Ron Paul on the Issues

This started as a response to a comment by Meg, but I opted to just post it completely.

'I want to know how he's just going to reduce taxes.' Dr. Paul not only wants to cut or eliminate the Federal income tax, but also reduce business taxes. To compensate he wants to reduce spending by the Federal government; cut the programs & agencies which require taxes, and you can cut the taxes. Also, he would target the Federal Reserve and bring it under control or elimination, because it's policies of money printing help fuel the unprecedented inflation we've experienced in the last 35 odd years. http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/debt-and-taxes/

'Securing the borders.' Dr. Paul has outlined a very specific 6 Point Plan for securing America's borders, and called for legitimate immigration reform to find a fair and legal method of immigration assimilation. His first priority is securing the borders and dealing with the 10-20 million illegal invaders estimated to reside within America, then to move on to permanent immigration reform. http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/border-security-and-immigration-reform/

'Deliver[ing] more than 4,000 babies.' Dr. Paul has served 40 years as a medical doctor, and his experience as an OB/GYN doctor has dictated his approach to the issues of healthcare and abortion. Having served for over 40 years and delivered more than 4,000 babies, he admits that not once did he ever recommend an abortion or find it medically neccessary to save the life of the mother. He furthermore recognizes that a society which denies life and liberty to its innocent and most defenseless members (unborn babies) cannot simultaneously preserve or champion life and liberty for other members without succumbing to hypocrisy. He also recognizes the inherent Constitutional danger of allowing Federal courts to intervene in state affairs and dictate legislative and judicial changes to them, which abortion has triggered. http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/

Perhaps this might be slightly thought provoking or helpful. For a comprehensive platform on what Ron Paul stands for, visit this link: http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/. Never forget, as well, that as the ONLY candidate in either party to be on record as having voted AGAINST the war in Iraq in 2003, Ron Paul is also the only legitimate anti-war candidate running. He resisted the Imperial Militarists' propaganda and deceptions 4 years ago, and he's openly calling for an end to the war now. All the other Republican or Democratic candidates cannot say that.

Ron Paul Rising

Despite all the claims of the pundits, partisans and mainstream media, Ron Paul is steadily rising nationwide as Constitutionally-minded citizens answer his call for volunteers, supporters and fundraisers. The swelling ranks are demanding increasing (and often begrudging) recognition and admiration from his opponents and all them that still try to write him off. The proof is in the pudding....

1. For all the naysayers who claim that Ron Paul is too dark to be a Dark Horse candidate in the 2008 presidential elections, you might like to know that GQ Magazine has officially named Ron Paul one of its 38 'Men of the Year' for 2007. Not only is he the only '08 presidential candidate to make the cut, but he was further honoured by GQ as "Dark Horse of the Year." http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-releases/49/ron-paul-a-gq-man-of-the-year http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/11/gq-picks-ron-pa.html http://men.style.com/gq/blogs/gqeditors/2007/11/gqs-dark-horse.html (The GQ reference).

2. Released Monday, 11/19/07, a CNN tracking poll of New Hampshire Republicans shows Ron Paul doubling his support from 4% to 8%. While not seemingly impressive, the reality beneath this doubling support is potentially explosive. At 8%, Ron Paul is now the 4th place candidate in the New Hampshire Republican primary, while former Senator Fred Thompson has dropped down to 6th place. Perhaps most interesting, 56% of New Hampshire Republicans admit to still being totally undecided. These findings were confirmed by 3 other polls conducted by CBS/New York Times, Boston Globe/University of New Hampshire, and the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion. Top 4 in New Hampshire with surging momentum and funds is a great reason to be thankful this Thanksgiving! http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-releases/48/cnn-reports-ron-paul-in-4th-place-for-republican-nomination http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/11/19/thompson-skids-while-romney-paul-climb-in-nh-poll/ (the CNN poll report).

3. Republican Party straw polls conducted in October & November have yielded a solid string of successes for Ron Paul's surging national campaign. In the 14 straw polls conducted within the GOP since 10/1/07, Ron Paul has finished first place in 10, and fourth place or higher in 3 more. His straw poll victories have been won in diverse battlefields: Oregon, Oklahoma, Alabama, Nevada, Wyoming, Missouri, Washington, New York, California and most recently among registered Republicans temporarily abroad in South Korea. http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/

4. Since pulling down over $4.3 million in 24 hours earlier this month (the now famous "Money Bomb!"), Ron Paul has steadily gained financial ground in the increasingly money-dominated presidential campaigns. He currently ranks 10th in net fundraising for 2008 candidates, and 5th among the Republican candidates. Standing at approximately $8.3 million he's far behind Hillary Clinton ($90.9 million), Barack Obama ($80.3 million) and Mit Romney ($62.8 million)- the three most successful fundraisers between the two parties. However, a comparison of money on hand puts Paul at 8th overall (Clinton, Obama & Giuliania are top 3) and 4th among Republicans. A very interesting figure, however, is the size of the debt owed by the various campaigns. The debts amassed by the leading fundraisers are approximately: Hillary Clinton ($2.3 million), Barack Obama ($1.4 million), Mit Romney (a staggering $17.4 million!!!), and Ron Paul ($0.00). If a candidate's ability to manage the national debt and economy can be inferred from their campaign spending and debts, the choice is clear- Ron Paul! Unless, of course, you think you can trust Hillary, Obama, or Romney with tax dollars more than with their own! http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/finances/index.html http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp

Long Live Liv!

Small in the grand scheme of things, but by all means take a look at my absolute first official online encyclopedia article! It's an official biography of Liv, the Ron Paul Girl and internet filmmaker, whom Wikipedia decided was too unimportant to keep a page on and deleted.

How does Wikipedia get to decide that Obama Girl or Hott 4 Hill (an admitted parody on her own blog) is famous enough to keep online but Ron Paul Girl isn't?

Maybe it's because she's a vegetarian...

Long live a free internet devoid of censorship AND a free Republic!

Long live... well, Liv!
http://open-site.org/Society/Politics/Campaigns_and_Elections/Ron_Paul/Ron_Paul_Girl

Ron Paul Tea Pary 2007 Ad!

www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=36829

A highly motivated, well educated and civic-minded citizen has seen fit to pay for this private ad to be published in newspapers all over America. Find out WHY Ron Paul supporters are so enthusiastic and self-sacrificing at these fine links.

www.ronpaul2008.com
www.ronpaulnation.com/
www.ronpaulnation.com/?p=413
www.teaparty07.com/

Contribute to Tea Party 07 and help fan the flames of a new Revolution, in the spirit of the old Revolution, and rekindle the hopes of a free Republic!

Million-Member Military Madness

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/13/politics/main3495921.shtml

During a speech at The Citadel in Charleston, S.C. on Tuesday 13 November, 2007, Republican presidential candidate & former senator Fred Thompson of Tennessee called for the enlargement of the US Army & Marine Corps beyond Pentagon requests for a standing Army of 547,000 soldiers. Mr. Thompson yesterday went so far as to outline his plan for a 1 MILLION member ground force in the US military: the Army boasting 775,000 and the Marine Corps adding 225,000.

Mr. Thompson went even farther, advocating a policy pegging America's annual defense budget at exactly 4.5% the annual GDP. This massive annual increase (corresponding more or less to $150 billion more per year than current non-war related spending), however, was not specified as a means to foot the bill for such a large standing army.

In fact, Mr. Thompson totally failed to clarify exactly HOW the million-member military he called for would be recruited and paid for. This is an important question, since the Pentagon is already straining to meet existing soldier recruitment quotas, and started the current fiscal year with the lowest recruitment levels in the 34 year history of the all-volunteer standing Army.

Essentially, Mr. Thompson is doing nothing more than pounding the drum of Imperial Militarism, calling for a standing military so hopelessly large and expensive that it cannot be sustained in the face of a massively unpopular and immoral war, lengthening deployments, and dropping recruitment.

That begs the question of what exactly Mr. Thompson's point REALLY must be. Can he actually believe that enlarging the US military's ground forces to a million soldiers & marines while increasing already high military spending is in the best interests of a Republic built by free men yet already politically, militarily and economically strained to the breaking point? Or is it just possible that he's merely espousing more Imperial Militarism propaganda to reassure Neo-Cons of his 'peace through strength' credentials as being better than any other Republican candidate despite the manifest pie in the sky fantasies that such policies are smart, safe, and even Constitutional?

