News
- Details
- Written by: Jay Edgar
- Category: Latest News
From the Cato Institute:
There is plenty of disagreement on whether a big-government stimulus project is the best way to bring the United States out of recession. The Cato Institute purchased a full-page ad in major newspapers across the country listing the names of several hundred economists who object to massive deficit spending as an economic stimulus. Cato scholars and ad signatories have made their case on television since the spending program was proposed.
See Cato's Fiscal Reality Central.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
Published on cnn.com:
CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (CNN) -- When libertarians question the merit of President Obama's stimulus package, a frequent rejoinder is, "Well, we have to do something." This is hardly a persuasive response. If the cure is worse than the disease, it is better to live with the disease.
In any case, libertarians do not argue for doing nothing; rather, they advocate eliminating or adjusting policies that are bad for the economy independent of the recession. Here is a stimulus package that libertarians can endorse:
American Business Has Sold Its Soul to the Devil: Exhibit A- Obama Warns Companies Not to Book Event
- Details
- Category: Selected Blogs
Government is filled with people who couldn't get a job in the private sector. Why on earth would we put them in charge of our economy? If they knew anything about running a business, they'd be running a business. George W. Bush was a failure at virtually everything he ever did in the business world- except buying the Texas Rangers. He succeeded at that because of his family connections and wealth. Anyone could make money buying a baseball team- if you have the connections and millions of dollars necessary to buy one in the first place. Then Bush proved his lack of business skills by running our country into the ground, ruining our economy, and increasing our debt dramatically.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
For most people, the term "moderate" means someone who is "middle of the road," a "centrist" or a "pragmatic." It also is described a person who "avoids extremism" or "extremes." After doing research and after watching so-called "moderate" politicians and others in action, sort to speak, I come down to a conclusion that they stand for nothing at all. If they did, they would only stand for themselves and nothing else. I seen this when "moderate" politicians like Arlen Spector, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowne who voted for the $800 billion dollar "stimulis" plan in Congress. I saw it also when "moderate" Justices like Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor sided with the majority on the court in the Kelo decison as well as in the Campaign Finance Reform decision. They stand not for the plain words of the Constitution, nor good fiscal policy and when it comes to individual rights, they think that those can be "compromised" as well. They stand for statism.
When it comes to "extremism," I have come to the conclusion that "moderates" regard that as "one who stands for his or her principals." If that is the case, then there should be more extremists around. They would be blessed. They would stand more for freedom than a "moderate" would.
- Details
- Written by: Jay Edgar
- Category: Latest News
The Democrats have adopted the behavior of George Bush with the Big Spending/Corporate Welfare Bill being rushed through congress. George W. Bush used 911 to increase executive power and to immensely increase the size government. Now Barack Obama is using the same tactics with the financial crisis. I at one time had hope for Obama. Boy was I wrong.
George W. Bush made the same mistakes as Herbert Hoover, and Obama is making the same mistakes as Roosevelt. During Obama's speech last night he clearly believes that Rooselvelt's New Deal worked. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The Myth of the Laissez-Faire Bush Years
By Anthony GregoryOne of the most pernicious misconceptions of our time is that the Bush administration represented an era of free-market capitalism. By wrongly blaming the financial crisis and economic woes associated with Bush on his alleged devotion to laissez-faire, many in the mainstream press, academia and political life are misdiagnosing the problem and prescribing the wrong solution: More government, which will in reality only make things worse.
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Letters to Editor
Published in the Home News Tribune, February 8, 2009
For more than 60 years there have been many in power and elsewhere who stated that to mention the word "God" or anything of a spiritual nature violates the law. They have stated the so-called "separation of church and state" must be maintained, a phrase that is nowhere in the Constitution. I have now come to a different conclusion. Those who advocate that spirituality should be forbidden in the public square do so for one reason: irrational fear. These individuals, whether they be on the courts, in political office, in the legal profession, in religion, in the press, or where have you, fear that if one follows a particular form of spirituality, then people will turn away from other beliefs or philosophies. They believe that philosophies like existentialism, utilitarianism, Marxism or others cannot compete with the Bible, the Torah or other holy books. So these individuals have to force it out in order to make their "morality" dominant. It is foolish. None should be forbidden from competing in the public square. It is time that we realize this truth and not give counsel to fears.
ALEX PUGLIESE
Kenilworth
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Latest News
Published on FreedomWorks.org:
By: Matt Kibbe
When you get beyond the rhetoric of change, it is astonishing how close President Barack Obama is following his predecessor in economic policy. Just as George W. Bush attempted to jump-start the economy with a jolt of hundreds of billions of dollars, Obama is doubling down on the bailout bets. In the Troubled Assets Relief Program process, the legislative branch is authorizing nearly a trillion dollars in spending.
But isn’t this backward? Doesn’t Congress have the sole power to authorize executive branch spending, and the president, the power to veto congressional spending authorizations?
- Details
- Written by: Alex Pugliese
- Category: Selected Blogs
Published on townhall.com
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, was set up to combat fraudulent practices. The SEC's website explains that "Ponzi schemes are a type of illegal pyramid scheme named for Charles Ponzi, who duped thousands of New England residents into investing in a postage stamp speculation scheme back in the 1920s." It goes on to say, "Decades later, the Ponzi scheme continues to work on the 'rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul' principle, as money from new investors is used to pay off earlier investors until the whole scheme collapses." That is how the SEC described the recent Bernard Madoff $50 billion Ponzi scheme, "a stunning fraud that appears to be of epic proportions."
A Ponzi scheme does not generate any wealth whatsoever; that is why it ultimately collapses. As Circuit Judge Anderson said in the 1922 Lowell v. Brown case, the Ponzi scheme was "simply the old fraud of paying the earlier comers out of the contributions of the later comers." So long as the number of late comers – you might call them suckers – grows, the fraudulent scheme has life.
