Posts Tagged ‘libertarian

04
Apr
14

3 Very Needed Changes in the Political System

1.  End anonymous voting, for every office, NOW!

With all of the election fraud, rigged elections and vote tampering that has been reported over the years–especially now, with electronic voting machines–the next logical step would be to remove all anonymity from the electoral process, and make each vote traceable, public and verifiable.

I can hear certain people screaming, already: “But I don’t want people to know who I voted for!”

The problem with that is this: We already know exactly who you are going to vote for, blabbermouth, because you talk about it with all your friends, you have the bumper stickers on your car, you write letters to the editor, and you call to rant and rave on the local talk radio shows. We already know how you vote, so stop whining.

With removing anonymity from the voting process, each person would be able to verify their votes and put an end to vote tampering. Plus, if you’re going to “vote” to (illegitimately) empower someone to rule over everyone, shouldn’t you at least have the balls to put it out there in public?

2.  Put politicians on a similar wage scale as restaurant wait staff.

There are laws on the books that say restaurants don’t have to pay above a $2.13/hour wage, if tips make up the slack toward the minimum wage per hour (the reason why you are constantly guilt-tripped into tipping, even when you don’t feel someone deserved it).

Personally, I feel that employees and employers should be able to work out the terms of their employment contract, voluntarily, but since politicians created this standard, I want politicians to be hit even harder–and lead by example. With that in mind, I propose we end a politician’s pay if he/she receives more than his/her office’s salary level from money made in the private sector.

In other words, if the Speaker of the House makes more than the office’s $223,500/year salary from business done in the private sector, he/she does not get a government paycheck. Period. No pension payments (if “retired”), or any other benefits, either.

You want to cut costs in government? That’s the first place I would start.

3.  Require ALL current politicians to be enrolled in Obamacare, and have to deal with the same level of coverage and headaches that everyone else will have to endure. Maybe that will get the nightmare legislation repealed.

Of course, this is just the tip of the iceberg, but a good place to start, until we can eventually abolish ALL of it.

Advertisements
29
Sep
11

The Ron Paul Scenario

Let’s imagine, for a moment, that Ron Paul is elected President of the United States–even though we know that voting machines have been shown to be rigged with predetermined outcomes. What then?

I’ve heard some people say that Ron Paul will end all the “bad stuff,” if elected. I’ve heard that he will use Executive Orders to end the Federal Reserve, Department of Education and other “unconstitutional”  agencies and programs (doesn’t go far enough, but would be a good first step). From listening to some of the chatter, some folks are making Ron Paul out to be some kind of Messiah.

Unfortunately, it is not true and those things will never happen.

First of all, Ron Paul doesn’t believe that Executive Orders are Constitutional, so he would never use them. If he did, he would be helping to legitimize the process and open himself up to criticism from his detractors and those who do want to use them (“If you don’t believe they’re Constitutional, why are you issuing them?”), so don’t hold your breath waiting for Ron Paul to use dictatorial “stroke of the pen, law of the land” stuff anytime soon.

Second, even if Ron Paul was elected, he would be overriden by the Legislature at every turn, in the same way that Mark Sanford (former Governor of SC) had around 98% of his vetoes overriden with every new budget. Also, nearly every time Sanford wanted to push through a new idea, eliminate wasteful spending, cut taxes, consolidate agencies or eliminate redundant offices, the State Legislature pounded him from every angle, used the progressive (WIS-TV, The State Newspaper, PBS/ETV, Free Times, etc.) local media to make him look like an idiot for even asking for those things, and then boldly refused to give him what he was asking for–and it was done by both Democrats AND Republicans.

The only reason I could see for The Powers That Be to give–yes, give–Ron Paul the Presidency would be for accomplishing something like eliminating the Electoral College–something the progressives have wanted to do, for decades.

If Paul wins the “Presidential Preference” vote (public vote), the Electors are not bound to cast their votes for the popular choice (the candidate for which the public cast the most votes). If the Electors choose to cast their electoral votes to elect a different candidate, the country will come close to another civil war, with riots in the streets. The cries for eliminating the Electoral College will be heard far and wide, and the People will probably be duped into going along with it–including an increase in police power and presence to control any “civil unrest.” (Not that there should be elections for Masters, in the first place, but you get what I’m saying.)

The end result would be that the Statists have more police power and control, and the Socialist Republic of California has control of every new presidential election.

Remember: No matter who is elected, the State always wins.

In over 200 years of voting, we have only gotten higher (and more) taxes, more regulations, more currency manipulation and wealth destruction, more war, more surveillance (monitoring emails and phone calls, street cameras, tracking our cell phones, etc.), and so much more. Minor “victories,” once in awhile, keep the clueless Sheeple thinking that voting can make a difference, but history shows otherwise, so STOP VOTING! Stop legitimizing the rigged game of politics and keeping it alive! Separate yourself from it, and get “off the grid,” as much as possible.

Personally, I would actually like to see Ron Paul win, for one main reason: When his supporters watch as he is rendered completely ineffective, they will come to realize that voting accomplishes nothing but giving the People more of what they were getting, before. Even Ron Paul, himself, stated that he could “only be so independent.” At that point it will hopefully be easier for supporters of Voluntaryism (http://voluntaryist.com/fundamentals/introduction.html) to share the message of peace, cooperation and real freedom.

So…yay! Ron Paul 2012! Woo-hoo!

30
Oct
09

Problems with the Freedom Movement

1.  “No, I don’t have a better idea; I just know that yours won’t work.”

2.  “Why? Because that’s just the way we’ve always done it [and not gotten anywhere].”

3.  “The anarchists are messing everything up!”

4.  “The Reformists are messing everything up!”

5.  “I’d love to help, but my daughter has piano lessons.”

6.  “Someone [else] needs to do something!”

7.  “You ought to do it this way. I would do it, myself, but I don’t have the time.”

8.  “You didn’t score high enough on the quiz; you’re not a real Libertarian.”

9.  “We met a lot of people wanting change and more freedom, so we had a meeting to get organized and plan some events.”

“That’s great! How many people attended?”

“Two.”

10.  “Hey, I do support the group; I go to the meetings to debate and vent my frustrations. It’s the officers who should take the lead and get things moving.”

11.  “He didn’t support my earlier proposal, so I’m going to vote against his–no matter how good it really is. Maybe next time he’ll see things my way.”

12.  “I don’t really know how to do stuff like that, so I’ll just leave it to someone else.”

13.  “I shouldn’t have to put a lot of work into this; people should naturally want freedom.”

14.  “I agree with 95% of what you just said, but I can’t support you because of this one little thing…”

15.  “If we make our message more agreeable with the mainstream voters [water it down], we’ll get more members [and exactly what kind of members will you be getting?]”

16.  “I don’t like his stance on [insert pet issue, here], so I’m going to send a blind-copy email out to the whole group/mailing list blasting his position and causing more division. That way, he won’t be able to respond to all the people I send it to and they’ll only see my side of the debate, so I’ll probably get my way.”

17.  “I’ll just sit at my computer and post one alert after another. Hopefully, someone will do something.”

I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

If any of this sounds like you, YOU ARE A PROBLEM. Fix it.