BUY A GUN
By Pastor Chuck Baldwin
December 14, 2007
“He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.” (Luke 22:36 KJV)
Most of us are aware that the heroic actions of a brave woman at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado a few days ago saved the lives of perhaps scores, or even hundreds, of people. However, her bravery would not have counted for much had she not been armed.
On that fateful December Sunday, a man by the name of Matthew Murray entered the church armed to the teeth. According to press reports, he was armed with a semi-automatic rifle, two handguns, some smoke grenades, and more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition.
By the time Murray arrived in the Colorado Springs church, he had already killed four people: two at a missionary training center miles away, and two in the church parking lot. He had wounded several others. No one realized it at the time, but the man was a serial killer in the midst of a rampage. He doubtless planned to kill as many people as he could, as there were thousands of people inside the church. Had there not been an armed citizen in the church house, the death toll would have been massive.
According to church spokesmen, the congregation has over a dozen members who volunteered to serve as security personnel for the church. Jeanne Assam was one of those volunteers.
A former police officer, Assam said, “I saw him [Murray] coming through the doors, and I took cover, and I waited for him to get closer. I came out of cover, I identified myself and engaged him and took him down.” Murray died in the exchange. Although Assam shot him several times with her 9mm pistol, the coroner’s office said that Murray actually succumbed to a self-inflicted gunshot wound. After being incapacitated by Assam’s gunfire, Murray apparently turned one of his weapons on himself.
Chalk one up for the good guys, or in this case, good gals.
Have you noticed how the media dropped the Colorado story as soon as it was discovered that a lawfully armed citizen ended the potential massacre by using her own handgun? Had the killer been successful in murdering scores of people, however, it would have been at the top of the news for weeks. As it is, the story is already buried in the dungeon section of the news, if it is in the news at all.
One thing the national news media will always ignore is the practice of lawful self-defense. For example, most people are probably not aware of the fact that American citizens use a firearm to defend themselves more than 2.4 million times EVERY YEAR. That is more than 6,500 times EVERY DAY. This means that, each year, firearms are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. Furthermore, of the 2.4 million self-defense cases, more than 192,000 are by women defending themselves against sexual assault. And in less than eight percent of those occasions is a shot actually fired. The vast majority of the time (92%), the mere presence of a firearm helps to avert a major crime from occurring. That is what Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) concluded after extensive research. According to Rep. Bartlett, the number of defensive uses is four times the number of crimes reported committed with guns.
John Lott, senior research scientist at the University of Maryland, agrees with Bartlett. His book “More Guns, Less Crime” documents the fact that–instead of being a cause of crime–firearms in the hands of private citizens are actually a major deterrent to crime.
Another fact conveniently ignored by the major media is the connection between wanton killings and so-called “gun-free” zones. For an example of this, look no further than the Virginia Tech massacre. In spite of Virginia state laws that allow citizens to carry concealed weapons for self-defense, Virginia Tech forbade its students and faculty from carrying weapons for self-defense on campus. Had a student or faculty member been armed–as was Ms. Assam in the Colorado Springs attack–no doubt many, if not most, of the Virginia Tech victims would not have died. Obviously, bad guys do not pay any attention to “gun-free” zones, except to note that such zones create a free-killing environment.
Is it any wonder that those states and cities with the most restrictive gun control laws tend to also be home to the highest crime rates? The old saying is still true. “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” There is another saying I like even better. “When guns are outlawed, I will be an outlaw.”
Even our Lord understood and validated the right of every person to arm themselves for personal self-defense. He said, “He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.” (Luke 22:36 KJV) The old Roman sword was the First Century equivalent of a modern handgun. It was the most practical and convenient form of self-defense available at that time. Also, please note that at least two of Jesus’ disciples (one of whom was Simon Peter) were in the habit of carrying their own personal swords, and Jesus never rebuked them. (See Luke 22:38.)
Jesus also acknowledged, “When a strong man ARMED [emphasis added] keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace.” (Luke 11:21)
Furthermore, the Apostle Paul said, emphatically, “But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” (I Tim. 5:8) Does “not providing for his own” include not providing protection? Of course it does.
The right and, yes, obligation of personal self-defense is entrenched in both Christian and American tradition. People who would deny citizens the right to arm themselves are either naïvely ignorant or deliberately duplicitous. As Robert Heinlein said, “An armed society is a polite society.”
America’s Founding Fathers agreed with Heinlein. Thomas Jefferson said, “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” He also said, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
Samuel Adams said, “[T]he said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.”
James Madison said, “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms.”
Thomas Paine said, “[A]rms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property . . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.”
George Washington called the private collections of arms “the people’s liberty’s teeth.”
America must always preserve the right to keep and bear arms. To do any less is to invite oppression and tyranny, not to mention acts of violence.
Some years back, Alan Rice of the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) wrote, “Since 1900 at least seven major genocides have occurred resulting in the murder of 50-60 million people:
Ottoman Turkey, 1915-17; 1-1.5 million Armenians murdered;
Soviet Union, 1929-53; 20 million anti-Communists and anti-Stalinists murdered;
Nazi Germany & Occupied Europe, 1933-45; 13 million Jews, Gypsies, and Anti-Nazis murdered;
China, 1949-52, 1957-60 & 1966-1976; 20 million anti-Communists murdered;
Guatemala, 1960-1981; 100,000 Mayan Indians murdered;
Uganda, 1971-1979; 300,000 Christians and Political Rivals of Idi Amin murdered;
Cambodia, 1975-1979; 1 million murdered.”
Rice continued to say, “In all seven of the genocides summarized above, gun control laws were in force before the genocide occurred, in some cases decades before. In five of the seven genocides, the lethal law, the gun control law was in force before the genocide regime took power.”
Rice also said, “Gun control laws are usually enacted during a crisis or a perceived crisis.” He then said, “Government officials, not hate groups or common criminals, were responsible for these seven genocides. In most of these cases the murder victims outnumbered their murderers; yet they were powerless to defend themselves because they were disarmed.”
Do the math yourself. Absent an armed citizen, 32 innocent people lost their lives at Virginia Tech, while the presence of 1 armed citizen resulted in 2 innocent deaths in Colorado Springs. Furthermore, the presence of over 200 million firearms in the possession of the American people has done more to keep America free than any other human element–bar none!
Therefore, to help keep your family safe and your country free, go buy a gun.
© 2007 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985 the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence.
Dr. Baldwin is the host of a lively, hard-hitting syndicated radio talk show on the Genesis Communications Network called, “Chuck Baldwin Live” This is a daily, one hour long call-in show in which Dr. Baldwin addresses current event topics from a conservative Christian point of view. Pastor Baldwin writes weekly articles on the internet http://www.ChuckBaldwinLive.com and newspapers.
To learn more about his radio talk show please visit his web site at: www.chuckbaldwinlive.com. When responding, please include your name, city and state.
Re Buy A Gun
Home > Newsroom > Press Releases > 2007
Return to Regular Formatting
For Immediate Release
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Let It Bleed: Restoring the Republican Party
U.S. Representative Thaddeus G. McCotter, Chair
House Republican Policy Committee
U.S. House Floor Special Order
December 12, 2007
As my Republican party completes its first year in the minority since 1994, we find ourselves held in historically low regard by the sovereign American people.
To end this trend, Republicans must accurately assess our party’s past and present failings; and its future prospects of again providing Americans a meaningful choice between the major parties. This remains, after all, a party’s duty to the citizenry.
For my GOP to fulfill it, first we must bury our ideological dead.
Safely on this side of the cleansing mists of memory, it is chic to eulogize the late Republican majority. From the chattering class few insights emerge, for in the aftermath, only poetry is an apt epitaph:
The world is too much with us,
Late and soon;
Getting and spending we lay waste our powers;
Little we see in nature that is ours;
We have given our hearts away –
A sordid boon!
Such was the Republican bathos: a transformational majority sinned and slipped into a transactional “Cashocracy” – promises, policies, principles, all bartered, even honor. The majority now is of the ages, may it rest in peace…
And be redeemed.
Once, George Santayana cautioned: “Those who do not learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them.” If our current Republican minority guilefully refutes or gutlessly refuses to admit, accept, and atone for the bitter fruits of its lapsed majority, it will continue to decline in the eyes of the American electorate. Thus, for the sake of our nation in this time of transformation, we must fully and frankly examine and understand the cardinal causes of the Republican majority’s recent demise; and, sadder but wiser, commence our Republican minority’s restoration as a transformation political movement serving the sovereign citizens of our free republic.
Through the Past Darkly
Big Hits and Fazed Cookies
To begin, we must retrace our steps down a darkened alley of broken hopes to glean the essence of our party’s headier times, big hits and fazed cookies.
Though many of its legislative leaders may moot the point, two Presidents caused the 1994 Republican Revolution: Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton.
The members of 1995′s new Republican Majority were Ronald Regan’s political children. From President Reagan, Republican Congressional revolutionaries inherited a philosophy of “politics as the art of the possible.” Cogently expressed by conservative intellectuals ranging from Edmund Burke to Russell Kirk, this philosophy’s central tenets held:
1. Men and women are transcendent children of God endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights.
2. Government was instituted to defend citizens’ inalienable rights and facilitate citizens’ pursuit of the good and of true happiness.
3. Over the generations, Divine Providence has established and revealed through tradition, prescriptive rights and custom within communities how order, justice, and freedom – each essential, co-equal and mutually reinforcing – are best arranged and nurtured for humanity to pursue the good and true happiness.
4. Human happiness is endangered by every political ideology, for each is premised upon abstract ideas; each claims a superior insight into human nature not revealed through historical experience; each proffers a secular utopia unobtainable by an imperfect humanity; and, each demands an omnipotent, centralized government to forcefully impose its vision upon an “unenlightened” and unwilling population.
This is the political philosophy and resulting public policies a once impoverished youth from Dixon, Illinois, Ronald Reagan, engagingly articulated to America throughout his Presidency in the 1980s. By 1994, the American people who, having taken Reagan at Russell Kirk’s word that “conservatism is the negation of ideology” and remembering its beneficent impact upon their daily lives, yearned for its return. For self-described Congressional Republican revolutionaries, this formed fertile electoral ground (one shaped as well, it must be admitted, by a host of unheralded and immensely talented GOP redistricting attorneys). But like all revolutions, the piece required a villain.
Enter President Clinton.
Exuberant at having defeated an incumbent President George H. W. Bush, Clinton mistook a mandate against his predecessor as a mandate for his own craftily concealed liberalism. In his first two years in the oval office, this mistake led Clinton to over-reach on “kitchen table” issues, such as raising taxes and socializing medicine. Daily, the four-decade old Democratic Congressional majority abetted Clinton’s radical policies; and across the political spectrum voters seethed.
Congressional Republicans bided their time, planned their revolution, and seized their moment. Led by their spell-binding and abrasive guru from Georgia, Congressional Republicans unveiled their “Contract with America” to much popular – if not pundit – acclaim.
Though much mythologized, if it is to prove instructive for the present Republican minority, this Contract can and must be placed in its proper perspective. A musical analogy is most elucidating.
When a reporter once praised the Beatles for producing Rock’s first “concept album,” Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, John Lennon curtly corrected him: “It was a concept album because we said it was.” Lennon’s point was this: yes, the Beatles had originally set out to produce a concept album; but early in their sessions the band dropped any conceits to creating a concept album and recorded whatever songs were on hand. Recognizing their failure, the Beatles tacked on a final song, Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (Reprise), to engender the illusion they had, after all, created a “concept album.” Importantly, when the band later tried to produce a true “concept album” and accompanying film, Magical Mystery Tour, the lackluster result was one of the Beatles’ few failed artistic ventures.
Similarly, Congressional Republicans’ “Contract with America” was a collection of specific policy proposals and concrete grievances against the incumbent Democratic President and his legislative allies. It possessed merely an implicit philosophy (one obviously harkening back to Reagan). Even less than Sergeant Pepper, the individual tracks of which have (mostly) stood the test of time, today many of the Contract’s specific proposals sound dated. But like Sergeant Pepper, what endures about the Contract is the fact it was marketed as a revolutionary “concept” in governance. Of course, it is not. The Contract was a suitable period piece which served its purpose – the election of Congressional Republicans in sufficient numbers to attain our party’s first majority in forty years. Nevertheless the Contact’s lack of a clearly enunciated political philosophy with immutable principles sowed the seeds of the subsequent Republican Devolution.
Therefore, if the current Republican minority buys into the myth and makes the Contract the basis of a derivative “concept” agenda, the GOP will be condemned to another forty-year Magical Mystery Tour through the political wilderness.
Out of Our Heads
This is not to say the members of 1995′s new Republican majority lacked a political philosophy or immutable principles. Quite the contrary: these members were steeped in the Reagan tradition. But after an initial rush of laudable accomplishments, the members found themselves trapped by the Contract’s inherent pragmatism and particularity. Absent a philosophical anchor in the Contract, members drifted into the grind of governance, which distorted Reagan’s philosophical principles for public policy into non-binding precedents for political popularity. Exacerbating this process, the new majority’s leaders, exuberant at having defeated an incumbent Democratic Congressional majority, mistook a mandate against their predecessors as a mandate for their own finitely posited conservatism. In its first two years in control of the House, this led the majority’s leaders to erroneously conclude it could govern as a parliament, rather than as a Congress equivalent in power to the executive branch; and they over-reached on key issues, most notably in the shut down of the United States government over the issue of spending. Artfully framed by President Clinton with sufficient plausibility as an irresponsible Republican ideological attack on good government, this moment marked the beginning of the Republican majority’s end – in point of fact, from the government shutdown to the present the House GOP Conference has never had as many members as it did in 1995.
Some persist in too facilely dismissing this Republican debacle as being due to Clinton’s superior messaging of the issue from his bully pulpit. This analysis is errant. The reason Clinton succeeded is the kernel of truth he wielded on this issue: House Republican leaders had stopped governing prudently in accordance with Reagan’s political philosophy of politics being the art of the possible and, instead, started acting belligerently in an ideological manner against the public’s interest. It is no an accident this battle fundamentally affected Clinton’s thinking and spurred his reinvention from a liberal ideologue into a pragmatic problem-solver and proponent of “good government.” Unfortunately, Clinton’s publicly applauded posturing as a “centrist” incensed the Republican majority; and accelerated their efforts to differentiate themselves from an unprincipled President by being increasingly ideological, which they confuted with being principled.
As this ideological fever progressed through 1996, too late did the new majority’s members intuit the political cost to candidates considered “ideologues.” The Republicans’ majority did survive the partisan carnage of Clinton’s overwhelming 1996 re-election, but the cycle’s cumulative effect was lasting and damning. Without gawking at the gruesome minutia of each ensuing GOP ideological purge and internal coup instigated by this election, we can note it spawned the unseemly political perversion of the House Republicans’ transformational majority into a transactional “Cashocracy.”
Hubristically deemed by its leading denizens as a “Permanent Majority,” the GOP Cashocracy was a Beggars’ Banquet at taxpayers’ expense. The Cashocracy’s sole goal was its own perpetuation; and its Cashocrats and High Priests of Money-theism myopically chased this aim through pragmatic corporatism and political machinations.
Obviously, the Cashocracy’s cardinal vice was its conviction to survive for its own sake. Curiously, this is not the height of arrogance; it is the height of insecurity. Aware it stood for nothing but election, the Cashocracy knew anything could topple it. This fear cancerously compelled the poll-driven Cashocrats to grope for ephemeral popularity by abandoning immutable principles. Materialist to their core and devoid of empathy, the Cashocrats routinely ignored the centrality to governmental policies of transcendent human beings.
