Thread: Ron Paul on the Issues

My Beloved R3VOL: You Guys Kill Me!

Submitted by AnCapMercenary on Tue, 05/15/2012 - 03:09
Ron Paul 2012

Two weeks ago, someone here at DailyPaul misread an obviously sarcastic video of John Stossel, then proceeded to blow it way out of proportion, compounding it with another unsubstantiated expectation of an unannounced, announcement at Doug's last Tuesday's FaceBook live-chat.

What ensued was some of y'all making expectations based on a non-event.

Then, came being worked up over NOT watching both part 1 and 2 of Rand's rather informative speech at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition. How do I know? Because his only 'controversial' portion of the speech, aka "Part 2" of the video had 10's of thousands of views, whereas "Part 1" only had 100's of views. It's clear how and which video various sites and bloggers directed people to view.

Then, all the sudden descending of the most massive amount of troll attacks in one weekend I've ever witnessed. Signaling that our delegate strategy was being taken as a much more clear and present danger to the RINOs, not to mention, all the craziness exhibited strictly by the RINOS at the AZ and OK State Conventions over the weekend. Along with the predictable paranoia that ensued, which to a certain extent was justified, though in the aggregate, never too good.

Then, closing out the trifecta, now comes the official campaign news release, clarifying our intentions.

Sure, certainly I suppose the official RP2012 campaign did not 'need' to let us know that they were switching their focus to strictly concentrating on the delegate strategy at state conventions.

But please, think folks. Think.

Do y'all suppose that, that was for our benefit, or the MSM & RINOs'?

I'd call it a "strategically calculated risk."

We know by now that the only way in which someone is nominated, is at the GOP state conventions, via the delegate process.

By now, we already know and accept the reality (well, hopefully most of you, by now) that the Primaries are merely a PR parade to give the sheeple an illusion of a democratic process by feigning constituency participation.

We've played along with the thieving RINOs in the few early primary and caucus states: they stole them all! PERIOD!

If you dispute that, please STOP living in denial!

For those who keep asking for evidence of fraud? There are plenty.

I'm not gonna list them all here. I've parsed them in the past here at DP, ad infinitum. You can search my avatar for related comments if you must. And there are those here who are much more informed than me at the caucus process, who were on the ground recording video and accounted blow-by-blow of what transpired at those early primaries/caucuses.

Please look those up, if you must.

So, we tried to give the Ruling Class and their pliant RINOs the benefit of the doubt.

It didn't work. In fact, it was never meant to, probably.

Not that I have to recount the last 5~6 months for y'all, but we were clearly blocked every step of the way, from utter MSM blackout, shifting around voting locations, holding a separate one solely for Likudniks as were the case with Sheldon Adelson's private caucus, which we also 'took over!'

And sure, part of the reason for some of the difficulties weren't solely attributed to our enemies efforts. We're only human, and none of us are perfect, nor are Dr. Paul's staff.
Here we are, post-RINO manipulated primaries/caucuses.

Now all their shenanigans and utterly despicable aims had been made abundantly clear and laid bare, it's simply time that we put them on notice, not so bluntly, that we're gonna do things on OUR terms, right here, right now, with a strategy that has been proven spectacularly successful!

You guys do realize that Mitt Romney practically LOST EVERY SINGLE STATE CONVENTION except for ND, so far, right?

Let me repeat that: Mitt Romney practically LOST EVERY SINGLE STATE CONVENTION except for ND, so far!

As in, we ARE the ones who are actually

winning, when and where it REALLY COUNTS???

So, it is abundantly clear that Romney cannot lock up anything before Tampa in very real terms. Really, does anyone here still think that Mittens has got anything remotely close to the serial liar ASSociated Press' deceitful 900-ish delegate count?

Considering the nature of it all, I'd proffer that Mutt Wrongney probably has, in reality, less than 300 delegates out of the 1144 needed, 'locked up.'

Now, today's Dr. Paul's announcement comes out, and my R3VOLutionaries fall into disarray?

What's going on here?

How is ANY of what Dr. Paul's campaign staff released, come as 'news?'

I mean come on people! You should ALL know better than this!!!!

Today's RP press release is merely a documented admission of what we have already been doing: HYPER-focusing on Delegates! Delegates! Delegates!

What part of that wasn't clear??

As far as I understand, anyone can become a delegate regardless of whether it's a primary or a caucus state, right?

So, in those states that haven't had their delegate process commence, please do so!

So, just what in God's grace is all the big hoopla today over?

I truly don't get it.

Allow me to repeat: the only way in which GOP nominates its national delegates who will be picking the eventual POTUS nominee, can only be done at the State Conventions!

Dollars spent on TV ads, FRN's spent pursuing on-the-fence-RINOs at this point may not be all too smart or practical.

Dollar for dollar, it is true, we have spent the most per delegate of any of the campaign, other than GoldmanSUX Flip Obmaney.

So, if you run the numbers, all that effort chasing after votes that may not exist at this point is probably irrelevant, but certainly a waste of our campaign's very limited resources.

Besides especially now, I personally believe that no RINO neoCon, whom after like 20+ debates this season, is gonna be swayed by the Doc's message anyway. So, it is much more prudent that we focus on turning out our base, the R3VOLutionaries, to turn out in massive numbers at the various respective State Conventions.

As we've all undeniably witnessed in Nevada and Maine, all it really takes is only a couple of hundred to a couple of thousands of informed R3VOL to attend the State Conventions to turn the tide of history, right?

We do not need millions of primary/caucus beauty pageant votes to win anything!

We're witnessing history, and those of you who are participating at convention levels are making history, even as we speak!

So ask yourselves this: how is what the campaign released today in regards to changing strategy to concentrate strictly on the delegates, now, any different from what the campaign were ALREADY focused on doing at IA, CO, WA, MN, MA, ME, NV, LA, AZ, OK, etc.?

Today's announcement literally didn't change a damn thing, other than making RINOs and MSM complacent about the level of our threat!

So, here's the million dollar question for y'all who are pondering the reason behind the timing and the specific wording within the release, if the only real outcome is just that: the MSM & RINOs' confused reaction, don't you guys think that was the actual, originally intended goal, to begin with?

We're not the ones the campaign were expecting to respond like this!

LOL

Sometimes, I think for all the times that we complain (I myself included) about how the official RP2012 campaign and Benton are running things, perhaps they're giving us too much credit!

So, my dearest R3VOL, please take a pause and think. It's still legal under NDAA.D I think...er... I'm still right, right?

As our Gray Champion is so oft fond of saying: No Long Faces!

Chins up, Chest high!

Not to be complacent, but if you gauge all the state conventions so far, there is no denying it: We ARE the Ones who're really WINNING!

Plus, on a side note, check out the visitor numbers on DP. I've NEVER seen it HIGHER on a weekday, well past 10pm PST; we had over 500+ log-ons, on a Monday! That's a HUGE improvement! There is no sign that the R3VOLution isn't on the March!

We're WINNING!

But first, it does require that you truly believe it, and know it!

Stop letting negative emotions and doubt take hold.

Those negative downers are only temporary, momentary feelings whose only purpose is for you to waste time wallowing in.

Depression, is not an action. It's an indulgence.

So SNAP OUT OF IT!

Now let's embarrass some RINOs this weekend at Minnesota, shall we? Dr. Paul himself will be attending. I mean, what more proof do y'all need to know that Dr. Paul is in it to WIN it?

Geesh. Some of you truly, truly, kill me. But, don't kill yourselves, either! LOL

You know, everything we see physically manifested in our world today, all started with just one spark. One spark of idea.

That's all it took: a single momentary thought.

So why not make that reality work for us?

Just specifically envision Dr.Paul winning the Presidency, and sitting behind the desk at the Oval Office.

So, envision that, folks.

You are living history.

We have no choice but to survive and thrive.

But y'all already knew that before getting involved with the R3VOLution, right? Unless we have President Paul, it's NDAA policestate at home, and WWIII abroad starting with Syria, then Iran.

So high time y'all re-introduced yourself, to yourselves, back around April2011, when this Pres. Election cycle all began, or perhaps earlier, or whenever it was that you decided having your Natural Rights ensured and restored was all worth it, and worth fighting for.

We're not enthusiastic about Dr. Paul and the message, for the mere sake of being excited. We're fervent because we truly believe in something.

Just remind yourselves of it, occasionally, perhaps like twice a day, from now on .D

Now, we only have 3 months till Tampa, and 5 months and change till November.

The world is about to be in for a rude awakening, come August.

Now, make sure that history happens, as we planned.

We're gonna make a mark, whether the sheeple like it or not. We're not here to just win an election. We are here to change the path of our own destiny.

What's a misunderstood campaign press release, compared to that priority??

Go Get'em R3VOL!

My Beloved R3VOL: You Guys Kill Me! | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Ron Paul 2012

Ron Paul Has Dropped Out of the Presidential Race … Or Has He?

Posted on May 15, 2012 by WashingtonsBlog

Ron Paul Ends His Campaign In New Primary States … What Does It Mean?

The corporate media is abuzz with headlines saying that Ron Paul has finally seen the light, thrown in the towel, and ended his campaign.

However, Ron Paul supporters believe that – while he won’t be campaigning in the primary states – Paul is still in the race, and will be focusing on winning delegates in caucus states.

For example, Policy Mic argues:

Ron Paul announced today in a letter to supporters that he will not campaign for the popular vote in states that have yet to held their primaries.

In his under-reported IDD strategy (“It’s the Delegates, Dummy”), Paul has focused on the fact that presidential nominees are chosen by delegates, not by popular vote. Paul’s campaign has focused to date especially on states that allow committed Republican Party members to have a greater voice in the process. States like Iowa, Nevada, Maine, Louisiana, Washington, and Colorado have been states where Paul supporters have made tremendous inroads in winning party leadership positions and being influential in the national delegate selection process. While many states have yet to finish the delegate selection process, it increasingly looks like Paul could dominate the nationwide delegate process called long ago in Romney’s favor.

Paul’s announcement today fits that same vein, but will no doubt surprise many of his supporters. Not only is Paul saying “It’s the Delegates Dummy” to Mitt Romney and the national media, he is taking it a step further and saying that spending his supporters’ money on winning the popular vote is of such little importance to the campaign that they aren’t going to waste time or money on that any longer.

Does that mean Paul has dropped out? Quit the race? Suspended his campaign? Packed his bags? Returned home to lil ole Lake Jackson, Texas? No, it means quite the opposite. It means that Paul will have more ability to focus on delegate selection instead of the many upcoming winner take all states.

As has been the case from January 3 – the night of the Iowa Caucus – this is a two man race. It’s Mitt Romney v. Ron Paul. Paul, the seasoned campaigner, will be on Romney’s heels through to the RNC in August. If Romney makes 1,144 delegates on the first ballot, Romney becomes the Republican nominee. If Romney slips, the man on his heels will gladly take his place. That’s been the story since Iowa and remains the story today. The decision remains in the hands of 2,286 Republican delegates, many of whom have yet to be chosen. Will it be more of the same or will it be the man who’s spent some 40 years standing on his principle against the GOP establishment both inside DC and out?

The following videos show that passionate Paul supporters believe that Paul is still in the race:

Video 1: Ron Paul Has Not Suspended His Campaign - YouTube


Video 2: Ron Paul has NOT Suspended His Campaign - YouTube


Video 3: Ron Paul Did NOT Drop Out - The Truth - YouTube

Is this wishful thinking by Paul supporters … or for real?

