Volume 13, Number 3 | February 7, 2008
The Liberator Online
Contents
PRESIDENT'S CORNER
GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS, UNBELIEVABLE NEWS
PERSUASION POWER POINT
#243
ASK DR. RUWART
PRODUCT REVIEW
Dear friends, The World's Smallest Political Quiz is highlighted in the February 2008 issue of NEWSMAX magazine. The Quiz is prominently featured in the cover story, which is about Ron Paul's presidential campaign. The story portrays libertarianism in a very positive and accurate light. NEWSMAX magazine reaches one of the most influential
and affluent audiences in America.
It's also a high-profile newsstand magazine. It's among the top 10% selling magazines at Barnes and Noble's 800 stores -- surpassing such well-known publications as Reader's Digest and Family Circle. And NEWSMAX is one of the top 25 best-selling magazines at U.S. college bookstores. To help this largely conservative audience understand the libertarian view, NEWSMAX asked me if they could include the Quiz in their story. I was, of course, delighted to say yes. "Take This Quick Political Quiz," the headline reads. "Where do your views fall on the political spectrum? Many voters find that their stance on the issues are closer to libertarians than they realize. Take this Quiz to help determine where you stand." The article also includes colorful sections on world-famous libertarian celebrities -- like Dave Barry, Drew Carey, Clint Eastwood and Kurt Russell. The Advocates was the first organization to gather and publicize this kind of information, at our immensely popular "Libertarian Celebrities and VIPS" Web feature. The NEWSMAX article is just one more example of how the Advocates is successfully helping huge numbers of people around the world encounter, evaluate, and embrace libertarianism. Consider: * Several thousand people take the Quiz online -- every day. Millions more have encountered the Quiz in card form. The Quiz is quite simply the most effective libertarian outreach tool ever. * Our Quiz is in the online supplemental material of a dozen textbooks used in thousands of classrooms across America -- including some of the most popular high school and college texts published. Yes, libertarianism in the classroom -- thanks to the Advocates. * Every year readers encounter the Quiz in magazine articles like this NEWSMAX piece, or in their local newspapers. Some of the world's largest and most influential newspapers -- the Washington Post, the Sunday London Times, the Miami Herald, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution -- have featured the Quiz. * Thousands of Americans encounter libertarian ideas at Operation Politically Homeless (OPH) booths -- the phenomenally successful Advocates tool that uses the Quiz and other material to turn a dull outreach booth into a crowd-drawing, fun *event*. In addition to that, we help libertarians become successful, persuasive communicators of the ideas of liberty -- so they in turn can bring others into our movement. Every minute of every day, the Advocates is working to build an ever larger, ever more effective libertarian movement. Thank you for being part of it! * * * Welcome to 251 new Liberator Online subscribers this issue. Thanks for joining our subscription "family" of over 70,000 liberty-loving readers in more than 100 countries! To learn more about the Advocates and our work for
liberty: To learn more about libertarianism: PS: We have a very special, limited-time offer for you: Save 40% on "The Best of Harry Browne!" Take advantage of this, and you'll get... * Harry Browne's last published book, LIBERTY A-Z. (A
$13.95 value.) All of this is yours for only $20 (plus shipping and handling). This is a $33.95 value -- so you save $13.95. That's
more than a 40% savings on Act today! This offer is good through February 20, 2008. To order, or learn more, see "Product Review" at the
end of this issue. Or Your purchase supports the great work of the Advocates. Thank you! ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
What's Happening With The Advocates * Heartland Libertarian Conference: Sharon Harris will be the dinner speaker, and joins a great list of speakers at this Kansas City, Missouri event, including former U.S. Congressman Bob Barr; Libertarian Party Executive Director Shane Cory; and 2004 Libertarian Party presidential candidate Michael Badnarik. Also featured: a debate between 2008 Libertarian Presidential candidates. Co-sponsored by the Kansas Libertarian Party, the Missouri Libertarian Party, and the Cass County Libertarian Party. April 4-5, 2008. http://www.lpmo.org/heartland2008/ * Freedom Cruise: Announcing the Eleventh Annual
"Freedom Cruise" -- a glorious 12 day cruise through the Mediterranean,
focused on Italy and the Greek islands: Venice; Dubrovnic; Corfu;
Argostoli; Santorini; Catania; Naples; Rome; Florence; and Barcelona!
September 29 - October 11, 2008. The event is organized by Ken Bisson of
Freedom Cruises. Great food, an amazing itinerary, and fine company!
(This isn't an Advocates event, but Ken is on our Board of Directors,
and libertarians who have been on past cruises rave about them.) For
more details, visit: * QUIZ ON FACEBOOK: The Advocates has brought the World's Smallest Political Quiz to Facebook, the world's fastest-growing social networking site! Over 1,000 people per day are already using it! FACEBOOK USERS: See how you can use our new Quiz Facebook app to spread the ideas of liberty throughout the Facebook
community: NOT FAMILIAR WITH FACEBOOK? Learn more about it, why
you might want to join and how easy it is, and how you can begin to
network for liberty: ******
by James W. Harris The national ID battle, brewing for years, is now underway in earnest. On January 11, the Department of Homeland Security released its final rules on what states must do to implement REAL ID, the national identification law Congress passed in 2005. Homeland Security has taken the gloves off. States have until May to accept the plan. Beginning May 11, 2008, says Homeland Security, residents of states that have not agreed to implement REAL ID will not be allowed to use their state drivers licenses to board airplanes or enter federal buildings. They can use a U.S. passport or possibly other documents in some circumstances, but they must expect to "suffer delays due to the requirement for enhanced security screening." In other words, take your shoes off, pal, and get in that LONG LONG line over there. States that agree to comply may be granted extensions
of several years to fully implement REAL I In practice, it may be impossible even to get a job or open a bank account without REAL ID. REAL ID is widely expected to become the standard ID for the private sector. And that's just the start. Homeland Security is already floating additional uses for the cards, including "reducing unlawful employment, voter fraud, and underage drinking," and monitoring the purchase of over-the-counter medicines. The REAL ID Act explicitly says that REAL IDs shall be required for "any other purposes that the Secretary [of Homeland Security] shall determine." A more open-ended grant of power could not be written. REAL ID requires all states to make major changes to
their driver's "The massive database that would be created by the REAL ID Act, containing all manner of private information on citizens, is potentially one of the most privacy-invasive laws in the history of our country," Barr says. "Anything less than scrapping this offensive national identification card law is unacceptable." The ACLU points out that the REAL ID "will become tantamount to a license to leave your house," since it will be required virtually everywhere you go. "The end result could be a situation where citizens' movements inside their own country are monitored and recorded through these 'internal passports.'" And so the stage is now set for a massive battle right out of the movie "V For Vendetta": Big Brother at its most evil and intrusive versus outraged citizens who cherish civil liberties and privacy rights. A true grassroots rebellion against REAL ID is forming. So far, 17 states have passed laws or resolutions rejecting REAL ID: Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and Washington. Twenty-one other states have either introduced legislation or had legislation pass in one chamber opposing REAL ID. But all those states are facing tremendous pressure from the federal government. Like so much recent statist legislation, REAL ID was sneaked into law. It was slipped into a May 2005 emergency-spending bill to fund the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and provide tsunami relief. Such bills are almost impossible to defeat. It passed the House 368-58 and the Senate unanimously. There was not a single debate on the Act in the Senate, and insufficient discussion in the House. President Bush, who, his spokespersons once said, "does not support a national ID card," strongly backed it and quickly signed it into law. There have been attempts to kill the REAL ID beast in Congress. Legislation has been introduced in both the House and Senate to repeal the act, but thus far they have not progressed. As this battle begins in earnest, state by state, no one should be fooled into thinking REAL ID has anything to do with fighting terrorism. The federal government has pushed for a national ID card for years, well before the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Previous justifications have included health care, the War on Drugs, protecting children, and controlling immigration. Any excuse, it seems, will do. This is all about massive, Orwellian control of Americans by a federal government run amok. As Ron Paul said when the bill was introduced in 2005: "National ID cards will be used to track the law-abiding masses, not criminals." REAL ID is a Real Bad Idea: a giant move towards a 1984-ish police state where the government monitors and controls everything you say and do. It can still be stopped. But it's now or never. * * * New Study: All Candidate But One Will Increase Government Spending Of all the Republican and Democratic candidates for president, only one is proposing to actually cut government spending. That one, not surprisingly, is libertarian Republican Ron Paul. The rest -- Republicans and Democrats alike -- are proposing to *increase* government spending by anywhere from several billion to hundreds of billions of dollars. That's the startling conclusion of a comprehensive new study from the National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF). NTUF is the research arm of the 362,000-member National Taxpayers Union, a nonpartisan citizen group founded in 1969 that works for lower taxes and tax reform. Their new study provides cost estimates -- based on hard data -- for more than 450 actual proposals by the presidential candidates.
