The Soccer Mom Vote

The Liberty Dollar- A Cautionary Tale?

The Federal Government appears to have shut down Liberty Dollar in Evansville, IN.  The company was dealing in "alternative currency" which is backed by silver.  Apparently the Federal Government doesn't appreciate it when you make your own currency.  Who knew?

In interviews, the owner of Liberty Dollar, Bernard Von Nothaus, states that he expects to be arrested.  He also claims that he is being persecuted because he brought a suit against the U.S. Mint to stop claiming that trying to spend or circulate the liberty dollar is a crime.  You can read more and watch news coverage here.

The FBI is not confirming that they, in fact, raided the shop and the Sunshine Mint in Idaho(where the coins are actually produced) last Thursday. They wouldn't be very good at their jobs if they copped to everything, would they?

Von Nothaus, despite his unfortunate last name, makes some excellent arguments about the U.S. dollar.  He also seems unflinching in the face of this turn of events.  The Washington Post had this quote from Von Nothaus,

Should he be charged, he said, "I'll turn it into my golden opportunity to validate the Liberty Dollar as a legal, lawful currency and save the country from a monetary collapse."

There are big questions here. 

Does the Federal Government have a right to keep people from bartering with one another using an alternative currency?  I see the public interest in not having counterfeit currency being used as genuine U.S. dollars.  However, since U.S. dollars are no longer backed by....well, anything, and these Liberty Dollars are backed by silver which is the counterfeit?

I see the public interest in having a normalized version of currency, but when one form takes a nose dive, is it in our personal interest to start looking at ways to protect the value of our own money?

Soccer Moms have so much to think about (ladies for the love of God I hope you've taken your turkey out of the freezer already) but this is an intriguing exercise in what we really think about he Federal Government and it's tactics.  As citizens, what are our rights?  As Moms what is in our best interest and the interest of our children's future. 

I'd love to know what you all think.

Universal Health Care...No Thank You

A few days ago Soccer Mom Bobbi Jo wrote a passionate article suggesting the US should embrace universal health care. If you haven't already, I encourage you to read her article and the comments associated with it. Then come back here and read my article. I think by having both articles here at Soccer Moms we will spark some interesting debate and discussion. Please keep it civil (but then, you always do!).

It wasn't that long ago that people were actually responsible for paying for their own health care. No one expected a government entity to swoop in and save them from themselves. In fact, many of our parents and grandparents probably paid for a doctor visit out of their own pockets. Thomas Sowell writes

This was all before politicians gave us the idea that the things we could not afford individually we could somehow afford collectively through the magic of government. (Read the rest of his article discussing his thoughts on universal health care.)

For me, that really is the heart of the matter. Over the last forty years we've somehow come to the conclusion that we are owed something simply because we live in the United States of America. Every election we are ready and willing to hand over more of our responsibility to the government so we don't have to think about taking care of ourselves.

I would rather see us paying for our medical bills out of pocket and not relying on government for any of our health care issues. Then again, I'm a Libertarian and I'd love to see the government butt out of just about everything. I'm a fan of medical savings plans. These plans allow you to put aside money for your health care issues (including doctor visits, medicine, etc.). John Stossel explains why these savings plans work and actually save us money.

Here's another article by John Stossel outlining why universal health care and its lack of competition just can't work. In fact, he discusses Canada specifically.

As for the debate on S-CHIP? Please read this article from Reason Magazine that explains what that program was really doing and how we could fix it. You'll want to read through to the end; that's where it gets good. It's particularly relevant to Bobbi Jo's assertion that our capitalist mentality should be ditched in favor socialism. is not working (sorry to Bobbi Jo--I misunderstood her assertion!).

Speaking of S-CHIP--you know I have to bring this up--apparently those of us who don't want universal health care are heartless people who don't care about the children. Mark Steyn says it better than I ever could. Please read his article explaining why the real "war on children" is not changing our system for the better now (i.e., jumping off the government gravy train and taking responsibility for ourselves) and leaving it for them to pay for later.

Introduction: Soccer Mom Melanie

I'm Soccer Mom Melanie. I'm the new mom on the field and, I must say, it's a little intimidating to be writing here in such good company! As I was writing my official first post it sort of spiraled out of control and I quickly realized I'm more passionate about politics than I realized. It's going to take me a day or two to sort out the mess I wrote so I'm going to take a different tack to introduce myself.

These are links to articles that illustrate my political point of view. I hope you enjoy them as much as I do. I'll be back next month with an actual article.

