might-makes-right state that’s like something out of Lord of the Flies or Hobbes’ Leviathan. When this plan fails, the EPA chief decides to nuke the city inside the dome — then convert its vast annihilation crater into a “new grand canyon” tourist attraction. The Simpson family, having escaped the dome through a sinkhole in their backyard, first flees to Alaska, then return to save their hometown and foil the Feds…

Of course, The Simpsons Movie is farfetched and nonsensical. But it’s also brilliantly crystalline in its illustration of the very essence of government — how it does exactly the wrong things, for the wrong reasons (like their own enrichment and expansion), while selling it to the public under the auspices of acting in their interests.

It’s simultaneously stupid slapstick camp and quasi-polemical high art. And it’s hilariously funny, especially if you’re alert. An unbelievable amount of stuff is happening in the margins of the screen or in the background of scenes here that’s pure comedic gold. If you take a bathroom break from this 87-minute film, you’ll miss five good chuckles at least…

Among the funniest highlights in The Simpsons Movie that poke a hot stick in the eye of government are:

When EPA Chief Cargill — a business wizard who was appointed to bring his PR savvy to the largely invisible agency — presents President Schwarzenegger (they never show his face, but he’s remarkably similar in voice and background to a certain West Coast governor) with dossiers outlining five options for dealing with the environmental crisis in Springfield, he chooses one at random, offering the heavily-accented justification “I was elected to lead, not to read.”

Later in the movie, the same scenario plays out in the Oval Office after the containment dome plan begins to show weaknesses that could backfire, hurting the EPA’s image. Villain Cargill again presents the President with five options — but hints and prods and coaches him until he picks Option 4, which calls for the nuclear annihilation of Springfield. At other points in the film, we discover that Cargill’s conglomerate had a hand in making not only the bomb, but also the dome that originally sealed off the town.

Not exactly a MENSA candidate himself, Homer outwits a jack-booted military guard (and breeches the dome to rescue the town) by appearing out of the bushes dressed in a gold-piped, epaulette-equipped hotel doorman’s outfit. Consulting the uniform’s nametag, he pretends to be General “Marriot Suites” and orders the guard away with an official-looking letter — written on a leaf!

In an attempt to win public support for the creation of a “new Grand Canyon” where Springfield used to be, the Feds enlist the aid of uber-popular Tom Hanks to appear in a public service announcement, in which he says: “Hello, I'm Tom Hanks. The U.S. Government has lost its credibility, so it’s borrowing some of mine…” And later, “Because if you have to trust a government, why not this one?”

When Cargill calls in the troops to protect Springfield from Homer’s attempt to rescue both his family (whom the EPA has taken prisoner) and the town, one of his minions calls him on the carpet — accusing the bureaucrat of having let power go to his head. Cargill answers: “Of course I've gone mad with power! Have you ever tried going mad without power? It's boring and no one listens to you!”

Having fled Springfield as wanted fugitives, the Simpson family takes refuge in Alaska. But after seeing the Tom Hanks commercial about the “new Grand Canyon” coming soon to where Springfield is on the map, Marge realizes that the EPA plans to nuke her home. But Homer refuses to help save the town, so she takes the children and leaves him, heading back to Springfield with no real plan except to sound the alarm and do whatever else she can. While on a train across the tundra, they talk openly, Marge assuring the kids that they’re far from the prying eyes and ears of government. Just then, the conductor — who’s actually a surveillance robot — picks up and starts transmitting their conversation to a vast installation of the NSA, where hundreds of Federal agents are eavesdropping on thousands of conversations across the nation. The pointy-headed geek who hears them jumps up and gleefully screams to the whole cavernous room: “The government finally found someone we were looking for!”

These are just a few from many of the comedic barbs The Simpsons Movie hurls at our government. And it would take multiple essays to catalog even the most obvious shots the film takes at the media, popular culture and big business. If you see the film (and you should), keep an eye out for Bart’s almost under-the-radar swipe at Disney. It’s priceless!

But I digress. Again. I’m here to talk about why The Simpsons is important to America, and why — even if you can’t stand them — you should cheer their very existence…

The (Free) World According to Bart

As I alluded to earlier, it’s my opinion that what The Simpsons does better than any other television show, radio gripe-fest, blog or anything else on the scene today is reveal the hypocrisy in a lot of establishment institutions. This is a very necessary thing for the care and feeding of a proper democracy — in America and elsewhere in the free world.

But what’s really scary these days is the fact that so much of this type of healthy dissent gets quashed — by the media’s political correctness, the increasing hyper-sensitivity of a litigation-happy victim state, or by the bullying (or outright mandate) of government and the courts. This should make us all a bit leery. When the most biting, accurate and poignant kinds of dissent in our society have to be delivered with animated pratfalls, quips and pranks in order to be palatable to the masses and those who rule them, something’s wrong…

Then again, perhaps I’m being too dramatic here. It could be that the lightest form of comedy — not the earnest, dire commentary of somber-faced, over-educated talking heads — really is the best vehicle for simplifying and exposing the root of institutional hypocrisies. Perhaps the ambiguity of the inane and farcical creates the perfect receptive condition in the mind for the realization of just how screwed we really are by those whom we’re trusting to look after our interests on a larger scale.

But regardless of WHY The Simpsons are able to speak truth to power whilst so many others are muzzled, one thing’s clear: Biased, culturally destructive or not, Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa, Maggie and their friends reflect more accurately than anything else in mainstream culture the things Americans from all points on the political spectrum should have in common: A healthy, objective, and constant skepticism of not only our government, but the other institutions that rule over or influence us by virtue of their position, doctrine, proximity, wealth, mythology, dogma or technology…

That’s what I mean when I say The Simpsons can save America. If only we will let them.

Riding along on a Homeric odyssey,

Jim Amrhein
Freedoms Editor, Whiskey & Gunpowder

2007-08-11T19:09:00.000-04:00

Here's a great piece from Karen Kwiatowski. Love her. I'll post it in full, but check out her blog at the link.

A lot of people are frightened of Dr. Ron Paul's possible presidency. They're scared to talk about it, to consider it, or recognize its possibility. Like so many frightened people, they are putting their heads in the sand, and hoping it will all just go away.

Give us a snarky political professional like Guiliani or Clinton, or a nicely coiffed white family man like Romney or Edwards. Give us a nice neoconservative grandpa like Fred Thompson, or a grouchy neoconservative grandpa like McCain. Give us an Obama -- for a change of pace in everything but currently established domestic and foreign policies.

But by golly, don't dare threaten the establishment with Jeffersonian democratic vision and Washingtonian non-interventionism. Don't boldly challenge the NYC/DC axis of politics with sheer constitutionalism. Better yet, don't remind us that the American president is not the commander-in-chief of everybody but a narrowly defined and legally constrained institution that is only equal -- and certainly subject -- to our judicial and legislative bodies.

Ron Paul, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich are the only candidates who seem to understand this. They are also the only candidates who will quickly, if not immediately, end the U.S. occupation of Iraq. Wait a sec -- I mean end it peacefully. Ultimately, Iraqis and their supporters around the world will bring down the American occupation -- but they will do so limb by limb, heart by heart, and soul by soul. They will kill thousands of us and themselves before it reaches that inevitable point of non-occupation and honest political independence. Only Paul and two underfunded Democratic contenders offer wisdom to Americans across the nation who are hungry for wisdom, at least in foreign policy.

However -- it is in domestic policy where Ron Paul completes the package. Unlike the democratic longshots, and the candidacy of GuiliClintoRomnObamThomEdwaCain, Ron Paul is about real freedom. Freedom to choose, freedom to live, freedom to decide for ourselves. He offers freedom from excessive government mandates, excessive rules and regulations, excessive confiscation of our life and property. In this, Paul is the only real conservative in the group, and yes, perhaps the only radical.

Social planners of all sorts -- some more Marxist in orientation, others more nationalist -- present themselves as the American presidential front runners. The media focuses cameras on their faces, murmurs over their every word, and wonders if America and the world will really like them as Most Supreme Leader of the World.

Ron Paul, humbly and simply, honors the Constitution -- and perhaps this makes him boring to mainstream media. When asked recently how he would use the great power of the executive office, circa 2009, Paul indicated he'd use his power to restrain the natural temptation to abuse that mostly unconstitutional concentration of power. He'd then work to restore a constitutionally established presidency -- in part by revoking the many executive orders to which we have all become inured.

Ron Paul may not excite the mainstream press, establishment policy cheerleaders, big investors in government programs, or the military-industrial complex. But Ron Paul really excites a whole heck of a lot of regular people -- and puts the scare in the rest of them.

Ron's latest odds in the Iowa Straw poll are 8 to 1 -- and the big Republican candidates who represent all-spending, all-war, all-the-time are worried. So worried, many of them aren't even coming to Iowa.

Those who wish to discredit Ron Paul as a viable candidate don't point out his popularity among traditional Republicans, Democrats and Independents. They don't point out that his "Don't Tread on Me" libertarian streak is shared by half the adults in this country, and three quarters of the teenagers. They ignore his grass roots support, the money and the passion that flows steadily into his campaign.

The Republican Party, its Democratic emulators, and mainstream media are living dinosaurs. All refuse to pull their heads out of the sand and face the issues that really touch Americans, and to deliver what Americans really want for themselves, their families and their government. And unlike in previous elections, nobody in American really, truly, cares what mainstream media thinks. It's not that Katie Couric and her ilk aren't nice people. It's just that times have changed.

These dinosaurs -- and the theropods that report the news -- are increasingly irrelevant. I believe that the other contenders for the Presidency will soon begin to adopt Paul's message and attempt to promote his agenda of freedom and peace, or they will become politically extinct. As a peace and freedom-loving American, I can't wait.

