Thursday, December 15, 2011

8 reasons why Ron Paul will be the best president of our lifetime

The Examiner
By Gabe Vogt
December 14th 2011

Another article prompted this piece. While it might be easier to simply respond to the other column's claims (many of which are rather ludicrous), the current times seem to suggest that it correlates more with common sense to look towards the future, including Ron Paul's election to the presidency.

1. Paul will abolish the Federal Reserve

Since its formation in 1913, America's private bank has contributed to loss of value in the dollar as well as multiple wars to protect central banking interests. The manipulation of interest rates by Fed leaders has also led to generations that consume and do not save, thus reducing the ability of retirees to manage their own lives without government pensions or safety nets. By all considerations, the institution is no better than Hitler's Reichstag, and Paul's courage in opposing its continued operation forms the basis of his historical greatness as president

2. Respect for the 1st Amendment

After both "conservative," and "liberal," presidents have proven to follow each others marks step by step when pursuing policies relating to the cessation of individual liberty, Ron Paul will end violations of the 1st Amendment and stop enforcing the Patriot Act through his administration. Unlike many politicians, both past and present, Paul understands that an act by Congress cannot legally suppress the Constitution, thus making laws such as the Patriot Act and others wholly anti-freedom and therefore unacceptable.

3. Free Trade

Ron Paul's presidency will be noted for its pursuit of free trade with all countries, not the cartelization of corporate interests in unfair international boundaries. Rather than hiding behind two-state loathing from the Cold War, Paul believes that America should trade with all nations, including Cuba, Iran and North Korea. Through these changes our economy will expand, leaving relics of leftist extremism such as Castro a lame statue for the past. The congressman would also oppose a North America Union or any other similar trade blocs, thus endorsing truly neoliberal policies which America has too long ignored.

4. Taxes

Paul opposes class warfare and believes in abolishing the Income Tax. Not only will this approach create millions of jobs, but its falls in line with the critical aspect of empowering Americans to take responsibility for their own lives rather than granting more power to the government. As with the Federal Reserve, lower taxes will promote saving and investment, influencing Americans in a meaningful way to prepare for their futures instead of leaving it at the feet of a broken federal authority.

5. War on Drugs

America has spent the last two decades fighting an endless war on drug distribution that costs more than simply decriminalizing--or even legalizing--the substances. Rather than spending billions and losing countless lives in law enforcement and civilian populations, Ron Paul will devolve power to the states and end this senseless pursuit of a moral high ground once and for all. With the unspent money remaining, America will secure the borders and focus on real homeland security--not societal paranoia.

6. Immigration Security

Both major political parties have argued for radical approaches to immigration control. On one side, Republicans propose an expensive fence and guest worker programs to deal with the massive immigration problem. Democrats prefer amnesty and instate tuition benefits for illegal alien students (or former Democrats like Rick Perry). Ron Paul's presidency will oversee the halting of benefits for all those who come here illegally, thus helping our border hospitals and saving America billions of dollars each year. A Paul Administration would handle this issue sensibly; not by spending billions more simply to feel safe inside the head.

7. Humble Foreign Policy

In stark contrast to both major party leaders, Paul will end frivolous intervention around the world to restore American prosperity. As a veteran and Air Force flight surgeon, the congressman understands the importance of human life better than most public officials, and he will fail to send troops into battle like pawns in a suicidal scheme to save face or secure corporatist interests. His administration will avoid unnecessary intervention and push for a  view on foreign affairs where America responds when attacked--not to endorse a ridiculous notion of expensive democracy in the Middle East. Under his watch foreign aid to murderous regimes such as the Palestinian National Authority and North Korea will be ended, thus preventing the expansion of violence around the globe.

8. Upholding the Oath

Most importantly, Ron Paul will respect the oath he takes when sworn into office in 2013. To the congressman, an oath is before God, not a simple recitation that can be bended according to political expediency. With him at the helm, Americans will once again believe in the Constitution as the foundation of this country's political culture, and a new generation will be born that understands limits of the government. Should we as a nation reclaim this committal to founding principle, there is not end to what we may accomplish as one united country, standing together as a whole, and not splintered among warring factions.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Ron Paul calls for criminal charges against Eric Holder

The Examiner
By Kyle Rogers
December 13th 2011

Just days ago, CBS national news printed new details about Department of Justice operation "Fast & Furious." Internal memos show that agents actually discussed using the operation as a "false flag" to justify taking away the 2nd amendment rights of US citizens.

Congress is currently investigating Fast & Furious. Attorney General Eric Holder has already been caught making at least one false statement under oath.

Gun rights advocates have been asking why Republicans aren't calling for criminal charges against Eric Holder. Many have criticized FOX News for giving the story little coverage. CBS national news has been breaking most of the new details related to Fast & Furious. Recently Eric Holder yelled at a reporter at an event in DC. He blamed the media for public outrage over Fast & Furious, and told a reporter "you guys need to stop it."

Today, Texas Congressman Ron Paul became the first GOP president candidate to call for criminal charges against Eric Holder.

Speaking to syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones, Paul called for Holder to be "immediately fired." Paul went on to say "I think it was criminal," and called the operation a "false flag." He said that there needs to be an immediate investigation into Holder himself, and said Holder "deserves charges."

Paul went on to discuss a now infamous memo from White House lawyers who claim Obama has the right to assassinate American citizens anywhere in the world. Paul stated that Obama is trying to "legalize Martial law."

Paul also mocked the FBI's claim of uncovering an Iranian assignation plot against the Saudi ambassador. He said the man arrested "may never be tried because they don't want the truth to come out."

POLL BOMBSHELL: Ron Paul Is Close To A Win In Iowa

Business Insider
By Grace Wyler
December 13th 2011

Ron Paul, the once-forgotten presidential candidate, is picking up steam in Iowa and now appears poised to overtake frontrunner Newt Gingrich, according to a new survey released today from the left-leaning Public Policy Polling.

The poll finds support for Gingrich has slipped to 22%, with Ron Paul just behind with 21%. Mitt Romney trails in third place with 16%.

That's a five-point drop in favorability for Gingrich, who has raced to the top of the Republican presidential field over the past month. PPP found Gingrich's favorability numbers have fallen 19 points over the past week.

Meanwhile, support for Paul is on the rise, particularly among younger voters and voters who identify themselves as "new." Among likely caucus-goers under age 45, Paul leads Gingrich 30-16. The numbers are nearly flipped for caucus-goers over age 45.

But what Paul's fans lack in age and experience, they make up for in enthusiasm — 77% of Paul supporters say they are definitely going to vote for him, compared to 54% for Gingrich.

Interestingly, Romney's support is also stronger than Gingrich's in Iowa, despite Romney's relative absence from the state this fall — 67% of Romney supporters say they will definitely be voting for him.

In fact, there is strong evidence that Romney actually could have been a major factor in Iowa this year, if he had not stayed away from the state. As PPP notes, only 44% of Romney's 2008 supporters plan to vote for him this time — which means if he had just managed to keep his support from last time, he would be leading in Iowa by now.

The PPP survey finds the rest of the field largely unchanged. Michele Bachmann comes in fourth with 11%, down from 13% last week. Rick Perry stayed stagnant at 9%, apparently unaffected by his controversial gay marriage/war on Christmas ad last week. Rick Santorum came in with 8%, while Jon Huntsman rounded out the field with 5% support.

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Dr. Ron Paul's 11-Point Plan That Could Save America

Huffington Post
By Laura Trice
September 26th 2011

Have Americans read Dr. Ron Paul's written plan for the country? Are Americans ready to upset the apple cart in a controlled and methodical way for the betterment of the greater good? The main source I am referencing here is Dr. Ron Paul's website, so that we can debate his priorities and proposed approaches. I have paraphrased items from his site; however, I encourage the reader to thoroughly review all the links.

Here is Dr. Ron Paul's 11-point plan:

11. Energy Independence: Eliminate the federal gas tax of $0.18 per gallon and eliminate the EPA, allowing prosecution of polluters to answer to citizens, not Washington, and allowing coal, oil, nuclear and other forms of energy to be safely explored.

10. Education: Dr. Paul would like to see the U.S. Department of Education return its powers to the states and parents. He proposes and intends to give parents a $5,000 tax credit per child for kids K-12 to help with all the costs of education. He is supportive of home-schooling and will veto legislation that interferes with parents choosing to home-school their children.

9. Workers' Rights: Dr. Ron Paul is against forcing workers to join unions and pay dues if they do not want to, citing the $8 billion that union leaders bring in annually that is often given to political candidates. He does not want workers forced to belong to unions or to be under union control against their will.

8. Protect Gun Rights: Protecting the right of Americans to keep and bear arms. Here is an example of a town that required each head of household to own a gun. This policy resulted in decreased crime.

7. Heath Care: Dr. Ron Paul will repeal Obamacare, allow for tax credits and deductions for all medical expenses and not allow money that belongs in Medicare or Medicaid to be misused for other purposes. He will protect the privacy of American citizens' medical records from the federal government, remove barriers for all citizens to have HSAs and keep the FDA out of vitamins and alternative treatments. Also, he wants to provide payroll deductions for terminal illnesses and caregivers.

6. Pro-Life Issue: Here is the one fact all Americans need to know. Dr. Paul is the only Republican candidate who has said, "So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid." Abortion is one of the most divisive issues and may always be a divisive issue as long as Americans have freedom of religion and the right to be, think and feel differently. Dr. Ron Paul may be personally pro-life; however, his voting record indicates that, even if a bill attempting to make abortion illegal federally in the U.S. were passed by the House and Senate, Dr. Paul would veto the bill as unconstitutional. Which other Republican candidate has a track record to indicate that? Would Dr. Paul look to put pro-life judges on the Supreme Court bench? Probably as much as past Republican presidents. The current Democratic President has recently placed two women on the Supreme Court, and new Justices are appointed only when a Justice dies or retires. Six Republican Presidential candidates have already signed the Susan B. Anthony List 2012. Dr. Ron Paul is the safest Republican candidate because he would veto anti-abortion bills at the federal level and support states that chose to protect women's reproductive rights. His other strong Constitution-based reforms outweigh the small risk that Roe v. Wade would be overturned during his term, returning the power to the states, who can then protect women's reproductive rights, as Vermont has. Would he truly respect the states' rights on this, considering his strong personal stand? Many progressive states have anti-abortion laws on their books that are not enforceable due to Roe v. Wade. So far, Dr. Paul has written bills to make it possible for states to make abortion illegal in the Sanctity of Life bill. He wrote the We the People Act, which, if passed, would render Roe v. Wade invalid and return powers to the states. He signed the Susan B. Anthony list, which describes federally defunding all abortions and Planned Parenthood. If Dr. Paul can fix the economic mess, is the slight chance that Roe v. Wade would be rendered invalid something Americans are willing risk for the betterment of the country in many other important areas? We will not ever go back to a time before birth control, morning-after pills, RU 486, the Internet and other advancements. Certain states, even with Roe v. Wade, are extremely restrictive.

