Dubiously Free Trade, Federal Reserve, Game Theory

Never Trust a Socialist: Bernie Sanders Stabs Ron Paul in the Back on H.R. 1207

When it comes to halting corporatism; never trust a socialist to do a libertarian’s job. Back in June of 2009, I noted the irony that libertarian Ron Paul and the self-identified social democrat, Bernie Sanders both introduced a bill to audit the very secretive Federal Reserve (H.R. 1207  in the House and S. 604 in the Senate).

After Ron Paul, every Republican in the House and a large number of Democrats pushed through H.R. 1207 (against the efforts of the Federal Reserve and their former Enron lobbyist), Bernie Sanders went soft. It appears he has comprised the teeth out of S. 604 and put the effort to audit the Fed in jeopardy. According to TalkingPointMemos.com:

“In order to allay some of the White House’s and the Fed’s concerns, [Bernie] Sanders has agreed to limit the scope of what the Government Accountability Office would be allowed to audit.”

John Tate, the president of Ron Paul’s Campaign For Liberty, has referred to this “limit the scope” compromise as follows:

“According to our sources on the Hill, Senator Bernie Sanders caved to pressure from the White House and Chris Dodd and stripped out the Paul-Grayson language from his Fed transparency amendment. “What Sanders is now proposing is essentially the Watt amendment we all opposed last year in the House. In addition, it supports just a one-time audit.”

Not particularly surprising, but disappointing nonetheless. Here’s Ron Paul discussing the latest developments:


3 thoughts on “Never Trust a Socialist: Bernie Sanders Stabs Ron Paul in the Back on H.R. 1207

  1. Ross Wolf says:

    Who Would You Trust More To Run U.S. Government Obama/Or The U.S. Military the Next 2-years?

    The Neomarxist behind the Obama/FTC intend to drown out the voice of America with Obama/Marxist propaganda, enforcing new regulations that will cripple bloggers and other alternative media from disseminating information that grass-roots among other organizations depend on to make informed decisions. Obama’s support of the DISCLOSE Act confirmed what many Americans already believed; that Obama and certain Democrats in Congress intend to strangle the flow of information. If Obama and his leftists associations get their way, our Children will be brainwashed by Obama’s one-sided propaganda at school, through Obama controlled Radio, TV and Obama media policies that restrict the free flow of information. Historically when communists attempt or take over a country, one of their first steps is to control the media and all forms of public communications to control the Civilian populations. When Russia took over Hungary, it immediately took control of the Radio stations to thwart Citizen resistance and to psychologically control the population. Considering the Obama administration’s obsession with controlling all media, one might ask, are some of the same persons inside and outside U.S. Government working with the Obama administration to push the Disclose Act and other censorship regulations, involved in causes that promulgate overthrow of the United States? While some in the Obama Government say they support dismantling capitalism, brick by brick, does their endgame call for destruction of the United States? If it does, what should Americans do to stop it? Does the Obama administration’s proposed censorship of information threaten National Security? In other countries where members of political parties and ideological extremists attempted or succeeded in this kind of forced censorship, forbidding Citizens to receive information, they have been arrested for treason among and other crimes. The Obama administration appears intended to curtail Americans’ right to know, restrict American’s right to communicate via the Internet and the Obama administration admits they want to pay writers in newspapers and other media to covertly propagandize their point of view. Is this not treason? Top CZAR Cass Sunstein prepared a 2008 paper that proposed spying on Americans, infiltrating groups and organizations to obstruct Free Speech, disrupt the exchange of ideas and disseminate false information to neutralize Americans that might question government. See: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=121884

    The majority of Americans oppose military governments. But increasingly during the last six months, more Americans quietly state they would trust the U.S. Military running U.S. Government temporarily over the extremists in Obama’s government; that they would support a quasi-military form of government temporally provided their civil and constitutional rights were protected and importantly, all leftists extremists in U.S. Government were deposed. This recent change of attitude by Americans might be explained by the fact they can relate to their U.S. Military and find nothing in common with Obama and his extreme leftist associations and supporters. Increasingly Americans appear to fear the Obama government more than the idea of having the U.S. Military temporarily run U.S. Government. Additionally Obama’s refusal to secure America’s Mexican border might have contributed to Americans’ identifying with a quasi/U.S. military government over an Obama government that won’t protect Border States from foreign invaders. The number of Marxists in the U.S. is small, but having them control any part of our government is repugnant to most Americans that believe it not in the best interest of our economy, national defense and National Security. Considering the direction America is going economically, more Americans are afraid that if things collapse, Obama might use the U.S. Military against U.S. Citizens; that should things collapse a quasi Civilian/ U.S. Military government not the Obama administration should run America. This is mentioned only to note there is a strong wind blowing across America, that is howling enough of Obama.


    • Thankfully Pelosi pulled the Disclose Act yesterday, at least for now.

      My problems with it are pretty straight forward. Firstly, creating exemptions for those with lobbying power (see NRA) further exemplifies the inherent problems in Washington. If the Federal Election Commission wanted to preserve free speech from individuals in new media, like myself, they could have carved out such an exemption for us. Instead, smaller grass root organizations have to sit around and wonder about government’s intentions while exemptions are doled out for those with lobbying muscle.

      Better yet, let people be. Why should a blogger be granted an exemption but not another entity creating similar political or economic speech? Or vice versa. I do want to know where money is coming from to fund ads and massive campaigns. Following the money is an important exercise. Beyond that, let people speak freely.

      The FEC, like the FCC, operates like a business. That is, they must grow or die. It’s a continual push for government organizations to extend their reach, so they can flourish. Nobody needs to regulate political or economic commentary on the web. There should be a free flow of information and ideas. I suspect the reason incumbents don’t like the internet is it has made it easy for dissenting like-minded individuals, who previously had little voice pre-interwebs, to now assemble, galvanize, and disseminate their message.

      We should all keep a close eye on the Disclose Act.


  2. I’m extremely impressed with your writing skills and also with the layout on your blog. Is this a paid theme or did you modify it yourself? Anyway keep up the nice quality writing, it is rare to see a nice blog like this one nowadays..


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s