In other words, if every lawmaker who votes for health reform agrees to personally pay for everyone else’s health care for any amount health care costs rise above the CBO estimates in the future I could support it.

This would include their “estate” continuing to pay after they die, perhaps from sub-standard government-run health care. If Obama and company really honestly believe that their plan would reduce costs why would they not stand behind that belief?

Oh, that’s right, they aren’t very big supporters of personal responsibility are they?

Blame-shifting is an art in DC, and our representatives are master artists.

Nevermind. Once health costs sky rocket under this plan, they would likely just raise their own salaries enough to cover the costs, thereby sticking it to the taxpayers anyway.

Rand Paul is everything the Tea Partiers wanted in Scott Brown and more. He is their Reagan fantasy becoming reality. Only they don’t appear to completely realize it yet. Sarah Palin’s endorsement was huge, but the jury is still out on whether Palin is more than just a conservative “Barbie” to Scott Brown’s “Ken”.

Dropping the campaign sweat from Rand Paul’s brow on truly limited government litmus paper reveals two names that would make almost every conservative smile: Goldwater and Reagan. These two icons are at the very root of Rand Paul’s philosophy of governance.

Philosophy is nice for those of us that immerse ourselves in the issues on a daily basis, but it’s not very appealing to the large majority that catch a whiff of it on the news while stepping through the routine of their lives. To be successful politically, as much as I hate to admit it, requires more than just being right on the issues. So much more.

In today’s media-centric world it requires an attractive appearance, charm, charisma, no skeletons, and a beautiful family and articulate wife doesn’t hurt either. Rand Paul has all of these things plus he’s right on the philosophy.

Proof came recently when Rand’s wife Kelley delivered a speech on behalf of her husband to a county GOP woman’s group in Owensboro, Kentucky. She details some of her husband’s history including a story about Rand Paul attending the 1976 Republican convention with his father, Ron Paul. The younger Paul witnessed his father be one of only 4 Republicans to stand up and support Reagan against the incumbent Ford at the time.

I highly recommend you take some time and watch Kelley Paul speak in the video below (2 parts). When you are finished head over to WinRandWin.com and pledge to participate in the March 23rd money bomb. He needs help to fend off the barrage of attacks that have already started from his GOP primary opponent Trey Grayson.

I get concerned when I hear that Rand is dedicated to being a citizen legislator and that he’s not embarking on this political journey as a stepping stone to higher office. I suppose that can change like it does for many of our elected officials (including his father). I worry about this because I see potential in Rand Paul that goes beyond the title of Senator right on to the title of President.

The final quote from Rand’s brother Robert, in a recent Houston Chronicle article does provide some hope.

Rand, he said, is a good messenger for the second generation of the Paul revolution: “I think my dad has always wanted someone to take the message forward.”

And how sweet that Tea Party-Goldwater-Reagan-Paul message is. Watch Kelley Paul below.

Ron Paul took his five minutes to continue his lifelong demonstration called, “How to follow the Constitution”.

Alan Grayson, who’s really really good to listen to when you agree with him and horrid when you don’t, smacked a home run with his time.

But perhaps the cold hard truth of the entire debate came from departing Congressman Patrick Kennedy, who railed against the media for not properly covering the debate.

The bill failed by a vote of 356 to 65 with only 5 Republicans voting for it. Those five Republicans were:

• Ron Paul (Texas)
• Walter Jones (North Carolina)
• Timothy Johnson (Illinois)
• John Campbell (California)
• John Duncan (Tennessee)

I suppose a valid argument could be made that this bill is unconstitutional because it usurps the President’s Commander-in-Chief power. However, since war was never declared by Congress, should the President even be wielding such power?

The full roll call by state and party affiliation is available here.

This is uncomfortable territory for those of us who are used to being the underdogs. Rand Paul has the best chance of any liberty candidate at winning, but a 15% lead does not mean victory is assured.

The great sports teams don’t sit on a lead, they attack until the game is over.  Rand Paul, thus far, has run an excellent campaign and he has a lead according to the polls, but the game is not over.There are still many undecided voters (19% according to the poll) and once they decide, Paul needs them to decide to vote for him.

