Following the recent clashes between the alt-right and the group antifa, some libertarians have debated which group they should support. The answer is simple: neither. The alt-right and its leftist opponents are two sides of the same authoritarian coin.
The alt-right elevates racial identity over individual identity. The obsession with race leads them to support massive government interference in the economy in order to benefit members of the favored race. They also favor massive welfare and entitlement spending, as long as it functions as a racial spoils system. Some prominent alt-right leaders even support abortion as a way of limiting the minority population. No one who sincerely supports individual liberty, property rights, or the right to life can have any sympathy for this type of racial collectivism.
Antifa, like all Marxists, elevates class identity over individual identity. Antifa supporters believe government must run the economy because otherwise workers will be exploited by greedy capitalists. This faith in central planning ignores economic reality, as well as the reality that in a free market employers and workers voluntarily work together for their mutual benefit. It is only when government intervenes in the economy that crony capitalists have the opportunity to exploit workers, consumers, and taxpayers. Sadly, many on the left confuse the results of the “mixed economy” with free markets.
Ironically, the failure of the Keynesian model of economic authoritarianism, promoted by establishment economists like Paul Krugman, is responsible for the rise of the alt-right and antifa. Despite a recent (and likely short-lived) upturn in some sectors of the economy, many Americans continue to struggle with unemployment and a Federal Reserve-caused eroding standard of living. History shows that economic hardship causes many to follow demagogues offering easy solutions and convenient scapegoats.
Left-wing demagogues scapegoat businesses and the “one percent,” ignoring the distinction between those who made their fortunes serving consumers and those who enriched themselves by manipulating the political process. Right-wing demagogues scapegoat immigrants and minorities, ignoring how these groups suffer under the current system and how they are disproportionally impacted by policies like the war on drugs and police militarization.
As the Keynesian-Krugman empire of big government and fiat currency collapses, more people will be attracted to authoritarianism, leading to an increase in violence. The only way to ensure the current system is not replaced with something even worse is for those of us who know the truth to work harder to spread the ideas of liberty.
While we should be willing to form coalitions with individuals of good will across the political spectrum, we must never align with anyone promoting violence as a solution to social and economic problems. We must also oppose any attempts to use the violence committed by extremists as a justification for expanding the police state or infringing on free speech. Laws against hate speech set a dangerous precedent for censorship of speech unpopular with the ruling elite and the deep state.
Libertarians have several advantages in the ideological battle over what we will replace the Keynesian welfare model with. First, we do not need to resort to scapegoating and demagoguing, as we have the truth about the welfare-warfare state and the Federal Reserve on our side. We also offer a realistic way to restore prosperity. But our greatest advantage is that, while authoritarianism divides people by race, class, religion, or other differences, the cause of liberty unites all who seek peace and prosperity.
Ron Paul’s Weekly Column can be found at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity’s website each week.
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2v79ZrC
The Defender of the Constitution and Campaign for Liberty Chairman Ron Paul celebrates his birthday on Sunday. Happy birthday, Dr. Paul, and thank you for all you do for liberty. Click here to celebrate with a donation to Campaign for Liberty.
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2wYqcAC
There is something unsettling about how President Trump has surrounded himself with generals. From his defense secretary to his national security advisor to his White House chief of staff, Trump looks to senior military officers to fill key positions that have been customarily filled by civilians. He’s surrounded by generals and threatens war at the drop of a hat.
President Trump began last week by threatening “fire and fury” on North Korea. He continued through the week claiming, falsely, that Iran is violating the terms of the nuclear deal. He finally ended the week by threatening a US military attack on Venezuela.
He told reporters on Friday that, “We have many options for Venezuela including a possible military option if necessary. …We have troops all over the world in places that are very, very far away. Venezuela is not very far away and the people are suffering, and they are dying.”
Venezuela’s defense minister called Trump’s threat “an act of craziness.”
Even more worrisome, when Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro tried to call President Trump for clarification he was refused. The White House stated that discussions with the Venezuelan president could only take place once democracy was restored in the country. Does that mean President Trump is moving toward declaring Maduro no longer the legitimate president of Venezuela? Is Trump taking a page from Obama’s failed regime change policy for Syria and declaring that “Maduro must go”?
