The following is the text of an article that was just published under my
by-line at http://www.etherzone.com/2009/beam061009.shtml.
Roderick T. Beaman,D.O.
Board Certified Family Physician
Protect freedom. Disarm the government.
THE FIRE THIS TIME - PART THREE
INFIGHTING - PARRY & THRUST
Several readers took me to task about my previous column in this series. The
objections centered around my choosing the Republican Party to save ths
country. One mentioned the Imperial Presidency of Richard Nixon, ‘The shredding
of constitutional principles in the Iran Contra
Affair and ‘eight years of attacks on our constitutional freedoms’.
He also wrote you ‘(assume) the GOP is the friend of liberty and not the enemy.
Recent history proves that thought very, very wrong. Eight years of increased
executive power through the use of signing statements.’
He went on that the ‘patriotic and moral issue is with your conclusion. If you
can foresee
"rioting will break out . . .and vaults us into a Mozambique like inflationary
spiral." Why would you see this a historic opportunity?’ For clarification, it
wasn’t rioting that I regard as an historic opportunity but the chance to head
it off and use it as an example of the danger of not returning to limited
constitutional government. All of his comments though were on the money and
that’s the point.
No thinking libertarian can disagree with him. The Republican has indeed been
wayward in its policies, especially under George W. Bush but also, I must
concede, under George H. W. Bush, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, our supposed
modern presidential hero.
As the fight is joined, Republicans must be ready to have a lot of dirt thrown
at them. The Democrats are already doing it, citing the spending excesses
George W. Bush years and claiming that the Republicans have no right to quibble
over this. And yes, the GOP must be ready to concede that it has been remiss.
But every political problem has a solution. The Chinese word for problem is the
same as opportunity. This is what I mean by opportunity.
The proper response is a reversion to and invocation of principles, plain and
simple. That Republican leaders, including presidents, have violated the
principles of the party does not invalidate the principles any more than
priests and nuns committing abuse of children invalidates the principles of the
Catholic Church or that a cop committing murder legitimizes murder.
My own journey through life saw me vote for William F. Buckley, Jr., the only
time he ever ran for public office, Mayor of New York, on the Conservative
Party ticket. Other than for that, I always voted Republican and finally
registered as a Republican in 1980, when Ronald Reagan was nominated for
President.
I switched to the Libertarians during the Clinton years, went to the
Constitutionalists, back to the Libertarians and finally back to the
Republicans with Ron Paul’s 2008 presidential candidacy. With the failure of
that campaign, I have joined the Republican Liberty Caucus, the RLC. Despite
the observations of that perceptive reader cited above, I am staying with the
GOP and plan to be part of the conscience of the party, to hold its feet to the
fires of the Constitution and freedom.
Karl Marx was nothing if not a great observer of the political process. He
originated the idea of thesis, antithesis, synthesis. One party proposes, the
other raises its objections and they then arrive at some kind of an agreement.
Thus, ever since the New Deal, the Democrats have proposed programs, the
Republicans have questioned how to pay for them and the synthesis was to raise
taxes.
Is there another way? Yes. The Republican Party must ask what any measure does
for freedom and the Constitution. This is the antithesis for any of the Marxist
proposals which will come from the Democrats. They are the weapons to be used.
Parry, thrust and ‘Toucheʹ.’
The RLC is growing across the country. There is a rising tide of resentment
that is shaking the Republican leadership to its very core and which it will
not be able to deny much longer.
This past weekend, along with many other members of the Jacksonville RLC, I
attended a ‘Drive the Discussion’ meeting conducted by the Florida GOP in
Lakeland. It was obvious that the rank and file were upset by the direction
that party has taken, especially over the past eight years and as worried as
those in attendance were over that, they are horrified at what has happened in
just 21 weeks under a functionally Marxist president and Congress.
Thus, the opportunity strengthens along with this perfect economic storm that
we are in the midst of. This is a radical problem and with radical problems
come radical opportunities for radical solutions. So what can the RCL do?
It can list a set of proposals that all Republican candidates must agree to
work for if the RLC is to approve their candidacies. This would not necessarily
be an endorsement, only an approval. I suggest the following:
To repeal the Sixteenth (the income tax) Amendment;
To repeal the Seventeenth Amendment. (This amendment provided for the direct
election of senators before which they had been appointed by the state
legislatures. I can’t believe that the states actually ratified an amendment
that eviscerated their power, in the process eliminating a mechanism for them
to directly propose additional amendments.)
To repeal the Federal Reserve Act;
To invoke Article III, Section 2, Paragraph 2 of The Constitution and introduce
legislation to eliminate the authority of the Courts over abortion cases and to
allow the issue to revert to the individual states;
To define the phrase ‘ a well regulated militia’ in the Second Amendment to
mean a well-organized militia and that the amendment confers the right to bear
arms on the people themselves and not the states;
That every law proposed must cite its justification in the Constitution.
I regard these first six requirements as nonnegotiable demands, to use an old
1960s phrase, for any candidate to receive the approval of the RLC. The
following are additional recommendations that can be debated. Some are related
to the previous six.
Repeal of both Patriot Acts;
Eliminate the Department of Homeland Security;
To repeal the National Security Act of 1947 that established the Central
Intelligence Agency on the grounds that it allows the Executive to pursue
foreign policy without congressional oversight. Alternatively, the CIA could
simply be placed under the authority of the Congress;
To allow any individual or institution to coin and print money based upon any
commodity and to allow even fractional reserve banking provided that all such
information be clearly provided by the issuing agency. Congress would be
limited to determining the denominations to be used;
To define the term ‘regulate’ in the Commerce clause as meaning only that
Congress will ensure the flow of commerce unobstructed across state lines and
has no authority in restricting it;
To eliminate federal government supervisory power over all manufacturing in
this country including food and drugs. Those functions would devolve to the
states;
To establish that no unilateral presidential proclamation shall have any force
of law;
To guarantee that the federal government will take no action against the
sovereignty or secession of any state;
To discontinue all federal support of and all supervisory power over
transportation, energy, education and communications.
I emphasize that none of these is written in stone. They are suggestions and I
feel the first six are the most crucial. The others can be delayed until
another time and any other suggestions would be welcome.
Everyone would have to be aware that such a huge realignment of function would
result in the emergence of massive political resistance and might include
violence. The GOP must be ready for this and immediately respond that each of
them offers more freedom for the individual and limits the power of the federal
government as was the aim of the Founders. Violence would have to be put down.
The only response that the Democrats and collectivists could make, would be to
either prove that their proposed bills don’t restrict freedom or admit that
they do and then have to justify it. In the either case, the collectivists
would be on the defensive. They’d either have to fold or give the Republicans a
political bonanza that would resonate across the country.
As I have said, these proposals might seem radical but these are radical times.
More and more people are predicting that the United States of America is on the
verge of a complete collapse. I stand among them.
I do not know if even all of these proposals were enacted that it would be
sufficient but at least we can say we tried and they might stave off the
collapse until we could complete the process.