* John McCain's proposals would result in a $6.9
billion spending hike.
As for the Democrats: * Hillary Clinton's proposals would result in a $218.2
billion spending hike. What about Ron Paul? The NTUF study notes that only
Ron Paul is proposing to eliminate whole departments he considers
wasteful, unnecessary He would also end "corporate welfare," or government handouts to business. He has proposed numerous other measures to reduce government spending as well. Finally, his call for ending America's self-assumed role as policeman of the world would save trillions of dollars over time, as well as American lives. Bottom line on Ron Paul, according to NTUF: * Ron Paul's proposals would result in a $150 billion spending CUT. (Source: National Taxpayers Union Foundation study: www.ntu.org ) * * * Food Fascism in Mississippi Overweight citizens in Mississippi will have to be weighed and measured before being allowed to order food in restaurants, if legislation introduced in that state becomes law. And if they're found to be obese, it would be illegal for the restaurant to serve them. That's the bright idea of three Mississippi state
legislators, who have proposed to make it a The law would apply to virtually every restaurant in Mississippi. Studies have pegged Mississippi as the most obese state in America. Obviously, then, the Mississippi government must step in and prevent people from deciding for themselves what they can and cannot eat. Declares the bill: "Any food establishment ... shall not be allowed to serve food to any person who is obese, based on criteria prescribed by the State Department of Health after consultation with the Mississippi Council on Obesity Prevention and Management." The bill also directs the State Department of Health to "prepare written materials that describe and explain the criteria for determining whether a person is obese and to provide those materials to the food establishments" and "to direct the Department to monitor the food establishments for compliance." Liberator Online readers will agree, of course, that this a brilliant and eminently sensible proposal. However, some citizens may be concerned that this principle could spread further. After all, if the government can control what people eat "for their own good," what's next? Why not outlaw smoking in workplaces and other buildings? Why not hold bars liable if they serve booze to overly-intoxicated patrons? Why not force people to wear seatbelts and motorcycle helmets? Why not outlaw gambling, or drugs like marijuana and cocaine? Why not... Oh, sorry. The government already does all that. (Source: "First they came for the fat people..."
* * * There is a growing call from doctors in Britain's
system of socialized medicine to limit health care for the elderly and
those who lead unhealthy lifestyles, according to the U.K.-based Daily
Telegraph.
Indeed, some patients are already being denied treatment for those reasons. Further, Prime Minister Gordon Brown is calling for the government to identify patient "responsibilities" -- which many believe is a first stop towards penalizing, controlling or denying medical care to citizens who drink, smoke, or eat too much. Rationing and invasive government controls are, of course, predictable outcomes of socialism. Reports the Daily Telegraph on a new survey conducted by Doctors magazine: "Smokers, heavy drinkers, the obese and the elderly
should be barred from receiving some operations, according to doctors,
with most saying the health service cannot afford to provide free care
to everyone. ... "Among the survey of 870 family and hospital doctors, almost 60 per cent said the National Health Service could not provide full healthcare to everyone and that some individuals should pay for services. "One in three said that elderly patients should not be given free treatment if it were unlikely to do them good for long. Half thought that smokers should be denied a heart bypass, while a quarter believed that the obese should be denied hip replacements." But never fear, the government has a solution: spend more tax money to "solve" the problem it created. The British government has announced plans to offer overweight people cash payments if they will exercise and diet. (Source: "Don't treat the old and unhealthy, say
doctors" * * * * UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE COVERAGE OR ELSE: From
Associated Press: "Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might
be willing to have workers' wages garnisheed if they refuse to buy
health insurance to achieve [her goal of] coverage for all Americans.
