Republican Party
News Journal: Number 35, December 1, 2010: The Audacity of Grope: A TSA Exposé–Progressive Pervert Petulent Prevaricating President–Must View Video!
Campaign for Liberty launches a public relations campaign against President Obama’s TSA government interventionism:
“…Got questions about the TSA? This video’s got answers. Jam-packed with all the information you need to get up to speed on the 2010 holiday airport security uproar. Get the inside scoop on full body scanners, radiation health risks, pat-downs, screw-ups, underwear bombers, cavity searches, special interests, government officials, the Constitution (specifically, the 4th Amendment), scanner storage capability, and hear from some of the most engaged minds in the debate; including Congressman Ron Paul…”
Campaign for Liberty Mission Statement
“Our mission is to promote and defend the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity.”
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/about.php
http://www.youtube.com/user/campaignforliberty
One point that the above video failed to address is the spread of disease as a direct result of the TSA not changing their blue gloves after each pat down.
Instead the TSA screeners use the same pair of blue gloves most of the day.
Imagine going to a doctor or dentist who wore the same blue gloves while examining many patients during the day.
An unintended consequence of the government grope will be the spread of the various influenza (flu) viruses.
The time has come to stop this security theater nonsense and start profiling passengers and targeting individuals that are more likely to be terrorist bombers.
Flawless Airline Security on Israeli Planes
TSA: Enemy of the American People?
Ron Paul: TSA Has Gone too Far
Enough is enough.
Terminate the TSA peepers and pat downs.
President Obama responds:
President Obama explains the new TSA Airport Security Screenings
News Journal: Number 33, November 9, 2010: Tea Party Movement Expects Republican Party To Balance The Budget By Cutting Spending Now!
Debt Clock
Economics 101 – It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes!
Deficits are Bad, but the Real Problem is Spending
Meltzer Says U.S. Economic Programs Have Been `Foolish’
Ron Paul – Dr. Allan Meltzer
No Compromise: Issa, Ryan and Cantor Will Cut Runaway Federal Spending
Eric Cantor Discusses Tax Rates, Ending Earmarks & Cutting Spending On Fox News Sunday
Rand Paul: GOP must consider military spending cuts
Ron Paul on the Deficit, Government Spending, and Military Industrial Complex (1988)
The tea party movement is expecting the Republican Party to balance the Fiscal Year 2011 and 2012 budgets or face the consequences or fate in 2012 of the big spending Democrats in this past election.
Instead the Republican Party is talking about a Fiscal Year 2008 level of total outlays of about $3 trillion dollars.
This is definitely an improvement over President Obama’s estimated budget deficits exceeding over $1,000 billion in FY 2010 and FY 2011.
However, it still would not come close to balancing the budget in FY 2011 where tax revenues are expected to be about $2,567 billion.
Unfortunately the deficit would be about $400 billion for the total combined on-budget and off-budget.
Refer to the following receipts and outlay estimates at:
Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (−): 1789–2015
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/
The total estimated tax revenues for FY 2011 and FY 2012 are $2,567 billion and $2,926 billion respectively for the combined on-budget and off-budget.
The total estimated outlays for FY 2011 and FY 2012 are $3,834 billion and $3,755 billion respectively for the combined on-budget and off-budget.
The total estimated deficits for FY 2011 and FY 2012 are $1,267 billion and $828 billion respectively for combined on-budget and off-budget.
To balance the combined on-budget and off-budget the FY 2011 outlays would need to about the level of Fiscal Year 2005 of $2,472 billion.
To balance the combined on-budget and off-budget the FY 2012 outlays would need to about the level of Fiscal Year 2008 of $2,983 billion.
Either balance the budget or face the consequences in 2012.
Stop dithering.
Start shutting down entire Federal Departments, agencies and programs.
Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 4 of 4)
Pass the FairTax and limit future outlays or expenditures for the total on-budget and off-budget to 80% of previous year’s tax revenue from the FairTax.
The FairTax: It’s Time
The remaining 20% of FairTax revenues would go to pay down the debt.
Time for some real change and hope.
Stop spending our future and balance the budget.
Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis
Background Articles and Videos
Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economics
Keynesian Predictions vs. American History | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
Why You’ve Never Heard of the Great Depression of 1920 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
Warren Harding and the Forgotten Depression of 1920
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
“…The economic situation in 1920 was grim. By that year unemployment had jumped from 4 percent to nearly 12 percent, and GNP declined 17 percent. No wonder, then, that Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover – falsely characterized as a supporter of laissez-faire economics – urged President Harding to consider an array of interventions to turn the economy around. Hoover was ignored.
Instead of “fiscal stimulus,” Harding cut the government’s budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Harding’s approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third. The Federal Reserve’s activity, moreover, was hardly noticeable. As one economic historian puts it, “Despite the severity of the contraction, the Fed did not move to use its powers to turn the money supply around and fight the contraction.”2 By the late summer of 1921, signs of recovery were already visible. The following year, unemployment was back down to 6.7 percent and was only 2.4 percent by 1923.
It is instructive to compare the American response in this period to that of Japan. In 1920, the Japanese government introduced the fundamentals of a planned economy, with the aim of keeping prices artificially high. According to economist Benjamin Anderson, “The great banks, the concentrated industries, and the government got together, destroyed the freedom of the markets, arrested the decline in commodity prices, and held the Japanese price level high above the receding world level for seven years. During these years Japan endured chronic industrial stagnation and at the end, in 1927, she had a banking crisis of such severity that many great branch bank systems went down, as well as many industries. It was a stupid policy. In the effort to avert losses on inventory representing one year’s production, Japan lost seven years.”3
The U.S., by contrast, allowed its economy to readjust. “In 1920–21,” writes Anderson, “we took our losses, we readjusted our financial structure, we endured our depression, and in August 1921 we started up again. . . . The rally in business production and employment that started in August 1921 was soundly based on a drastic cleaning up of credit weakness, a drastic reduction in the costs of production, and on the free play of private enterprise. It was not based on governmental policy designed to make business good.” The federal government did not do what Keynesian economists ever since have urged it to do: run unbalanced budgets and prime the pump through increased expenditures. Rather, there prevailed the old-fashioned view that government should keep spending and taxation low and reduce the public debt.4 …”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods125.html
Historical Tables
Historical Tables provides data on budget receipts, outlays, surpluses or deficits, Federal debt, and Federal employment over an extended time period, generally from 1940 or earlier to 2011 or 2015.
Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (−): 1789–2015
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/
High Taxes and High Budget Deficits
The Hoover–Roosevelt Tax Increases of the 1930s
by Veronique de Rugy, Fiscal Policy Analyst, Cato Institute
“…Conclusion
The tax increases of the 1930s coincided with large
deficits and economic stagnation. While the monetary and
trade policy mistakes of the 1930s are now widely
understood, the tax policy mistakes are less appreciated.
As Congress grapples with today’s budget deficit and
mediocre economic growth, it should look to the tax cuts
of the 1920s for inspiration rather than the failed “budget
balancing with high taxes” approach of the 1930s.”
http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0303-14.pdf
Can GOP Shrink Government Spending?
Ron Paul in San Francisco – Amazing Speech!
Republicans roll out “Pledge to America”
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Pronk Papers 
