The Humble Libertarian original

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor More and more Americans are growing tired of the bitter partisanship that has come to define our nation's politics. Republicans hate the Democrats, and Democrats hate the Republicans. George W. Bush was supposed to be a "uniter, not a divider," yet he ended up bitterly dividing a nation. President Obama was supposed to heal those divisions, yet the nation seems even more polarized than ever under his leadership so far. There is however, one individual who continues to buck the trend. This individual has demonstrated an uncanny ability to unite diverse political factions on a slew of critical issues. If there was ever a model for effective and principled bipartisanship, this individual fits the mold. Most recently, this individual has united over 300 Republicans and Democrats on monetary policy reform. This individual has united two Democrats and two Republicans on potential war legislation. This individual has united d...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor Since 2007, the GOP has been prolifically citing President Ronald Reagan as its primary source of inspiration. In 2007-2008, the presidential candidates mentioned Reagan a dizzying number of times in the debates, and popular conservative commentators such as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity frequently appeal to him as the standard bearer of the Republican Party. Reagan is viewed as the epitome of conservatism, a man whose tax cuts produced a veritable economic boom in the 1980s, whose foreign policy defeated the mighty Soviets, and whose philosophy of limited government, individual responsibility, and traditional family values shaped a nation. While Reagan's reputation is unmatched in the conservative community, perhaps we should take a closer look at what he himself called his "greatest disappointment." For even great men make mistakes. According to a Cato Institute analysis back in 1996, Reagan's fiscal policies generated a s...

A 50 million mark Weimar Republic banknote worth $1 USD By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor I'm not one to be an alarmist, but this is serious folks. Over the last few months , central banks around the world put a whopping 63% of their cash into Euros and Yen, instead of the U.S. Dollar. Though not widely reported, this is a seismic shift. Normally, the U.S. Dollar is the top choice for central bank reserves. Overall, the US Dollar represents 62% of the currency reserves at central banks, an all-time record low, and this percentage continues to precipitously drop. What does this all mean? It means the US financial system may be about to receive the shock of its life, making the "Panic of '08" look like a stroll in the park. How did we get here? To make a long story short, the recent pace of Dollar devaluation began to accelerate under President Bush, a Republican-led Congress, and Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan. Insistent on stimulating the economy out of the 2...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor Once again, we're seeing a ratcheting up of tensions with Iran. Democrats and Republicans are threatening tough sanctions if Iran doesn't agree to greater transparency regarding its nuclear program. Many Republicans are calling for military strikes of suspicious facilities, and they're denouncing Obama for recognizing the dictatorial regime by conducting more direct negotiations. Before opening Pandora's Box, perhaps we should step back and take a deep breath. While Republicans are talking tough again, let's remember that the Bush administration did virtually nothing to halt Iran's nuclear program. There were no air strikes and no brutal sanctions. Refusing to speak with the anti-democratic regime did little to stem Iran's march toward nuclear power. On the Democratic side, there may be more direct discussion now, but the threat of punitive sanctions is growing stronger by the day, even if sanctions only serve to pun...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor Former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, made the case for spending more money on national security in front of a crowd of 400 at the World Affairs Council . He made a number of comments worthy of a more detailed analysis. He stated, "At some point down the road, we are going to get hurt very badly because we are spending too much on welfare and too much on domestic things, and not enough on national security." The Defense Budget, for Fiscal Year 2010, stands at $680 billion . $534 billion of this amount represents discretionary budget authority, which is more than President Bush's final defense budget of $515 billion (discretionary spending). The war tab for Afghanistan and Iraq now sits at over $1 trillion and counting. And according to a 2007 study sponsored by the Independent Institute, America's foreign policy actually costs about $1 trillion per year. Therefore, one could argue that national security spending is already ...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor According to General Stanley McChrystal, even as many as 80,000 additional troops may not secure victory in Afghanistan due to rampant government corruption. In fact, General McChrystal has submitted multiple options to President Obama, with requests ranging from 10,000 all the way up to the full 80,000 in additional troops. The General cited a high risk of failure with each option, though he concluded a smaller troop deployment carries with it the highest risk of failure. America has long known that President Karzai's administration is rife with corruption, and the recent, contested elections show all the signs of massive fraud. Voter coercion and ballot box stuffing may have saved the "President of Kabul." Despite approximately 100,000 U.S. and NATO troops, seven years of assistance and international recognition, Karzai has proven to be an inept, ineffectual, and some would even say, corrupt leader of a broken, third world nati...