"At some point Americans must realize that Congress, and the Federal Reserve system that permits the creation of new money by fiat, are the real culprits in the erosion of your personal savings and buying power."
Congressman Ron Paul, 01/01/07
"Real U.S. shortfall: $4.6 trillion in red" WorldNetDaily.com
"North American Union leader says merger just crisis away" WorldNetDaily.com
The federal government is like the Energizer Bunny. It keeps growing and growing and growing....
"Congress away but regulations keep on coming" The Washington Times
Kent Snyder
Brian Lamb of C-SPAN is urging Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi to allow C-SPAN cameras to show more of what really takes place on the House floor starting next year. Let's hope Mr. Lamb is persuasive. More cameras would be great, but ever better would be microphones on the House floor. Microphones would really show Americans what goes on when votes are traded and then cast on the floor.
"C-SPAN presses Pelosi on transparency" The Hill
Kent Snyder
"Last week I wrote about the critical need for Congress to reassert its authority over foreign policy, and for the American people to recognize that the Constitution makes no distinction between domestic and foreign matters. Policy is policy, and it must be made by the legislature and not the executive.
"But what policy is best? How should we deal with the rest of the world in a way that best advances proper national interests, while not threatening our freedoms at home?"
Congressman Ron Paul, 12/18/06
Rudy Giuliani is atracrting support from certain libertarians who believe that his support for abortion and "gay rights" indicate some libertarian tendencies. However, Rudy is one of the most authoritarian figures in America politics today. He attempted to turn New York City into his own personal fiefdom complete with police brutality. Giuliani's alleged "tolerance" consists of using the power of the state to force people to associate with homosexuals against their will. Of course, Giuliani is a cheerleader for the neocon policy of "perpetual war for perpetual piece." Giuliani is also a big proponent of gun control, his record shows no respect for what Jefferson called the "guardian of every other right." Far from being a libertarian dream candidate, Rudy makes John McCain look like Ron Paul!
"Two parts hubris, one part paranoia", Cintra Wilson, Slate
Richard Wilkins
Twelve years ago the GOP assumed control of Congress promising to reduce the size and scope of government and reform the way Congress conducted business. On 3:06 a.m., December 8, 2006 the House of Representatives had the last roll-call vote that will be conducted under GOP control. So did the GOP Congress fulfill its promises? A look at the subject of that last vote, and the circumstances under which it was held, give us some answers.
The bill itself, S. 3546, attacks consumer freedom to use dietary supplements by setting up an "adverse event reporting system" guaranteed to make supplements seem dangerous. For example, cases where someone taken both prescription medicine and supplements has a health problem, the government will likely record this as a result of the dietary supplements not the prescription medicines!
S. 3546 was opposed by many health freedom advocates, some of whom where assured by the GOP leadership that the bill would not come to the floor that week. But a last-minute, backroom deal set the charge for the GOP to take one last bit of liberty away from us on their way out of town. My sources tell me the bill was rushed to the floor as part of an agreement to facilitate the movement of legislation reauthorizing the (unconstitutional) National Institutes of Health through Congress. Most members of the House where not informed that they would be voting on S. 3546 until 12:45 a.m. -- less than three hours before the vote!
So the Republicans failed to either reduce the size of government or reform Congress. Instead they grew the welfare-warfare state to unprecedented proportions and set a new standard of congressional corruption, abuse of power, and arrogance. The Democrats might not have deserved to win control of Congress, but the Republicans certainly deserved to lose control.
Richard Wilkins
Listen to Congressman Ron Paul discuss how Congress, not the president, is suppose to make foreign policy for the United States. Congressman Paul is interviewed by Scott Horton.
The Institute for Health Freedom provides a roundup on the efforts around the country to pass so-called universal healthcare or, more accurately called, socialized sickcare.
Kent Snyder
Is New Hampshire turning away from its "Live Free or Die" tradition? According to a Christian Science Monitor article, it is. Let's hope, however, the Free State Project can counter that change and keep New Hampshire's tradition of freedom alive and well.
Kent Snyder
"The media, Congress, and the American public all seem to have accepted something that is patently untrue: namely, that foreign policy is the domain of the president and not Congress. This is absolutely not the case and directly contrary to what our founding fathers wanted."
Congressman Ron Paul, 12/11/06
According to The Hill newspaper, the National Republican Congressional Committee is "begging to clear debt" of $2 million. You see, the committee spent almost $2 million more than it had in the bank in its failed effort to keep a Republican majority in the U.S. House this last election.
The article quotes Sally Vastola the executive director of the committee: "In the end, we were forced to spend nearly $2 million we didn’t have...."
Spending money they didn't have?! Well, that's no surprise. This is Washington, D.C. after all.
