Shaking up the establishment

As our King is about to be re-crowned and we must look at the failings within our own party to realize why he manged to get put on the throne to begin with.

Please watch this documentary and take in the essence of what it means to campaign for liberty in the face of tyrannical opposition:

Ron Paul campaigned in both 2008 and 2012, both times he was ignored by the establishment and the media. Both times he could have beaten Obama in a toe to toe election. Our party has strayed away from us, as the democratic party strayed away from liberals many decades ago. It’s time to reclaim the party, elect tea party and libertarian candidates, and take back the country!

shake up 3

Revolutions are long term projects and our revolution is just now beginning to ripen. Ron Paul’s son is now standing up for our constitutional rights in the senate, and he is being backed by millions of people all over the country. We are paving the way not for another RINO or a socialist democrat, but for a constitutional libertarian minded conservative to become president in 2016. We are entering perhaps our darkest hour in the liberty movement, but our light shines on, and our movement is growing. We will take this country back, and we’ll do it by shaking up the establishment, and putting real leaders in charge.

shake up 4

Our current tasks seem impossible, but we are well on the way to restoring liberty in this country.

“The American revolutionaries did the impossible. So can we.” – Ron Paul, The Revolution; A Manifesto

Transcript of Ron Paul’s farewell to congress

Below is the transcript of Ron Paul’s farewell address to Congress:

 

Farewell to Congress

This may well be the last time I speak on the House Floor.  At the end of the year I’ll leave Congress after 23 years in office over a 36 year period.  My goals in 1976 were the same as they are today:  promote peace and prosperity by a strict adherence to the principles of individual liberty.

It was my opinion, that the course the U.S. embarked on in the latter part of the 20th Century would bring us a major financial crisis and engulf us in a foreign policy that would overextend us and undermine our national security.

To achieve the goals I sought, government would have had to shrink in size and scope, reduce spending, change the monetary system, and reject the unsustainable costs of policing the world and expanding the American Empire.

The problems seemed to be overwhelming and impossible to solve, yet from my view point, just following the constraints placed on the federal government by the Constitution would have been a good place to start.

 

How Much Did I Accomplish?

In many ways, according to conventional wisdom, my off-and-on career in Congress, from 1976 to 2012, accomplished very little.  No named legislation, no named federal buildings or highways—thank goodness.  In spite of my efforts, the government has grown exponentially, taxes remain excessive, and the prolific increase of incomprehensible regulations continues.  Wars are constant and pursued without Congressional declaration, deficits rise to the sky, poverty is rampant and dependency on the federal government is now worse than any time in our history.

All this with minimal concerns for the deficits and unfunded liabilities that common sense tells us cannot go on much longer.  A grand, but never mentioned, bipartisan agreement allows for the well-kept secret that keeps the spending going.  One side doesn’t give up one penny on military spending, the other side doesn’t give up one penny on welfare spending, while both sides support the bailouts and subsidies for the banking and  corporate elite.  And the spending continues as the economy weakens and the downward spiral continues.   As the government continues fiddling around, our liberties and our wealth burn in the flames of a foreign policy that makes us less safe.

The major stumbling block to real change in Washington is the total resistance to admitting that the country is broke. This has made compromising, just to agree to increase spending, inevitable since neither side has any intention of cutting spending.

The country and the Congress will remain divisive since there’s no “loot left to divvy up.”

Without this recognition the spenders in Washington will continue the march toward a fiscal cliff much bigger than the one anticipated this coming January.

I have thought a lot about why those of us who believe in liberty, as a solution, have done so poorly in convincing others of its benefits.  If liberty is what we claim it is- the principle that protects all personal, social and economic decisions necessary for maximum prosperity and the best chance for peace- it should be an easy sell.  Yet, history has shown that the masses have been quite receptive to the promises of authoritarians which are rarely if ever fulfilled.

 

Authoritarianism vs. Liberty

If authoritarianism leads to poverty and war and less freedom for all individuals and is controlled by rich special interests, the people should be begging for liberty.  There certainly was a strong enough sentiment for more freedom at the time of our founding that motivated those who were willing to fight in the revolution against the powerful British government.

During my time in Congress the appetite for liberty has been quite weak; the understanding of its significance negligible.  Yet the good news is that compared to 1976 when I first came to Congress, the desire for more freedom and less government in 2012 is much greater and growing, especially in grassroots America. Tens of thousands of teenagers and college age students are, with great enthusiasm, welcoming the message of liberty.

I have a few thoughts as to why the people of a country like ours, once the freest and most prosperous, allowed the conditions to deteriorate to the degree that they have.

Freedom, private property, and enforceable voluntary contracts, generate wealth.  In our early history we were very much aware of this.  But in the early part of the 20th century our politicians promoted the notion that the tax and monetary systems had to change if we were to involve ourselves in excessive domestic and military spending. That is why Congress gave us the Federal Reserve and the income tax.  The majority of Americans and many government officials agreed that sacrificing some liberty was necessary to carry out what some claimed to be “progressive” ideas. Pure democracy became acceptable.

They failed to recognized that what they were doing was exactly opposite of what the colonists were seeking when they broke away from the British.

Some complain that my arguments makes no sense, since great wealth and the standard of living improved  for many Americans over the last 100 years, even with these new policies.

But the damage to the market economy, and the currency, has been insidious and steady.  It took a long time to consume our wealth, destroy the currency and undermine productivity and get our financial obligations to a point of no return. Confidence sometimes lasts longer than deserved. Most of our wealth today depends on debt.

The wealth that we enjoyed and seemed to be endless, allowed concern for the principle of a free society to be neglected.  As long as most people believed the material abundance would last forever, worrying about protecting a competitive productive economy and individual liberty seemed unnecessary.

 

The Age of Redistribution

This neglect ushered in an age of redistribution of wealth by government kowtowing to any and all special interests, except for those who just wanted to left alone.  That is why today money in politics far surpasses money currently going into research and development and productive entrepreneurial efforts.

The material benefits became more important than the understanding and promoting the principles of liberty and a free market.  It is good that material abundance is a result of liberty but if materialism is all that we care about, problems are guaranteed.

The crisis arrived because the illusion that wealth and prosperity would last forever has ended. Since it was based on debt and a pretense that debt can be papered over by an out-of-control fiat monetary system, it was doomed to fail.  We have ended up with a system that doesn’t produce enough even to finance the debt and no fundamental understanding of why a free society is crucial to reversing these trends.

If this is not recognized, the recovery will linger for a long time.  Bigger government, more spending, more debt, more poverty for the middle class, and a more intense scramble by the elite special interests will continue.

 

We Need an Intellectual Awakening

Without an intellectual awakening, the turning point will be driven by economic law.  A dollar crisis will bring the current out-of-control system to its knees.

If it’s not accepted that big government, fiat money, ignoring liberty, central economic planning, welfarism, and warfarism caused our crisis we can expect a continuous and dangerous march toward corporatism and even fascism with even more loss of our liberties.  Prosperity for a large middle class though will become an abstract dream.

