Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Jacob Lawrence

I recently received a letter from Jacob Lawrence. Jacob's blog is here. He sent out letters to all the candidates in Missouri's 7th Congressional District. Four have not yet responded. Here is my response:


Jacob Lawrence wrote:

> Mr. Craig,
> I am Jacob Lawrence, a 16 year old from Nixa.

Good to see someone your age interested in
politics. Are you homeschooled? [I just discovered
that he is.]

> As I search for information
> regarding the candidates for the 7th
> congressional district primary, I am
> unable to find straight question and answers.

My website is probably one of the largest
candidate websites on the internet, with
over 300 separate webpages on important
issues. In addition, I have over 600 blog
posts. I've never been accused of not
giving straight answers. :-)


> Because of this, I am emailing
> each of the you to ask a few questions.
> I would appreciate it if you had
> time to answer them.
> 1. As a Libertarian, how do your views
> differ from the other candidates?

Where to begin?
There are so many HUGE differences.

I am a Bible-believing Christian.


Therefore, I am a radical libertarian.

Jesus told His disciples that the kings
of the Gentiles love to be "archists"
(Mark 10:42-45). They love to rule --
to impose their will on others by
force. Jesus said Christians are NOT
to be archists. Christians are not to
initiate force in order to advance their
goals or to solve their problems --
personal or social.


My campaign theme is "Liberty Under God."


My Republican opponents will say that
by "liberty" I mean "anarchy."
My Democrat opponents will say that
by "Under God" I reveal an intention to
"impose a THEOCRACY on America."

Of course, central to my beliefs is that
coercion and compulsion are improper ways
of advancing "Liberty Under God." I do not
seek to "impose" my views on anyone.

However, I do in fact advocate "anarchy":


And I do in fact advocate "Theocracy":


Which is more "extreme": a nation of liberty,
or a nation under God?

Politics is a tug-of-war:


I am passionately pulling the political rope
toward "Liberty Under God."
By refusing to defend Christian Theocracy and
the "anarchy" of laissez-faire capitalism,
my opponents are either pulling the political
rope toward atheistic Obammunism, or they are
stuck in the mud in the middle of the two extremes.


Jesus condemned the lukewarm and the moderate.

If America's Founding Fathers were transported
through time to our day, I believe my opponents
would call them "radicals," "extremists," and


I believe if the Founders were here today,
they would take immediate steps to repeal
the Constitution they signed and abolish
the government it created, and make America
a libertarian Christian Theocracy:


I believe the current doctrine of "separation
of church and state" is a myth:


It is because I am a Christian that I am
for *liberty* from government compulsion.
The other candidates (as far as I can tell)
place a higher priority on *security* -- a gift
from a powerful, globe-encircling government --
than they do on liberty:


I believe I would get the vote of those who
participated in the original Boston Tea Party.
This is because I believe our government is
a tyranny -- a greater tyranny than the government
they overthrew in the American Revolution.


However, I myself would not have participated
in the original Boston Tea Party. I view
that event as an unChristian act of vandalism.
I also oppose the American Revolution, or
"War for Independence."


I am the only candidate who agrees with
America's Founding Fathers, that we have
a duty -- not just a right -- to *abolish*
our current government, because it is an
atheistic tyranny far more immoral than
the government denounced in the Declaration
of Independence:


I reject the violence of the musket and
the cannon that America's Founders approved.


I reject U.S. wars and imperialism:


I too used to believe that U.S. wars were
just wars, so I appreciate those members of
U.S. armed forces who have lost life and limb
in the unnecessary wars of our atheistic, fascist
government, but by their failure to oppose
these wars, they do not reflect the kind of
vision and leadership America needs for
the 21st century:


America's Founders would not vote for
any of the other candidates, based on
what I know of these candidates so far.
(Some do not yet have their campaign
websites completed.)

> 2. How would you address the deficit?

There are only two ways to address (and
by this I assume you mean, "reduce")
government deficits:

1) spend less
2) tax more

I believe taxation is immoral:


No tax is a "fair" tax.


Therefore we must cut government spending.

I would start by abolishing all unconstitutional
government agencies. I would keep the solemn
promises that Republicans regularly make
-- and regularly break:


Another important way to reduce the deficit
is to hold Congress to the Constitution, which
prohibits anything but gold and silver from
being made a legal tender. James Madison,
the "Father of the Constitution," writing in
Federalist #44, spoke of "the pestilent
effects of paper money." Congress allows
the Federal Reserve to create trillions
of dollars out of thin air through a process
called "monetization of debt." Americans are
forced to pay interest on this Funny Money.
Madison correctly observed that this practice
destroys contracts ("the necessary confidence
between man and man,") "confidence in the public
councils ... the industry and morals of the
people, and ... the character of republican
government." The Federal Reserve and the creation
of "fiat money" must be abolished. Any candidate
who does not include this demand in his platform
is no friend of America.


> 3. How do you plan to bring jobs to district 7?

This question might reflect an enormous political
fallacy. I suspect it contains unconstitutional
and socialist thinking.

It is unconstitutional for Congress to even
*attempt* to "bring jobs" to any or all
congressional districts in any or all of
the states.


It is also impossible for Congress to succeed
in any such effort. Any action Congress undertakes
(which requires funding) depletes funds needed
to create jobs. Any funds Congress allocates to
"create jobs" creates fewer jobs than a Free Market
would create with the same funds. Congress does not
know which jobs Americans want created, or
where Americans want those jobs created.


Congress should therefore make no effort whatsoever
to "bring jobs" to the district. The States
should resist such efforts, such as Obama's
efforts to create "green" jobs, or to expand
health insurance coverage by compulsion:


Congress already destroys jobs, and should
repeal all legislation which adversely impacts
the creation of jobs by the Free Market:


> Thank you for your time and good luck!

Thanks for enquiring!

I see you've already endorsed another candidate.
It's very early in the campaign.
Make news by changing your endorsement!
Missouri should get credit for rejecting
the last 80 years of the two-party socialist
duopoly by sending America's first Libertarian
to Congress:


Kevin Craig
Libertarian Party Candidate
Missouri 7th District
U.S. House of Representatives
P.O. Box 179
Powersite, MO 65731

No comments: