Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (148994)	11/15/2012 7:22:51 AM
From: lorne	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224868

Ron Paul's Farewell Speech to Congress: We Must Reject Coercion as a Tool to Mold Social and Economic Behavior Brian Doherty \|Nov. 14, 2012 reason.com Rep. Ron Paul, who did not seek re-election to the House seat he won in 1996, gave part one of his farewell speech to Congress from the House floor this afternoon, aired live on C-SPAN. (Paul told me last week he was having a hard time getting the Speaker's office to grant him the time he wanted to give this talk and would likely have to split it in two; he seems to have gotten his full hour today.) He wrote this speech out and read it, not his usual style. For my taste, the extemporizing Ron Paul of the campaign trail is a little more appealing, but this was still a good and important talk. The talk was certainly not tightly structured; it hopped from idea to idea connected only by the theme, "things government does that are dangerous to liberty" and the vital importance of the people re-embracing the idea of liberty. Paul used the talk mostly an opportunity to get out as many libertarian ideas and observations as he could squeeze into a half hour to what he hoped would be an attentive audience. What I write here covers at best half of the specifics he managed to rattle out quickly, and will likely not be much better organized than Paul was himself. Paul says he is encouraged by what he sees as a renaissance of interest in the ideas of liberty among students and the young. He insists that while liberty does tend to make us rich, we need to understand why liberty is good even beyond mere materialist concerns--and that our apparent material prosperity lately is phony and based largely on debt and out-of-control fiat money that he predicts will lead to even greater economic crises ahead. He laments that America departed from what he saw as a generally proper attitude toward government's role back in the progressive era, particularly with the income tax and Federal Reserve. He wonders why there aren't more politicians who defend both economic and civil liberties. Paul attacked a long string of what he sees as government abuses, including the National Defense Authorization Act, sanctions, opposition to true free trade, arresting users of medical pot or raw milk, and wonders why Germany wants its gold. He doesn't like how many federal crimes now exist and how insecure our electronic communications are to government snooping. He attacks the TSA and mandatory sentences in drug prosecutions and the drug war in general, and wonders why you can't criticize AIPAC without committing political suicide. He's against using government to give away others' resources to special interests, and he's against Keynesian economics, and he's for habeus corpus. Paul is against violence, even for humanitarian reasons. He says only those with criminal minds would want to walk into someone's house and tell them what they need to do, allegedly for their own good. He calls for "no government monopoly over initiating violence," one of the more anarchistic thoughts one has ever heard from the House floor. "The fact that violence by government is seen as morally justified," he says, will likely lead to more violence in the case of domestic unrest as the result of further economic troubles where people are fighting to keep what they think is theirs. He wonders why government authorities are able to sleep knowing the damage they are causing to others with their wars--and thinks as long as that philosophy of might makes right rules, it will tend to create a lack of morality in the people as well. He pretty much blames public immorality for the immorality of government later on in the talk, lamenting our general loss of understanding that violence to solve social problems is wrong. He says the rich tend to benefit more from government's income redistribution schemes than the poor. He hat tips the homeschooling movement and the Internet as the likely sources for the spread of the ideas of liberty that America needs to survive the looming crisis. Our five biggest crises, he says, are attacks on civil liberties; foreign policy blowback; the ease with which we go to war; a financial crisis from excessive debt; and (I think) giving extranational governing authorities too much say over our national decisions (an old populist Right theme that Paul pretty much dropped in his last campaign). In summation, Paul says, people should care for themselves, and give government authority merely to enforce contracts, settle disputes, and protect against foreign aggression. And politicians need to educate people that they need to be prepared to take up the burdens that government should never have taken up to begin with. It's all about peace and tolerance, Paul says, and a truly moral people must reject the use of violence for social goals. (He calls back to the time he was booed in January at a South Carolina GOP debate for calling on the golden rule in our foreign affairs.) Envy and intolerance must go; love and free market economics have to rule. He calls on all of us to help spread the message of liberty--which usually accompanies wealth and prosperity--throughout the land. Ron Paul: a true American original. No politician talks like this, and I suspect it will be a long time before another does. Ideas like this will be much harder to find in the House of Representatives with Paul gone, and we will all be the poorer for it.

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (148994)	11/15/2012 2:43:14 PM
From: lorne	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224868

Maine Republican chairman questions black voters Charlie Webster's claim that hundreds of unknown black people voted in rural Maine towns causes a stir, and leads one GOP strategist to call for his immediate resignation. By Eric Russell erussell@pressherald.com Staff Writer Posted: November 14 pressherald.com Maine Republican Party Chairman Charlie Webster is once again alleging possible voting irregularities, this time claiming that groups of unknown black people showed up in some rural towns to vote on Election Day. Webster made the claim in a wide-ranging, post-election interview this week with Don Carrigan of WCSH-TV. "In some parts of rural Maine, there were dozens, dozens of black people who came in and voted on Election Day," he said. "Everybody has a right to vote, but nobody in (these) towns knows anyone who's black. How did that happen? I don't know. We're going to find out." When Carrigan pressed Webster on where it happened, Webster provided no specifics or proof of his claims, but said the party would investigate further. When asked about the issue in an interview Wednesday with the Portland Press Herald, Webster again refused to provide specifics. He said his point is not that the new voters were black, but that they were not recognized by town officials. "I'm not talking about 15 or 20. I'm talking hundreds," he said Wednesday. "I'm not politically correct and maybe I shouldn't have said these voters were black, but anyone who suggests I have a bias toward any race or group, frankly, that's sleazy." Webster's comments come at a sensitive moment for Republicans, including many who say the election losses last week show that the party needs to reach out to minority voters. Lance Dutson, a Republican strategist and former campaign manager for Senate candidate Charlie Summers, posted a statement on his Twitter account Thursday saying Webster should step down now rather than wait until his term ends next month. "Webster's statements should be cause for immediate resignation. Any GOP who values future of the party should demand the same," he says in the Tweet. Webster said he has identified five "pockets" of the state where he has concerns about voting irregularities. He would not identify those areas, but said he plans to mail "Thank You" cards to all of the newly registered voters. If a large number of cards are returned because the addresses are invalid, Webster said, he will know he is on to something. Megan Sanborn, spokeswoman for Secretary of State Charlie Summers, said Summers was shocked when he watched the video of the interview on WCSH. "Our office has not heard any complaints about Election Day," Sanborn said. "Secretary Summers jealously guards the right of everyone to vote and feels that they should." Hallowell Town Clerk Deanna Mosher Hallett, outgoing president of the Maine Town and City Clerks' Association, said she hasn't heard about any Election Day problems from clerks around the state. "If there is enough chatter out there, I'd hear about it," she said. "Everything went smoothly." There were reports on Nov. 6 that Somali immigrants in Auburn were challenged at the polls by a Republican poll watcher, who later backed off that challenge. Maine historically has been among the whitest states. In the 2010 census, only Vermont had a smaller percentage of minorities, but Maine showed a subtle demographic shift, particularly in certain areas. The 2010 census showed Maine's black population at 15,707, just 1.2 percent of the total. Democrats criticized Webster for making new allegations without providing any proof or details, although they said they don't consider his comments racist. Sen. John Patrick, D-Rumford, said he agrees with Webster on one thing: There were new voters on Election Day. "But I see that as a good thing," Patrick said. "I'm not looking at these people with skepticism. But poor Charlie, this has been his mantra. I don't know why he wastes so much energy on it." Maine Democratic Party Chairman Ben Grant said he wasn't surprised to hear Webster's comments. "The only troubling thing is that Webster still believes in this garbage and that people still believe him," Grant said. "The issue of voter fraud has been thoroughly vetted. His party suffers this huge loss and his response is not to reflect or go quietly, but to continue with fear-mongering and blame." Grant said his party received calls on Election Day about voting issues, but nothing that wasn't addressed by a quick call to the Secretary of State's Office. Webster, a former lawmaker from Farmington who has said he will step down as party chairman when his term ends in December, has made similar claims in the past. He has long complained that Maine elections are too loose and open to voter fraud. Last year, he targeted college students when he alleged that more than 200 had voted in recent elections without establishing residency in the places where they voted. The Secretary of State's Office reviewed Webster's allegations and found no instances of fraud. Webster, however, remains unconvinced. "I just think that the system, without some kind of ID or some kind of way to check, is fraught for abuse," he said Wednesday. In the last legislative session, lawmakers considered, and rejected, a bill to require voters to show photo identification. With Democrats now in the majority, it's unlikely that Maine voting laws will change in the next two years. Staff Writer Eric Russell can be contacted at 791-6344 or at: