Thread: Ron Paul on the Issues

Originally Posted by stevetheroofer

Why did NumbersUSA give Paul an 'F' on illegal immigration? At this point that's all I give a rats ass about! All the rest that crap can be fixed as we go!

give me a few minutes and I'll explain why NumbersUSA blew it badly on that call...... this is going to take me about an hour to type it all out

NumbersUSA gave Paul an F ... the same as Obama from comments paul made in one of his books... saying we cannot round them all up, but never advocated Amnesty... what he said was a card with an asterick that was a work card but did not give them citizenship nor would it allow them to vote or recieve any money from the federal government

Obama is begging for Amnesty as well as every social progam available to Illegal Immigrants / Paul does not; nor does he want Amesty as he has said many times

Paul was rated the Lowest Rating an yet he never ever said anything about Amnesty

Read below from Pauls website .. stop giving benifits to Illegal Aliens and a majority they will go home on their own

Paul is rated lower than Newt and yet Newt is calling for Amnesty (They talk the good talk but dont walk the walk)

Paul is rated lower than Romney and yet Romney gave health care to Illegal Aliens (They talk the good talk but dont walk the walk)

Paul is rated lower than Perry and yet Perry gave In State Tuition to Illegal Aliens (They talk the good talk but dont walk the walk)

NumbersUSA says on its web page that the grades adjust as a politician adjusts their position ... Pauls web page info is listed below on Illegal Immigration which is far harder than 3/4 of the Republicans running for POTUS and yet he is rated lower than all and tied with Obama

the only grade with on NumbersUSA I agree with is Bachmann and "I LOVE HER TO PIECES"

Here is Ron Pauls Position on Illegal Immigration / Protection our borders

Immigration http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/immigration/

A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY

A nation without borders is no nation at all.

It just doesn’t make sense to fight terrorists abroad while leaving our front door unlocked.

Unfortunately, for far too long, neither major political party has had the courage to do what is necessary to tackle the problem.

Instead, we’re presented with so-called “solutions” that involve amnesty proposals or further restricting Americans’ civil liberties through programs like REAL ID.

Ron Paul opposes both of these schemes and believes they will only make illegal immigration and the problems associated with it worse. He has been proud to see states exercising their Tenth Amendment rights and protecting their citizens by refusing to comply with the unconstitutional REAL ID law.

While the federal government neglects its constitutional responsibility to protect our borders, it continues to push mandates on the states to provide free education and medical care to illegal immigrants at a time when the states are drowning in debt. This must not be tolerated any longer.

Like most Americans, Ron Paul also understands just how valuable legal immigration is to our country.

Immigrants who want to work hard, obey our laws, and live the American Dream have always been great assets.

COMMON SENSE REFORMS

If elected President, Ron Paul will work to implement the following common sense reforms:

* Enforce Border Security – America should be guarding her own borders and enforcing her own laws instead of policing the world and implementing UN mandates.

* No Amnesty - The Obama Administration’s endorsement of so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, will only encourage more law-breaking.

* Abolish the Welfare State – Taxpayers cannot continue to pay the high costs to sustain this powerful incentive for illegal immigration. As Milton Friedman famously said, you can’t have open borders and a welfare state.

* End Birthright Citizenship – As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be granted U.S. citizenship, we’ll never be able to control our immigration problem.

* Protect Lawful Immigrants – As President, Ron Paul will encourage legal immigration by streamlining the entry process without rewarding lawbreakers.

As long as our borders remain wide open, the security and safety of the American people are at stake.

As President, Ron Paul will address immigration by fighting for effective solutions that protect our nation, uphold the rule of law, and respect every American citizen’s civil liberties.

National Defense http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/national-defense/

PROVEN LEADERSHIP

“Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.” – Ronald Reagan

A PRO-AMERICA FOREIGN POLICY

As an Air Force veteran, Ron Paul believes national defense is the single most important responsibility the Constitution entrusts to the federal government.

In Congress, Ron Paul voted to authorize military force to hunt down Osama bin Laden and authored legislation to specifically target terrorist leaders and bring them to justice.

Today, however, hundreds of thousands of our fighting men and women have been stretched thin all across the globe in over 135 countries – often without a clear mission, any sense of what defines victory, or the knowledge of when they’ll be permanently reunited with their families.

Acting as the world’s policeman and nation-building weakens our country, puts our troops in harm’s way, and sends precious resources to other nations in the midst of an historic economic crisis.

