http://i2.tagstat.com/image07/9/9861/000Z053mpxx.jpg
Printable View
http://ronpaul-2012.org/images/SC_email.jpg
$1,459,961.29 VICTORY LIES AHEAD
http://ronpaul-2012.org/mbpledge_sc.html?pid=0110
Ron Paul Tied with Obama and in Two-Man Race with RomneyPoll highlights include Paul having notably strong support across many key voter segmentsLAKE JACKSON, Texas – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul again polls strong against incumbent President Barack Obama in a general election matchup, according to today’s CNN/ORC Poll.
Highlights include Paul besting Obama 49 to 45 percent among persons 65 and older, a voter segment considered to be the most reliable for turnout. Paul also beats Obama among persons 50 to 64 by a 47 to 45 percent margin. Taken together, according to the poll, voters over 50 deliver Paul a clean 48 to 45 percent win over Obama.
When factoring geography and racial background, Paul also carries substantial numbers.
Versus Obama, Paul defeats him 51 to 45 percent in the Midwest, 49 to 45 percent in the South, 61 to 35 percent in rural areas, and ties him at 47 percent in suburban areas. Paul also bests all other Republican candidates among nonwhite voters when matched against Obama, again carrying a solid quarter of those votes, and defeating Obama among white voters 54 to 41 percent, and men 49 to 44 percent.
Among many segments, the numbers of other Republican hopefuls is paltry to Paul’s performance.
CNN’s Political Unit states, “…according to the poll, the president is doing better against two other presidential candidates. If Rick Santorum were the GOP nominee, Obama would hold a 51%-45% advantage over the former senator from Pennsylvania. And if Newt Gingrich faced off against the president, Obama would lead the former House speaker 52-43%.”
The hits keep coming.
Among men, Paul garners more support in the general by a larger margin over Obama than any other candidate. He undercuts Obama’s support among youth the most, winning 40 percent of the 18-34 vote, with Paul’s nearest competitor Romney coming no closer than 35 percent. Paul also garners more from those under 50 than any other Republican. Paul is also at the top – tying Romney – among persons ages 35 to 49.
Perhaps most important in the race for the White House, Paul seizes more support from independents than any other Republican, matching or defeating Obama 46 to 48 percent vis a vis the +/- 5 percent error margin.
Also notable in the survey is that 53 percent of the sample believe that Romney does not “generally agree” with them on issues they care about, and 56 percent feel that Romney is not in touch with the problems ordinary Americans face in their daily lives.
“This poll, as with all the other general election matchup polls, debunks the misconceptions about Ron Paul’s electability. His competitiveness against Obama is far beyond all but one competitor, Mitt Romney, again proving it is appropriate for all other candidates to drop out and unite behind Dr. Paul as the only viable conservative alternative to establishment Romney,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton.
“This is a clear two-man race and only two can beat Obama. It also begs the question, ‘Which candidate will Republicans choose, status quo Romney or the candidate of authentic change, Ron Paul?’” asked Mr. Benton.
ORC International surveyed 1,021 adult Americans from January 11th to the 12th. The error margin for this total sample is +/- 3.0 percentage points. The sample includes 928 registered voters, with the margin of error for this group also +/- 3.0 percentage points. Error margins for micro-targeting can range much higher.
For CNN coverage of the poll, please click here. For the full poll results including crosstabs and methodology, please click here.
Ron Paul Tied with Obama and in Two-Man Race with Romney*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/...icalticker.jpg
Ron Paul Explains the Difference Between Pentagon Waste and Defense Spending- Again
Ron Paul just told the FOX moderator that building an embassy in Baghdad larger than the Vatican does not necessarily qualify as defense spending.
The audience cheered. Why don’t more people ask such questions about the rampant government waste so often categorized as “defense?” Why is Ron Paul the only candidate who asks these question?
Correlatively, why is Ron Paul the only candidate offering $1 trillion in spending cuts?
You do the math. Ron Paul already did.
Ron Paul Explains the Difference Between Pentagon Waste and Defense Spending- Again*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
Ron Paul Nevada Team Salutes Newest ‘Veterans for Ron Paul’Heroes from Clark and Washoe Counties support fellow veteran Paul
HENDERSON, Nevada – The Ron Paul 2012 Presidential campaign announced today new members of its active “Veterans for Ron Paul” nationwide coalition. The new coalition members hail from Clark and Washoe counties, both Nevada.
These are everyday veterans, yet active citizens in their community with honorable records of service.
Coast Guard veteran Glen Heleman of Las Vegas served from 1979 to 1983 as an E-4 Electrician’s Mate in Alaska. “Our nation cannot support or afford unconstitutional wars any longer. Our President must understand that in order to declare war it must first go to Congress for approval,” said Mr. Heleman.
Also advocating for Ron Paul’s vision for our nation’s future is Athens Chimenti of Las Vegas. Mr. Chimenti spent four years in the United States Navy stationed in San Diego, California and summarizes his support by stating, “I believe the wars we’re fighting overseas do not protect the interests of the American people. In fact, I firmly believe they put our country at greater risk. It’s time to bring our troops home and protect our national borders. Ron Paul is the only candidate for president who will do this.”
Another supporter is Marine veteran Kiran Hill of Reno, who spent 10 years of his service predominately in the Middle East. Mr. Hill also toured in Europe and the Far East. His experiences in over 27 countries worldwide, including in Iraq and Afghanistan, have shaped his outlook on freedom in the United States.
“In my lifetime I have seen freedom erode in the less-free countries I have visited instead of these nations becoming freer, as is the intent. When I carried a weapon overseas I searched cars, searched people’s homes, and took their property if I was told to – all at will. People in these nations, it seemed, had no rights whatsoever. Freedom equals prosperity, and that notion is the one generalization I take from all my travels. The reason why American troops are capable of patrolling foreign streets, and foreign troops are incapable of patrolling our streets is our prosperity. Prosperity is our best defense,” Mr. Hill explains.
Sam Calunga supports Dr. Paul’s stance on lowering government spending and minimizing government growth. Mr. Calunga served in the Army from September 1967 through May 1970 spending over two years stationed at the Long Bing post in Saigon, Vietnam.
“I like the fact that Ron Paul is trying to lower government spending and minimize the size of our government, which I feel is growing out of its britches. We need to lower taxes, but how we do it is a difficult job. Also, I have been paying into social security for fifty years and I do not want to see it disappear for my generation,” said Mr. Calunga.
Ron Paul is one of only two candidates this election with an honorable record of military service. A flight surgeon during the Cold War era, his commitment to veterans was recently showcased in the campaign’s television ad ‘He Served.’ To view Dr. Paul’s more recent national security-themed television ad title ‘Secure,’ click here.
As a first basic step, those wanting to join the “Veterans for Ron Paul” nationwide coalition should visit the official page by clicking here. Veterans residing in Nevada should email the Nevada Director of Voter Outreach, Meghann Walker, at meghannw@ronpaul2012.com.
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/01/1...paul%e2%80%99/
http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/...icalticker.jpg
National Right-to-Work on Rick Santorum
Says National Right-to-Work’s Patrick Semmens:
Rick Santorums’ position on Right to Work should be deeply troubling to the 80 percent of Americans who believe workers should not be forced to pay dues or fees to a union just to get or keep a job.
Not only has he refused to answer the National Right to Work Committee’s Presidential Survey, but while in the Senate he joined with Democrats to filibuster the National Right to Work Act. Siding with Big Labor in favor of union boss forced dues powers should be particularly troubling to the people of South Carolina, who’ve spent the last year fighting off attacks by the Obama Labor Board on the state’s popular Right to Work law and the jobs it has helped create.
National Right-to-Work on Rick Santorum*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/...icalticker.jpg
The Most Conservative GOP Senate Members Agree with Ron Paul on Indefinite Detention
Explains Townhall’s Mike Shedlock:
Any Senator voting on a bill that would allow US citizens to be arrested, detained indefinitely, even sent to Cuba without being formally charged with any crime is no friend or supporter to the US constitution…
Indeed, all 86 Senators who voted for that bill are cowards, hypocrites, and no friend to the United States or the US Constitution.
13 Courageous Votes
Nay ID Crapo, Michael [R]
Nay ID Risch, James [R]
Nay IL Durbin, Richard [D]
Nay IA Harkin, Thomas [D]
Nay KY Paul, Rand [R]
Nay MD Cardin, Benjamin [D]
Nay MN Franken, Al [D]
Nay OK Coburn, Thomas [R]
Nay OR Merkley, Jeff [D]
Nay OR Wyden, Ron [D]
Nay SC DeMint, Jim [R]
Nay UT Lee, Mike [R]
Nay VT Sanders, Bernard [I]
There you have it. Anyone not on that list voted to trash the constitution. I am particularly pleased by the votes of Senators Jim DeMint, Thomas Coburn, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Michael Crapo, and James Risch.
Those are the only six Republicans willing to stand behind the Constitution.
The Most Conservative GOP Senate Members Agree with Ron Paul on Indefinite Detention*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
Ron Paul on the Campaign Trail in South Carolina on TuesdayHolds major press conference at State Capitol in Columbia
and town hall meetings in Spartanburg and Rock Hill
COLUMBIA, SC – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul will campaign in South Carolina on Tuesday, January 17th.
The 12-term Congressman from Texas will hold a major press conference at the State Capitol and then hold a town hall meeting in Spartanburg.
Details of the events are as follows. All times Eastern.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
10:00 a.m.
