From the Desk of

Kevin Tracy

2010-05-20

Travis appears to have caved and accepted the title of "Neo-Con;" which Ron Paulers like to use to describe modern conservatives who are hawkish on foreign policy and not entirely in favor of eliminating US currency and returning to the barter system, literally putting us on the old gold standard.

In order to survive in a modern economy, we need a fungible currency (something that can easily be traded and turned into something else... it's easy to turn cash into cows... it's less easy to turn a bunch of chickens and gold nuggets into cows). The US Dollar fulfills that function for us and does so quite well. The problem isn't with the US Dollar, the problem is with how many US Dollars we're printing to cover the increasing cost of government.

Now, your run of the mill, Ron Paul idiot will say that neo-cons are just as bad as Democrats when it comes to this. That's a lie. First of all, there's no way on God's green earth that Republicans would spend as much on domestic programs as Democrats if left to their own devices. Beyond that, however, the Ron Paulers are assuming that every Republican that isn't humping Ron Paul's leg is a supporter of George W. Bush.

President Bush, especially in his second term, was NOT a conservative. He pushed for amnesty, increased dependency on government health care, and was among the driving forces behind the 2008 TARP bill. Most people the Ron Paulers call "neo-cons" were adamantly opposed to these measures. Just because a Republican President (with strong Democrat minorities and majorities in Congress ) passes liberal legislation doesn't mean that the bulk of the GOP supports it. What Bush did domestically, away from social issues, was not conservative, neo or otherwise.

However, that's not going to be enough for the Paulers. More often than not, they cite America's involvement in the Global War on Terrorism as an example of unacceptable government spending, and it's hawkish Republican supporters are therefore neo-cons. It's this foolish anti-war stance that makes me call the Ron Paul fanatics and anti-war Libertarians "neo-cons."

This group tends to use guys like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison as what it means to be a conservative. The origin of this is probably their opposition to the First Bank of the United States (commonly referred to as the BUS, it was the precursor to the FED). The difference between post-Revolutionary America and today is that the global economy literally forces us to have an entity like the FED to handle basic economic functions without bubbles and crashes every two or three months. Although I would support an audit of the FED, such an audit should be done to ensure there's no corruption and to investigate ways to improve the process; not eliminate it. I think Jefferson was a reasonable enough man to recognize that.

But here's the real kicker.

Jefferson and Madison were pro-war.

In 1801, the year of his inauguration as President, Jefferson put us on a course to war with the Barbary States (Tripoli in particular). The First Barbary War is almost identical to the War on Terrorism (and not just because our opponents were Muslims). The motivation behind the war was that pirates (terrorists) backed by nations were seizing American ships and demanding ransom for the release of the prisoners. Jefferson refused to pay tribute to the pirate states to ensure their safe voyages, so war was declared on us.

And get this, JEFFERSON NEVER HAD A DECLARATION OF WAR FROM CONGRESS!!!

Granted, he did try shutting America off from the rest of the world when Britain and France refused to recognize American shipping rights, but all that succeeded in doing was utterly destroying the American economy. He even recognized that decision as a mistake.

Instead, his protégé James Madison who followed him to the Presidency in 1809 decided the best way to have American shipping rights recognized was to go to war in 1812. Granted, the British Navy was the main culprit in denying these maritime rights to American sailors, but it was ultimately decided that the best course of action would be to invade Canada! Heck, Madison didn't even have to say there were Weapons of Mass Destruction there.

The War of 1812 cost the United States well over $200 Million, including the price of rebuilding Washington, DC and repairing the damage the British and their Indian allies had done on most fronts. In today's dollars, that would be over $2.5 Billion. That's not a lot compared to today's wars, but keep in mind that laser guided munitions, nuclear aircraft carriers, night vision goggles, and stealthy supersonic fighters and bombers are all expensive technological advances in warfare. If the British had any of this stuff and we didn't, the flag would NOT still be there.

Regardless of how much money the wars cost after inflation, the Global War on Terrorism and the War of 1812 were both wars that the United States "couldn't afford." After the War of 1812, the federal government passed the first tax on the civilian population to pay for it. So, from the point of view of Ron Paulers, President Madison was a "Tax and Spend Neo-Con." From that same point of view, President Jefferson was a neo-con who got us involved in an unconstitutional war and then over-regulated the economy by banning all incoming and outgoing traffic from American shipping ports because of his hawkish foreign policy.

The underlying motivation behind Ron Paul, his tin foil hat society, and most Libertarians isn't Thomas Jefferson or James Madison. It's not their narrow interpretation of the Constitution. It's not even American; it's French. The truth that they don't want you to discover for yourselves is that their philosophies are rooted in French Anarchism from the mid-20th century. Take a moment to look at their radical tactics, their desire to SPAM every public forum that dares criticize them, and compare that to the foul behavior and idiot rhetoric of European Anarchists and you'll be shocked at the similarities.

If you're a socially responsible person, who believes in limited government for a country that isn't afraid to defend itself or its interests, you're a plain ol' conservative in the truest, most American sense of the word.

The only neo-cons that exist in this country are the Paulers and libertarians who want to pervert what it means to be a conservative in this country.