Finally a Voice of Reason in the Budget Debate!

It is so refreshing to finally hear someone in Washington refusing to play the partisan game and standing up, like an adult, offering a real voice with real solutions to our national spending and debt crisis. Thank you Senator Paul for taking a stand against the status quo that is being supported by both parties.

Amazing Article on Beck's Rally and Beyond

I beg you to head over to The Humble Libertarian and read Carl Wicklander's latest on the Beck rally and the state of conservatism in America. It is an absolute must read, brilliantly laying out what is in front of us and stating the tough truth. 

Here is a taste of the article:

If there is any question about the status of the conservative movement, it could be found in Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally: it is as alive and kicking as Ronald Reagan himself. Too soon? Either way, despite estimates of hundreds of thousands attending Beck’s rally last Saturday, there was nothing on display to imply that American conservatism has any long-term usefulness.

More than anything, it showed the triumph of "liberalism" over everything in the country, even the purported conservative movement itself.

Heeding criticism that the rally could only be political in nature, the Mormon Beck made it about “god.” Only keynote speaker Sarah Palin, whose presence was derided as proof that the event would just be a Republican rally, treaded into the political muck.

The insufferable opening prayer, led by a supposed descendent of Mayflower passengers, alongside a rabbi and supposed descendants of the Indians er, Native Americans at Plymouth Rock, included a petition about Quaker William Penn and this beauty:

“And you, O God, called us to repentance when we did not live up to our creed, and we did not treat everyone as equal. But Lord, we found out that you are a God of forgiveness, you are a God of covenant, you are a God of restoration, you are a God of healing and you have healed us.”

I’m no professional theologian, but if I understand that correctly, Americans didn’t learn about the forgiveness of God by reading the Bible’s account of Christ’s sacrificial death but only after we had enslaved the blacks and broken our treaties with the Ind-. . . Native Americans. Was this conservative Christianity or the liberal gods of collective guilt and multiculturalism?

This display of multiculturalism isn’t new and it isn’t even unique for Beck. (Continue Here).

 PS: Please check out Carl's personal blog here. I am a huge fan.

Uncomfortable Lindsey Graham by the Southern Avenger

Yet another great video from the Southern Avenger about my least favorite person in Congress.

New Article Hightlights Establishment's Disdain for Tea Party

Here is an interesting piece from the Washington Post.

With the Tea Parties starting have an effect on elections across the country, the establishment is not pleased. Why? Because they know that the Tea Party is seeking to hold them accountable. It is my experience that when establishment politicians are upset, something good is happening. Incumbents hate being held accountable, and they will seek any route to discredit their opponents.

With Michele Bachman in the House and Rand Paul soon to be in the Senate both seeking to form a Tea Party caucus, the establishment is squirming, and I am loving every moment of it.

Please read the article here and enjoy such gems as the one below from the oblivious Trent Lott.

Former Senate majority leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), now a D.C. lobbyist, warned that a robust bloc of rabble-rousers spells further Senate dysfunction. "We don't need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples," Lott said in an interview. "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them."

But Lott said he's not expecting a tea-party sweep. "I still have faith in the visceral judgment of the American people," he said. 

(Enough to make you sick, right?)

A Victory for Rand Paul and the Tea Party

The power of the Tea Party Movement manifested itself mightily in yesterday's GOP primary in Kentucky. In what seemed an impossibility just a few short months ago, Rand Paul--a Bowling Green doctor and Tea Party favorite--defeated the establishment-backed Trey Grayson with a margin slightly higher than 2:1.

Lacking the powerful donors and the backing of the establishment machine, Paul's support came primarily from Tea Party patriots, conservative/libertarian groups, and other grassroots activists across the Bluegrass State. Defying the likes of Mitch McConnell and a whole host of neoconservatives, Rand Paul's primary victory proved that the grassroots can still provide electoral victory, and it will be that same grassroots support that will provide general election victory for Paul and other liberty lovers come November.

Looking to the results in Kentucky, we can draw a few conclusions.

