Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Dear Friends,
Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.
The events of the past week are no exception.
The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."
That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told it's unavoidable.
The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!
- The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.
- Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.
- Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.
There goes your country.
Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.
Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.
Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.
The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?
When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?
Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.
In liberty,
Ron Paul
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 18
Last time I checked, Ron Paul was a Republican, and a part of the system. Is he admitting his guilt for his part in this "Crime against the American people"? Is he turning himself in? Nope.
Sure the bailout plan sucks, but for a ten-term Republican congressman to try to convince people he's not part of the problem is absolutely ridiculous.
I didn't affiliate him with the Republican Party, Sue. He did that to himself. As I understand it, he doesn't like to keep all his eggs in one basket, though. So he's also a member of the Libertarian Party, and has chosen to endorse the Constitution Party candidate in the presidential race. That's all good, but the simple fact is that he chooses to run for his Congressional seat as a Republican candidate, not a Libertarian candidate, or a Constitution Party candidate, or an Independent candidate.
Unlike his first failed attempt at winning the White House, when he ran as the Libertarian Party candidate, in his latest failed attempt to get himself elected President, he ran as a Republican candidate.
Dr. Paul also chooses to be a member of the Republican Liberty Caucus.
Regardless of how much he may disagree with his fellow Republicans, he's one of them. He's just as much a part of the problem as they are.
"The fact that you don't like him just endorses him, as far as I'm concerned."
Then I strongly encourage you to trust his endorsement and vote Baldwin/Castle on 4 November.
When i saw first noticed him as candidate for president, i really did think "here a candidate who's not backed by special interest, probably the first in decades, more like a century", i thgouth he was the only shot the nation had out of a destructive path planned in the future. Even in all of this i do confess, i was very doubtful he would make it to the presidential office because there was too much the elite had too risk and the corporate media & the establishment would never allow it. The only other possibility i thought was for him to make it to office as a dead man cause surely the bankers would have him killed (Its not like they havent taken care of threats before).
Of course, as i suspected it didnt get that far either and the fact is the corporate media have never allowed him & he simply does not have the influence that the other corporate puppets do. Nevertheless, i think if can still manage to get knock some sense into another 5 people who are willing to listen & understand what he says, i'd think he'd still be better alive than a dead man as president.
Then does that mean if you knew anything about this subject, you'd write an article about what you know instead of just copying and pasting Ron Paul's words?
Of course he is a Republican, he made that very clear. However he is a real Republican with the principals of the old Republican party. He has made it very clear that he does not subscribe to the Neo Con, One Worlder Republican party of today.
Without the plan, the entire credit system could be completely frozen. If that happens, businesses won't be able to obtain loans in which many depend on to meet their payrolls. G.M. has already tapped out their credit limit and Caterpillar is on the verge. This spells more job losses that our economy just can't handle.
With the plan, companies will be bailed out and the U.S. Treasury buys bad paper and the cost will be passed on to the taxpayers eventually. Buying bad paper just isn't good business no matter how you look at it. I wouldn't invest my money that way, would you?
And where will the initial 700 billion come from? Will they open up more printing presses and just print the money? Some economists believe that is exactly what will happen. Since we are no longer on the Gold Standard, that money will be printed with nothing to back it up, which spells pure inflation and a train wreck just waiting around the corner.
It's a catch 22. Damed if we do..damed if we don't. But we are living in a Country where a handfull of people will think nothing of crashing our entire economy just to make a few more bucks. That's exactly what has happened and I'm afraid that it's too late to do anything to reverse the damage that has been done.
The bailout will likely happen and all it will do is put off the cras that is going to happen. The best it can do is delay and make it worse when it get here.