For most, “politician” has become a dirty word. Calling someone a “politician” these days has negative connotations. One need not even use the modifier, “typical”, in front of the jab anymore to maintain its full effect. Ron Paul is hardly a politician, but he practices politics. He is the worst example of a politician. Today that is probably the nicest compliment one could give to one who practices politics. On the other end of the spectrum lies Hillary Clinton. She is a politician. She served as an apprentice under probably the greatest politician of recent years: Bill Clinton. That is no compliment.
Like many from the left, Hillary Clinton’s brand of politics panders to emotion. The truth is treated as a secondary unnecessary evil. Her willingness to lie and distort in order to gain favor is quickly becoming legendary. The writing is on the wall though. If she were to become our next President, there seems to be no doubt her legendary chronic lying will equal her husband’s grand lies. I’m not saying she will say the words, “I did not have sex with that woman…”, although that certainly would be interesting. I’m merely saying she comes from the same mold.
The latest from DownsizeDC.org urges us to tell congress to stop wasting our tax dollars on the devastating scam of ethanol production.
Quote of the Day:
“Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people.”
– Oscar Wilde “The Soul of Man Under Socialism,” 1891
Fact of the Day:
British dentists have been forced to go on holiday because they’ve fulfilled the annual work quotas allotted to them by the National Health Service. The dentists are denying treatment to patients because the government will not pay them to do the work. More than 7 million British citizens are unable to find an NHS dentist. Universal access?
Throughout Ron Paul’s campaign he has been called many inaccurate and demeaning names: kook, mayor of crazytown, etc.. It is interesting that not many people call him a pacifist. For someone who rejects preemptive war and wishes the troops would come home from overseas, that is surprising. Also interesting is that it is proper not to label him a pacifist, but the truth never stopped them before.
He voted for going after Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan. He has continually spoken as a proponent for the Christian “just war” doctrine. So if an attack is truly imminent or if a retaliatory strike is required he would be for it. It comes down to a matter of focus. He focuses on defense, while our recent policy focus from both Democrats and Republicans has been on offense.
Contrast this with labeling John McCain a warmonger. Ed Schultz, a left leaning radio talk show host, called McCain a “warmonger” at an Obama rally over the weekend. The McCain campaign cried foul and sure enough, the Obama campaign rejected the remark as false. By definition John McCain is a warmonger. No one should be apologizing or crying foul. He advocated the “surge”. He advocates maintaining a presence in Iraq for possibly 100 years. He has also said that “there will be more wars.”
If John McCain is not a warmonger then Ron Paul doesn’t believe in the Constitution.
It’s too bad the Obama campaign doesn’t have the political chops to publicly stand behind a comment everyone knows to be true. I guess that’s why his campaign is all about the audacity of hope, instead of the audacity of truth. For me, I’d rather have truth.
Bob Barr fled the Republican Party and dashed over to the Libertarian Party a few years ago. Today he announced he is forming an exploratory committee for seeking the Libertarian nomination for President. As written previously on Liberty Maven I support this move wholeheartedly.
Well, what’s with the exploratory committee BS anyway? Why not just come out and say, “Listen liberty lovers, I’m in, and I’m in to win!” It’s getting so bad that someday potential candidates will announce they are forming an exploratory committee to consider forming an exploratory committee to seek the nomination. I suppose this is a method to get the word out to more people about his candidacy. Ron Paul did the same a year ago.
The most interesting aspect of Barr’s candidacy is how it will benefit from the battles already won by Ron Paul. Ron Paul has a lot of vocal and opinionated supporters and certainly not all of them will end up being Barr-tards, to borrow probably the most idiotic name for Paul supporters (courtesy of the smarmy but sometimes humorous idiots over at Wonkette).
The bottom line is, if Bob Barr, Hillary or Obama, and John McCain are on the ballot in November, Bob Barr is my choice. No question, I’ll be a Barr-tard. See Bob Barr’s announcement video below. Also, for those that don’t understand the title of this article, check out Babar’s wikipedia page. Or if you want the real thing, check out Bob Barr’s own wikipedia page.
Stories from various places and sources reveal that opposition to the REAL ID Act is growing. First there is an editorial in the OC Register denouncing it.
The big trouble is that there’s no evidence that this Draconian act, even if fully implemented, would be more than a minor inconvenience for a determined terrorist. But having all that information – including copies of birth certificates and Social Security cards – available in one database would make an irresistible target for identity thieves. And it would be a major inconvenience for millions of innocent Americans and a major expense for state governments – meaning taxpayers. (Source Article)
In the Missouri legislature a new Anti-REAL ID law is getting a lot of support. “Derdy” on Ron Paul Forums posted the text of the bill introduced by Rep. Jim Guest and notes the following, “This bill passed committee by 8-0 and has 36 co-sponsors! Final vote is coming up soon.” The bill “prohibits the violation of a person’s privacy rights in order to obtain or renew a driver’s license,” according to the summary.
Finally, perhaps the most interesting news comes from CNET in a story showing a graphic of the entire United States colored in green. The green color indicates states that have been granted a waiver on their licenses not being accepted for airline travel beginning on May 11th, 2008. In effect, all states have now been granted this waiver, even though many states have stated they will not now nor ever support the federally mandated REAL ID.
Perhaps the most interesting thing is that states that have outright rejected REAL ID have sent the Department of Homeland Security notices telling them as much. Yet DHS has used those statements of REAL ID rejection as evidence to grant the state a waiver. In the end this looks more and more like a triumph for states rights and the tenth amendment. In fact, the CNET article’s conclusion says as much.
“DHS is not in power here,” said Jim Harper, the director of information policy studies at the free-market Cato Institute. “The states are in power. DHS has done all it could, but from a position of weakness…DHS put the best face it could on its capitulation to states with backbone. A lot more states will recognize that they own this issue, they control this debate.” (Source Article from CNET)
The battle against REAL ID is not over, but it may be safe to say that privacy and liberty is on the side that is currently winning. And I have to say it, Ron Paul told you so!
Bob Barr is reportedly ready to announce his candidacy for the Libertarian Party Presidential nomination Saturday during his speech at the Heartland Libertarian Conference in Kansas City. This has been rumored for quite a long time, and now seems like a certainty.
Bob Barr was a guest on Sean Hannity’s radio program yesterday and was accused by Hannity of handing the White House to the Democratic nominee. Barr had nothing of that saying, “If McCain is not able to pull enough votes to win outright, then shame on him” and he is “tired of hearing all the whining”.
Barr will pull in a sizable portion of the almost 1 million Ron Paul supporters. He will pull votes from the Democrat because of his civil liberties advocacy. He will pull votes from John McCain because of his conservative roots. If he were to get the Libertarian nomination, he could conceivably get more votes than any Libertarian candidate in history.
The idea that his candidacy will lead to the Democrat winning the White House; I’m not buying it. There seems to be only one publication willing to agree with me. Everyone else sees it as a foregone conclusion that a Barr run equates to a Democratic win. I suppose we’ll find out if there is a chance of this on Saturday following Barr’s speech.
Bob Barr has some events in his past that call into question his character, but faced with the choice between he, Hillary, Obama, or McCain, he wins my vote every time.
Barr introduced Ron Paul at CPAC this year and his association with Paul will likely be used by some neo-conservative McCain lovers against him. I think (and hope) the effect of this will be trivial.
It is interesting to ponder whether Bob Barr would be doing this if it weren’t for Ron Paul’s enthusiastic support in his own campaign. No doubt, Ron Paul will be happy to help Barr in any way he can. Paul will not likely endorse Barr. Paul is a Republican and endorsing a Libertarian spits in the face of the GOP he’s trying to change from within. It would not surprise me to see mass emails going out to Ron Paul supporters supporting Barr for President. The Barr campaign can purchase the list and start jockeying for support immediately.
One of the more interesting developments that will come out of Barr’s candidacy is how much Ron Paul will help “raise the Barr.”
This is an excellent article from the student newspaper about Ron Paul’s rally at the University of Pittsburgh last night.
Rep. Ron Paul, the Republican presidential candidate from Texas who runs his campaign based on a platform of libertarian “revolution,” greeted a full auditorium of student and community supporters at Bellefield Hall last night.
When the rally opened with chants of “Ron Paul” and a standing ovation, Paul said, “It sounds like the revolution has arrived in Pittsburgh.”
Although John McCain has nearly secured the Republican presidential nomination, Paul asked supporters to buy his new book, “The Revolution: A Manifesto,” to bring more attention to his campaign. He said the media ignores his presidential bid, but that other candidates have admitted Paul has many enthusiastic supporters.
“Even though we have not been showing up at the polls like we can and should and will, we have enthusiasm,” Paul said.
The ideological Ron Paul math can be summed up with the following expression:
Ron Paul(Foreign Policy) + Ron Paul(Economy) = The Solution
Ron Paul’s position on foreign policy is consistent with his position on economics. He preaches non-intervention overseas and the deregulation of markets. His positions are interesting in that they steadfastly refuse to contradict each other. Likewise, He is pro-life and against the death penalty. Many other Republicans contradict their pro-life view by supporting the death penalty.
His is a true non-interventionist position. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have a faux non-interventionist position. They make the colossal mistake of thinking that pulling out of Iraq is enough non-intervention. Ron Paul correctly and consistently points out that Iraq is only part of the entire foreign policy portrait. Obama and Clinton do not preach non-interventionism because they don’t believe in the principle. They will not bring our troops home from Germany or Korea. They advocate repositioning troops from Iraq to Afghanistan. This is hardly any real “change” from George W. Bush. Chances are neither would even follow up on their promise to bring our troops home from Iraq. Certainly, some new excuse to keep troops there can be manufactured when the time comes.
Ron Paul appeared for a very short segment on Cavuto’s show this evening speaking about the Fed and regulation (what else?). Nothing new, but nice exposure.
Ron Paul was on KDKA Pittsburgh again this morning following his longer and more in depth interview last night. The morning news program promoted his appearance by including him in their news reports at the top of each hour leading up to this interview.
The interview was short (about 7 minutes) and very general. The most interesting portion was when Ron Paul spoke of remembering the area where he grew up near Pittsburgh. This was great exposure during morning drive time.
Liberty Maven
Loading ...