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor Based on the latest polls, Americans want a public health care option, they don't want to send more troops to Afghanistan, and they don't like the GOP. This is not surprising since the GOP, on the whole, advocates a second surge in Afghanistan and is resistant to any type of public option. Let's take a closer look at the numbers. In a CNN Poll , 52% of Americans believe Afghanistan is turning into "another Vietnam", while 46% disagree. 59% oppose sending more troops to Afghanistan, while 39% support sending more. Of the 59% opposed to more troops, 49% support a partial or full-scale withdrawal. Greater than 67% believe that Afghanistan will not have a stable government in the next few years, although a similar percentage feels an American presence is necessary to assist the Afghan government and to prevent the reemergence of Al-Qaeda. In a Quinnipiac Poll , 61% of voters want a public option, although voters, by ...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor Over at the Cato Institute , Justin Logan offered some unique insights into Defense Secretary Robert Gates' latest rationale for escalation in Afghanistan. Gates, representative of those who favor a second troop surge, nation building, and long-term deployment, made the case for further escalation by appealing to one of the most common emotional arguments. If we withdraw, Al-Qaeda declares victory and initiates a massive propaganda campaign. Hawkish supporters of open-ended commitment often use a similar line of reasoning. We can't withdraw or alter strategy because America will appear as the "loser" just like in Vietnam, or we will have "fought in vain", or will have "cut and run" like cowards, etc, etc. Al-Qaeda will reap an enormous propaganda boost, draw a barrage of fresh recruits, and redevelop into a worldwide terrorist powerhouse. In other words, to save face at any cost, America must commit i...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor In response to theater commanders on the ground, Defense Secretary Robert Gates approved 1,000 more "combat enablers" to be sent to Iraq last month. Combat enablers are classified as noncombat troops who specialize in intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, explosives disposal, medical and mental health, and personnel administration. 3,000 of these specialized troops will already be sent to Afghanistan as well, independent of General McChrystal's upcoming request for more. The additional troops in Iraq appear to contradict President Obama's promise to institute a swift, orderly, and substantial withdrawal. Before Obama entered office, approximately 135,000 U.S. troops were stationed in Iraq. Since taking office eight months ago, 131,000 still remain. The 1,000 troop increase, in addition to the 131,000 troops currently on the ground, also appear to contradict one of the central pillars of the so-called "Democratic m...

"Partisanship meets reality" By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor In a quick strike blog at The National Review , highly esteemed historian and columnist, Victor Davis Hanson, taunts critics while comparing the "jobless recovery" of 2004-2006 to the current "jobless recovery." Hanson's thesis, buried in sarcasm, can be paraphrased as follows: The Republican economic recovery of 2004-2006 is superior to the Democratic economic recovery of today. It's no secret that Hanson was a staunch supporter of the Bush administration and is often a harsh critic of the Obama administration and Democratic-led Congress. However, in this blog, he appears to allow partisanship to cloud his sense of objectivity. Following the 2000-2001 recession, the so-called "jobless recovery" produced low unemployment, low inflation, high GDP growth, and a booming stock market. Today's "jobless recovery," according to the consensus, is producing hig...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor Republicans, I'd like to have a candid conversation with you. The word on the street is that you are starting to get excited at the prospect of a backlash against "liberals" in the 2010 elections. But, why would America want you back? What do you really have to offer that is so much better than Obama and the Democrats? Let's take a closer look. On the bright side of things, from 2000-2008, you accomplished a few good things. George W. Bush and a Republican-led Congress (for six years) cut taxes and helped to maintain low unemployment until the last six months. America was not hit by further terror attacks after 9/11, several Al-Qaeda terrorists were killed, and from 2002-2007, the nation experienced an unprecedented boom in housing and stocks. Many would also argue that Iraq proved to be a huge success after the surge was instituted against the advice of skeptical opponents. You defunded embryonic stem cell research, passed a...