Taxpayers are forced to spend billions of dollars each year to protect the borders of other countries, while Washington refuses to deal with our own border security needs.

Congress has been rendered virtually irrelevant in foreign policy decisions and regularly cedes authority to an executive branch that refuses to be held accountable for its actions.

Far from defeating the enemy, our current policies provide incentive for more to take up arms against us.

That’s why, as Commander-in-Chief, Dr. Paul will lead the fight to:

* Make securing our borders the top national security priority.

* Avoid long and expensive land wars that bankrupt our country by using constitutional means to capture or kill terrorist leaders who helped attack the U.S. and continue to plot further attacks.

* Guarantee our intelligence community’s efforts are directed toward legitimate threats and not spying on innocent Americans through unconstitutional power grabs like the Patriot Act.

* End the nation-building that is draining troop morale, increasing our debt, and sacrificing lives with no end in sight.

* Follow the Constitution by asking Congress to declare war before one is waged.

* Only send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.

* Ensure our veterans receive the care, benefits, and honors they have earned when they return.

* Revitalize the military for the 21^st century by eliminating waste in a trillion-dollar military budget.

* Prevent the TSA from forcing Americans to either be groped or ogled just to travel on an airplane and ultimately abolish the unconstitutional agency.

* Stop taking money from the middle class and the poor to give to rich dictators through foreign aid.

As President, Ron Paul’s national defense policy will ensure that the greatest nation in human history is strong, secure, and respected.

RON PAUL IS THE ONLY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WHO GETS IT

By Chuck Baldwin
December 29, 2011
NewsWithViews.com

The recent passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the reaction--or better, lack of reaction--by the GOP's Presidential candidates is a perfect example of how it will not matter to a Tinker's Dam which Republican candidate wins the nomination, unless that candidate is Congressman Ron Paul. This is what so many people within the so-called Religious Right and establishment GOP just do not understand: they do not understand the fact that America is in the throes of a burgeoning police state. They have buried their heads in the sand for so long that they wouldn't know what tyranny looked like if it came up and bit them on their blessed assurance! They have totally drunk the propaganda Kool Aid that purports that the biggest threat to our liberties comes from the Sand People. Our Founding Fathers were a much wiser lot, of course. They understood perfectly that the biggest threat to our liberties comes from Washington, D.C., not Baghdad, or Tehran, or any other foreign entity.

Listen to Daniel Webster: "There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence. I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men and become the instruments of their own undoing."

Yet, except for Ron Paul, not a single Republican Presidential candidate has issued the slightest warning regarding the draconian components of the NDAA that literally turns America's homeland into a war zone and, with the stroke of a pen, effectively eviscerates the Bill of Rights. Why is that? Because, except for Ron Paul, none of them get it. Bachman, Gingrich, Perry, Romney, Santorum. None of them!

The day after Christmas, TheHill.com posted this report quoting Dr. Paul. "GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul warned that the National Defense Authorization Act, which was passed by Congress this month, will accelerate the country's 'slip into tyranny' and virtually assures 'our descent into totalitarianism.'

"'The founders wanted to set a high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty,' Paul, the libertarian congressman from Texas, said Monday in a weekly phone message to supporters. 'To lower that bar is to endanger everyone. When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured. The Patriot Act, as bad as its violations against the Fourth Amendment was, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act continues that slip into tyranny, and in fact, accelerates it significantly.'"

The Hill report continued quoting Dr. Paul, "'The Fifth Amendment is about much more than the right to remain silent in the face of government questioning,' Paul continued. 'It contains very basic and very critical stipulations about the due process of law. The government cannot imprison a person for no reason and with no evidence presented and without access to legal council. The danger of the NDAA is its alarmingly vague, undefined criteria for who can be indefinitely detained by the U.S. government without trial.'"

The report also quoted Congressman Paul as saying, "'The president's widely expanded view of his own authority to detain Americans indefinitely even on American soil is for the first time in this legislation codified in law,' Paul said. 'That should chill all of us to our cores.'

"'The Bill of Rights has no exceptions for really bad people or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. That is not a weakness in our legal system, it is the very strength of our legal system. The NDAA attempts to justify abridging the Bill of Rights on the theory that rights are suspended in a time of war, and the entire United States is a battlefield in the war on terror. This is a very dangerous development, indeed. Beware.'"

See TheHill report here.