5. Immigration: In Dr. Paul's own words:
Immigration reform should start with improving our border protection, yet it was reported last week that the federal government has approved the recruitment of 120 of our best trained Border Patrol agents to go to Iraq to train Iraqis how to better defend their borders! This comes at a time when the National Guard troops participating in Operation Jump Start are being removed from border protection duties in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas and preparing to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan! It is an outrage and it will result in our borders being more vulnerable to illegal entry, including by terrorists.
Also, we need to take serious steps to prevent terrorists from gaining easy access to targets on our soil. Quite alarmingly, even with the knowledge that the 19 terrorist hijackers entered our country legally, and that 15 of them were from Saudi Arabia , student visas from terrorist sponsoring countries are still far too easily obtained. In a baffling move President Bush struck a deal with Saudi King Abdullah in 2005 to allow 21,000 more Saudi young men into the US on student Visas. Of course, not all students from terror sponsoring countries are terrorists, but I place a higher premium on the security of the American people than the convenience of citizens of hostile countries. We should not be making the goals of would-be terrorists easier to accomplish, but rather should be vigilant about defending against enemies at every turn. They should not be slipping through our doors so easily, using our immigration laws against us, and that is why I proposed the Terror Immigration Elimination Act (HR 3217) to toughen standards for VISAS from countries on the State Department's list of terrorist sponsoring countries in addition to Saudi Arabia . Just as you decide who to invite to a dinner party in your home, we should be in charge of who we allow in this country, without apology.
Both the Bush administration and congressional leadership have promised to spend the next two months addressing national security issues. But real national security cannot be achieved unless and until our borders are physically secured. It's as simple as that. All the talk about fighting terror and making America safer is meaningless without border security. It makes no sense to seek terrorists abroad if our own front door is left unlocked.
In short, Dr. Paul's plan is to secure the border, end amnesty, abolish welfare to illegal immigrants, end birthright citizenship and protect lawful immigrants.

4. National Defense: Dr. Paul's approach is simple. He believes in a strong national defense and is against militarism -- in other words, protect the U.S. but do not police the world and require congressional approval before declaring war. The last time the U.S. formally declared war was World War II in 1941. Dr. Paul would bring the troops home to protect America. Dr. Paul said he would get the troops home as soon as the ships would get here. He is the largest recipient of donations from soldiers in the U.S. military, getting 71 percent of all military donations.

3. Taxes: Dr. Paul would support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that abolishes income and death taxes. Ideally, he'd like to close the IRS. He would seek to repeal capital gains taxes and reduce then abolish taxes on Social Security. Before a flat or fair tax would be implemented, Dr. Paul would ensure that the 16th Amendment, which made income taxation legal, would be repealed so we don't end up with both.

2. End the Fed: The Fed was created in a time of turmoil and seems similar to the Patriot Act in that it was done from a position of hysteria, not logical and rational decision-making. The U.S. Constitution is considered such a well thought-through document as it was drafted in a time of peace rather than as a reaction to a panic. Documents and policies that are reviewed and seen in the light of day by calm, rational people tend to be better for the long-term wellness of the people than policies passed quickly in an emotional, reactive and hurried manner. Dr. Paul equates the Fed with deeply-in-debt parents sending their teenagers out with credit cards and blank checks. Dr. Paul's ultimate goal would be to see the Fed end, yet he would not act rashly. What his focus would be is a full and complete audit of the Fed, as Congress is currently unable to audit the Fed. Dr. Paul would commit to passing legislation that requires transparency and accountability from the Fed. At this time, the Fed can keep secret to whom they are lending trillions of taxpayers' dollars. If the Fed is handling American money responsibly, for what reason would they refuse to open their books? We American citizens are all subject to audits from the IRS, but the U.S. central bank is not? Please take three minutes to watch this amazing video of Bernie Sanders asking Ben Bernanke, where $2.2 trillion of taxpayer money is. Bernanke will not answer the question and will not disclose where $2.2 trillion went, and he doesn't have to.

1. Economy: Dr. Paul's plan is to audit the Fed, veto any unbalanced budget and refuse to raise the debt ceiling. He is also committed to getting rid of self-dealing and corruption in D.C. Additionally, he will eliminate income taxes, capital gains taxes and death taxes. It would be a breath of fresh air to have the Fed audited and wasteful government spending eliminated, and to actually be able to keep more of the money we make. America's debt did not come out of nowhere. In 2008, the U.S. had spent $3 trillion on the war in Iraq. The current costs are at $3.2 to $4 trillion. How much did we vote to increase the debt ceiling? We raised the $14.3-trillion debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion, to $16.7 trillion on Aug. 2, 2011. Here is a great 10-minute video with Dr. Paul clearly stating how, if elected president in 2012, he would balance the budget in one year.

In this discussion, I request that emotional reactions and sarcasm be set aside. The goal is an accurate, clear and truthful dialogue. We are blessed with a group of knowledgeable Americans making comments here. What I want to suggest is that we discuss what is best for the greater good for our country, not just for ourselves.

Any presidential choice we make involves a risk. Is he lying and manipulating to win the election, or is he honest? Will she serve American citizens ethically and honorably as president? The U.S. Constitution was created to unite the states in our country in certain crucial areas, like national defense, while allowing states their autonomy and uniqueness. In the spirit of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, good character is the most essential quality to bring to our government. Dr. Paul combines solid character and backbone with seasoned wisdom and experience. He has not compromised the values and principles that America holds dear.

If you are not going to register as a Republican and vote for Dr. Ron Paul in the primary, who do you think is better, and for what reasons? Don't state what you dislike about Dr. Paul's plan. It is easy to shoot someone's ideas down.

"[At times of hysteria] that is all the more reason the President has to speak out for what is right. Otherwise, he's got no reason being in the White House. The President has to do the leading in a case like that. I've said before, the President is the only person in the government who represents the whole people. There are some who can afford to hire lobbyists and others to represent their special interests, but the President isn't elected to pull strings for anybody. He's elected to be the lobbyist for everybody in the United States. And, he is, too, if he's any good."
--Harry Truman (from
Plain Speaking: An Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman, by Merle Miller, Tess Press 1974)

Monday, September 19, 2011

Bob Chapman: If Ron Paul does not win the election, then America is done
By Kenneth Schortgen
Monday September 19th 2011

Economist Bob Chapman of the International Forecaster spoke in an interview on Sunday, September 18th and laid out a dire scenario for the American people regarding to the path we are headed towards financially.  After describing what the state of the economy in America is now during his interview, and comparing it to previous empires' and their declines in history, Mr. Chapman made the comment that the only hope for change would come from Americans electing Ron Paul in 2012, and men like him who would vie to alter the statist course the country is headed for.
…These people are playing for everything.  They want to win, and enslave you… those of you who are young and not ill.  Just like in ancient Egypt, and in Rome where they did the same thing.  So that’s where we’re headed.  I hope… that a year from November Ron Paul can get elected with people like him… in office.  And then, maybe we can make some changes.  But in lieu of that, and if that doesn’t exist, cause he doesn’t win, your goose is cooked.  And you either stay, and live like an animal, or get out of the country, cause that’s how bad it’s gonna get. – Bob Chapman radio interview
Bob Chapman is an economist, stockbroker, journalist, and forecaster with over 51 years in the industry.  Starting in 1960 as a stockbroker, and having been trained in the Army as a counter-intelligence officer, his articles and opinions have been printed or re-printed in over 200 publications, and he is considered one of the most respected forecasters in the market.  He currently is owner and editor of The International Forecaster, a compendium of information on business, finance, economics and social and political issues worldwide, which reaches 10,000 investors and brokers monthly directly, and parts of his publication are picked up by 60 different websites weekly exposing his ideas to over 10 million investors a week.

Mr. Chapman is not alone in his belief that the economy and the government are pushing towards a tyranical end.  Other well known forecasters such as Gerald Celente, and Peter Schiff have determined that the present course of the global economy, the destruction of the banking system, and the political chaos taking place in the Middle East, Europe, and even the United States, are directed towards the creation of a single global government and economy.

In each forecast, all three men believe that Ron Paul is the only answer to changing the course American is on economically.  No other presidential candidate has the ideas, plan, and the will to implement them to stave off the inevitable destruction of capitalism, the middle class, and the creation of a global structure where the only two classes will be the elites, and the poor.

As when billionaire investor Jim Rogers recently put his backing towards Ron Paul for the 2012 presidency, so too is economist and forecaster Bob Chapman joining him and others in seeing no alternative for America's economic future unless the Congressman from Texas is elected in 2012.

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Barry Manilow on Ron Paul: ‘I agree with just about everything he says’

The Daily Caller
By Nicholas Ballasy
Thursday Sept. 15th 2011

Grammy award-winning musician Barry Manilow told The Daily Caller that he agrees with “just about everything” 2012 Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul says, calling him a “solid” contender for the highest office in the land.

“I like him. I like what he says, I do. I like what he says. I think he’s solid,” said Manilow, who confirmed to TheDC in an interview at the Capitol on Thursday that he contributed to Paul’s last campaign for president.

“I agree with just about everything he says. What can I tell you?” Manilow added.

Manilow was on Capitol Hill speaking at a briefing on atrial fibrillation or AFib, a heart disease that affects over 2.5 million Americans. Manilow, who has fought the disease for over 15 years, encouraged lawmakers to support H.R. 295, a bill that would advance AFib research and education in part by “encouraging education programs that promote collaboration among the Federal health agencies and that increase public and clinician awareness of atrial fibrillation, including risk assessment, screening, treatment, and appropriate clinical management.”

“The public needs to know — they need to know as much about atrial fibrillation as they do about cancer and diabetes,” Manilow told TheDC.

“Atrial fibrillation has been the low man on the totem pole and so we’re just trying to get more visibility about this particular disease and how dangerous this could be.”

Manilow was also asked if he is satisfied with what the federal government has put forth in the health care law signed by President Obama in March 2010.

“I’m not sure yet. I’m not sure. I have work to do,” he said.

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Constitutional scholar refutes anti-Paul claims

By Tom Woods
Wednesday August 31st 2011

A good rule of thumb I’ve discovered is that critics who claim Rep. Ron Paul doesn’t understand the Constitution are themselves the ones whose knowledge is deficient.

For example, Scott McKeag, a teacher in the Iowa City School District, came down hard on the congressman in these pages for denying that the federal government has a role in education according to the Constitution. The congressman further believes that education is better managed by states, localities, and parents.

McKeag cites the Constitution’s “necessary and proper” clause to justify the federal Department of Education, which opened its doors in 1980.

Let’s tick off the problems with this howler.

First, Alexander Hamilton noted in Federalist No. 33 that the necessary and proper clause was inserted merely for clarification and did not augment federal power at all. He even said the Constitution would be exactly the same if that clause were “entirely obliterated.” Appealing to the clause to carry the burden of justifying federal involvement in education — which is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution — is asking it to do much heavier lifting than even Hamilton, the broadest of constitutional constructionists, thought it could bear.

Second, George Nicholas, future attorney general of Kentucky, told the Virginia ratifying convention (and remember, according to James Madison, it is to the ratifying conventions that we turn for constitutional interpretation) that the clause “only enables it [Congress] to carry into execution the powers given to it, but gives it no additional power.” Many other statements to this effect can be found in the documentary records of the ratifying conventions.

In other words, citing this clause for authority to establish a Department of Education only begs the question, since McKeag has not first established education as one of “the powers given to it.”

Third, in numerous state ratifying conventions, the people were assured the federal government would have only the powers “expressly delegated” to it. Power over education is obviously not expressly delegated.

Fourth, Thomas Jefferson explained in 1791 that “necessary and proper” had to mean really necessary, as opposed to merely convenient, in carrying out the enumerated powers if the clause were not to swallow up the whole Constitution and defeat its very purpose. Because education is nowhere listed among the enumerated powers, it wouldn’t survive even the first stage of Jefferson’s test.

McKeag only makes things worse when he appeals to Jefferson: “President Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, championed this idea from his time in the Virginia Legislature.”

Ouch. Here’s what Jefferson actually said: “An amendment to our Constitution must here come in aid of the public education.”

Got that? An amendment to our Constitution. That means federal involvement in education is unconstitutional given the text of the document as it stands. In other words, Jefferson held precisely the view that Ron Paul holds today.

McKeag has no better luck when he tries to claim Madison. Madison warned people in 1792 that if they interpreted the general welfare clause too broadly, we’d wind up with the federal government taking “into its own hands the education of children,” an outcome he considered absurd. Ouch again, Mr. McKeag.
The rest of the article argues from the precedent, “Hey, lots of politicians have thought the people were too stupid to run their own schools and needed to be taxed for the privilege of being bossed around by their Washington betters.” Maybe so, but that doesn’t answer the question: Is it constitutional?

Before filling the heads of Iowan children with any more nonsense, Scott McKeag might consider leaving Ron Paul alone and spending a teensy bit more time reading.

Thomas E. Woods Jr., who holds a Ph.D. in history from Columbia University, is a New York Times bestselling author of 11 books.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

As his numbers continue to improve, Ron Paul presents challenge to Obama, other GOP candidates

By J.D. Heyes
Wednesday August 24th 2011
(NaturalNews) President Barack Obama's campaign has dismissed his candidacy as a Tea Party fringe, much the same way as his fellow Republican presidential contenders have, but that's par for the course. Ron Paul knows he has always been an underdog.
But new polling data is showing Paul in a close race with Obama and other leading GOP contenders. Is it an anomaly? No, it's not and it shows clearly how Paul's message is increasingly resonating with a larger percentage of the American people, making him much less the underdog now than during any of his previous presidential bids.

According to Gallup, Paul is statistically tied with Obama, with the president leading slightly 47-45 percent. Paul out polls Minnesota Rep. Michelle Bachmann (she's behind Obama 48-44 percent), and just under former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (he leads Obama 48-46 percent) and Texas Gov. Rick Perry (who splits with the president 47-47 percent).

Not bad for a "fringe" candidate who has been virtually ignored by Big Media. And while other Republican presidential contenders Romney and Perry generally poll better, Paul continues to do well.

That's what the pundits call "the right message," and it just could be that a perfect political storm is brewing that will sweep him into office in 2012.

For one, his message has never changed. An obstetrician by training who is pro-life, Paul has espoused a small government, personal liberties and freedom platform since practically his first days in office. So there's the consistency factor; what you see is what you get, and what you get from Paul you've been getting for decades.

Also, Paul is the only major candidate calling for an end to what he has labeled unwinnable wars. His call comes as Americans support for the conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya are at all time lows.

As early as November 2010, support for the war in Afghanistan in particular began plummeting, with respondents to a Quinnipiac University survey saying they opposed it in general, 50-44 percent.

Almost three quarters of Americans, or 72 percent, support efforts to begin pulling U.S. troops out of Afghanistan, and only one in five Americans support continued U.S. involvement in Libya.

As the economy and unemployment remain stagnant, the current administration's solution is to raise taxes and increase government regulation. But recent surveys show most of us oppose such "solutions," and neither of those is favored by Paul.

In fact, his solution is to eliminate income taxes altogether, along with the so called "death tax" and capital gains taxes that stifle the free market. He wants to dump the Federal Reserve altogether, and he has pledged never to vote to raise the debt ceiling again.

Just a month ago, Obama held a 41-37 percent lead over Paul, but that's since been cut to 39-38 percent, a statistical tie. Paul's lack of coverage in the media is hurting him nationally, and his genuine small-government mindset is alienating most mainstream members of his own party.

But the fact remains that Obama's regime is collapsing, just like the economy and the free market. And despite what the other GOP candidates espouse, more Americans are learning that Paul is the real deal when it comes to offering a legitimate choice to change the direction the nation is headed. The polls show that Paul is gaining ground on everyone, so much so that he could be too hard to ignore for much longer.

Sunday, August 21, 2011

Ron Paul spreading same message as always, resonating finally

By Alex Leary
Thursday August 11th 2011

Ron Paul framed it as "a fight that could literally change our country" and laid out a plan: Return to the gold standard, end U.S. military interventions overseas, demolish the Federal Reserve and stop bailouts.

"Overwhelmingly, people said they wanted a man of principle in Washington," his campaign manifesto read. "They said they want someone who was really against budget deficits, big spending and high taxes, not someone who says one thing and does another."

The fundraising letter could have arrived yesterday.

But it was written in 1984.

As he seeks the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, the Texas congressman is spreading the same message — and people are finally listening.

His persistent bleating about federal spending and the national debt, for years ignored by both Democrats and Republicans, has proven prophetic. Paul's Republican rivals today sound like he did in 2008, when he was viewed as the kooky older guy on the campaign trail warning about an impending crash.

"People kid me now about going mainstream," Paul said in an interview. "Maybe the mainstream came in my direction."

Anti-Washington from the day he stepped foot on Capitol Hill in 1976, Paul was the tea party before the tea party.

People are drawn to Paul — or at least respect him — because he has been consistent in an era of finger-in-the-wind politics.

"Many political campaigns devolve into personality cults — 'Vote for me. I'm the kind of guy you want to have a beer with,' " said former U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson of Orlando, a liberal Democrat who teamed up with Paul last year to pass a measure requiring an audit of the Fed. "That is completely foreign to him. He'll only talk about issues.

"He's actually a bit shy and isn't particularly fond of being in front of large crowds or cameras. But that preoccupation with the issues and internal revulsion toward personality politics is exactly what makes him so popular."

Paul, who turns 76 next week, is hoping a top-three finish in Saturday's straw poll in Ames, Iowa, will thrust him into the upper level of contenders.

For the past two years, Paul has won the straw poll at the American Conservative Union's annual gathering in Washington, his raucous supporters looked on with some disdain by establishment Republicans in the crowd.

He concedes that he is best positioned to affect the debate rather than win, but he holds an underdog's hope.

"How come I think I have a chance? My name's on the ballot," he said. "And the country's shifting my way."

Paul is an anti-war, anti-abortion Republican who was the Libertarian nominee for president in 1988. He burst from obscurity in the last election with a boisterous following and prolific fundraising.

On a single day in December 2007 — the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party — he raised $6 million as part of a "money bomb." His visions of small government, personal responsibility and strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution have become tenets of the tea party movement.

Paul remains a loner in his party, and even now some of his views remain on the fringe. During a GOP debate in South Carolina in May, Paul said that if a person wants to shoot up with heroin, it's that person's choice, and the federal government should stay out of it.
The audience boomed with applause.

So rigid are his views that his routinely is the lone dissenting vote in Congress. He opposes most programs not authorized in the Constitution or those he considers a waste of time or money.

Paul votes against resolutions honoring Boy Scout troops and civil rights leaders. He voted against a congressional medal for former President Ronald Reagan because of its $30,000 cost. He has voted against constitutional bans on same-sex marriage and flag burning, believing in individual expression. And he opposes farm subsidies that benefit constituents in his rural Texas district because he wants the free enterprise system to work.

A retired obstetrician who delivered 4,000 babies and fathered five (including son Rand, who in 2010 became a U.S. senator from Kentucky), Paul says no so often that he has a nickname in Washington: Dr. No.

In his 2008 run for president, Paul drew accusations of hypocrisy for requesting hundreds of millions in budget earmarks, or pork, for his district while voting against the final bill. Paul said he does not endorse the system but puts in earmarks because he represents people who want some of their money back.

A follower of Austrian economics, Paul said his political awakening came on Aug. 15, 1971, when President Richard Nixon ended the last tie between gold and U.S. currency. Paul said that opened the floodgates for both parties to spend and print money and run up debt.

Returning to the gold standard has been his burning cause. Most economists dismiss that as unrealistic and say the gold standard helped cause the Great Depression by limiting how much money could be generated.

But over the years, Paul has gained legions of believers.

Paul was one of only six Republicans to vote against giving President George W. Bush the authority to wage war in Iraq and has long bemoaned U.S. intervention overseas.

"We should spread our values, but we can't spread our values through guns and bombs and occupations," he said. "We should do it through following good economic policy and understanding what personal liberty is all about and set a good example. Maybe the rest of the world would want to follow us."

Paul demurs when asked about his longtime warnings about the debt, once ignored but no longer. His son, campaigning with him in Iowa on Wednesday, said it was something to highlight.

"We should do some gloating," Rand Paul told reporters. "The slogan for the campaign should be, 'Ron Paul was right!' "

Saturday, August 20, 2011

Ron Paul supporters blast back with over $1 million and counting

By Lori Stacey
Saturday August 20th 2011

The Ron Paul birthday money bomb is well underway and they have already raised over $1 million today.  It will be going on until midnight. This event was billed as "a fundraiser the establishment would never forget". Whatever the reason, part birthday celebration and perhaps part firing back after the lack of media coverage following his dead-heat finish in Iowa; the Ron Paul campaign is full-speed ahead.

The only thing the mainstream media has been able to keep beating the drums on is saying that he is unelectable.  For a 12-term Congressman from Texas to be constantly criticized about electability, it is ironic that his 11 re-elections makes him the most elected candidate in the Presidential field.

As the media keeps attacking or ignoring, his support continues to soar.  The Congressman spent the weekend at the 3rd Annual Liberty Summit in Orlando, Florida this weekend where the focus was on "The Future of Conservatism in America".  Paul was a keynote speaker at the event with a packed, standing room only crowd.

Can this momentum continue to build?  One thing is for sure, the worst thing the mainstream media can do at this point is continue to anger his supporters.

Continuous updates on the money bomb throughout the evening can be found here.

Ron Paul Wins NH Straw Poll

Hampton-North Hampton PATCH
By Kyle Stucker
Saturday August 20th 2011

The Texas congressman won Saturday's New Hampshire Young Republicans Straw Poll by a commanding margin.

Ron Paul got a great birthday present Saturday, as the 76-year-old defeated 11 other Republicans in Saturday's New Hampshire Young Republicans Straw Poll.

Paul, a congressman from Texas, won a commanding 45 percent of the vote and bested runner-up Mitt Romney by 35 percent votes despite not actually attending the event, which was held in New Castle and also included a lobster bake.

There were 302 ballots cast Saturday, and the full vote results are as follows, in the order the candidates were listed on the ballot: Jon Huntsman - 3 percent ; Herman Cain - 5 percent; Rick Perry - 8 percent; Fred Karger - 0 percent ; Paul - 45 percent; Mitt Romney - 10 percent; Thaddeus McCotter - 8 percent; Rick Santorum - 3 percent; Michele Bachmann - 5 percent; Buddy Roemer - 3 percent; Gary Johnson - 6 percent; and Newt Gingrich - 1 percent.

Rudy Giuliani and Paul Ryan each received 1 percent of the vote as write-in candidates, while another 1 percent was comprised of candidates who received less than 1 percent, according to event officials.

Gingrich, Perry, Romney and Santorum all were unrepresented at Saturday's event, as no one spoke on their behalf and none had a table at the event.

State Sen. Jim Forsythe spoke on behalf of Paul.

Saturday's event, which drew roughly 350 people, also featured a vote for New Hampshire governor

Friday, August 19, 2011

Ron Paul galore!

Concord Monitor
By Felice Belman
Friday August 19th 2011

The woman on the other end of the phone had never called a newspaper editor before, but she was angry. She had traveled to Concord from Connecticut to get a gander at Ron Paul on Wednesday night and was frustrated that Thursday morning’s edition of the Monitor included no story on Paul’s appearance. Yes, there were two large photographs from the event by photographer John Tully, but no accompanying news article. To make matters worse, a full story on Rick Perry appeared on the front page.

What the caller couldn’t have known was that our plan for this morning’s edition was a virtual Paul-a-palooza: two front-page stories, a photograph and an editorial. On, there is a video from Paul’s Thursday interview with the Monitor editorial board. Additionally, Sunday’s Viewpoints section will include more outtakes from the interview – and a terrific new caricature of Paul by longtime Monitor cartoonist Mike Marland.

Our goal between now and the presidential primary election is to give readers as much coverage of the presidential candidates as possible – while also keeping track of local news. We won’t achieve perfect parity among the candidates in column inches or number of photographs – nor are we trying to. But, with luck, by February Monitor readers will have a good sense of what each of the Republican candidates stand for and how that compares to their opponents – and to President Obama.

How do we do that? We send journalists to scads of campaign events: in the Concord area and, when the news merits it, out of the area. (Earlier this week, for instance, reporter Karen Langley filed a story about Mitt Romney from Berlin.) We’ll publish profiles of the candidates – including these on Paul and Bachmann from earlier in the summer. We’ll check the veracity of their statements. We’ll talk to voters. We’ll dissect the big issues of the campaign. We’ll let readers know when and where the candidates are appearing.

Additionally, we’ll invite all the candidates for long sit-downs and use those conversations to help inform our news coverage as well as the newspaper’s eventual endorsement of a candidate. Editorial board interviews with presidential candidates are among the joys of working here –  and yesterday’s interview with Paul was particularly fun. He speaks his mind and – though he’s been saying the same thing for years and years – his performance is remarkably refreshing.

Here’s one more tidbit from yesterday’s interview: Asked whether his age would be a detriment to getting elected (he turns 76 tomorrow), Paul smiled and dismissed the hypothesis:

“That’s an old-fashioned idea. In this day and age, what really counts are your ideas and my ideas are promoting liberty – and that’s a very young idea and young people love it.”

He went on to challenge anyone worried about his senior-citizen status to a physical competition. “Anytime any other running candidate wants to come to Houston at 12 o’clock noon when the temperature is 100 and the humidity is 102, I’ll ride 20 miles with them on a bicycle.”

Any takers?

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Ron Paul: Rick Perry makes me look moderate

The Ticket
By Chris Moody
Thursday August 18th 2011

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, the national drumbeater against the Federal Reserve, said Wednesday that compared to "some southern governor" (a clear reference to fellow contender Rick Perry) Paul looks more like a moderate.

"I'll tell you what, he makes me sound like a moderate," Paul said at a campaign stop in Concord, New Hampshire. "I have never once said Bernanke has committed treason. But I have suggested very strongly that the Federal Reserve system and all the members have been counterfeiters for a long time." The remarks were first reported by NBC News.

The title of Paul's book is End the Fed.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry said earlier this week that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke would be "almost treasonous" if he increases the money supply before the elections in November.

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Ron Paul has a dirty little habit of telling the truth

New Jersey
By Michael Hayne
Monday August 15th 2011

Perennial Republican Presidential Candidate, Ron Paul (R-TX), was the clear-cut winner of last Thursday nite’s debate, according to many different polls. While former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, now no longer a presidential candidate, attempted to break himself free from the shackles of mediocrity by sparring frivolously with crazed Congresswoman Bachmann, Ron Paul did the unthinkable in today’s circus-like GOP by sticking to the facts. Indeed, Ron Paul has a dirty little habit of telling the truth and strictly adhering to the seemingly dead fundamental philosophical underpinnings of the founding fathers, sometimes at his own peril.

On the economy, all the presidential wannabes spoke about lower taxes, cutting spending, and a balanced budget – the usual mantra– in focus group approved, Fox News soundbite fashion. But like always, Ron Paul threw caution to the wind and downright cut right through the carefully arranged beauty pageant that elections have come to be by thoroughly explaining why we have recessions in the first place. Mr. Paul stuck to his hallmark positions of criticizing the role of the Federal Reserve System and the monetary system, one in which money can be created out of thin air whenever the political class wants it.

"The country's bankrupt, and nobody wanted to admit it,” said Ron Paul during the Fox News Debate.

On foreign policy, Ron Paul once again proved that he is a the sharpest voice and firmly understands the pivotal Law of Unintended Consequences with regards to America’s interventionist polices in the Middle East. Mr. Paul is famed for schooling Rudy “I appeared on television the most on 9/11″ Giuliani on foreign policy during a 2008 Republican presidential debate. Paul has now said, those who spread the lie that it was all Muslims throughout the world who attacked America on that September morning are also those who seem to favor the most wars in the most places, usually so long as other Americans fight them. This time around, however, it was walking gay joke and long shot far-right candidate, Rick Santorum, who was on the receiving end of an epic Ron Paul history smackdown.

Mr. Paul handily dismissed the comments of the neoconservative former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum as “war propaganda,” which indeed Senator Santorum can be relied upon to parrot at every opportunity. He then beautifully explained that the history of U.S. relations in Iran did not begin with the hostage crisis in 1979, as Senator Santorum. On the contrary, It began with the U.S./British coup in 1953 that brought the oppressive shah to power, and it was resentment over his police state that turned Iranians against the U.S.

"Just think of what we went through in the Cold War when I was in the Air Force, after I was drafted into the Air Force, all through the 60's. We were standing up against the Soviets. They had like 30,000 nuclear weapons with intercontinental missiles. Just think of the agitation and the worry about a country that might get a nuclear weapon some day."

-Ron Paul when asked by Fox News channel anchor Chris Wallace why he was "soft" on Iran in his opposition to economic sanctions against the country

Oh no, Ron Paul! Just call the black guy a socialist, demand to see his birth certificate, and utter totally empty slogans like “Drill baby Drill” and “Washington is out of touch with the people”. Oh, and make sure you say nothing remotely factual. Above all, be sure to wear the biggest American Flag pin you can find while uttering such easily digestible ignorance.

But while Ron Paul displays a refreshing and audacious ability to speak from the gut, he also displays a dangerous mindset that reflects some of the more severe libertarian propensities. Case in point, Ron Paul compared social security and medicare to slavery earlier this year. Indeed, Ron Paul has the remarkable gift of politely invoking thought while simultaneously causing immediate aversion and bewilderment—unlike Perry, Bachmann, et all.—who just invoke setups for late night comedy and fodder for the American Psychological Association.

Now that the debate is over and the dust has settled, it is clear that Ron Paul is a formidable force— stronger and better positioned—than he was four years ago.

Ron Paul Scores Big in Iowa Despite Media Bias
By Doug Wead
Tuesday August 16th 2011

Out of 16,892 votes cast in the Iowa Straw Poll last Saturday, Texas Congressman Ron Paul came within 152 votes of upsetting Congresswoman Michele Bachmann in her own home state.

The close call was ignored by the national media. On Sunday, Bachmann, who was born in Waterloo, Iowa, appeared on five national news programs carried by ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and the Fox News Channel. Paul was invited on none.

The following day, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty withdrew from the race and was featured by all of the networks all day long. Once more, Ron Paul was ignored.

To give you an idea of how staggering Paul’s victory was, and why the national media risks a total disconnect with its readers and viewers in their effort to ignore it, he won twice as many votes as Tim Pawlenty and almost as many votes as Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, New Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman combined.

There’s more. Michele Bachmann was a regular attendee of Dr. Paul’s famous weekly congressional meetings until she was re-elected to congress in her own right.

She openly claims leadership of the tea party that was inspired and started as a Ron Paul fundraiser. Except for her lapse in voting for Nancy Peolosi’s stimulus bill, she has been careful to mimic Ron Paul’s votes in the House. The combined total of the Bachmann-Paul votes amounted to a tea party takeover of the GOP. But once more the media uniformly declined to make an observation.

Some reporters were at times schizophrenic in their post straw poll analysis. Executives had apparently prepared them. There were talking points for what to say if Bachmann wins and what to say if Ron Paul wins.

Sometimes they couldn’t get it straight. A pundit would say that it was a stunning victory for Bachmann and a significant event since it knocked out Pawlenty out of the race and crippled fundraising for the lower tier candidates. Then the same pundit would add in the same sentence that it really didn’t mean anything. No one offered their viewers any explanation for why the networks were spending three days talking about something that didn’t mean anything. A reporter from one network told me that they had 900 journalists and technicians covering the straw poll.

The Ron Paul Campaign arrived in Des Moines on Wednesday buoyed by a CNN national poll showing their candidate ahead of Bachmann and Pawlenty. But they soon had a taste of what was to come in that night’s presidential debates. They were greeted at their headquarters’ hotel by the headlines of the Washington Examiner declaring “All Eyes on Romney, Bachmann, and Pawlenty.” The Examiner, along with Fox News, would co-host the evening’s debate.

The debate kicked off with a series of questions to Bachmann and Romney. Seven minutes into the debate, Ron Paul was asked one question and given one minute to answer. He would not be heard from again until 38 minutes into the program, after all the other candidates gave their answers to multiple questions.

This included a lively exchange between Bachmann and Pawlenty. The debate within the debate was launched by questions from Fox News anchor Christ Wallace, who occasionally added a provocation to keep things going and seemed perfectly delighted to have a presidential debate turn into an infomercial for Bachmann and Pawlenty.

What was happening did not go unnoticed by the national media. Although on-air discussions were rare, private stories abounded. And one from an MSNBC journalist, of all things. (MSNBC producers were intercepted in their own debate telling Chris Matthews in his ear piece, “Don’t go to Paul, don’t go to Paul!”)

Knowing that the race was tight, Chris Wallace announced on Friday that regardless of what happened at the straw poll, his Sunday guest would be Michele Bachmann. It was apparent that Fox News had decided against the Ron Paul candidacy and was willing to risk the scorn of violating its own motto “fair and balanced” to achieve its ends.

Ron Paul supporters should not panic at this media snobbery. Ronald Reagan won in a landslide in 1980, in spite of unanimous and vitriolic attacks from the media. He was portrayed as racist, a warmonger and an extremist.

Reagan went directly to the television airwaves with his own message. Ron Paul tested that in Iowa with stunning success. Iowa showed that given a small taste of the truth, without the media filter, people will choose Ron Paul. The real test to his campaign will be decided in his next money bomb. If it works, he will compete on the airwaves in the Iowa caucuses and he will win.

Doug Wead is a New York Times best-selling author and a former adviser to two American presidents. He is senior adviser to the Ron Paul presidential campaign.