His lead makes him a target in every one of his opponent’s eyes. Their campaign strategists are sitting around a table right now trying to figure out ways to rip him apart and cut into his lead. They may not be great on the issues, but they are good on the politics, and sometimes that’s all that matters.

Money is required to beat the political strategists at their own game. It has reached the point where everyone and their brother (or son) has a money bomb. Imitation is flattering, but there’s a real sense of money bomb fatigue out there. We can’t let this fatigue be a roadblock. This is especially true in Rand Paul’s case. He’s the outsider running against a candidate the DC machine is supporting. His campaign fund intake has slowed and his opponent has caught up in the funds race.

The next Rand Paul money bomb is scheduled for March 23rd. These money bombs are usually centered around a theme or some anniversary of some liberty-linked event. This one is no different, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is doing everything we can to help Rand Paul win his race to add a true voice for liberty and limited government in the U.S. Senate.

So this “rah rah” article is my unabashed effort to help the March 23rd money bomb be a success. I hope you will join me in this endeavor. Please pledge at WinRandWin.com and donate at RandPaul2010.com on March 23rd.

Do it because Rand Paul has “it”, but hasn’t won anything yet. Back in the day eternal vigilance may have been the sole price of liberty, but these days it also costs money. It’s time to help Rand Paul win the game.

Editor’s Note: Sometimes it’s good to listen to the other side with an open mind because perhaps they know better. This article about Ron Paul was sent to us by our neo-conservative friend, Richard Deekbag, founder of the following website (we apologize for the length of the URL):

http://ohmygodronpaulwilleatallofourbabiesandourbabiesbabiesandtheirbabiesbabiesuntiltherearenobabiesleft.com/

I mean just look at the guy. Ron Paul is all skinny, old, and wrinkly. His speeches are rambling diatribes supporting the long debunked conspiracy theory known as the U.S. Constitution. Everyone knows the Constitution expired more than 100 years ago and has no place in our Conservative-Progressive-Democratic-Socialist-Liberal-Republican (ConProDemSocLibRep) society.

After all it was Ru Paul’s isolationist ideas that lead America into its darkest period following the Revolutionary War after his idiotic idols, the Founding Fathers, defeated the British occupiers. Well, they were more like friendly visitors than occupiers. Visitors that honored the American colonies by taxing them heavily and treating them like peasants.

Everyone knows by now that Ron Paul’s efforts to abolish the massively successful Federal Reserve bank is kookier than cookies. The Fed has been our savior over and over and over and over and over again over the years.  If it weren’t for the Fed the so-called “Great Depression” would have been much shorter. That’s a gigantic problem because we needed it to last much longer just to prove that government regulation is the lifeblood of the economy!

Ron Paul’s foreign policy ideas are moonbat crazy. His ideas violate the golden rule. You know, the whole “do unto others as you would have them do unto you thing”? We would be far less safe if we hadn’t flexed our military muscle in the Middle East. They only respect force and they’ve been cowering in fear of us for the last 10 years. Hopefully we’ll be able to show them who’s boss for at least 100 more years.

Ben Bernanke was overheard saying: “You can’t put a price tag on keeping America safe. Do you know where I can get discounted printer ink? After all we need to save money where we can in these trying times!”, according to a source who didn’t want to be named as a source and who spoke to me through telepathy.

It was so stupid that Ron Paul won the CPAC straw poll. It was obviously rigged by his Campaign For Liberty organization and they were all young people anyway. Everyone knows the future of the GOP will come from the old people! At least the results of the poll were booed loudly which just proves that I’m right.

Not to mention Paul is an anti-semite because he wants to cut off foreign aid to all countries and the last time we checked, Israel was a country. It couldn’t possibly defend itself with a stockpile of only 400 or so nuclear bombs. They need our help!

He’s also an obvious racist because he has a long history of hate speech following the publication of some newsletters written by someone else 25 years ago. His racism is so rampant that one could pull just about any speech of his in his decades in Congress and find the bigotry. In fact here’s one called “Government and Racism“.

It’s so easy to imagine a Klan hood over his head whenever he’s on TV espousing the virtues of some of his lilly-white heroes like Dr. Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks.