Certainly, the timing will strike Paul supporters as odd, given that Paul has picked up a huge number of delegates in recent weeks, and the fact is starting to be known that delegates pledged to Romney can switch their vote at will.

But mixed messages are coming out of the Paul camp … even as they claim that Paul is still in the race.

As senior Paul adviser Doug Wead writes today:

“We are absolutely not dropping out of this race! We are focusing our efforts squarely on winning delegates and party leadership positions at state conventions.”
- Jesse Benton, Campaign Chairman

Ron Paul announced today he would not be competing in the upcoming primary states, saying that he would focus, instead, on his delegate strategy. A strategy that is working, by the way, and transforming the Republican Party. It is something he has said many times since the February 11, 2012 caucus in Maine.

Only this time, the main stream media gave the announcement full attention and treated it like the end of his campaign. Drudge ran it as a front page headline “Ron Paul is out.”

***
For the last two years the national media has been saying that Ron Paul is out. So how could that possibly be news? One might ask, “When has the mainstream media ever thought that Ron Paul was in?”

Bracing for a Ron Paul win in Iowa, major new outlets last January announced that if he won, the Iowa Caucus, itself, would be discredited. According to the New York Times and the Associated Press, Ron Paul is still listed as the recipient of one, count em, one delegate from Iowa, a state that he now dominates.

Likewise, the fact that Ron Paul supporters took a big chunk of the delegation of Mitt Romney’s home state of Massachusetts was not big news.

***

By ending the primary battles, Ron Paul is signalling to the field that this is the end of hostilities. In primaries you end up tearing each other down. It is millions of dollars spent on negative advertising. In caucuses, as brutal as they may be, you change the Republican Party, you empower the new and challenge the established.

The delegate strategy is working. That is the way we will impact the platform in Tampa. That is the way we will begin the process of change. It is through the caucuses that we are attracting youth, like the twenty-one year old woman recently elected to the national committee from Maine or the Ron Paul Hispanics or the Independents who have never been involved in party politics.

***Our people have been punched, yelled at, lied to and worked until they can hardly stand. But on they come, fighting for their children, fighting for their future, angry at the corruption of the banks, of Wall Street, of the lobbyists, of the congress, of the White House. The battle for liberty is not over. It has just taken on a new phase. It cannot be stopped by the national media. If that were the case it would never have been born in the first place.

And some will say that it is a lost cause, which I will not concede but it does remind me of Clarence Darrow’s famous line, “Lost causes are the only ones worth fighting for.”

Ron Paul Has Dropped Out of the Presidential Race … Or Has He? - Washington's Blog

Establishment Dirty Tricks At Conventions Target Paul Supporters

AZ and OK state conventions end in chaos as insiders try to derail Paul delegate strategy

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
May 14, 2012





GOP state conventions in Arizona and Oklahoma ended in chaos this past weekend as establishment insiders did everything within and beyond their power to prevent Ron Paul walking away with more delegates to the national convention.

With Paul picking up recent victories at state conventions in Iowa, Nevada, Maine, Louisiana, and Massachusetts, Romney supporters, along with GOP committeemen set out to stop Paul supporters from having any influence over the delegate election process by shutting down the conventions and falsely claiming victories.

In Arizona, Romney supporters accused Paul activists of booing Josh Romney, Mitt Romney’s son, and disrupting his speech. The mainstream media ran with the claim, suggesting that boisterous Paul fans forced Romney to cut short his speech, jeering him off the stage.

In reality, as this video proves, Romney received respectful applause when he ‘officially’ ended the speech, and was only booed when, in blatant violation of party rules, he attempted to return to the podium and promote his father’s officially endorsed slate.

As the convention progressed, the dirty tricks against Paul supporters, who were present in vast numbers, gathered pace.

Paul supporters complained that they were being moved back and forth between convention halls and the main floor in a deliberate attempt to confuse the proceedings. During this confusion, several Paul supporters complained that Romney supporters were engaging in ballot stuffing.



It was also reported that two attendees standing as Ron Paul delegate candidates were physically assaulted by Romney supporters on the convention floor.

As it became more clear that Paul supporters were extremely well organized and prepared to win the day for their candidate, strange occurrences began to happen.

Warren Woodward, an attendee at the convention writes:

I was elected as a delegate. This was surprising since no one, not even me, voted for me.

Another person was also elected for whom no one voted. Leadership was reluctant to do anything about this anomaly at first but enough people yelled. I heard something about how the Republican leadership had cheaped out on the voting tabulating equipment. I don’t know if that’s true but in any case the ballots had been misread and in both cases the election really went to the person below the “winner”. So from there on everything had to be hand counted which took forever and was not performed in plain view.

Woodward also noted that all candidates were listed in alphabetical order except Romney’s slate which always appeared at the top on all ballots.

The establishment backed chairman then decided that enough was enough and shut down the convention altogether before voting had finished, saying that it would be finished at a later date, possibly by mail.

This caused chaos and prompted the remaining attendees to elect a new chairman and hold a new vote outside the building:

Video at the page link: » Establishment Dirty Tricks At Conventions Target Paul Supporters Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Voting from this gathering indicated that Ron Paul won 11 of the 18 available delegate slots, however, no one knows the official results from the Arizona convention, and it is unclear if they ever will.

If you thought it couldn’t get any worse you’d be wrong, as the convention in Oklahoma reached an even more farcical conclusion.

Paul supporters, who made up around 50% of the attendees, complained that entire sections of the convention hall had been walled off and they couldn’t get any access.

Paul campaign senior adviser Doug Wead also noted on his blog that several other dirty tricks against Paul supporters came into play, that eventually caused the convention to adjourn in much the same fashion as the Arizona meeting:

“Frightened that the Ron Paul delegates had become the majority in the convention, the establishment GOP, running the event, used its own errors in the Credentials Report to stall the convention for several hours. On the premise that the time for the convention hall rental was coming to an end they refused to hold a final vote on credentials or to acknowledge the calls for a roll call vote on the Delegates and Alternates as required under the rules.”

The GOP insiders essentially ignored votes from the floor altogether, shut down the convention, and claimed that they had won 96% of the vote, despite the fact that Ron Paul supporters made up around half of the attendees.

“Paul delegates who had give up weeks and months of their lives to get elected as delegates at the precinct and county levels were scandalized… Challenges will surely follow.” Doug Wead wrote.

Just as in Arizona, another symbolic convention was held in the parking lot:

3rd video: BREAKING NEWS: Oklahoma GOP Cheating Ron Paul In Delegate Process - YouTube

4th video: Romney Supporters attack Ron Paul

As we reported last week, two separate incidents captured on video revealed desperate attempts by Mitt Romney operatives to divide and disrupt official Ron Paul endorsed delegate slates by handing out fake ballots to attendees at the state conventions in Nevada and Maine.

It is clear that GOP insiders are frightened to death that well organized Ron Paul supporters are operating within the rules to win delegates for their candidate and ultimately influence the national GOP convention.

» Establishment Dirty Tricks At Conventions Target Paul Supporters Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Florida investigation reveals 180,000 non-citizens may be registered to vote

Submitted by Misfit4Peace on Tue, 05/15/2012 - 07:29
Current Events

Florida officials have discovered that 180,000 registered voters may be non-citizens.

A CBS4/Miami Herald analysis of information supplied by Miami-Dade shows a large number of the potential non-citizens voters cast ballots in the past — including the 2000 election, when the presidency was decided by just over 500 votes.

According to Deputy Supervisor of Elections Christina White, there are a “lot of non-citizens on our registration rolls.”

Florida’s Division of Elections is checking the citizenship of voters by comparing drivers license records, which show whether a licensed driver is also a U.S. citizen.

Non-citizens are able to become registered voters in Florida because if a non-citizen checks the box on the voter registration form that says they are a citizen they are registered to vote, because the form is signed under oath.

Those registered who are identified as possible non-citizens are reported to the State Attorney’s office The States Attorney may charge anyone who unlawfully registered to vote with a felony.

According to the Heritage Foundation’s Hans Von Spakovsky, Florida’s investigation is only looking at legal immigrants, not illegal aliens, who may have registered to vote even though they are not citizens. Von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Elections Commission, says that Florida is doing the right thing with this investigation, but is only scratching the surface. Florida can’t check for illegal aliens who registered to vote because the Federal government is not giving Florida access to Immigration and Naturalization Service records which would help identify illegals who have registered to vote.

You can watch Bill Hemmer and Hans Von Spakovsky discuss Florida’s investigation of non-citizens illegally voting in the accompanying video here.

Nearly four years after CNN reported on the scandalous ACORN voter fraud, and those fraudulent voter registrations were converted into fraudulent votes, we are still struggling to prevent voter fraud. Instead of working to prevent voter fraud, the Obama regime goes so far as to sue some states that require voters to show a photo ID in order to vote.

RED STATE

Florida investigation reveals 180,000 non-citizens may be registered to vote | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Ron Paul 2012

The Republican Party's Ron Paul Problem

Brian Doherty | May 15, 2012



Rep. Ron Paul announced yesterday that he will no longer be actively campaigning in forthcoming primaries. While this announcement--as perhaps his team should have figured, especially with its injudicious use of past tense about "fought hard"--was widely played in the media as essentially "Ron Paul drops out", he in fact directly said his quest to rack up as many delegates as he can for the Republican presidential nomination willcontinue. In fact, the announcement was more or less merely a public declaration of what had been the campaign's style for the past few weeks, featuring few of the smaller public events that make up a full-fledged campaign and more just giant campus rallies. The campaign was indeed likely down to only about a million on hand, and seems ill-inclined right now to do more big calls for cash.

His campaign advisors have had to try to play damage control--many, though by no means all, Paul fans around the Internet were dispirited, especially the ones still wanting to rack up big vote totals in states like Texas and California, just to show the establishment what's what.

But as a further announcement from Paul's campaign website stated, "Asked if this is a dropout, Paul’s campaign manager Jesse Benton said ‘Absolutely not! We are focusing our efforts squarely on winning delegates and partyleadership positions at state conventions.”

This announcement happened just a couple of days after state Republican Party conventions in Oklahoma and Arizona were racked by dissention, boos, accusations of illegal adjournment, at least one physical attack, and in Oklahoma a rump convention exiled in a parking lot. That all arose from the continued fervor of Paul’s supporters, and not even Paul will be able to stop it. Such tumult is just the latest manifestations of the slow march of Paul people through the institutions of the Republican Party this year, a movement that is about more than whether or not Ron Paul is personally on the campaign trail.

Indeed, campaign advisor Doug Wead seemed to indicate that ending that sort of loud fighting--which makes the Paul movement seem unbearably wild and feisty for the Republican establishment--might have been part of the goal of the announcement:

all of this fighting makes Ron Paul nervous. Yes, he is taking on the establishment. Yes, he wants the monetary policy reformed so that the poor and the middle class and even the excluded rich can know the thrill and opportunity of free markets that aren’t rigged for insider trading. But Dr. Paul is a happy warrior on these issues. He is a person who has always believed in a respectful dialogue and debate. As John Tate says, “That is what he wants his legacy to be.”

Shouting people down is not Ron Paul’s way. Winning a battle of ideals based on principles, in a respectful way, is how he approaches the contest and it is how he wants others to approach the contest, as well.

