Want to know why you keep loosing money on the stock market?
Did the best man win?
Yeah, I know, I just felt like posting on the subject of Ron Paul.
Congratulations, dear reader. Cost of Government Day was last Wednesday, July 16th. This means that after slaving away for over half the year to pay state, local and federal taxes, you’re finally working for yourself.
This year’s Cost of Government Day fell four days later than last year’s, and sixteen days later than in 2000. Ironically, the biggest increases in government spending took place during the “conservative” administrations of George Bush 41 & 43.
It’s up to us to take back what it means to be “conservative” once again. A good place to start will be our upcoming rally in Minneapolis!
I hate to break this to the revolutionaries, but this is what comes of defining yourselves with a term as mutable as Conservative (I’m sure that Senator Goldwater is rolling in his grave seeing what his idea of Conservatism has come to) which has no real meaning politically other than “resistant to change”.
Time to break the mold, reinvent the system.
I don’t know how long The Revolution will continue without Ron Paul to lead it, but I did pick up a copy of his book when he was in town for the book signing tour today. I’ve already read a good portion of it. I wouldn’t do the book justice if I tried to review it myself, so let me just point you here; The Revolution: A Manifesto.
On the subject of Ron Paul and The Revolution, I ran across this video:
I daresay I’ve probably blogged my last on the subject of Ron Paul. But then I’ve been wrong before.
Another Polling Point poll today. They still can’t figure out that politics, like reality itself, isn’t confined to a single plane of opinion. Left/Right, Liberal/Conservative definitions of political views will only serve to keep the citizens at each others throats. If you can narrow the range of opinion down to two valid views, then everyone who doesn’t agree with you is wrong, obviously.
The “Who would you vote for as President” questions were at least not a total waste of time. Given a range of 5 options, including other and not voting, they asked us to pick which candidate we would vote for contrasting first Barak Obama and John McCain, and then Hillary Clinton and John McCain.
My choice, in both instances? Mary Ruwart. I might feel a bit of ambivalence about Barack Obama and his goals for the presidency; but ambivalence isn’t informed opinion. I’ve read enough of Ms. Ruwart’s writings to know she would make a better candidate than any of the chosen front runners.
Neither Hillary Clinton or John McCain can be trusted to run the country; their behavior in the campaigns so far has proven this.
And while I’m a supporter of Ron Paul, I can’t see the Republicans giving him the nomination over McCain, no matter how much the conservatives within the party despise McCain. Dr. Paul has stated repeatedly that he has no intention of running as a third party candidate.
So it’s Mary Ruwart for President, hands down.
“Inflation has now been institutionalized at a fairly constant 5% per year. This has been determined to be the optimum level for generating the most revenue without causing public alarm. A 5% devaluation applies, not only to the money earned this year, but to all that is left over from previous years. At the end of the first year, a dollar is worth 95 cents. At the end of the second year, the 95 cents is reduced again by 5%, leaving its worth at 90 cents, and so on. By the time a person has worked 20 years, the government will have confiscated 64% of every dollar he saved over those years. By the time he has worked 45 years, the hidden tax will be 90%. The government will take virtually everything a person saves over a lifetime.”
— G. Edward Griffin
I actually beat DownsizeDC to the punch and promoted the End the Inflation Tax action item before they did by incorporating it into this previous post and digging it. Of course, I don’t have nearly the reach that DownsizeDC has but…
Well, Perry Willis’ blog entry on the Inflation Tax subject is here.
I stumbled across this teaser on digg the other day:
CATO ran a related subject on the daily podcast recently, titled Is the Gold Standard Still the Gold Standard among Monetary Systems? Personally, I don’t even know how you would justify a different standard. All the counter arguments have now been discredited.
…and the dollar continues to fall, while gold and silver continue to rise.
…it should come as no surprise that the greatest boom and bust in American history happened immediately following the Fed’s birth in 1913. Fed inflation put the inflationary “roar” in the “Roaring Twenties” followed by the biggest bust ever, the Great Depression.
All past inflations, booms, and busts were created through essentially the same process, including the recent stock market and housing bubbles. The Fed is simply the government’s latest-and-greatest tool for legalized counterfeiting.
How You Can End This Con-game
Imagine what would happen if FRNs had to compete with gold, a form of money that can’t be significantly inflated or deflated because of its scarcity and durability…
- People would begin to have gold accounts that they would use to buy and sell. The ownership of the gold would be transferred back and forth using checks, debit cards, paper certificates (currency), and a few coins, just like with FRNs.
- When you went shopping you would start to see two prices, one in FRNs and one in a certain weight of gold.
- If the Fed inflated the number of FRNs you would see the FRN prices rise while the gold price would stay roughly the same.
- You would begin to prefer to pay the gold price, so you would want to be paid in gold too.
- How could the Fed stop the flight to gold? Only one way. Stop inflating the number of FRNs.