Kent Snyder
Sabastian Mallaby concludes the era of big government is here to stay; something that will please Democrats, Republicans and even libertarians. Libertarians for big government? It's true for the Beltway libertarians.
Kent Snyder
One former GOP capo who won't be dinning on egg noodles and ketchup is retiring U.S. Representative Michael Oxley, former chairman of the Financial Services Committee and co-author of the infamous Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Sarbanes-Oxley, a congressional overreaction to the Enron and Worldcom scandals, did to the financial services industry what the PATRIOT and military tribunals acts did to all of our liberties. Sarbanes-Oxley is a major reason why many small companies are refusing to list on the American Exchanges and why large companies are leaving Wall Street for London.
Yet, for the past two years, Oxley turned a deaf ear to calls for reform of this bill. Now Monday's Roll Call reports Oxley might take a high-paying job with a DC law-lobbying firm that works to roll-back...Sarbanes-Oxley!
When the mob does it it is called extortion, when politicians do it it is called democracy.
Richard Wilkins
"Politicians often manage to fool voters and the media, but they rarely fool the financial markets over time."
Congressman Ron Paul, 12/04/06
There is something terribly wrong with (Beltway) libertarians.
The CATO Institute has a new study on corruption in Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, which calls for Chavez's removal from office. Now, I have no doubt that Chavez is a crook and a thug, but why, out of all the many politicians around the world is Chavez worthy of a CATO study highlighting his offenses? This would not be an attempt to curry favor with the neocons by lending support to the attempts to remove Chavez from office? Again, I am sure Chavez deserves the scorn of any friend of freedom, but for a libertarian think-tank to explicitly call for the removal of a foreign leader seems to at least raise questions about that institution's commitment to a non-interventionism.
Instead of criticizing the neocons latest hate figure, perhaps CATO should spend more time on the US government's assault on liberty. As James Bovard pointed out recently, CATO all but ignored the controversy over the US use of torture. CATO was also largely silent in the recent debate on the bill authorizing military tribunals, suspending habeas corpus, and allowing the president to designate American citizens as enemy combatants. Maybe they'll be more outspoken when Hillary designates all opponents of socialized healthcare "enemy combatants."
"The Torturous Servility of Washington Think Tanks" James Bovard, 11/17/06
Richard Wilkins
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's service on the infamous "Continuity of Government" commission showed he had no respect for the structure of republican government created by the drafters of the Constitution. Now Newt reveals he has no respect for the Bill of Rights either.
Speaking in New Hampshire on Monday, Newt proposed creating a "different set of rules" regarding free speech in order to stop terrorists from using the Internet to find new recruits. However, plotting terrorists acts or recruiting "volunteers" to join terrorists groups are already illegal and are not considered constitutionally-protected speech. So why does Newt think we need to change the First Amendment? Perhaps a clue is found when he says the Internet can be used by potential terrorists to "get their message out." Thus, Newt appears to be saying the government should have the ability to censor political speech that is associated with terrorist organizations.
The potential this gives the government to silence critics of government policy is staggering. Under the Newt doctrine, critics of the Iraq war could be silenced since terrorists also oppose the war. A future liberal administration could also use this to silence pro-lifers on the grounds that criticizing abortion helps bombers of abortion clinics ("domestic terrorists") gain new recruits. These concerns are all the more valid considering the PATRIOT Act's broad definition of "terrorism" could easily encompass peaceful political activities and how federal authorities have been spying on anti-war protesters. Ironically, Newt's remarks where made at a dinner celebrating champions of the First Amendment!
Looks like the "groundswell" Gingrich hopes to create to propel him into the White House will bury what remains of our liberty and constitutional government.
"Gingrich raises alarm at event honoring those who stand up for freedom of speech" Union Leader, 11/28/06
Richard Wilkins
P.S. Separated at birth?
Paper Money is Bad for Everyone – Not Just Blind People
By keeping all U.S. currency the same size and texture, the government has denied blind people meaningful access to money, a federal judge said Tuesday. U.S. District Judge James Robertson said the Treasury Department has violated the law, and he ordered the government to come up with ways for the blind to tell bills apart. Of the more than 180 countries that issue paper currency, only the United States prints bills that are identical in size and color in all their denominations," Robertson wrote. "More than 100 of the other issuers vary their bills in size according to denomination, and every other issuer includes at least some features that help the visually impaired. The fact that each of these features is currently used in other currencies suggests that, at least on the face of things, such accommodations are reasonable," he wrote. He said the government was violating the Rehabilitation Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in government programs. The opinion came after a four-year legal fight.