A Bigger Bang
This Cashocracy’s first cardinal facilitated its second: pragmatic corporatism. Ensconced in insular power, the GOP Leadership lived the lives of the rich and famous, despite their middling personal means, due to their new-found friends in the corporate and lobbying community. Cut off from Main Street, these GOP leaders embraced “K Street.” The desire was mutual, and the corporatists’ influence grew gradually but ineluctably. Closed within a corporatist echo chamber, the GOP majority became deadened to the tribulations and aspirations of real Americans, and came to measure the “success” of its pragmatic policies by their reception on K Street. Reams of measures spewed forth prioritizing the interests of multi-national corporations over the needs of middle class Americans.
In fairness, even without the Cashocrats’ incessant inducements, blandishments and bullying, the majority of GOP members truly did feel they were promoting the interests of their constituents. This belief was insidiously sustained by the Cashocrats grafting their pragmatic corporatism onto the philosophy of economic determinism. It was not an unforeseeable development. Akin to their conservative brethren who after the fall of the Soviet Union proclaimed the “End of History,” House Republicans convinced themselves the ideology of democratic capitalism was an unstoppable deterministic force predestined to conquer the world; and, on their part, they viewed their job as hastening its triumph and preparing Americans to cope with its consequences. Combined with the Cashocracy’s insatiable need of corporate contributions for its sustenance, this adherence to ideological democratic capitalism reveals how the Republican House majority helped President Clinton (whom they had unknowingly come to emulate and, likely loathe ever more because of it) grant the Permanent Normalization of Trade Relations to Communist China. With this enact of this legislation, the Cashocracy reached its political zenith and moral nadir, for it did not shape globalization to suit Americans’ interests; it had shaped Americans’ interests to suit globalization.
The handsome rewards for such “courageous” legislation fueled the Cashocracy’s third vice, avarice. The process was both seductive and simple, especially in a materialistic town forsaking the qualitative measurement of virtue for the quantitative measurement of money. While this temptation is to be expected in a city where politicians “prove” their moral superiority by spending other people’s money, it was equally to be expected Republicans would collectively resist it.
Earmarks, which began as a cost-saving reform to prevent federal bureaucrats from controlling and wasting taxpayers’ money in contravention of express Congressional intent, spiraled out of control once the Cashocrats and their K-Street cronies realized the process could be manipulated to direct any appropriation, however undeserving, to any client, however questionable. In turn, political contributions materialized from the recipients of these earmarks for the members on both sides of the aisle who dropped them into legislation, often times without the knowledge of or the appropriate review by their peers. The passage of policy bills, too, increasingly mirrored the earmark process, as special interest provisions were slipped into the dimmer recesses of bills in the dead of night. The outcome of this fiscal chicanery was an escalation of the K-Street contributions the Cashocracy required to attain its aim of perpetuating itself in power; and of the illegal perks required to sate the more venal tastes of some morally challenged members who are now paying their debts to society.
Black and Blue
Cumulatively, in addition to rendering it morally bankrupt, these three vices left the Cashocracy intellectually impotent. Tellingly, within this less than subtle and manifestly sinister system of earmarks and contributions, the Cashocrats’ greased the skids for their legislative “favors” by relegating the majority’s younger members to voting rather than legislating; ignoring these members’ qualitative virtues, ideals and talents; measuring these members by the quantitative standard of how much money they raised; and, thereby, condemning these members to the status of highly paid telemarketers. Having squandered this infusion of youthful energy and insight, the Cashocrats hailed the election of Republican President George W. Bush and handed him the nation’s legislative agenda.
At first, the Cashocrats’ subordination of their separate, equal branch of government to the executive branch bore dividends. But by 2006, when the failures of the Iraq War’s reconstruction policy and Hurricane Katrina’s emergency relief torpedoed Bush’s popularity, the latent danger to the Cashocrats of hitching their SUVs to the fortunes of a President was evident. Precluded from tying its vicarious popularity to Bush’s coat tails, the Cashocracy teetered beneath the gale force invective of the Democrats’ campaign mantra the Congressional Republican majority was “a culture of corruption” slothfully content to “rubber stamp” the failed policies of an unpopular President. Panic stricken, the politically tone-deaf Cashocrats urged GOP members to tout America’s “robust economy” and attack Democrats on national security issues. The innately materialist economic argument was doomed to fail, because the “robust” economy was not to be found in regions like the Northeast and Midwest. The latter argument proved unconvincing to an electorate convinced Iraq and New Orleans were GOP national security fiascos. And, finally, nothing could persuade an outraged electorate to return a Republican majority which, in the interests of perpetuating itself in power, failed to protect House pages from predatory members of Congress.
By election day the public had concluded the Republican majority cared more about corporations than Americans; and, when the tsunami hit, the Cashocracy crumbled down upon many now former GOP members, who became the last, blameless victims of its stolid cupidity.
In hindsight, the Cashocracy would best have heeded President Theodore Roosevelt’s warning:
“The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.”
Exile on Main Street
Straggling back to Washington for the Republican Revolution’s death vigil, the 2006 election’s surviving GOP members bid anguished goodbyes to defeated friends and struggled to make sense of it all. Dazed and confused, some members managed to grasp the reality of their newly minted minority, while some still grapple with it. Out of this former group, a distinct vision has emerged concerning how House Republicans can revitalize and redeem themselves in the estimation of their fellow Americans.
Got Live if You Want It
“Restoration Republicans” are best considered Reagan’s grandchildren. Like their Reagan-Democratic parents, Restoration Republicans were attracted to our party by the intellectual, cultural, and moral components and proven practical benefits of philosophical conservatism. Transcending talking points and political cant, these Restoration Republicans’ are devoted to restoring human soul’s centrality to public policy decisions; and focusing these policies on preserving and perpetuating the permanent things of our evanescent earthly existence which surpass all politics in importance.
The enduring ideals of Restoration Republicans are succinctly enumerated by Russell Kirk in his book, The Politics of Prudence:
1. The conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order.
2. The conservative adheres to custom, convention, and continuity.
3. Conservatives believe in what may be called the principle of prescription – that is, of things established by immemorial usage.
4. Conservatives are guided by the principle of prudence.
5. Conservatives pay attention to the principle of variety.
6. Conservatives are chastened by their principle of imperfectability.
7. Conservatives are persuaded that freedom and property are closely linked.
8. Conservatives uphold voluntary community, quite as they oppose involuntary collectivism.
9. The Conservative perceives the need for prudent restraints upon power and upon human passion.
10. The thinking conservative understands that permanence and change must be recognized and reconciled in a vigorous society.
Given how the Cashocracy repeatedly violated these principles during its descent into oblivion, and how the Democrats’ 2006 consequent rallying cry was “change,” this tenth ideal merits deeper contemplation. For to understand it fully is to fully understand why Restoration Republicans, who are convinced we live amidst a crucible of liberty, proclaim our minority must emulate and implement the philosophical conservatism of Ronald Reagan and the fiery integrity of Theodore Roosevelt in the cause of empowering Americans and strengthening their eternal institutions of faith, family, community and country. Again, Kirk:
“Therefore the intelligent conservative endeavors to reconcile the claims of Permanence and the claims of Progression. He [or she] thinks that the liberal and the radical, blind to the just claims of Permanence, would endanger the heritage bequeathed to us, in an endeavor to hurry us into some dubious Terrestrial Paradise. The conservative, in short, favors reasoned and temperate progress; he [or she] is opposed to the cult of Progress, whose votaries believe that everything new necessarily is superior to everything old.
“Change is essential to the body social, the conservative reasons, just as it is essential to the human body. A body that has ceases to renew itself has begun to die. But if that body is to be vigorous, the change must occur in a regular manner, harmonizing with the form and nature of that body; otherwise change produces a monstrous growth, a cancer, which devours its host. The conservative takes care that nothing in a society should ever be wholly old, and that nothing should ever be wholly new. This is the means of the conservation of a nation, quite as it is the means of conservation of a living organism. Just how much change a society requires, and what sort of change, depend upon the circumstances of an age and a nation.”
Love You Live
Kirk’s words compelled Restoration Republicans to empathetically assess our nation’s age and circumstances; and ponder the direction and scope of the changes our American community requires.
In making these determinations, Restoration Republicans draw parallels between and inspiration from America’s “Greatest Generation.”
Our Greatest Generation faced and surmounted a quartet of generational challenges born of industrialization:
1. Economic, social, and political upheavals;
2. A second world war against abject evil;
3. The rise of the Soviet “super-state” as a strategic threat and rival model of governance; and
4. The civil rights movement’s moral struggle to equally ensure the God given and constitutionally recognized rights of all Americans.
Today, our generation of Americans must confront and transcend a quartet of generational challenges born of globalization:
1. Economic, social and political upheavals;
2. A third world war against abject evil;
3. The rise of the communist Chinese “super-state” as a strategic threat and rival model of governance; and
4. Moral relativism’s erosion of our nation’s foundational, self-evident truths.
The critical difference between the challenges conquered by the Greatest Generation and the challenges crises confronting our generation of Americans is this: they faced their crises consecutively; we face our crises simultaneously.
In response to these generational challenges to our free republic, Restoration Republicans have drawn upon the roots of their philosophical conservatism to affirm the truth America does not exist to emulate others, America exists to inspire the world; and to advance the policy paradigm of American Excellence, which rests upon a foundation of liberty, and the four cornerstones of sovereignty, security, prosperity and verities.
Individually and collectively, American Excellence’s foundation and four cornerstones are reinforced by these policy principles:
1. Our liberty is granted not by the pen of a government bureaucrat, but is authored by the hand of almighty God.
2. Our sovereignty rests not in our soil, but in our souls.
3. Our security is guaranteed not by the thin hopes of appeasement, but by the moral and physical courage of our troops defending us in hours of maximum danger;
4. Our prosperity is produced not by the tax hikes and spending sprees of politicians, but by the innovation and perspiration of free people engaged in free enterprise.
5. Our cherished truths and communal virtues are preserved and observed not by a coerced political correctness, but by our reverent citizenry’s voluntary celebration of the culture of life.
Restoration Republicans conclude, therefore, we must be Champions of American Freedom in challenging new millennium to keep our America a community of destiny inspired and guided by the virtuous genius of our free people; and forever blessed by the unfathomable grace of God.
It will not be easy, given the root public policy question of our times. In the Age of Industrialization, President Theodore Roosevelt empathized with Americans’ feelings of powerlessness in the face of the economic, social and political forces radically altering or terminating their traditional, typically agrarian, lives. Writing years later in his book A Humane Economy, the economist Wilhelm Ropke examined the impacts upon human beings by these forces, which he collectively termed “mass society”:
“(T)he disintegration of the social structure (generates) a profound upheaval in the outward conditions of each individual’s life, thought, and work. Independence is smothered; men are uprooted and taken out of the close-woven social texture in which they were secure; true communities are broken up in favor of more universal but impersonal collectivities in which the individual is no longer a person in this own right; the inward, spontaneous social fabric is loosened in favor of mechanical, soulless organization, with its outward compulsion; all individuality is reduced to one plane of uniform normality; the area of individual action, decision, and responsibility shrinks in favor of collective planning and decision; the whole of life becomes uniform and standard mass life, ever more subject to party politics, ‘nationalization,’ and ‘socialization.’”
In that epoch, the root public policy question was how to protect Americans’ traditional rights to order, justice, and freedom from being usurped by corporate or governmental centralization. Aware of this quandary, T.R. responded by taming an emerging capitalist oligarchy which considered itself above the laws and, thereby, soothing the economic, social, and political anxieties of urban industrial workers which threatened the stability of our free republic. Over time, from T.R.’s seminal efforts arose the industrial-welfare state which, in a tenuous detente, divided solutions to Americans’ economic and social upheavals between and within both centralized corporations and government.
In this Age of Globalization, however, while Americans are vexed by their seeming inability to influence the potent economic, social and political forces radically reshaping their lives, American corporations are busy decentralizing into “virtual corporations” reliant upon the outsourcing of jobs to other nations to obtain lower labor costs and evade cumbersome domestic laws and regulations. Such “rootless capital” being sent around the world in a keystroke to more “competitive markets” has cost Americans their livelihoods; reduced their wages and employer provided benefits; diminished their unions’ memberships; eclipsed their optimism regarding our economy’s continued vitality; and, in cases of extreme economic distress and angst, destroyed their marriages and dreams for their children.
The failure to realize the seismic ramifications to normal Americans of this tectonic economic shift was a primary cause of the Cashocracy’s collapse. As rising corporate profits and Wall Street bull markets became increasingly divorced from working Americans’ prosperity, the Cashocrats clung ever more tightly to their corporate benefactors without grasping Americans had concluded what is “good for GM” is no longer necessarily good for them.
The advent of virtual corporations and transient international capital has ended the old industrial-welfare state model of governance, wherein solutions to Americans’ economic and social anxieties were the shared burdens of centralized corporations and government. The stark choice is now between increasing the centralized power of the federal government or decentralization power into the hands of individuals, families and communities.
In their urgency to replace their lost or slashed corporate benefits, Americans will be sorely tempted to further centralize federal government to do it. But expanding the authority and compulsory powers of the federal government will be injurious to the American people. Big government doesn’t stop chaos; big government is chaos. By usurping the rightful powers of individuals beneath its bureaucracy’s steel wheels, highly centralized government alienates individuals and atomizes communities. Once more, Ropke speaks to the heart of the matter:
“The temptation of centrism has been great at all times, as regards both theory and political action. It is the temptation of mechanical perfection and of uniformity at the expense of freedom. Perhaps Montesquieu was right when he said that it is the small minds, above all, which succumb to this temptation. Once the mania of uniformity and centralization spreads and once the centrists begin to lay down the law of the land, then we are in the presence of one of the most serious danger signals warning us of the impending loss of freedom, humanity, and the health of society.”
Only liberty unleashes Americans to establish the true roots of a holistic American order – the voluntary and virtuous individual, familial, and communal associations which invigorate and instruct a free people conquering challenges. In contrast, centralized and, thus, inherently unaccountable government suffocates liberty, order and justice by smothering and severing citizens’ voluntary bonds within mediating, non-governmental institutions; and, thereby, stifles our free people’s individual and collective solutions to challenges. In consequence, the temptation for more centralized government must be fought to prevent turning sovereign Americans from the masters of their destiny into the serfs of governmental dependency.
Fully versed in this verity, Restoration Republicans have made their decision – power to the people. Thus, in this Age of Globalization, Restoration Republicans vow to:
1. Empower the sovereign American people to protect and promote their God-given and constitutionally recognized and protected rights.
2. Promote the decentralization of federal governmental powers to the American people or to their most appropriate and closest unit of government.
3. Defend Americans’ enduring moral order of faith, family, community and country from all enemies.
4. Foster a dynamic market economy of entrepreneurial opportunity for all Americans.
5. Honor and nurture a “humanity of scale” in Americans’ relations and endeavors.
Further, while these Restoration Republicans will be releasing a more detailed program in the future, the above will form the basis of their concrete policy proposals.
Get Your Ya-Ya’s Out
My constituents are honest, hard-working, and intelligent people who are bearing the brunt of the generational challenges facing our nation. They have lost manufacturing and every manner of jobs due to globalization and, especially, the predatory trade practices of communist China. Throughout these economically anxious times, they spend sleepless nights wondering if they will be able to afford to keep their jobs; their houses; their health care; their hopes for their children. In the War for Freedom, they have buried, mourned, and honored their loved ones lost in the battle against our nation and all of civilization’s barbaric enemies. And, every day, they struggle to make sense of an increasingly perverse culture disdainful of and destructive to faith, truths, virtue and beauty, if the existence of these permanent things is even admitted.
