This Method Is very simple, but very powerful.
Help Ron Paul: Show the other candidates that the internet Rules ALL!
Donate to ron paul, then add this widget to your blog...
insert the following code at the top of your post
edit: doesn't seem to be working....
just go to http://digg.com/tools/integrate and copy and paste the first code.
In addition copy the description of this blog.
Then Simply Digg this post, stumble this post, and comment on this message with a link to your post.
If you see others with comments on the blog follow their link and digg their post as well as comment on their blog. This will combine all our blogs and get us TONS more digg exposure, which will in turn get us , more stumble upon exposure
We can do this!
Monday, December 1, 2008
Sunday, June 1, 2008
How to promote Ron Paul through video part 1
Ok, so if you want to promote Ron Paul via video, you're going to want to do one of 2 things. In this 1st lesson I am going to teach you how to download previous videos that you find on sites, and how to convert them to a format that you can submit to other video sites. In the 2nd lesson I'll teach you how you can use a free software to compile videos together and edit them, put music on them, and make them your own. In the third part I'll summarize how you can use the same software to record the screen, and your voice through a microphone for those of you that want to create a video by recording maybe a slideshow that you created.
In order to download a video, you'll need to go to youtube, or google video, or other video sites, and find a Ron Paul video link that you want to download.
Then you'll want to copy that link and paste it into keepvid.com. then click download, a link will appear below. Click on it and then click save to disk and press ok.
Now once it downloads, you have to rename it to the name you want followed by .flv. So you click on the icon that will say "getvideo" and you change it to something like RonPaul.flv.
Now you need to convert that .flv file to avi. I use a software called Moyea, because you can also convert it to a format that works on the Ipod or zune and many other options. The problem is with a free account there are "watermarks" which is basically an image advertising for Moyea that is always on the screen.
To get Moyea, you're going to need to go to http://www.flvsoft.com/flv_to_video/ and click on the button on the far left that says free trial. (you can also download the lite version by clicking on the middle button, but I have no experience with the lite version)
Click on it and then save it to disk, choose somewhere on the laptop or somewhere that you'll be able to find. open the file when it's done and download it.
Once it's downloaded, open the file, click on the top left corner button to add a file. click on the .flv video such as the RonPaul.flv that you created. Now you will see it opened and there's a bunch of settings that you can adjust but there's not much of a need. Simply click on #3 Convert, and the file will convert to the format you selected.
Congratulations you have your video. Now you can upload this to a few video sites... starting with the popular here are a few
http://youtube.com/
http://video.google.com/
Http://vids.Myspace.com/
http://vsocial.com/
http://one.revver.com/revver
http://grouper.com/ Alexa
http://blip.tv/ Alexa
http://vimeo.com/ Alexa
All of the above have Alexa ratings lower than 10,000 meaning they are all among the top 10,000 most visited sites on the interenet.
http://jumpcut.com/
Alexa rating 12,600
http://www.videoegg.com/
Alexa rating 20,105
http://ourmedia.org/
Alexa rating 31,365
http://eyespot.com/
Alexa rating 39,000
If you want mre, read the comments section. But I recommend that you just do the top video sites, and if you want to do more promotion, just do so with another video
There's the end of lesson one. Thanks guys
Please note: I am not liable for any copywrite enfringement, it is your responsibilty to contact the person that owns the rights to the video or created the video and ask them if you can have the rights to distribute.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Who Is Ron Paul?
If you want to know why Ron Paul is taking the internet by storm, and why so many people are falling in love with the guy, and others are taking off of their clothes just to get some attention toward Ron Paul... You've come to the right place...
This is going to be a video blog, I'm going to let the videos speak for themselves...
If you're already familiar with Ron Paul, you probably are a big fan of Ron Paul. Once you check out his videos, and do your research, and you, like me, will become more and more excited about Ron Paul. It's like the more you watch, the more you like him and the more excited you are.
Here's what you can do to help promote Ron Paul.
-Either print this post or bookmark it so you make sure you get all of this information
-goto Http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ On his site, you can make a donation, and register to vote!
-Notice on the left side of his site the area titled "networking" Add Ron Paul in any of the networks that you are already a part of (facebook, digg, myspace, youtube, etc)... Feel free to check out his sites other features.
-But you need to tell all of your friends about this site and others related to Ron Paul. The more people that are fully equipped with all the tools to help promote Ron Paul, the better. This site just started on 12/2/07, but I will update it and I hope to have some help from you guys.
-Check out all of the things I have on the sidebar that I will continue to update. Note the sidebars on the right side of my site. They are all designed to promote Ron Paul, mostly through this site in some way. For Example every time you click on that blogrush widget will actually get the "who is ron paul" site 1 view from someone else who has that up on there blog... and if I get enough sign ups then every 1 view becomes 2 instead.I will put an RSS feed subscription button, and a email subscription. This way you will be updated everytime there's a new post.
But of course this Ron Paul Revolution is much bigger then just my site... The reason I want to make my site get attention, is because I want this to be a complete tool for you and others to use to promote ron paul as well as to use their own resources to teach others to teach others to teach others to teach others to promote Ron Paul, as well as learn how themselves... That's the power of the internet, and the other candidates aren't with the times, Ron Paul is. If you want proof, check out his Digg friends compared to the other candidates... As I write this he has TWICE as much as any democratic candidate, and 16 times the amount of the 2nd overall republican candidate which is Huckabee.
-Sign up for Digg and Stumble upon
-Install the digg toolbar.
-(Optional, go to del.icio.us and download there tool bar and check out other sites such as Netscape Propeller and sign up for those... for a complete list of 175 of these sites, check out this site.)
On Digg, First you can Add Ron Paul as your friend by going to this site http://digg.com/users/ronpaulin2008. While you're at Ron Paul's site, press "I Like it" on the stumble toolbar as well.
Check out Ron Paul's favorites Press "I Like it" then Digg all of his articles and you can press the "I like it" button in every article, or on the digg section.
If you have a blog press "blog it" on every single post about ron paul so all of your viewers can read it. Digg all of your posts, and blog as well as use stumble's I like it button... continue to do the same thing with articles, and videos related to Ron Paul. If you have a blog reply to this comment with a link to your blog. That way I can help promote your Ron Paul related site as well as everyone else's, and they can do the same.
Search for every related news story related to Ron Paul sorting by most dugg.
Use the Stumble upons for the digg search as well as the individual articles, and digg and stumble them all.
Check out the videos by clicking on the links below the... Rate them 5 stars, and favorite them. Reply to the videos if you wish, send the videos to your friends, relatives, and whoever you can.
Add content to this blog. The more content, the better. Post a comment on this post that you want to guest blog, and I will give you the rights to do so. If you have a blog, I will do the same for you. We need to help each other out if we want to expand the Ron Paul Revolution. If you are a guest blogger, you can simply log in and publish posts to our Ron Paul blog. In addition, you can make your post an article and submit it to ezinearticles.com. I will do this for you if you want... a backlink back to this site or another Ron Paul related site is advisable so this way people can read the article, get interested in Ron Paul, and decide to find out more on him.
Make Posters and signs.
Favorite and rate 5 stars to every Ron Paul video you can, and press subscribe as well
google Ron Paul and use the Stumble "I like it" button on the toolbar for the google page" Visit the top few sites on there and Stumble them as well. Make a brief comment on them as well to help get his videos on the "mosted commented" list.
Much more to come... stay tuned to this site
Monday, January 7, 2008
Ron Paul takes New Hampshire!
That's exactly the type of headline I expect to see, now get out and vote!
Why The Federal Reserve MUST go!
"I believe that banking institutions are more
dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If
the American people EVER allow private banks to
control the issue of their currency, first by
inflation, then by deflation, the banks and
corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will
deprive the people of all property until their
children wake-up homeless on the continent their
fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken
from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it
properly belongs." -- Thomas Jefferson
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
— U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864
(letter to Col. William F. Elkins)
Ref: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan, 1950, NY)
"It is the mere truth to say that the financial resources of the country are not at the command of those who do not submit to the direction and domination of small groups of capitalists who wish to keep the economic development of the country under their own eye and guidance. The great monopoly in this country is the monopoly of big credits. So long as that exists, our old variety and freedom and individual energy of development are out of the question. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom
We are at the parting of the ways. We have, not one or two or three, but many, established and formidable monopolies in the United States. We have, not one or two, but many, fields of endeavor into which it is difficult, if not impossible, for the independent man to enter. We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men"
-Widrow Wilson
It is perfectly possible for a man to be out of prison, and yet not be free - to be under no physical constraint and yet to be a psychological captive, compelled to think, feel and act as the representatives of the national state, or of some private interest within the nation, wants him to think, feel and act.
"The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective."
— Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley, 1958
"There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution."
— Aldous Huxley, Tavistock Group, California Medical School, 1961
"The so-called Left-Right political spectrum is our creation. In fact, it is accurately reflects our careful, artificial polarization of the population on phony issues that prevents the issue of our power from arising in their minds... We control the Right-Left conflict such that both forms of liberty are suppressed to the degree we require. Our own liberty rests not on legal or 'moral' rights," but on our own control of the government bureaucracy and courts which apply the complex, subjective regulations we dupe the public into supporting for our benefit."
— The Occult Technology of Power
In November of 1975, Congressman Larry P. McDonald spearheaded efforts against the New World Order. He wrote the introduction to The Rockefeller File which stated: “The Rockefeller File is not fiction. It is a compact, powerful and frightening presentation of what may be the most important story of our lifetime - the drive of the Rockefellers and their allies to create a one-world government combining super-capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.......not one has dared reveal the most vital part of the Rockefeller story: that the Rockefellers and their allies have, for at least fifty years, been carefully following a plan to use their economic power to gain political control of first America, and then the rest of the world. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent”.
-McDonald
On 31 August 1983, McDonald was killed aboard Korean Airline 007 flight which "accidentally" strayed over Soviet airspace and was "accidentally" shot down. The media reporting was scant and short-lived and not a single mention was publicly made about the fact that McDonald had been heading a congressional effort to expose what he called a dangerous international conspiracy.
...endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government
It becomes aboslutely neccesary that Ron Paul wins, or else their WILL be a revolt from the government, maybe not now, maybe not a year from now, but soon.
dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If
the American people EVER allow private banks to
control the issue of their currency, first by
inflation, then by deflation, the banks and
corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will
deprive the people of all property until their
children wake-up homeless on the continent their
fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken
from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it
properly belongs." -- Thomas Jefferson
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
— U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864
(letter to Col. William F. Elkins)
Ref: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan, 1950, NY)
"It is the mere truth to say that the financial resources of the country are not at the command of those who do not submit to the direction and domination of small groups of capitalists who wish to keep the economic development of the country under their own eye and guidance. The great monopoly in this country is the monopoly of big credits. So long as that exists, our old variety and freedom and individual energy of development are out of the question. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom
We are at the parting of the ways. We have, not one or two or three, but many, established and formidable monopolies in the United States. We have, not one or two, but many, fields of endeavor into which it is difficult, if not impossible, for the independent man to enter. We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men"
-Widrow Wilson
It is perfectly possible for a man to be out of prison, and yet not be free - to be under no physical constraint and yet to be a psychological captive, compelled to think, feel and act as the representatives of the national state, or of some private interest within the nation, wants him to think, feel and act.
"The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective."
— Brave New World Revisited, Aldous Huxley, 1958
"There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution."
— Aldous Huxley, Tavistock Group, California Medical School, 1961
"The so-called Left-Right political spectrum is our creation. In fact, it is accurately reflects our careful, artificial polarization of the population on phony issues that prevents the issue of our power from arising in their minds... We control the Right-Left conflict such that both forms of liberty are suppressed to the degree we require. Our own liberty rests not on legal or 'moral' rights," but on our own control of the government bureaucracy and courts which apply the complex, subjective regulations we dupe the public into supporting for our benefit."
— The Occult Technology of Power
In November of 1975, Congressman Larry P. McDonald spearheaded efforts against the New World Order. He wrote the introduction to The Rockefeller File which stated: “The Rockefeller File is not fiction. It is a compact, powerful and frightening presentation of what may be the most important story of our lifetime - the drive of the Rockefellers and their allies to create a one-world government combining super-capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.......not one has dared reveal the most vital part of the Rockefeller story: that the Rockefellers and their allies have, for at least fifty years, been carefully following a plan to use their economic power to gain political control of first America, and then the rest of the world. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent”.
-McDonald
On 31 August 1983, McDonald was killed aboard Korean Airline 007 flight which "accidentally" strayed over Soviet airspace and was "accidentally" shot down. The media reporting was scant and short-lived and not a single mention was publicly made about the fact that McDonald had been heading a congressional effort to expose what he called a dangerous international conspiracy.
...endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government
It becomes aboslutely neccesary that Ron Paul wins, or else their WILL be a revolt from the government, maybe not now, maybe not a year from now, but soon.
Thursday, January 3, 2008
My Ron Paul Rant
You all know about the contraversy about Ron Paul as he said that the US policy was a contributing factor causing the september 11th attacks. But if Rudy would have read the 9/11 commission reports he would have realized that their were many admitting that there was blowback. The amount of people and antiamerican troops in Iraq and afghanistan has only gotten greater, not smaller.
But we've been brainwashed for years by the old media not to think for ourselves, and even the so called alternative media at times. They've tried to propagate the idea that "you can't fight the wars over there so we don't have to fight them here. But come on... you mean to tell me that if Iraq was occupying our holy land, our churches, our temples, our places for prayer, and killing many innocent lives that at least some of us wouldn't get out our tomahawks and guns and fight Mel Gibson Patriotic style all out? Of course we would!... And you mean to tell me that our government wouldn't orginize some sort of attack on Iraq in retaliation? That we wouldn't build up our military, and increasing the advertisement for increased millitary personell? If they were fighting us here, I know that if people were forced to pull out there guns and help that they would be more people joining the military.
Osama Bin Ladin sent out videos saying essentially "we are attacking you because you defend Israel our enemy and have not stopped... We are attacking you because you occupy our neighboring middle east countries..."
The US certainly wouldn't orginize an attack where the intention of killing them involves suiside bombing, but there would be many willing to die to defend it if need be. The logic "a best defense is a good offense" is incredibly faulty, because if they also maintain that same logic, we have no one to defend ourselves, and both countries end up destroying ourselves. They have the homefield advantage...
Meanwhile we have 130 or so countries occupied with US bases set up... there are only 190 countries. We have had troops in Korea, and everywhere. Bush in 2000 claimed that he would engge in no nation building, and use that as a point to beat Al Gore. He also claimed to advocate a humble foreign policy... From Bush's official who was fired (I can't recall his name if someone can help me out that'd be great, otherwize I'll look for a link), it was said that on day one he said "find me a way to go after Sadaam). Personally I'm curious about Bush's motivation. We live in a nation that unfortunately is becomming one of coorperations funding both sides of presidential campaigns... Special interest groups, etc. With Iraq having precious oil that is valuable to companies like Haliburton, it certainly is possible that Bush could only accept the money if he made certain agreements.
I for many years had thought the idea "war is bad, but sometimes there comes a time when it's neccesary." Although I still maintain that idea in some respect that idea has changed considerably and has become much more specific. Even if it is neccesary, it should not be done without the propper support from the representatives. And it should not be done pre emptively.
Dwight D Eisenhower can be found quoted as saying "Pre emptive war is an invension of Hitler, frankly I would not even listen to someone that proposed such an idea." Funny, Eisenhower was a republican.
Bush claims to be a republican, but he goes to war without the congress voting for it, without the approvqal of the UN, he's been quoed as saying "this would be a hcek of a lot easier if this was a dictatorship, as long as I was the dictator". In addition, Bush cliamed to be a man of humble foreign policy and no nation building, but he went to Iraq anyways and that's exactly what he's doing. He also said that he's a republican which stands for limited government. oh really? is that why he spent more money than all of the presidents in history combined? I regrettably supported Bush for 6 years with the 2004 vote being me not really considering him the "lesser of two evils", but more so me paying too much attention to why I disliked Kerry an believing somehow that killing more people in Iraq would lead to less deaths overall. Soon I started to question his actions more and more as I learned more about him. But there came a point when I couldn't write his actions off as the "liberal media bias". I did my own research, and certainly didn't like what I saw. I still think that there's certainly a decent possibility that Bush and Cheney might just be following the demands of special interest groups, and a small probability that he's protecting his secret fraternal order's agenda that both he and Kerry admitted to being members but saying "it's so secret we can't talk about it."
curiously enough, when someone asked about it in a joking matter to John Kerry he was pinned down and tased for not allowing the police to arrest him for expressing his freedom of speech. This resulted in him being tased annd that's when the infamous "dont tase me bro" resulted.
Well the american people seem to want to put an end to this, as do I, and I'm sure you do too...
Ron Paul also represents the people in this regard
He wants to End government secrecy; restore openness of information. (Aug 2007)
http://ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm
I demand some answers. The fact that there is such secracy is peculiar enough, nevermind the fact that people say Cheny ordered a stand down before the trade center was hit the 2nd time. nevermind the connection between Hitler and Bush both being quoted as saying "
"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland"
Adolf Hitler gave this speach when announcing the Gestapo to the people of Nazi Germany:
"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland"
I have only seen written quotes saying that Hitler said that quote, but I have seen video of Bush saying that exact quote.
But one connection is also peculiar. Hitler blamed the bombing of the radio tower on Poland, and eventually it lead to a holywar, which he later blamed the Jews. This was proved later to have been planned by Hitler. Now Bush retaliated to the September 11th attacks going after afghanistan. Somehow it turned to a war in Iraq, and an aggressive offensive pre emptive war in Iraq. Hitler used Pre emptive war and propagated the idea of an offensive war. The scariest thing about it is, both repiublican AND democratic candidates that are given the attention of the media support this preemptive strike.
Even if it's possible that the war would save more lives in the long run, which I know believe to be totally false unless there' somseone that actually starts taking action and declaring war and arming nukes, etc... It's not going to do so by much, and it's costing us 100's of billions of dollars. Think of how much more good we could do with that money.Huckabee, Guiliani, Romeny on one side... Clinton, Edwards, Obama on the other... All of these people are not even taking the idea of pre emptive war off the table involving Iran who doesn't even have an army, navy, military that could scare even a small police force. They don't have nuclear weapons, they may be in thre process of getting one, but if Reagan would have bombed the soviats, you bet the would have the inceentive to use one, and we would have had global nuclear war. Instead we had an arms race, and then after the Soviats realized they couldn't win without sever consequences for both sides, let alone the fact that they were probably just using the aqcuiring of these nukes to gain power and respect and robably weren't going to use it, we then agreed to disarm and disengage the nuclear weapons if they did. If he would have instead attacked, if either one of either us or the soviets atck, that could have meant the end of civilization . Pre emptive war is absolutely idiotic, especially with the possibility of nuclear war. Although I have looked into all of the other issues, for this reason alone is enough to support Ron Paul. Ron Paul wants to bring ALL of our troops home as soon as we can do so safely. That means all the troops that are in Korea, etc. That's saves us Millions oh wait... hundreds of billions of dollars a year. Then he can knock down the size of the government not only restoring our freedoms but saving us billions more. With that he can get rid of the IRS and promote free market and more people will spend money stimulating the economy, not weakening it. Andhe can then get rid of all the government ssecrecy, he can start using the government to print money rather then the federal reserve which is owned by privates banks and cost us interest. Then once the competing currency is down he can get rid of the federal reserve. He can get rid of the korrupt CIA that has lied to people in the past including presidents, and appears to have their own agenda.
This is a country that our forefathers fought, and many of our soldiers fought to keep free, keep the government limited and out of our lives. yet every year it's grown. Thomas Jefferson said something to the extend of, if it doeesn't work democracy), we should not return to a rule similar to Englad, but move more towards n anarchy such asthe native americans (that's a vague memory of what was actually said, but the idea is the same (I will check that quote to find the exact one if need be). For those of you that don't think anarchy can work, well that's exactly what we had in Massachucetts before the Declaration was signed... But people got along just fine without any rules, and they were very kind and friendly. Maybe anarchy can't work with such Tyrants that will invade aND PILLAGE LIKE THE ENGLISH INQUISITION, AND OTHERS MAY DO, BUT WE CERTAINLY CAN DO WITH A GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE THE WAY OUR FOREFATHERS WANTED. tHERE'S ONLY ONE PROBLEM WITH A VERY SMALL LIMITED GOVERNMENT, AND THAT'S THAT SECRET ORGINIZATIONS AND BROTHERHOOD CAN BECOME LARGE ENOUGH ESPECIALLY THROUGH COOPERATIONS FUNDING THE to infiltrate it. People can have connections with groups that have certain desires and motivation.. Fortunately I believe that with as much information avaluable as there is, we will know what people are involved in. The old addage "he who controls the eyeballs controlls the brain" is an important one to recognize as well. Unfortunately the mainstreem media has been able to do just that. But fortunately with technology and the internet being so avalilable to the public, people can find their own information. It would be nice, but unneccesary for the "mainstreem media" to also be run by the people for the people. It is my belief that the government should only act to PROTET our freedoms as technology grows. Fortunately for us, technology growth is big enough where government can't prevent the exchange of information. Even in a police state people would overthrow it in some areas and get the message out to the policemen. After seeing Nazi Germany in a police stte and so many people opposed, I very much doubt that that could happen, even by use of technology. Then people point to the possibility of election rigging. Sorry,the election rigging of Ohio has been exposed. Now that the information is out there, there's no way that if all of you act to ensure that the elections aren't rigged that they can do it. If everyone asks ahead of tiem for polls to be handcounted, recepts printed and handcounted and verified, ask to view the source code and have a copy of it. Post it on the online forums and ask your fellow computer nerds if th source code correctly counts every vote and not a vote more. If possible document your own vote, take pictures of you checking the presidential name whether it be Ronpaul or someone else.