Congressman Paul has hit upon the easiest way to end inflation, and the booms and busts that follow in its wake. Simply repeal the legal tender monopoly enjoyed by FRNs, and the coinage monopoly held by the United States government. Allow monetary competition. Not only would this help to end inflation and recessions, it would also limit the ability of politicians to hide the true cost of government through the inflation tax. But that’s not all . . .
Forcing FRNs to compete with gold would also confer one other benefit. Over time the prices you pay will tend to fall as increases in economic efficiency (for example, technological improvements) lower the cost of production and increase the supply of goods and services. A stable money supply tends to become more valuable over time, unlike an inflationary currency that constantly loses value.
Both of these pieces of legislation would be a benefit to those of us seeking shelter from the continuing weakening of the dollar; which is probably why neither of them will see the light of day. Still, nothing happens without effort.
Which is what I figured. The local news station (KVUE) I watch has a candidate selector (that includes Ron Paul, if not third party candidates) and after honestly answering the questions I discovered that Ron Paul is the only candidate that scored higher than 50% (67, to be precise) agreement with my views.
When I answered the questions for the Select Smart candidate selector, Ron Paul came up second (76%) after an LP candidate (Kent McManigal 89%) whose candidacy has been suspended. None of the other candidates listed at the National LP site are on any of the selectors that I’ve seen, but that really doesn’t surprise me either; although why the potential LP candidates can’t be listed alongside the potential R & D candidates is beyond me. But that’s about par for the course these days.
Which is why the inclusion of Ron Paul is a beacon of hope for those of us who really understand what is at stake in this election. Not that I think that beacon will be lit for that much longer, I’m just enjoying it while it lasts…
Voting Irregularities, as in ‘Errors’ Transposing Votes and Diebold Machines Removed Votes From Obama and Paul a link sent to me by a fellow Ron Paul supporter, outlining outright vote counting misconduct, and touching on the already well understood failings of the Diebold voting machines.
This is a major issue, unless of course you’re an Anarchist who just wants government to go away.
Newspeak (the language of engsoc in 1984) is a language that is crafted in such a way as to make it impossible to think wrong thoughts, because the words will no longer exist to express them. Anarchists are engaged in crafting their own version of Newspeak these days, redefining words like Power and Government to meet specific goals.
Don’t believe me? Here’s an example:
power and liberty are opposites; wherever the former appears, the latter disappears.
Power is, in fact, the only way to secure liberty. Individual will, inalienable rights, individual’s power. Not recognizing power unless it’s power relegated to state authority is redefining what power is.
Government exists, and will always exist, because self-government is still government. Unless, of course, you are an anarchist; in which case, state and government are interchangeable concepts, and all government must be abolished (and yet somehow this won’t result in chaos, even though governing oneself would presumably also be a no-no) as the evil that it is.
Libertarians engaging in a political campaign to have someone elected have from my point of view given up their claim on liberty; they are no longer striving for liberty as number one, but are working to give someone power to liberate them.
More Newspeak. The elections will take place whether libertarians participate in them or not (what about the LP? They exist only to participate politically. I guess none of them are libertarian at all in this anarchist’s opinion) Taking part in politics is the only way to secure one’s liberty (politics, after all, being nothing more than the art and science of government) and any candidate with a proven track record like Ron Paul’s is going to be an improvement over any of the other candidates who might get the nomination.
There is this mistaken belief amongst many of the Voluntaryists and Anarchists out there that the state will simply cease to exist once enough of the population refuses to participate. I have no idea why they hold this belief. It’s quite apparent through simple observation that the average world state requires nothing of it’s citizens except tribute…
…which it will take by force, whether force is required or not. Given that, I’ll work to limit government in any way that I can personally, including supporting a candidate in a party that I do not claim as my own.
It’s better than the alternative. Doing nothing.
Gotta love these numbers:
Ron Paul took over 10% in yesterday’s Iowa caucus, handily beating Rudy Giuliani and finishing right behind both Fred Thompson and John McCain. This despite that Rudy Giuliani made more visits to Iowa than Ron Paul. And, entrance polls showed that Ron Paul took first place (29%) among independent Republicans!
Yet another attempt to exclude minority opinions, even when those opinions carry the name of a major party:
PLAISTOW, N.H. — Ron Paul said the decision to exclude him from a debate on Fox News Sunday the weekend before the New Hampshire Primary is proof that the network “is scared” of him.
“They are scared of me and don’t want my message to get out, but it will,” Paul said in an interview at a diner here. “They are propagandists for this war and I challenge them on the notion that they are conservative.”
Paul’s staff said they are beginning to plan a rally that will take place at the same time the 90-minute debate will air on television. It will be taped at Saint Anselm College in Goffstown.
“They will not win this skirmish,” he promised.
The Fox debate occurs less than 24 hours after two back to back Republican and Democratic debates on the same campus sponsored by ABC News, WMUR-TV and the social networking website Facebook.
Paul, the Republican Texas Congressman, was wrapping up his final day of campaigning in New Hampshire until the Iowa Caucuses on Thursday.