True, they differ on specific solutions to their pressing issues. But they do agree Washington isn’t serving their concerns. They agree this storied representative institution is increasingly detached from the daily realities of their lives. And they remind me that when we enter this House – Their House – we enter as guests, who must honor the leap of faith they took in letting us in and allowing us to serve them.
With my constituents, I utterly agree. While it is not my purpose here to discuss the majority party, let me be clear as to my own: House Republicans have no business practicing business as usual. My constituents, our country, and this Congress deserve better.
And we will provide it!
Our Republican minority has members who know America isn’t an economy, America is a country.
Our Republican minority has members who know the only thing worth measuring in money is greed.
Our Republican minority has members with the heart to put individuals ahead of abstractions; people ahead of politics; souls ahead of systems.
Our Republican minority has members who have seen sorrow seep down a widow’s cheek and joy shine from a child’s eyes.
Yes, our Republican minority has members who know our deeds on behalf of our sovereign constituents must accord with Wordsworth’s poetic prayer:
“And then a wish: my best and favorite aspiration mounts with yearning toward some higher song of philosophic truth which cherishes our daily lives.”
It is these Republicans whose service in this Congress will redeem our party by honoring the sacred trust of the majestic American people who, in their virtuous genius, will transcend these transformational times and strengthen our exceptional nation’s revolutionary experiment in human freedom.
With these Republicans, I hereby throw in my lot and pledge my best efforts on behalf of my constituents and our country.
May God continue to grace, guard, guide and bless our community of destiny, the United States of America.
READ MORE, CLICK-BELOW!
First, It Was War On Crime, Then Drugs, Next Terror, Now It’s War On Americans
There’s A Press Blackout on S 1959, the Thought Crime Prevention Bill; Why?
As odd as it sounds, it’s true. The Mainstream News Media appears to be in a total news blackout in regard S 1959. At first, I believed it was merely the reluctance of the MSM to discuss this Bill, however, the answer may be much more sinister than that! Below is a reply I found on Ron Paul’s Campaign site which references this Bill, and I double and triple checked for ANY Mainstream News Coverage on this issue – and so far, it appears to almost be non-existent!
The Greatest Obstacle
On December 4th, 2007 hemingway811 says:
is that the MSM has had a total blackout on the House’s passage of HR 1955 on Oct. 23rd. Do a search at any major newspaper & the major television stations, including cable. I have found a few comments in Blogs at a couple of television sites, but that’s about it.
For example, at the Washington Post you get:
“No Results Found”
No matches found on search for: hr 1955
No matches found on search for: violent radicalization
404 members of the House voted for this “thought crime” Bill. The ACLU is working with members of the Senate to amend the language. They specifically refer to the regulation of thoughts. I don’t expect the ACLU to make much headway with the Senate. We have been bombarded with so much fear-mongering 24/7 for so long, members of Congress are too afraid of being labeled unpatriotic if they don’t vote for legislation like this.
RP did not cast a vote on HR 1955.
It is time to flood Keith Olbermann, Lou Dobbs, Jack Cafferty, and anyone else speaking out of the real issues the rest of the MSM ignores, with e-mails urging them to speak out about this Legislation. I already have.
Unfortunately, writing Lou Dobbs or Jack Cafferty is futile, as CNN refuses to publish any information in regard this assault on our Constitution, and that’s after they have received hundreds, maybe even thousands of requests to editorialize on the subject. Has the government issued “signing letters” or other orders that prevent ALL of America’s Mainstream News Media from reporting on this vital issue? Jack Cafferty is attempting to promote his so-called “Blog” on CNN, however, if you even mention S 1959 in your comment, it probably won’t be published. CNN is stonewalling their viewer-ship, and on an issue where the public is demanding that this Bill be discussed in a public forum; CNN, along with the rest of the MSM, have turned their backs on America and have shown, despite increasing public outrage that they don’t give a damn about public opinion!
If you fine-tune your Internet searches, and Google S 1959, there are pages and pages of results, almost all of them Blogs and Discussion forums in the US who are discussing this matter and urging their subscribers to call, email, and write to Congress to defeat this Bill, yet it appears we are screaming into a void – and no one in the MSM has the courage to bring this odious Bill to the publics attention. In fact, there is little or nothing mentioned in the foreign press as well, and in this writer’s opinion, we must break the silence of the Mainstream News Media to bring about enough awareness where the people can protest in enough numbers to kill this Bill before free speech in America is nothing more than a fleeting memory.
To anyone that is aware of Naomi Wolf’s writing, the Guardian Unlimited published her recent essay, Fascist America, in 10 easy steps. One chilling part of that essay is published below, and we all need to take note that a Fascist America appears to be on our doorstep, and only by making the MSM report upon this attempt to silence free speech in America will we have any chance of stopping the steady march toward total fascism and dictatorship in America:
8. Control the press
Italy in the 1920s, Germany in the 30s, East Germany in the 50s, Czechoslovakia in the 60s, the Latin American dictatorships in the 70s, China in the 80s and 90s – all dictatorships and would-be dictators target newspapers and journalists. They threaten and harass them in more open societies that they are seeking to close, and they arrest them and worse in societies that have been closed already.
The Committee to Protect Journalists says arrests of US journalists are at an all-time high: Josh Wolf (no relation), a blogger in San Francisco, has been put in jail for a year for refusing to turn over video of an anti-war demonstration; Homeland Security brought a criminal complaint against reporter Greg Palast, claiming he threatened “critical infrastructure” when he and a TV producer were filming victims of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana. Palast had written a bestseller critical of the Bush administration.
Other reporters and writers have been punished in other ways. Joseph C Wilson accused Bush, in a New York Times op-ed, of leading the country to war on the basis of a false charge that Saddam Hussein had acquired yellowcake uranium in Niger. His wife, Valerie Plame, was outed as a CIA spy – a form of retaliation that ended her career.
Prosecution and job loss are nothing, though, compared with how the US is treating journalists seeking to cover the conflict in Iraq in an unbiased way. The Committee to Protect Journalists has documented multiple accounts of the US military in Iraq firing upon or threatening to fire upon unembedded (meaning independent) reporters and camera operators from organisations ranging from al-Jazeera to the BBC. While westerners may question the accounts by al-Jazeera, they should pay attention to the accounts of reporters such as the BBC’s Kate Adie. In some cases reporters have been wounded or killed, including ITN’s Terry Lloyd in 2003. Both CBS and the Associated Press in Iraq had staff members seized by the US military and taken to violent prisons; the news organisations were unable to see the evidence against their staffers.
Over time in closing societies, real news is supplanted by fake news and false documents. Pinochet showed Chilean citizens falsified documents to back up his claim that terrorists had been about to attack the nation. The yellowcake charge, too, was based on forged papers.
You won’t have a shutdown of news in modern America – it is not possible. But you can have, as Frank Rich and Sidney Blumenthal have pointed out, a steady stream of lies polluting the news well. What you already have is a White House directing a stream of false information that is so relentless that it is increasingly hard to sort out truth from untruth. In a fascist system, it’s not the lies that count but the muddying. When citizens can’t tell real news from fake, they give up their demands for accountability bit by bit.
9. Dissent equals treason
Cast dissent as “treason” and criticism as “espionage’. Every closing society does this, just as it elaborates laws that increasingly criminalize certain kinds of speech and expand the definition of “spy” and “traitor”. When Bill Keller, the publisher of the New York Times, ran the Lichtblau/Risen stories, Bush called the Times’ leaking of classified information “disgraceful”, while Republicans in Congress called for Keller to be charged with treason, and rightwing commentators and news outlets kept up the “treason” drumbeat. Some commentators, as Conason noted, reminded readers smugly that one penalty for violating the Espionage Act is execution.MORE
Based on all of the Blogs which are standing in solidarity against this issue, I’d bet my last dollar (If I had one to spare…) the Congress has received hundreds of thousands of phone calls and emails, yet they still remain mute and refuse to offer the public anything at all – not even an assurance they will look into our concern and outrage; instead, it appears The United States Congress is betraying their constituents, this time in an assault that could change the face of America! Based on the refusal of the MSM to publicize the issue, and Congress remaining deaf and dumb in the performance of their duties, we can only ascertain that Congress is attempting to pass this Bill while the bulk of the population isn’t even aware of its existence, and to me, that speaks of treason!
We have only one chance of defeating this Bill before it gets out of Committee, and that’s to make enough calls and send enough emails to effectively jam-up the phone systems in Congress, and only by acting in unison will we be able to save free speech in America. As an alternative, I’m calling upon the foreign press to publicize this matter, especially those in England, Germany, France, and all of the countries that America gave so many lives in World War I and II to help them throw off the yolk of oppression. America was there for them when Nazi Germany was attempting to enslave all of Europe, and I believe they have a debt of honor to repay -to stand tall and write about this critical issue that affects all of America. We were there for them, and now it seems that we need their help, if it’s nothing more than embarrassing the American Mainstream News Media into covering an issue that affects each and every American alive, here and abroad, and to lend their assistance in helping to insure that the United States will remain a free and democratic nation.
FootNote: This morning, I noted that NBC is quietly refunding money to advertisers because their ratings have been so low. LINK NBC, if you want to jump-start your ratings and be a top network again, maybe you might try reporting the news – all of it, and if you would break this press blackout and show some courage, I’m guessing, based on the interest of the public in regard S 1959, your ratings would soar and rather than giving refunds for poor ratings, you’d see your viewer-ship increase dramatically.
To anyone in the foreign Press reading this Op-Ed
As you read this Op-Ed, please sit back and contemplate on the significance of this matter; President Bush is blathering on and on about “Democratic Principles” while our own society is closing down and now we don’t even have a free press except for what the Internet offers us – and we can’t reach enough people by the Internet alone unless every one of us bands together in solidarity, and so far, that’s been a daunting task -although people from all walks of life are joining in, but without fair representation in the media, we remain unaware of how many thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of Americans who have called or emailed Congress in regard this assault on our constitution.
Freedom in Americana is quickly becoming what the Presidency “feels like” rather than a strict adherence to our constitution and laws – and without massive foreign coverage of the assault against the freedom of Americans by the Bush administration, this nation could easily be overwhelmed by fascism, something countless Americans died for in helping to protect Europe so many years ago.
Keep in mind these actions will not help the Bush administration and the Neo-cons who seem to want perpetual war, but will benefit the average American that still believes the United States should return to our constitutional roots, adhere to the Rule of American Law as well as International law, something this President holds in utter contempt.
Your help will be appreciated, and although I have been loathe to request international press support, however, with the mainstream news media compromised by so many factors, we are now looking for any measure that could help to bring awareness to the general public in regard S 1959. Even the United Nations should be able to see through this ploy to keep the American people in ignorance – and ignorance and propaganda is how a free society is transformed to a fascist and authoritarian government.
It’s time for the international community to understand the struggle the “Freedom Fighters” in America are engaged in to bring our country back under the rule of law, and publicizing this struggle and giving “the people” credit for their efforts to throw-off oppression and the unconstitutional muzzling of the News will help us to bring our fight to the countless millions of Americans who still remain unaware of the danger(s) they face. If the US MSM won’t represent us, then maybe it’s time for the international community to step-in and lend their support, and tomorrow won’t be fast enough!
READ MORE, CLICK-BELOW!
Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Ron Paul
Regret I was unable to post the “clickable” listing here (too large)–but the following is a text listing of what is available on the clickable list/please use link at top/bottom this post.
Find this article at:
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Ron Paul
Articles about Ron Paul
Articles by Ron Paul
Open Letters on Behalf of Ron Paul
Audio/Video by Ron Paul
Books by Ron Paul
Books Recommended by Ron Paul
Ron Paul T-Shirt
Breaking Ron Paul News
Articles about Ron Paul on LRC
An Open Letter to Democrats
On behalf of Ron Paul. Article by Justine Nicholas.
An Open Letter to Apathetic Americans
On behalf of Ron Paul. Article by Connor Boyack.
An Open Letter to Advocates of Individual Freedom
On behalf of Ron Paul. Article by Joe Abbate.
Are You a Patriot or a Loyalist?
Lawrence Lepard on the Ron Paul Revolution.
An Open Letter to the Antiwar Left
On behalf of Ron Paul Revolution, by Donna J. Volatile.
A Man for All Reasons
Bill Sardi on Ron Paul.
Thank you, Bush and Cheney
You helped start the Ron Paul Revolution, says Murray Sabrin.
An Open Letter to Republicans
On behalf of Ron Paul. Article by Andrew Ter-Grigoryan.
It’s a Statist Life
D. Saul Weiner reimagines a famous movie for the Ron Paul era.
For an advocate of freedom, never, says David Bergland.
A Rigged ‘Scientific’ Poll
Deconstructed. Article by Rolf Lindgren.
Is it edging closer to the Ron Paul revolution? Article by Nick Heeringa.
The Biggest Youth Freedom Movement Ever
Ron Paul’s, of course. Article by Anthony Gregory.
Did ‘Isolationism’ Cause World War II?
Phil Duffy on McCain and the Hitler card.
An Open Letter to RP Supporters
On behalf of the revolution. Article by Robert Hawes, Jr.
Right on Drugs
Ron Paul. Article by Jesse Starrick.
An Open Letter to American Muslims
On behalf of Ron Paul. Article by Hussein Ali.
An Open Letter to Mike Gravel
On behalf of Ron Paul, from Max Raskin.
An Open Letter to Libertarians
On behalf, believe it or not, of Ron Paul. Article by David Gordon.
Ron Paul on the Fed
The evil Fed and the IRS and saving the buck. An interview with Maria Bartiromo.
The Best Documentary Ever on the Federal Reserve
Features Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, and others.
Geoffrey Pike on why now.
‘The Message Is So Powerful, in Spite of My Shortcomings’
Ron Paul is surprised by his spontaneous, self-organizing presidential campaign, says Michael Scherer.
Disgusting Media Spins the Debate
John Keller on CNN vs. Ron Paul.
A Ron Paul Critic
Wrong, like the rest of them. Article by Bretigne Shaffer.
Follow the Words of Paul
Chris Van Landingham on the Apostle and the Doctor.
Health in the Year 2050
Thanks to Ron Paul. Article by Bill Sardi.
God Saved the Queen
But not the Sex Pistols. C.J. Maloney on the anarcho-punk rockers who support Ron Paul. NB: Some bad language.
The State vs. Ron Paul
The deadtree South Carolina newspaper, that is. Article by Gail Jarvis.
An Open Letter to Mormons
Regarding Ron Paul. Article by Robert Higgins.
The Economics of Ron Paul
Lew Rockwell on the great public intellectual of free markets and sound money.
A Non-Interventionist America
Michael Scheuer on what the world can expect from Ron Paul.
Why Ron Paul Is Right About Terrorism
An open letter to the GOP base from David Beito and Scott Horton.
An Open Letter to Orthodox Christians
On behalf of Ron Paul. Article by Clark Carlton.
It’s Time To End Hamilton’s Curse
Thomas DiLorenzo on Jeffersonianism and Ron Paul.
An Open Letter to Arab-Americans
On Ron Paul. Article by George Ajjan.
Paul Krugman Smears Ron Paul
William L. Anderson on a paleo-Keynesian inflationist attack.
Ron Paul Is Another Ronald Reagan
Only he’s not acting, says Bill Huff.
Sandra Hamilton on Ron Paul.
The Coming Political Earthquake
Already, dishes are rattling in DC. Article by Kyle Hunt.
An Open Letter About Open Letters
Walter Block on Ron Paul.
An Open Letter to the Catholic Community
On behalf of Ron Paul, from Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
Who’s the Real Isolationist?
Bill Barnwell on Rudy and Ron.
Paul Gottfried on the amazing Philadelphia Ron rally.
Ron Paul and the Jews
Walter Block has more to say.
