Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
What About Bob?
Ron Paul's press conference with the top third party candidates just wrapped up, but it was missing one of the scheduled speakers: Libertarian Bob Barr. Barr pulled out of the conference this morning, but the LP's Austin Petersen hadn't been told. He showed up with campaign literature and was kicked out of the hallway by Paul spokesman Jesse Benton. "He was extremely angry," Petersen said. "I feel like the fall guy."
[UPDATE: A video of the press conference is here.]
I'll find out shortly why Barr decided to bail on the press conference. He wasn't going to get an endorsement apart from Paul's blanket, quasi-endorsement of all four candidates. According to Ralph Nader (who joined the Green Party's Cynthia McKinney and the Constitution Party's Chuck Baldwin on the dais), Barr's campaign manager Russ Verney affirmed that Barr agreed with the premise behind the press conference, that all the candidates had agreed to four principles.
Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.
Privacy: We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We must repeal or radically change the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA legislation. We must reject the notion and practice of torture, eliminations of habeas corpus, secret tribunals, and secret prisons. We must deny immunity for corporations that spy willingly on the people for the benefit of the government. We must reject the unitary presidency, the illegal use of signing statements and excessive use of executive orders.
The National Debt: We believe that there should be no increase in the national debt. The burden of debt placed on the next generation is unjust and already threatening our economy and the value of our dollar. We must pay our bills as we go along and not unfairly place this burden on a future generation.
The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests must be ended. There should be no taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds. financial institutions.
Barr agrees with all of that. It's a coup for Paul, who has
settled into a role as the patron saint of political outcasts. He
introduced the candidates as representatives of the real American
majority. "Most people are voting for the lesser of two evils!"
Ralph Nader took the sentiment further, arguing that lousy media
coverage and trivia "like the newest one, Lipstickgate!" was
preventing the average voter from learning how he agreed with these
four candidates. As weird as the event got, this was really
something: Ralph Nader, old-time contributer to the Freeman,
signing on to a libertarian candidate's principles. Cynthia
McKinney and Chuck Baldwin agreeing on the bulk of a political
platform.
But it did get weird. There was no censorship of the candidates.
Cynthia McKinney had time to tell press to watch the film
American Blackout and learn how the 2000 and 2004
elections were stolen. Chuck Baldwin repeated his line that when
he's elected "the New World Order comes crashing down!"
A few more details:
- Paul said that the McCain campaign contacted him on Tuesday about
endorsing the GOP candidate. He turned them down, again.
- Paul lambasted the Commission on Presidential Debates for
excluding third parties and recalled the way that his was excluded
from Dukakis-Bush debates 20 years ago. (Those wounds never heal.
Who hasn't wondered what he would have done if Kitty Dukakis was
raped and murdered?) Paul's stance: If you're on enough ballots to
theoretically win 270 electoral votes, you should debate.
- Paul, on whether his endorsements would hurt McCain or Obama: "I
don't want to hurt anybody! I want to save the country!"
The Extispicator|9.10.08 @ 11:58AM|#
Great title for the post, considering the content covers a
meeting of people who need to see a psychologist.
Please note, this does not apply to the average Paul supporter,
more the New World Order and Troofer crowd.
|9.10.08 @ 11:59AM|#
Aaaaaaaaaand Bob Barr shoots himself in the foot again.
There is a point where even crackpot publicity is better than none
at all.
|9.10.08 @ 12:04PM|#
Aaaaaaaaaand Bob Barr shoots himself in the foot
again.
Not at all. Barr is doing a damn good job of shedding the
"libertarians are insane" image.
|9.10.08 @ 12:06PM|#
I don't know guys, I like Ron Paul but I feel he's marginalizing
himself and squandering his political capitol with stunts like
this. He only has so much juice to lend other people, and every
time a crackpot shares a stage with him (Ventura, Cynthia, Baldwin)
it makes him seem less and less important.
There's a different way to do what he wants to do. He can galvanize
a movement. But I keep thinking of it through my own POV: I want to
be part of that change, but I don't want to be in the same wading
pool as people who, sorry to say, are in fact loons. Paul, I would
say, is not such a loon, but he's breaking bread with some real
whackjobs these days, and that makes me very, very worried.
