Election

Ron Paul Revolution: Something in the Air

January 10th, 2012 1:56 am  |  by  |  Published in Activism, Commentary, Constitution, Election, Foreign Policy, Liberty, Politics, Ron Paul  |  11 Responses

Call out the instigators
Because there’s something in the air
We’ve got to get together sooner or later
Because the revolution’s here, and you know it’s right
And you know that it’s right

-Thunderclap Newman “Something in the Air

“A neo-con is a former Marxist turned conservative who is in reality now a Fabian socialist.”

-Kelleigh Nelson

I confess I am puzzled by the folks who say “I like Ron Paul’s domestic agenda, but I do not like his foreign policy stance.”  Well isn’t that special.  They like Dr. Paul’s positions regarding liberty, the economy, and the US Constitution, but…but they oppose his positions on waging unconstitutional wars, giving away billions of our hard-earned tax dollars to foreign governments (many of them reprehensible, and some who hate us), and throwing our military men and women into unwinnable meat-grinder wars.  I suppose that they must just love big government.

Hmm, perhaps someday they will explain their nonsensical flip-flopping to me.  In any event, I am sure that the Power Elites and “merchants of death” welcome their myopic tunnel-visioned “patriotism,” their feeble grasp of the US Constitution, and their total failure to understand what liberty is all about.  Go get ‘em tigers and tigerettes!

Me — I smell freedom in the air.  I sense that even though the GOP elites, Democratic elites, MSM elites, entertainment elites, the Military/industrial complex elites, and all of The Powers That Be — that is, the establishment — are arrayed against the Ron Paul revolution, they are on the losing side of history.  ”An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government.”

Voting for Obama, who has shown himself to be in the pocket of the banksters and military/industrial complex is no longer an option for anyone who values freedom — nor is voting for any of the GOP-approved “Obama Lite” candidates.  ”We the people” must see through the web of lies, disinformation, and slander — whether they come from simple ignorance of the truth, or from Power Elite shills.  This is our last shot at saving America as a free republic, and if Ron Paul loses it all goes down the drain, on our watch.

The tired schtick of “meet the new boss; same as the old boss” is no longer playing in Peoria these days.  ”We the people” are increasing hip to how we have been played and gamed by the Power Elites — under whatever label they hide behind.  Time for a revolution, a real revolution, the Ron Paul Revolution.


The Ron Paul and Gary Johnson Factor

January 5th, 2012 9:13 pm  |  by  |  Published in Election, Gary Johnson, Liberty, Maven Commentary, Politics, Polling, Ron Paul, War  |  37 Responses

With Ron Paul still pushing for the GOP nomination and Gary Johnson running as a Libertarian it begs a question. I’ve written at length about how I firmly believe that Ron Paul would beat Obama in a general election; however, what about Gary Johnson? No, I don’t think he’d win, but there are likely many Ron Paul supporters who would vote for Johnson over Obama or the GOP nominee. So if that is true it suggests another reason why, if you want nothing more than to defeat Obama, Ron Paul should be your choice for the GOP nomination.

But is it true? What percentage could Gary Johnson receive should Paul not get the GOP nomination and would it be enough to help re-elect Barack Obama? I suspect it is. To add more fuel to this fire Obama is starting to campaign as an anti-war president to difference himself from the GOP field of likely nominees. This “Campaigner-In-Chief” move could be completely stymied by Republicans making Ron Paul their nominee. Who would be the real anti-war candidate if it were a Ron “non-interventionist” Paul vs Barack “drone bomber” Obama contest? This is yet another reason to make Paul the nominee.

Let’s see what you think about the Ron Paul and Gary Johnson factor.

If Ron Paul does not get the GOP nomination, but Gary Johnson gets the Libertarian Party nomination, who will get your vote in the general election?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

POLL: Rest easy Ron Paul detractors, Iowa GOP won’t let him win

January 3rd, 2012 1:18 am  |  by  |  Published in Activism, Caucus, Election, Liberty, Politics, Polling, Ron Paul  |  1

Iowans, there is no need for you to caucus tonight. It seems that new information has come out that suggests your effort to support the candidate of your choice does not matter at all. The Iowa GOP leaders will decide the winner, not you. So, go ahead and snuggle up in front of your TV’s and wait for your almighty GOP leaders to tell you the winner. And since it would be so embarrassing for a candidate to win that actually believes in and follows his oath to the Constitution unlike any of the other candidates… you don’t have to fret about Ron Paul winning. They won’t let him.

The only question is will the party bosses side with Willard “Sideburns” Romney or will they be eating a giant plate of frothy Santorum Salad on caucus night? Or will they even conspire to have Ron Paul finish in 3rd behind both or worse?

For evidence of this effort, please see this video.

What do you think?

Would it be an embarrassment to Iowa if Ron Paul were to win the Iowa Caucus?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

 

If you want to beat Obama, Ron Paul is your choice

January 2nd, 2012 12:52 am  |  by  |  Published in Caucus, Election, Liberty, Maven Commentary, Obama, Politics, Polling, Ron Paul  |  Comments Off

The final Public Policy Polling Iowa Caucus poll has just come out. The final tally is: Ron Paul 20%, Mitt Romney 19%, Rick Santorum 18%, and the rest further back. Even after being attacked incessantly for over a week about his newsletters, Ron Paul is still in the lead though the attacks seemed to have had an affect. His overall poll numbers are down 4%.  This poll is likely the most accurate because it doesn’t exclude itself to Republicans. In Iowa, no matter your party you can show up and register as a Republican then vote/caucus for the candidate of your choice.

It seems to me that this process is more open and most like a general election. To win the general you need independents and party-switchers. This is why Ron Paul is in the best position to beat Obama. He wins in those segments in poll after poll. Something that should negate any question of “electability”.

Following the results, something the PPP folks noted on Twitter was the following:

Young voters and indys unusual winning formula for GOP caucus but if Paul really gets them out he can win.

This comment is specific to Iowa, but Iowa is probably the best microcosm we have at this time of a general election. Paul is rather notorious for getting supporters out to vote for him. He wins or places in just about every straw poll in the country, including a very close 2nd in this summer’s Iowa Ames Straw Poll. So that is truly the bottom line, if Paul’s unusual strategy works then he can win Iowa. And that unusual strategy happens to be the exact strategy to take votes away from Obama in the general election.

Some of Paul’s detractors make the claim he’d be “dangerous for America”. Well, okay, that depends upon how you define America. If by America you mean the statist-status-quo in Washington DC and Obama’s re-election chances then yes, he’s extremely dangerous for America.

If by America you mean the country of “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none” and if by America you mean a country that places individual liberty as its highest value then Ron Paul would be the best friend America ever had.

So yes, if you want to beat Obama, Ron Paul is your choice, but he’s also so much more than that.

The best Ron Paul analysis you will ever read this campaign season…

December 31st, 2011 2:55 pm  |  by  |  Published in Civil Liberties, Commentary, Drugs, Election, Federal Reserve, Foreign Policy, Liberty, Politics, Ron Paul, Social Security, torture, War  |  33 Responses

…comes from Glenn Greenwald. I’ve always admired Greenwald; however, I found myself cheering in agreement as I read his latest article, “Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies”. He suggests that voters will have to decide for themselves on the lesser of evils (as usual). In doing so Greenwald pushes to the surface the numerous actions Obama has taken that goes directly against what self-righteous progressives are all about. It’s long, but read it. It is truth. Yes, even the part about the newsletters. Here is an excerpt:

The thing I loathe most about election season is reflected in the central fallacy that drives progressive discussion the minute “Ron Paul” is mentioned. As soon as his candidacy is discussed, progressives will reflexively point to a slew of positions he holds that are anathema to liberalism and odious in their own right and then say: how can you support someone who holds this awful, destructive position? The premise here — the game that’s being played — is that if you can identify some heinous views that a certain candidate holds, then it means they are beyond the pale, that no Decent Person should even consider praising any part of their candidacy.

The fallacy in this reasoning is glaring. The candidate supported by progressives — President Obama — himself holds heinous views on a slew of critical issues and himself has done heinous things with the power he has been vested. He has slaughtered civilians — Muslim children by the dozens — not once or twice, but continuously in numerous nations withdronescluster bombs and other forms of attack. He has sought to overturn a global ban on cluster bombs. He has institutionalized the power of Presidents — in secret and with no checks — to target American citizens for assassination-by-CIA, far from any battlefield. He has wagedan unprecedented war against whistleblowers, the protection of which was once a liberal shibboleth. He rendered permanently irrelevant the War Powers Resolution, a crown jewel in the list of post-Vietnam liberal accomplishments, and thus enshrined the power of Presidents to wage war even in the face of a Congressional vote against it. His obsession with secrecy is so extreme that it has become darkly laughable in its manifestations, and he even worked to amend the Freedom of Information Act (another crown jewel of liberal legislative successes) when compliance became inconvenient.

He has entrenched for a generation the once-reviled, once-radical Bush/Cheney Terrorism powers of indefinite detention, military commissions, and the state secret privilege as a weapon to immunize political leaders from the rule of law. He has shielded Bush era criminals from every last form of accountability. He has vigorously prosecuted the cruel and supremely racist War on Drugs, including those parts he vowed during the campaign to relinquish — a war which devastates minority communities and encages and converts into felons huge numbers of minority youth for no good reason. He has empowered thieving bankers through the Wall Street bailout, Fed secrecy, efforts to shield mortgage defrauders from prosecution, and the appointment of an endless roster of former Goldman, Sachs executives and lobbyists. He’s brought the nation to a full-on Cold War and a covert hot war with Iran, on the brink of far greater hostilities. He has made the U.S. as subservient as ever to the destructive agenda of the right-wing Israeli government. His support for some of the Arab world’s most repressive regimes is as strong as ever.

Read it all at Salon.com.

Michelle Bachmann’s own political director claims she lied about Ron Paul defection

December 29th, 2011 3:10 am  |  by  |  Published in Election, Politics, Ron Paul  |  2 Responses

Earlier tonight Michelle Bachmann lost her Iowa Campaign chairman to the Ron Paul campaign. She lashed out claiming it was financially motivated. Not true, says her current Iowa Political Director.

Here is the relevant portion of Bachmann’s statement after the defection occurred:

Kent Sorenson personally told me he was offered a large sum of money to go to work for the Paul campaign. Kent campaigned with us earlier this afternoon and went immediately afterward  to a Ron Paul event and announced he is changing teams. Kent said to me yesterday that ‘everyone sells out in Iowa, why shouldn’t I,’ then he told me he would stay with our campaign.

Here is a statement from her current Iowa political director Wes Enos regarding her statement above from a press release put out by the Ron Paul campaign:

“I won’t say much about the situation or the conflicting statements beyond this; I can say unequivocally that Kent Sorenson’s decision was, in no way financially motivated.  His decision had more to do with the fact that the Ron Paul supporters have been something of a family to him since he was first elected in 2008 and here in the end, as it becomes more and more apparent that the caucus cycle is coming to an end, Kent believed that he needed to be with them as they stand on the cusp of a potential caucus upset.  While I personally disagree with Kent’s decision, and plan to stay with Michele Bachmann because I truly believe in her, I cannot, in good conscious watch a good man like Kent Sorenson be attacked as a ‘sell-out’ ….That is simply not the case, and it was not the basis of his decision,” said Mr. Enos.

The full press release (received via email) is here but should soon be up on the Ron Paul 2012 site:

Read More »

Indecent American For Ron Paul

December 28th, 2011 4:52 pm  |  by  |  Published in Election, Maven Commentary, Ron Paul  |  4 Responses

Newt Gingrich is right. There are no decent Americans that could possibly support Ron Paul. I am one example of a person that Gingrich calls indecent. I support Ron Paul. Since Gingrich has decided to make it personal. I will too. I’m 40 years old. I have 3 young children. I work long hours for decent pay. I’ve been married for nearly 12 years to the same woman. I’ve never been divorced. I never committed adultery with younger women while my wife was seriously ill two times. I’ve not even done it one time. I never will.  I’ve never been accused of saying the following about my wife, “She’s not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of the President. And besides, she has cancer.“  I will never take 1.6 million dollars as a “consultant” to a tax-funded government sponsored enterprise like Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae. I never had 84 ethics sanctions brought against me by my peers.

Yeah, Newt… we who support Ron Paul are the indecent ones. You figured us out. Congrats.

Signing On for the Ron Paul Revolution

December 27th, 2011 2:27 pm  |  by  |  Published in Commentary, Constitution, Election, Foreign Policy, Liberty, Media, Politics, Ron Paul  |  21 Responses

“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government…we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.  In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military/industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

Dwight D. Eisenhower, Farewell Address to the Nation, 1961                                    

“Ron Paul and I would disagree on many issues. …However, these are policy differences. They can be negotiated or legislated into a compromise.  But on liberty, on human rights, and on the Constitution, Ron Paul is the only candidate who gets it.  …Liberty is where we begin and end the conversation in America.  For far too long, government has chipped away at the rights of Americans.  Ron Paul would reverse that trend.  Whatever else he does is secondary to that prime directive.”

John Thorpe Forbes“                                                                                                                                  

I agree with the sentiments expressed by Mr. Thorpe (a liberal) in the above paragraph.  I also agree with those expressed by conservative Steve Deace: “as much as I disagree with Paul, I’d choose him over the Republicrat ruling class any day of the week, and twice on Sunday.” 

The fact that individuals from both the left and right of the political spectrum find Ron Paul increasingly attractive is of no little concern to The Powers That Be (TPTB) and their long-knives are already out.  Should Ron Paul become the lead, or one of the lead Republican candidates they will attempt to slice and dice him like a Cuisinart — count on it.  The MSM, who cannot seem to find Obama’s past history with a bloodhound and a road map will suddenly become super-sleuths able to sniff out every nook and cranny of Ron Paul’s past — and where the truth does not suit their purposes they will twist it until it does.

It is understandable that the Far Left would oppose Ron Paul, because of his stance on state’s rights, limited government, and his staunch defense of the US Constitution.  What perplexes me is the animosity shown toward Paul by the purportedly conservative Republican establishment — and there can be no doubt that the GOP elites despise Paul’s positions.  Rush Limbaugh has dumped on him; the “conservative” press treats him as a joke, and “conservative” talking heads routinely dismiss him.  Recently Neil Cavuto took his fellow pundits at Fox News to task for their blatantly dismissive attitudes toward Ron Paul.                                                                                                                                  

All of which only makes Ron Paul all the more attractive to me as a candidate, and I suspect that a growing number of conservatives feel similarly — we know how lame “conservative” media can be. 

“We the people” are more than a little tired of the condescending arrogance thrown our way by Republican elites and their duplicitous mouthpieces.  The truth is that for all of their talk of being conservative, they find Ron Paul’s ideas about limited government anathema.  They want big government — they only differ from the liberal elites in their choice of what type of big government we should have.  It is of no importance to them that freedom decreases as government increases. 

I only recently became aware of just how much negative information TPTB have already put out about Ron Paul, so one of my first tasks has been to bring myself up to speed on what is true about Ron Paul, and what is false.  I found that I needed to brush aside much of the “common wisdom” surrounding him.

 

Read More »

Ron Paul, and why reality is immune to human fantasy

December 21st, 2011 2:51 am  |  by  |  Published in Constitution, Election, government spending, Maven Commentary, Politics, Ron Paul, Taxes  |  21 Responses

Conservative/Libertarian radio talk show host (in Baltimore) Ron Smith passed away this week from pancreatic cancer. He was an outspoken supporter of Ron Paul. The article announcing his death included some audio excerpts, including one on the 4 year anniversary of 9-11. In it he quotes Vernon Howard:

Reality is immune to human fantasy

This truism is no more prevalent than now as we witness Ron Paul’s rise in the polls in both Iowa and New Hampshire to front runner status. All of the usual pundits in the usual media outlets are attempting to discredit a potential Paul victory in Iowa by calling it meaningless. This is irritating and predictable; however, it gets worse. The governor of Iowa has now joined in on this fantasy. From Politico:

Leading Republicans, looking to put the best possible frame on a Paul victory, are already testing out a message for what they’ll say if the 76-year-old Texas congressman is triumphant.

The short version: Ignore him.

“People are going to look at who comes in second and who comes in third,” said Gov. Terry Branstad. “If [Mitt] Romney comes in a strong second, it definitely helps him going into New Hampshire and the other states.”

What country do we live in again? This ain’t America…. not even the America I was taught about in public school. Discrediting an election (caucus) merely because you disagree with the results is something Hugo Chavez does. It is not something we do in America. At least I thought we didn’t. Do these Ron Paul detractors really believe this behavior is acceptable? If the majority (or plurality) of people in your state vote for someone you don’t like how can you say it doesn’t count?

This effort at undermining their own process by making these comments has more danger of discrediting the election than Ron Paul winning. Hopefully Iowans and others see through this poppycock and vote without its influence.

The reality of Ron Paul should be no match for those naysayers living in fantasy land calling him an anti-semite, racist, and worse. It seems to me that once your foes start calling you names rather than debate you on your positions then you’ve already won.

During Paul’s 2008 campaign I wrote that I didn’t think America was quite ready for Ron Paul. Here in 2012, America just might be ready for him and the harsh reality he brings. We are going broke. We need to cut spending. We need to cut taxes. We need to bring our troops home from overseas to defend this country. We need to end all foreign aid. Yes, including Israel. Give them back their sovereignty.

If you fear a Ron Paul presidency just take a deep breath, calm down, and read the Constitution. That’s his platform. If you still think he’s too extreme then realize that there are 2 other branches of government that will be operating to limit his extremism. That’s a major reason we have the judiciary and legislature, checks and balances. If any other candidate wins, nothing will change. We’ll keep going down the spending death-spiral to our own demise. I’m not a big fan of demise. I’m voting for Ron Paul. Are you?

RIP Ron Smith.

 

Ron Paul now on top in Iowa, Gingrich fading fast

December 19th, 2011 2:29 am  |  by  |  Published in Election, Liberty, Polling, Ron Paul  |  7 Responses

In the latest poll released by Public Policy Polling, Ron Paul is now leading in Iowa with 23% of the vote. In second place is Romney with 20%. Gingrich has dropped to 14%. While the complete results are not all come up roses for Paul. They demonstrate two things that I’ve already been repeating over and over again:

  1. Ron Paul is unlikely to win the GOP nomination but…
  2. If he did win the GOP nomination, he’d beat Obama.

The poll results again show that most of Paul’s support is coming from younger people, independents, and Democrats. From the release:

Paul’s base of support continues to rely on some unusual groups for a Republican contest.  Among voters under 45 he’s at 33% to 16% for Romney and 11% for Gingrich.  He’s really going to need that younger than normal electorate because with seniors Romney’s blowing him out 31-15 with Gingrich coming in 2nd at 18%. Paul is also cleaning up 35-14 with the 24% of voters who identify as either Democrats or independents. Romney is actually ahead 22-19 with GOP voters.  Young people and non-Republicans are an unusual coalition to hang your hat on in Iowa, and it will be interesting to see if Paul can actually pull it off.

Read it all here at PPP.