Jack Guerrero for Treasurer -Liberty, Free Markets & Respect for the Constitution

Former Cudahy Mayor Jack Guerrero is a Republican candidate for State Treasurer in the June 5 primary. His campaign theme is “Liberty, Free Markets & Respect for the Constitution”

Jack Guerrero has served as a member of the Cudahy City Council, and as Mayor. As a local official he exposed problems with the city’s financial controls, and worked with the state Controller to examine the city’s spending. Mr Guerrero also pushed for school reform and held public hearings on education quality.

Jack Guerrero promotes his vision of limited government with a recommended reading list “Great Works of Influence” which
includes “Human Action” by Ludwig von Mises; “The Road to Serfdom” by Friedrich Hayek; “Atlas Shrugged” by Ayn Rand; “Conscience of a Conservative” by Barry Goldwater and more books, all of them available at the Renaissance Book Shop www.renbook.com

His experience in local government and his commitment to liberty and free markets make Jack Guerrero the best choice for State Treasurer. Vote for Jack Guerrero for State Treasurer on Tuesday, June 5. More info @ https://www.jack4treasurer.com/

Vote Libertarian June 5! California Needs an Alternative Party

In recent years California has moved rapidly toward becoming a one-party state. Not so long ago, Republican Pete Wilson began his first term as Governor pushing a tax hike that was passed by the Democrats in the legislature.

Now the tax hikes are passed by Democrats and signed by Democrats. Since the 1990s the Republican Party has gone out of its way to alienate California voters. In the state with the largest population of foreign born residents, Republican politicians have sought votes by demonizing immigrants. More recently, California Republicans loyally supported President George W Bush when he initiated a pre-emptive military attack on Iraq, a country which had not attacked the United States. This too alienated California voters.

It is true that many Democrats – Sen. Feinstein among them – helped to pass the Authorization for the Use of Military Force against Iraq. But the war was a project of the Republican Party, and President Bush used the Republican Party to push for war – for a pre-emptive war of choice that made America less safe, not more secure. Now even Sen. John McCain and Bush sibling Jeb admit that the Iraq War was “a mistake” that cost American lives and treasure, and caused suffering for millions of Iraqis.

With a few exceptions, California Republicans in state or federal office have opposed the legalization of marijuana. This too puts them at odds with most California voters. It also shows that Republican rhetoric about freedom and limited government does not really apply in all too many cases.

The Los Angeles Times reported on May 11 almost as many California voters have registered as independent as have registered as Republican. As former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has observed, “California Republicans are dying at the box office.” That leaves the pro-government Democrats with little opposition.

The Democratic Party is committed to active government, paid for by taxing productive workers and profitable businesses. The Democratic Party threatens our property with regulations and the possible restoration of Community Redevelopment programs. The Democratic Party threatens our children’s future with their commitment to a public school monopoly, and their opposition to educational choice. Many Democrats now champion legalization of marijuana, but in the past these same politicians supported the drug war and its totalitarian crackdown on personal behavior.

The Libertarian Party offers a choice that many Californians already agree with: lower taxes, limited government, and personal freedom across the board. If you are a home-owner who relies on Proposition 13, or a young person glad that California has legalized marijuana, The Libertarian Party speaks for you. If you are a parent hoping for an alternative to failing public schools, the Democrats have nothing to offer you. The Libertarian Party supports Freedom of Choice, and opposes military interventionism as promoted by both Democrats and Republicans.

Several Libertarian candidates have qualified for the June 5 primary ballot.
Nickolas Wildstar is running for Governor. He calls for tax cuts, restoring freedom of choice, and ending government corruption. Mr Wildstar champions the free market as the best way to increase employment and end poverty. And Mr Wildstar defends the right of states to legalize marijuana.
More information on the Wildstar for Governor campaign @ http://wildstar2018.com/

Tim Ferreira has qualified as a Libertarian candidate for Lt. Governor, sharing the vision of the Wildstar campaign.

Derrick Michael Reid will be on the June ballot as a Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senator, challenging the big government views of Sen. Feinstein. Mr Reid has stated his goals as elimination of the national debt; end corruption in D.C.; stop the transfer of wealth from the poor and middle-class to the politically connected, and restore the Constitution’s limits on government power. More information @ http://www.derrickmreid.com/

Vote for these Libertarian candidates on Tuesday, June 5 and help lay the groundwork for a new opposition party in California – an alternative for freedom, capitalism and peace.

Utley:”The Lies Behind America’s Interventions”

Official Washington and those associated with it have misrepresented the facts numerous times in the service of military actions that might not otherwise have taken place. In the Middle East, these interventions have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Arab civilians, brought chaos to Iraq and Libya, and led to the expulsion of a million Christians from communities where they have lived since biblical times.

The most famous of these episodes, of course, was the U.S. government’s assurance to the world that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, which formed the basis for the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. The government also insisted Saddam had ties to al-Qaeda, bolstering the call to war. Of course neither was true.

