Friday, July 31, 2009

Ron Paul blew it.

The Congress shall have power to[..]
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States; -Constitution of the United States of America, Article one, section eight.



Ron Paul, in a recent speech before Congress, has pointed out that the Chairman of the Federal Reserve in his stated opposition to the bill requiring an audit of that same body that such an audit would "politicize monetary policy" and allow Congress to SET monetary policy. Dr. Paul goes on to say that his bill does no such thing.

Now, even though I think he's tilting at windmills, I usually admire Dr. Paul. He's a believer. A man who thinks that the constitution means what it says, and that a minimal state is both possible and desirable. As an anarchist, I completely disagree and thus could not support him or any other Statist.

But this time he fuckin' blew it. His response SHOULD have been to tell Mr. Bernanke straight out:" CONGRESS ALREADY has that authority, you mealy mouthed, arrogant, scum sucker!"

Of course, Dr. Paul is much more polite than this, but he's never really held back before on issues where congress' mandate is obvious, such as this case. While I suppose it could be argued that Congress made no legal transgression in outsourcing one of their duties, the idea that the contractor can keep itself separate and secret from the body FROM WHICH IT SOLELY DERIVES IT'S AUTHORITY TO EXIST is outrageous.

The moment the Federal Reserve started objecting to this, they should have been fired. Yes, that's right, FIRED. Terminated. Sorry, but your services are no longer required due to demonstrated incompetence and malfeasance, nevermind that part that you've hidden.

Central banking schemes have never worked, even when they are transparent. Secret banking schemes such as the Fed have ONLY one purpose: The absolute denial of the free market.

4 comments:

xrazorwirex said...

I remember watching Bernanke bitch about how he had "no idea why congress thinks it has the authority to do what the fed does" (paraphrased) but I totally missed Paul conceding that point.

It must be getting real dicey on the hill when Ron Paul makes concessions....

-Kenny; xrindustries.com

Kevin K. Biomech said...

Unfortunately the video got pulled. But I don't think he actually INTENDED to concede anything. He was just being placatory when he NEEDED to be incendiary.

Aside from his support for a minimal state, a thing as likely as a unicorn, my biggest problem with Dr. Paul is that he is TOO polite to his enemies. Being genteel has it's place. When facing ravening predators, you use heavy weapons.

That's why I titled it "Ron Paul Blew It" instead of something like RP sold out. I don't think it was intentional.

Mechanized said...

It is good to see you posting again Kevin.

Dr. Paul, obviously a constitutional minarchist, intends to utilize the idea of the itroduction of H.R. 1207 as a "stepping stone," if you will, to the eventual abolishment of the Federal Reserve.

Ron Paul is probably overly polite. He appears to be one of the few Christians today who continues to uphold the belief of "do unto others." Without his efforts--as well as that of The Mises Institute--it is unlikely the public would even be discussing the subject. However, having stated this, I would agree that Ron Paul would do well to better solidify his message with the infusion of a certain amount of rightous indignation.

Incidentally, it would be most interesting to observe a speech given by Kevin Biomech to Congress. The righteous fury, infused with logic and reason, would prove quite entertaining.

Kevin K. Biomech said...

Hello Mechanized!

Yeah, that would be fun. Maybe I can do a Youtube that's exactly that.

Thing is (which I think you know), I've met Ron Paul. I even like the man. I just don't think he's on the right path when it comes to governance. Everything he speaks to would be better served by the absolute abolition of central authority.

If I were ever to vote again, it would be for him or someone he endorsed. But I can't do that, because voting itself is an immoral act against the people at large. I have no qualms using government against itself as honor is not owed to the dishonorable.