Liberty Maven

Much has been made amongst the Ron Paul faithful about who Ron Paul will end up endorsing for President. The only thing they all seem to agree on is that it won’t be John McCain. It seems that the sentiments are evenly split between Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin. The truth is it doesn’t really matter who wins his endorsement. Anyone who has followed Ron Paul knows what issues represent true liberty. They don’t need Ron Paul’s expressed approval to know which candidates support liberty and which do not.

For those that don’t already know here is a refresher. If your last name is Obama or McCain you are anti-liberty and don’t understand the Constitution even though you will swear to defend and uphold it when you take office. If your last name is Barr or Baldwin you are pro-liberty and you understand that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. That is really all you need to know. Ron Paul has De-facto endorsed both Barr and Baldwin. It is unlikely Paul will officially endorse either candidate.

Why is it unlikely that he endorse one or both of them officially? The answer is simple. He’s a sitting Republican Congressman. If he were to publicly and officially endorse someone from another party he could be committing political suicide. He could lose his committee memberships. He could lose his seniority. It is important for Paul to walk this political line in order to help return the Republican Party back to its “Old Right” principles. He could not do so if he loses his status as a senior Congressman. He would be jeopardizing his ability to directly question the Federal Reserve Chairman about monetary policy. That is something he seems to relish so much, as do his supporters.

The only other evidence that can be given to support the argument that he will not endorse a non-Republican candidate is that he has played politics with his endorsements over the past year. He refused to endorse against any incumbent Republicans even when the challenge came from a liberty minded Ron Paul Republican. To this day he still has not endorsed against any incumbent neo-conservative Republican. The only motivation for doing this has to be maintaining his Congressional status on committees and other relationships. This runs at odds with his rhetoric of castigating the party for its neo-con ways. He won’t put his endorsements where his mouth is.

So stop waiting for Ron Paul to endorse Bob Barr or Chuck Baldwin. Pick one to endorse yourself then go out and campaign for your choice. When you do so you know you are campaigning for liberty whether Ron Paul gives his endorsement seal of approval or not.

We support Bob Barr over Chuck Baldwin, but supporting either is a victory for liberty. Writing in Ron Paul is a victory for your own conscience but it won’t help liberty win. However, supporting Barr, Baldwin, or writing in Ron Paul is infinitely better for liberty than voting for Obamccain.

Bob Barr was interviewed by Dennis Miller on his syndicated radio show today. They discussed much about FISA and Barr’s role in the election. Interesting how Miller cuts Barr off at the end of the interview. It was an odd thing to do. Miller apparently believes that Obama and McCain will actually debate the substantive nature of issues like FISA, limited government, taxes, etc.. Miller cut Barr off for suggesting that his own candidacy will move the debate more towards the fundamentals rather than the usual political surface. The overall meat of the interview is pretty good though. The interview is about 14 minutes long (commercials stripped out).

Listen/Download the interview here (mp3).

According to the media the big debate over the FISA warrantless wiretapping bill is because the Democrats don’t want retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies and the Republicans do. Indeed this is an important part of the debate, but it is hardly what the real debate should be. It just shows that our lawmakers care little about the rule of law in the Constitution. If they did care the debate would be about whether it is permitted by the Constitution to spy on American citizens without a warrant.

Instead they focus on the telecom immunity portion which is almost just as bad, but from a liberty standpoint focusing on this portion of FISA reeks of political misdirection. The recent so called compromise on FISA by the Democrats clearly demonstrates neither party truly cares about “upholding the Constitution”. Someone needs to remind them of their oath.

It is good advice to always be weary when a lawmaker uses the word “compromise”. A zebra truly is a horse designed by a committee. This FISA zebra like so many others coming from “compromise” just means a bigger and costlier federal government and less freedom for American citizens.

It is close to impossible technologically to guarantee that government eavesdropping as outlined by FISA will only be done when one side of the communication resides outside of the United States. This says nothing of the fact that government required monitoring systems put in place by communications companies give hacker terrorists another method of breaching the system. So it can be argued that FISA is not just unconstitutional but it makes America more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, not less.

In fact this type of attack has already occurred in Greece leading up to the Olympic Games in 2004. That attack and other technological issues regarding FISA are explored in depth in an article by the IEEE Computer Society’s Computer and Security publication earlier this year.

FISA is yet another in the litany of “good sounding” legislation with horrible unforeseen consequences.

Ever since Bob Barr became the Libertarian Presidential nominee he has been met with venomous criticism from those that can’t let bygones be bygones. There is no such thing as “forgiveness” apparently. Their distrust of Barr blinds and binds them. They are not just letting a golden opportunity for liberty pass them by, but are openly recruiting others to the anti-Barr cause. I feel sorry for their children should they ever make a mistake, own up to the mistake, and denounce it. For as long as they live they will be punished for that mistake no matter what measures they attempt to make up for that mistake.

I support Bob Barr because I believe in human liberty. It seems to me that if one truly believes in liberty then they should also believe in personal redemption. How can one believe in individual liberty but not accept Bob Barr’s own denouncement of his anti-liberty votes? Many of the Ron Paul faithful complained at the seemingly conspiratorial media attacks against Paul during his campaign. Now some of those very same Ron Paul supporters are attacking Barr in a similar fashion. The attacks on Bob Barr have now reached the trite stage. So trite, in fact, that they can be made into a list. Below is the countdown with the lowdown.

Read More »

Ben Adler writes on Politico.com about the likely destination for Ron Paul supporters in the November election. In doing so he recaps Paul’s campaign and brings up the racist newsletters again. I guess he needed some filler for his article. Of course he has to use one of the most negative aspects of Paul’s campaign. He also erroneously reports that $5 million was raised in one day for a money bomb, when in fact more than $6 million was raised.

Overall the article concludes that Ron Paul supporters will be split amongst McCain, Barr, and Baldwin via quotes from Ron Paul volunteers and campaign staff.

“Unless McCain does make changes in his platform,” including abandoning his support for the Iraq War and renouncing deficit spending, “I don’t think [Paul supporters] will be voting for him,” said Hart, who hopes to attend the Republican Convention as a delegate for the state. “They will more likely be voting for the Constitution Party or Bob Barr.”

“It wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of the disaffected Republicans would cast their vote for Bob Barr because he’s much more conservative than John McCain,” said Jeff Greenspan, Paul’s Nevada state coordinator.

Read the full article here.

Ron Paul has inspired many citizens from coast to coast to become more active in politics. Some of these citizens have chosen to run for office. All of these office seekers for liberty deserve praise, but BJ Lawson is not your average citizen candidate. He has already won his primary in North Carolina’s 4th District and now faces the toughest challenge yet: Beating the incumbent Democrat in a Democratic district.

What gives BJ Lawson a great chance is that he is a true “old right” conservative who echoes Ron Paul on the issues. That means the Democrat cannot paint Lawson as a Bush twin. That means there can be no criticism for him “supporting the failed Iraq war”. If any Republican has a chance in North Carolina’s 4th district it is BJ Lawson.

Liberty Maven has sent along a request for an interview to the Lawson campaign. Hopefully, in the coming weeks the interview will come to fruition and you’ll see it posted here and on our interview page.

In the meantime, BJ Lawson needs campaign funds. A Ron Paul style money bomb is scheduled for June 29th, 2008. If you believe in true liberty in our lifetime… If you believe in sending another Ron Paul style unequivocally limited government conservative to Congress to fight for freedom…. then you need to head over to http://www.lawsonlibertyfund.com/ and pledge your support now and then donate on June 29th.

If you still aren’t convinced then check out his beautifully designed campaign web site: http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/

Then click on the banner below and help a liberty brother out.

There are two candidates left in the Presidential race who have the ability to spread Ron Paul’s liberty message far and wide. Which of these two candidates has the best chance to spread that glorious message to the most people? Which candidate has more “reach” with voters?

The candidates for liberty are Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin and Libertarian Candidate Bob Barr. Like Ron Paul both are preaching to bring the troops home from Iraq and switching to a non-interventionist foreign policy. They are advocating getting rid of the Federal Reserve. They are both advocating privacy rights and an adherence to the Constitution. They are both preaching a federalist approach on abortion and drug policy. They are the only liberty candidates left in the race.

Ignoring media attention and the potential for more media attention for now let’s look at hard numbers where we can. The hard numbers we will look at are fund raising and meetup group support via meetup.com.

Read More »

In a phone discussion with Reason Magazine’s David Weigel Ron Paul confirmed what myself and many other Paul supporters think of writing in Paul’s name on the November ballot.

“I don’t think that’s very productive,” Paul said of a write-in campaign. “They could do it, of course, but in most of the states it won’t count. If they can change the rules in a primary and not count all the votes, imagine what they could do with write-in votes!”

What is most interesting, at least among the Ron Paul faithful who frequent Ron Paul Forums, is that in a forum poll asking “Who will you vote for?” with over 200 respondents about 34% said they’d be writing in Ron Paul (second place). The winner of the poll was Bob Barr with about 39%. In a distant third was Chuck Baldwin with 21%. Perhaps also of note is that Barack Obama received more votes (9) than John McCain (3). Ralph Nader was last with 2 votes.

Ron Paul’s penchant for bringing together a wide political spectrum of supporters is both a blessing and a curse. It is a blessing when the candidate is Ron Paul. Once Ron Paul exits the race, his free thinking voters split apart. They can unite behind a message, but veer apart when deciding who should carry that message.

For now, it seems Bob Barr is winning most of the support, but not by a wide margin. If Ron Paul were to endorse Barr it could help a little with unity. For the purist, Bob Barr is still a neo-con, regardless of his present day rhetoric. It is these Ron Paul supporters who will either write in Ron Paul (no matter what Paul himself suggests) or support Chuck Baldwin. Bob Barr simply isn’t a viable option for them.

The Barr detractors seem enjoy pointing to his anti-libertarian voting record as evidence for not supporting him. Sure Barr has blemishes on his record which he has renounced repeatedly, but he also shines in other places.

Read more about the shiny side of Barr’s record below.

Read More »

Now that Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign is over it is time for reflection. What were the expectations? Were those expectations met? What was accomplished? What will happen in the future?

I started writing about Ron Paul online in April of 2007. This writing was purely accidental. I had just started blogging on my personal site. I ended up almost writing exclusively about Ron Paul. That was not my intent, but Ron Paul had a gravitational pull on my mind that I could not resist. Luckily it was an attraction that I did not want to resist. Watching his “In The Name Of Patriotism (Who Are The Patriots?)” speech online almost brought me to tears in a “proud to be an American” sort of way. It was not his oratorical style that did it, but rather the substance of his words. Little did I know at the time that would become the underlying theme of his campaign: Substance over surface.

Ron Paul’s own expectations were most likely equivalent to my own at that time. We live in a country where the superficial is awarded and the substantive is ignored. Paul’s lack of smooth talking used car salesman media appeal was one of my reasons for believing his campaign was dead on arrival at the time. The other reason was that his penchant for plain spoken brutal truth would alienate many voters immediately. Ron Paul has recently said that when beginning his campaign he had no idea that there were so many believers in the Constitution. I felt the same way then, but today, like him, I stand corrected.

Read More »

The Ron Paul Presidential campaign is officially over. There is a large Thank You message on the official web site. It reads:

THANK YOU

For 17 months we brought the message of peace, freedom, and prosperity to millions of Americans. The response overwhelmed me: more Americans believe in liberty and the Constitutions than I ever imagined. I am deeply honored and moved by your hard work and sacrifice on behalf of our cause.

However, after much serious thought, I have decided to end my campaign for the Presidency of the United States. It is time now to take the energy this campaign has awakened and channel it into long term efforts to take back our country. We have some exciting plans and projects to move the revolution forward that will come together in the next several months. Watch for them.

I will work until my last breath on behalf of this great message. That I promise you. We don’t have to live in the kind of America the two major parties have in store for us. Together, let us continue to lay the foundations for an America worthy of our Founding Fathers.

-Ron Paul

With an end comes a new beginning. Thank You Ron Paul. You will always be the President of my heart and my mind. I look forward to helping spread the message of liberty along with the millions of people you have stirred from apathetic slumber. May millions more join us.