Mainstream Republicans are starting to notice the Republican Liberty Caucus, RLC. Founded in 1991, during the presidency of George H. W. Bush, the RLC took the stated principles of Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater and Robert Taft and made them the foundation of their movement. It bills itself as ‘The Conscience of the Republican Party.’

Nineteen ninety one was about the time I stopped my almost continuous 36 year subscription to National Review. It was also about the time I switched my registration to Libertarian after I started having doubts about exactly where the GOP was headed and increasing doubts about the elder Bush’s commitment to smaller government.

After all, the Berlin Wall had fallen and the Iron Curtain had lifted off Europe. So what was the purpose of the huge totalitarian bureaucracy that we’d have to tolerate to defeat international communism that William F. Buckley had told us about? I’d begun to think I’d missed something.

What I, and many like-minded people had missed was the fundamental flaw in the assumptions of the Cold War. We all knew that communism could never match the free market in production. We all knew the Soviet Union was falling far behind us, so how could such a system, mired in bureaucracy, ever truly be a threat to us? Of course, it couldn’t.

The second thing that never occurred to us was what would happen to the military-industrial complex when and if we did defeat international revolutionary socialism. We should have known that bureaucracies never simply folded up their tents and went away. There would always be other justifications for their perpetuation. The military-industrial complex found it in Islamic terrorism.

So I migrated to the Libertarian Party, the Constitutionalists, back to the Libertarians and finally back to the GOP with the candidacy of Ron Paul. In the meantime, I did a lot of thinking and reading. I think there are a lot of people like me.

Now, John McCain, as the 2008 nominee is the head of the Republican Party but that offers no solace. But, I am sticking with the GOP because of the disastrous results of 2008. The Libertarian nominee, Bob Barr, Constitutionalist nominee Chuck Baldwin and Alan Keyes didn’t even combine for 1% of the vote despite widespread disillusionment with the two main candidates.

So now what do we do? The Barack Obama administration is far more radical that of Bill Clinton, who despite the radicals in his, had a strong commitment to free market principles for new proposals, although he was at least as committed to the perpetuation of the existing bureaucracy. There is no doubt that Barack Obama wants to expand the bureaucracy exponentially. He is far and away, the worst news for individual freedom in American history.

Elections are looming and the RLC has been growing and is flexing its muscles. We are being noticed. When Rush Limbaugh, Bill Kristol, Bill Bennett, Frank Rich and Ben Stein start criticizing the movement and its titular head, Ron Paul, you know it is scoring some big points.

The RLC was instrumental in toppling Jim Greer, the autocratic Florida Republican State Chairman. Candidates are noticing and currying our support. In Texas, the RLC has endorsed 16 candidates and it has extended its endorsement in 16 others.

For candidates for United States Senate and House, I suggest that we draw up a series of planks that any candidate seeking our endorsement pledge and sign a commitment to work for. Further, every candidate should be made aware that we will be grading them on their performance very frequently during their terms, if elected.

I can see no room for variation in this. They must be held accountable for their actions, once in office and be aware that we are watching them. As M. Stanton Evans, one of the original staffers of National Review said, once elected, an office holder should be viewed as the enemy. Any office holder should be viewed as an enemy of freedom!

I suggest the following list of positions:

• To sponsor legislation to repeal of all the Federal Reserve Acts,
• To sponsor legislation to repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment,
• To sponsor legislation to repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment,
• To sponsor legislation limiting military commitments to 90 days without a declaration of war,
• Irrespective of the outcome of the recently heard, McDonald vs. City of Chicago case, to sponsor legislation defining the Second Amendment as giving the people the right to keep and bear arms and removing the Amendment from the purview of the courts.

These five positions I submit should be regarded as nonnegotiable. Between them, they will help choke out the life of the Washington behemoth and will help bring it to heel. The first two choke it at its trachea. Without money, Washington can’t continue its assault upon the states and citizens.

Numerous observers have noted that the Seventeenth Amendment deprived the states of representation to the federal government. Unmentioned is that it also deprived the states of a mechanism to order the proposal of additional amendments. With state power thus restricted, it helped spawn the unbridled power that is Washington tyranny today.

The fifth is self-explanatory.

To sponsor legislation to either the repeal of the 1947 act that established the Central Intelligence Agency or to transfer its function to the Congress where Congress can reassert its authority over foreign policy as it is supposed to. The President does Congress’ bidding, not the other way around,

To sponsor legislation to end all foreign military involvement within 2 years and the closing of all foreign American military bases within 10 years,

To sponsor legislation reasserting Congress’ authority over the courts by removing certain issues, such as abortion, from court purview and letting them devolve to the individual state,

To sponsor legislation to end every cabinet level position other than Defense, Justice, Treasury and State and to transfer the Department of Veterans’ Affairs to the Department of Defense and to end all of sub-departments of every one of the eliminated department.

Barack Obama is shaping up for the Democrats as worse than a combination of Herbert Hoover, James Carter and George H. W. Bush combined. He is a one-termer for sure.

This is an opportunity to make these next two elections referenda on The Constitution; to force it, front and center, into the debate. In the process, hundreds of thousands of bureaucratic leeches should be sent packing back to their homes.

Everyone displays interest. Even liberal Democrats respond with interest when The Constitution is invoked. This is an educational opportunity of a lifetime.

The vilified Glenn Beck is one of the few, if the only, national radio or TV host who has seen fit to criticize both Democrats and Republicans for their excesses. I have seen him blasted by both conservatives and liberals, which to me means he’s doing something right.

Just last week he featured the World’s Smallest Political Quiz on his program. The quiz gets away from the liberal-conservative, left-right, Democrat-Republican paradigm that has been at the base of just about all political discussion in this country. It was this quiz that showed so many people that they were libertarians, at heart. Libertarian ideas are ascendant.

In a nutshell, I think that if you want to destroy yourself with alcohol, drugs, sex or gambling, you should be free to do it. Just don’t try to turn around and force me to subsidize the disasters that result.

And, you should be free to be a bigot or racist in your own affairs, just so long as you don’t hurt someone else’s physical well being or his property but once more, you’d better be ready to suffer the economic consequences of your actions. If you don’t want to associate with me or anyone else for whatever reason, you will pay a price, directly or indirectly.

And don’t come knocking on my door to send me or my children off to fight your battles. I’ll be ready to defend this country, when an enemy comes here.

Personally, I would be very reluctant to vote for any candidate who wouldn’t sign on to, at least, the first four planks. Washington, D.C. is a hydra-headed monster. The people and Congress must guard their power jealously so that this doesn’t happen again.

These would just be for starters. I am sure that any libertarian could come up with a whole group of others. So, put on your thinking caps, guys. I don’t think we’ll have another chance to save this country.

Open Letter to Bob Smith, a leader in the St. John’s County Republican Executive committee that continues to attack and smear the RLC, without ever attempting to address any issues he may have head-on.

Bob,

I got a call from the Rubio campaign this morning stating that you sent them an email that said that we did not want Aaron Bean to come speak based on our newsletter. This is not the truth. We are resending the announcement. I was waiting to talk to Aaron myself, since this whole scheduling thing has been such a fiasco. Now that we have confirmed him, we have no problem promoting him. The RLC would have appreciated if you had confirmed with us, before passing on misinformation.

I have recently been told of numerous times that you have gone out of your way to attack and smear the RLC, specifically with people in the Tea Party and 912 groups. I am not sure why you find it necessary to continue these aggressive and non-productive attacks. However, you need to understand that not only do most of the people that you talk to in attempts to smear the RLC come back to us to find out if there is any cause for the absolute vitriol that you send towards the RLC, this allows us to prove to them what kind of people and organization we actually are. Often times the very people you tried to convince that the RLC was evil and working against the party, end up becoming very active within our organization, once they see and understand how untrue your perceptions and attacks really are.

I know that you have told people that the RLC was the “kiss of death” to the Dan Quiggle campaign, that we lack integrity, and so on. I have a statement from Dan Quiggle stating the exact opposite. The RLC is consistent in its beliefs and what it stands for. When you state these kinds of things with no proof it proves that you have a different agenda than advancing principles of conservatism within the Republican Party.

Even those within the Republican Executive Committee, such as Lenny Curry and Cindy Graves (copied on this email), have proven to be leaders, because they understand that we are all, for the most part, working towards a common goal. They do not find it necessary to attack the RLC and are actually happy, many times, to have us working with them side-by-side. Sometimes we disagree, but neither Lenny nor Cindy have ever tried to shut out the voice of dissent. Often each of them have taken the time to listen to other points of view and even explain their own, allowing us to reach an agreeable resolution. This proves that it is only when you shut out the voice of the people – when you choose unethical, unfair and wrong behavior, when you choose to attack, berate and smear other Republicans – that there are problems.

It is funny how the ONLY club or committee in Duval or St. Johns that has problems with the RLC is the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee. We are at nearly every GOP meeting in those two counties without any problems. We are being recruited to work on campaigns and people are flooding to our meetings, I get several emails a day from people asking for more information about the RLC.

So if you stop and examine this, the fact of the matter is that whenever there is a problem, the same leadership within the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee is involved. It is those people and their behavior, and not the RLC, that is the common denominator when problems arise at the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee meetings.

If Senator Thrasher sticks to his word (and I hope that he will), as he gave it to me, to John Stevens and to Will Pitts, that he believes we are working together for a common cause (as we are), that he wants to bring the party together and stop the unneeded attacks on others within the party, then you and the others in the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee will need to find a way to work with us. We are fighting for our country. We have the same goal. While we may disagree with how to get there, the constant attacks and attempts to smear the character of others, proves that it is never your intention to work with others and it is you and not the RLC that are attempting to tear the party apart.

I would point out, that the Tea Party and the 912 groups share the RLC’s vision and that all of these groups are growing. Many of these people are joining their local Republican Executive Committee in order to fight for principles. They share the RLC’s message. To continue to fight us on these issues is to fight what is a growing majority within the Republican Party.

You have yet to actually attempt to talk to us, about any of the issues that you are so vocal about with everyone else. On every public forum that you posted your hateful words regarding the RLC, I have posted my contact information. I have NOT caused problems, I have always voted Republican and I have worked hard on Republican Campaigns, as has nearly everyone else in the RLC.

You and the others in St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee leadership do not get to choose who is Republican. This is my party as much as it yours. I fight for the values that the GOP has always been for and I am disappointed when a candidate is chosen in the primary or is elected that I feel does not represent those values. This is the cry of the rank and file Republican today. And we want to use that passion to move our party back to those values once again. When people like you create road blocks to that cause, it not only drives a wedge into the party, it shuts out the voice of the people that the leadership within the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee are supposed to be representing.

You know very little about the RLC or the people that are within the organization. By never seeking to find out more or attempting to see what we could work together on, you, sir, are the one causing problems in the party.

If you are not the one trying to drive a wedge into the Republican Party by determining who is acceptable and who is not, then you would attempt to make ways for us to work with you, instead of you working against us. I will also add that is you and a handful of others in the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee that are spreading these untruths regarding the RLC. We are focused on the big picture, which is the goal of restoring our Republic and we are not spending our time trying to find ways to attack you or the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee. It is our wish to work together.

Prior to the attacks, character assassination and grievances, several attempts were made to reconcile with the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee and these attempts and acts of faith have been disregarded.

Consider this story, http://staugustine.com/stories/082508/news_news01_002.shtml

Jon Woodard and Becky Reichenberg agreed to cease attacks on the RLC on the condition that John Stevens and Wynona Mayer drop out of the race, which they did, in good faith, taking them at their word. Less than a year later those very people were involved in a grievance proceeding with one of the  people ( John Stevens) they had given their word to.

Now it is happening again with Precinct Committeeman Cliff Johnson being shut out of the vote for John Thrasher. He politely asked for the records, via certified mail, that would prove that he has missed three meetings, and was denied. He was denied entry at the vote and now has been ignored in his request for the records that should simply prove that he missed three meetings. This kind of behavior is not demonstrated on the part of the RLC, these are things happening at the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee and within their leadership.

Many of the rank and file  who hear this story and the lengths that it appears that the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee leadership has gone to, in order to shut out a certain group of people, are baffled and disenfranchised (with the party, not the RLC) to say the least. We do not want bad publicity, we do not want to keep fighting. But we believe the message of return to Constitutional principles is worth fighting for, and because of that, we are not going away.

So now I am asking you, as a leader within the community and the party, will you step up and be the one to make amends? Will you cease the attacks and admit that we have more in common than we do different? Will you allow us to work towards the same goal?

Most of the RLC feels it has done all it can do, we have put our contact information out there, along with an open invitation to sit down and talk these issues out. I hope that as a leader and fellow fighter and servant within the party you would take us up on that and stop with the senseless attacks.

I hope to hear from you soon, all my contact information is below.