Friends, Brothers, Patriots! STOP the Imperial Militarism Madness of a Million-Member Standy Army! Support Ron Paul in the 2008 Republican presidential primaries, and end the madness of warmongering, imperialism, and Federal usurpations that candidates like Fred Thompson will only too proudly perpetuate.

Let It Begin Here

'Stand your ground; don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.'

~Attributed to Captain John Park, 19 April 1775

Shortly after dawn on the morning of 19 April, 1775, several companies of His Majesty's elite light infantry marched with high spirits and iron discipline into the sleepy Massachusetts village of Lexington. They marched under the command of Major John Pitcairn, very much the proud vanguard of a peerless army en route to the town of Concord- yet several more miles.

The mission for which they had already marched through the night from Boston was to 'seize and destroy' a large cache of military supplies stored by the Massachusetts colonial milita in Concord. The royal governor of Massachusetts, General Thomas Gage, had ordered them out for the purpose of preventing any possible uprising by the Whig partisans and militia of Massachusetts, increasingly resistant to his attempts to exert Royal authority over the entire colony through legislative acts the colonists deemed intolerable.

This resolute English legion marched not to war, but to the prevention of war. Paradoxically, it marched to avoid a rebellion, to enforce royal authority, and to keep the peace. Yet to keep the peace and prevent a war, General Gage had sent these professional soldiers (trained only to follow orders and paid to kill whomever they were ordered to kill) to deprive free subjects of the English crown of their traditional and legal liberties. Little irony, then, that their march to keep the peace provoked the very rebellion Gage sought to avoid by sending them. After all, what peace can be built upon the reduction of free men, deprived of their freedoms and laid low to slavery? Furthermore, what manner of free men will choose the peace of slaves over the clarion call of the vigilant and the sacrifices of the just?

When these soldiers paid by the English King George III met 77 farmers of Lexington arrayed across the town common, the dice of destiny were cast. After Major Pitcairn shouted 'Disperse you rebels; damn you, throw down your arms and disperse!' and the brave men of Lexington failed to immediately comply, there issued a shot never identified, yet which provoked the English soldiers to fire several vollies at the militiamen before lowering bayonets and charging. The result would see 8 colonists dead and an additional 10 wounded, while a single English soldier suffered a wound. Shortly thereafter the soldiers were successfully reformed and continued their march to Concord, which they occupied later in the morning.

At Concord, however, they would encounter not 77 militiamen, but a progressively swelling levy of freemen in the hundreds, congregating to prevent the further loss of life, liberty and property which they saw inflicted by the King's soldiers that day. Resolved to stand and fight rather than permit their liberties to be taken by the bayonet and the bullet, these militiamen offered resistance on the North Bridge over the Concord River, and struck repeatedly against the soldiers during their withdrawal from Concord back towards Boston throughout the afternoon. By day's end an army of free men in the thousands had routed the English and laid siege to the city of Boston, determined to rise with all valour against an army brought across the sea by a distant king for the sole purpose of depriving Englishmen of their cherished freedoms and rights.


As word of the battles at Lexington, Concord and the route of the King's army along the road to Boston spread, it became the metaphorical 'shot heard round the world.' Free men who had repeatedly petitioned a tyrant for redress of their grievances had been met with usurpations, occupations and the imposition of violence. In the aftermath of the battles, the men who would go on to become the Founding Fathers of the new American Republic clearly established the moral and political dimensions of the stand made by the initial militiamen.

John Adams rode through the battlefields the morning after, and understood that 'the die was cast, the Rubicon crossed.' The distant Virginian George Washington, acclaimed hero of the French & Indian War, heard of the battles and perhaps best recognized the significance. He wrote 'the once-happy and peaceful plains of America are either to be drenched in blood or inhabited by slaves. Sad alternative! But can a virtuous man hesitate in his choice?'

Think long on that query at the end... 'But can a virtuous man hesitate in his choice?' To preserve liberty in the face of violent oppression and governmental usurpations, Washington recognized that a virtuous man must lament the bloodshed and pain of the conflict, but must not hesitate to fight with all vigour to secure the blessings of liberty for all posterity. Nearly two and a half centuries later, do we citizens of the American Republic recognize the same?