Saturday, December 31, 2011

America! What About Ron Paul For President? (Part 2)

*******
*******
Ron Paul: Constitutionalist or Racist and Anti-Semite?
By Coach Mitchell Goldstein
January 11, 2012
NewsWithViews.com
*******
*******
Political correctness at its worst
The liberal/fascist press are all agog - 22 years ago, some questionable phrases appeared in four of Ron Paul’s newsletters. I have read the “hate” speech and the racist, anti-Semitic rants of Ron Paul. They amount to nothing! At root, this is a political witch hunt, a liberal lynching, in the best style of Goebbels, Hitler’s master marketing manipulator. See for yourself: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/12/27/395391/fact-check-ron-paul-personally-defended-racist-newsletters/?mobile=nc [or see above]
This really comes down to the question of what constitutes racism. Is a statement racist if it is primarily factual but also has a negative overtone? My experience shows that anything liberals/progressives/fascists don’t like will automatically be labeled as racist, fascist, anti-environmental, anti-union, anti-democratic or fattening.
We all lose when perception is seen as reality, when style supersedes substance, when “winning is the only thing.” Yet, sadly, this Americas political reality is 2011, and 2012 will be even worse.
The examples used in Ron Paul’s newsletters were not racist. It is not racist to state facts or comment on societal impressions related to a particular race or ethnicity.
Truth as Hate Speech
Q. Is it Truth or Hate Speech: African American woman are prone to having illegitimate children.
A. 75% of babies born to African-American woman are illegitimate.
Q. In today’s America, how do you state this fact without being accused of being racist?
Q. As 33% of Caucasian births are illegitimate, is it racist to think or to ask: Have African-American attitudes towards the acceptance of illegitimate babies been adopted into the greater American culture?
Q. Is it racist to ask if the African-American imprint on American culture is primarily: illegitimate babies, gangster rap and young men avoiding their responsibilities to become educated, care for their illegitimate children, and avoid drugs and criminal activity?
Q. If 50% of African-American males are able to avoid arrest, is it racist to ask why the other 50% cannot also act properly?
Q. Is it Truth or Hate Speech: Jews are the biggest thieves on Wall Street.
A. Bernie Madoff, Michael Milken, Ivan Boesky. These are men who defrauded the most or have been fined the most – all were born of Jewish parentage.
Being an American Jew, I will admit that the tone of the statement can be considered troublesome, but so is the fact that many thousands were harmed terribly by Madoff, Milken and Boesky. These criminals deserve all the punishment they receive and more. All their jail time multiplied by 100 will not come close to the angst, disappointment and trauma that these men caused to others. Their ill effect will be felt for generations.
Q. Is it less Anti-Semitic to say, “In Europe, one of the only professions Jews were allowed to pursue was moneylending; therefore, Jews became skilled in finance. A human trait is to manipulate when able and history has shown that a few persons of Jewish descent have been prosecuted successfully for financial crimes.”
The real issue is not the statement; rather, it is the context of the statement and the reaction to the statement.
If one were to say, “Those Jews, they’re the biggest thieves on Wall Street; you can’t trust any of them.” Then that is Anti-Semitic.
Compare the statement above with a recent interview given by “anti-Semitic” Ron Paul: http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/west-of-eden/ron-paul-tells-haaretz-i-am-not-an-anti-semite-1.404208 
“Any kind of racism or anti-Semitism is incompatible with my philosophy,” Paul said in an interview with Haaretz, conducted by email. “Ludwig von Mises, the great economist whose writing helped inspire my political career, was a Jew who was forced to leave his native Austria to escape the Nazis. Mises wrote about the folly of seeing people as part of groups rather than as individuals,”
“I supported Israel’s right to attack the Iraqi nuclear reactor in the 1980s, and I opposed President Obama’s attempt to dictate Israel’s borders this year.”
“I do not believe we should be Israel’s master but, rather, her friend. We should not be dictating her policies and announcing her negotiating positions before talks with her neighbors have even begun.”
“I believe I’m the only candidate who would allow Israel to take immediate action to defend herself without having to get our approval. Israel should be free to take whatever steps she deems necessary to protect her national security and sovereignty.”
“I am personally against all foreign aid. We give $3 billion to Israel and $12 billion to her avowed enemies. How does that help Israel? And in return, we act like her master and demand veto power over her foreign policy.”
Q. Is it Truth or Hate Speech: Conservatives are Fascists!
A. This is both false and speech that is full of hate. However, because it is stated so often in the left wing press without any push back, it is accepted by the left as being gospel.
