Texas Straight Talk From Ron Paul

Washington's Intervention Addiction

One problem with politicians is that when problems they create come to a head, they typically feel this irresistible urge to DO something, rather than to UN-do something, or to simply back off to avoid exacerbating the situation. Too often, that which they end up doing has very little connection to the cause of the crisis, but plays well in the press and superficially makes everyone feel better. Bills that are rushed through Congress under duress are never studied enough, providing too tempting an opportunity to quietly slip in unrelated provisions that erode freedoms in ways that would never pass as a stand-alone bill. We famously saw this with the PATRIOT Act, but Washington learned nothing from that.

The current housing crisis and the corresponding big government fix are another prime example. First of all, the so-called solution will actually make the problem worse. The problem stems from easy credit and a rush to flood the housing and mortgage markets with money. Relaxed or non-existent lending standards led many into mortgages and houses they could not afford. As more foreclosures hit, the lending institutions will continue collapsing like dominoes under the weight of all the bad paper they underwrote. Some are reacting and reintroducing lending standards. Thus the number of buyers in the market for homes is beginning to shrink back to its natural size, and hyper-inflated prices are falling back down to earth. In these ways, the market is trying to correct itself in the wake of the mistakes government intervention encouraged them to make through easy credit. However, this correction is causing pain, especially to Wall Street investors and those who bought homes at the top of the market bubble, never expecting it to crash, always assuming they would easily be able to refinance.

Some mistakenly identify the falling home prices as the disease instead of merely a symptom – which they plan to fix with more easy credit and more liquidity to push more unqualified buyers back into the market for homes they still cannot afford. This is akin to the drug addict identifying withdrawal symptoms as his problem and searching for another fix as his solution. The cycle continues and the problems compound themselves. The addiction deepens.

Addicts are told the first step to recovery is to admit their problem. To cure this addiction to intervention we have to honestly admit the problem and once and for all, kick the habit. That will involve some pain, without a doubt. There is no easy, painless solution to the mess the disastrous economic interventions of the past have wrought. The question is – do we allow some lending institutions to collapse, or do we allow the dollar to collapse? To extend the metaphor, do we endure the temporary discomfort of withdrawal, or do we continue on until there is a fatal overdose? We can delay the agony, but only for a little while, and then we will all end up paying the price for the mistakes of a few.

With the final passage of the Housing Bailout Bill quietly on a Saturday in the Senate, and the President’s signature, our government has unfortunately chosen the latter…

Look Back And Learn

There is talk in the US Congresss of using nuclear weapons, not by Dr. Paul, as a means to an end. But before going forward perhaps those promoting such a legacy should be reminded of what happened when such power was wielded.

Here is a story that’s been around from about the time Dr. Paul started in public office. It is a reminder and perhaps an encouragement for people to voice their opinions and take action to find solutions to the worlds many problems.

The story is called Sadako and the Thousand Paper Cranes by Eleanor Coerr with illustrations by Ronald Himler. It is based upon a real child.
The real life Japanese girl was Sadako Sasaki who lived a short life from January 7, 1943 to October 25, 1955. She was two years old, living near Misasa Bridge in Hiroshima, Japan, when an atomic bomb dropped on the city exploded about one mile from her home. It was August 6, 1945. She developed what was called “an atomic bomb disease” ten years later. This is better known as leukemia. She was hospitalized on 21 February 1955.
Her friend Chizuko Hamamoto visited her in the hospital on August 13th and made her an origami paper crane. Chizuko told Sadako about the Japanese saying that if a person folded 1,000 cranes then their wish would be granted. Sadako did fold the 1,000 cranes by the end of August and even more. For paper she would use paper from medicine wrappers and even asked other patients to use the paper used to wrap get well presents. Chizuko also gave her paper from school.
Her family was with her when Sadako died on the morning of October 25, 1955.

A collection of her letters was published by her friends and classmates after she died. Their goal was to build a memorial to Sadako and all of the children who died from “atomic bomb disease”.
The statue was unveiled in the Hiroshima Peace Memorial in 1958. The plaque at the base reads:


This is our cry.
This is our prayer.
Peace in the world.

From: Winning Against The Odds

A Look At The Ron Paul Story

http://www.lulu.com/content/2761104

True Character

"Nearly all men

can stand adversity,

but

if you want to test

a man's character,

give him

power."

-Abraham Lincoln

Book Exerpt About Ron Paul

Thought I'd share this with you.

Winning

Against The Odds

A Look At The Ron Paul Story

By

Joan Reinbold


Copyright © Joan Reinbold


"First they ignore you,

then they ridicule you,

then they fight you,

then you win."


-- Mahatma Gandhi


Table Of Contents

Introduction…………………………………………..5

Chapter 1……Business As Usual……………..7
Chapter 2……Opportunity For Change….13
Chapter 3……Beginnings……………………….22
Chapter 4……Military…………………………….37
Chapter 5……Political Views………………….45
Chapter 6……Conclusions…………………….101


Introduction


I used to live in Texas, and so may have heard of Ron Paul in some news broadcast. But I don’t think so.

When I applied to a ghostwriter position for a political book, I wasn’t sure of the objective. The request was to write about someone named Ron Paul. He was running in the 2008 United States presidential campaign. The requestor had specific guidelines on what they wanted expressed.

As with any project, I did extensive research. The more I found the more I was fascinated by how this one individual worked within government and as a doctor. I also found that he didn’t fit the mold for “regular” politics and that that was probably why there was limited information in general sources. The internet however had vast amounts of information.

And as far as talking to people, they had the same response as me, “Dr. who?”

So, I was looking for information on a doctor who had been in the United States House of Representative off and on since the 1970’s and then steadily for the last ten. He represents the coastal area of Texas. His co-workers in Congress call him ‘Dr. No’ but not as a bad name.

The Republicans, his official party, don’t seem to agree with him. Despite this, Dr. Paul is considered consistent, principled, and a man of great integrity.

Here was a mystery person who is a public figure. But why didn’t people want to hear what he has to say?

Yet those who do know something of his policies say that he has workable solutions to:
• the loss of your buying power.
• health care
• wars,
• corruption,
• school quality

and many other areas.

What they said wasn’t the usual political talk. Ron Paul’s solutions for the country’s problems may be just what the ‘doctor ordered’.


Chapter 1
Business As Usual

“As citizens of this democracy, you are the rulers and the ruled, the
law-givers and the law-abiding, the beginning and the end.”
-Adlai Stevenson

Imagine going to work everyday and being only one of a few people following the rules? Imagine that this goes on year after year? You point out why it’s important to follow the operating manual. Maybe a few others listen. You keep making decisions based upon the rules you said you’d uphold when you started your job. You stay because you know that your work is important and believe that you make a positive difference.
You are persistent in doing your work and speaking out about making decisions based upon the operating guidelines. Business goes well and not so well as time goes on. Eventually, the not so well starts to be more obvious. But co-workers still think that what they do is more important.
Are you a whistle blower? No, you don’t fit into the standard whistle blower mold. You do give speeches and talk to the media. Mostly the media ignores your voiced concerns or even worse portrays you as a quack. You have been very open and consistent in saying ‘the rules need to be used.’ Yet, business is as usual and continues to become more of a monster.

An outside organization evaluates your work and ranks you at number 27 out of 200 other people who work in your category. They looked in part at you having been on a finance committee, how long you’ve been there and how much influence you have.
Then there is the watchdog group that watches over your workplace. You have been saying what they have been saying.

…current long-range fiscal path is clearly imprudent and fiscally unsustainable. It is also alarming given the range of current and emerging problems that require attention: health care, energy dependency… These long-term challenges have profound implications for our future economic growth… Unless these issues are effectively addressed, they will surely begin to manage us. What is needed is a more strategic, long-term, comprehensive, and integrated approach to help capitalize on related opportunities and manage related risks within current and expected resource levels.
The watchdog makes repeated operational recommendations due to the ongoing decline. Yet, even though co-workers talk about the need for change, the solutions they propose and implement only make matters worse.
No, this is not ENRON or any of the other corporations or banks that have made the national headlines. This is more pervasive than that. Actions taken by this group influence every aspect of everyone’s lives.
The watchdog is the Government Accounting Office:

Summary: A Call For Stewardship: Enhancing the Federal Government's Ability to Address Key Fiscal and Other 21st Century Challenges GAO-08-93SP December 17, 2007

Since the founding of the republic and the ratification of the Constitution, the U.S. government has evolved to reflect changing circumstances at home and abroad. At the end of George Washington's presidency in 1797, there were four cabinet-level departments--most run by small staffs of civil servants--and five cabinet-level officials, including the Attorney General. Today, there are nearly 30 major federal departments and agencies with cabinet-level officials in the executive branch, and the federal workforce, including military personnel, now totals in the millions. In 1797, U.S. government spending represented about 2 percent of the U.S. economy and now it represents over 20 percent. A quick look at the federal budget reveals how much we have expanded beyond the Constitution's framers' original thoughts and our modest beginnings. In the coming decades, however, our ability to sustain even the constitutionally enumerated responsibilities of the federal government will come under increasing pressure. Without meaningful act on, by 2040 our government could only have the resources to do little more than mail out Social Security checks and pay interest on the massive and growing national debt. This is obviously an unacceptable scenario. Our current long-range fiscal path is clearly imprudent and fiscally unsustainable. It is also alarming given the range of current and emerging problems that require attention: health care, energy dependency, environmental protection, and homeland security, to name a few. These long-term challenges have profound implications for our future economic growth, standard of living, and national security. Unless these issues are effectively addressed, they will surely begin to manage us. What is needed is a more strategic, long-term, comprehensive, and integrated approach to help capitalize on related opportunities and manage related risks within current and expected resource levels.

In February 2007, the Comptroller General transmitted to Congress a new publication entitled Fiscal Stewardship: A Critical Challenge Facing Our Nation (GAO-07-362SP) designed to provide, in a relatively brief and understandable form, selected budget and financial information regarding our nation's current financial condition, long-term fiscal outlook, and possible ways forward. In April 2007, we updated GAO's strategic plan, which describes our goals and strategies for serving Congress for fiscal years 2007 through 2012. We also issued separately a part of it that contains detailed descriptions of the key themes and strategic forces framing our strategic plan and their implications for governance n the 21st century (GAO-07-467SP). This document, as the next piece of that body of reports, lays out a set of analytical tools to help policymakers transform government to better meet the demands of the 21st century. At GAO, we strongly believe that consistent use of these items will help policymakers (1) reach consensus on the outcomes Americans most want their government to achieve, (2) increase transparency and accountability, (3) better prioritize competing demands, (4) make more-informed decisions, and (5) modernize federal operations and management.
This is the group that reports on the government being overcharged. In general the GAO looks out for everyone.
Here’s information from their website:
The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent, nonpartisan agency that works for Congress. Often called the "congressional watchdog," GAO investigates how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars. The head of GAO, the Comptroller General of the United States, is appointed to a 15-year term by the President from a slate of candidates Congress proposes. Gene L. Dodaro became Acting Comptroller General of the U.S. Government Accountability Office on March 13, 2008, succeeding David M. Walker, who appointed him upon resigning. Mr. Dodaro will serve in
this position until the President nominates and the Senate confirms a successor from a list of candidates proposed by the Congress.
Our Mission is to support the Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and ensure the accountability of the federal government for the benefit of the American people. We provide Congress with timely information that is objective, fact-based, nonpartisan, nonideological, fair, and balanced.
Our Core Values of accountability, integrity, and reliability are reflected in all of the work we do. We operate under strict professional standards of review and referencing; all facts and decsionaanalyses in our work are thoroughly checked for accuracy.
Our Work is done at the request of congressional committees or subcommittees or is mandated by public laws or committee reports. We also undertake research under the authority of the Comptroller General. We support congressional oversight by auditing agency operations to determine whether federal funds are being spent efficiently and effectively; investigating allegations of illegal and improper activities; reporting on how well government programs and policies are meeting their objectives; performing policy analyses and outlining options for congressional consideration; and issuing legal decisions and opinions, such as bid protest rulings and reports on agency rules.
We advise Congress and the heads of executive agencies about ways to make government more efficient, effective, ethical, equitable and responsive.
Our work leads to laws and acts that improve government operations, saving the government and taxpayers billions of dollars.
The other evaluating organization is a Knowlegis. This information is from a press release on the Representative Paul’s U.S. House of Representatives:

Congressman Paul Ranks #27 in House GOP. March 3, 2008. For immediate release. Washington, DC –
Knowlegis released the 2008 Congressional Power Rankings today on Congress.org marking the fourth edition of the Power Rankings, which compiles more than 20 objective criteria measuring power in Congress.

Knowlegis ranks Congressman Ron Paul #27 out of 200 House Republicans. Among the criteria that garnered this standing were his Ranking Member status on the House Financial Services Committee, tenure and influence.


Chapter 2

Opportunity For Change

People point out that Ron Paul talks faster than they’d like him to at times and that hiss during a debate didn’t sound good. The use of old terms such as Red China and manifesto stand out. And he focuses on the youth while pointing out that he was surprised to see how many older people are concerned about the state of the country. Is he just another politician? He knows how to debate and engage a crowd.

He is also well informed and when he isn’t he says so. His is not the usual political answer. He must be a challenge to a lot of people within his political party. Why? They represent a ‘modern day’ version of politics. Ron Paul represents what today seems to be out of style. He uses history and current happenings to form opinions. He points out that there is a need to look at what has changed, what isn’t working, and what will work because it is the tried and valid way of running the government. That doesn’t always go over well.

When something isn’t working, simply go back and read the directions. Follow the owner’s manual to get things back in order. This country’s founders were knowledgeable of human behavior and had experienced problems. Problems were taken into consideration in the development of the country. Allowances were made for change. The hard part is saying that what you’re doing isn’t working in order to “have a fresh start”.

Dr. Paul expects individuals to be accountable. Morality isn’t dictated by government ‘ruling’ but comes from the individual and local society/church. Perhaps a meaning for what is meant by the separation of church and state. Morality can’t be legislated.

You have the choice of taking action by speaking out, writing, voting, etc., to bring about change. Change can help everyone and not just special interest groups, whether social or economic. Rights taken away from the local level of a community takes away individuality. There is a sense of loss of identity, a loss of authority, and a loss of self.

Do you have the last say about what happens in you local school? What about your tax dollar or even the food you eat? What about your medical care?

Small businesses are impacted by government regulations. Here is information from the Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy:

Report on the Regulatory Flexibility Act
FY 2007
Annual Report of the Chief Counsel for Advocacy
on Implementation of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
and Executive Order 13272
February 2008
Small businesses are the nation’s economic backbone, representing 99.9 percent of all employer firms and generating 60 to 80 percent of net new jobs annually over the past 10 years. Our office is dedicated to fostering a regulatory environment that enables these small entities to further innovate in the dynamic U.S. marketplace. …

…The cost of complying with federal regulatory requirements has grown dramatically since the early 1970s, and small businesses have borne a disproportionate share of this regulatory burden. In 1979, the cost of federal regulations reached an estimated $100 billion, representing a fivefold increase from the 1970 total. Recent estimates indicate that this cost has further expanded to $1.1 trillion, or more than $10,000 per household in 2004—more than the amount the average household spent on health insurance. The Office of Advocacy has played a key role in voicing small business concerns about these rising costs. Advocacy has made significant progress in working with federal agencies to improve their proposed rules by reducing their impacts on small entities while still accomplishing their regulatory objectives.
...A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released in August 2007 highlighted the need for clearer standards and enhanced public participation…

Opportunity for change can be found in many ways and places. Even doing something different in a new way can enhance what you do. Take Alice Stokes Paul for example. She was an American suffragist leader. Along with Lucy Burns and others, she led a successful campaign for women's suffrage that resulted in the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1920.


If you find this helpful please let me know and others.
Who knows, if enough are bought then I can go to the
D.C. march and to Minn.!

Thanks!

Joan

The whole book can be found here.

Ron Paul on Republican Position

This is from a campaign debate. Dr. Paul explains his position, it's historical significance , and why the current government policy is questionable.

Educational Interview of Ron Paul by Larry King

The Ron Paul campaign has ended but the education continues.

John Adams said, "Facts are stubborn things"

Ron Paul Los Angeles Times

The Los Angeles Times included this video of Ron Paul covering the basics of his policies...

Ron Paul Opening Statement to Iraq Lawmakers Parts 1 & 2

Ron Paul Questions Iraqi Lawmakers
June 5, 2008
House of Representatives hearing on proposed U.S.-Iraq Security agreement.
On June 5, 2008, the U.S.-Iraq Security Agreement was examined during a House hearing. The Bush administration proposed an agreement which would permit combat forces to stay in Iraq for an unspecified period of time.
Two Iraqi Parliament representatives gave their assessment. Nadeem Al-Jaberi and Khalaf Al-Ulayyan. Al-Jaberi indicated that the U.S. presence in Iraq is highly unpopular with the public, as roughly 70 percent of Iraqis favor a withdrawal. There is also support for a timetable for the troop withdrawal.
Also discussed with the Iraqi representatives was the view of the 104 acre, $700 million U.S. embassy in Baghdad. It has 27 buildings and 3,000 employees.
Nadeem Al Jaberi: It is certainly larger than the diplomatic mission for which it has arrived for. … I mean why do we need 3,000 employees in an embassy in Iraq if we consider it as a diplomatic mission like any other diplomatic mission? From the principle of reciprocity, would it be appropriate for Iraqis to establish a 3,000 employee embassy in Washington? … It [the embassy] certainly would not be a very positive signal to the Iraqi people.
Nadeem Al Jaberi also criticized the enclosed nature of embassy activities, which sits in the heavily-fortified Green Zone: “And yes, there is some procrastination in its relationship with the society, because its relations are limited to the Green Zone.”
Spencer Ackerman notes that Khalaf Al Ulayyan, when asked about the invasion of Iraq, remarked:
Khalaf Al Ulayyan: “I would prefer if it didn’t happen, because it led to the destruction of the country. The U.S. got rid of one person. It put in hundreds of persons that are worse than Saddam Hussein. Unfortunately, now Iran is going into Iraq, and this is under the umbrella of the United States



Dr. Ron Paul on Iraq

The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. Our Founders understood that how we go to war is as important as when we go to war, which is why they vested the power to declare war in the Legislative Branch. The resolution passed in Congress authorizing the president to use force in Iraq said nothing about the U.S. Constitution, but it mentioned the United Nations a dozen times. The United States should never go to war to enforce UN resolutions!

