Government is created by man. Economically speaking, government agents are a division of labor that allows an individual to occupy their time for productive means. Individuals certainly could ration a portion of their time to sitting on the front porch with a shotgun protecting their property and person from harm. They also could stay close to the home in case of fire. But economic activity and thus human progress would move at a snail’s pace under such an arrangement. Labor necessary for the production of goods and the satisfaction of human wants would sit idle for a good portion of time watching over their property. Government agents free labor from idleness to productive. An agent cannot act in a manner differently from the collective individuals that hired them.

Under the idealism of liberty, a person cannot use force or fraud to plunder another’s property or threaten life. If I desire food on my table, then I cannot steal my neighbor’s dinner. Similarly, my sickness does not allow me to rob my neighbor’s money so I can buy medicine. I also have no right to threaten my neighbor with an act of violence for behaving in a manner that I do not approve of even though their actions cause me no harm. We hire government agents to intervene in acts of injustice. If I cannot steal from my neighbor, then neither can my agent. I cannot through force demand that my neighbor hand over money to put food on the table and neither can my agent. I cannot murder except in the case of self defense or property protection and neither can my agent.

A person cannot be both a thief and a saint. An agent cannot on one hand protect me and on the other hand steal from my wallet. No matter how noble the cause, the government becomes the agent of a thief when it takes through the threat of penalty or force the property of one for the benefit of another. And yet, this is exactly the state of our society. Government at all levels spends a large portion of its time as an agent for plunder instead of a protector against it.

Thomas Jefferson defined the proper role of government in his first inaugural address.

“A wise and frugal government , which shall restrain men from injuring one another shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”

Debates over government policy today are merely discussions on the amount of theft.

Related posts:

1. The True Nature of Federal Reserve Policy If any doubt existed about the true mission of the Federal Reserve, then a recent interview with hedge-fund manager David Tepper should erase any questions....
2. Government Bans Cash and Hoodies While all freedom loving eyes have looked on in horror as the federal government has shredded the threads of free markets, state and local laws...
3. Attention GOP: The Proper Immigration Policy Every candidate on the stage last night had and has it totally wrong. Open immigration is the only moral policy that this country should have....

This is where I want to scream. The argument is moot. Capitalism does not exist. The economies of the world range on a scale from light socialism to communism. As it has been said many times before, capitalism or free markets become extinct the moment a central bank is created. The Federal Reserve practices a price manipulation for money (interest rates) that benefits one party while having a negative impact on another. Free markets are based on the premise of mutual benefit. Price rigging of any good, including money, interferes with the necessary signals between buyers and sellers that allow them to mutually gain.

Secondly, an exchange governed by regulation under the threat of penalty for non-compliance cannot be considered free and voluntary. It is hard to think of one transaction in this country that does come under a maze of bureaucratic rule. Even the products exchanged at a garage sale or Tupperware party must at some stage be approved regulators. Children selling lemonade on the sidewalk are now under government harassment for not having a business license or health inspection.

The following article by James Miller is one of the best I have come across that succinctly describes capitalism.

Capitalism

Related posts:

1. Why Capitalism Is Worth Defending “It is simply a fact that capitalism, even hampered by the state, has dragged most of the world out of the pitiful poverty that characterized...
2. Capitalism v. Christianity The reality is clear, the delusions rampant. At the end of the day, you must pick one or the other for, as Dr. Hsieh adeptly...
3. Sherlock on Occupy and Capitalism Some time ago I received a newsletter that stated the following as part of a defense of capitalism: “The capitalist system is messy, imperfect, and...

If you supported (or attended) the protests in Madison over collective bargaining, you were exercising your freedom of speech. If you protested the protestors in Madison, you too were exercising your freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is, in fact, what I would consider an inviolable, sacrosanct, principle of American-style democracy and fully reflects the brilliant enlightenment ideology of our founders and the founding documents they penned. It doesn’t mean you are endowed with some un-sourced, uncaused, supernaturally or socially granted right to say what you want, wherever, and whenever. Freedom of speech is fundamentally premised upon the recognition and due respect for the property upon which one speaks – it is a reflection and outgrowth of the fundamental of individual rights.

When you have permission from those who have ownership of said property to speak, you are enjoying the freedom of speech, properly understood. If you do not have their permission, and speak anyway, you are wrongfully trespassing and violating their pre-emptive right to hold and enjoy property privately. This means the land upon which you are holding your sign, or speaking into your megaphone; the building in which you rise to deliver your message; the radio station or television studio in which you are crafting your words and images; or, indeed, the very web page upon which you are posting your thoughts (video, writing, audio message). Since we the people have granted to government the unique use of physical force in our society, they have a profound role to uphold the individual rights of property owners who invite-or give permission to-people to speak. We have the right to speak our minds provided we do not violate the actual rights of others in the process – my individual rights end where yours begin. Were you or I invited onto private property to speak and demonstrate, and the police (or anyone) used force to unilaterally silence such speech THAT would be a violation of your freedom to speak and the property rights of the landowner. Alternatively, if you run into a lecture hall where an invited speaker is presenting views you are opposed to, and begin to shout, interrupting the speaker, it is YOU who are violating the speaker’s (and the venue owner’s) freedom of speech – you are NOT legitimately exercising your own freedom, but rather preventing someone else from it.

If you were one of the impassioned protestors in Madison who showed up on the steps of the capital, on either side of the debate, you were exercising this protected right and the principles behind it. You were not hauled off to jail as a consequence of protesting against Governor Walker because the land upon which you demonstrated is owned, theoretically, by no one in particular, and everyone simultaneously, i.e. public property. If we lived in a dictatorship, Governor Walker could have simply ordered the Capital Police to seize your signs, and toss you in jail. Protesting on public lands is, in fact, a unique case in an otherwise general freedom of speech. It is the government’s agents responsibility to ensure that your right to speak is protected, and not violated – whether it be on public lands (while abiding the reasonable access rules needed), or, especially, on private property. The worst case of all is where the government presumes ownership of all property and simply uses its unique access to physical force to censor you from speaking out merely because the message you want to deliver is either antagonistic to, or otherwise inconsistent with, official government policy. Tied for first worst, you are hauled off, or censored, because someone standing next to you, who you don’t know or perhaps don’t even agree with, held up a sign or played some audio that the government didn’t appreciate, or violated someone’s intellectual property rights, and therefore you were summarily denied the right to speak (or even remain on the premises because the government could condemn the property forthwith) by use of the force of government – all without any due process. That is what happens in a dictatorship, or any overtly tyrannical, or theocratic/religious, state.

Which brings me to SOPA (and PIPA) –ill-conceived legislation supported by the Motion Pictures Association of America (MPAA), and others who claim (correctly) that piracy of protected material is a problem on the internet. The stated intention of this expansion of the Federal Government’s power over the internet is ostensibly to protect intellectual property, such as music, video content, and literature. While protecting the individual rights of intellectual property owners IS a legitimate function of government, it cannot be the case that such protection simultaneously tramples the rights of other’s free speech in the process. But that is exactly what this legislation would do. The legislation’s fundamental premise is that the internet is actually the property of the United States Government, and as such those who happen to be in power today can unilaterally use force to restrict your and my ability to exercise our freedom of speech, properly understood. The proponents of SOPA view the internet as being owned by the United States Government, and therefore subject not just to protection of intellectual property, but to the overt use of force to shut down entire websites and internet communities without the application of the rule of law. This is wrong, it is a violation of property rights, and in fact a violation of the individual rights of website owners and other content producers.

As stated on Wikipedia’s site “The originally proposed bill would allow the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as copyright holders, to seek court orders against websites accused of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. Depending on who makes the request, the court order could include barring online advertising networks and payment facilitators from doing business with the allegedly infringing website, barring search engines from linking to such sites, and requiring Internet service providers to block access to such sites. The bill would make unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content a crime, with a maximum penalty of five years in prison for ten such infringements within six months. The bill also gives immunity to Internet services that voluntarily take action against websites dedicated to infringement, while making liable for damages any copyright holder who knowingly misrepresents that a website is dedicated to infringement.[4]”

This is analogous to all the protestors against Governor Walker who were on the grounds of the capital in Madison being hauled off, en-masse, because a single protestor on the other side of the block held up a sign that violated the copyright of some third party. If you or I violate a copyright in our activity on the internet, if someone pirates intellectual property, that is a problem and piracy laws are already in force. But trampling the rights of otherwise innocent website owners and their law abiding site visitors is not the solution – but that is exactly what SOPA would do.

I rarely agree with Hillary Clinton, but I do agree with her when she said: “When ideas are blocked, information deleted, conversations stifled and people constrained in their choices, the Internet is diminished for all of us.. There isn’t an economic Internet and a social Internet and a political Internet. There’s just the Internet.”

Today Wikipedia, and numerous other sites, are offline to protest this proposed legislation. I stand in full support of Wiki in this matter. Oppose SOPA! If such laws are allowed to pass in America, then we deserve the noose because we have given the government the rope and the authority to tie the knot.

Related posts:

1. Collective Bargaining is Not a Right With all this talk of collective bargaining rights, one must wonder if the people using the term can define the meaning of a right. Often...
2. Get The Hell Off Your Property As the over-hyped Category 1 Hurricane Irene targeted the east coast of the United States, the customary mandatory evacuations were issued by several governors and...
3. Iowa’s Mystic Caucus Only in evangelical nut-job-land, aka Iowa, could a meat head the likes of Rick Santorum almost pull out a victory. This is the same holier...

According to the self-appointed Popes of the conservative church, Paul and his philosophy of liberty and free markets is often characterized as whacky, nutty, or even dangerous. One writer described Paul’s Austrian economic beliefs as out of this world and acquired by reading obscure economist. The author never spent one word trying to explain the reasons for his feelings. Lack of supporting argument is commonplace among the media in their attacks on the Texas Congressman.

What we have learned over the last few months is the shallowness of their intellectual depths. Limbaugh, Hannity, and O’Reilly may talk a good game about freedom, but by flippantly dismissing Paul through a word or short phrase, they have shown an inability to express an argument in any meaningful words. One possible reason for this lack of argumentation is that the talking heads understand little about what they bloviate. Simply, they are read but not learned individuals. Their response to a person that dares to challenge their beliefs is to shout, name call, or hang-up.

This Republican “big government” Party may well be on its death bed. Libertarians are no longer willing to mark a ballot for the lesser of two evils. Conservative talk radio may also find its attraction waning. The new awakening in America finds people thirsting for knowledge not fill in the blank opinions. According to recent survey, the radio audience for Hannity and Limbaugh is down about 30% for both since last November.

May the Republican Party and their talking heads rest in peace.

Related posts:

1. Paul versus Paul Whenever I hear the name of Congressman Paul Ryan, it brings me back to his justification that government had to do something during the financial...
2. Any Question Who Should Be President Ron Paul is the only choice for freedom. As Michelle Bachman said about Newt Gingrich earlier in the week, the rest are just frugal socialist...
3. A Real Speech Rand Paul is quietly becoming a giant in the philosophical debate. Unlike Boehner and company, Rand takes after his father and shows no inclination to...

Share It.

Related posts:

1. Herman Cain, the real deal! Herman Cain Announcement Herman Cain will be our next president. He is the real deal and I hope that the moderate Republican establishment doesn’t stand...
2. Attention GOP: The Proper Immigration Policy Every candidate on the stage last night had and has it totally wrong. Open immigration is the only moral policy that this country should have....
3. Ron Paul Nevada GOP Debate ...

In traditional Western medical ethics, a doctor’s fundamental responsibility is to practice to the best of his ability for his patient’s benefit. But lately, doctors are being taught a radical new collectivist medical ethics where the “social good” trumps the individual patient’s welfare.

Related posts:

1. The Source of Natural Rights – Part II Physical force is anti-life. And to whatever extent or degree it is used, it restricts or prevents one from acting on his or her own...

Ron Paul Debate Answers

Related posts:

1. The Republican Conundrum Nearly two months ago, a gathering of friends highlighted a problem facing the mainstream media labeled frontrunners for the Republican Presidential nomination. At that time,...
2. Paul versus Paul Whenever I hear the name of Congressman Paul Ryan, it brings me back to his justification that government had to do something during the financial...
3. A Real Speech Rand Paul is quietly becoming a giant in the philosophical debate. Unlike Boehner and company, Rand takes after his father and shows no inclination to...

More government

Of course like most government solutions, this idea completely misses the mark on several fronts. First and foremost, searches conducted by the TSA violate the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution. You cannot solve the inherent problems of an unconstitutional government arm with another unconstitutional government arm. It is akin to one thief overseeing the actions of another thief. The question always with government advocates is what side they will be advocating for. One thing I can say for certain is that their concerns will not involve the US Constitution.

Fourth Amendment
Secondly, TSA personnel are not professionals in any meaning of the word. Most have little more law enforcement experience than a night security guard at the lumber yard. I would suspect that for many receiving a government check for non-work is quite common. The bottom line is that the people working for the TSA are not the brightest bulbs on the tree.

The real answer to airport security is to follow the path of private property and the free markets. The airlines should handle their own security issues. If passengers feel a particular carrier is not adequately promoting the safety of customers, than the flying public travel with another airline that will. The consequence of bad experiences will be customers taking their business to a competitor. The free market is the only advocate a customer needs; an idea that government does not advocate for.

Related posts:

1. TSA Rap Sheet The Thanksgiving holiday is the busiest travel days for Americans. For the blue-clad badge thugs of the TSA it must seem more like Christmas. More...
2. TSA Reasoning When I arrived at the airport tonight for my trip home, the line for the TSA Checkpoint Charlie stretched damn near outside the front doors...
3. Sprechen Sie Deutsch I read today where the TSA is going to experiment with another screening process by chatting with the passengers. After having you strip half naked...

As noted many times before, the argument for government intervention in the free market is of course based on a fallacy. You cannot logically blame something that does not exist in the first place. Free markets do not include a central bank manipulating the cost of money. Free markets do not include bureaucrats telling a producer the minimum amount to pay their employees or what benefits they must offer. The free market does not have government reaching into the pockets of people and extracting a chunk of their wealth. The free market does not have government subsidizing housing, medicine, education, agriculture, energy, and hundreds of other industries. Backstops against failure are not part of the free market playbook. For at least the past hundred years, the government at all levels has increasingly molded private transactions into a form that looks nothing like a society based on voluntary exchange.

The governments of Europe and their central banking partners are rapidly crumbling. The extent of the damage is so great that trillions of dollars are needed to just keep the boat floating for a few more months. Across the United States the roll of municipalities declaring bankruptcy grows daily. The accumulated debt of numerous states like Illinois and California makes Greece look frugal. The total liability of the federal government that includes Medicare and Social Security dwarfs the world’s wealth. Individuals around the globe are in danger of being swept out into a sea of financial ruin by the massive government debt wave circling the earth.

What is to blame for all of this? Not the free market, it does not exist. When the Federal Reserve set out on a course of bailing out Europe yesterday in a clandestine operation, Ron Paul summed it up best. According to Paul, the action by the Federal Reserve essentially bailed out socialism.

Related posts:

1. Bernanke and Natural Economic Forces In a prelude to QE3 or some version of money printing, Ben Bernanke in Minneapolis today conceded that the economy is suffering from more than...
2. Smashing the Peg Board Obama today chastised leaders for not having the political will to solve the European financial cesspool. This line about “political will” seems to be the...
3. The Fallacy of Job Creation A colleague with a Keynesian bent presented the following thought: corporations are reporting record profits and hoarding loads of cash while unemployment continues at high...

William Anderson posted a story about a man charged on the basis of “could happen”. One of the weapons citizens have against laws that inhibit liberty is to nullify or ignore government edicts. In the case of a trial for instance of a person charged with drug possession, a jury contrary to all evidence can vote the defendant not guilty on the basis that the law is wrong. I believe it was Jefferson that once declared people have a duty to ignore bad laws. The civil rights movement was an example of people turning their backs on “Jim Crow” laws.

Summarizing the story relayed by Anderson, a man in New York City stood outside a courthouse passing out leaflets arguing for jury nullification. Federal prosecutors had the man arrested and charged him with jury tampering even though he was not on trial or had any personal benefit in a specific court case, which is usually necessary to prove to find an individual guilty of trying to influence a juror or the jury.

It Could Happen

What is the man guilty of in the eyes of federal prosecutors? The people receiving the leaflet could happen to sit on a jury one day. The next thing you know there will be a law against team sports because the coach could happen to become a child rapist.

Related posts:

1. Could Happen Laws In a rebuttal to an editorial opinion by the staff of the Hudson Star-Observer the other week over the recent passage of conceal and carry,...
2. The Source of Natural Rights – Part I Part I of II.. revised slightly for readability and some coherence and now posted next to Part II for ease of access and flow.. :>.....
3. The Source of Natural Rights – Part II Physical force is anti-life. And to whatever extent or degree it is used, it restricts or prevents one from acting on his or her own...

In the past few days we learned that while the major banks tried to comfort people in 2008 and 2009 about their solvency, they were secretly receiving $7.77 trillion from their partner in crime, Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve. The banks begged Congress for temporary relief in the name of a $700 billion bailout known as TARP, which is chump change compared what they received from the central bank. The Federal Reserve states that the “solvent” banks” exchanged collateral for the newly printed money. What type of collateral? We are told the banks paid back the money, says who; the same Federal Reserve that lied and covered up the counterfeiting of $7.7trillion. Just to make us feel better, the central bank said today that the major banks in this country are good shape because now they are only leveraged 7 to 1.

The subject of economics in college classroom is based on a lie call Keynesianism. Contrary to all logic, history, and recent experiences, many academic economists still push the mathematical mystical idea of a multiplier on their students and the public. Worse yet,, economists of the Nobel Prize variety along with their academic counterparts believe that the way to solve a debt crisis is by taking on more debt or printing more counterfeit money.

Investing money in stocks is based on lies. Again mathematical voodoo leads you to believe in value where none exists. You don’t invest in a company when you buy stock; the only person receiving the money is some other Joe. When George Bush implored people after 9-11 to support America by buying stocks, an individual could have purchased the certificate from a person in a country that supported the people who flew the planes that fateful day.

Science has become a hoax. Scientist without hard evidence now pushes agendas through predictions ginned up mathematical models. Global Warming now runs neck and neck with Keynesian Economics as the biggest scam to ever be perpetrated upon mankind. As it has been said before, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

“We care about the kids” is a damn lie. Government schools talk teary-eyed about the children. But as we witnessed this past year in Wisconsin, the only thing government school teachers care about is their wallet and precious taxpayer funded pensions. They don’t care how much people are suffering in the economy; it is all about them getting more.

The police do not prevent crime. Ninety-nine percent of the time they show up after the gun has been fired or the money has been stolen from the safe. Police do not protect you the citizen. Their priority is to safeguard the government bureaucrats and politicians that steal from you and give a portion of the loot to them. Again, the police in Wisconsin this past year displayed whose side they really are on.

The War on Terror has been mostly a lie. No WMDs existed in Iraq where we have waged war for almost a decade. People in other countries do not hate us because of freedom; they hate us because our government bureaucrats stick their noses in the business of other countries. We have no moral authority to tell another country how their people should live or the structure of their government. We occupy territory in over 100 countries throughout the world. How would we feel if China established a military base in Des Moines? History has shown that we are weaker country because of the military involvement.

We are not a free country. Name one thing the government does not regulate or tax or manipulate. Whether you travel by air, bus, train, or car, the government is watching and frisking you in the process. Is going through an airport similar to the United States fifty years ago or NAZI Germany in the 1930s?

The road to collapse is paved with lies and fraud. The very same pillars that the world now rests upon

Related posts:

1. Herman Keynes Count me as one not running with the crowd toward the Herman Cain bandwagon. As I pointed out two weeks ago, his 999 tax plan...

Related posts:

1. Get The Hell Off Your Property As the over-hyped Category 1 Hurricane Irene targeted the east coast of the United States, the customary mandatory evacuations were issued by several governors and...

Germany now faces a dilemma. One course of action is to copy the insanity of the United States by giving the European Central Bank the authority to buy the sovereign debt of European Union members that banks and investors shy away from. The central bank purchases the bonds by printing new money. In essence the central bank institutes price controls on debt yield. Do you really think the free market interest rate on 5 year US Treasuries is less than 1%?

Printing money in order keep a lid on debt yields may work for a brief time. As the Germans learned firsthand after WWI when investors shied from purchasing German bonds, the country’s central bank resorted to money printing that eventually exploded into hyperinflation. Prices rise so rapidly that the value of money totally disintegrates. In such an environment the middle class is wiped out as their savings evaporate into thin air. Store shelves lay bare as distribution cannot keep pace with individuals seeking goods in exchange for a currency becoming more worthless with each passing moment. Rapid increases in prices all but make it impossible for producers to make the necessary revenue and cost calculations. Productions of goods come to a standstill. Knowing the history of money printing to buy debt, Germany has rightfully balked at any agreement to allow the European Bank to engage in monetizing the debt.

The only alternative for Germany to regain the confidence of bond investors is to sever ties with the Eurozone. Without the common thread of the European Union and a singular currency, Germany’s financial structure can be viewed with a microscope instead of a telescope scanning the entire continent.

When the Titanic made its icy plunge toward the ocean floor, passengers in lifeboats had to row far enough to keep from getting sucked down in the vortex of the sinking ship. Germany needs to paddle hard away from the Euro.

The question for people in this country is why anyone should be shackled to another person’s debt. Many, including myself, have handled our personal finances responsibly carrying little or no liabilities. If a neighbor takes on a debt load that will in the future wipe out his assets, then why must I be forced to surrender a portion of my wealth and financial security to keep the neighbor afloat? The same can be said for bad decisions made politicians. Because I am tied to the currency of the federal government and they by law dictate that I must use their money for transactions in this country, their irresponsible behavior directly affects my wealth. The only option left to the public is either let the Federal Reserve continue buying Treasuries by printing money or let the politicians tax every dime we possess. Either choice results in a destroyed economic system.

The only chance to be saved from such catastrophe is no different than choices facing Germany. We must sever ties from the source of the problem.

.

Related posts:

1. Check-Kiting In order to create the illusion of money in the bank, individuals of less than moral character will write a check from the account of...
2. S&P Got It Wrong The Obama administration loudly called foul the past few days over Standard and Poors budget analysis and credit downgrade of US debt to AA+. And...
3. The Union is Breaking Apart The European Union appears on the brink of crumbling apart under the burden of sovereign debt created by bloated governments, a burdensome public employee pension...

Last night at an impromptu meeting of a half-dozen friends the same question was again put to the table. The people involved in the question, like the time before, are quite intelligent and knowledgeable about an array of subjects. The answers last night were again all over the board. Gingrich pulled one vote; Cain got one other; two voted for Paul; one said anybody but Obama, and the most politically astute member of the group voted they were deeply conflicted. Notice how Romney again received not a single nod.

Furthermore, several voiced the opinion that if Gingrich or Romney ended up winning the nomination, then two would sit out the election and another stated they would mark the ballot for Obama in an act of pouring gasoline on to the fire.

The problem for the Republicans, and thus the country appears to be this: A significant portion of the country truly wants liberty restored and an end to American imperialism abroad. They see government at all levels as corrupt. Additionally, they recognize the crony capitalism of government and the Federal Reserve as the source of all economic evil, which is true. Many may agree with such an outline, but swayed somewhat by the media and the Republican power brokers, they have determined a candidate espousing these views cannot win a general election.

A candidate like Gingrich or Romney that speaks in tempered terms about freedom while still promoting the ideas of American global power and government solution to economic woes is according to the experts palatable to the masses. But the two recently anointed front-runners leave a bad taste to those with a deep conviction toward minimal government, not just less. With a chunk of the electorate bolting someone other than Gingrich or Romney, then the pair becomes no different than the stigma attached to Ron Paul; they are unelectable.

The fact remains this country is about evenly divided between the :makers and the takers”. At this point, the election for President appears to be headed for a very ugly conclusion, which is the re-election of Obama.

Related posts:

1. 118 Words for Economic Growth Versus 160 Pages Today Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney unveiled his 160 page job creation plan. Like most policy proposals coming from Republican political transvestites, Romney dabbles at...
2. Republican Logic On Friday the Republican controlled House of Representatives voted and rejected a resolution that would have given Obama the authority to deploy US troops in...
3. A Warning Shot For Republicans During the course of the evening with a gathering of friends, the topic turned toward the Republican nomination for President. An impromptu straw poll was...

Nationalizing Yields

Related posts:

1. Treasury Purchases Up 700% by Federal Reserve In Past Months The Federal Reserve is Buying 70% of U.S. Treasuries. The Federal Reserve has been buying 70% of all new U.S. treasury debt. Up until this...
2. Herman Keynes Count me as one not running with the crowd toward the Herman Cain bandwagon. As I pointed out two weeks ago, his 999 tax plan...
3. Float Like A Butterfly, Sting Like A Bee During the subcommittee hearing that he chairs, Ron Paul blindsided Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke with a question of whether gold is money. Bernanke looked...