2007-08-05T23:12:00.000-04:00

I wrote a few weeks ago about the dire fiscal straits the United States was in, and it appears that I was right on the money. This article from few months ago clearly illustrates the nature of the problems we are facing, and it was written before the recent downturn in the stock market. Jim Cramer, host of "Mad Money" on CNBC, had an on air "meltdown" on Friday, saying that the turmoil in the financial markets was just beginning, and that the collapse was just beginning. No matter what you think of Cramer, he has many top level contacts within the world of high finance, and according to him many of them are terrified of a serious economic downturn. The level of panic in his voice should scare anyone who has investments in the stock market, especially those heavily invested in banking, building or mortgage-related stocks. He has gone from relatively bullish to extremely bearish in the last few weeks. The NYTimes had an in-depth article today discussing the massive contraction of credit and the inability for many individuals and institutions to borrow money. Unless you have spotless credit and a hefty down payment, you can no longer get a loan to purchase a home, meaning that the pool of people able to buy homes has contracted even further. This means that the record high levels of inventory will only go higher. Factor in the record levels of foreclosures, and the number of unsold homes is bound to grow, which will further depress falling prices. Millions of homeowners now owe more on their mortgage than their house is worth, effectively trapping them in their current home unless they have the money to pay the difference.

These problems, as well as our record trade deficit and government spending levels, are not going to go away anytime soon. The derivatives market, which has grown to epic proportions, is predicated on financial stability. If the market begins to weaken further, the chance of the derivatives market collapsing becomes more likely. This could lead to cascading cross defaults, threatening every bank in the world. Unfortunately, this doomsday scenario becomes more likely every day. The dollar, already weaker than at any point in history, could collapse in value, driving the cost of imports- including oil- through the roof. The American economy could not survive $200 a barrel oil and $10 a gallon gasoline.

I don't know why I'm writing about this. It just depresses me, especially since I firmly believe that the likelihood of these events coming to pass is almost certain. I fear that such a collapse would lead to more government intervention, both domestically and abroad, and could plunge the world into a new dark age. This could make the "Great Depression" look like a walk in the park.

However, there is a glimmer of hope. The American people might lay the blame at the door of the architects of this fiasco and dissolve the American Empire once and for all. If Washington DC was "disintermediated" and the responsibilities of government devolved back to the individual states, America could very well find itself on the path to a new golden age. With no federal government interference, the states could set their own internal policies and compete with one another for population and commerce. Efficient and free states would prosper as people and businesses relocated within their borders, while poorly governed ones would lose population and corporations. This would pressure all states to become freer and more respectful of their citizens. It sounds like a dream, but if the financial chaos we facing comes to fruition, it may well become a reality.

2007-08-03T09:18:00.001-04:00

Here's the actual article by Todd Seavey from National Review that I referenced below. The previous link is to his blog post about his article, not the article itself. Mea culpa. They are both well worth a quick read. Some quotes-

"And for those who say it can’t happen, here’s the beauty part: Get Paul through the primaries, to the Republican nomination, and he has the tools to take on Hillary. He plainly gets the libertarian swing voters that the Republicans lost in 2006, he should garner most conservative votes when contrasted with Hillary, and — here’s the clincher — he gets a huge share of the bourgeoning antiwar vote to boot. Think about it: Clinton has already alienated the substantial antiwar faction of the Democratic party, while Ron Paul has inspired a supportive banner even at an anarchist rally full of hippies and punks, urging people to join the Ron Paul “love revolution.”

and

"Do conservatives not really want all the things Paul has to offer? Then why do we fight at all? If it’s merely for power and mainstream acceptance, one might as well support Hillary Clinton or wait until after November 2008 and support whoever comes out on top. But if we want a radically smaller government — precisely that thing that a Republican Congress neglected to do for the last twelve years, which has created the current mood of conservative frustration — we must support Ron Paul. Remember how small government was at the nation’s founding and consider how perhaps even conservatives have since then become de facto socialists, accepting the leviathan state as inevitable. But it’s not inevitable if they vote against it when history hands them that chance. "

2007-08-03T09:09:00.000-04:00

Former war supporter Andrew Sullivan writes: "What Americans want are the benefits of empire, without the work of empire. If you can't do the work, you shouldn't start. That's why I think non-interventionism will become a consensus in Washington in the not-to-distant future. Experience doth make cowards of us all."

2007-08-03T09:06:00.000-04:00

Here's a short interview with Liberty Watch magazine. This quote from one of the members of the Las Vegas Meetup group is great-

“The ‘conversion’ rate is amazing,” says Osborne. “Once people learn that Paul voted against the war, against the Patriot Act, against government getting on our backs from the very beginning, people start to view him differently. I’m serious when I say that Paul is our last chance to get rid of the partisan junk. He doesn’t tow the party line. He’ll work both sides of the aisle, but only in accordance with the Constitution. He can bring the country back together and heal. He can reverse some of the self-destructive trends that have been set into motion. Anything else is just more of the same.”

2007-08-02T23:51:00.000-04:00

This has nothing to do with Ron Paul. It's a piece by Camille Paglia about the intersection of Fine Arts and Religion over the last few decades, and in my opinion it's a brilliant article. I think that Ms. Paglia may be one of the most important, intelligent, insightful and infuriating intellectuals in contemporary public life. Even when I vehemently disagree with her, I find her stimulating. It's well worth your time to read the whole thing.

I would LOVE to see what she has to say about Dr. Paul. As his star continues to rise, I'm sure she will feel compelled to write about his candidacy. Although she may not end up supporting him, I'm sure his iconoclastic ideas and personal integrity will impress her and earn her respect.

2007-08-02T23:47:00.000-04:00

Here's a good blog post by Todd Seavey about an article he has written about Ron. It looks like Ron's campaign is getting his message into the conservative part of the MSM- National Review nonetheless! Be sure to check out the comments.

The instant feedback that blogs allow is perhaps the most revolutionary and exciting part of the "new media" the internet is fostering. It allows the reader to go from passive recipient of information to active creator of content. In many cases the comments that follow an article are as useful as the information contained in the main text. If the author has engaged in intellectual dishonesty or even outright lies, the comments that follow are sure to point it out. It allows a reader to instantly vet anything they read, and makes it difficult for writers to mislead their audience without repercussion.

2007-07-29T02:00:00.001-04:00

I'm just feeling a ramble coming on, so anyone reading this blog entry is subjecting themselves to it willingly.

Did Alan Greenspan try to set himself up as a stealth version of John Galt? Knowing that he was an acolyte of Rand's in the 60s and a firm believer in the gold standard and limited government, it seems unfathomable to me that he would so totally turn on those principles the way that he did in his facilitation of the run-up of the housing bubble. He KNEW what the consequences would be. He KNEW that the "crack up boom" that is happening now would be devastating, perhaps more devastating than the Great Depression. He KNEW that it would stress our economic system to the point of breaking. You may not believe these things right now, but I'm fairly certain that the next few years are going to be filled with financial turmoil. The laws of economics cannot be repealed, no matter how many laws and regulations the jackasses in DC try to create and enforce. This turmoil may be more than our already fractured and ossified federal government can handle. As the grassroots support of Ron Paul shows, many millions of educated and intelligent people are disgusted with our government. A lot of those people are ready to openly revolt against it, something that would have been unthinkable to them 2 decades ago. If our economic system crumbles, the fault will lie squarely at Greenspan's feet.

And that may not be a totally bad thing. Sure, it's going to radically alter life in America, but it will also accelerate the growing dissatisfaction people feel towards Washington DC, and may lead to a dissolution of the federal level of our republic. If the populace withdraws support for the Feds, then secession becomes a real possibility. If we decide to take matters into our own hands, and forcibly devolve those federal powers to the state level, then the United part of the US crumbles and we become a loose conglomeration of states instead of being a superstate. If that happens, then perhaps that loose grouping of states will learn to better manage their own affairs and slowly become free states committed to liberty and justice once again. The process may be slow, and full of fits and starts, but the end result will be a much freer and more peaceful country. And Alan Greenspan will be responsible. Perhaps he's a hero after all?

2007-07-24T20:28:00.000-04:00

From the LewRockwell.com blog-

Writes Jay Henderson: "Just wanted to keep you abreast of the progress Ron Paul's Google video has made thus far. Today he has almost tripled Hillary's numbers:

Ron Paul: 100,615 views in 1 week.
Hillary Clinton: 33,732 views in 4 months."

Watch the video via YouTube here.

This kind of momentum is astonishing. Don't believe the polls that show his support at 3%- the good doctor has a much deeper base of support than the MSM is willing to recognize.

2007-07-24T20:03:00.000-04:00

This is a post in response to an article on the MSNBC website-

Almost everyone I know, who heard of the actual Ron Paul message (and not the crap Fox labels him), has become an avid Ron Paul supporter.

I have done a lot of firsts since I learned about Ron Paul.
1-For the first time ever, I donated money to a politician.
2-For the first time ever, I called in to a radio show to voice my opinion about a candidate, didn't get on...but still for someone who isn't a fan of phone calls that was a big feat for me.
3-For the first time ever, I actually got involved in the grass roots effort.
4-For the first time ever, I actually believe a politician.
5-For the first time ever, I will vote in the primaries.
6-For the first time ever, I actually bring up politics, just so that I can tell more people about RP.
7-For the first time ever, I've spent my free time looking for new appearances by the politician online.
8-For the first time ever, I feel good about my vote.

And thats the case for many of Ron Paul supporters...his message resonates with the disenfranchised voter(you know that 50% of the country that doesn't turn out to vote)...and since we realize that this country is screwed if we don't get him elected, we change parties, just to be able to vote for him in the primaries.

So don't discount Ron Paul yet...even if he ends up with 5% in the polls, he can still win the primaries, because his supporters will actually go out and vote

Andrew, NJ (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 5:24 PM)

Posts like this are the reason that I think that Dr. Paul has an excellent shot at winning the presidency next year. God knows we need him.

2007-07-21T00:15:00.000-04:00

Bellum omnium contra omnes, a Latin phrase meaning "the war of all against all", is the description that Thomas Hobbes gives to human existence in the state of nature thought experiment that he conducts in De Cive (1642) and Leviathan (1651).