Our continued presence in Iraq is serving as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. A recent National Intelligence Estimate found that the U.S. presence in Iraq has had a “rejuvenating” effect on the terrorist group. Proponents of the surge say that we are achieving victory. However, even if the level of our troops being killed has declined, they are still being targeted and the Iraqi government is no closer to stability, meaning that the violence will continue.

While we keep our focus on Iraq indefinitely, bin Laden remains free to plot his next attack, and can continue to portray us as occupiers and recruit more volunteers to his cause. Shortly after 9/11, I voted for the authorization to go into Afghanistan because it told the president to do what he already had the authority to do: go after the ones who directly hit us. I was extremely disappointed that the mission there changed to one of nation-building.

Military experts, including Generals Barry McCaffrey and John Batiste, have sounded the warning that our military is stretched so thin because of Iraq and our other commitments that, as General Batiste put it recently, “our Army and Marine Corps are at a breaking point with little to show for it.” A weakened and over-committed military is a recipe for a national security disaster. Meanwhile, Washington continues to talk about how many other countries it could send troops to.

As if a national debt topping $9 trillion is not bad enough, each day this war is fought, deficit spending increases. To avoid raising taxes and the subsequent anger that would follow come election time, the federal government will continue to borrow money from countries like Saudi Arabia and China, making your children and grandchildren’s futures dependent on the actions of other nations and selling out our national security to the highest bidder.

Make no mistake, as Congress spends more and more, there will be less and less to fund Social Security and Medicare, the programs Washington has made us dependent on, without a massive tax increase. Meanwhile, bin Laden proclaims that our falling dollar is a sign that al-Qaeda’s “bleed-until-bankruptcy plan” is working.

On my first day as commander-in-chief, I will direct the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our commanders on the ground to devise and execute a plan to immediately withdraw our troops in the safest manner possible.

Those who caution that leaving Iraq would be a disaster are the same ones who promised the conflict would be a “cake-walk.” It is impossible to tell how long we will have to stay and how many lives we will have to lose if we wait for political factions that have been at war for centuries to come together.

As long as we occupy Iraq, the violence against our troops will continue, and the Iraqi government will become more dependent on us. It is in the best interests of the Iraqi people that we return their country to them immediately. Indeed, violence has already gone down in the areas that are not as heavily occupied.

It is now time to bring our troops home. We must return our focus to finding bin Laden and making sure that we can be prepared for any future threats against our national security.

The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. Our Founders understood that how we go to war is as important as when we go to war, which is why they vested the power to declare war in the Legislative Branch. The resolution passed in Congress authorizing the president to use force in Iraq said nothing about the U.S. Constitution, but it mentioned the United Nations a dozen times. The United States should never go to war to enforce UN resolutions!

Our continued presence in Iraq is serving as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. A recent National Intelligence Estimate found that the U.S. presence in Iraq has had a “rejuvenating” effect on the terrorist group. Proponents of the surge say that we are achieving victory. However, even if the level of our troops being killed has declined, they are still being targeted and the Iraqi government is no closer to stability, meaning that the violence will continue.

While we keep our focus on Iraq indefinitely, bin Laden remains free to plot his next attack, and can continue to portray us as occupiers and recruit more volunteers to his cause. Shortly after 9/11, I voted for the authorization to go into Afghanistan because it told the president to do what he already had the authority to do: go after the ones who directly hit us. I was extremely disappointed that the mission there changed to one of nation-building.

Military experts, including Generals Barry McCaffrey and John Batiste, have sounded the warning that our military is stretched so thin because of Iraq and our other commitments that, as General Batiste put it recently, “our Army and Marine Corps are at a breaking point with little to show for it.” A weakened and over-committed military is a recipe for a national security disaster. Meanwhile, Washington continues to talk about how many other countries it could send troops to.

As if a national debt topping $9 trillion is not bad enough, each day this war is fought, deficit spending increases. To avoid raising taxes and the subsequent anger that would follow come election time, the federal government will continue to borrow money from countries like Saudi Arabia and China, making your children and grandchildren’s futures dependent on the actions of other nations and selling out our national security to the highest bidder.

Make no mistake, as Congress spends more and more, there will be less and less to fund Social Security and Medicare, the programs Washington has made us dependent on, without a massive tax increase. Meanwhile, bin Laden proclaims that our falling dollar is a sign that al-Qaeda’s “bleed-until-bankruptcy plan” is working.

On my first day as commander-in-chief, I will direct the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our commanders on the ground to devise and execute a plan to immediately withdraw our troops in the safest manner possible.

Those who caution that leaving Iraq would be a disaster are the same ones who promised the conflict would be a “cake-walk.” It is impossible to tell how long we will have to stay and how many lives we will have to lose if we wait for political factions that have been at war for centuries to come together.

As long as we occupy Iraq, the violence against our troops will continue, and the Iraqi government will become more dependent on us. It is in the best interests of the Iraqi people that we return their country to them immediately. Indeed, violence has already gone down in the areas that are not as heavily occupied.

It is now time to bring our troops home. We must return our focus to finding bin Laden and making sure that we can be prepared for any future threats against our national security.

The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. Our Founders understood that how we go to war is as important as when we go to war, which is why they vested the power to declare war in the Legislative Branch. The resolution passed in Congress authorizing the president to use force in Iraq said nothing about the U.S. Constitution, but it mentioned the United Nations a dozen times. The United States should never go to war to enforce UN resolutions!

Our continued presence in Iraq is serving as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. A recent National Intelligence Estimate found that the U.S. presence in Iraq has had a “rejuvenating” effect on the terrorist group. Proponents of the surge say that we are achieving victory. However, even if the level of our troops being killed has declined, they are still being targeted and the Iraqi government is no closer to stability, meaning that the violence will continue.

While we keep our focus on Iraq indefinitely, bin Laden remains free to plot his next attack, and can continue to portray us as occupiers and recruit more volunteers to his cause. Shortly after 9/11, I voted for the authorization to go into Afghanistan because it told the president to do what he already had the authority to do: go after the ones who directly hit us. I was extremely disappointed that the mission there changed to one of nation-building.

Military experts, including Generals Barry McCaffrey and John Batiste, have sounded the warning that our military is stretched so thin because of Iraq and our other commitments that, as General Batiste put it recently, “our Army and Marine Corps are at a breaking point with little to show for it.” A weakened and over-committed military is a recipe for a national security disaster. Meanwhile, Washington continues to talk about how many other countries it could send troops to.

As if a national debt topping $9 trillion is not bad enough, each day this war is fought, deficit spending increases. To avoid raising taxes and the subsequent anger that would follow come election time, the federal government will continue to borrow money from countries like Saudi Arabia and China, making your children and grandchildren’s futures dependent on the actions of other nations and selling out our national security to the highest bidder.

Make no mistake, as Congress spends more and more, there will be less and less to fund Social Security and Medicare, the programs Washington has made us dependent on, without a massive tax increase. Meanwhile, bin Laden proclaims that our falling dollar is a sign that al-Qaeda’s “bleed-until-bankruptcy plan” is working.

On my first day as commander-in-chief, I will direct the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our commanders on the ground to devise and execute a plan to immediately withdraw our troops in the safest manner possible.

Those who caution that leaving Iraq would be a disaster are the same ones who promised the conflict would be a “cake-walk.” It is impossible to tell how long we will have to stay and how many lives we will have to lose if we wait for political factions that have been at war for centuries to come together.

As long as we occupy Iraq, the violence against our troops will continue, and the Iraqi government will become more dependent on us. It is in the best interests of the Iraqi people that we return their country to them immediately. Indeed, violence has already gone down in the areas that are not as heavily occupied.

It is now time to bring our troops home. We must return our focus to finding bin Laden and making sure that we can be prepared for any future threats against our national security.

The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. Our Founders understood that how we go to war is as important as when we go to war, which is why they vested the power to declare war in the Legislative Branch. The resolution passed in Congress authorizing the president to use force in Iraq said nothing about the U.S. Constitution, but it mentioned the United Nations a dozen times. The United States should never go to war to enforce UN resolutions!

Our continued presence in Iraq is serving as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. A recent National Intelligence Estimate found that the U.S. presence in Iraq has had a “rejuvenating” effect on the terrorist group. Proponents of the surge say that we are achieving victory. However, even if the level of our troops being killed has declined, they are still being targeted and the Iraqi government is no closer to stability, meaning that the violence will continue.

While we keep our focus on Iraq indefinitely, bin Laden remains free to plot his next attack, and can continue to portray us as occupiers and recruit more volunteers to his cause. Shortly after 9/11, I voted for the authorization to go into Afghanistan because it told the president to do what he already had the authority to do: go after the ones who directly hit us. I was extremely disappointed that the mission there changed to one of nation-building.

Military experts, including Generals Barry McCaffrey and John Batiste, have sounded the warning that our military is stretched so thin because of Iraq and our other commitments that, as General Batiste put it recently, “our Army and Marine Corps are at a breaking point with little to show for it.” A weakened and over-committed military is a recipe for a national security disaster. Meanwhile, Washington continues to talk about how many other countries it could send troops to.

As if a national debt topping $9 trillion is not bad enough, each day this war is fought, deficit spending increases. To avoid raising taxes and the subsequent anger that would follow come election time, the federal government will continue to borrow money from countries like Saudi Arabia and China, making your children and grandchildren’s futures dependent on the actions of other nations and selling out our national security to the highest bidder.

Make no mistake, as Congress spends more and more, there will be less and less to fund Social Security and Medicare, the programs Washington has made us dependent on, without a massive tax increase. Meanwhile, bin Laden proclaims that our falling dollar is a sign that al-Qaeda’s “bleed-until-bankruptcy plan” is working.

On my first day as commander-in-chief, I will direct the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our commanders on the ground to devise and execute a plan to immediately withdraw our troops in the safest manner possible.

Those who caution that leaving Iraq would be a disaster are the same ones who promised the conflict would be a “cake-walk.” It is impossible to tell how long we will have to stay and how many lives we will have to lose if we wait for political factions that have been at war for centuries to come together.

As long as we occupy Iraq, the violence against our troops will continue, and the Iraqi government will become more dependent on us. It is in the best interests of the Iraqi people that we return their country to them immediately. Indeed, violence has already gone down in the areas that are not as heavily occupied.

It is now time to bring our troops home. We must return our focus to finding bin Laden and making sure that we can be prepared for any future threats against our national security.

The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. Our Founders understood that how we go to war is as important as when we go to war, which is why they vested the power to declare war in the Legislative Branch. The resolution passed in Congress authorizing the president to use force in Iraq said nothing about the U.S. Constitution, but it mentioned the United Nations a dozen times. The United States should never go to war to enforce UN resolutions!

Our continued presence in Iraq is serving as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. A recent National Intelligence Estimate found that the U.S. presence in Iraq has had a “rejuvenating” effect on the terrorist group. Proponents of the surge say that we are achieving victory. However, even if the level of our troops being killed has declined, they are still being targeted and the Iraqi government is no closer to stability, meaning that the violence will continue.

While we keep our focus on Iraq indefinitely, bin Laden remains free to plot his next attack, and can continue to portray us as occupiers and recruit more volunteers to his cause. Shortly after 9/11, I voted for the authorization to go into Afghanistan because it told the president to do what he already had the authority to do: go after the ones who directly hit us. I was extremely disappointed that the mission there changed to one of nation-building.

Military experts, including Generals Barry McCaffrey and John Batiste, have sounded the warning that our military is stretched so thin because of Iraq and our other commitments that, as General Batiste put it recently, “our Army and Marine Corps are at a breaking point with little to show for it.” A weakened and over-committed military is a recipe for a national security disaster. Meanwhile, Washington continues to talk about how many other countries it could send troops to.

As if a national debt topping $9 trillion is not bad enough, each day this war is fought, deficit spending increases. To avoid raising taxes and the subsequent anger that would follow come election time, the federal government will continue to borrow money from countries like Saudi Arabia and China, making your children and grandchildren’s futures dependent on the actions of other nations and selling out our national security to the highest bidder.

Make no mistake, as Congress spends more and more, there will be less and less to fund Social Security and Medicare, the programs Washington has made us dependent on, without a massive tax increase. Meanwhile, bin Laden proclaims that our falling dollar is a sign that al-Qaeda’s “bleed-until-bankruptcy plan” is working.

On my first day as commander-in-chief, I will direct the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our commanders on the ground to devise and execute a plan to immediately withdraw our troops in the safest manner possible.

Those who caution that leaving Iraq would be a disaster are the same ones who promised the conflict would be a “cake-walk.” It is impossible to tell how long we will have to stay and how many lives we will have to lose if we wait for political factions that have been at war for centuries to come together.

As long as we occupy Iraq, the violence against our troops will continue, and the Iraqi government will become more dependent on us. It is in the best interests of the Iraqi people that we return their country to them immediately. Indeed, violence has already gone down in the areas that are not as heavily occupied.

It is now time to bring our troops home. We must return our focus to finding bin Laden and making sure that we can be prepared for any future threats against our national security.

The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. Our Founders understood that how we go to war is as important as when we go to war, which is why they vested the power to declare war in the Legislative Branch. The resolution passed in Congress authorizing the president to use force in Iraq said nothing about the U.S. Constitution, but it mentioned the United Nations a dozen times. The United States should never go to war to enforce UN resolutions!

Our continued presence in Iraq is serving as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. A recent National Intelligence Estimate found that the U.S. presence in Iraq has had a “rejuvenating” effect on the terrorist group. Proponents of the surge say that we are achieving victory. However, even if the level of our troops being killed has declined, they are still being targeted and the Iraqi government is no closer to stability, meaning that the violence will continue.

While we keep our focus on Iraq indefinitely, bin Laden remains free to plot his next attack, and can continue to portray us as occupiers and recruit more volunteers to his cause. Shortly after 9/11, I voted for the authorization to go into Afghanistan because it told the president to do what he already had the authority to do: go after the ones who directly hit us. I was extremely disappointed that the mission there changed to one of nation-building.

Military experts, including Generals Barry McCaffrey and John Batiste, have sounded the warning that our military is stretched so thin because of Iraq and our other commitments that, as General Batiste put it recently, “our Army and Marine Corps are at a breaking point with little to show for it.” A weakened and over-committed military is a recipe for a national security disaster. Meanwhile, Washington continues to talk about how many other countries it could send troops to.

As if a national debt topping $9 trillion is not bad enough, each day this war is fought, deficit spending increases. To avoid raising taxes and the subsequent anger that would follow come election time, the federal government will continue to borrow money from countries like Saudi Arabia and China, making your children and grandchildren’s futures dependent on the actions of other nations and selling out our national security to the highest bidder.

Make no mistake, as Congress spends more and more, there will be less and less to fund Social Security and Medicare, the programs Washington has made us dependent on, without a massive tax increase. Meanwhile, bin Laden proclaims that our falling dollar is a sign that al-Qaeda’s “bleed-until-bankruptcy plan” is working.

On my first day as commander-in-chief, I will direct the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our commanders on the ground to devise and execute a plan to immediately withdraw our troops in the safest manner possible.

Those who caution that leaving Iraq would be a disaster are the same ones who promised the conflict would be a “cake-walk.” It is impossible to tell how long we will have to stay and how many lives we will have to lose if we wait for political factions that have been at war for centuries to come together.

As long as we occupy Iraq, the violence against our troops will continue, and the Iraqi government will become more dependent on us. It is in the best interests of the Iraqi people that we return their country to them immediately. Indeed, violence has already gone down in the areas that are not as heavily occupied.

It is now time to bring our troops home. We must return our focus to finding bin Laden and making sure that we can be prepared for any future threats against our national security.

Ron Paul Questions Iraq Lawmakers (2/2)

3/3 Ron Paul presents "Power to the Jury" At Issue (NEFL)

Notes from the site:

In this OLD TV SHOW "At Issue" (from The National Endowment For Liberty), Ron Paul is joined by a panel of experts to discuss the power of the jury and to expose the Judge's dirty little secret.

"Jury Nullification" is the power of the Jury to overturn bad laws (of which, we have MANY). It is an important tool guaranteed to citizens serving on jury duty. Jury nullification enables us to declare laws unjust, if we are so inclined.

Most Judges do not want you to know about this power. Juries are only told they can rule "guilty" or "not guilty." They are never told of their third option, "the law is bad."

Shame on bad Judges covering up this power and the corrupt system which allow these arrogant Judges to remain on the bench.

Learn your rights and DO NOT try to get out of jury duty.

As citizens we only have two real powers to keep the Gov't in check:
1) The power to vote
2) The power of the jury

Your rights: Use them or loose them. With rumors of the American Bar Association working to eliminate juries in the future. And with the PROVEN vulnerability of the electronic voting machines, what voice will we have left? Welcome to Slavery, population: YOU!

2/3 Ron Paul presents "Power to the Jury" At Issue (NEFL)

Notes On Video From Site:

In this OLD TV SHOW "At Issue" (from The National Endowment For Liberty), Ron Paul is joined by a panel of experts to discuss the In this OLD TV SHOW "At Issue" (from The National Endowment For Liberty), Ron Paul is joined by a panel of experts to discuss the power of the jury and to expose the Judge's dirty little secret.

"Jury Nullification" is the power of the Jury to overturn bad laws (of which, we have MANY). It is an important tool guaranteed to citizens serving on jury duty. Jury nullification enables us to declare laws unjust, if we are so inclined.

Most Judges do not want you to know about this power. Juries are only told they can rule "guilty" or "not guilty." They are never told of their third option, "the law is bad."

Shame on bad Judges covering up this power and the corrupt system which allow these arrogant Judges to remain on the bench.

Learn your rights and DO NOT try to get out of jury duty.

As citizens we only have two real powers to keep the Gov't in check:
1) The power to vote
2) The power of the jury

Your rights: Use them or loose them. With rumors of the American Bar Association working to eliminate juries in the future. And with the PROVEN vulnerability of the electronic voting machines, what voice will we have left? Welcome to Slavery, population: YOU!

Trial By Jury by Lysander Spooner

Part two of this series mentions a book called Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner. Look here at Google Books for more on this.

1/3 Ron Paul presents "Power to the Jury" At Issue (NEFL)

Notes With Video

In this OLD TV SHOW "At Issue" (from The National Endowment For Liberty), Ron Paul is joined by a panel of experts to discuss the power of the jury and to expose the Judge's dirty little secret.

"Jury Nullification" is the power of the Jury to overturn bad laws (of which, we have MANY). It is an important tool guaranteed to citizens serving on jury duty. Jury nullification enables us to declare laws unjust, if we are so inclined.

Most Judges do not want you to know about this power. Juries are only told they can rule "guilty" or "not guilty." They are never told of their third option, "the law is bad."

Shame on bad Judges covering up this power and the corrupt system which allow these arrogant Judges to remain on the bench.

Learn your rights and DO NOT try to get out of jury duty.

As citizens we only have two real powers to keep the Gov't in check:
1) The power to vote
2) The power of the jury

Your rights: Use them or loose them. With rumors of the American Bar Association working to eliminate juries in the future. And with the PROVEN vulnerability of the electronic voting machines, what voice will we have left? Welcome to Slavery, population: YOU!

Media Caught Lying, Version2

Revolution March: July 12 Washington DC

Ron Paul Night Talk Bloomberg TV 04/29/2008 Part 3

More Issues and Information

Ron Paul Night Talk Bloomberg TV 04/29/2008 Part 2

More Issues

Ron Paul Night Talk Bloomberg TV 04/29/2008 Part 1

Discussing Issues

RON PAUL NEWS HOUR INTERVIEW OCT 12, 2007 PART.2

More on the Issues

RON PAUL NEWS HOUR INTERVIEW OCT 12, 2007 PART.1

More of the 'Why' Behind the Issues Part 1

Education: Effective Schools

Dear friend:

As a father and grandfather whose children attended public schools, I’ve always had a personal stake in America’s educational system -- just as you do.

The fact is, not only do I understand the challenges students face each day, but with several teachers in my own family, I also understand things from an teacher’s point of view.

Because they work with children everyday, I recognize that parents and teachers are better equipped to make educational decisions than distant Washington bureaucrats.

That’s why, as a member of the Education Committee in Congress, I worked hard to get more local control over education and opposed efforts like Ted Kennedy’s so-called "No Child Left Behind Bill" that strips parents and teachers of the ability to make important educational decisions.

I’ve also introduced legislation that would give parents a tax credit to help pay for their children’s education expenses -- whether they’re homeschooled or attend public or private schools.

And it was my privilege to introduce tax credits for teachers who get professional training, so we can begin to transform our educational system through real incentive -- rather than waiting for Washington politicians to "throw more money at the problem."

If you agree as I do that more educational opportunities could be given to Americans using the principles of conservatism, I hope to earn your support for the Republican nomination for president.

To learn more about my views on improving educational opportunities, please visit http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Sincerely,

Dr. Ron Paul

Republican for President

Authorized by Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee – permission to reprint granted www.ronpaul2008.com ● Phone: 703-248-9115

An Ode to the Candidates

This is from the end of last year (Ron Paul is listed somewhere in the middle):

True Common Sense

A very interesting comparison.

Glenn Beck & Ron Paul on the Federal Reserve & the Economy

Ron Paul on Glenn Beck 4-1-08 discusses the federal reserve and the economy.

Economic Solution

An interesting and friendly debate. Yet while the debate goes on, the Fed's effort to correct the current economic challenge proves Ron Paul's point.

Ron Paul on CNBC's Kudlow & Company

Value of Leadership

While elections and campaigns continue there is the on going non-coverage. Yet inspite of the lack of large media providing equal information on all candidates Ron Paul doesn't give up. This is a great quality for a leader. It also shows his belief and trust in the American people who want a change in how government is being run.

Value in earnings continue to be errored while the government tries different stategies which are really a repeat of what hasn't worked for decades. So, going against such an established routine is a challenge that requires an unusually strong leader which is being demonstarted in Dr. Paul.

Why No Membership in World Trade Associations?

A View of the World Trade Association

Here's something to consider!

A 'New' Way To Run Things?

Politics as usual is something we say because of expecting government to run pretty much as usual. Well, a couple of months ago I looked at ghostwriting a book for someone about a political candidate. My first thought was 'who is this person'. The more I learned the more fascinated I became. Even though he came in third in the 1988 presidential race there was little about him in the main line media.The contract for writing the book fell through but I still had this information. Then I was asked to ghostwrite an article about this candidate, for free, which I did. So, after gathering the information, I could at least make use of it. Then there were other areas where his name came up. So, I thought I'd make use of the information and post it on an ongoing basis because he has turned out to be the 'not politics as usual' candidate nor has he been the usual government employee in the House of Representatives. He's obtained international recognition and a growing number of supporters from every aspect of society.

A New Hope In An Unexpected President?

A little rebellion now and then is a good thing…God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. …And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? …The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, …The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time,…Thomas Jefferson

Dr. Ron Paul

Fringe Element

or

Modern Day Statesman?

Ron Paul a Traditionalist?

When Ron Paul is portrayed in main line media, that is, if and when he is, people have been known to say, “Dr. who?” Yet he is a Republican presidential candidate for 2008. He has one of the highest campaign fund raising records and supporters from all walks of life. So, why is he so popular and yet unknown?Originally from Pennsylvania, he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from Texas. In 1988 he ran for the presidency representing the Libertarian party while still a Republican.The Congressional Record shows a history of his voting according to what his website refers to as Constitutional lines. He votes against big government, voted against going to war in Iraq and is for a constructive withdrawal, and promotes states rights and individual rights. He says he uses the Constitution as his guide along with the wisdom of the people who started the country. And when you look at U.S. history he fits in with a long line of people who challenged government: the people who instigated the Boston Tea Party, Shay’s Rebellion, and the Whisky Rebellion, and people like Abraham Lincoln. This is why he is considered a ‘traditionalist’.So, how did he go from being a physician to a politician? He questioned the economics of government policies. Also, he is an individualist who challenges and asks people to question.In an interview with Jay Leno he pointed out that it’s the message people are excited about. He presents himself as a messenger telling people about individual liberty. He says that he is for human rights, that is ‘the rights of the individual’. His message is about freedom, prosperity, and hope. And he has a diverse following.

Beginning

Ron was born August 20, 1935 as Ronald Ernest in the small town of Green Tree in western Pennsylvania, near the city of Pittsburgh. The Paul dairy farm was home to his two older brothers, William being the oldest, then David, himself and two younger brothers, Jerrold, and Wayne. Inside the four room home the brothers shared a bedroom. Their births spanned seven years while the country went through the Great Depression and transitions in world relations.Peggy Paul, his Mother, was Margaret Dumont (1908-2001) before she married his Dad, Howard Caspar Paul (1904 -1997). His Dad’s father emigrated from Germany. His Dad’s brothers, Uncles Lewis and Arthur were owners, along with his Dad, of the Green Tree Dairy.Western Pennsylvania is a land of astonishing surprises from the beautiful fall color change of leaves to the hidden treasure of a mountain waterfall. The mountains are dotted with farms, towns, cities, and a very diverse people.But there are also the historical places like Fort Duquesne where Pittsburg was built. And a historical people who over the years disappeared but not entirely. People also migrated there from many places throughout the world whether the Middle East or Scotland and beyond. It has even had its rebels. Yes, even before Ron, there were people challenging a central government telling them what to do. This was also the land where the Whisky Rebellion took place, Western Pennsylvania. People who converted produce to alcohol for barter and shipping in the 1700’s. The central government tax on the alcohol was challenged as being unfair. There was a close time frame between this and Shay’s Rebellion and even the Boston Tea Party.Over the years economic difficulties influenced the region. Agriculture, lumber, mining, and industry in general were affected. The steel industry was king in Pittsburg, along with oil, but both of those went their way leaving a declining city. People were without jobs or even the opportunities for jobs. Those who could left. Then there is the migration to the south and southwest.The Western Pennsylvania life consisted of a hard work ethic both on the part of Ron’s family. On a dairy farm that extends to seven days a week. Animals don’t take a day off. It is a way of life that teaches self-reliance.

Government Involvement

One of Ron Paul's issues has to do with the extensiveness of government. He states that in general people do better with less government involvement.

Those who question this think that there should be more government involvement for things to work right.

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
- Plato (427-347 B.C.)

Compassion Is Not Religious Business

Compassion is not religious business,
it is human business,
it is not luxury,
it is essential for our own peace and mental stability,
it is essential for human survival.
Dalai Lama

Is the Voice of Reason Being Shunned?

by

Joan Reinbold

Enemy of the People is an eighteen hundreds play about polluted public baths. Even though people got sick from the water the town’s people wouldn’t follow the doctor’s advice to close and fix them. A repair meant lost income and prestige. .

Even the news media and schools were involved in the ‘mass think’ of not wanting to listen to reason. Not so unlike today. Multiple individuals and groups have their own version of what they consider the truth and what should be stopped.

The decision for the baths safety was initially placed within the realm of the person who said they needed to be closed. But when he pointed out the need for the closing, no one wanted to listen. Not unlike today. People become acclimated to a way of life and even if a change would be for the better there is resistance to change. Whether it’s with health, environment, or politics, people are reluctant to change.

The mass media presents what the major controllers of their individual ‘businesses’ dictate, while schools are subject to broader guidelines at the national level. The voices of ‘reason’ can so easily be ignored in the light of ‘how it is’ and ‘how it benefits’ everyone.

Unlike the play, the real world actions of the ‘voices of reason’ have the internet to state their positions. Of course, even there, there are limitations but the availability of information is more widespread. Even though ‘special interests’ groups may control certain sectors of media outlets there are ways for people to communicate.

The voice of reason may be shunned but somehow it finds a way to emerge, to grow beyond the controls of the few to reach the many. This has been true throughout human history.

This writing started after I’d read and listened to interviews of the U.S. political candidate Dr. Ron Paul. If you were to just go by the headlines or short clips of what he says it would be reasonable to decide that there is no voice of reason. But if you go beyond that and hear, ‘the rest of the story’ then what he says takes on a whole new meaning.

Are the media and leadership, and all of the people who have become ‘comfortable doing the same thing’ just reliving the play from long ago? Is there a lack of listening to the voice of reason in order to prevent any changes in the status quo?

Ways of life do change even if the voice of reason is not part of the decision making. How you as an individual decide is based upon your knowledge. What do you know? How do you find out?

Dr. Ron Paul is a presidential candidate who is not widely covered by the news media but is widely known on the internet. He too has been stating that a change needs to take place. Is he the modern day voice of reason saying that the current state of affairs is hurting people? He contends that a change in how the government runs things must take place.

Dr. Paul’s point of view is to return control of issues to the local level, to an individual level. The local level of dealing with a concern allows for a unique perspective. This view is based upon local values and understanding from an individual’s perspective and involvement. A home voice empowers people to become involved.