Drafting Women Means Equality in Slavery


Posted on 1st May 2016 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,


Last week the House Armed Services Committee approved an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act requiring women to register with Selective Service. This means that if Congress ever brings back the draft, women will be forcibly sent to war.

The amendment is a response to the Pentagon’s decision to allow women to serve in combat. Supporters of drafting women point out that the ban on women in combat was the reason the Supreme Court upheld a male-only draft. Therefore, they argue, it is only logical to now force women to register for Selective Service. Besides, supporters of extending the draft point out, not all draftees are sent into combat.




Posted on 29th April 2016 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , ,

Yes, Prince Faisal, We Need to ‘Recalibrate’ Our Relationship


Posted on 25th April 2016 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues



For decades the US and Saudi Arabia have shared a peculiar relationship: the Saudis sell relatively cheap oil to the United States for which they accept our fiat currency. They then recycle those paper dollars into the US military-industrial complex through the purchase of billions of dollars worth of military equipment, and the US guarantees the security of the Saudi monarchy.

By accepting only dollars for the sale of its oil, the Saudis help the dollar remain the world’s reserve currency. This has meant that we can export inflation, finance the warfare/welfare state, and delay our day of financial reckoning.

But it seems this longstanding entangling alliance is coming apart.


The 2016 Election: Ron Paul’s Deep Dive Into The Real Issues


Posted on 20th April 2016 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues


By Ron Paul at the Ron Paul Liberty Report

The middle class, which as defined by politicians now includes almost everyone, is angry, fearful, and filled with rage. When politicians address this group it’s frequently defined as “populism,” of which there are many varieties. Whether liberals, conservatives, libertarians, socialists, or authoritarians, when the people become restless and angry, demanding change, the politicians pay attention. This reflects a need to appeal to the masses, and a populist message is well received. But there is never real agreement on the analysis and suggested solutions to the problems. Instead, scapegoats are easily found. Economic understanding is not of high priority, and demagoguery is a useful tool for politically mobilizing the “victims.” Since there are real reasons given for the conditions that exist, competition arises among those who want to take charge of the crisis and benefit politically. This only increases the anxiety and anger of the people, who see themselves as victims of an unfair system.

Until the political economic crisis became readily apparent, most politicians were unaware of the rapidly increasing distortions in wealth distribution. The dangers are conveniently ignored because most people live for the short term. If one is doing well financially, even though the system is financed with the whole country living beyond its means, worrying about preparing for a rainy day seems like wasted energy. However the payment is now coming due, and because few plan or understand it, any threat to benefits – both earned and unearned – creates great anxiety. Fear of being squeezed out of a share of the benefits that come with government intervention becomes the driving force for the whole country. The one group that seems the least worried about current conditions is the “one percent” who are financially secure by living off the special interest financial system. This does not include the wealthy who are financially rewarded for providing products and services that consumers choose to buy.

But even the one percent who benefit from government programs and the monetary system are concerned that the current uprising will interfere with their privileged position.


What Did Fed Chairman Yellen Tell Obama?


Posted on 18th April 2016 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,


This week, President Obama and Vice President Biden held a hastily arranged secret meeting with Federal Reserve Chairman Janet Yellen. According to the one paragraph statement released by the White House following the meeting, Yellen, Obama, and Biden simply “exchanged notes” about the economy and the progress of financial reform. Because the meeting was held behind closed doors, the American people have no way of knowing what else the three might have discussed.

Yellen’s secret meeting at the White House followed an emergency secret Federal Reserve Board meeting. The Fed then held another secret meeting to discuss bank reform. These secret meetings come on the heels of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s estimate that first quarter GDP growth was .01 percent, dangerously close to the official definition of recession.

Thus the real reason for all these secret meetings could be a panic that the Fed’s eight year explosion of money creation has not just failed to revive the economy, but is about to cause another major market meltdown.




Posted on 13th April 2016 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Census Bureau put out their monthly retail sales report this morning. During good times, the MSM would be hailing the tremendous increases as proof the consumer was flush with cash and all was well with the economy. Considering 70% of our GDP is dependent upon consumer spending, you would think this data point would be pretty important in judging how well Americans are really doing.

It’s not perfect, because the issuance of debt to consumers to purchase autos, furniture, appliances and electronics can juice the retail sales numbers and create the false impression of strength. That’s what has been going on with auto sales for the last two years.

The retail sales figures have been propped up by the issuance of subprime auto loans to deadbeats, 7 year 0% interest loans to good credit customers, and an all-time high in leases (aka 3 year rentals). Despite this Fed induced auto loan scheme, retail sales have still been pitiful, as the average American has been left with stagnant wages, 0% interest on their minuscule savings, surging rent and home prices, and drastic increases in their healthcare costs due to Obamacare.

The retail sales for March, reported this morning, were disastrous and further confirmed a myriad of other economic indicators that the country is in recession. GDP for the first quarter will be negative. And this time they can’t blame it on snow in the winter. They have already doubly seasonally adjusted the figures, and they will still be negative. Retail sales in the first quarter were atrocious. It might make a critical thinking person question the establishment storyline of solid job growth being peddled by politicians and their MSM mouthpieces. If people had good paying jobs, they would be spending money.


As Ukraine Collapses, Europeans Tire of US Interventions


Posted on 11th April 2016 by Administrator in Economy

, ,


On Sunday Ukrainian prime minister Yatsenyuk resigned, just four days after the Dutch voted against Ukraine joining the European Union. Taken together, these two events are clear signals that the US-backed coup in Ukraine has not given that country freedom and democracy. They also suggest a deeper dissatisfaction among Europeans over Washington’s addiction to interventionism.

According to US and EU governments – and repeated without question by the mainstream media – the Ukrainian people stood up on their own in 2014 to throw off the chains of a corrupt government in the back pocket of Moscow and finally plant themselves in the pro-west camp. According to these people, US government personnel who handed out cookies and even took the stage in Kiev to urge the people to overthrow their government had nothing at all to do with the coup.

When Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland was videotaped bragging about how the US government spent $5 billion to “promote democracy” in Ukraine, it had nothing to do with the overthrow of the Yanukovich government. When Nuland was recorded telling the US Ambassador in Kiev that Yatsenyuk is the US choice for prime minister, it was not US interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine. In fact, the neocons still consider it a “conspiracy theory” to suggest the US had anything to do with the overthrow.




Posted on 8th April 2016 by Administrator in Economy

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Last Friday night, proving what a party animal I really am, I watched the Libertarian debate during the John Stossel Show. It was a one hour part one of a two part debate. The second part will be tonight. The three candidates are Gary Johnson, the 2012 Libertarian candidate & former Governor of New Mexico; John McAfee, billionaire security software creator; and Austin Petersen, a young unknown quantity.

Stossel is a hard core libertarian, and his show is one of the few Fox shows I can stomach. It was an entertaining hour. All three hold views I generally agree with. Johnson is the odds on favorite to win the nomination again, as he has the best name recognition and track record. I found the debate interesting and completely the opposite of the Republican and Democrat circus debates. There was no yelling, screaming, accusations, or gotcha questions from faux journalists. Stossel asked good questions and the candidates answered them honestly.

Truthfully, none of the three could ever inspire a movement. Ron Paul is more of a Libertarian than any of them. Petersen was the most passionate, quoting the founding fathers at every opportunity. But he is in his thirties, hasn’t done anything of substance, and comes across as naive and child like. McAfee has certainly accomplished stuff in his life. He created a security software company and made a billion dollars. He was also on the run from the law in South America on murder charges, that were never proved. He comes across as a little weird. His statement that we are already at war with China was odd for a Libertarian. He made a few odd statements and joked with Petersen about meeting in a gay bar.

Johnson is the overwhelming favorite to win the nomination again. Denninger hates him. He comes across as if he is smoking some of that weed he has been selling. He has no charisma, no passion, and no guiding principles. He seems alright with forcing businesses to sell to people they choose not to sell to. He is Libertarian-lite. He got the most votes of a Libertarian candidate in history at 1.3 million in 2012. That amounted to 1% of the vote. I voted for him as my protest vote.

The story below was a shock to me. Johnson is currently polling in double digits. The biggest detriment to the Libertarian candidate is not getting to participate in the debates. They need to be polling at 15% or higher to get invited to the debates. The only way to explain his double digit support at this point is the absolute hatred that many Americans have for Clinton and Trump. There is no middle ground. You either love them or hate them. This does open up a door for an alternative candidate. If Ron Paul ran as a Libertarian he would get more than 15%. Those debates would be for the ages.

But, it’s not to be. Watch part two of the Libertarian debate tonight at 9:00 on Fox Business Network and see what you think of these guys. I hope Johnson doesn’t kiss McAfee again, like he did in part one.


Vietnam War at 50: Have We Learned Nothing?


Posted on 4th April 2016 by Administrator in Economy



Last week Defense Secretary Ashton Carter laid a wreath at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington in commemoration of the “50th anniversary” of that war. The date is confusing, as the war started earlier and ended far later than 1966. But the Vietnam War at 50 commemoration presents a good opportunity to reflect on the war and whether we have learned anything from it.

Some 60,000 Americans were killed fighting in that war more than 8,000 miles away. More than a million Vietnamese military and civilians also lost their lives. The US government did not accept that it had pursued a bad policy in Vietnam until the bitter end. But in the end the war was lost and we went home, leaving the destruction of the war behind. For the many who survived on both sides, the war would continue to haunt them.

It was thought at the time that we had learned something from this lost war. The War Powers Resolution was passed in 1973 to prevent future Vietnams by limiting the president’s ability to take the country to war without the Constitutionally-mandated Congressional declaration of war. But the law failed in its purpose and was actually used by the war party in Washington to make it easier to go to war without Congress.


Rule 40(b): Republicans Set the Stage to Select the Establishment Candidate


Posted on 2nd April 2016 by Administrator in Economy

, , , , , ,

As expected, the Republican Party will not follow the candidate who the people select in the primaries. Rule 40(b), which requires a presidential candidate to win eight states to qualify for the nomination, has been scrapped for the upcoming convention in Cleveland. Rule 40(b) was a special rule to prevent Ron Paul’s name from being introduced. Under the present circumstances, the very rule used to put Mitt Romney in the candidate slot would prevent anyone but Trump from being the candidate.

Rule 40(b) only applied to the 2012 Republican Convention in Tampa, Florida, that nominated former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. The chairman is trying to pretend that the delegates pick the nominee, but if they can stop Trump on the first ballot then they are free to vote for whoever they want, which nullifies the entire primary process.

The ceiling will start to crumble when the American people see that their votes do not really count. The establishment picks the nominee — not the people. They will try to do their best to pretend this is a democratic process, but if anyone other than Trump becomes the candidate it will prove that the right to vote is meaningless.

A European PATRIOT Act Will Not Keep People Safe


Posted on 28th March 2016 by Administrator in Economy



It was not long after last week’s horrifying bombings in Brussels that the so-called security experts were out warning that Europeans must give up more of their liberty so government can keep them secure from terrorism. I guess people are not supposed to notice that every terrorist attack represents a major government failure and that rewarding failure with more of the same policies only invites more failure.

I am sure a frightened population will find government promises of perfect security attractive and may be willing to allow more surveillance of their personal lives. They should pause a little beforehand and consider what their governments have done so far to keep them “safe.”

The government of France, for example, has been particularly aggressive in its Middle East policy. Then-French President Sarkozy was among the most determined proponents of “regime change” in Libya. That operation has left the country in chaos, with much of the territory controlled by an ISIS and al-Qaeda that were not there before the “liberation.” As we learned last week from Hillary Clinton’s emails, Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron were much more concerned with getting their hands on Libya’s oil after the overthrow of Gaddafi. The creation of a hotbed of terrorism that could easily make its way to Europe was not important. They wanted to secure enormously profitable deals for well-connected French and English energy companies.



1 comment

Posted on 23rd March 2016 by Administrator in Economy

, , ,

Beltway Conservative Budget Plans Are Big Spending and Anti-Liberty


Posted on 21st March 2016 by Administrator in Economy

, , , ,


According to a recent poll, 73 percent of all Americans oppose increases in federal spending. Since this anti-government spending sentiment is a major reason Republicans control the House and Senate, one would expect the Republican Congress to hold the line on, or even cut, government spending. Yet, despite the Republican leadership’s rhetoric about “fiscal responsibility,” this year’s House Republican budget spends $104 billion more than the GOP’s 2013 budget.

Some conservatives, most notably the Heritage Foundation, have criticized the GOP budget. Heritage and the conservative House Republican Study Committee (RSC) have both prepared conservative alternatives to the official Republican budgets. Unfortunately, neither Heritage nor the RSC budgets meaningfully reduce federal spending.

Conservative efforts to reduce the size of government are handicapped by their love affair with the military-industrial complex. Since the Pentagon’s budget makes up the largest category of “discretionary” spending, it seems logical that a serious balanced budget plan would reduce spending on militarism.


Loretta Lynch and the Government War on Free Speech


Posted on 14th March 2016 by Administrator in Economy

, ,


During her appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitted that she asked the FBI to examine whether the federal government should take legal action against so-called climate change deniers. Attorney General Lynch is not responding to any criminal acts committed by climate change skeptics. Instead, she is responding to requests from those frustrated that dissenters from the alleged climate change consensuses have successfully blocked attempts to create new government programs to fight climate change.

These climate change censors claim that the argument over climate change is settled and the deniers’ success in blocking congressional action is harming the public. Therefore, the government must disregard the First Amendment and silence anyone who dares question the reigning climate change dogma. This argument ignores the many reputable scientists who have questioned the magnitude, effects, and role of human action in causing climate change.

If successful, the climate change censors could set a precedent that could silence numerous other views. For example, many people believe the argument over whether we should audit, and then end, the Federal Reserve is settled. Therefore, the deniers of Austrian economics are harming the public by making it more difficult for Congress to restore a free-market monetary policy. So why shouldn’t the government silence Paul Krugman?