Get this through your think skulls people, Ron Paul has no chance at being the next President of the United States. He shouldn’t run because all he will do is screw up the chances for the anointed Republican nominee, who won’t be a crazy, kooky, old, skinny, wrinkly, anti-semitic, racist, isolationist with a fetish for the supreme law of the land.

Don’t you understand, we hate Barack Obama more than we love the Constitution!

The last thing America needs is a candidate that adheres so rigidly to his principles and is logically consistent in both domestic and foreign policy.

And don’t get me started on his supporters.

This dismissal by the establishment didn’t make the earth flat. Likewise, just because many of today’s establishment politicians and pundits consider Ron Paul “crazy” doesn’t make him wrong. Yet this seems to be the prevailing argument against him. In other words, yeah I get it, his name is similar to Ru Paul, but what about his ideas?

Ron Paul challenges your indoctrination. He makes the flow of your synapses hurt. He makes you uncomfortable and that is no excuse to dub him “crazy” or “kooky”.

In an excellent piece, Paul Mulshine explores this theme.

The winner of that poll [CPAC] is often considered the consensus leader in the race for the next GOP presidential nomination. When Mitt Romney won it last time around, he was seen as something of a sure thing in an otherwise weak field.

Well the 2012 field is even weaker than last time around. But across the spectrum, the pundits agree that the Texas congressman has no business being in it. Newsweek proclaimed Paul “probably won’t run again for president in 2012 and almost certainly wouldn’t win the Republican nomination if he did.” The Fox News crowd repeated the “Paul is dead” mantra as if the congressman were a Beatle. As for Glenn Beck, who spoke at CPAC, he termed the winner of 31 percent of the audience’s votes “a crazy, kooky guy.”

Quite an achievement for a man who may be the single most unexciting speaker in American politics today. I mean that as high praise. The U.S. Constitution is a dry, unemotional document. And Paul, as its leading proponent in Congress, is a dry, unemotional guy.

So why do his opponents get worked up into such a fervor?

I’ve been mystified by that since early in 2007, when I first interviewed him. Even though Paul had announced for the Republican nomination for president, I didn’t have to go through a press secretary to contact him. I just asked around and got his home number. We had a pleasant chat about the Constitution.

Read the entire piece here.

These are the facts, I know because I was there.

1. Ron Paul’s keynote speech on Friday was the first speech in the main room to pack the house and require overflow seating in other rooms. He was welcomed with cheers as can be witnessed by watching the video of his speech. His supporters (31% apparently) had a chance to get into the main room to hear his speech.
2. Saturday, the Campaign For Liberty held a panel discussion that began at 2pm and didn’t end until nearly 4pm. By this time the line waiting to get into the main room was 8-10 deep and down the long hotel hallway. When I left the Campaign for Liberty panel I overheard a volunteer telling people in line that they would likely not get into the main room and should instead find an overflow room to watch the event.
3. CPAC sells Saturday-only tickets. A co-worker and his wife took advantage of this so they could see Ann Coulter, Newt Gingrich, and Glenn Beck. Many people, apparently, took advantage of this which left those that attended the conference all 3 days in overflow rooms.
4. Those that came on Saturday were not able to vote in the straw poll. The polling ended on Friday at 1pm.

So, those that were in the main ballroom during the straw poll announcement were mostly unfriendly to Ron Paul. I didn’t even know there were boos when they announced the results because in the overflow room I was in there were mostly cheers and clapping drowning out the boos from the main room.

It makes for a good story for the media, pointing out the boos, but if the room was full of Ron Paul supporters and Mitt Romney (or someone else) had won there would have been a large number of boos at the results.

Please note, I’m not suggesting that Ron Paul supporters were blocked from the main room on purpose. It’s just the way it ended up due to the logistics of so many people coming to CPAC on Saturday to listen to Glenn Beck, Coulter, and Gingrich. Most of these people were neo-conservatives antithetical to Ron Paul’s foreign policy of non-intervention who did not and could not vote in the straw poll.