Steve|9.10.08 @ 12:06PM|#
I think Paul's agenda would have been much more effective had he backed one particular third party candidate.
|9.10.08 @ 12:09PM|#
Something very profound is taking shape here. Despite Paul's poor communication skills he is out of shear will bringing about a major fundamental change in a badly broken and fraudulent selection and election process. Third parties are needed to open peoples minds enough to foment change in the main parties. Without this we get a game show election with game show host quality Presidents.
|9.10.08 @ 12:11PM|#
Fruitcakes in the kitchen (fruitcakes in the kitchen)
Fruitcakes on the street (fruitcakes on the street)
Struttin naked through the crosswalk
In the middle of the week
Half-baked cookies in the oven (cookies in the oven)
Half-baked people on the bus (people on the bus)
Theres a little bit of fruitcake left in everyone of
us
|9.10.08 @ 12:12PM|#
Not at all. Barr is doing a damn good job of shedding the
"libertarians are insane" image.
Eh, I guess I'm torn. I don't think that he's shedding that image
at all. Most people (I suspect) continue to think that libertarians
are insane, and how can you work against that impression when no
one even knows who you are?
For all his faults, Ron Paul has provided a chance for libertarians
to be noticed, and Bob Barr is squandering that opportunity.
Steve|9.10.08 @ 12:13PM|#
I agree completely.
Why did Paul spend a large amount of his hard-earned political
clout on these numbskulls? Barr, an excellent third party
candidate, wasn't even there. And only a few days ago, Paul was
flat-out endorsing Barr.
He should have just stuck with backing Barr.
Bad move Paul. Too bad ...
damon|9.10.08 @ 12:14PM|#
>>Gary
Seriously? I think there are some interesting things happening, and
there's some energy, but stitching together a coalition of some
solid libertarians and then adding a whole big bag of
crazy-insane-nutjobs isn't really a good thing, I don't think.
Unless they all want to jump on and throw their support behind a
single third party candidate if only to get more than 2% of the
vote.
I mean, important? Maybe. But it may just as likely kill off the
movement as the more rational, real-politic style supporters start
looking around at the other folks in the crowd and think "oh man,
do I really want to be in on -this- kind of thing?"
Shrug.
|9.10.08 @ 12:18PM|#
The Washington Post already reported this was the case LAST NIGHT. Their blog about Paul's announcement said Bob Barr would be holding a SEPARATE press conference today at noon.
|9.10.08 @ 12:21PM|#
This event almost convinced me to vote in a game that I know is
rigged, something that I'd sworn never to do. But the only
candidate that I thought I could have voted for would have been Bob
Barr. After his no-show this morning though, I suspect that Bob
Barr really is the GOP mole that his critics have claimed. A true
libertarian patriot would have showed up this morning, no matter
how much it pissed off John McCain or any of his other GOP friends.
If the LP was smart, they'd dump this guy right now. He just lost
them a whole lot of votes. For now this principled non-voter has
decided to keep his principles. You can start the election without
me.
BTW, doesn't this awesomely stupid action, on the part of the
Libertarian Party, just prove that Ron Paul was correct to push
libertarianism through the GOP instead of the LP? The LP has been
around for 35 years-- 35 bumbling years--and they've accomplished
precisely squat because of idiocy such as this morning. This year's
Paul campaign has achieved more for libertarianism in eight months
than the LP has in 35 years. What a tragedy it is for the world
that Paul is not a younger man.
|9.10.08 @ 12:23PM|#
Barr backed out because he is CIA and can't participate in a
press coference that starts
off by with a guy quoting Carroll Quigley and explaining how the
fake two party system is by design there to give the masses an
allusion that we live in a democracy. Barr's job is to gain
leadership of what was seen as a threat(rising
libertarianism)...and his job after gaining a leadership role was
to diminish the focus on the taboo issues(foreign policy, monetary
policy)....Ron Paul is seeking to join together the 60% of the
population not happy with our choices for president...all of these
people need to be aware of the sham organization called the
Commission for Presidential Debates!
without real debates we have no real democracy....as long as teh
issues are controlled we have no choice...whether you are a
socialist, a peacenik, a tree hugger or a cosmo or a paleo
libertarian....this is one thing we should all be able to agree
on.
|9.10.08 @ 12:24PM|#
I am a sane but radical libertarian. Bob Barr is not shedding any "libertarians are sane" image. If anything he is establishing/adding to a "libertarians are really conservative Republicans" image. He holds many views that are not libertarian in the least on fairly noncontroversial ( non-nutter) issues. I am a "big tent" guy. I'm not a "kick out all the libertarians who dont score 100/100 on the Nolan Chart" purger, but there has to be SOME minimum thresh hold to be a libertarian.
|9.10.08 @ 12:31PM|#
Ron Paul is too loony for me I will not participate in his
shennanigans. What has he ever done to spreadlibertarian ideas
anyway? I am the greatest most respected libertarian to have ever
existed adn I am smashing the old libertarian records in
fundraising and at teh polls! Carroll Quigely never existed, the
Commission for Presidential Debates does a great service for this
country.
