Liberty Maven

In one of the more interesting exchanges in last night’s GOP Debate on FOX News, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann found some time to disagree with each other. Without checking on the facts of what each said, one could walk away believing something that was just not true. Which candidate lied? Here is your answer from “FACT CHECK” via the AP:

MICHELE BACHMANN: “We have an IAEA report that just recently came out that said literally Iran is within just months of being able to obtain that (a nuclear) weapon.”
RON PAUL: “There is no U.N. report that said that. It’s totally wrong, what you just said.”
Bachmann: “It’s the IAEA report.”
THE FACTS: As Paul said, the report of the International Atomic Energy Agency does not state that Iran is within months of having nuclear arms. The U.N. agency report does suggest that Iran conducted secret experiments whose sole purpose is the development of nuclear weapons but did not put a time frame on when Iran might succeed in building a bomb, and it made no final conclusion on Tehran’s intent.
Bachmann also erred by arguing that Iran has “stated they will use it (a nuclear weapon) against the United States.”
Iran vehemently rejects that it is developing a nuclear bomb, let alone that it plans to drop one on the U.S.

Yes, unsurprisingly it was Michelle Bachmann who lied or I guess if you are a supporter of hers, “stretched the truth”. Bachmann also appears to have lied about what is in the Iranian Constitution, claiming it “states unequivocally” to stretch “jihad across the world”. Well, unless the Wikipedia interpretation of the Iranian Constitution is wrong I see no mention of “jihad” or “caliphate”. In fact, it directly mentions foreign policy in section X, saying in part:

Article 152 The foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is based upon the rejection of all forms of domination, both the exertion of it and submission to it, the preservation of the independence of the country in all respects and its territorial integrity, the defence of the rights of all Muslims, non-alignment with respect to the hegemonic superpowers, and the maintenance of mutually peaceful relations with all non-belligerent States.

There is certainly no “unequivocal” mention of jihad against the world. Hopefully voters will see through Bachmann’s and Santorum’s melodramatic horse-hockey.

Here are all of Ron Paul’s moments in the debate, totaling over 18 minutes:

DONATE TODAY! It’s Tea Party ’11 Money Bomb Time.

It is so predictable. Now that Ron Paul is a real threat to win Iowa it is no surprise that the pea-brained pundits have begun to throw stones. First up, Chris Wallace, who stated that a Ron Paul victory would mean that “Iowa won’t count”. His reasoning was because most establishment GOP insiders don’t think Ron Paul will get the nomination. The typical Ron Paul supporter is used to this, but to me this comment should make Iowans more angry than anyone. Wallace will host tonight’s debate in Iowa on Fox News channel. Should be interesting.

Next up are two familiar tools of status-quo politics discussing Ron Paul’s recent poll numbers in Iowa. Of course, I’m talking about Bill O’Reilly and Dick Morris. Dick Morris actually appears to shudder when he considers (and then immediately dismisses) the possibility of Ron Paul being the GOP nominee. What Morris doesn’t realize is that when he speaks later in the segment about his “cockroach theory” (whatever that means) he’s actually describing the very reason Ron Paul would win against Obama and not one of his choices of Romney or Gingrich.

This just, once again, proves what a monumental task Ron Paul is up against in his quest to spread liberty by leading by example rather than leading by a leash. The pundits are coming out in droves to discredit Paul’s candidacy because they don’t want to be forced to vote for him if he should get the nomination. I’d love for one of these tools to answer the question, “If Ron Paul gets the nomination would you support him?” They’d likely dismiss the question as “impossible” rather than admit they’d support him, eventually.

Paul has a long road ahead of him. Not only must he actually win enough votes in each state, but he must also win over the pundits and their despicable preliminary coronations of other candidates. Doing enough of the former will help with the latter. One thing is for sure, Ron Paul’s campaign this time around is not an educational effort like it was in 2008. He’s all in and if Ron Paul wins, America wins.