It’s safe to say that if the panel at 2pm by the Campaign For Liberty called “Why Real Conservatives are Against the War on Terrorism” were held in the main room, the cheers would have drowned out the boos when the poll results were announced. Of course, Judging from the boos in the main room, there may have been a mutiny if the anti-war panel were held there.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

I then made my way to the friendly environs of the Young Americans for Liberty Youth Summit. This young group of American patriots left me impressed. There is no doubt that these students of today will be the liberty leaders of tomorrow.

Following the summit was a panel of speakers discussing why good conservatives are anti-war. The room was packed with two rows of people standing in the back. Philip Girardi, Karen Kwiatkowski, Bruce Fein, and Jacob Hornberger took turns speaking. All were excellent, but for me, Jacob Hornberger, was the best at clearly articulating all of the major arguments for a non-interventionist foreign policy. He did it with passion. It rivaled Judge Napolitano’s speech from the Liberty Forum the other night.

As I was sitting there amongst my libertarian-conservative brethren I couldn’t help but dream that some day maybe a panel like this will be in the main ballroom and the interventionists would be the smaller wing of the party relegated to a tertiary room during the conference. In fact, taking my dream further, I think it would be appropriate to one day see a lone neo-conservative “activist” handing out paper flyers to people preaching an interventionist foreign policy, only to see every single flyer crumpled up in the trash later in the day.

Upon leaving the talk I noticed a long throng of people waiting to get into the main ballroom. I chose not to wait in the line and instead sat down in a nice comfortable chair inside one of the overflow rooms to await the straw poll results and to watch Glenn Beck’s closing keynote.

After enduring a few speakers it was time to announce the straw poll results. As the data was revealed bit by bit my excitement grew because the data being presented suggested a potential Paul victory. The kicker was Jim DeMint getting the most votes for the best “image” poll. DeMint is a huge backer of Ron Paul’s Federal Reserve audit and I knew that there was no one else on the list that a Ron Paul person could support.

When they revealed the poll results, sure enough, Ron Paul won with 31% of the vote. This drew loud boos from the main ballroom, but in my overflow room there were mostly clapping and cheers. If you boo Ron Paul then you boo your Constitution.

CPAC offers a Saturday only pass, which is likely the reason, there were so many boos in the ballroom. The Saturday pass people filled up the main room early in the afternoon, then around 4pm I witnessed a volunteer tell people that it was unlikely that they would get in to the main room. This left many Ron Paul supporters filtering into the overflow rooms.

The straw poll results are not a true measure of a candidates likelihood of winning. The results demonstrate that Ron Paul has one of the most active and dedicated group of supporters in the Republican Party. Paul was the leading straw poll winner during his presidential campaign of 2008. This win could mark the 1st win for his 2012 campaign, if he chooses to run again.

Then it was time for Glenn Beck. There are many Ron Paul supporters who despise Beck. I’m not one of them. I think Beck is really good at what he does and he proved it last night. He hammered on Republicans and Democrats. He utilized some Ron Paul (and Tom Woods) talking points.

First, he educated people on the recession of 1920-1921 and compared it to the Great Depression showing that cutting spending and lower taxes help the economy. Then, in the only portion of his speech that touched on foreign policy, he professed we shouldn’t go overseas looking to spread democracy. Instead, Beck said we should set an example for other countries to emulate. I suppose I could have done without the now ubiquitous “morning in America” Reagan homage and hearing him say “I love Dick Cheney” just before being critical of good ole’ sure-shot Dick.

You can watch the entire Beck speech here at CSPAN.

You can view the full CPAC 2010 Straw Poll results here [PDF].

I leave CPAC with hope for the future of America. As long as organizations like the Campaign for Liberty and the Young Americans for Liberty exist, there will always be hope for freedom.

We made our way to a panel discussion called “Saving Freedom: Defending the Constitution”. The panelists included Steve Bierfeldt of the Campaign For Liberty. Bierfeldt was the man who was detained by the TSA for carrying a “suspicious” amount of cash. He fought the TSA and they modified their policy. The discussion from all the panelists were interesting and educational.