Other chatter around the Paul campaign I heard today indicated that an attempt to embue a more realistic sense of what Paul's actual electoral prospects are moving forward might have been part of the motive for the misunderstood announcement. Regardless, it's unlikely that a mere word from the top will slow down the desire to make as big a splash in the remaining state conventions, and eventually Tampa, as possible.

Of course, many in the Republican Party will continue to be merely aggravated by the Paulites loud persistence and refusal to get in line behind front runner Mitt Romney. But the rise of the movement around Paul, and the past history of such loud minorities within the GOP, indicate the Republican Party should figure out a way to keep the Paul people in the tent—not out in the parking lot.

A year ago, Paul was the presumed least-likely-to-succeed candidate in the GOP field. His radical libertarian bent and his fervent opposition to the Party’s standard foreign policy positions made him seem anathema to the Party’s primary base. Anyway, hadn’t he tried this same trick in 2008, with no real electoral result? His running again was treated by both Party and the media as an easy-to-ignore distraction. Now, Paul is still the last man standing in opposition to Romney—and far from fading, his fortunes both within the Party and within the culture are rising.

Politically, Paul has been pulling off wins thought impossible through the winter and spring, when every other candidate had their moment as the presumptive leader of the opposition to Romney. Paul now controls the delegation from Maine, and seems quite likely on target to do the same inMinnesota, Iowa, and Louisiana, and has made substantial in-roads in filling delegate slots in Massachusetts and Nevada (though even delegates who are Paul supporters are bound to vote for Romney). Paul supporters hold top leadership positions in the state Party now in both Iowa and Alaska. No matter how many delegates he goes into Tampa with, Paul and his fans can no longer be written off as politically unimportant.

But political importance, as measured in votes or delegates right now, isn’t the only measure of Paul’s effect. Some have mocked Paul’s presidential runs as ideologically motivated acting out, not serious attempts to win office. That accusation seems to ring true to some because Paul can gain whether he wins or loses.

Though a Republican congressman and a Ronald Reagan delegate to the 1976 Republican convention, Paul’s intellectual background is in the libertarian movement. He was the Libertarian Party’s 1988 presidential candidate in-between stints as a Republican congressman, and his attitudes about government purpose and monetary policy were shaped by libertarian hero economists such as Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard.

The libertarian movement has been driven not necessarily to win political office, but to educate the mass public on the virtues of libertarian ideas. Politicians, most libertarian think, are going to be lagging indicators of public opinion. The real game is shaping that public opinion.

Thus, Paul’s cultural and intellectual victories—a series of best-selling books, launching organizations such as Campaign for Liberty, becoming a positive political signifier on everything fromSaturday Night Live to Daily Show with Jon Stewart—can be as meaningful as racking up votes.

And Paul’s status as a cultural hero, especially to the young, is growing. In the past couple of months, he’s pulled bigger crowds than ever at college campuses, including over 7,000 at UCLA, over 6,000 at University of Texas-Austin, and over 4,000 in the rain in Philadelphia. His “Youth for Ron Paul” group now has over 110,000 members in 627 chapters in all 50 states. He is creating a legacy of enthusiastic, giving activists, many skewing young.

The “giving” part should be especially important to the Party. Paul raised $35 million in the 2008 run, and got nowhere electorally. Rather than feeling burned out, his fans have given even more this go-round. Paul outraised Newt Gingrich by $14 million, and Rick Santorum by $16 million.

His vote totals in 2012 also show the Paul phenomenon growing, not shrinking. He doubled his total number of votes, and his share of the total Republican primary vote more than doubled so far, increasing by 6 percentage points, from 4 to 10. While his armies are undoubtedly at an election cycle or two from succeeding in large number, dozens of would-be federal office holders and hundreds of state and local ones are running now explicitly inspired by Ron Paul. The first fruition of that strategy was in 2010, with the election of Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul.

The Republican Party has seen this phenomenon before—young, passionate, uncompromising activists with a powerful anti-government bent coming into a Party whose establishment is confused or aggravated by them, led by a very ideological politician who inspires great personal loyalty and affection. It was the Barry Goldwater movement, in 1960. Four years later their man got the nomination, and 20 years later an exemplar of that movement won the presidency of the United States.

How much hold on the future could this libertarian minority within the Republican Party have, energized by a failed presidential campaign and deliberately following a strategy of occupying positions within the Party structure from the bottom up? To answer that, consider Pat Robertson in 1988 and the effect the religious right has had on the Republican Party ever since.

The libertarians could well have success in shaping the Party’s actual policies in a way the religious right did not. The libertarians concerns actually represent serious solutions to actual crises the country faces, in fiscal, monetary, and foreign policy, not merely a shrinking reaction against cultural and values change. The cultural values of the religious right are losing their grip on the majority of the American people, while Paul’s libertarian leanings are growing. In a CNN poll from last June, 63 percent say they think government was doing too much, and 50 percent said government should not favor any particular set of values. That was the highest numbers ever supporting those libertarian-leaning attitudes.

The most important reason Paul’s fans aren’t going away is that they believe that his very serious attempts to rein in government spending and function—his budget proposals are far stronger on instant spending cuts and debt reduction than Romney’s or any other past candidate's—are what the Party needs to focus on, in the wake of the still-dissatisfied Tea Party movement, and what the country needs to focus on, in the wake of our overwhelming and growing debt.

In 2008, Paul and his people ran an alternate convention called the Rally for the Republic that drew well over 10,000 dedicated fans. Paul has not made any promises to endorse Romney, and despite the studied cordiality with which the candidates have treated the other, he’s unlikely to. That won’t make the Republican Party powers any happier than were those people fussing in the Oklahoma and Arizona GOP conventions. But the activists Paul has energized won’t be going away until the issues of debt and government overreach that inspire them have been dealt with, and from their perspective that won’t be happening no matter who wins in November.

Brian Doherty is a senior editor of Reason magazine and author of Ron Paul’s Revolution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired(Broadside Books).

The Republican Party's Ron Paul Problem - Ron Paul's rEVOLution : Reason.com

I'm A Near Atheist Ron Paul Supporter And I Prayed Tonight

Submitted by PaxLibertas on Tue, 05/15/2012 - 06:25
Ron Paul 2012

I was walking along Redondo Beach tonight. It was quiet, the waves were crashing and I was out there alone.

I was thinking of this country, what we've been through, what might come. I was thinking of the support and bond between RP supporters.

Out of nowhere I broke out and 'prayed'. TO who or what I don't know, those questions don't plague me much anymore. I don't know if anyone or anything heard me, but I found myself yelling at the ocean in the dark.

It ended when I said to myself "You know you're yelling at water...right?"

I was a "Christian" at one point. Now I would say I'm Agnostic. But who the hell cares about labels? I don't.

I'm not going to 'see the light' though, it won't happen, so don't preach to me please. But...there are very few things that will make me talk to whatever is out there these days and this happens to be one.

I don't care if a "God" or whatever force out there answers my prayers for MY sake. But there are a lot of good people in this struggle who I feel deserve the victory of seeing a RP Presidency more than I do. People who have done more, believed more, given more of their time.

If a "God" exists I hope He/She/It answers the prayers of those who believe, and that's what I prayed for. It doesn't make sense to me either. In fact the whole time I was saying how I don't believe but others do, so help them, and so forth.

I hope something heard me. I highly doubt it, but stranger things have happened. Maybe I hope the collective will of those who do 'believe' will be answered by some force, but that's as far as I can go with 'faith'.

It's weird logic, I know, but I figured it was worth a shot.

I'm A Near Atheist Ron Paul Supporter And I Prayed Tonight | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Ron Paul 2012

Carey Elizabeth, Fmr.O-Supporter: The R3VOLution Rolls On! Donate to May 17th MoneyBomb!

Submitted by AnCapMercenary on Tue, 05/15/2012 - 04:28
Ron Paul 2012

THE REVOLUTION IS NOT DEAD: Rise for Liberty on May 17!!!

Published on May 14, 2012 by CareyElizabeth824

Unlike every other politician who nurses off of greedy corporations, RON PAUL NEEDS US!!! Give anything you can before, on, or after May 17, 2012 for the Rise for Liberty Moneybomb!!!!!!!

www.RonPaul2012.com

NEVER BELIEVE THE MEDIA- Ron Paul is still in!

Published on May 14, 2012 by CareyElizabeth824

Especially when they say Ron Paul is dropping out. Instead, DONATE TO THE MONEYBOMB ON MAY 17.

www.ronpaul2012.com

Carey Elizabeth, Fmr.O-Supporter: The R3VOLution Rolls On! Donate to May 17th MoneyBomb! | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Ron Paul 2012

Christians and Conservatives–Rally Now! Ron Paul Has Out-Polled Obama and Scored Big Multi-State Wins Over Romney!

Posted on May 13, 2012.

The Hope: A True Conservative Republican Candidate Who Can Defeat Barack Obama


Christians, social conservatives, economic conservatives, and others sought to find a candidate to rally behind as an alternative to Mitt Romney. Candidates took turns rising to the top, only to eventually fall back for one reason or another. There is little in the national media to suggest that Romney has anyone still competing with him for the Republican nomination. Yet recent events indicate that Dr. Ron Paul is still in contention to become that elusive solid conservative Republican presidential candidate–if conservatives seize the opportunity to rally around him. To do so, they must (1) become aware of the window of opportunity before them, (2) be convinced that Ron Paul is a genuine conservative who supports Christian and constitutional values (3) know that Ron Paul is the best candidate to defeat President Obama, and (4) understand that Dr. Paul still has a shot at capturing the Republican nomination.

Recent Ron Paul Victories and Advances

Before proceeding further in this article, I urge a look at this three-minute video which powerfully unfolds the reason that Ron Paul’s candidacy should now be seriously considered by all conservative Republicans. Then, because it is scriptural and wise to listen to contending points of view and to examine the teachings of even the most trusted leaders (Acts 17:11), please use the links in the text below to get a broader view of any points on which you have misgivings about Dr. Paul.

Recent Ron Paul victories in Minnesota, Iowa, Louisiana, Alaska, Colorado, Maine, and Nevada are beginning to get a bit of notice in the mainstream press. Despite questionable tactics by the party establishment in Georgia, Missouri, Alaska, Nevada, Maine, Oklahoma, and elsewhere. Rachel Maddow and FOX News have reported Ron Paul’s Iowa and Minnesota victories and essentially “inevitable” wins in a minimum of five states to put his name into nomination. Dr. Paul even had major delegate wins in Mitt Romney’s home state of Massachusetts. For the last month or more, while the media has asked “Where is Ron Paul?” and did not report on his massive rallies, Dr. Paul has been consistently drawing thousands upon thousands to rallies at Urbana-Champaign, IL, Madison, WI, University of Maryland, Columbia, MO, Chico, CA, UCLA, Berkely, CA, Texas A&M, Fort Worth, TX, San Antonio, TX, Ithaca, NY, University of Rhode Island, University of Pittsburg, Philadelphia, PA, Houston, TX, El Paso, TX, Austin, TX. Fullerton, CA, Davis, CA, and San Diego, CA.

For accurate updates on the status of the Ron Paul campaign, which the mainstream media seldom give, a good source is Doug Wead The Blog. Mr. Wead is a Presidential historian and senior adviser to the Ron Paul campaign. For a realistic and more accurate delegate count than the AP count nearly all the media use, see The Real 2012 Delegate Count. Reporter Ben Swann does a superb job of seeking the truth on these issues in his Reality Check program.