They're clearly trying to hide the amount of support from Ron Paul, and the majority of the people that actually intend on voting will vote Ron Paul according to many polls. For the first time since I can remember the nation is actually uniting for one message, democrats and republicans alike... resotre our constitutional rights and stop fighting "100 year wars" that we can't afford. Forget titles of republican and democrat, you don't stand for a name for a party, you stand for certain values. If you're a pro life republican, shouldn't you be against the wars? If you're a "pro choice" democrat, shouldn't you have the choice to do what you want and not what the government tells you to?
Politics always has people use the term "anti aerican" to somehow indicate anyone who's against their personal agenda. Its nothing but word and emotional manipuliization, the only way you can be antiamerican is by promoting alarge government. If you don't support the slaughtering of certain goroups tht doesn't make you a terrorist does it? it's this double speak used in politics to manipulate to tell people what they want. A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for freedom, plain and simple.
But we've been brainwashed for years by the old media not to think for ourselves, and even the so called alternative media at times. They've tried to propagate the idea that "you can't fight the wars over there so we don't have to fight them here. But come on... you mean to tell me that if Iraq was occupying our holy land, our churches, our temples, our places for prayer, and killing many innocent lives that at least some of us wouldn't get out our tomahawks and guns and fight Mel Gibson Patriotic style all out? Of course we would!... And you mean to tell me that our government wouldn't orginize some sort of attack on Iraq in retaliation? That we wouldn't build up our military, and increasing the advertisement for increased millitary personell? If they were fighting us here, I know that if people were forced to pull out there guns and help that they would be more people joining the military.
Osama Bin Ladin sent out videos saying essentially "we are attacking you because you defend Israel our enemy and have not stopped... We are attacking you because you occupy our neighboring middle east countries..."
The US certainly wouldn't orginize an attack where the intention of killing them involves suiside bombing, but there would be many willing to die to defend it if need be. The logic "a best defense is a good offense" is incredibly faulty, because if they also maintain that same logic, we have no one to defend ourselves, and both countries end up destroying ourselves. They have the homefield advantage...
Meanwhile we have 130 or so countries occupied with US bases set up... there are only 190 countries. We have had troops in Korea, and everywhere. Bush in 2000 claimed that he would engge in no nation building, and use that as a point to beat Al Gore. He also claimed to advocate a humble foreign policy... From Bush's official who was fired (I can't recall his name if someone can help me out that'd be great, otherwize I'll look for a link), it was said that on day one he said "find me a way to go after Sadaam). Personally I'm curious about Bush's motivation. We live in a nation that unfortunately is becomming one of coorperations funding both sides of presidential campaigns... Special interest groups, etc. With Iraq having precious oil that is valuable to companies like Haliburton, it certainly is possible that Bush could only accept the money if he made certain agreements.
I for many years had thought the idea "war is bad, but sometimes there comes a time when it's neccesary." Although I still maintain that idea in some respect that idea has changed considerably and has become much more specific. Even if it is neccesary, it should not be done without the propper support from the representatives. And it should not be done pre emptively.
Dwight D Eisenhower can be found quoted as saying "Pre emptive war is an invension of Hitler, frankly I would not even listen to someone that proposed such an idea." Funny, Eisenhower was a republican.
Bush claims to be a republican, but he goes to war without the congress voting for it, without the approvqal of the UN, he's been quoed as saying "this would be a hcek of a lot easier if this was a dictatorship, as long as I was the dictator". In addition, Bush cliamed to be a man of humble foreign policy and no nation building, but he went to Iraq anyways and that's exactly what he's doing. He also said that he's a republican which stands for limited government. oh really? is that why he spent more money than all of the presidents in history combined? I regrettably supported Bush for 6 years with the 2004 vote being me not really considering him the "lesser of two evils", but more so me paying too much attention to why I disliked Kerry an believing somehow that killing more people in Iraq would lead to less deaths overall. Soon I started to question his actions more and more as I learned more about him. But there came a point when I couldn't write his actions off as the "liberal media bias". I did my own research, and certainly didn't like what I saw. I still think that there's certainly a decent possibility that Bush and Cheney might just be following the demands of special interest groups, and a small probability that he's protecting his secret fraternal order's agenda that both he and Kerry admitted to being members but saying "it's so secret we can't talk about it."
curiously enough, when someone asked about it in a joking matter to John Kerry he was pinned down and tased for not allowing the police to arrest him for expressing his freedom of speech. This resulted in him being tased annd that's when the infamous "dont tase me bro" resulted.
Well the american people seem to want to put an end to this, as do I, and I'm sure you do too...
Ron Paul also represents the people in this regard
He wants to End government secrecy; restore openness of information. (Aug 2007)
http://ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm
I demand some answers. The fact that there is such secracy is peculiar enough, nevermind the fact that people say Cheny ordered a stand down before the trade center was hit the 2nd time. nevermind the connection between Hitler and Bush both being quoted as saying "
"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland"
Adolf Hitler gave this speach when announcing the Gestapo to the people of Nazi Germany:
"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland"
I have only seen written quotes saying that Hitler said that quote, but I have seen video of Bush saying that exact quote.
But one connection is also peculiar. Hitler blamed the bombing of the radio tower on Poland, and eventually it lead to a holywar, which he later blamed the Jews. This was proved later to have been planned by Hitler. Now Bush retaliated to the September 11th attacks going after afghanistan. Somehow it turned to a war in Iraq, and an aggressive offensive pre emptive war in Iraq. Hitler used Pre emptive war and propagated the idea of an offensive war. The scariest thing about it is, both repiublican AND democratic candidates that are given the attention of the media support this preemptive strike.
Even if it's possible that the war would save more lives in the long run, which I know believe to be totally false unless there' somseone that actually starts taking action and declaring war and arming nukes, etc... It's not going to do so by much, and it's costing us 100's of billions of dollars. Think of how much more good we could do with that money.Huckabee, Guiliani, Romeny on one side... Clinton, Edwards, Obama on the other... All of these people are not even taking the idea of pre emptive war off the table involving Iran who doesn't even have an army, navy, military that could scare even a small police force. They don't have nuclear weapons, they may be in thre process of getting one, but if Reagan would have bombed the soviats, you bet the would have the inceentive to use one, and we would have had global nuclear war. Instead we had an arms race, and then after the Soviats realized they couldn't win without sever consequences for both sides, let alone the fact that they were probably just using the aqcuiring of these nukes to gain power and respect and robably weren't going to use it, we then agreed to disarm and disengage the nuclear weapons if they did. If he would have instead attacked, if either one of either us or the soviets atck, that could have meant the end of civilization . Pre emptive war is absolutely idiotic, especially with the possibility of nuclear war. Although I have looked into all of the other issues, for this reason alone is enough to support Ron Paul. Ron Paul wants to bring ALL of our troops home as soon as we can do so safely. That means all the troops that are in Korea, etc. That's saves us Millions oh wait... hundreds of billions of dollars a year. Then he can knock down the size of the government not only restoring our freedoms but saving us billions more. With that he can get rid of the IRS and promote free market and more people will spend money stimulating the economy, not weakening it. Andhe can then get rid of all the government ssecrecy, he can start using the government to print money rather then the federal reserve which is owned by privates banks and cost us interest. Then once the competing currency is down he can get rid of the federal reserve. He can get rid of the korrupt CIA that has lied to people in the past including presidents, and appears to have their own agenda.