1. The establishment should not overlook the possible success of  those they currently do not see as threats. Those minor threats could morph into major contenders who boast major victories.

2. These positive results can and should be replicated in races across the nations. If it can happen for Paul in Kentucky, it can happen for other candidates around the country. (I believe it will happen for Ron Ramsey in Tennessee, personally.)

3. The Tea Party can and will make a difference at the end of the day. The media and others can mock all they want, but they cannot argue with these (and similar) results.

Despite these truths the Tea Party movement should remain vigilant and guard against co-optation. If they are not careful to maintain philosophical consistency and purity, they may be the establishment who is punished years from now.

No Mercy for Incumbents by the Southern Avenger

Ron Paul on Chris Matthews

This is a much watch video in which Dr. Paul defends the principles of liberty as well as the Tea Party movement, and touches on a number of other issues.



Hat Tip: The Humble Libertarian

Conservatism In Exile by the Southern Avenger

Was Joe Stack a Terrorist? by the Southern Avenger

Tea Party Speech

For any interested in my speech from yesterday's local Tax Day Tea Party. Here it is.

Are Tea Partiers Racist?

What Will Novemeber Bring?

Besides my take on the passage of Obamacare, I have been most asked the following types of questions as of late by concerned citizens: Can we actually get some good guys in office this Fall? Do you think the Republicans will take back the House come election night? Will the Tea Party actually be able to have a positive effect on the conservative movement in November?

Well...I'm no soothsayer; so my knowledge of the future is just as good as the next guy. Moreover, I think that each of these questions, though they may overlap, are referring to different things. Nevertheless, I will attempt to unpack the political situation as I see it.

Yes, the Democrats have been engaging in very unpopular behavior for a number of years which has escalated over the past 14 months, and they have just passed a mammoth piece of unpopular legislation--Obamacare. But we need only look back to the 2004 re-election of George W. Bush to see that unpopularity and poor policy does not always guarantee electoral failure. Despite this reality, I see major gains for the GOP come November unless their is a drastic, unforeseen change in the political environment.

Therefore, if one is merely concerned with success for those running under the Republican brand, it will be a good year. This does not mean, however, that 2010 will be a great year for conservatism. As we can see from our current crop of Republicans, true conservatism and a commitment to limited government principles couldn't be further from many in the GOP's minds.

Indeed, 2010 should be a great year for conservatism and a great year for the restoration of the Republican Party to its conservative platform, but if early signs hold true, those of us who love liberty and the Constitution may be left wanting. I say this not for lack of opportunity nor for lack of strength in our cause. Rather, my doubts stem from both the party establishments' support of non-principled candidates and from movements like the Tea Party folks' perceived willingness to pick the "lesser of two evils." The establishment of both parties is powerful in its support of the status quo; since the current status quo is against liberty, the tide will not be easily turned. Moreover, if those who claim to want change side with "the lesser of two evils," there will be no hope for lasting change--unless the change one wants is a government full of liberals like Scott Brown and John McCain.

Not to sound overly pessimistic, I would like to clarify my opinion. I do think good things will come about this Fall. Good conservatives, like Kentucky's Rand Paul, will have success, and our country will benefit greatly from it. Likewise, many bad officeholders will be punished by losing their seats. Moreover, I think that the Tea Party movement and the whole host of other movements under the "liberty" banner have a great opportunity to do good and put constitutionalists into office this Fall. The time is ripe, and the moment should not be wasted.

But I have also been around politics long enough to know that people are often short sided and quick to sell out their principles. If the Tea Party movement uses its influence merely as an arm of the GOP, we as small government advocates will see electoral failure. Until shills like Sean Hannity are called out on their hypocrisy, rather than being celebrated as movement torch-bearers, their will be great difficulty in restoring a constitutional republic. Moreover, the GOP is not the conservative movement. This needs to be noted. I believe that working within the GOP provides the most promising electoral prospect, and as conservatives and libertarians, we can assert our influence to take back the GOP from neoconservatives and political progressives. But the acknowledgement that working within the GOP may be the best path to power, does not mean that we should wholesale endorse GOP candidates. Only those who share our values and principles deserve our support; others should e opposed. If we don't act accordingly, we will be doomed.