Who can defeat Barack Obama?

Ron Paul often polls as well or better than Mitt Romney against President Obama. A recent Rasmussen poll has Ron Paul defeating President Obama, while Romney ties. A recent Public Policy Polling survey also found Ron Paul more electable than Mitt Romney when pitted against Barack Obama. Recent polling often has Romney trailing Obama in a general election match up. Remember that everything Ron Paul accomplishes is without media assistance. Besides his competitiveness with Obama (the media constantly says, “Ron Paul can’t win.”), did you ever hear anything in the media about Ron Paul polling second nationally to Romney, ahead of Gingrich and Santorum, as recently as February of this year? If you think the media is liberal, perhaps you should wonder why essentially only one candidate never got a media boost.

Unify to Strengthen Romney?

Some fear that continued competition for the Republican nomination will weaken Romney and hurt Republican chances to defeat Obama. Bear in mind that any criticism of Romney from conservative opponents will be insignificant compared to the barrage of advertising President Obama will unleash with his massive political war chest which will approach $1 billion. If Romney cannot stand up to scrutiny from his own party, how will he fare against a ruthless, well-funded media blitz? Look at this ad already produced by Democrats for a taste of what is coming.

What happens even if Romney wins? Will that mean 4, 8, or even 12 years of conservative compromise and a further erosion of conservative principles in the Republican party? There is some serious food for thought in The Twelve-Year Conservative Compromise. And consider the tendency of Republicans to support their president even if he waters down conservative values. Sadly, the Republican party seems to stand up for principle much better when it is opposing a Democrat than when it has a “moderate” Republican president in office.

For a solid critique of Mitt Romney from an evangelical viewpoint, Steve Baldwin’s post The Case Against Mitt Romney is substantial. Here is one small selection:

Thanks to stupidity, naiveté and conflicts of interest on the right, we have created the Romney monster and given him the credibility he does not deserve. The chances are Romney will win the GOP nomination, but this could be disastrous since there’s a large block of Christian right and Tea Party voters who will not vote for Romney, thus increasing the chance of an Obama victory. They believe, with good reason, that a worldview-free President Romney will just swing with the wind and not make the bold decisions necessary to save America. Many also believe that a Romney Presidency will do so much damage to the Republican brand — by governing as a “lets-make-big-government-work-more-efficiently” technocrat – that it may be better if Obama won reelection with both houses hopefully controlled by Republicans willing to shut his agenda down.

For one of the most complete and well-documented sites regarding Mitt Romney’s positions, go to The Mitt Romney Report by a Massachusetts pro-family group which has closely followed Mitt Romney’s record on a range of issues over the years as a Presidential candidate (2007-present), Governor of Massachusetts (Jan. 2003 – Jan. 2007), candidate for US Senate (1994), and businessman. This report includes many videos of Romney in his own words on abortion, “gay” rights, stimulus, illegal immigration, getting money from DC, identifying himself as a “progressive,” guns, and more.

Romney and Obama Similarities

Perhaps, therefore, an even more important question is “How different is Mitt Romney from Barack Obama?” Although there is some humor in this story, watch the video that follows it and ask yourself, “Do Romney and Obama have the same speech writer?” Watch here: Scientists reveal Romney and Obama are actually clones. Here is a similar compilation: Mitt Romney vs. Barack Obama First Debate Preview.

Issues of Importance to Christians

Having looked at the practical question of whether Ron Paul still has a chance to win, and whether continued campaigning for a conservative alternative to Romney is wise, we need to now look at issues of importance to Christians. If Ron Paul was the obvious alternative to Mitt Romney from the start, why did Christians not rally behind him? If they had misgivings about him before, will they be able to overcome them now that Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have sidelined their campaigns?

Many Christians are now taking a serious look at Ron Paul. Consider this letter to fellow Christian leaders by Justin Machacek, an Emmy award winning television producer, independent faith-based filmmaker, and promotional creative. He serves as the president of Reel Deal Productions, Inc. in Fort Worth, Texas and as the Senior On Air Producer for Daystar, one of the largest Christian media networks in the world. Justin has worked closely with many of the most prominent Christian ministries and faith-based media organizations in America. Mr. Machacek recently participated in a conference call with Ron Paul and concerned Christian leaders. One Christian businessman who participated said, “There can be little doubt that if evangelicals were made aware of his views and heard first hand his explanations on abortion, gun rights, gay marriage, our monetary system, defense etc… that the move towards the RP camp would be dramatic.”

Pastor Voddie Baucham of Grace Family Baptist Church has an excellent post “Why Ron Paul?” as does Michael Eversden in “A Biblical Case for Ron Paul on Four Issues of Importance to Christians“. Both are important articles for Christians newly considering Ron Paul. The Evangelicals for Ron Paul Blog is a thoughtful site, as well.
Let’s examine some of these issues.

Abortion

Although Dr. Paul is a strongly pro-life physician who has personally delivered over 4,000 babies without performing an abortion, some had the impression that a candidate such is Rick Santorum was more staunchly pro-life than Ron Paul. Of course, Mr. Santorum himself encouraged that impression when he stated in debate that Ron Paul only had a 50% pro-life voting record–about the same as Democrat Harry Reid. Mr. Santorum did not lie, but neither did he explain that he was speaking of Dr. Paul’s 55% National Right to Life rating in 2005/2006. During this period Dr. Paul agreed with NRTL on 5 of 6 issues. However, the one issue he disagreed on was voted on 4 times, and every time was counted as a separate vote–thus giving him a 5 of 9 record instead of 5 of 6. Dr. Paul explained in detail why he voted as he did on that one issue.

For those who want more detail on Ron Paul’s stellar pro-life position, I recommend Lori Stacey’s posts Ron Paul, Champion of the Pro-Life movement: Not pro-life enough??? and Personhood USA insults the only true champion of life, Dr. Ron Paul. To hear Dr. Paul in person, and in detail, I strongly suggest Ron Paul by Satellite at Prolife Forum Greenville SC 01/18/12. After digesting these, you may begin to wonder if millions of children could already have been saved if pro-life conservatives had followed Ron Paul’s approach when Republicans controlled the White House and Congress.

Gun Rights

This isn’t even a contest. Here’s Gun Owners of America’s evaluation of Republican presidential candidates. Santorum and Gingrich will be included in some of these comparisons, as well, to demonstrate that Dr. Paul deserved more consideration even before they dropped out: Dr. Paul A+, Santorum B-, Gingrich C, Romney D-. GOA says, “Guts. That is the one word which describes Rep. Ron Paul of Texas best. Perhaps the most consistent vote in the Congress, he can be expected to oppose any unconstitutional expansion of government, no matter how politically difficult that vote might be.” Read the link for more details.

Our Monetary System and the Federal Reserve System

Although many people still do not see the Federal Reserve System as much of an issue, Dr. Ron Paul has fought almost alone for years to make the immorality and failure of our central banking system a fundamental political issue. To get some concept of the relationship of “millions” to “trillions” (it’s jaw-dropping!) look at this graphic depiction in $100 bills. To understand the magnitude of this issue that has been kept quiet for decades, just try to fathom that $16 trillion was secretly loaned at no interest to big banks and their cronies. That’s about 20 times the amount of the TARP bail outs voted by Congress! Do you suppose it is truly David vs. Goliath when private bankers have the legal right to create such sums essentially out of thin air and secretly distribute them? And $5 trillion went to foreign banks. That’s more than the U.S. budget (including deficit spending!) for an entire year! No wonder Henry Ford said, “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”

Steve Forbes has gone so far as to say Ron Paul should be the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve System.

For more on this tremendously important issue, which only Ron Paul has the courage and knowledge to tackle, refer to The Official Counterfeiter:

As “the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil” (1 Tim. 6:10, NIV), it would be wise to scrutinize the current monetary system of the United States, which is presently the reserve currency of the world.

Vic Lockman, a former Disney cartoonist with economic and biblical insight, has given his permission to put his 1969 booklet The Official Counterfeiter on line. Although it is dated, I think you will find all the essential facts still very relevant to today. With evangelical voters exerting a major influence on Republican presidential politics, Mr. Lockman’s work can go a long way towards educating us about a very fundamental, but (before Ron Paul) misunderstood and unnoticed issue.

This unique work makes a major contribution to making sound, biblical economics comprehensible to a non-technical audience. It is a great tool for learning to discern what “just weights and balances” are in the modern world (Lev. 19:36; Proverbs 11:1, 16:11; Ezek. 45:10). This is a crash course in economics for everyone. We do well to understand how the world really works so we can make biblically and economically informed decisions in casting our votes for national leaders.

Download the free PDF here.

An event worth serious consideration, The Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology, chaired by Rep. Ron Paul, chairs a hearing to examine six legislative proposals that either reform or abolish the Federal Reserve System.

Israel

Many Christians believe that God blesses those who bless Israel. Hearing the claim that Ron Paul wants to stop aid to Israel, they believe he opposes Israel. However, Ron Paul wants to halt U.S. aid to all countries, not just Israel. He believes it wrong to borrow money we do not have (largely from China) to give to other countries. He also points out that we give at least four times more aid to potentially hostile nations surrounding Israel. Cutting aid to all countries would be to Israel’s distinct advantage. Not only would cessation of all foreign aid help Israel more than its foes, but it would also allow Israel to make its own defense decisions without U.S. approval. In line with supporting Israel’s right to it’s own self-determination, Ron Paul also supports Israel’s right to designate Jerusalem as its capital.

In 1981, when Israel bombed the Iraq nuclear reactor, Ron Paul was one of the only congressmen to refuse to condemn Israel for doing so. Dr. Paul believes Israel, not the U.S.A., should determine what is best for Israel.

A well-written article on Ron Paul’s relation to Israel is Ron Paul and the Israel Question. Another very informative article is Ron Paul on Israel by the former vice president of Christian and Jews United for Israel–who is now a senior adviser to the Ron Paul campaign. For those who want some “let’s get real” talk from a Baptist pastor and former Constitution Party presidential candidate, I also recommend Chuck Baldwin’s Ron Paul’s Israel Problem.

Nuclear Iran


Connected with the Israel question is the claim that Iran is developing nuclear weapons which it would use to attack Israel and the U.S.A. However, it is doubtful that Iran ever threatened either country with nuclear destruction. U.S. intelligence continues to find no evidence that Iran is developing, or even wants to develop nuclear weapons. Even if it would turn out that Iran did possess nuclear weapons, ex-chief of Mossad Meir Dagan spoke out against a preemptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities anytime soon. He says the Iranian regime is rational in its own way.

Please understand clearly that Ron Paul is not against military defense of our country. However, he feels the greater danger now, with no solid evidence that Iran even wants a nuclear weapon, is over-reaction. A pre-emptive strike on another country is not the prerogative of the president. War should be declared by congress, not decided by the president, unless the president is forced to act in self-defense with no time for consultation. Ron Paul adheres to the Christian just war concept.

National Defense

Let’s use Iran as a stepping stone to the larger question of national defense. In one of the debates Ron Paul said our problems with Iran went back farther than 1979 (Santorum) to 1953 when our CIA helped overthrown Iran’s democratically elected leader and installed the Shah. Dr. Paul said our foreign policy often causes “blowback” when factions within other countries, rightly or wrongly, react to our interference in their internal affairs. So who is correct on their history and foreign policy? Here are several short videos on Iran/U.S. relations: The Secret Government (CIA Overthrow of Mossadeq), History of U.S. Intervention in Iran – 1953 Until Present, and Ron Paul’s speech after the imposition of sanctions on Iran, Israel and Saudi Arabia are Greater Threats than Iran, and Sanctions on Iran are Sanctions on You.

It has been sometimes mentioned, but often forgotten, that our national debt is a major national security issue. Ron Paul is the only candidate who seriously confronts the debt issue. As the Bible says, the borrower is a slave to the lender, and we are becoming increasingly dependent on other countries such as China. Other candidates talk of cutting the debt–while increasing military spending and maintaining Social Security, Medicare, and a host of federal agencies and programs. The fact that maintaining both at current levels is unsustainable is confirmed by conservative Republican Senator Jim DeMint. Realistically, if Ron Paul is not correct about the fact that we can actually strengthen our defense by reducing morally questionable, budget-busting, counterproductive meddling in the internal affairs of foreign nations, then our national defense is destined for a severe blown when our economy eventually collapses due to deficit spending. Fortunately, as Douglas A. Macgregor, Ph.D. Colonel (ret), U.S. Army, says, more money does not necessarily mean better defense. Romney’s willingness to spend far more than our national deficit on just military alone does not bode well for anyone wanting to save this country from imminent bankruptcy.

Perhaps it is sometimes forgotten that U.S. foreign policy may have an indirect but very substantial effect on Christian communities and missions overseas. A thought-provoking article on this influence is “Christian Massacres: A Result of U.S. Foreign Policy“.

Iraq and Afghanistan

It is frequently said, “I like Ron Paul except for his views on defense.” Some are under the impression that Dr. Paul “blames American” for 9-11. Actually, Ron Paul blames the terrorists who perpetrated the attacks, and he voted to pursue Bin Laden and submitted a bill to go after terrorists themselves, rather than invading countries. He believes that to properly deal with a problem you must understand its causes. Although the 9-11 attacks on innocent Americans were reprehensible and unjust, we should still examine the motives of those perpetrating the crime if we want to understand and combat them. Just as most Americans were unaware of the CIA overthrow of Iran’s elected government in 1953, most were unaware of any U.S. actions that could provoke the terrorists to strike against us. U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said in a 60 minutes interview that the death of 500,000 Iraqi children due to U.S. economic sanctions was worth it. Seventeen of the nineteen terrorists were from Saudi Arabia and none from Iraq, but we invaded Iraq. Regime change in Iraq was a U.S. policy before 9-11. Ron Paul first began speaking against it in 1998. Former CIA Head of the Bin Laden Unit Michael Scheuer said that Ron Paul’s correct position on the reason’s for 9-11 would have worried Bin Laden and his allies, but they thrived under the view held by all other candidates. It is often said that good theories can be tested by their ability to predict. Everyone must watch Ron Paul’s famous Predictions speech from April 24, 2002, to understand his wisdom. In this five-minute speech you will see a decade of history predicted with amazing precision! Then, if you want to hear Ron Paul speaking candidly about foreign policy, go to this national defense page.

Col. Macgregor recently granted a detailed interview on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars which is comprehensive and enlightening. Here is a small excerpt:

Iraq and Afghanistan are disasters and anyone who asserts otherwise is misinformed. I recently met with someone who is an advocate for Mitt Romney and he was unhappy with me because I pointed out that the differences between Governor Romney and President Obama are marginal at best. He was trying to demonstrate how profoundly different they were. He was unsuccessful but one of the things he insisted on was that Obama had somehow or another sacrificed our great gains in Iraq. I looked at him and said, “You can’t be serious.” He said, “What do you mean?” He seemed to be completely unaware, as many Americans are, that Iraq is effectively a satellite for Iran. That the United States Army and it’s generals did a brilliant job of consolidating the power and influence of Iran inside Iraq, by backing Mr. Maliki who is always Tehran’s chosen candidate and utterly destroying the Sunni Arab population’s influence and power.

Who do the troops vote for with their campaign contributions–Ron Paul or Mitt Romney?

National Defense Authorization Act

The NDAA authorizes indefinite imprisonment, without charges, and without the right to a lawyer solely on the secret determination that a U.S. citizen is suspected of a terrorist threat or has had some indefinite connection to a terrorist. This essentially removes Bill of Rights protections from every U.S. citizen. There’s not much more to say, but read it again until it sinks in! For more details, read this Forbes article. Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul all answered a question about NDAA in a debate.

War on Drugs

Voters often do not realize that Ron Paul acknowledges the right of states and localities to pass laws regulating the use and possession of drugs. Ron Paul conscientiously adheres to his oath to defend the Constitution. To enact federal prohibition of alcohol required an amendment to the Constitution. His position is that the federal War on Drugs is unconstitutional, and, in fact, is a failure that exacerbates the problem–just as prohibition did with alcohol. Drug prohibition increases the price of drugs on the black market, creating the climate conducive for the formation of drug lords, cartels, and the resulting increasing violence. The U.S. has the largest prison population in the world both in number and percentage, and the drug war is a major cause. Dr. Paul points that imprisonment of minorities for drug offenses has affected minorities greatly disproportional to their percentage of conviction of drug crimes. Many countries, groups, and noted individuals agree with Dr. Paul on the failure of the War on Drugs, including Britain, Latin American, the Global Commission on Drug Policy, law enforcement groups, Pat Robertson, Judge Jim Gray, Nobel Prize economist Milton Friedman, and 500 U.S. economists. I strongly recommend Milton Friedman’s short video interview for those particularly interested in the moral questions involved. The experience of countries who have tried drug decriminalization demonstrates the soundness of this approach.

Marijuana itself may not even be the main factor in its criminalization. There are far bigger economics and politics involved than the smoking of marijuana. One major factor may be the competition hemp poses to the oil industry.

Ron Paul points out that the federal government is overriding state laws that allow medical use of marijuana. The different views of Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are contrasted in a short video of their responses to a medical marijuana user whose five doctors affirm it is his only relief.

Health and Nutrition Freedoms

What many conservatives seem to overlook is that federal laws and regulations among the biggest threats to our most cherished freedoms. Again, bear in mind that saying federal (national) legislation in a given area is unconstitutional does not mean that states and localities cannot legislate on these matters. It is their proper and intended jurisdiction. Thus, while it may sound conservative and moral to fight drugs at the federal level, this opens the door to other federal legislation that can remove our most fundamental liberties.

As Milton Friedman said above, if the federal government can criminalize marijuana because it is deemed bad for one’s health, why not raw milk (Amish farmers have been arrested at gunpoint for selling it), free speech in nutritional information, nutritional products, not eating a federally prescribed diet (yes, a girl was not allowed to eat her sack lunch because it did not meet federal diet “guidelines”), selling raw almonds, etc. Besides what the federal government can prohibit, there are also concerns over what it can fund or mandate–psychiatric screenings of children, for example. Granted, there may be some arguments for and against many of these issues. But federalizing issues leaves no room for error. If a state makes a mistake, other states are not forced into the same mold, but federal laws affect the whole country and stifle the creativity inherent in multiple individual state approaches. There is a growing protest of state and federal regulations that restrict what appear to many as basic rights in the area of food and nutrition.

Also, however well-intended, centralized government agencies will naturally be targets of special interests who can buy influence to favor their products or protect themselves from competition by placing sympathetic personnel in government regulatory agencies. Ron Paul talks of this when he says the FDA and drug companies are in bed together. The award-winning Burzynski movie is a real eye-opener for anyone places total confidence in the capability of the federal FDA to protect and promote our best health interests. One can look at a site like Natural News for a critical look at many federal health initiatives, if only to be aware that there is often a credible alternative viewpoint that may receive scant positive news coverage.

Local Control of Education

Education is an area that receives far less attention than it deserves from Christians and conservatives. There has been a recent movement in the nation’s largest protestant denomination, The Southern Baptist Convention, to consider alternatives to public schooling. “Dr. Morris H. Chapman, president and chief executive officer of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Executive Committee, criticizes the public school system for increasing secularism and moral erosion….” saying, “All Christians should note this sea-change in sentiment within the SBC. The spiritual, moral, and intellectual pathologies of the government school system are now obvious even to casual observers. Christian parents and pastors need to ask themselves just how much longer they intend to render our children to Caesar’s spiritually dark, morally decaying, and physically dangerous government schools.”

Whether spiritually, morally, politically, culturally, safety, or educationally speaking, it would seem parental and local control over what our children are being taught is of prime importance. While Mitt Romney may talk of block grants and reforming the Department of Education, Ron Paul advocates its essential abolition. Ron Paul is a strong advocate of freedom of education under parental control, including the option to home school. Dr. Paul sees no Constitutional authority for a federal role in education.
Prayer in schools, creation vs. evolution, abortion, sex education, history, politics, math and reading strategies, religion, sexual orientation, marriage, and other issues that can provoke strong differences of opinion are best decided at a local level and ultimately left in the hands of parents who have the right to chose the school their children attend–or teach them at home.

Dr. Paul says such issues cannot be discussed on their merits in an educational environment where each side attempts to use the force of law and imposed curriculum to impose its views on all. Dr. Paul would be a strong advocate for Christians rights of free speech and association.

Religious Freedom

Of course without the educational freedom and parental control Dr. Paul so strongly advocates, religious freedom is actually a fading entity. If a government school’s “neutral” education denies any speech about God or Christian values to be spoken, children will by default receive a secular education. Likewise, churches under federal tax rules are steered away from any political speech or any moral pronouncements that could be considered discriminatory to individuals practicing acts that Christians may deem sinful. Ron Paul believes that the Constitution grants the federal government no authority to impose morality upon the nation as a whole. This type of legislation is reserved to the states and localities. Ron Paul would defend Christians from federal imposition upon their right of free speech and association. Christians and churches could promote their biblical morality and freely choose to associate or not associate in their churches. Christians would not be accused of hate speech or discrimination for preaching biblical teachings. They would not be forced by federal intrusion to hire or retain personnel deemed immoral by their standards. They would be free to proclaim and practice their teachings and win converts through persuasion. Rather than engaging in the legislative battle to impose moral values through federal legislation (the states do have authority to take up such matters), Ron Paul would strive instead to preserve the freedoms of speech and association for everyone–and also prohibit the federal government from imposing one state’s standards upon another state.

Marriage and Gay Rights

Ron Paul’s position on the issue of marriage (he has been married to his wife, Carol, for 55 years) is consistent with his Constitutional approach. He says, in opposing a constitutional marriage amendment, and endorsing The Defense of Marriage Act,

Ironically, liberal social engineers who wish to use federal government power to redefine marriage will be able to point to the constitutional marriage amendment as proof that the definition of marriage is indeed a federal matter! I am unwilling either to cede to federal courts the authority to redefine marriage, or to deny a state’s ability to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. Instead, I believe it is time for Congress and state legislatures to reassert their authority by refusing to enforce judicial usurpations of power.

I suggest Christians and conservatives look more closely at Dr. Paul’s Constitutional reasoning, rather than making quick judgments that he’s against marriage. His positions are decidedly constitutional, and would most often have yielded superior short-term and long-term practical results. His position on gay rights is reasoned similarly.

Economic Policy

Ron Paul proposes to cut $1 trillion dollars his first year, and balance the budget by his third year. He will essentially abolish five federal agencies, eliminating them by attrition and transfer rather than abrupt cuts. All others want to balance the budget sometime beyond the end of their term (usually many years beyond). Dr. Paul says the only budget we can really control is this year’s–refreshing candor and truth. No more kicking the can down the road. It is called his Plan to Restore America.

Many conservatives, for example Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and Sean Hannity, endorse Ron Paul’s economic plan and recognize his economic expertise and solid track record in this area. There really is no peer to Dr. Paul in knowledge and consistency in economic matters among any of the candidates who have run in this year’s race. Dr. Paul has been praised by David Stockman (Ronald Reagan’s former Director of the Office of Management and Budget), the independent Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Nassim Taleb (“Black Swan” author), Dr. Iris Mack (celebrated Harvard alum), The Club for Growth, and many others.

How about a 0% Income Tax? Wall Street Journal editorial board director Stephen Moore explains why Rep. Ron Paul’s ideas on economics are correct and must be accepted in the mainstream GOP platform. Mr. Moore says, “…you would see the most insourcing of jobs into America in the history of the world.”


Although Rick Santorum made some comments based on creative interpretations of data in a debate, the independent and respected National Taxpayers Union (NTU) issued a press release to clarify its presidential candidate ratings. For Mitt Romney’s evaluation compare the NTU evaluation of candidate budget proposals. Between Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul, NTU said Ron Paul’s proposal dwarfed others’ proposals in deficit reduction.

Social Security and Medicare

Related to the deficit situation is the funding of Social Security and Medicare. Christians and conservatives generally find it morally unjustified to pass on immense debt to their children and grandchildren. However, senior citizens are rightly concerned about whether the funds they have been contributing to throughout their lives will remain sound into their retirement years. Ron Paul’s cuts in overseas spending offer the only plan to cut our deficit and balance the budget while not cutting Social Security and Medicare for those who will be dependent on it. Other candidates plans to maintain Social Security and Medicare, increase military spending, and balance the budget do not compute. Note well that those seniors on fixed retirement incomes and dependent on savings are hurt tremendously by the inflationary Federal Reserve policies that cause the value of the dollar to fall and, therefore, the prices of goods to rise.

For more on this, including some interesting and relevant light on Newt Gingrich’s claims to have helped balance the budget four times, see Dr. Ron Paul: Champion of the Senior Citizen!

Talking Points

For those who have not looked seriously at Ron Paul previously, here is a recent comparison of Ron Paul with Mitt Romney, a comparison of Ron Paul with Barack Obama, and some bullet points highlighting his consistent record over twelve terms in the U.S. House of Representatives:

• He has never taken a government junket
• He does not participate in the lucrative Congressional Pension Program
• He returns a portion of his annual Congressional Office Budget every year
• He has never voted to raise taxes
• He has never voted for an unbalanced budget
• He voted no to the bankster bailout
• He always voted no on raising the debt ceiling
• He warned us against The “Super Congress” legislation that resembles both an “Enabling Act” and a “Politburo”
• He has never voted to restrict gun ownership
• He has never voted to raise Congressional Pay
• President Paul will take a yearly salary of $39,336, the average US worker’s salary, instead of the President’s $400,000 salary
• He will cut One Trillion Dollars from the budget in the first year and balance the budget in three years
• He will Return Power to the States as set down in the 9th and 10th Amendments (Bill of Rights) to the Constitution
• He never voted to increase Executive Branch Power
• He will Reinstate The Constitution and Save The Republic
• He will audit and eventually end the unconstitutional Federal Reserve System
• He will phase out the unconstitutional IRS beginning immediately
• He will secure the borders
• He will limit Big Government in your private affairs
• He will stop Illegal immigration and birthright citizenship, grant no amnesty, and defend our borders
• He will protect internet freedom and our Bill of Rights

Christians and Conservatives–Rally Now! Ron Paul Has Out-Polled Obama and Scored Big Multi-State Wins Over Romney! « Scriptural Scrutiny

Christians and Conservatives–Rally Now! Ron Paul Has Out-Polled Obama and Scored Big Multi-State Wins Over Romney!

Posted on May 13, 2012.

The Hope: A True Conservative Republican Candidate Who Can Defeat Barack Obama


Christians, social conservatives, economic conservatives, and others sought to find a candidate to rally behind as an alternative to Mitt Romney. Candidates took turns rising to the top, only to eventually fall back for one reason or another. There is little in the national media to suggest that Romney has anyone still competing with him for the Republican nomination. Yet recent events indicate that Dr. Ron Paul is still in contention to become that elusive solid conservative Republican presidential candidate–if conservatives seize the opportunity to rally around him. To do so, they must (1) become aware of the window of opportunity before them, (2) be convinced that Ron Paul is a genuine conservative who supports Christian and constitutional values (3) know that Ron Paul is the best candidate to defeat President Obama, and (4) understand that Dr. Paul still has a shot at capturing the Republican nomination.

Recent Ron Paul Victories and Advances

Before proceeding further in this article, I urge a look at this three-minute video which powerfully unfolds the reason that Ron Paul’s candidacy should now be seriously considered by all conservative Republicans. Then, because it is scriptural and wise to listen to contending points of view and to examine the teachings of even the most trusted leaders (Acts 17:11), please use the links in the text below to get a broader view of any points on which you have misgivings about Dr. Paul.

Recent Ron Paul victories in Minnesota, Iowa, Louisiana, Alaska, Colorado, Maine, and Nevada are beginning to get a bit of notice in the mainstream press. Despite questionable tactics by the party establishment in Georgia, Missouri, Alaska, Nevada, Maine, Oklahoma, and elsewhere. Rachel Maddow and FOX News have reported Ron Paul’s Iowa and Minnesota victories and essentially “inevitable” wins in a minimum of five states to put his name into nomination. Dr. Paul even had major delegate wins in Mitt Romney’s home state of Massachusetts. For the last month or more, while the media has asked “Where is Ron Paul?” and did not report on his massive rallies, Dr. Paul has been consistently drawing thousands upon thousands to rallies at Urbana-Champaign, IL, Madison, WI, University of Maryland, Columbia, MO, Chico, CA, UCLA, Berkely, CA, Texas A&M, Fort Worth, TX, San Antonio, TX, Ithaca, NY, University of Rhode Island, University of Pittsburg, Philadelphia, PA, Houston, TX, El Paso, TX, Austin, TX. Fullerton, CA, Davis, CA, and San Diego, CA.

For accurate updates on the status of the Ron Paul campaign, which the mainstream media seldom give, a good source is Doug Wead The Blog. Mr. Wead is a Presidential historian and senior adviser to the Ron Paul campaign. For a realistic and more accurate delegate count than the AP count nearly all the media use, see The Real 2012 Delegate Count. Reporter Ben Swann does a superb job of seeking the truth on these issues in his Reality Check program.

Who can defeat Barack Obama?

Ron Paul often polls as well or better than Mitt Romney against President Obama. A recent Rasmussen poll has Ron Paul defeating President Obama, while Romney ties. A recent Public Policy Polling survey also found Ron Paul more electable than Mitt Romney when pitted against Barack Obama. Recent polling often has Romney trailing Obama in a general election match up. Remember that everything Ron Paul accomplishes is without media assistance. Besides his competitiveness with Obama (the media constantly says, “Ron Paul can’t win.”), did you ever hear anything in the media about Ron Paul polling second nationally to Romney, ahead of Gingrich and Santorum, as recently as February of this year? If you think the media is liberal, perhaps you should wonder why essentially only one candidate never got a media boost.

Unify to Strengthen Romney?

Some fear that continued competition for the Republican nomination will weaken Romney and hurt Republican chances to defeat Obama. Bear in mind that any criticism of Romney from conservative opponents will be insignificant compared to the barrage of advertising President Obama will unleash with his massive political war chest which will approach $1 billion. If Romney cannot stand up to scrutiny from his own party, how will he fare against a ruthless, well-funded media blitz? Look at this ad already produced by Democrats for a taste of what is coming.

What happens even if Romney wins? Will that mean 4, 8, or even 12 years of conservative compromise and a further erosion of conservative principles in the Republican party? There is some serious food for thought in The Twelve-Year Conservative Compromise. And consider the tendency of Republicans to support their president even if he waters down conservative values. Sadly, the Republican party seems to stand up for principle much better when it is opposing a Democrat than when it has a “moderate” Republican president in office.

For a solid critique of Mitt Romney from an evangelical viewpoint, Steve Baldwin’s post The Case Against Mitt Romney is substantial. Here is one small selection:

Thanks to stupidity, naiveté and conflicts of interest on the right, we have created the Romney monster and given him the credibility he does not deserve. The chances are Romney will win the GOP nomination, but this could be disastrous since there’s a large block of Christian right and Tea Party voters who will not vote for Romney, thus increasing the chance of an Obama victory. They believe, with good reason, that a worldview-free President Romney will just swing with the wind and not make the bold decisions necessary to save America. Many also believe that a Romney Presidency will do so much damage to the Republican brand — by governing as a “lets-make-big-government-work-more-efficiently” technocrat – that it may be better if Obama won reelection with both houses hopefully controlled by Republicans willing to shut his agenda down.

For one of the most complete and well-documented sites regarding Mitt Romney’s positions, go to The Mitt Romney Report by a Massachusetts pro-family group which has closely followed Mitt Romney’s record on a range of issues over the years as a Presidential candidate (2007-present), Governor of Massachusetts (Jan. 2003 – Jan. 2007), candidate for US Senate (1994), and businessman. This report includes many videos of Romney in his own words on abortion, “gay” rights, stimulus, illegal immigration, getting money from DC, identifying himself as a “progressive,” guns, and more.

Romney and Obama Similarities

Perhaps, therefore, an even more important question is “How different is Mitt Romney from Barack Obama?” Although there is some humor in this story, watch the video that follows it and ask yourself, “Do Romney and Obama have the same speech writer?” Watch here: Scientists reveal Romney and Obama are actually clones. Here is a similar compilation: Mitt Romney vs. Barack Obama First Debate Preview.

Issues of Importance to Christians

Having looked at the practical question of whether Ron Paul still has a chance to win, and whether continued campaigning for a conservative alternative to Romney is wise, we need to now look at issues of importance to Christians. If Ron Paul was the obvious alternative to Mitt Romney from the start, why did Christians not rally behind him? If they had misgivings about him before, will they be able to overcome them now that Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have sidelined their campaigns?

Many Christians are now taking a serious look at Ron Paul. Consider this letter to fellow Christian leaders by Justin Machacek, an Emmy award winning television producer, independent faith-based filmmaker, and promotional creative. He serves as the president of Reel Deal Productions, Inc. in Fort Worth, Texas and as the Senior On Air Producer for Daystar, one of the largest Christian media networks in the world. Justin has worked closely with many of the most prominent Christian ministries and faith-based media organizations in America. Mr. Machacek recently participated in a conference call with Ron Paul and concerned Christian leaders. One Christian businessman who participated said, “There can be little doubt that if evangelicals were made aware of his views and heard first hand his explanations on abortion, gun rights, gay marriage, our monetary system, defense etc… that the move towards the RP camp would be dramatic.”

Pastor Voddie Baucham of Grace Family Baptist Church has an excellent post “Why Ron Paul?” as does Michael Eversden in “A Biblical Case for Ron Paul on Four Issues of Importance to Christians“. Both are important articles for Christians newly considering Ron Paul. The Evangelicals for Ron Paul Blog is a thoughtful site, as well.
Let’s examine some of these issues.

Abortion

Although Dr. Paul is a strongly pro-life physician who has personally delivered over 4,000 babies without performing an abortion, some had the impression that a candidate such is Rick Santorum was more staunchly pro-life than Ron Paul. Of course, Mr. Santorum himself encouraged that impression when he stated in debate that Ron Paul only had a 50% pro-life voting record–about the same as Democrat Harry Reid. Mr. Santorum did not lie, but neither did he explain that he was speaking of Dr. Paul’s 55% National Right to Life rating in 2005/2006. During this period Dr. Paul agreed with NRTL on 5 of 6 issues. However, the one issue he disagreed on was voted on 4 times, and every time was counted as a separate vote–thus giving him a 5 of 9 record instead of 5 of 6. Dr. Paul explained in detail why he voted as he did on that one issue.

For those who want more detail on Ron Paul’s stellar pro-life position, I recommend Lori Stacey’s posts Ron Paul, Champion of the Pro-Life movement: Not pro-life enough??? and Personhood USA insults the only true champion of life, Dr. Ron Paul. To hear Dr. Paul in person, and in detail, I strongly suggest Ron Paul by Satellite at Prolife Forum Greenville SC 01/18/12. After digesting these, you may begin to wonder if millions of children could already have been saved if pro-life conservatives had followed Ron Paul’s approach when Republicans controlled the White House and Congress.

Gun Rights

This isn’t even a contest. Here’s Gun Owners of America’s evaluation of Republican presidential candidates. Santorum and Gingrich will be included in some of these comparisons, as well, to demonstrate that Dr. Paul deserved more consideration even before they dropped out: Dr. Paul A+, Santorum B-, Gingrich C, Romney D-. GOA says, “Guts. That is the one word which describes Rep. Ron Paul of Texas best. Perhaps the most consistent vote in the Congress, he can be expected to oppose any unconstitutional expansion of government, no matter how politically difficult that vote might be.” Read the link for more details.

Our Monetary System and the Federal Reserve System

Although many people still do not see the Federal Reserve System as much of an issue, Dr. Ron Paul has fought almost alone for years to make the immorality and failure of our central banking system a fundamental political issue. To get some concept of the relationship of “millions” to “trillions” (it’s jaw-dropping!) look at this graphic depiction in $100 bills. To understand the magnitude of this issue that has been kept quiet for decades, just try to fathom that $16 trillion was secretly loaned at no interest to big banks and their cronies. That’s about 20 times the amount of the TARP bail outs voted by Congress! Do you suppose it is truly David vs. Goliath when private bankers have the legal right to create such sums essentially out of thin air and secretly distribute them? And $5 trillion went to foreign banks. That’s more than the U.S. budget (including deficit spending!) for an entire year! No wonder Henry Ford said, “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”

Steve Forbes has gone so far as to say Ron Paul should be the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve System.

For more on this tremendously important issue, which only Ron Paul has the courage and knowledge to tackle, refer to The Official Counterfeiter:

As “the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil” (1 Tim. 6:10, NIV), it would be wise to scrutinize the current monetary system of the United States, which is presently the reserve currency of the world.

Vic Lockman, a former Disney cartoonist with economic and biblical insight, has given his permission to put his 1969 booklet The Official Counterfeiter on line. Although it is dated, I think you will find all the essential facts still very relevant to today. With evangelical voters exerting a major influence on Republican presidential politics, Mr. Lockman’s work can go a long way towards educating us about a very fundamental, but (before Ron Paul) misunderstood and unnoticed issue.

This unique work makes a major contribution to making sound, biblical economics comprehensible to a non-technical audience. It is a great tool for learning to discern what “just weights and balances” are in the modern world (Lev. 19:36; Proverbs 11:1, 16:11; Ezek. 45:10). This is a crash course in economics for everyone. We do well to understand how the world really works so we can make biblically and economically informed decisions in casting our votes for national leaders.

Download the free PDF here.

An event worth serious consideration, The Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology, chaired by Rep. Ron Paul, chairs a hearing to examine six legislative proposals that either reform or abolish the Federal Reserve System.

Israel

Many Christians believe that God blesses those who bless Israel. Hearing the claim that Ron Paul wants to stop aid to Israel, they believe he opposes Israel. However, Ron Paul wants to halt U.S. aid to all countries, not just Israel. He believes it wrong to borrow money we do not have (largely from China) to give to other countries. He also points out that we give at least four times more aid to potentially hostile nations surrounding Israel. Cutting aid to all countries would be to Israel’s distinct advantage. Not only would cessation of all foreign aid help Israel more than its foes, but it would also allow Israel to make its own defense decisions without U.S. approval. In line with supporting Israel’s right to it’s own self-determination, Ron Paul also supports Israel’s right to designate Jerusalem as its capital.

In 1981, when Israel bombed the Iraq nuclear reactor, Ron Paul was one of the only congressmen to refuse to condemn Israel for doing so. Dr. Paul believes Israel, not the U.S.A., should determine what is best for Israel.

A well-written article on Ron Paul’s relation to Israel is Ron Paul and the Israel Question. Another very informative article is Ron Paul on Israel by the former vice president of Christian and Jews United for Israel–who is now a senior adviser to the Ron Paul campaign. For those who want some “let’s get real” talk from a Baptist pastor and former Constitution Party presidential candidate, I also recommend Chuck Baldwin’s Ron Paul’s Israel Problem.

Nuclear Iran


Connected with the Israel question is the claim that Iran is developing nuclear weapons which it would use to attack Israel and the U.S.A. However, it is doubtful that Iran ever threatened either country with nuclear destruction. U.S. intelligence continues to find no evidence that Iran is developing, or even wants to develop nuclear weapons. Even if it would turn out that Iran did possess nuclear weapons, ex-chief of Mossad Meir Dagan spoke out against a preemptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities anytime soon. He says the Iranian regime is rational in its own way.

Please understand clearly that Ron Paul is not against military defense of our country. However, he feels the greater danger now, with no solid evidence that Iran even wants a nuclear weapon, is over-reaction. A pre-emptive strike on another country is not the prerogative of the president. War should be declared by congress, not decided by the president, unless the president is forced to act in self-defense with no time for consultation. Ron Paul adheres to the Christian just war concept.

National Defense

Let’s use Iran as a stepping stone to the larger question of national defense. In one of the debates Ron Paul said our problems with Iran went back farther than 1979 (Santorum) to 1953 when our CIA helped overthrown Iran’s democratically elected leader and installed the Shah. Dr. Paul said our foreign policy often causes “blowback” when factions within other countries, rightly or wrongly, react to our interference in their internal affairs. So who is correct on their history and foreign policy? Here are several short videos on Iran/U.S. relations: The Secret Government (CIA Overthrow of Mossadeq), History of U.S. Intervention in Iran – 1953 Until Present, and Ron Paul’s speech after the imposition of sanctions on Iran, Israel and Saudi Arabia are Greater Threats than Iran, and Sanctions on Iran are Sanctions on You.

It has been sometimes mentioned, but often forgotten, that our national debt is a major national security issue. Ron Paul is the only candidate who seriously confronts the debt issue. As the Bible says, the borrower is a slave to the lender, and we are becoming increasingly dependent on other countries such as China. Other candidates talk of cutting the debt–while increasing military spending and maintaining Social Security, Medicare, and a host of federal agencies and programs. The fact that maintaining both at current levels is unsustainable is confirmed by conservative Republican Senator Jim DeMint. Realistically, if Ron Paul is not correct about the fact that we can actually strengthen our defense by reducing morally questionable, budget-busting, counterproductive meddling in the internal affairs of foreign nations, then our national defense is destined for a severe blown when our economy eventually collapses due to deficit spending. Fortunately, as Douglas A. Macgregor, Ph.D. Colonel (ret), U.S. Army, says, more money does not necessarily mean better defense. Romney’s willingness to spend far more than our national deficit on just military alone does not bode well for anyone wanting to save this country from imminent bankruptcy.

Perhaps it is sometimes forgotten that U.S. foreign policy may have an indirect but very substantial effect on Christian communities and missions overseas. A thought-provoking article on this influence is “Christian Massacres: A Result of U.S. Foreign Policy“.

Iraq and Afghanistan

It is frequently said, “I like Ron Paul except for his views on defense.” Some are under the impression that Dr. Paul “blames American” for 9-11. Actually, Ron Paul blames the terrorists who perpetrated the attacks, and he voted to pursue Bin Laden and submitted a bill to go after terrorists themselves, rather than invading countries. He believes that to properly deal with a problem you must understand its causes. Although the 9-11 attacks on innocent Americans were reprehensible and unjust, we should still examine the motives of those perpetrating the crime if we want to understand and combat them. Just as most Americans were unaware of the CIA overthrow of Iran’s elected government in 1953, most were unaware of any U.S. actions that could provoke the terrorists to strike against us. U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said in a 60 minutes interview that the death of 500,000 Iraqi children due to U.S. economic sanctions was worth it. Seventeen of the nineteen terrorists were from Saudi Arabia and none from Iraq, but we invaded Iraq. Regime change in Iraq was a U.S. policy before 9-11. Ron Paul first began speaking against it in 1998. Former CIA Head of the Bin Laden Unit Michael Scheuer said that Ron Paul’s correct position on the reason’s for 9-11 would have worried Bin Laden and his allies, but they thrived under the view held by all other candidates. It is often said that good theories can be tested by their ability to predict. Everyone must watch Ron Paul’s famous Predictions speech from April 24, 2002, to understand his wisdom. In this five-minute speech you will see a decade of history predicted with amazing precision! Then, if you want to hear Ron Paul speaking candidly about foreign policy, go to this national defense page.

Col. Macgregor recently granted a detailed interview on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars which is comprehensive and enlightening. Here is a small excerpt:

Iraq and Afghanistan are disasters and anyone who asserts otherwise is misinformed. I recently met with someone who is an advocate for Mitt Romney and he was unhappy with me because I pointed out that the differences between Governor Romney and President Obama are marginal at best. He was trying to demonstrate how profoundly different they were. He was unsuccessful but one of the things he insisted on was that Obama had somehow or another sacrificed our great gains in Iraq. I looked at him and said, “You can’t be serious.” He said, “What do you mean?” He seemed to be completely unaware, as many Americans are, that Iraq is effectively a satellite for Iran. That the United States Army and it’s generals did a brilliant job of consolidating the power and influence of Iran inside Iraq, by backing Mr. Maliki who is always Tehran’s chosen candidate and utterly destroying the Sunni Arab population’s influence and power.

Who do the troops vote for with their campaign contributions–Ron Paul or Mitt Romney?

National Defense Authorization Act

The NDAA authorizes indefinite imprisonment, without charges, and without the right to a lawyer solely on the secret determination that a U.S. citizen is suspected of a terrorist threat or has had some indefinite connection to a terrorist. This essentially removes Bill of Rights protections from every U.S. citizen. There’s not much more to say, but read it again until it sinks in! For more details, read this Forbes article. Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul all answered a question about NDAA in a debate.

War on Drugs

Voters often do not realize that Ron Paul acknowledges the right of states and localities to pass laws regulating the use and possession of drugs. Ron Paul conscientiously adheres to his oath to defend the Constitution. To enact federal prohibition of alcohol required an amendment to the Constitution. His position is that the federal War on Drugs is unconstitutional, and, in fact, is a failure that exacerbates the problem–just as prohibition did with alcohol. Drug prohibition increases the price of drugs on the black market, creating the climate conducive for the formation of drug lords, cartels, and the resulting increasing violence. The U.S. has the largest prison population in the world both in number and percentage, and the drug war is a major cause. Dr. Paul points that imprisonment of minorities for drug offenses has affected minorities greatly disproportional to their percentage of conviction of drug crimes. Many countries, groups, and noted individuals agree with Dr. Paul on the failure of the War on Drugs, including Britain, Latin American, the Global Commission on Drug Policy, law enforcement groups, Pat Robertson, Judge Jim Gray, Nobel Prize economist Milton Friedman, and 500 U.S. economists. I strongly recommend Milton Friedman’s short video interview for those particularly interested in the moral questions involved. The experience of countries who have tried drug decriminalization demonstrates the soundness of this approach.

Marijuana itself may not even be the main factor in its criminalization. There are far bigger economics and politics involved than the smoking of marijuana. One major factor may be the competition hemp poses to the oil industry.

Ron Paul points out that the federal government is overriding state laws that allow medical use of marijuana. The different views of Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are contrasted in a short video of their responses to a medical marijuana user whose five doctors affirm it is his only relief.

Health and Nutrition Freedoms

What many conservatives seem to overlook is that federal laws and regulations among the biggest threats to our most cherished freedoms. Again, bear in mind that saying federal (national) legislation in a given area is unconstitutional does not mean that states and localities cannot legislate on these matters. It is their proper and intended jurisdiction. Thus, while it may sound conservative and moral to fight drugs at the federal level, this opens the door to other federal legislation that can remove our most fundamental liberties.

As Milton Friedman said above, if the federal government can criminalize marijuana because it is deemed bad for one’s health, why not raw milk (Amish farmers have been arrested at gunpoint for selling it), free speech in nutritional information, nutritional products, not eating a federally prescribed diet (yes, a girl was not allowed to eat her sack lunch because it did not meet federal diet “guidelines”), selling raw almonds, etc. Besides what the federal government can prohibit, there are also concerns over what it can fund or mandate–psychiatric screenings of children, for example. Granted, there may be some arguments for and against many of these issues. But federalizing issues leaves no room for error. If a state makes a mistake, other states are not forced into the same mold, but federal laws affect the whole country and stifle the creativity inherent in multiple individual state approaches. There is a growing protest of state and federal regulations that restrict what appear to many as basic rights in the area of food and nutrition.

Also, however well-intended, centralized government agencies will naturally be targets of special interests who can buy influence to favor their products or protect themselves from competition by placing sympathetic personnel in government regulatory agencies. Ron Paul talks of this when he says the FDA and drug companies are in bed together. The award-winning Burzynski movie is a real eye-opener for anyone places total confidence in the capability of the federal FDA to protect and promote our best health interests. One can look at a site like Natural News for a critical look at many federal health initiatives, if only to be aware that there is often a credible alternative viewpoint that may receive scant positive news coverage.

Local Control of Education

Education is an area that receives far less attention than it deserves from Christians and conservatives. There has been a recent movement in the nation’s largest protestant denomination, The Southern Baptist Convention, to consider alternatives to public schooling. “Dr. Morris H. Chapman, president and chief executive officer of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Executive Committee, criticizes the public school system for increasing secularism and moral erosion….” saying, “All Christians should note this sea-change in sentiment within the SBC. The spiritual, moral, and intellectual pathologies of the government school system are now obvious even to casual observers. Christian parents and pastors need to ask themselves just how much longer they intend to render our children to Caesar’s spiritually dark, morally decaying, and physically dangerous government schools.”

Whether spiritually, morally, politically, culturally, safety, or educationally speaking, it would seem parental and local control over what our children are being taught is of prime importance. While Mitt Romney may talk of block grants and reforming the Department of Education, Ron Paul advocates its essential abolition. Ron Paul is a strong advocate of freedom of education under parental control, including the option to home school. Dr. Paul sees no Constitutional authority for a federal role in education.
Prayer in schools, creation vs. evolution, abortion, sex education, history, politics, math and reading strategies, religion, sexual orientation, marriage, and other issues that can provoke strong differences of opinion are best decided at a local level and ultimately left in the hands of parents who have the right to chose the school their children attend–or teach them at home.

Dr. Paul says such issues cannot be discussed on their merits in an educational environment where each side attempts to use the force of law and imposed curriculum to impose its views on all. Dr. Paul would be a strong advocate for Christians rights of free speech and association.

Religious Freedom

Of course without the educational freedom and parental control Dr. Paul so strongly advocates, religious freedom is actually a fading entity. If a government school’s “neutral” education denies any speech about God or Christian values to be spoken, children will by default receive a secular education. Likewise, churches under federal tax rules are steered away from any political speech or any moral pronouncements that could be considered discriminatory to individuals practicing acts that Christians may deem sinful. Ron Paul believes that the Constitution grants the federal government no authority to impose morality upon the nation as a whole. This type of legislation is reserved to the states and localities. Ron Paul would defend Christians from federal imposition upon their right of free speech and association. Christians and churches could promote their biblical morality and freely choose to associate or not associate in their churches. Christians would not be accused of hate speech or discrimination for preaching biblical teachings. They would not be forced by federal intrusion to hire or retain personnel deemed immoral by their standards. They would be free to proclaim and practice their teachings and win converts through persuasion. Rather than engaging in the legislative battle to impose moral values through federal legislation (the states do have authority to take up such matters), Ron Paul would strive instead to preserve the freedoms of speech and association for everyone–and also prohibit the federal government from imposing one state’s standards upon another state.

Marriage and Gay Rights

Ron Paul’s position on the issue of marriage (he has been married to his wife, Carol, for 55 years) is consistent with his Constitutional approach. He says, in opposing a constitutional marriage amendment, and endorsing The Defense of Marriage Act,

Ironically, liberal social engineers who wish to use federal government power to redefine marriage will be able to point to the constitutional marriage amendment as proof that the definition of marriage is indeed a federal matter! I am unwilling either to cede to federal courts the authority to redefine marriage, or to deny a state’s ability to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. Instead, I believe it is time for Congress and state legislatures to reassert their authority by refusing to enforce judicial usurpations of power.

I suggest Christians and conservatives look more closely at Dr. Paul’s Constitutional reasoning, rather than making quick judgments that he’s against marriage. His positions are decidedly constitutional, and would most often have yielded superior short-term and long-term practical results. His position on gay rights is reasoned similarly.

Economic Policy

Ron Paul proposes to cut $1 trillion dollars his first year, and balance the budget by his third year. He will essentially abolish five federal agencies, eliminating them by attrition and transfer rather than abrupt cuts. All others want to balance the budget sometime beyond the end of their term (usually many years beyond). Dr. Paul says the only budget we can really control is this year’s–refreshing candor and truth. No more kicking the can down the road. It is called his Plan to Restore America.

Many conservatives, for example Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and Sean Hannity, endorse Ron Paul’s economic plan and recognize his economic expertise and solid track record in this area. There really is no peer to Dr. Paul in knowledge and consistency in economic matters among any of the candidates who have run in this year’s race. Dr. Paul has been praised by David Stockman (Ronald Reagan’s former Director of the Office of Management and Budget), the independent Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Nassim Taleb (“Black Swan” author), Dr. Iris Mack (celebrated Harvard alum), The Club for Growth, and many others.

How about a 0% Income Tax? Wall Street Journal editorial board director Stephen Moore explains why Rep. Ron Paul’s ideas on economics are correct and must be accepted in the mainstream GOP platform. Mr. Moore says, “…you would see the most insourcing of jobs into America in the history of the world.”


Although Rick Santorum made some comments based on creative interpretations of data in a debate, the independent and respected National Taxpayers Union (NTU) issued a press release to clarify its presidential candidate ratings. For Mitt Romney’s evaluation compare the NTU evaluation of candidate budget proposals. Between Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul, NTU said Ron Paul’s proposal dwarfed others’ proposals in deficit reduction.

Social Security and Medicare

Related to the deficit situation is the funding of Social Security and Medicare. Christians and conservatives generally find it morally unjustified to pass on immense debt to their children and grandchildren. However, senior citizens are rightly concerned about whether the funds they have been contributing to throughout their lives will remain sound into their retirement years. Ron Paul’s cuts in overseas spending offer the only plan to cut our deficit and balance the budget while not cutting Social Security and Medicare for those who will be dependent on it. Other candidates plans to maintain Social Security and Medicare, increase military spending, and balance the budget do not compute. Note well that those seniors on fixed retirement incomes and dependent on savings are hurt tremendously by the inflationary Federal Reserve policies that cause the value of the dollar to fall and, therefore, the prices of goods to rise.

For more on this, including some interesting and relevant light on Newt Gingrich’s claims to have helped balance the budget four times, see Dr. Ron Paul: Champion of the Senior Citizen!

Talking Points

For those who have not looked seriously at Ron Paul previously, here is a recent comparison of Ron Paul with Mitt Romney, a comparison of Ron Paul with Barack Obama, and some bullet points highlighting his consistent record over twelve terms in the U.S. House of Representatives:

• He has never taken a government junket
• He does not participate in the lucrative Congressional Pension Program
• He returns a portion of his annual Congressional Office Budget every year
• He has never voted to raise taxes
• He has never voted for an unbalanced budget
• He voted no to the bankster bailout
• He always voted no on raising the debt ceiling
• He warned us against The “Super Congress” legislation that resembles both an “Enabling Act” and a “Politburo”
• He has never voted to restrict gun ownership
• He has never voted to raise Congressional Pay
• President Paul will take a yearly salary of $39,336, the average US worker’s salary, instead of the President’s $400,000 salary
• He will cut One Trillion Dollars from the budget in the first year and balance the budget in three years
• He will Return Power to the States as set down in the 9th and 10th Amendments (Bill of Rights) to the Constitution
• He never voted to increase Executive Branch Power
• He will Reinstate The Constitution and Save The Republic
• He will audit and eventually end the unconstitutional Federal Reserve System
• He will phase out the unconstitutional IRS beginning immediately
• He will secure the borders
• He will limit Big Government in your private affairs
• He will stop Illegal immigration and birthright citizenship, grant no amnesty, and defend our borders
• He will protect internet freedom and our Bill of Rights

Christians and Conservatives–Rally Now! Ron Paul Has Out-Polled Obama and Scored Big Multi-State Wins Over Romney! « Scriptural Scrutiny

Paul Craig Roberts (Served Under Reagan) The “War on Terror” is a hoax

Submitted by go213mph on Mon, 05/14/2012 - 21:35
Peace / War

This is an execllent article. Time is running out (if it hasn't already) for people to wake up. Just THINK when you read the article of ALL the money, liberties, and lives that have been wasted on the false war on terror. It's so ****ing sad that there are still people (even on this site) that think 9/11 was an accident. (Heavy Sigh) BTW-The article has nothing to do with 9/11 but 9/11 was the begining of the end...IMHO.

Excerpt:

""The “War on Terror” is a hoax, one that has been successfully used to destroy the US Constitution and to complete the transformation of law from a shield of the people into a weapon in the hands of the state. By destroying habeas corpus, due process, and the presumption of innocence, the “War on Terror” has destroyed our security."

Full Article: The Case of the Missing Terrorists |


Paul Craig Roberts (Served Under Reagan) The