Of course, the real problem is not with the unitary size of the paper money. It is the tragedy of paper money unbacked by any real commodity that should be occupying the minds of treasury officials. Absent paper money being tied to some commodity, government is free to print it cheaply and devalue and destroy existing money in circulation. In other words, if you think counterfeiting U.S. notes is tough, try alchemy.
"Conscription is wrongly associated with patriotism, when really it represents collectivism and involuntary servitude."
"Ronald Reagan said it best: 'The most fundamental objection to draft registration is moral.' The notion of involuntary servitude, in whatever form, is simply incompatible with a free society."
Congressman Ron Paul, 11/27/06
The quote of the week comes from former House speaker and possible 2008 presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich:
"I'm going to tell you something, and whether or not it's plausible given the world you come out of is your problem," he tells Fortune. "I am not 'running' for president. I am seeking to create a movement to win the future by offering a series of solutions so compelling that if the American people say I have to be president, it will happen."
This is far from the first time Newt has shown traces of megalomania. Remember when it was discovered he made drawings meant to depict the future of Western civilization which featured him at the center as the transformational figure who would save civilization?
"Gingrich '08: The stealth candidate" Fortune, 11/21/06
Richard Wilkins
Conservatives have criticized and mocked the left for attempting to silence views that did not meet the litmus test of "political correctness." Yet, a form of political correctness has invaded the Heritage Foundation, one of the major pillars of the modern conservative movement. Instead of the left's obsession with race and gender, a desire to silence all criticism of President Bush and the neocons is the animating feature of this right-wing PC.
First, Heritage fired foreign policy analyst John Hulsman for writing a book questioning whether the neocon crusade for democracy was either good for the nation or representative of a true conservative approach to foreign affairs. Then, last week, Heritage reneged on a commitment to host the November meeting of the Prosperity Caucus when it leaned the featured speaker was Ryan Sager. Sager, a moderate libertarian journalist has written a book criticizing the Bush administration for neglecting the libertarian wing of the conservative collation in favor of pandering to the most extreme faction of the Christian Right and attempting to buy votes with new welfare programs and pork-barrel spending. Finally, it appears Heritage refused to invite Bruce Bartlett to a dinner commemorating the 25th anniversary of Reagan's tax cuts, even though Bartlett worked for Jack Kemp at the time and thus played a major role in the tax cut, because of Bartlett's criticisms of the Bush Administration. Bartlett's outspoken criticisms of the Bush Administration already cost him his job at the National Center for Policy Analysis.
To be fair, Heritage is a private organization that can hire and host whoever they please. However, Heritage bills itself the center of conservative thought in DC, a place where conservatives of all stripes can come to together and debate the issues of the day. For them to continue to claim to be open to all conservatives while attempting to silence those who criticize Bush from the right is a case of false advertising and something Heritage's principled donors might be concerned about.
Heritage was also outspoken in their criticism of the Bush's Medicare prescription drug plan and his fiscal irresponsibility. However, opposing the biggest opposition of the welfare state since the Great Society should be a no brainier for conservatives, not a sign of valor. However, Heritage was also a major source of inspiration and intellectual support for Bush's other major expansion of the welfare state: No Child Left Behind.
Considering how political correctness turned the left from a significant force in American politics into a brain-dead national joke the rise of a similar phenomenon on the right does not bode well for the future of the conservative movement. Especially since this right-wing PC is devoted to denying a platform to conservative and libertarian critics of an increasingly unpopular president.
The Conservative Thought Police
"Sager BANNED at Heritage?" Alabama Liberation Front, 11/21/06
Richard Wilkins
According to the Associated Press, civil
rights activist and U.S. Congressman Charles Rangel from the 15th
District of New York, will introduce a bill when the 110th Congress
reconvenes to reinstate the draft. Apparently lost on the self-proclaimed civil rights leader is the text
of the slavery-banning 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which
reads, in part: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall
exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. It seems that either Congressman Rangel
doesn’t equate being conscripted into the military as “involuntary service” or he
somehow believes slavery is dandy, so long as it is government that is the
slave owner. Neither is tenable.
It is self-evident that forcing
citizens to register and be conscripted into the military is both an extreme
form of servitude and certainly most involuntary. In these days of ongoing U.S. foreign global interventionism, one
would hope that the rounding up of young men by warlords, only to have them
shipped off to unfamiliar and dangerous lands against their wills might strike
a disharmonious chord -- especially among those forever loudly claiming strong
ties to their cultural heritage, their history, and those still seeking
reparations.
Or, can it be that in Mr. Rangel’s
mind, because it is government rather than private individuals assuming
ownership of the enslaved that this “military slavery” is somehow innocuous? From his voting record it is apparent that
Mr. Rangel believes generally that collective ownership and control of property
is preferable to self ownership and individual liberty. He apparently also fails to understand that,
for a good number of reasons, government-owned-and-operated slavery is
necessarily and decidedly worse even than that of a system of private or monarchial
slavery.