Bob Levy of CATO used his time to make the distinction between a living breathing document, textualism, original intent, and strict constructionism as they apply to the Constitution. Bierfeldt gave an excellent speech that focused on historical abuses of the Constitution. This gave him an opportunity to bash Lincoln and plug Tom DiLorenzo’s work on the topic. He ended by discussing the abuses of power and the legal cover the Patriot Act provides.

The Q & A portion ended with a man holding up a Federal Reserve Note and asking if paper money is constitutional. All the panelists answered in the negative though one pointed out that there is ample Supreme Court precedent to block any kind of effort to repeal the federal legal tender laws.

After the session ended we went to the main room and listened to Michelle Bachman finish her speech. She was pretty good, mentioning the threats to our economic liberty, but she didn’t mention auditing the Federal Reserve, at least not while I was there. We then left and had lunch.

Later in the day walked into the main room to find some seats for Ron Paul’s keynote speech. There were no seats available except for a bunch of reserved seats on the far side of the room. We were able to talk to a coordinator and get him to open the reserved section for us and many others milling about looking for empty seats.

While this was going on the Young Americans for Freedom students were delivering their 2 minute speeches on freedom. Some fireworks ensued. For a bit of background, Alexander McCobin of the Students for Liberty gave the following two minute speech. He gets booed as he praises CPAC for allowing GOProud to sponsor the conference. You can’t tell from the video, but the loudest boos (and nearly the only ones) came from one man sitting on the panel right next to McCobin as he was speaking.

Later the man who booed McCobin the loudest, Ryan Sorba, author of “The Born Gay Hoax” took the podium for his anti-gay rant and for some unexplained reason chooses to call out Jeff Frazee, the head of the Young Americans for Liberty, an organization spawned from Ron Paul’s presidential campaign. Frazee said he was just sitting there and suddenly Sorba chose to call him out.

I suppose Sorba assumed that members of Young Americans for Liberty in the audience were the ones booing and heckling him so he chose to attack Frazee. This kind of reminds me of our former president attacking Iraq even though they had nothing to do with 9/11. How fitting.

Once all of this died down, it was time for Ron Paul. He’s not a great speaker, but his message did not disappoint. Yesterday I wrote how I thought the Campaign for Liberty was almost like a subversive organization at CPAC, but today Ron Paul proved that they belong and they are here to stay.

After Ron Paul brought the house down we had dinner. Mike had to rush home to attend to a personal matter. I stayed and went to Gary Johnson’s event. Mike Church and Tim Carney spoke first, then Johnson. Johnson is a subdued speaker, but he hits on all the important points. He made it known that he will not pander to the people by saying that we must cut medicare and legalize marijuana. It was a decent talk, but I think Johnson needs some work on his delivery and pace.

Following the talk I introduced myself to Matt Hawes of the Campaign for Liberty. We regularly exchange emails and it was nice to meet him face to face for the first time.

Tomorrow is the final day of CPAC 2010. I’ll be staying until the end so I’ll write another update tomorrow evening.

The idea would be to trade in America’s my-gun-is-bigger-than-yours foreign policy for a more constitution-oriented, defense-focused effort. Sure, it would permit the terrorists to openly claim victory. So what? This is the kind of victory that, in the end, helps reduce terrorism. Once victorious, what is their recruiting incentive?

I know what you’re thinking: “But they hate us because we are free! They’ll just continue what they are doing!”

“They hate us because we are free” is the neo-conservative equivalent of the “truther” claim that “9/11 was an inside job”. Just because it becomes a convenient narrative for pundits on either side doesn’t necessarily make it true.

Read Robert Pape, Michael Scheuer (former head of CIA’s Osama bin Laden unit), or Osama bin Laden himself to find out that the real motivation for Al-Qaeda is our persistent interventions in the Middle East.

Even if the “freedom hate” argument were true, is that hate deep enough to turn non-extremist Muslims into suicide bombers? Successful suicide bombers do not live very long. New recruits are always needed. It’s an infinitely easier path toward graduating from the University of Al-Qaeda with a degree in suicide bombing if the instructors can point to America as an occupier, torturer, and murderer. Without America’s presence Al-Qaeda leaders would have zero credibility if they attempted to paint America with such a brush. Continuing our interventions gives their leaders perfect suicide bomber recruit-fodder.

I find it sadly humorous that Obama gets criticized from the Right on foreign policy. They label him weak, yet he’s merely continuing the same policies that made Bush a hero to those very same people. Hypocrisy abounds. The original Tea Party was made up of patriots who protested an overseas intervention. Today the Tea Parties are over-run with a faction, commonly called “tea-ocons”, that supports America behaving like Britain did back in the 1770’s. These are flawed principles unworthy of the Tea Party moniker.

Many people who oppose government-run health care love to point out how government is inept at everything it does. You’ll get no argument from me on that, but if that is true then why do many of these people also believe that the government can be successful in bullying the world toward freedom? It’s an absurd notion. To win the “War on Terror” we must withdraw and call it a tactic for victory rather than a strategy for admitting defeat.

Once the bully’s gun rises, liberty becomes impossible.

Paul continued: “We have legislators we sent to Washington who think their job is to be an errand boy or an errand girl for us…and grab as much federal money as they can get and bring it back.”

Sitting at the table closest to the podium was Hal Rogers…CONGRESSMAN Hal Rogers. The 5th District Republican who went to Washington the same year Ronald Reagan did…1981. Rogers is a prolific procurer of federal dollars (aka ‘pork’). Last year alone…according to Citizens Against Government Waste…Rogers hauled home $80-million dollars in pork.

Contrast this with Grayson who followed Paul at the podium:

Getting back to McCreary County…after Paul all but called Hal Rogers an un-repentant part of Washington’s budget woes…Trey Grayson stepped to the mic.

Grayson…Kentucky’s two-term Secretary of State acknowledge there is discontent among Kentucky voters. The anti-establishment feeling is out there. But on this occasion…Senate candidate Grayson did what many would say is the smart political thing. He passionately defended Rogers.

Grayson refered to “one of my opponents”…but it was clear this one was lobbed at Paul:

“When he’s calling out career politicians…he’s calling out Hal Rogers and Mitch McConnell…and let me tell you one thing. Hal Rogers and Mitch McConnell are part of the solution in Washington. They are not part of the problem!”

The difference between the two candidates could not be more clear. Do you want someone who is willing to face the hard truths about being fiscally responsible or do you want yet another political chameleon without clear convictions on anything?

If you are reading this then I think you know the right answer. Check out http://randpaul2010.com/.

Here’s a video from Fox News related to this article:

Some question whether or not the Federal Reserve is a government entity. I don’t. It has government written all over it. It was created by the government and, like most government creations, it is a failure.

Congress created the Federal Reserve primarily to stabilize the dollar and the U.S. economy. Prior to the creation of the Fed the dollar was relatively stable. Following the creation of the Federal Reserve the dollar has declined nearly every year, but especially since the early 1970’s. By this rather essential measure, the Federal Reserve is a colossal bust.

Over 100 Democrats have co-sponsored Ron Paul’s bill to audit the Federal Reserve. They agree with Paul that the Fed is a monumental failure. Yet many of these same Democrats somehow believe that the government can effectively provide health care for a majority of Americans.

Let’s make an assumption (a seemingly unlikely one these days) that the Democrats’ version of health care reform passes in the next few months or few years. I wonder if 100 years from now there will be a giant bipartisan effort to audit and/or end government health care after it proves to be an expensive failure. I hope we never have to find out.

Let today’s failed Federal Reserve be a warning about what the future likely holds for health care reform, should it become law. Both are perfect examples of expensive and unconstitutional efforts that purport to do good, but in the final analysis, do the most harm to those they aim to help.

The Federal Reserve makes the poor poorer through the “inflation tax”. As the Fed prints more money each dollar becomes less valuable and will by fewer goods. Poor Americans are hurt the most by this because they don’t own as many dollars as the rich.

The proposed government health care reforms hurt the people required to use it the most. There will be rationing and long waiting lists. Additionally, innovative procedures will be disallowed due to their risk and expense. We can make this claim based on America’s long history of failed government programs and the high demand that the new government health care system would generate.

Haven’t we learned by now that when it comes to government-granted wishes… you’d better be careful what you wish for?