————–
Don’t forget to pledge and donate this Friday for the Tea Party 2011 Money Bomb. It’s one way that we can punch back at the Dick Morris types.

I’ve watched Ron Paul over the course of several years, drinking in his comments and positions. At times I actually find myself bored with him because I already know what his answer will be. Of course this also demonstrates just how consistent Paul is. In the ABC GOP debate last night I’m not sure I saw him perform better. I don’t know if I would have said this a year ago, as I tend to be realistic about things, but he could win Iowa. He could win New Hampshire. Hell, he could even be the GOP nominee. I’ll discuss that more in a future article. For now, watch Ron Paul’s answer’s during the debate below and marvel at how he’s transformed himself into a more polished, calm, and charming candidate to go along with his life-long love of liberty.

Have you ever checked a “Terms of Service” agreement without reading it? Have you ever been less-than-truthful in an email or social network?

Then you may be a criminal. At least, that’s what the Justice Department claims, and they want to strengthen the law to ensure that they have the power to prosecute you.

That’s why I sent a letter to my Representative and Senators to resist this power-grab and protect our freedom to use the Internet.

I hope you do the same, and you may borrow from or copy this letter… Read More »

The U.S. Senate is about to take some law enforcement powers from the Justice Department, and give greater policing powers to the Department of Defense. These policing powers can (and will) be used on American soil. It appears that, under just two small sections of the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1867). . .

1. American citizens and lawful resident aliens, could be held, INDEFINITELY, jailed.
2. Other persons can be DISAPPEARED by the military, without benefit of habeas corpus or trial. And worse…
3. These other persons can also be shipped off to a foreign judicial system that might deliver a result the Justice Department wants.

The sponsors of this bill claim that this bill contains no new powers — that they’re merely codifying the behavior of two (renegade) administrations. 

Yet two of the bill’s Senate backers admit there is a new power: The ability of the military to engage in police work on American soil — Posse Comitatus be damned.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who backs the bill, indicated that the bill “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”

Here’s a link to a copy of the two offending sections, 1031 and 1032, which must be removed by amendment.

In 1031 the Federal State gains the power of indefinite imprisonment without trial. In 1032, American citizens and lawful resident aliens must be given civilian jails for their potentially permanent stays, and cannot be shipped off for a show trial by a convenient foreign power.

Read More »

Quote of the Day: “The FDA helped kill my dad.” — Jim Babka, President, Downsize DC

We’ve launched a new campaign. This one aims to trim the power of the FDA (the Food and Drug Administration).

The hardwired portion of the letter to Congress for this new campaign reads…

Make the FDA advisory, not mandatory.

We’ve placed this campaign under the Our Heresies tab on our website, because we know it will take the public time to catch up to the truth.

We think the evidence is overwhelming that the FDA is worse than bad. The FDA is evil. It kills people…

• It denies people access to life-saving treatments
• It treats unique human beings as if they were genetically identical clones with exactly the same needs and risks
• It hobbles research
• It creates barriers to entry for new companies
• It makes medicines and supplements more expensive than they need to be
• It serves the interests of Big Pharma at the expense of the consumer
• It violates the First Amendment, by restricting commercial speech
• It opposes prevention, preferring that people get sick first, before they can Read More »

It occurs to me (and many others) that if the GOP wants nothing more than to just beat Obama then Ron Paul is the most viable candidate in the Republican field. I’ll make a prediction. If any other candidate is the GOP nominee then Obama will be settling in to the Oval Office for “4 more years” in 2013. That is of course if the world doesn’t end in December of 2012… oops… did some “crazy Ron Paul supporter” juice just leak out of me by mistake? Maybe.

There are Republicans that will only vote Republican and stand behind the nominee no matter who it is.

There are Democrats that believe in unicorns, double rainbows, and “Yes we can!” that will vote for Obama no matter how much his actions suggest “Oh no we didn’t!”.

Then there are the the rest of us who will vote for the guy (Sorry Michele and Sarah but you gals don’t have a chance… how’s that feel coming from a Ron Paul supporter?) that actually agrees with us on approximately 80 to 100% of what we believe in.

If Ron Paul were the GOP nominee Obama would be forced to attack from the right on foreign policy, alienating those liberal voters who are ignorantly sympathetic to the drone-bombing fetishist, Nobel Peace Prize winner. Obama would be compelled to “let-me-be-clear” his way out of not being very clear on why there are still troops in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and maybe Syria and “Pock-ih-stohn”.

Now where would those voters turn after being stabbed in the back by their warmonger-in-chief? That’s right, the only other candidate in the race with years of truth and integrity spilling out of him: Ron Paul.

Nearly every question Paul received during the debate last week on MSNBC was obviously aimed at scaring people who have become dependent on the federal government. Even the CNN “Tea Party” debate earlier this week had some of this as well. Don’t fall for their magic markers. Paint your own picture of who Ron Paul is and what he believes (this video is a great start).

Newsflash: Hey MSNBC viewers, everything you despise about FOX News is exactly what MSNBC does except the paint dries blue, not red.

You have to take the crazy out of yourself before you will notice that Ron Paul is just not crazy. He is the candidate with the most common sense. I’m sure that one of Paul’s trusted advisers said to him prior to the debate, “Ron, if you look at the rest of the candidates on that stage, and you can’t find the sane one, then YOU are the sane one.”

It is said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results. We keep electing the same clowns over and over again and expect different results. But here is Ron Paul, once again, offering America new solutions to ancient problems.

He’s the only one that can truly beat Obama. Do you want four more years of recession, desperation, broken promises, and apologies? Vote Perry, Romney, Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrich, Huntsman, or Obama.

But if you want four years of prosperity, integrity, honesty, liberty, and peace. Vote Paul. He’s just the kind of crazy America needs.

Quote of the Day: “We take his money and, um, count it as a drug seizure.” A Douglas County, Nebraska Sheriff’s Deputy, who didn’t like the attitude of a man pulled over at a traffic stop

Civil asset forfeiture is government seizure of property and cash, even when the owner isn’t charged of a crime. Innocent owners must go through a costly, time-consuming process to get their property back — and even then they may be denied. Police departments get to sell the seized property and keep most of the proceeds. If you’re unfamiliar with this form of legalized theft, we recommend you learn more on our End Asset Forfeiture page.

Back in May, 2009, we predicted that because of the bad economy and budget crunches, police will “increase searches, raids, and seizures to generate more revenue.”

As the letter below demonstrates, our prediction has been proven true.

That’s why I wrote to my Representative and Senators to end this evil practice.

You may borrow from or copy this letter… Read More »

Stung by bad publicity, the TSA is making “reforms.” One of them is to give frequent fliers a “choice”: give up even MORE of your privacy for greater convenience!

Isn’t this just more evidence that the TSA should be ABOLISHED, instead of reformed?

I wrote a letter telling Congress to do just that, and I invite you to do the same.

You may borrow from or copy this letter… Read More »

Ron Paul appeared for a friendly interview with Lou Dobbs last night on Fox Business. They discuss economics and the debt. At the end Dobbs seems to begin to say.. ‘that’s why we need you… [as POTUS]‘, then half-way through realizes he is supposed to be unbiased and changes it up a bit though the implication is still there.

Nice interview, though I wish Paul would choose more optimistic words when he speaks. All of this “I’m afraid there will be people in the streets like we’ve seen in other countries” talk is worrying Grandma and Grandpa voter out there. It reminds me of my penchant for jokingly yelling “WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE!” at the top of my lungs while going over the first big drop on a roller-coaster. You know, just for fun. Of course, Ron Paul is being serious and he’s right. I just don’t know if that is earning him the kind of votes he needs to rise even further in the polls.