Saturday, January 30, 2010

We've Been Neo-Conned

by Ron Paul

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

The State of the Nation: I am afraid

By John W. Whitehead
The Rutherford Institute

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Thoughts about government intervention

By Mat McClain

It is baffling to listen to and read what proponents of government intervention into the market say. Take Medicare for example, the interventionist points out that vast numbers of people are satisfied with their coverage. What they fail to address is that medical care was cheaper and more accessible before government intervened in the market place not to mention that the program is insolvent.

Talking about prosperity is mute in a debt system. In the current fractional reserve lending system that has been evolving since 1913, bankruptcies are inevitable, even designed by the arbitrary availability of credit. Until commodity backed currency is restored and replaces credit, governments will continue to weaken peoples wealth. The laborer is the one most harmed by an inflated currency. The lenders and those close to them are the ones who are most enriched.

The problems of high taxes and high unemployment are created in a bi partisan way politically. A sound monetary system backed by a commodity, preferably gold, would serve as a way to tie the hands of the political class and promote a greater availability of scarce resources that have alternative uses. Some, like Webster Tarpley, would argue that there has never been such a thing as a completely free market. It is hard to dispute that claim. It is in mankind's nature to gain power and steal from weaker people. That is why Constitutional limits on government are best when followed.

Finally, since there are no free markets today, only regulated ones, giving the free market a chance is the logical conclusion. Trade agreements like NAFTA, CAFTA and GATT are misnamed as 'Free Trade Agreements'. They are nothing more than mercantilist agreements that attempt to bind members to global regulations and erode sovereignty.

Decades After Roe vs. Wade, Pro-Lifers Still Don't Get It

Boulder, CO - Thirty seven years after the infamous Roe vs. Wade decision, the death toll continues to mount, with no end in sight. With about 50 million U.S. surgical abortions now performed, the carnage is on par with that of World War II. A tragedy that began with a GOP dominated court and an invented "constitutional right," continues after many decades of
continual domination of the court by Republican nominees.

As former presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin aptly stated, "While the national Democratic Party proudly touts itself as being 'pro-choice,' (meaning, pro-murdering unborn babies), it has been the so-called 'pro-life' Republican Party that is mostly to blame for legalized abortion being left as the law of the land for nearly 4 decades."

While the GOP controlled the court for the last 37 years, Congress was also GOP controlled for 6 years, starting in 2000. During that period, Republicans had ample opportunity to live up to their pro-life rhetoric, but failed. They could have passed the simple legislation, called the Right to Life Act (RTLA), which defines the fetus to be a "person" under the 14th Amendment. In Roe, the court affirmed that doing precisely this would prohibit its jurisprudence from authorizing more abortions. But sadly, only about 25% of the House members supported RTLA, while the Senate often failed to generate a solitary sponsor.

Although many trends led to the onset of abortion in 1973, a proximate cause is failure to respect the U.S. Constitution. And yet, 37 years later, pro-life political strategy has rarely acknowledged this when endorsing candidates. Oddly, some pro-lifers now advocate supporting pro-abortion GOP candidates, believing that these will still support a Republican president's judicial nominees; they strangely believe that such nominees tend to be strict constructionists. The most recent evidence of this is the debacle in Massachusetts, where pro-lifers endorsed a strongly pro-abortion candidate, Scott Brown, despite having a more principled third party alternative. Brown, a Lieutenant Colonel in the National Guard, supports the unconstitutional war in Iraq.

The result of this policy is a continual diminishment of respect for constitutional principle, both in Congress, and in the leadership of the Republican Party. Today, this strategy is partly responsible for the continuation of abortion, as well as for many troublesome federal policies both at home and abroad which endanger national prosperity and stability.

America First Party
1630 A 30th Street #111
Boulder, Colorado 80301

Sunday, January 17, 2010

Private Sector Should Lead Haiti Relief Effort

Boulder, CO - Our hearts go out to the people of Haiti, while recognizing our immediate responsibility to aid our neighbors now in such dire need. While the federal government has no authority to spend one cent for any activity which is primarily intended for foreign aid, state governments, subject to the limits of their constitutions, as well as individual persons, are free to do so. In some cases, state governors could deploy National Guard units specifically for relief operations.

While it is permissible for the U.S. military to participate in training exercises that would indirectly benefit a relief effort, direct sponsorship of foreign aid by the federal government is not a legal option. Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution gives the only three reasons for raising revenue under our system of government. These are "to pay the debts" and "for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;" foreign aid is definitely outside of these categories.

Both the remoteness of Haiti, and the severe damage to roads and ports in that nation, impose certain requirements on a successful relief effort. Airlift, both fixed and rotary-wing, and sealift capabilities appear necessary to save the greatest number of lives. Since governments tend to possess specialized transportation assets needed in relief efforts, as well as the ability to deploy them quickly, the cooperation of the federal government may be needed. While the Constitution proscribes direct aid, transportation assets could be provided for shipping private aid under the auspices of military training exercises. Alternatively, some military assets could be provided to private aid organizations via short term leases, and operated by volunteer crews on unpaid military leave.

It is of great urgency that we all do our part to assist the people of Haiti. While there are many groups assisting, a cursory examination suggests that the three listed below are among the most effective in deploying resources and/or in the best position to do so. Please consider donating to them:

Catholic Relief Services -- -- 877-HELP-CRS
International Committee of the Red Cross -- --- 1-800-HELP-NOW
Friends of the World Food Program -- -- 1-866-929-1694

America First Party
1630 A 30th Street #111
Boulder, Colorado 80301