Thread: Why I Joined the 'Ron Paul Revolution'

Originally Posted by AuntB

Paul supporters are in fine company!


The Muslim Observer endorsed Congressman Ron Paul in the Michigan Republican primary.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008

The Muslim Observer, a newspaper based in Michigan, came down on the side of the presidential candidacy of Republican Congressman Ron Paul of Texas. "The Muslim community in Michigan has a unique opportunity to beat the pundits by voting as a block for Ron Paul as the Republican candidate".

The newspaper added "Ron Paul meets the Muslim community's major concern about War in Iraq - an issue that every media outlet has ignored in the primary political campaign in Michigan. To the Muslim community, it is the source of major problems in America - security, jobs, education, healthcare, etc.; and the world peace. The Republican candidate who voted NO against War in Iraq, is against the Patriot Act and is in favor of bringing the troops back home - deserves our full support in the Michigan Primary".

The Democratic primary in Michigan allows voters to choose only Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, while the Republican primary allows voters to choose from a variety of candidates, including Congressman Paul, Governor Mitt Romney, Governor Mike Huckabee, and Senator John McCain.

The Muslim Observer opined to its readers, "The Muslim community must very honestly understand that the system of governance in this country follows in the same general direction, irrespective of who is in leadership. With Democrats, the paths may be less treacherous than if the Republicans are in power, but are leading in the same direction! Unless the system gets an overhaul, there will be very little change in the way whole system operates in this country".

Urging its Muslim readers to get out and vote in Michigan's January 15th primary, The Muslim Observer said "The Muslim community's failure to recognize the importance of primary elections and their vital role in the overall elections process will mean that this year, as usual, a small minority of voters will make decisions for everyone else and the outcome most likely will not be pleasant for the American Muslims. Let's beat the odds, let's vote."
http://www.speroforum.com/site/article. ... n+Michigan

I don't see anything wrong with Muslim Americans backing Ron Paul. They don't like war anymore than the majority of other Americans do.

I have a list of CFR members. Romney, Ron Paul, Huckabee aren't on the list. I didnt' see Guiliani either. McPain and Thompson are on the CFR List. On the democrat side, Bill Clinton. I know that Huckabee has spoken at a cfr meeting. Cheney, Wolfowitz and Scooter Libby are on the list, Bush is not. George Tenent is on the list. Rupert Murdoch is on the List, Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw are on the list. Condeleeza Rice and Colin Powell are on the list. Still and all..Romney got elected governor of a very blue state. What does that tell ya? RON PAUL 2008

I don't see anything wrong with Muslim Americans backing Ron Paul. They don't like war anymore than the majority of other Americans do.

I actually believe that Ron Paul makes the most sense on how to deal with the middle east. I actually think oil supplies would go up and prices down if we got our noses out of their business.

I also think that blaming all Muslims for 9-11 and terrorist actions would be akin to blaming all Americans for what the CIA does on a daily basis.

Originally Posted by theclassics

I have a list of CFR members. Romney, Ron Paul, Huckabee aren't on the list. I didnt' see Guiliani either. McPain and Thompson are on the CFR List. On the democrat side, Bill Clinton. I know that Huckabee has spoken at a cfr meeting. Cheney, Wolfowitz and Scooter Libby are on the list, Bush is not. George Tenent is on the list. Rupert Murdoch is on the List, Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw are on the list. Condeleeza Rice and Colin Powell are on the list. Still and all..Romney got elected governor of a very blue state. What does that tell ya? RON PAUL 2008

Huck is a new member and I believe that list is old , I've also
seen lists that claim Romney is an associate member , whatever that means

I'm going to try to clear this up Saturday morning at the caucus here

While the Romney pushers continue to post garbage in Ron Paul threads, I suppose no one is reading the Romney threads but them, I'm going to stick with the title of this thread and the links provided!

Originally Posted by sturmruger

Originally Posted by zeezil

Why I Joined the 'Ron Paul Revolution'
by Daniel Sheehy
January 14, 2008

...I strongly endorse Ron Paul for President!