This continuous move is no different than what we have seen in how our financial crisis of 2008 was handled.  Congress first directed, with bipartisan support, bailouts for the wealthy.  Then it was the Federal Reserve with its endless quantitative easing. If at first it doesn’t succeed try again; QE1, QE2, and QE3 and with no results we try QE indefinitely—that is until it too fails.  There’s a cost to all of this and let me assure you delaying the payment is no longer an option.  The rules of the market will extract its pound of flesh and it won’t be pretty.

The current crisis elicits a lot of pessimism.  And the pessimism adds to less confidence in the future.  The two feed on themselves, making our situation worse.

If the underlying cause of the crisis is not understood we cannot solve our problems. The issues of warfare, welfare, deficits, inflationism, corporatism, bailouts and authoritarianism cannot be ignored.  By only expanding these policies we cannot expect good results.

Everyone claims support for freedom.  But too often it’s for one’s own freedom and not for others.  Too many believe that there must be limits on freedom. They argue that freedom must be directed and managed to achieve fairness and equality thus making it acceptable to curtail, through force, certain liberties.

Some decide what and whose freedoms are to be limited.  These are the politicians whose goal in life is power. Their success depends on gaining support from special interests.

 

No More ‘isms’

The great news is the answer is not to be found in more “isms.”  The answers are to be found in more liberty which cost so much less.  Under these circumstances spending goes down, wealth production goes up, and the quality of life improves.

Just this recognition—especially if we move in this direction—increases optimism which in itself is beneficial.  The follow through with sound policies are required which must be understood and supported by the people.

But there is good evidence that the generation coming of age at the present time is supportive of moving in the direction of more liberty and self-reliance. The more this change in direction and the solutions become known, the quicker will be the return of optimism.

Our job, for those of us who believe that a different system than the  one that we have  had for the  last 100 years, has driven us to this unsustainable crisis, is to be more convincing that there is a wonderful, uncomplicated, and moral system that provides the answers.  We had a taste of it in our early history. We need not give up on the notion of advancing this cause.

It worked, but we allowed our leaders to concentrate on the material abundance that freedom generates, while ignoring freedom itself.  Now we have neither, but the door is open, out of necessity, for an answer.  The answer available is based on the Constitution, individual liberty and prohibiting the use of government force to provide privileges and benefits to all special interests.

After over 100 years we face a society quite different from the one that was intended by the Founders.  In many ways their efforts to protect future generations with the Constitution from this danger has failed.  Skeptics, at the time the Constitution was written in 1787, warned us of today’s possible outcome.  The insidious nature of the erosion of our liberties and the reassurance our great abundance gave us, allowed the process to evolve into the dangerous period in which we now live.

 

Dependency on Government Largesse

Today we face a dependency on government largesse for almost every need.  Our liberties are restricted and government operates outside the rule of law, protecting and rewarding those who buy or coerce government into satisfying their demands. Here are a few examples:

  • Undeclared wars are commonplace.
  • Welfare for the rich and poor is considered an entitlement.
  • The economy is overregulated, overtaxed and grossly distorted by a deeply flawed monetary system.
  • Debt is growing exponentially.
  • The Patriot Act and FISA legislation passed without much debate have resulted in a steady erosion of our 4th Amendment rights.
  • Tragically our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression, with no complaints from the American people.
  • The drone warfare we are pursuing worldwide is destined to end badly for us as the hatred builds for innocent lives lost and the international laws flaunted. Once we are financially weakened and militarily challenged, there will be a lot resentment thrown our way.
  • It’s now the law of the land that the military can arrest American citizens, hold them indefinitely, without charges or a trial.
  • Rampant hostility toward free trade is supported by a large number in Washington.
  • Supporters of sanctions, currency manipulation and WTO trade retaliation, call the true free traders “isolationists.”
  • Sanctions are used to punish countries that don’t follow our orders.
  • Bailouts and guarantees for all kinds of misbehavior are routine.
  • Central economic planning through monetary policy, regulations and legislative mandates has been an acceptable policy.

 

Questions

Excessive government has created such a mess it prompts many questions:

  • Why are sick people who use medical marijuana put in prison?
  • Why does the federal government restrict the drinking of raw milk?
  • Why can’t Americans manufacturer rope and other products from hemp?
  • Why are Americans not allowed to use gold and silver as legal tender as mandated by the Constitution?
  • Why is Germany concerned enough to consider repatriating their gold held by the FED for her in New York?  Is it that the trust in the U.S. and dollar supremacy beginning to wane?
  • Why do our political leaders believe it’s unnecessary to thoroughly audit our own gold?
  • Why can’t Americans decide which type of light bulbs they can buy?
  • Why is the TSA permitted to abuse the rights of any American traveling by air?
  • Why should there be mandatory sentences—even up to life for crimes without victims—as our drug laws require?
  • Why have we allowed the federal government to regulate commodes in our homes?
  • Why is it political suicide for anyone to criticize AIPAC ?
  • Why haven’t we given up on the drug war since it’s an obvious failure and violates the people’s rights? Has nobody noticed that the authorities can’t even keep drugs out of the prisons? How can making our entire society a prison solve the problem?
  • Why do we sacrifice so much getting needlessly involved in border disputes and civil strife around the world and ignore the root cause of the most deadly border in the world-the one between Mexico and the US?
  • Why does Congress willingly give up its prerogatives to the Executive Branch?
  • Why does changing the party in power never change policy? Could it be that the views of both parties are essentially the same?
  • Why did the big banks, the large corporations, and foreign banks and foreign central banks get bailed out in 2008 and the middle class lost their jobs and their homes?
  • Why do so many in the government and the federal officials believe that creating money out of thin air creates wealth?
  • Why do so many accept the deeply flawed principle that government bureaucrats and politicians can protect us from ourselves without totally destroying the principle of liberty?
  • Why can’t people understand that war always destroys wealth and liberty?
  • Why is there so little concern for the Executive Order that gives the President authority to establish a “kill list,” including American citizens, of those targeted for assassination?
  • Why is patriotism thought to be blind loyalty to the government and the politicians who run it, rather than loyalty to the principles of liberty and support for the people? Real patriotism is a willingness to challenge the government when it’s wrong.
  • Why is it is claimed that if people won’t  or can’t take care of their own needs, that people in government can do it for them?
  • Why did we ever give the government a safe haven for initiating violence against the people?
  • Why do some members defend free markets, but not civil liberties?
  • Why do some members defend civil liberties but not free markets? Aren’t they the same?
  • Why don’t more defend both economic liberty and personal liberty?
  • Why are there not more individuals who seek to intellectually influence others to bring about positive changes than those who seek power to force others to obey their commands?
  • Why does the use of religion to support a social gospel and preemptive wars, both of which requires authoritarians to use violence, or the threat of violence, go unchallenged? Aggression and forced redistribution of wealth has nothing to do with the teachings of the world great religions.
  • Why do we allow the government and the Federal Reserve to disseminate false information dealing with both economic and  foreign policy?
  • Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority?
  • Why should anyone be surprised that Congress has no credibility, since there’s such a disconnect between what politicians say and what they do?
  • Is there any explanation for all the deception, the unhappiness, the fear of the future, the loss of confidence in our leaders, the distrust, the anger and frustration?   Yes there is, and there’s a way to reverse these attitudes.  The negative perceptions are logical and a consequence of bad policies bringing about our problems.  Identification of the problems and recognizing the cause allow the proper changes to come easy.