The current unrest in Venezuela is related to the economic shortcomings of that country’s centrally-planned economy. The 20th century has shown us very clearly that state control over an economy leads to mismanagement, mal-investment, massive shortages, and finally economic collapse. That is why those of us who advocate free market economics constantly warn that US government intervention in our own economy is leading us toward a similar financial crisis.
But there is another factor in the unrest in Venezuela. For many years the United States government, through the CIA, the National Endowment for Democracy, and US government funded NGOs, have been trying to overthrow the Venezuelan government. They almost succeeded in 2002, when then-president Hugo Chavez was briefly driven from office. Washington has spent millions trying to manipulate Venezuela’s elections and overturn the results. US policy is to create unrest and then use that unrest as a pretext for US intervention.
Military officers play an important role in defending the United States. Their job is to fight and win wars. But the White House is becoming the war house and the president seems to see war as a first solution rather than a last resort. His threats of military action against a Venezuela that neither threatens nor could threaten the United States suggests a shocking lack of judgment.
Congress should take President Trump’s threats seriously. In the 1980s, when President Reagan was determined to overthrow the Nicaraguan government using a proxy army, Congress passed a series of amendments, named after their author, Rep. Edward Boland (D-MA), to prohibit the president from using funds it appropriated to do so. Congress should make it clear in a similar manner that absent a Venezuelan attack on the United States, President Trump would be committing a serious crime in ignoring the Constitution were he to follow through with his threats. Maybe they should call it the “We’re Not The World’s Policeman” act.
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2wZZ7w8
By the end of this month, Defense Secretary James Mattis and National Security Advisor HR McMaster will deliver to President Trump their plans for military escalations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. President Trump would be wise to rip the plans up and send his national security team back to the drawing board – or replace them. There is no way another “surge” in Afghanistan and Iraq (plus a new one in Syria) puts America first. There is no way doing the same thing over again will succeed any better than it did the last time.
Near the tenth anniversary of the US war on Afghanistan – seven years ago – I went to the Floor of Congress to point out that the war makes no sense. The original authorization had little to do with eliminating the Taliban. It was a resolution to retaliate against those who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001. From what we know now, the government of Saudi Arabia had far more to do with the financing and planning of 9/11 than did the Taliban. But we’re still pumping money into that lost cause. We are still killing Afghanis and in so doing creating the next generation of terrorists.
The war against ISIS will not end with its defeat in Mosul and Raqqa. We will not pack up and go home. Instead, the Pentagon and State Department have both said that US troops would remain in Iraq after ISIS is defeated. The continued presence of US troops in Iraq will provide all the recruiting needed for more ISIS or ISIS-like resistance groups to arise, which will in turn lead to a permanent US occupation of Iraq. The US “experts” have completely misdiagnosed the problem so it no surprise that their solutions will not work. They have claimed that al-Qaeda and ISIS arose in Iraq because we left, when actually they arose because we invaded in the first place.
General David Petraeus is said to have a lot of influence over HR McMaster, and in Syria he is pushing for the kind of US troop “surge” that he still believes was successful in Iraq. The two are said to favor thousands of US troops to fight ISIS in eastern Syria instead of relying on the US-sponsored and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces to do the job. This “surge” into Syria would also lead to a lengthy US occupation of a large part of that country, as it is unlikely that the US would return the territory to the Syrian government. Would it remain an outpost of armed rebels that could be unleashed on Assad at the US President’s will? It’s hard to know from week to week whether “regime change” in Syria is a US priority or not. But we do know that a long-term US occupation of half of Syria would be illegal, dangerous, and enormously expensive.
President Trump’s Generals all seem to be pushing for a major US military escalation in the Middle East and south Asia. The President goes back and forth, one minute saying “we’re not going into Syria,” while the next seeming to favor another surge. He has given the military much decision-making latitude and may be persuaded by his Generals that the only solution is to go in big. If he follows such advice, it is likely his presidency itself will be buried in that graveyard of empires.
Ron Paul’s Weekly Column can be found at the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity’s website.
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2vBSS2k
As our national debt continues to climb towards $20 trillion, our government continues their spending spree. The Federal Reserve keeps printing more money with the belief this will solve the problem. Congress still cannot produce a balanced budget, and will soon be voting to raise the debt ceiling yet again. We found the following video is indicative of Congress’ failure to accept reality.
