The United States has now murdered over 56 million babies since Roe vs. Wade back in 1973. The United States also claims the number one title for the highest abortion rate in the Western World. However, China has the East on lockdown due to their one child per family policy. Could these same policies make their way to the United States soon?

Let's hear what our current President and Vice President have to say about it. Our Vice President, Joe Biden seems to think that China's policy of murdering their children is completely fine saying that he "fully understands" China's one child policy. That's not all! While in the Senate, Obama voted to "protect doctors who killed babies who survived the abortion" which means Obama was protecting the doctors performing infanticide which is shown in the picture. Just like China, our President has voted to protect live abortions...a.k.a...Murder. Why are more people not outraged about this? Since a baby is unable to speak for themselves we must do that for them. We must help the innocent and the weak when they are unable to help themselves.

Here's some other interesting facts about abortion you may not be aware of.
  1. Less than 1% of all abortions are done to save the life of the mother.
  2. Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger once said the following…
    “The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
  3. Planned Parenthood performs more than 300,000 abortions every single year.
  4. There are 30 Planned Parenthood executives that make more than $200,000 a year. A few of them actually make more than $300,000 a year.
  5. Planned Parenthood receives hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal government every single year.
  6. At 8 weeks or older, an unborn baby feels very real physical pain during an abortion.
  7. About one-third of all American women will have had an abortion by the age of 45.
  8. Approximately 47 percent of the women that get an abortion each year in the United States have also had a previous abortion.
  9. There have been well over a billion abortions performed around the world since 1980.
  10. Abortion is more dangerous than childbirth.
As a Libertarian, I believe that everyone should have the freedom to do as they please as long as they are not harming someone else. However, just because a child is still in the womb does not mean that they are not alive. These babies have heartbeats and fingers. A child is "someone else" and during an abortion they are being harmed by the mother committing murder! You have to ask yourself which is worse, the right to not be killed or the right to not be pregnant?


Is Legalizing Drugs a Good Idea?

Recently there has been a lot of talk about legalizing Marijuana in many states. Legalizing Marijuana is a giant step for freedom. However, why should we stop with Marijuana? If you truly believe in freedom then we should be working towards legalizing all drugs. Why not legalize Heroin, Cocaine, Ecstasy and others. It doesn't matter if someone is drinking, smoking pot or taking ecstasy as long as long as they are doing this in the privacy of their own home. As long as someone else is not being hurt from their actions then people should have the freedom to live how they wish.

Along with having greater freedom in America another benefit of legalizing drugs would also be bringing down taxes on everyone else who is not using them. The laws to regulate all drugs could be very similar to the laws of alcohol and tobacco. Of course you could not do drugs and then drive as that could possibly cause harm to someone else against their will. However, the tax benefits of legalizing drugs would definitely be a positive.

Another benefit of legalizing drugs would be the reduced crime. After drugs are legalized the black market would begin to disappear. The gangsters on the street corners would be put out of business and the drug related shootings would be eliminated. After all, why would any consumer want to buy their drugs on a street corner and potentially put their life in jeopardy? When consumers are buying drugs on the street they are buying an unregulated product from an unknown dealer. However, once legalization happens consumers will naturally flock to a drug franchise or registered corporate entity where the drugs they are selling have been tested for quality. A legitimate business owner has a natural incentive to sell quality products or they lose their profits and lose their business.

In the end, the federal government should have absolutely nothing to do with regulating drugs. These laws should be best left to the states as every state is not the same. If the people of a particular state want to legalize a particular drug or all drugs they should have the freedom to do that in their state without the federal government trying to force their beliefs on them. One of the best parts of leaving the federal government out of these matters is that if you don't like the laws in your state you can easily move to another state. However, when the federal government gets involved and sets uniform laws for every state then if you don't like it you have to go through the process of moving to an entirely different county. If you truly value freedom then you will allow others to live their lives the way they wish even if you don't agree with their beliefs. The drug debate is often difficult to understand since most of us have never used drugs. However, we should treat others as we would want to be treated. If you want others to dictate your life then this may not make much sense but if you don't like being forced to do/not do something then live and let live.


The Payday Loan Debate

Payday loans are typically used for a quick form of cash in a emergency situation where you need to pay an unpaid or unexpected bill. These loans are recommended to be paid off on your next payday, hence the name. However, most liberals believe that consumers and businesses should not have the freedom to reach an agreement without the government getting involved which is why in 13 states payday loans are still illegal. For that small handful of states the liberals would much rather consumers not make their payments and possibly lose their cars or maybe even their house. This is why so many consumers within those states are now looking to online payday loans to get the money they need fast.

If you reside in one of the following states then the government believes they know what is best for you and you are completely incapable of making an educated decision on your own regarding what's best for your family.

  1. Arkansas
  2. Arizona
  3. Connecticut
  4. Georgia
  5. Kentucky
  6. Maryland
  7. Massachusetts
  8. New Jersey
  9. New York
  10. North Carolina
  11. Pennsylvania
  12. Vermont
  13. West Virginia

Although payday loans typically involve interest rates that can range from 100% - 1,000% the majority of these loans do get paid back as soon as the consumer gets paid exactly like the name suggests. Therefore, the damage done from the interest rate charged is minimal. However, this does not stop liberals from capping interest rates on these loans and therefore eliminating payday loans completely in 13 states.

When a consumer needs a loan in an emergency situation the first place most consumers will go to is their bank. However, for those consumers with bad credit a bank may be unable to lend any money. The only other option to get some quick money is typically through payday loans. When the loan is taken out the borrower provides their banking information so that the loan will be repaid through electronic payment. In return the borrower gets the money they are in need of on the spot. The borrower can decide to repay the entire loan on their next payday (the smart choice) or defer their payment to a later date which is typically not a good idea due to the high interest rates.

In the end, as long as a company is being fully transparent with the rate and fee details this transaction should be allowed to happen. When two parties form an agreement that is in no way harming anyone else they should have the freedom to carry out that agreement without the government denying them their freedom to do so. The problem here is that the egotistical liberals think they know what is best for each American family. The next time you need to make an important decision for your family don't talk it over with your family because the omnipotent liberals are going to make that decision for you. Just remember, YOU KNOW NOTHING!

Live & Let Live.


The Employment Non-Discrimination Act

WASHINGTON - MAY 20: Members of GetEQUAL, a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender organization, stage a protest on Capitol Hill May 20, 2010 in Washington, DC. Activists call on Democratic congressional leaders to keep their promise to schedule a vote for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) this legislative year.  (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Monday night the Senate took a vote that will more than likely send The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) to congress. However, what congress will do with it is yet to be determined.

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act is much like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. We know that the Civil Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, religion, gender, national origin, age and disability. ENDA is set to prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or sexual identity. Supposidely, the law would not apply to religious organizations, members of the armed forces, or companies with fewer than 15 employees.

The problem with both ENDA and the Civil Rights Act is that while the intention is to help, these laws also take away the freedom of the business owner. No one should force their beliefs upon others whether it be Republican's not allowing gay marriage or gay's forcing business owners to run their business a certain way. When a company first starts off the entrepreneur takes a risk and puts a lot of time and money on the line. The business owner has ownership of his/her company just as an employee has ownership over his/her own self. If a business owner does not want to hire someone who is gay that is their right. It is their company and their building which was accomplished by the risk they took. If someone is not hired by a company then they have the right to work for another company or start their own. Perhaps, they could start a company that only would hire gays. The second issue that is has drawn out this legislation is the claim that gays do not make as much as their colleagues. I have good news regarding wages though. Regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation any employee has the right to quit their job and find another if they feel they are not being paid enough. There should be no entitlements! I'm not sure what has happened to America but when it comes to employment you have to earn what you get.

ENDA and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act provide freedom for some while taking it from others. Passing a gay marriage law would be great because while I am not gay, two others who are would not harm me in the least bit. In addition gays should have every right to the same protections and benefits that being legally married allows a non-gay couple. However, ENDA is wrong because it takes away freedom from business owners just like TItle VII of the Civil Rights Act has done. The problem here is not equal rights but rather a group of people who feel they are entitled to something and do not want to work for what they get. If someone who is gay is getting paid less than their colleugues than they can quit. However, if someones skills are truly valuable to a company, whether they are gay or not, their employer will give them the equal pay they are looking for not because they are required to by the government but because that person earned it!


The Unaffordable Care Act

  • "73,000 Maryland residents will need to find a new health plan next year, as insurers drop plans that don't meet new federal guidelines"

  • "80,000 Louisianians' health insurance policies will be canceled under Affordable Care Act"

  • "300,000 to Lose Health Coverage in Florida"

  • "500,000 Californians Lose Health Policies"

  • "...at least 129 million (68 percent) will not be able to keep their previous health care plan either because they already have lost or will lose that coverage by the end of 2014"

  • "Anyone who likes their health plan can keep it."

- Barack Obama

It appears that Obamacare has finally began to sicken the majority of Americans. My question is how did anyone believe this plan would actually lower health insurance rates to begin with? It is not possible for the government to require health insurance companies to provide additional coverage at a lesser cost. When you go to purchase a vehicle and you want to add splash guards, pin striping and a moon roof you know that the price of the car will not decrease! I'm not sure how the President could have ever thought this could work. The general summary of what is happening now to Americans all over the country is that due to the additional requirements Obamacare has put on health insurance companies rates have gone up to cover those expenses. A recent NBC News report stated,

"George S., 62, of North Carolina, said he was 'prefectly happy' with his plan from Blue Cross Blue Shield, which also insured his wife for a $228 monthly premium. But this past September, he was surprised to receive a letter saying his policy was no longer available. The 'comparable' plan the insurance company offered him carried a $1,208 monthly premium and a $5,500 deductible."

As if it couldn't get worse the website has never been fully functioning and is still filled with plenty of glitches. After months of planning and $634,320,919 later the website will not allow most users to complete the enrollment process. The few users that do get through end up regretting that they did. In South Carolina an attorney wanted to shop for cheaper insurance through healthcare.gov and later found out that all his personal information had gone to a random guy in North Carolina! The next question you have to ask is how many others have been affected by this glitch? A follow up question could be if this website is having this many problems than could this be a hacker's dream come true?

Between the flawed economics, the broken promises and the broken website there should be no question why we should never involve government in something as important as health care. We now should know that when it comes to the Affordable Care Act the information given to the American public from President Obama has been a lie.

"If you like your doctor you will be able to keep your doctor. Period."

"If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period."

"If you're one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. This law will only make itmore secure and more affordable."

Even if America went back to a pre-Obamacare system we would have better and more affordable insurance. However, a true resolution for a more affordable healthcare can not be achieved through government intervention but rather with less government intervention. If competition were allowed across state lines insurance premiums everywhere would go down drastically due to the increased competition among insurance companies. A new idea for lower health insurance doesn't have to be 20,000 pages long or have 11,588,500 words in it. A new plan for lower health insurance is just simply asking our government to eliminate laws that prevent competition. The fact that competition lowers prices is common sense which our current President seems to be lacking.


Top 10 Famous Libertarians

  1. Angelina Jolie - Wanted to star in the first "Atlas Shrugged" movie.
  2. Chuck Norris - "I would go to congress , I'd line up every member of congress, and I'd have Ron Paul, who I believe is the, probably the, one of the more honest ones there, and I'd say Ron, point out the honest ones." "Ron Paul is the only guy I trust"
  3. Drew Carey - "As far as your personal goals are and what you actually want to do with your life, it should never have to do with the government. You should never depend on the government for your retirement, your financial security, for anything. If you do, you're screwed."
  4. Clint Eastwood - "I like the Libertarian view, which is to leave everyone alone. You have to believe in total equality. People should be able to be what they want to be and do what they want as long as they're not harming people."
  5. Vince Vaughn - Vaughn endorsed Paul’s 2009 book, “End the Fed,” with the following blurb: “Everyone must read this book—Congressmen and college students, Democrats and Republicans—all Americans.”
  6. Billie Joe Armstrong (Lead Singer of 'Green Day') - Registered as a Libertarian in the state of California
  7. Peter Thiel (Founder/CEO of Paypal) - In 2012, Thiel, along with PayPal co-founder Luke Nosek and Scott Banister, an early adviser and board member, put their support behind the Endorse Liberty Super PAC, alongside Internet advertising veteran Stephen Oskoui and entrepreneur Jeffrey Harmon, who founded Endorse Liberty in November 2011. Collectively Thiel gave $3.9 million to Endorse Liberty, whose purpose was to promote Texas congressman Ron Paul for president in 2012. As of January 31, 2012 (2012-01-31), Endorse Liberty reported spending about $3.3 million promoting Paul by setting up two YouTube channels, buying ads from Google and Facebook and StumbleUpon, and building a presence on the Web.
  8. Willie Nelson - In 2012 Willie Nelson endorsed Libertarian Party Candidate, Gary Johnson.
  9. Joe Rogan (Host of 'Fear Factor') - "I support Ron Paul"
  10. Jonathan Davis (Lead Singer of 'Korn') - Wants Ron Paul to replace President Obama in the White House.


The Free Market Answer for Consumer Protection

The U.S. Federal Government spends billions of your tax dollars every year on consumer protection services. However, if you are interested in lowering your taxes and still receiving the exact same consumer protection services but more efficiently look no further than a free market solution called The Better Business Bureau.

First a quick overview of The Better Business Bureau (BBB). The BBB is a non-profit organization that operates with absolutely zero funding from the government and therefore zero effect on your taxes. BBB issues business reviews on all companies and has been operating for over 100 years now by collecting dues from businesses who qualify and agree to adhere to BBB's high standards for business ethics and marketplace trust. Therefore, consumers know that choosing a BBB Accredited Business is a safe bet due to the rigorous background check completed on each business beforehand. BBB issues ratings for all businesses which is calculated by an algorithm that takes into account several different factors such as complaint volume, time in business, background information and other factors. A common misconception is that company's rating can increase if a business is Accredited with BBB, however, BBB Accreditation is not factored into the algorithm that computes a company's rating in order to keep every business on a level playing field. There are over 100 regional BBB's throughout the United States & Canada. Each BBB is independently governed by their own boards of directors, but must meet international BBB requirements, which are monitored by the Council of Better Business Bureaus.

The best thing about BBB is the services the organization provides are absolutely free to consumers. The BBB has handled complaints regarding marketplace transactions & advertising issues before the FTC even came into existence, except BBB does not need to collect tax money from you in order to do it. According to the FTC's website, the mission of the FTC is "To prevent business practices that are anti competitive or deceptive or unfair to consumers; to enhance informed consumer choice and public understanding of the competitive process; and to accomplish this without unduly burdening legitimate business activity." The BBB has this exact same mission as well but does not require tax money from consumers. BBB regulates the market through their rating system. Each company has a rating that is calculated by using the algorithm I previously mentioned. If that rating drops then consumers that check up on a company via BBB.org before using them will see that and through due diligence will then decide whether or not to hire a company. In the end, if the rating for a company is bad consumers will not choose to do business with that company and the business will lose profit. The BBB also works very closely with the media so if there is a bad company out there not only will that company have an "F" rating but you will hear about them on the T.V. or radio as well.

The BBB can also help you with all of your financial complaints exactly like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The website for the CFPB states that complaints can be filed related to banks, credit cards, credit reporting, debt collection, money transfer, mortgages, student loans & vehicle or consumer loans. Ironically, BBB handles all of the complaint categories listed on the CFPB website. The BBB can even shut down fraudulent financial websites when the F.B.I. or FTC does not have time to do so.
The BBB can do the work of the FTC & and CFPB without increasing your taxes or adding to the Federal debt which has now currently passed $17 Trillion! Take a look at the chart below which illustrates how much it takes to run each of these government agencies and ask yourself where they are getting the money for this. The answer is you!

Agency/Organization Start Date 2014 Budget for Public Funding
Better Business Bureau (BBB) 1912 $0.00
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 1914 $301,000,000.00
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) 2011 $497,493,387.00

Before making a purchase, smart consumers advocate for themselves by checking background information on a company before choosing to do business with them. Consumers are able to visit www.bbb.org to check a business review online or simply call their local BBB office for detailed information on a company. BBB resolves around 80% of all complaints it receives. If a complaint goes unresolved the rating for the company will be affected and therefore serve as a warning to other potential consumers. Once a business becomes aware of a rating decrease they naturally will have a change of heart and resolve a complaint since businesses are incentivized by profit. However, for the remainder of complaints that go unresolved the consumer should then proceed to file their case in court for a resolution.

Although the government agencies above claim to be a free service to consumers it is ultimately the consumer that is paying for them via increased taxes. The BBB has successfully served the United States & Canada before any of these government agencies were even created and they have done this at no cost to the consumer. If you are in favor of the government agencies listed above then I urge you to call you congressman and ask for an increase in your taxes so that more money can be allocated to government run consumer protection agencies. However, if you have ever filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau then you probably already know that they get the job done must quicker than the government agencies do. The U.S. is currently nearing $17 Trillion in debt and they are wondering where to cut spending. Why not eliminate the government agencies listed above since the free market already has these services covered? Sounds like a Billion Dollars of tax payer money wasted to me.