'08 depends on the entire Middle East

Classic Republican victory in 2008 really has nothing to do with our domestic issues, and entirely with the Middle East. With our cozy homes and nice cars, we seemingly have little to worry about domestically, sure there are a few things that need to be taken care of, but on a large scale that is rubbish in the minds of most Americans. With all our comforts, Middle Eastern intervention seems justifiable to many folks, mainstream Democrat and Republican alike. The only way our current policies can be rocked is if our thinking is changed, by way of foreign influence.

Israel's recent return of withheld money from the former Palestinian regime heavily influenced by Hamas has brought life to a possible peaceful solution in the region. While this may be wishful thinking, we are seeing a large amount of peaceful intervention and proposals from both sides of the situation. You may be wondering, what does this have to do with our elections? Well, simply, it allows for our mainstream ideas to be changed, along with Iraq's situation. By not taking the lead role in the Israel/ Palestine proceedings, we are seeing how our constant intervention is not healthy for the nation. Of course, Israel's situation won't win Paul the election, but along with other foreign issues, it can be used to support his ideas.

If Iraq continues down the path that it is on, which it most likely will, both sides that are preaching continued presence there by either a phased withdrawal or a "stay till the job is done" philosophy, can be picked apart for their interventionist policies. Iran is the key to how well Paul can use the anti-interventionism to his advantage. If we are able to stay out of Iran's issues, it will show how well his proposed policy will work. A society that has often shown democratic tendencies is on its way to regaining the democracy it had before we intervened earlier this century. A peaceful resolution (and non-interventionist) to current tensions will give Paul a more justified platform from which to campaign on. It will also allow for the furthering of Iranian freedoms, and if Israel's situation is remedied, it will allow for a more self sustaining Middle East.

This is one of those cases where less equates to more, and Americans need to wake up and realize it.

Another reason why everybody should hate the income tax…

I am not going to write about the history of the income tax. The "who" and "why" and the history are very interesting, but should be written by those who spend their internet time actually researching stuff. Anyway, the only thing that is historically important for this piece is that the income tax was put in place to help pave the way for government intervention into our society.
The primer for income tax was at first a social economic interventionist need. Situations in the earlier 20th century arose that had people looking for solutions for the economic woes of the US and its citizens… Now before you click somewhere else because A) you’ve worn the “welfare state is the downfall of the US” shirt out; or B) that you click somewhere else because you’re tired of “typical” conservative irrationality, let me cover my point. As the popularity of government intervention and, yes, the populace wanting to further the expansion of the federal government, income taxes along with product taxes went even further to manipulate our economy, our social interaction, and our moral interaction anything short of our civil rights (no, not having to do with race relations, but with the rights nationally accepted for the individual in the Constitution). Now, of course even more so of late, many would say even those civil rights are taking a path of being voided.
All other product taxes don’t necessarily affect our lives. You may not smoke, drink or partake in international discourse or care of those taxes. However the income tax currently does affect everyone whether it is according to their ability or according to their need regardless. If you are paying income taxes you are funding all the programs that are delegated by the federal government, whether you like them or not. A paying liberal or Democrat has to accept the fact that he/she is financially supporting a counter productive conservative or Republican solution and vise versa… A middle class family trying to make it will be in fact, to whatever extent, be expected to support a family richer/poorer than one’s self.
If you remove the income tax, it forces the federal government to revert itself to the regressive role it once held. The federal government works well when supporting the nation’s sovereignty because it deals with the nation. The more local its demands are, the less efficient it processes a solution.
Now there are currently 3 ways to consider life without income tax. A non- progressive flat tax (which I believe is more fair than the progressive tax system, but has a paralleled difficult for financial security), sales tax replacement such as the FAIRTAX (even more fair and the easiest of the full tax collect for the poor to move up in) or simply moving on with our lives without the federal government interfering at all with our lives. Imagine that? The demands of the state are more important, yet more capable to handle particular situations as they arise!
As logical deduction directs my message, I hope to make my next blog entry titled “The individual vs. The Collective” because when considering not having a income tax, you get issues with the US’s fascination and desire to be a socialist society, which by the way WE ARE A SOCIALIST COUNTRY for better or worse.