To learn more about Ron Paul, visit his website at www.ronpaul2008.com. I also recommend an article by Chuck Baldwin titled "Why Does The Establishment Hate Ron Paul?":
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com:80/c200 ... 108.html...

The article by Pastor Chuck Baldwin, "Why Does The Establishment Hate Ron Paul":
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c200..._20080108.html

Why Does The Establishment Hate Ron Paul?
by Chuck Baldwin
January 8, 2008

What is it about Ron Paul that the Establishment finds so disturbing?

This is a man who perhaps personifies Christian character and integrity, American patriotism, and family values more than any other public figure. Ron Paul is a committed family man whose marriage to Carol has lasted for more than 50 years. He is a lover of families and children. As an OB/GYN physician, Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies into this world. His life demonstrates a commitment to life and marriage.

Furthermore, Ron Paul's devotion to Christ is very personal and deep. Unlike many politicians (especially in the Republican Party), Ron Paul does not wear his religion on his sleeve. He doesn't need to. Anyone who knows him knows his faith is exhibited on a daily basis. His life and family are testaments to his Christian faith.

Beyond that, Ron Paul's record in Congress is so unblemished, so honest, so full of integrity that it is difficult to describe. This is a man who actually takes his oath to the Constitution (an oath every congressman, senator, and President also takes--but then ignores) seriously. So much so that he has never voted to raise taxes, never voted for an unbalanced budget, never voted for a congressional pay raise, never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership, and never voted to increase the power of the executive branch of the federal government.

In addition, Ron Paul has never taken a government-paid junket. Even though he is a 10-term congressman, he is not accepting a government pension. He also returns a portion of his office budget every year to the taxpayers. No wonder Ron Paul was declared to be the "Taxpayer's Best Friend."

Now, how in the name of common sense can a man such as Ron Paul be hated? Maybe it is because he is a man of integrity and honesty. Remember, our Lord said that men who love darkness hate the light. And if there is a word that describes the Establishment in America today, it is DARKNESS.

Name it: the establishment Democrat and Republican Parties, the establishment media, the establishment financial institutions, and even the establishment churches all seem to be run by people who exude the power of darkness. It should not surprise us, therefore, when a man arises who personifies the light of integrity and honesty, that the powers that be should hate him--and hate Ron Paul they do.

Conservative Republican Ron Paul is loathed as much by members of his own party as he is by liberal Democrats. Even though he is the epitome of a Christian gentleman, Ron Paul is despised by Christians and pastors as much as he is by pagans--maybe more. The media despises him--especially Fox News. The so-called conservative Fox News celebrity Sean Hannity practically goes ballistic at the mere mention of Dr. Paul's name.

Ron Paul has been categorized with the Ku Klux Klan, brothel owners, and Skin Heads. He has been called practically every name in the book. Conservatives and liberals alike rail against Dr. Paul in a manner never seen before in modern politics. Again, why does the Establishment hate him so much? I'll tell you why.

The Establishment hates Ron Paul because his honesty and integrity expose the rest of them for the moral reprobates they are. Their own conscience cannot bear the sight of him. His very presence condemns them. Their personal greed and ambition cringe at the very thought of Ron Paul. If Dr. Paul became President, the Gig would be up! It would be Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday at Tombstone all over again. They know it, and they will fight like mad to keep their corrupt stranglehold on American politics.

Another reason the Establishment hates Ron Paul is because he is a true American--and there are not very many true Americans left in Washington, D.C., these days. You see, Ron Paul has read and studied American history. He understands constitutional government. He knows what real money is--and is not. As historian and author Thomas DiLorenzo said, Ron Paul is a modern-day Thomas Jefferson. (See his column at: http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo137.html )...

What does Thomas DiLorenzo say about Ron Paul:

The Jefferson of Our Time
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

DIGG THIS

American politicians, from Lincoln to FDR and even Bill Clinton, have tried to claim the political mantle of Thomas Jefferson. Lincoln was truly the anti-Jefferson who nevertheless mouthed Jefferson’s words of "all men are created equal" to try to win the support of Jeffersonians in the North in the 1864 election. FDR even more ludicrously tried to paint the New Deal as a Jeffersonian program for similar reasons; and political junkies may recall that President William Jefferson Clinton made a point of stopping off at Jefferson’s home, Monticello, on the way to his first inauguration. (He then turned around and proposed to nationalize the health care sector of the economy, funded by the largest tax increases in history – decidedly anti-Jeffersonian positions.)

