background image

Saturday, October 11, 2008

Decisions decisions...

I have to say it has not been easy deciding who to vote for this election.  I have been on the fence about Bob Barr as I am a registered Libertarian, and I find his knowledge on Liberty to be strong and his talk easy to listen to, but he still ends up grating someone or something before the end of his talks.  Barrb may be a good nickname for him.   Alright, though, seriously - he didn't pull it off properly when he had the chance to unite with Ron Paul and help the message of Liberty grow to new heights.

I've also known about Chuck Baldwin and read the Constitution Party platform.  I haven't had an opportunity to really hear the man speak until tonight, though.  Simply put, he is a powerful speaker.  Much more powerful than John McCain.  He promise to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and that my friends is my biggest requirement to anyone I want to see in office.  Someone that will actually do it after put into office.

Don't get me wrong, I like and respect Senator McCain, however I could never vote for someone that disregards their oath of office whenever politics makes it convenient or "necessary". 

Obama's message is a one of, er hope?  What?  How is creating several hundred more government funded programs that we cannot afford a message of hope?  Can anyone prove to me that he isn't just blustering out campaign promises while trying to ensure that the democratic head of the liberal party is in the white house?  Certainly he's a good speaker.  Granted he sounds like he believes in himself.  But, he doesn't sound to me like he believes in anyone other than himself.

Chuck Baldwin Speech at JBS 50th Anniversary
Friday, 03 October 2008 17:06

The page I found this on, at also had a good speech from Ron Paul.  Check the link for more.

NRA votes for an evil

Even though the NRA gave a perfect score to Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party, they recently decided to just do what they always do in every presidential election - back the Republican.  No matter how liberal or how bad a record that candidate has with gun control.

I sent them my .06 cents (that's 2 cents in 2008 versus 1913 dollars = $.0006)

Where is the back-bone of the NRA? I cannot believe this organization has backed John McCain. With Chuck Baldwin and the Libertarian Party to opt for, this organization has let down gun owners and patriots across our land.
I doubt I will ever become a dues paying member of the NRA, now. I'll keep hoping that this association wakes up next election cycle, but for now it appears to want to stay in business as usual.  

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Vote against the two party system if you want change!

I wrote this in response to a political string myself and some friends and family are on:Exactly! ...Good sir!  I am glad to see you are angry!  I have been angry about the color of law that has ruled this nation since I discovered it layer by disgusting layer starting back while I served in the US Navy and really unraveling in 1996/7 when I read the book, "How to cook a Vulture" by Lynn Meredith.  She wasn't the first to point out what a sham our Income Tax is or how government programs with great intentions actually hurt more people than they help.  Government programs have a double edged sword as nothing good can come of using guns to enforce compassion, socialism, capitalism, or morality.  As soon as something is given to the government it is the rule of force to ensure it happens.  Many of us think governments role is to help us all by stepping in to help, but when a new law strips anyone of any right infringing freedom or creates a victim-less crime to ensure someone else gets something they aren't rightfully entitled to, it is a travesty.  

It could be theft from the mass to ensure someone gets medical insurance.  It looks good on paper!  We can all afford to chip in a little bit of our income to ensure the poor can get medical insurance!  Seriously, it's a noble idea and on the surface, good to do.  So we created medicare.  Then doctors who accepted medicare had extra paperwork added to them and new regulations they had to abide by so they had to hire more staff, which means they had to raise their rates - except for the medicare covered people as the government regulated how much the doc could get for a medicare patient.  Medical care started to go up instead of down with each new regulation added by the government.  Eventually it became no longer a luxury to own medical insurance, but a necessity.  Then doctors had to get bigger staffs to keep up with all the insurance claims they had.  Then record keeping became regulated and the doctors found they either needed more staff or they had to outsource their record keeping which added even more $$ to their operational costs.

That doesn't cover every issue created by the government entering into the medical regulation and insurance business, but it is a very high level view that any doctor will readily tell you is true.  I've had this conversation with several of them - those of you that know me know how many doctors I've met over the past several years.

Don't even get me started on the property tax theft to fund "education"!  In Leesburg county, VA in 2006 they spent $18,000 per student for "education"!  Where does all that money go?  The parents get the supplies and clothe the child.  The teachers are lucky to take home $40K pretend that benefits double the salary to $80K and 4.5 students have just paid for the teacher - what does the money for the other 16+ students go to?!  A private school runs between $3,000 and $6,000 a student and somehow they *make a profit* while the public school receiving $18k a student needs subsidizing?!  Florida isn't much better.  Brevard county spends $13K per student.  Isn't that lovely?  Oooops, I got started.  Dernit!