Q. Is it Truth or Hate Speech: Liberals are Fascists!
A. This is nominally true and therefore not hate speech. The problem is that liberals do not know that they are fascists because they do not know history nor the proper definition of words. The actual definition of Fascism: A type of Socialism; an economic system that controls the means of production; Webster’s Dictionary1962 edition - before it became politically correct. The politically correct current left wing propaganda definition of Fascism is: “any ideology, movement, programme, tendency, etc, that may be characterized as right-wing, chauvinist, authoritarian, etc”
These definitions are far apart from each other. This is a great example of how the Left adulterates language to its own purpose.
To control the workplace via regulation is nominal fascism. You own the factory, but the government controls by telling you how much to pay the workers, the safety equipment required, rules the product must conform to, etc. This is all done under the banner of safety, i.e. “It is for your own good.” The real question is: who is in control of your property, you or the government?
Tort law will repair any negligence in safety.
BTW, it is factually impossible for economic conservatives to be fascists.
We have grown up hearing and believing one of the biggest left wing lies; that the political paradigm is left wing = liberal and right wing = fascist. This is totally incorrect.
Total Government:
Socialist/Communist/Fascist
Liberal/Progressives
Constitutional Republic:
America = just enough government
Conservatives
No Government:
Anarchy
On the left put 100% government, or some form of collectivism like socialism or dictatorship or plutocracy. The opposite of 100% government is 0% government, or anarchy. In the middle is our constitutional republic, rule by moral/freedom oriented law.
Anarchy can never be a form of government because out of the chaos, some men will organize their tribes and rule as mini dictators, e.g. kings, chiefs. Current events verify and history is replete with those seeking power. Individual freedom simply does not exist in the manner that allows men to thrive. Americans are on the verge of allowing the virtual annihilation of our G-d given rights to life, liberty and property, and the left cheers this on.
Socialism has many variants, only two of which are Communists and Fascists. Fabian Socialism is the type that exists in England and in America. Fabian Socialism envisions a slow adjustment of the people and the economy to the constrictions of freedom and the institutionalization of government, with “them” as the rule makers and overseers. Leninists/Stalinists/Hitlerites/Maoists-Castroites/Sandanista’s/Sadam/Chavez etc. all sought a quick reversion to dictatorial Socialism, typically through revolution.
Socialism is simply the best marketing vehicle available for those with selfish intentions who want to gain and hold sway over the masses. The strategy is to gain control over people by calling for people to be constrained because of safety concerns, e.g. mining, environment, finance, consumer protection, etc. It sounds so nice. How could anyone possibly be against safety? The answer: the devil is in the details.
How does this relate to Ron Paul?
First, Ron Paul has disavowed these few newsletters, only four letters in several thousand having any questionable passages. The political talking heads have cherry picked a few isolated incidents and paint a false narrative while ignoring 30 years of the candidate’s actions. These jaded “journalists” have to look back over 22 years in order to find dirt on Ron Paul because he has zero skeletons in his closet.
One does not become known as a racist overnight. If one is a racist, then there is a long documented history, e.g. David Duke. To say, “Ron Paul is a racist,” rates the Orwellian Double-Speak Award for Speech of the Lowest Order.
It is ironic that the only person in the race who wants to stop the US government from killing more “brown people” is being labeled a racist! This, despite the many instances of free health care Ron Paul has given to “brown people.” The only member of the Texas congressional delegation to vote for the Martin Luther King national holiday was Ron Paul. Senator McCain did not vote for the holiday and was not labeled a racist. Ron Paul wants to release all non-violent drug offenders; African-American’s make up the largest segment of offenders.
See video evidence of Ron Paul’s purported racism:
*******
*******
The double-standard
The left wing/liberal/progressive/fascist press has done all it can to collapse support for Ron Paul. They are unabashed about their partiality, making unfair and prejudicial comments like, “Paul can’t win,” “Paul is crazy,” “Paul’s support is thin,” “His 21% in Iowa is as high as he gets,” “He certainly sounds like a racist.” etc.
However, upon the least blip of support or on any good news, the left wing/liberal/progressive/fascist press goes agog over Obama. We get more accurate news reading Pravda.
Reverend Wright’s anti-American, anti-White, anti-Semitic rhetoric seems to not be taken seriously. Obama’s allegiance to Wright and the brainwashing Obama received over the many years he attended Wright’s church seem to not be an important issue. Compare Wright’s rhetoric to Ron Paul’s. Wright’s sermons are vitriolic, to the point of actual incitement to violence or at least inciting attitudes in a dangerous direction; Paul’s mild comments in a letter are aimed at fundraising.
Ronald Reagan’s candidacy back in 1980 was endorsed by several KKK groups. Does that mean Reagan was a racist? Some would claim that those endorsements must mean that Ronald Reagan believed in the same things as the KKK. Lunacy.