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2wP6qXp
We spend a lot of time attacking politicians who vote against liberty. Today, for a change I would like to highlight some courageous votes and other actions taken in the last month by some Representatives and one Senator.
First, kudos to Representatives Thomas Massie (KY-04), Justin Amash (MI-03), and Jimmy Duncan (TN-02). These three were the only Representatives to oppose the Russia-Iran-North Korea sanctions bill. This bill, which may threaten free speech, could very well start World War Three.
Of course, Massie and Amash have long records of standing up for liberty, even against the leadership of their own party. Representative Massie is also the lead sponsor of the Audit the Fed bill, as well as other pieces of liberty legislation.
Representative Duncan has served in the House since 1988 and has a very consistent pro-Liberty voting record. He was also one of seven Republicans who opposed the Iraqi war in 2003. The others where Amo Houghton, Connie Morella, Lincoln Chaffee, Jim Leach, John Hostettler, and, of course, Campaign for Liberty Chairman Ron Paul.
Representative Duncan recently announced he will not be running for reelection.
The sanctions bill was opposed by only two Senators, Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders. However, Senator Sanders issued a statement saying he supported the sanctions against Russia, but opposed the sanctions against Iran. So Senator Paul is the only Senator opposing the new Cold War with Russia.
Senator Paul is also leading the effort to force the Senate to vote on repealing ObamaCare, and was the only libertarian or conservative Senator to vote against McConnellCare.
Senator Paul finished up July by stopping the Senate leadership from ramming the National Defense Authorization Act through the Senate without giving Senators the chance to offer amendments. Senator Paul plans to offer amendments dealing with topics such as indefinite detention and repealing the 2001 Authorization of Force that has been used to justify military actions having nothing to do with the attacks of September 11.
Hopefully the Senate will vote on and pass Senator Paul’s amendments in September.
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2vSh0ji
Daniel McAdams examines some little-noticed provisions of the Russian sanctions legislation and discovers it could justify a crackdown on free speech.
The justification? Criticism of the U.S. government’s foreign policy is equal to spreading Russian propaganda. Some have even suggested that criticizing the Federal Reserve or violations of civil liberties is spreading Russian propaganda because it “weakens faith in the U.S. government.”
Read Daniel’s article here.
Last week I wrote an article and did an interview explaining that in my reading of the new Russia sanctions bill just signed by President Trump, there is a measure opening the door to a US government crackdown on some of the non-mainstream media. In particular, Section 221 of the “Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act” would punish “persons” who are “engaging in transactions with the intelligence or defense sectors of the Government of the Russian Federation.”
At first one might think this is reading too much into the text, however as a twelve year Capitol Hill veteran bill-reader I can assure you that these bills are never written in a simple, expository manner. There is always a subtext, and in this case we must consider the numerous instances where the Director of Central Intelligence and other senior leadership in the US intelligence community have attempted to establish the idea that foreign news channels such as RT or Sputnik News are not First Amendment protected press, but rather tools of a foreign intelligence organization.
You can see in the current atmosphere, where anti-Russia hysteria has spread like typhoid, how readily-accepted such a notion would be by many. The reds are under our beds and the Russkies have taken over our airwaves.
I don’t think the crackdown will stop at Russian government funded news organizations like RT and Sputnik, however. Once the initial strike is made at the lowest hanging fruit, the second wave will target Russia-focused organizations not funded by governments but that challenge the official US government line that Russia is our number one enemy and its government must be overthrown. Popular private alternative websites like The Duran and Russia Insider will likely be next on the list for prosecution.
Sound farfetched? Think of it this way (I can assure you the neocons do): if the Russian government and RT are opposed to sanctions and you operate a website that also takes a line in opposition to Russia sanctions are you not doing the work of Russian intelligence? Are you not seeking to influence your readers in a manner that Russian intelligence would want? Are you not “engaging in transactions” even over the airwaves?
And after this second wave you can be sure there will be a push to move on other alternative media that has nothing to do with Russia but that opposes US interventionist foreign policy: ZeroHedge, Lew Rockwell, Ron Paul Institute, ConsortiumNews, etc.
Crazy, you say? Don’t forget: this war against us already started last year when the Washington Post ran a front page article accusing all of the above of being Russian agents!
What would be next? Do you read any of these alternative news sites? Do you pass along articles that oppose US sanctions policy toward Russia? You are engaging in transactions. You will be subject to “sanctions” as described in the “Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act,” which is now the law of the land.