But even before that there was the first Iraq war in 1991, justified in part by the story of Iraqi soldiers reportedly dumping babies out of incubators to die in a Kuwaiti hospital. The 15-year-old daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador cleverly lied to a set-up congressional committee. The Christian Science Monitor detailed this bizarre episode in 2002.

There were also the lies about the Iraqi army being poised to invade Saudi Arabia. That was the ostensible reason for the U.S. sending troops to Kuwait—to defend Saudi Arabia. Writing in the the Los Angeles Times in 2003, Independent Institute fellow Victor Marshall pointed out that neither the CIA nor the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency viewed an Iraqi attack on Saudi Arabia as probable, and said the administration’s Iraqi troop estimates were “grossly exaggerated.” In fact, the administration’s claim that it had aerial photographs proving its assertions was never verified because, as we later learned, the photos never existed. The Christian Science Monitor also reported on this in 2002 ahead of the second Iraq war.

America attacked Iraq in 1991, bombing and destroying that nation’s irrigation, sanitation, and electricity plants. (See here regarding Washington’s knowledge of and planning for the horrific mass contamination of Iraqi drinking water.) Then we blockaded reconstruction supplies for nine years while some half-million children died of disease and starvation. We blamed it all on Saddam, although we controlled Iraq’s money flows through the UN food-for-oil program. Fortunately, we have a rare admission by Madeleine Albright on 60 Minutes about what was done.

full post by Jon Basil Utley@ The American Conservative http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-pretty-little-lies-behind-americas-interventions/

“The GOP’s Laughable Call for a Balanced Budget Amendment” by Barbara Boland

On the heels of an unpaid-for $1.3 trillion spending binge, House Republicans have announced they plan to—I’m not making this up—push for a balanced budget amendment (BBA) when they return from recess. This only proves there is no low to which the GOP will not stoop as it continues to insult the intelligence of its voter base.

The real strategy to pass a BBA, as happened with Obamacare, will most likely be to hold empty, meaningless roll call votes on measures that have no hope of passing and which the GOP has no plan to carry out. Then a Republican lawmaker can tell voters in the fall: “Look, we tried to do something about federal spending, but the Democrats voted against the balanced budget amendment.”

Here’s why the GOP’s move to prioritize BBAs should be perceived as the duplicitous pandering and vacuous virtue signaling that it is: first, there’s the timing. This gesture comes just after lawmakers from both parties passed a broad, two-year budget framework that blows up the budget caps imposed in 2011, and will lead to trillions in spending each and every year henceforth, with interest payments on the massive federal debt set to outpace the cost of the military and the cost of Medicaid in just eight years. Voting for gargantuan spending of this size and then claiming to support a balanced budget amendment is like gorging on a sumptuous feast while insisting that you want a svelte physique.

The other reason voters should not take the Republican call for a BBA seriously is that even in the best of times it is almost impossible to pass an amendment to the Constitution. A balanced-budget amendment would require the support of two-thirds majorities in both the House and the Senate, in addition to the backing of three quarters of the states. That’s an almost impossible lift, which is why only 27 amendments to the Constitution have ever been ratified.

Nevertheless, calls for BBAs have been popular since the 1980s, and gained particular steam from conservatives in 2010 with the Tea Party movement. The idea sounds deceptively simple: a balanced budget amendment would require that the government spend no more than it takes in during any given year.

But even if by some miracle one was ratified, a balanced budget amendment is a blunt instrument that wouldn’t necessarily be effective. That’s because during recessions and economic downturns, the government has to spend more on things like nutritional assistance and unemployment benefits. With a BBA in place, Congress would be unable to do so, resulting in something like sequestration on steroids.

Full column by Barbara Boland @ The American Conservative http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-gops-laughable-call-for-a-balanced-budget-amendment/

Sen. Rand Paul: Why I’ll Fight Gina Haspel and Mike Pompeo Nominations

Since President Trump took office, our country finally seems to be heading in the right direction. In just the past year, the American people have seen enormous tax cuts, more judges appointed who take the Constitution seriously, relief from the massive regulatory state, and an economy rapidly gaining strength and offering greater opportunities for those seeking to turn their dreams into reality.

But when it comes to our place on the world stage, we are at a crossroads. We can continue to build on our recent successes by reaffirming America’s role as a trusted, powerful nation guided by principle. Or we can throw it all away by allowing neocon interventionists to infiltrate our leadership and make America the purveyor of destruction.

For decades, we have failed to bring about real peace thanks to a foreign policy guided by the idea that war and intervention are the answers. “Blow up and rebuild” has been the battle cry of those determined to keep us perpetually in conflict.

It was the battle cry of Hillary Clinton, who supported military intervention in Iraq, Syria, and Libya. I supported President Trump during his campaign because he advocated for less military intervention. He opposed the Iraq War. He acknowledged that nation-building doesn’t work. He understood the damage previous foreign policy missteps have caused, including helping to strengthen ISIS.

I want to continue making America great again. That won’t happen if we give power-hungry neocons the reins to our nation’s foreign policy.

People already distrust the CIA. So why on earth has this administration picked someone to run the Agency who was instrumental in running a place where people were tortured and then covered it up afterwards?