I won't stand for anyone questioning our foreign policy or our
monetary system.
Sure I supported killing babies in Columbia by air dropping poison
on them and had no problem whent he CIA shipped drugs into our
country to fund some fun adventures, but that was a long time ago
when I thought we may just be able to win this drug war. Since then
I have become a libertarian 5th degree master!
|9.10.08 @ 12:37PM|#
oh wow...that's so weird man. everything obama and mccain say is
down to earth and normal. that's why i'm voting for both of
them.
you should write for the national enquirer you shit sack.
|9.10.08 @ 12:40PM|#
I am not a "sane" libertarian, because I think "Fabled Enemies"
is a really good movie.
youtube it.
However, I was finding it much easier to convince people in
Massachusetts to read libertarian tainted stuff when Ron Paul was
the guy compared to when Bob Barr is the guy....the guy has very
bad baggage for anyone who paid attention to politics in the 90's
and doesn't describe himself as a "christian conservative"
For a guy who is supposed to be a master of publicity and
professional politician the pedophile mustache sure does seem like
a poor image choice.
Not showing up at a nationally televised press conference
explaining the sham that is the CPD is inexcusable. I never knew
Barr had a pro-CPD plank in his platform.
|9.10.08 @ 12:43PM|#
I think it was wrong of Barr to back out of this at the last
minute. Instead of voting for the lesser of two evils, I'm now to
the point where I'm going to be forced to vote for the lesser of 6
evils - 7 evils if you count Allen Keys.
America, we are so screwed.
Sean Scallon|9.10.08 @ 12:53PM|#
Why would Barr do this? Because he doesn't want his campaign to
be seen as another "third party" run for President. He wants to be
seen as above third party politics. That's why he won't participate
in any kind of joint appearances or debates with such
candidates.
Barr and Root seem to believe they can remake the LP into the
disgruntled Republicans club (or better yet the Eric Dondero
Society), a means to influence the broader GOP. As the pick of
Sarah Palin as McCain's VP , they've already succeeded in that
regard. But just as there's not enough of those around any more
than there are enough regular Libertarians to build a broad based
Libertarian Party (the purists and the crazies can go elsewhere
thank you very much.) You need both for better or worse. Most
regular LPers are deserting Barr and this slap at Ron Paul will
only make it worse.
Ever since the Palin pick the air has gone right out of the Barr
campaign, as if thought they feel satisifed with Palin and are just
gointg through the motions (you get that feeling from Root). But
then again it was already losing altitude. Regular libertarians are
now refusing to work for Barr, purist libertarians are forming
their own party (Boston Tea Party). Barr may have more name
recognition than most LP nominees and may very well get over a
million votes this fall. But the potential vote that was out there
created by Ron Paul was even bigger and this clear insult to Ron
Paul and his supporters.
Fine then. Barr may very well find a sympathetic ear at Reason as
they cast aspersions on Ron Paul's supporters. But now there's
simply no grassroots base for Barr. It's a top-down camapaign that
had potential but wasted it because it couldn't decide what it
wanted to be. Ideally the best LP ticket would have been Barr/Kubby
because Kubby was a regular libertarian and would created the broad
base party that could have done good things this fall. Now what we
see is basically a ticket that can only be celebrated by the
RLC.
|9.10.08 @ 1:05PM|#
I feel like there is some behind the scene scheme going on..I
hope the Barr campaign didn't compromise with the McCain
mob..
I heard that McCain's man, Phill Gramm, (yes, the one who called
American's whiners, he's back) approached Ron Paul earlier asking
for his endorsement for McCain..who's to say that the phill didn't
approach Barr? We know how underhanded these crooks are..