Ron Paul’s message has been consistent for decades. He’s never been a flip-flopper, unlike Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Gingrich, Romney, and the rest of the GOP field
In the newsletter, Ron Paul echoed Jesse Jackson’s statement that he felt fear hearing men walking behind him, fearing they were black, and when he looked back over his shoulder, he felt relief seeing that it was white men walking behind him. This is understandable because in 2004 African Americans constituted roughly 13.4% of the general population, yet 49% of all murder victims in 2005 were African American. According to “The Color of Crime,” http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf “blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.”
Showing a correlation to race within crime rate statistics is not racism, and making unflattering statements about African-Americans is not racism, in and of itself, except to semi-literates. Racism is pernicious and malicious. And, as many of US know, both of these traits are specialties of the Left.
Are we all racists for having genuine human feelings of fear based upon the knowledge that, statistically, African-American males have a higher likelihood of committing a crime? This is the kind of backwards logic that permeates the Left.
Why all the hate speech aimed at Ron Paul?
Left wing/liberal/progressive/fascists feel genuine terror that Ron Paul, if elected, would actually follow through with his campaign promises and reduce government overreach.
The left wing fears that someone who stands for something with a clear message has a chance to break down the status quo in American politics. They fear less government, lower taxes and a country where people are not forced to implement their left wing agenda.
Ron Paul is not some messianic fix-all; but he is a step in the right direction. Ron Paul has voted with an originalist constitutional mindset consistently for the last 30 years. That is not hearsay but 100% fact. He is the only congressman who regularly receives a 100% rating on the Freedom Index. Ron Paul is the boogeyman that haunts big federal government. His sin is that he believes in US as individuals; his congressional colleagues all believe in some level of big federal government.
Paul has an honest, constitutional, pro-American mentality. This is exactly what we need right now. Only an originalist constitutional approach will save our country. However, if Ron Paul is elected, prepare for big fights, as neither Congress nor the bureaucracy is going to allow the implementation of the elimination of subsidies, sweetheart contacts, insider deals, special protections and massive war preparations; the greed is too deeply embedded. They will defend at all costs over 100 years of planning and scheming to insinuate their subservient mindset.
The biggest problems in America today ALL stem from our bloated, overbearing form of Statism. That’s the principle or policy of concentrating extensive economic, political, and related controls in the state at the cost of individual liberty. America needs the constitutional restitution that Ron Paul represents and this is exactly what the big corporations that own the major media outlets do NOT want.
Rep. Paul’s message has achieved enough currency that it can no longer be ignored, despite the alarming lack of media coverage. I now expect the Establishment to switch to attack mode.
However, Ron Paul doesn’t have much in his background to attack. His writings and rhetoric have remained consistent. We know that there are no major scandals to uncover or they would have already announced them. He remains faithful to one wife. Ron Paul never dodged the draft and he is the only veteran in the race.
There is only one place to attack and it is tenuous at best. Some of his distant staff wrote some unpopular lines in a few newsletters 22 years ago. The lines fail to match anything in Dr. Paul’s long voting record or anything he’s actually said. Paul clearly states what he believes personally and that his personal views should not matter. Liberty for all means exactly that. Ron Paul’s positions on individual liberty are antithetical to the collectivist notion of racism.
Interestingly, the question of whether Ron Paul is racist has never come up in a political career spanning 30+ years. Were Paul a racist, I would expect many people to come forward with accounts of anti-Semitism and hatred of minorities. However, all we ever hear about are the accounts of minorities getting free healthcare. The lack of proper journalism in the media today is appalling.
These attacks on the only candidate who upholds the Constitution are happening because the military industrial complex and big business do NOT want an end to the status quo of bug business in bed with big totalitarian government.
Don’t be fooled by the mainstream media’s disinformation campaign to marginalize Ron Paul’s anti-war, pro-constitutionalist message.
See what real people are saying about Ron Paul
1- See what grass-roots African-Americans think about the “vicious racist” Ron Paul http://www.youtube.com/embed/ej5_rZof7MA?rel=0; http://www.youtube.com/embed/0fyRVa4lzRo?rel=0
2- See what active duty service men and women think about the “isolationist appeaser” Ron Paul http://www.youtube.com/embed/WhxJ1XUGLR0?rel=0
3- See what veterans think about the “uncaring and uncompassionate” Ron Paul http://www.youtube.com/embed/dAVoYciURoU?rel=0
4- See what women think about the “hateful misogynist” Ron Paul  http://www.youtube.com/embed/f_qBSow4FrE?rel=0
Coach (Mitch) Mitchell Goldstein is a Nationally Recognized Expert in tax delinquent property investing and a Real Estate Investor since 1972 in commercial and residential properties.
Coach Mitch is dedicated to helping would be real estate investors to attain their financial goals through investing in tax delinquent real estate and has created various products and services to facilitate the tax delinquent real estate investor.
Mitchell is a Jewish American of Hungarian and Polish extraction and a fan of Locke, Jefferson, and Madison, whose instincts against accumulated power have proven prescient; and of Washington, and Hamilton, whose notions regarding consolidated power required that honor and the highest moral behavior be the hallmark of those exercising power.
Website: CoachMitch.com
*******

*******
Ron Paul the Official Ross Perot of 2012
By J.B. Williams
December 30, 2011
NewsWithViews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams170.htm
Paulestinians (aka - rabid Ron Paul fanatics) have a full-court-press on for the upcoming Iowa Caucus, as if winning Iowa makes one a lock to win the eventual GOP primary. Iowa has a distinguished history of getting it wrong most of the time.
In 2008, Iowa chose Mike Huckabee for their GOP nominee and gave John McCain a 13% fourth place finish, which was still above Ron Paul who won only 10% in Iowa last time. John McCain went on to become the GOP nominee.
In 2004, Iowa got it right with George W. Bush. But Bush ran unopposed in 2004…
In 2000, Iowa gave George W. Bush a nod with 41%, meaning that 59% of Iowa Caucus goers got it wrong. Bush became the GOP nominee.
In 1996, Iowa chose Bob Dole, who became the GOP nominee before getting slaughtered in the general election by Impeached President Bill Clinton. Iowa picked another loser.
In 1992, Iowa got it right again with George H. W. Bush, but he was also running unopposed.
In 1988, Iowa chose Bob Dole, who was defeated by George H. W. Bush, whom they only gave 19% of their confidence. Of course, Bush won the nomination and became President of the United States.
The point is -- Iowa has a long history of getting it wrong in Republican primaries. If I were a GOP candidate, I’d be trying not to win Iowa, as winning Iowa appears to be a jinx to any GOP candidate seeking the GOP nomination or the White House.
Winning Iowa is like your momma telling you what a great singer you are, even though you can’t carry a tune in a bucket.
So, why all the hoopla over Iowa and Ron Paul? -- He’s “Mr. Constitution” they say! (with great pride and vigor…) Why are they only going half-way here? Why President Ron Paul when they could have President Alex Jones? Maybe Alex will be his VP pick, and their Inaugural Hajj will be held at Area 51, complete with an alter call by Glenn Beck…
Yeah? Where does Mr. Constitution stand on Obama’s Article II ineligibility? Mr. Constitution would fight for all of the constitution, not just the cherry-picked sections his anti-war base appreciates. Besides, the average age of a Paul supporter is about 20 – which means they haven’t a clue about the constitution or the world they live in.
Once again, why Ron Paul? What does his thirty-year career politicians résumé hold to give his followers such confidence in Mr. Constitution, who remains totally MIA (Missing In Action) on Article II, which disqualifies Obama for office and every member of congress, including Ron Paul, knows it!
Mr. Constitution would know that the primary function of the Federal Government is to protect and defend the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. - To do that in a 21st Century world, you had better have one hell of a standing Military, which Mr. Constitution also opposes.
All of the Tea Party candidates are already out of the race, systematically eliminated by Team Obama. They successfully killed off four GOP messiahs in a row, Palin, Bachmann, Perry and Cane. That was easy!
RNC darlings Romney and Gingrich have also received the Obama hatchet job, clearing the field for whom? -- Ron Paul and Rick Santorum…. Rick who? And Ron Paul… Gee whiz… how’d that happen so fast?
Obama likes running unopposed. He has won every political race by eliminating his opponents, one by one, leaving him unopposed in the general election. That’s what we are watching right now.
In 2008, the Clinton’s had so many skeletons rattling around in their closets that Obama was able to derail the greatest political war room ever known to modern politics by simply cutting a backroom power-sharing deal, making Hillary Secretary of State and opening the door for Bill on the international scene.
Hillary Clinton was a lock for the DNC nomination headed into the 2008 primaries. Then the nobody from nowhere with a blank résumé and not so much as a birth certificate, stole the show. By the DNC convention, Hillary was just a memory and despite threats to defect by Clinton supporters, they rallied behind Obama in the general election anyway.
In the end analysis, the left always marches forward in lockstep, despite their many internal disputes. But the political right is more divided and scattered than ever in U.S. history, and they are no match for the unified international left that has already eliminated any real opposition for Obama in 2012.
Ron Paul will not rule out a third-party run, if he happens to lose the GOP nomination. Paul promises to play spoiler even if he has to do it from outside the GOP.
The Ron Paul campaign is built on a foundation of social liberals, chronic anti-war misfits, modern day peaceniks seeking legalized drugs, atheists, and Democrats and Independents with liberaltarian leanings. Nowhere in there is “conservatives…” who oppose Paul as much as they oppose Obama.
If Ron Paul really was a constitutionalist, he would attract the conservative vote, because it is conservatives who have spent a lifetime trying to protect and preserve our nation’s founding principles and values, hence the term “conservative,” to conserve.
