The Daily Bell Newswire – It's Free!

Editorial

The Tea Party Nation's Sellout

Wednesday, October 26, 2011 – by Nelson Hultberg

Nelson Hultberg

On February 19, 2009, CNBC commentator Rick Santelli put forth a marvelous patriotic rant for several minutes declaring that Americans should stand up and protest the Obama administration's outrageous socialist policies. And he promised to organize a Chicago Tea Party to help publicize the cause later in July.

Little did he know at the time what he had wrought. He was cheered vehemently by millions of libertarians, conservatives and independents throughout America. By April 15th "tea parties" in more than 750 cities held demonstrations. The fervor for revitalizing Samuel Adams' 1773 Boston Tea Party rebellion against the oppressive English spread in waves across modern America. The call went out to stand against Washington's domination of our lives just as the patriots of our founding era had done. And it was met magnificently. The protests swelled into July and culminated in a massive "taxpayers march on DC" on September 12, 2009 that numbered several hundred thousand marchers.

Out of this, many of us in the libertarian and conservative movements developed high hopes that the history of Lexington and Concord could be repeated – not violently, but intellectually and democratically. Could we not spawn a new Sons of Liberty for the modern day that would do as Sam Adams' boys had done in the beginning? The original Sons of Liberty in 1773 became the hub of a profound wheel that fanned out across the colonies with intrepid spokes of brilliance to galvanize Americans against the tyranny of King George. The combination of their provocative protests with the philosophical thought of the likes of Locke and Jefferson brought us the Declaration of Independence, the Revolution and the birth of the world's first free nation at Philadelphia's Independence Hall in 1787. Out of such kernels of intrepidity usher forth all the giant societal changes in mankind's fortunes. When heroic men and women of integrity become acquainted with great philosophical truth, they become willing to stand against the tides of corruption and conformity inherent in all statist establishments. To such revolutionary paragons we owe much.

It was a heady time to be alive in September of 2009. The contemptible Marxist-Keynesian political control over Americans – orchestrated by professorial cheerleaders in the universities and enabled so shamefully by a lapdog media – would surely now be brought to account. The dreadful decadence and destruction of our country that had been slithering over us for the past 50 years would be exposed. Americans would rally to drive out the Demopublican usurpers of our rights and liberties. New leaders would be brought to the helm of the Republican Party to challenge the vice grip that the neocon pundits, the corporatists and the elite bankers held over the party's policy directives. The vision of Jefferson would be restored to Washington. Heady times, indeed.

Einstein's Definition of Insanity

But throughout 2009, even though many of us held high hopes we remained suspicious of any movement that set out to "reform the GOP." Such reform visions had been the goals of countless organizations and prominent activists ever since the early days of Barry Goldwater in 1960. And what had they brought us? Nothing but relentless capitulation to the welfare-warfare state for 50 years.

We realized a terrible fact that the Tea Party marchers were not facing up to: Republicans have, for many decades now, approached politics like mules – stupidly and stodgily repeating the same course that they have trekked for decades. The history of the GOP is Einstein's definition of insanity – doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting different results.

From Eisenhower to Nixon to Ford to Reagan to Daddy Bush to little boy George, the GOP has lived by one rule: Once in Washington, waste no time in capitulating to Democratic socialism because that is where the votes are. Always put re-election above the country, above freedom and above honor. If the Democrats increase spending by $200 billion in any given year, then Republicans must increase it also. Of course, our fearless Republicans only push for increases of $180 billion and in so doing they conceive of themselves as brave defenders of the pass, as modern day Rolands at Roncesvalles. How paltry these GOP pygmies appear to those of us who have studied history and grasp the inherent weaknesses of human nature, to those of us who are willing to view the big picture rather than merely the next election and the assumption of power.

Neocons like Newt Gingrich and Dick Armey have done what we on the radical right feared. They have sucked the Tea Party into the Black Hole of their Demopublican monopoly. Gingrich and Armey quickly positioned their organizations to co-opt the Tea Party movement. And the Tea Party leaders, so flattered with this emergent courtship and accompanying media prominence, now conceive of themselves as "profound revolutionaries" that are going to heroically reform the GOP. This is the kiss of death for the Tea Party. Gingrich, Armey and their cohorts are the epitome of what is wrong with the conservative movement in America. They pay only lip service to freedom's ideals. When it comes time to match the rhetoric with action and adherence to principle, they cave in to the debt sirens like female groupies falling into the sack at a rock star's after-performance party. Yet Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation writes worshipful articles now praising the merits of neocon Newt Gingrich for President. Power rather than principle is what Phillips and the Tea Party Nation want and they will hop onto the backs of the most disgraceful of solons to get it. This game has been played by conservatives for five decades now and it gets us nothing but bigger and uglier government.

To paraphrase biblical wisdom, what does it benefit conservatives to win power if it must be done by joining with liberals and neocons to expand the usurpations of the state? What has been gained but a disgraceful charade? This, I submit, is the political history of the Republican Party for the past 50 years – a disgraceful charade. Even the fabled Reagan swelled the welfare state and debt prodigiously over his eight years in office. Does Judson Phillips actually think that the likes of Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain will somehow reverse the course of this runaway socialist freight train we have created in Washington?

Stop the Disgraceful Charade

If one is brave enough to face up to this disgraceful charade on the part of the GOP, then the next step is to be brave enough to stop being a mule, to stop blindly doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Yet what do we hear from 80% of the conservatives in the Tea Party movement? "We need to concentrate," they say, "on electing to office better, more conservative Republicans who will go to Washington with a clear commitment to reduce government spending. We need to take over control of the GOP." These, of course, are the same platitudinous mouthings that conservative activists have been exhorting for 50 years. This is what I mean by being mules – a harsh word to call fellow conservatives but unfortunately, their blindness regarding the past 50 years dictates such a label.

Oh, Tea Party conservatives do have great aspirations just as those activists in the '60s, '70s and '80s had. They envision an army of Republican Jimmy Stewarts, like his character in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, marching to the Potomac and turning the tyrannical federal beast into a true limited governing body again.

What the mules are missing, however, is that once the new conservative Mr. Smiths get ensconced in the capital city, they soon get bit by the power disease and realize that it is much easier to win votes by playing the pork and subsidy game, that it is much easier to get big campaign donations by conveying special privileges to the corporations. They quickly succumb to the sordid favor-dispensing game and join the ranks of the Demopublican big spenders. Very few, if any, Ron Pauls emerge from these "better, more conservative Republicans."

Why? Because without a third party in the race, and most specifically in the National TV Presidential Debates, there is no counteracting force to mandate that the Republicans continue to try and distinguish themselves from the Democrats. Without the people being aware of another vision (e.g., that of honest money and equal tax rates), they will not demand that the Republicans change their stripes. If there is no demand from the voters, then these "better, more conservative Republicans" quickly get consumed by the Washington beast of big government. That ol' devil human nature gets in the way of their original, noble aspirations. They end up choosing another term of acquiescence to statism – with all its celebrity in Washington – instead of fighting for true tax reform, which brings the risk of losing on Election Day and having to return to the obscurity of life in Midville.

Unless the tax system is changed to a genuine equal-rate tax that everyone has to pay (i.e., no exemptions for anyone) there is no hope to ever reduce the ruinous levels of government spending we now endure. The "infinite demand for government services" that is bankrupting us stems from our progressive income tax system that exempts 50% of the nation's voters from paying taxes. If those 50% are not dinged proportionally as everyone else is, then they can't possibly have any real desire to eliminate Washington's egregious conveyance of entitlements. They're not paying for them. This is one of the cardinal laws of economics. If government benefits are free, then demand for them will be infinite. Only by enacting a 10% equal-rate tax for everyone can this irresponsibility be ended.

Conservative freedom seekers are wasting their time with any and all political activism without this paramount tax reform. It is the all-important linchpin. And there is no chance to get such a radical tax reform measure passed unless an independent candidate makes a Ross Perot-style run and gains entrance into the National TV Presidential Debates to sell 70 million Americans on such a reform's crucial necessity in stopping government growth.

Why? Because neither the Republicans nor the Democrats will ever adopt such a tax reform proposal. They both know it would spell death to their all-consuming desires to be re-elected. Only a third party can bring such a proposal to the public in clear, unadulterated form because only a third party (if it was properly structured) would be in a position of not needing to win office immediately. What do we mean by "properly structured"? We mean that the third party be first and foremost a "teaching party." Such a third party would then put the necessary reform measure in front of the 70 million voters who watch the national debates because its presidential candidate's goal would be primarily to get the ideas of "honest money and equal-tax rates" in front of the people and let election victory come later after these two policies have won the people over. A properly structured third party's goal would be to teach the people the truth about what is destroying our country. It would be to act as a magnet to draw the people away from the nefarious views of Republicans and Democrats.