 

Trust Yourself, Not the Government

Too many people have for too long placed too much confidence and trust in government and not enough in themselves.  Fortunately, many are now becoming aware of the seriousness of the gross mistakes of the past several decades.  The blame is shared by both political parties.  Many Americans now are demanding to hear the plain truth of things and want the demagoguing to stop.  Without this first step, solutions are impossible.

Seeking the truth and finding the answers in liberty and self-reliance promotes the optimism necessary for restoring prosperity.  The task is not that difficult if politics doesn’t get in the way.

We have allowed ourselves to get into such a mess for various reasons.

Politicians deceive themselves as to how wealth is produced.  Excessive confidence is placed in the judgment of politicians and bureaucrats.  This replaces the confidence in a free society.  Too many in high places of authority became convinced that only they,   armed with arbitrary government power, can bring about fairness, while facilitating wealth production.  This always proves to be a utopian dream and destroys wealth and liberty.  It impoverishes the people and rewards the special interests who end up controlling both political parties.

It’s no surprise then that much of what goes on in Washington is driven by aggressive partisanship and power seeking, with philosophic differences being minor.

 

Economic Ignorance

Economic ignorance is commonplace.  Keynesianism continues to thrive, although today it is facing healthy and enthusiastic rebuttals.  Believers in military Keynesianism and domestic Keynesianism continue to desperately promote their failed policies, as the economy languishes in a deep slumber.

Supporters of all government edicts use humanitarian arguments to justify them.

Humanitarian arguments are always used to justify government mandates related to the economy, monetary policy, foreign policy, and personal liberty.  This is on purpose to make it more difficult to challenge.  But, initiating violence for humanitarian reasons is still violence.  Good intentions are no excuse and are just as harmful as when people use force with bad intentions.  The results are always negative.

The immoral use of force is the source of man’s political problems.  Sadly, many religious groups, secular organizations, and psychopathic authoritarians endorse government initiated force to change the world.  Even when the desired goals are well-intentioned—or especially when well-intentioned—the results are dismal.  The good results sought never materialize.  The new problems created require even more government force as a solution.  The net result is institutionalizing government initiated violence and morally justifying it on humanitarian grounds.

This is the same fundamental reason our government  uses force  for invading other countries at will, central economic planning at home, and the regulation of personal liberty and habits of our citizens.

It is rather strange, that unless one has a criminal mind and no respect for other people and their property, no one claims it’s permissible to go into one’s neighbor’s house and tell them how to behave, what they can eat, smoke and drink or how to spend their money.

Yet, rarely is it asked why it is morally acceptable that a stranger with a badge and a gun can do the same thing in the name of law and order.  Any resistance is met with brute force, fines, taxes, arrests, and even imprisonment. This is done more frequently every day without a proper search warrant.

 

No Government Monopoly over Initiating Violence

Restraining aggressive behavior is one thing, but legalizing a government monopoly for initiating aggression can only lead to exhausting liberty associated with chaos, anger and the breakdown of civil society.  Permitting such authority and expecting saintly behavior from the bureaucrats and the politicians is a pipe dream.  We now have a standing army of armed bureaucrats in the TSA, CIA, FBI, Fish and Wildlife, FEMA, IRS, Corp of Engineers, etc. numbering over 100,000.  Citizens are guilty until proven innocent in the unconstitutional administrative courts.

Government in a free society should have no authority to meddle in social activities or the economic transactions of individuals. Nor should government meddle in the affairs of other nations. All things peaceful, even when controversial, should be permitted.

We must reject the notion of prior restraint in economic activity just we do in the area of free speech and religious liberty. But even in these areas government is starting to use a backdoor approach of political correctness to regulate speech-a dangerous trend. Since 9/11 monitoring speech on the internet is now a problem since warrants are no longer required.

 

The Proliferation of Federal Crimes

The Constitution established four federal crimes.  Today the experts can’t even agree on how many federal crimes are now on the books—they number into the thousands.  No one person can comprehend the enormity of the legal system—especially the tax code.  Due to the ill-advised drug war and the endless federal expansion of the criminal code we have over 6 million people under correctional suspension, more than the Soviets ever had, and more than any other nation today, including China.  I don’t understand the complacency of the Congress and the willingness to continue their obsession with passing more Federal laws.  Mandatory sentencing laws associated with drug laws have compounded our prison problems.

The federal register is now 75,000 pages long and the tax code has 72,000 pages, and expands every year.  When will the people start shouting, “enough is enough,” and demand Congress cease and desist.

 

Achieving Liberty

Liberty can only be achieved when government is denied the aggressive use of force.  If one seeks liberty, a precise type of government is needed.  To achieve it, more than lip service is required.

Two choices are available.

  1. A government designed to protect liberty—a natural right—as its sole objective.  The people are expected to care for themselves and reject the use of any force for interfering with another person’s liberty.  Government is given a strictly limited authority to enforce contracts, property ownership, settle disputes, and defend against foreign aggression.
  2. A government that pretends to protect liberty but is granted power to arbitrarily use force over the people and foreign nations.  Though the grant of power many times is meant to be small and limited, it inevitably metastasizes into an omnipotent political cancer.  This is the problem for which the world has suffered throughout the ages.  Though meant to be limited it nevertheless is a 100% sacrifice of a principle that would-be-tyrants find irresistible.  It is used vigorously—though incrementally and insidiously.  Granting power to government officials always proves the adage that:  “power corrupts.”

Once government gets a limited concession for the use of force to mold people habits and plan the economy, it causes a steady move toward tyrannical government.  Only a revolutionary spirit can reverse the process and deny to the government this arbitrary use of aggression.  There’s no in-between.  Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always ends badly.

Today’s mess is a result of Americans accepting option #2, even though the Founders attempted to give us Option #1.

The results are not good.  As our liberties have been eroded our wealth has been consumed.  The wealth we see today is based on debt and a foolish willingness on the part of foreigners to take our dollars for goods and services. They then loan them back to us to perpetuate our debt system.  It’s amazing that it has worked for this long but the impasse in Washington, in solving our problems indicate that many are starting to understand the seriousness of the world -wide debt crisis and the dangers we face. The longer this process continues the harsher the outcome will be.

 

The Financial Crisis Is a Moral Crisis

Many are now acknowledging that a financial crisis looms but few understand it’s, in reality, a moral crisis.  It’s the moral crisis that has allowed our liberties to be undermined and permits the exponential growth of illegal government power.  Without a clear understanding of the nature of the crisis it will be difficult to prevent a steady march toward tyranny and the poverty that will accompany it.

