REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS POSITION STATEMENT

RLC Website ^ | December 8, 2000 | Republican Liberty Caucus

[Doug Fiedor]

You make a good point.

George Mason University Professor of Economics Walter Williams writes that the eighteen duties mandated to the federal government by our Constitution would account for approximately just one-third of the federal budget. The other two-thirds of the federal budget is, therefore, "extra-Constitutional" spending -- not authorized functions of the federal government. In other words, two-thirds of the hard earned money we are forced to send to Washington every year is spent by the federal government with no Constitutional authority.

Just as starters, I call for the federal government to display the same type of budgetary responsibility we would expect from a corporation and have a 15% across the board (except military) lay-off. Probably a 10% lay-off for each of the next five years thereafter would tend to bring the budget back in line. It would do a lot to promote Liberty and do a great deal for the economy, too.

[Protagoras]

This means replacing them with Republicans.

That is where you always get hung up Jim. Replacing them with Republicans who are precisely the same (or worse) than the Democrats you are replacing.

Everything you stand for in the RLC info you posted above, is totally undermined by that ONE statement. They will NEVER, EVER do the things that you want in the RLC plan. NEVER, EVER.

Voting for Republicans instead of Democrats even if they are the same, is the most illogical thing you could possibly do. Your hopes are never to be realized with that strategy.

It seems hopeless to get you to change your mind. You are stuck, and they know it. They win, you lose, the country loses. GWB and his ilk are laughing at you. (So are Gephart, Clinton and Dashle) Sad as hell. Regards TJ

[toenail]

"You won't declare abortion wrong, etc."

Are you, by the remotest possibility, confusing me with another toenail?

[Jim Robinson]

Well, it's my choice.

[rwfromkansas]

I am talking about the Libertarian party, not individual libertarians.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

Everything you stand for in the RLC info you posted above, is totally undermined by that ONE statement. They will NEVER, EVER do the things that you want in the RLC plan. NEVER, EVER.

I can demonstrate how wrong you are with four simple words about the RLC and its ironclad commitment to the Constitution and liberty:

Ron Paul, Founding Chair

[Protagoras]

Well, it's my choice.

You're right Jim, for now.

If you stay with your strategy, you will wake up one morning, and you won't have any choices left. It's inevitable, your only hope is that it will occur after we are gone. Which of course leaves our kids and grandkids in slavery.

[Protagoras]

Clearly, you missed my point entirely. You must have missed the context or who I was referring to.

Please reread the whole exchange between JR and myself if you want to understand what I said.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

What a fabulous summation of the RLC's foundational principles. They are, indeed, 100% aligned with the nation's foundational principles as a federation of sovereign states with very limited central powers (e.g. only as allowed by the Constitution). The Federal Government did not create the states-- it was the other way around. This point is lost on probably 90% of Americans today, and that sad fact is fundamental to the steady erosion of our liberty and why it is tolerated by the citizenry.

One thing we must keep in mind is that the march of socialism has benefited greatly from the patience and discipline brought to Marxism by its Fabian and Gramscian believers and their useful tools. Their spirit of patient incrementalism is a strategy that we are well-advised to emulate. The single-issue voters among us should think carefully about that.

[Jim Robinson]

Well, we'll just have to disagree on this point and let it go at that.
Thanks, Jim

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

Clearly, you missed my point entirely. You must have missed the context or who I was referring to. Please reread the whole exchange between JR and myself if you want to understand what I said.

Sorry. Seems to me you specifically stated that the Republicans would not accomplish any of the RLC's goals. In rebuttal, I gave an example of an exemplar of the RLC who is also one of the most vocal Republican Congressmen today. He's the lone voice of the Constitution now, but there are more coming thanks to the RLC's growing influence among patriotic voters who until now have had no voice and no leverage in the latter-day Republican party. The RLC's effectiveness in electing liberty-minded individuals at all levels is detailed in several other examples in this thread. It's exciting stuff!

The key thing to realize is that we are not working to "convert" the RINOs but to wrench the Party towards its foundational small-government, Constitution-respecting original principles by attracting and giving a voice to disaffected voters who are sitting out elections or escaping to third parties. Because when they do so, they either impotently toss their vote away or--worse--elect a Clinton (as in 1992) or give the Senate to a Daschle by squeaking socialists into office by the narrowest of margins (as happened in Washington and New Mexico in 2000).

Meanwhile, RINOs are the way they are because they crave political success. They will adapt as "our side" gains its voice. I hold out little hope that some of the politicians you reference will suddenly sprout credible Constitutional credentials, but they're smart enough to sing along as we steer the chorus.

Frankly, I think you and I agree on at least 90% of the issues. What we seem to not agree-on is the viability of the GOP as a vehicle for liberty-minded candidates who respect the Constitution and foundational principles of the nation. I say emphatically yes to the idea of molding the GOP back to its little-l libertarian roots, and in the thread I just referenced there's abundant evidence supporting that position.

[alfons]

I want to thank Jim Robinson for allowiing this partnership with the rlc. I hope that as time goes on, we can both work together in a coalition. Perhaps even we can hold joint conventions. Here in Florida we have the RLC in regional groups. We have the South Florida Regional Group and now the Central Florida regional group. As chair of the Florida RLC I plan to help start a North Florida regional group. I am proud to be in the RLC and work with Free Republic. He philosophy of the RLC is consistent with my own. I came to this country seeking freedom back in 1961 when Castro took over Cuba and I have seen what it is like to lose your rights, property and so on Thanks again for this partnership Jim. Al Gutierrez Chairman Florida RLC .

[alfons]

I want to thank Jim Robinson for allowiing this partnership with the rlc. I hope that as time goes on, we can both work together in a coalition. Perhaps even we can hold joint conventions. Here in Florida we have the RLC in regional groups. We have the South Florida Regional Group and now the Central Florida regional group. As chair of the Florida RLC I plan to help start a North Florida regional group. I am proud to be in the RLC and work with Free Republic. He philosophy of the RLC is consistent with my own. I came to this country seeking freedom back in 1961 when Castro took over Cuba and I have seen what it is like to lose your rights, property and so on Thanks again for this partnership Jim. Al Gutierrez Chairman Florida RLC .

[Doug Fiedor]

One thing we must keep in mind is that the march of socialism has benefited greatly from the patience and discipline brought to Marxism by its Fabian and Gramscian believers and their useful tools. Their spirit of patient incrementalism is a strategy that we are well-advised to emulate. The single-issue voters among us should think carefully about that.

Wow, I haven't even seen the name Gramsci written since I wrote a paper on Italian fascism in high school. Such things were still fresh in people's minds way back then and at least part of the class knew who he was.

Not so anymore, eh? Most people today don't even know what fascism was -- except to know that it wasn't good and they probably don't want any here. That's why they do not recognize that we already have strong tendencies in that direction. Very strong!

Same with socialism. Few Americans realize that there are different types of socialism. In the communist type, government outwardly owns all of the means of production. In the present type, government uses licensing and regulation to tightly control all of the means of production, agriculture, service, and sales. Government regulation, then, becomes the de facto standard for quality and performance and free market competition is greatly diminished. Look to medial care and the automobile industry as prime examples.

Of course, we all know about that part of socialism that concerns the redistribution of wealth. Yet, we tend to accept that simply because most of the nation grew up under that system and cannot imagine how life would be without big government as the nanny.

We have even given up our God to the alter of politically correct socialism. Today's "Christians" sit back in near silence as those on the far left continually defame our most personal beliefs. We have also become so complacent we now allow the socialist controlled government schools to teach our children the acceptance and practice of all sorts of deviant behaviors we know in our hearts to be improper.

The point is, they are winning. They keep the black population in a constant state of agitation against the white. They pit the Jews against the Christians. They protect the belligerents in society, explain away the terrorist helpers and disgrace all of our national heroes.

Most Americans, in turn, sit back and grumble a little, but say protesting is useless. Worse, when some others actually try to make a difference, instead of joining in to help, they make fun of the attempt -- calling it futile and impossible.

Except, it is far from impossible. Give me ten good political activists in each State and I will elect you a president. If we have three or four active RLC groups in each State -- active being the operative word here -- we will have significant change by the next presidential election.

Or, we can just sit back like many people are doing and accept our fate, as determined by that small group that is the socialist controlling force in this society.

Two points are indisputable: The socialists can be stopped by just a handful of good political activists simply because this Liberty thing gets infectious when presented to people properly. And, because the Republican Liberty Caucus is a club, we can also have fun while doing something constructive.

[alfons]

There are liobertarians who are Christian who oppose abortion like I do. Look at the Lord Acton Institute for example. That is a Catholic libertarian group. Heck, even in the Libertarian Party you have Libertarian For Life lead by Doris Gordon. Libertarians come from different philosophies or factions but one thing that we have in common is limited government, property rights, strict construction of the Constitution the Supreme Law Of the Land, we are pro second ammendment. There are other Christian Libertarian Groups also.

[Robert_Paulson2]

good stuff

[Robert_Paulson2]

no tom... most of us are just tired of being slammed as "libertines" and "drug addicts" or "smut lovers" over anything that leans towards individualism, self reliance and the like as we see it, under the constitution...

STATISM is a powerful drug to those who dream of utopia made in the likeness of their own ideologies... and INDIVIDUALISM has become anathema to what used to be called conservatism...

[Robert_Paulson2]

"That won't fly with social, moral and Christian conservatives"

That is probably true, but who cares? Not me. As soon as you moved that word "social" to the front of any list of qualities, you negated any references to "conservative" that follow. SOCIALISTS will adapt ANY ideology that they can use to move into governing a utopian society ir their UNIQUE and twisted view of it. Even so-called "christians".

The same authority that folks surrender to the feds for one area are WITHOUT exception, used in unexpected ways to our detriment. Abortion should return to being a state regulated issue, as there were far less abortions then, than there are now.

We need to get FEDERAL government out of EVERYTHING but its enumerated powers. It is time to end the illicit affair our residents have had with federalism. It has adulterated the fiduciary rights and responsibilities between sovereign states and their residents.

First degree murder and it's corollaries, are still all defined under regional and state laws. It should be the same for MOST items that have now been federalized... drugs, sex, guns, alcohol, abortion, and so on... WE need to keep them regulated at state and local levels where special interests cannot concentrate their efforts so easily and the electorate lives within driving distance of the legislatures... and leave the big guns of federalism for INTERNATIONAL issues of security, economics and trade...

The founders never envisioned the "interstate commerce" clause being used to regulate such wide ranges of issues as medical proceedures... they were right in that LACK of vision. They just couldn't see it then, and we shouldn't now.

[Robert_Paulson2]

there are a lot of folks that want to see their version of biblical christianity imposed on the rest of us... at a federal level....

THEY say they are socially conservatives... I think what begins with "social" is a socialist world view regardless of what noun or words follow.

The taliban were social conservatives who managed to get THEIR view of the KORAN instituted as laws against their fellow man... It's evil no matter who does it though... and we need to return to such thinking in america.

[Robert_Paulson2]

Please cut down on the vitriol...