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor U.S. Rep. Tim Johnson (R) intends to sponsor legislation calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Johnson stated that he is working closely with a bipartisan group, including fellow Republican Dr. Ron Paul, and Democrats, Jim McGovern and Jerry Costello, to craft withdrawal legislation. At a recent town hall meeting , he explained the reasoning behind his position: "I want to protect America, but I don't want to lose lives senselessly... and we cannot police the world. "I'm suggesting to you that there is no end-game. I believe that our men and women are there in a mission that is ill-defined. I think we're losing people by the day, here and over there, with no even indirect relationship to our national security. "We've had a succession from Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan, and the net result has been thousands of lives lost, and very little progress made. "I'm in favor of doing ...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor Last night, CBS's 60 Minutes aired its highly anticipated interview with our top commander of the Afghanistan War, General Stanley McChrystal. General McChrystal has been enlisted by the Obama administration to generate a new war strategy at a time when U.S. casualties are spiking, Taliban militants are rapidly gaining the upper hand, and the Afghan government is mired in corruption. Despite the addition of nearly 21,000 additional troops this year, General McChrystal is calling for more troops, up to 40,000 more according to some reports . General McChrystal is warning that the United States may lose the war within the next 12-18 months if the situation on the ground further deteriorates. After watching the interview, I thought I'd share a few of my initial thoughts and impressions. Impressions of the interview The interview lasted about 15 minutes, which in my view, was shockingly brief considering our nation is bogged down in a deadly ...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor In my recent blog, " Make a choice: contain Al Qaeda or nation build in Afghanistan ," I endorsed George Will's proposal for a more limited and focused mission. Now, U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel (Ret.) Ralph Peters, has issued a similar proposal in the New York Post . Like Will, Peters advocates a more narrowly defined mission, one that specifically targets Al-Qaeda and any unabashed cohorts, instead of expending endless amounts of blood and treasure on rebuilding a corrupt nation-state. If adopted, such an approach would likely save hundreds of billions of dollars, decrease the casualty count by thousands, lower suicide rates and PTSD in the military , prevent a resurgence of Al-Qaeda safe havens, and inspire the Afghanis to fight for their own future. Most conservatives, however, appear to be quite reluctant to adopt this type of approach. Much like Iraq, they are far more willing, at this time, to sign off on thousands more troop...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor Make a choice: contain Al Qaeda or nation-build in Afghanistan. General Stanley McChrystal, top commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan has called for more troops in Afghanistan , saying: "Failure to gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum in the near-term (next 12 months) -- while Afghan security capacity matures -- risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible." Afghan President, Hamid Karzai supports the general's recommendation. But General McChrystal also said earlier this month that there is no evidence to suggest a major Al-Qaeda presence in the war torn country. In light of McChrystal's assessment, columnist George Will writes in a recent Washington Post op-ed : "If U.S. forces are there to prevent reestablishment of Al-Qaeda bases -- evidently there are none now -- must there be nation-building invasions of Somalia, Yemen and other sovereignty vacuums?" If Al-Qaeda's ...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor As the U.S. cuts back on its own national missile defense, the Obama Administration has decided to install a U.S. led, global missile defense shield in Central & Eastern Europe- but a different one than that proposed by George W. Bush in 2007. Proponents of the missile shield claim that the missile defense system will shield U.S. forces, as well as its European allies, from potential attack by Iran, terrorists, or even an increasingly bellicose Russia. Many proponents feel Obama's new plan doesn't do enough, even claiming that he has " scrapped missile defense " in Europe, which is untrue- he has scrapped Bush's missile defense proposal, and replaced it with a different plan that focuses on Iran's present short and medium range capabilities. Let's consider the following issues. First , the U.S. is running a $1.6 trillion budget deficit. How can we afford to build, install, and fund a missile defense project in...

By: Ryan Jaroncyk , T H L Contributor It's the stuff of nightmares. Within minutes of detonation, America's entire electronic and communications grid is wiped out. Planes plummet from the skies. Hospitals and rest homes lose power. Food begins to spoil. Panic and fear begin to sweep the streets. Millions die in a matter of weeks. What could cause such a catastrophic event, and what can we do to prevent such a doomsday scenario? It's called an EMP attack. Years ago, our government sponsored a commission to discuss the threat and the media has covered it from time to time, but nothing has been done to protect America from this existential threat. Without delving into a detailed scientific explanation, imagine a ballistic missile launched off our coast, perhaps by terrorists on a barge, or by agents of certain rogue states. The missile detonates approximately 300 miles above sea level, and within minutes, our entire electronic infrastructure is shut down. Computers,...