... Clinton has not always specified the enforcement measures she would
embrace, but when pressed during a television interview, she said: "I
think there are a number of mechanisms" that are possible, including
"going after people's wages, automatic enrollment." * NO EVIDENCE GOV'T AIRLINE SECURITY WORKS: From
Reuters: "Airport security lines can annoy passengers, but there is no
evidence that they make flying any safer, U.S. researchers reported... A
team at the Harvard School of Public Health could not find any studies
showing whether the time-consuming process of X-raying carry-on luggage
prevents hijackings or attacks. They also found no evidence to suggest
that making passengers take off their shoes and confiscating small items
prevented any incidents." TSA (the U.S. Transportation Security
Administration) defended their efforts by saying they had confiscated
over 13 million prohibited items in one year. Most were... cigarette
lighters. * * * * * * * *
Nothing Is So Dangerous as an Idea Whose Time Has Passed by Michael Cloud "Nothing is so powerful as an idea whose time has come," wrote Victor Hugo. Raising crops and livestock replaced hunting and gathering. Science and technology replaced magic and superstition. Chemistry replaced alchemy. Reason and evidence replaced inspiration and authority. Production and trade replaced most conquest and war.
Reduction and rollbacks in government power replaced unbounded and
unaccountable government. Each individual's right to life, liberty, and
property replaced the doctrine of Victor Hugo was right. But Hugo's coin has two sides. Here's the flip side: Nothing is so dangerous as an idea whose time has *passed*. Why? Because those who prosper and profit from the entrenched idea will resist change. They will fight to protect their position and privileges. They will not go gently, they will not go quietly, they will not go willingly, they will not go. Powerful kings fought reductions and restrictions of their power. Then the royal class and their allies fought reductions and restrictions to their power. They all fought even limited democracy and elective government. All fought the idea of each individual's right to life, liberty, and property -- and government limited to the consent of the governed. Privileged, pampered, and protected businesses fought to keep high tariffs and regulations. To prevent competitors from offering consumers lower prices and better products. Slaveholders and those who profited from slavery fiercely battled against freeing slaves and ending slavery. Those who benefited from women as second-class citizens opposed women's suffrage. Opposed giving women the vote or repealing laws and regulations that treated women differently than men. Non-competitive and dying industries do everything they can to resist and put off the day of reckoning. So do political ideas. Nothing is so dangerous as an entrenched government idea whose time has passed. Big Government is that decaying and dying idea. An idea and institution whose time has passed. Government-run, government-managed charity is a dying idea. Government-run, tax-funded public schooling is a dying idea. Government-managed or government mandated, government-regulated, tax-funded medical care is worse than a dying idea. It is a dead idea, a Frankenstein monster that will turn on us. Government-run, government-controlled Social Security is an idea whose time has passed. Big Government must go. You can let it be a slow, toxic, costly passing -- or you can hasten the birth of individual liberty and small government. Small government is an idea whose time has come. But ideas do NOT spread themselves. People spread ideas. Why not you? What will you do to win people over to the idea of small government? What will you do to show people the blessings and benefits of small government? Who will you try to persuade? When and where? Then who else? The more people you reach and teach, the more people you engage and persuade, the sooner you can have the liberty you've hoped and dreamed about. It's in your hands. "Nothing is so powerful as an idea whose time has come." * * * * * * * * In 2000, Michael was honored with the Thomas Paine Award as the Most
Persuasive Libertarian Communicator in America.
HARD EVIDENCE FOR LIBERTY
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Dr. Mary Ruwart is a leading expert in libertarian communication. In this column she offers short answers to real questions about libertarianism. To submit questions to Dr. Ruwart, see end of column. * * * MY SHORT ANSWER: If your concern about immigrants is their use of tax-supported welfare and health care, maybe these shouldn't be made available to them. Libertarians believe that tax-supported giveaways harm many of the people they are intended to help -- whether they are citizens or immigrants. Welfare, for example, often encourages people to make life-destroying choices. As a low-income landlady, my applicants included teenage girls who viewed getting pregnant and on welfare as a way to establish their own households. By the time they had three children, and realized that they would always be poor on the dole, entry-level jobs didn't even cover child care. A job that would have been a great stepping stone for a single person simply wasn't enough for a family. Almost all of these women quit their jobs after a few months and went back on welfare. If our own citizens "milk" the system, to our detriment and their own, why should we be surprised if immigrants do so? The solution isn't to do away with immigration, but to do away with these programs that reward poor choices. (LEARN MORE about immigration and the harmful effects
of welfare: * * * QUESTION: If there are to be public schools, should
not the people who use them most pay more? (LEARN MORE about successful private alternatives to
government schools: * * * * * * * * Due to volume, Dr. Ruwart can't personally acknowledge all emails. But we'll run the best questions and answers in upcoming issues. Dr. Ruwart's previous Liberator Online answers are archived in searchable form at: http://www.TheAdvocates.org/ruwart/categories_list.php Dr. Ruwart's outstanding books "Healing Our World" and "Short Answers
to the Tough Questions" are available from the Advocates:
http://www.TheAdvocates.org/Merchant2/merchant.mv
Word Choice: Separation of SCHOOL and State by Sharon Harris, Advocates President There are lots of ways to describe the libertarian position on education. Parental choice in education. Privatization of education. Getting government out of education. One of the most powerful ways to state this is to use the phrase "separation of school and state." Everyone is familiar with the phrase "separation of *church* and state." It is a bedrock principle of a free society. It has very positive connotations for most listeners. "Separation of *school* and state" has the same ringing sound. It is clear and bold. Using the phrase will grab your listeners' attention.
You can then tell them you favor this for exactly
You can then, of course, add to your argument the many other reasons why private education is far superior to government education. An additional benefit is that the phrase has grown enormously in popularity. In 1994, when Advocates Founder Marshall Fritz first created an organization called the Alliance for the Separation of School and State, the phrase was obscure. Now, however, it is beginning to be widely used. It represents a growing national movement. A Google search finds nearly 27,000 entries for the term. "Separation of school and state" is one of those magic phrases that win attention, open minds, and provide listeners an instant "aha!" insight. It isn't appropriate for all times and audiences. No phrase is. But it packs a powerful punch in the right circumstances. (To learn more arguments for the separation of school
and state, visit: See more One-Minute Liberty Tips! •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Home
| Library |
Publications |
Programs | Celebrities
| Quiz
| Store
| Site Map |
About us |
Search |
Contact Us |
|
Contents copyrighted © The Advocates for Self-Government,, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) educational organization. Donations tax-deductible in U.S. All rights reserved. |
Their subscribers are intelligent (80
percent are college graduates), informed, and very politically active.
Fully 14% have a net worth over $1,000,000; 7% have a net worth over
$2,000,000. 
D. But when REAL ID is in
place, notes CNET NEWS, in addition to flying and entering federal
buildings, "REAL ID could in theory be required for traveling on Amtrak,
collecting federal welfare benefits, signing up for Social Security,
applying for student loans, interacting with the U.S. Postal Service,
entering national parks" as well as purchasing firearms. 
The leading Republicans love to describe themselves as
"fiscal conservatives" and they all pledge to cut back government. But
that's all hot air, says NTUF. The truth is, all but Ron Paul are
proposing an even bigger, even more bloated, even more intrusive federal
government than we have today: 
and unconstitutional. Among them: the departments
of Education, Commerce, Energy, Agriculture, and Homeland Security.
crime for a restaurant to
serve anyone with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 30 or more. 
the same reason you
favor separation of church and state: because education -- the molding
of the minds and souls of our children and citizens -- is far too
important to put into the hands of government. And far too easy for the
government to abuse. Government education is as dangerous and as
inappropriate as government religion. 