Then again, not only are these pathetic Presidential pretenders not aware of this fast erosion of our liberties being orchestrated by these miserable miscreants inside the Beltway, how many of you folks who go to church every Sunday hear your pastor say a peep about the totalitarian elements contained within the NDAA? Yep! That's what I thought! They don't get it, either!
For that matter, where is the first State Governor, Lieutenant Governor, or Attorney General to say, "Not in my State!"? Where are the county sheriffs to say, "Not in my county!"? (I can promise you this, if Bob Fanning and Chuck Baldwin are elected Montana Governor and Lieutenant Governor in 2012, we will say it! And we will say it loudly enough that everyone in Washington D.C., will be able to hear it!)

And speaking of Montana, it is extremely encouraging to learn that my friend and Oathkeepers founder, attorney Stewart Rhodes, is leading a recall petition against the two US senators from Montana who both supported NDAA. Salem-News.com has the story: "Moving quickly on Christmas Day after the US Senate voted 86-14 to pass the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 (NDAA) which allows for the indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial, Montanans have announced the launch of recall campaigns against Senators Max Baucus and Jonathan Tester, who voted for the bill.

"Montana is one of nine states with provisions that say that the right of recall extends to recalling members of its federal congressional delegation, pursuant to Montana Code 2-16-603, on the grounds of physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of certain felony offenses."

The Salem-News report continued saying, "Montana law requires grounds for recall to be stated which show conformity to the allowed grounds for recall. The draft language of the Montana petitions, 'reason for recall' reads:
"The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees all U.S. citizens:

"'a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed...'

Continued Below

"[NDAA] permanently abolishes the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, 'for the duration of hostilities' in the War on Terror, which was defined by President George W. Bush as 'task which does not end' to a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2011.

"Those who voted Aye on December 15, 2011, Bill of Rights Day, for NDAA 2011 have attempted to grant powers which cannot be granted, which violate both the spirit and the letter of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

"The Montana Recall Act stipulates that officials including US senators can only be recalled for physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of the oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of a felony offense. We the undersigned call for a recall election to be held for Senator Max S. Baucus [and Senator Jonathan Tester] and charge that he has violated his oath of office, to protect and defend the United States Constitution."

The report goes on to quote Rhodes (a Yale Law School graduate) as saying, "These politicians from both parties betrayed our trust, and violated the oath they took to defend the Constitution. It's not about the left or the right, it's about our Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, there is no America. It is the Crown Jewel of our Constitution, and the high-water mark of Western Civilization." Amen, Stewart! Amen!

See the Salem-News report here.

NDAA should be to Americans in 2011 what the Boston Massacre was to the colonists in 1770, because this Act literally massacres the Bill of Rights. (And risking the charge that I'm tooting my own horn, when Montanans elect Bob Fanning Governor and Chuck Baldwin Lieutenant Governor in 2012, it will be the second "shot heard 'round the world.") And of all the Presidential hopefuls, Ron Paul is only one who gets it!

P.S. This is the final call for THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS. To order this giant compilation of America's great historical documents, click here.

P.S.S. To see the Fanning-Baldwin campaign web site, or to donate to our campaign, click here.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

© 2011 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He and his wife, Connie, have 3 children and 8 grandchildren. Chuck and his family reside in the Flathead Valley of Montana. See Chuck's complete bio here.

E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin681.htm

Originally Posted by AirborneSapper7

give me a few minutes and I'll explain why NumbersUSA blew it badly on that call...... this is going to take me about an hour to type it all out

getting back to this

1. I still support NumbersUSA but will not do so financially until they stop being biased

there are only 2 candidates that I will vote for in this race Bachmann or Paul

- Bachmann was graded fairly (LETS GO MICHELLE)
- Gingrich was graded with a bell curve and NumbersUSA was FAR to Generous with his grade ((Good Ole Boy Network / Amnesty guarenteed)
- Perry was graded with a bell curve and NumbersUSA was FAR to Generous with his grade (Bush on Steroids)
- Romney was graded with a bell curve and NumbersUSA was FAR to Generous with his grade (European Socialist policys / Obama Lite ) the New Boss would be the same as the Old Boss
- Santorum ..... I wouldnt vote for another Bush wannabe Megalomanic (Bomb the World NUT) if my life depended on it
Paul - Got Slammed ... WHODATHUNKIT ....

2. NumbersUSA is not calling a fair game and they are / have lost allot of support because of it

Running Strong, Paul Back on Iowa Campaign Trail

Wednesday, 28 Dec 2011 04:43 PM

NEWTON, Iowa (AP) — Republican presidential contender Ron Paul is back in Iowa, running strongly in the polls and questioning why U.S. troops are in Korea and other parts of the world.

In an appearance Wednesday in Newton, Paul strongly suggested U.S. forces be withdrawn from South Korea, Japan and Germany, and made the audience laugh when he questioned President Barack Obama's decision to send Marines to Australia.

The 76-year-old Paul said American troops have been in Korea since he was in high school. He omitted any mention of the death of North Korea's leader Kim Jong Il and the uncertainty it's causing in Asia.

Obama's recent announcement that some Marines will be stationed in Australia was seen as a signal to China that the U.S. intends to maintain a presence in the Pacific.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/RonPaul/2011/12/28/id/422403

Paul Maintains Lead in First Post-Christmas Iowa Poll

Wednesday, 28 Dec 2011 04:49 PM
By Dan Weil

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has maintained his lead leading up to the Iowa caucuses, according to the first major poll since Christmas.

Public Policy Polling’s survey of likely Republican caucus voters, conducted Dec. 26-27, shows 24 percent support the Texas congressman, compared with 20 percent for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and 13 percent for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. To be sure, Paul’s lead over Romney was within the poll’s 4.1 percentage point margin of error.

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann was in fourth place at 11 percent, followed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who were tied at 10 percent. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman scored 4 percent.

Romney leads Paul among voters who are actually Republicans – 22 percent to 20 percent. But Democrats and Independents can vote in Iowa’s Republican caucuses, too. Among the 24 percent of voters who said they are Independents or Democrats, Paul tops Romney 39 percent to 12 percent.

Romney does better with seniors, beating Paul 34 percent to 12 percent. But Paul does better with voters under age 45 -- 35 percent to 11 percent.

“If Ron Paul really manages to change the electorate by turning out large numbers of young people and Independents, he should win Iowa,” Dean Debnam, president of Public Policy Polling, said in a statement.

“If it’s a more traditional turnout with an older electorate, Romney will probably win. And given his personal popularity, it’s worth keeping an eye on Santorum in the final week.”

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Public-Policy-Polling-Iowa/2011/12/28/id/422406

2012: The Year Of Living Dangerously

December 28, 2011 by John Myers


We could be in for an economic shock the likes of which the Nation has not seen since the Great Depression.

Despite talk about the end of time, I fully expect the world will survive 2012; but it will be a bumpy ride this year. Expect the U.S. economy and the Nation’s standing in the world to further weaken. Expect more protests, both at home and abroad. And expect us to have to endure another four years with Barack Obama as President.

The United States faces myriad problems that will exacerbate an already sick economy giving birth to a second financial crisis in four years. Meanwhile, the Federal government and the Federal Reserve do not have the wherewithal to prevent a major economic meltdown.

We could be in for an economic shock the likes of which the Nation has not seen since the Great Depression. Only this time, the social upheaval and overall violence resulting from an economic crisis will be far worse than anything our grandparents experienced in the Dirty Thirties.

This is my third annual forecast column for Personal Liberty Digest™. Let’s review how well I did for 2010 and 2011.

In my Jan. 6, 2010 column, I wrote: “Gold continues to shine, although expected profit taking will happen along the way. Washington and other governments would love to keep a cap on the price of bullion, but right now they have much bigger fish to fry. My expectation is that the Midas metal will top $1,500 per ounce before year’s end and silver will rise from the $17 range to $25 per ounce.”

On the day my column came out, bullion was trading at $1,130. On Dec. 30, 2010, bullion closed within a few dollars of its high point for the year at $1,405 per ounce.

Also on the day my forecast column for 2010 was published, spot silver was $17.89 per ounce. On the last trading day of 2010, silver was trading at its high for the year: $30.63 per ounce.

On Jan. 5, I wrote my forecast column for this year. I predicted prices for gold would rise higher in 2011, despite coming off all-time highs.

A year ago, I wrote: “My expectation is that we have yet to see the spectacular blow-off for either gold or silver… with gold moving close to $2,000 per ounce and silver hitting $50 per ounce. Therefore there is more leverage in silver than in gold, but both are worth buying and holding.”

The day my prediction came out, gold was at $1,388 per ounce. In September 2011, gold hit $1,895 per ounce. Meanwhile, silver, which was trading at $29.21 when I wrote my forecast column, hit $48.70 in April.

Check my archives and you will see that I was also correct about my prediction for higher oil prices. I was wrong about both the U.S. stock and bond markets. I anticipated a severe correction that did not occur. I believe a severe correction is inevitable and would not be surprised to see the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which is now trading just under 12,000, to be below 8,500 within 12 months.

I expect both gold and silver will decline over the short-term before this correction has run its course. As a result, I would not buy either yet. Given the substantial commission on physical precious metals, I wouldn’t be selling them either.

I expect we will get further quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve going into the election. Look for gold to reach $2,500 per ounce and silver to hit $75 per ounce.

Silver is a more practical investment for ordinary investors than gold. Silver has more leverage than gold.

I think we will see inflation in 2012. Obama’s mission is to get re-elected. I don’t believe he cares what the final cost to America will be to see his ambition achieved.

The U.S. money supply has been growing at an annual rate of nearly 10 percent per year since the Crash of 2008. By 2013, I expect the money supply to be growing in excess of 15 percent per year.

Obama’s Ambitions And The Prospects Of War

I don’t make forecasts on the basis of what I want to happen but rather on how I think things will happen.

My hope is that Ron Paul wins the Republican nomination and the Presidency, but I don’t think he has a realistic chance. He is offering America some bitter medicine to cure our economic ills.

The other GOP contenders, especially Newt Gingrich, have serious character flaws. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney must overcome being a Mormon as well as his knack for changing his mind.

Recently, Romney gratefully accepted the endorsement of Republican elder and onetime Presidential nominee, former Senator Bob Dole.

However, in 2008, Romney didn’t think very much of Bob Dole’s endorsement– at least, not when it went to his competition, Senator John McCain. When Dole sent a letter of support to talk show host Rush Limbaugh, Romney said: “Well, it’s probably the last person I would have wanted to have write a letter for me.”

A weak field in the GOP ranks, along with the powers inherent for a sitting President, lead me to conclude that Obama will be re-elected in 2012. That will mean greater spending by the Federal government, more gridlock in Congress, and continued quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve.

To win re-election, Obama may even launch another war — this time against Iran or possibly North Korea and its leader, 20-something Kim Jong Un. Not much is known about Kim Jong Un. North Korean state media call him a “great successor.” Before dying, Kim Jong Il made his son a four-star general.

If President George W. Bush could sell a war against Iraq on threadbare evidence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, how hard will it be for Obama to rummage up a war against Iran or North Korea?
North Korea’s nuclear arsenal is estimated to consist of perhaps six operational nuclear warheads, and Iran may be on the verge of nuclear armament.

The re-election of Obama, bought with greater debt and a new war in the Mideast, will have devastating consequences over the long term. The inevitable result will be growing protests and more lawlessness across the United States and around the world.
Action to Take: Dedicate yourself to accumulating basic provisions and protection for you and your family. I wish I could suggest more carefree New Year resolutions.

I would be happy to write next year to point out how wrong I was and say that a true conservative will soon be sitting in the Oval Office and that America is starting to get back on her feet. But as the English Proverb suggests: “Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.”

Yours in good times and in bad,
–John Myers

http://www.personalliberty.com/conse...gerously/?eiid=

I'm a skeptic.. Till we get the houses cleaned also BUT..Bachman and Paul I feel are the only ones that address my concerns at this point.
#1. Birth right citizenship. And thats been a big one since we were eating buggers. OK, did not either..I never. BUT.! Why do you PRESS 2 for English? Demographics, welfare, crime, education costs? The list goes on. Our American values?, principles, RESPONSIBILITIES? and #1.5 RESPECT OF OUR LAWS....All out the door with "birth right citizenship". How about wet foot dry foot...Out dated and..bye-bye. No longer apply as ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION LOOP HOLES!

These being addressed I give them an A+..If I'm wrong tell me...


#2 Attrition through Enforcement. Both say no new laws are needed..Enforce laws on the books.. Between the lines that means Deportation..Right? OK...then....

A+ on Attrition through Enforcement..Correct me if I'm wrong!


#3 Work permits-ID with asterisks? Whatever..We already have them, lots of them. But it sounds so scary?

I can fight that battle to curtail work visas at a future date. Once every damn illegal alien is gone? Much easier to address...

Border Security is a No Brainer A third grader could do it as long as foreign interests like DRUG CARTELS, and other big money corrupt contributers were told to go to Hell sooo.....

I give them an skeptical B+...No ones perfect!

Thats my opine so far on Paul and well Bachman gets an A+ for "pretty" too..Paul..not so much.

Illegal immigration I say.....Except for the looks part!

USA in decline while the war machine rages on