Ron Paul on the Issues

Oh my: Another Iowa poll has Ron Paul in second place

posted at 7:10 pm on November 17, 2011
by Allahpundit

He was a distant fourth in Rasmussen’s poll of likely voters this morning, but there’s no way the “Paul surge!” meme is going to die that easily. New fuel for the fire today from Iowa State: A poll of almost 1,000 Iowa registered Republicans has him just above 20 percent, four points better than Romney and just four points back of a guy whose own supporters have taken to dumping him as unelectable on national TV. As Cain fades a bit, Newt starts to come on strong, and Perry gets his second wind, there’s at least a chance here of a five-way split that would let Paul squeak to victory with, say, 25 percent. Look out, fiat money!

Is the rEVOLution coming to Des Moines? WaPo’s Chris Cillizza is bullish:

The most obvious reason is that Paul has been on television in the state since July and has spent more than $1.35 million on ads. (For months, Paul had the airwaves to himself although Texas Gov. Rick Perry is now on television in Iowa as well.)…

And, it’s not just Paul’s television ads that have blanketed the state. Sixty seven percent of those tested in the Bloomberg poll said they had been contacted by the Paul campaign via email, direct mail, telephone or someone coming directly to their door over the last year — the highest percentage for any candidate. (Just 47 percent said the same of Perry, 46 percent of Romney and 41 percent of Cain.)…

“Turnout will probably be lower than in 2008 because there are not the kind of hyper-developed ground efforts like we saw in 2008, 2000, or 1996,” said Gentry Collins, a former executive director of the Republican Party of Iowa. “I think that benefits a candidate like Paul because the depth of his appeal will guarantee him a minimum number.”…

“[Paul] will benefit more than other candidates from our registration rules as independents, Libertarians [and] Democrats can effectively become Republicans for a night and caucus for Paul,” said one veteran Iowa Republican operative. “Anecdotally, I have encountered more than a few self-described liberals who will caucus for Paul due to his anti-war stance.”

Caucusing for Paul as a liberal would be exceedingly stupid, and not just because his ideology is the most antithetical to the welfare state of any candidate in the field. Like I said yesterday, a Paul win in Iowa would greatly raise the chances of Romney being nominated — and Romney is, for better or worse, The One’s toughest opponent head to head. A smart, cynical, calculating liberal would organize an “Operation Chaos” on behalf of Perry, whose favorables have turned toxic but who could still, probably, win the nomination on a wave of Not Romney enthusiasm if he takes Iowa. He’d be easier pickings for Obama in the general, especially if he goes crosseyed again at one of the debates.

Via Cillizza, here’s one of the spots airing in Iowa. Can’t wait for the Ron Paul foreign policy ad. Exit question: Is the Republican field really going to be out-organized and out-hustled in corn country by a libertarian outsider? What’s the point of being establishment if the establishment can be outmaneuvered like that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7RaY...layer_embedded

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/11/1...-second-place/

Ron Paul is for real in Iowa. Seriously.

Posted by Chris Cillizza at 02:48 PM ET, 11/17/2011

Texas Rep. Ron Paul, long dismissed by the GOP establishment as a fringe candidate, has broadened his electoral appeal and emerged as a major player in the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, according to several recent polls and conversations with a handful of longtime Hawkeye political operatives.

“He has certainly broadened his coalition from the ‘rage against the machine’ types that primarily comprised his supporters in 2008,” said one senior Iowa Republican operative granted anonymity to speak candidly about Paul’s prospects. “The expanded coalition includes more traditional activists — as a number of GOP county chairs have endorsed his campaign, as have a handful of legislators.”Two recent polls confirm Paul’s momentum in the state.

In a Bloomberg News survey — conducted by renowned Iowa-based pollster Ann Selzer — Paul was in a four-way statistical tie for first along with businessman Herman Cain, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. (Cain had 20 percent to 19 percent for Paul, 18 percent for Romney and 17 percent for Gingrich.)

And, in a new Iowa State/Gazette/KCRG survey, Paul took 20 percent — behind only Cain at 25 percent.

(For more on Paul’s surprising poll strength in Iowa, make sure to check out the Post’s “Behind the Numbers” polling blog.)

So, there is broad — if not unanimous — agreement that Paul has momentum in Iowa. But, why?

The most obvious reason is that Paul has been on television in the state since July and has spent more than $1.35 million on ads. (For months, Paul had the airwaves to himself although Texas Gov. Rick Perry is now on television in Iowa as well.)

Paul is using the relatively uncluttered airwaves to tell a story of himself as a consistent champion of fiscal responsibility in a field of candidates that have not always hewed so closely to that mantra.

One ad attacks the inconsistencies of Cain, Romney and Perry on fiscal matters — TARP, economic stimulus — before cutting to Paul; “I’ve been talking about these problems for a long long time...now we’re bankrupt and we have to decide which way we’re going to go,” he says.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7RaYbToq7Q&feature=player_embedded

And, it’s not just Paul’s television ads that have blanketed the state. Sixty seven percent of those tested in the Bloomberg poll said they had been contacted by the Paul campaign via email, direct mail, telephone or someone coming directly to their door over the last year — the highest percentage for any candidate. (Just 47 percent said the same of Perry, 46 percent of Romney and 41 percent of Cain.)

“We have a strong ground game in the state that is reaching out at a faster pace than any other campaign,” argued Trygve Olson, a Paul adviser.

The other major factor that appears to be working in Paul’s favor is the lack of a clear social conservative candidate ala former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee in 2008.

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann appeared to be the natural 2012 heir to the Huckabee slot in Iowa but has collapsed both in the state and nationally since she won the Ames Straw Poll in mid-August. (Don’t forget — because many people do — that Paul came within a hairsbreadth of defeating Bachmann at Ames.)

Perry, too, has faltered badly since he began his campaign. And, while Gingrich and Cain have pockets of support among social conservatives neither have an organization in the state to match Paul’s.

“We are picking up support among social conservatives in Iowa -- particularly ones who believe our country’s fiscal situation is in serious peril,” noted Olson.

There are other, more technical reasons to believe that Paul warrants being taken seriously in the state.

Turnout in the 2012 caucuses is expected to dip below the 119,000 (or so) people who turned out in 2008.

“Turnout will probably be lower than in 2008 because there are not the kind of hyper-developed ground efforts like we saw in 2008, 2000, or 1996,” said Gentry Collins, a former executive director of the Republican Party of Iowa. “I think that benefits a candidate like Paul because the depth of his appeal will guarantee him a minimum number.”

The composition of the caucus-goers, too, could help Paul whose appeal — much more so than his GOP rivals — expands beyond the typical Republican rank and file.

“[Paul] will benefit more than other candidates from our registration rules as independents, Libertarians [and] Democrats can effectively become Republicans for a night and caucus for Paul,” said one veteran Iowa Republican operative. “Anecdotally, I have encountered more than a few self-described liberals who will caucus for Paul due to his anti-war stance.”

There are still few people — outside of Paul’s direct orbit — who see a clear path to victory for the Texas Republican in Iowa. Paul’s problem in Iowa, as it is almost everywhere, is that his support base is loyal and getting larger but still too small to comprise a winning coalition. (Make sure to read our piece on what Paul has in common with “Friday Night Lights” for more on that particular phenomenon.)
But, Paul is an emerging Iowa force in a rac
e that remains as wide open as at any time in recent memory. That means that Paul’s rivals ignore him at their own peril.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...M7UN_blog.html

November 17, 2011

Ron Pauls Revolution Riding High

FNC Online Editor Chris Stirewalt handicaps the 2012 election and describes Rep. Ron Pauls path to the nomination.

Video: http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/freed ... _id=158146

If you agree with the way Freddie Mac screwed America, Vote for one of their lobbyists - Newt Gingrich.

If you think you aren't paying enough taxes and you don't care if your president knows anything about foreign policy, vote for Herman Cain.

If you think that your daughter's body is owned by the state and they can force dangerous vaccines on her for sexually transmitted diseases, and you think illegal immigrants should have a free education paid for by American taxpayers - vote for Rick Perry.

If you like Obama care, vote for its founder - Mitt Romney.

If you think we just haven't killed enough Muslim civilians or American soldiers and you think we should kill more of both, vote Rick Santorum (or any of the above).

If you love freedom and agree with our founding fathers - vote Ron Paul.

Ron Paul Signs on to Letter Calling for Pay Cut in Congress

Advocates cutting compensation to reduce deficit

LAKE JACKSON, Texas - Yesterday, 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul joined a bipartisan group of legislators in a letter sent to the members of the Super Committee calling for a reduction in Congressional compensation as part of any proposal to reduce the deficit.

The letter advocates reducing Congressional pay to “send a powerful message to the American people that Congress should not be exempt from the sacrifices it will take to balance the budget.” It also highlights the fact that members of Congress are paid salaries 3.4 times the average full-time American workers.

“Congressman Paul has always voted against congressional pay raises, and he not does participate in the lucrative pension program,” said Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee Chairman Jesse Benton.

“Ron Paul understands that Washington has to tighten its belt just like the rest of America, which is why as President, he plans to take a salary of $39,336, which is approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker.”

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/11/1...t-in-congress/

http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/...icalticker.jpg

Ron Pauls Plan Perfect Match for Tea Party

Writes Yahoo News Lou Lippincott:

This past summer, the tea party members fought so valiantly to keep the Obama administration from additional deficit spending, so much so that Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa) had the insensitivity to proclaim, “This small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money.” Not long after wrongfully being labeled terrorists, the tea party was bullied by statements from the Obama administration that Social Security and Medicare could be in danger if their persistence on limiting spending continued.

In the end what most of us know, and what the tea party knew back in February, is that spending is the disease that is causing America to lose credibility and economic prosperity — not our $3 trillion in annual tax revenue. Social Security and Medicare checks would have still been sent, though perhaps we would have had to cut the $3 billion in annual foreign aid to Pakistan.

The various economic plans offered by Republican candidates propose some cuts to spending, and tea party members will think this is good move for the country. Gov. Mitt Romney’s plan only cuts about $30 billion in the first year, and Rick Perry’s plan proposes cuts of about $100 billion.

However, only one candidate for president offers a plan that seems to embody the heart and soul of the tea party caucus — Texas Congressman Ron Paul and his Trillion Dollar plan. Logically, tea party members would back the plan that achieves a balanced budget most aggressively since a balanced budget is the Holy Grail of tea party members.

Paul’s plan boldly cuts $1 trillion in the first year and returns America to a balanced budget in his first term as president. Even more astounding is that the budget cuts come from senseless government waste and federal government duplicity, like maintaining active military bases in foreign countries a half-century after the end of the war. Paul achieves a balanced budget in just three years while keeping the government’s promise to those receiving Social Security and Medicare benefits.

The tea party members have always been mindfully focused on fiscal matters, and their gradual return to Paul’s candidacy and spending plan is only beginning.

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/11/1...for-tea-party/

Ron Paul Steady in New Hampshire Top Three

New poll shows Pauls continued rise in GOP field

LAKE JACKSON, Texas In the latest New Hampshire Journal poll, http://www.scribd.com/doc/73114432/New- ... lts-111711 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul remains a top three choice of likely New Hampshire primary voters with 16 percent.

While others may rise and fall quickly, Congressman Pauls support is steady and rising

GOP outsider Ron Paul gaining traction in Iowa

By THOMAS BEAUMONT
Associated Press
Nov 19, 1:03 AM EST


FILE - In this Nov. 12, 2011 photo, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, speaks at the CBS News/National Journal foreign policy debate at the Benjamin Johnson Arena in Spartanburg, S.C. Paul is emerging as a significant factor in the Republican presidential race, especially in Iowa. Long dismissed by the GOP establishment, the libertarian-leaning candidate is turning heads beyond his hard-core followers just weeks before the state holds the leadoff presidential caucuses. (AP Photo/Richard Shiro)

ANAMOSA, Iowa (AP) -- Texas Rep. Ron Paul is emerging as a significant factor in the Republican presidential race, especially in Iowa.

He's been long dismissed by the GOP establishment, but the libertarian-leaning candidate is now turning heads beyond his hard-core followers - and rising in some polls - just weeks before the state holds the leadoff presidential caucuses and four years since his failed 2008 bid.

Paul's sharp criticism of government spending and U.S. monetary policy hasn't changed since then.

And while his isolationist brand of foreign policy may be a non-starter for some establishment Republicans, its appeal among independents is helping Paul gain ground in a crowded Republican field. His boost is an indication of just how volatile the Republican presidential race is in this state and across the country.

"The good news is the country has changed in the last four years in a way I never would have believed," Paul told about 80 Republicans and independents at the Pizza Ranch restaurant in this town on Friday. "In the last four years, something dramatic has happened."

What has helped Paul rise here has been more methodic than dramatic.

His campaign here is a stark comparison to the shoestring, rag-tag operation of four years ago that attracted a narrow band of supporters.

This time, he has built an Iowa organization with the look of a more mainstream campaign.

He has raised more money, hired three times the staff and started organizing his campaign in Iowa earlier than before. Paul was the first candidate to begin airing television ads this fall, and has maintained the most consistent advertising schedule in Iowa.

"We have a more structured, methodical, traditional campaign with Ron Paul here in Iowa more often," said Drew Ivers, an Iowa Republican Party central committee member and Paul's Iowa campaign chairman.

Paul is better-known this time, and has spent almost twice as much time in Iowa at this point in the 2012 campaign than in his bid for the 2008 caucuses. Paul finished in fifth place, closely behind Arizona Sen. John McCain and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson in Iowa in 2008.

The intense focus on Iowa this time may be working, with surveys showing Paul is reaching deeper into the caucus electorate.

A recent Bloomberg News poll showed him in close second place in Iowa, behind Herman Cain and narrowly ahead of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

The same poll showed more Iowa caucus-goers had been contacted by the Paul campaign than any of the other six GOP campaigns actively competing for the Jan. 3 caucuses.

Two weeks earlier, The Des Moines Register's poll showed Paul in solid third place, behind Cain and Romney.

And Paul seems to have been able to sustain his support after finishing a close second in the Iowa GOP's August straw poll, while straw poll winner Michele Bachmann, a Minnesota representative, has dipped in Iowa polls since.

But it's unclear whether Paul can cobble together broad enough support to win the caucuses with a plurality of the vote. At the very least, he will impact the results of the contest. But to what degree is anyone's guess.

The one thing that hasn't changed from four years ago is Paul's style.

He remains the mild-mannered, professorial former obstetrician, delivering long explanations of the history of U.S. monetary and trade policy.

In Anamosa, the audience of more than 130 at the small town's community center applauded when he said he would propose cutting $1 trillion from the federal deficit his first year in office, primarily by vastly reducing U.S. foreign aid.

But he also called for shrinking the military budget by reducing the U.S. military presence around the world, arguing that Congress and military contractors are too closely tied together.

"Yes, we have to have national security, but we don't get it by bankrupting our country and being in everyone's face constantly," Paul said.

The sentiment rings true with Charles Betz, a 47-year-old network engineer from nearby Tama, Iowa. He has typically been an independent voter, but is registered as a Republican so he can caucus for Paul on Jan. 3.

It's Paul's foreign and national security policy that has drawn fire from establishment Republicans. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who is competing with Paul in Iowa for the outsider vote, has been vocally critical of Paul's stance.

So has Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, a Republican who has been courted by most of the GOP candidates.

"I gave Paul credit for having the most ambitious plan to reduce the debt, which he does," Branstad told The Associated Press. "But I don't agree with him on foreign policy, at all. I'm real concerned with his views on that."

Paul's rivals have particularly criticized his view that Iran does not pose a serious threat to the U.S., a point Paul made again Friday.

"Think about how the war drums were beating to get into Iraq. None of it was true, and I don't believe the stories now about why we should be shaking in our boots over Iran," he said. "They are absolutely incapable of attacking us."

Paul was traveling from small-town Vinton to equally small Anamosa Friday, before capping the day with a major rally in metropolitan Cedar Rapids, where he was to be endorsed by the founder of the Cedar Rapids tea party.

His focus isn't limited to Iowa.

Paul will be in New Hampshire early next week, where he finished fifth four years ago.

This time, Paul's fiscally-conservative profile combined with his anti-interventionist foreign policy could help him do better.

