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.

In the most recent issue of Liberator Online (published by The Advocates for Self-Government), James W. Harris writes:

President John McCain: A Military “Near-Dictator”?

John McCain proudly announced the newest member of his staff this week. Michael Goldfarb, online editor for the neocon magazine The Weekly Standard, is his new Deputy Communications Director.

Last April, Goldfarb wrote the following about the powers he thinks the U.S. president possesses:

“The framers… sought an energetic executive with near dictatorial power in pursuing foreign policy and war.”

Oh, really? The Founders wanted a president with “near dictatorial” power? Responds liberal journalist Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com:

“Until the Bill Kristols and John Yoos and other authoritarians of that strainentered the political mainstream, I never heard of prominent Americans who describe the power that they want to vest in our political leaders as ‘near dictatorial.’ Anyone with an even passing belief in American political values would consider the word ‘dictatorial’ — at least rhetorically, if not substantively — to define that which we avoid at all costs, not something which we seek, embrace and celebrate.

“And the very idea that the Founders — whose principal concern was how to avoid consolidated power in any one person — sought to vest ‘near dictatorial power’ in the president is too perverse for words. But that’s been the core ‘principle’ driving the destructive radicalism of the last seven years, and it’s an extremist view that is obviously welcomed at the highest levels of the McCain campaign.”

Goldfarb has also endorsed torture techniques such as beatings and waterboarding, and has called for amnesty for corporations which assist the government in knowingly and illegally spying upon Americans without warrants.

But of course, that’s what you’d expect from the spokesman for a “near dictator,” right?

(Source: Glenn Greenwald, Salon.com: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/02/goldfarb/index.html )

Awhile ago I signed up for Rep. Frank Wolf’s (10th District VA) email newsletter. I used to support this guy. Today I received an email that perfectly represents why I no longer support him. As a libertarian leaning conservative I take offense to more government spending. When the government spends what it doesn’t have, as it has been doing for many years now we suffer. It is this kind of behavior that helped give us the economic calamity we are now facing.

Frank Wolf is trying to have his cake and eat it too. In the very same email he advocates cutting spending and using those cuts for more spending. He, like many other elected officials, is trying to gain support for the projects he feels are most important. He advocates moving money from one area in to another, rather than actually cutting spending. It’s obvious to this 10th district voter he doesn’t really care about curbing spending overall. He puts a few good key words in this statement but in the end he’s not really advocating cutting anything. Here is the relevant quote:

Although we have been successful in raising awareness of the need for a strong STEM workforce and in authorizing innovative programs, we now face a serious challenge in funding these initiatives. As you will read, I believe that we must rein in explosive mandatory spending in order to ensure sufficient funding is available for this critical competitiveness initiative, among other programs. (Source: Wolf Email)

I don’t care how “good” the programs may or may not be. The point is Congressman Wolf is NOT interested in cutting spending. He’s only interested in continuing the budgeting shell game of typical establishment DC politicians. We need to replace him with someone with a fresh perspective on spending and government programs. Someone who will actually practice what he preaches. That person is Vern McKinley who is challenging him in the Republican Primary on June 10th in Virginia’s 10th District.

Breaking News! Read and Listen here at the dod.mil link. Digg this if you think Donald Rumsfeld is “waaaay off the record,” I mean way out of line!

(Originally published by the author at The Nolan Chart http://www.nolanchart.com/article3806.html)

A newly released audiotape by the Department of Defense of a December 12^th, 2006 Luncheon taped Rumsfeld telling a group of military analysts that the American public needs another 9/11 Attack to wake up. Please listen here at dod.mil and read below, but decide for yourself please. The Huffington Post beat your author to the punch and released an article here as well.

To the clatter and din of dinner knives and forks, Rumsfeld also blathers on about attacking Iran, jokingly infers to a “stroke of lightning” (aka assassination) of Moqtada al-Sadr and that he would reward the killer with a bottle of champagne. Perhaps topping everything is a statement that the US will win the actual military fighting, but can’t win a War of Occupation against guerilla warfare in Iraq, etc., etc.

Read More »

This is an excellent interview with Ron Paul on NPR Radio’s “Talk Of The Nation” show. Ron Paul even used a little humor which is somewhat unlike his normal “serious talk” on the campaign trail

Listen the 34 minute interview at NPR.

Browsing the issues pages of all the presidential candidates last year revealed a glaring omission. Sure there were taxes, foreign policy, Iraq war, health care, immigration, and a slew of others, but probably the most important was not listed. “Has a chance to win” is the unmentionable issue yet it is the response many give as to the reason they chose not to vote for Ron Paul. “I’d vote for him, but he doesn’t have a chance,” goes the mantra. It trumps, “He’s crazy”, or “His views are too extreme.” Indeed, if “has a chance” never was, then Ron Paul would be the Republican nominee.

Of course, there is no way to necessarily prove this assertion, but the larger question is why “has a chance” is even an issue in the first place? In most other areas people love the underdog, but in politics the underdog is usually treated unfairly by the establishment (especially in primary contests) and belittled as “unelectable” by the media and therefore the masses.