The reality is, each time we start a good program it gets used in ways that it was never intended to be used and it is the force of law.  Law = gun.  Don't believe me?  Ask restaurant owners in CA that refused to stop using trans fats in their deserts.  CA legislators had passed a law prohibiting the use of trans fats, which to many people make foods taste better.  The restaurants that refused to stop using them where fined.  The restaurants that didn't pay their fines and/or continued to serve foods with trans fats had a visit from the police who then arrested the owner or manager and shut the restaurants down.  If they resisted what did the police do?  You got it, they pulled their guns.  Think laws are nice little things to remind us not to do or ensure we do something and that if we disregard it we'll go home with a little wrist-slap?

Whereas states reserve the right to make silly laws like CA did on the trans fats, the federal government is bound by the Constitution Article 1, Section 8 limiting what it is allowed to make laws about.  The tenth amendment, which has yet to be repealed, specifically says that all other powers not explicitly granted to the federal government remain in the hands of the people and the states, respectively.  Of course, the only thing that can hold the government to those bounds are the people.  The only peaceful tool we have is to ensure we vote in people that aren't going to wipe their butt with their oath the next day after they take office.  What is the oath of the President of the United States?  

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The Senate and the Congress take this oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Members of the military both enlisted and office also say the above bold portion in their oath.  The only difference for them, truly is that they must first obey the orders of their superior officers and the President.

Now, if those people running our government had been doing what they swore to do, how did we get all these agencies, programs, and institutions that only the States had the power to create within their own jurisdictions?

Think Obama is going to let the Constitution get in the way of creating all the social programs he has on his list ?  Or that he's really only going to stick it to our richest people in the US to pay the bill?  Keep in mind that the richest people have little problem moving to another country if he really can convince the house to implement his several hundred new programs.  

Believe that McCain will let the Constitution get in the way of maintaining an undeclared war in Iraq, voting away even more of our rights than happened under the Bush administration with nice packages like the patriot act (which he voted for), the bailout (which he voted for), or the previous bailout package that the houses voted on (which most all of us do not know about) back in July 24, 2008 granting the treasury to extend Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac an nearly unlimited lifeline with no conditions.  HR 3221  It also created a new housing oversight agency - the Federal Housing Finance Agency.  It was made into law by the President on July 30th.  It even gave the Secretary of the Treasury temporary authority to purchase obligations.  Neato! Of course, McCain didn't vote as he was out campaigning.

The only person that stood up as a candidate in the republican party this year and said that he believed in the Constitution was Ron Paul.  Who was invited to the Republican convention?  Joe Lieberman one of the most left leaning democrats in history.  There is no longer a difference between the two parties.  It used to be that the one difference left was that the republicans grew government slower than democrats, but during the time that the republicans held the houses, and the presidency the single largest growth of government *ever* occurred.  They used 9/11 as the excuse and they grew government 40%.

The only way to send a message to Washington this year is to first, really discover what your political beliefs are - temporarily suspend what you think they have to be based on the party you used to belong to and think of it as "what restrictions I want on *myself* and my neighbors" - take the world's smallest political quiz.

Next research some of the third party platforms and see which one most closely fits you.  Really read their platforms and investigate why they believe in it.  You may find what seems completely bazaar at first glance to make complete sense when you think about it from a different direction for a bit.

Now for the most important step.  Overcoming the nonsense about how the democrat or the republican is a bigger evil than the other and how you must vote for one of them to ensure your vote isn't wasted and the big bad evil one doesn't get in.  The only wasted vote is a vote that is made in contrast to your principles.  Simply put, if you vote for the lesser of two evils you are actually telling the lesser evil that you support his ideals and he smiles and is grateful to you and does exactly what you have told him you will permit.
 "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost. " -- John Quincy Adams
The wasted vote concept is a product of the two party system fear-fully clinging to their strangle hold on the government.

Oh, yeah, and lastly - vote!  Not voting doesn't send a message to anyone.  Apathy is exactly what the two party system depends on.  Sure they make a big pandering play to the "please register" nonsense during the campaign, but they really only want to register someone that will vote for their party.

The only way to begin change this election is to get the third parties to obtain a combined vote of over 15%, thus rattling the big two with fear of the people. First we have to get these third-parties to actually have ballot access every year without spending millions to get signatures to obtain the access.  Signatures are not free - most people who do signature collections charge $2 a signature.  In a state where 140,000 signatures are needed for ballot access....that's $280,000 just for the signatures, then there are legal fees to defend the signatures, file the signatures, and most third parties end up in court hoping to over-turn an election supervisor decision that uses an un-dotted i or non-crossed t argument to keep the candidate off the ballot.  Meanwhile, in Texas, the republican and democrat parties got access on the ballot even though they didn't have their candidates or running-mates selected 70 days prior to the election which is a Texas state law.  Nope - the parties are *above* the law. 

For more of my ramblings about the recent economic nonsense scare (there is a problem with the economy, but it's not what wall street and the politicians have talked about so far) you are welcome to read my blog and comment away. 

I hope to hear from more of you on this string.