American politicians understand that there are – and always have been – a great many Americans who believe in the Jeffersonian philosophy that "that government is best which governs least." They may want minimal government, as called for by the Constitution, but by and large they want to be left alone to live their own lives within the rule of law and the norms of civilized society. They distrust centralized political power and hold the commonsense view that government is always easier to control the closer it is to the people.

That’s why politicians from Lincoln to Clinton have mouthed Jeffersonian slogans. They want the votes, but have no intention of adopting any of Jefferson’s political beliefs and policies based on them. (For his part, George W. Bush is probably more familiar with "The Jeffersons" television show of the 1970s than the political ideas of our third president.)

In reality, Grover Cleveland was the last American president who actually believed in Jeffersonian principles of government and was even moderately successful in implementing them (he vetoed literally hundreds of pieces of legislation). It’s been almost 120 years since a genuine Jeffersonian has been a major candidate for the highest office in the land, but we finally have in our midst the genuine item – the real deal – in the person of Ron Paul.

Unlike all other candidates for the presidency, Ron Paul does not attempt to dupe the public into believing that he is in favor of fiscal responsibility, limited and decentralized government, and individual liberty. He has spent the past three decades demonstrating that he is single-mindedly devoted to these principles, and sincerely believes that he can succeed in returning them to the American polity.

When Ron Paul proposes abolishing the Federal Reserve Board and returning to the gold standard, he is taking Jefferson’s position in his great debate with Hamilton over the propriety of a government-run bank. As explained in my forthcoming book, Hamilton’s Curse, Hamilton wanted a big, expansive and intrusive central government that would centrally plan the economy and pursue "imperial glory" in foreign affairs. He wanted America to imitate the British empire. In order to achieve this, he knew that a government-run bank would be necessary. Jefferson, on the other hand, believed that the sole purpose of government was to protect the lives, liberty and property of the people, and that such a bank would be a danger to liberty. The two men debated the issue in long essays submitted to President George Washington, who eventually adopted the position of his fellow Federalist, Hamilton. (The Federalists in Congress played a role by passing legislation that enlarged the District of Columbia so that it would be adjacent to Washington’s property on the Potomac River. They had blocked Washington’s request for this until he signed the bank bill.)

It was a Jeffersonian Democrat, President Andrew Jackson, who would de-fund Hamilton’s Bank of the United States some forty years later, after it had fueled decades of political corruption and economic instability. Hamiltonian central banking was subsequently revived by one of his political heirs – Lincoln – and then cemented into place by the Federal Reserve Act in 1913.

Ron Paul also calls for a dramatic reduction in government debt by abolishing unnecessary and harmful government bureaucracies, such as the U.S. Department of Education, as well as a foreign policy that defends America instead of attempting to centrally plan and police the entire planet. It was Jefferson who argued that the federal government’s debt was only legitimate in emergencies, such as a defensive war, and even then it should never exist for more than 19 years. He believed it was immoral for one generation to incur debt – even in a defensive war – that would financially burden future generations. "I consider the fortunes of our republic," he wrote, "as depending, in an eminent degree, on the extinguishment of the public debt." As president, his party abolished all of Hamilton’s (and the Federalists’) excise taxes and reduced the government debt from $83 million to $57 million.

Hamilton, on the other hand, wanted a large national debt because it would tie the affluent of the country to the government, just as welfare ties the poor to the government today. The affluent would be the government bondholders, he argued, and would therefore provide political support for all the tax increases he had in mind to assure that they would be paid their principal and interest. He called the national debt a "blessing." The Jeffersonian view of government debt prevailed, more or less, until the Woodrow Wilson administration, after which Hamiltonian Keynesianism became the order of the day. Today the U.S. government is in debt to the tune of some $70 trillion if one includes all the unfunded Social Security, Medicare, and government pension liabilities. Ron Paul wants to reverse the economically devastating and immoral policy of rampant government debt accumulation.

The income tax has centralized all political power in Washington, D.C., eviscerated the independence of the states, and has made tax slaves out of millions of Americans. Once again, Ron Paul’s call for the abolition of income taxation is a genuine Jeffersonian sentiment. How inspirational and revolutionary would it be to hear President Ron Paul quote Jefferson’s first inaugural address at his first inaugural: "[A] wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government . . ." (emphasis added).

Jefferson was of course a strict constructionist in regard to the Constitution, as is Ron Paul. This was the key to Jefferson’s debate with Hamilton over a national bank, with Jefferson arguing that the Constitution did not provide for such a function, and Hamilton inventing the subversive notion of "implied powers" of the Constitution to defend his proposal. The Hamiltonian position has prevailed for several generations now, making a complete mockery of the Constitution itself. Ron Paul wants to reverse the damage done by the political heirs of Hamilton.

Along with his strict constructionist views of the Constitution, Jefferson believed that the keystone of the entire document was the Tenth Amendment. After delegating a few express powers to the central government, the citizens of the states reserved all others to themselves, and to the states respectively. The Tenth Amendment announced, essentially, that the citizens of the free and independent states were sovereign. They were the masters, not the servants, of the federal government which they had created by ratifying the Constitution in state political conventions. In his first inaugural he announced his support of "the State governments, in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies . . ." This is how government was to be consistent with the protection of individual liberty in Jefferson’s opinion. It is also Ron Paul’s opinion.

Jefferson advocated a modest foreign policy, unlike his nemesis Hamilton, the original Neocon, who wanted to invade France and become an imperialistic power. "[P]eace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none," was his foreign policy philosophy (from the first inaugural).

Jefferson understood that war is the mother of the state, and did everything he could to avoid it. When the British began confiscating American ships and kidnapping American sailors, he imposed an economically destructive trade embargo rather than risk an even more economically destructive war with England. Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate in memory to espouse the wisdom of Jefferson and Washington when it comes to foreign policy.

When Ron Paul sounds the alarm about how the current regime has attacked civil liberties, including the freedom of speech, with its totalitarian "PATRIOT Act," its lust to suspend habeas corpus, and even calls by the likes of Newt Gingrich to "rethink" the First Amendment, it is reminiscent of Jefferson’s great confrontation with the enemies of civil liberty during his time – the Adams administration and the Federalist Party. One of the first things the Federalist Party did upon assuming power was to make criticism of the government illegal with its Sedition Act. Jefferson orchestrated nationwide opposition to this totalitarian policy, and authored his famous Kentucky Resolve of 1798: "Resolved, that the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principles of unlimited submission to their General Government . . . and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers [such as the abolition of free speech], its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force." This would also be an appropriate quote for President Ron Paul’s first inaugural address.

The dominance of the Hamiltonian, Big Government philosophy, and the marginalization of Jefferson and his ideas, is the fundamental source of America’s biggest problems, including a foreign policy that has run amok; a tax system that treats citizens like medieval serfs; an arrogant and unresponsive central government; the evisceration of the states as independent political sovereignties; the economic boom-and-bust cycle that is generated by "the Fed"; the eagerness of Washington politicians to strip away more and more of our civil liberties; and the infantilization of America that has been created by a gargantuan welfare state. Ron Paul is the only national politician who is devoted to reversing all of these dangerous trends. All other candidates propose either minor tinkering at the margins, or an expansion of the same failed policies. He is the Jefferson of our time, and our true hope of returning to the guiding principles of the founding fathers. We can take this road, or we can continue along on the road to serfdom.

January 7, 2008

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland and the author of The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, (Three Rivers Press/Random House). His latest book is Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe (Crown Forum/Random House).

Copyright © 2008 LewRockwell.com

Another great article that could have been posted all in bold!

Good , I'd like to know if Romney has been added to the cfr list.