Ed Failor: NTU Boardmember

NOTICE: Some of the information contained herewithin is now out of date - the Iowa Christian Alliance has re-added Ron Paul's name to their list of Presidential Candidates. I will attempt to get a cached link to the last day or two when his name was absent. Score one for the blogs.


Between some sleuthing on my own part and some assistance via RonPaulForums, I've found out some interesting things about Ed Failor, chairman of the Iowans for Tax Relief.

The most interesting of these is that Failor is, in fact, on the board of directors of the National Taxpayers Union, a very pro-Paul group. In fact, Dr. Paul was one of the opening speakers at the National Taxpayers Union just one week ago. Plus, Paul has been rated a 'Taxpayers' Friend' every year by the National Taxpayers Union. And even more amazingly, the Iowans for Tax Relief co-organized the event. And in the straw poll at the event, Paul came in second to only Fred Thompson.

Considering these facts, it is almost unimaginable that Failor would consider Paul to be an insignificant candidate with no 'credibility', when his organization helped run an even where Paul was one of the featured speakers, and where Paul showed extremely well in a straw poll.

So we know that Failor's claim that Paul lacks 'credibility' is bull.

And we know, through very recent scheduling changes announced by the ITR, that his claim that the lineup was set months in advance is bull as well.

And if that's not enough...

The Iowa Christian Alliance, co-sponsor of the forum, have removed Paul's name from the list of candidates, which includes every other Republican and Democratic candidate, even those who have not participated in any of the nationally televised debates, unlike Paul (thanks to Students for Paul for coming up with these links)

Cached list of candidates from June 9

List of candidates today

Pedrique at RonPaulForums sent the NTU's deputy press secretary Sam Batkins an email, and recieved the following response:

As you may know, Ron Paul is a very good friend of NTU's. In our
annual Rating of Congress, he has won our Taxpayers Best Friend Award
several times and has been a winner of our Taxpayers Friend Award
every year he's been in Congress. He was also a featured speaker at
our National Taxpayers Conference this past weekend. He came in 2nd
place in the straw poll we conducted at our Conference. One of our
best working relationships with a Member of Congress is with
Representative Paul and his staff.

Iowans for Tax Relief is also a very good friend of NTU's. This is
an ITR forum, and as such, the decisions on who to include (or not)
were ITR's and not ours. When we found out about their decision to
exclude Dr. Paul, we offered them our views on the matter (as many
others did, apparently). It's my understanding that ITR's decision
was made based on Mr. Paul's position in the polls, but I am not 100% positive.

Since this forum is being conducted by ITR, all I can suggest is that
you also contact them and express your views directly. Perhaps they
will also be able to clarify your questions.

Now, I won't post contact information for the NTU here (it's posted on both RonPaulForums and the Facebook group forums and, obviously, the NTU's website itself), but if you do choose to contact the NTU, remember, this is a group that is largely on Ron Paul's side. So, be considerate, be brief, be polite, and remember that these are the good guys and, ultimately, they have no real power over the ITR.

The Corporation

I was perusing the blog... I looked at the Milton video. It was very interesting. I then noticed another video on the same You Tube page having to do with The Corporation. I watched it and found it as equally interesting except in a bad way...

The Corporation is a popular documentary explains that a corporation is premised on the idea of people conducting themselves in the market place with no need of regard other than the bottom line at the expense of its workers, its social environment, and its ecological environment. The profit motivation is the only concern. Aside from knowing that M. Moore and Chomsky are only true to there beliefs that their endeavors are not about the bottom line is that they believe in the 'common good' syndrome first (that even embryonic stem cell research supposedly wouldn't even have the potential cure for) and then they want to make as much profit, or have as much accolades respectively so off of that idea, if you are for free trade, or for investing a risk, this is the anti-capitalistic charge of the economic fear mongers... *** one extra charge for Michael, you have at least one corporation, you invest in many corporations you call evil and I do not believe you are not doing your social or ecological environment any bit of positive constructivism...

Corporations are set up for big ideas and big operations... You simply cannot start big ideas or business operations without Corporations or being a corporation financially. Corporations and the idea of limited liability is setup up for people who don't have money to invest in the idea. They could loan and ultimately destroy themselves or the company's ability to do anything if things didn't go well or if they even if they did badly. At least with a corporation with private investors, the investors are the ones at risk. Now from that you could conclude that the corporation isn't for the bottom dollar as much as the investor is... who is the investor? That's right, the American public...