It is my fear that November will bring compromise and neglect of principle that will usher Republicans into office but leave conservatives and libertarians out.

The only way to combat this potential march of the RINOs is to hold strongly to principle. There should be no blind partisanship, no choosing "the lesser of two evils," and no room for selling out. If we do not demand a higher standard from our candidates and our representatives, we will continue to reap these poor results, and we may reap nothing but more bad governance come election day.

Supreme Court's Thomas: Conflict of Interest?...Nah

The internet has been buzzing with the Los Angeles Times article about the wife of Justice Clarence Thomas' political involvement. The article notes that Virginia Thomas "has launched a tea-party-linked group that could test the traditional notions of political impartiality for the court." Her organization, Liberty Central Inc., seeks to educate in Founding principles, motivate individuals around key issues, and engage in activism. From what I can tell by perusing around the organization's website, it seems to be your run-of-the-mill conservative activism non-profit.

What makes Liberty Central stand out is its president/CEO--Mrs. Clarence Thomas. I say this not to downplay her organization; I am sure they do fine work. My point is merely that Mrs. Thomas' husband's place on the highest court in the land is what makes this newsworthy--if, indeed, it is newsworthy.

I am not entirely convinced that Thomas' political involvement is a problem. Nowhere in the Constitution do we see a ban against such a situation. Moreover, legal experts have admitted that Mrs. Thomas' work violates no ethical rules. Nevertheless, there is still some concern over a potential conflict of interests. This concern is justified and should be something always guarded against. But so should it in all cases--regardless of whether a spouse is a judge, a legislator, or even a low-level bureaucrat. There is always potential for abuse, and we should safeguard against it. However, that reality should not forbid a spouse from pursuing a career. There is no need for one's ambition to be thwarted when another succeeds.Furthermore, we would be foolish to assume that judges' spouses are political neutral. I hate to break it to you, but the judges aren't even politically neutral.

Though the examples of spousal political involvement may be limited, their is a long history of members of the Court stepping aside to prevent conflicts of interests. I am sure that Justice Thomas would excuse himself from any proceeding involving Liberty Central, if a case happened to arise. Moreover, to suggest that Justice Thomas would use his position on the Court unethically to advance his wife's organization is both silly and unthinkable.

Virginia Thomas is no stranger to politics. She has over 30 years of beltway experience, including stints with Dick Armey and the Heritage Foundation. Nineteen of those years have been with her husband as a Supreme Court Justice. In that time we have seen no conflict of interests, giving us no reason to expect it now.

For now, we should remain vigilant (as we always should). If a problem arises, we should address it. But for I see no reason to worry. I don't say this because I like Justice Thomas, though I do in many ways. I say it because I am realistic. I know the Court, and I know that Justice Thomas is too bright and principled to unethically assist his wife.

Extremism in the Defense of Liberty by the Southern Avenger

 I don't know how I missed this one when it came out, but it is good nonetheless.

Brown Should Offer No Surprise

I was an opponent of Scott Brown even before he was named victor in the recent Massachusetts special election. I didn't drink the Kool-aide so to speak and warned friends and family early on that Brown was far from a conservative--even though he was a bit of Tea Party poster boy. He may have offered another Republican vote, but he offered nothing positive for the conservative movement.

Now, by joining 5 other Republicans in voting for the disastrous and unconstitutional "jobs bill," Sen. Brown is being met with rebuke from many of the very ones that helped get him elected.(I would like to note that the jobs bill has little to do with jobs and goes about the entire matter in the completely wrong way, in case some would think that I am opposed to job creation.)

A Washing Post headline reflecting on the vote reads,"GOP's Brown Branded Turncoat for Jobs Bill." Moreover, Politico offers the following, "Scott Brown Vote Draws Anger, Shrugs."  He is no turncoat; he did what he always does--supported statist policies. Moreover, the only ones to be angry at are the ones who betray principle and supported Brown.