Thus die-hard Republicans in pursuit of an army of Mr. Smiths end up fulfilling Einstein's definition of insanity because their candidates want to win office immediately and repeatedly. They've been doing this for five decades and still they never get the message. The Washington beast destroys all Republicans who start out with budget-cutting aspirations, except for those rare and noble contrarians like Ron Paul. This is why "working within the Republican Party" can never bring us a restoration of limited government. It is why the GOP will always be a party of mules. It is what Judson Phillips and 80% of his Tea Party Nation followers are oblivious to. They will never be able to reform the mules by working within the GOP. They will succeed only in becoming like them.

Hopping into the Hot Tub

To those still unconvinced, consider the following. Why hasn't the flow of new conservatives to Washington over the past 50 years grown and helped to turn the tide? Because until there is a mandate among the people for less government, almost every one of the new conservatives we send to Washington quickly conclude that if they are to be guaranteed re-election every two years, they must join with the Democrats to increase government spending. They end up, as journalist Stanton Evans told us, "treating the sewer of Washington like a hot tub." They hop in and wallow in pork and privilege with the likes of Pelosi and Reid. Consequently, for every "new conservative" we send to Congress we lose an equally new conservative to the hot tub. The freedom movement stalls and statism continues to grow.

Why? Because the people mandate it. The people possess infinite demand for pork and privilege because our progressive tax system exempts 50% of the nation from paying any income taxes. The "uniformity clause" for tax rates established by the Founders in the Constitution has been junked and we now have an irresponsible electorate that gets billions of dollars worth of breaks and benefits for free. This is the nefarious lure destroying the system.

Oh, the 50% non-payers will protest that they pay their fair share because they are charged FICA taxes for social security and in many states have to pay sales taxes. But the truth is that these taxes don't even come close to paying for the massive entitlements they receive in the form of retirement benefits, Medicare benefits, food stamp benefits, welfare services, student loans, Head Start grants, earned income tax credits, unemployment insurance, subsidized housing and all the other prodigal government programs that have inundated our Republic ever since FDR came to visit us.

Moreover, the FICA taxes and sales taxes they pay don't come close to covering their share of the massive interest on the government's debt, the funding for the myriad of ABC bureaucracies that breed like bacteria and the imperialist military expenditures that most non-payers continue to vote for every decade in acquiescence to Demopublican paranoia. Our foreign policy is broke. Our social security program is broke. Our medicare program is broke. Our state governments are broke. Our federal government is broke. Our banks are broke. Our nation is broke. The ideal of a free, self-reliant America is sinking into a hideous swamp of greed, stupidity and the opiates of monetary inflation and "pilfer thy neighbor through the taxman." Could this travesty have something to do with the fact that 50% of the nation is granted an exemption from the responsibility of citizenship with multitudinous government functions given to them free?

Thus, to continue sending conservative and libertarian Republicans to Congress without establishing a mandate to stop the growth of government can only bring continued failure. To create such a mandate, we have to tell the people the truth about what is causing the relentless growth of government. We have to show them how progressive tax rates and fiat money inflation act as the fuel for exponential government growth. And we must do it in a sensationalized manner. We must get an articulate independent candidate into the National TV Presidential Debates to instruct 70 million Americans in a matter of years, not decades. We must do what Steve Jobs continually encouraged his comrades at Apple to do: "Think Different!" The media and the academy will not tell the truth. The GOP will not tell the truth. Only a third-party candidate (who's not afraid of losing the election) will. My book, The Conservative Revolution, explains how to bring this about. (Read a review here.)

A Corrupt and Ossified Institution

It is time to dramatically change our strategy. All conservative activist groups need to see the GOP for what it is – a corrupt and ossified institution that no longer serves a meaningful purpose. The GOP is like the tragic protagonist in Oscar Wilde's nineteenth century novel, The Picture of Dorian Gray. Because Dorian Gray had made a Faustian bargain by selling his soul to the devil, he never ages over the years. Only his portrait becomes effete and grotesquely wrinkled, hidden away from friends in the attic. This deal with the devil enables him to continually live in debauchery. In like manner, the GOP sold its soul to the devils of massive debt and privilege and thus continually lives in debauchery. It conveys privileges to banks and corporations who donate money to them in return, and it creates massive debt for the free entitlements it grants to the lower 50% of income earners in return for their votes. To imperceptive observers, the GOP, like Dorian Gray, appears to be beautiful and idealistic. But in actuality it is like Gray's hidden portrait in the attic, a withered and decrepit gargoyle of greed and blindness.

Because of the Faustian bargain they have made with the banks, corporations and seekers of "entitlements for nothing," Republican politicians will always choose to be Demopublicans and can never become Jeffersonians. The snare of fiat money and progressive taxation defines their existence. They will always be profligate Dorian Grays irresponsibly cavorting through life, stealing from the productive and bankrupting the future. Why? Because it is the only way they can get re-elected under our distorted tax system, and re-election is what they want more than freedom, more than honor, more than justice.

How do we end the tragedy of this Faustian bargain? Only by restoring the concept of "equal rights under the law" to our tax system. In other words, by repealing progressive tax rates and enacting a "10% equal-rate tax" that requires all citizens to pay proportionally for their government services. We cannot have equal rights without equal rates. Our progressive tax rate system is the cardinal evil that Democrats and Republicans signed onto decades ago.

The Dorian Grays of the GOP cannot and will not change this. Only a third party can. Once a third party based on "honest money and equal tax rates" is in the mix everything changes dramatically. There would then be a chance for reform because the people could be shown an alternative political vision that is rational. They could be shown what is causing the tyrannical expansion of government. There would then be a competitor to the Demopublican monopoly and its Faustian bargain of tax and spend in return for votes. The flow of political ideas would be opened up.

The statist establishment controls the minds of the populace through its control of the schools and it controls how they vote by controlling the flow of political ideas through the one-party charade of Demopublicanism. Until this monopoly is broken, Republicans will forever be mules fooling themselves in the worst way with hopes of reform.

This is simple human nature. Monopolies in the corporate world, in the labor arena and in the ideological arena are all destructive. They stifle the flow of people, money and ideas. They asphyxiate the country in which they are tolerated. Well, we now have a firmly entrenched political monopoly in this country that is stultifying the process and the ossified GOP is a major part of that monopoly.

Tea Party activists are playing a fool's game if they think the likes of Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain will do anything other than what Republicans have been doing for 50 years – cross over the aisle to hop into the hot tub of pork and privilege to insure their re-election. If we are not wise enough and strong enough to put an opposition voice (i.e., an independent party voice) into the National TV Presidential Debates to explain the requisites for saving America to the people, then we will not save America. We will live out our lives like the members of Marshal Petain's Vichy government in 1940 France – as that of enablers of tyranny – and the end result of our life's commitment will be the sad degradation of the American experiment.




Nelson Hultberg:   View Bio  l  View Site Contributions

Latest Daily Bell Articles

Feedback

Effective April 25, 2012, the Daily Bell will discontinue allowing feedback comments. We have left in place the large body of responses posted in the past, as we appreciate the valuable contributions made by some of our readers.
Showing 1 - 20 of 34 - Newest on top - Reorder Feedback
  Posted by EconomicsMonkey on 11/12/11 02:21 PM

"Why? Because the people mandate it. The people possess infinite demand for pork and privilege because our progressive tax system exempts 50% of the nation from paying any income taxes."

The problem here is the wealth disparity. Through union-busting and a gradually less progressive taxation that's lead America to being a nation of great wealth disparity (the greatest that's existed here since the Gilded age, and more than any other industrialized nation). The way to get that "50%" to pay taxes is to allow them to collectively bargain for higher wages. The "invisible" hand benefits those at the top at the expense of those at the bottom.

Click to view link

Reply from The Daily Bell

So now, finally, we have an explanation of the half-baked economics at the heart of OWS. What a disappointment. It shows again that those who do not read are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.

  Posted by WD on 10/29/11 02:58 AM

@ AnarchoLibertine on 10/27/11 02:47 PM

"I ABSOLUTELY believe separate states could MORE THAN "hold off large countries like China"... ever heard of nukes?"

Riiight! States could afford this? I think not.

"How do you explain how this overly "voluntary" federation of nascent American states were able to prevail against the then-world-superpower English Empire?"

If you will recall, the Confederation almost didn't hold off the British. It was the character of Washington and others who carried the day despite lack of pay and provision. You couldn't carry off Valley Forge or the crossing of the Delaware under those conditions today. In an updated Articles of Confederation I would want mandatory provisioning of a defensive military used at the direction of a majority of member states. Secession would be legal at any time except when defending against on armed foreign assault.

"As far as Banksters... I'm less concerned w/them than I am w/an organization (govt.) which claims the right to impose a monetary system on us... "

... which the Constitution did. I agree, the government should not have that power. Let's go back to a wiser Articles of Confederation and let the banksters live off their own work for a change.

  Posted by Pitchman on 10/28/11 07:23 PM

Very good piece.

If not now, when? If not you, who? What is holding you back?

The New Republic 'Can' Party nominates Nelson Hultberg For President:

For the most part a shallow thinking American public has been reduced to mouthing nothing more than slogans, put in mind by the statist money power. Most of which, I am not sure they understand.

Our once great Democracy, over the decades, has been reduced to a leadership of sock puppets herding an inattentive and craven public, like Lemmings to their demise.

One need look no further than the dimming light coming from OccupyWallStreet. While I have great admiration for the protestors, their energies are misguided and miss directed. There are the standouts, and sure the time will come when these Wall Street Charlatans meet a tragic end. However, the fact that the protestors are looking to a captured government, that has trampled the RULE OF LAW and abdicated their Sacred Oath to protect and defend the Constitution, to suddenly change face and become paragons for all that is right and good is, a giant leap in the wrong direction. You might as well offer yourself up to the auction block.

An abject lesson regarding the Nations ignorance was witnessed when Peter Schiff went down to the street for some one on one time with America's future.

See: Peter Schiff Occupies Wall Street: Government Is The Problem But, Ignorance Abounds - Click to view link

- Inflection Point - Click to view link

  Posted by AnarchoLibertine on 10/27/11 02:52 PM

Posted by onebornfreeatyahoo on 10/26/11 02:57 PM
OK, point taken. However, group secession was tried once before on a grand scale in the US and look where that got them. Smaller group/community attempts at secession were made both before that big one and continue afterwards up to the present day, as I am sure you are aware - all to no avail, so I can see little point in your encouraging others to secede as a group, which is what you appear to be doing- unless I misunderstand.

Group [i.e. political] attempts at secession [or any other group or political activity] are a waste of time and resources for the individual who wants to live a freer life, as far as I am concerned. Regards, onebornfree.

Group secession HAS worked in the past... the American Revolution (seceded from English jurisdiction), post-USSR the soviet republics reassumed full sovereign powers, Portugal seceded from Spain, West Virginia from Virginia, Norway and Sweden I believe, N. Korea, Vietnam (seceded from USGovt's claim of jurisdiction)... Iraq and Afghanistan are in the process of seceding (i.e., resisting) American domination...

And, I DIDN'T encourage anyone to secede... I simply SUGGESTED that, IF politics is your thing, you might want to consider giving up on nat'l politics. I no longer participate in the political system/process, so it doesn't really matter to me...

  Posted by AnarchoLibertine on 10/27/11 02:47 PM

Posted by WD on 10/26/11 09:16 PM
@ AnarchoLibertine on 10/26/11 10:53 AM

Are you suggesting separated states could hold off large countries like China? I think not. The solution lies in the Articles of Confederation under which we expelled the British banksters. It was a little too voluntary, which made supporting a defense force overly difficult. I would suggest a confederation supported by a majority of state votes on all matters with authority to defend the whole against outside intrusion and nothing else.

The Constitution, along with containing the hopes of Jefferson is replete with the basis for Hamilton's dream of an all powerful state and was designed to trick America into accepting an all powerful state under the guise of being just the opposite. Read Kenneth W. Royce's 'Hologram of Liberty'.

It is long past time we quit worshiping what the Constitution is not and pay attention to what it is, the basis for the centralized totalitarian state the United States has become.

Why do you assume China would want to conquer any American states? What makes you think they'd be able to? Aren't you confusing them w/the USGovt? This is EXACTLY the kind of "the boogeyman is gonna get us!" thinking that ALWAYS leads to TYRANNY.

I ABSOLUTELY believe separate states could MORE THAN "hold off large countries like China"... ever heard of nukes?

The A'sOC would be an improvement, yes, but I'm puzzled at your statement that it was "too voluntary"...

How do you explain how this overly "voluntary" federation of nascent American states were able to prevail against the then-world-superpower English Empire?

As far as Banksters... I'm less concerned w/them than I am w/an organization (govt.) which claims the right to impose a monetary system on us...

  Posted by WD on 10/26/11 09:16 PM

@ AnarchoLibertine on 10/26/11 10:53 AM

Are you suggesting separated states could hold off large countries like China? I think not. The solution lies in the Articles of Confederation under which we expelled the British banksters. It was a little too voluntary, which made supporting a defense force overly difficult. I would suggest a confederation supported by a majority of state votes on all matters with authority to defend the whole against outside intrusion and nothing else.

The Constitution, along with containing the hopes of Jefferson is replete with the basis for Hamilton's dream of an all powerful state and was designed to trick America into accepting an all powerful state under the guise of being just the opposite. Read Kenneth W. Royce's 'Hologram of Liberty'.

It is long past time we quit worshiping what the Constitution is not and pay attention to what it is, the basis for the centralized totalitarian state the United States has become.

  Posted by WD on 10/26/11 08:47 PM

I applaud Mr. Hultberg's intentions. I agree that a political revolution is required to pry the avaricious hands of career party politicians from the levers of power. But I must confess that I don't think his dream is likely to happen. Not because the bottom 50% are unwilling. The bottom 50% are barely conscious politically compared to the top 4% who are the real welfare/mercantilist hogs. All government does is help the top 4% live off the ignorance of the bottom 96%.

It's not just the tax system, although Mr. Hultberg is right about that. As long as politicians can write unlimited checks against all dollar denominated wealth, all citizens not able to position themselves against the resulting devaluation of the currency are helpless against this stealth tax. It will do absolutely no good to call for the bottom 50% to step up for higher taxes as long as the money supply is in the hands of the private banksters of the Federal Reserve. Until the Fed is ended, Mr. Hultberg's pipe dream is dead.

  Posted by zebblanc on 10/26/11 04:46 PM

Not pitching Hultberg's "stuff" but you have to read his book or see Jaeger's movie SPOiLER to get the full grasp of what he is up to. Hultberg has no delusions of the difficulty of getting a third party off the ground. He would settle for a three party debate in 2012, I think, and a win in 2016 or even later. The platform he proposes is just a flat tax and control of the FED printing presses, period, simple concepts and an incremental start towards a road to recovery.
Is there time? Who knows, but Hultberg has hopes that there would an influx of third party candidates who could go to congress to buy time.
I see Herman as a harbinger of things to come. I don't fear Herman's platform even if he should get elected because it can't be incorporated when congress is populated with Hultberg's Demopublicans but will the pols in office see the popular uprising and change their ways for fear of being voted out? Perhaps.
If Ron Paul gets 15% of the Demopublicans mandated popular vote he can debate as a third party member. This is Hultberg's hope, but Dr. Paul has made no overtures to do so, and won't until the primaries are over. And who else could shine in Hultberg's third party? Who even could or would stand with Dr. Paul? The Judge? The judge has a good gig and might not want to give it up. The Huckster didn't.
Statesmen who stand for the Constitution are hard to come by!

  Posted by olde reb on 10/26/11 04:34 PM

The basic assumption Mr. Hultberg has made is that an income tax on individuals exists. As Mr. Joe Bannister, ex-IRS criminal agent, confirmed after much study, such a tax does not exist.

Your right to pursue a livelihood is (supposedly) secured as a Constitutional Right by the clause of Liberty. Such rights cannot be subjects to taxation or oppression. It is enforced by the corruption of the courts.

The Ninth Circuit has issued a travesty opinion in US v Vroman that has been referenced in several other circuits. A writing that analyzes the legal flaws of that Opinion are Part 4 & 5 of the linked articles that details the above thesis. Click to view link

What presidential candidate will grant amnesty to all individuals accused of income tax violations? And reveal the tax has been a fraud for decades ???

  Posted by Nightcrawler on 10/26/11 03:48 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Nelson Hultberg was interviewed previously here at the DB. He also wrote a book about needing 38% on board to have a 3rd party win the US Presidency.

My memory is a little foggy on this but I also thought that if Dr. Ron Paul were to get enough traction to garner 13% to 15% of the Republican vote, Nelson and his organization were ready to swoop in and go the third party route, putting him in the presidential debates with Romney and Obama.

That is a debate I'd pay gold money to see!

  Posted by onebornfreeatyahoo on 10/26/11 02:57 PM

Posted by AnarchoLibertine on 10/26/11 02:01 PM
Don't forgot the rest of what I said:

"... if one MUST pursue politics... "

I was saying IF one thinks organized politics is the answer to an out-of-control fedgovt... they should pursue secession INSTEAD of trying to 'reform' DC.

OK, point taken. However, group secession was tried once before on a grand scale in the US and look where that got them. Smaller group/community attempts at secession were made both before that big one and continue afterwards up to the present day, as I am sure you are aware - all to no avail, so I can see little point in your encouraging others to secede as a group, which is what you appear to be doing- unless I misunderstand.

Group [i.e. political] attempts at secession [or any other group or political activity] are a waste of time and resources for the individual who wants to live a freer life, as far as I am concerned. Regards, onebornfree.

  Posted by onebornfreeatyahoo on 10/26/11 02:40 PM

Posted by Dave Jr on 10/26/11 01:51 PM
How are you able to post from way out there in the wilderness? Just wondering.

From way out where? regards, onebornfree.

  Posted by Dave Jr on 10/26/11 02:18 PM

Posted by AnarchoLibertine on 10/26/11 02:02 PM
I have no idea what point you think you're making...

My post was for onebornfree. Though I agree with his definition of true freedom, it is a hard and lonely place.

  Posted by AnarchoLibertine on 10/26/11 02:02 PM

Posted by Dave Jr on 10/26/11 01:51 PM
How are you able to post from way out there in the wilderness? Just wondering.

I have no idea what point you think you're making...

  Posted by AnarchoLibertine on 10/26/11 02:01 PM

Posted by onebornfreeatyahoo on 10/26/11 01:47 PM
AnarchoLibertine said: "... the only sensible path is to push for secession".

The only person who needs to secede from anything is yourself. Simply forget about political systems, whether real or imaginary, and their imagined possible[or impossible] secessions from larger systems.

Believe me, personal secession from it all is a heck of a lot cheaper, quicker , and easier than trying to persuade others to secede instead [ that is basically a waste of your time].

Just secede for yourself, to your own standards, in your own way, and just forget about everyone else and what they do or don't do.

Personally I have never met anyone who has accomplished this [personal secession] who has regretted it . Regards, onebornfree

Don't forgot the rest of what I said:

"... if one MUST pursue politics... "

I was saying IF one thinks organized politics is the answer to an out-of-control fedgovt... they should pursue secession INSTEAD of trying to 'reform' DC.

  Posted by Dave Jr on 10/26/11 01:51 PM

Posted by onebornfreeatyahoo on 10/26/11 01:47 PM
AnarchoLibertine said: "... the only sensible path is to push for secession".

The only person who needs to secede from anything is yourself. Simply forget about political systems, whether real or imaginary, and their imagined possible[or impossible] secessions from larger systems.

Believe me, personal secession from it all is a heck of a lot cheaper, quicker , and easier than trying to persuade others to secede instead [ that is basically a waste of your time].

Just secede for yourself, to your own standards, in your own way, and just forget about everyone else and what they do or don't do.

Personally I have never met anyone who has accomplished this [personal secession] who has regretted it . Regards, onebornfree

How are you able to post from way out there in the wilderness? Just wondering.

  Posted by Dave Jr on 10/26/11 01:48 PM

Posted by Lamb on 10/26/11 12:15 PM
With due respect to Mr. Hultaberg, he's appearing clueless here. The Tea Party movement didn't sell out.
Those of us who were involved in the Ron Paul campaign in 2008 know that the Tea Party grew out of the grassroots Ron Paul campaign as a rally/fundraising event on the anniversary of the historic Boston Tea Party. The term caught on. Other Republican campaigns, envious of Ron Paul's un-rivaled grassroots support, later co-opted the Tea Party term in an attempt to appear part of the movement (obviously, they never were).
So the real "Tea Party" members are Ron Paul's legions. The rest have been fakes from the moment they first uttered the word "Tea". Santelli, Beck, and other commentators were mere spectators who were six months late to the party. I'm surprised that the Daily Bell editors missed this one...
I agree with the other comments that the Republican party is obviously part of the problem, and thus cannot and will not be the solution. Government and the law is the problem, amplified by a dumbed-down public that's been conned into dependency and subservience. There's no path to freedom that's not going to be painful for a lot of people, especially for the millions of 'petty tyrants' who earn their paycheck and status as government agents. It's the age-old struggle...

"It's the age-old struggle... "

Yes, how to get you to do the most for me with the least amount of effort on my part. Whether producer (worker or business person) or usurper (welfare recipient or governer), we are all the same in this regard.

The difference is in how we choose to conduct ourselves and what we are willing to tolerate of others. Almost all would agree that deception, lies, cheat, theft and murder is not acceptable. But throw a blanket over it and utter some pleasant verbiage, then we don't have to feel guilty?

I think that even through Beck, the Tea Party was touching on this. Once it reached the GOP, it was all over.

  Posted by onebornfreeatyahoo on 10/26/11 01:47 PM

Posted by AnarchoLibertine on 10/26/11 10:53 AM
Mr. Hultberg is right... partially (his glorified version of the 'founders' and 'founding' notwithstanding)...

The system IS rigged... it IS waste-of-time trying to "reform" the GOP.

However, so too is trying to "reform" Washington DC and the very bad idea of centralized govt. created by the constitution. The 'experiment' in [NON-SELF] 'self-govt' FAILED--as it was destined to, being a system rife w/unreconcilable contradictions and logical fallacies. Its time for constitution-worshippers to ADMIT it failed.

The FACT of the matter is that ONLY a non-political, non-system of NO govt. is consistent w/libertarian values and philosophy. You can't have freedom AND a ruling-class (no matter how you want to describe it)... it just doesn't work.

That said, if one MUST pursue politics, the only sensical path is to push for secession--get rid of the most destructive layer of govt. FIRST, the fedgovt, then work from there. You don't achieve more freedom by creating more layers of govt... folks like Mr. Hultberg need to recognize this and act accordingly.

AnarchoLibertine said: "... the only sensible path is to push for secession".

The only person who needs to secede from anything is yourself. Simply forget about political systems, whether real or imaginary, and their imagined possible[or impossible] secessions from larger systems.

Believe me, personal secession from it all is a heck of a lot cheaper, quicker , and easier than trying to persuade others to secede instead [ that is basically a waste of your time].

Just secede for yourself, to your own standards, in your own way, and just forget about everyone else and what they do or don't do.

Personally I have never met anyone who has accomplished this [personal secession] who has regretted it . Regards, onebornfree

  Posted by AnarchoLibertine on 10/26/11 12:52 PM

Posted by Lamb on 10/26/11 12:15 PM
With due respect to Mr. Hultaberg, he's appearing clueless here. The Tea Party movement didn't sell out.
Those of us who were involved in the Ron Paul campaign in 2008 know that the Tea Party grew out of the grassroots Ron Paul campaign as a rally/fundraising event on the anniversary of the historic Boston Tea Party. The term caught on. Other Republican campaigns, envious of Ron Paul's un-rivaled grassroots support, later co-opted the Tea Party term in an attempt to appear part of the movement (obviously, they never were).
So the real "Tea Party" members are Ron Paul's legions. The rest have been fakes from the moment they first uttered the word "Tea". Santelli, Beck, and other commentators were mere spectators who were six months late to the party. I'm surprised that the Daily Bell editors missed this one...
I agree with the other comments that the Republican party is obviously part of the problem, and thus cannot and will not be the solution. Government and the law is the problem, amplified by a dumbed-down public that's been conned into dependency and subservience. There's no path to freedom that's not going to be painful for a lot of people, especially for the millions of 'petty tyrants' who earn their paycheck and status as government agents. It's the age-old struggle...

Good point... Santelli had zip to do w/the Ron Paul-inspired emergence of the TPM... I wish people would stop giving this MSM talking-head so much credit.

Its not so much that the TPM has been "co-opted" as it is that typical "conservatives" (pro-war, pro-empire, pro-military, pro-Big Daddy Govt) flooded the ranks. There are, in reality, two TPMs: a smaller Paulian-wing which wants drastic reform of the fedgovt/banking system and a Teapublican/Anyone-But-Obama-wing which thinks a return to the GW years would be great.

The sad truth is that libertarians are greatly outnumbered by big-govt. cons and libs... there just isn't much we can do to immediately change this fact.

  Posted by Lamb on 10/26/11 12:15 PM

With due respect to Mr. Hultaberg, he's appearing clueless here. The Tea Party movement didn't sell out.
Those of us who were involved in the Ron Paul campaign in 2008 know that the Tea Party grew out of the grassroots Ron Paul campaign as a rally/fundraising event on the anniversary of the historic Boston Tea Party. The term caught on. Other Republican campaigns, envious of Ron Paul's un-rivaled grassroots support, later co-opted the Tea Party term in an attempt to appear part of the movement (obviously, they never were).
So the real "Tea Party" members are Ron Paul's legions. The rest have been fakes from the moment they first uttered the word "Tea". Santelli, Beck, and other commentators were mere spectators who were six months late to the party. I'm surprised that the Daily Bell editors missed this one...
I agree with the other comments that the Republican party is obviously part of the problem, and thus cannot and will not be the solution. Government and the law is the problem, amplified by a dumbed-down public that's been conned into dependency and subservience. There's no path to freedom that's not going to be painful for a lot of people, especially for the millions of 'petty tyrants' who earn their paycheck and status as government agents. It's the age-old struggle...

1 2 Next