Challenging the American Empire
Ron Paul is the only candidate who does, say David Beito and Scott Horton.
The Honest Money Man
Murray Sabrin on Ron Paul vs. the Federal Reserve.
Temperament and Communication
And the Ron Paul Revolution. Article by David Bergland.
Turn the Other Cheek
For Ron Paul. Article by Bob Murphy.
Don’t Be Surprised
Of course the Republican Jewish Coalition discriminates against Ron Paul, says Paul Gottfried.
The Defeat of the Liberventionists
Anthony Gregory on Ron Paul vs. prowar libertarians.
An Open Letter to Ron Paul
From a father of young children. Article by John R. Hamilton.
Starve the State
Ron Paul’s long coat-tails can help us do it, says Gary North.
Butler Shaffer on neo-fascist accusations against Ron Paul donors.
A Non-Voter for Ron Paul
Bretigne Shaffer can hardly believe it herself.
The Prescription Every American Needs
Ron Paul, MD, has it, says Sandra Hamilton.
Get ‘er Done
With Ron Paul, says Jim Fedako.
An Open Letter to Protestants
About Ron Paul. Article by Laurence M. Vance.
What the ‘Subprime’ Mess Is Really About
The international fiat monetary regime’s denouement, and Ron Paul. Article by John Regan.
Pareto and Ron Paul
Joshua Snyder on the long tail.
Geoff Pike on what it means.
Rolling the Snowball
Andrew Greve on the Philly rally.
Stop Libeling Ron Paul
Glenn Grenwald on the smearbund.
In Ten Years, Your Life Will Be Terrible
Without Ron Paul. Article by Mark R. Crovelli.
Go, Ron, Go
Jacob G. Hornberger on The Man.
The American Presidency
And Ron Paul. Article by Charles Burris.
Kucinich vs. Paul
Scott McPherson on not compromising.
Mark Sunwall on the new knight of liberty.
The Handwriting Is on the Screen
The establishment has been weighed and found wanting, says Gary North. Thus Ron Paul.
Ron Paul’s Chances
Lasse Pikkaniemi on the opinion polls.
How a ‘Third-Tier’ Candidate Can Win Primaries
Kathryn Muratore on Ron Paul’s secret weapon.
Sticks and Stones
Sandra Hamilton on smears against Ron Paul.
Ron Paul Can Win It All
Christopher Deliso explains how.
The Media Scheme To Ambush Ron Paul
It won’t work, says Mike Whitney.
My Generation and Ron Paul
Anthony Merola, 19-years-old, on The Man.
Dr. Ron Paul Tightens the Screws
Rick Fisk on how he learned to stop worrying and love the money bomb.
The Paul Phenom
From the left, Glenn Greenwald on the Ron Paul revolution.
The Expatriate’s Patriot
Joshua Snyder on Ron Paul.
‘Leaners’ and Polling Bias
Rolf Lindgren on Ron Paul’s numbers.
Ron Paul’s Opponents
They gambled and lost, says Robert Murphy.
Ron Paul, Israel, and the Jews
Walter Block on foreign aid.
Rick Fisk on Ron Paul.
Why Not Ron Paul?
Walter Block vs. socialists and beltway libertarians.
Ron Paul Crossing the Chasm
Isaac Lopez on getting the liberty message across the polling gap.
The Peaceful Guy Fawkes
Thomas Luongo on Ron Paul.
America Approaches Its Darkest Chapter
But there is Ron Paul, says Vedran Vuk.
Frank Luntz’s Dog and Pony Show
Rick Fisk on FOX outsmarting itself.
How Ron Paul Could Win the Presidency
A chronology from Benjamin Tyler Fenton.
The Revolution Is Now
Charles A. Burris on Ron Paul, the CIA, and the future of liberty.
Fascistocons vs. Ron Paulians
Steven Greenhut on the present state of the Republican coalition.
Murray Sabrin on his dream ticket.
A Perfect Storm in a Sea of Statism
Karen De Coster on Ron Paul.
The Criminal Fed
It’s immoral, as Ron Paul says. Article by Doug French.
Here’s why “they” hate us. Chris Manion on Turkey, Ron Paul, and the Cheney-Bush junta.
Ron Paul Is a Protest Candidate
No more, no less, says Isaac Lopez.
War and the Constitution
Only Ron Paul gets it, says Charley Reese.
CNBC’s Pulled Paul Poll
Robert Murphy on a peek into the heart of MSM bias.
Ron Paul Tzu
Dr. Paul deserves the Chinese title of “master,” given to the great sages of antiquity, says Joshua Snyder.
The Silence of the Fundamentalist Lambs
Gary North on understanding, really understanding, the Christian Right (and Ron Paul).
Butler Shaffer on an establishment fraud vs. Ron Paul.
Why Harry Browne Refused Matching Funds
And Ron Paul should too. Article by Pamela Wolfe Browne.
Rick Fisk on Ron Paul’s electoral chances.
The Ron Paul FAQ
Bob Murphy’s one-stop intro to the man and the movement.
The Conservative Case for Ron Paul
In light of The Betrayal of the American Right. Article by Lucas Mafaldo.
The Ron Paul Phenom
Alan Bock on the future of the revolution.
Ron Paul Can Win
It’s far from being wishful thinking, says Rick Fisk.
Ron Paul Family, Ron Paul Nation, Ron Paul World
Jay Roberts on the future of the revolution.
Ron Paul Has a Real Shot
So says real money. Article by Bob Murphy.
I Took Matching Funds
Ron Paul should too, says Murray Sabrin.
The Ron Paul Nation
It’s digital, and it’s replacing the state. Article by Jay Roberts.
Should Ron Paul Accept Matching Funds?
It’s libertarian to do so, says Walter Block, though there are other considerations.
Misunderestimating Ron Paul’s Support
Rick Fisk on what the neocons and the media are about to learn.
Ron Paul vs. the Neocon Cowards
James Herndon on the real nature of the opposition.
They Live To Run (Your Life)
Rick Fisk on the candidates vs. Ron Paul.
Ron Paul’s Secrets Revealed
Jennifer Haman spills the beans.
The Values of Values Voters
Rick Fisk on Christian Jihadists vs. Ron Paul.
Enter Ron Paul
The silver-haired knight in the battle of ideas. Article by Koen Swinkels.
Beltwayites Love Fred Thompson
And not Ron Paul. Article by Thomas DiLorenzo.
Ron Paul Takes on The Monster
That is, the Federal Reserve. James Herndon on why the elites are terrified.
Ron Paul vs. US Foreign Policy
Dom Armentano on the cause of peace.
Aeschylus Would Be Proud of Ron Paul
Kyle Jones on the neocons’ blood-rite “honor.”
The Ron Paul Revolution
A lesson in free-market economics. Article by Jason Rink.
Ron Paul and David Petraeus
And two kinds of patriotism. Article by Lila Rajiva.
The Betrayal of the American Right
Every Ron Paul supporter must read this book, says Charles Burris.
Ron ‘Veto’ Paul
Kevin Southwick on his presidency.
The Establishment Is Scared of Ron Paul
Johnny Kramer on the case of Alan Keyes.
American Consumers Are Terrified About the Economy
And rightly so. James Herndon on the one man who can fix it: Ron Paul.
The New Hampshire Debate Debacle
And the disgrace called Fox News. Article by Joseph P. Geiger, Jr.
Mr. Paul Goes to Washington
Lila Rajiva on reviving the constitution.
Ron Paul 1, Statism 0
The state is going down, says Lawrence Lepard.
Ron Paul vs. the Huckster
Justin Raimondo on taking down Huckabee and the rest of the neocons.
Want To Bet on Ron Paul?
A Busy Week for the Front-Runner
Rick Fisk on Ron Paul.
This Is a Man: Take Notes
William Norman Grigg on Ron Paul.
Will George Bush Join the Ron Paul Revolution?
Karen Kwiatkowski on the Dubya Freedom Institute.
Ron Paul’s Inaugural Address?
Johnny Kramer imagines what it might be like.
Ron Paul and the Four Horseman
James Ostrowski on Ron vs. Rudy, Fred, McCain, and Romney.
Ron Paul and the Empire of Experts
Lila Rajiva on why he attracts such a big, diverse following.
Ron Paul and Immigration
Rick Fisk on being illegal.
Rockwell’s Next 30 Days
Another blueprint for the Paul administration?
A Ron Paulian Blueprint?
Lew Rockwell’s classic 30-day plan for less government.
Ron Paul Is a Geek
Jeffrey Tucker on the political theory of geeks and wonks.
Conservative Republicans Have Only One Choice
Chuck Baldwin on Ron Paul.
Ron Paul Is a Great American
William R. Tonso writes to Sean Hannity.
What They Don’t Know
Rick Fisk on the Ron Paul deniers.
Not a Dime’s Worth of Difference
Laurence M. Vance on non-Paul Republicans.
Ron Paul and the Matrix
What is it: the red pill or the blue? Article by John J. Smalanskas.
Socialists & Neocons vs. Ron Paul
Bryan Edds on the two groups that oppose him.
Ten Reasons Ron Paul Can’t Win
With apologies to David Letterman. Article by Thomas R. Eddlem.
Ron Paul Victory in the Deep South
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., on the Alabama straw poll.
Is Ron Paul Unoriginal?
Let’s face it, says Rick Fisk, his ideas are old-hat.
The Perfect Storm
Is it forming for Ron Paul? Article by Murray Sabrin.
Having Fun Doing Good
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., on the Ron Paul movement.
The Ron Paul Ultimatum
Mark Thornton on Jason Bourne and the CIA.
A Wise and Prudent Foreign Policy
Rick Fisk on Ron Paul’s.
The Instruments of Tyranny
Ron Paul is right about the police state, says John W. Whitehead.
Ron Paul vs. the Empire
Steven LaTulippe on what’s at stake.
The Good News Is Everywhere
For Ron Paulians, that is. Article by Karen Kwiatkowski.
Ron Paul, Thomist
Clay Rossi on the ancient philosophical battle against the neocons.
Degreasing the Pig
Gary North on Ron Paul and the presidency.
The Long Haul
Scott Sutton on Ron Paul’s future.
Those Paul Poll Numbers
James Ostrowski picks them apart.
Ron Paul vs. SOX
Jennifer Haman on the one public official to understand economics.
Ron Paul’s VP
Linda Schrock Taylor has a suggestion.
Ron Paul Is Cool
Robert Murphy on strategic voting among Republicans.
Libertarians, Murder, and Ron Paul
Max Raskin responds to Randy Barnett.
I Know Who ‘None-of-the-Above’ Is
Trevor Bothwell on Ron Paul.
No Patronizing, No Sloganeering
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., on Ron Paul.
Who Speaks for the US Military on Iraq?
The presidential donation figures show it’s Ron Paul, says William Marina.
Pro-War ‘Libertarianism’ vs. Ron Paul
Justin Raimondo on Randy Barnett’s Wall Street Journal attack.
The Ron Paul Revolution
What every marketer can learn from it. Article by Marnie L. Pehrson.
A Choice, Not an Echo
Justin Raimondo on Ron Paul.
Ron Paul Defends Natural Rights
On guns, for example. Article by Timothy Finnegan Boyle.
A Self-Organizing Complex System
Richard L. Sanders on the Ron Paul campaign.
What’s Up With Ron Paul’s Poll Numbers?
Rick Fisk on polling methodology and politics.
Ron Paul Leads in the Polls
Of those who have heard him speak. Article by Jennifer Haman.
Ron Paul and the Lying Opinion Polls
Lasse Pitkaniemi, a political scientist in Finland, on why they’re biased.
Homeland Security Responds to Ron Paul
George Gould on what they might say (but didn’t).
Straws in the Wind in New Hampshire
Jack Kenny on Ron Paul.
The Honor of Ron Paul
To know him is to love him, says Joseph Sobran.
The Fed Becomes a Campaign Issue
For the first time since 1913? Bill Haynes on Ron Paul.
The Tao of Ron Paul
Jeff Bryan on ancient libertarian wisdom from China.
Only Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich
Opposed the empire’s planned genocide, says Arthur Silber.
The Iowa Crime
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., on the latest developments in the exclusion of Ron Paul.
The Attempt To Exclude Ron Paul
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., on the Iowa cabal.
The Ron Paul Revolution
A halftime report from James Ostrowski.
George Will Ridicules Ron Paul
And loves Giuliani. Time to jettison “conservatism,” says Joseph Sobran.
Ron Paul Is the Gandhi of Our Time
And the empire will not stand against him.
Ron Paul, the Non-Condescending Intellectual
Zack Pelta-Heller on why he’s earned so much respect.
What Ron Paul Means to America
Karen De Coster on making us think.
A Conversation With a Most Unusual Man
Charles Davis talks to Ron Paul.
The Neocons and Us
Burton S. Blumert on the ideological landscape.
And Then They Ignore You Again…
Eric Phillips on Ron Paul and the CNN debate.
The Remnant and Ron Paul
Butler Shaffer on the shape of the future.
Ron Paul Rocks Bigwigs
James Pinkerton on altruism and genuine belief.
The Patriotism Smear
Ron Paul dissents from authoritarian government.
The Real Reason They Hate Us
Bill Barnwell eavesdrops on the terrorists.
Ron Paul’s Answer Terrifies Them
Jacob G. Hornberger explains why.
Will the Republicans Destroy Themselves?
Before they destroy America? Article by Paul Craig Roberts.
Two Men Enter, One Man Leaves
Bob Murphy on Ron, Rudy, and gasoline prices.
The Neocons Are Through
Thanks to Ron Paul, says Paul Mulshine.
Bill Steigerwald on the man who’s driving the Republican power-elite crazy.
Guilty Blue Pleasure
Liking Ron Paul. Article by Justine Nicholas.
Why Are They Lying About Ron Paul?
Cliff Kincaid on the MSM and friends.
Ron Paul on Peace and Freedom
Lew Rockwell on his foreign policy.
Tim Swanson on evidence and claims.
The Man Who Would Be Duce
Charley Reese on Giuliani the fake.
Ron Paul Rocks!
Karen Kwiatkowski on speaking truth to power.
Giuliani Unveils His New Terrorism Strategy
If they hate us for our freedom…. Article by Max Raskin.
Not an Empire
Brian Wilson on a foreign policy of freedom.
Glenn Beck Hates Ron Paul
Of course. Article by Eric Phillips.
Do Conservatives Hate Their Own Founder?
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., on Russell Kirk (and Ron Paul).
By All Means, Eliminate the Guy Who’s Right
Patrick J. Buchanan on the debates.
The Man Who Roiled Republican Politics
And knocked out Giuliani. Article by Jacob Hornberger.
Fight the Slavers
Will Grigg on John Edwards, Ron Paul, and the draft.
Giuliani Is Right To Be Outraged
How dare Ron Paul suggest that people get angry when bombed. Article by Thomas Eddlem.
Ron Paul Violated the Rules
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., on The Man.
Blaming Uncle Sam Last
Michael Tennant on Ron Paul and US foreign policy.
Defeat the Media Clones
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., on the big-media shrouding of Ron Paul.
Ron Paul vs. Hillary Clinton
James Ostrowski on the great unknown.
Will he be the candidate of the Christian Right?
The Revolutionary Candidate
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., on Ron Paul.
A Modest Proposal
Ron Paul for president, says David Henderson.
Audio/Video by Ron Paul
Ron Paul YouTube Channel
The LRC Speeches of Ron Paul
What a great introduction to the good doctor who says No to tyranny, and Yes to freedom.
Ron Paul Debates the War
With libertarian Doug Casey, against neocons Dinesh D’Souza and Larry Abraham (video).