Ultimately, the people have to decide which form of government they want; option #1 or option #2.  There is no other choice.  Claiming there is a choice of a “little” tyranny is like describing pregnancy as a “touch of pregnancy.”  It is a myth to believe that a mixture of free markets and government central economic planning is a worthy compromise.  What we see today is a result of that type of thinking.  And the results speak for themselves.

 

A Culture of Violence

American now suffers from a culture of violence.  It’s easy to reject the initiation of violence against one’s neighbor but it’s ironic that the people arbitrarily and freely anoint government officials with monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people—practically at will.

Because it’s the government that initiates force, most people accept it as being legitimate.  Those who exert the force have no sense of guilt.  It is believed by too many that governments are morally justified in initiating force supposedly to “do good.”  They incorrectly believe that this authority has come from the “consent of the people.”  The minority, or victims of government violence never consented to suffer the abuse of government mandates, even when dictated by the majority.  Victims of TSA excesses never consented to this abuse.

This attitude has given us a policy of initiating war to “do good,” as well. It is claimed that war, to prevent war for noble purposes, is justified.  This is similar to what we were once told that:  “destroying a village to save a village” was justified.  It was said by a US Secretary of State that the loss of 500,000 Iraqis, mostly children, in the 1990s, as a result of American bombs and sanctions, was “worth it” to achieve the “good” we brought to the Iraqi people.  And look at the mess that Iraq is in today.

Government use of force to mold social and economic behavior at home and abroad has justified individuals using force on their own terms.  The fact that violence by government is seen as morally justified, is the reason why violence will increase when the big financial crisis hits and becomes a political crisis as well.

First, we recognize that individuals shouldn’t initiate violence, then we give the authority to government.   Eventually, the immoral use of government violence, when things goes badly, will be used to justify an individual’s “right” to do the same thing. Neither the government nor individuals have the moral right to initiate violence against another yet we are moving toward the day when both will claim this authority.  If this cycle is not reversed society will break down.

When needs are pressing, conditions deteriorate and rights become relative to the demands and the whims of the majority.  It’s then not a great leap for individuals to take it upon themselves to use violence to get what they claim is theirs.  As the economy deteriorates and the wealth discrepancies increase—as are already occurring— violence increases as those in need take it in their own hands to get what they believe is theirs.  They will not wait for a government rescue program.

When government officials wield power over others to bail out the special interests, even with disastrous results to the average citizen, they feel no guilt for the harm they do. Those who take us into undeclared wars with many casualties resulting, never lose sleep over the death and destruction their bad decisions caused. They are convinced that what they do is morally justified, and the fact that many suffer   just can’t be helped.

When the street criminals do the same thing, they too have no remorse, believing they are only taking what is rightfully theirs.  All moral standards become relative.  Whether it’s bailouts, privileges, government subsidies or benefits for some from inflating a currency, it’s all part of a process justified by a philosophy of forced redistribution of wealth.  Violence, or a threat of such, is the instrument required and unfortunately is of little concern of most members of Congress.

Some argue it’s only a matter of “fairness” that those in need are cared for. There are two problems with this. First, the principle is used to provide a greater amount of benefits to the rich than the poor. Second, no one seems to be concerned about whether or not it’s fair to those who end up paying for the benefits. The costs are usually placed on the backs of the middle class and are hidden from the public eye. Too many people believe government handouts are free, like printing money out of thin air, and there is no cost. That deception is coming to an end. The bills are coming due and that’s what the economic slowdown is all about.

Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government.  It is the tool for telling the people how to live, what to eat and drink, what to read and how to spend their money.

To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected.  Granting to government even a small amount of force is a dangerous concession.

 

Limiting Government Excesses vs. a Virtuous Moral People

Our Constitution, which was intended to limit government power and abuse, has failed.  The Founders warned that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people.  The current crisis reflects that their concerns were justified.

Most politicians and pundits are aware of the problems we face but spend all their time in trying to reform government.  The sad part is that the suggested reforms almost always lead to less freedom and the importance of a virtuous and moral people is either ignored, or not understood. The new reforms serve only to further undermine liberty.  The compounding effect has given us this steady erosion of liberty and the massive expansion of debt.  The real question is: if it is liberty we seek, should most of the emphasis be placed on government reform or trying to understand what “a virtuous and moral people” means and how to promote it. The Constitution has not prevented the people from demanding handouts for both rich and poor in their efforts to reform the government, while ignoring the principles of a free society. All branches of our government today are controlled by individuals who use their power to undermine liberty and enhance the welfare/warfare state-and frequently their own wealth and power.

If the people are unhappy with the government performance it must be recognized that government is merely a reflection of an immoral society that rejected a moral government of constitutional limitations of power and love of freedom.

If this is the problem all the tinkering with thousands of pages of new laws and regulations will do nothing to solve the problem.

It is self-evident that our freedoms have been severely limited and the apparent prosperity we still have, is nothing more than leftover wealth from a previous time.  This fictitious wealth based on debt and benefits from a false trust in our currency and credit, will play havoc with our society when the bills come due.  This means that the full consequence of our lost liberties is yet to be felt.

But that illusion is now ending.  Reversing a downward spiral depends on accepting a new approach.

Expect the rapidly expanding homeschooling movement to play a significant role in the revolutionary reforms needed to build a free society with Constitutional protections. We cannot expect a Federal government controlled school system to provide the intellectual ammunition to combat the dangerous growth of government that threatens our liberties.

The internet will provide the alternative to the government/media complex that controls the news and most political propaganda. This is why it’s essential that the internet remains free of government regulation.

Many of our religious institutions and secular organizations support greater dependency on the state by supporting war, welfare and corporatism and ignore the need for a virtuous people.

I never believed that the world or our country could be made more free by politicians, if the people had no desire for freedom.

Under the current circumstances the most we can hope to achieve in the political process is to use it as a podium to reach the people to alert them of the nature of the crisis and the importance of their need to assume responsibility for themselves, if it is liberty that they truly seek.  Without this, a constitutionally protected free society is impossible.

If this is true, our individual goal in life ought to be for us to seek virtue and excellence and recognize that self-esteem and happiness only comes from using one’s natural ability, in the most productive manner possible, according to one’s own talents.

Productivity and creativity are the true source of personal satisfaction. Freedom, and not dependency, provides the environment needed to achieve these goals. Government cannot do this for us; it only gets in the way. When the government gets involved, the goal becomes a bailout or a subsidy and these cannot provide a sense of  personal achievement.

Achieving legislative power and political influence should not be our goal. Most of the change, if it is to come, will not come from the politicians, but rather from individuals, family, friends, intellectual leaders and our religious institutions.  The solution can only come from rejecting the use of coercion, compulsion, government commands, and aggressive force, to mold social and economic behavior.  Without accepting these restraints, inevitably the consensus will be to allow the government to mandate economic equality and obedience to the politicians who gain power and promote an environment that smothers the freedoms of everyone. It is then that the responsible individuals who seek excellence and self-esteem by being self-reliance and productive, become the true victims.

 

Conclusion                                                                                                                                                    

What are the greatest dangers that the American people face today and impede the goal of a free society? There are five.

1. The continuous attack on our civil liberties which threatens the rule of law and our ability to resist the onrush of tyranny.               