Who know's, but I'll not vote anyway that would give mcCain an
edge..I do NOT want to see that man for the Next 4 years, living in
our Whitehouse while all our nation's declines further...Obama
neither..but least of all McCain.
I'll still cast a vote for Barr..
idiotface|9.10.08 @ 1:08PM|#
I can't take it anymore. Will you guys stop and think
critically?
Paul is a POLITICIAN and a bad one at that. After he raised the
money, he needed professional help. However, he insisted on keeping
his friends and family in charge. He could have left the
Republicans after the primaries and joined the LP, but he retained
his RINO status so he could linger on the House Financial Services
Committee and harangue Bernanke.
Barr is not my ideal LP candidate, but he's the last legit
candidate that stand for any form of libertarianism. He does exude
more mainstream credibility because he's a little more of a
pragmatist than Paul.
If Paul really gave shit about shaking up the two party system, he
would have endorsed Barr straight up w/o the dog and pony show with
all the other 2nd tier candidates. Instead, Paul doesn't want to
tell people what to do, yet he's telling them what to do.
|9.10.08 @ 1:09PM|#
Sure, I think Paul should have endorsed Barr outright. But Barr's campaign is looking increasingly like some half-ass rinky-dink dog and pony show. Is this his first campaign, or did he actually get elected to congress in a former life? I find these kinds of 'we don't know what we're doing' shenanigans especially unacceptable from Barr.
|9.10.08 @ 1:09PM|#
I think Barr's problem is that because of the recentness of his
conversion, he genuinely doesn't understand the Libertarian
movement. The only Libertarians he's ever met are the Cato crowd,
and that's who he is tailoring his message to impress. The LP has
committed a lot blunders over the years, but this year will
probably be remembered as their greatest fuck up ever. You had a
movement that delivered over a million votes in the relatively
restricted forum of the Republican Primaries, and instead of taking
that movement and running with it in the general election, they
decided to piss on it and try to build some new coalition out of
disaffected Republicans who were sour on Bush, but not sour enough
to support Paul. The bulk of those people are going to hold their
noses and vote for McCain, especially after the Palin
selection.
The big winner today was Chuck Baldwin. I think he's going to
inherit the bulk of the support from former Paultards not already
committed to write Paul in or stay home.
svf|9.10.08 @ 1:14PM|#
If Paul really gave shit about shaking up the two party system, he would have endorsed Barr straight up w/o the dog and pony show with all the other 2nd tier candidates. Instead, Paul doesn't want to tell people what to do, yet he's telling them what to do.
yes.
Barr's campaign is looking increasingly like some half-ass rinky-dink dog and pony show. Is this his first campaign, or did he actually get elected to congress in a former life? I find these kinds of 'we don't know what we're doing' shenanigans especially unacceptable from Barr.
YES.
svf|9.10.08 @ 1:22PM|#
... so like, I understand why Barr might not have wanted to
participate in this sideshow... and yet I must utter a mystified
"WTF".
He's in no position to turn down anything resembling publicity
and/or pseudo-endorsement at this point.
Hm.
and "WTF" happened/is happening at Barr's own press conference, by
the way... ???
damon|9.10.08 @ 1:27PM|#
Dude, when did this turn into the crazy conspiracy theory
forum.
Some of you need to go visit the Skeptics Guide to the Universe.
Right. Now.
|9.10.08 @ 1:28PM|#
"instead of taking that movement and running with it in the
general election, they decided to piss on it and try to build some
new coalition out of disaffected Republicans who were sour on Bush,
but not sour enough to support Paul. The bulk of those people are
going to hold their noses and vote for McCain, especially after the
Palin selection."
And it is no wonder this happens, since Weigel and his friends are
constantly baiting the small but vocal group of reality challenged
RP supporters, making it appear that they are the majority of the
supporters, when in fact they are not.
Barr has just continued the self destruction and failure of the
beltway libertarians.
|9.10.08 @ 1:47PM|#
Well, I can't say if Fatdrunkandstupid lives up to the first two
parts of his name or not. He sounds as if he drunk too long at Lew
Rockwell's poisoned well. This absurd Rockwellian tendency to blame
anything they don't like on Cato is childish and cultic. The Cato
crowd, as they put it, have been rather cool about Barr and not
likely to support him. And Barr doesn't seem to care about them
either. There is no connection but in the fever swamps where
Rockwell and his loonies hang out. I suspect they would be happier
with theocrat Chuck Baldwin and his loony conspiracy busting
campaign.