Associated Press writer Steve Peoples in Exeter, N.H., contributed to this report.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 8-18-27-33

Ron Paul Warns GOP Not To "Capitulate" On Taxes, Won't Rule Out Indy Bid

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 8OR2r6NYm0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=P8OR2r6NYm0

Posted on November 18, 2011

Ron Paul with Sean Hannity discussing the economy and the election. Paul talks about the lack of attention he receives, if he is not ignored altogether. Paul says he and his staff were "annoyed" by the fact that he only received 89 seconds to speak at the last Republican debate.

Paul warned his Republican colleagues in the Congress that they better keep their pledge to not raise taxes. He says if they do "capitulate" on taxes then people will make them pay.

"I have no intention of doing that," Paul says of a third-party run if he doesn't get the Republican nomination. However, when asked several times by Hannity to rule out an independent bid, he would not.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... y_bid.html

Round Table Republican Debate Live Webcast

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/19/2011 17:36 -0500

It must be at least a few days since the last one because CitizenLink is currently webcasting yet another GOP presidential debate this time the Thanksgiving Family Forum in Iowa which is hosting a round table for the candidates not to be confused with the pumpins generously strewn around, and in which Ron Paul is not unexpectedly projected to potentially win.

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...5.40.31 PM.png

Thanksgiving Family Forum Complete Video

Nov 19, 2011

Video: http://www.citizenlink.com/2011/11/19/t ... ete-video/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGR61aRzyb4&feature=player_embedded

Hear what the candidates have to say about family issues, life challenges, the sanctity of life, marriage and more. Watch the event in its entirety. The Forum took place in Des Moines, Iowa, on Nov. 19.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/round-tab ... nt-1895491

Ron Paul: "It Is Estimated That US Banks Have Over A Trillion Dollars Tied Up At-Risk With German And French Banks"

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/14/2011 14:58 -0500

From Ron Paul

European Debt Crisis Threatens the Dollar

The global economic situation is becoming more dire every day. Approximately half of all US banks have significant exposure to the debt crisis in Europe. Much more dangerous for the US taxpayer is the dollar's status as reserve currency for the world, and the US Federal Reserve's status as the lender of last resort. As we've learned in recent disclosures, this has not only benefitted companies like AIG, the auto industry and various US banks, but multiple foreign central banks as they have run into trouble. Nothing has been solved, however, by offering up the productivity of Americans as a sacrificial lamb. Greece is set to be the first domino to fall in the string of European economies at risk. Rather than learning from Greece's terrible example of an over-consuming public sector and drowning private sector, what is more likely from our politicians is an eventual bailout of European investors.

The US has a relatively small exposure to overwhelmed Greek banks, but much larger economies in Europe are set to follow and that will have serious implications for US banks. Greece is technically small enough to bail out. Italy is not. Germany is not. France is not. It is estimated that US banks have over a trillion dollars tied up in at-risk German and French banks. Because the urge to paper over the debt with more credit is so strong, the collapse of the Euro is imminent. Will the Fed be held responsible if the Euro brings the US dollar down with it?

The most disingenuous aspect of the narrative about the European sovereign debt crisis is that entire economies will collapse if more resources are not bilked from productive people around the world. This is untrue. Tough times are coming for the banks, to be sure, but free people always find a way back to prosperity if the politicians leave them alone. Communities within Greece are coming together and forming barter systems because they know the Euro is becoming unstable. Greeks are learning how to engage in commerce with each other, without the use of fiat currency controlled by central banks. In other words, they are rediscovering what money really is, and they are trading with each other in ways that cannot be controlled, manipulated, squandered, inflated away and generally ruined by corrupt bankers and the politicians that enable them. Farmers will still grow food, mechanics will still fix cars, people will still make things and exchange them with each other. No banker, no politician can stop that by destroying one medium of exchange. People will find or create another medium of exchange.

Unfortunately when politicians try to monopolize currency with legal tender laws, the people find it harder and harder to survive the inflation and taxation to which they are subjected. Bankers should take their dreaded haircut rather than making innocent people pay for their mistakes. The losses should be limited and liquidated, rather than perpetuated and rewarded. This is the only way we can recover.

Government debt is often considered rock solid because it is backed by a government's ability to forcibly extract interest payments out of the public. The public is increasingly unwilling to be bilked to make bankers whole. The riots and the violence in Greece should tell us something about the sustainability of this system.

If we continue to bail out banks and bankers so they can continue to lose money, if we cavalierly put this burden on the taxpayer, it is all too predictable what will happen here.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/ron-paul- ... ench-banks

Ron Paul Doesnt Exist

November 18, 2011 by Bob Livingston

http://plimages.blob.core.windows.ne...1117_image.jpg
The mainstream media insist Ron Paul doesnt really exist, but more Americans are finding him every day.

Listening to the mainstream government propaganda arm corporatist media, one would think Ron Paul doesnt exist; or, if he does, theres no way hes going to be the Republican nominee.

But something happened on the way to the media blackout party. Ron Pauls message is winning despite the concerted effort by the political and media elites to act like hes not really there. In Iowa, Paul is in a four-way tie with Herman Cain, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, according to a new Bloomberg News survey. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-1 ... cuses.html

In New Hampshire, Paul is now second to Romney according to a Bloomberg News poll of that States voters. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-1 ... shire.html New Hampshire is essentially Romneys home State, and he holds a commanding lead there; but a win in Iowa and strong second place in the Granite State would cement Paul as the leading anti-Romney candidate.

And according to Public Policy Polling, Paul now leads President Barack Obama 48 percent to 39 percent among the key independent voters. So that should put a damper on any arguments that Paul cant beat Obama. http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... 115513.pdf

The mainstream media insist Paul doesnt really exist, but more Americans are finding him every day despite the medias best efforts to sweep him aside, paint him as a kook or call him irrelevant. As one after another of the Chosen

The fix is in: Republicans make sure Obama serves second term

November 19, 2011 by ppjg
John Boering /PPJ contributor November 19, 2011

http://ppjg.files.wordpress.com/2011...pg?w=300&h=253

I have concluded that we may as well dispense with the coming media circus surrounding the 2012 presidential election. Think of it: no phony “debates”, no stage shows, no mud slinging ads, no having to hear the same lame lies and statements as one candidate after another tries to convince us that he/she will reverse the terrible destructive course the US is on. We don’t need to subject ourselves to any of it; the fix is in and Obama wins hands down, no competition……or at least none that the Republican party will acknowledge. Why upset the status quo?
How do I know this?

The Republican party could easily sweep the elections and retake the White House simply by running Ron Paul (R) TX. Poll after poll shows Paul garnering 25% with GOP voters and as much as 70% or more with the public from BOTH sides of the political spectrum.

During the GOP debate, CBS twice removed a candidate poll because the support for Ron Paul showed that he was far and away the leading choice for Republican voters and that was not supposed to happen!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-wwbrihlXts

So why wouldn’t the Republican party run what is clearly a winning candidate? Hmmmmm. Because Ron Paul would put an end to much of the power Republicans and Democrats enjoy as a result of their own self-pandering, power grabbing and unconstitutional activity.

Instead they are offering the sorriest collection of non-starters most likely ever assembled for a presidential race and are actively blacking out and refusing to acknowledge the popularity of Paul with the voters and what would be a sure-fire land-slide election.

When I see politicians such as Newt (I just can’t keep my pants on)Gingrich being paraded out for the umpteenth time and treated as if he is actually a viable and desirable candidate for the country’s highest office, knowing this man’s proclivity for mistresses and philandering, for abusing position and power, I tend to think the Republican party has bottomed out.

The remaining candidates are so lack luster, so unqualified, so entrenched in neo-conservative ideology that these pseudo debates are actually tedious to listen to. The canned questions with the corresponding canned and scripted answers are an insult to the viewers.

As a last ditch effort to throw a clinker into the mix, Herman Cain appeared on the Republican bandwagon. For cripes sake, from where did the Republicans dig this man up? Every time Cain appears on camera, viewers begin cringing as they wait for the next fabulously idiotic statement emanating from this man’s mouth. Of course Faux News just loves him……that should be a tip off right there that something is wrong.

So the question remains: Why would the Republican party shun a candidate who can obviously win against all comers, and instead support candidates they know have no chance of winning anything unless the electronic voting machines are rigged yet again?

The Answer: Obama is their candidate also. As president he has been far more effective at dismantling the Constitution, passing oppressive legislation, issuing unlawful and unconstitutional Executive Orders, and expanding the death grip of the federal government on the states than Bush2 and his neo-conservative collection of psychopaths’, ideologues’, new world order, corporate pandering and UN suck-ups than any of these supposed candidates now offered for consideration.

Make no mistake, the Republicans want Obama re-elected just as much as the Democrats do, after all there really is only one party in the District of Criminals and all concerned are quite happy with Obama. There is no way the Republican party is going to run a sure fire winner whose intentions are to reign in the federal corporation when they already have the perfect man in office who has done more to deconstruct the US than even Bush 2 did.

I guess I just answered my own question.

Why vote? With the exception of Ron Paul, they are all selling the same product; its just which sales pitch are you going to buy?

http://ppjg.wordpress.com/2011/11/19...s-second-term/

A veteran speak out about Iraq and Ron Paul http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRaDxiWj ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRaDxiWjSdE&feature=related

Ron Paul This Is Why US Troops Support Him http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59NNHfnM ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59NNHfnMRng&feature=related

Marine Speaks About Taliban, Blackwater, Ron Paul, Etc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlXmASH4 ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlXmASH4AZ8&feature=related

The Most AMAZING video on the internet …2012 Election…RP revolution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoP0Itnd ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoP0ItndrAk&feature=related

Ron Paul On Face The Nation 11-20-11 - Vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... f5eJlDupo#!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-pf5eJlDupo#

Highlights Of Ron Paul In Nov 19 'Debate' - Vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1-PKek8 ... e=youtu.be

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1-PKek8aNs&feature=youtu.be

Ron Paul Reality Check - Vid http://patriotupdate.com/videos/ron-paul-reality-check

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKaq4qoQvOs&feature=player_embedded

Ron Paul - How To End The Fed, Pt 1 - Vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... xSzPjqPz_M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dxSzPjqPz_M

Ron Paul - How To End The Fed, Pt 2 - Vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... h-FisYgFjI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6h-FisYgFjI

The Military Industrial Complex In Five Minutes - Vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... JTaw0GhY_s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=sJTaw0GhY_s

Ron Paul "Faces The Nation" On September 11 And Other Key Topics

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/20/2011 13:37 -0500
Comments: 239 / Reads: 14,201

Video at the link: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/ron-paul- ... key-topics

Rep. Ron Paul, who is statistically tied in first in the Iowa polls among the 2012 GOP presidential candidates, spoke with Bob Schieffer on how America's flawed policies contributed to 9/11, his stance on dealing with Iran, and the dismantling of key government institutions. Must watch, as unlike the other GOP candidates, Paul never peppers the audience (pardon the pun) with banal sound bites, moronic meanderings and pandering platitudes.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/ron-paul- ... key-topics

10 Certainties

November 21, 2011 by Bob Livingston

http://plimages.blob.core.windows.ne...1118_image.jpg
We should never underestimate the ignorance of the American voter.

We live in strange times. Millions of Americans are out of work. Millions more live in fear that their job could go away at any time. The food stamp rolls are larger than they’ve ever been.
An untold number are homeless, not because they choose to be or because they suffer from some mental disease or defect, but because they have lost everything in the second Great Depression. And many more are one missed paycheck or one delinquent mortgage payment away from finding themselves on the street.
A growing number of young adults are now living with their parents or other relatives. Unable to find a decent job despite possessing a college diploma, tens of thousands leave college mired under an irrepressible and unmanageable debt burden.
Protests that began in the Middle East earlier this year over rising food prices and food shortages evolved and spread throughout the region and now find themselves smack in the middle of America in the form of the Occupy movement.
Our country suffers from an amoral rot. Secular humanism, nontheism, atheism and other humanist philosophies are attempting to elevate the creature above the Creator. As such, a belief that the end justifies the means is consuming society. It’s become, “Anything goes.”


Where America is headed is anybody’s guess. I think we are in store for a complete collapse of the system, because there are 10 things that are certain.
We should never underestimate the ignorance of the American voter.
After all, they elected Barack Hussein Obama, a man who openly campaigned on an anti-American socialist philosophy and had the least experience, fewest qualifications, thinnest resume and shadiest past of any serious Presidential candidate in United States history.
Of course, the alternative was really no alternative. That’s the way the elites wanted it. And now the global elites and their corporate media propaganda machine are deciding again who will be elected — and the American voter, with nary a whimper, follows blindly along, accepting that a two-horse race between Mitt Romney and some neocon anti-Romney are the only choices we have.
The trouble has been in selecting the anti-Romney. So far, Michele Bachmann’s star fizzled like a New Year’s sparkler, Rick Perry fell off his horse after he insulted most Republicans over illegal immigration in one debate and stepped on his tongue in two others, Herman Cain’s stock has begun dropping faster than Sharon Bialek’s perky mood in the back of a limo — as much because of Cain’s incoherent answers to tough questions as over the dubious sexual harassment claims — and now Newt Gingrich is the rising neocon star.
The same Newt Gingrich who twice (at least) cheated on his wives (he’s had three) while they suffered from serious illnesses. The same globalist, Council on Foreign Relations member, pagan ritual Bohemian Grove attendee Newt Gingrich who sat on a couch with Nancy Pelosi in an advertisement hawking the threat of man-caused global warming, who has a penchant for cozying up with people like race huckster Al Sharpton when it’s politically expedient and then denouncing them later, who devised the original government-growing Contract with America, who endorsed RINO (later to turn Democrat) Dede Scozzafava over a Tea Party candidate, who called Congressman Paul Ryan’s deficit reduction plan right-wing social engineering, who said the Tea Party will be the “militant wing” of the GOP, and who we now know looted American taxpayers of between $1.6 million and $1.8 million as a “historian” for the Freddie Mac corporatist slush fund (although Gingrich remembers only about $300,000 of it). And this is the same Newt Gingrich who once called for a Federal mandate to purchase health insurance, endorsed “cap-and-trade” legislation, said he would have voted for TARP and promoted Bush’s prescription drug bill. He also continues to support ethanol subsidies and is pro-amnesty for illegals.
That Gingrich, with all his baggage and pompousness, can be an attractive candidate to people who call themselves conservatives, tells you all you need to know of the ignorance of the average voter. And this ignorance continues because…
There is a concerted effort by the establishment to defeat Ron Paul.
It’s gotten so overt that even the corporatist media propaganda machine is chastising its own members over their treatment of Paul. It all seemed to come to a head after the Nov. 12 CBS News debate in which Paul got 89 seconds to speak during the only televised hour of the debate.
In addition to the snubs, which have left Paul with the least speaking time in all the debates — even much less than Jon Huntsman and Rick Santorum, who are barely registering in the polls — networks have a habit of taking down or dismissing as irrelevant any polls that show Paul doing well. Despite it all, Paul is in a virtual tie for first in Iowa and is a strong second in New Hampshire, a State that Romney will probably carry hands-down. And Paul is polling the best of all Republican candidates against Obama with independent voters.
The media and political elites fear Paul because he has not been corrupted and will expose that…
Government is a criminal enterprise.
News this week that members of Congress have been involved in unethical, if not illegal, insider trading based on information they possess before anyone else or on laws they know are about to be considered is just one more straw to put in the camel’s pack. How many more can that poor camel hold before the American people really wake up?
We have long told you here about the crony capitalism and fascism that infest the capital. And while Congress, former Congressional staffers and big businesses dip into the money-printing till and pass dollars around like the Monopoly® money it is, bureaucrats, paper pushers, statist judges, on-the-take regulators, Department of Justice thugs, Congress and an increasingly-militarized Federal government create dozens of new statutes and regulations because…
The Federal Government wants to make everyone a criminal.
Just last week, it was announced that the Department of Justice wanted to criminalize lying to a website. So, if you violate the “Terms of Use” policy by fibbing on online dating sites, social networks, etc., you could become a felon. The government wants to treat those terms as contracts.
In his book, Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent, Harvey A. Silverglate writes that “federal prosecutors are abusing their power by using the criminal law to prosecute law abiding citizens…” They are seizing illegal power by twisting marginal and highly questionable interpretations of criminal law.
We are in danger of becoming a society in which prosecutors alone become judges, juries and executioners because the threat of high sentences makes it too costly for even innocent people to resist the prosecutorial pressure. The pattern is to intimidate all criminally charged defendants into pleading guilty to “reduced” charges rather than risk going to trial with the threat of draconian sentences in the implied event of conviction. And remember, government prosecutors have unlimited funds to use to pay an unlimited number of lawyers and investigators to spend an unlimited number of hours to snoop, dig and scratch around in every aspect of a citizen’s business, thanks to the USA Patriot Act.
No trial? This means that the Federal prosecuting attorney is the judge and the jury.
We now have a huge volume of Federal criminal laws which are broad and impossibly vague, and Silverglate believes it’s possible the average citizen unknowingly violates at least three of them every day. They have become dangerously disconnected from English common law tradition. And since most Federal judges are selected from a pool of former Federal prosecutors, it’s rare if ever that a judge rules against the government’s case.
Liberty-loving Americans are now considered the enemy of the State. The Department of Homeland Security and other government agencies have issued memos and directives describing who they see as potential “domestic” terrorists. They include military veterans — both retired and those returning from overseas engagements — Tea Party supporters, Ron Paul supporters, 2^nd Amendment supporters, 10^th Amendment supporters, people who display American flags, people with Gadsden Flag bumper stickers, anti-Obamacare protesters and anyone who advocates for smaller government.
But this is only part of our government’s war on us because…

Continued Below

Government creates crises and uses them to steal liberty and transfer wealth.

In the days following the 9/11 attacks, President George W. Bush and Congress acted quickly to pass overarching laws that allowed increased surveillance of Americans. The meme was that law enforcement agencies needed increased “power” to snoop, spy, eavesdrop and invade in order to identify terrorists. With the passage of the law, government has almost carte blanch to go anywhere, look at anything and listen to whatever it wants on any and all conversations, transactions and correspondence Americans have. And Americans can no longer travel without subjecting themselves to radiation-emitting scans or humiliating searches.

Meanwhile, the FBI infiltrates mosques, Muslim communities, militias and other “subversive” groups looking for ignorant patsies they can turn into potential terrorists. They then provide them with dummy bombs or weapons and ridiculously ineffective plans for terror plots and wait for them to try to pull them off.

These “terror plots” give the government more excuses to intrude on civil liberties.

With the bursting of the housing bubble (created by former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan’s easy-money policies), Bush, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke went on television claiming the sky was falling and predicted the end of the world if “government” didn’t bail out Goldman Sachs, AIG and their other corporatist buddies in the financial sector. We got the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), and Bush claimed he had “abandoned free-market principals to save the free-market system.”

What really happened is that trillions of dollars were transferred from hard-working Americans to the coffers of big business and big finance, both in the United States and abroad. Of course, there is nothing new about this. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt used the Great Depression to reward his labor friends and grow government’s power under the interstate commerce clause. And while Americans starved, thousands of farmers were forced by the government to destroy crops and livestock.

After the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, Roosevelt began issuing executive orders by the handfuls, locking up Americans without cause and stealing liberty, wealth and prosperity from citizens in the process.

But this is not the history that people are taught. And schoolchildren certainly never hear in school that…

The Federal Reserve is looting your bank account right out from under your nose.

Few people have a real understanding of just how insidious the Federal Reserve and inflation are. But no matter where you hide your money, through its money-printing, the Federal Reserve steals a portion every day.

That’s because every dollar printed reduces the value of those you hold. Think of it like pouring water into a glass of milk. The more water that is poured in, the less milk remains. Pretty soon, there is no milk left.

Right now the official rate of inflation is about 3.5 percent. It is, in fact, much higher. But the highest-paying interest rate on a certificate of deposit is about 1.1 percent. You do the math.

Face it. The system is stacked against you because…

Financial interests control the world.

Of course, that has long been the ultimate goal of the elites. They have been, throughout history, ruthless and unwavering in their efforts. They are the true 1 percent.

I and others have long warned about the growing power of the financial elites. We write often about their growing power and the increased fascism of the system. Now a group of researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology have uncovered the 147 “super-entities” that control the world’s wealth, according to an article in New Scientist.
Here’s a list of the Top 25. See any familiar names?
1. Barclays PLC
2. Capital Group Companies Inc.
3. FMR Corp.
4. AXA
5. State Street Corporation
6.JP Morgan Chase & Co.
7. Legal & General Group PLC
8. Vanguard Group Inc.
9. UBS AG
10. Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc.
11. Wellington Management Company LLP
12. Deutsche Bank AG
13. Franklin Resources Inc.
14. Credit Suisse Group
15. Walton Enterprises LLC
16. The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation
17. Natixis
18. Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
19. T. Rowe Price Group Inc.
20. Legg Mason Inc.
21. Morgan Stanley
22. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc.
23. Northern Trust Corporation
24. Société Générale
25. Bank of America Corporation

“From Orbis 2007, a database listing 37 million companies and investors worldwide, they pulled out all 43,060 TNCs (transnational corporations) and the share ownerships linking them. Then they constructed a model of which companies controlled others through shareholding networks, coupled with each company’s operating revenues, to map the structure of economic power,” according to the report.

“When the team further untangled the web of ownership, it found much of it tracked back to a ‘super-entity’ of 147 even more tightly knit companies—all of their ownership was held by other members of the super-entity—that controlled 40 per cent of the total wealth in the network. ‘In effect, less than 1 per cent of the companies were able to control 40 per cent of the entire network,’ says [researcher James] Glattfelder.”

Now you see why the buddy system operated so well when the Fed began bailing out the “too big to fails.” And the big corporations got there with the help of their corporatist partners in crime in Congress.

The truth of the matter is…

We are no longer operating under Constitutional government, but people are completely unaware.

The government-controlled non-education system, corporate-controlled media and government propaganda machine have succeeded in producing an uneducated generation that is so ignorant it doesn’t even know it’s ignorant and, therefore, can’t do anything about it.

Continued Below

Rather than teach history, government indoctrination centers focus on less-significant, politically correct characters — in order to prop up the self-esteem of the “underpriviledged” and “underrepresented” — and singular, historically insignificant events. One specific example I know of is of a middle-school child whose teacher spent three class days on the U.S. Olympic hockey team’s upset of the Soviets in 1980, and about 15 minutes of class time on World War II.Of course, a discussion of the founding of our country, the conditions that sparked the revolution, the Federalist Papers, the Constitution that resulted from their discussions, or the greatness of the Founding Fathers received little or no attention in that class. I’m afraid it’s the rule rather than the exception.

Ask someone on the street about the Constitution and you’ll probably get some lame answer about “separation of church and state” or “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” like Herman Cain gave in one of his speeches.

And rather than work to gain knowledge of the country and its politics, most would rather devote their time to voting for the next “Idol” and debating who should get voted off the island and whether college football should have a playoff. These and other unimportant events completely consume the general public.

So when government does pass new unConstitutional laws, no one is the wiser. Most people are concerned about — if they think about it all — “what’s in it for me?” and “how much ‘free’ money do I get?” Many are still waiting for the “free money” from “Obama’s stash.” Unfortunately, because they weren’t large corporate donors, they got nothing but disdain from the teleprompter in chief.

Congress, aided by a willing Judiciary and President, long ago left any pretense of governing according to the Constitution. When they’re sworn in, they pledge their fealty to it, then put it away never to be read again.

Meanwhile, the two-party system of governance entraps people who do pay a modicum of attention into a false left/right paradigm and the corporate-controlled government propaganda machine pushes the false notion that there is a difference between the parties. But Democrat or Republican is irrelevant. It’s all class warfare, dissembling Kabuki Theater.

To demonstrate how far we’ve traversed from the Constitution, the government can now prevent you from drinking raw milk, can force you to have your children vaccinated for non-existent maladies, can search you without cause, can arrest you for videotaping in public, can murder American citizens at will and can twist and turn obscure statutes and use them to incarcerate and fine you.

The Federal agencies designed to protect us from bad foods and bad drugs instead promote bad foods and bad drugs and make natural foods and supplements illegal or difficult to obtain. That keeps Americans fat and happy and stupid.

In addition to loving the increased power they get by ignoring the Constitution, it’s a fact that…

Politicians love war and an attack on Iran is inevitable.

War is yet another way for government to steal the liberty of the American people, and war with Iran is inevitable, Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize notwithstanding. The drumbeats for war are reaching a crescendo, and the same rhetoric used in the run-up to the Iraq war is being replayed in the run-up to Iran.

The frightening thing is that the anti-war Democrats have gone silent. Some protested loud and long over Bush’s wars, but Obama has been given a pass — by Congress and the American people — to invade any country he chooses over the most dubious of reasons. And it seems from the cheering the neocon warmongers get during the Republican debates, Americans have grown to love war as much as the politicians.

Sources tell me U.S. Marines will be on the ground in Libya in January, news reports indicate a Marine contingent will soon land in Australia, and Obama recently sent “military advisers” to Central Africa. The French just recalled their diplomat from Syria, an indication a Libya-style attack is in the offing. This is all proof that…
The American government is seeking world conquest.

The globalists and One World Government crowd will not rest until all the world is in subjection. Moammar Gadhafi was taken down because he wouldn’t play in the OWG pool, and Syria and Iran are next. The Marines going to Australia will be a foil to China. Then, who knows?

http://www.personalliberty.com/conse...0-certainties/

bttt

http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/...icalticker.jpg

Ron Paul Surging

Writes The Hills Brent Budowsky: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/p ... ossibility

There are now multiple polls that show Ron Paul has gained support and has a legitimate chance to come in first or second in Iowa and New Hampshire. I would now call Ron Paul one of three front-runners in both Iowa and New Hampshire alongside Mitt Romney and a third candidate, currently Newt Gingrich. If Ron Paul wins Iowa, which he might, all bets are off

The campaign gets very interesting if Newt Gingrich joins Herman Cain, Rick Perry and Donald Trump in collapsing, which would give Paul a head-to-head contest with Romney¦

Ron Paul is now a force to be reckoned with.

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/11/21/ron-paul-surging/

The Consistent Candidate: Ron Paul 2012

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICwwgCW5 ... r_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICwwgCW5jF4&feature=player_embedded

Nov 16, 2011

"Here's the latest Ron Paul video, focused on two important points that every voter needs to know. Dr. Paul has been consistent in his message for over 30 years, and the other candidates have been jumping on his bandwagon.

With The Consistent Candidate, we hope we've driven those two points home.

We've tried to create a video worthy of going viral; a video short enough for anyone to watch, focused enough to make the points, and compelling enough to get forwarded to everybody's friends and family.

We also hope the tagline, Ron Paul: Right Then, Right Now, Right for America, will prove to be as memorable as the video.

Enjoy. Share the link everywhere you can. Vote up and favorite the YouTube. Let's infect the voters with this viral message."

-written by Don Childers
-created by Christian Malazarte
--------------------------
Ron Paul 2012: Restore America Now http://www.ronpaul2012.com

The Awakening of a Generation: Ron Paul 2012

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Muf23Rc7 ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Muf23Rc7HV8&feature=related

Ron Paul leads the GOP pack….but for some reason Newty Gingrich is said to be on top

November 21, 2011 by ppjg
John Boering / PPJ Contributor

For those of us who voluntarily expose ourselves to the news that isn’t news on Lame Street Media, this morning was a real waker-upper. We have all come to expect sports games being treated as if they were of national importance; after all why wouldn’t we? It’s not like we have illegal wars being conducted on numerous fronts, or the corruption on Wall Street and in the overall banking system isn’t killing us economically.

http://ppjg.files.wordpress.com/2011...pg?w=242&h=300

The interlacing of sports news, celebrity mis-haps and other nonsense that is irrelevant considering the current sad state of affairs of our country goes, eats up a huge portion of valuable time that isn’t consumed by the incessant commercials for crap you aren’t likely to buy anyway.

Sports and celebrity news seems to consume large blocks of time while relevant news (what little is offered) gets a few sound bites and we can suddenly find ourselves listening to a story about a man who saw Jesus’ face in cheeseburger that he is selling on Ebay. My yes….that would be important and so earthshaking.

I watch at least one of these corporate/government shills for the powers that be every morning just to note what they ARE NOT reporting that might have been of real interest and useful to the average viewer. And then it happened……………

I was sipping my coffee, kind of zoning out as the CNN (and several other cable networks) broadcaster smiled and talked about football as if it really mattered to any of us out here who are observing the slow wrenching demise of our economy, the on-going and growing corruption of the government, and suddenly Newty Gingrich appeared on my screen. The cream in my coffee curdled, and I mentally recoiled as if a huge snake had appeared before me. In essence it had.

I was stunned to learn that this pompous, arrogant, philandering, corrupt politician that we have tried repeatedly to drive out of national politics because he brings the vomit up in most people’s throats at just the mention of his name……this liar of epic proportions who claimed he had multiple affairs outside of his marriage(s) as a result of his deep passionate love of country that he could express only by engaging in repeated sexual dalliances with various women; he was supposedly leading the pack of GOP contenders for the presidential election.

Wait a minute! What happened to family values? Moral convictions? Defending traditional marriage? Rediscovering God? Cleaning up the District of Criminals?

And finally and most importantly……what happened to Ron Paul?

Ron Paul has outdone every other candidate on the GOP ticket. Support for Paul on both sides of the fictional left/right divide is monumental. Yet not one cable network that aired this obviously fictional accounting of who was in the lead even mentioned, noted or alluded to the fact that Ron Paul was even in the race, much less that he was far and away the leader of the pack.

Here before me was one of the clearest indicators showing just how controlled these media outlets are; how willing they are to turn the cameras on and stare straight into them and …..lie. The 3 minute or less snippet on Gingrich was immediately followed by news about the Giants….then another on how Michael Vick broke some ribs. I know this only because I was sitting in stunned, paralyzed silence, unable to hit the “off” button on the remote.
Newty Gingrich isn’t even a contender, unless of course we are considering going into the business of running brothels, internationally.

At some point maybe Ron Paul will ditch the Republican party and run as an Independent. If he were to do this, and if the electronic voting machines weren’t so easily rigged, it is quite possible that a true landslide election would occur. Can’t you just imagine the “reporting” on these government controlled media outlets? Maybe something like…….

“Good morning! Newty Gingrich joins us to discuss the presidential election and the rumor is we have a new president but we didn’t get his name which isn’t a problem for our guest because he can’t remember his most recent wife’s name! (giggle giggle)….. So Newty….what do you think about the Giants?”

http://ppjg.wordpress.com/2011/11/21/ro ... be-on-top/

Ron Paul Leading

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64BCvvKKXjQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64BCvvKKXjQ

Ron Paul Simple Super Committee Solution

On the Super Committee

Tuesday, November 22, 2011 – by Ron Paul


This week marks the deadline for the so-called congressional Super Committee to meet its goal of cutting a laughably small amount of federal spending over the next decade. In fact, the Committee merely needs to cut about $120 billion annually from the federal budget over the next 10 years to meet its modest goals, but even this paltry amount has produced hand-wringing and hysteria on Capitol Hill. This is only cutting proposed increases. It has nothing to do with actually cutting anything. This shows how unserious politicians are about our very serious debt problems.

To be fair, however, in one sense members of the Super Committee face an impossible task. They must, in effect, cut government spending without first addressing the role of government in our society. They must continue to insist the federal government can provide Social Security, Medicareand Medicaid benefits in the future as promised, while maintaining our wildly interventionist foreign policy. Yet everyone knows this is a lie.

Keep in mind that the 2011 federal deficit alone was about $1.3 trillion, which means the Super Committee needs to cut that much PER YEAR rather than over a 10 year period. If Congress ever hopes to address its debt problem, it must first stop accumulating any new debt immediately, in 2012.

Federal revenue likely will be about $2.3 trillion in fiscal 2012. The 2004 federal budget was about $2.3 trillion. So Congress simply needs to adopt the 2004 budget next year and the federal government will balance outlays and revenue. That's all it would take to produce a balanced budget right now. Was the federal government really too small just seven years ago, in 2004? Of course not. Only Washington hysteria would have us believe otherwise.

Yet our Republican and Democrat friends on the Super Committee want to take 10 years, or even 30 years, to produce a balanced budget.

Government spending isn't just wasteful; it is often actively harmful to stated goals. The Super Committee could simply apply 2004 spending levels across the board and a tremendous victory for fiscal sanity would be accomplished.

What seems more likely, however, is a rearrangement of the tax code in an attempt to bring in more revenue. Deductions and credits will be taken away, and the Bush tax cuts will be allowed to expire. As a result, less money will remain in the private sector to create jobs and produce economic growth. The Super Committee has an opportunity to take a small baby step in the right direction. Instead, they no doubt will take this opportunity to raise taxes and make everything worse. But increasing taxes will only diminish freedom and deepen the recession. Instead of looking for ways to hike taxes under the guise of "raising revenue," the Super Committee should put forth a plan of real spending cuts to put America back on the path to liberty and prosperity.

http://www.thedailybell.com/3270/Ron...uper-Committee

Monday, November 21, 2011 11:59 AM

Ron Paul Smacks Bob Schieffer on Face The Nation

I used to have a modicum of respect for Bob Schieffer, host of Face the Nation. Not anymore. Instead of conducting an interview, Schieffer acted with clear intent to discredit Ron Paul. It backfired on Schieffer when Paul held his ground and refused to be cutoff by Schieffer's biased comments.

YouTube Video: Ron Paul on Face the Nation http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... KlBw2uocl0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TKlBw2uocl0

Ron Paul supporters should check out and participate in Paul's SuperVoter Bomb. Any amount will help. http://supervoterbomb.com/fundraiser_svb.html

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot. ... -face.html

http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/...vb_header2.gif

http://supervoterbomb.com/fundraiser_svb.html

http://www.csmonitor.com/extension/c...ogo_179x46.gif

Ron Paul's strength in Iowa shows it's too soon to write him off

Though he has a large and loyal following, Ron Paul's positions on key issues sets him apart from many Republicans. But he keeps moving steadily toward a position of strength in the early voting – especially in Iowa.

By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff writer / November 20, 2011

http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_...g_full_600.jpg
Republican Presidential hopeful Texas Rep. Ron Paul answers questions during a campaign event Friday, Nov. 18, 2011 at the Lawrence Community Center in Anamosa, Iowa. Brian Ray/The Gazette/AP

To most pollsters and pundits, any mention of Ron Paul typically comes with an implied asterisk. Whether they say it outright or not, they don’t think the Texas congressman has a chance of being the GOP presidential nominee. Too far outside mainstream, tea party, or born-again socially conservative Republicanism, they say. More libertarian than anything else.

Ron Paul wins yet another straw poll. So why are the media ignoring him? http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/ ... noring-him

Ron Paul denies third-party run. So why are pundits still talking about it? http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/T ... g-about-it

Why Ron Paul did well among social conservatives at the Values Voter Summit http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/ ... ter-Summit

And yet Rep. Paul soldiers on, and you know what? As other candidates – Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain – dash forward hare-like only to stumble or be run over by the next new thing, Paul is the perpetual tortoise in the race, mild-mannered, confident and unwavering in his positions (no flip-flopper he), advancing steadily toward the first real test in the Iowa caucuses six weeks from now.

MONITOR QUIZ: Weekly News Quiz for Nov. 13-18, 2011

Consider these recent headlines:
“Ron Paul is for real in Iowa. Seriously.” (Washington Post)
“Niche Voters Giving Paul Momentum in Iowa Polls” (New York Times)
“Ron Paul’s 19 percent in Iowa may indicate a path to the nomination” (Daily Caller)
“GOP outsider Ron Paul gaining traction in Iowa” (Associated Press)
“Ron Paul And Libertarians Can't Be Discounted” (Forbes)

A Bloomberg News poll this past week shows a four-way scrum for the lead in Iowa, with Paul in second place. (Cain gets 20 percent, Paul 19 percent, Mitt Romney 18 percent, and Newt Gingrich 17 percent among likely caucus goers.)

“A caucus state like Iowa is tailor-made to maximize the vote for a candidate like Ron Paul,” University of Virginia Center for Politics director Larry Sabato told The Daily Caller. “He has a dedicated band of supporters who will show up to vote in three feet of snow.”

That dedication shows up two ways in the latest poll in Iowa

Among likely caucus-goers who say their minds are made up, Paul leads with 32 percent, followed by Romney at 25 percent and former House speaker Gingrich at 17 percent, Bloomberg reports. And Paul’s campaign leads for voter contact, with about two-thirds of respondents saying they’ve heard from his campaign.

“Paul gets labeled a fringe candidate. But in this era of a closely divided electorate, anyone who commands the allegiance that Paul does from an activist libertarian movement must be accounted for in the political calculus,” pollster John Zogby writes in his regular Forbes column.

Dedicated allegiance has paid off for Paul in a string of straw polls.

The State Column, an online source of state political news, notes that Paul took second place in the Ames Straw Poll in August (finishing just 1 percentage point behind Bachmann), and he won a Values Voter Summit straw poll in October and a California Republican Party straw poll in September.

He also won an Ohio GOP poll with 53 percent of the votes, an Iowa straw poll at the National Federation of Republican Assemblies in Des Moines with 82 percent of the votes, and an Illinois straw poll with 52 percent of the vote – more than Romney or Cain.

Much of that can be attributed to a hearty band of Paul loyalists – many of them young supporters – who do the most important thing in such contests: show up and vote.
In a way, Mr. Zogby points out, Paul is like Ralph Nader, even though he’s running as a major party candidate and not a third party outlier.
“In both cases, the support for Paul and Nader is a rejection of both parties,” Zogby writes. “Don’t expect Paul to endorse one of his GOP rivals, or for it to matter very much to libertarians if he did.”

Paul’s advantage is that rejecting both parties is a huge part of the tea party movement (at least before it started running its own Republicans in 2010) as well as of libertarianism. His challenge is that electability – finding the candidate most likely to defeat Barack Obama – has become the main thing Republicans are looking for in whichever champion they finally settle on.

Much of what Paul advocates is appealing to at least one faction of the Republican Party (mainstream, tea party, and socially conservatives), whether it’s about abortion, the definition of marriage, government regulation, foreign aid, military actions abroad, health care, or immigration.

He describes himself as “a constitutionalist” in ways that could appeal to civil libertarians. (He advocates an end to the Patriot Act, warrantless searches, the TSA, and the “war on drugs.”)

But it’s hard to imagine a Republican Party presidential candidate these days who would not support a constitutional ban on abortion, would cut defense spending by nearly a billion dollars, would shutter at least a half dozen departments of federal government, would leave it to religions (and not government) to define marriage, or who would end all US aid to Israel.

And while Romney beats Obama in at least a few polls, Paul does not, according to Real Clear Politics.

Still, Ron Paul keeps moving steadily toward a position of strength in the early voting – especially in Iowa. So he may yet surprise the pundits writing him off today.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Electio...-write-him-off

http://www.csmonitor.com/extension/c...ogo_179x46.gif

Did Ron Paul win GOP's national security debate?

Media-types seem to think Ron Paul more than held his own, which is no small feat, considering many of his ideas on national security are well outside the Republican mainstream.

By Peter Grier, Staff writer / November 23, 2011

http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_...g_full_600.jpg
Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul of Texas speaks during the CNN GOP national security debate in Washington Tuesday. Jonathan Ernst /REUTERS

Did Ron Paul win Tuesday's GOP debate at DAR Constitution Hall in Washington?

OK, it’s hard to really say anyone “wins” a debate, given that there’s no scoring, and Wolf Blitzer doesn’t come out afterward and hand out a medal. In general, last night’s word fight was high-minded and good for everybody, except maybe Herman Cain, since he didn’t say much.

CNN’s Blitzer did well, too – drawing candidates into real conversations, and emceeing questions from assembled think-tank luminaries. The whole thing was a real debate in that it juxtaposed real differences of opinion.

Which is where Congressman Paul comes in. It was him against the Republican world last night. His positions are often very different from those of his GOP opponents, and he defended them with his typical well-honed points. You’re reminded once again that he’s been at this for decades. Even longer than Mitt Romney.

University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato tweeted last night that Paul tied with Newt Gingrich as last night’s winner. Sabato gave both a “B+.”
New York Times polling analyst Nate Silver similarly gave Paul a “B+.” He thought both Newt and Jon Huntsman rated an “A,” however.

Paul “sounded authoritative and made his points clearly” judged Politico’s Maggie Haberman.

Our own reaction to Paul was that nobody laid a glove on him, despite the fact that many of his positions are controversial both within the GOP and in US politics at large. (He said foreign aid is “worthless,” for instance. Really? Not even the other GOP candidates went that far. US cash is paying for much of Africa’s fight against HIV/AIDS, for instance. Is that not money well spent?)

But take the opening sequence, when most all the other candidates supported Patriot Act antiterror provisions as necessary intrusions on liberty at a time of danger for the US. Paul was having none of that.

“I think the Patriot Act is unpatriotic, because it undermines our liberty,” said Paul in the opening moments of the debate.

The longtime libertarian was just getting warmed up.

“So if you advocate a police state, you can have safety and security, and you might prevent a crime, but the crime then will be against the American people and against our freedoms,” said Paul.

Paul then went on to differ with the crowd by saying the US should “let Israel take care of itself.” That meant, apparently, don’t meddle with Israel if it wants to bomb Iran, but don’t give it any money to do the deed, either.

(As an aside, we’ll ask this: Did the Texas congressman let slip some interesting and closely guarded info in his response? He said, “Israel has 200, 300 nuclear missiles, and they can take care of themselves.” That’s on the high end of the estimates experts outside the US government make as to the extent of Israel’s nuclear program.)

Then there was the whole defense budget-cutting thing, in which Paul and Mitt Romney went at it.

First Romney opposed the possibility of a trillion dollars being cut from the defense budget. That might happen because the congressional super committee didn’t figure out a way to reduce the budget by $1.2 trillion over 10 years, so automatic cuts might take effect next year.

“They’re not cutting anything out of anything,” replied Paul. “All this talk is just talk.”

Paul appeared to be referring to the fact that nothing is in stone yet – some in Congress want to repeal the automatic cuts, many of the “cuts” are reductions in growth as opposed to actual reductions in the size of government programs, and so forth.

Romney disagreed. He ticked off a list of weapons systems Congress has already trimmed. “They’re cutting ... into the capacity of America to defend itself,” he said.
So what do you think of Paul versus the GOP world? Leave a comment and let us know.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...ecurity-debate

http://www.csmonitor.com/extension/c...ogo_179x46.gif

GOP debate: all but Ron Paul want Patriot Act extended

GOP debate touches on Patriot Act, which most Republican candidates agreed should be extended.

By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press / November 22, 2011

http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_...t_full_600.jpg
Republican presidential candidates stand for the National Anthem before a Republican presidential debate in Washington, Tuesday. Evan Vucci/AP

Republican presidential hopefuls spoke up strongly for the anti-terror Patriot Act in campaign debate Tuesday night, saying it should be extended or perhaps strengthened to help identify and capture those who would attack the United States.

Only Rep. Ron Paul of Texas among eight presidential hopefuls dissented, arguing that the law is "unpatriotic because it undermines our liberties."

In a debate on national security, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann said President Barack Obama has "essentially handed over our investigation of terrorists to the" American Civil Liberties Union. "Our CIA has no ability to investigate," she said. Bachmann did not cite any examples to buttress either of her claims.

The debate unfolded six weeks to the day before the Iowa caucuses inaugurate the competition for delegates to the Republican National Convention. The venerable DAR Constitution Hall was the site — a few blocks from the White House and as close as most if not all of the GOPhopefuls are likely to get.

The Patriot Act is one of the nation's principal tools in ferreting out terrorist threats but has often provoked dissents from both liberals and conservatives who argue that in the name of national security it erodes constitutional protections.

Paul made that point, and said other investigative techniques captured Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh.

Gingrich jumped at that. "That's the whole point. Timothy McVeigh killed a lot of Americans," the former House speaker said. "I don't want a law that says after we lose a major American city, we're sure going to come and find you. I want a law that says, you try to take out an American city, we're going to stop you."

Neither Gingrich nor any other Republican mentioned that Obama, like President George W. Bush before him, signed legislation extending the Patriot Act. He did so while traveling in Europe last May, putting him name on a four-year extension of the law that gives the government sweeping powers to search records and conduct wiretaps in pursuit of terrorists.

In a race that is constantly in flux, Gingrich has emerged as Romney's principal rival atop the public opinion polls. As he looked around him, he saw other rivals who once held that position — Bachmann, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and businessman Herman Cain among them.

The debate ranged widely over foreign policy issues, but neither the format nor the moderator permitted all eight candidates to answer any one question. That produced a somewhat disjoined event in which there was relatively little back-and-forth among the rivals.

Asked if he would support an Israel attack on Iran to prevent the Islamic regime from acquiring a nuclear weapon, Cain said he would want to know what the plan was and have an understanding of its chance of success.

Gingrich said he would bomb Iran only as a last resort and with a goal of bringing about the downfall of the government.

There was more disagreement when it came to the war in Afghanistan.

Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman said it was time for the United States to withdraw nearly all its troops.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said top generals disagreed with that and asked Huntsman if he was talking about a withdrawal beginning immediately.

"Did you hear what I said?" Huntsman asked across the debate stage, noting that under the Constitution the president is commander in chief. A few moments later, referring to Vietnam, he said a president had listened to the generals in 1967, and the outcome was not in the interests of the United States.

Also on the debate stage were businessman Herman Cain and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-New ... t-extended

bttt

Neal Boortz is AMAZED at Ron Paul's 2002 prediction of the housing bubble

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K2ktRZ4T48&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K2ktRZ4T48&NR=1

Nov 19, 2011

from the 11/18/11 edition of The Neal Boortz Show. Read Ron Paul's complete statement predicting the housing bubble and exactly how it would happen here:
http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-26/ron-p ... july-2002/

Ron Paul Iowa Surge Discussed on Judge Nepalitano (11-19-11)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P9t6QVt ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P9t6QVt2Lo&feature=related

Ron Paul Discussed on Neal Boortz Radio Show (11-18-11)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChIU4tUz ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChIU4tUzGDM&feature=related

Nov 19, 2011

This episode of Neal Boortz Radio aired on November 18th, 2011.

Ron Paul Is Electable Because He's Delegatable. The Most important things to Know

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFtHmem2 ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFtHmem2pLk&feature=related

Nov 18, 2011

This is a very informative video about Ron Paul and the current political system.

Watch This Video and LEARN what many already know

http://static.infowars.com/2011/08/i.../warisover.png

Brief Overview of Congressman Pauls Record:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

When Gov. Mitt Romney was Writing the Prototype for Obamacare in Mass; Ron Paul looked back over his carear of delivering more than 4,000 babys as a OBGYN Doctor

When Rick Perry was getting Ds in Economics 101, Ron Paul was writing books on Austrian Economics.

When Michele Bachmann was campaigning for Jimmy Carter, Ron Paul was one of four congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan on his second run.

When Herman Cain was working for the Federal Reserve, Ron Paul was trying to end it.

"Ladies and Gentlemen"

"The Man that has NO Corporate Endorsements"

"The Defender of the Constitution"

"The Thomas Jefferson of our Time"

"Ron Paul"

Chinese Professor ~ Banned US Commercial about the national debt

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTSQozWP-rM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTSQozWP-rM

Nov 2, 2010

A new television ad about the U.S. national debt produced by Citizens Against Government Waste has been deemed "too controversial" by major networks including ABC, A&E and The History Channel and will not be shown on those channels. The commercial is a homage to a 1986 ad that was entitled "The Deficit Trials" that was also banned by the major networks. Apparently telling the truth about the national debt is a little too "hot" for the major networks to handle. But perhaps it is time to tell the American people the truth. In 1986, the U.S. national debt was around 2 trillion dollars. Today, it is rapidly approaching 14 trillion dollars. The American Dream is being ripped apart right in front of our eyes, but apparently some of the major networks don't want the American people to really understand what is going on.

The truth is that the ad does not even have anything in it that should be offensive. The commercial is set in the year 2030, and the main character is a Chinese professor that is seen lecturing his students on the fall of great empires. As images of the United States are shown on a screen behind him, the Chinese professor tells his students the following about the behavior of great empires: "They all make the same mistakes. Turning their backs on the principles that made them great. America tried to spend and tax itself out of a great recession. Enormous so-called "stimulus" spending, massive changes to health care, government takeover of private industries, and crushing debt."

Perhaps it is what the Chinese Professor says next that is alarming the big television networks: "Of course, we owned most of their debt, so now they work for us".