Nonintervention: The Original Foreign Policy(video)
Rep. Ron Paul on War, Peace, and the News Media (video)
The Iraq War Funding Bill (video)
The Scandal at Walter Reed (video)
The Neoconservative Empire (video)
3000 American Deaths in Iraq (video)
My Years With Alan Greenspan(audio)
Gold or Tyranny(audio)
The Gold Standard: An Austrian Perspective (video)
The Gold Standard: An Austrian Perspective (audio)
The Trouble With Washington (audio)
Ron Paul T-Shirt
Books by Ron Paul
A Foreign Policy of Freedom Freedom Under Siege: The US Constitution After 200 Years
Mises and Austrian Economics: A Personal View Gold, Peace, and Prosperity
The Case for Gold (with Lewis Lehrman)
Articles by Ron Paul on LRC
Bombed If You Do, Bombed If You Don’t
Ron Paul on the NIE on Iran.
Against the Terrorism Regime
Ron Paul on thought control and federal power.
On Illegal Immigration and Border Security
Thoughts on what to do, by Ron Paul.
Repeal Federal Taxes on Gasoline
Ron Paul on how to deal with higher prices.
The True Cost of Taxing and Spending
Ron Paul runs the numbers.
Free the Milk Market
Ron Paul on ending restrictions on unpasteurized milk.
No Cents Makes Sense
Ron Paul on what the Fed has done to our money.
Ron Paul on foreign policy.
Ron Paul explains economics to the Joint Economic Committee.
Ron Paul, Scholar
Some of his important writings.
All Trick and No Treat
Ron Paul on tax reform.
The Fed Rate Cut
Ron Paul on another monetary disaster.
Hands Off Cuba
No sanctions, no foreign aid, no meddling.
Interventionism? Isolationism? Actually, Both
Ron Paul on foreign policy.
Restoring the Constitution
Ron Paul on the American Freedom Restoration Act.
Taxing Ourselves to Death
Ron Paul on the death tax vs. property rights.
Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy
It’s the Framers’, he explains to an attacking newspaper.
No Taxes on Tips
A reform from Ron Paul.
Congress, Keep Your Hands Off
Ron Paul on children’s health care.
What the Fed Has Done to Us
Ron Paul on the Big Counterfeiter.
Surrender Should Not Be an Option
Ron Paul on the war.
Solving the Malpractice Crisis Constitutionally
Ron Paul on unnecessary litigation.
Ron Paul on how to increase it.
Health Care Costs
Ron Paul on what to do about them.
Why the Credit Markets Are a Mess
Ron Paul on the culprit.
Some of it is crazy even by federal standards.
Ron Paul on big government’s best friend.
Exposing the True Isolationists
Ron Paul on the protectionists and warmongers.
Muzzle the FDA
Ron Paul on protecting health freedom.
Ron Paul on what it means, and what it should mean.
Bring Our Troops Home Now
Ron Paul on why the Democrats are also wrong.
Hans F. Sennholz, RIP
Ron Paul remembers a great economist.
Defend the Constitution
Ron Paul on the dangerous presidential signing statements.
The Spirit of Independence
Ron Paul on how to recover it.
Missing in the Stem-Cell Debate
The rights of taxpayers.
Ron Paul Against Aggression
And lying war propaganda to justify it.
Ron Paul on earmarks.
The Ron Paul Economics Library
Here’s where to start.
Ron Paul’s Summer Reading List
What you need to know.
Get out of Iraq.
The Immigration Compromise
It’s a sell-out, says Ron Paul.
The Patriotism Smear
Ron Paul dissents from authoritarian government.
How To End the War
Ron Paul has a moderate plan.
Expensive Security Theatre
Ron Paul on another DC fraud.
Crazed Hate Crime Laws
They threaten freedom.
The Path Out of Iraq
First, Congress must admit its crime of giving the Executive war-making power, says Ron Paul.
Guns vs. Crime
Ron Paul on the massacre that could have been stopped.
Where’s the Exit?
Ron Paul on the one easy step in getting out of Iraq.
The Answer to Racism
Liberty, not government, says Ron Paul.
The Most Dangerous Monopolist
Ron Paul on the Federal Reserve.
The Big Book of Crimes
Ron Paul on the 2008 federal budget.
Making Iraq Even Worse
Ron Paul on the Democrats.
War Is the Enemy of Freedom
Ron Paul interviewed by Michael Shank.
Dr. No on More War Funding
No, says Ron Paul.
Don’t Blame the Market
For the housing bubble, says Ron Paul.
The Original American Foreign Policy
Ron Paul on why it’s still the right one.
The Right To Keep and Bear Arms
Even (especially?) in DC.
The Scandal of US Foreign Policy
And the scandal of Walter Reed.
The Coming Meltdown
What the Fed Is Doing to the Economy
Ron Paul on Bernanke’s mischief.
The Neoconservative Empire
Stop the war, stop threatening war, and bring the troops home now. Article by Ron Paul.
Ron Paul advises President Bush.
More War Spending
And more, and more.
Stop Glorifying Political Power
It’s the enemy of the rule of law, says Ron Paul.
Everybody Supports the Troops
Let’s move on to the real issues.
Monetary Depreciation and Killing
Ron Paul on inflation and war finance.
Stop All Foreign Aid to Israel, Egypt, Jordan, et al.
That would be a contribution to peace, says Ron Paul.
Will Bush Pull an LBJ?
Will he phony up an Iranian Gulf of Tonkin incident?
George the Warmonger
Ron Paul on the escalations.
No Welfare for Foreigners
Welfare for domestics is quite bad enough.
We Need a Surge of Liberty
Not more tyranny of war, says Ron Paul.
Don’t Blame the Euro
Blame the Congress and the Fed, says Ron Paul.
Foreign Policy and the Prince of Peace
Or do they worship the Prince of War?
George Washington Was Right
It’s long past time to return to his foreign policy, says Ron Paul.
Is Foreign Policy a One-Man Show?
Yes, but that is unconstitutional.
It’s monetary inflation, says Ron Paul.
Time To Abolish ‘Selective Service’
Military slavery is always a pure evil.
The Land of the Free Lunch
It will, or ought to, miss Milton Friedman, says Ron Paul.
The Entitlement State is Coming Down
Ron Paul on the demographic reality.
The Gun Controllers Haven’t Given Up
We must keep our powder dry, says Ron Paul.
The Waco Summit
And the Nafta superhighway.
Do Tax Cuts Cost the Government Money?
That is the wrong question, says Ron Paul.
Taxes, Spending, and Debt
Ron Paul on the real issues.
Time to rethink it, says Ron Paul.
Diagnosing Our Health Care Woes
Dr. Ron Paul on the government disease.
Amnesty and the Welfare State
Ron Paul on immigration.
Time for Immigration Reform
Now, says Ron Paul.
Big Government Always Fails
And must. Ron Paul on the Law of Opposites.
A North American United Nations?
Ron Paul on another establishment scheme.
Ron Paul vs. Ben Bernanke
On “plunge protection,” fiat money, and the Fed.
Want To Cut Medical Costs?
Here’s how, says Ron Paul.
Trade With China, Yes
Subsidized trade, no.
The Threat of Property Taxes
Especially rising ones.
What Congress Can Do About High Gas Prices
Stop making war.
Why I Voted Against the Israeli Resolution
It’s dangerous and wrong, says Ron Paul.
The Yoke of the Fed
Ron Paul on the inflation tax.
Your Enemy, the Fed
Ron Paul on what it does to your savings.
Time for a New Declaration
Ron Paul on what we have forgotten.
Undermining the Regime
Ron Paul on why the American people are so angry.
Global Gun Control
Having failed in the US, the disarmers try the UN.
Congress Rejects UN Taxes
But not, unfortunately, US taxes.
The Estate Tax Is a Social and Moral Evil
Abolish it, says Ron Paul.
Ron Paul on the annual foreign-aid ripoff.
Stop the NAIS
Ron Paul on the totalitarian animal ID system.
Don’t Commit the Crime
Ron Paul on avoiding war with Iran.
Ron Paul on the declining dollar and eroding personal savings.
Upset at Gas Prices?
Look at US foreign and monetary policy, says Ron Paul.
Soaring Gas Prices
Ron Paul on what Congress can do about them.
The Only Worthwhile Foreign Aid
The ‘Academic Bill of Rights’
It’s a trick to suppress dissent on US foreign policy, says Ron Paul.
The Sicker and Sicker Dollar
Ron Paul on what the gold price is telling us.
Rumsfeld Is Not the Issue
The government’s use of force is.
Hands Off Iran
And no murderous sanctions either, says Ron Paul.
Your Money or Your Life
Ron Paul on April 15th.
The Next Neocon Target
Ron Paul on Iran.
Should the Children of Illegal Aliens Be Citizens?
Stop “birthright citizenship,” says Ron Paul.
A Tribute to the Late Harry Browne
Ron Paul on a great libertarian.
Making the World Safe for Christianity
The Perils of Economic Ignorance
And what to do about it.
Another ‘Emergency’ Spending Bill
The Nature of Government Debt
Those who borrow never repay.
Ron Paul on a UN scheme.
Bringing Sunshine to Mordor
Ron Paul on opening up Congress.
The Port Security Controversy
Constitutionally, this is not the president’s decision, says Ron Paul.
The Federal Hurricane
Ron Paul on Katrina relief, six months later.
Silence the War Drums!
Ron Paul to the congressional Gene Krupas.
Why the US Hates Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela
Ron Paul on the end of dollar hegemony.
A Real DC Scandal
Ron Paul on the Fed.
Abortion Is None of the Feds’ Business
Same with all social policy, says Ron Paul.
New Rules, Same Game
Ron Paul on congressional “reform.”
Federal Courts vs. Freedom
Ron Paul on the growth of government power.
The Real DC Scandal
It’s the leviathan state, says Ron Paul.
A Symptom Not a Cause
Ron Paul on DC scandals.
Peace and Prosperity in 2006?
Only if we limit the feds.
Ron Paul on domestic surveillance and the Patriot Act.
The Proper American Foreign Policy
It would favor peace over war, trade over sanctions, courtesy over arrogance, and liberty over coercion.
What Do Rising Gold Prices Mean?
Less faith in the paper dollar.
Rothbard vs. Bernanke
Ron Paul on continuing Fed propaganda, and the antidote.
So-Called Deficit Reduction
Ron Paul on another Republican fraud.
Slashing the Budget?
Don’t make me laugh.
The Trouble With Federal Deposit ‘Insurance’
And increasing it in the name of decreasing government spending.
The FDA Suppresses Speech on Dietary Supplements
Ron Paul wants health freedom.
Too Little, Too Late
Ron Paul on spendaholic conservatives and their talk of cutting back.
The Evil of Foreign Aid
Ron Paul on a bipartisan scam.
Big Lies and Little Lies
Ron Paul on the phony justifications for aggressive war.
George Reisman Is Right
We need a free market in gasoline, says Ron Paul.
Hands Off Syria
Stop the foreign-policy lunacy.
The GSE Crisis
Stop pumping up the bubble!
Picking the Pennies Off Dead Men’s Eyes
Will the death tax ever be repealed?
Another Tax Reform Fraud
It’s government spending we need to cut first, says Ron Paul.
Federal Courts Are Political
Ron Paul on the Miers nomination.
Should We Stop Killing and Being Killed?
Ron Paul on leaving vs. staying.
Ron Paul on the DC spendathon.
Coming Cat 5 Hurricane
Financial, that is.
Ron Paul on the response to Katrina.
The Evil of Standing Armies
Ron Paul on “why we fight.” And why we really do.
Some Things You’re Not Supposed To Think About
Ron Paul on gasoline, taxes, and Middle East policy.
Hey, Big Spender
Ron Paul on the feds.
Borrowing, Spending, Counterfeiting
Ron Paul on the federal parasite.
The Answer to Judicial Tyranny
Strip the federal courts of their power, as the constitution allows, says Ron Paul.
Immigration and the Welfare State
Ron Paul on the nexus.
The Sausage Factory
Make that the poison-sausage factory. Ron Paul on how federal edicts are imposed on us.
Ron Paul vs. the Counterfeiter-in-Chief, 1997-2005.
Advancing the Police State
Ron Paul on the 4th anniversary of the Patriot Act.
Ron Paul and Alan Greenspan
Mr. Sound Money vs. the Counterfeiter-in-Chief.
Don’t Start a Trade War With China
Ron Paul on the protectionist menace.
Don’t Expand the Police State
Ron Paul on the Patriot Act.
The Party of Big Government
Ron Paul on the Republicans.
Ron Paul on how to stop it.
Cafta and the War on Supplements
Ron Paul on globalists together.
What Should America Do For Africa?
Not have our politicians send their politicians our money, says Ron Paul.
We Have No Jurisdiction in ‘Kelo’
Ron Paul on what the Supremes should have said, and the war on property.
The Psycho State
Ron Paul on federal “mental health” screening for school children.
The UN Cannot Be Reformed
Because it is inherently illegitimate, says Ron Paul.
Global Central Planning
Ron Paul’s speech on the floor of Congress about the WTO.
Conservatives Expand UN
To use it for conservative world government.
More Government, Less Free Trade
Ron Paul on CAFTA.
Questions for Greenspan
The famed Q&A between Ron Paul and the Fed chairman, 1997-2004.
Missing the Point
Ron Paul on federal funding of stem-cell research.
The Guilty Fed
Ron Paul on dollar erosion.
Get Out of the WTO
We need free trade, not world government, says Ron Paul.
No More Bank Bailouts
Not by the taxpayers.
Don’t Believe the Lies
About a “national ID.” It is meant to control you, not terrorism or illegal immigration, says Ron Paul.
Repeal the Patriot Act
Ron Paul on the federal powergrab and moneygrab.
Don’t let the FDA restrict our dietary supplements, says Ron Paul.
Why Fund UNESCO?
Ron Paul wants to know.
Being Pro-Life and Pro-War
It doesn’t work, Ron Paul tells conservatives.
And the hypocrites.
Defender of Life
Ron Paul on John Paul II.
The Iraqi People Are Worse Off
Despite administration propaganda, says Ron Paul.
The Pro-Life Movement
It must be a matter of changing hearts, not an empowered central state, says Ron Paul.
Ron Paul on the drunken-sailor spending.
Deficits Make You Poorer
Ron Paul tries to teach the Republicans a little economics.
Tax Reform Is a Shell Game
Ron Paul on why Lew Rockwell is right.
The Maestro Changes His Tune
Ron Paul on Alan Greenspan and gold.
The Federal Trojan Horse
Ron Paul on the national ID.
Your Papers, Citizen!
Ron Paul on the totalitarian national ID.
Democracy Isn’t Freedom
In Iraq or America.
Psycho Feds Target Your Children
Don’t let Bush give them mental exams, says Ron Paul.
Bollixing Up the World
Ron Paul on US foreign policy.
Your Papers, Citizen
No Soviet-like internal passports, please.
One Evil of Government IDs
They make identity theft easy, says Ron Paul.
More Articles by Ron Paul
Back to LewRockwell.com Home Page
Find this article at:
THE “G” BLOGS…by GyG
Also known as Gunny G’s
Globe and Anchor Sites/Forums/Blogs….
HISTORY ETC. — The Gunny G History Wiki!
Police Out of Control! – A Gunny G Wiki…
News-n-Views, Military, History, Politics,
Controversial, Unusual, Non-PC
Articles Just Not Seen… Elsewhere!
RESTORE THE REPUBLIC/
TAKE AMERICA BACK!
The “Original/The Only “Gunny G”
Dec. 12, 2007, 10:58PM
Falkenberg: Property outweighing people in Horn case
By LISA FALKENBERG
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
In Joe Horn’s now-infamous 911 call reporting the burglary of his neighbor’s home last month, there’s a particularly disturbing refrain that made many of us cringe.