Buit the moment someone starts spouting about "beltway
libertarians" and the "Cato crowd" I assume they are at least one
third of this gentleman's pseudonym.
|9.10.08 @ 1:51PM|#
Former United Stated Senator from Alaska:
Maurice Robert "Mike" Gravel
Got history cred?
Dave Weigel|9.10.08 @ 1:56PM|#
Since Weigel and his friends are constantly baiting the
small but vocal group of reality challenged RP supporters, making
it appear that they are the majority of the supporters, when in
fact they are not.
If you want to believe that, go ahead. I seem to remember hounding
Michelle Malkin during the height of the Paul movement for claiming
that Paul was a 9/11 Truther based on one video of him talking to
Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth. I remember her retracting the
story live on Fox News.
But as the primaries recede into the distance, a greater and
greater chunk of Paul's remaining supporters (in some cases,
exploiters) are indeed the guys who yell about the CFR, North
American Union, and Amero.
idiotface|9.10.08 @ 2:14PM|#
Dave, newsletter-gate aside. You guys have been more than fair
and supportive of Paul.
You are also dead on with the remaining Paul supporters. They will
either waste their vote with a write in or vote Baldwin. Barr has
no appeal for them.
|9.10.08 @ 2:28PM|#
It is disappointing to see from the comments section, what a bunch of "last in gate" snobs Reason's readers appears to be. Libertarianism was marginalized for years, brutally in some cases, and now that it is gaining some respect, we are supposed to start marginalizing the other minority parties just because we've been let into the club? Pathetic. This is every bit as reprehensible as the failure of the African-American community to get behind the Gay community on civil rights. As long as such selfish pecking orders exist, no one deserves to be inside the gate.
Orange Line Special|9.10.08 @ 3:00PM|#
OH NO!! ADAM KOKESH HAS DROPPED HIS ENDORSEMENF OF BOB
BARR!!!
But, we all need to move on.
Everyone please help me get a message to Reason and to the various
campaigns, this is urgent! I have an idea how all these candidates
could spread the message of liberty: a bus! A great big,
PatridgeFamily-style bus that would tour the country, spreading
liberty and freedom one appearance at a time!
But, wait, there's more: the bus could have a blimp
attached!
The bus-blimp combination will surely fail where all the period
costume parades have failed!
Alternatively, Paultards and others should read
this.
Paultards and others have had a huge opportunity to influence the
elections all along, but they're just too dumb to figure it out and
too wimpy to actually do it.
|9.10.08 @ 3:28PM|#
OLS's idea of confronting and taping politicians is a good one.
Most people will only believe what they see, not what you tell them
you heard. There appears to be no Bob Barr campaign at the
grassroots at all. Why?
Well, most LP state and local organizations have no grassroots
activities at all. You'd think that even if only 1% of the voting
public is libertarian, you would still have enough people to have
an LP club in every county in America. Perhaps Barr assumed such an
organization was in place? Finding out it wasn't, at the beginning
of the summer before the electon, doesn't leave much time to build
one. Nor does the fact that the LP had no real front running
candidate that 80-90% would get behind immediately upon winning the
nomination. Unless the LP and/or the Campaign for Liberty commits
itself to building a grassroots activist movement that takes on the
politicians and their plans, then this whole movement becomes about
nothing except building a mailing list to extract more money from
those who respond to words and not actions.
|9.10.08 @ 3:53PM|#
I love all the unnecessary gloom and doom. Worst part is most of you didn't support Bob in the first place. I'd say a small percentage of the negative commentary here are from people that are actually capable of objective thought.
Nick|9.10.08 @ 4:48PM|#
The fact is that Barr, Baldwin, McKinney, Nader, etc. will not
be elected. PERIOD.
That being said, Paul trying to get them to combine their voter
capital and resources to put a chip in the duopoly armor seems like
a pretty good idea to me.
They would actually accomplish something and build a path for
better 3rd party opportunity down the road. Barr lacked the insight
to see this as an opportunity to make lemonade from what he
perceived is lemons....instead he's starting to sound bitter with
"it's just not worth it". Now we know why he doesn't measure up to
Paul who has faced ridicule and general shunning for decades in his
attempts to hold true libertarian style beliefs....Barr just lost a
lot of votes today- thankfully.
|9.10.08 @ 5:43PM|#
But it did get weird. There was no censorship of the
candidates. Cynthia McKinney had time to tell press to watch the
film American Blackout and learn how the 2000 and 2004 elections
were stolen.
