Boston Tea Party response to 2012 State of the Union

President Obama wants us to imagine an America that is within reach. I would rather have you imagine a world a little further down the road. The President wants “[a] country that leads the world in educating its people. An America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs. A future where we’re in control of our own energy, and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off, and responsibility is rewarded.”

I prefer to imagine a world in which governments allow you to educate your children as you see fit, without interference. A world in which governments allow you to start and run your own business and create jobs without interference from bureaucrats. A world where you are allowed to purchase energy from any number of sources or companies that do not have special government privilege, or supply your own energy from wind or solar and be able to share the excess with your neighbors without government regulation. A world where you are able to use the currency of your choice without threat of violating a legal tender law. Such a world would have an economy built to last, where hard work pays off, and responsibility is rewarded.

The President also said “We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by. Or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.”

If the President were serious about having an economy where everyone plays by the same set of rules; he would immediately ask Congress to revoke all government contracts, abolish the IRS, abolish the Federal Reserve which serves to protect the large banking institutions, and work with the Governors of the 50 States to abolish the use of eminent domain, abolish special privilege given to “corporations,” repeal zoning laws and abolish welfare and licensing laws which do little more than stifle the free market. A world without government interference would be a world where everyone gets a “fair shot.”

President Obama additionally said that he will “fight obstruction” in Congress. As long as bills that create more laws, continue funding the military occupation of foreign nations, take away more rights of the people and increase spending are being proposed, I believe that obstruction is the only admirable action that any member of Congress could commit.

In closing, the President says “[m]illions of Americans who work hard and play by the rules every day deserve a government and a financial system that does the same.” I am curious what President Obama means by this statement. I doubt that he intends to remove the special privilege given to the Federal Reserve System. I doubt he will remove government contracts and privatize all government agencies. I doubt he will ask Congress to abolish the postal monopoly that prohibits competition on delivery of first class mail. I also doubt that President Obama will request the repeal of “sovereign immunity” which protects governments from civil suits when a government (or government employee) violates someone’s rights.

As long as there is a central bank (whether private or government run) there will be “phony financial profits” and “bad debt;” two things Obama says he wants to eliminate. If the President were serious about moving forward with a blueprint for an economy built to last; he would heed the advice I’ve already mentioned. The only way forward, is to remove the obstacles – placed by government at all levels – from the road.

posted by southernpatriot
  • Slim Strong

    I’d like to add that we need to make the move away from the restriction
    of movement of goods and people in this country, that is ultimately what
    has been stifling economic growth the most. Worst off, it’s endorsed by
    monopoly-seeking corporations who reap the benefits in the short term on their rush
    to provide security products to the government. They fail to realize that this is the same government that
    will steal a company out from under you if they see fit.

    Giving up that liberty to attain the fictional security state against
    the terrorism/piracy/runningoutofenergy boogeyman is what has been killing off our economic
    security little by little. It’s time Americans realize the vast majority
    of the chains that have been laid upon them are nothing more than
    immoral paper laws and that we have the tools to change all of it within our grasp.

    As for Obama’s latest lofty rhetoric in the SOTU: the haters have been vindicated
    many times over by his foul actions. He’s nothing more than a slick,
    modern tyrant with few who truly believe in him any more. Look for the
    rats to abandon ship and tag team over to the GOP side after 2012. 

  • Slim Strong

    I’d like to add that we need to make the move away from the restriction of movement of goods and people in this country, that is ultimately what has been stifling economic growth the most. Worst off, it’s endorsed by monopoly-seeking corporations who reap the benefits in the short term on their rush  to provide security products to the government. They fail to realize that this is the same government that will steal a company out from under you if they see fit.

    Giving up that liberty to attain the fictional security state against  the terrorism/piracy/runningoutofenergy boogeyman is what has been killing off our economic security little by little. It’s time Americans realize the vast majority of the chains that have been laid upon them are nothing more than immoral paper laws and that we have the tools to change all of it within our grasp.

    As for Obama’s latest lofty rhetoric in the SOTU: the haters have been vindicated many times over by his foul actions. He’s nothing more than a slick, modern tyrant with few who truly believe in him any more. Look for the rats to abandon ship and tag team over to the GOP side after 2012.

  • http://vforvandyke.com vforvandyke

    Darryl,

    I have a few questions about the BTP that I’ve been meaning to ask you, and in the interest of transparency I’ll just get right to it in a comment here:

    1) What is the membership size of the BTP? Is there a growth chart of any kind since its inception?

    2) Have you considered forming a caucus or bloc within one of the established political parties?

    3) How is the platform different than that of the Libertarian Party? What would you say the fundamental difference is in your party’s coming together in the online era.

    4) How many candidates will the BTP be fielding in 2012?

    5) As a political party, what has your role been in challenging the onerous ballot access laws in many states?

    Thanks for your time,
    Stephen VanDyke