Kristi Dunn

MsKristiDunn@gmail.com

You can listen to the show with the player below.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

No Dissent Allowed: St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee

St. Johns County, January, 21, 2010 — The leadership of the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee (SJCREC) dealt a blow to the grassroots and derailed recent attempts to reconcile long standing differences with the Republican Liberty Caucus of Northeast Florida (RLCNEF) Thursday night when it refused to allow RLCNEF members access to a meeting where State Committeeman Jon Woodard stepped down and State Senator John Thrasher was elected to Woodard’s position. The election of Thrasher to Woodard’s State Committeeman post clears the way for Thrasher to run for the Republican Party of Florida (RPOF) Chair position to be vacated on February 20th by Jim Greer. There is a level of excitement within the party that has not been seen in a long time surrounding the race to succeed Jim Greer. Greer’s re-election a year ago has resulted in a leadership implosion within the RPOF. Thrasher, a sitting Republican State Senator, is seeking to lead the Republican Party out of its doldrums. Unfortunately for Thrasher, the SJCREC appears to have added fuel to an internal firestorm.

The latest in an unfortunate series of events occurred when the majority of the SJCREC members were not given notice the meeting would be closed in Executive Session, and only received the news upon their arrival at the meeting that night. To further exacerbate matters, SJCREC officials – allegedly in preparation for the vote on Senator Thrasher – performed a “purge” of the membership list for the stated purpose of removing members who had missed three consecutive meetings pursuant to state bylaws.

The purpose and accuracy of the list purge is in question, however, as RLCNEF member Cliff Johnson who is also a sworn member of the SJCREC and who had not missed three consecutive meetings, was told that he was not eligible to attend the Executive Session or vote in the Special Election.

While SJCREC leadership claimed that access to the Executive Session was limited only to SJCREC members, at least four members of the Duval County Republican Executive Committee who support Thrasher were allowed inside while known opponents of Thrasher and supporters of Sharon Day – also a candidate for State Chair – were told they must stay outside.

In a protest against the double standard and blatant cronyism on display, RLCNEF Chair John Stevens entered the meeting despite being told not to do so. Stevens was then asked to leave and refused. SJCREC officials called police and Stevens was escorted from the meeting. No charges were filed.

Chairman Stevens desired to attend the meeting to ask Thrasher what position he would be taking on Orange and St. Johns County REC members removed by Greer through the never-before-used grievance process  last year. Stevens commented regarding the incident, “It was unfortunate that it had to come that. The RLC is working for accountability within the Party and we would prefer to do so quietly from within; but if members are being locked out and denied an opportunity to be heard then we are left with no option but to make our voices heard publicly.”

This incident in St. Johns is eerily similar to a situation that occurred last year in Orange County where Orange County Republican Executive Committee (OCREC) Chair Lew Oliver prevented members of the OCREC from voting in the election for Oliver’s seat; the people barred from voting were supporters of his opponent, Deon Long, who is now running for the 24th District of the U.S. Congress.

Many of the registered voters of Florida agree with the message of the Republican Liberty Caucus. The

RLC’s message has begun attracting large numbers of people statewide. Support has poured out from around the state as this struggle with the corruption within the party has continued. Many of the recent changes in the RPOF leadership started at the grassroots level with large groups of dissenters, such as the RLC, calling for honesty and transparency in our elected leaders.

About The Republican Liberty Caucus of Florida:

The Republican Liberty Caucus of Florida is a coalition of traditional conservatives and liberty minded Republicans working within the Republican Party to promote individual liberty, smaller government, state and national sovereignty and the Constitution. The caucus advocates the return of our nation to the values and intentions of the Constitution and our founders.

(i) www.rlcfl.org
(ii) www.rlcnef.org

CONTACT:

Frank Zilaitis
Email: frank@zilaitis.com
Phone: (321) 480-7597

New opportunities were opened as a result of the anger and energy of these activist groups, and the RPOF state committee recognized this with a resolution to encourage county executive committees to reach out to “Tea Party people.”  This would have given the RPOF a solid boost heading into the 2010 elections.  But they failed to understand that those “Tea Party people” want principled leadership and bottom-up representation, not the party-first top-down mentality currently in place.

At the annual meeting, the RPOF leadership demonstrated that they still don’t get it.  Chairman Greer received a standing ovation from party leadership when he exclaimed at the conclusion of his speech, “It’s about the party, party, party”. The cries heard at a Tea Party or grassroots function, however, are for “principles, principles, principles.”

Rank-and-file Republicans are clearly angry over the unprecedented growth of the federal government in 2009.  They are also disgusted at our Governor Charlie Crist’s display of support for Obama’s stimulus package. Yet, when Crist addressed the RPOF at the meeting, he stated that “Florida needs to get her fair share,” and added that he would “not apologize for supporting the stimulus.” Such a statement would be met with scorn from the majority of voters of the Republican Party and Tea Party attendees, but was met with a standing ovation by party leadership.

The first person to speak on policy was Jeff Kottkamp, candidate for Attorney General. Kottkamp did not talk about reducing the size and scope of government, cutting spending, or removing regulations and encouraging free enterprise.  Instead, he focused his remarks on expanding the Defense and Space industries in Florida.  Grassroots Republicans are pleading for leadership that understands the core issues of fiscal responsibility and limiting the size and scope of government, but RPOF leadership offers only promises to protect special interests.

Most discouraging of all, however, was the apparent coronation of Senator John Thrasher to replace Jim Greer as Chair of the RPOF. In much the same fashion Jim Greer was chosen, the word is that Thrasher had been chosen before the conference call announcing Greer’s resignation had even ended. Many in leadership have rallied around Thrasher because of his ability to raise large sums of money, something the RPOF is in need of. What the RPOF needs more than money, however, is to discover its principles and to get candidates who truly understand those principles elected to office.

A Sign of Hope

In spite of the leadership’s general disconnect with the grassroots, there was a significant sign of hope.  There appears to be some serious resistance to the leadership-led coronation of John Thrasher as the new RPOF Chair. Sharon Day, who currently serves as national committeewoman for Florida, stated that she too is running for RPOF Chair in the election that will take place at the February 20th special meeting in Orlando. “I’m running to give the RPOF members a choice, because there should always be a choice,” Day said when she addressed the state committee Saturday morning.

The RLC applauds those in the RPOF that are supporting the courage of Sharon Day and others that seek to offer a voice to the rank-and-file Republicans. We hope that more in party leadership will stand against the top-down approach taken by many in the RPOF.

-Republican Liberty Caucus Leadership

Many of us are passionate about politics and often get so caught up in what we are fighting against, that we tend to forget what we are fighting for, what we represent and why it is important to us.

Why is it important to frame what we say as political activists in a positive manner? Because while negative tactics in politics often involves “getting things done at the expense of others” and “being willing to win while others lose,” positive politics is the ability to influence opinions, obtain resources and work with people to get things done.

When we practice positive politics we are acting in the service of our organization and our mission. We become powerful advocates for our stated cause. While building an understanding and mutual network of support with those around us. Even those that do not fully understand what we are fighting for are willing to listen when the message is framed in a positive light.

In debate class, students quickly learn that whoever frames the message in the most positive manner wins the debate. This is an important skill for those of us fighting for Liberty to understand and incorporate in our interactions with others.  As an example, when the abortion argument began, both sides of the debate fought to see who would be able to best “frame the message” which they believed would recruit more followers to their viewpoint.  One side started calling those who were against abortion “anti-choice.” The opposing side responded by framing those who were for abortion as being “pro-death.”  Today, this framed marketing message has polarized both groups into the Pro-life / Pro-choice movement.  This matters because it clearly states what they are fighting for and not what they are fighting against, thus attracting people to the cause.

Those of us fighting in the liberty movement should understand the physiological way that others respond to the message that we are presenting. We need to be able to articulate what we are for, instead of always with what we are against.

If we want to be leaders in our respective political parties, we need to be able to communicate a clear, positive, call to action to potential supporters. Outstanding leaders are able to positively express an ideological vision congruent with the deeply-held values of their followers. Real leaders display a passion for, and have a strong conviction about what they regard as the moral correctness of their vision. They engage in outstanding or extraordinary behavior and are willing to make tremendous self-sacrifices in the interest of their vision and mission. We need to learn to do this in order attract people to the cause of Liberty and communicate with them the importance of what we are trying to accomplish.

Once we learn to “frame the Liberty Message” in a positive, upbeat way, we will have more curious bystanders join our cause.  Those who are apprehensive will begin to listen. People become fascinated with and are drawn to a message of hope and encouragement. After all, the ultimate goal is attracting more people to our message of Liberty and Freedom.

How do we frame the issues that are important to us in a positive manner:

Our opposition to the Patriot Act- We support protecting all American’s privacy and personal liberties.

Opposition to the current managing of the Federal Reserve- We support a sound monetary policy that is transparent to all Americans

Not being willing to Vote for the lesser of 2 evils in elections- We believe American’s should only vote for someone whom they agree with on fundamental Republican principles.

Our Opposition to unprincipled republicans such as Charlie Crist, John Thrasher and other such as them- We support holding all Republicans accountable because it is the only way to insure our party remains true to its principles.

Our opposition to Interventionist Foreign Policy- We support a Constitutional approach to foreign policy thus allowing us to build a strong national defense.

It has been interesting to witness the confusion amongst conventional politicos as groups like The Campaign for Liberty and The Republican Liberty Caucus begin to exert more and more influence over today’s political discourse. Members of these groups are fighting for issues and taking positions that don’t seem to fit neatly into the traditional left or right boxes. I recall hearing a long time Republican Party loyalist accuse one of these activists of being a “left-wing Obama supporter” because they questioned the GOP’s support of the Patriot Act. On another occasion I witnessed this same activist being mocked as a “right-wing extremist” by a long time member of the Democratic Party for suggesting that the federal government should have no involvement in the issue of health care.   How can the same political activist be both “left wing” and “right wing”?

It seems that in 2009 politics, the “left” or “right” label is determined by where you stand on issues in relation to where the Republican and Democratic Parties stand on those issues. Oppose the Patriot Act, question the constitutionality of the war in Iraq or oppose government involvement in the issue of gay marriage and you will find yourself on the wrong side of the GOP and therefore labeled a “leftist”. However, oppose a federal health care bill, support the elimination of the federal Department of Education or speak out against the progressive income tax and you will be at odds with the Democratic Party and likely lumped in with the “right wing extremists”.   The problem with this approach to politics is that rarely is the question asked why the parties hold their positions on various issues. And even rarer is an actual discussion or debate on the reasons for holding those positions.

Members of groups promoting liberty do not fit into the conventional Left/Right paradigm.  When an issue is presented to a liberty activist, the first question is not where does my party stand on this issue, but rather what position protects the freedom and liberty of the individual. In looking at the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, Gay Marriage, Health Care, Education and Taxes, one must first have a clear understanding of individual rights, where they come from and the proper role of government. The Declaration of Independence clearly spells out the fact that our rights come not from man but from our Creator. And the United States Constitution clearly spells out what authority the federal government has in relation to those rights. It is from these two documents that all political issues should be discussed, debated and acted upon.

Does the federal government ever have the authority to violate the right of an individual to be secure in their person and possessions from search and seizure without probable cause? The answer is no and therefore the liberty position on the Patriot Act is to oppose it.

Does the Constitution give the Legislative Branch of the federal government the ability to transfer its authority to Declare War to the Executive Branch? The answer is no. And would allowing the federal government to violate its contract with the people potentially threaten the liberty of all individuals?  The answer is yes and therefore the liberty position on the Iraq War has been to oppose it.

Is the federal government given any authority by the constitution to define or regulate the institution of marriage? The answer is no. And would allowing the federal government to violate its contract with the people potentially threaten the liberty of all individuals?  The answer is yes and therefore the liberty position on the issue of any gay marriage regulation (pro or con) is to oppose it.

Is the federal government given any authority by the constitution to impose laws or to regulate the delivery of health care? The answer is no. And would allowing the federal government to violate its contract with the people potentially threaten the liberty of all individuals?  The answer is yes and therefore the liberty position on federal health care legislation is to oppose it.

Is the federal government given any authority by the constitution to impose laws or to regulate education? The answer is no. And would allowing the federal government to violate its contract with the people potentially threaten the liberty of all individuals?  The answer is yes and therefore the liberty position on funding a federal department of education is to oppose it.

Does government taxing the fruits of one’s labor threaten the freedom and liberty of all individuals?  The answer is yes and therefore the liberty position on income taxes is to oppose them.

These concepts are pretty simple for those who get involved in politics for the purpose of ensuring that government protects the liberty of the individual. To those who complicate politics by focusing on things like party loyalty, personal ambition or political personalities, understanding exactly what it is you stand for can be a little more difficult. When you are not looking at issues based on a fundamental set of principles you will often times open yourself up to weak arguments or even worse, hypocrisy.

Understanding liberty and applying it to all political issues is a liberating and empowering experience. You no longer have to feel uncomfortable when asked your position on an issue because you will no longer have to worry about making the party line fit with your own personal logic.  You won’t have to defend the inconsistencies coming from party “leaders” or political personalities. In essence “The truth sets you free”.

Yes a good understanding of the concept of liberty will change your scale from one measuring Left vs Right to one which measures Freedom vs Tyranny. And that is the only measurement that should matter in the fight for liberty.

John Stevens
RLCNEF Chairman