So you don't think the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen? Now
THAT's weird.
|9.10.08 @ 5:45PM|#
Barr and McKinney can each make a very convincing argument for inclusion in the presidential debates, beyond being on enough ballots: they have more Congressional experience than Obama does, and he will be in the debates.
|9.10.08 @ 6:37PM|#
I DO believe that Barr is echoing the Cato crowd ...who are kinda weird. He lost my vote and so did the LP. Ron Paul should have made an endorsement of ONE candidate to solidify his base...now the LP is all over the place and the Ron Paul movement is all over the place...sometimes I think it's more of this "creative destruction" the Neocons like Michael Ledeen speak of. Matter of fact, I'm 90% convinced it is.
Raising the Barr|9.10.08 @ 8:17PM|#
Ron Paul is not a libertarian, but he is a Republican. The
strategy seems simple: get as many people to vote third party as
possible. He proves that he's NOT out to destroy the Republican
Party but to reform it; He doesn't give up any of his base, some of
which would never vote Libertarian; He has two torpedoes, a
Naderite-Green one for Obama and Barr-Baldwinian one for McCain.
He's hedged his bet and one of the Statists will fall.
Will Paul the Constitutionalist get the credit for it? Prolly not,
but it will punish Obama for cheneyesque Biden and McCain for being
cheneyesque. That message will hopefully not be lost.
B|9.10.08 @ 9:16PM|#
Anyone who appears on the stage with Cynthia McKinney is a total fucking joke. Wait I hear something. Oh, it's just the last shreds of Ron Paul's credibility running out the door.
|9.11.08 @ 4:39AM|#
HOW TO FIX THE ECONOMY
CHANGE THE SYSTEM, NOT JUST THE FACES
a plan to replace the Federal Reserve system, get rid of the IRS
and involuntary taxation, start paying off the National Debt, and
improve `social security` for everyone by replacing our OLD
economic system with a NEW system based on a new U.S. currency to
replace Federal Reserve Debt-Money, a small, voluntarily-paid debit
tax to replace the Federal Income Tax and the IRS, and equi-dollar
`justified compensation` to replace corporate and personal welfare
programs
As many of us were forced to learn in our Quality Improvement
classes at work, the problem is never a person, a party, or `the
people`. The problem is always THE SYSTEM. Unless (and until) we
fix THE SYSTEM, the same bad things will keep happening, over and
over. The fault lies not with the borrowers and the banks who
profitted from THE SYSTEM (and then lost their shirts), but with
our ancestors for allowing this SYSTEM to get set up, and with
ourselves for letting this SYSTEM continue incentivizing our own
destruction.
The primary problem with the OLD SYSTEM is that the tool that we
use to facilitate exchange (Federal Reserve Debt-Money)
intentionally leaks its purchasing power into the pockets of the
rich like a bucket with a hole in the bottom leaks water. The Fed
dollar currently buys about 5% or less of what it bought in 1913
when the Federal Reserve System first sprang from Satan`s loins.
The vanishing value of those dollars goes, finally, to our
international banking owners in the form of interest payments on
personal and governmental loans. (To view a video that makes the
problems inherent in our use of the Fed`s Debt-Money much clearer,
do an online search for `Zeitgeist Fed`.)
Congress` creation of the Federal Reserve System in 1913 was the
equivalent of giving every taxpayer a vampire bat to keep as a pet.
There is NO BENEFIT AT ALL in having a Central Bank (well, none for
us) compared to having the U.S. Treasury print and distribute our
own debt-free money to ourselves. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE between
having a central bank or not, is that ``One system costs us 95% of
our wealth every hundred years and puts us and our posterity into
mind-boggling debt until the end of time``... and the other
doesn`t.