This would never happen, you might say. The government would never compile, analyze, and target private news outlets just because they deviate from the official neocon Washington line.
Perhaps not yet. But some US government funded “non-governmental” organizations are already doing just that.
The German Marshall Fund has less to do with Germany these days than it did when founded after WWII as a show of appreciation for the US Marshall Fund. These days it’s mostly funded by the US government, allied governments (especially in the Russia-hating Baltics), neocon grant-making foundations, and the military-industrial complex. Through its strangely Soviet-sounding “Alliance for Securing Democracy” project it has launched something called “Hamilton 68: A New Tool to Track Russian Disinformation on Twitter.”
This project monitors 600 Twitter accounts that the German Marshall Fund claims are “accounts that are involved in promoting Russian influence and disinformation goals.” Which accounts does this monitor? It won’t tell us. How does it choose which ones to monitor? It won’t tell us. To what end? Frighteningly, it won’t tell us.
How ironic that something called the German Marshall Fund is bringing Stasi-like tactics to silence alternative media and opinions in the United States!
So what does the “Hamilton 68” project do? In its own words it firstly “shows tweets from official Russian propaganda outlets in English, and a short post discussing the themes of the day. This is Russia’s overt messaging.”
But it goes further than that. It tracks and stores information about others who have no connection to Russia but who “on their own initiative reliably repeat and amplify Russian themes.” This is what the German Marshall Fund calls a “network” of second tier disinformation distributors.
What does this “network” of people with no connection to Russia but who amplify Russian “themes” do?
It “reflects Russian messaging priorities, but that does not mean every name or link you see on the dashboard is pro-Russian. The network sometimes amplifies stories that Russia likes, or people with like-minded views but no formal connection to Russia.”
So, according to the self-proclaimed alliance for securing democracy you might not even know it when you are pushing Russian state propaganda!
Do you see what they are doing here? They are using US and other government money in an effort to eliminate any news organization or individual who deviates from the official neocon foreign policy line on Russia, Syria, Ukraine, etc. They are trying to eliminate any information that challenges the neocon line. To criminalize it.
In fact they admit that they are seeking to silence alternative viewpoints:
Our objective in providing this dashboard is to help ordinary people, journalists, and other analysts identify Russian messaging themes and detect active disinformation or attack campaigns as soon as they begin. Exposing these messages will make information consumers more resilient and reduce the effectiveness of Russia’s attempts to influence Americans’ thinking, and deter this activity in the future by making it less effective.The very Soviet-sounding “Alliance for Securing Democracy” project description ends with a suitably authoritarian warning, ripped from the pages of 1984, Darkness at Noon, or Erich Honecker‘s “how-to” guide:
We are not telling you what to think, but we believe you should know when someone is trying to manipulate you. What you do with that information is up to you.Chilling, no? And much of it is being done with your money by your government and in your name.
That is why the neocons and their myriad think tanks (government-funded in many cases) would like nothing more than to shut down our upcoming Peace and Prosperity 2017 Conference, to be held right at their front door! They cannot stand an open debate about Washington’s hyper-interventionist foreign policy. They don’t want to talk about all their failed wars — and they really don’t want to talk about the wars they have planned and are pushing.
We are not the anti-Americans. They are. They hate the First Amendment. They hate debate. They hate us.
How can we fight back? One very easy way is to show them a full house at our conference! Just by showing up you are poking a neocon in the eye.
Can you imagine how furious they were when last year’s Peace and Prosperity Conference was broadcast on CSPAN?
Thanks to the support of our very generous Host Committee we can keep the ticket price as low as possible. We want to see all of you there! You will get a full day of fantastic and insightful speakers, the opportunity to network and plot with like-minded individuals, and a very nice luncheon with plenty of coffee and tea to boot! We also managed to get a great rate at the hotel to save you some money!
And you’ll drive the neocons nuts! What are you waiting for! Book your ticket today!
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2vNOG1u
Yesterday the House leadership announced that when the House comes back from August recess it will consider a “consolidated” appropriations bill. The bill will contain the 8 appropriation bills that have yet to pass the House.
The idea is to get this bill to the Senate in time to avoid another end of year, big spending budget deal rammed through Congress.