In order for society to peacefully and naturally organize, in accordance with the laws and tenets that arise from our natural tendency towards order and justice, something possible only when true freedom reigns, this anthropologically inaccurate assertion must be laid to rest. The "State of Nature" that Hobbes conjured was based on his fundamental lack of insight into the character of the human fabric. He saw only the flaws in the stitching, the uneven patches of color and texture, and the threadbare sections adjoining the heavily weighted ones. He then convinced a legion of obtuse intellectuals, positive of their own infallibility, that nothing beautiful could ever be conjured from this unless the state directed its' production, transforming it from damaged cloth and into garments for all. He was wrong.

Humans are a notoriously destructive species, and we gladly turn that destructiveness on one another with alarming regularity. The 20th century alone saw the extermination of nearly 100 million people during such things as purges and war. The thing that these 100 million people had in common was that someone else other than the person doing the killing was responsible for the policy that was causing said killing. These people would not have been killing their human brethren willingly, except in the case of invasion, when they would have defended their homes, families and properties against the intruder, with their lives if necessary. Once again, these intruders generally had someone else writing and deciding on the intrusion, while they served as fodder until the thing the policymakers wants was acquired, or they grew bored or scared, at which time the invasion was ended.

That said, when people recognize all of humanity as their brethren, something else that only happens in a free society, killing one of them is rewarded with justice. Therefore, a truly free society sees ANY death caused by them, even if the killed are from another country, as crime that must be punished. If that held for our own poor soldiers, then God help them. These once innocent men have seen many horrors, and in some cases helped perpetrate them, or cover them up. These horrors will haunt these men for long after the war in Iraq has ended. Just ask a Viet Nam veteran. These soldiers swore to preserve their own country, but most of them recognized that the war was launched on lies, and felt nothing but contempt for the government that sent them there. Change the tenses in the sentence above, and it is an apt description on Iraq as well. So much for the governments' assertion that there are no parallels.

Unless the state is neutered, these killings on a mass scale will continue. Only then will we learn that when we conduct ourselves peacefully with other nations and entities, they will conduct themselves peacefully with us. When we quit trying to control, via political means, the conduct of other states they will have less reason to hold contempt for us that leads to conflict.

This is why Ron Paul needs to be the next president. Whether you are a Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal, you need to vote for this man, because he will embody the peaceful and patriotic message I have tried to convey in this post. He will never send troops into harms way unless it is the only option, and he will never do it without proper authorization and much reflection. He will use the forum provided by his position to advance the cause of liberty in the world. If we work together, we could create an atmosphere where liberty thrives, all by electing this man to the presidency.

2007-07-18T13:06:00.000-04:00

MORE ARTICLES FROM THE FUTURE!

Wednesday, December 26 2007 pg C-12

Suffolk County elections official Mary Stewart says she has never seen anything like it. Every day for the last 2 months, dozens of people have come to her office to change their party affiliation from Democrat or Independent to Republican, with many more requests being processed by mail. Stewart says that one common theme seems to unite these new Republicans- they want to vote for Ron Paul in the upcoming Primary. "We're trying to get the word out that if you want to vote in the primary as a Republican, you need to change your party affiliation at least 30 days before the election, which means that they need to get it done by next Friday". Stewart says that she has processed "close to a thousand" party affiliation changes, and that the number of people doing it seems to be increasing each week. "I expect to process about 500 changes over the next ten days. Last Friday we had 42 people come into the office to do their changes in person, and got probably twice as many requests for change in the mail." Stewart says. Office worker Jenny Sparks says that one couple "in their 70s" came in last week and told her that they had never voted for a Republican, but that after seeing Dr. Paul on several news shows they both decided that they were going to vote for him. Boston resident Pat Cain was in the office changing her affiliation and said "I've been a Democrat for 40 years, but I think that (Dr. Paul) might be the only honest politician I've ever seen run for president. I don't agree with him on some things, but at least I know where he really stands on every issue, and I don't have to worry that he's going to flip-flop, especially when it comes to ending the war (in Iraq)." All of the people that we interviewed for this story cited the deteriorating conditions in Iraq as one of the main reasons for their change in party identification. When asked why he was changing his affiliation, East Cambridge resident Mark Collingsworth said "I don't trust Hillary or Obama to get us out of Iraq, but I trust this guy". Polls conducted by Gallup show that Dr. Paul has a solid base of support in Massachusetts, but still trails Governor Romney and former senator Fred Thompson.

2007-07-18T12:24:00.001-04:00

ARTICLES FROM THE FUTURE!

Monday, February 4 2008

Paul Looms Large Over Super Tuesday

Twenty-one states hold their primary elections tomorrow, and Presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul, a Representative from Texas, seems poised to cement his commanding lead in the race for the Republican nomination for president. Dismissed less than six months ago as a fringe candidate with no chance of winning the presidency, Paul has emerged as the dominant front runner with his decisive wins in the first seven Republican primaries. In Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina he trampled competitors, receiving nearly twice as many votes as his nearest rival, Fred Thompson. In Nevada and Florida, he beat Thompson by nearly 10 points, and by 15 points in Wyoming and Maine. Polls suggest that he will replicate these victories in many states tomorrow, with the sole exception of Utah. Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, a Mormon, is expected to win there, due to the state's Mormon majority, but will likely lose his home state to Paul. Even in Tennessee, Fred Thompson's home state, polls show Paul is running even with the former senator. Paul leads Giuliani in his home state of New York by nearly 20 points, according to recent polls by Gallup.

Campaign leaders from the Giuliani, Thompson and Romney campaigns have scrambled in recent weeks to craft a strategy to counteract the surging Paul campaign, with little apparent success. Over the last few months their campaigns have attempted to replicate Paul's internet strategy, but have seen few benefits. Paul seems to have hijacked the internet, and many other candidates are finding it to be a rather hostile environment. Sites dedicated to electing Thompson have been inundated with posts accusing the former senator of attempting to portray himself as a "more electable version of Ron Paul" and duplicating many of Paul's small government themes, despite the fact that they contradict many of the positions he advocated when he officially announced his presidential aspirations last August. Thompson has even softened his rhetoric on Iraq, indicating he would consider pulling troops from the region if the benchmarks put in place by the Democratic Congress have not been reached by the time he takes office.

Depending on the results of tomorrow's election, Giuliani and Romney are expected to withdraw from the race. If Paul continues his streak and emerges the victor in the majority of tomorrow's primaries, it will be all but over for the Thompson campaign as well. With over half of the states firmly in the win column for Paul, there is little hope that Thompson could capture the party's nomination at the Republican National Convention in September.

2007-07-17T00:24:00.000-04:00

According to this article, half of all donations from military members have gone to Ron Paul.

The news just gets better and better every day doesn't it?

2007-07-16T10:43:00.000-04:00

Here's an article about Dr. Paul's poll numbers, and how they are skewed to make it appear that the Paul campaign is only supported by 1 to 3% of the voting populace. As we all saw with the online and text message polls immediately following the first 3 presidential debates, Dr. Paul gets a large majority of the votes of people that actually get to hear him speak. Don't be fooled or dissuaded by the apparent lack of support that the silence of the MSM or low poll numbers imply.

Not mentioned in this article but worth noting- I recently read that polling organizations don't just report the numbers straight- if you poll 1,000 people and 100 support a certain candidate, that does not translate into 10% support. Instead, the numbers are manipulated by various formulae that take into account numerous bits of minutia, such as media mentions, TV appearances, prior poll numbers, etc., to give an allegedly more accurate representation of support. In Dr. Paul's case, the number of respondents that support him might actually be divided by 2.13, while McCain's might be multiplied by 1.55 or somesuch nonsense. Here, here and here are some articles that discuss various aspects of these manipulations.

While researching this blog post, I came across this page. At the bottom of the page they have the results of a poll of Democrats and liberal independents, comparing support for each individual Democratic candidate against Ron Paul. Only Gravel and Kucinich beat him, indicating a strong anti-war sentiment, something that the 2 leading Democrats, Obama and Clinton, lack the ability to tap considering their support of the Iraq invasion and their statements indicating support for a bombing campaign against Iran. The only Republican that can beat Hillary or Obama is Dr. Paul.

2007-07-16T10:01:00.000-04:00

The YouTube video of Dr. Paul speaking to the employees of Google is incredible. He gets to talk at length about a variety of issues, and wins the crowd over handily. He speaks of principles and integrity and freedom, and you can tell that he means it. It has been viewed over 25,000 times in the last 3 days. It's over an hour long, but well worth your time.

A short assessment of Dr. Paul by Lew Rockwell, who has been traveling with the Paul campaign the last few days-

"Never in American political history has there been a booming volunteer-driven, decentralized effort like Ron Paul's. All over the country, tens of thousands of self-directed individuals and groups print their own yard signs, banners, push cards, and bumper stickers; organize their own neighborhoods, towns, and states, and regions; rally and raise money; go door-to-door; demonstrate near malls and traffic intersections; register and organize voters; educate themselves in the new and old classics of liberty; create YouTubes; make phone calls; dominate FaceBook and MySpace; set up Yahoo groups, blogs, mailing lists, and Meetups; and even buy their own billboards. (Thanks to Adam Dada for the URL.) In an industry used to central direction and very tight control, this is a spontaneous and perhaps unstoppable revolution. In DC, they're feeling the ground move under their feet, and fearing the future. In America, they've seldom felt so much hope."

A link to a photo of the billboard he mentions.

2007-07-12T23:26:00.000-04:00

Scary quotes of the day-

"Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." - Irving Fisher, Ph.D. in economics, Oct. 17, 1929

"This is far and away the strongest global economy I've seen in my business lifetime," U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson declared on a recent visit to Fortune's offices.

2007-07-12T16:25:00.000-04:00

I met several friends last night for sushi and took some of the Ron Paul fliers I had printed up, and after dinner I passed them out and started a discussion about the election. I fielded a ton of questions and tried to explain my passion for this man and his message. By the end of the night, I had convinced one of them that he was the best choice out of the entire field, and had several others intrigued enough to say that they would spend some time on the internet reading up on his policies. These friends are of all political stripes, though only one of them is a republican, and one other is a libertarian. I expect that after they spend some time and energy finding out about Dr. Paul they will come around to supporting him. I plan on repeating this many times over the next few months, taking every opportunity that I get to foster discussion about the Paul campaign, and I plan on keeping at least a half-dozen fliers on me at all times so that I can be prepared to give them to anyone who expresses even the slightest bit of interest.