“I’m not going to let them get away with this,” the Pasadena homeowner tells the dispatcher several times in various ways in the moments before he shot to death the two burglars, Miguel Antonio DeJesus, 28, and Diego Ortiz, 30.
To many of us, Horn’s preoccupation with stopping the crime and recovering the stolen property — “a bag of loot,” as Horn described it — seemed irrational and vengeful rather than heroic. We agreed with the dispatcher, who repeatedly pleaded with the 61-year-old computer consultant to keep himself and his shotgun safe inside his own house while police headed to the scene.
“Ain’t no property worth shooting somebody over,” the dispatcher told Horn.
Property versus human life
Human life is worth more than property. It seems like a universal truth. But apparently not in Texas, or other states with similar laws.Over the past week, I’ve researched the Texas Penal Code and discovered some provisions that were surprising even to this fifth-generation Texan.
The law of our land seems to place more value on the property being stolen — even if it belongs to a neighbor — than on the life of the burglar stealing it.
A review of our state’s protection-of-property statutes suggests that Horn’s repeated declarations about not letting the burglars “get away with it” may be the words that ultimately set him free.
If Horn doesn’t get indicted, don’t blame the grand jury. And don’t blame Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal. Blame the section of Chapter 9 of the Penal Code that deals with protection of property.
Under the section, which has been in place at least since 1973, a person is justified in using deadly force to protect a neighbor’s property from burglary if the person “reasonably believes” deadly force is immediately necessary to stop the burglars from escaping with the stolen property. It’s also justified if the shooter “reasonably believes” that “the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means.”Now, one might argue that, since the dispatcher told Horn that police were on their way, Horn should have reasonably believed authorities would nab the bad guys.
But the escalating anxiety in Horn’s voice as he sees the burglars emerge from his neighbor’s window with the goods, and his reiteration that “they’re getting away” moments before he fires his 12-gauge may indicate to a grand jury that Horn didn’t believe police would arrive in time.
Rosenthal wouldn’t discuss the particulars of the Horn case, which he is still waiting to receive from Pasadena police. And police haven’t revealed all the facts. A police spokesman disclosed last week that, according to a plain-clothes detective who witnessed the Nov. 14 shootings, Horn shot the two men in the back after they’d ventured into his front yard.
The fact that they were on his yard may provide Horn with even more protection.
Rosenthal said he’s gotten about 50 letters and e-mails, including out-of-state inquiries from California to Minnesota, split about even in favor and against Horn being indicted. Rosenthal said he won’t let the controversy surrounding the case — including a death threat against Horn called into the DA’s public integrity division on Sunday —influence his office’s handling of it.
He said he’s not assigning any particular prosecutor, saying “whoever’s working intake (when Pasadena files it) gets to be the person in the bucket.”
And the prosecutor won’t make a recommendation to the grand jury, which Rosenthal said is standard for such cases.
“We’ll take it to a grand jury; we’ll present it straight up, and whatever the grand jury does, we’ll follow it. And if they decide they want to indict the guy, we’ll handle it and we’ll suffer the slings and arrows, but that’s part of the territory,” Rosenthal said.
Texas isn’t unique in allowing the use of deadly force in the protection of property during felony crimes such as burglary, but the experts I talked with weren’t aware how many states allow deadly force in the protection of a neighbor’s property.
And for those of us tempted to dismiss such laws as backward or antiquated notions in a trigger-happy state, experts suggest states are moving closer to Texas’ model than away.
“My sense is that the reason, not just Texas, but other states have been enacting statutes more and more like this is because politicians are afraid to vote against them,” said Steven Goode, a law professor at the University of Texas.
“They don’t want the next attack ad to be one where they are criticized for voting against someone’s ability to protect themselves in their home.”
“In a calmer and less politicized environment we might have different laws,” Goode said. “But campaign ads don’t allow for particularly nuanced discussions of issue.”
Even if they don’t indict him, it doesn’t mean Horn’s actions were morally right. He chose to kill; he didn’t have to. His own life and property were not in danger until he confronted the burglars.
There’s a difference between what we can do and what we should do. Without careful judgment and discretion, the law can be a dangerous thing.
The same law that may protect Horn from indictment could also protect someone who, in the dark of night, discovers a group of teenage girls wrapping his front yard trees with toilet paper.
To a rational person, this is a harmless prank. Under Texas law, in a world without discretion, the girls are engaging in criminal mischief and the homeowner would be justified in mowing them down with a shotgun.
THE “G” BLOGS…by GyG
Also known as Gunny G’s
Globe and Anchor Sites/Forums/Blogs….
The Weekly Standard
12/17/2007, Volume 013, Issue 14
What Happened in 2003?
In thinking about Iran, don’t forget Iraq.
by William Kristol
What highly significant word is nowhere to be found in the declassified summary of the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran’s nuclear intentions and capabilities? Iraq.
When did Iran (apparently) stop its nuclear weapons program–as distinct from its “civil” program of uranium enrichment, which of course is proceeding apace? In the fall of 2003. The NIE “assess[es] with high confidence that until fall 2003, Iranian military entities were working under government direction to develop nuclear weapons.”
Why did Iran stop its nuclear weapons program? According to the NIE, “the program probably was halted primarily in response to international pressure.” But, as Claudia Rosett pointed out in a trenchant analysis in the Philadelphia Inquirer, “If international pressure achieved such sterling results in Iran four years ago, then surely we deserve to know what, exactly, impressed Iran’s rulers so thoroughly that they might have slammed on the brakes.”
What did that pressure consist of? In the fall of 2003, the International Atomic Energy Agency had not yet referred the civil Iranian nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council. That happened in 2006, and the Security Council finally agreed on (weak) sanctions later that year. In the fall of 2003, the European Union had barely swung into action with its negotiations–which have gone nowhere in four years. The quasi-urgency displayed by both the IAEA and the EU in late 2003 was a result of fear that unless they got engaged, the United States might act unilaterally and militarily. Why such fear?
Much as the U.S. intelligence community, the IAEA, and the EU might prefer to forget it, we did overthrow Saddam Hussein in April 2003. As Rosett puts it, that “was the year in which Saddam Hussein became Exhibit A of the post-Sept.-11 era for what could happen to terror-linked tyrants who ignored America’s demands that they abjure weapons of mass murder.”
Did anyone notice? Muammar Qaddafi did. Libya, in late 2003, gave up its nuclear weapons program (which was, incidentally, more advanced than the IAEA believed) and invited U.S. experts in to dismantle it.
Perhaps Iran’s mullahs also noticed. Perhaps they noticed, too, a large U.S.-led military force just across their border. More determined and stronger than Qaddafi, the mullahs did not dismantle their program. But they may have halted their nuclear weapon work, and their covert uranium-conversion and uranium-enrichment work. (Though the NIE acknowledges that “because of intelligence gaps,” parts of the U.S. government “assess with only moderate confidence that the halt to those activities represents a halt to Iran’s entire nuclear weapons program.”) Still, Iran quite openly forged ahead with its easier-to-defend-publicly “civil” uranium enrichment program. And rather than dismantling or scrapping the “weapons” part of the program, Iran merely “halted” it. It may well be that Iran paused its work in that area simply to wait for the “civil” enrichment program to catch up, not slowing its overall push for nuclear weapons at all. We don’t know.
What we do know, as the NIE acknowledges, is that “some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways, might–if perceived by Iran’s leaders as credible–prompt Tehran to extend the current halt to its nuclear weapons program.” Given “Iran’s considerable effort from at least the late 1980s to 2003 to develop such weapons,” the NIE concludes, reasonably if tautologically, that “only an Iranian political decision to abandon a nuclear weapons objective would plausibly keep Iran from eventually producing nuclear weapons–and such a decision is inherently reversible.”
Of course, all such political decisions are “inherently reversible.” This coda is meant to induce fatalism about Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. But if one chooses not to be fatalistic, and to think about what might induce an Iranian “political decision” to abandon its nuclear program, part of the answer, surely, is a more robust effort to pressure the Iranian regime. Another part is the credible use of force–as in 2003.
The final part is victory in Iraq. President Bush’s successful shift in strategy in Iraq a year ago, as part of his commitment to finishing that job, remains his greatest contribution to peace in the Middle East. The complete and unequivocal defeat of al Qaeda and of Iranian-backed proxies in Iraq is the best way to show Iran that the United States is a serious power to be reckoned with in the region. Resisting the temptation to throw away success in Iraq by drawing down too fast or too deep is the greatest service this president can render his successor. Only if Bush wins in Iraq will the next president have a reasonable chance to defeat the threat of a nuclear-weapons-seeking Islamic Republic of Iran.
New program allows state signs for victims of DUI
Houston Chronicle ^ | 12/11/2007 | JIM VERTUNO
Posted on 12/13/2007 10:21:16 AM EST by Responsibility2nd
AUSTIN — A new state program will allow friends and family of deceased victims of drunken driving accidents in Texas to purchase memorial signs that will be placed near the crash site for a year.
The signs will have the victim’s name, date of the crash and the phrases “Please Don’t Drink and Drive” and “In Memory of.”
According to the Texas Department of Transportation, Texas had more than 1,670 fatalities in 2006 that involved drivers under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
The $300 signs will be 42 inches high and 48 inches wide with a blue background and white lettering. The cost covers the expense of making the sign and putting it up, TxDOT spokesman Mark Cross said Tuesday.
After a year, the signs will be offered to the people who applied for them.
The first sign will be unveiled next week and will be in memory of Rachel Blasingame, a 16-year-old high school honors student who died in May 2003 when her car was struck head-on by a drunken driver on Interstate 635 in Mesquite.
Her mother, Julie Blasingame, asked the Legislature to create the program, which lawmakers approved in May.
“I would love to see these memorial signs all over Texas as constant reminders for our drivers to not drink and drive,” Blasingame said in a statement released by TxDOT.
The program applies only to victims killed by impaired drivers. To be eligible, the victims must have been killed on a state-maintained roadway. Impaired drivers who are killed in a crash will not be eligible.
Signs will be placed as close as possible to the crash site, Cross said.
The program does not limit or prevent privately made memorials that are governed by other rules and regulations, Cross said.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) of Texas already helps families coordinate placing wooden markers, most often white crosses, at crash sites. Those usually cost between $10 and $25 and can be left in place indefinitely, said Karen Housewright, MADD state director.
She said MADD will tell victims about the new sign program, noting the cost will be prohibitive for some families.
“It will depend on the family. Some will very much want to put the metal sign up,” Housewright said. “We’re trying everything we can to get the message across that it is such a dangerous and senseless crime and it affects real people.”
TIME MAGAZINE ADVOCATES UNENDING IMMIGRATION
By Frosty Wooldridge
December 13, 2007
This week, Time Magazine columnist Michael Kinsley perpetrated the biggest fraud concerning illegal immigration yet expressed in America.
What sickens me stems from Time publisher Richard Stengel and Kingsley’s unabashed support of illegal alien migration. In addition, they refuse to address the ominous population dilemma created by relentless and unending immigration.
They expose global warming, but refuse to address its causes. They report on air pollution gripping our nation’s cities, but refuse to address its source. They survey our national water crisis, but won’t give a word as to its origin. Both men dance around the denial tree.
Time Magazine remains infamous for its alignment with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the progressive liberal socialists in the U.S. Congress. At first, it seemed this piece intended humor. With incredulity, this critic read the piece again – and got the message. What Kingsley expresses proves a “sour grapes” attempt to cheer the errant Congress to once again urinate in the face of the two-thirds of the U.S. electorate who have made their views crystal clear;
We need a sensible, logical and reasonable long-range “U.S. POPULATION STRATEGIC PLAN .”
A key part of that equation must be a “U.S. IMMIGRATION MASTER PLAN.”
After you read this column, I invite you to write a rebuttal letter to Time Magazine expressing your disgust at their total lack of foresight, forethought and responsible action toward future generations. I’m including my letter send to Time for an example.
This country’s brightest minds and most educated elite sell us down the river toward a Niagara Fall’s ending. They shove more coal into a runaway steam locomotive that’s headed over the cliff of the Grand Canyon. They drive us into the teeth of a “Human Katrina” instead of writing ideas for solving our national crisis. I shake my head at how stupid our leaders’ lack of leadership at all levels.
We don’t need double the current number of legal immigrants that Kinsley supports let alone the millions of illegal ones.
“Another question: Why are you so upset about this particular form of lawbreaking?” Kinsley wrote. “After all, there are lots of laws, not all of them enforced with vigor. The suspicion naturally arises that the illegality is not what bothers you. What bothers you is the immigration. There is an easy way to test this. Reducing illegal immigration is hard, but increasing legal immigration would be easy. If your view is that legal immigration is good and illegal immigration is bad, how about increasing legal immigration? How about doubling it? So in the end, this is not really a debate about illegal immigration. This is a debate about immigration.”
Double legal immigration? Kinsley blathers with no intelligent, critical thinking.
In the name of reality, give us one positive reason for adding 100 million people to the USA in the next three decades Mr. Kinsley? Have you seen the Lake Lanier, Georgia water crisis? Do you live there? Does it affect you? How about Los Angeles traffic? What about breathing the toxic air over Denver, Chicago or Houston? How about the $3.00 a gallon gas soon to be $6.00 a gallon? And you want to double immigration? You prove indolent and inane!
How out of touch can Kinsley be when he writes, “Maybe the complainers are right, and immigration is now damaging our country, stealing jobs and opportunity, ripping off taxpayers, fragmenting our culture. I doubt it, but maybe so.”
Here’s what I wrote time and invite you to do the same. Keep your letter under 100 words for maximum chance for publication. Let’s email 100,000 letters into Time’s inbox for a taste of American expression:
To: Time Magazine editors
From: Frosty Wooldridge
RE: Michael Kinsley “Kidding Ourselves About Immigration/12/17/07
Michael Kingsley’s admonition to double current legal immigration numbers fails to understand the horrific environmental impact on U.S. sustainability 40 years from now! Current demographic figures show our country adding 120 million people by 2040 to 2050. Over 80 percent driven by immigration! Every added person to America negatively impacts our sustainability by multiplying our exhaustion of our energy resources, water and food while it destroys our quality of life. Did Kingsley consider another 100 million Americans’ impact on our gridlock in our cities? We can’t save the world, but we can destroy our civilization. As a sustainable nation, we grow tired of unending immigration that explodes us into the same consequences those immigrants flee.
You may read Kinsley’s column in full by going to this web site.
© 2007 Frosty Wooldridge – All Rights Reserved
Frosty’s new book “Immigration’s Unarmed Invasion“
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Frosty Wooldridge possesses a unique view of the world, cultures and families in that he has bicycled around the globe 100,000 miles, on six continents and six times across the United States in the past 30 years. His published books include: “HANDBOOK FOR TOURING BICYCLISTS” ; “STRIKE THREE! TAKE YOUR BASE”; “IMMIGRATION’S UNARMED INVASION: DEADLY CONSEQUENCES”; “MOTORCYCLE ADVENTURE TO ALASKA: INTO THE WIND—A TEEN NOVEL”; “BICYCLING AROUND THE WORLD: TIRE TRACKS FOR YOUR IMAGINATION”; “AN EXTREME ENCOUNTER: ANTARCTIA.” His next book: “TILTING THE STATUE OF LIBERTY INTO A SWAMP.” He lives in Denver, Colorado.
His latest book. ‘IMMIGRATION’S UNARMED INVASION—DEADLY CONSEQUENCES.’
