Walter E. Williams has been one of my favorite columnists over the years. Anytime I open up one of his columns I salivate for the contents. His latest column is another good one. This article finds Williams, as usual, effectively arguing against government intervention in our lives. Here is an excerpt.
Right now Congress tells each American how much should be set aside out of his weekly paycheck for retirement. How can they have the information to know what’s the best use for the $70, or so, taken from you and put into Social Security? Might you benefit more by saving that money to start a business, purchase tutoring lessons for your children, or putting it in a private retirement plan? Unlike congressional control of traffic signals and supermarkets, the effects of Social Security aren’t apparent because we don’t have the information about what people would have been able to accomplish if they were able to keep more of their earnings.
You might argue that saving for retirement is important, but so is saving for a home or your children’s education. Would you want Congress to force us to put money aside for a home or our children’s education?
Here is the 6 part (full hour) interview of Glenn Beck interviewing Bob Barr from tonight (06/06/2008). Good stuff. Note that without the commercials it is not a full hour.
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
Here is video for the Ron Paul appearance on Glenn Beck this evening. Overall it was a very positive interview for Dr. Paul. No disagreements/arguments and Beck gave Ron Paul time to answer his questions. It was more of an economic ideas lovefest than an interview.
The buzzword “change” has been tossed about by candidates of both parties, but it has been mostly associated with Barack Obama and the Democrats. In fact it now seems like the Democrats are addicted to change so much that they vote against their own front runner out of habit rather than conviction. Early in the campaign Hillary was the anointed one. They didn’t like that much so Obama had his own messianic rise to the top.
Apparently that too wasn’t good enough for the blue team. With Hillary Clinton’s recent big victories in Texas and Ohio the race for the Democratic nomination changes yet again. Perhaps the voters are a whimsical bunch on the Democratic side. Perhaps some strategic minded Republicans put Hillary over the top in Texas, as some conservative talk show hosts have suggested. Whatever the reason, this most recent swing shows the Democrats may not only have an addiction, but an identity crisis as well.
Hillary Clinton announced a “child poverty plan” today. Her plan expands the government nanny state towards socialism. She’s merely playing politics here. It’s a last ditch effort to win votes from Obama. Sure, it’s nice to take care of “the children”, but why does the federal government have to do it?
She says she will pay for it by toughening enforcement to collect taxes currently owed but not paid. Uh-huh. So she’s going to use the IRS to terrorize people in to paying unconstitutional taxes so that the federal government can deliver “free” and “fresh” food to children living in poor areas.
I have a better idea to help with child poverty. Repeal the income tax to free up poor families to make more money to feed their own. Repeal the income tax so that people will be more likely to give their money away to charities and churches that always do a much better job at helping the poor than the federal government.
The federal government can’t even help people properly after a disaster like hurricane Katrina. Instead of putting free market measures in place to encourage charitable giving we get a a dose of Hugo Chavez-like socialism.
At some point we are going to have to change the term “land of the free” to “land of the coerced.”
During the debate last night Obama said the following:
“It is not going to be easy to have a sensible energy policy in this country. Exxon/Mobil made $11 billion last quarter. They’re not going to give up those profits easily.”
What in the Constitution allows the government to take profits from a private company? It is comments like these that make me ill at the thought of Obama becoming President. Of course, the federal government already takes their cut. I guess the first law of Obamanomics says they will take more.
American voters will have a choice between the lesser of two evils yet again in the Presidential election of 2008.
It is the equivalent of choosing mint chocolate chip over strawberry ice cream. Sure they taste different, but the end result is the same. You will still get fat. Or in the case of the election you will still get evil. Like ice cream, evil comes in many flavors. This year your featured flavors are fascism and socialism.
On the Democratic side you have the choice of two flavors: light vanilla socialism or french vanilla socialism. On the Republican side your only choice is a single scoop of soft serve fascism. Unfortunately, the political reality is that an independent or third party flavor will likely melt away into non-relevance unless enough of us truly want change.
In this interview Judge Napolitano (always a favorite of mine) promotes his book “A Nation Of Sheep” and in the end endorses Ron Paul without actually saying he endorses Ron Paul. It is a great interview and worth your time. It is in 3 parts.
This was a very good 25 minute speech at CPAC today. I only wish the media covered it more widely. He went in to his normal monetary policy stuff, but had some choice words about McCain as well. The portion about a strong national defense was also very good. Especially when he talked about Osama Bin Laden’s plan to financially bankrupt the United States. Well… listen to it yourself. Right now I have the audio. I’m guessing someone will have the video up as well at some point.
Liberty Maven