Continue reading "Black Civil Rights Leader Wants to Restore Slavery" »
Representative Charlie Rangel (New York): Reinstate the Draft! All Youth Must Serve the Glorious Homeland! Sieg Heil!'There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the Administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way,' Rangel said.
....
'If We're going to challenge Iran and challenge North Korea and then, as some people have asked, to send more troops to Iraq, we can't do that without a draft,' Rangel said."
Rangel is truly living up to the ideal of the Democratic party's mascot. The one thing the neocons don't have enough of is cannon fodder, and this monumental ass of a Democratic "leader" wants to give them just that –- all the cannon fodder they can order up, by enslaving people who otherwise have the good sense to not enlist when our nation's foreign policy is under the control of a cabal of chicken-hawks with a fetish for "pre-emptive" war and empire. Does Rangel really think a draft would have stopped the neocons from invading Iraq?
As for the notion that politicians will hesitate to go to war with a draft in place because it means kids from their own communities will have to fight, Rangel is presuming that Congress will even be consulted. Under the 2001 AUMF, and the broad grant of power Bush has claimed it gave him, he does not think he needs a vote from Congress to go to war. Bush is more likely to send in the troops first, and then ask for Congressional "support" after. And even if the President did ask Congress what it thinks prior to just starting a war, warhawks in Congress have already demonstrated, with a volunteer military, that they don't give a damn about sending kids from their own communities off to die in some sand-pit. Why should they care more about draftees? Does he really think the politician's own children will actually be drafted and sent off to fight and die? What a fool.
So why is Rangel is so hot for a draft?
He said having a draft would not necessarily mean everyone called to duty would have to serve. Instead, "young people (would) commit themselves to a couple of years in service to this great republic, whether it's our seaports, our airports, in schools, in hospitals," with a promise of educational benefits at the end of service. (Emphasis added.)
Ah, there is Comrade Rangel's real motivation; his real wet dream -- a communist-style nationalization of all us unwashed masses -- the worker bees -- for compelled national "service to this great republic" wherever he and his fellow travelers at Party Headquarters think we are best utilized as their resources.
Lenin, Stalin and Mao would be so proud. Of the ten planks of the Communist Manifesto, number eight was "Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture" and part of plank ten was the "Combination of education with industrial production."
Keep your eye on this totalitarian idea of "national service" -- with all of our kids enrolled at eighteen into an American version of the Hitler Youth -- it is not going away anytime soon. Would-be slave foreman Rangel is not alone in his desire that the federal government own the means of production -- your kids. As William Grigg noted back in 1997, in a New American article responding to a similar idea during the Clinton Administration, the idea of National Service is a staple of statist regimes throughout history, whether they be communist (international socialist) or fascist (national socialist) in orientation.
Murray Rothbard famously urged people to view the state as a "criminal gang." In fact, we should view the American political system as a rivalry between two criminal families fighting over who gets to control the loot gained from their criminal activities. Of course, the gangs will collaborate when necessary to protect the welfare-warfare state that enables their systematic plunder. This cooperation among thieves is the real meaning of the "bipartianship" the establishment media is always clamoring for.
The behavior of many GOP "elected representatives," staffers, and lobbyists certainly bears a closer resemblance to a gangster movie than the idealized picture of government presented in high school civics. In return for free meals, sporting tickets, and trips members and staffers allowed lobbyists to shape the legislative agenda and even write the bills. I have heard from reliable sources that the Republican staff of the House Financial Services Committee regularly showed lobbyists draft legislation weeks before the committee even bothered informing the average members that the legislation has been added to the committee's agenda. The committee staffers also used government resources to promote briefings by their favorite lobbyists on the pretext that members and staffers needed the perspective of the "business community."
The Financial Services Committee also took the "K Street" project to new, thug-like heights when they threatened an industry with unfavorable treatment unless they hired a Republican lobbyists.
I can think of no better eulogy for the GOP Congress than Henry Hill's lament on leaving the gangster lifestyle for the wittiness protection program at the end of Goodfellas:
Everybody had their hands out. Everything was for the taking. And now it's all over...After I got here I ordered spaghetti with marina sauce..and I got egg noodles with ketchup....I get to live the rest of my life like a schnook.
Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of schnooks.
For more on culture on Capitol Hill see:
"K Street grumbles about an entitlement culture" The Hill, 06/27/05
"The Road to Riches Is Called K Street" Washington Post, 06/22/05
"K Street Faces Changing of the Guard" Capitol Hill Blue, 11/16/06
Richard Wilkins