I’m skeptical that this will work. For one thing, passing it through the Senate will require 60 votes and I doubt any Democrat will vote for it since they can get a better deal from Republicans by holding out until December, when GOP leadership is desperate to pass a deal.
The bill is likely to be opposed by some fiscal conservatives as early indications are that the bill will increase spending.
The bill could also be full of policy “riders” added in Committee, on the House floor, or as part of a back room deal. Campaign for Liberty staff is keeping a close eye on the process for any rider worth bringing to your attention.
Right now we are aware of one dangerous rider. Representative Charles Dent of Pennsylvania wants to add a rider to the Commerce, Justice, and State Appropriations bill implementing a federal ban on online gaming.
According to well-placed Capitol Hill sources, Campaign for Liberty members have so far successfully blocked the bill. However, as the appropriations process continues there will be a renewed effort to pass this ban into law. We must keep up the heat.
Campaign for Liberty has learned that the following member of the appropriations committee are listening to their constituents and opposing the Dent Amendment. Campaign for Liberty members in their districts should contact them and tell them to continue opposing any attempt to add the online gaming ban to the end of year appropriations bill:
Rodney Frelinghuysen (NJ-11) 202-235-5034
Harold Rogers (KY-5) 202-225-4601
Kay Granger (TX-12) 202-235-5071
John Culberson (TX-7) 202-225-2571
John Carter (TX-31) 202-225-3864
Tom Cole (OK-4) 202-225-6165
Mario Diaz-Balart (FL-25) 202-225-4211
Tom Graves (GA-14) 202-225-5211
Steve Womack (AR-3) 202-225-4301
Thomas Rooney (FL-17) 202-225-5792
Andy Harris (MD-1) 202-225-5311
Mark Amodei (NV-2) 202-225-6155
Evan Jenkins (WV-3) 202-225-3452
Steven Palazzo (MS-4) 202-225-5772
John Moolenaar (MI-4) 202-226-3561
Scott Taylor (VA-2) 202-225-4215
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2ulPXJw
Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently ordered the Justice Department to increase the use of civil asset forfeiture, thus once again endorsing an unconstitutional, authoritarian, and increasingly unpopular policy.
Civil asset forfeiture, which should be called civil asset theft, is the practice of seizing property believed to be involved in a crime. The government keeps the property even if it never convicts, or even charges, the owner of the property.
Police can even use civil asset theft to steal from people whose property was used in criminal activity without the owners’ knowledge. Some have even lost their homes because a renter or houseguest was dealing drugs on the premises behind the owners’ backs.
Civil asset theft is a multi-billion dollar a year moneymaker for all levels of government. Police and prosecutors receive more than their “fair share” of the loot. According to a 2016 study by the Institute for Justice, 43 states allow police and prosecutors to keep at least half of the loot they got from civil asset theft.
Obviously, this gives police an incentive to aggressively use civil asset theft, even against those who are not even tangentially involved in a crime. For example, police in Tenaha, Texas literally engaged in highway robbery — seizing cash and other items from innocent motorists — while police in Detroit once seized every car in an art institute’s parking lot. The official justification for that seizure was that the cars belonged to attendees at an event for which the institute had failed to get a liquor license.
The Tenaha police are not the only ones targeting those carrying large sums of cash. Anyone traveling with “too much” cash runs the risk of having it stolen by a police officer, since carrying large amounts of cash is treated as evidence of involvement in criminal activity.
Civil asset theft also provides an easy way for the IRS to squeeze more money from the American taxpayer. As the growing federal debt increases the pressure to increase tax collections without raising tax rates, the IRS will likely ramp up its use of civil asset forfeiture.
Growing opposition to the legalized theft called civil asset forfeiture has led 24 states to pass laws limiting its use. Sadly, but not surprisingly, Attorney General Jeff Sessions is out of step with this growing consensus. After all, Sessions is a cheerleader for the drug war, and civil asset theft came into common usage as a tool in the drug war.
President Trump could do the American people a favor by naming a new attorney general who opposes police state policies like the drug war and police state tactics like civil asset theft.
Ron Paul’s Weekly Column can be found on the Ron Paul Institute website.
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2uyOEWQ
With the Senate’s failure to repeal ObamaCare, the American people want to see Congress taking concrete actions to finally Drain the Swamp.
