Big Government: Run On Embezzlers' Accounting Tricks
From an email from Geoffrey J. Neale, Chair, Libertarian National Committee:

Tax increases and government spending reductions are polar opposites when it comes to their impact.

Tax hikes hurt you. They diminish your family's wealth and hurt the economy.

Government spending cuts are good for your family. They transfer money out of the reckless, irresponsible, wasteful government sector that consumes wealth and into the productive, private sector that creates wealth.

By blending tax hikes with (alleged) government spending cuts, they try to convince you that they're all part of one scary package. That both things are bad.

To add injury to insult, their phony "fiscal cliff" doesn't include a dime of actual government spending cuts. Just pretend reductions in future spending.

Big Government politicians are using embezzlers' accounting tricks to avoid removing waste and truly discretionary spending from today's federal budget. They refuse to balance the budget now -- the way you have to every month with your family budget.

They threaten us with insanely inflated tax increases -- while demanding praise for any taxes that they don't raise.

It's as if a thief breaks into your house and threatens to take your new flat-screen TV, your car, all your precious jewelry, and your kids' favorite electronic games -- and then takes just the car and a few rings. He makes you feel relieved that you still have your TV, the kids' games, and the rest of your jewelry.

On New Year's Day, what did Big Government politicians actually vote for?

They voted to rip you off an average of $800 a year MORE -- a 2 percent increase in your Social Security payroll tax. While they bragged that they were doing you a favor.

They raised a pile of other taxes as well, including taxes on estates, higher incomes, investment income, health care, and businesses.

These Democratic and Republican tax hikes will allow them to rake in a total of $514 billion in new revenue and will destroy millions of private sector jobs. While we have 8 percent unemployment.

While raising taxes, they refused to cut a dime from this year's government spending. They didn't even allow their phony future spending cuts to stand.

But they did slip into the deal loads of new federal spending, adding even more to this year's $1.3 TRILLION deficit.

More government debt = higher taxes for you. Government debt devalues the dollars you earn and save. This hidden tax will gouge you just as surely as a direct tax would. Instead of taking it out of your paycheck, it will cost you in the form of higher prices you will pay for groceries, utilities and virtually everything you buy.

This is what you get when you vote for either Democrats or Republicans. Higher taxes. Higher government spending. More government debt. Higher prices. More unemployment.

It doesn't matter which of the two you vote for. For all the posturing and gamesmanship, both Democrats and Republicans are peas of a pod. Birds of a feather. They are both addicted to Big Government.

Libertarians have the solution, and it's simple. To immediately revive the American economy, we must dramatically cut total government spending now.

Every dollar transferred out of government coffers and back into the private sector creates business investment and jobs.

Libertarian candidates who ran for federal office in 2012 called for big spending cuts and balancing the budget now, including Gov. Gary Johnson for president. He proposed to immediately slash spending by at least $1.3 trillion in 2013 to balance the budget his first year in office.

American voters: Help us help you. Join the Libertarian Party today. Help us run bold Libertarian candidates who will eliminate wasteful and bloated Big Government programs now, dramatically reduce government spending now, stabilize the dollar, and cut your taxes.

As I wrote back:

The Libertarian Party also needs to do its part, and find more electable candidates for president -- as in, libertarians with the charisma of a Sarah Palin or an Obama.

No, being right on substance just is not enough.