This is a country that our forefathers fought, and many of our soldiers fought to keep free, keep the government limited and out of our lives. yet every year it's grown. Thomas Jefferson said something to the extend of, if it doeesn't work democracy), we should not return to a rule similar to Englad, but move more towards n anarchy such asthe native americans (that's a vague memory of what was actually said, but the idea is the same (I will check that quote to find the exact one if need be). For those of you that don't think anarchy can work, well that's exactly what we had in Massachucetts before the Declaration was signed... But people got along just fine without any rules, and they were very kind and friendly. Maybe anarchy can't work with such Tyrants that will invade aND PILLAGE LIKE THE ENGLISH INQUISITION, AND OTHERS MAY DO, BUT WE CERTAINLY CAN DO WITH A GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE THE WAY OUR FOREFATHERS WANTED. tHERE'S ONLY ONE PROBLEM WITH A VERY SMALL LIMITED GOVERNMENT, AND THAT'S THAT SECRET ORGINIZATIONS AND BROTHERHOOD CAN BECOME LARGE ENOUGH ESPECIALLY THROUGH COOPERATIONS FUNDING THE to infiltrate it. People can have connections with groups that have certain desires and motivation.. Fortunately I believe that with as much information avaluable as there is, we will know what people are involved in. The old addage "he who controls the eyeballs controlls the brain" is an important one to recognize as well. Unfortunately the mainstreem media has been able to do just that. But fortunately with technology and the internet being so avalilable to the public, people can find their own information. It would be nice, but unneccesary for the "mainstreem media" to also be run by the people for the people. It is my belief that the government should only act to PROTET our freedoms as technology grows. Fortunately for us, technology growth is big enough where government can't prevent the exchange of information. Even in a police state people would overthrow it in some areas and get the message out to the policemen. After seeing Nazi Germany in a police stte and so many people opposed, I very much doubt that that could happen, even by use of technology. Then people point to the possibility of election rigging. Sorry,the election rigging of Ohio has been exposed. Now that the information is out there, there's no way that if all of you act to ensure that the elections aren't rigged that they can do it. If everyone asks ahead of tiem for polls to be handcounted, recepts printed and handcounted and verified, ask to view the source code and have a copy of it. Post it on the online forums and ask your fellow computer nerds if th source code correctly counts every vote and not a vote more. If possible document your own vote, take pictures of you checking the presidential name whether it be Ronpaul or someone else.
They're clearly trying to hide the amount of support from Ron Paul, and the majority of the people that actually intend on voting will vote Ron Paul according to many polls. For the first time since I can remember the nation is actually uniting for one message, democrats and republicans alike... resotre our constitutional rights and stop fighting "100 year wars" that we can't afford. Forget titles of republican and democrat, you don't stand for a name for a party, you stand for certain values. If you're a pro life republican, shouldn't you be against the wars? If you're a "pro choice" democrat, shouldn't you have the choice to do what you want and not what the government tells you to?
Politics always has people use the term "anti aerican" to somehow indicate anyone who's against their personal agenda. Its nothing but word and emotional manipuliization, the only way you can be antiamerican is by promoting alarge government. If you don't support the slaughtering of certain goroups tht doesn't make you a terrorist does it? it's this double speak used in politics to manipulate to tell people what they want. A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for freedom, plain and simple.
Paul defends asking for special projects
By JENNIFER C. KERR, Associated Press Writer
Sun Dec 23, 3:12 PM ET
WASHINGTON - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul on Sunday defended his efforts in Congress to bring home money to his Texas district, despite his long-held aversion to big government and congressional votes to reign in federal spending.
"I've never voted for an earmark in my life," the Texas congressman said under questioning on NBC's "Meet the Press" about reports that he has requested hundreds of millions of dollars for special projects in his home district.
"I put them in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back," said Paul, who likened it to taking a tax credit. "I'm against the tax system, but I take all my tax credits. I want to get their money back for the people."
The 10-term congressman and longshot candidate for the Republican presidential nomination added that although he has requested special projects known as earmarks, he ultimately ends up voting against them in the House. Paul is known in Congress as "Dr. No" for his votes against some types of government spending, including a medal for Pope John Paul II and civil rights leader Rosa Parks because of the cost to taxpayers.
For his home state, however, Paul has sought money for water projects, a nursing program, to expand a hospital cancer center and to promote Texas shrimp.
Just last week, President Bush complained about thousands of earmarks in a massive spending bill Congress sent to him.
As the only Republican candidate opposed to the Iraq war, Paul was an anti-war asterisk in the race until his campaign began raising money, most of it over the Internet. He brought in a record $6 million in one day, and $18 million in less than three months, though he still registers in single digits in most polls.
Paul, who ran for president as a libertarian in 1988, was asked whether he'd run as a third-party candidate next year if he loses the GOP nomination.
Paul said that was unlikely. "I have no intention, no plans of doing it, and that's about 99.9 percent," said Paul, a 72-year-old obstetrician-gynecologist and former Air Force flight surgeon.
On other issues:
_Paul railed against the government's anti-drug policy, complaining that federal law overrules state laws that permit medicinal use of marijuana for pain or other symptoms of debilitating illnesses such as cancer, multiple sclerosis and other diseases. "This war on drugs is totally out of control. If you want to regulate cigarettes and alcohol and drugs, it should be at the state level," he said.
_Paul said he wants to eliminate foreign aid to Israel and other nations. "Why make Israel so dependent?" he asked. "They can't defend their borders without coming to us."
Sun Dec 23, 3:12 PM ET
WASHINGTON - Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul on Sunday defended his efforts in Congress to bring home money to his Texas district, despite his long-held aversion to big government and congressional votes to reign in federal spending.
"I've never voted for an earmark in my life," the Texas congressman said under questioning on NBC's "Meet the Press" about reports that he has requested hundreds of millions of dollars for special projects in his home district.
"I put them in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back," said Paul, who likened it to taking a tax credit. "I'm against the tax system, but I take all my tax credits. I want to get their money back for the people."
The 10-term congressman and longshot candidate for the Republican presidential nomination added that although he has requested special projects known as earmarks, he ultimately ends up voting against them in the House. Paul is known in Congress as "Dr. No" for his votes against some types of government spending, including a medal for Pope John Paul II and civil rights leader Rosa Parks because of the cost to taxpayers.
For his home state, however, Paul has sought money for water projects, a nursing program, to expand a hospital cancer center and to promote Texas shrimp.
Just last week, President Bush complained about thousands of earmarks in a massive spending bill Congress sent to him.
As the only Republican candidate opposed to the Iraq war, Paul was an anti-war asterisk in the race until his campaign began raising money, most of it over the Internet. He brought in a record $6 million in one day, and $18 million in less than three months, though he still registers in single digits in most polls.
Paul, who ran for president as a libertarian in 1988, was asked whether he'd run as a third-party candidate next year if he loses the GOP nomination.
Paul said that was unlikely. "I have no intention, no plans of doing it, and that's about 99.9 percent," said Paul, a 72-year-old obstetrician-gynecologist and former Air Force flight surgeon.
On other issues:
_Paul railed against the government's anti-drug policy, complaining that federal law overrules state laws that permit medicinal use of marijuana for pain or other symptoms of debilitating illnesses such as cancer, multiple sclerosis and other diseases. "This war on drugs is totally out of control. If you want to regulate cigarettes and alcohol and drugs, it should be at the state level," he said.
_Paul said he wants to eliminate foreign aid to Israel and other nations. "Why make Israel so dependent?" he asked. "They can't defend their borders without coming to us."