So the first thing we need for our NEW SYSTEM is our own, debt-free
U.S. Government fiat currency, backed by all the property within
the nation`s borders. Obviously I disagree with those who insist
that `only gold is real money`. The hoarding of gold-backed money
has led to and prolonged many U.S. economic depressions which
explains why the U.S. has tried and abandoned `the gold standard`
many times over the years. (One of the most famous speeches in U.S.
history, William Jenning Bryan`s `Cross of Gold` speech, concerned
this very subject.) ``Bad money drives out good`` means people will
always wind up using as money whatever has the least actual value
that will still be accepted by others to facilitate trade. (Back in
the 1800`s they would use as money just about any slip of paper
with numbers printed on it.) Debt-Free fiat money will work just as
well as Federal Reserve fiat Debt-money, but without all the nasty
side-effects.
Another problem with the OLD SYSTEM is that income-based taxation
creates wasteful tax avoidance behavior, requires an expensive tax
reporting industry and an intrusive collection bureaucracy, and is,
arguably, a form of `involuntary servitude`. Under our NEW SYSTEM,
we should replace all income-related taxes with a one-half percent,
automatically-collected electronic transfer tax (also known as a
`debit tax`) which will be avoidable by transacting business using
cash or barter. This will not only rid us of the IRS (saving the
billions currently spent on `tax reporting`), it will also end the
current penalization of work and entrepreneurism, as well as
freeing up untold billions currently spent on `tax avoidance`. A
debit tax is `more just`, corresponding closely with ``benefits
previously-obtained`` rather than penalizing labor and
industriousness, and (as it can be legally avoided, even if only
inconveniently so) this debit tax can be considered
``voluntarily-paid``. A small electronic transfer tax will also act
to discourage excessive short-term market speculation and should be
able to raise enough revenue to begin paying off the National Debt.
The tax should be either paid with the new debt-free money or
exchanged for it by the Treasury with the Fed money being used to
help retire the National Debt.
``There are two kinds of property. Firstly, natural property --
such as the earth, air, water. Secondly, artificial or acquired
property -- Equality of natural property is the subject of this
essay. Every individual in the world is born with legitimate claims
on a certain kind of property, or its equivalent...{government
Privatization of Property} has dispossessed half the inhabitants of
every nation of their natural inheritance, without providing for
them...an indemnification for that loss. In advocating the case of
the persons thus dispossessed, it is a right, and not a charity,
that I am pleading for.`` --- excerpted from ``Agrarian Justice``
by Tom Paine, 1797
As argued by Tom Paine back in 1797, the third problem with the OLD
SYSTEM is that, because governments privatize all of their claimed
property (allocating it however they like), everyone winds up being
denied free access to all property (other than that which has been
specifically allocated to them) without being compensated for that
loss. That`s not a problem for those with access to capital and
property ownership, but for the rest of us, it is totally unfair
and creates a slanted playing field upon which wealth gravitates to
the already wealthy and the well-connected. However governments
allocate their property, every method has the same result of
`denial to everyone of free access to all land`. It has taken 200
years for this injustice to be acknowledged in a place and time
where something can be done about it and when events have conspired
to make rectification not only justice, but action vital to our
economic survival. Just as compensation for eminent domain takings
are provided for in the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,
governments should provide compensation for denying everyone `right
of free access to all property`. The U.S. is the place to do it,
and now is the time.
Thus, in order to remedy this third problem of the OLD SYSTEM, we
must elect a Congress that will PAY EVERY LEGAL U.S. RESIDENT
`Adequate and Equal Compensation for Denial of Free Access to U.S.
Property`, compensation which can FUNCTIONALLY REPLACE ALL FORMS OF
PERSONAL AND CORPORATE WELFARE AND SUBSIDIES, including rescinding
Federal Minimum Wage laws and phasing-out the Social Security
system. (Once everyone is getting `Denial of Free Access`
compensation their whole lives, most people will be able to save
enough to be able to comfortably cease working at some point in
their lives.)
Our NEW SYSTEM should pay $1000 per month (of our new, non-Fed,
non-Debt-Money) to every legal adult resident. Compensation for
minors should be held in a trust fund to avoid incentivizing `baby
factories`. Since everyone gets the same amount of compensation,
this plan is not wealth redistributive, but will give the least
wealthy the biggest relative monthly percentage increase of wealth.
Because when people HAVE something, they have something to lose, we
can expect a reduction in all sorts of crime under our NEW SYSTEM.
I also expect the social gains to snowball once the viciousness of
the OLD SYSTEM starts getting unwound.
