Thread: Ron Paul on the Issues

Ron Paul Draws More Than 2,000 Voters to Idaho Falls Town Hall Meeting

Continues tradition of attracting huge crowds at town hall meetings throughout the Gem State

BOISE, Idaho – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul attracted a remarkable over 2,000 supporters and undecided voters to his town hall meeting in Idaho Falls, continuing his tradition of drawing huge crowds in the Gem State.

The 12-term Congressman from Texas’ Idaho Falls Town Hall Meeting took place at 7:00 p.m. MST at the Civic Auditorium of Idaho Falls, located at 501 South Holmes Avenue. During the event, Dr. Paul outlined aspects of his path-breaking ‘Plan to Restore America’ and other features of his platform of returning the federal government to its constitutionally-limited roots.

Below please find a photo of Ron Paul’s Idaho Falls Town Hall Meeting.

Ron Paul surveys the 2,000-plus crowd in Idaho Falls.

Ron Paul Draws More Than 2,000 Voters to Idaho Falls Town Hall Meeting*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign CommitteeRon Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee

Ron Paul to Speak in Fargo, North Dakota at Statewide Caucus on Super Tuesday

Congressman’s support combined with voter eligibility openness will enfranchise thousands of North Dakotans and get out the vote for Paul


BISMARCK, North Dakota – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul will return to North Dakota on March 6^th – Super Tuesday – to speak at a Fargo mega-caucus where thousands of state residents will select who they prefer to defeat President Barack Obama come November.

North Dakota has no voter registration of any kind including no political party enrollment.

Those eligible to caucus must be 18 years of age by Election Day in November, and they must bring government ID or proof of 30-day residency such as a utility bill. State residents from all over North Dakota may vote at any caucus location statewide, making North Dakota caucusing rules among the most open nationally. Therefore, state residents from all over North Dakota who are eligible to vote under these loose eligibility requirements are eligible to vote at the Fargo-area caucus where Dr. Paul will be speaking.

Voting at the Fargo mega-caucus will commence at 5:30 p.m. CST.

“We are excited to welcome back Ron Paul to Fargo and to North Dakota on this pivotal day for the state and nation. I’d like to issue a challenge to all Ron Paul supporters in the greater Fargo area. And that is, ‘Come to Fargo to hear Dr. Paul speak, vote for Ron Paul, and help us restore our economic and personal liberties,’” said Ron Paul 2012 North Dakota State Director Jared Hendrix. “And to those not in the vicinity of Fargo, vote for Ron Paul where you can,” added Mr. Hendrix.

The 12-term Congressman from Texas’ speech to the Fargo-area mega-caucus will be followed by a media availability. Members of the local and major print, broadcast, and online media are advised that production aspects such as press riser and sound are available. Those with particular needs are asked to contact National Media Coordinator Megan Stiles at megans@ronpaul2012.com. Please, no exceptions.
Details of the event are as follows. Time is Central.

Tuesday, March 6, 2012
5:30 p.m. caucus start time
Speaks at Fargo-area caucus*
Ramada Plaza Inn and Suites
1635 42nd Street South
Fargo, ND 58103
[*Media availability to follow.]


Ron Paul to Speak in Fargo, North Dakota at Statewide Caucus on Super Tuesday*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign CommitteeRon Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee

$1,002,338.12

https://secure.ronpaul2012.com/?sr=022512#

Mitt Romney and the Mandate

By W. James Antle, III on 3.5.12 @ 11:37AM


We've read many confident assurances, in Ann Coulter columns and elsewhere, that Mitt Romney never intended his Massachusetts health care plan to be a national model and never supported unconstitutional federal individual mandates. This 2009 USA Today op-ed, written at the height of the Obamacare debate, is the latest piece of evidence suggesting that this isn't exactly true.
With the subheadline "Obama could learn a thing or two about health care reform in Massachusetts," Romney had this to say about mandates:

Our experience also demonstrates that getting every citizen insured doesn't have to break the bank. First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance. Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages "free riders" to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others. This doesn't cost the government a single dollar.

Tax penalities, what a beautiful choice. But Peter Suderman pointed out in his Reason profile of Romney that this is hardly the only example of the candidate suggesting Romneycare could go national.

During his first presidential primary campaign, Romney enthusiastically touted the plan's national possibilities. "We have to have our citizens insured, and we're not going to do that by tax exemptions, because the people that don't have insurance aren't paying taxes," he said at an Iowa debate in August 2007. "What you have to do is what we did in Massachusetts. Is it perfect? No. But we say, let's rely on personal responsibility, help people buy their own private insurance, get our citizens insured, not with a government takeover, not with new taxes needed, but instead with a free-market-based system that gets all of our citizens in the system. No more free rides. It works."

In October of that year, Romney told the Republican Jewish Coalition: "I think we'll be successful nationwide. My plan, by the way, allows every citizen in America to get health insurance." Asked by CNN's John King at the time whether RomneyCare was a good model for the nation, he responded with a big grin, "Well, I think so."

These days, he thinks not. In an October 2011 debate on CNN, Romney insisted, despite evidence to the contrary, that "in the last campaign I was asked, 'Is this something you would have the whole nation do?' And I said no."

This is a candidate making a conservative case for the individual mandate -- and a candidate who seems poised to do well on Super Tuesday tomorrow. If Romney is nominated, this will have an impact on the Obamacare debate in the general election.
UPDATE: Ramesh Ponnuru provides some context suggesting that Romney was stopping just short of endorsing a federal insurance mandate in 2009. But when you look at the entire record, it is pretty clear that this ironclad distinction between state and federal mandates Romney is relying on is a fairly recent invention.

The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Mitt Romney and the Mandate

Huge Ron Paul Banner in Worcester MA

Submitted by Michael Nystrom on Tue, 03/06/2012 - 14:52
Ron Paul 2012
Massachusetts




Jon Allen has been a Ron Paul supporter since 2004. This is a 18' x 25' hand drawn and painted banner that hangs on the North face of the Osgood-Bradley building in Worcester, MA, home of the Massachusetts Liberty Clubhouse. The artist worked feverishly over the weekend to ensure that this banner would be up in time for Super Tuesday, facing Route 290, which carries over 150,000 passengers a day. Hopefully his art will inspire a few undecided voters to cast their vote and support for the only candidate who will restore our liberties and freedoms, Ron Paul!


More examples of his work can be seen on the following sites: www.jonallenart.com, and www.jonallenart.tumblr.com

http://www.dailypaul.com/218742/huge...n-worcester-ma

Will Super Tuesday reveal the true number of Ron Paul supporters?


Deborah Morgan
Kansas City Political Buzz Examiner

Commentary: He's already come in second place in Maine, New Hampshire, Minnesota, and Washington, if you don't figure in the fervent demand for recounts in Iowa, Maine, and Nevada. Yet, GOP presidential hopeful Ron Paul is still widely discounted by most major media pundits.

Rep. Paul has polled highest in likelihood to beat President Obama in the general election. However, he has yet to be taken seriously by his opponents, who consider him an amusing yet hardly threatening boulder on the road to the Republican nomination.

His hard stance on strict Constitutionalism has earned his campaign discord among those Republicans who claim to cherish our most revered document while refusing to lift a verbal finger to insist it be followed as law dictates.

Take, for example, the issue of both birth control and drug policy. The simple fact is, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution insists that those powers not specifically granted to the federal government must be delegated to the individual states and the people thereof. Our founding fathers were clear: let the states decide on their own how to handle these matters and make no mistake. The federal government has no place in legislating these matters. Period.

Ron Paul - who has never wavered from his defense and protection of the Constitution - merely wants the federal government to obey and respect the laws of our country. Yet he is labelled a radical.

The same sentiment goes for foreign policy. The Constitution requires a formal declaration of war from the U.S. Congress before we invoke our military to interfere in matters outside our borders. This means getting mad at Syria and Iran for acts which irritate our sense of democracy is not ample justification for waging war. The federal government expects the average American to obey its laws; shouldn't our government be held to the same standard?

So the question is this: Will Super Tuesday reveal the true number of Ron Paul supporters? Those young, patriotic, and disenfranchised voters who see Ron Paul for what he is - the defender of America's most basic and fundamental principles?

President Obama has lost most of the support he had from the 18-30 demographic in 2008, mainly because he reneged on his campaign promises to run an open and transparent government and to respect the Tenth Amendment. Specifically, his repeated calls for the general public to participate in his White House We The People petition drives, YouTube Q&A's, and online town hall meetings became fuel for public fires when he mocked or ignored the staggering number of calls for drug policy reform.

That behavior can hardly be called 'transparent' or 'respectful'. Quite disheartening to the salivating masses who broke their impoverished backs to get Obama elected in 2008.

As a result, those teeming masses of young voters now must decide which GOP candidate will best represent their interests:
Mitt Romney doesn't seem to have his political finger on the pulse of lower and middle class Americans.

Rick Santorum seems at first glance to fill the role by repeatedly referring to the Constitution, yet his disinterest in discussing any policy change which threatens his personal ideals - regardless of what the people may want - shines the spotlight of truth on his electability.

Newt Gingrich's chances of connecting with young voters met a quick death when he called for the same punishment of marijuana users as Singapore: the death penalty. For the record, that includes those registered medical marijuana patients who abide by their state laws, which include the elderly, the sick, the dying, and those who suffer with daily agony.

The drug policy attitudes of these three candidates alone should weigh heavily on the minds of voters in states who will face medical marijuana initiatives on the November ballots, including Missouri - a state which was once the chief agricultural producer of hemp and cannabis before its prohibition in 1939.

So, we are left with Ron Paul. And those Americans who value their constitutional right to live their lives the way each one of us sees fit will see Ron Paul as a beacon of hope in the sea of darkness.

And that beacon, many suspect, will expose a huge number of Ron Paul fanatics who just want their civil liberties back. It's our country. These are our lives. If we aren't hurting anyone with who we marry, what non-lethal medication we choose, or our other personal choices, the federal government should have no say in our daily lives.

Ron Paul is a physician and - ironically - he seems to be the only presidential candidate who has his finger on the pulse of the nation's people. He has proven time and again - without fail - to respect and defend the Constitution. Not one of his opponents can deny that.

Super Tuesday is upon us and, even if Ron Paul doesn't deliver a win in a single state, the magic of democracy and delegate selection should ultimately cause quite a stir in the coming months.

Something to think about before another pundit writes the good doctor off...

Will Super Tuesday reveal the true number of Ron Paul supporters? - Kansas City Political Buzz | Examiner.com

Ron Paul Endorsed by Actor Darren Burrows & Wife Melinda

Prominent Wichita local best known for ‘Northern Exposure’ role declares support for Dr. Paul

LENEXA, Kansas – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul was endorsed today by actor Darren Burrows, a Wichita resident known best for his role in the popular television series, “Northern Exposure.”

In endorsing the 12-term Congressman from Texas, Mr. Burrows also was joined by his wife Melinda, and issued the following statement:

“Dr. Ron Paul has stood steadfast, as a man of integrity his entire public life. In this day and age of ‘go along to get along,’ his constancy and incorruptibility are legendary in Washington.

“Ron Paul’s message of freedom and personal liberty for all, sound money, limited government, and a non-interventionist foreign policy is not a new one. It is in fact actually and exactly the same message our founding fathers set forth so boldly when they put pen to paper in drafting that foundation of our great Republic, the Constitution. It is precisely because the message is not his own that we can believe him and know he speaks the truth.

“Having never endorsed a politician before, I am so pleased and honored to have this opportunity to endorse Dr. Ron Paul as my candidate for President of the United States of America. No one but Paul.”

The following biography was provided:

Darren Burrows was born in Winfield, Kansas. He is best known for his six seasons playing Ed Chigliak in the hit television series Northern Exposure. He has also worked with such notable directors as Brain DePalma, John Waters, Steven Spielberg, and Stephen Frears appearing in Casualties of War, Cry-Baby, Amistad, The Hi-Lo Country, Sunset Strip, Forty Shades of Blue, as well as Guest Starring on such series as X-Files and CSI.

Also publicly endorsing Dr. Ron Paul is Melinda Burrows, who issued the following statement:

“As a wife of 19 years and a mother of four sons, Dr. Ron Paul’s 55 years of steadfast dedication to his lovely wife, Carol, his five children and his 18 grandchildren speaks volumes to me about the kind of man he is. This along with his constancy in standing for the cause of freedom and liberty makes me proud to endorse Dr. Ron Paul for the Presidency of the United States.”

Executive Chef Melinda Burrows is a French chef having trained in Paris, France at the prestigious Ecole Ritz-Escoffier de Gastronomie Française. She has been a culinarian in many venues covering the globe, including specially preparing cuisines for recognized celebrities, movie stars and musicians. Chef Burrows is the Campus Executive Chef at Wichita State University.

Ron Paul Endorsed by Actor Darren Burrows & Wife Melinda*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign CommitteeRon Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee

Ron Paul Attracts 900-plus Voters to Nampa, Idaho

Canyon County town hall meeting yields big crowds and tops off eventful visit to the Gem State

BOISE, Idaho – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul drew an impressive 900 people to an event in Nampa, Idaho on a cool Tuesday afternoon, again attracting large crowds immediately ahead of the Gem State’s first-ever Republican caucus today.

The 12-term Congressman from Texas’ Canyon County Town Hall Meeting took place at 12:00 p.m. MST at the Nampa Civic Center, located at 311 Third Street South, Nampa, ID 83651. At the event, Dr. Paul discussed his platform of shrinking the federal government to its constitutional limits, and protecting economic and civil liberties to bring about a freer, more prosperous society where decision-making take place at the most local level. In addition, Dr. Paul outlined elements of his path-breaking ‘Plan to Restore America,’ an economic blueprint that earns high praise for its seriousness and specificity.

Ron Paul addresses 900 people at his Canyon County Town Hall Meeting held in Nampa.
###

Ron Paul Attracts 900-plus Voters to Nampa, Idaho*|*Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign CommitteeRon Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee

There Is No Left Left

Posted: 03/ 6/2012 10:49 am

I had a great time at the GOP caucus on Saturday in Seattle's Belltown district. Being a Brit, I could not participate, but I enjoyed watching this brand of direct and participatory democracy that differs profoundly from anything that goes on in the country of my birth.

Belltown is a hipster-lite district in one of the most liberal cities on the Left coast, and it went hard for Ron Paul on Saturday. Eight (I think) people from my precinct turned up. All but one had voted for Obama in 2008, and all were there for Paul. Indeed, throughout the caucus (comprising almost 200 people and 30 precincts) almost everyone under 40 voted for Paul, and almost everyone over 60 voted for Romney. Accordingly, overall, my legislative district -- very urban and very blue -- came down solidly for Paul.

It was all rather encouraging for me, since I've been flying around the country promoting the Blue Republicans, but it was not half as satisfying as a particular thought that has been floating around my head in the last week or two: the only anti-war movement with any visibility, political influence, savvy and momentum is around a white, male, Republican, American septuagenarian: in other words, the most politically active peace movement in the western world has coalesced around exactly the kind of person who, on paper, should be starting wars.

How deliciously unlikely. How handsomely ironic. How perfectly pragmatic in its seizing of the moment.
And for all those reasons, how wonderfully American.

The times, they are a-changing.

But whereas the change Dylan was singing about when he penned those words was both cause and effect of the birth of the modern American Left, now the change is both cause and effect of its death. America hasn't quite noticed it yet, but its effect will be every bit as far-reaching.

The death of the Left may sound a bit dramatic, but look around. What is the Left if it has ceded the politics of peace to an old, male, conservative who caucuses with the party recently of Bush and Cheney?

Anti-war movements have throughout my lifetime been creatures of the Left. Think back to the Vietnam protests. That was the generation of the summer of love that went on to oversee the transformation of the USA to a social democracy. Think of the protesters against the second war in Iraq. They were overwhelmingly Democrats. Similarly, the symbol of the British Left during my younger years was the women of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, who chained themselves to the fences around the nuclear missile bases -- and their goal of unilateral disarmament was part of the official platform of the leftist Labour party.

Fast-forward to today. In our nation -- the most militaristic in the world, and therefore the country where the peace movement matters the most -- the single passionate pro-peace presidential candidate is an old Republican who would run against a leftist president who, like his predecessor, authorizes un-abating military action all over the globe.

If the fact that the Left can no longer lay philosophical claim to peace does not suffice to declare it dead, then let's look for another sign of life. There is, after all, much more to the traditional Left than peace.
The instinct for peace on the Left has historically been very followed closely by a passion against the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few.

Yet, the Democratic party now oversees arguably the greatest transfer of wealth to those few that the USA has seen in generations, and to make sure it goes smoothly, it has a few of those few installed in some of the most important public positions in the country, including in the central bank and even the Treasury.

But what about the Left as the guardian of our civil rights?

That's gone too. The American Left has extended the Patriot Act and brought us the National Defense Authorization Act. It is militarizing the homeland. Even as it tries to give us easier access to contraception, it forgets that someone who is indefinitely detained without trial probably won't have much use for it.

And the few citizen-warriors who are actively fighting for our civil rights are not having any success within the Democratic party -- assuming there are any there -- and all of those whom I meet talk an awful lot about that old Republican

As the Left splutters out of existence, the only fire in its belly seems to be for legislating in support unionized workers at the cost of the rights of those who prefer not to have anything to do with organized labor.

Simply put, there is no Left left.

The politically engaged young people who flooded the GOP caucuses on Saturday would, a generation ago, have formed the energetic core of the Left. They are educated. They are under 30. They are typical of their age and class throughout the ages in being driven by peace, civil rights and the urgent desire for a brighter future. They are in all these ways, liberal, in the true sense of the term.

Unattached to old political parties and tired labels, an increasing number of this group have discovered the fundamental piece of the puzzle that many Left-leaning Americans have been missing right up until the time they leaned so far over that they fell flat on their faces: the way in which power is exercised determines the direction of a country more than do good political intentions.

History is rhyming, as it is wont to do. Today's young activists are excited. They are still marching in the street, as they did in the '60s. They still hold banners against unnecessary wars, as they did in the '60s. They still fight against corporate and political corruption, as they did in the '60s. They still demand their civil rights, as they did in the 60s. And because they are serious about these liberal values, not only are they not carrying "Obama 2012" signs: they are roundly rejecting statist Liberalism altogether.

Those unsympathetic to the Left -- who don't see its principles as much as its methods of control (those mechanisms that put power in the hands of the few to enable them to implement their vision of social justice) -- may of course say that the Left is not dead at all. After all, these big-government types are still concentrating power and imposing themselves on Americans everywhere. In that, they would be right (pun intended), of course. But that is to argue my point: for this is not how the Left has ever seen itself nor what it seeks to be.

Of course, the original liberal thinkers foresaw this outcome. They taught that true liberalism must hold up peace, civil rights and a just economy not only as declared goals, but as principles that constrain political action -- or else those goals, they warned, will become just liberal-sounding abstractions to distract a population from a reality increasingly shaped by the illiberal policies and increasingly powerful politicians and their friends.

Does that ring any bells?

American Liberalism is dead. Long live American liberalism -- the proper kind.

Robin Koerner: There Is No Left Left

2012 Republican Primary Delegate Allocation

2012 Republican Primary Delegate Allocation - The Capital Free Press


Dont fret a Majority of the Unpledged Caucus Selected belongs to Paul