Paul Rivals Clinton, Raising Almost $20 Million for Campaign
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080101/pl_bloomberg/acilyj9ouudi
Kristin Jensen
Tue Jan 1, 12:55 PM ET
Jan. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Presidential candidate Ron Paul raised almost $20 million for his campaign in the last three months, potentially outpacing every one of his Republican rivals and putting his fundraising in league with Hillary Clinton's.
Paul, a U.S. representative from Texas, raised at least $19.5 million, according to a statement posted on his Web site. His campaign said today that he originally aimed to raise $12 million in the fourth quarter of 2007.
The take puts Paul on par with the top fundraisers in the Democratic Party, who outpaced Republicans last year. The campaign of New York Senator Clinton yesterday said she raised more than $100 million for the year, meaning she brought in at least $20 million in the fourth quarter.
Paul has drawn supporters with his libertarian message and his opposition to the war in Iraq, spurring a burst of donations on the Internet, the source of about 80 percent of the contributions last quarter, according to Paul spokesman Jesse Benton. In the three months through September, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani brought in the most contributions among Republicans, for a total of $11.5 million.
Presidential campaigns don't have to report fundraising figures until the end of January, though many give hints about their totals earlier than that. Arizona Senator John McCain, who's seeking the Republican presidential nomination, yesterday told reporters in New Hampshire that December was his best fundraising month since July. He gave no further details.
To contact the reporter on this story: Kristin Jensen in Iowa at kjensen@bloomberg.net
Kristin Jensen
Tue Jan 1, 12:55 PM ET
Jan. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Presidential candidate Ron Paul raised almost $20 million for his campaign in the last three months, potentially outpacing every one of his Republican rivals and putting his fundraising in league with Hillary Clinton's.
Paul, a U.S. representative from Texas, raised at least $19.5 million, according to a statement posted on his Web site. His campaign said today that he originally aimed to raise $12 million in the fourth quarter of 2007.
The take puts Paul on par with the top fundraisers in the Democratic Party, who outpaced Republicans last year. The campaign of New York Senator Clinton yesterday said she raised more than $100 million for the year, meaning she brought in at least $20 million in the fourth quarter.
Paul has drawn supporters with his libertarian message and his opposition to the war in Iraq, spurring a burst of donations on the Internet, the source of about 80 percent of the contributions last quarter, according to Paul spokesman Jesse Benton. In the three months through September, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani brought in the most contributions among Republicans, for a total of $11.5 million.
Presidential campaigns don't have to report fundraising figures until the end of January, though many give hints about their totals earlier than that. Arizona Senator John McCain, who's seeking the Republican presidential nomination, yesterday told reporters in New Hampshire that December was his best fundraising month since July. He gave no further details.
To contact the reporter on this story: Kristin Jensen in Iowa at kjensen@bloomberg.net
Ron Paul: an absolute faith in free markets and less government
By Gail Russell Chaddock
Wed Jan 2, 3:00 AM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080102/ts_csm/apaul
Berlin, N.H. - Ron Paul still looks surprised when his calls to follow the Constitution and restore a sound currency set off whoops of approval at a campaign stop.
The 10-term GOP congressman from Texas has been making these points for 30 years, with little to show for it beyond hundreds of House votes on the short end of 434 to 1. Critics called him a crank.
But lately, his views and values – the product of a lifetime of intense, self-directed study – are finding an audience. His message is basic: freedom and limited government. Repeal the welfare-warfare state. Get out of Iraq, now. Abolish the income tax. End the war on drugs. Put the dollar back on a more solid footing.
"Unlike some others, I wasn't really anxious to run for president," he tells supporters at Tea Bird's Café and Bistro in Berlin, N.H. "I didn't believe the country was ready for a strict constitutionalist."
When he says "strict," he means it. As a member of Congress, he refuses to vote for any bill not explicitly set out in the Constitution, earning him the nickname "Dr. No." He routinely votes against new taxes, deficit budgets, government surveillance, gun control, war funding, and the war on drugs. He would abolish the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Reserve, the US Departments of Education, Energy, and Commerce as well as other "unconstitutional domestic bureaucracies." He has called for America to withdraw from the World Trade Organization and the United Nations.
At the heart of Paul's worldview is a conviction that people are born free and should govern themselves – and that free markets make better decisions than governments do.
"Some people think I don't love governing, but it's different," he says in a Monitor interview. "I believe in self-governing and family governing. The responsibility is put more on the individual than on some huge monstrosity in Washington."
Family Roots
Paul traces his values of personal responsibility and self-reliance to his early family life. His father, Howard, the son of a German immigrant, ran a family dairy business in Green Tree, Pa., near Pittsburgh, where he pasteurized and bottled milk. The third of five sons, Paul learned responsibility and the work ethic at age 5 in the family basement. There, milk bottles were washed by hand, and he and his brothers earned a penny for every dirty bottle they spotted coming down a conveyer belt.
"We learned the incentive system," he says. The boys soon figured out that one of their uncles was a worse bottle washer than the other. "We liked to work for that one uncle, because we got more pennies," he says.
The five boys shared a small bedroom in a four-room house. From spring through fall, they slept outside in a small, screened porch. His grandmother and two uncles lived in the same family compound. His father hoped that all five sons would become Lutheran ministers; two of them did. "Confirmation was a big event in my family; birthdays weren't a big event," Paul says. His mother, Margaret, urged her sons to read and get an education.
"I would say that probably from the cradle, their ethic was work and church. That was it," says Carol Paul, the candidate's wife of 50 years. "They weren't a family that played a lot. Everything was serious."
The family lived two miles from the local high school. Although there was a bus to school, Paul preferred to run. He won the state championship in the 220-yard dash and ranked No. 2 in the 440-yard run in Pennsylvania. "He knew he was obligated to do with his God-given body the best he could," says Mrs. Paul. They met in high school at a track meet and married in his last year at Gettysburg College in Gettysburg, Pa., where he studied biology.
Paul says he briefly considered becoming a Lutheran minister, but opted instead for medicine. He graduated from Duke University Medical School in Durham, N.C., in 1961, and was just starting a residency in internal medicine when he was drafted into the US Air Force. From 1963 to 1965, he served as a flight surgeon, then moved to Texas to practice obstetrics. As an OB/GYN, he has delivered more than 4,000 babies.
Paul doesn't often talk about religion, at least not in the context of a political campaign. There's a reason the Gospels teach praying in secret, he says. Over the years, he has attended an Episcopal church, which "became more liberal than we were comfortable with," as well as an evangelical church. He currently attends Baptist services.
Austrian economics
The most decisive intellectual influence in Paul's life was his discovery, while in medical school, of a passion for economics. It started with two vast novels: Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" and Boris Pasternak's "Dr. Zhivago," a gift from his mother. Both books make a case for the threat that big government bureaucracies pose to creativity and liberty.
Later, he read his way into Austrian economics – the counterweight to Keynesian economic ideas that informed the New Deal. He read Friedrich Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom" – a book that influenced a generation of American conservatives – and especially Ludwig von Mises, a libertarian who extended the influence of the Austrian school of economics in the United States.
For the Austrian school, government intervention in free markets isn't a formula for long-term economic growth. Mises warned that over time it would cripple free markets and lead to state control. Free markets are always superior to a centrally planned economy, he wrote. Mises also advocated a non-inflationary gold standard – an idea that Paul has made his own in his 2007 book "The Case for Gold" and a forthcoming book "Pillars of Prosperity: Free Markets, Honest Money, Private Property."
In 1971, Paul and another local doctor closed their practices for a day and drove 60 miles to the University of Houston to hear Mises give one of his last lectures in the United States.