- Details
- Written by: Webmaster
- Category: Selected Blogs
Originally published at http://lp.org
The Wall Street Journal's Daniel Henninger doesn't point out congressional Republican voted against the stimulus, not out of opposition to Big Government, but in spite of it. They simply wanted their pork included.
But Henninger does ask the question no one on Capitol Hill wants offered -- if this $1.2 trillion Frankenstein's monster of wealth transfers and exploding spending is supposed to create jobs and help families, why then does it do more for Pennsylvania Avenue than for Main Street? And he takes Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell to task for playing along with Obama's dreams of exponentially-expanding government.
- Details
- Written by: Webmaster
- Category: Selected Blogs
Hoping to win favor for adding trillions of dollars in additional bailouts for banks to his already-struggling government expansion plan, President Barack Obama announced yesterday the imposition of salary caps on executives whose banks receive TARP funds.
In other words, if your bank is struggling and its failure could throw the economy deeper into turmoil, Barack Obama wants to make it even harder to hire the managers you need to stay in business.
So if you're keeping score at home, Obama's plan to create jobs is to 1) permanently inflate government spending, 2) impose billions of dollars in additional debt on future workers, 3) eventually repeal tax relief for employers and 4) impose salary caps on bank executives that ensure they will only hire less-qualified managers in a time of economic trouble.
Inciting class warfare and funneling taxpayer money to groups that supported your election doesn't create jobs. Cutting taxes and hiring experienced business managers will.
No wonder independent voters are turning against the Obama plan in hordes.
- Details
- Written by: Chris Wuestefeld
- Category: Selected Blogs
I recently received a message from the New Jersey Republican Party urging me to lobby my Senators to vote against the so-called "stimulus plan". While I certainly oppose this legislation, I found their position so obviously hypocritical that I was insulted. Here is my reply to them.
- Details
- Written by: Webmaster
- Category: Selected Blogs
Bretigne Shaffer (www.bretigne.com) is a writer and filmmaker. Her weekly Internet TV show "On the Banks" can be seen at www.breakthematrix.com, channel 2 every Friday at 12:00 Pacific Time. |
Originally published at Campaign For Liberty
Dear pro-Obama friends,
I got a call from one of you the day after the election. You were so happy. You had "not been so proud to be an American for... decades!" You're living overseas, and you told me about watching the results in a bar with other Americans and how you were all hugging and crying you were so happy. As I hung up the phone, I found that I felt happy for you too.
Most of you know that I supported neither McCain nor Obama, that I view them as equally opposed to peace and freedom and equally ignorant of sound economic principles. I wasn't going to be happy with the election results no matter who won, so I can at least be glad that some of my friends are happy, and I am. And after his first few days in office, even I have to admit that Obama has done some very good things for which he is receiving well-deserved praise. It is not my intention to dismiss these accomplishments, nor is it my intent to rain on anyone's parade. But I do want to ask you all a big favor.
- Details
- Written by: Webmaster
- Category: Selected Blogs
Originally published at http://lp.org
Syndicated columnist Paul Mulshine of the Newark Star-Ledger expresses his surprise today over reports the Republican Party has discovered fiscal conservatism again.
As Mulshine points out, the Libertarian Party and its 2008 presidential nominee, former congressman Bob Barr, opposed taxpayer-funded bailouts and explosive government growth back when the GOP was espousing it as bedrock principle.
More than a little miffed about Republicans suddenly painting themselves as fiscally responsible, Mulshine decided to give Congressman Barr's office a call:
Subcategories
NJ Libertarian Blog
Imported from NJ Libertarian News from the published feed
Videos
This is a page of various videos that we have either created or found interesting. Be sure to check out and follow our YouTube page.
Open Government Advocacy Project
The Open Government Advocacy Project is a committee of the NJ Libertarian Party. Its goal is to ensure transparency and accountability at all levels of government. Articles posted here are a subset of the work of the committee. For more information visit the Open Government Advocacy Project blog.
If you would like to demand accountability and ensure that your local governing body or school board adheres to the Open Public Records Act we can help you request information from them. Contact John Paff, the project chair here.
Insight New Jersey
NJ government is huge and complex. Private industry is shrinking while the size and cost of government bureacracy continues to grow. The articles posted here provide a guide of the NJ State Government and can be used by citizens and candidates for office to evaluate what departments can be reduced drastically in size.
We'll start with just some of the departments and provide a breakdown on what they do (or purport to do), how many employees they have and how big their budget is.
Preempted Ordinance Repeal Project
The New Jersey Libertarian Party's Preempted Ordinance Repeal Project (“the Project”) seeks to get New Jersey municipalities to repeal loitering ordinances that should have been -- but were not -- repealed when the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice was enacted in 1979. The Project has successfully had loitering ordinances repealed in over 30 towns. For a summary listing of all the towns see Preempted Ordinance Repeal Project page.
Police Accountability Project
The Police Accountability Project is a committee of the NJ Libertarian Party. Its goal is to search out cases of police misconduct, file former Internal Affairs (IA) complaints when appropriate, and to publicize violations of rules and laws by the police. There may be other stories posted on the NJLP Police Internal Affairs Complaint Blog page.
If you would like to help or know of a case we should be looking at, contact the committee at
Legislative Affairs Committee
The Legislative Affairs Committee was created to allow a select core of Volunteers to take action on legislation and policies which directly affects the people of New Jersey.
[INTRO VIDEO - HOSTED ON NJLP STATE YOUTUBE AND EMBEDED HERE]
Staff
Legislative Director and Committee Chair
Volunteers: