Archive for March, 2008

Iraq and Iran Pose Threat to False Strength of the US Dollar

Sunday, March 9th, 2008

It is hard to trust politicians, isn’t it? I know I believed Colin Powell’s speech to the UN detailing Iraq’s WMD capabilities, with the mobile units and all that. That trust has gotten us involved in an unconstitutional war, one that has cost us and the Iraqi people dearly in lives, property, and money. Still, there is one politician who can be trusted, mostly because what he’s been preaching in the House has come to pass in our experience. It should be no stretch to know I’m talking about Ron Paul.

What I have come to learn is that Ron Paul is dead-on when he talks about the negative impact our foreign and monetary policies are having on our standard of living. While modern Republicans and Democrats think they represent different ideals, they are really two heads of the same beast. Both encourage a welfare state in our country; the Democrats just support a more visible version.

In an article written by Ron Paul in February of 2006, Paul lays out the last 100 years of US monetary policy, and shows, in crystal clear HD detail, how the Federal Reserve and the Federal government have given us a very false sense of prosperity. In essence, because of the government and the people of this nation as a whole, cannot live within their means, we have had to control the value of our dollar by force, either covertly overthrowing governments that threaten our dollar supremacy, or by outright war. The problem is that, militarily speaking, we are unmatched in the world in military might.

Why that’s a problem is that, rather than producing more goods and exporting them, generating wealth, we are the schoolyard bullies who, when someone questions the value of our dollar, we push them around until we get what we want. So it was with Iraq and Saddam. As the world’s reserve currency, the US dollar was the only currency used in pricing oil. In November of 2000, Saddam decided he would sell oil in Euros, challenging US dollar dominance. Before this time, there was no talk of Saddam and his threat to “national security”. Using 9/11 as a false springboard to rally support, the US military went in, and soon after Hussein’s capture, Iraq was selling oil in dollars, not Euros.

A similar situation occurred in 2001 in Venezuela when an Venezuelan ambassador mentioned the possibility of selling oil in Euros. Within that year, there was a coup attempt supported by the CIA. Fast forward to today and Iran’s plans to form an oil bourse that would sell its oil in a handful of non-dollar currencies, including the Euro. Following this announcement and subsequent execution, war drums began pounding in Washington, as the President fabricated Iran’s nuclear armament program to scare Americans into another engagement in the Middle East. Rumors abound, with one saying Bush wants us in Iran by the summer.

What is clear from reading the article is that our flawed and failed monetary policies are crumbling around us, and rather than face facts and make appropriate changes, we are resorting to violence against those that challenge our fairytale. Like punching a kid that tells you there’s no Santa, forcefully stopping countries from conducting business, particularly oil exports, in competing currencies only delays the inevitable collapse, and worse still, alienates us from the rest of the world who perceive America as a bully living in a dream world. Are we surprised at how little support across the globe we have anymore? Sure, countries roll out the red carpet for us when we visit because they fear our military, but when it comes to supporting our inane wars, their support proves scarce.

Dr. Paul’s article is much longer (probably a 15-20 minute read) and runs through a lot more of the history and implications, but it is very much worth the time to read it and contemplate the consequences of voting in McCain, Clinton, or Obama, all of whom support war to varying degrees (maybe not Iraq with Obama, but he still supports operations in Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan). Keep in mind, too, that the article was written in 2006, and how much of its foretelling has come true.

Remember, a vote for Ron Paul is a vote for true peace, not just withdrawal from Iraq.

Join the REVOLUTION!

McCain Not Fit To Lead

Wednesday, March 5th, 2008

It is easy to convince yourself that John McCain is able to be president. He has served in the Senate for years and is a veteran of our Armed Forces. Sounds pretty much like a textbook president. Except he’s not fit. The presidency requires more than a militaristic view of the country and world. The economy can’t be run with an iron fist; it must flow and have a life of its own, with the government protecting the economy’s ability to thrive, not force-feeding it fertilizer in the hopes it would grow faster. McCain, by his own admission, doesn’t “get” economics (for more on McCain and his economics squad, read this article from the Weekly Standard and you’ll see the people he cites as advisers have economic views that are antagonistic with the others).

The problem with not “getting it” is that national security and the economy are married issues. You can’t get one and not the other. In an interview between Nathan Gardels and Nobel laureate Joe Stiglitz (Nobel Prize winner in Economics in 2001), Mr. Stiglitz responds to this lack of knowledge on McCain’s part:

Gardels: The economic costs have now come back to undermine the whole post-9/11 security effort. When John McCain says he’s not interested in and doesn’t understand the economic aspect of things, and only knows about how to keep America safe, what does that say about his leadership capability?

Stiglitz: If he doesn’t understand the economy, he doesn’t understand security. If we had infinite resources, we might be able to have perfect security. But America, like every other country, has resource constraints. That means you need to be smart — that is, economic — about the money we spend. If you weaken the American economy, you won’t be able to find the resources you need for security. The two cannot be separated.

Sadly, this critique can be made of the two front-runners in the democratic race as well. What we need is a candidate who gets the economy and foreign policy. Hmm, Michael Scheuer knows all about bin Laden and foreign policy and he is on record as saying that only Ron Paul gets it. Dr. Paul is also the only candidate that can go toe-to-toe with Ben “I’m Alan Greenspan in a bigger man’s body” Bernanke, head of the Federal Reserve and make him squirm. So Dr. Paul gets the economy.

A candidate that gets foreign policy and the economy?!? Incredible!

And yet, because of the nanny state our country has devolved into, people seem to not question the media’s anointed Republican candidate. A man riddled in controversy (Keating 5, improper relationship with female lobbyist), lacking in moral integrity (dumping wife after she has an accident and marrying trophy wife a couple months later), embraces more war-mongering (stay in Iraq 100 years, bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran), and an ardent supporter of Bush Co.; no, John McCain is not fit to run this country.

Join the REVOLUTION!