But conservatives are not easily fooled by constitutional rhetoric, whether coming from the lips of Teddy Kennedy or Ron Paul. Even Obama claims to be a constitutional scholar and no one has been as successful at undermining the constitution as Barack Obama.
Ron Paul is at odds with conservatives on numerous key issues.
• Paul supports same-sex marriage
• Paul opposes the death penalty for violent criminals
• Paul opposes mandatory sentencing for three-time losers
• Paul supports legalizing illicit drugs
• Paul opposes firm enforcement of immigration laws
• Paul opposes free trade
• Paul opposes a strong U.S. Military and National Defense
• Paul opposes foreign diplomacy and prefers isolationism
• Paul opposes stricter limits on criminal campaign finance
• Paul opposes the Patriot Act, but also insists on letting terrorist live amongst us
• Paul supported the arbitrary withdrawal from Iraq that resulted in deadly terror attacks hours later
• Overall, Paul falls in the Middle ground, where libertarians, moderates and populists are found, not conservatives
As a result, he cannot muster the conservative vote in November 2012, without which, he cannot defeat Barack Obama.
Most of Paul’s “social conservative” congressional votes are actually Tenth Amendment votes, which sidestep the actual issue at hand and redirect the discussion to states right. He is a career politician, supported by folks who claim to oppose career politicians.
While conservatives are strong on Tenth Amendment states right, they are also strong on founding principles and values grounded in the moral laws of nature, at the foundation of our Constitutional Representative Republic.
In short, Paul is actually a liberal leaning populist candidate, rather than a Jeffersonian libertarian. He has very little in common with American conservatives and that presents a serious problem for him in any national election, especially at a time in history when conservative voters are looking to reverse course in America.
Paul has been MIA on far too many constitutional issues to call himself a constitutionalist with a straight face. Beyond lower taxes and less government, he has literally nothing in common with conservatives and even his smaller government leanings can’t work in a socially and morally bankrupt society.
Then we have the issue of white supremacists and anti-Semites in his past, which won’t come up from other Republican candidates in the primary, but will come up from Team Obama in the general election. Remember, Obama must run unopposed… and the U.S. press will tear Paul from limb to limb long before next November.
If Obama’s name is allowed to appear on the 2012 ballot, he will be re-elected.
None of the 2012 GOP candidates deserve the support of truly engaged and patriotic Americans. Of course, neither does Obama.
Voters who grasp the reality that the nation is on the brink of total collapse and the world is on the verge of WWIII, are looking for who can defeat Obama and who might have the backbone to protect the nation from eminent danger on several fronts.
I’m not sure such a candidate exists in the 2012 election, but I am certain that Ron Paul isn’t it. Facts don’t have any friends, but so far, Paul fans don’t seem too impressed by facts. Paul is unqualified for the job he seeks on this single issue alone! His anti-Semitism and poor-pitiful misunderstood jihadists, blame America first and often rhetoric should be enough to end his campaign… but do the facts matter anymore? People who can’t vote for a lesser evil are in real trouble this time, as every candidate in the race is a lesser evil. We will see what the people’s real priorities are…
Our nation hangs in the balance…
JB Williams is a business man, a husband, a father, and a writer. A no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy. He is published nationwide and in many countries around the world. He is also a Founder of Freedom Force USA and a staunch conservative actively engaged in returning the power to the right people in America.
Web site 1: www.PatriotsUnion.org
Web site 2: www.VeteranDefenders.org
E-Mail: JB.USPU@gmail.com
*******
The Phony Rightwing
By Kelleigh Nelson
December 30, 2011
NewsWithViews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Nelson/kelleigh143.htm
Ron Paul
Yep we're slaves alright. Tax law being the most nefarious of the lot. Certainly, we are no longer living in a land of "justice". . We have lots and lots of laws of "Control and Obedience" to the American Royalty erroneously called The Federal Government. We have King and Queen Obama and a bunch of Czar's...Does anybody remember "America"? (the land of the free?) -J. Carlton, Calgary
This is for everyone who keeps writing me and asking, "When are you going to write about Ron Paul?" No matter what I write about Ron Paul, I will be loved by some and hated by others. Please remember I started with the worst of the lot and, IMHO all but Bachmann and Paul are globalists. Michele carries a lot of baggage, working for the IRS to me is as damaging as Herman Cain having worked for the Federal Reserve. With Ron Paul, you have a man who, among other things, wants to rid us of the Federal Reserve, (watch this important video: http://www.youtube.com/v/3dl1y-zBAFg) give power back to the states, is staunchly pro-life, doesn't believe in World Government, wants to stop the federal spending, wants to stop all foreign aid, wants to bring our soldiers home, has a way to cut spending and the deficit, wants to eliminate federal departments responsible for pushing the horrid UN Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development, would repeal Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and Sarbanes-Oxley, would lower the corporate tax to 15%, and is a Christian who isn't pandering his faith like so many of the candidates. http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/RestoreAmericaPlan.pdf 
Here is Ron's statement of faith and I love it. http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com/2011/10/as-a-model-for-values-ron-paul-prefers-%e2%80%98our-original-king-our-creator%e2%80%99-to-the-gov%e2%80%99t/ Congressman Paul's detractors will list many points against him, but if one only searches the reasoning behind Paul's stances, you'll find that many of them are constitutional.