Multiple undisputed accounts have detailed how Gina Haspel not only ran a CIA “black site” in Thailand but also destroyed video evidence of torture.

Full Commentary by Sen. Rand Paul @ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/rand-paul-why-ill-fight-gina-haspels-and-mike-pompeos-nominations/

Gary Johnson: Americans Are Not Under-Taxed

Republicans must cut spending Once again, the politicians in Washington, DC, just don’t get it. Right now, the Senate and the House are negotiating to reconcile the respective tax bills they have passed — with a self-imposed deadline of finishing by December 22.

Reasonable people are finding things to like and dislike about these tax reform proposals. The devil is in the details, and several thousand lobbyists are busily engaged in influencing those details… and undoubtedly mucking them up beyond comprehension.

To me, pretty much any proposal that reduces the amount of money the government sucks out of the private economy is better than the status quo. Personally, I have long preferred a shift to a consumption tax rather than continuing to tax productivity and profit. But I have also long recognized that such a dramatic change would require more courage than Congress is capable of summoning.

The tax reform debate leaves out a key element: cutting spending

Regardless, the debate over the current proposals is a great example of what I believe to be Congress’ most fundamental problem: An absolute refusal to actually do anything about federal spending.

The prevailing angst over the tax bills stems from the projections from various groups that cutting taxes will increase the federal deficit by a trillion dollars or more over the next 10 years. They are playing with all kinds of gimmicks and “offsets” to try to reduce that imbalance.

I am as concerned as anyone — and probably more concerned than most — about the debt and chronic deficits. $20 trillion in debt is unsustainable, and adding to it is unacceptable. Period.

HOWEVER, the cause of our debt is not that Americans are under-taxed. It is the simple fact that the politicians of both parties continue to spend and create money we don’t have. Yet, nowhere in the conversation about the tax bills or the threat that they might add to the debt is a serious proposal to do the obvious: Cut spending.

Based on the official analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation, the greatest one-year increase in the deficit would be $200 billion in 2020. In most other years, it would be significantly less. Come on, folks.

They can’t find $200 billion in savings out of a $4 TRILLION budget? That’s 5% — and much smaller spending reductions would be required in most other years.

The politicians in Washington are so out-of-touch with common sense that they can’t see the obvious even when it’s staring them in the face. Forget the gimmicks. Stop trying to find cute loopholes or fake “offsets” — and just cut the spending.

It’s not complicated. Any rational small business owner or household budget manager could find the necessary savings and cuts to reduce federal spending by 5% without breaking a sweat. Yet, the politicians can’t do it.

Maybe we need different politicians.

Source: https://www.thejacknews.com/featured/gary-johnson-tax-cuts-great-but-republicans-must-cut-spending/

Blood & Soil BSers Look Back to Miserable Era

by Gene Berkman

Q:”Why do Nazis rally around statues of Confederate heros?”
A:”There are no statues of Hitler in Germany for Nazis to rally around.”

Now that civic and business leaders in the south are beginning to deal with the statues of confederate politicians and generals, some are defending the statues as more about nostalgia than about racism. Of course, it is hard to separate nostalgia for the old south from the racist society that it stood for.

At the recent “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, VA, another kind of nostalgia was on display. A couple hundred night-time marchers carried tiki torches and chanted “Blood & Soil” and anti-Semitic slogans, in a juvenile parody of a Nuremburg rally. Americans, in the early 21st Century, nostalgic for the Third Reich – National Socialist Germany.

The National Socialist Party held power in Germany for 12 years, from April 30, 1933 to June of 1945. When the National Socialist reign came to an end, German cities had whole neighborhoods turned to rubble. Millions of Germans were homeless – they even created their own party, Bund der Heimatlosen. Factories and shops were damaged, and people were reduced to selling anything they had or could find to occupation soldiers in the hopes of making a little money to make survival possible.

Today, Germany is a major economic power, producing and exporting precision equipment and high quality consumer goods. Each year, Germany exports almost a trillion dollars worth of products. Germans have the highest standard of living and lowest taxes in Europe, except for the Swiss. And millions of foreigners have found in Germany a place to live and be creative.

Germany has achieved its economic success by restoring the market economy that the Nazis had destroyed, by enacting guarantees for civil liberties, and adopting a foreign policy based on avoiding conflict. Modern Germany has made a clean break with the Nazi past, and it has prospered.

Only a fool with a very low IQ, or someone with serious psychological problems, would think that the Third Reich was a better place to live than contemporary Germany. In Germany only a real loser would be nostalgic for a system that destroyed their country. In America, we have losers too, and they were on display in Charlottesville just recently.

The losers in Charlottesville included some who carried confederate flags, and others who carried flags with swastikas, mixing two forms of nostalgia. And who can deny that in the southern states today, life is better for everyone than it was during the 4 years of the slaveholders rebellion? After 4 years of the confederacy, millions in the south were in want, their dreams of a prosperous life dashed in a war caused by the defenders of slavery. How can anyone be nostalgic for that?

I guess nostalgia just isn’t what it used to be.