• Thomas Sowell's Random Thoughts are provoking.
• The NEA is a union that's toeing the party line--whether it's related to education or not.
• An unbelievable story about a Dr. being sacked because he was concerned about health care in our country.
• Jonah Goldberg on hypocrisy.
• It Takes a Socialist Village by Cal Thomas

I'll be writing about the issues raised in these articles over the next few weeks and months because they are something I feel strongly about. I'm interested in a friendly debate; I always like to try to see things from both sides.

The Third-Party Vote

Some of the most heated political debates I have been witness to or involved in have had to do with third-party candidates. In particular, this argument was prevalent immediately after the U.S. Presidential Election of 2000. Go figure.

In case you were under a rock in November of 2000, I’ll recap. In the 2000  U.S. Presidential election, Al Gore beat George Bush in the popular vote by almost 550,000 votes.  But he lost the election to George Bush by a mere five electoral votes. It was a close race and controversial, to say the least.

Ralph Nader, a candidate for the Green Party, got almost three million votes. That’s more than five times the number of votes that made the difference between Bush and Gore. Wow.

Many democrats were openly furious with people that they considered to be fellow democrats at heart, who they felt had “given up their vote” to make a statement.

Am I saying you should never vote for a third-party candidate? No. Make no mistake. I am absolutely not saying that. I believe you should vote for the candidate you believe in. I really believe that. I’m an optimist. I believe our votes can make a difference.

Am I saying you should always vote for a third-party candidate? No. Absolutely not. In fact, in the interest of full disclosure, I should say that in spite of the fact that I am a fan of both Ralph Nader and Kinky Friedman, I voted for Al Gore in the 2000 U.S. Presidential election and for Chris Bell in the 2006 Texas Gubernatorial election.

What am I saying, then? Well, I have heard other people say that you should never waste your time voting for third-party candidates, and I think I’m saying, after recent elections, I can see their point. Might you be throwing an extremely valuable vote down the toilet? Well, yes. Considering recent elections, you might be doing just that.

At heart, I’m a believer in going with your instinct. The optimist in me says to vote for the candidate who you truly believe would be the best leader, the man or woman who most closely epitomizes your own ideals, your belief system.

Incidentally, did you know Abraham Lincoln was a third-party candidate? I believe Mr. Lincoln is the only third-party candidate who actually won the presidency.  So a third-party candidate can make a difference, I daresay a pretty big difference, if people actually have the nerve to go for it and vote for him (or her). Hmmm.

What do you think? To make it easier for you in 2008, here is a list of the third-party candidates thus far.

When we vote for a third-party candidate, even when we know they won’t win, are we making a valid statement that will make a difference?  Or are we throwing away our vote? In any case, is voting the right time to make a statement?

We’d love to hear what you think…

Can America's Mayor become President?

I make no secret of my love for New York, nor of my admiration for Rudy Giuliani.  After he had to abandon his Senate campaign due to prostate cancer, I’m thrilled to see that he has continued to pursue his political ambitions and announced his presidential candidacy.

Although I didn’t move to New York until 2000, I began visiting as frequently as possible starting in 1995.  Over those five years, I observed from a tourist’s perspective how the city was changing.  Granted, I saw only a small fraction of the process in a very limited geographic area, but the changes were unmistakable.

His record in New York is irrefutable.  While his tactics have often come under fire – such as how he addressed homelessness – and he has been criticized for his unfaltering support of the NYPD even in the face of such tragedies as the assault on Abner Louima and the killing of Amadou Diallo, it remains clear that his leadership was at the heart of New York’s revitalization in the 1990s.  Both his record as mayor and his post-9/11 leadership have led to his unprecedented favorability across the country, despite the issues on which he differs from mainstream conservative views.

But can he become President?  Can he even win the Republican nomination?

While many of Giuliani’s social views (such as his pro-choice stance and his support of same-sex civil unions) mirror my own, many Republicans - by virtue of their religious beliefs – do not agree and could not support Giuliani as a candidate.  In spite of his favorability, as well as his openness regarding his views and his somewhat checkered past, I wonder how much damage the Religious Right could do to his campaign.

Unlike past candidates like Ross Perot and Steve Forbes, I think Giuliani’s previous political experience gives him sufficient credibility among voters and adequate preparation for effectively navigating the bureaucracy of our federal government.  New York didn’t change overnight; neither will our country.  And as many checks and balances exist in the government of our country’s largest city, even more are present in the workings of our federal government.

I’m pleased that the Republican candidates who have emerged thus far – John McCain, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani – are moderate in their views and have demonstrated an ability to work well with both sides of the aisle.  Of the three, I think Giuliani is the long-shot candidate.  And whether he captures the nomination and ultimately wins the presidency or not, I’m confident that he will continue as a strong voice in American politics.