Ron Paul was born in August of 1935, and raised in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He graduated from Gettysburg College and the Duke University School of Medicine, before proudly serving as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force during the 1960s. He and his wife Carol moved to Texas in 1968, where he began his medical practice in Brazoria County. As a specialist in obstetrics/gynecology, Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He and Carol, who reside in Lake Jackson, Texas, are the proud parents of five children and have 18 grandchildren and five great grandchildren. Paul was raised Lutheran, but now attends a Baptist Church.
Paul is a libertarian and thus there will be many facets of his belief system that constitutional conservatives might disagree with albeit his reasoning in most instances is sound and constitutional. If the states were given back their original power under the Constitution to decide issues such as abortion, that action would deprive the Federal government from passing laws like Roe v. Wade which resulted in a national law that forces all States to uphold abortion.
Let's look at some of the issues conservatives may have problems with, as well as those areas where we'd agree Ron Paul is the only candidate for President who is truly a constitutional conservative and who could put this nation back on the right track. Please take special notice of the links as they're quite informative and important.
1. Ron Paul voted for the repeal of "Don't Ask. Don't Tell." http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd510.htm Paul seems to waver on whether homosexuality is a sin. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIeW0DY64bE The Congressman also believes the government should not be in your bedroom and says, "Gay couples can do whatever they want and call it whatever they want as long as they don't impose it on someone else." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbVwN3dEdU4&feature=related&noredirect=1
Ron Paul stated in an article in the Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/26/ron-paul-gays-military-dadt_n_1032990.html, "Everybody is an individual person, and everybody has the same rights as anyone else. The government has no business in your private life, you know, so if one person is allowed to do something so should everyone else. The whole gay marriage issue is a private affair, and the federal government has no say." Get the government out of our bedrooms! It is very important to see that this is an issue of individual justice rather than social justice.
2. Many Libertarians like Ron Paul are closer to the leftists in their love affair with Islam which is one area that is extremely troubling inasmuch as the desire of Islam is to overtake America and make it a Muslim nation. Paul doesn't believe the religion of Islam is our enemy and I'd have to disagree with him on this issue. http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/08/28/libertarians-leftist-love-affair-with-islam/
3. Congressman Paul says U.S. intervention motivated 9/11 attacks. http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-09-14/ron-paul-explains-reasons-for-911/ . Two weeks prior to the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, Ron Paul says that U.S. intervention in the Middle East is a main motivation behind terrorist hostilities toward America, and that Islam is not a threat to the nation. http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/08/27/paul-says-u-s-intervention-motivated-911-attacks/ . Ron Paul has spoken about ";," which is the unintended consequences of foreign operations that were deliberately kept secret from the American public. In Christopher Simpson's 1988 book, Blowback, he thoroughly explains America's recruitment of Nazis into the CIA and its disastrous effect on our domestic and foreign policy that has lasted for years. The same goes for the other CIA foreign operations the public has no knowledge of even today.
Paul also believes we should get out of the Muslim countries now. I too believe this, albeit I want all our soldiers brought home and put on our borders with 50 caliber machine guns to protect our nation from drug cartels and illegal aliens.
4. Ron Paul, the most visible libertarian in the US (under the Republican banner), has said he thinks that sending illegal aliens home where they came from is not "humanitarian." He also doesn't believe in building a 700 mile fence. Now it seems the Libertarian Party is following this same kind of reasoning. http://www.lp.org/news/press-releases/libertarian-chair-time-to-re-legalize-immigration But wait! Here's what Ron says about illegal aliens in an interview with John Stossel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y3zEP75kFM . He wants to get rid of the subsidies for illegals, as well as any mandates by the Federal Government. This would include food stamps, social security, medical care, automatic citizenship under the guise of amnesty, free education, etc. Stop the free rides and they'll stop rushing over our borders. I agree with his stance. If the bird feeder is empty, the birds won't come. With soldiers on the border, terrorists won't either. Paul is against amnesty. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju5Ar2BWAwQ 
5. Ron Paul's libertarian views would support legalization of pornography and prostitution; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oS5_1K9LW8E . Again, Ron's view is the First Amendment protection and that parents can restrict and control their children and it is not the Federal government's responsibility to do same. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wDYtDfZ_GM&feature=related Prostitution is still going on today whether it is legalized or not and this is a social issue like homosexuality and pornography. Congressman Paul doesn't believe the government should legislate virtue or morality. I wish he'd tell this to the leftist Fabian socialists and Marxists we have in government control. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbVwN3dEdU4&feature=related
One of the factors that has brought the decline of morality in America is the failure of today's churches in teaching sound biblical doctrines and exhorting the members to read and study God's Word and spread the Gospel and we need to understand this rather than laying the blame elsewhere.