I hate to say I told you so...I really do in this manner. There shouldn't be a reason to, and I shouldn't have to. Brown's voting record should have prepared those who are now left with egg on their face for this type of disappointing behavior. I called Brown a liberal neocon from day one because that what he is--that is what his record showed. So I'm not at all surprised by his vote. The only surprising thing is how surprised so many seem to be.

As I said in a previous entry, Brown could run to the left of Olympia Snowe. So why be surprised when he supports leftist positions? I don't mind that he does; he's being true to hiimself. What I do mind is the following: Brown parades around like some type of conservative. Just look at his presence at last weekend's Conservative Political Action Conference for proof. Moreover, I despise the support he received from the Tea Party movement and other so-called conservatives. It was unjustified and reckless.

If you are going to go on being a Massachusetts liberal, fine. Just call yourself one, Mr. Brown. If you are going to support liberals without concern for ideological ties, do not say you support conservatism, Tea Party movement and other so-called conservatives. It is that simple.

Perhaps this will be a learning experience for all those deceived by false hype and empty "conservatism." We may not get many more chances to affect real change, if we continue to give elections to statists who hide behind labels for support.

Tea Partiers Should Be Weary of the GOP

The Tea Party movement needs the Republican Party like one needs a shotgun blast to the head. It is that plain and simple.

I say this as someone who has interned for the state GOP and has served in a number of leadership positions in the local party for over 7 years (The entire time I refused to walk a party line--even voting Libertarian in 2008). Needless to say, the party system is geared toward compromise of principles and the creation of governance problems.

The Republican Party, in its current practice, is not committed to liberty, smaller government, or the Constitution. Rather, it is committed to electoral victory regardless of principle. Look no further than the election of Massachusetts liberal Scott Brown for proof. If the Tea Party is truly committed to limited constitutional government, they do not need a partner in the GOP that is not.

Sadly, the very GOP establishment that has forsaken the Constitution and got us into our current mess is now attempting to wed itself with the Tea Party movement--quite successfully I might add. Moreover, I believe that the Tea Party movement represents more than just Republicans; it is made up of a number of dissatisfied voters from a number of different backgrounds. But if there is not a concerted effort to fight this partisan influence and stand firm on principle, the Tea Party will fail.

Now is not the time for compromise in order to win elections. Electing more of the same will not reverse the tides; it'll merely provide us with a fresh set of actors.

Sarah Palin's speech at the Tea Party Convention showed that her concern is with furthering Republican politics and her own ambition, not with restoration of liberty in our republic. All this occured while thousands cheered on. Sadly, it appears the Tea Party movement is blind to this move toward co-optation. If the Tea Party wants to merely act as a midterm Republican Convention, then that avenue is open. But if it wants to bring back constitutional government, then it must distance itself from candidates and a party that will not advance liberty. Don't look to the parties as the power structure to be obeyed. Rather, force the parties to look to the grassroots as those with the power and listen to the voice of the people.

If the Tea Party movement refuses to stand on principle and instead caves into the GOP, the party structure will have the upper hand, knowing that they can continue to field neocons and other liberals while counting on the Tea Party's support. May it not be so.

I have seen these co-optation attempts with my own eyes, and I don't like it. This is one Tea Party that needs to keep a close eye on the guest list because to pick party over principle one would have to be as mad as a hatter.

Ron Paul on Rachael Maddow

Here is a great video of Dr. Paul on the Rachael Maddow Show. I absolutely despise Maddow, not because I disagree with her (though I assure you I do), but because of her demeanor, ignorance, and pompous attitude. Listen to her opening remarks for a good example of this. She is an absolute disgrace along with many in cable news from the right and left, but what sets her apart is her "high school drama student" interviewing technique. Notice her forced nods and smirks as she squints as if to say, "look how intently I am listening." What a joke! I stay away from cable news most of the time because the talking heads make me sick. Maddow makes me downright ill time after time.

Moreover,in this clip notice how the segment producers only display the most extreme of the tea party activists' signs to caricature the movement set against the words of Dr. Paul.

Despite Maddow, Dr. Paul is honest, informed, and at the top of his game.

A must watch.