When I heard William “BJ” Lawson speak for the first time in person I said to myself, “This is the Ron Paul Republican who can win”. Then I checked out his opponent David Price and immediately thought, “I know Lawson can win.” At first glance, the problem is the heavily Democratic North Carolina district he is in, but if you dig a bit deeper, Lawson is the perfect candidate for a district of this kind. He is not your normal present day Republican. Lawson has the ability to attract those on all sides of the political spectrum much like Ron Paul did during his own campaign.
Below you will discover the Liberty Maven rankings for BJ Lawson on the Paul-O-Meter, where candidates and current lawmakers can be rated on how closely they are in line with Dr. Ron Paul on the issues. To learn about the Paul-O-Meter methodology please see this article. You may also assign your own rankings or request a candidate be added to the system.
Continue reading to see if BJ Lawson truly deserves the moniker “Ron Paul Jr.”
It is now time to rate the vice presidential candidates on the Paul-O-Meter. We start with John McCain’s VP pick Sarah Palin. The perfect strategic pick for McCain, Palin has little history. She’s been Governor of Alaska for less than two years, but now that McCain’s handlers are pulling Palin’s puppet strings it is difficult to see a difference between the two.
Here we examine Palin on 20 issues to see how she stacks up to Ron Paul. Hopefully this will help some see the lips through the lipstick.
John McCain continues his expertise in politics with the choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate. He also continues his quite Bill Clinton-like “wherever the wind blows” stances on policy. I don’t understand how John McCain can argue for his VP selection with a straight face when he says that she “can best help me shake up Washington and make it start working again for people who are counting on us.” McCain has been working in Washington for almost 30 years. He is partly responsible for the broken Washington he himself, and now Palin, aims to fix. The hypocrisy is rampant. Sarah Palin is nothing more than a pretty political puppet for McCain’s politics as usual.
McCain and his expert campaigners have selected someone who the Ron Paul faithful singled out as a potential running mate for Dr. Paul should he magically win the GOP nomination. She has a great conservative record of cutting spending and demanding ethics in government although she is no stranger to alleged ethics violations herself. She is greatly similar to McCain in that light. McCain was part of the Keating 5 Savings and Loan scandal in the 1980’s. He seems to have an expertise in getting people to ignore such things by championing reform of the very things he’s accused of abusing. Palin has a much shorter history of such things, but she has “welcomed the investigation” of herself after being accused of similar nepotism.
On the policy front there are decidedly non-McCain-like Palin positions. She is a very strong proponent of drilling in Alaska, while McCain is still clinging on the protection of ANWR. She has spoken out against “cap and trade” while McCain has made it a key element of his platform. When the Alaskan legislature voted to not fund the implementation of REAL ID Act, Governor Palin acquiesced by not vetoing nor signing the bill. The effect being that Alaska has now rejected the federally mandated REAL ID. The ACLU even praised Palin for her inaction. McCain is a vocal supporter of REAL ID and an assortment of federal legislation that pretends there is no 10th amendment to the Constitution.
Bob Barr gets another hour with Glenn Beck. He demonstrates his moderate libertarianism here. Hopefully he wins over some viewers who were/are on the fence about voting third party. Many topics are discussed. The video below is in 6 parts thanks to YouTube 10 minute limits and commercials on the show.
This afternoon WashingtonPost.com had a Q&A session with Bob Barr. I found it somewhat annoying that he didn’t answer all the questions (or they weren’t included in the transcript) when someone asked a two- or three-part question, but nonetheless it could serve well for those not too familiar with Bob Barr. Oh, and the closet Libertarian purist in me cringed when he called for “some form of a consumption type tax” in lieu of the IRS and payroll deductions.
News Blaze has a op-ed piece detailing the libertarian perspective on lowering energy costs.
Americans pay much more than necessary for energy because of taxes and restrictions that pump up the costs….Speculators have been blamed for driving the price of oil up to $140 or more per barrel, but if that is the case, there is a simple remedy. The big users of oil, such as the airline and trucking industries, could sell oil futures contracts and drive the price down. The fact that there evidently has been no movement to do so indicates that the price of oil is up because of greater demand and limited supply. The price of oil for Americans is also up because the exchange value of the dollar has fallen.
Then the article goes on to give specific details on things that can be done (mostly getting rid of stifling taxes and regulations that hinder the industry).
No, the Ron Paul supporter I speak of is not someone living in China or Japan loaning George W. Bush money to fund his “illegal” war in Iraq; thereby, giving him “credit”. I am the supporter I speak of, and I think Bush deserves credit for two very important things. It is pretty sad that there are only two things that represent the good in the 8 years of W, but so it goes.
First, George W. Bush has lifted the executive order moratorium on drilling off our coastlines. This action helped lower fuel prices significantly. The price of a single barrel of oil dropped more than 15 dollars in the week following the lifting of the ban. This seems to prove wrong those on the left in Congress (and elsewhere) that claim lifting the coastal ban would not show any immediate relief at the pump. So, thank you President Bush for doing something. Sure, you can do more, but this is a good start.
The second thing I give Bush credit for is his tax cuts. They certainly were not the sweeping cuts we sorely need, but they were fairly substantial. I fear with the potential of a Democrat in the White House beginning next year those cuts will be repealed. They not only should be made permanent, but more cuts should be done. However, cuts are only one part of the equation.
Cutting taxes without cutting spending only increases the yearly deficit and the national debt. This is an area where Ron Paul and Bob Barr rise above every other candidate for President. McCain likes to talk about cutting earmarks, but they are only a drop in the bucket. Doing that without other cuts is the equivalent of removing a single flea from a flea-infested pet.
George W. Bush could have certainly done more in his 8 long years in office, but he has at least done some good. Does his good make up for the bad? Not a chance. But we should at least recognize that there is some good. He even has a few more months in office to do more good things.
What will we think of the Bush Presidency 3 years from now? If history is any guide, once Presidents leave office they become more popular with the American public. Will this be the case for George Bush? Only time will tell.
As reported in a recent article, Bob Barr has likened current U.S. energy policy with that of Jimmy Carter, pointing out that many are clamoring for the government to control the energy marketplace:
“As gas prices have risen, policymakers in Washington have exhibited a Jimmy Carter era mentality,” observes Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. “They are upset that Americans use energy, and want government to take over the energy marketplace. But it is government that has left us vulnerable to reduced supplies and higher prices.”
Adds Barr, “legislators denounce speculators, as if people never before attempted to predict future price changes. Politicians criticize oil companies, as if the firms were able to set prices at will. If so, why were prices so low for so long? Most of the so-called solutions being proposed in Congress amount to more regulations and more subsidies, and would make our energy problems worse.”
Recently Virginia Senator John Warner proposed bringing back the federally mandated 55 MPH speed limit. His argument is that it will reduce carbon emissions and save many thousands of barrels of oil per day. Just about every one-size-fits-all federal government mandate comes with unintended consequences. Is bringing back the 55 MPH speed limit any different? Can other government imposed “green” transportation regulations help us “save the planet”?
Ever since the invention of the automobile governments at all levels have imposed regulations on the industry, drivers, and the roads people drive upon. There have been laws for registering vehicles, mandatory safety standards, licensing, emission controls, speed limits, seat belts, child seats, driving under the influence of various substances, carrying certain materials, using the proper tires for road conditions, traffic signals, and more. As a libertarian I certainly take issue with many of these laws, but I’ve always had a personal conflict between the purist in me who’d like absolutely no regulation and the pragmatist in me that realizes some of these laws may be necessary.
The final Presidential candidate we will be rating on the Paul-O-Meter is the Green Party’s nominee, Cynthia McKinney. For a description of the Paul-O-Meter see this article. We have previously completed ratings for John McCain, Barack Obama, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, and Ralph Nader.
Liberty Maven