2. Violent anti-Americanism that has engulfed the world. Because the phenomenon of “blow-back” is not understood or denied, our foreign policy is destined to keep us involved in many wars that we have no business being in. National bankruptcy and a greater threat to our national security will result.                                                         

3. The ease in which we go to war, without a declaration by Congress, but accepting international authority from the UN or NATO even for preemptive wars, otherwise known as aggression.                                        

4. A financial political crisis as a consequence of excessive debt, unfunded liabilities, spending, bailouts, and gross discrepancy in wealth distribution going from the middle class to the rich. The danger of central economic planning, by the Federal Reserve must be understood.                                               

 5. World government taking over  local and US sovereignty by getting involved in the issues of war, welfare, trade, banking,  a world currency, taxes, property ownership, and private ownership of guns.

Happily, there is an answer for these very dangerous trends.                                                     

What a wonderful world it would be if everyone accepted the simple moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression.  The retort to such a suggestion is always:  it’s too simplistic, too idealistic, impractical, naïve, utopian, dangerous, and unrealistic to strive for such an ideal.

The answer to that is that for thousands of years the acceptance of government force, to rule over the people, at the sacrifice of liberty, was considered moral and the only available option for achieving peace and prosperity.

What could be more utopian than that myth—considering the results especially looking at the state sponsored killing, by nearly every government during the 20th Century, estimated to be in the hundreds of millions.  It’s time to reconsider this grant of authority to the state.

No good has ever come from granting monopoly power to the state to use aggression against the people to arbitrarily mold human behavior.  Such power, when left unchecked, becomes the seed of an ugly tyranny.  This method of governance has been adequately tested, and the results are in: reality dictates we try liberty.

The idealism of non-aggression and rejecting all offensive use of force should be tried.  The idealism of government sanctioned violence has been abused throughout history and is the primary source of poverty and war.  The theory of a society being based on individual freedom has been around for a long time.  It’s time to take a bold step and actually permit it by advancing this cause, rather than taking a step backwards as some would like us to do.

Today the principle of habeas corpus, established when King John signed the Magna Carta in 1215, is under attack. There’s every reason to believe that a renewed effort with the use of the internet that we can instead advance the cause of liberty by spreading an uncensored message that will serve to rein in government authority and challenge the obsession with war and welfare.

What I’m talking about is a system of government guided by the moral principles of peace and tolerance.

The Founders were convinced that a free society could not exist without a moral people.  Just writing rules won’t work if the people choose to ignore them.  Today the rule of law written in the Constitution has little meaning for most Americans, especially those who work in Washington DC.

Benjamin Franklin claimed “only a virtuous people are capable of freedom.”  John Adams concurred:  “Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

A moral people must reject all violence in an effort to mold people’s beliefs or habits.

A society that boos or ridicules the Golden Rule is not a moral society.  All great religions endorse the Golden Rule.  The same moral standards that individuals are required to follow should apply to all government officials.  They cannot be exempt.

The ultimate solution is not in the hands of the government.

The solution falls on each and every individual, with guidance from family, friends and community.

The #1 responsibility for each of us is to change ourselves with hope that others will follow.  This is of greater importance than working on changing the government; that is secondary to promoting a virtuous society.  If we can achieve this, then the government will change.

It doesn’t mean that political action or holding office has no value. At times it does nudge policy in the right direction. But what is true is that when seeking office is done for personal aggrandizement, money or power, it becomes useless if not harmful. When political action is taken for the right reasons it’s easy to understand why compromise should be avoided. It also becomes clear why progress is best achieved by working with coalitions, which bring people together, without anyone sacrificing his principles.

Political action, to be truly beneficial, must be directed toward changing the hearts and minds of the people, recognizing that it’s the virtue and morality of the people that allow liberty to flourish.

The Constitution or more laws per se, have no value if the people’s attitudes aren’t changed.

To achieve liberty and peace, two powerful human emotions have to be overcome.  Number one is “envy” which leads to hate and class warfare.  Number two is “intolerance” which leads to bigoted and judgmental policies.  These emotions must be replaced with a much better understanding of love, compassion, tolerance and free market economics. Freedom, when understood, brings people together. When tried, freedom is popular.

The problem we have faced over the years has been that economic interventionists are swayed by envy, whereas social interventionists are swayed by intolerance of habits and lifestyles. The misunderstanding that tolerance is an endorsement of certain activities, motivates many to legislate moral standards which should only be set by individuals making their own choices. Both sides use force to deal with these misplaced emotions. Both are authoritarians. Neither endorses voluntarism.  Both views ought to be rejected.

I have come to one firm conviction after these many years of trying to figure out “the plain truth of things.”  The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of LIBERTY.

If you find this to be a worthwhile message, spread it throughout the land.

The 2012 election fallout

It’s even better than I predicted. I already knew that Romney would fail. After all, who really wanted to vote for the progressive liberal anyway? He was only marginally better than Obama when it came to economics, and that was only because of the looting he did as a vulture capitalist, which was hardly a role model for the country. On every other issue Romney and Obama were essentially the same. Many core republicans voted for him anyway, and are now reeling from the news of finding out that Obama has clinched a second term in office. But the good news is that while everyone’s hair is now standing up on end, their skin has thickened also. Already the Tea Party has called out Speaker of the House John Boehner for his remarks about the Tea Party being ineffective and inconsequential, and his progressive side has shone through on accepting Obama-care as ‘law of the land’. Many conservatives have just had a stinging slap in the face, and are looking very clearly at the corruption in their own party. This corruption is what I have been trying to tell everyone for months. Thank God people are now starting to see it.

I wrote earlier in the week that every cloud has a silver lining, and indeed it does. All the progressives are currently singing and dancing, and already planning to tax us more than ever and load us up with even more stupid government programs. But little do they know that we in the liberty movement have only just started to take a hold of the rug that will be pulled out from under them. The economy will crash before wealthy producers pay another nickle for their stupid social programs. Many people will simply ‘go galt’ before they are driven into wage slavery to support the ‘needy’. The fact that we now have our very way of life at stake means that all the liberty groups will band together to preserve that, and will do all that they can do push our liberty agendas forward.

“This is not the end, this is not even the beginning of the end, but this is perhaps the end of the beginning” – Winston Churchill

Did you really think everything was going to be solved last Tuesday? Did you really expect everything to be put right with another wolf in sheep’s clothing sitting behind the desk in the Oval office? At least with Obama there is a clear and present threat that the majority of us can see. Do you really think that the Army or the local county sheriffs will comply if Obama declares martial law? If it had been Romney, they may have complied, and we would slowly and quietly sink into the abyss. But since it’s Obama, no one will comply. Except maybe the big cities; but they are mostly full of moochers anyway, and their fate will be one of their own creation. As for the true liberty movement, and the core conservatives, we will prevail.

Let the silly progressives have their fun, it will be short lived. The campaign to regain the senate in 2014 has already begun, and the Tea Party has only just began to call out the progressives from within our own party. A revolution is at hand, a revolution of the mind, and all the progressives will fall in our wake.