"I just thought it was fascinating. It made common sense – the sort of thing I would have concluded on my own, but the Austrian economists were a lot smarter," Paul says. He made friends with American economists such as Murray Rothbard, a student of Mises, and often visited Milton Friedman while continuing his own study of economics and world markets.
"He's been a very serious student of economics since medical school, and has read a huge amount of history – constitutional history and monetary history. His philosophical and economic views drive him and everything he does," says Llewellyn Rockwell, a former congressional chief of staff for Paul. Mr. Rockwell is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Ala., and maintains the popular website, lewrockwell.com.
As a physician, Paul says he came to resent government intervention in his practice. In his years as an OB/GYN, he didn't accept Medicare and Medicaid payments because he felt they represented unconstitutional government overreach. Sometimes, he'd treat patients for free.
"I found that government was interfering with my judgment as a doctor, disrupting the doctor/patient relationship, and making prices go up," he says.
But what drove him into public life was President Richard Nixon's decision in 1971 to break the last link between gold and US currency and impose wage and price controls. "I decided to speak out," he says.
A nation that spends, borrows, and prints too much money inevitably pays a price, he says. Unrestrained by a link to gold, the Federal Reserve can create too much credit, fueling housing and stock bubbles. The result: The dollar continues to goes down in value, the nation becomes ever more dependent on borrowing money abroad, and young people pay the price. A return to the gold standard restrains the government and restores the value of the dollar.
"My influence, such as it is, comes only by educating others about the rightness of the free market," he wrote in a 1984 essay, "Mises and Austrian Economics: A Personal View."
In Congress, Paul often speaks of his own record of consistency in voting against big government and refusing the perks it offers. He says he will not accept a government pension and did not seek government loans to help finance college for his five children. Paul, a longtime Ronald Reagan supporter, even voted against awarding the former president a Congressional Gold Medal in 2000, saying that taxpayers shouldn't be charged the $30,000 to mint the coin.
But critics note inconsistencies in Paul's long public record. For example, while Paul crusades against big government and voted against government funds for victims of hurricane Katrina, he has requested and won billions in special projects for his congressional district, which includes Galveston, Texas.
"I put it in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back…. And if Congress has the responsibility to spend the money, why leave the money in the executive branch and let them spend the money?" he said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Dec. 23.
At a recent town meeting in Conway, N.H., one audience member said he supported most of Paul's positions, but wondered whether government wasn't needed after all in the cases of monster storms, such as hurricane Katrina. Paul cited the case of the 1900 hurricane in Galveston, which he said rebuilt significantly without help from Washington.
Some libertarian critics also complain that his opposition to abortion rights for women violates libertarian principles of choice. In an interview, Paul says that he came to his views on abortion in part from his experience delivering babies. "From the very beginning, I had a moral and legal obligation to take care of two people, the mother and the child, and if I did anything wrong, I realized that I could be sued for it," he said. "That had an impact on me."
He recalls witnessing an illegal abortion in his first year out of medical school that made an impression, too. "Once I became more firmly entrenched with libertarian beliefs, I realized that another life was involved, I saw this as a principle of nonaggression, which libertarians adhere to. The baby has a choice, too."
For some Washington-based libertarians, Paul's success on the campaign trail is puzzling. "Because Ron Paul is personally a very traditional man, a small town guy, his libertarianism is embedded in a lot more traditionalism that you find in many libertarians," who bristle at his stance on abortion, for example, says Brian Doherty, senior editor at Reason Magazine, the leading libertarian political and cultural journal. "But many financial analysts, who are disproportionate fans of the Paul campaign, say that in their world, the stuff that might strike a normal American as kooky, such as restoring the gold standard, does not strike them as kooky, especially given how the dollar's value is plummeting. There isn't a single other candidate out there talking about their world in an interesting way – or at all," he adds.
A surge of grass-roots support
When Paul first ran for president as the Libertarian Party candidate in 1988, he won 0.54 percent of the vote. In his second presidential bid, he's on track to do better.
While Paul still polls only in single digits nationally and in early primary states, his supporters have raised more than $19 million since October, including a record $6.2 million on one day, Dec. 16. This unofficial, grass-roots campaign is out-organizing all other campaigns over the Internet and recently launched a Ron Paul blimp.
"I'm not surprised that the views are popular, but I'm surprised to the extent that people have rallied and gotten spontaneously involved and done so much in fundraising and campaign events," Paul said in a Monitor interview.
Paul says his campaign is still working out what to do with the last quarter's surge of campaign contributions. "It's a real job figuring out what to do with it," he says. "We're going to budget it out. It just means it's a lot easier planning for super-Tuesday [on Feb. 5], when we have money in the bank."
In Iowa, the campaign has used new funds to quickly ramp up a ground operation. In New Hampshire, it launched new television and radio ads.
Some experts say polls may be undercounting Paul's support, because so many of his backers haven't voted in the past and use cellphones rather than the landlines, which pollsters use. That's why Paul "is likely to do better on election day than polls say he might," said Fergus Cullen, chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party in an interview for C-SPAN's "Newsmakers" on Sunday.
Wed Jan 2, 3:00 AM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080102/ts_csm/apaul
Berlin, N.H. - Ron Paul still looks surprised when his calls to follow the Constitution and restore a sound currency set off whoops of approval at a campaign stop.
The 10-term GOP congressman from Texas has been making these points for 30 years, with little to show for it beyond hundreds of House votes on the short end of 434 to 1. Critics called him a crank.
But lately, his views and values – the product of a lifetime of intense, self-directed study – are finding an audience. His message is basic: freedom and limited government. Repeal the welfare-warfare state. Get out of Iraq, now. Abolish the income tax. End the war on drugs. Put the dollar back on a more solid footing.
"Unlike some others, I wasn't really anxious to run for president," he tells supporters at Tea Bird's Café and Bistro in Berlin, N.H. "I didn't believe the country was ready for a strict constitutionalist."
When he says "strict," he means it. As a member of Congress, he refuses to vote for any bill not explicitly set out in the Constitution, earning him the nickname "Dr. No." He routinely votes against new taxes, deficit budgets, government surveillance, gun control, war funding, and the war on drugs. He would abolish the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Reserve, the US Departments of Education, Energy, and Commerce as well as other "unconstitutional domestic bureaucracies." He has called for America to withdraw from the World Trade Organization and the United Nations.
At the heart of Paul's worldview is a conviction that people are born free and should govern themselves – and that free markets make better decisions than governments do.
"Some people think I don't love governing, but it's different," he says in a Monitor interview. "I believe in self-governing and family governing. The responsibility is put more on the individual than on some huge monstrosity in Washington."
Family Roots
Paul traces his values of personal responsibility and self-reliance to his early family life. His father, Howard, the son of a German immigrant, ran a family dairy business in Green Tree, Pa., near Pittsburgh, where he pasteurized and bottled milk. The third of five sons, Paul learned responsibility and the work ethic at age 5 in the family basement. There, milk bottles were washed by hand, and he and his brothers earned a penny for every dirty bottle they spotted coming down a conveyer belt.
"We learned the incentive system," he says. The boys soon figured out that one of their uncles was a worse bottle washer than the other. "We liked to work for that one uncle, because we got more pennies," he says.
The five boys shared a small bedroom in a four-room house. From spring through fall, they slept outside in a small, screened porch. His grandmother and two uncles lived in the same family compound. His father hoped that all five sons would become Lutheran ministers; two of them did. "Confirmation was a big event in my family; birthdays weren't a big event," Paul says. His mother, Margaret, urged her sons to read and get an education.