6. Ron Paul is staunchly pro-life and would have laws protecting life decreed by the States rather than by federal law. As I explained above, Ron would like to see Roe v. Wade repealed and let the States decide rather than having the Federal Government making abortion a nationalized law. http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/abortion/ 
7. Paul believes the government has no role or authority in regulating drugs, another Libertarian concept. However, his stance has a great deal of merit inasmuch as it actually does pull the rug out from under the drug cartels and their profits. Am I in agreement? Not necessarily, but here's the Congressman's take on this issue. http://www.ronpaul.com/2009-03-30/ron-paul-end-the-war-on-drugs/
8. Ron says terrorists should be tried in American civil courts. The opposition says, "Foreign terrorists belong in a military court." As for American Citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, who was killed by a U.S. drone strike in Yemen, like Ron Paul I have to ask, "Are we setting a precedent that will be used against other US citizens in the future?" http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/8573-gop-debate-michele-bachmann-says-foreigners-have-no-rights It is something we definitely need to consider. Remember, what our government will do to an undesirable citizen, they can also do to us. Note the bill that just passed and will be signed into law H.R.1540 NDAA
9. Florida Republican Congressman John Mica offered the following morally clear Amendment (5/25/2011-H.AMDT.318 (A018) Amends H.R.1540):
Amendment requires that the rules of engagement [ROE] allow any military service personnel assigned to duty in a designated hostile fire area to have rules of engagement that fully protect their right to proactively defend themselves from hostile actions.
The results? (tallied here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-354): 143 out of 185 Democrats present — 77% — voted against this amendment; 217 out of 235 Republicans present — 92% — voted for it. As for the two Republicans in Congress running who are Presidential candidates, Michele Bachmann voted for the amendment; Ron Paul against it.
AND here is the caveat, the law authorizes the United States to use military force anywhere it says there are terrorists, including within the borders of our own country and including against American citizens. This bill eliminates habeas corpus making detention indefinite. It represents the largest hand-over of unchecked war authority from Congress to the executive branch in modern American history. The founders were seriously opposed to handing this much power over to executive, fearing tyranny, which is what we have today. If enacted into law, this provision would make Obama a total dictator who can wage war without the consent of the American people, which he has already done with Libya, but would legitimize it. This bill will legalize an unconstitutional act. http://www.eutimes.net/2011/05/ron-paul-house-floor-speech-republic-almost-completely-dead/ Ron Paul has clearly sounded the alarm regarding the imminent destruction of the Republic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeCpLcjxOq4&feature=related
10. The bogus claim of anti-Semitism arises with Ron Paul for several reasons. Basically his stance on our intervention in the Middle East which he feels resulted in terrorist attacks against us, and his pro-Islamic Mosque stance in New York have fueled this belief. Unfortunately Congressman Paul sponsored a bill that would have eliminated all aid to Israel alone rather than all foreign aid to any country. I do believe Paul wishes to eliminate all foreign aid and I'm in agreement with this stance. As well, I have Jewish friends in Israel who wish Israel would decline any monies from America so Israel could act as Israel sees fit and would not have to bow to American interests.
Here is what my one Israeli friend said, "US aid to Israel has made us (Israel) a puppet under the power of a terrible prez we didn't elect. US money enslaves us. If no one has the guts to speak truth, they don't merit to lead a nation. We in Israel live with empty words of blowhard politicians who're afraid of making the Arabs mad. If you don't tell the truth, they'll kill more of us. IF you tell the truth, they'll kill more of us. I'd rather die for the truth than a lie. The fact is, archeology- facts on the ground- and the history of the region attest to Jews not Palestinians being here from the beginning of time. Go study."
I have to agree with my Israeli friends and with Paul inasmuch as the strings attached to accepting US dollars inhibits Israel from proper defense of their country.
In Paul's book The Revolution: A Manifesto, at the end the Congressman includes a section called "A Reading List for a Free and Prosperous America." And on that recommended reading list is John T. Flynn's book, As We Go Marching. Congressman Paul is recommending the writings of a man who, in his day, was seen as a driving force behind the anti-Semitic liberal Republican Senator Nye and the Senate investigation into Jewish influence in Hollywood. http://www.filmreference.com/encyclopedia/Romantic-Comedy-Yugoslavia/World-War-II-HOLLYWOOD-GOES-TO-WAR.html; http://www.ecommcode2.com/hoover/research/historicalmaterials/other/nye_g.htm
More troubling is the fact that Ron Paul's website mourned the passing of virulent anti-Semite, Eustace Mullins. http://adamholland.blogspot.com/2010/02/ron-pauls-official-website-mourns.html In my files I have a copy of Mullins' booklet, "My Life In Christ," which was printed for him by Aryan Nations. Any investigation of Mullins reveals strong anti-Semitism. The question is who controls Ron's website? I am sure Paul does not.
