Who needs a Ron Paul endorsement when you have the Paul-O-Meter?
Everyone knows the perfection of Ron Paul. He is already a living legend. All future candidates are damaged goods simply because they are not Ron Paul. There is only one Ron Paul. So to see how other candidates measure up to his perfection we are introducing the “Paul-O-Meter”.
The Paul-O-Meter ranks candidates on a scale from 0 to 100 depending on how closely they are in agreement with Ron Paul on chosen criteria. Since no candidate can possibly equal Ron Paul, the highest score on the Paul-O-Meter attainable for candidates other than Ron Paul is 99. To simplify the ranking, each candidate will be graded from 1 to 5 on each of the 20 criteria. The 20 criteria are listed below, along with a short description for each.
NEW: Now you can submit your own ratings using our new Paul-O-Meter web polling service. Check it out here.
According to the media the big debate over the FISA warrantless wiretapping bill is because the Democrats don’t want retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies and the Republicans do. Indeed this is an important part of the debate, but it is hardly what the real debate should be. It just shows that our lawmakers care little about the rule of law in the Constitution. If they did care the debate would be about whether it is permitted by the Constitution to spy on American citizens without a warrant.
Instead they focus on the telecom immunity portion which is almost just as bad, but from a liberty standpoint focusing on this portion of FISA reeks of political misdirection. The recent so called compromise on FISA by the Democrats clearly demonstrates neither party truly cares about “upholding the Constitution”. Someone needs to remind them of their oath.
It is good advice to always be weary when a lawmaker uses the word “compromise”. A zebra truly is a horse designed by a committee. This FISA zebra like so many others coming from “compromise” just means a bigger and costlier federal government and less freedom for American citizens.
It is close to impossible technologically to guarantee that government eavesdropping as outlined by FISA will only be done when one side of the communication resides outside of the United States. This says nothing of the fact that government required monitoring systems put in place by communications companies give hacker terrorists another method of breaching the system. So it can be argued that FISA is not just unconstitutional but it makes America more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, not less.
Three recent cases illustrate the ever downward spiraling psyche of responsibility in America. Perhaps, just this once, I’ll let the cases speak for themselves. Make your own judgments about them and comment if you feel the need.
Case 1:
LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) — A Missouri mom was indicted Thursday for her alleged role in the death of a teen who killed herself over a failed Internet romance that turned out to be a hoax.
A federal indictment accuses Lori Drew, 49, of O’Fallon, Missouri, of using the social networking Web site MySpace.com to pose as a 16-year-old boy and feign romantic interest in the girl.
The girl, Megan Meier, committed suicide after her online love interest spurned her, according to prosecutors, telling her the world would be a better place without her.
Drew faces up to 20 years in prison on charges of conspiracy and accessing protected computers to obtain information to inflict emotional distress. (Source: CNN)
Case 2:
WAYNE, N.J. — A New Jersey couple, whose son was struck in the chest with a line drive, is planning to sue the maker of a metal baseball bat used in the game.
Two years ago, Steven Domalewski was pitching when the ball slammed into his chest and stopped his heart. He was resuscitated but now has brain damage and is severely disabled.
The family contends metal baseball bats are inherently unsafe for youth games because the ball comes off them much faster than from wooden bats. The lawsuit will also be filed against Little League Baseball and a sporting goods chain that sold the bat. (Source: FOX News)
Case 3:
WASHINGTON – Close your eyes, reach into your wallet and try to distinguish between a $1 bill and a $5 bill. Impossible? It’s also discriminatory, a federal appeals court says.
Since all paper money feels pretty much the same, the government is denying blind people meaningful access to the currency, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Tuesday. The decision could force the Treasury Department to make bills of different sizes or print them with raised markings or other distinguishing features. (Source: AP via Yahoo News)
Ron Paul spoke out on December 5th against HR 1955 “The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act”. He missed the vote due to campaigning, but he wanted to be sure people knew his position on the bill. Those who know the way Paul votes already knew what his position would be. We were right.
Madame Speaker, I regret that I was unavoidably out of town on October 23, 2007, when a vote was taken on HR 1955, the Violent Radicalization & Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted against this misguided and dangerous piece of legislation. This legislation focuses the weight of the US government inward toward its own citizens under the guise of protecting us against “violent radicalization.”
The Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online (SAFE) Act would force “anyone with an open Wi-Fi connection to report illegal images–or pay fines of up to $300,000.” The bill passed in the House and is being sent to the Senate for review.
Not one Democrat opposed the SAFE Act. Two Republicans did: Rep. Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning presidential candidate from Texas, and Rep. Paul Broun from Georgia.
That broad definition would cover individuals, coffee shops, libraries, hotels, and even some government agencies that provide Wi-Fi. It also sweeps in social-networking sites, domain name registrars, Internet service providers, and e-mail service providers such as Hotmail and Gmail, and it may require that the complete contents of the user’s account be retained for subsequent police inspection.
Before the House vote, which was a lopsided 409 to 2, Rep. Nick Lampson (D-Texas) held a press conference on Capitol Hill with John Walsh, the host of America’s Most Wanted and Ernie Allen, head of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
Allen said the legislation–called the Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online Act, or SAFE Act–will “ensure better reporting, investigation, and prosecution of those who use the Internet to distribute images of illegal child pornography.”
The SAFE Act represents the latest in Congress’ efforts–some of which have raised free speech and privacy concerns–to crack down on sex offenders and Internet predators. One billrequire sex offenders to supply e-mail addresses and instant messaging user names. introduced a year ago was even broader and would have forced Web sites and blogs to report illegal images. Another would
Wednesday’s vote caught Internet companies by surprise: the Democratic leadership rushed the SAFE Act to the floor under a procedure that’s supposed to be reserved for noncontroversial legislation. It was introduced October 10, but has never received even one hearing or committee vote. In addition, the legislation approved this week has changed substantially since the earlier version and was not available for public review.
Here is yet another excuse to take away liberties. The “war on terror” brought us the PATRIOT Act. Now “Protect the children” brings us the SAFE Act. Please, make it stop.
This is a nice long (over 10 minute interview) with Ron Paul on G4, the tech TV channel and web site. He covers some new issues here as well. Good stuff.
The federal government can’t force families to come together and treat their children better. That is a spiritual issue, and the government’s responsibility is mainly to maintain order and punish violence.
Liberty Maven
Follow LM on Twitter