"I would say that probably from the cradle, their ethic was work and church. That was it," says Carol Paul, the candidate's wife of 50 years. "They weren't a family that played a lot. Everything was serious."
The family lived two miles from the local high school. Although there was a bus to school, Paul preferred to run. He won the state championship in the 220-yard dash and ranked No. 2 in the 440-yard run in Pennsylvania. "He knew he was obligated to do with his God-given body the best he could," says Mrs. Paul. They met in high school at a track meet and married in his last year at Gettysburg College in Gettysburg, Pa., where he studied biology.
Paul says he briefly considered becoming a Lutheran minister, but opted instead for medicine. He graduated from Duke University Medical School in Durham, N.C., in 1961, and was just starting a residency in internal medicine when he was drafted into the US Air Force. From 1963 to 1965, he served as a flight surgeon, then moved to Texas to practice obstetrics. As an OB/GYN, he has delivered more than 4,000 babies.
Paul doesn't often talk about religion, at least not in the context of a political campaign. There's a reason the Gospels teach praying in secret, he says. Over the years, he has attended an Episcopal church, which "became more liberal than we were comfortable with," as well as an evangelical church. He currently attends Baptist services.
Austrian economics
The most decisive intellectual influence in Paul's life was his discovery, while in medical school, of a passion for economics. It started with two vast novels: Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" and Boris Pasternak's "Dr. Zhivago," a gift from his mother. Both books make a case for the threat that big government bureaucracies pose to creativity and liberty.
Later, he read his way into Austrian economics – the counterweight to Keynesian economic ideas that informed the New Deal. He read Friedrich Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom" – a book that influenced a generation of American conservatives – and especially Ludwig von Mises, a libertarian who extended the influence of the Austrian school of economics in the United States.
For the Austrian school, government intervention in free markets isn't a formula for long-term economic growth. Mises warned that over time it would cripple free markets and lead to state control. Free markets are always superior to a centrally planned economy, he wrote. Mises also advocated a non-inflationary gold standard – an idea that Paul has made his own in his 2007 book "The Case for Gold" and a forthcoming book "Pillars of Prosperity: Free Markets, Honest Money, Private Property."
In 1971, Paul and another local doctor closed their practices for a day and drove 60 miles to the University of Houston to hear Mises give one of his last lectures in the United States.
"I just thought it was fascinating. It made common sense – the sort of thing I would have concluded on my own, but the Austrian economists were a lot smarter," Paul says. He made friends with American economists such as Murray Rothbard, a student of Mises, and often visited Milton Friedman while continuing his own study of economics and world markets.
"He's been a very serious student of economics since medical school, and has read a huge amount of history – constitutional history and monetary history. His philosophical and economic views drive him and everything he does," says Llewellyn Rockwell, a former congressional chief of staff for Paul. Mr. Rockwell is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Ala., and maintains the popular website, lewrockwell.com.
As a physician, Paul says he came to resent government intervention in his practice. In his years as an OB/GYN, he didn't accept Medicare and Medicaid payments because he felt they represented unconstitutional government overreach. Sometimes, he'd treat patients for free.
"I found that government was interfering with my judgment as a doctor, disrupting the doctor/patient relationship, and making prices go up," he says.
But what drove him into public life was President Richard Nixon's decision in 1971 to break the last link between gold and US currency and impose wage and price controls. "I decided to speak out," he says.
A nation that spends, borrows, and prints too much money inevitably pays a price, he says. Unrestrained by a link to gold, the Federal Reserve can create too much credit, fueling housing and stock bubbles. The result: The dollar continues to goes down in value, the nation becomes ever more dependent on borrowing money abroad, and young people pay the price. A return to the gold standard restrains the government and restores the value of the dollar.
"My influence, such as it is, comes only by educating others about the rightness of the free market," he wrote in a 1984 essay, "Mises and Austrian Economics: A Personal View."
In Congress, Paul often speaks of his own record of consistency in voting against big government and refusing the perks it offers. He says he will not accept a government pension and did not seek government loans to help finance college for his five children. Paul, a longtime Ronald Reagan supporter, even voted against awarding the former president a Congressional Gold Medal in 2000, saying that taxpayers shouldn't be charged the $30,000 to mint the coin.
But critics note inconsistencies in Paul's long public record. For example, while Paul crusades against big government and voted against government funds for victims of hurricane Katrina, he has requested and won billions in special projects for his congressional district, which includes Galveston, Texas.
"I put it in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back…. And if Congress has the responsibility to spend the money, why leave the money in the executive branch and let them spend the money?" he said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Dec. 23.
At a recent town meeting in Conway, N.H., one audience member said he supported most of Paul's positions, but wondered whether government wasn't needed after all in the cases of monster storms, such as hurricane Katrina. Paul cited the case of the 1900 hurricane in Galveston, which he said rebuilt significantly without help from Washington.
Some libertarian critics also complain that his opposition to abortion rights for women violates libertarian principles of choice. In an interview, Paul says that he came to his views on abortion in part from his experience delivering babies. "From the very beginning, I had a moral and legal obligation to take care of two people, the mother and the child, and if I did anything wrong, I realized that I could be sued for it," he said. "That had an impact on me."
He recalls witnessing an illegal abortion in his first year out of medical school that made an impression, too. "Once I became more firmly entrenched with libertarian beliefs, I realized that another life was involved, I saw this as a principle of nonaggression, which libertarians adhere to. The baby has a choice, too."
For some Washington-based libertarians, Paul's success on the campaign trail is puzzling. "Because Ron Paul is personally a very traditional man, a small town guy, his libertarianism is embedded in a lot more traditionalism that you find in many libertarians," who bristle at his stance on abortion, for example, says Brian Doherty, senior editor at Reason Magazine, the leading libertarian political and cultural journal. "But many financial analysts, who are disproportionate fans of the Paul campaign, say that in their world, the stuff that might strike a normal American as kooky, such as restoring the gold standard, does not strike them as kooky, especially given how the dollar's value is plummeting. There isn't a single other candidate out there talking about their world in an interesting way – or at all," he adds.
A surge of grass-roots support
When Paul first ran for president as the Libertarian Party candidate in 1988, he won 0.54 percent of the vote. In his second presidential bid, he's on track to do better.
While Paul still polls only in single digits nationally and in early primary states, his supporters have raised more than $19 million since October, including a record $6.2 million on one day, Dec. 16. This unofficial, grass-roots campaign is out-organizing all other campaigns over the Internet and recently launched a Ron Paul blimp.
"I'm not surprised that the views are popular, but I'm surprised to the extent that people have rallied and gotten spontaneously involved and done so much in fundraising and campaign events," Paul said in a Monitor interview.
Paul says his campaign is still working out what to do with the last quarter's surge of campaign contributions. "It's a real job figuring out what to do with it," he says. "We're going to budget it out. It just means it's a lot easier planning for super-Tuesday [on Feb. 5], when we have money in the bank."
In Iowa, the campaign has used new funds to quickly ramp up a ground operation. In New Hampshire, it launched new television and radio ads.
Some experts say polls may be undercounting Paul's support, because so many of his backers haven't voted in the past and use cellphones rather than the landlines, which pollsters use. That's why Paul "is likely to do better on election day than polls say he might," said Fergus Cullen, chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party in an interview for C-SPAN's "Newsmakers" on Sunday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)