And as for the next president, let’s choose one who can combine all our movements together, who understands true liberty, who will set this country straight again. I am officially endorsing Rand Paul for president in 2016!

How to win the next election

It does not surprise me that the republicans lost the race for the white house. You get what you pay for. A rich out of touch guy with a vague (at best) plan to fix the economy and a base which ignores a large portion of its supporters running against an incumbent who passes himself off as being cool. This only leads to disaster.

The funny thing is, the youth voted for Reagan (the oldest ever president) thinking that he was cool and they loved his message. The youthful conservatives of today voted and supported Ron Paul during the primaries (a man who would have been the oldest ever president) because they thought he was cool and they loved his message.

The republicans of today are not the conservatives of Ronald Reagan. It is no surprise that after George Bush Sr a large portion broke away for Ross Perot, and since then they have lost two races to Clinton, barely scraped by against Gore and Kerry, and lost consecutively to Obama, the second time to a man who had a worse economy than Carter. Unfortunately Romney is no Reagan, so even with Obama being similar to Carter, he still won. If you wanted a Reagan revolution you had it laid out on a plate for you in the form of Ron Paul.

Many people forget or do not know that Reagan was never supposed to be president to begin with, it was supposed to be Bush Sr all along. The republicans learned their mistake from last time and did everything to shut out Ron Paul, so that they could get one of their groomed candidates to run again. It is no surprise that Reagan and Ron Paul broke the mold and did so well, because they offered real ‘hope and change’ a message which Obama adopted, even if it was only empty rhetoric on his part.

The way to win an election is to energize your base and appeal to other groups. That is why the democrats have been successful. Though their economic handling has been disastrous, they still pass themselves off as being cool and being tolerant. People like to vote for their hopes, not their fears.

The republican party has become the party of fear and hate. Conservatives hate Obama, and bash his supporters without mercy, they fear him, and even say so openly. This does not make them look good, but worse is their shunning of the youthful voters.

I am a capitalist and my views are very libertarian. Most of the people I know would be happy to vote conservative, if they would just stick to free market and civil liberty principles. Though we may be ‘pure’ by nature, we’d be happy if the conservatives just stuck to their own free market principles, which are supposed to run parallel to ours.

Had the conservatives looked at what the youth in the party was doing, what they were saying, and who they were following. If they had paid the slightest bit of attention, they would have flocked to Ron Paul and carried him to victory. Instead they for a second time went with someone ‘electable’ and then shot themselves in the foot by silencing the youth in a despicable manner. If you want anyone to blame for the loss of the 2012 elections, you must first look at the Obama supporters and then look at yourselves in a mirror. Your hatred, you intolerance, your fear has caused this to happen. You only have yourselves to blame. We did everything we could to get you to see reason, to get ourselves heard, to stick to true conservative principles, to elect a man who would have made a real difference in this country. And yet this man was shunned and set to the side by the media, the party, and the ‘loyal supporters’. Had we been given at the very least a fair hearing at the RNC, things would have turned out very differently.

But now we have a second Obama term, and we must reunite forces if we are to stop his atrocious agendas.

The Tea Party of 2010 must reignite itself, and push to take over the senate. It is a tragedy that we lost seats in this election, when we surely should have won them. This is what happens when a movement loses its way, ignores its own principles, shuns a large part of its supporters, and go’s with the party line. Too much time was spent trying to push an unpopular candidate on those who were not interested in him, and not enough effort was put on safeguarding ourselves through the senate. The arrogance of the republican party about getting Romney elected because ‘Obama sucks’ really turned potential voters away. There was absolutely no net increase in voters for the party between 2008 and 2012, in one of the worse economies and worse loss of civil liberties in a life time, that is truly a crying shame, and sticks out like a sore thumb about how far off track the party really is.

If we want to win the next election, if we want to stop the deficit, if we want to regain our civil liberties, the Ron Paul libertarian conservatives (mostly young people) must be embraced with open arms.

This cannot be the party of ‘no’. It must be the party of (dare I say it) ‘yes we can’. Yes we can restore this nation, yes we can rebuild the economy, yes we can defeat the democrats, but only if we get our edge back, only if we gain more voting blocks. And do you know what the easiest voting block is to take over? Youth. Even the college kids who currently worship Obama would vote republican if we put a cool guy like Ron Paul in, someone with a strong message, strong convictions, and a background to prove it. If thousands of people show up to see this old man talk at a college campus in the primaries, how many people do you think will show up for his son at a presidential event?

Forget abortion, forget gay marriage, forget drug enforcement; these issues make us look like we’re from the stone age and they pale in comparison to the economy and civil liberties, issues which are vital to our survival. Wake up, get hip, promote freedom, make it cool, and embrace the youth. It’s our future that’s at stake, so there’s plenty to talk about. If you want to regrow the party, that’s where to start.

The young conservatives of today will be the core of the republican party tomorrow, so you want to nurture that, not turn it away. The new generation of conservatives are more libertarian in nature than the previous generation. We are more tolerant of others beliefs and practices, but we’re more firm in our convictions on economics and civil liberties. Oh, and we already have a new candidate in mind, one that even the older conservatives can like.

Let’s get the ball rolling, let’s get to work on calling our representatives and putting their feet to the fire. Let’s gear up for the senate races in 2014 and let’s start the campaign for Rand Paul 2016!

Why the republicans lost

The republicans lost because they ignored the youthful base which was highly energized, and wanted Ron Paul to be their leader. Once Ron Paul was shunned at the RNC by John Boehner and the other crony establishment republicans, the stage was set, and Mitt Romney was destined to lose.

Many of the youthful republicans who wanted to see a real change during the elections then switched over to the libertarian campaign for Gary Johnson, seeing no real difference between the republican and democrat candidates.

The republicans lost because they are warmongering fascists who deal in backroom deals and pats on the back to push their agendas. The democrats winning has nothing to do with socialism. It has everything to do with both sides playing the ‘lesser of two evils’ card, and both ultimately losing.

Don’t be a sore loser, remember all the things I told you about both candidates and parties, and go out there and look up the information. If we really want to make a difference, we must be informed, and we must learn to pay attention to the youthful voters. The college kids who voted for Obama would also have voted for Ron Paul had he been nominated, citing his anti-war stance and social acceptance on internal issues. Whenever a party ignores its youthful and energetic base, it is destined to lose a campaign.

Another reason the republicans lost is due to the Tea Party losing its way. The Tea Party had a tremendous impact on the 2010 elections, citing fiscally conservative and constitutional minded principles. During this 2012 election cycle the Tea Party became burdened by the republican party line, and forgot its limited government roots. It swung its support behind a man who showed little to no difference to the standing president, and ultimately we have all paid the price for the ignorance of the members towing the party line. Instead of concentrating on local issues and adhering to its fiscally conservative and constitutional principles, the Tea Party put all its effort into the ‘anybody but Obama’ campaign  and ultimately paid the price for its lack of vision.

The way forward is not to try and impeach Obama, or complain about voter fraud. Remember that many of Obama’s policies are based off George W Bush’s big republican spending and war policies. And remember that Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital bought into some of the companies controlling the voting machines after he became the nominee. The problem we have is on both sides of the isle. But since the democrats are too far gone, we must evaluate the republicans, and do what we can do ensure they do what they are supposed to do, and that is to limit government interference in our lives, and to limit spending.

Do not start infighting among yourselves, and do not be sore losers. Do not shout insults and fraud at Obama and his supporters. Obama won the fight fair and square purely off the ‘lesser of two evils’ card, and not because he’s a foreign Muslim Marxist extremist hell bent on destroying America. If you think about it, even if half of that is true, it doesn’t resonate well with the general voting populace because it just sounds darn right nutty. The reason I so strongly supported Ron Paul is because his message resonated with voters from all backgrounds; democrat, republican, black, white, socialist leaning, fascist leaning, he appealed to everyone on some level, and he meant what he said, and you could tell that through his speeches.

The republicans have a lot to learn if they want to get back into power again. But for now we have to keep an eye on Obama, control spending locally, and spread the message of liberty. This fire is only just getting started, and we are going to need to work harder than ever to secure peace, free markets and liberty.

Oh, and dare I suggest ‘Rand Paul 2016’?

Hurricane Sandy and the test of individuals

As Hurricane Sandy barrels down on the east coast, we are reminded of what is really important to us. We look to our families, to our structures, and to our achievements as individuals as we brace ourselves for the worst.

It is up to the individual to secure for himself and his family a strong building, and supplies to last through a storm and it’s aftermath.

It is the individuals and their inventions which give us structures to take shelter in, devices to track weather patterns, and storage to hold food during the storm.

It is the individuals who board up their homes to prevent glass breaking, who fill sandbags to prevent their homes from flooding, who store extra food and water for power outages. It is the individuals who will pick up the pieces after the storm has passed.

Do not look for government to help you during this mess. Take care of yourself, take care of your family. Always be prepared, and always improvise in times of need.

God speed to everyone in the path of the storm.

Sold down the river

When I moved here I was sold on the idea of freedom.

The United States of America as it stands today; is not a free country.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are not going to save this nation. These two men are parasites. Mitt Romney is not a great businessman; he is a looter of the highest caliber. Paul Ryan is not a great Ayn Rand prodigy; he is a moocher. Paul Ryan practically begged for the auto bailouts which Obama has been ridiculed for over the last four years. There is no clear evidence to prove there is any real difference in policy between a Romney and an Obama administration. Both men support more government, both men will destroy this country.

It is upsetting and infuriating to see people around you who believe in freedom, and yet do not know that they are part of the wall that separates all of us from it.

When it comes to spending and debt; wars are the highest cost. You cannot be pro liberty and pro war at the same time.

You cannot say that you believe in liberty and freedom of choice and be against legalizing drugs.

You cannot be for fiscal and personal responsibility and argue for different forms of medicare/Medicaid and social security.

It is up to individuals to make their own choices in life. If they make bad choices; they should pay the consequences. It is not up to me, you or big brother government to enforce our opinions on others. I do not want the DEA breaking down my door and shooting my dog because they got the wrong house on some stupid drug raid. I do not want my friends killed in some foreign land so that corrupt politicians can make a profit on an out dated fossil fuel. I do not want my wife grouped at an airport so that a corrupt company can make money on cancer giving body scanners. I want to be left the hell alone so that I can live my life as I see fit in my own way. That is what I thought this country was about. But apparently I was wrong. And the upsetting part is that so many people are so plugged into the system that they’ll even fight for bad parts of it, just so that other parts can’t gain control. But you know what? When you fight for evil; evil prospers. You cannot win in a rigged game.

When I first moved here I thought this country had avoided the pitfall of socialism and that freedom was flourishing. Unfortunately I found out that both Britain and America have both thrust themselves headlong down the path of totalitarianism. What a tragedy for all the brave men and women, for all the families of those who died in the last world war who thought they were fighting to preserve freedom and democracy in the world. Well to be fair, perhaps they did, at least for a few decades. But now, things are about as bad as they’ve ever been.

I like my father-in-laws concept (adapted from Nietzsche) about the overman. He calls himself the overman warrior. It means that he has become more than man, better than man if you will, and is a warrior for advancement past the usual pitfalls of life. The overman goes beyond petty emotions and is strong where others are weak. The overman sees through evil and does what is right no matter how great the adversaries.

At the young age of 17 Rich’s first book ‘the symposium of justice’ instilled a lot of great ideals in me. After having read his book, he suggested I read ‘the hero with a thousand faces’ by Joseph Campbell. The top three books that changed my life are Robert Kayosaki’s Rich Dad Poor Dad, Rich Hoffman’s ‘Symposium of Justice’ and Joseph Campbell’s ‘Hero with a thousand faces’. Between these three books during my teenage years, and some other great books since, I have been on a very different path than most. When you add that into having a great wife and having moved to a different country; it all adds up to a very different and very clear set of viewpoints on the world.

I absolutely adore Charlie Chaplin’s speech at the end of ‘the great dictator’. Every single time I watch his speech on YouTube I get a little choked up. How touching and how fitting it is for today’s global society, and how sad it is that it wasn’t paid attention to before all the killing of World War II.

“we don’t want to hate and despise one another…in this world there is room for everyone..” What a wonderful and touching thing to say.

I love capitalism, and when I say that I mean true lassie-fair capitalism. In its raw form it has brought the world from mud huts to skyscrapers, and from sweaty brick homes to air conditioned mansions. In its true form capitalism helps everyone.

I think the general population of the USA is being sold down the river in this election, in the same way they have been for the last few decades. It’s like the south park episode with the douche and the turd. Which crap do you want to vote for most?

I’m happy to report though, that there is a huge groundswell for liberty in this country. I love it’s history. People here have such an individualist attitude. Most people do not want to be told what to do.

There is a third option in this presidential race, and I am proud to say that I support it. I support it in the same way that the founding fathers supported and gave birth to the constitution.

I will help defend this fragile old document, because it is the most important thing worth saving in this country.

All the other subjects being talked about during the debates are just distractions to get you sold down the river.

Better than the debates

I’m not watching the debates for two reasons: one is that I don’t have cable, the second is that I could care less about them. I’m not interested in watching the charade. It’s all staged, and its all fake. There are no hardball issues, and no real solid answers. So what’s the point? But instead of being negative, I’ll just post some humorous videos of Obama and Romney. In many ways these videos are more factual than the men themselves.

Will Obama call you maybe?

Would the real Mitt Romney please stand up:

Barack Obama is here to save the day:

Mitt Romney Style:

Obama didn’t build that:

But to be serious for a minute. The two party system is broken, the country is in shambles, and we are nearing complete destruction:

So you can vote for ‘the lesser of two evils’ (if you can figure out which one that is) or; you could always vote the third option:

If you see the bigger picture, you’ll know how much is really at stake, and that no Romney or Obama candidacy will fix anything. These amazing videos on YouTube, both funny and factual are more informative than any staged debate. They can only show you the door, but to open it; that’s up to you.

