Skip to comments.Final speech from Cong. Ron Paul from floor of the House of Reps
Posted on 11/14/2012 7:38:48 PM PST by GlockThe Vote
Very good speech.
(Excerpt) Read more at c-spanvideo.org ...
Interesting (barely), but irrelevant, as my posting focused entirely on the epic disaster that was the Team Mittens campaign belly flop, and not even remotely on Paul, pro or con.
Ah... but you already knew that, of course.
'Rats have made free bennies, and plenty of 'em, component Numero Uno of their national electoral strategy since The New Deal, for pity's sake.
If Team Mittens, Karl Rove and/or the GOP-e "brain trust" couldn't (or didn't) know enough to factor even something as basic as that into their baseline campaign equations, at any point along the way during the previous six years: it's that bald level of abject imbecility and incompetence that's the real problem, ultimately.
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 doesnt give up one penny on military spending, the other side doesnt 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 theres 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 doesnt 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 its 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 doesnt succeed try again; QE1, QE2, and QE3 and with no results we try QE indefinitely that is until it too fails. Theres 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 wont 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 its for ones 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 todays 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:
Excessive government has created such a mess it prompts many questions:
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 doesnt 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.
Its 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 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 mans 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 its permissible to go into ones neighbors 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 cant 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 dont 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.
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.
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. Theres no in-between. Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always ends badly.
Todays 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. Its 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 its, in reality, a moral crisis. Its 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. Its easy to reject the initiation of violence against ones neighbor but its ironic that the people arbitrarily and freely anoint government officials with monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people practically at will.
Because its 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 shouldnt 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 individuals “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. Its 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 cant 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 its bailouts, privileges, government subsidies or benefits for some from inflating a currency, its 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 its 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 its 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 thats 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 its 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 ones natural ability, in the most productive manner possible, according to ones 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.
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: its 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. Its 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. Its 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. Theres 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 Im 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 wont 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 peoples 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 doesnt 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 its 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 its the virtue and morality of the people that allow liberty to flourish.
The Constitution or more laws per se, have no value if the peoples attitudes arent 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 judgemental 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 GOP-e and liberals are in league with each other in their disgust and hatred of conservatives. Romney and his team deceived themselves they had the money and the superior intellect to win more votes than the childish immature president.
It may well turn out that Romney got the votes, but he did nothing to protect them from getting canceled out by vote fraud.
Bingo. In the proverbial nutshell.
The maladroits of Team Mittens -- both online shills and campaign (*cough*cough*)"professionals" -- spent the entire first half of the campaign (when virtually every legitimate polling outfit showed them trailing Obama... badly) incessantly chittering and shrilling: "Don't Believe The Polls! DON'T BELIEVE THE EVIL, EVIL POLLLLLLLLLLLLLLSSSSSSS --!!!"
When the continual cascade of No Good, Very Bad Polling Data continued unabated regardless, said maladroits -- rather than dealing forthrightly with the increasingly dire reality of their candidate's situation -- actively CHOSE to relocate, en masse, to a happy, magical la-la land of talking bunny make-believe. (E.g. "unskewedpolls.com"; "Lunch Alerts!" featuring bucktoothed wish-casting from Dick Morris; etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum.)
... and now, today: rather than sacking up, like adults, and finally admitting that their cherished baseline assumptions ("Sacrifice the Conservative Base for 'Moderates'"; "You Really CAN Beat a Socialist with Socialist Lite!"; etc.) might have been, just maybe, wrong a teeny tiny little... they simply throw their hands up in the air, and huff exasperatedly: "Well, then, nobody could have won, darn it!"
Never, ever again will you (or I) live to witness such a perfect storm of mulish, blinkered GOP-e electoral incompetence and insanity as we've been treated to, these past twelve months or so.
Thanks for the formatting work. Good to read this.
What has gotten lost in all the recriminations about the election is that perhaps IF the GOP-e had invested ‘security’ for the votes cast to them, we may well not be talking about a Romney loss.
Look what West is going through in Florida. I read countless reports of machines giving Obama votes that were cast for Romney in Ohio and Colorado.
The (ultimately) more serious and long-term source of Republican party rot, on the other hand -- that of the GOP-e's every last baseline electoral assumption being not just wildly ineffectual, but suicidal, outright -- not so very much, in comparison.
If the GOP-e can't even competently champion and promote candidates capable of not causing a significant portion of the conservative voting base from turning away with a barely-repressed shudder, at barest minimum: the 'Rats won't ever NEED to cheat, from this point forward.
But the GOP-e and Romney in particular have not even mentioned it. They are the ones with the money and the clout to investigate it.
The (ultimately) more serious and long-term source of Republican party rot, on the other hand -- that of the GOP-e's every last baseline electoral assumption being not just wildly ineffectual, but suicidal, outright -- not so very much, in comparison. If the GOP-e can't even competently champion and promote candidates capable of not causing a significant portion of the conservative voting base from turning away with a barely-repressed shudder, at barest minimum: the 'Rats won't ever NEED to cheat, from this point forward.
I cannot disagree with you at all on these fine points.
I cannot disagree with you at all on these fine points.
Either through a rebuilt-from-the-ground-up GOP, or else (my own personal preference) a new, more principled political party: we conservatives will fix things, ultimately. ;)
Elanor, is that you?
Are you kidding me? 99% of the republican party are not and do not know what conservatism is. I would go as far to say that most Freepers dont even know what conservatism is. As a libertarian, Ron Paul is more conservative than any Republican currently in government.
hopefully he was playing the venue with his remarks, and is going to double down on his assaults on the establishment...
MJ laws ??? HA !!! Ky could make bank in hemp, much less disband 3/4 of leos that are dedicated to the wo[some]d...
foreign policy ??? well being the police force of the world hasnt worked out too well so far...arguments can be made pro/con, but on the whole, we seem to simply accumulate casualties w/o an undeniable *victory* since everytime we leave a sh!thole, the septic waters rise back up...
immigration ??? well as an "L" guy, i dont know how he sees it, except that those legal methods should be encouraged while denying the third world drones from setting up house, and votes, and turning us into their home countries...we'll hafta wait and see i reckon, whether he gets on the mexican republican bandwagon...
Thanks for trying. I got about three fourths through before my eyes said, enough.
I found the statement used to describe Ron’s influence in the congress to be most enlightening. That statement short as it is does describe what he says is his legacy. “Four hundred thirty five, to Ron Paul”.
The "conservative voting base" had it's shot in the primary with FOUR YEARS to find an alternative. Romney won. Some of those "conservatives" refused to vote Romney because he was a Mormon. Don't pretend otherwise; you can read their posts here on FR.
If four more years of Obama was not enough motivation for these so-called "conservatives" to cast a vote, make calls, get like-minded individuals to the polls, then they are unworthy cowards more concerned with purity than getting things done.
They should be continue to be marginalized further and further because they've made it clear no effort to appeal to them will be sufficient even in the face of something as grave as Obama having a second term for his "fundamental transformation" agenda.
Too bad freepers have no clue what a “true conservative” is either.
I love Dr Paul. But a false choice is presented here:
Trust Yourself or Trust In Government?
The answer is: "In God We Trust". What does that mean? Self-governance is impossible unless God rules us through His Word informing our conscience. Liberty is the fruit of self-governance but our nation is leaking self-governance like a sieve.
1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying,
3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.
Here are a few:
Tragically our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression, with no complaints from the American people.
I doubt that Ron Paul can name one war in America's history that has been conducted without complaints from the American people. This is a typical statement of hyperbole from him.
Why cant people understand that war always destroys wealth and liberty?
This is similar to the statement that "violence never solves anything," and it is just as wrong. In modern times, most implementation of war creates liberty, especially for those who are freed from tyranny.
Ron Paul makes a lot of sense most of the time, and like most conservatives, I agree with 90% of what he says. But then he makes statements like this one and we all roll our eyes:
What a wonderful world it would be if everyone accepted the simple moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression.
Apparently he thinks that America should withdraw our troops from every corner of the globe, and things will be fine. We can sit behind our own borders and watch the rest of the world burn. We can forsake our friends, abandon our allies, and become mere observers as the planet degenerates into chaos. What Ron Paul fails to consider, over and over, is that not everyone is ready to reject acts of aggression. There are people in this world whose mentality and morality is still stuck in the 7th century AD. They are willing to employ rape and murder and decapitation to forward their agenda of enrichment or religious fascism or political superiority. For those reasons, modern countries need to maintain a defensive military capability. And when Saddam Hussein invades Kuwait or the Taliban attacks the World Trade Center, the civilized nations of the world need to bring their troops together and put an end to it. And that's exactly what happened.
It is impossible to reason with someone who is unreasonable. If a rabid dog is biting people, you don't run inside and shut the door, hoping he will bite everyone else but not you. You and your neighbors draw your weapons and you put him down, to protect yourselves and your families. Maybe someday there will be no rabies and all dogs will be friendly. But today is not that day.
Good luck in your retirement, Dr. Paul.
Well, you've absolutely convinced me.
Seriously. I mean it. Solemn pinky swear.
It's simply a straightforward, logistical matter of making those stinking, worthless dogs eat the @#$%ing dog food we deign to jam down their ungrateful neck holes, is all.
I'll just sit here, in this nice shady spot, and watch. You've obviously got this whole thing covered.
I see no possible way your cunning and brilliant master plan could conceivably go wrong, a third consecutive time. Truly.
Enjoy Hillary, come 2016.
read this and weep......
Trey Grayson turned out to be a traitor (as many suspected cause “used to” be a democrat) so Palin made the right choice in that race.
I put little faith in Rand though.
When Saddam invades Kuwait? Are u @$@#%@# kidding me?! Why should we care about Iraq and Kuwaiti problems? Because the terrorist Saudi people tell us to?! To be completely honest, Kuwait deserved what Saddam gave them in 1990, because they were exploying economic warfare and costing Iraq billions by overproducing above their oil production quota driving prices down. This is besides the fact that they were slant drilling into iraqi oil fields.
How pathetic that you think it is our duty to go save those terrorists from each other..
The you bring up the Taliban, we were like one of 3 countries that saw them as a legitamate regime in Afghanistan, secondly the Taliban didnt attack the world trade center, Bin Laden did genius and he belongs to Al qaeda. Ieven remember the Taliban saying that they just wanted evidence that Bin laden perpetrated the attacks and they would hand him over butwe just dove right in. In hindsight it probably would have been better to have them hand him over and quickly deal with him as opposed to him being a symbol against us for 10 years and allowing all sorts of extremists growing up to support him.
Your analogy about the biting dog is flawed. He never said he would not respond to an attack, such as a dog bite. He said he wouldnt respond to a dog barking, at least not militarily. Should the dog show signs he will bite or does bite, thats a whole other issue. However the dog wont bite or bark if we arent trying to run the world. Idont see people saying death to sweden daily in the middle east.
As far as im concerned they can deal with their own problems and we should stay out of it, and should they ever attack us we should crush them and not try to nation build. Intelligence agencies can do much more than military presence to stop individuals from carrying out their terrorist dreams.
Nicely done, thank you.