I've given several dozen fliers to my mom so that she can give them to her friends and clients, since she moves in much more traditionally Republican circles than I. I've convinced her that Fred Thompson is just another political hack, and that Dr. Paul is the only real conservative in the race. She still has a soft spot in her heart for Fred, but I'm working on her!

2007-07-12T01:07:00.000-04:00

A quick update on my last post about debit cards backed by fractional gold accounts. I sent emails to several gold-as-money sites and got this reply today. It seems to indicate that it is only a matter of time before my idea is economically feasible.

My email-

I am wondering when some enterprising individual, company or bank will begin offering debit cards that can be used anywhere a credit card can be used, but instead of being backed by dollars or pounds, is backed by fractions of gold. I think that the technology of the internet is sufficiently mature to make such a proposition feasible. If I could deposit my paycheck into an account that immediately converted it into gold and allowed me to then purchase gas or groceries or withdraw cash at an ATM, I would switch all of my money to that form immediately. The idea seems simple and feasible. Is there a reason this has not yet happened? Thank you so much for your time.

Their Reply-

Thank you for your suggestion.

Please be aware that GoldMoney continues to endeavor to
bring this capability to our customers.  The reason that we
have not yet offered a debit or a credit card feature truly
boils down to cost.  The extensive research that we have
done to date has not yet led us to a cost-effective
solution that would make it worthwhile, and valuable, to
our customers.

We very much hope to offer a debit card solution as soon as
we can, but it is unlikely that such a product will be
available within the year.

If you have any additional questions, please don't hesitate
to contact us.

Best regards,

Rachel Parker
GoldMoney Support Team

From this I can infer that it is only a matter of time before someone
implements this idea and makes "hard money" electronic currency a
reality.  The day that this becomes feasible I will be among the first
in line to transfer ALL of my holdings to such a system and leave the
fiat currency world behind.  I  am sure that I am not the only person
that feels this way, and that the first company that implements this
process will be wildly successful.

2007-07-10T18:35:00.000-04:00

The stock market took a hit today after Standard and Poor's stated that they would lower the ratings of 612 bonds valued at $12 billion, and would be reviewing the rest of the bonds they have rated with a great probability that many more would be downgraded as well. As the Bear Stearns debacle illustrated, many of those bonds are worth less than 10 cents on the dollar, and the cumulative effect on the market will undoubtedly be dramatic. With Trillions of dollars in derivatives built upon this house of cards, it is a virtual certainty that many hedge funds will collapse as investors begin to demand withdrawals from their accounts, rightly fearing that their money is at great risk. The whole thing scares the hell out of me.

That, however, is not the real point of this post. Instead, I want to speculate on the future of money. Every currency extant is fiat, based on the notion that the government issuing it will back it with...something. The fact that no definition of "money" in the fiat application of the word can adequately explain what that something is should be your first clue that something is rotten in Denmark. Instead of being a hard asset, money today is transactional, useful only for the purchase of goods, its value based solely on what the person you exchange it with for goods (or other fiat currencies) believes it to be worth. Considering the fact that millions of new units of those fiat currencies come into existence every day courtesy of the central banks of the world, the dollar in your wallet today will be, by virtue of its very nature, worth less tomorrow. (That's clue #2) This was not always the case. Once upon a time, not so very long ago, the dollar was worth a fixed amount of gold. The coins in your pocket contained real silver. (Did you know that until 1964 quarters contained about 1/5th of an ounce of silver, and that a single pre-1965 quarter is worth about $2.30 today?) In other words, money had some real intrinsic value. However, this limited the ability of the government to inflate the currency to pay for such wonderful things as foreign invasions, the war on drugs and stagings of all-female versions of Oedipus Rex in Central Park.

As my previous post asserted, this state of affairs has lead to some inevitable consequences, and they will not be pretty. Millions of people are going to find themselves bankrupt, and those that still have their jobs and their homes will find that their paycheck buys fewer groceries to stock the pantry and less electricity to power the lights of that aforementioned abode. The value of the dollar will fall significantly as these hedge funds and derivatives falter and disrupt the economy.

That pessimistic assessment leads me to the point of this post- as people lose faith in their currency, they will seek alternatives that are less volatile, and the networked world seems poised to offer those alternatives. Imagine that every time you got a paycheck you bought gold with it, and deposited that gold into an account that allowed you to sell fractional amounts of that gold every time you made a payment with your debit card. You could rest assured that the money in that account would not be subject to the whims of our political masters in Washington, and would retain its value no matter how many units of fiat currency rolled off the presses. I believe that this will soon become a reality, since the technical hurdles to such a system are all but eliminated. Current gold payment systems, like e-Gold, are cumbersome to use and don't allow you to do something like pay for beer at the convenience store with a debit card. I believe that will soon change. Somewhere some foreign bank will stumble upon the perfect recipe for creating accounts like this, and the result will be revolutionary. It can't happen soon enough.

UPDATE:

New York, July 10, 2007 -- Moody's Investors Service today announced negative rating actions on 431 securities originated in 2006 and backed by subprime first lien mortgage loans. The negative rating actions affect securities with an original face value of over $5.2 billion, representing 1.2% of the dollar volume and 6.8% of the securities rated by Moody's in 2006 that were backed by subprime first lien loans.

2007-07-10T18:18:00.000-04:00

Here's an idea I've been mulling over the last few years- as the freedoms we enjoy are progressively stripped away by the state and more things are made criminal offenses, the general public loses respect for the law and become de facto criminals. As Tacitus said, "A corrupt society has many laws". With the tools of the surveillance state becoming more powerful, our ability to evade these stupid and pointless laws is diminishing, and more people find themselves branded as criminals. Eventually, the point is reached where the average person loses respect for the law entirely, and at that point the government begins to collapse. A society in which the majority are branded as criminals cannot function properly, and thus seeks to govern itself according to more libertarian principles. As The State tries to cement its control even further, it instead finds itself ridiculed and ignored. As Ghandi noted, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you and then you win."

2007-07-10T18:05:00.000-04:00

Here is an excerpt from an article at Cato Unbound that captures part of the essence of why Ron Paul is so popular. I found it via link on Reason Magazine's "Hit & Run" blog.

Compare conditions now to how they were at the outset of the 1960s. Official governmental discrimination against blacks no longer exists. Censorship has beaten a wholesale retreat. The rights of the accused enjoy much better protection. Abortion, birth control, interracial marriage, and gay sex are legal. Divorce laws have been liberalized and rape laws strengthened. Pervasive price and entry controls in the transportation, energy, communications, and financial sectors are gone. Top income tax rates have been slashed. The pretensions of macroeconomic fine-tuning have been abandoned. Barriers to international trade are much lower. Unionization of the private sector work force has collapsed. Of course there are obvious counterexamples, but on the whole it seems clear that cultural expression, personal lifestyle choices, entrepreneurship, and the play of market forces all now enjoy much wider freedom of maneuver. The many and complex reasons for this trend can be boiled down to one sweeping generalization: in an age of mass affluence, economic development and individualism go together.

I think this perfectly encapsulates why Ron's message has resonated so strongly with the public. We're tired of the government telling us what to do and how to do it (and what NOT to do and how NOT to do it) and essentially treating everyone like children and criminals. We realize that government has grown too large and intrusive and threatens our liberties more than it safeguards them. The time has come to return government to the limits prescribed by the Constitution, and Ron Paul is just the man to lead the charge!

2007-07-08T09:29:00.000-04:00

I've been out of town the last few days in sunny St. Thomas in the USVI. It was a great little vacation, with wonderful food- Craig & Sally's and Romano's are both world class restaurants and deserve a visit if you go to St T- and some time on the boat cruising and snorkeling.

I am pleased with the reports about the fundraising for Dr. Paul, and especially how the media keeps pointing out that he beat McCain. Poor John seems to have earned the ire of someone in the MSM, and they keep twisting the dagger, even if it means that they have to mention Dr. Paul. I'm sure there are many high level media gatekeepers wondering how they are going to continue to ignore the Paul campaign in light of the fundraising successes and the rising poll numbers. The straw polls are also pointing to growing support for Dr. Paul. I guess that he is unofficially the number 4 candidate, behind Fred, Rudy and Mitt.

I'm guessing that by the time that the actual primaries come around in January, these will probably be the only 4 names on the ballot, with maybe one or two of the others. It doesn't matter- the pro-war candidates will split their votes, and Paul will win by a landslide. I think this is a foregone conclusion. With more major Republicans openly opposing the war, the tides are turning against the neocons.

For the record, as of this morning Ron Paul Google hits stand at 2,090,000, or +30,000 in the last week.

2007-07-02T13:27:00.000-04:00

The most overlooked aspect of Ron's campaign is perhaps the most important. Although the general public is unaware of it, the US is in the midst of a serious financial crisis, one that has the potential to dwarf the Great Depression. Over the last 94 years, ever since the creation of the Federal Reserve, we have played a game with our fiscal stability based on the promise of the US government to back the US dollar. That game has gotten more dangerous ever since Nixon "closed the gold window" allowing the US dollar to be backed by gold. Over the last few decades, we have created more and more "dollars", backed by nothing more than the "full faith and credit" of the US government. That game appears to be reaching an endpoint. Our massive accumulation of debt, financed by foreign central banks- primarily in Asia- has weakened our dollar to the point that any minor break in the chain could send the dollar plunging in value and disrupt the entire financial system. The housing market, inflated by the Fed in order to short-circuit the recession of 2001, is in woeful shape. Sales have dropped significantly, foreclosures are skyrocketing, and mortgage applications are dwindling (and the majority of those applications are being rejected based on the borrowers poor credit). The problems reported on last week at one of Bear Sterns hedge funds, which faces collapse, could be the event that sends the entire system into freefall. Many investment analysts are concerned that it is just the "tip of the iceberg", and that many more hedge funds will follow suit, leading to financial troubles for the entire industry. A massive sell off of the dollar, substantially higher interest rates and numerous bank failures could be the end result. This could plunge the entire world into uncharted and dangerous economic territory. The prognosis is not good.

Dr. Paul, who understands these issues better than any other person in Congress, and possibly better than anyone in Washington DC, is the only person running for president that has the insight and fortitude to solve these seemingly intractable problems. He wants a return to fiscal responsibility that will limit the power of the government to create the kind of mess we are currently facing. Only a return to "sound money" principles will allow us to survive the coming economic chaos. All of the other candidates will employ financial chicanery and foolish Keynesian policies that will simply exacerbate the problem, inevitably leading to further crises in the future. Dr. Paul's remedy will result in short-term economic pain, but will cure the problem for the long term.

I implore anyone reading this blog to familiarize themselves with the theories of Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard of the "Austrian school" of economic thought. www.LewRockwell.com and Mises.org are great sites to visit to learn about how we can avoid the cyclical booms and busts endemic to the fiat currency system we currently live with.

2007-07-01T23:34:00.000-04:00

Apparently things went well yesterday in Iowa, with a capacity crowd much larger than the crowd at the "official" forum.

"Ron Paul" now returns 2,060,000 hits on Google, which is 1,000,000+ more than "Rudy Giuliani", nearly 200,000 more than "John McCain", 300,000 more than "Mitt Romney", and 40,000 more sites than Obama. Hillary gets 5.2 million, but she's been in a high profile position in the public eye for 15 years, and Fred Thompson, at 3.5 million, is an actor with a relatively high profile, so their readings are a bit skewed.

2007-06-30T01:50:00.000-04:00

This is an INCREDIBLE video. Ron Paul at his best. He discusses all of his major political and ideological points and whips the audience into a frenzy! THIS IS WHY THIS MAN NEEDS TO BE PRESIDENT! Watch it. Email it to all of your friends. Show it to everyone you know.

If he keeps delivering speeches like this over the next few months, there is no doubt in my mind that he will win the presidency.

2007-06-29T10:57:00.000-04:00

I went to a Republican Party meeting last night and passed out some more fliers to the 15 or so people in attendance. They were featuring one of the local councilmen as a speaker, so I had to move quickly, and didn't get a chance to really talk at length with anyone about Dr. Paul. Only one person, an older woman, refused the flier and said she was supporting Fred Thompson, no ifs, ands or buts. The featured speaker was the only person who indicated that he knew who Dr. Paul was, and said that one of his close friends was a big supporter. All in all, not as productive as my trip through the neighborhood, but it may have opened the eyes of at least one person in attendance, and that's good enough for me! If I keep plugging away, over the next few months I hope I can convert at least 100 people into supporters. Then if each of those 100 will convert at least 5 more people, who will in turn convert at least 3 more people, then my efforts will have added a grand total of about 1,600 new Ron Paul supporters in my area! Assuming a 50% participation rate in the primaries, those extra 800 votes might just be enough to tip the scales in favor of Dr. Paul.

This is the thing about these early "get out the vote" activities- if we can mobilize more and more people to support Dr. Paul early in the race, we stand a better chance of drawing mainstream media attention to his campaign and exposing much larger numbers of people to him and his ideas. It may seem very early on in the race to be expending a lot of effort, but the more people that see him as a viable candidate, the more the media will be forced to give him more attention. This positive feedback loop could be the thing that propels him over the top.

2007-06-29T01:21:00.000-04:00

Here's an excellent blog post from TownHall.com. Here's an excerpt-

"I submit that any of my fellow Republicans who don’t want to cede the White House to Clinton next year must understand that Paul alone can take victory away from Hillary. Even if you don’t agree with his foreign policy position, there is no good reason to dismiss him based on this component. The truth is, his foreign policy position gives him the edge against Hillary in the election and at the same time puts the onus back on Congress to declare war—which they can easily do. For Republicans who favor a strong military response in the Middle East, this really is the best possible option. The alternative is Hillary and everything that means. If we don’t recognize that Ron Paul truly is the strongest candidate in the field, we may as well hand the keys back over to the Clintons now so they can start measuring the drapes."

2007-06-28T11:54:00.001-04:00

The Non-Interventionist's Prayer by Thomas Eddlem Great God in Heaven, Save us from the humanitarians who are generous with the lives of other people's sons. Amen.

2007-06-28T11:44:00.000-04:00

Here's a link to a wonderful article posted on LewRockwell.com by Jeffery L. Bryan titled "The Tao of Ron Paul". It illustrates Dr. Paul's political position using excerpts from the legendary philosophical treatise "Tao Te Ching" by Lao- Tzu. Well worth reading.

2007-06-27T22:17:00.001-04:00

The weather finally cooperated today, and I spent several hours early this evening going door-to-door in my grandmother's neighborhood (I'm staying with her for a few days) handing out fliers for Ron. My first 2 stops were not encouraging- the first neighbor was flat out rude, while the second said she had heard of Ron Paul and called him a loony. When I asked her why she thought he was loony, she just repeated herself. I thanked her for her time, and walked off feeling a bit disheartened. I was worried that the pattern was set, and I would be rejected at each turn. Fortunately, the 3rd house was much friendlier, and by the time I had passed out about 25 of the fliers I had gotten enough positive responses and earnest assurances that they would review the material that I'm psyched about doing it again tomorrow evening! In one case, a woman named Karen was taking her evening walk so I asked if I could walk with her and tell her a little about our man. We talked for about 10 minutes, and when we parted I could tell she was seriously interested in learning more about Dr. Paul. All in all, it was a very positive experience, and one that I hope thousands of other Ron Paul supporters throughout the nation will replicate!

2007-06-27T14:12:00.000-04:00

Here's an article from Wired magazine's blog that discusses Dr. Paul's growing support on the web. The comments section is filled with people pointing out that people aren't "gaming the system", they're just passionate about the potential for true freedom and limited government that his campaign embodies.

I can't wait to see how many people show up for his appearance in Iowa this weekend. I have little doubt that more people will show up to see him compared to the "official" forum being sponsored by ITR. If the "official" forum only gets 1,000 attendees and Dr. Paul gets 4,000 or 5,000, I'm sure it will make national news. It will force the MSM to treat his campaign as a real threat to the establishment candidates that they consider "top tier". Thank God he doesn't have any skeletons in his closet, because they will step up their efforts to discredit and destroy him if they begin to see him as a real threat to the status quo that they enjoy.

2007-06-26T22:51:00.000-04:00

I went to FedExKinkos tonight and had them print 100 Ron Paul fliers from the "Get Involved" section of his website. I didn't know that it was going to cost nearly $200 or I would have printed them at home and folded them myself, but these look very professional and it took a grand total of 10 minutes. The weather looks like it's going to cooperate tomorrow for my trip through the neighborhood, so wish me luck!

2007-06-26T22:46:00.000-04:00

PBWiki is a site that allows you to create your own personal Wikis. I created one for Ron Paul, accessible to everyone, with the password on the front page. We can use it to post ALL Ron Paul related info, from meetups to articles to blog mentions. I hope it becomes useful.

2007-06-26T00:35:00.001-04:00

I talked to the chair of the local Republican party chapter today, and he said that he would love to have me come to their meeting next month and give a presentation on Ron Paul. He said that after our initial conversation last week that he checked out Paul's site, and liked a lot of what he had to say. We talked for about 20 minutes, and I could tell he was interested in learning more about Dr. Paul.

Foul weather has forced me to postpone my trip through the neighborhood for the last 2 days, but I'm free all day tomorrow so I'm going to go around and take fliers, weather permitting. Wish me luck!

2007-06-24T00:08:00.001-04:00

I changed my template so that I could enable comments. Please leave me some feedback, even if it's just to say that you liked (or didn't like) what you read.

2007-06-23T22:32:00.000-04:00

I posted earlier about how a Ron Paul win would fundamentally realign the 2 major national parties. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many Democrats support Dr. Paul, mostly for his staunch anti-war stance and his defense of civil liberties, while many Republicans oppose him for the former. If- nay, WHEN- Dr. Paul wins the presidency, many people in both parties will find themselves questioning their loyalties, and the deep divisions between the libertarians and the authoritarians in both parties will manifest fully. It will prompt many Republicans to leave their party for a 3rd alternative (the Fascist Party?) and cause many Democrats to grudgingly join the Republicans, potentially gutting the Democratic base. As Dr. Paul's policies begin to work their magic and rejuvenate the country, this process will accelerate. The entrenched political class (academics, party apparatchiki, elected officials) will find itself under attack from all sides. Constitutionalist Republicans will begin to dominate the political landscape.

The speed at which this will happen will surprise everyone involved. The Constitution has been ignored and trampled upon for so long that we've forgotten that the principles that it embodies are incredibly powerful and effective. Citizens and officials will be shocked to find that when they can effectively legislate at a state level without interference from DC that many of the problems we face as a nation subside substantially. As power begins to devolve from the national level back to the states, debate about the role of government and the limits of political power over our lives will be at the forefront of most political debates, discussions and diatribes.

These kind of things get me excited about the future of our country! GO RON PAUL!!!

2007-06-23T21:44:00.000-04:00

Here's an inspiring story, sent via Meetup email. I think I'm going to go door-to-door tomorrow in my neighborhood and take 100 fliers to my neighbors and try to drum up support for Ron. We should all try to do something ACTIVE, offline, to show our support.

From Dean of Ron Paul Meetup Jacksonville, FL:

Hi Ron Paul supporters,

Yesterday I went to the local office of the Supervisor of Elections and picked up 100 voter registration forms. I rented a table at the local flea market. Last night I went to Kinkos and printed a Ron Paul Revolution Banner from the files section of the meetup group. (While I was there I talked to a Catholic Priest about Ron's Right to Life record). I also printed 150 fliers from the files section too. I arrived at the flea market at 8:30, and things were slow up until 10:00. Then the people started coming in. I spoke with all sorts of people.

I had 75 people come to my table and pick up Ron Paul literature. I was able to speak with them personally. The typical response of 60% of the people was similar to this statement..... What is happening to America......I am deeply concerned about losing my individual rights.

The easy response to this objection was... That is why you should vote for Ron Paul.... This was a great time to tell them the following answers to this objection... Ron Paul is the biggest defender of the constitution, and he doesn't vote for legislation unless it matches up with the constitution. Ron Paul wants to simplify our government and make sure we are protected by the Bill of Rights. This is when people's eyes got big.... "How do you know that he isn't greedy like the rest of those crooks." Because Ron Paul is the only congressman who doesnt accept corporate lobbyist payoffs."

By this time, the future Ron Paul voter is salivating.... The thought of electing a politician who wants to support the constitution is an ideal to so many people, this is really what they want.

There was a Navy officer in full uniform who came to the table. I explained to him that Ron Paul does not support going to war based on UN resolutions, but he supports America fighting battles based on the constitution. The Navy officer immediately grabbed the literature, and I thanked him for his service to his country. There was a sweet old lady who came up to me, and said.... "I subscribe to the magazine American Conservative, and they just had a wonderful article about Ron Paul. She took a voter application, and is changing her party affiliation to Republican.

There were many opportunities. One fellow gave me support money for Ron's Campaign, and I am forwarding that... plus my own... to the Ron Paul campaign. I made some big progress outside of the Internet, by selling Ron Paul to people, shaking hands, and pressing the flesh.

I saw a friend I know who is a musician from a church. He asked me what I was doing there. I told him I was campaigning for the biggest right to lifer I could find. He took the literature and said.... I will vote for him too, I trust you. Oh, I will be out there during following weekends.

For some people, I just gave them the literature with the website information and recommended they research it on their own, to make thier own decisions. We can win people. we can't rely on any media.... We have got to meet people face to face and discuss the issues. We are Winning. Ron Paul is winning big time. I recommend you go to your local community and try the same thing.

2007-06-23T19:32:00.000-04:00

Here's an article from "RedStateEclectic" that has some good points about why he thinks that Ron Paul has a good shot at winning the Republican nomination. Here are some excerpts-

"I've been to the rallies, and I've seen the excitement and the diversity. I've wondered, though, whether these are just people caught up temporarily in the excitement of the moment, who aren't in it for the long haul, and who will drop out the first time something bad happens.

"But then, as a newly added member of the Ron Paul Meet Up organizers e-mailings this week, those fears have been quelled. Yes, there are people out there who have some rather outrageous ideas. But, there are also people who are learning quickly--they're figuring out what they need to do in different states, they're registering Republican (probably a painful process for some of them), and they are able to mobilize armies of e-mail, blog and in-person support within hours, if not minutes."

...

"While--as of this writing--the Iowa folks don't seem to be backing down, there is talk of perhaps THOUSANDS of Ron Paul supporters around the country driving to Des Moines for next Saturday's "forum"--with rumors that a "big announcement" is going to be coming from Ron Paul headquarters today. I'll speculate (based on a comment that Dr. Paul made in a radio interview to the effect that maybe 'we'll have bigger attendance at a rally of our own") that perhaps an organized Ron Paul rally is going to happen, and that Dr. Paul will put in an appearance.

"Can Ron Paul win? I think he can. If he does, it will be in spite of the mainstream media, and against the wishes of the establishment Republicans, but I see signs all over that people are doing the things they need to do to build a really good "on-the-ground" campaign; Ron Paul's message plays well to those who hear it; and the more the establishment tries to keep him away, and the more the anti-establishment pushes back, the more notice he'll get in the mainstream press. Ron Paul's campaign is rolling--if it rolls fast enough, he could be well positioned to grab some delegates in New Hampshire and Iowa in January--and then we'll watch how fast the campaign can really move."

If Dr. Paul wins the nomination (and I'm becoming more convinced every day that he will) then he will beat any democratic opponent he faces. He simply outflanks them in every direction.

If he wins, I think that we will see a major realignment of the parties, perhaps even an implosion of the Democratic party and a major shift in the Republicans. Neo-cons will leave the Republicans, while civil liberties Democrats will join the Republicans. I'll expound on this line of thought later.

2007-06-23T08:59:00.000-04:00

This is one of the best YouTube "commercials" for Dr. Paul that I've seen. Short, sweet and to the point.

2007-06-21T11:35:00.000-04:00

Want more proof that Ron really has a chance at winning the presidency? Here's an article from Free Market News Network that indicates that he's raised between 3 and 5 MILLION DOLLARS since the beginning of April. That's impressive considering he only had about half a million prior to the first debate. This kind of funding puts him up there with the big boys like McCain, Romney and Giuliani, who have 5, 11 and 12 million respectively. As he continues to raise his profile via mainstream media appearances and the internet, this amount will continue to grow. If you haven't already donated, go to his website and make a donation TODAY!

2007-06-20T23:49:00.000-04:00

Mike Green, from BlogCritics Magazine, has a great piece today talking about Dr. Paul's exclusion from the Iowa debate taking place on June 30th. Excerpts from the article appear below.

Lew Rockwell has a list of contact information for the organizers and sponsors for the event that you can use to try and pressure them into letting Paul attend. I personally think that a better idea would be to put on a one man show across the street from the official forum and let Dr. Paul speak his mind without the limits of a "formal" forum. I think that the controversy of such a move would guarantee some media coverage and a great turnout of curious citizens as well as his faithful supporters.

From Mike Green-

"How is it possible that the future Commander-in-Chief is not grilled relentlessly (as are those appointed by him subject to the approval of Congress) about his or her position on Iraq today, yesterday and as far back as they were holding office? This nation has been at war in Iraq since 1991. The rationale for sending more ground troops in 2003 was the case made by a Commander-in-Chief with the approval of Congress in the aftermath of 9/11. How is it possible that the media is not centered like a laser on the issue of 9/11 and grilling each candidate about his or her evolving positions regarding 9/11 and Iraq? Why is there no focus on the controversies surrounding this administration's reaction to 9/11 and the conspicuously missing Congress members who failed to call for an independent investigation of a scene of mass murder?

"There is no greater issue facing this nation than our involvement in the "war on terror" that came as a result of 9/11.

"Ron Paul has the courage and integrity to address the issue. He is today alienated by much of the media and his colleagues running concurrent campaigns for the same office. It is no secret that other candidates are unwilling to appear on the same stage as Paul. After all, they are the lying leaders who desire not to have their lies exposed through a thorough scrutiny or debate. No such risk exists in dealing directly with a compliant and complicit media. And no such risk exists when standing on a stage with other puppets.

"But Paul is no puppet. And the refusal to invite him to present his point of view to the people of Iowa displays a haughty disrespect for Iowans in general, and those supporters of Paul specifically."

2007-06-20T13:16:00.000-04:00

Here's a copy of a letter to the Editor that I sent to 4 papers in my region. Everyone who supports Dr. Paul should send at least one letter to their local newspaper editor. One letter each month would be even better. One letter a week might be overkill, but if hundreds of people were sending one letter a month it would shock most editors. If thousands of letters to the Editor pour in over the next few months, those editors will realize that they have a big news story on their hands- not just his candidacy, but the passion it rouses in people. Newspapers rarely get hundreds of letters supporting one candidate, especially this early in the race. Such an outpouring of support would definitely intrigue them, and probably lead to numerous feature articles on "The Ron Paul Phenomena". Let's show our local papers how passionate we are about Dr. Paul, and try to get him more media coverage!Dear Editor, Although the presidential elections are still over 16 months away, the campaigns are already in full swing. Dozens of Republicans and Democrats are already vying for the office, but only one has truly stood out from the pack in terms of credibility, integrity and honesty. Dr. Ron Paul, a Republican Representative from Texas, has stood apart from the field with his willingness to do something that no other candidate dares to do- defend the US Constitution. His principled defense of the Constitution is evident in his voting record in Congress. He voted against the invasion of Iraq and the Patriot Act. He has never voted to raise taxes. He opposes giving amnesty to illegal aliens. He has never voted for any bill that restricts gun ownership. In short, he has never voted for any bill that reduces the freedoms and civil liberties that our government is supposed to guarantee. He seeks to return our government back to its proper functions and size, and make our country truly free once more. Please do yourself, and your country, a tremendous service and find out more about this incredible patriot. Go to www.ronpaul2008.com and read for yourself about the vision that this amazing hero has for our country's future. You can also contact me at 423-202-8180 for information on helping his campaign.

2007-06-20T00:06:00.000-04:00

I've neglected this blog for over a year (I just can't seem to get into this blogging thing...) but I'm rededicating myself to it for one purpose- getting Ron Paul elected president of the United States. I've been following Dr. Paul for many years now, having been exposed to him via LewRockwell.com and the numerous articles he has published on that site.

Do I agree with Dr. Paul on everything? Lord no. As the title of my blog implies, I do not believe that the state is in any way conducive to the functioning of a healthy society, and even the most minimal state will eventually grow despotic. BUT, barring revolution, we must work within the framework that we have. The way I see it, Paul is the last, best hope we have of averting the looming fiscal and moral disaster that we are facing as a nation. Plus, he's a great educator. Using the bully pulpit of the presidency, he can expose the world to the virtues of libertarian freedom, and make the transition to a stateless society easier. Although he has an uphill battle looming in his effort to become president, I am becoming more convinced day by day that he has a real shot at winning.

First of all, he's the only Republican who is against the war. That alone gives him the support of all of the republicans who have grown weary of this disaster in the mideast, since all of the rest of the republican candidates are still convinced that we can impose democracy and freedom at gunpoint. If all of the anti-war republicans vote for him in the primaries, he's a shoo-in to win.

Secondly, his supporters are passionate! Really passionate. People who could generally give a flying f^@% about politics are in love with this guy. These people will brave hail and high water to make it to the polls on primary day to vote for him.

Imagine a hypothetical state with 1,000 voters. Let's assume that only 10% of the populace supports him, but that 90% of those supporters will vote in the primary. Now, since primaries generally have extremely low turnouts, let's also assume that there are only 200 total voters of the 1,000 potential voters. Since 90 of them are supporting Ron, the remaining 110 votes will be split between the other candidates. The top-tier candidates- McCain, Romney, Thompson and Guiliani- will split the remaining votes, garnering about 27 votes each. In that scenario, Paul beats all of them by a 3 to 1 margin. That's a decisive victory. Assuming that scenario repeats itself during the first 3 or 4 primaries, Ron immediately becomes the frontrunner for the nomination, and garners massive media attention. Suddenly he doesn't look like such a "dark-horse" candidate any longer.

We still have 7 months to go before the primaries, and Paul is gathering steam with each passing week. With each media appearance, each article, each public appearance and each debate he gains more supporters. By the beginning of next year, Ron's name will be extremely well known and he will be a force to be reckoned with. I think the media, and the political establishment, are scared to death of Ron. He represents a real earthquake of change for the general concept of government power. The mainstream politicos don't want him to win because he represents a real threat to their power to control the lives of the the average American. The media doesn't want to lose their ability to dictate from Washington DC and control the terms of political discourse.

I could go on, but this is enough for tonight. Just remember what I've written the next time someone says "He can't win". The way I see it, he can't lose!!! He is our Luke Skywalker. May the force be with him!

2006-04-17T10:36:00.000-04:00

$600 an ounce gold is here. It sits at $606.30 as I type, and the dollar is sharply lower this morning.

2006-04-14T09:20:00.000-04:00

As write this at 915AM EST, Gold is flirting with $600 an ounce, and oil continues to climb as well. Scary.

2006-04-05T10:48:00.000-04:00

The absurdity of this story would be hysterical if it weren't so terrifying in its implications. Harraj Mann (of middle eastern descent, judging by his first name) was detained, handcuffed and "frog-marched" off of a plane headed for London...because he played songs by The Clash (London Calling) and Led Zeppelin (Immigrant Song) for his taxi driver as he headed to the airport. The taxi driver believed that the lyrics promoted terrorism and called the police to report the passenger as a terrorist suspect. The credulous cretins in the police force then questioned him for 3 hours before releasing him.

At least the UK doesn't constantly proclaim itself to be "A Free Country" the way America does.

2006-04-02T14:44:00.000-04:00

Time for some updates. Sorry to anyone who reads this for my lack of recent posts. I'll start off with this- Gold went over $587/oz this week, and sits at $581.50 right now. I have little doubt, outside of a worldwide commodity rout, that it will go higher than that. Will we see $600 by May Day?

GM is being battered by all sides, housing prices continue to fall while inventories skyrocket and mortgage applications plummet, the FED raises interest rates while the yield curve remains inverted, and Iraq is plunging head first into a sectarian civil war that will likely lead to millions of deaths.

And I wonder why it depresses me to update this blog.

Here's the upside- the pressures on the US government will continue to mount, and it will continue to thrash around like a wounded animal, unaware that the cumulative effect of these wounds is mortal. The American people will, because of the transformative powers of the internet, be privy to all of this no matter how the media tries to spin it. The incompetence and mendacity of our government will be so apparent during the approaching economic maelstrom that the crucial minority necessary to effect change in a society will crystallize into an effective bloc and begin taking the measures necessary to ensure the long term survival of our society. Secession is the ultimate outcome, unless we annihilate ourselves before the reorganization can take shape. Yeah, that makes me feel better.

2006-01-28T17:48:00.000-05:00

I post a lot of articles from Lewrockwell.com, but only because it is such an indispensible source of unvarnished information about how corrupt our federal masters have become. Few websites have the chutzpah to question the basic legitimacy of what happens in Mordor on the Potomac or expose the elemental frauds that they undertake in areas such as Health Care, Education or War.

Bill Bonner has been writing articles for LRC since 2002 exploring the dangerous territory that Alan Greenspan has lead the American economy into, and has expounded at length on the consequences that are inherent in the measures he and the FED have used to prop up the US economy. Few have dared to question Greenspan's methods or examined the fragile sand upon which he has constructed our financial house. The list of his "crimes" is too long to expound upon here, but a quick look at Bonner's archives will give a detailed indictment.

Today he wrote about the end of Greenspan's tenure, and the accolades that are being heaped upon him by financial and political commentators from around the world. Bonner and I are of the opinion that we should wait and see what the effects of the undeniably weakening real estate market are on the world before canonizing Sir Alan. The preliminary results do not look good once you consider the anemic growth of jobs, wages, and stocks compared to the explosive growth of debt, inflation and government power. Summer 2005 seems to have been the peak of the Real Estate Bubble, and how far those inflated prices will fall is the big question. I think the only way that housing prices will remain stable is if Bernake pumps so much money into the economy that other goods rise in price dramatically (Who cares if your house is appreciating at 20% a year if bread, milk and gas are going up 40% a year?)

2006-01-21T12:50:00.000-05:00

Here's an article from LewRockwell.com today about a man named Mike Ferner who decided to spray-paint "Troops Out Now" on 3 highway overpasses on New Years Day and his experience with the law and his community. His letter to the editor in response to his felony charges is as heartbreaking as it is infuriating. How long will we allow the monsters in DC continue to set the terms of this debate? How long before it becomes our duty to protest loudly, passionately and unceasingly against the crimes being commited in our names?

On every email I send I have this quote- "When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty"- as my signature, and it has never seemed more appropriate than today. I don't care if it is a "socialist" slogan, it encapsulates much wisdom in 7 little words, and I doubt Hayek, Mises or Rothbard would dispute the sentiment.

2006-01-15T12:32:00.000-05:00

I found a blog I really like, El Borak's Myopia. In this post he discusses the relationship between the "just universe God designed" and gold as money. In this one he scores perfectly as an anarchist, but prefers the term libertarian.

2006-01-13T20:39:00.000-05:00

Gold closed at 556+ today.

2006-01-07T13:31:00.000-05:00

Here's an article I found via Lewrockwell.com today. I've always been skeptical of the theory that global warming is caused by human activity and this article, by Ian Plimer of the University of Melbourne, exposes many of the fallacies the fearmongers use to perpetuate that myth.

A few years ago I found an article that asserted that the eruption of Mt. St. Helens in 1980 released more "greenhouse gases" than the US has produced since the beginning of the industrial revolution. If that's the case, trying to halt global warming by reducing man-made pollution is impossible and counter-productive, and that steps like the Kyoto protocol will provide negligible benefits while producing untold harm and economic destruction.

We must always remember that tomorrow's problems cannot be solved with today's technology.

2006-01-03T15:01:00.000-05:00

It's not at the $550 an ounce I thought it might hit by 1/1/06, but as of 3PM, Tueday January 3rd gold is at $531.90 and rising.

2005-12-31T01:27:00.000-05:00

Matt Taibbi has a way with words. We may not agree on a lot of issues, but I'm glad he's in our corner when it comes to Iraq and the line of bullshit that Bush is feeding us with his "Strategery for Vict'ry in Iraq". I hope that the outrage he says permeates the White House press room spills over into their reporting.

2005-12-30T11:10:00.000-05:00

Conspiracy theories. Most of them are shite, but once in a while, one rolls around that seems to have legs. The revelations about Diebold are making me think there may be something to the allegations that the Ohio results in 2004 were faked, and maybe the ones in Florida too. Crazy.

2005-12-29T17:40:00.000-05:00

This post has the 5 top signs that the Real Estate boom is busting.

2005-12-29T17:03:00.000-05:00

More bad news on the Real Estate front. Unsold inventory is at a 19 year high, and sales have slowed considerably.

2005-12-28T19:35:00.000-05:00

Great article about the End of the Real Estate Boom. I've been selling real estate for 5 years, and I can sense the party is over. When something like the housing bubble, like the Tech Bubble, starts making headlines in the local papers, the hangover is beginning. I expect that the bad news will continue to come in as 2006 begins, and that by spring a lot of the shape of this thing will be identifiable. Interest rates continue to edge upward, gold steadily climbs, foreclosures begin to be noticeable, bank loans become more stringent, signs reading "for sale" signs begin to vastly outnumber ones with "sold" on them, the price of new construction stagnates or declines, so on and so forth. In my opinion, the picture is pretty grim.

2005-12-24T11:47:00.000-05:00

Here's a post from datalounge dealing with secession and how precariously close we are to losing our liberty totally. I posted my thoughts as Salvadore Dada.

2005-12-14T18:09:00.000-05:00

The tragic story of Cory Maye is so infuriating that one would have to be somewhat obtuse not to see the direct connection between it and the damage caused by the "War on Drugs". It appears that the prosecutor originally involved in the case is acting as his attorney in his appeals. I have to suspect that this prosecutor had a crisis of conscience after sending a man he knew in his gut was innocent to die.

A friend from my childhood was in this weekend, and after 15 years in the military (with a great retirement plan at the 20 year mark) he is seriously considering retiring rather than return to Iraq. He got a kick out of my bumper sticker of Bush with the text "International Terrorist" beneath it. He's sick of Bush too, but can't express it most of the time for fear of repercussions.

2005-12-13T00:27:00.000-05:00

I used to buy a lot of comic books, and I still read some Trades and follow the industry. I was thinking about the first Crisis on Infinite Earths and how it hooked me on comics, and how at $3 a pop it was hard to become a comic freak today, in spite of The Infinite Crisis and the hype around it.

Then it dawned on me- I paid about .75 cents an issue for stuff coming out around that time, and since a dollar is only worth .25 cents in today's dollars that means that the books today actually cost the same, but are vastly superior to the product of 25 years ago- better paper, sharper art, more compelling writing, more diversity.

So, in spite of all the government has done to wreck us financially, we get a better product for a quality-adjusted lower price. Imagine how great it would be if we had NO INFLATION!?!