Read More »

Readers of Liberty Maven know by now how much we adore Ron Paul and his message of freedom, prosperity, and peace. That does not mean we can’t be critical of him when circumstances call for it. Anyone who views the list of candidates Ron Paul has endorsed for office should notice something missing. He hasn’t endorsed a single candidate who is running against an incumbent Republican in a primary.

As a Ron Paul supporter of all the liberty minded candidates it greatly concerns me that Ron Paul has not endorsed some candidates who are close to 100% in line with his platform. A perfect example of this is the race in Virginia’s 10th District between Vern McKinley and incumbent Frank Wolf. Vern McKinley is about 90% aligned with Paul on the issues. Frank Wolf is an Iraq war supporter, who voted for both SCHIP and minimum wage increases along with the Democrats. Wolf voted against repealing the DC gun ban. Wolf voted for Bush’s prescription drug plan. Wolf just had a bill that he sponsored signed into law by President Bush that will make property rights advocates vomit.

Read More »

I cannot be impartial when reviewing Ron Paul’s new book “The Revolution: A Manifesto“. I’ve spent over one year of my life thinking “Ron Paul” in almost every waking moment. More accurately I’ve thought about the potential for true liberty in my lifetime.

As a Libertarian voter since 1996 I’ve grown accustomed to losing elections. For me that did not matter. All that mattered was that I was voting for the person I believed would best uphold and defend the Constitution. Hope for winning was never an option. Then Ron Paul came along.

I knew of Ron Paul and was ecstatic to learn he was going to run for President. I liked that he was going to run as a Republican. That fact alone gave me hope. I didn’t realize just how hopeful I would become. Early in the campaign I did not have much hope. I said that he is the one with the right message but is the wrong messenger. I never expected for him to raise so much money and win the hearts of Constitutionalists everywhere.

In the sound bite world of TV news and politics Ron Paul sometimes comes off as extreme. He normally shines like a founding father in the longer more in depth segments, such as the interview he did on PBS with Bill Moyers. Then came his book. It demonstrates his expansive knowledge of history, the Constitution, the rule of law, and political psychology.

For someone who has studied Ron Paul for a year like a graduate course in liberty, the book started with the same principled Ron Paul. As the book developed it got better and more enjoyable. In the end it left me smiling on the inside, happy to be a member of the rEVOLution.

Many will likely see the book as the end of Ron Paul’s upstart campaign for President. Those of us who have been paying attention know better than that. In fact, the last words in the book demonstrate that this is only the beginning. There are Ron Paul supporters registering as delegates all over the country. The Meetup Groups are still meeting and strategizing. Ron Paul influenced candidates are running in states from Florida to Alaska.

The Republican Party is slowly being transformed back into the party of the “old right” in the name of Ron Paul. No one is aiming to crash the Party. The desire is only to blow out the candles of warmongering neo-conservatism and rekindle the flame of liberty. We owe it to ourselves, our children, and the founders.

Ron Paul’s “Manifesto” manifests uncompromising liberty. It is the bible of human freedom. It is up to each of us individually to spread this message. We must take action now so that one day in the future our children will not dust off a yellowing copy of the book and ask “Why didn’t we listen to this guy?”

The latest reports from the Nevada Republican State Convention are disturbing on the face, but should give any liberty loving American a sense of validated unencumbered hope. GOP County, district, and state conventions all over the country are being dominated by Ron Paul supporters. Some say those words, “Ron Paul supporter”, with spite. As if it is a curse of its own. The supporters themselves wear the title as a badge of patriotic honor. In Nevada, the peaceful but determined “Ron Paul Revolution” struck a major blow to the establishment.

The Nevada convention divided the establishment Republicans vs. the New Order Paulites and the establishment cried for mercy. When the process went over the alloted time the Chairman called for a recess and left the room. No national delegates were chosen. The convention will be reconvened at a later date. This angered the many in the Paul camp. Indeed it seems the rules of the convention were bent (or broken) in order for the recess.

Many are angry over the events on both sides, but supporters of Ron Paul should be ecstatic. This is the kind of activism required to coerce the Republican Party back towards its roots. This is not a takeover, it is a take back. Neo-conservatism stole the Republican Party from “Old Right” Ron Paul Constitution oriented principles. The “Old Right” wants its party back and is willing to fight for it.

The decision (perhaps forced by time allotment) by the Nevada Chairman to end the convention before finishing the delegate vote selection is certainly questionable. Perhaps more important are the many patriots in Nevada who turned out for the Convention and involved themselves in the process.

This should make all Paul supporters smile because it further proves the message of freedom still lives in the hearts of some Americans and that someday we may be able to truthfully say that it lives in the hearts of ALL Americans.

The more news that comes out about the current administration’s foreign policy and Iraq war maneuvers the more Ron Paul’s Presidential campaign rhetoric is vindicated. If Ron Paul were the type to gloat we would likely see him prancing up and down the aisles of the House floor pointing at his cohorts repeatedly shouting “I told you so! I told you so!”

As enjoyable that act would be for Ron Paul’s supporters, it is unlikely to happen. Ron Paul is a gentleman in the truest sense. Today media pundits feel vindicated at their negative predictions regarding Ron Paul’s chances for the GOP nomination. It must be nice to be able to make predictions and then have the power to help them come about. The media marginalization of Ron Paul is just one example of this. In another example, it is Ron Paul who is vindicated.

Read More »