The GOP has made a "Pledge to America" to undo excessive government growth, regulation, taxes, corruption, waste, and spending. It is a promise to pursue, establish, and protect conservative principles in government that the GOP stands for, but this time it is "for real".
I read it, and I feel mixed about it. There are certainly many things I agree with advocated here, but there is a lot missing in my opinion and some of the pledges I disagree with. My main concern is how much weight the GOP's word will hold. Can the old Republican guard be trusted to finally act on their party platform?
I am not a registered Republican, nor do I align with the Republican party. I am simply questioning the promise the Republicans are giving, much like the Democrats have been giving on "change". The Republicans were booted out for their failed policies, expansion of government and an explosion in debt. The democrats are likely to get the boot for much of the same reasons. Is this the same viscous cycle, or is this a sincere attempt of the Republican party to produce positive reform?
Things I would like to have seen are as follows:
*End the Fed. The inflation it has created has done significant harm to our economy and global economy to an extent. Floating currencies in theory can work, but it has been proven that governments are not disciplined nor reliable enough to be trusted with the ability to expand the monetary base as needed on a whim.
*Return to a gold standard or a bimetallism standard, which would include silver. Their scarcity and intrinsic value makes them excellent forms of currency, and are widely accepted as money or highly valued.
*Return all armed forces back to the United States. We have two oceans to protect us from invasion, and there currently is no military power capable of mounting a large enough amphibious offensive against us, unless I am mistaken.
*Term limits need to be enacted. There are too many career politicians in Congress. Yes, even Ron Paul can't serve forever. Experience in government has not refined our elected officials in a positive way by any means, only to give them more opportunity to milk the system.
*As far as I know, the government has a national list for rating agencies. They have decided who can rate and who can't, from my understanding. The government has been endorsing the wrong and failed agencies and I think the list should be abolished and that ratings should be shopped around freely. JG you probably understand this better than me, what say you?
And here are some pieces from the pledge I would like to comment on.
Do any of you agree with Judge Napolitano?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu8YotE2 … eature=sub
Interesting commentary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VH2KYdZ … embedded#!
Ron Paul's thought.
So... just felt like spurring some thoughtful discussion, I don't know. My silly attempt ;(
Okay night all.
A Pledge to America (PDF)PTA wrote:
America is more than a country.
America is an idea – an idea that free people can govern themselves, that government’s powers
are derived from the consent of the governed, that each of us is endowed by their Creator with
the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. America is the belief that any
man or woman can – given economic, political, and religious liberty – advance themselves, their
families, and the common good.
America is an inspiration to those who yearn to be free and have the ability and the dignity to
determine their own destiny.
Whenever the agenda of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the
people to institute a new governing agenda and set a different course.
These first principles were proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, enshrined in the
Constitution, and have endured through hard sacrifice and commitment by generations of
Americans.
In a self-governing society, the only bulwark against the power of the state is the consent of the
governed, and regarding the policies of the current government, the governed do not consent.
An unchecked executive, a compliant legislature, and an overreaching judiciary have combined
to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values, striking down longstanding
laws and institutions and scorning the deepest beliefs of the American people.
An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues
mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many.
I read it, and I feel mixed about it. There are certainly many things I agree with advocated here, but there is a lot missing in my opinion and some of the pledges I disagree with. My main concern is how much weight the GOP's word will hold. Can the old Republican guard be trusted to finally act on their party platform?
I am not a registered Republican, nor do I align with the Republican party. I am simply questioning the promise the Republicans are giving, much like the Democrats have been giving on "change". The Republicans were booted out for their failed policies, expansion of government and an explosion in debt. The democrats are likely to get the boot for much of the same reasons. Is this the same viscous cycle, or is this a sincere attempt of the Republican party to produce positive reform?
Things I would like to have seen are as follows:
*End the Fed. The inflation it has created has done significant harm to our economy and global economy to an extent. Floating currencies in theory can work, but it has been proven that governments are not disciplined nor reliable enough to be trusted with the ability to expand the monetary base as needed on a whim.
*Return to a gold standard or a bimetallism standard, which would include silver. Their scarcity and intrinsic value makes them excellent forms of currency, and are widely accepted as money or highly valued.
*Return all armed forces back to the United States. We have two oceans to protect us from invasion, and there currently is no military power capable of mounting a large enough amphibious offensive against us, unless I am mistaken.
*Term limits need to be enacted. There are too many career politicians in Congress. Yes, even Ron Paul can't serve forever. Experience in government has not refined our elected officials in a positive way by any means, only to give them more opportunity to milk the system.
*As far as I know, the government has a national list for rating agencies. They have decided who can rate and who can't, from my understanding. The government has been endorsing the wrong and failed agencies and I think the list should be abolished and that ratings should be shopped around freely. JG you probably understand this better than me, what say you?
And here are some pieces from the pledge I would like to comment on.
Limit government, limit regulation, limit spending, except when it concerns national defense. You will see "non-security" spending and jobs being criticized a lot in the pledge. I also do not feel we should impose sanctions against Iran. After the sanctions imposed against Iraq, we should be reluctant to even consider them.PTA wrote:
Above all else, the primary obligation of
the federal government remains providing
for the common defense against all threats
foreign and domestic. We offer a plan to
keep our nation secure at home and
abroad that will provide the resources,
authority, and support our deployed
military requires, fully fund missile defense,
and enforce sanctions against Iran.
page 7
Interesting quoting Reagan. Indeed, the quote seems to have much truth to it, however, Reagan describes himself in 3rd person again. I'm not sure if he was much of a taxer, but he did regulate and subsidize. The S&L crisis, for example, and the underlying problems because of it were kicked down the road to our current crisis, if you want to call it that. The conservative hero that wasn't.PTA wrote:
“Government’s view of the economy
could be summed up in a few short
phrases: if it moves, tax it. If it
keeps moving, regulate it. And if it
stops moving, subsidize it.”
- President Ronald Reagan
page 20
The rating agencies did more ham in my opinion. Credit default swaps were attractive because of their triple or double A ratings, and subprime mortgage bonds that did not qualify for those high ratings (about 20%) were repackaged into CDOs that did. Aside the point, abolish them all. This includes Ginnie Mae and anyone else in the area.PTA wrote:
End Government Control of Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac
Since taking over Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, the mortgage companies that
triggered the financial meltdown by giving
too many high risk loans to people who
couldn’t afford them, taxpayers were billed
more than $145 billion to save the two
companies. We will reform Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac by ending their government
takeover, shrinking their portfolios, and
establishing minimum capital standards.
This will save taxpayers as much as $30
billion.
page 22
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8Xg6W4MlaAPTA wrote:
Keep Terrorists Out of America
We will prevent the government from
importing terrorists onto American soil. We
will hold President Obama and his
administration responsible for any
Guantanamo Bay detainees they release
who return to fight against our troops or
who have become involved in any terrorist
plots or activities.
Demand an Overarching Detention
Policy
Foreign terrorists do not have the same
rights as American citizens, nor do they
have more rights than U.S. military
personnel. We will work to ensure foreign
terrorists, such as the 9/11 conspirators, are
tried in military, not civilian, court. We will
oppose all efforts to force our military,
intelligence, and law enforcement personnel operating overseas to extend
“Miranda Rights” to foreign terrorists.
page 38
Do any of you agree with Judge Napolitano?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu8YotE2 … eature=sub
Interesting commentary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VH2KYdZ … embedded#!
Ron Paul's thought.
So... just felt like spurring some thoughtful discussion, I don't know. My silly attempt ;(
Okay night all.