Benefits of the NEW SYSTEM should include better childcare, less
poverty, less crime, more rural homesteading, better maintained
urban areas, less intrusive and cheaper government with lower
military-related expenses and a safer world in general. Once this
NEW SYSTEM gets going, I expect residents of other countries will
insist their governments either copy our NEW SYSTEM or else apply
for U.S. statehood as Texas did in 1845.
HOUSING/CREDIT...Anyone who thinks we can `prop up` housing prices
without `propping up` the incomes of everyone necessary to support
those housing prices is selling you the same snake oil that got us
into this mess. Our NEW SYSTEM will actually prop up housing prices
(and contribute to better maintained properties) better than any
other plan once home prices get back to affordable levels. No other
plan that I`ve heard of will do anything but make things
worse.
HEALTH CARE...Regarding the overly-expensive and underly-effective
U.S. Health Care `system`, the AMA and FDA work to constrain
competition in order to maximize the medical and pharmaceutical
industries` ability to extort unconscionable prices for services
and substances that should be affordable out-of-pocket. We need to
train up thousands more doctors and other healthcare professionals
and to decriminalize and unbridle access for adults to WHATEVER
drugs adults want, obtained from WHATEVER source adults decide thay
want to obtain them, for WHATEVER purpose those adults wish to use
them, and let the market work to make prices of normal medical help
and pharmacology affordable. (Cuba has 4 times as many doctors as
we do (per capita), and medical treatment over there is DIRT
cheap.)
OUR ADDICTION TO CHEAP OIL...If we are serious about wanting to get
the USA to kick its `crude (oil) habit`, we need to have Congress
add on a 10% surcharge at the gas pump (bumping it up another 10%
every six months) and rebate the surcharge revenue in monthly
equi-dollar amounts to every registered car OWNER, regardless of
how much or little they drive. That causes the biggest oil
consumers to subsidize everyone else with no BOTTOMLINE cost to
taxpayers or consumers. The surcharge will incentivize cheaper
alternatives to rapidly come to market and we will soon implement
and use them, no government mandate required.
HERE`S WHAT I NEED FROM YOU...Seriously consider whether the OLD
SYSTEM of incalcuable debt, of more and more wealth held in fewer
and fewer hands, and more and more people in worse and worse shape,
is really the direction we want to continue going. Then consider
whether moving to a NEW SYSTEM deserves serious discussion. If you
agree that it does, then please join me in creating a mass write-in
campaign to bring these ideas to the attention of everyone in
America. With both major parties fielding such good people who are
such BAD candidates, this election seems like the ideal time to
vote for REAL CHANGE, not just new faces. I will be registered as a
Write-In Candidate for U.S. President in Michigan and in any other
states where I get help with the registering process (volunteers
are needed to help with that). A write-in vote for Alan Jacquemotte
will be a vote for taking back our country and our lives from the
banks, the government, and the IRS, and for saving America from a
looming Depression. If you agree that we need to at least talk
about this nationally, then you need to WRITE-IN your vote this
November and pass this message along to two or more people every
day until then (or, even better, to everyone you know right now,
and then meet more people and tell them). If everyone contacted
spreads the word to just two other people every day, over one
billion people can be reached within 30 days. I know we can do
this. alan
ps. I support the Campaign for Liberty`s 4 Principles recently
agreed to by several 3rd Party candidates.
any questions?
alan jacquemotte
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's
minds.."
- Samuel Adams
|9.13.08 @ 4:35AM|#
I just ran across this article tonight:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/hamilton4.html
Best thing I have read yet about how to vote if you don't like the
two major parties (or anyone else).
Just brilliant. I hope you like it too. I found it
inspirational.
|9.13.08 @ 4:49PM|#
I only heard of the libretarian party because of hearing Ron
Paul in the Republican debates, and have found my home in the
LP.
Having said that, I believe we are NOT GOING TO WIN the election.
Now Dr. Paul has two choices, he can join the LP ticket and give a
boost to this years LOSS, or he can stay in the RP and continue to
get media attention that the LP DOESN'T get.
He played it perfectly, and best of all he got to keep his
principle of not telling people what to do.
Perfect.
|9.16.08 @ 4:15PM|#
The American Ruse &
when Black Friday comes.
Honesty or lies?
Compassion or greed?
Intelligence or narrow-minded?
Guts - or go along to get along?
Ralph Nader
Cynthia McKinney
Ron Paul
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich
Jesse Ventura
H. Ross Perot
President Carter
JFK RFK MLK Malcolm
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245