Ron's real stance on Israel is clear and the rumors of anti-Semitism are false. Here is Ron's stance on Israel in this interview. Here is Ron's interview with Newsmax on his support of Israel and from The Atlantic, "Ron Paul is More Mainstream than His Opponents on Foreign Policy."
11. Ron Paul's new Plan to Restore America basically abolishes all the cabinet level departments tasked with implementation and dissemination of Agenda 21. His supporters have been hot on all the Agenda 21 issues for a long time. They're probably the ones who got Rand Paul up to speed on the issues, since he didn't have a clue when one of our researchers wrote to him. Ron is proposing One Trillion dollars in budget cuts! http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66114.html . Here are the key components of Paul's economic plan, "Restore America," released in October.
It’s not mentioned by name anywhere in Ron Paul's 11 page Plan to Restore America; but, the cabinet-level departments he’s abolishing (page 2 on his plan) are the same departments (Energy, HUD, Commerce, Interior & Education) that Bill Clinton appointed to his President’s Council on Sustainable Development in 1993 to co-ordinate with the UN’s Agenda 21. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20121485-503544.html?tag=re1.channel
For this reason alone I'd cast my vote for Ron Paul. If you are unaware of what UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development/Smart Growth/Smart Meters/Wildlands Project is all about, then visit Tom DeWeese's site on Agenda 21; http://americanpolicy.org/category/sustainable-development/
Conclusions
No one has ever accused Ron Paul of being a flip-flopper. He has been saying the same things for 35 years. Now the latest events in America and the world have conspired to make him look increasingly on target.
Congressman Paul is by far the most radically anti-big government candidate in the running. He'd boil the Federal government back down to a few skeletal constitutional functions. He'd cut all foreign aid, abolish the Patriot Act, get rid of Obamacare, return us to a gold standard, as well as eliminating the welfare state, and federal income taxes. He hates bipartisan compromise and loves gridlock!
Are there things on which I'd disagree with Dr. Paul? You bet there are! But there are far more things I agree with him on, especially his love of liberty and the Constitution. I have spent the better part of six months researching Dr. Paul and have collected hundreds of documents and articles on the man. The elite establishment politicos and media will do anything to destroy the reputation of this man, yet he gains more followers as the days go by. Recently he was on the Jay Leno Show; http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1731158/pg1 . Leno asked him how he liked the debates so far and Ron answered that standing there for two hours to speak for three minutes wasn't very enjoyable. Jay also made the statement that the bottom 15% of Americans pay no taxes. Ron quipped back, "That's a good start!"
If you wish to know more about Ron Paul, go to his website, Ron Paul on the Issues. Another site that contains valid information is Wikipedia's Political Positions of Ron Paul.
Paul isn't a 6'2" square jawed hunk of male flesh with a pompous arrogant, know-it-all attitude. He's a little Banty rooster who's smaller and faster than the globalists he's running against and who loves freedom. If there's any chance in saving our country, I believe it's with Congressman Ron Paul.
P.S. Here is a recent article written by his first and only speech writer in 1976. I think you'll enjoy it!
P.P.S. As the MSM falsely attacks Ron Paul for racist remarks, see the truth here and here. Make sure you watch the video.
Kelleigh Nelson has been researching the Christian right and their connections to the left, the new age, and cults since 1975. Formerly an executive producer for three different national radio talk show hosts, she was adept at finding and scheduling a variety of wonderful guests for her radio hosts. She and her husband live in Knoxville, TN, and she has owned her own wholesale commercial bakery since 1990. Prior to moving to Tennessee, Kelleigh was marketing communications and advertising manager for a fortune 100 company in Ohio. Born and raised in Chicago, Illinois, she was a Goldwater girl with high school classmate, Hillary Rodham, in Park Ridge, Illinois. Kelleigh is well acquainted with Chicago politics and was working in downtown Chicago during the 1968 Democratic convention riots. Kelleigh is presently the secretary for Rocky Top Freedom Campaign, a strong freedom advocate group.
Website: www.rockytopfreedom.com
E-Mail: proverbs133@bellsouth.net
*******
Also See:
America! What About Ron Paul For President?
(Part 1)
13 May 2008
http://arcticcompass.blogspot.com/2008/05/next-president-should-be-ron-paul.html
*******

No comments: