It’s quite amusing (if not nauseating) to hear McCain and Palin calling Obama a socialist at every turn if you pay the slightest attention to the ideas McCain embraces. A nice little article at HighClearing.com successfully reams McCain for his hypocrisy:
The word “socialism” can mean many things to many people, anything from Western European style social welfare to state ownership of the means of production to the New Deal or the Great Society or a wide range of other usages. I’ll let those who know (or at least claim to know) more about the real meaning of the word have the debate over which usage is proper (mostly because I hate debates over whether somebody is using a politically-charged word correctly). Instead, I’ll engage the McCain rhetoric on its own terms.
McCain, just like Obama, believes that taxes should be levied for the purpose of funding social programs that redistribute income downwards. (We’ll leave aside, for the moment, the fact that both of them also believe that taxes should be levied for the purpose of funding a bloated military-industrial complex and other things that redistribute at least some of the income upward.) McCain and Obama may envision different forms and scopes for those programs, and those differences may or may not have profound consequences in practice. However, the McCain rhetoric is being employed to argue that just about any downward redistribution is a type of socialism. If it is (at least in McCain’s usage of the term) then McCain is a socialist. Maybe not as much of a socialist as Obama (we’ll leave aside welfare for the rich, for the moment) but a socialist nonetheless.
In this week’s Texas Straight Talk column, Ron Paul warns about the disastrous consequences of yet another bailout package congress is debating:
With news this week that Congress is poised to consider a new stimulus package, I am forced to again ask a question that seems silly in Washington:How will we pay for this?
While a few Members of Congress have raised the issue, it certainly was not the primary concern of the House Budget Committee when they interviewed Ben Bernanke on Monday.And, when they did direct this question to the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, his answer was the standard rhetoric about how Congress needed to make tough choices.Needless to say, not many specifics were discussed.
One of the most liberal members of the House, Barney Frank, has at least volunteered something of a suggestion: “We can let Iraq take care of itself.”This, of course, goes in the right direction, but hardly far enough.
We need to declare the facts and their obvious consequences.The deficit of the United States is now spiraling out of control, and the recent bailout package has only made it worse.Our crushing federal debt is one key reason behind our current economic turbulence.
As Congress begins to consider the third “stimulus package” of the year, we need to realize it is time to start setting priorities.Priority number one should be cutting spending in foreign countries. This does not simply mean Iraq, but everywhere.
The next stimulus package is likely to include money for infrastructure.While these investments are, constitutionally speaking, supposed to be made by state and local governments, it is not likely that Congress will suddenly begin to pay heed to the document we are all sworn to uphold.Still, we need to acknowledge the fact that the current Congress and Administration are rushing the nation toward bankruptcy.
This being the case, we could hope they would at least come to their senses regarding our debt and foreign spending sprees.Our nation’s foreign-held debt is at record highs and moving ever higher.Continuing to borrow money from Red China and others in order to pay “dues” to the United Nations and run “Plan Colombia” makes no sense at all.
Our whole carrot-and-stick approach to foreign policy makes no sense.The US government simultaneously gives money to Israel, and to Egypt.We send AIDS money to Africa while AIDS clinics in America shut down.“Millennium challenge” funding goes to countries which enact “market based reforms” as we push our own country further and further into a centrally planned economy.
Economic recovery will only come through financial prudence, savings and getting back to producing things of value again.But it seems to be a foregone conclusion that we are about to enact another government initiative to “stimulate the economy.” Instead, there should be some serious talk about cutting all of these foreign giveaway programs.But, alas and again, we should not hold our breath.Congress is still not close to being serious about ending its addiction to debt and spending, and is again faced with the deadly temptation to attempt to spend us out of a recession.We should not forget that in the 1930’s those types of efforts gave us the Great Depression.
Why, oh why can’t the rest of the world be as wise as those who live in Texas’ 14th Congressional District?
On a new video published on Ron Paul’s Congressional web site he rants on the lunacy of voting for more and more foreign aid and bailouts while America is bankrupt. In it he continues his argument that if you care about humanitarian issues the most important thing that needs to be done is to protect the currency. That is the polar opposite of what is happening all around us today.
Although Ron flounders a little at the end there, he pretty much sums it up in a way that I think a lot of us have never fully considered: 16% of the country votes for one candidate, and the rest of us, the true majority, are all left feeling like “the minority”. Footage below, including what we can and need to do about it:
Neil Cavuto had a fantastic interview with Ron Paul today, in which they both discussed the election itself, as well as the policies and ideas of Ron Paul, and even the GOP’s utter shock when this “fringe” candidate ended up being a true force to contend with.
In at least two spots, Neil perfectly sums up the stance of Ron Paul and the Revolution, paraphrasing “Look, you guys [GOP, McCain, etc.] are the ones who abandoned the party, not me. I’m going back to what our roots are.”
The Council On Foreign Relations is a political slur according to many staunch Ron Paul supporters, but in an interview posted on the CFR site it is all business and unbiased.
Former Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) staged a protest rally on the sidelines of the Republican convention on September 2 to try to reclaim what he says are the true traditional virtues of the GOP, including limited government and less involvement in military campaigns abroad. He criticized some of the main national security policies of the party’s presumptive nominee, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), including his position on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and his staunch support of the Georgian government following the Russian invasion of Georgia in August. “This whole incident points out the fallacy of the current foreign policy,” Paul said. “We weren’t even capable of doing anything. It shows how bankrupt we are. We didn’t have the troops, nor the energy, to go in there.” But Paul does support expanded offshore drilling, a chief Republican platform plank, and a greater role for the private sector in developing domestic energy resources.
Here we are in Minnesota, site of the Republican National Convention, but at a rally that is not being held in honor of John McCain. What is the purpose of this rally?
The main purpose of the rally is to continue the momentum that was building during the presidential primary race, because a lot of young people joined us, they got enthusiastic. They really liked the message of limited government, personal liberties, and a different foreign policy. They didn’t want to quit. But the campaign had to come to an end, because John McCain did get the votes to be nominated. So in order to not discourage too many people and think that everything has ended, we decided to have a Rally for the Republic, a celebration of what we achieved, and actually to build momentum to continue this effort and to build for the future so that we can influence the Republican Party. Because we think the Republican Party has strayed from its original values of limited government, and we emphasize that. We want balanced budgets and strictly limited government and less controls and less taxes, and therefore we’re going to continue in this effort.
Turning to foreign policy, the Republicans have released their 2008 platform (PDF). Have you seen the platform? What policy initiatives would you like to see added to the GOP agenda?
I haven’t seen it, but I can probably guess. They’re probably not calling for the immediate removal of the troops from Iraq. They probably haven’t said, “We absolutely promise not to bomb Iran unless they attack us.” They probably haven’t promised to bring the troops home from Europe and Korea and Japan.
Ron Paul appeared for about 3 minutes this morning on CNN’s “American Morning”. He spoke the hard truth about the interventionist foreign policies of both McCain and Barack Obama. Many people seem to believe that Obama is the “peace” candidate. I saw a bumper sticker with the ‘O’ in Obama represented as a peace sign. What a ridiculous lie that is. Ron Paul sets the story straight. He also points out the truth about the Russia-Georgian conflict saying that we did in Kosovo exactly what Russia is doing in South Ossetia.
Yet again Ron Paul demonstrates why he should have been the GOP nominee. He is the real change candidate. Watch the video below.
Bob Barr appeared on FOX News yesterday with Neil Cavuto and discussed the Georgian conflict, his spoiler role (of course), and debate access. Once again Barr gets the libertarian message out there. It is a bit of wishful thinking on his part about getting access to the debates, but it is something that must be pursued no matter how unlikely it is to happen. Watch the interview below.
In the latest press release from the Bob Barr campaign Barr minces no words in condemning the call by the Bush administration and others on Capitol Hill to send an expensive aid package to Georgia to help them rebuild after their hostilities with Russia.
“The Bush administration is talking about pumping aid into the damaged Georgian economy, after that nation’s short war with Russia,” says Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. “The conflict between Georgia and Russia was tragic, but it’s time officials in Washington stopped treating the Treasury Department like an ATM for the world. The deficit rose last month after Uncle Sam had to bail out several failed banks and the total federal deficit this year is going to run about $400 billion. It’s time to say enough!”
“The U.S. spent $21 billion on foreign aid last year, not counting money for Iraq,” explains Barr. “Over the years Washington has shipped hundreds of billions of dollars overseas, with much of it wasted. The Third World remains poor, only with a larger debt. Indeed, U.S. aid programs often subsidized socialist and undemocratic regimes.”
“The Saakashvili government in Georgia made a foolish mistake by initiating hostilities in its breakaway province of South Ossetia,” notes Barr. “American taxpayers should not have to pay for that mistake. After all, they already are paying $10 billion a month for the administration’s mistaken invasion and occupation of Iraq. They cannot afford to pay the price for other people’s wars as well,” says Barr.
“Instead of increasing foreign aid, the U.S. government needs to cut the amount of taxpayer money that it sends overseas,” insists Barr. “Most important, it is time to start saying no more. No more international welfare clients. No more foreign governments treating America as a cash cow. We need to put our own fiscal house in order rather than constantly bail out irresponsible governments around the world.”
It is comforting to know that Barr is quick to point out what the press and the Bush administration seem to want to sweep under the rug: Georgia instigated this conflict. Even if the Russian response was disproportionate that fact remains.
Liberty Maven