2005-12-13T00:23:00.000-05:00

I just noted my post from 22 September. $500 an oz. gold is a memory now. Will it hit $550 before 2006?

2005-12-13T00:08:00.000-05:00

I've been thinking about songs that provide a soundtrack for my life, and I've decided to list them here. For posterity.

I'll start with "Irish Blood, English Heart" by Morrissey.

And closing piece has to be the old bluegrass tune "Satisfied Mind" as sung by the sublime Jeff Buckley.

Yes, I have a thing for broody dark-haired geniuses.

2005-12-13T00:07:00.000-05:00

Should Tookie Williams die? I don't think ANYONE should die at the incompetent hands of The State.

2005-12-13T00:02:00.000-05:00

Get Fuzzy on December 12 2005 has been edited in my local paper. The punchline, a play on the euphemism for a man's testicles, has been replaced with a nonsense edit of the word "sack", replacing it with "case". Huh?

2005-12-13T00:01:00.000-05:00

I suck at keeping this updated.

2005-09-22T15:27:00.000-04:00

Gold prices are very volatile right now. Could we see it break $500 in intraday trading?

2005-08-06T01:13:00.000-04:00

Things that annoy me, # 1,618,033

There are a lot of beautiful things to behold in this world, but that is usually not the focus of this blog. Insane ranting is the order of the day here!

So, let's ponder how a small, nonprofit organization can help thousands of impoverished men and women utilize the principles of classic liberal economics to better both individual and community lives at a miniscule cost, while the billions in foreign aid that we provide, via various programs, fund cruel and seriously undemocratic autocrats who plunder the money to wage war on their subjects, also known under the pseudonym "humanitarian aid"?

(Mathematically inclined folks should look at the numbering of this post.)

2005-07-26T10:37:00.000-04:00

And I thought I was pessimistic!

2005-06-29T16:12:00.000-04:00

Bob Wallace, as usual, gets it exactly right when it comes to how amazing modern society is when compared to 50 or 100 or 500 years ago. Now if we could just do something about this World Empire of Governments thing.

2005-06-21T21:13:00.000-04:00

I noticed this link on Lewrockwell.com and decided to come back to this thing. When one of the best sites on the internet has a link to your blog, it's a shame not to take advantage of the potential exposure!

Let's see. The mercury poisoning of millions of children via vaccines is troubling, the documentation that confirms that Bush lied us into war mounts, real estate continues to bubble along...but it's a great life I tell ya.

No, my rant tonight is pretty bleak, but with an appropriately upbeat coda.

Suppose a "worst case scenario" in which some breach in the undoubtedly dynamic but highly leveraged "world economy" caused our strategically built but fragile economic house to crumble? Alan Greenspan would be blamed, and rightly so, because he oversaw the macroeconomic policies of the US for over a decade, even if he wasn't the one actually spending the money.

Now suppose this crisis is bad. Depression era bad. US neutered bad. Sure, it could lead to another world war, but most governments are so indebted they couldn't pay to do it properly. Hell, some idiot might launch that first missle and destroy a lot of us, but at the rate we're going, that's going to happen anyway. I would just hate to be, you know, sympathetic.

Now, we have a highly decentralized information network in place and thousands of would-be tyrants, who in old days thrived on that lack of information. At what point do states, or even cities, decide that they can take care of themselves better than the wheezing behemoth in DC can? Does the collapse of the US economy create conditions for more decentralization in addition to the strife?

Here's my theory (cribbed from someone else a few years ago, but I can't remember where)- Greenspan, who has never renounced his Randian views, wants to be John Galt. An older, uglier and more laconic Galt, but nonetheless a kind of Shiva meets Schumpeter. He wants to shake us of our notion that "the government" can do anything we want or need with no consequence, and has mastered his act as a Central Banker over the last few decades. By bankrupting the various world gov's he clears the way for smaller units to form in a way that our current "advanced" status makes impossible. Sure, he has the weight of history against him, but has that ever stopped a good Randroid?

My honest take? I don't know. A worldwide collapse would more than suck, but the status quo is absurd. Maybe what we need is a good "reality based" take on the world.

2004-07-07T02:10:00.000-04:00

I spent Fri-Mon in Man-asses VA and DC for the holiday, with Yvette, Mollie, Will, Matt, Landon, Jeremy, Kate, Tina, Blake, Storm, Svetlananana...and you get the idea. Like herding muthafuckin cats. Saw an Uhhhh-mazing Buffett concert with gorgeous weather Sat, and then it fucking rained all day on the 4th, right up 'til the fireworks, which even though we had a great view...were kinda lame. Damn DC. Promises the moon and stars and then gang rapes you and steals your wallet (and then breaks into your house and rapes and kills your kids... and I'll stop now)

Best view in DC- Lincoln's monument toward Washington's. Breathtaking, but oh, the irony. Like having the best seat in hell. Godammit, I'm really getting pissed. F9/11 has done 70+/- Million in the last 10 days or so. 10 million 'merkans have seen this flick, and tidal changes are looming. Ahhh, maybe it's just my inner anarchist, but I think critical changes in the zeitgeist are happening in favor of what amounts to radical change. Secession by states unhappy with the current climate has a strange legitimacy in conversation of late, supported both by conservatives and liberals of increasingly varied stripes. Apparently there's a movement in NYC that is making headway and is comprised of liberals and conservatives who just want off the merry-go-war.

Edwards as a VP nom for Kerry is a lock. The man is HOT. Sexy, but in a nonthreatening antiClintonesque kinda way- very "boy next door" (and his legs are mad sexy). VP's are like wives- the should be obedient, silent and HOT. Edwards fits all 3. Kerry winning would be another pivotal moment- a refutation of Iraq AND a no-confidence vote, since Kerry supported it. Kerry's such a fuckup that I don't think he can keep a large enough part of the populace happy (in large because of the ability for the average person to track shit on the internet and put it out for the world to see) to prevent secessionist impulses from growing (esp. from conservatives).

Or, one can hope.

Later,

2004-06-23T12:26:00.000-04:00

Did Ashcroft lie? Well, of course he did, but the issue here is whether it was under oath, and whether he suborned perjury by asking his aide to back up his version of the events in question. I hope that more witnesses can confirm Pickard's side of the story, and then maybe we can get this madman removed from office.

2004-06-22T13:15:00.000-04:00

Thanks to Libertarian Jackass for linking me from his site!

2004-05-11T17:49:00.000-04:00

Back from a month long trip to the EU, and ready to blog...after I get over the jetlag.

2004-04-13T23:41:00.000-04:00

A great review and personal analysis of Hoppe's "D:TGTF".

2004-04-12T19:02:00.000-04:00

And now for something totally different.
The interviewee, Aubrey de Grey, is a theoretical biologist and biogerentologist at the University of Cambridge in England. He believes that biology and technology will extend human lifespan indefinitely, and that in the not-so-distant future (+/-30 years) we will have a lifespan of well over 150 years. By the end of the century he believes that we will have the potential to extend the human lifespan into the thousands of years.

I hope he's right!

2004-04-12T18:41:00.000-04:00

The poorly thought out occupation of Iraq is quickly becoming an albatross around GWB's neck. Things are beginning to really unravel, and I doubt his cabal of deluded advisors can wiggle out of this mess before November.

I guess we'll all have a new president to rail against come January, and barring a miracle it will be John Kerry. Fortunately, his Gomer Pylesque features and Thurston Howellish snobbery will make for great antipolitical fodder.

This article by the great Jim Lobe should be read by everyone, especially anyone who thinks that things are going to get better in Iraq anytime soon. As long as our troops are there, the uprisings will continue, and they will become more and more violent and tightly coordinated.

.....

Since just last Sunday, some 42 US soldiers have been killed in fighting in the "Sunni Triangle," the Shia south and in Baghdad itself. Hundreds of Iraqis have also been killed, including, according to latest reports, as many as 450 in the besieged Sunni city of Fallujah.

Few observers believe that the ragtag militias and gangs that have taken on US forces pose a serious threat to Washington's vast military might. (And, in a familiar Vietnam-era refrain, US officers insisted that they had won every engagement with the insurgents.)

But by the end of the week, it was clear that military power was, in another Vietnam metaphor, not only losing "hearts and minds," but actually building a stronger insurgency.

Evidence to that effect became clear by midweek when the media reported Baghdad residents – Shia as well as Sunni – lining up to donate blood and relief supplies for Fallujah, the center of Sunni resistance to the occupation since 13 of its residents were killed by US soldiers during a demonstration almost exactly one year ago.

The political implications, both at home and in Iraq, of the week's fighting – and the shattered illusions that it revealed – are enormous.

.....

Polling by the Pew Research Center showed that approval of Bush's performance on Iraq has plunged from 59 percent in January to 40 percent early this week and that 57 percent of the public now believe he has no plan for how to proceed.

"There's a sense that things are perhaps spinning out of control, and that's a very dangerous perception," Carroll Doherty, the Pew report's editor, told the Christian Science Monitor.

.....

"The unintended result (of cracking down on Sadr the same week as the attack on Fallujah) was that America finally brought Shiites and Sunnis together – in opposing occupation," noted David Ignatius, a Post columnist who has generally supported US actions in Iraq.

The degree to which the occupation's crackdown had backfired politically against Washington became abundantly clear by Friday night, when even members of the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) felt it necessary to distance themselves from their patron.

IGC elder statesman Adnan Pachachi, who is especially close to the State Department, denounced the offensive against Fallujah as "illegal and totally unacceptable," while Iyad Allawi, a prominent Shiite and longtime favorite of the US and British intelligence service, abruptly resigned from the council without explanation, as did the IGC's human rights minister, Abdel Basit Turki.

On Saturday, Mideast historian Juan Cole wrote in his Internet journal that other council members had either fled the country or were on the verge of resigning. He predicted, "an incipient collapse of the US government of Iraq."

According to Ignatius, "US military forces in Iraq this week sadly became what they have been trying for a year to avoid becoming – an army of occupation fighting a bitter urban war against a broad Iraqi insurgency."