Unlearn what you have learned

I have written before how I think that Romney and Obama supporters are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. It really is shocking that they think there is any difference between the two candidates. It is very telling of how terrible Mitt Romney is when his supporters are only voting for him ‘to get rid of Obama’. The man has no character, he has no integrity. He is a complete sellout and a flip flop on almost every issue. And yet this is the great contender that we put up against Barack Obama, who to date has been one of the worst presidents in US history.

Let me tell you this once more. If you vote for Mitt Romney; you will be the one’s voting for Barack Obama. A vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for Obama. I can say that because there are millions of people like myself who are awake now, and refuse to go back to sleep and plug ourselves back into the matrix.

Those who refuse to wake up and smell the stench in the air from both parties are the ones who will continue the status quo.

Do not point fingers at the Ron Paul supporters and the Gary Johnson supporters when their millions of votes upset you next month during the elections. You will be the reason that Barack Obama is re-elected. We have done everything we can to show you what’s really going on. We stand for liberty, we will not be swayed, we will ignite the future.

If you want to make a real difference and take us back to freedom in this country (we do not have it right now) you must unlearn what you have learned.

I have found so many groups which are deeply passionate  but also flawed because they do not go far enough. Full unbridled liberty is the only way forward, not just a shave here or a shave there on taxes. We want to repeal the NDAA, the patriot act, the TSA, homeland security. We want to end the wars, stop the spending, restore value to our currency. We want freedom to flourish so that we might have a chance at building a future.

The pill that has been prescribed to us is ‘the lesser of two evils’. This decades old charade is coming to an end. We are no longer interested in playing these silly games. We want our future back.

Will you make a difference? Will you vote for a candidate of character and integrity? Or will you vote for a sellout just to get rid of the other guy?

Remember, when you vote for someone, you vote for them. Don’t do it just to vote against someone else, that is stupid. The world will never change if you allow yourself to think that way. That is the way the powers that be, want you to think. The men behind the curtain want you to have a choice between poison A and poison B. They do not want you to have a real say in the matter.

Do you honestly believe that Mitt Romney will uphold your values? Do you honestly think he’ll keep his word? Remember that he has changed his position on so many issues so many times, that he’ll practically say anything just to get elected. Will this really help you? Remember that at the RNC many attendees were completely shunned. Do you think it’ll be any better if Romney gets the presidency?

Gary Johnson is gaining momentum. He has all the potential of winning the presidency. The only reason he wont is because of Obama and Romney supporters who refuse to wake up and realize that their parties have abandoned them. Both parties have abandoned principle, and they will leave you hanging out to dry no matter which sell out wins.

So will you unplug yourself from the matrix this November? Will you take a stand? Will you make a difference?

Remember, if your side loses and you voted for ‘the lesser of two evils’ won’t you be even more disappointed in yourself that you didn’t at least make a stand for liberty?

The liberty movement is growing, will you be a part of it?

The debates: wasn’t Obama the lesser of two evils last time?

In the debates tonight, Gary Johnson will not be allowed to debate, but yet all of his supporters are being told that if we do not support Romney, Obama will get back in. If we are a large enough crowd to swing the vote, then why are we not allowed to be represented in the debates? Does this not tell you something? That a large majority is completely ignored and shutdown, and yet is told they must vote for another candidate, or they’ll split the vote?

So which is it? If we are large enough to swing the vote, why can we not have our presidential contender in the debates?

If you are republican; does Romney actually support your views and principles? And if not; will you stand with us, or against us? Since the libertarians represent most republican views and more, why do you not separate yourself from this broken two party system which does not represent you?

Wasn’t Obama the lesser of two evils the first time around?

Obama was supposed to bring the troops home and close Guantanamo Bay. This resonated with many voters.

McCain wanted to continue Bush’s policies, which many people didn’t want. Many people were tired of all the wars and endless bailouts and big government spending.

Judging by his record as governor of Massachusetts; Mitt Romney appears to be no different than Obama or Bush, and would continue all the same evil constitution crushing policies and massive government spending of his predecessors.

Why are we not supporting men of conviction instead? Why are we not supporting men with proven records of keeping their word and keeping the government in check?

Why are we pleading to candidates who act like feudal lords? Why are we choosing ‘the lesser of two evils’ in a vain effort to slow down evil, rather than end it?

When we look to presidents as being all powerful, we look to the main challenger and we ask them to save us. It’s like saying “Oh lord Romney, will you save us from the wrath of King Obama? Will you be good to your loyal subjects? Will you be a better ruler of the masses?” This is a tragic way to go about voting for ‘change’ in any country.

Why don’t we stand on our own two feet and vote on principle instead?

Why are we allowing ourselves to be guided by fears instead of convictions? Why are we not acting as the founding fathers did?

As far as electing president; Gary Johnson is our only real hope to make a difference in this election, and he should be allowed to debate the other two contenders.

Presidential Debate 2012: Gary Johnson Support Grows, Sponsors Pull Out to Protest Exclusion of Libertarians

Both President Barack Obama and Republican presidential nominee are gearing up for their first presidential debate showdown in Denver on Wednesday, but there is one man who will not be participating in the prime-time television debate: libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. That decision has angered some Gary Johnson supporters so much that at least two of the original sponsors of the 2012 presidential debates have decided to pull their support.

Philips Electronics and the women’s organization YWCA have dropped their sponsorship, after they got flooded with letters from Gary Johnson supporters and the watchdog groups Open Debates and Help the Comission. According to US News, the non-profit which runs the presidential debates, the Commission on Presidential Debates, relies heavily on sponsors, so the decision by Philips Electronics and YWCA is likely to make a real impact.

In it announcement of its withdrawal of support, Philips wrote that it is concerned the commission’s work “may appear to support bi-partisan” instead of “non-partisan” politics. That comes as a major victory to Johnson supporters and Open Debate, who have been protesting the debates for months.

The commission had originally stated that Johnson could be included in the debates, but he ultimately failed to garner the 15 percent support of the national electorate in order to be featured. Although Johnson filed a lawsuit over being excluded, he still does not have enough support to meet the commission’s criteria. Since the commission was created in 1987, only at the 1992 debate, when Ross Perot appeared alongside George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, has a third-party candidate appeared on stage at a debate.

The Gary Johnson campaign is not expected to make in-roads in its legal challenge to being excluded, so libertarian supporters may seek to pressure more sponsors to boycott and pull their support as a way to express their disapproval with the debate commission.

3 out of 10 sponsors of the debates have already pulled out their funding. The paradigm shift is happening. People are waking up. They realize this election is a fraud. There is a real chance that Gary Johnson and the libertarians could win big in this election, and the media is terrified that the general populace will find out. Voting for one candidate to prevent another from winning is a terrible strategy and will only end in tragedy.

Will you be a part of the movement which forever changes the political landscape for the better? Or will you be part of the tired old broken tradition of voting for the lesser of two evils? Will you vote for more of the same under a different banner, or will you be brave enough to make a difference? The future is up to you, one by one, we will make a difference.