He spent much of the day campaigning at diners in Manchester and Plaistow and downtown walks in Derry and Exeter.archive.org/boston.com
Those who prefer to exclude opinions they disagree with will cite poll numbers as the reason that Dr. Paul does not rate inclusion in the debate; but polls are representative of what respondents thought of the questions asked; nothing more and nothing less. When the polls are unbiased and inclusive, Dr. Paul ranks much higher than the 3 to 4 percent that is often cited. Fox has no business excluding him for any reason other than fear of what he represents, a groundswell of revolt against the current system.
As a corporate representative of that system (as all publicly held corporations are) they have every right to be afraid; but their fear shows their bias, and it also shows just how much “fair and balanced” is worth at Fox Noise, and that is not very much.
It is the opinions that are being excluded here (anti-war Republican, Austrian economics, limited government candidate) not the person of Dr. Paul. If these are your values as well as Dr. Paul’s, then you need to get behind him and show your support.
Change is coming in this country, make no mistake about that. Make sure it’s the right kind of change.
I’m beginning to think that the inhabitants over at digg.com are just a bunch of children. There’s a flag on the first message I stumbled across questioning the accuracy of the information. …And yet, even Ron Paul’s website acknowledges the truth as far as they know it:
December 28, 2007 10:39 pm EST
ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – According to the New Hampshire State Republican Party and an Associated Press report, Republican presidential candidate and Texas Congressman Ron Paul will be excluded from an upcoming forum of Republican candidates to be broadcast by Fox News on January 6, 2008.
“Given Ron Paul’s support in New Hampshire and his recent historic fundraising success, it is outrageous that Dr. Paul would be excluded,” said Ron Paul 2008 campaign chairman Kent Snyder. “Dr. Paul has consistently polled higher in New Hampshire than some of the other candidates who have been invited.”
Snyder continued, “Paul supporters should know that we are continuing to make inquiries with Fox News as to why they have apparently excluded Dr. Paul from this event.”archive.org/ronpaul2008.com
So, what’s up digg? Are you vying to be as biased as Fox Noise?
The second press release on the subject:
December 30, 2007
Has Fox News Excluded Ron Paul? pt. 2
On December 27, the Associated Press reported: “The New Hampshire Republican Party is sponsoring a forum for Republican presidential candidates on Jan. 6, two days before the state’s first-in-the-nation primary.” Later in the article, the AP stated: “Participating in the forum will be Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson.”
On the evening of December 28, Jared Chicoine and Jordan Brown of our New Hampshire campaign staff met in person with Fergus Cullen the New Hampshire GOP chairman to discuss whether or not Dr. Paul would be invited to participate in the forum. Mr. Cullen confirmed there will be an event on January 6, but he could not confirm whether or not Dr. Paul would be invited. We also learned the event would not be a debate with an audience, but instead would be a forum in a closed studio with the candidates questioned only by Chris Wallace of Fox News.
A few hours after that meeting, we contacted Fox News seeking clarification. Later that night, we issued a press release while waiting to hear from Fox News.
On December 29, the Baltimore Sun featured a report by Jason George. Mr. George reported, “Calls and emails to Fox News spokespersons by the Tribune were not returned Saturday evening.
“An official at the New Hampshire GOP, which is co-sponsoring the event with Fox, said that Paul might still be included, but the planning for the debate was still coming together and it was ultimately Fox’s call.”
As of late afternoon today (December 30), we have nothing more to report.
Chairman, Ron Paul 2008
The third press release:
December 31, 2007
Has Fox News Excluded Ron Paul? pt. 3
Fergus Cullen, chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party, issued a press release this afternoon about Fox News’ presidential candidates forum scheduled for January 6. His release is below.
We thank Mr. Cullen for his statement today and for his efforts with Fox News.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: December 31, 2007
Contact: Fergus Cullen, Chairman, New Hampshire Republican Party
NH REPUBLICANS: DON’T LIMIT DEBATE PARTICIPANTS
CONCORD – New Hampshire Republican Party Chairman Fergus Cullen releases the following statement regarding primary weekend debates:
“Limiting the number of candidates who are invited to participate in debates is not consistent with the tradition of the first in the nation primary. The level playing field requires that all candidates be given an equal opportunity to participate – not just a select few determined by the media prior to any votes being cast.”
“Therefore, the New Hampshire Republican Party calls upon all media organizations planning pre-primary debates or forums for both parties to include all recognized major candidates in their events.”
“The New Hampshire Republican Party has notified FOX News of our position, and we are in ongoing discussions with FOX News about having as many candidates as possible participate in the forum scheduled for January 6.”ronpaul2008.typepad.com
What this blog entry shows, more than anything, is that I was blissfully happy to freight water for a racist Republican turned Libertarian turned Republican. He talked a good game, just like all politicians do, but he didn’t have what it took to lead in any real fashion. In the end, the things that he believed were without merit.