ONE THING MITT GITS
Coach Dave Daubenmire
December 13, 2007
“He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.” –George Orwell
I am not a Mitt Romney supporter. Let me make that clear up front. And this is not a debate about whether or not Mormons are Christians. But it certainly was refreshing to hear a politician make a stand for Christianity. Most of them spend their time apologizing for “their faith,” assuring us that it would “never influence” their decisions. Why would we want a President whose core values didn’t affect his decisions?
We all have core values, things we believe are important, and they do influence our lives. For some reason we have been convinced that standing up for what you believe is “hateful,” “bigoted,” and “judgmental.” For too long we have watched our “politicians” say things they obviously didn’t believe. President Bush claims Christians and Muslims worship the same God. Could anything be more blasphemous than that? Many of his decisions have made me question his “core values.”
That’s what political correctness has done to us. It has taught us to lie. It has taught us to believe others are lying. It has taught us to accept lying as a way of life. There are plenty of liars today but I am most concerned about those who lie about the truth. That is where “Mitt gits it.” They have been lying to us about American history and they are doing it today in our schools. At least he has the courage to point it out.
In his speech last week Romney reminded us what we all used to know. At least before Orwell’s kids began re-writing the history books. Christianity was at the center of the founding of this nation. It is unmistakable and undeniable. I explain it all in my tape series on “The Lie of Separation between the Church and the State.”
You do know that don’t you? The phrase “separation between the church and state” appears nowhere in any of our founding documents. It is neither in the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution. It is however, in the Humanist Manifesto and the Russian Constitution. It was a major plank in the Communist Manifesto. But it is not now, nor has it ever been an American ideal. Why don’t more of our leaders know that?
“Blessed is the Nation Whose God is the Lord” Psalm 33:12. America thrived when we placed the Lord in His rightful place. Can you deny that today we are a nation in decline? Only a return to Christianity can save this nation. Without it we will become a “proverb and a byward among all of the nations.” Christian men founded this nation, not Secularists. America must return to her Christian roots. Our Founding Fathers were not Muslim. They were not Buddhists, Hindus, or atheists. They were Christians. Here is what they said.
“Having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine our selves together…” —Mayflower Compact 1620
The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.” —John Adams
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” — John Adams
“Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day [the Fourth of July]?” “Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer’s mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity”? —John Quincy Adams
” Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure…are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments.” —Charles Carroll—signer of the Declaration of Independence.
“For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests.” —Alexander Hamilton
“Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” And this “Whether our religion permits Christians to vote for infidel rulers is a question which merits more consideration than it seems yet to have generally received either from the clergy or the laity. It appears to me that what the prophet said to Jehoshaphat about his attachment to Ahab ["Shouldest thou help the ungodly and love them that hate the Lord? (2 Chronicles 19:2) affords a salutary lesson.”---John Jay---Former Supreme Court Justice
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” ---Thomas Jefferson.
“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” --- James Madison “The Father of the Constitution.”
"To the kindly influence of Christianity we owe that degree of civil freedom, and political and social happiness which mankind now enjoys. . . . Whenever the pillars of Christianity shall be overthrown, our present republican forms of government, and all blessings which flow from them, must fall with them." ---Jedediah Morse, Signer of the Declaration.
"Let the children who are sent to those schools be taught to read and write and above all, let both sexes be carefully instructed in the principles and obligations of the Christian religion. This is the most essential part of education” ---Benjamin Rush
Let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers just men who will rule in the fear of God [Exodus 18:21]. . . . If the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted . . . If our government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the Divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws.” –Noah Webster
At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, James Madison proposed the plan to divide the central government into three branches. He discovered this model of government from the Perfect Governor, as he read Isaiah 33:22;
“For the LORD is our judge,
the LORD is our lawgiver,
the LORD is our king;
He will save us.”
You see the secularists don’t want religion removed from government. They just want Christianity removed. They want THEIR religion taught. Our founders would be astounded.
“[F]or avoiding the extremes of despotism or anarchy . . . the only ground of hope must be on the morals of the people. I believe that religion is the only solid base of morals and that morals are the only possible support of free governments. [T]herefore education should teach the precepts of religion and the duties of man towards God.” —Gouverneur Morris
America was founded on Biblical precepts.
At least Mitt gits it. What’s wrong with the rest of us? How long will we believe a lie?
Order the CDs here.
Do you think like a Christian or a humanist? Did the Founders really separate Church and State? Is Judicial tyranny ruining America? Check out these great teachings by the Coach.
© 2007 Dave Daubenmire – All Rights Reserved
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Coach Dave Daubenmire, founder and President of Pass The Salt Ministries www.ptsalt.com and Minutemen United www.minutemenunited.org, is host of the high octane Pass The Salt radio show heard in Columbus, Ohio.
In 1999 Coach Daubenmire was sued by the ACLU for praying with his teams while coaching high school in Ohio. He now spends his energy fighting for Christian principles in the public domain.
Huckabee Broke, Romney Borrows, Giuliani Ducks Terrorist Ties
December 13, 2007
© 2007 – NewsWithViews.com
“Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth.” George Washington, letter to James Madison, March 2, 1788
Something is very strange about the GOP presidential race. Mike Huckabee, kissed and blessed by the treasonous Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is in Iowa begging with a new slogan: Tanks for Huck. According to reports, Brother Huckabee has a skimpy $650,000 in the till and needs gas money to campaign. Flip Romney, on the other hand as reported on December 11, 2007, has loaned his campaign some $17 MILLION dollars from his own personal stash of bling. That’s not to say Romney hasn’t raised other funds, because he has and most likely will continue to do so.
Recently, war monger and staunch supporter of illegal aliens, John McCain, was in the process of borrowing $3 million dollars to prop up his monotonous bid for the Oval Office. Of course, since McCain is part and parcel to the U.S. Congress writing hot checks and sacking the people’s purse, what’s a little more debt to him? Cross-dressing, serial adulterer, pro-sodomy, pro-abortion, pro-war, Rudy Julie Annie, has taken in a considerable chunk of cash and is still considered by polls the front runner. His big money and support is coming from liberal Republicans and big business. Rudy Julie Annie has filled his pockets by playing 911 hero; a trashy and untrue concoction. But, his cozy relationships with certain countries and business dealings are beginning to stink up his carefully crafted image. This column is long, but you will find it is accurate and this one could sink the 911 caped crusader.
But what about the “maverick,” “obscure,” congressman from Texas, Ron Paul?
Ron Paul not only broke the record for one day donations in the fourth quarter, $4.2 million in one day last month, it appears he will raise more than any other “Republican” candidate before the quarter ends. As I write this, donations to his campaign for this quarter are now at $11,380,325.69; watch the screen, it changes by the minute. His web site gets more hits than anyone hands down. This candidate continues to dominate in all these GOP straw polls over the so-called “top tier” candidates. Why, even people around the world want this man elected! The National Review just anointed Flip Romney. I watched one of their mouthpieces on FAUX (FOX) yesterday explain to the devoid of all brain wave activity anchor, John Gibson, one of the reasons. Willard represents their warped definition of conservative and that he will “hold together the national security hawks.” That’s right: Endless wars for the bankers.
It is no secret Ron Paul has been blacked out by the corrupted “mainstream” media with FAUX (FOX) News leading the way. The amount of air time given to anything about Ron Paul’s run for the White House by other than the Internet is unlike anything I’ve ever seen in my adult life. What all network channels have done to this decent man has really been shameful to their profession. These pitiful moderators at the debates have shown anyone with the ability to see, a cut and slash job each and every time, deliberately cutting Ron Paul off and squashing his rseponse time down to mere minutes for the entire debate. Is it any wonder Americans call it the “lame stream” media and have no respect for the whole stinkin’ bunch of them?
Every day on the FOX News web site for political articles, they list the “top tier” candidates, Giuliani, Huckabee, Thompson and some days, McCain. Day before yesterday, they finally listed Ron Paul at the bottom of the heap from poll numbers. Almost every poll number coverage one sees on any network channel omits Ron Paul, which begs some questions:
What other candidate has this kind of grassroots support, raising this kind of money – The blimp will fly!
If Huckabee is so well loved, why is no one donating to his campaign? People know these candidates need money to run an effective campaign. I guess Brother Huck’s supporters will pray on it!
If Romney is so popular, why does he have to reach into his deep pockets and loan his own campaign $17 MILLION bux? Where are the donations from the little people?
How is it John McCain shows higher in polls than Ron Paul, but no one will support him with the cash a candidate needs?
If Fred Thompson is so popular as to be right up there with Rudy Julie Annie and Huckabee, why is it Ron Paul beats him in straw polls 32-15? Remember: These are Republican voters.
How can Ron Paul continue to win all these straw polls by Republican voters, yet polls show no one would vote for him?
How is it Ron Paul continues to raise so much money if no one except the “fringe” element out there supports him?
Why does Ron Paul’s web site and his campaign show such popularity and numbers?
“Paul, 71, enjoys about 160,000 mentions on Digg.com, more than the next four most popular candidates combined. Alexa.com’s statistics show Paul’s Web site with a narrow lead over all the Democratic candidates and a sizable one over his fellow Republicans. Similarly, a report by Hitwise puts Paul’s Web site ahead of other GOP candidates in terms of popularity.
“The libertarian-minded Republican enjoys a hefty lead in two unscientific online polls: 56.3 percent in one hosted by the conservative group FreedomWorks.com, and 56 percent in a poll created by GOPstrawpolls.com, with undeclared candidate Fred Thompson coming in second at 18.7 percent. Paul is Technorati’s most searched-for term, in front of stalwart contenders such as “iPhone” and “Paris Hilton,” and recently reclaimed the spot after briefly falling behind a Puerto Rican singer with the undeniable advantage of having a sex tape on the loose. He’s a close second to Barack Obama (and far outpaces Hillary Clinton) on Eventful.com’s list of in-demand politicians, and, as The New York Times notes, is the most “friended” Republican on MySpace.com.”
How about those all important “meet-ups” that define grassroots politics? Click here and scroll down for a map of the number per candidate. It’s a real eye opener and the numbers grow by the day. These meet up groups are the foot soldiers of the candidates. A picture is worth a thousand words. One thing Congressman Paul won’t be lacking is media attacks on him, eventually dragging out the no longer tried and true, “anti-semitic.” That one isn’t washing anymore, especially when it applies to a man of such principled beliefs and convictions, the way he has led his life and his statesman legacy in Congress. Americans are tired of these labels tossed around for “scorched earth politics” which don’t benefit we the people, only the money brokers behind the scenes.
How is it this fringe candidate won this one:
Barack Obama Wins Democrat Caucuses; Ron Paul Dominates Both GOP And “Open” Caucuses —
“Washington, DC (December 12, 2007) — On December 7, 2007 in cities and small towns across the country, Democrat, Republican and “Open” Caucus groups formed independently online and Caucused face-to-face on National Caucus Day. The first-ever National Presidential Caucus is now history and the results are in.
“Barack Obama wins over Democrat voters generating 40% of Democrat Caucus voter preferences. Obama was followed by a three-way tie for second, with John Edwards, Bill Richardson and “Undecided” each generating 20% of Democratic Caucus preferences.
“On the Republican side, Ron Paul obliterated the field for the GOP generating the preference of 50% of GOP Caucuses. Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson follow, generating 33.3% and 16.6% of Republican Caucus preferences, respectively. Among votes in Open Caucuses, Ron Paul wins with 62.5% of Open Caucus votes, followed by Barack Obama (18.75%), Fred Thompson (12.5%), and Hilary Clinton (6.25%).
“Results were tallied from 19 independently formed Caucus groups (Republican, Democrat, and Open) that met on Friday, December 7th, 2007 in Dallas, TX (2D); Sarcoxie, MO (O); Boise, ID (R); Needham, MA (D); Carthage, MO (O); Manhattan, KS (D & R); Pineville, MO (O); Richmond, MO (O); Costa Mesa, CA (O); Springfield MO (R); Winston-Salem, NC (O); Overland Park, KS (R); New York City, NY (O); and Joplin, MO (R), Warrensburg, MO (R), Roselle Park, NK (D), and Philadelphia, PA (O).
“Issue results reflected opposition to Iraq involvement, foreign intervention in general, and health care, immigration and erosion of civil liberties rounding out the top concerns of all caucusers.”
If Dr. Paul is such a “fringe” candidate, a “maverick” candidate that no one is interested in, how come he continues to lead in all these areas? Are all Ron Paul supporters, you know, doctors, lawyers, scientists, bank tellers, farmers, ranchers, homemakers, fire fighters, school teachers, brick layers, nurses, – Americans from all walks of life – “fringe element” voters? How about one American, Lawrence Lepard, who put up $100,000 bux in cold, hard cash to buy a full page ad for Congressman Ron Paul, which appeared November 21, 2007, in USA TODAY? (A fabulous ad; check your library for back issues of that paper.) Is he also a fringe element, “disenfranchised” voter? Why are Democrats, independents and voters of other parties rushing to change their voter registrations so they can vote for Congressman Paul in the primaries – which is not happening for any Democrat candidate? Are they all part of this fringe element of voters who don’t understand the issues? Are they all “dangerous” as gab fest CNN News network anchor, Glen Beck honks on his show?
The polls say no one wants Congressman Paul. If one goes to this web site, Ron Paul isn’t even mentioned. How many voters were contacted for these polls? Well, the first one, CNN, says 1,002, described as ‘likely’ would ‘support’ a candidate. You have to scroll way, way down on the ABC/Washington Post poll to find 1,136 polled. Close to 100 MILLION Americans vote in the presidential elections, yet we’re to believe that a ‘random’ sampling of a little over 1,000 voters from who knows where represents the choices of a nation the size of America? Do these companies who make big mullah with this polling really believe people like me care how the people in Iowa or New Hampshire vote? Their vote is theirs and mine is mine.
Despite the putrid attempt by what passes itself off as fair and balanced or a free press, the Ron Paul run for the White House is making history and it is being done, not by special interest groups, but by we the people. Would it fair to say that Dr. Paul is truly the people’s candidate? While he might not be the high gloss, buffed up peacock staying in five star hotels paid for by campaign donations, his message is resonating because he talks to the people with respect and knowledge of the issues. Those who research his life and terms in Congress know he is not for sale. In the end, your vote is yours and yours alone. I hope you will make it for America first.
If you would like a comprehensive look at the candidates, you might visit my column here. I will be updating it monthly with new items for the candidates remaining in the race. With everyone’s busy lives trying to put food on the table and deal with life’s issues, it’s easy to miss a great deal.
If you would like to discuss this and other issues, I will be hosting Larry Becraft’s radio show again this Saturday, December 15th while he’s in trial. I hope you will call in and discuss these issues with me. Click here for instructions on how to tune in. I love to take callers because that’s what talk radio is all about! Larry’s time slot is 9:00 am – 10:00 am CST. The toll free number to call in: 1.800.313.9443.
1 - 4 minute Land of the Free video – excellent
2 - CNN polls show people want Ron Paul to lead Revolution – Short 1:20 video
3 - Race for the White House Financial breakdowns
4 - Stop spreading the big lie: America is not a democracy
© 2007 – NewsWithViews.com – All Rights Reserved
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country, ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker. Devvy belongs to no organization.
She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn’t left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party. Her web site (www.devvy.com) contains a tremendous amount of information, solutions and a vast Reading Room.
Devvy’s website: www.devvy.com
Before you send Devvy e-mail, please take the time to check the FAQ section on her web site. It is filled with answers to frequently asked questions and links to reliable research sources.
E-mail is: firstname.lastname@example.org
Ron Paul v. Foxy News: We Reveal, You Deride
by Alan Stang
December 13, 2007
I am receiving heartfelt messages from some fine folks who say they were thinking of voting for Ron Paul, but now they will not because they have discovered one or another Paul position they do not share. For just one instance, broadcaster Tucker Carlson is supposed to be a Dr. No fan. He had me fooled because recently he brought a man to a Dr. No appearance in Nevada.
The man turned out to be Dennis Hof, proprietor of the Moonlight Bunny Ranch, a local brothel. Hof was accompanied by two of his hookers, who apparently are still politically uncommitted, but Dennis made a substantial contribution and vowed to put a collection box outside the door of his whore house where customers can do their part for Dr. No on the way in or out.
A minor debate erupted about whether Tucker was trying to sabotage Ron or is just stupid. I don’t know which is correct, but the contretemps aroused inevitable headlines about “Pimping for Paul.” Indeed, that is what it says on the site of sodomite “conservative” Matt Drudge. For viewers as stupid as Tucker could be, the coverage even shows one of the hookers conducting a tour of the room where she does business. Fox News, the neo-con network owned by Hillaroid financier Rupert Murdoch, gave the (non) story mega-coverage, but did not show anyone talking about Mitt’s great grandfather’s five wives, or Rudy’s bra size.
Compounding the amusement is the fact that Dr. No is such a prude he declines to be alone with a lady other than his wife and family members, despite which I am now receiving messages from people who say they won’t support him, people who say they know he had never met Dennis Hof before the Carlson confrontation and didn’t even know who Hof is, but won’t support him anyway. Others are put off by his positions on drugs or pornography or abortion, because they are appear similar to the positions of ACLU (Anti-American Communist Liars Union).
First, let’s get rid of this last point. Are you sure you really want to condemn someone because an utterly foul, treasonous group temporarily says the same thing? Remember that the Communists love to pose as patriots. Should we stop saying and doing patriotic things? ACLU itself pretends to be American. El presidente Jorge W. Boosh has made an immensely successful racket out of pretending to be a Christian. Should we eschew Christianity?
But now what about the fact that you may take issue with one or another of Dr. Paul’s positions? Remember first that we are not talking here about the infamous “lesser of two evils” that has brought this country to the brink of dissolution. We’re not talking about whether cross-dressing serial husband Rudolph Giuliani or sodomy promoter Mitt Romney is the “lesser,” versus Hillaroid, the “greater.” We’re talking about a man everyone agrees is good, not evil, a man with whom we may honestly disagree.
By the way, Mitt Romney still boasts about the medical “insurance” scheme he imposed on Taxachusetts, which as President he presumably would inflict on the United States. It’s perfectly “voluntary,” of course, but, if you do not participate, you must pay a hefty fine. Among the benefits, says the state itself are “outpatient medical care (doctor’s visits, surgery, radiology and lab, abortion, community health center visits).” Yes, abortion! And, just think, you would pay only $50 to kill your baby. Of course, Mitt opposed abortion before he endorsed it, before he opposed it before he endorsed it.
But here come Pat Robertson, Janet Folger, and other leaders of the Religious Wrong. The Religious Wrong opposes Dr. Paul with a passion because, although he personally opposes abortion, drugs and prostitution, he says the federal government has no power to legislate or intrude in those areas, which are properly the jurisdiction of the states. But the Religious Wrong doesn’t care. It demands federal intervention in everything; that is why it now supports Friar Huck, because a President Huckabee would make Hillaroid look like an isolationist. He believes God has ordained him not only to preach, but to force his whims – including a federal ban on smoking – down your craw. Pastor Chuck Baldwin says Friar Huck is “George W. Bush on steroids.”
The Religious Wrong totally ignores the fact that if the Constitution – the law – withholds power to do something from the federal government, then it is illegal for the federal government to do it. If the federal government does it anyway, it becomes a law breaker, which puts it in conflict with the Religious Wrong’s misinterpretation of Romans 13. But the Religious Wrong perversely persists in “improving” the Kingdom, “improving” on God.
Look at the record of the Religious Wrong. In the 1860s, they called themselves Abolitionists. The issue they used as a cloak for their true purpose was slavery; it could have been something else. Their motive was to destroy our republican system, a union of independent states. They provoked Lincoln’s Communist War to Destroy the Union for the purpose. That war destroyed the system the Founding Fathers bequeathed us and replaced it with an incipient Empire. They tricked us into many more wars.
Among their achievements was Prohibition, which banned alcohol. Prohibition also created the powerful criminal gangs that still plague us. If anything, it increased alcohol consumption, by adding to it the lure of the forbidden. It gave us the War on Drugs, which has created international drug trafficking so lucrative it can subvert whole nations; and drug use has exploded.
The War on Drugs was the original excuse for the Nazi/Communist superstructure the federal government has imposed. All of these effects are the product of the Religious Wrong’s lust to use that government to inflict its perverted version of Christianity, in which “Christianity” becomes the state.
Religious Wrong leaders trumpet totalitarianism. They want all the power to be in one place, so they can use it. They have contempt for our system of government, and its checks and balances. They don’t really believe in the efficacy of state governments, despite the fact that the states of course created the federal government. Ask yourself, isn’t there something the states are supposed to do? Isn’t it the things Dr. Paul says the Constitution gives the federal government no power to govern? If the federal government is supposed to do everything, why do we have states?
You leaders of the Religious Wrong are losers. After many decades of your unethical, illegal intervention, the moral situation in our country is worse than ever. We now suffer from much more and much worse of the things you claim to be against: abortion, drugs, alcohol, sexual perversion, divorce, illegitimacy, immorality and on and on and on. Sucking up to the Presidents in both parties has failed. You have lost even the last shred of credibility. You want everything big, but all you have for your efforts is a big head. You have victimized millions of genuine Christians. How dare you continue to claim that you know what we need?
Is there a perfect candidate? There is, a candidate who would be right on every issue, however complicated, a candidate the most persnickety voter would agree with every time, whose policies would easily solve every problem, a candidate who would leave Dr. Paul in the dust. The perfect candidate would be Jesus Christ; sadly, as I set this down, Jesus has not agreed to run. Friar Huck confirms that. Why not? Jesus is already King. Why would He step down? That means – whoever is chosen in either party – we are stuck for a candidate with the most deceitful, dishonest, dictatorial, sinful choice possible: a man. Remember, Hillaroid is not a woman.
Dr. No, like me, like you, is rotten with sin, utterly hopeless and riddled with faults. He is also redeemed by Jesus Christ, given to Him by the Father before the foundation of the world. He is the political champion of what you say you believe. Are you sure you want to discard him because you have found something you disagree with, however serious; discard him in favor of someone else with whom you agree much less? Because by dumping Dr. No, you are choosing someone else.
There are some things I strongly disagree with Dr. Ron about. He speaks favorably of Mike (“Martin Luther”) King, Jr. But Mike King was financed by the Communist Party, which wrote his speeches; he said himself that his “non-violence” consisted entirely of deliberately provoking violence. That is why violence almost always broke out in a “non-violent” King operation. Go to my archives to see the details.
His staunchest admirers, professors preparing his papers for posthumous publication, discovered that he was a career plagiarist who stole almost everything that appeared in his name; he was a sexual predator who hired prostitutes and chased a woman naked down the corridor of an Oslo hotel the night before he won the Nobel Prize; and he was not even a Christian. He wrote himself that he disbelieved the Resurrection. At the request of the family, a judge sequestered the FBI files about him until long after you and I are dead.
Another place I disagree with Ron is his belief that the only reason Muslim madmen attack us over here is that we are over there, that if we leave them alone, they will do us the same. It is certainly true that our presence there inflames them, but it is also true that from the beginning the central purpose of Islam has been the conquest of the world and the massacre of “infidels” who stand in the way. Islam has been perpetrating such massacres ever since; they continue today.
Typically, Muslims complain about the Crusades to “Muslim” countries. How did those countries get to be “Muslim?” Remember that they were Christian for more than six hundred years. They became “Muslim” through bestial conquest. The Crusaders didn’t go there to conquer them but to get them back.
Horrible excesses, aberrations, have been committed in the name of Christianity. In Islam the situation is reversed. Muslims willing to live in peace with other people are the backsliders, the aberration. The Islamic mainstream is murder and conquest. We need to remain aware of that.
So, yes, our presence there inflames them; but it constitutes throwing gasoline on a fire. It doesn’t mean setting the fire. Indeed, Ron is certainly right in that if we simply leave them alone many will kill each other. Remember also that the Soviets have been recruiting, financing, training and protecting Islamic terrorism for many decades.
Finally, my good friend Ron says we can come home from Iraq because no one has invaded us for 220 years. Didn’t the English invade us in 1812? Didn’t the Japanese invade us – the Aleutian Islands – during World War II? He says there was no “domino effect,” no bloodbath, in Southeast Asia after the War in Vietnam, but that country, Laos and Cambodia were the dominos that fell. There was a Communist bloodbath – the “Killing Fields” – in Cambodia; in Vietnam, the Communists still oppress and kill the Montagnards.
Is that enough? Were I of the same mind as some of the Religious Wrong people I am talking about, I would now indignantly rebuff Dr. Ron because he dares to disagree with me about something. Wouldn’t that be the enormously egotistical attitude of a spoiled brat? Who am I that a candidate must agree with every thought I have? Instead, I am doing everything I can to put Ron in the Oval Office. I have contributed to every money “bomb.” I attend Dr. No meetings. My wife spends all day handwriting letters to Iowa voters. Why?
Because I am living in the real world and recognize that I am dealing with a real man, an imperfect man, a man riddled with faults, a man who can’t be right about everything. I am weighing his virtues, his great qualities, against where he goes wrong, the way you evaluate everyone you meet.
Why not evaluate a candidate for President the same way? What is there about the presidency that makes us throw these normal, commonsensical principles into the garbage? I weigh the right against the wrong and guess what? Dr. No weighs in as a historic, American hero, a man who risks everything, who puts it all on the line. You know what I am talking about. The places he is right so far outweigh the places he is wrong that the latter seem in comparison like picking nits.
Would those of you who rebuff Ron Paul because you disagree about one issue or another be willing to give up all the other things he would do? Remember, for instance, that Dr. Paul favors the abolition of I.R.S. and the income tax. He has always said the same thing; he didn’t start to parrot that position last week, after promoting high taxes for years as governor of a state. He doesn’t want to replace them with anything. In fact, much of the time, you don’t even need to ask where he stands. Just read the Constitution. He will stand wherever the Constitution does. Dr. No’s integrity makes the Rock of Gibraltar look like a sand castle at the beach.
He favors abolition of the Federal Reserve and restoration of the money power to the people, thereby ending the disastrous, cyclical behavior of the economy that causes Great Depressions. He would encourage genuine free trade – between people – not the monstrous totalitarian misnomer that strangles it.
He would end the Vietnam-type no-win war in Iraq that is killing and maiming the best of our best. He would not expand the war to Iran. Unlike most of the other candidates, he spent five years in the military, as a flight surgeon. He would mind our own business and maintain a military so overwhelming that anyone who messes with us would cease to exist.
He would guarantee medical freedom, your right to choose the treatment you want. He would stop the invasion of our country across the Mexican border. He would restore our independence, kick the Communist UN out of our country, stop the North American Union and the Treason Highway that would destroy us. He would demand abolition of the Department of Education and end the federal handouts that inspire people to break into our country illegally. In one sentence, he would restore the freedom our country was founded to protect. I’m sure I have left a lot out.
Again, rebuffing Dr. No would mean choosing someone else. Who would that be? Instead, the Religious Wrong is presently trying to trick you into supporting the candidacy of Friar Huck, a man you probably disagree with much more than you disagree with Dr. Paul. Are you sure you want to give up everything Dr. Paul offers in exchange for the fact that Huckabee has been to divinity school?
Again, what I am suggesting is that we evaluate a presidential candidate the same way we evaluate everyone else, by looking at the whole person. We lay his faults beside his virtues, our agreements beside our disagreements; we assign the importance of each, and add up the totals. We don’t look at just one thing out of context. In short, we can work around a disagreement in the family.
Consider that you probably disagree with your wife more than you disagree with Ron. Why haven’t you kicked her out? And remember that Ron isn’t proposing anything near as important as marriage. All he wants is your vote for President.
Consider also that a President Paul would inspire the states to reassert the powers they have had all along; inspire them to do all the things the Religious Wrong says it wants. Would you give all this up because you disagree about some things? You’re kidding. Again, the Religious Wrong has zero credibility, none. Tell them to stow it and go home.
Another criticism of Dr. Paul is circulating in both the Prostitute National Press and the Religious Wrong. His campaign, we are told, is boisterous, unruly, unkempt, sometimes rude, so unlike the sissy style we are taught in government school. The Love Priestess explains this. She remains not only the most beautiful woman I have ever met; she also extrudes maternal (five kids) and other kinds of wisdom.
She says, yes, the Dr. No campaign is all these things, because it is masculine; it is run by men. That is one of the things the present, overweening bull dyke culture hates about it. In the Nanny State the bull dykes are constructing, the emasculated men walk behind them, heads down, terrified that some accidental gesture will land them in court, where other bull dykes will take away their kids.
In the Dr. No campaign, the men once again actually lead, which, by the way, is what normal women really want, decades of Communist propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding. The Love Priestess has become a real expert in the art of manipulating men to take control. Look at me.
In the Dr. No campaign, the men and women walk hand in hand. It may not be an exaggeration to say that Ron Paul may represent the last foreseeable attempt for the restoration of political masculinity before the degenerates at the top of the conspiracy for world government allow bull dykes in shiny pants suits to impose their perversion from sea to shining sea. Remember that the Paul campaign doesn’t tell us what to do. We do it and tell them. Dr. Ron just happens to be the remarkably handsome, brilliant, utterly charming and charismatic candidate we men have chosen for the job.
At least 60% of the volunteers in the Paul campaign are men, happy men because we are not involved on one side or the other of the dialectical “wars” the Marxists who control our country constantly provoke to divide us. Instead, we strive to revive the Constitution that brings us together.
The more progress Dr. Ron makes, the more you will hear all kinds of fabrications about him, although I wonder what even the expert network prevaricators – the Limbags, the Hannitwerps, etc. – could say that is believable about a man who is so straight he makes an arrow look like a hula hoop. Do not let them deflect you. Remember that you don’t need to wonder about what Ron will do. Read the Constitution and find out. Stay the course.
Say Yes To No!
© 2007 – Alan Stang – All Rights Reserved
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Alan Stang was one of Mike Wallace’s original writers at Channel 13 in New York, where he wrote some of the scripts that sent Mike to CBS. Stang has been a radio talk show host himself. In Los Angeles, he went head to head nightly with Larry King, and, according to Arbitron, had almost twice as many listeners. He has been a foreign correspondent. He has written hundreds of feature magazine articles in national magazines and some fifteen books, for which he has won many awards, including a citation from the Pennsylvania House of Representatives for journalistic excellence. One of Stang’s exposés stopped a criminal attempt to seize control of New Mexico, where a gang seized a court house, held a judge hostage and killed a deputy. The scheme was close to success before Stang intervened. Another Stang exposé inspired major reforms in federal labor legislation.
His first book, It’s Very Simple: The True Story of Civil Rights, was an instant best-seller. His first novel, The Highest Virtue, set in the Russian Revolution, won smashing reviews and five stars, top rating, from the West Coast Review of Books, which gave five stars in only one per cent of its reviews.
Stang has lectured in every American state and around the world and has guested on many top shows, including CNN’s Cross Fire. Because he and his wife had the most kids in Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic, where they lived at the time, the entire family was chosen to be actors in “Havana,” directed by Sydney Pollack and starring Robert Redford, the most expensive movie ever made (at the time). Alan Stang is the man in the ridiculous Harry Truman shirt with the pasted-down hair. He says they made him do it.
THE “G” BLOGS…by GyG
Also known as Gunny G’s
Globe and Anchor Sites/Forums/Blogs….