How is Ron Paul like a Chevy Commercial?

Topher Morrison
PurpleSerf.com

Poll averages since November 2010 for the 2012 GOP
presidential nomination.
Image Source: RealClearPolitics.com

He's like a rock, ohh like a rock!  Dependable, long lasting and hard working a true and tested 2012 Ron Paul at a poll near you!  Maybe Bob Seger could endorse Ron Paul, I can just see the campaign ad now...


          Throughout the campaign, much like his career, Ron Paul has been the consistent conservative; like his policies his support has remained unwavering.  With the exception of two candidates whom were essentially dead-on-arrival, Ron Paul has had the lowest poll swings among all the candidates.  The GOP presidential nomination has resembled the stock market more than it has a traditional campaign.  Just look at those coasters, it could make an Imagineer blush!


          There have been lots of hares in this race from Rick Perry's meteoric rise and crash to Herman Cain's sharp ascension, but Ron Paul's slow and steady pace may indeed win him the race.  While a massive swing into the positive would of course be welcomed by the Ron Paul campaign and his ardent Paulistas, it may be better to save his growing war chest for Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida.


          The Drudge Report linked "New Polls Show: Romney Ahead in First Four States", but the article also mentioned something not widely accepted, the fact that it looks as though Ron Paul is beating not only Newt Gingrich, but Rick Perry as well.  Moreover, as Bachmann's summer star continues to fade Rick Santorum and John Huntsman look more than ever, irrelevant.  Once all three have finally sung their last song all attention will undoubtedly be on three others: Cain, Romney and Perry, but Ron Paul will evidently be in 3rd regardless of who is paying attention.  

GOPs New Love Affair, Herman Cain and VAT Taxes

Topher Morrison
PurpleSerf.com

There is a floating faction in the GOP which can't seem to settle on one candidate.  First into the spotlight was Michelle Bachmann and her Tea Party legitimacy.  Then it was Rick Perry who in classic Texan fashion came out of the gate guns a blazin' only to be holstered just as fast.  Begrudgingly the conservative undecideds have returned to Mitt Romney who wears his experience in Massachusetts like a scarlet letter.  In every case with a challenger to this ostensible nominee their loss of appeal is someone else's gain, Herman Cain is the latest example.  But is Cain destined for a similar fate once the restless side of the GOP takes a closer look at him?


          He is a straight talker.  You feel like you know where he stands and if he doesn't know he'll tell you.  But aside from the esoteric who is Herman Cain?  What would his first 100 days look like?  Well in the words of Herman Cain himself, "Lets Get Real."


UPDATE: American Research Group says Cain is #1 in South Carolina



          No stranger to business (or admittedly to ignorance in world affairs) and evidently adept at communicating his goals, Cain has succinctly articulated his platform; 9-9-9.  He advocates flat taxes of 9% on net business profits, 9% personal income tax allowing only for charitable donation deductions and a 9% national sales tax.  The 9-9-9 plan includes a transitional stage where the "the Fair Tax would ultimately replace individual and corporate income taxes."  Why there is a need for a transition is not clear, however, Cain claims that "amidst a backdrop of the economic boom created by the Phase 1 Enhanced Plan, I will begin the process of educating the American people on the benefits of continuing the next step to the Fair Tax."  Whether America will be ready for the lesson is another question entirely.   


          There are some interesting opinions on this strategy of transition.  Considering Congress' short attention span who's to say that some "crisis" won't arise (they do so often in Washington these days) and stymies any transition from Cain's tripartite taxation system into a true flat and fair tax.  How many crises do you think would arise should the United States carve out not only the IRS, but the galaxy of ancillary organizations from Deloitte & Touche to Turbo Tax?  Who's to say we wouldn't be stuck with the whole shebang?


          The Wall Street Journal calls "Cain's tax mutiny" a "political killer."  They admit the plan is deficit neutral and would bring into government coffers as much as the current tax system, that it would eliminate double taxation on savings and investment, eliminate loopholes that have allowed companies like Google and General Electric to pay next to zero income tax.  Cain's plan admittedly would also reduce the distortions created by compliance (and avoidance), would substantially increase our global competitiveness, and would allow the U.S. economy to tap into a deep worldwide reservoir of foreign direct investment; in other words "if Americans want more jobs, this plan would produce them in a hurry" according to the WSJ.  However, there is a dark side to Herman Cain's plan.


          Americans have been snookered before, according to the WSJ:


          "the current income tax was introduced in 1913 with a top rate of 7% amid promises
           that it would never exceed 10%.  By 1918 the tope rate was 77%."


Because his plan does not first eliminate the 16th Amendment, which created the national income tax, America seduced by the intoxicating prospect of flat and fair taxes and rapid growth will in reality be made vulnerable to newer more demagogic style tax politics akin to those in Europe. 


          "Consumption tax rates usually started at less than 10%, but in much of euroland 'the
           rates have nearly doubled and now are close to 20%,' according to a study by the
           Cato Institute's Dan Mitchell.  Because a sales tax would raise hug sums with small
           increases in the rate, we would see regular campaigns like 'a penny to fight poverty,'
           or 'one-cent for universal health care' that would be politically tough to defeat."


Moreover, Josh Barro of the National Review points out that the 9% business tax needs either some fine tuning or at least clarification as it seems to be in essence a "lightly modified VAT" which doesn't exactly "equalize the treatment of corporate debt and equity."


          If you don't buy that the European track record will apply here, a head Senatorial tax advisor pointed out to PurpleSerf today the abysmal situation in California.  The politically blue state is very much in the red even though it has both sales and state income taxes which exceed corresponding rates in most of the lower 48!  "That is a staggering double whammy!" he continued "...unless the income tax is completely abolished an additional tax system like a VAT is and should be a non-starter."   


          The issue of federal taxation is of growing importance not only when it comes to reducing the debt, simplifying our lives, but who is ultimately being paid and how much control Washington should wield over the country's wealth.  Herman Cain's time with the Federal Reserve of Kansas City has been a concern for many paleo-conservatives, libertarians and constitutionalists.  The group WeAreChange.org recently followed Herman Cain in Iowa (gets interesting at 6:50):

          Evidently Herman Cain is for a sound money system and from this interview apparently one based on gold, which brings him within the orbit of Ron Paul yet there is little publicity on this point.  However, much in the same vein as his 9-9-9 plan there needs to be another transition period from fiat currency to sound money so don't expect him to end the Federal Reserve any time soon.  He offers a compelling reason not to: "the guiding economic principles is... measurements must be dependable" if we were to eliminate the Fed "there would be chaos."  

           He advocates that Congress should start doing its job by vetting Federal Reserve appointees more closely and narrowing their prerogatives.  In response to Thomas Jefferson's words lamenting the prospect of a central bank Mr. Cain claimed we now live in a "global economy and a global financial system."  The exact point at which a private central bank was required for this new world order rather than the democratically elected Congress of the United States he did not elaborate.   

          I wonder if Mr. Cain has thought about how the global system would react to him undercutting their tax rates and reintroducing a gold standard to a world based on fiat.  Talk about chaos!  For all the transitions Herman Cain advocates one has to wonder when or will the rubber ever meet the road.  With no public record to point to, lets get real, it's anyones guess. 

UPDATE: Ron Paul's Revolution Super PAC has their own incendiary compare and contrast.

Ron Paul Warns of 'Dictatorship in Washington DC'

Topher Morrison
PurpleSerf.com
6/2/11


While at a campaign stop in Mason City, Iowa Ron Paul (R-Texas) admonished the crowd before him.  According to Josiah Ryan of The Hill: 

"'We're not on the verge of having a king, but we are on the verge of having way too much dictatorship in Washington, D.C.,' Paul said, comparing the U.S.'s current situation to a Biblical tale in which the ancient Israelites demanded, against their own good, that a king rule their land instead of God."

Paul continued on, stating "Our rights come from our creator, not our government."  

The biblical tale Dr. Paul was referring to can be found in 1 Samuel 8.  Regardless of your views on the Bible or whether you adhere to Christian, Jewish, or Muslim dogma/doctrine the author of these words obviously understood politics and government, this much is difficult to deny.  

In ancient times Israel, having escaped from Egypt, was governed by a theocratic monarchy.  Moses passed down a constitution and enshrined into law what was thereafter interpreted and executed by elders and priests.  Samuel was the last of these elders to govern in large part because his successors (his sons) were found to "accept bribes and pervert justice."  

Israel mistakingly believed their system had failed rather than simply admitting their leadership had betrayed their system.  Instead of impeaching their leaders and retaining their constitution and decentralized familial organization their false conclusion lead them to subsequently demand a king.  The command and control political models which yielded the fabulous military victories of nearby nations evidently persuaded Israel.  

These autocracies appealed to a young, vulnerable, and ambitious Israel because they were able to make the quick and efficient decisions necessary to "lead [them]...and go out before [them] and fight [their] battles."  While this general king, as it were, would in fact lead to glorious victories and the establishment of Israel as a powerful regional power it would also set the stage for chronic internal struggles which would plague Israel throughout the Old Testament.

What the Israelites didn't understand was that a king, unlike the theocratic constitution and its executors they were accustomed to (however flawed), would wield very different powers as God lays out in verse 9.  Speaking to Samuel: 

"Now listen to them (the Israelites); but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights."  

God continues and warns Samuel how in 7 different ways the Israelites personal rights and liberties will be violated once they took on the arbitrary and expansive powers inherent in a king.

1. Military Conscription "He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots."

2. Military Industrial Complex "Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots."

3. Central Economic Organization "He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers."

4. Redistribution of Wealth "He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants." 

5. Bureaucracy & Largesse "He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants."

6. High Taxes "[He will take] Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use."

7. High Debt & Slavery "He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves."

The wonderful thing about a constitution is that unlike leaders who are in the end human, prone to failure and corruption, a constitution remains consistent, knowable, and often times flexible, manipulated through democratic initiative or judicial interpretation.  A biblical example can be found in the story of the Daughters of Zelophehad – American examples are abundant.   

Human nature has changed very little over the last few thousand years, albeit our technology and cultures may.  Rep. Paul contends that when nations vest most of their political power into one area of government, or into one person for that matter, history teaches us the aforementioned violations and encroachments on our liberty necessarily occur. 

What is the solution to this historical tendency?  "Be the change you want to see in the world" as Ghandi encouraged.  Don't give up your rights and liberties in order to feel safe or to alleviate yourself of the responsibility to better the lives of those in your community.  It is no doubt an intoxicating idea that the right government formula or a charismatic figure might potentially save society from its perpetual ills, but the human experience unfortunately provides no examples of this.  

Freedom by contrast requires vigilance and hard work.  It is therefore understandable that people would rather be told what to do in certain instances; however, this acquiescence inevitably leads to being told what to do in every instance. 

When we abandon the confines set forth in the Constitution (federalism, separation and limitation of powers) in favor of expediency, when our government takes on more of the responsibility we owe to ourselves it becomes harder and harder for our culture to regain what it has given up.  

I agree with Ron Paul, we are not on the verge of having one king, however, I feel he understates in this instance the fact we have too many kings (czars, heads, whatever...)  already in Washington. We submit to so many of their decisions because we docilely operate under the flag of democracy when most of our laws are in fact legislated, adjudicated, and executed by faceless unelected bureaucrats.

We live in an increasingly centralized society where most look to Washington DC for answers rather than within their own communities.  Washington is a den of self serving bureaucracies, self aggrandizing power brokers and entrenched interests whom shape the national dialogue, laws, and policies of our country and where the state, county, and city governments are being undermined at the expense of the family and the individual.  

In reviewing the Constitution and history it is clear, we have ceded too much power to DC in order for it to fight the battles we ought to fight ourselves.  It is up to us to watch over our own health, it is up to us to save for a rainy day, and it is up to us to defend ourselves against those who would do us harm.  We are the generals and armies of our own lives - we should start acting like it.