And my son, Sen. Rand Paul’s REINS Act (S. 21/H.R. 26) could do just that!
The truth is, there’s practically no other bill in Washington, D.C. that makes Big Government bureaucrats more FURIOUS.
For decades, these out-of-control overlords have (UNCONSTITUTIONALLY) ruled virtually every aspect of American life by decree.
You and I have been almost powerless to do anything about it.
The good news is, if passed, the REINS (Regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny) Act could stop the power-hungry bureaucrats at the BATFE, EPA, ED, FDA, IRS, HHS — and those in virtually every other government agency — cold.
But the news is not all good . . .
I recently learned from a loyal friend and Capitol Hill insider that some members of the U.S. Senate are scheming to water down — or even KILL — the REINS Act before it can even be voted on!
That’s why I’m counting on your IMMEDIATE action.
As you’ll see, this petition insists Mitch McConnell schedule a roll-call vote on the REINS Act as soon as possible to prevent this handful of Senators from derailing yet another common sense bill to help the American people.
And if possible, please agree to a generous contribution as well.
Please agree to $100, $250, or $500 if you can afford it. Or, if that’s too much, please agree to $50, $25, or even just $10.
Without your action today, I’m afraid this could be an enormous missed opportunity for you and me to finally rein in out-of-control government.
Just consider the madness we witnessed during Obama’s presidency where:
*** Government agencies added 20,642 new regulations at a rate averaging almost 80,000 pages a year!
*** New regulations inflicted more than $100 BILLION in economic damage from 2009-2016!
*** The EPA alone issued 4,000 new rules!
Estimates are that federal regulations as a whole cost the U.S. economy over $2 trillion every year!
But if passed, the REINS Act would prohibit out-of-control government bureaucrats from imposing major regulations without a vote by Congress.
In other words, the FCC, EPA, and TSA can make all the
“recommendations” they want, but they’ll mean absolutely nothing unless passed by Congress with a majority vote.
So you and I will have the chance to mobilize to DEFEAT these regulations — or hold politicians who vote for them accountable!
In short, REINS strips these massive and bloated unconstitutional bureaucracies of most of their power — paving the way for their outright ELIMINATION.
Talk about Draining the Swamp!
On paper, this vote should come down to just a handful of senators . . .
You see, while the bill passed with overwhelming Republican votes in the U.S. House, there are many members of the Senate in BOTH parties who represent states hit hard by the Obama administration’s regulatory tirades.
Many represent states President Trump won, and they are already nervous about their reelections.
So, turning a handful is very possible and could break a filibuster and guarantee REIN’s passage — if Republican “moderates” don’t work with “liberal” Democrats to sabotage it.
Sadly, that’s what I’m worried about right now.
Instead of daring senators who are wavering on REINS to vote “NO!” and risk their political careers, some are looking for ways to weaken REINS by increasing the threshold for a congressional vote far past $100 million!
And it’s all being done in secret because they’re scared of your action.
That’s why I’m counting on you to sign your petition right away.
And if possible, please also agree to your most generous contribution as well, to help Campaign for Liberty pull out all the stops to pass REINS.
Using direct mail and email — in addition to Internet, radio, and newspaper advertising — my goal is to light a fire under certain members of the U.S. Senate whose votes are up in the air.
With your help, this could be the difference!
After all, if he’s hit with a firestorm of grassroots pressure, does Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia really want to vote against the REINS Act — especially after complaining non-stop about how President Obama’s EPA destroyed coal jobs?
So just forcing a Senate vote on the REINS Act puts you and me in a win-win situation — if we can force a vote and stop a weak-kneed “compromise.”
That’s why I’m counting on your support.
First, won’t you please sign your petition to Mitch McConnell, urging him to quickly schedule a roll-call vote on the REINS Act?
And then, if you can, I hope you’ll also rush me your most generous contribution — $100, $250, $500, or even more if you can possibly afford it.
I know that’s a lot to ask for.
But should you and I succeed in passing the REINS Act, it would be a massive blow against Big Government.
Bloated and unconstitutional federal bureaucracies will see much of their power stripped — paving the way for their outright ELIMINATION.
Of course, if $100, $250, or $500 is just too much, I hope you’ll agree to a contribution of $50, $25, or even $10.
Vía Campaign for Liberty » National Blog http://ift.tt/2u7VK9I