Press Conference
South Carolina State House
1100 Gervais Street
Columbia, SC 29201
2:00 p.m.
Spartanburg Town Hall Meeting
Marriot Spartanburg– Heritage Ballroom E & F
299 North Church Street
Spartanburg, SC 29306
4:30 p.m.
York County Town Hall
Holiday Inn
503 Galleria Blvd.
Rock Hill, SC 29730
Ron Paul on the Campaign Trail in South Carolina on Tuesday*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
Collier County Florida for Ron Paul - Restore America now!
Hitting the Early Voting Sites & Sign Waves
Greeting Patriots,
We are now focusing on setting up at the Early Voting Sites throughout Collier County and passing out these voter recommendation fliers.
The four precincts with the highest volume of voters are:
Library Headquarters on Orange Blossom
Golden Gate Library
Naples City Hall
Marco Island Library
The full list of the voting sites is here: Photos of Collier County for Ron Paul | Facebook
Please respond if you are able to spend even an hour or two at any of these precincts handing out materials.
Wednesday the 18th at 4:00 pm, we will be having a sign wave in front of the Library Headquarters on Orange Blossom. Ron Paul Sign Wave - Early Voting Site (Library Headquarters) - 01/18/2012 | Facebook
Looking forward to seeing you!
-Elsa Martinez
--
Collier County for Ron Paul - Restore America now!
Overstock.com President Jonathan Johnson Endorses Ron Paul for the PresidencyNationally-recognized Salt Lake City entrepreneur joins ‘LDS for Ron Paul’ nationwide coalition and stands with Ron Paul to Restore America Now
LAKE JACKSON, Texas – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul was endorsed today by Overstock.com President Jonathan Johnson, who is also joining the “Latter-day Saints for Ron Paul” nationwide coalition.
The following statement of endorsement from Mr. Johnson is personal, and does not represent an endorsement on behalf of any companies or organizations with which he is affiliated, including Overstock.com.
“The federal government has run roughshod on the Constitution and now intrudes into too many areas of our lives. Ron Paul’s staunch adherence to the Constitution, defense of individual liberty and vision of a smaller government are the right prescription for our time,” said Mr. Johnson.
Jonathan E. Johnson III has been the President of Overstock.com since 2008. Mr. Johnson joined Overstock.com in 2002 as the Company’s General Counsel and has held various business and legal related positions at the company. He has been part of Overstock.com’s meteoric growth, as the company has grown from a small start-up to a company with $1.1 billion in sales and over 1,400 employees throughout Utah.
Prior to joining Overstock.com, Johnson was with TenFold Corporation in various positions, including CFO and General Counsel. Before that, he practiced corporate law in Los Angeles with two international law firms. He also served as a judicial clerk at the Utah Supreme Court.
Johnson received a bachelor’s degree in Japanese from Brigham Young University, studied at Osaka University of Foreign Studies in Japan as a Ministry of Education Scholar, and received his law degree from the BYU Law School.
Johnson lives in Salt Lake with his wife and five sons, and is active in the Utah Republican Party and a longtime member of the board of governors of the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce.
Concerning the active “Latter-day Saints for Ron Paul” coalition, Johnson’s endorsement follows the high-profile support of prominent author and chair of the Utah Tenth Amendment Center Connor Boyack, that of Utah Republican Liberty Caucus Chair Darcy Van Orden, as well as that of everyday LDS Nevadans.
All such announcements help present Ron Paul as the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney and demonstrate that no presidential candidate has a monopoly on this crucial western states voter segment.
As a first basic step, those wanting to join the active “Latter-day Saints for Ron Paul” nationwide coalition should visit the official page by clicking here. They should also send an email to Chris Kuper, National Coalitions Liaison, at hq.coalitions@ronpaul2012.com.
Overstock.com President Jonathan Johnson Endorses Ron Paul for the Presidency*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
EVENTS
- LAS VEGAS, CLARK COUNTY GOP MEETING 7PM
- 01/17/2012 7:00 PM
- MORE DETAILS
- RENO, RON PAUL CAUCUS TRAINING 6PM
- 01/18/2012 6:00 PM
- MORE DETAILS
- RENO, REPRESENT RON PAUL AT WASHOE COUNTY GOP MEETING 630PM
- 01/19/2012 6:30 PM
- MORE DETAILS
- HENDERSON, RON PAUL CAUCUS TRAINING 6PM
- 01/20/2012 6:00 PM
- MORE DETAILS
- RENO, RON PAUL CAUCUS TRAINING 630PM
- 01/20/2012 6:30 PM
- MORE DETAILS
- TONOPAH, RON PAUL CAUCUS TRAINING 1PM
- 01/21/2012 1:00 PM
- MORE DETAILS
Senator Kevin Bryant Is Supporting Ron Paul
Source: http://www.wearepolitics.com
http://www.wearepolitics.com/uploads...45/7948694.jpgI just recieved a personal message from State Senator Kevin Bryant of South Carolina who has confirmed that he will indeed be supporting Congressman Ron Paul for President.
Quite honestly, I wrote to the Senator asking him to reconsider his support for Paul. He sent me the following gracious email:
“Great to hear from you Bill, I have chosen to support Dr. Paul as I believe his message energizes our base. Interestingly, even though he’s the oldest candidate, the young voters seem to be attracted to him. Thanks for your input.”
I responded back that I sincerely hopes that he will do what most Paul supporters won’t, and that is back the eventual nominee of the GOP should it not be Congressman Paul. I will let you know if he responds.
[CIM Comment]
Now more than every we need the Champion of the Constitution!
Please visit Ron Paul’s official campaign site by following the link below and donate today!
http://www.ronpaul.com/images/ronpaul2012.png
Senator Kevin Bryant Is Supporting Ron Paul | ChrisInMaryville's Blog
NYT Caught Lying about Iran & IAEA Report on Civilian Nuclear Program - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOCH1ECkyio
Jan 12, 2012
Devious Reporter Lies to Sell another war to the public. Don't Let Them Trick Us into Another War! See These Videos, Click Here for Playlist:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebqp-xaMfkc&list=PL90B5A93EDB34024C&fe...
Before 1979, the U.S. strongly supported Iran's nuclear energy programs. Mainstream media is helping sell another illegal war. The way they do this is mainly by not reporting things or under-reporting things.
"Introduction of nuclear power will both provide for the growing needs of Iran's economy and free remaining oil reserves for export or conversion to petrochemicals" - Henry Kissinger, Secretary of State for President Ford
"the IAEA report made no firm conclusion that Iran had a nuclear weapons program, and noted that its inspections of Iran's facilities continue to show no diversion of uranium for military purposes."
☞ PASS IT ON: http://tinyurl.com/NYTcaught
Recommended FAIR radio show clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...fiEQK-o#t=606s
PASS IT ON ☞ http://tinyurl.com/DerailWarTrain
PASS IT ON ☞ http://tinyurl.com/WarmongerCalledOut
PASS IT ON ☞ http://tinyurl.com/WarPropagandaExposed
☀ The Record of the Paper: How the New York Times Misreports US Foreign Policy
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...presentativ-20
☀ Israel-Palestine on Record: How the New York Times Misreports Conflict in the Middle East
"Howard Friel and Richard Falk reveal the persistent ways the New York Times has ignored principles of international law in order to shield its readers from Israel's lawlessness."
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...presentativ-20
NYT bias for Israel continues
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2007/09/nyt-bias-for-israel-continues...
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2009/01/israel-attacks-gaza-silence-f...
Warmongers who sold you the Iraq war are pushing for a war with Iran.
CLICK HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akWdJ...90B5A93EDB3...
FAIR Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting Action Alert
NYT Misleads Readers on Iran Crisis
Paper disappears some inaccurate reporting
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4454
Youtuber tantzer sent me this info: In a Congressional hearing early in 2011, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, replying to Senator Carl Levin, confirmed that as of 2011, the American intelligence community has a high level of confidence that Iran has not made a decision as of this point to restart its nuclear weapons program.
This testimony reflects the contents of the 2011 National Intelligence Estimate. Its texts has not been released, but from the Congressional testimony, it's clear that it repeats the conclusions of the 2007 that since 2003 Iran has not pursued military applications of nuclear technology. The text of the 2007 NIE was published during the Bush presidency.
Sanger of the New York Times has often relayed misinformation from anonymous U.S. officials to the effect that the 2011 NIE would reverse that of 2007. On 6/8/10, he wrote that the new NIE "is using new evidence to revise and in some cases reverse conclusions from that [2007] estimate," and that the U.S. "is gradually backing away from a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate." On 6/15/10, he wrote that the new estimate "is likely to back away from some of the conclusions in the earlier document." On 3/27/10, he wrote that the 2007 NIE's key conclusion "is also being rewritten." On 1/2/10, he wrote, "Mr. Obama's top advisers say they no longer believe the key finding of a much disputed National Intelligence Estimate about Iran." As of today, the New York Times has not corrected such misinformation or tried to explain it.
As for the 2007 NIE: the NYT's reporting gives exhaustive coverage to criticisms of the 2007 NIE and information that seems to contradict it. Sanger rarely referred to the NIE estimate without the adjective "much-disputed"-- not pointing out that within the United States, it's politicians and media pundits who dispute it quite predictably, not U.S. intelligence organizations that voted for it 16-0 and reconfirmed it in 2011.
As late as November 6, 2011, Sanger has sentences like this: "the report has been widely criticized as flawed." Note the absence of any reference to the 2011 NIE as recently as last November in a context where it should have been mentioned! And in this story from a month ago he put the emphasis on its being "widely criticized as flawed" rather than its having been re-affirmed
Bain Capitalism: Subsidies, Tax Breaks -- And Bust-Outs?
Mon, 01/16/2012 - 8:47am — Joe Conason
Mitt Romney complains loudly and often about the "European" policies of the Obama White House, from excessive deficits and debt to government subsidies of industry. But his ultra-lucrative career at Bain Capital shows this carping is more rhetorical (and recent) than sincere. His inflated boasts of job creation appear to derive from companies that depended on government grants, tax favors, and other public benefits.
Even worse, however, Romney seems to have been unfazed by excessive borrowing when he worked in the private sector. For instance, Bain piled debt on a steel company it acquired, took the borrowed proceeds as “dividends,” and left the workers and the government to cope with the subsequent bankruptcy. Someday perhaps, Romney will explain just how this predatory style differs from what the mob used to call a “bust-out scheme.”
Certainly that is how things seemed to end at the Kansas City steel mill ultimately known as GS Technologies, although the early intentions of the Bain financiers may have been more benign. By the time GS shut down in 2001 after seven years of Bain mismanagement and laid off 750 workers, it had accumulated hundreds of millions in unpaid debt and unfunded pension and health liabilities, as Reuters found in a recent investigation. The workers, many of them suffering from occupational illness, were denied promised severance and health benefits. The pension plan, which cut benefits drastically, would have gone under altogether without an infusion of $44 million from the federal government, despite many earlier warnings to the Bain managers that they were not providing sufficient funding for it.
Where did the money go? Under Bain’s oversight, the renamed GS Technologies had accumulated debt of $378 million on annual revenues less than one-tenth that amount. If that sounds familiar, so does the penalty paid by the executives responsible: They walked away with a very handsome profit on their investment. Having put up about $8 million of their own money, they quickly issued $125 million in bonds and walked away with more than $36 million in “dividends.” According to Reuters, the Bain suits had no notion whatsoever of how to run a steel operation, let alone improve it – but they were constantly seeking federal and state tax handouts and grants, including a loan guarantee from Washington (just like the auto bailout Romney opposed). The company went belly up two years after Romney left Bain while continuing to receive payouts from its investments and extolling the benefits of rugged individualism.
Nobody yet knows how many Bain deals benefited from government largesse in one form or another, but the invaluable researcher Phil Mattera has begun to excavate the truth from under the scrim of Romney’s phony rhetoric. Two examples involving famous American enterprises may suffice for now:
In 1998, one year after Bain bought Sealy Posturepedic with a group of other private equity firms, the mattress company sought and received a $600,000 grant from North Carolina authorities to relocate its corporate headquarters, research and manufacturing facilities there from Ohio (where Romney will no doubt be telling voters this year about his marvelous record of “job creation”).
And then there’s Staples, the office supply giant that Bain helped to create and that is often touted as its greatest success. Mattera writes that Staples has long depended on government subsidies, citing a Baltimore Sun story about a $4.2 million aid package the company received from Maryland authorities in 1996 to build a distribution center in Hagerstown.
As Mattera often notes, there is no need to go to Europe to find governments subsidizing industry. It happens here every day, and favored financiers like Romney have pocketed billions with their hands in the public purse.
Bain Capitalism: Subsidies, Tax Breaks -- And Bust-Outs? | National Memo | Breaking News, Smart Politics
http://ronpaul-2012.org/images/SC_email.jpg
$1,546,319.69 VICTORY LIES AHEAD
http://ronpaul-2012.org/mbpledge_sc.html?pid=0110
Ron Paul Shines in SC Debate, Despite Fox News Antics
Though Fox News moderators turned the once-honored SC Republican Debate into a three-ring circus, Congressman Ron Paul stays above the fray and comes out on top in Twitter poll.
by Jake Morphonios
(libertarian)
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
The South Carolina Republican Presidential Debate has a special place in my heart. Back in the 2000 election cycle, I was working for candidate Steve Forbes as a North Carolina state campaign manager. It was my opportunity to act as an escort and personal driver for Mr. Forbes during the debate in our sister state of South Carolina. While Mr. Forbes was prepping for his performance, I spoke with all the other candidates behind the scenes: John McCain, Gary Bauer, Orrin Hatch, George W. Bush and Alan Keyes. After the debate was over, I took Mr. Forbes to surprise thousands of independent distributors who were gathered for an Amway convention. The entire evening was memorable.
South Carolina had been my home, off and on, throughout my life. Being the third state in the nation to host a presidential contest was a big honor for us, and our televised presidential debate was the cherry on top. On Monday night, as I watched this year’s SC debate, my heart sank. Fox News took a special tradition and spat upon it to muster cheap ratings. The five remaining Republican presidential hopefuls from the 2012 Republican primary gathered in Myrtle Beach, SC for the Fox News/WSJ Debate. The hour and a half long farce was an insult to the candidates, as well as to the people of South Carolina.
Fox News moderators immediately called on Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum and gave them opportunities to attack frontrunner Mitt Romney. The three candidates sparred over SuperPac advertising, television commercials, and statements that each has made against each other. Sparks flew, with one-liners and sharp retorts drawing boisterous jeers from the audience. The debate became a free-for-all – more a school-yard taunting match than a discussion of ideas and substance.
Meanwhile, Texas Congressman Ron Paul refrained from joining in the mud-slinging and waited for the moderators to address a question to him. He waited a long time.
In the first 40 minutes of the debate, Fox News moderators only directed a single question to Ron Paul. During one commercial break, the effort to ignore Paul was so obvious that it was the topic of discussion by a Fox political panel, including analysts Doug Shoen, Pat Caddell, Ed Rollins and Harris Faulkner. Rollins, commented, “I thought Paul placed second in New Hampshire and was effectively second in Iowa – but they’ve got him standing way over on the side.”
Following the commercial break, an additional question was finally directed to Congressman Paul – though Paul had to begin his response by correcting the moderator, Bret Baier, for grossly distorting his position and effectively calling Paul a terrorist-sympathizer. The debate team was orchestrating a circus atmosphere and they knew that Paul was there to discuss substance, rather than participate in the political equivalent of professional wrestling entertainment. They tried to draw him in to the spectacle, but Paul would not take the bait.
Instead, Ron Paul used his few opportunities to speak clearly on real issues, such as eliminating taxes, protecting against inflation, the difference between defense and military spending and the constitutional role of the federal government. The response of the liberal debate moderators, including Juan Williams, was to get Paul off the microphone as quickly as possible and get back to cheap entertainment. If you want an answer to a serious question, you go to Ron Paul. But if you want to get the audience to whistle and hollar, give the microphone to Newt Gingrich and let him hurl self-righteous insults in whatever direction the mood strikes him.
Even the post-debate commentary was biased against Ron Paul. All throughout the event, Twitter users were encouraged to tweet about how well the candidates were answering their questions. Fox News tracked these results and graphed them to show who was answering questions directly and who was dodging. While a passing comment was made that Paul had given the most honest answers, he was conspicuously left off the graph by Fox reporter John Roberts.
Nearly an hour later, Fox had been flooded with such discontented messages over the collective effort to discount Ron Paul that John Roberts was brought back to re-explain the Twitter voting tallies. He went through each debate topic and displayed the Twitter results. In every category, Ron Paul not only won – but he won by significant margins. Roberts was noticeably uncomfortable having to go through the exercise and was flippant in his mention of Paul’s success. His attitude did not go unnoticed by the Fox political panel. After Roberts again made light of Paul's performance, Harris Faulkner said, “But John, let’s be clear. These charts show that Ron Paul was the big winner.” Roberts snapped back, “Harris, I’ll just say – “We report, you decide”. The testy exchange was bizarre. The fact, however, is that Fox was guilty, again, of reporting in a very biased way against Ron Paul and his supporters. It's hard for an audience to make an informed decision when the facts are distorted in a biased fashion.
In every respect, this debate was a joke. It was clear that the moderators were not looking to provide viewers with substance, but rather, sick entertainment. The objective was to turn candidates against each other like pit bulls in an underground dog fighting ring. Throughout the debate, an element of the audience hissed, booed and screamed as the candidates spoke. Analyst Pat Caddell said the South Carolina audience was “off-putting, snarky and nasty.”
During the post-debate analysis, one viewer sent in a question to the panel asking, “Can the Republican nominee win the presidency without Ron Paul or his supporters?” Ed Rollins replied emphatically, “No.” It was a sentiment echoed by the other panelists. There are far too many committed Paul supporters who are angry at having their opinions ignored by the MSM and the Republican establishment - as was so clearly demonstrated that very night by Fox News. Paul supporters are highly motivated and are a powerful force that can and will have a monumental impact on this election, one way or another.
After Paul’s excellent debate performance, it is clear that he is only gaining greater power as a candidate. Each day, it is being more widely reported that the Republican nomination has come down to a two man race between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul – even if Fox News reporters can’t accept this truth. As Ed Rollins correctly pointed out, “Paul and Romney are the only ones with the money to keep on going.”
Today, CNN released poll results showing that Ron Paul is tied with Mitt Romney in a head to head match up with President Obama. The results are no surprise to ardent Paul supporters who have dug in and look forward to the long campaign ahead. With supporters like these, one way or another - Ron Paul is going to win this election.
If you liked this article, give it a "thumbs up" and share it using the Facebook link below!
Jake Morphonios has worked as a political consultant and campaign strategist for over two decades and is the author of "Organizing a Grassroots Political Machine", used in the Steve Forbes 2000 Presidential campaign.
The Author with Ron Paul in South Carolina, 2009
http://www.morphonios.com/cimg5107.jpg
Other Articles by Jake Morphonios:
The Real Dirt on Slick Rick Santorum
Exchange with Paul Nearly Ends Perry Campaign
Ron Paul Knocks Off Michelle Bachmann
The Dirty Details of Newt Gingrich's Marital Infidelity
Ron Paul Shines in SC Debate, Despite Fox News Antics
Ron Paul Receives Key Endorsements from Three South Carolina State Senators
« on: Today at 09:58:51 AM »
COLUMBIA, S.C.--(EON: Enhanced Online News)--2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul received endorsements from Sen. Lee Bright (R-Spartanburg), Sen. Kevin Bryant (R-Spartanburg), and Sen. Danny Verdin (Greenville).
The consequential endorsements took place at a press conference at 10 a.m. EST at the South Carolina State House, located in Columbia.
“We’re excited and grateful to have these endorsements, as it shows South Carolina is serious about cutting spending and getting our fiscal house in order,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton. “South Carolinians know that real change will not come from the status quo, but only come through a President Paul in office.”
Senator Bryant is the former chairman of the Anderson County Republican Party (ACRP), a position he successfully served in for four years from 2000 to 2004. In 2004, Bryant received 64% of the vote to serve in the S.C. Senate District 3. He has been a constant voice for limited government, lower taxes, and supporting traditional family values.
Known as a fiscal and social conservative, Senator Lee Bright was elected to the South Carolina State Legislature in 2008. He diligently serves Spartanburg’s 12th District in the Senate and received the Friend of Taxpayer Award from the Spartanburg County Taxpayers Association.
Senator Verdin was elected to serve South Carolina's 9th Senate district in 2000, and is the Majority Whip for the Senate Republican Caucus. He is regarded as one of the most conservative members of the caucus along with Bryant, Bright, and State Senator Tom Davis who has also put his support behind Ron Paul's presidential campaign.
Ron Paul Receives Key Endorsements from Three South Carolina State Senators | EON: Enhanced Online News
Ron Paul Receives Key Endorsements from Three South Carolina State Senators
January 17, 2012, 11:12 AM
Ron Paul Picks Up Endorsements, Vows to Stay in GOP Race
By Kristina Peterson
COLUMBIA, S.C. — One day after Jon Huntsman formally suspended his campaign, Rep. Ron Paul said he has no plans to follow suit.
Mr. Paul, who has consistently trailed front-runner Mitt Romney in the polls, insisted that his campaign plays a valuable role keeping the spotlight trained on key issues, including slashing federal spending.
“To think that debating is not productive?” Mr. Paul scoffed at a press conference here. The Republican establishment might think “so-and-so’s going to win, so we better not discuss the issues anymore,” Mr. Paul said, but “I might just continue talking about cutting $1 trillion out of the budget. I think that’s legitimate.”
Mr. Paul spoke Tuesday at South Carolina’s statehouse, where he picked up the endorsement of three of the state’s conservative lawmakers days ahead of South Carolina’s GOP primary on Saturday. State Sens. Kevin Bryant, Lee Bright and Danny Verdin added their backing to that of state Sen. Tom Davis, who endorsed Mr. Paul on Sunday.
“Some would view some of these issues as extreme, but remember what hero, Barry Goldwater, said ‘extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice,’” Mr. Bryant said at the press conference. “We’re going to have to do some extreme things to turn this country around.”
Mr. Paul called the endorsements “another shot in the arm for the campaign.”
Ron Paul Picks Up Endorsements, Vows to Stay in GOP Race - Washington Wire - WSJ
Dear Kathyet,
Did you hear Rick Santorum defending his anti-Second Amendment record in last night's debate?
He proudly stated he supported - and worked to create - anti-gun legislation to avoid something worse coming along.
Rick just doesn't seem to get it.
If our country is being driven to the edge at 80 miles an hour, you don't slow down to 75 once you get control of the car.
You slam on the brakes and turn around!
Kathyet, I've never been afraid to stand against EVERY gun grab, EVERY bailout, and EVERY attempt to undermine our national sovereignty.
Although Rick Santorum tried to deflect attention by attacking my Second Amendment record, I'm proud of my hard work on behalf of gun owners.
In fact, in 2011, I was given the "Defender of the Second Amendment Award" by Gun Owners of America. GOA's Executive Director, Larry Pratt, described me as "a leader in the fight to defend and restore the Second Amendment."
Click to donate
I've introduced legislation to:
*** Repeal the Brady Bill, which sets up virtually all the infrastructure the government needs to implement national gun registration;
*** Repeal the so-called "Assault Weapons" Ban, which banned an entire class of firearms based on little more than looking scary;
*** End U.S. membership in the anti-gun United Nations to ensure American tax dollars are not used to fund global gun control schemes like the so-called "Small Arms Treaty";
*** Repeal the dangerous "Gun-Free School Zone Act," which virtually guarantees that bloodthirsty criminals will face no opposition should they choose to go on a rampage.
And I'm not just the only remaining candidate to answer the National Association for Gun Rights' Presidential Survey 100% - I'm the only remaining candidate proud enough of my record to respond at all.
As President, you have my word that I'll lead the charge to repeal every single unconstitutional gun-grab currently on the books.
Last night's debate provided just the latest example of why my campaign achieved historic success in states as diverse as Iowa and New Hampshire and is now surging in South Carolina, while counterfeit conservatives like Rick Santorum struggle to find momentum.
Click to donate
Voters don't want Big Government invading their lives one step at a time.
They don't want someone who thinks you fight unconstitutional legislation by creating your own.
They want a proven leader who will keep government off their backs, away from their wallets, and out of their everyday lives - period!
They want a candidate who will:
*** CUT $1 trillion in federal spending his first year in office;
*** ELIMINATE five federal departments and return power to the states;
*** BALANCE our out-of-control budget in only three years;
*** FIGHT gun grabbers, Big Labor, and the reckless spenders at the Federal Reserve each time they try to ram through another powergrab;
*** MAINTAIN a fighting force that is second-to-none while refusing to surrender our national sovereignty to carry out the UN's decrees.
I will lead on principle in the White House just like I've stood firm for liberty, limited government, and the Constitution in Congress.
If you're ready for a President who will reject any scheme that strips away more of your freedoms...
If you're sick and tired of the status quo and business-as-usual...
And if you're ready to take back your God-given rights...
... then I ask for your support today to help me get my consistent conservative message out to the voters in South Carolina.
I ask for your help to contact as many people as I can to let them know they don't have to settle for a candidate who will have to spend the entire general election campaign apologizing for endorsing the same disastrous policies as Barack Obama.
Many South Carolinians are just now making their final decision on who to support, and I want to make sure their last impression of my campaign is the truth - not the establishment media's distortions.
Please, donate whatever you are able right away to help me reach these voters today and secure another historic finish this weekend in South Carolina.
For Liberty,
Ron Paul
P.S. Counterfeit conservatives like Rick Santorum may think you fight unconstitutional legislation by writing some of your own.
I think you fight against Big Government by standing on principle - EVERY time.
And judging by the reaction my campaign is receiving from voters all across the country - not to mention our incredible finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire and our surge in South Carolina - the American people are ready for a President who refuses to ever bow the knee to Big Government.
Many South Carolinians are just now making their final decision on who to support for President. And I need your help to guarantee the last impression they get of my campaign is the truth - not the establishment media's distortions.
Please, if you are able, donate whatever you can right away to ensure my campaign can reach these voters in this final week before the South Carolina primary.
Paid for by Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
Ron Paul 2012 Official Campaign Website
Romney Pays Less In Tax Than His Secretary
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/17/2012 10:26 -0500
First Buffet, now Mitt Romney. Via Bloomberg:
- ROMNEY SAYS HIS EFFECTIVE TAX RATE CLOSER TO 15%
- ROMNEY SPEAKS TO REPORTERS IN FLORENCE, SOUTH CAROLINA
- ROMNEY SAYS MUCH OF HIS INCOME COMES FROM INVESTMENTS
Next thing you know he too will offer all Republicans a one for one match on all US sovereign debt repayments, and will demand that all millionaires generously hand over their income. As for us, we quietly wonder whether the account clerks at Zurich banks are sweating already?
Romney Pays Less In Tax Than His Secretary | ZeroHedge
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington - "Liberty is too Precious a thing to be buried in books" - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GD-lFCsYOPs
"Liberty is too Precious a thing to be buried in books"; Mr Smith goes to Washington:
Honesty, sincerity, selflessness, duty, integrity, political courage, these are the things missing in Washington. And until they return, we will continue to see our great Republic slip away from us, until eventually it is no better that a third rate banana republic run by tinhorn despot dictators who exploit the people for personal gain.
Do we still have politicians like the one portrayed in this movie? One's who will put their political careers on the line for something that they believe in? Or, are we just left with spineless greedy people who are only concerned with their own political futures.
I don't have much faith left in our politicians to do the right thing for our country no matter the consequence to their own future. But I do think that there are good people out there who would love to go to Washington and do what is right for our country. The problem is that they are not running for office. The likely reason for this is because they don't want to get into that cesspool that we call Washington politics.
I do not pretend to know what the answers are to all of our problems, but I do know that it has to start at the local level. We need more good people to start running for local offices. We also need to change the Primary systems so as to make them freer, where anyone can run who gets enough signatures. They should not be identified by Party affiliation, but instead, they should just be presented as preferring a certain Party or none at all, if that is what they prefer. The two top vote getters would then advance to the general election in the fall.
In this way the power of the Parties is taken away. The voter will no longer be voting for Parties, but instead they will be voting for people. 2008 was the first year that Washington State had a primary like this. The new law was voted in by the people years ago, but it was fought against in the courts by the two political Parties until it finally went to the Supreme Court where they ruled it constitutional (2-7).
The proof that this type of a Primary system is quite possibly the answer to much of our problems is that both the Republican Party, and the Democrat Party fought it tooth and nail clear up to the Supreme Court. They obviously feel that Primaries like this are a threat to their power, and they are right. Here's a link if you want to read more about it: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,338890,00.html
So there you go. I have laid it out for you, now it is up to you. If you want change then get busy, if not, then just continue to sit on your butt. Change will not happen on its own, the people must get involved.
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Naive and idealistic Jefferson Smith, leader of the Boy Rangers, is appointed on a lark by the spineless governor of his state. He is reunited with the state's senior senator--presidential hopeful and childhood hero, Senator Joseph Paine. In Washington, however, Smith discovers many of the shortcomings of the political process as his earnest goal of national boys' camp leads to a conflict with the state political boss, Jim Taylor. Taylor first tries to corrupt Smith and then later attempts to destroy Smith through a scandal.
http://ronpaul-2012.org/images/SC_email.jpg
$1,630,144.32 VICTORY LIES AHEAD
http://ronpaul-2012.org/mbpledge_sc.html?pid=0110
Romney Would Sign NDAA
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 17, 2012
During the latest “debate” in South Carolina, Mitt Romney said that if he were president he would sign the the National Defense Authorization Act.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=D1yY3NCiMVQ
Prior to his recent assertion that it is perfectly normal to dispense with the Fourth Amendment and suspend habeas corpus, Romney said he wasn’t up to speed on the law and promised to post an analysis on his website, which he never did.
Romney said you don’t have the “right to join a group that has challenged America” and then mentioned al-Qaeda, the terror group that the FBI admits poses little threat to the nation.
The NDAA, however, is not about indefinitely detaining Muslim cave dwellers. It’s about disappearing American citizens who oppose the bankster cartel now in control of the government.
The law is a “violent and sudden usurpation” of the Constitution of the sort James Madison warned about. The founders considered habeas corpus the most fundamental of rights because it insured that the executive branch could not hold people without cause. It was so important the founders included it in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution.
Truman tried to veto the Internal Security Act of 1950 that codified indefinite detention without trial but he was overturned by Congress.Truman said it was “the greatest danger to freedom of speech, press, and assembly” since the Alien and Sedition Laws of 1798 and represented a “mockery of the Bill of Rights” and was a “long step toward totalitarianism.”
In the years after Truman’s warning, the government slowly chipped away at the Fourth Amendment and habeas corpus as it passed the McCartney-Walter Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (following the Oklahoma false flag), the Patriot Act (following the 9/11 false flag), and has finally repealed the cornerstone of the Bill of Rights with the passage of the NDAA.
As Sherwood Ross notes, with the passage of the NDAA, we have returned “to the disgraceful Korematsu Era, when President Roosevelt ordered the military to round up law-abiding Japanese-American citizens and stick them in concentration camps for the duration of World War II.”
World War II, however, had an end, whereas the bogus war on terrorism is designed to last forever, as our leaders have stated on a number of occasions.
Romney has no opinion on the Constitution, Magna Carta, and centuries of common law. He is an empty vessel filled up with nonsense produced by the global elite who run the disgusting dog and pony shows that now pass as elections in the United States.
The ruling elite behind the curtain have worked slowly and methodically to dismantle the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It stands in the way of their plan to implement world government and a global banking and economic system. Habeas corpus is a thorn in the side that prevents them from sending out the military to disappear those of us opposed to their plan for a global totalitarian future now under construction. They now have that power.
» Romney Would Sign NDAA Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
Similar/Related Articles
NDAA Is A Hoax: You Can’t Legalize Tyranny
Ron Paul: The NDAA Repeals More Rights
Anonymous: Night Raid Firm Lobbied for NDAA, Donated $272K to Sen. Rob Portman
How Congress is Signing Its Own Arrest Warrants in the NDAA Citizen Arrest Bill
The Senate Assaults American Rights with NDAA Bill: Infowars Nightly News
Public Awakening to NDAA Criminal Takeover
Obama’s NDAA Power Grab vs. Bill of Rights: Infowars Nightly News
Anonymous will act against National Defense Authorization Act, NDAA
Montanans Launch Recall of Senators Who Approved NDAA Military Detention
Don’t Mute Humanity: NDAA’s War on Americans & Bill of Rights
Romney Doesn’t Know What’s IN NDAA, Vaccines Dropped From The Sky & More
Obama’s NDAA Signing Statement is Just Smoke & Mirrors
bttt
Romney and Obama Share Same Bankster Campaign Contributors
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 17, 2012
Like Obama, Mitt Romney is a wind-up doll for Wall Street and the bankers. There is virtually no difference between them despite all the fetid air from the GOP propaganda machine.
http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/G...78380_0460.jpgRomney’s Bain Capital owns the “conservative” propaganda machine, Clear Channel.
This is revealed by a quick look at Romney’s top contributors. An Open Secrets page on top Romney contributors reads like a Who’s Who of Wall Street and the financial cartel. The top contributor is Goldman Sachs, followed by Credit Suisse Group, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, UBS, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Barclays – major players in the Wall Street and City of London bankster constellation.
Bain Capital is also on the list. It is a “financial services” and investment firm co-founded by Romney. Bain owns the establishment media propaganda conglomerate Clear Channel, which explains why “conservative” talk show hosts like Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin are supporting Romney, especially with the strong showing of Ron Paul in the primaries. Both Savage (real name Weiner) and Levin have gone so far as to call Paul a threat to the country.
In December, Mitt refused to release the identity of his “bundlers,” or people who gather contributions from many individuals in an organization or community and give the cash to the campaign.
In other words, the above list is only the tip of the iceberg. Romney’s lack of transparency about his bundlers indicates he is getting money from sources that want their identity concealed.
In November, it was reported that Jimmy Lee, a veteran Wall Street investment banker, and three other top executives at JPMorgan Chase & Co hosted a $2,500-per-person reception for Romney.
“I am committed to doing all that I can to help his campaign because I also believe he is the strongest challenger to President Obama,” Lee told Reuters. Lee said he has known Romney for almost all of his Wall Street career and that he made one of the first loans to Romney at Bain Capital.
It is not clear why Mr. Lee opposes Obama – his campaign contributors are almost a carbon copy of Mitt’s. Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan (where Lee worked), Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, USB and many of the same players donated heavily to Obama’s campaign in 2008.
It should be obvious by now that the dog and pony show known as the “election cycle” in the United States is a musical chairs affair with the same gaggle of bankers and transnational corporations calling the shots.
Next time you hear Michael Savage, Mark Levin or some other bankster media whore rant and rave about the “communist” Obama and then declare their support for the “capitalist” Romney, you should realize they are selling the same poison designed to kill our republic.
There is virtually no difference between any of the establishment candidates – they are all onboard with the globalist agenda for war and the economic destruction of America as their masters and puppeteers move to consolidate their stranglehold over humanity and impose a dystopian one-world government and a high-tech control grid over the entire world.
» Romney and Obama Share Same Bankster Campaign Contributors Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
Similar/Related Articles
Wall Street cash shifts to Romney from Obama
Bain Capital Owns Clear Channel (Romney Supported by Talk Show sphere)
Moore: “Wall Street Has Their Man And His Name Is Barack Obama”
Romney Beats Obama in Race for Wall Street Cash
Federal Records Show Romney Campaign Bought And Paid For By Big Banks
Romney: I do support the Federal Reserve… auditing the Fed
Top Three Contributors to Ron Paul are U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force
Hypocrite Romney Is Just As Elitist As Obama
Goldman Sachs Hires Law Firm to Shut Down Blogger
Ron Paul Second Only To Romney In Obama Match Up
JPMorgan Chase Bankster Dimon Mentioned for Treasury Post
Goldman Profit Leaps as Firm Restrains Pay
The Stupid and the Dishonest Join the Attacks on Ron Paul
Thomas J. DiLorenzo
LewRockwell.com
January 17, 2012
Yet another neocon Republican establishment political hack has demonstrated ignorance, deceit, and bad manners in yet another attack on Ron Paul. This time it is one Jeffrey Lord, a “contributing editor” to The American Spectator magazine. Writing in a January 15 article on the Philly.com Web site, Lord feigns outrage over the fact that five years ago Ron Paul told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the Civil War was unnecessary to end slavery. Lord is being deceitful here by taking what Ron Paul said out of context. I remember Ron Paul’s appearance on that show, and the point he was making was that all the rest of the world – the British, Spaniards, French, Dutch, Danes, Swedes, the Northern states in the U.S. – ended slavery peacefully in the nineteenth century. His point was that we should have done what the British did, and used tax dollars to purchase the freedom of the slaves and then ended it forever.
That, Said Ron Paul, would have been preferable to a war that ended up killing over 650,000 Americans (850,000 according the the very latest historical research) while destroying a large part of the U.S. economy. Lord is obviously ignorant of all of this history.
Lord cites my book, The Real Lincoln, to feign additional outrage over the fact that I supposedly called Lincoln a “Dictator-President.” He apparently suffered a case of the vapors when he discovered that Ron Paul listed The Real Lincoln as “recommended reading” at the end of his own book, Revolution: A Manifesto. I don’t ever recall ever using those exact words about Lincoln, but I do know that generations of historians have routinely referred to “the Lincoln dicatatorhip,” although usually calling it a benign dictatorship. They have done this because of Lincoln’s illegal suspension of Habeas Corpus, the mass imprisonment of tens of thousands of Northern political dissenters, the shutting down of hundreds of opposition newspapers, the deportation of opposition member of Congress Clement L. Vallandigham, the rigging of elections, and worse. (Read Freedom Under Lincoln by Dean Sprague; and Constitutional Problems Under Lincolnby James Randall). Lord is obviously ignorant of these historical facts as well.
Jeffrey Lord is simply lying when he writes that “[Ron] Paul shares with DiLorenzo the belief that the war was not fought over issues of Union . . .” That in fact is exactly what I have argued in my writings. Southerners (and most Northern newspaper editors as well, by the way) believed that the union was voluntary, that the states that ratified the Constitution were sovereign, and that they therefore had a right to join or not join the Union. Lincoln believed that the union was a compulsory union from which there could never under any circumstances be any escape, and that he consequently had a right to wage total war on the civilian population of the South to “save the union.” I have argued that Lincoln destroyed the American union of the founders, which was in fact a voluntary union.
I have also quoted Lincoln himself as saying that his invasion of the Southern states was not to free the slaves but to “save the union” by destroying the right of secession. Lord expresses additional outrage that I have repeated Lincoln’s own views in my writing, instead of the comic book version of history that he prefers, which says that Lincoln launched an invasion to supposedly free the slaves. Of course, the Republican-controlled U.S. Congress also announced to the world at the beginning of the Civil War that the purpose of the war was not to interfere with slavery but to “save the union.” Jeffrey Lord is obviously ignorant of this aspect of American history as well.
What’s even worse, says Jeffrey Lord, many contributors to LewRockwell.com, such as myself, “are no fans” of some of the more notorious members of the neocon cabal such as “William F. Buckley, Jr., Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin”!! To this I plead guilty. Why, even “Rick Santorum also makes the list” of political figures who have been criticized by people like myself on LewRockwell.com. Off with our heads!
Jeffrey Lord also lies when he writes that “The Constitution, DiLorenzo maintains, is a ‘subversion’ orchestrated by Founding Father Alexander Hamilton to overthrow what DiLorenzo calls America’s first constitution – the Articles of Confederation.” First of all, I am hardly the first to note that the Constitution overthrew the Articles of Confederation. Scholars have been saying this for more than 200 years, but Jeffrey Lord is of course ignorant of this fact as well.
Secondly, I have never argued that Hamilton “orchestrated” the Constitution as some kind of “subversion.” Hamilton was essentially the original neocon, who showed up at the constitutional convention advocating a permanent president who would appoint all state governors, who would in turn have veto power over all state legislation. He did not get his way; the Constitution did not create a king, nor did it allow for the creation of an interventionist, mercantilist, corporate welfare empire of the sort Hamilton desired. (It wouldn’t be until the Lincoln administration that that was achieved). Hamilton did invent the idea of “implied powers” of the Constitution, and was the first to make the expansive interpretations of the Welfare and Commerce Clauses of the Constitution that have been used to essentially destroy the ability of the Constitution to limit the growth of government. I explain the Hamiltonian subversion of the Constitution that took place for decades after Hamilton’s death in my book, Hamilton’s Curse.
Perhaps the most ridiculous part of Jeffrey Lord’s rant is that he invokes the left-wing hate group known as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as one of his “authorities” in criticizing Ron Paul (and me). The SPLC espouses a communistic political philosophy and is so radical that it holds the confessed terrorist and murderer William Ayers up as a role model for children on its Web site, along with a woman named “Red Emma” Goldman, a twentieth-century communist who advocated the violent overthrow of the U.S. government in order to adopt communism in America. (Ayers admitted setting off bombs at the Capitol Building in Washington and at police stations in the 1960s, and recently told the New York Times that he wishes he had set off even more bombs).
The modus oprandi of the SPLC is to publicly label any and all critics of its left-wing extremism as “haters” or somehow “linked to” hate groups. When the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C. sponsored a public lecture on immigration policy, for example, the SPLC accused AEI of “mainstreaming hate.” The scholars at AEI are all really KKK guys in nice suits, you see. When the TEA Party movement was formed as a response to Obama’s mad rush to socialism the SPLC issued a special report on the movement that had the subtitle, “The Year in Hate.” These are the kinds of people who Jeffrey Lord of The American Spectator magazine chooses to associate himself with to assist him in his ignorant smears of Ron Paul and me.
Similar/Related Articles
Herman Cain Describes Ron Paul Supporters’ Concerns As “Stupid”
More Rival Staffers Join Ron Paul Campaign
Ron Paul Attacks State Of The Union Theater
Paper: Obama’s Speech Most ‘Dishonest in Decades’
DNC-linked Organization Attacks Ron Paul
NY Times Attacks Ron Paul For Living in the Real World
Smear Attacks Have No Effect, Ron Paul Still On Course To Win Iowa
Republican Tea Party Diva Bachmann Attacks Ron Paul on Iran During Iowa Debate
Corporate Media Switches Tactics, Attacks Ron Paul
Mark Steyn: Ron Paul’s Support of Constitution is “Stunted Parochialism”
Will Beck join the biggest dot?
Jesse Ventura to Join the Ron Paul Revolution
By Betty FreaufAnd then he said the Department of Justice turns a blind eye to the White House operatives, who violate federal privacy laws by rummaging through FBI files and smearing those in Congress who dared to hold a President accountable for impeachable offenses. Hillary Clinton accessed FBI records during the Lewinsky scandal.
January 18, 2012
NewsWithViews.com
Presidential candidate Ron Paul’s non-interventionist foreign policy which aligns with our first president’s philosophy about foreign entanglements seems to be a thorn in the side of the established Republicans who feel Israel must be an exception even though its Prime Minister says they do not need the financial aid. Being a consummate Libertarian, Paul makes no exceptions which brings the wrath of God on his head by the evangelical community.
For decades the GOP establishment figures the sheep will vote for any Republican candidate it chooses. If Paul doesn’t win, rather than not vote at all, the least we can do is go to the polls to vote for strong conservative people to be elected to the Senate and the House of Representatives where all appropriation bills originate and we surely must believe this time around any of those running for president on the GOP ticket will be better than Obama; however, never underestimate Barack and his well-oiled campaign and all his forced union dues money.
When Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) filed once again to run for President, he found RINOs hard pressed to even mention his name not alone say they’ll vote for him if he wins. It’s such a double standard and many voters are getting tired of voting the lesser of two evils but we’ve been burned so often by the smaller government rhetoric, which is now being advocated by Obama also, that we just don’t trust them anymore but I have to admit Gingrich really kicked butt at the South Carolina debate on the 16th receiving the first-ever standing ovation. Now, if we could only believe he wouldn’t flip flop again.
Paul’s persistent message has been resonating with more and more disgruntled Republicans, Independents and Democrats. Many Republicans are former Democrats who exited that party in the 60s when it began patronizing left-wing radicalism. For example, after the Watts Riots in 1965, which the Communists admitted they spent two years to foment, the Communists brought out this pamphlet entitled: “Watts Upsurge: A Communist Appraisal” indicating the challenge of the Watts explosion could be met only by a truly massive program of more government entitlements. This created more dependency on government by the slothful and class warfare and the eventual “white guilt” that elected Obama in 2008. Nothing happens by accident in government.
After Watts, Democrat leaders apologized to the rioters and gave them whatever they wanted and now we have the spoiled Occupy “Squatters.” While I doubt Presidential candidate Ron Paul supports the movement with its chaos and disruption in our communities, he can feel their sense of frustration because he’s been there – done that with his message for years only to be rebuffed and criticized by GOP leaders, the conservative media who seem to be Paul’s worst enemies stooping so low as to call him a racist! This is why we are seeing a variety of strange bedfellows and a blending of different causes including some of his Libertarian views agreeing with the liberal American Civil Liberties Union, for instance, which we’ve known for a long time, is a front for the Communist Party.
The tea parties are motivated by anger at being forced to pay for bailouts, while the most compelling poster children of the Occupy “99 percent” are angry that they’ve not getting bailouts and their ridiculous attacks on capitalism illustrates they have never had Economics 101 in college, where most of these morons originate.
Stockholders in these corporations are people. When the economy is strong, the Public Employees Pensions and individuals earn profits. When the economy sours, unlike individuals who take the loss in the pocketbook (unless that corporation got favorable bailout money), PERS, in Oregon, for instance, expects a guaranteed 8 percent return and the taxpayers must make up the difference so where’s their beef?
When I hear the “99” percentage I’m reminded when Jesus came to his hour in John 12:27. Elizabeth C. Clephane penned a verse called “The Ninety and Nine” – “But none of the ransomed ever knew, how deep were the waters crossed; or how dark was the night that the Lord passed through, Ere He found his sheep that was lost. “ It’s time for the lost sheep to remember how He borne our griefs and carried our sorrow there on the cross. (Is. 53:4) Today, Jesus can be either the great comforter or the great divider.
I have received word that Obama signaled Congress he is prepared to share U.S. missile defense secrets with Russia. Should we get excited and yell treason? The Soviets probably already have them. Democrat leaders have been violating the “Battle Act” and trading with the enemy since the Kennedy/Johnson administrations and the mainline media that is supposed to be a watchdog and report such things either distorts it or covers it up.
IT’S CALLED BRIDGE BUILDING
While there are many, one example discovered in the 1966 book The Politics of Surrender by M. Stanton Evans is the “sweet wheat” deal to the Soviet Union. In 1963 when Moscow let it be known the latest Soviet food shortage was acute, the Kennedy administration agreed to sell the Communists $200 million worth of American wheat and to get the deal consummated, our government went a good deal further than half way. The wheat was sold not at the price which the government had paid the American farmers, but at the artificially low world price. This, in effect, found the American government subsidizing the Soviet Union. Concessions were also made on freight rates and on credit with no conditions attached.
Later it was discovered that the wheat that the Soviets got from the U.S. at a bargain price was being shipped to Rumania to strengthen the Soviet grip on that satellite nation. This, at the same time, that the U.S. was plying Rumania with trade of our own, in order to woo it away from Moscow. All of these double dealings were suppose to help bridge the gap between the evil communist regimes and the U.S. Can we surmise the same type of double dealings is taking place with the Muslims in the Middle East? Liberal diplomats claimed their policy of aiding the Communists into affability would bring about a “thaw” in East-West relations but Stanton writes the historical record suggests, however that the Soviets have not responded very kindly to our pacifist overtures because while the wheat deal was moving toward completion, indeed, Communists acts of hostility seemed if anything to increase.
Then it was discovered after the wheat shipment that a shipment of rice was going to Moscow. Rice is not a high-consumption item in the USSR so can it be assumed the rice was also subsidized by the U.S. taxpayers and that it went to the Orient to feed the Viet Cong terrorists shooting at American soldiers in Viet Nam? We have only two presidential candidates – Ron Paul and Rick Perry- who have served their country in the military but I notice in these debates it’s the other candidates that are quick to go to war. We need to be more like Israel. My husband is a Korean vet, our son served in the U.S. Navy. We need a draft with no deferments or other excuses. With the exception of our volunteer military, this current generation of materialistic young people has taken their freedoms for granted.
THE BATTLE ACT OF 1951
The Battle Act of 1951 called for cutting off of aid to nations that knowingly sent strategic items to Communist countries. In 1961 Congress passed public law 87-128 which stated that subsidized agricultural commodities should not be available to the Soviet Union or to countries dominated by the USSR. The wheat deal was the first announced without any approval from Congress. In fact, Congress disapproved; however, the penalty provided in the Act – termination of U.S. aid – was never imposed and when the Act became operative on January 24, 1952, there was a presidential determination that continuance of aid was “in the interest of national security.”
This brings me to the next violation of “trading with the enemy.” Stanton writes about other U.S. sales to the Communist countries that were obviously “prototypes” – instruments or designs which the Communists could readily copy and manufacture in large numbers once they had obtained a specimen or blueprint of the original. This was in direct defiance of a finding by a select House Committee on Export Control which declared, “It makes no sense to strengthen the economic potential of our Cold War Communist enemies than to arm them,” and yet the Select Committee found glaring instances where we have economically strengthened countries in the Soviet bloc. It was suggested that immediate steps should be taken to more effectively control the exports of technical data. Were those steps implemented? Early in 1961, the Kennedy Administration approved for export to Russia precision machine tools designated as “clearly of military value” by the Defense Department.
WHAT HAPPENS TO WHISTLEBLOWERS
Congressman Ron Paul has been in Washington, D.C. long enough to have been aware of these double dealings by especially the State Department and may be why he responded to the current Wikileaks scandal as he did. It is easy for some to become Monday morning quarterbacks and shaming the Congressman for calling the accused traitor a patriot. While his remark may have been over the top, I sense he was glad to have a little transparency in government at long last.
Being a whistleblower takes courage. A caller to the Rush Limbaugh radio show on 7/1/2009 said he attended a Tea Party in April across from the White House. She talked to a man who was with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) when asked what he thought about the carbon credits, he rolled his eyes and said he learned a long time ago to be skeptical of his own agency – an agency at the top or Ron Paul’s agenda to be eliminated. She asked about Whistle Blowing and he said, “I’ve seen what happens to people so I’m just going to lay low and try to keep people honest.
These apathetic whistleblowers are generally jittery insiders who drop off brown envelopes at the risk of their job, their lives or a psychiatric facility. Former U.S. House of Representatives Republican Bob Barr said the scales of justice are rigged and the failure of Congress to protect people with the courage to blow the whistle on corruption has also been enormous. He mentions when Linda Tripp (remember the blue dress/Lewinsky and Bill Clinton) was illegally smeared, Congress offered only lukewarm words of support.
Revelation 3:15-16 has some pretty strong words about lukewarm people. He said allowing Tripp and others like her to suffer the unchecked wrath of the administration will ensure critics silence in the future.
And, of course, we’ve seen how the Obama Department of Justice covers for him. The journalists have the responsibility to expose corruption, but they, too, run for cover when the intimidating phone calls come in the middle of the night so the corruption goes on generally unabated. Things haven’t changed since Jesus walked on earth. Among the chief rulers, many believed on Him but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God (John 12:42-43) Today there are those who want their paychecks, paid health insurance, retirement benefits, etc. and they don’t want to lose their posh government jobs so the Titanic continues to tip like the luxury cruise ship that hit some rocks off the coast of Italy.
© 2012 Betty Freauf - All Rights Reserved
Betty is a former Oregon Republican party activist having served as state party secretary, county chairman, 5th congressional vice chairman and then elected chairman, and a precinct worker for many years but Betty gave up on the two-party system in 2004.
Betty is a researcher specializing in education, a freelance journalist and a regular contributor to www.NewsWithViews.com
E-Mail: bettyfreauf@gmail.com
Betty Freauf -- Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy
Ron Paul to Pause from Campaigning in South Carolina for Debt-Ceiling VoteShields taxpayers and future generations from costly Washington enlargement, irresponsibility
LAKE JACKSON, Texas – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul will pause from his active South Carolina campaign schedule to return to Washington for a vote denying President Obama’s request for a debt-ceiling increase. The 12-term Congressman from Texas will travel to the nation’s capital tomorrow, Wednesday, and return early Thursday morning for the final three days of campaigning.
On January 12th, Obama announced his intention to exercise early an option to increase the debt-limit, and to do so in the amount of $1.2 trillion. His option to do so was created under a 2011 budget agreement that created a near-automatic debt-increase mechanism, the use of a disastrous unconstitutional “Super Committee,” and other means of helping Congress shirk their core mission of managing the federal government’s purse-strings.
Tomorrow, House Republicans, Blue Dog Democrats, and other budget hawks have an opportunity to voice their displeasure at the spendthrift habits of the administration and those of their peers in a resolution refusing to grant Obama the right to exercise his option. The vote, then, separates the true budget hawks from the tax-hikers and the borrowers, and helps frame the debate by forcing the Democrat-controlled Senate to support Obama – or compelling Obama to step way out in front and demand a credit card increase of $1.2 trillion in taxpayer money at a time when the national debt surpasses national GDP.
Paul’s campaigning in the Palmetto State has been vigorous, with speeches to the South Carolina Tea Party Convention and the Faith & Freedom Coalition Presidential Kick-Off, and participation in last night’s Fox News presidential debate. Today Paul also is holding town hall meetings in Spartanburg and Rock Hill.
Paul’s campaigning was also fruitful. On Sunday he picked up the consequential endorsement of state Sen. Tom Davis (R-Beaufort), who earlier today joined Paul for a press conference at the South Carolina State House where Paul picked up additional key endorsements from state Sens. Lee Bright (R-Spartanburg), Kevin Bryant (R-Spartanburg), and Danny Verdin (Greenville).
“The issue of debt and spending are uniting Republicans and independent voters to stand up and say ‘enough.’ The Washington establishment has for far too long gambled away Americans’ hard-earned wages while going so far as to present the children and grandchildren of workers with a dim future saddled with debt,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton.
“Ron Paul is taking real action to stop the debt wherever he can while his rivals for the Republican nomination pay only lip service. Tomorrow’s vote will divide leaders into two starkly different camps: the tax-and-spend establishment, and the true reformers who want to roll back decades of government enlargement, overreach, and irresponsibility. Voters this election cycle, we trust, are savvy and can distinguish between smooth-talking politicians and the one candidate of authentic change, Ron Paul,” added Mr. Benton.
In addition to his South Carolina campaign successes, Ron Paul released his new ad ‘Three of a Kind’ concerning the serial hypocrisy, counterfeit conservatism, and flip-flopping of his rivals Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Mitt Romney respectively.
Ron Paul to Pause from Campaigning in South Carolina for Debt-Ceiling Vote*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
Unlike His Opponents, Opposing Debt Increases Always a “No-Brainer” for Ron Paul
The Washington Times reports:
Rep. Ron Paul will drop off the campaign trail in South Carolina on Wednesday and fly back to Washington to cast a vote against raising the debt ceiling, his campaign said Tuesday…
Returning to Washington to take the vote highlights one of Mr. Paul’s strengths in the race: He is one of only two current officeholders still in the race — the other is Texas Gov. Rick Perry — and the only one whose job allows him to actually go head-to-head with President Obama.
The vote is a no-brainer for Mr. Paul, now in his 12th term, who has made a career out of voting against spending bills and debt increases. It also will give him a chance to highlight another difference with some of his competitors, former Sen. Rick Santorum and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who supported debt increases during their time in Congress.
Unlike His Opponents, Opposing Debt Increases Always a "No-Brainer" for Ron Paul*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
Baptist Pastor Explains “Why Ron Paul?”
These are some good answers for voters who have questions about Ron Paul from a Christian perspective. Writes Voddie Baucham, Pastor at Grace Family Baptist Church:
Since posting a passing comment on my Facebook fan page about Ron Paul, I have been inundated with questions and concerns about my support of the Texas Congressman in the current Republican Primary race… The result was hundreds of comments; more than any other post I’ve ever submitted. Most of the comments were positive. However, several were extremely negative… As a result, I’ve decided to explain my position, and this seemed like the best place to do it.
I. Ron Paul is a Christian Conservative
While I am not looking for a “Pastor-in-Chief,” it is important to me that the man for whom I cast my vote be a Christian, if at all possible… I also want to know that the foundational ideology motivating a man’s decisions is biblical. I know it will not always mirror my own, but I trust God’s word, and appreciate those who look to it for aid in making decisions. To that end, I support Dr. Paul because he is not just a conservative, but a Christian Conservative.
Dr. Paul does not beat his Christian faith like a drum in his public/political life. Unfortunately, that is off-putting for the “Christian Right”. However, in a world full of ‘posturing’ in an effort to win over evangelicals, I find Paul’s public demeanor refreshing. And it is not as though he is a ‘closet Christian,’ either. “I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Savior, and I endeavor every day to follow Him in all I do and in every position I advocate” wrote Paul on his Web site… Having met and talked to Dr. Paul, I would say it is authenticity, and humility more than anything else. He wants “to avoid any appearance of exploiting [his faith] for political gain.”[6]
II. Ron Paul is a Constitutional Conservative
Not only is Ron Paul a Christian Conservative; he is also a Constitutional Conservative. He holds himself accountable to the Constitution of the United States, even when it means he has to vote against legislation that may be otherwise beneficial… I want a man whose decisions are predictable because of a long track record of constitutional conservatism. I may not always agree with a man like that, but I will always know why he did what he did, and I can live with that. Especially in several crucial areas facing our Republic, like money, war, States’ Rights, and foreign policy, for example.
Constitutional Money
I support Ron Paul because he has a constitutional view of money. He is the only candidate consistently to confront the Federal Reserve Bank (which is not federal, has no reserves, and is not a bank), and address the issue of fiat currency (a.k.a. unjust weights and measures; Lev 19:36; Prov 16:11), which debases the dollar, manipulates business cycles, creates inflation, and always benefits the rich at the expense of the poor and disenfranchised. And he talks about the issue in just those terms.
Congressman Paul is also the only candidate who has a budget that will cut a TRILLION DOLLARS in spending in year one.[7] He is the only candidate who has committed to defund and eliminate expensive, unconstitutional agencies…
Constitutional War
I support Ron Paul because he is a military veteran (yup… he refuses to beat that drum too, which is why you may not have known that little tidbit). And though I do not believe it is necessary for a man to have served in the military for him to serve as President, the fact that Congressman Paul knows and hates war lends credibility to his desire and commitment to ending the wars and bringing our troops home.
Moreover, he has a constitutional understanding of war (only Congress can send us to war), and a Christian commitment to historic Just War Theory (rooted in the Sixth Commandment… HIS WORDS).[8] He, unlike other candidates, can be counted on not to commit to acts of war without congressional authority (i.e., unilaterally deciding to bomb a sovereign nation if they advance their weapons technology in a region several thousand miles away from the U.S., under the watchful eye of a nation with over 300 nukes who can stop them in a heartbeat… but I digress).
There is a reason Dr. Paul has received more support from members of the military than all other candidates…
Constitutional States’ Rights
I support Ron Paul because he not only understands, but believes in the Tenth Amendment. I know many Christians have been scared off by the “Ron Paul wants to legalize drugs, gay marriage, and abortion” rhetoric. However, looking beyond the rhetoric reveals Paul’s true constitutional conservatism (and biblical understanding of jurisdiction). He has personal convictions, but those will not be allowed to steer him away from his constitutional oath. The presidency, and the Federal Government have limits.
The President is not “Pastor in Chief.” It is not the President’s job (or the job of the Federal Government) to set such policies. The “War on Drugs,” for example, has been a monumental, unconstitutional, fiscal failure (to the tune of more than $3 BILLION)![12] The Federal Government must be held within the confines of its enumerated powers. This is important for Christians because we will not always have people in the White House with whom we agree (in fact, politicians will always let us down).
What happens when we send a man to the White House with the express purpose of “changing the moral standards” of America in our favor, then, down the line we have a president who uses the same un-cheked powers to promote moral standards with which we disagree? How’s that workin’ for ya’?
Constitutional Foreign Policy
I support Ron Paul because he has a constitutional view of foreign policy. Ironically, our foreign policy has been so unconstitutional for so long that many people recoil at the idea of getting it back in line. Moreover, the semantic game Paul’s opponents play (using “isolationism” as opposed to “non-intervention” to define his position) doesn’t help. For most Christians, this is where they believe I’ve left the reservation. They may not say, “We have to be the world’s police force,” but I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard, “Do you know his position on Israel?” “Surely you can’t support a man who doesn’t support Israel!”
Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. Ron Paul does support Israel…
III. Ron Paul is a Consistent Conservative
Finally, I support Dr. Paul because he has been a consistent conservative. He has been married to the same woman for more than fifty years; delivered over 4,000 babies as an OB; never performed a single abortion; has never voted for an unbalanced budget, a tax increase, or a bailout; forecasted the economic debacle long before it happened;[13] and gave back $140,000 last year through his office to pay down the national debt (100,000 in 2010). This man is so principled that he refuses to claim his congressional pension!
Ron Paul is the real deal. He is not perfect. He needs a savior just like you and I do (as noted by his trust in Christ as his redeemer). But when it’s all said and done, he is a man with whom I agree in principle. I know where he’s coming from, and it’s not based on his “personal story,” or his sense of what’s going to get him elected. It’s the same thing he’s been running on (and governing from) for over three decades; the Constitution of the United States (viewed through the lens of a basic biblical world and life view). And I’m glad to support a man like that.
The entire post is well worth reading
Baptist Pastor Explains "Why Ron Paul?"*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee
It’s Over – Only Two Republican Candidates on Virginia BallotIn the Commonwealth, real change candidate and Champion of the Constitution Ron Paul will face down establishment flip-flopper Mitt RomneyLAKE JACKSON, Texas – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul, the constitutionally-observant candidate of real change, will face down establishment candidate and notorious flip-flopper Mitt Romney in a head-to-head matchup in the Virginia primary.
The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied four candidates’ appeals to appear on the ballot after their glaring failure to comply with the Commonwealth’s stringent, but widely-known, ballot access requirements.
Former candidate Jon Huntsman and Rick Santorum did not file signatures with the Virginia State Board of Elections at all. Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich did file signatures, but fell short of qualifying. Rick Perry then brought a suit against the state challenging the ballot-access requirements to which all candidates were held, and others failing to qualify joined the suit. When the suit was struck down, an injunction was filed in part to reconcile whether and when paper ballots would be printed, and today the final decision was handed down.
Virginia is the nation’s 12th-largest state and its primary election takes place on March 6th – Super Tuesday. The absence of any other candidates on the ballot aside from Paul and Romney, including serial hypocrite Gingrich and counterfeit conservative Santorum, is sending ripple effects throughout key early voting states including South Carolina where Palmetto State voters now are concerned about how their vote will affect the nominating process going forward.
For example, some voters might vote for a candidate with an organization too weak to comply with ballot access requirements. Voting for that candidate would result in a vote wasted, as were the votes of many for candidates who exited the race like Michele Bachmann and Jon Huntsman. Others ponder that only one veteran of the armed forces – Ron Paul – will be on the ballot in Virginia, a state so steeped in military tradition. Still others have observed that only one Evangelical Christian will appear on the ballot there. Indeed, there are many questions.
One thing is certain. And that is, the decision has upended what plaintiffs against the Commonwealth and voters nationwide had expected just hours ago when plaintiffs held onto thin hopes of a reversal, or a convenient exception to the rule of law.
“It’s over,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton. “Ron Paul, the candidate of real change, will face off against establishment flip-flopper Mitt Romney in the Virginia primary, making that that Tuesday less ‘super’ for serial hypocrite Newt Gingrich, counterfeit conservative Rick Santorum, and Rick Perry, who I should mention is marginally attached to the presidential race.”
“This legal development affirms that this Republican nominating contest has always been a two-man race between the candidates with the resources and organization required for a 50-state race. Voters nationwide should get behind the candidate of real change as he competes nationwide – and nationwide means a lot of states, including large ones like Virginia,” said Mr. Benton.
“Right now South Carolina voters have vital information helpful for deciding not only who the authentic conservative in the race is – Ron Paul – but whether that candidate leaves South Carolina with a ticket that actually gets him somewhere,” added Mr. Benton.
It's Over