Profits are evil? Only to those who suffer from envy. I could elaborate further, but I like the statement as it is so I won't add anymore to it...Now as far as some classes being able to better take advantage of investing or be at less risk due to their net worth... that's just class war mongering... Don't hate the player or the game... learn to play the game better...Socially speaking of Corporations, in-house or outhouse, it really is not the job of companies to put people before the business, or it will fail.The person is given the ability to fend for himself either by representation, or take his capabilities else where. Don't like a corporate feel or worried that you will be run over by the bad side of the corporate stampede? Try something else and have the faith that you can accomplish anything you want to. Ecologically speaking of Corporations is too difficult to put down generally... I will say that any form of PROVEN unhealthiness to the environment is already been made illegal and is largely regulated already, in fact the current over regulation has prohibited us from being more of an industrial nation rather than a services nation. As far as the political interference of Corporations, that is for someone much more aware of the number of ways business, political action groups, and external forces that all own Washington to answer. This influence is both good and bad. Think about it, everybody wants less pimping of our governing body. Everyone will agree the money and power is out of control. As far as the legislative body though, a Corporation should fight to protect itself. Everyone in this country has that ability; they just choose to not do so.

Kent Snyder vs. Ed Failor

Ron Paul's Campaign Chariman Kent Snyder battles Iowa Tax Relief Chairman Ed Failor on WHO newsradio Iowa regarding the decision of Iowans for Tax Relief and the Iowa Christian Alliance to exclude Ron Paul (of the other major candidates, only Mike Gravel was not invited) , from their forum. So, essentially, they invited 16 out of the 18 candidates, but didn't invite Paul because they 'couldn't invite everybody'.

Click Here.

I apologize for being blunt, but Ed Failor sounds like a sniveling little weasel. He's also a senior advisor for the John McCain campaign.

So, a 'Welcome' is in order...

Hey, I'm Warhawk. You might know me as the administrator of Football Refuge. In fact, you're probably a poster there. How do I know that? Because I just started this blog, and that's the only place on the big old internet that knows about this place.

We'll definitely have to change that. In any case, if you happen to be from someplace other than the aforementioned meassage board (which is quite the happening little website, if I may say so myself), welcome. Hang around a bit. We have a very nice color scheme. Not much else yet though, but that will change soon as well.

Anyway, a little bit about the purpose of this blog. Myself (and hopefully my loyal subj... er, I mean co-authors) are (for the most part anyway) some combination of libertarian, conservative, and constitutionalist. We might even get a liberal-leaning libertarian or two, but they're weird... I mean, special.

So, to put that into more context, each author here supports at least many, if not all, of the following...
-The free market and free trade, and the capitalist tradition of the US, along with the fight against socialist policy.
-A non-interventionist (but not isolationist) foreign policy, avoiding alliances and trade with all countries.
-A small federal government, less government spending, lower taxes, and reduction of the national debt.
-A secure border and tough immigration laws.
-Local and State control of things like education, drug laws, and issues such as gay marriage and abortion.
-A strong national defense
-And most importantly, adherence to the principles laid out by the US Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, and most notably the first and second amendments.

And we oppose at least many, if not all, of the following...
-Corruption in the government - in politicians, offices, and departments.
-Pork spending in congress.
-Socialist and Communist economic policies.
-The Federal Income Tax.
-Welfare and all entitlement systems.
-Military adventurism and the belief that the US must be the world's police force.
-UN restrictions of American interests, especially economic interests.

It probably wouldn't surprise you to learn that I support Dr. Ron Paul in the 2008 Election, as do several of the others who are planning to contribute here. More on that later.

I hope that you enjoy our blog, whether you agree with our principles or not. While we're serious with our beliefs, I myself like to add a little humor here and there, so don't expect a dull, bland, boring kind of blog. And, of course, if you like what you see (or even if you don't like what you see, and vehemently disagree with it), please spread the word, link to us, and tell your friends.

Now, to leave you with a little Milton Friedman.