Ron Paul For President

Ron Paul--Second In Delegate Count

2012-02-24T08:10:00.001-08:00

America & Iran: Locked In All-Out Mortal War

2012-02-23T12:24:00.000-08:00

The Coming U.S. –Iran War

While Americans slept two weeks ago Congress passed and President Obama signed a DECLARATION OF WAR document against Iran. It’s called the National Defense Appropriations Act. Most of us conservatives got sidetracked. We were wondering why those we elected could sell us down the river by including in the NDAA a clause that allows the military to come to your door and take you to some god-forsaken jail in a foreign country if they want, all without due process.

As if that wasn’t enough infamy for one month. Now we find the U.S. has declared war on Iran. Why hasn’t it stirred the hearts and minds of all Americans to do one of two things. Shout praises to Allah and his great black president with the Arab heritage. Or, two, rise up against such tyranny and injustice. Imagine the deceit—declaring war on a foreign country at the same time you declare war on your own people, justifying it at the NSA by calling many of us terrorists.

We should have known this was coming. It is a MONEY thing. We are at war with Iranian oil, stopping it from going to Europe. Why not, it just hurts the EU, not America. Last Thursday, in addition to the above listed, the Department of Treasury under Timothy Geithner blacklisted the intelligence ministry due to " its central role in perpetrating human rights abuses against the citizens of Iran." The sanctions bar U.S. companies and individuals from conducting any and all business with the MOIS. While the United States often uses sanctions against nations that are deemed a potential threat to peace, it rarely imposes sanctions on an individual department within the offending nation. However, on Thursday the U.S. government declared its imposition of sanctions on Iran's intelligence agencies.

It also freezes MOIS assets within the reach of the U.S. and it imposes a visa ban on all of its members.

The U.S. Treasury has accused the MOIS of providing financial, material or technological support for Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shiite terrorist group, and Hamas, a Palestinian terrorist organization that rules the Gaza Strip. The two groups allegedly conducted multiple joint projects with Iran in computer hacking.

The U.S. State Department lists both Hezbollah and Hamas as terrorist organizations.

The MOIS has also cooperated with al-Qaeda operatives in Iran and provided them with documents, identification cards and passports, in addition to providing money and weapons to al-Qaeda in Iraq, the Treasury Department said in a statement.

"Today we have designated the MOIS for abusing the basic human rights of Iranian citizens and exporting its vicious practices to support the Syrian regime's abhorrent crackdown on its own population," Under Secretary of Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David Cohen said.

"In addition, we are designating the MOIS for its support to terrorist groups, including al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda in Iraq, Hezbollah and Hamas, again exposing the extent of Iran's sponsorship of terrorism as a matter of Iranian state policy," he added.

"For now, Sunnis, Shiites, Wahhabists and other sects will work together until they achieve victory," said the Israeli police official who requested anonymity.

Just this week, Iran was accused of being behind bomb attacks in India, Georgia and Thailand targeting Israeli citizens, although the Iranians deny participating.

Prior to the Treasury Department's Thursday announcement, the U.S. and the European Union had already targeted Iran's central bank and oil exports for expanded sanctions in their continuous efforts to press the country to stop its uranium enrichment activities.

Recently, the Obama Administration leveled sanctions on Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force and Law Enforcement Forces, the country's national police, claiming that they have been supporting the Syrian government's attacks on protesters and dissenters.

For all intents and purposes, Iran is a mortal enemy of the United States and Israel.

Credits:

Amit Meir

The Elimination of Women's Rights

Upon seizing power, the Taliban regime instituted a system of gender apartheid effectively thrusting the women of Afghanistan into a state of virtual house arrest. Under Taliban rule women were stripped of all human rights - their work, visibility, opportunity for education, voice, healthcare, and mobility. When they took control in 1996, the Taliban initially imposed strict edicts that:

· Banished women from the work force

· Closed schools to girls and women and expelled women from universities

· Prohibited women from leaving their homes unless accompanied by a close male relative

· Ordered the publicly visible windows of women's houses painted black and forced women to wear the burqa (or chadari) - which completely shrouds the body, leaving only a small mesh-covered opening through which to see

· Prohibited women and girls from being examined by male physicians while at the same time prohibited female doctors and nurses from working

Women were brutally beaten, publicly flogged, and killed for violating Taliban decrees. Even after international condemnation, the Taliban made only slight changes. Some say it was progress when the Taliban allowed a few women doctors and nurses to work, even while hospitals still had segregated wards for women. In Kabul and other cities, a few home schools for girls operated in secret. In addition, women who conducted home schools were risking their lives or a severe beating.

But we’re out of Iraq, except for our embassy and contractors. Soon we shall be out of Afghanistan. What a farce this whole thing was—at a cost of maybe $4 trillion dollars when you add Afghanistan into the mix. And there’s no winning that war, either. They threw Russia out and now American troops will be going home permanently by 2014. These wars represent the second and third wars America has lost. It isn’t a knock on our military. They are still the best trained and equipped in the world. It’s a knock on president Bush primarily, and secondarily on President Obama for sponsoring these expensive, useless wars. It’s all part of a cabal, a master plan to support the mighty banks and our war machine.

I know, the military will loudly boast that we accomplished our mission. Mission? We didn’t even have an exit strategy when we went in. We didn’t have a mission, except to kill Sadam Hussein. All that talk about finding and destroying weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) was pure Bush and Cheney propaganda.

The Only Winner?

The losers are the U.S. taxpayers. The winners are the U.S. military-industrial complex and the banks which financed the whole mess at our expense plus interest. There’s never any reason we need to pay interest or to borrow money to finance a war. Governments don’t need to pay interest. They can merely print their own non-interest bearing money instead of having the banking system get rich on us. So there is a connection. Put banks together with the military and the huge war machine manufacturing plants we have scattered across America—probably the only thing we make these days—and we have in this country and in the world chaos, destruction, war victim amputees and psychological brain damaged men, loss of U.S. prestige abroad, and an angry populace here at home vowing “Never again.” See what you started, Bushies?

Yes, America gets to keep the military-industrial jobs. We get to add to our superior technology. We get to sell our technology to Japan, Saudi Arabia, and South Korea, and drop some of that intelligence off from the air gratis to Iran.. It helps the ailing economy. What would we do if we got rid of this war machine? The banks are happy. They get to finance all our wars

Goldman Sachs newest bank. Why are bank buildings the

biggest structures in every city of the world? They control

the world’s money supply.

That’s one reason why, sir, [Mr President, Barak Obama,] there are certain rich men in America—and the rich get richer—in this country and it’s why the poor get poorer. You’ve been ostensibly trying to break this up. But I’m telling you right now that you are contributing to it with your wars. It’s not capitalism’s fault, it’s the fault of you Nazi-like leaders we have had in the White House. You super-mad politicians who, somehow, seem to buy your way into office—and there’s a methodology there too. The Republican and Democratic party mechanism is complicit in all of this.

Americans don’t choose their presidents anymore, the big shakers and movers do all that for us as we, the little people, fall asleep and gaze up into the sky on Armed Forces Day as the jet airplanes scream by, saying isn’t it all so wonderful. What would we do without our military, without our war technology, without our gallivant, gallant, and valiant presidents? What we would do is prosper mightily in a peaceful world without debt, in a world where we, the people, through our legally chosen lawmakers, printed our own dollars, got rid of fractional reserve banking where banks can loan ten times or more than actual bank reserves and when they get into trouble the sophisticated presidents who know more than we do anyway can bail out the banks with hard earned taxpayer money.

That kind of slavery has got to stop!

What a crazy world we live in. And it’s going to stop. Our people are poised to take back America. But first they must learn how we got here and what they say about bad umpires in Major League Baseball, “Throw the bums out.” We’re talking about you, Barak Hussein Obama.

U.S. counterterrorism officials have long-favored sanctions against Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security for its material support of terrorist groups and the oppressive Syrian Ba'ath Party regime, claims a former military intelligence analyst. According to Wesley Pruden, editor emeritus of the Washington Times: The White House is trying desperately to rewrite Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s interview with David Ignatius of The Washington Post, where Panetta was said to believe that Israel is likely to bomb the Iranian nuclear-weapon works “in April, May or June before Israel enters a ’zone of immunity.’”

On Thursday, February 16, 2012, in addition to the above listed, the Department of Treasury under Timothy Geithner blacklisted the intelligence ministry due to " its central role in perpetrating human rights abuses against the citizens of Iran." The sanctions barred U.S. companies and individuals from conducting any and all business with the MOIS. It also froze MOIS assets within the reach of the U.S. and imposed a visa ban on all of its members.

If Ron Paul were president, there would be no need to do all of the above meddling in the lives of foreign nations. We would be as friendly with Iran as we are with Israel, and so would Israel become friends to the Iranians. The terrorist action against America and Israel would stop. We would engage in trade and other correspondence. We would open up an embassy in Tehran and welcome their ambassadors to New York and Washington. If you still wonder what marvelous principles this man, Congressman Ron Paul, must be living by to bring such world peace, I suggest you read and re-read “Patriot Call of Ron Paul,” an ebook available at Barnes & Noble and Amazon.com. http://bit.ly/tjGsUc

But Back to The Mundane Here & Now:

US Treasurer Tim Geithner staging monetary
war with Iran

The U.S. State Department lists both Hezbollah and Hamas as terrorist organizations.

"While conventional wisdom had been that Iran, a Shiite Muslim nation, would never cooperate with al-Qaeda since it is a Sunni Muslim network, the current geopolitical situation has turned them—at least temporarily—into allies against the 'infidels,'" said a former U.S. police sergeant now serving in the Israeli National Police. [This is another byproduct of a defective U.S. foreign policy. Imagine, the arch enemy of Iran’s Shiites—al-Qaeda—has “turned.” Shiites and al-Qaeda are now working feverishly together for the defeat of those monsters, the United States and Israel. Our foreign policy is backfiring and must be changed. Under Ron Paul it will be changed.

"For now, Sunnis, Shiites, Wahhabists and other sects will work together until they achieve victory," said the Israeli police official who requested anonymity.

Just this week, February 21, 2012, Iran was accused of being behind bomb attacks in India, Georgia and Thailand targeting Israeli citizens, although the Iranians deny participating. What kind of leadership position is the U.S. in now, to dissuade these bombers to say home? We have no position of strength with them except warfare, which before Obama came to power—no, before George W. Bush came to power—was the last resort. Can you wonder why Iran is busy pursuing a nuclear bomb? It hasn’t a chance against Israel and the U.S. at the present moment without the threat of a nuke. But in two years, if this nuke-building nation persists, it shall have the means to negotiate and do warfare with the big boys, something it lacks today.

For all intents and purposes, Iran is a mortal enemy of the United States and Israel.

Credits:

Amit Meir

Egypt Policy: Rand Paul and Ron Paul Support The Right Foreign Policy, Obama Doesn't

2012-02-19T17:06:00.000-08:00

Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky)

Rand Paul Calls for Cutoff of Aid to Egypt

Sen. Rand Paul has sponsored a bill to cut off all U.S. aid to Egypt unless authorities release 19 Americans being held there on what he called “trumped-up charges.”

The Kentucky Republican urged the Senate to take up an amendment to a transportation bill that would “end all foreign aid to Egypt if our U.S. citizens are not released in 30 days.”

But California Democrat Barbara Boxer, who co-sponsored the transportation bill, blocked Paul’s amendment, CNS News reported.

Egyptian authorities have taken action against American and other non-governmental organizations and said they intend to prosecute 43 people linked to them, including 19 American citizens. They have barred some Americans — including the son of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood — from leaving the country.

Paul said on the Senate floor: “When will we learn? You can’t buy friendship and you can’t convince authoritarians to love freedom with welfare checks.

“Egypt has been receiving welfare from the United States for nearly 40 years now. America has lavished over $60 billion on the government of Egypt and they react with insolence and disregard by detaining 19 of our U.S. citizens.”

Paul said the president should send the Egyptian ambassador home with “a message that America will not tolerate any country holding U.S. citizens as political prisoners.

“Congress should act today to tell Egypt that we will no longer send our annual welfare check to them; that this year's $1.8 billion is not on the way.

“The president’s budget this week includes the $1.8 billion for Egypt without a word of rebuke or any demand for our citizens to be released.”

Rejecting the amendment, Boxer said: “Members of both sides of the aisle, Republicans and Democrats, have very strong feelings that this amendment should not be brought up at this time. We need to be smart and strategic when we have people in harm’s way in another country.”

Paul said: “The Senate refuses to even hold a single vote to spend 10 minutes discussing why U.S. citizens are being detained in Egypt.”

Thanks to Dick Morris for the above...

Church Leaders Should Emphasize American Liberty In Their Talks As In Days of Yore

2012-02-16T08:42:00.000-08:00

embed this tweet

By Don White
January 13, 2012

LDS Church President Ezra Taft Benson

With Satan's powers running rampant in the minds of men, it is time church leaders from every persuasion got back to preaching anti-communism and principles of liberty across the pulpit. Our nation's capital--Republicans and Democrats--even the WhiteHouse--has an abundance of Marxist leaders who would strip us of our freedom, even our citizenship.

One such is Senator Lieberman who co-sponsored a bill that could strip citizenship from an American citizen without due process of law. It's called The Enemy Expatriation Act (HR 3166 and S. 1698). It is a proposed law for the United States sponsored by Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Congressman Charles Dent (R-PA). The proposal would allow the U.S. government to strip our. citizens of their citizenship without requiring that the citizen have been convicted of any crime. Theproposal was compared to the recently passed National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, which makes possible arrest of people from their homes, people who could be taken and transported in the dark of night to a jail in a far-away foreign country, a secret operation without due process rights so that the public would not know about it and could not protest; and it was suggested that the two laws could be used together to take away citizens' civil liberties. Many Americans are arguing that these laws are unconstitutional and have agreed to protest against them. I say we should elect a very good man, even conservative Congressman Ron Paul, who consistently says what he means and means what he says,
^{unlike so many others who flip flop in their beliefs, statements, and speeches. Ron Paul is the only presidential}
^{candidate out there who sees the current monetary and communist threats to America and who will fight to stop them.}
this tyranny.

The above law and the proposed law are just two examples of communist-inspired men--one a Republican and the other an independent who votes Democratic--taking the rights of Americans away. Does it cause anyone to pause and think? What has happened to our country since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989-91 and the defeat of the communist Soviet threat to the world? The truth is that communism is on the march, and ever so subtly it is being taught in ourschools, lived and preached by progressive lawmakers, and insidiously it pops up in legislation that proposes bigger and bigger Federal Government and more and more restrictions on citizens' rights. The president's 2012 is full of this kind of spending profuseness and big government crap.

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) Prophet Ezra Taft Benson and other LDS leaders spoke openly across the pulpit about this threat to free agency. Isn't it time the Church encouraged talk of freedom and liberty from the pulpit? Benson believed you could do so without being partisan or political. All good people have a stake in this fight, whether Democrat or Republican. As secretary of agriculture, Benson traveled extensively for President Dwight D. Eisenhower and noted the advance of communism. His attaches in Havana, Cuba gave compelling evidence of Castro's communist leanings at the same time he was denying he was a communist. At that time the New York Times was hailing Castro as a "Cuban Patriot" and "decidedly anti-communist." Ed Sullivan was giving the cigar-smoking despot a king's welcome on his popular television show, praising him as having "the real American spirit of George Washington."

By 1959 Castro had ousted Bautista and established a Communist-dominated dictatorship in Cuba. When Nikita Khrushchev visited the United States, Khrushchev, himself, had boasted to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Benson that "Ezra's grandchildren would live under communism." And Elder Benson had witnessed the tendency in his own country toward increased government involvement in the lives of its people.

Church President Benson noted that leaders throughout the history of the LDS Church had advocated for the freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, which they proclaimed was divinely inspired. and warned against the advance of anything that threatened man's liberty, Joseph Smith declared that the Constitution of the United States is a "glorious standard. It is founded in the wisdom of God. It is a heavenly banner."
In 1879 President John Taylor followed on that theme.:"

"When the people will have torn to shreds the Constitution of the United States the Elders of Israel will be found holding it up in the nations of the earth and proclaiming liberty and equal rights to all men...This is part of the program, and as long as we do what is right and fear God, he will help us and stand by us under all circumstances." In 1936, the First Presidency, comprised of Heber J. Grant, J. Reuben Clark, Jr. and David O. McKay, issued an official statement declaring: "The safety of our divinely inspired Constitution and government and the welfare of our Church imperatively demand that communism shall have no place in America." President George Albert Smith's feelings were consistent with his predecessors: "I am saying to you," he said in the April, 1948 general conference, "that to me the Constitution of the United States is as much from our Heavenly Father as the Ten Commandments..."

No Church president has been as vocal on this subject as David O. McKay, who counseled repeatedly and forcefully in favor of the Constitution against any threat to man's personal agency. In the April, 1942 general conference, for example, he told the Saints: "To deprive an intelligent human being of his free agency is to commit the crime of the ages...so fundamental in man's eternal progress is the right to choose, that the Lord would defend it even at the price of war." (War In Heaven against Lucifer). Eight years later, President McKay declared: "No greater immediate responsibility rests on the members of the Church, upon all citizens of the Republic...than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States."

In 1956 he reaffirmed in a statement in the Instructor Magazine: "Next to being one in worshiping God, there is nothing in this world upon which the Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States." And on another occasion, President McKay stated "In these days of uncertainty and unrest, liberty-loving people's greatest responsibility and paramount duty is to preserve and proclaim the freedom of the individual, his relationship to Deity and the necessity of obedience to the principles of the gospel or Jesus Christ." There were literally dozens of times when David O. McKay reiterated these warnings.

Elder Benson took President McKay's teachings seriously. In addition, his frequent study of the Book of Mormon had given him insights about freedom. In an address entitled "The Book of Mormon Warns America," he would explain: "To be on the Lord's side, a person must be able to distinguish between programs based on the Lord's Plan of Freedom, which is the U.S. Constitution, and those based on Satan's plan for tyranny." He continued: "He must inform himself, and do his own independent thinking...One of the best sources is the Book of Mormon. A person can learn more about what is really happening in America from the Book of Mormon than he can...from newspapers." To President Benson, the battle for agency was all-important, and that which threatened freedom caught his wrath.

He believed that the fight to preserve the God-given principle of agency and freedom was a matter of principle, not politics.

Book of Mormon, Second Nephi Chapter One, Verses 8 and 9:
"Wherefore, I, Lehi have obtained a promise that inasmuch as those whom the Lord God will bring out of the land of Jerusalem shall keep His commandments, they shall prosper upon the face of the land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves. And if it so be that they shall keep the commandments, they shall be blessed on the face of the land and there shall be none to molest them, nor to take away the land of their inheritance; and they shall dwell safely forever..."

The Lord promised that if these people (ancestors of the American Indians) were not righteous, they would lose their inheritance of this land and would be scattered; that the Lord would bring others to this choice land (the gentiles or the Pilgrims and settlers following them that came from Europe to America).

1 Nephi 1:7
"Wherefore, this land is consecrated unto him whom he shall bring. And if it so be that they shall serve him, according to the commandments that he hath given them, it shall be a land of liberty unto them; wherefore, they shall never be brought down into captivity; if so, it shall be because of iniquity; for if iniquity shall abound, cursed shall be the land for their sakes, but unto the righteous it shall be blessed forever."
The above is talking of America and the unrighteousness of the people, including and especially the government in Washington D.C. where "iniquity abounds."

Isn't it time for good men everywhere to shout it from the rooftops and from the pulpits that America is in trouble, that our Constitution is subtly being destroyed by government rules, by the errors of judges, by communist-inspired laws--word by word, precept by precept?

"Rise up ye men of God," good men of the earth, and proclaim freedom and liberty. Elect good men and women who will abide by the Constitution, not in word only, but in deed and in principle.

Dan Rather Says Ron Paul's Take On Syria Is Absolutely Correct

2012-02-09T18:25:00.000-08:00

Feb. 9, 2012
By Don White

Former CBS Anchorman Dan Rather

I watched the Piers Morgan CNN TV program tonight and was pleased with what I heard and saw. Piers had former CBS anchorman Dan Rather on as an expert. He commented on what the real answer is for the United States in riot-infested Syria.

Piers Morgan: What should be America's answer? Should we go to war over this? If we do we will not only face opposition from Syria's government--afterall, America would be siding with the people who are rioting in the streets, a strategy that worked in both Egypt and in Libya, but also Russia and Iran who have said if we cause a war to oust their president, these countries would militarily oppose the US.

Dan Rather:: It is true, this is a real problem. I have listened to all of the candidates and Obama and I'm convinced on this one the best advice is from Ron Paul. He said we have no business going to war with Syria, Russia, and Iran. We just got through with two wars and shouldn't be spending more money we don't have on a Third World War. Our best plan should be to leave Syria alone and let them resolve their own differences with their people.

Why haven't Rick Santorum, the current GOP front runner, Mitt Romney, and newt Gingrich gotten that message? We're broke, plus the right thing is to leave other nations alone. We don't need to be the policeman of the world. And who is to say it would be a successful operation? Or would it be another Vietnam where we would have to place our tail between our legs and go home defeated? Who wants more American soldiers killed, maimed, wounded, or psychologically disabled? The American electorate has no stomach for another war.

Mitt Romney would do well to side with Paul. This would bring him a lot of good faith from America, something he badly needs at this time. An alliance between Mitt and Ron would help both candidates and hurt Santorum and Gingrich more than saying bad things about them on television.

The Best $2.99 You Ever Spent On A Book, "Patriot Call"

2012-02-09T10:09:00.000-08:00

Renowned Economist Milton Friedman

"As you know, I am entirely sympathetic with the objectives of your Monetary Reform Act...You deserve a great deal of credit for carrying through so thoroughly on your own conception…I am impressed by your persistence and attention to detail in your successive revisions..Best wishes, Milton Friedman" Nobel Laureate in Economics; Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace

Milton Friedman:

END THE FED

Very many viewers have asked us what one practical action can they take to end the corrupt monetary system destroying our nation. Our answer last year was: "Support Dr. Rand Paul for his Senate race." Our answer in 2011-12 is: "Support Hon. Ron Paul for President of the United States." He is by far the most articulate spokesman for authentic Monetary Reform and ending the Fed's stranglehold on the US economy

Volume Two

Volume Two

/amzn.to/x0biUe
Volume 2 Link to Amazon

http://amzn.to/uheXiO
Volume 1Link To Amazon

http://bit.ly/nfVtfE

Volume 1 Link To Barnes

http://bit.ly/wcSocm

Volume 2 Link To Barnes

Volume One

http://amzn.to/uheXiO Link To Amazon

BARNES AND NOBLE LINK TO PATRIOT CALL

HTTP://BIT.LY/NFVTFE

Before you decide who to vote for, maybe it would be a good idea to do your due dilligence, study this man Ron Paul and his great platform. I have detailed it in my cliff notes version of his best seller Liberty Defined. My book is in ebook format and is called Patriot Call of Ron Paul, available at both Amazon.com and Barnes and Noble in two volumes at only $2.99 for each volume. This could be the best six dollars you ever spent. Don White

Patriot Call is not available at other book stores or at the library.

Ron Paul: The Only Principled Presidential Candidate: Paul's No-War Logic Is The Only Way To Solve International Problems by A Bankrupt Nation

2012-02-08T13:31:00.000-08:00

Now We've Caught The Fed Liars In Their Lies, Jail Them For Fraud!

2012-02-07T11:57:00.000-08:00

The first ever GAO(Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank bill, which passed last year.

Jim DeMint, a Republican Senator, and Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator, led the charge for a Federal Reserve audit in the Senate, but watered down the original language of the house bill(HR1207), so that a complete audit would not be carried out.

Ben Bernanke, Alan Greenspan, and various other bankers vehemently opposed the audit and lied to Congress about the effects an audit would have on markets. Nevertheless, the results of the first audit in the Federal Reserve's nearly 100 year history were posted on Senator Sander's webpage earlier this morning.

What was revealed in the audit was startling:

$16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland.

From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world's banks, corporations, and governments. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest.

Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious - the American public would have been outraged to find out that the Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs.

To place $16 trillion into perspective, remember that GDP of the United States is $14.12 trillion. The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year history is "only" $14.5 trillion.

The budget that is being debated so heavily in Congress and the Senate is "only" $3.5 trillion. Take all of the outrage and debate over the $1.5 trillion deficit into consideration, and swallow this Red pill: There was no debate about whether $16 Trillion would be given to failing banks and failing corporations around the world.

In late 2008, the TARP Bailout bill was passed and loans of $800 billion were given to failing banks and companies. That was a blatant lie considering the fact that Goldman Sachs alone received 814 billion dollars. As is turns out, the Federal Reserve donated $2.5 trillion to Citigroup, while Morgan Stanley received $2.04 trillion. The Royal Bank of Scotland and Deutsche Bank, a German bank, split about a trillion and numerous other banks received hefty chunks of the $16 trillion.

"This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you're-on-your-own individualism for everyone else." - Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

When you have conservative Republican stalwarts like Jim DeMint(R-SC) and Ron Paul(R-TX) as well as self identified Democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders all fighting against the Federal Reserve, you know that it is no longer an issue of Right versus Left. When you have every single member of the Republican Party in Congress and progressive Congressmen like Dennis Kucinich sponsoring a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, you realize that the Federal Reserve is an entity onto itself, which has no oversight and no accountability.

Americans should be swelled with anger and outrage at the abysmal state of affairs when an unelected group of bankers can create money out of thin air and give it out to megabanks and supercorporations like Halloween candy. If the Federal Reserve and the bankers who control it believe that they can continue to devalue the savings of Americans and continue to destroy the US economy, they will have to face the realization that their trillion dollar printing presses will eventually plunder the world economy.

The list of institutions that received the most money from the Federal Reserve can be found on page 131 of the GAO Audit and are as follows..

Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000)

Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)

Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion($1,949,000,000,000)

Bank of America: $1.344 trillion($1,344,000,000,000)

Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion($868,000,000,000)

Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)

Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000)

Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000)

JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion($391,000,000,000)

Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion($354,000,000,000)

UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000) Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)

Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)

Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000)

BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)

and many many more including banks in Belgium of all places.

Why Ron Paul Is Overqualified For President

2012-02-07T08:35:00.000-08:00

Bankers Would Assasinate Patriot Ron Paul

2012-02-04T11:00:00.000-08:00

The following links and copy thanks to http://www.nogw.com/

"Israel Did 9-11" - U.S. Military Expert Supports Bollyn Thesis PDF April 3, 2010

9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB (Conceived in Jerusalem)

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer

The Military KNOWS Israel did 911 Video March 16, 2010

How 9/11 was done PDF - 9/11 was a master plot, concocted by a hand full of Israelis and dual passport Americans and carried out by the resources of the Mossad.

I'll tell you what, a person who believes that [9-11] wasn't setup by our own government is an idiot.

..The Lady at the very end of this trailer: The Ultimate Con 911 Documentary Trailer Video

Some Things You Won't Be Hearing Much About in the MSM (Mainstream Media)

Dr. Ron Paul's Presidential Campaign

Iceland's Economic Recovery (After telling the Bankers to Get Stuffed)
Central Banks Being The Root of Our Economic Troubles
The Ongoing Manipulation of the Silver Market (Threatens Central Banks)
Nibiru
Israhell Starting WWIII
The Rothschild Backed Assassination of Dr. Ron Paul
The Rothschilds are control freaks. In order to attain their goal of complete control of the world's wealth and domination of the world, they need to stop two things. First, they must stop the price of gold and silver going up and second they must stop Dr. Ron Paul from becomming president.
The first one they have under control. They are able to keep precious metas prices down by selling unlimited amounts of naked shorts in the GLD and SLV funds and pouring newly minted dollars into these funds. After all that newly minted money must go somewhere.
The second one, namely Dr. Ron Paul becomming preident they have mainly under control but have a few loose ends. They have the CIA working in conjunction with the media to fix the elections. Many means are employed to that end. The media gives plently of coverage to every candidate that is Rothschild approved while trying to smear Dr. Ron Paul. The media manipulates polls, and portrays to the public that a vote for Dr. Ron Paul is a wasted vote. Then when the voting takes place the media conglomerate (Voter News Service or an incarnation of the same) actually counts the votes. Through the use of electronic voting machines, and electronic tabulation machines of paper ballots, stuffing of ballot boxes, elimination of exit polls, etc, the media can announce that the Rothschild approved candidate has won the election.
This election rigging is a well oiled machine with few hiccups, but occasionally there is a fly in the ointment. Dr. Ron Paul is one such fly. Despite the MSM (Mainstream Media)'s phony polls showing him losing, Dr. Paul has actually won primary after primary. As the vote fraud becomes evident and there is a large public outcry, the stage will be set for their next action, the execution of Dr. Paul. The Rothschilds simply cannot allow Dr. Paul to seriously challenge their hand-picked candidate. The assassination will most likely appear to have been done by a radical Islamic fundamentalist with ties to Iran, but will in reality have been perpetrated by Mossad.
--Webber Dec 31, 2011
Related Articles:
The Reality of Electronic Vote Fraud in America PDF Christopher Bollyn 28 January 2012 - where the election is a fiction, the representation is a fiction also.
The Ron Paul FIX is in: a SGT micro-doc Video by SGTbull07 Jan 24, 2012 - The government is OF the central banks and FOR the corporations, this IS fascism.
Will Diebold Voting Machines Steal Votes From Ron Paul in New Hampshire like 2008? Jan 9, 2012 - election officials in districts such as Sutton reported that Paul had received zero votes, despite numerous individuals immediately going public and asserting they had voted for Paul.
Ron Paul: Iowa Vote Fraud Video by ravenise00 Dec 28, 2011 - Michael Rivero tells it like it is! If Ron Paul loses Iowa, we KNOW it was stolen from him, it's time top start shooting the bastards!
Obama Declares Martial Law / CNN Iowa Poll-Gate Plot To Steal Iowa Caucus as Ron Paul Surges PDF by Tom Heneghan Jan 1, 2012
Caroline Kennedy Death Threats Update PDF by Tom Heneghan International Intelligence Expert January 22, 2009
Illuminati Murdered At Least Two Other Presidents PDF By Henry Makow, PhD 5-6-7 Updated 5-17-8

Romney And Paul Can Defeat Obama

2012-02-02T07:33:00.000-08:00

By Amy Gardner, Published: February 1

RENO, NEV. — The remaining candidates in the winnowed Republican presidential field are attacking one another with abandon, each day bringing fresh headlines of accusations and outrage.

But Mitt Romney and Ron Paul haven’t laid a hand on each other. Read my book "Patriot Call of Ron Paul" to see which conservative traits and policies Romney may gravitate to in order to win against Obama. http://bit.ly/tjGsUc

http://bit.ly/tjGsUc

1028

Comments

Video

Compared to other candidates’ contingents, Paul supporters are often the most vocal, the most visible and the most flamboyant. And many of them used to call themselves Democrats, or still do.

Graphic

Pre-game analysis: The GOP presidential field heads to Nevada for its “first in the West” caucuses on Saturday.

They never do.

Despite deep differences on a range of issues, Romney and Paul became friends in 2008, the last time both ran for president. So did their wives, Ann Romney and Carol Paul. The former Massachusetts governor compliments the Texas congressman during debates, praising Paul’s religious faith during the last one, in Jacksonville, Fla. Immediately afterward, as is often the case, the Pauls and the Romneys gravitated toward one another to say hello.

The Romney-Paul alliance is more than a curious connection. It is a strategic partnership: for Paul, an opportunity to gain a seat at the table if his long-shot bid for the presidency fails; for Romney, a chance to gain support from one of the most vibrant subgroups within the Republican Party.

“It would be very foolish for anybody in the Republican Party to dismiss a very real constituency,” said one senior GOP aide in Washington who is familiar with both camps. “Ron Paul plays a very valuable part in the process and brings a lot of voters toward the Republican Party and ultimately into the voting booth, and that’s something that can’t be ignored.”

To ensure that they are heard — not just now but after Election Day, too — Paul and his followers are working to gain a permanent foothold in the Republican Party nationwide. One state at a time, Paul’s supporters are seating themselves at county committee meetings, and standing for election as state officers and convention delegates, to make sure their candidate’s libertarian vision is taken into account. The goal is a lasting voice for an army of outsiders that has long felt ignored and sees the nation headed toward ruin if things don’t change.

That is just fine with the Romney campaign, which would be happy to bring Paul’s constituency — perhaps the most intense and loyal in the country — into the fold.

Romney’s aides are “quietly in touch with Ron Paul,” according to a Republican adviser who is in contact with the Romney campaign and spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss its internal thinking. The two campaigns have coordinated on minor things, the adviser said — even small details, such as staggering the timing of each candidate’s appearance on television the night of the New Hampshire primary for maximum effect.

One advantage for Romney is that Paul’s presence in the race helps keep the GOP electorate fractured. But there is also a growing recognition that the congressman plans to stay in the contest over the long term — and that accommodating him and his supporters could help unify Republican voters in the general election against President Obama.

“Ron Paul wants a presence at the convention,” the adviser said — and Romney, if he is the nominee, would grant it.

What Paul and his supporters would demand, and what Romney would offer, are subjects of some speculation. One Paul adviser, speaking on the condition of anonymity to talk freely, said prime-time speaking slots for Paul and his son Rand, the junior senator from Kentucky, are obvious goals. On the policy front, Ron Paul’s priorities are reforming the Federal Reserve and reducing federal spending. So promises to audit the Fed and to tackle deficit reduction seriously could appease the congressman and his supporters, the adviser said. http://bit.ly/tjGsUc

What Evil Lurks In the Eyes Of This Man?

2012-01-27T10:59:00.000-08:00

If you want to "drain the swamp," Newt Gingrich is not your man. He has been in Washington for 30 years.

"I have an enormous political ambition--I represent real power."
_________________________________________

Gingrich was fined $300,000 for unethical dealings in Congress--yet he still refuses to come clean and make public all the documents from the investigation.

Only House speaker in history to be formally reprimanded by his peers and thrown out of Congress
_______________________________________________________________
That vote included 90% Republicans for unethical practices.

Gingrich has been called Unethical, Erratic, Reckless
__________________________________________
Gingrich shares the same ethics as the politicians he likes to attack

He said it: I will install the same social security as in Chile, where recipients can't access their benefits if they have any money in savings. That would impoverish Seniors and make them totally dependent on government. THAT'S COMMUNISM

Highlights From Florida GOP Debate

2012-01-27T09:26:00.000-08:00

If Ron Paul Isn’t Elected, America’s Money Problems Will Send Us Into Depression

2012-01-25T08:27:00.000-08:00

Don White

If Ron Paul doesn’t get elected, it may take another four years for the U.S. to recognize the need for fiscal responsibility. But by then it will be too late.

Even Europe is ahead of America in cutting expenses. We in the U.S., especially Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum, are just thinking of biting at the edges of our humongous money problem. Only Ron Paul knows the answers, only he has the courage to do what is right—to administer the right medicine—despite the pain it will cause internally. http://bit.ly/tjGsUc

Europe’s recognition of the need for sound fiscal controls is evident. It consists of identifying economic problems and associated costs and dealing with realistic numbers. The U.S. government—Democrats and Republicans alike—isn’t quite mature enough to do what is right, or to even listen to what the people want them to do. The people want monetary reform, even if it hurts for a while. But a pandering Washington seems more interested in maintaining themselves in office than dealing with our current difficult economic problems in a tough-minded way.

The European Union is ahead of the U.S. because the y have already signed a treaty establishing an annual debt limit of no greater than 3 percent of GDP. It’s called the Maastricht Treaty.

Having 27 nations that have not been aligned over the course of history that couldn’t agree on anything signifies the importance of the treaty. The treaty recognized that deficits may be higher during periods of temporary circumstances but established the 3 percent benchmark as a long-term benchmark.

If the European Union, with its diverse cultures and economies, can identify and recognize the potential risk of not exercising fiscal control, it would seem that our nation should be capable of doing the same.

“A deficit of no more than 3 percent of GDP may not be the right number for all nations, but at least the European Union has established a target,” said Mike Gearhardt and Will Gates in their book, The Financial Tsunami, Will It Drown Us In A Wave of Debt?

President Obama recognized the need for responsibility and titled his first budget a “New Era of Responsibility.” Unfortunately he completely omitted the word “fiscal.” Here’s what Gearhardt and Gates observed: “In his 2011 budget, he is clear that fiscal responsibility is of utmost importance as evidenced by his desire to establish a bipartisan commission charged with identifying additional policies to put our country on a fiscally sustainable path of balancing the budget by 2015. But his goal for balancing the budget excludes interest payments on the debt.”

What’s with that? The interest will eat us alive if we don’t get serious about the problem.

Today our nation is facing the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Gearhardt and Gates agree with me in believing that our leaders are pushing programs that will only exacerbate the problems. Instead of fixing the economic problem, Obama and the Democrats propose expensive programs like a new fast rail system, cap-and-trade and Obama health care, which is already law. What about first fixing our unemployment problem? “Those advocating socially responsible programs must realize that without adequate funding those programs will fail or become a drag on the economy.

Republicans are more responsible than Democrats. The GOP will fight hard for first finding the funding before permanently extending the thousand-dollar payroll tax deduction—money that once funded social security. Lower taxes for all working Americans is a desirable goal, but the priority today must not be that particular tax break, it must be on concentrating on the larger picture—fixing the total economy, finding jobs for the jobless, eliminating our embarrassing debt position, and balancing our huge budget.

If it takes large cuts in government spending, as Dr. Paul demands, then so be it. If it takes fewer government agencies, then by all means eliminate five administrative departments. Paul suggests cutting some government functions gradually by merging duties of departments into other departments before completely cutting the umbilical cord.

If we are not successful in creating jobs, thus creating the tax revenue that goes along with them, we will not be able to continue to support current programs without causing an inflationary cycle that could bring down our entire system. Implementing new programs that require additional funding will only accelerate the demise of current programs. Obama suggests cutting 3% from the bloated current budget but NOT put the 500 Billion that has not been spent on the stimulus package back to the treasury. Like Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum, he, too, is just “biting on the edges.”

Listen to Obama and we will spend billions more on a high speed rail system— when we have airlines with 1/2 empty planes and most rail lines virtually empty—and the one place it currently works, the NE corridor, already has a high speed train.

We must not leave a legacy of debt to our children just because our current leaders could not make the tough decisions to drive our nation toward a balance of social and fiscal responsibility. “It is difficult to tell what fiscal responsibility looks like,” said Gearhardt and Gates, “as many of us have not been alive long enough to have experienced it.”

Read my book on Congressman Paul’s plans for America, Patriot Call of Ron Paul, available in ebook at Barnes and Noble and Amazon.com for only $2.99. Here’s my landing page link: http://bit.ly/tjGsUc Don White

Maybe Obama Himself Will Be Easy To Defeat. It's Those Lunkheads We Need to Change

2012-01-23T16:42:00.000-08:00

My brother-in-law from Utah has keen insight and sent the following quote from a Czech Republic man who understands our politics better than many Americans. Don White

his quote was translated into English from an article appearing in the

Czech Republicas published in the Prager Zeitung of 28 April 2011.

“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting an inexperienced man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of Idiots such as those who made him their president.”

Ron Paul, left, and Publisher Libertarian candidate
Bill Still who is also an award winning documentary
writer-director. If Paul doesn't make it, Still will be the
best conservative out there for president under the
Libertarian banner. He announced recently in Salt Lak
City after speaking before a Utah Monetary Forum.

Thanks, Paul

I wholeheartedly agree. We have a bunch of drones and dummies in the Democratic Party to overcome. Obama is just the latest dumbbell they have adopted. But I'm even more worried about our Tea Party conservatives. I attended one of our West Orange County Tea Party meetings and at that time they had a local atty/disc jokey Congresman wannabe Todd Long touting Herman Cain. I offered to come in sometime and talk up Ron Paul. No, they haven't taken me up on him--the man from whom all conservative Tea Party folks took their platform from--so I thought.

We all know that Herman had affairs and had to drop out. I told the local Tea Party before that that he would be a problem, not so much about his girl friends because we didn't know about all of them at that time. But more about how this Tea Party seemed like we could elect anyone and they could beat Obama--even an Obama look-alike--without a clue about governance and they'd be just fine with that so long as he was a Republican. Republican tyranny and ineptitude is no different than Democrat tyranny. Only Ron Paul, a real strict believer in Constitutional law seems to fill the bill right now.

Well, I've got news. Another Obama look-alike won't cut it. Ron Paul is the only conservative running for the Republicans--I mean real conservative who vows to cut government and save a trillion dollars his first year, end personal income taxes in three years and take control of our money. Probably ending the Fed. I don't know a lot, but I do know Romney and Gingrich are big war candidates. They don't want to bring home the troops. They don't know how to save more by bringing our military home out of Japan, Germany, and So. Korea.

I wrote a condensed version of his NY Times bestseller "Liberty Defined." My book, which I'm glad to say is selling nicely at Barnes and Amazon, is titled "Patriot Call of Ron Paul."

Check it out. Here's my ebook landing page with links. I think I've got four all together written and selling on Barnes and Amazon. http://bit.ly/tjGsUc

My one novel at those places is "The Exterminator" which was written a year ago but just got published as an ebook. I was remarkably accurate about presidential detainees, since The Military Defense Authorization Act (MDAA) just passed and was signed by Obama a couple weeks ago. It means Obama can have the military take us to jail without charging us with anything, no habeas corpus, no attorney, no trial, no 4th Amendment rights. It's very scary. But that's what my novel deals with. It also has adventure and romance involved, but no explicit romance scenes. It's a political thriller. I also wrote a church book about the LDS songbook called "90 Hymn Stories of Love."

Kind regards,

Don--
Paul Christensen

The list of things go on and on, but Mitt and Newt will not solve our problem. It's too deep for their steriotyped brains. They [Gingrich and Romney] would do their own thing, forget why the Tea Party came about and not cut the size of government. Both are big establishment, big government bureaucrats. Yes, they would do some good on things like Obamacare, but they haven't got an idea about our monetary system and how to fix that.

Thanks for the updates. I also liked very much that one about Microwaves.

Kind regards,

Don

--- Received from my brother-in-law On Mon, 1/23/12,

This quote was translated into English from an article appearing in the
CzechRepublicas published in the Prager Zeitung of 28 April 2011.
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting an inexperienced man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of Idiots such as those who made him their president.”

Ron Paul Just Has To Beat Mitt Romney To Be President and Newt Gingrich Gave Ron a Big Leg Up in South Carolina

2012-01-22T17:35:00.000-08:00

By Lori Stacey
DC Conservative Examiner

While Newt wins South Carolina, Paul campaign celebrates

January 22nd, 2012 by Lori Stacey

Credit: Photo by Mark Wilson, Getty Images

Newt Gingrich in South Carolina

I am sure many don't understand why the Paul campaign would be fairly happy with the results of the South Carolina primary tonight. Sure a stronger showing would have been a happier occasion but considering the portrait of Romney being the inevitable nominee has just been toppled, it is cause to not be too unhappy about their 4th place finish in the state. The other reason to not be crying in their soup may be quite interesting for many voters that are not aware of the current situation. Not only did Romney go down to defeat in South Carolina but he got beaten by someone that mathematically has no possibility of being able to win the nomination before the convention anyway.
You see, both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are not on several states' ballots as it seems maybe they were mostly running for book sales or better name recognition or possibly propping up their lobbyist credentials and speaking fees. Oh, I know many will be upset with that analogy but quite frankly it is the only plausible explanations to ponder as Newt Gingrich was not even able to get on the ballot in Virginia which is his home state. He does not live in Georgia anymore. He has been working on the lucrative K Street in Washington, DC for many years now.
Since Mitt Romney and Ron Paul actually are the only candidates that have had serious national campaigns planned and organized from the very beginning, they will be the only 2 candidates that can effectively even compete for the actual nomination as they both have full ballot access for opportunities to collect delegates. While it was preferred that Newt and Santorum just be honest with the American people and get out of the race at this point which is exactly what the Paul campaign had urged them to do as both of them can not even compete for delegates to the tune of 564 which are in states that they absolutely are not on the ballot and can not get on the ballot at this point.
So, the current situation is this. Newt taking away delegates that Romney did not get really only helped Ron Paul's campaign at this point. The Paul campaign has been trying to inform voters of this problem but of course the media does not want to give much play to them. After all the other candidates lost their court decision to get on the ballot in Virginia and then you add up the other states that Newt and Santorum also failed to get onto, they are basically wasting voters' time and money but don't seem to mind doing so apparently. Paul's senior advisor, Doug Wead appeared in a segment on MSNBC talking again about this very subject except this time he was pretty tickled that Newt got the win instead of Romney in South Carolina.
The only way that Newt or Santorum could possibly win the Republican nomination would be at a brokered convention in Florida. The problem with a brokered convention is that after the first vote fails to nominate a candidate, then all bets and will of the voters are off and cast to the wind. Then it is a battle and anything can happen. The will of the voters that voted in the primaries will not even be a thought as any candidate at that point could become the nominee including even a candidate that may have not even competed at all this year. And that is a scenario that many are very concerned about since this time around the GOP seems to have been doing everything possible to create this possibility. With changing the rules and having all the state primaries up until April 1st apportion their delegates proportionally instead of "winner take all"(except Florida), it sets up an even higher probability of ending up in a brokered convention scenario. At this point, that scenario could be changed if Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum dropped out. I don't suspect that either one of their egos are going to allow that to happen and this will be most likely a long-term 3 or 4-way race all the way to probably a brokered convention or Paul or Romney are able to get enough support to win it outright before the convention. At any rate, both Newt and Santorum are not being honest with voters at this point since their campaigns have not been out there even uttering a whisper regarding the current situation.
If Newt or Santorum really had integrity, they would be the ones explaining this situation to the voters and preferrably just drop out as Huntsman and Perry did recently. To do anything else, when they can not even compete for 564 delegates shows their failure to plan should be looked at as either a lack of organizational ability or lack of real leadership ability. The bottomline here is that they both did not have sufficient real support or organizational ability to even accomplish the minimum things necessary to lodge an honest campaign for the Republican nomination which is being able to achieve ballot access in enough states to actually win it.
All the other campaigns had this same problem except Ron Paul and Mitt Romney, the two campaigns that were obviously the only ones serious about this contest from the very beginning. I would hope that more news sources would finally get this story out but I am not exactly holding my breath to see that develop. In the meantime, these 2 gentlemen are the only ones in the field that deserve to eventually receive the nomination as they each took running for the Office of President, seriously.
If you like this and would like to receive an email when I publish a new article, please hit the "subscribe to get instant updates" above. I also have a South Dakota edition here. It is FREE to subscribe to both editions. Thank you for all your support.

This GOP Primary Season May Last Until Mid-April

2012-01-22T16:24:00.000-08:00

Ron Paul After 4th Place SC Finish: ‘Less Than 2 Percent of Delegates Chosen So Far’

January 22, 2012 | Subscribe to Video Updates

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul told supporters Saturday that the momentum of his campaign, and cause, will continue.

“This is the beginning of a long, hard slog,” Paul said. Paul placed fourth in the South Carolina primary, behind Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.

During his speech in Columbia, Paul vowed to continue campaigning, noting that only 37 delegates–a tiny fraction of what is needed to win the party nomination–had been awarded so far.

Author Don White wrote a great book about Ron Paul, now an ebook at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Take a look at it:http://bit.ly/tjGsUc

Newt Gingrich And His Communist Ideas

2012-01-22T12:55:00.000-08:00

Speaker Newt Gingrich should lose all of Florida's retiree votes.

Why? He plans to take away your social security money. In several debates Gingrich has said he wants America to go what he calls the successful Chile plan. But do you know that if Newt has his way he will actually end up taking money away from American retirees that they put into the plan.

Here's how that could happen. Chile is successful because they:
1) Don't allow a retiree to take any money at all from Social Security until they exhaust their own personal savings. Gingrich would do that in America.
2) Chile has two plans: one is straight social security owned by the government; plan two allows the recipients to own their own account and determine the investments--taking both the losses and the gains through their own investing genius, but Gingrich's plan has a hitch.

People in Florida and in other states with a high percentage of retired folks should shudder at the idea that Gingrich is for not letting you have any Social Security benefits--even the money you paid in for a lifetime of work--until you can prove that you don't have any savings.

Do you know what this provision would do? It would make people give their savings to their children or hide them in offshore accounts or in some other way rid themselves of that money.

Those people in South Carolina who voted for Newt Gingrich voted for a man who will draw this country closer to communism than many would like. For as he withholds SS benefits from people with money or other resources, he is making government bigger, more pervasive, and more terrible to deal with. Who do you think will be the people who will deny you your social security savings if you have other money? Big government, which each day seems to be growing and becoming more pervasive in every aspect of our lives.

Newt Gingrich's latest scheme is to privatize SS and then bail out the bad investors. His latest "Big" idea is to create a moral hazard for retirees.a return to Bush-style Social Security privatization. Gingrich has been quite vocal in his support for privatized Social Security accounts, but today marked the first time that he laid out specifics as to how he would gut one of the most successful programs in American history.

First, Gingrich explains that he would let workers opt into private accounts, just like Bush’s suggested system. Gingrich points to two models that inspired him to suggest this approach: privatized retirement accounts in both Chile and Galveston, Texas. He added the caveat that, should private accounts fail to deliver the same return as minimum Social Security benefits, the government would step in and make investors whole again:

The government guarantees that all workers with personal accounts will receive at least as much in retirement as they would under the current Social Security system. If someone with a personal account retires with benefits lower than those offered by the current system, the Treasury will send them a check to make up the difference. Thus, there is a legal government obligation that in a worst case scenario a retiree will be able to enjoy benefits at least as good as they would under th e traditional Social Security system.

Watch him explain the idea at a campaign event today:

As we pointed out when Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) suggested a similar idea, promising to make investors whole again sets up a huge moral hazard problem. If investors know full well that the government is going to provide them with a minimum benefit, no matter what they do, then the incentive is to make risky investments and hope for a big payoff. After all, why not take the risk if the government has guaranteed that you can’t lose money? Investors have every incentive to bet big in the hopes of a large payout, because if they go bust, the government will bail them out.

Add to this the fact that the privatized systems in Chile and Galveston aren’t as wonderful as Gingrich makes out. In fact, while they work quite well for the wealthy, middle- and lower-income participants wind up worse off. Regarding the Galveston system, Eric Kingson, a professor of social work at Syracuse University, explained that “for most people, it’s somewhere between ‘very bad’ and ‘not very good.’ ” Chile’s system, meanwhile, has “left millions without savings for their retirement.” According to estimates by Chile’s undersecretary for pensions, “in 2007, only 60 percent of Chilean workers had some kind of pension coverage, down from 86 percent in the 1970s.”

Gingrich’s plan would also cause the deficit to explode, as money meant for Social Security would have to be diverted into the creation and administration of private accounts. Social Security kept 14 million seniors out of poverty last year, but Gingrich would enact a scheme to privatize the system, while hoisting the costs of failure onto the federal government.

Bill Still Announces His Bid For President

2012-01-20T12:25:00.000-08:00

By Don White
January 20, 2012

Presidential Candidates Ron Paul and Bill Still, right

Jackson Hole, and The Grand Tetons, Wyoming---Publisher Bill Still spoke at the Utah Investment Summit in Salt Lake City recently and it is there that a friend asked him to run for president. He demurred, but finally decided to do so. Previously, he had been unable to penetrate big media television to advertise his favorite cause--a balanced budget amendment prohibiting government borrowing and the ending of the government's Fractional Reserve Lending System--and he saw this as a way to get the publicity that cause demands.

What is his cause? It is to change our Fractional Reserve Lending system that the Fed and the Treasury love and replace it with what he calls Capital Lending. He is all for state banks and said he was disappointed that California Governor Jerry Brown refused to sign the bill authorizing a state bank in that state. Brown will let the legislature come up with more specific ideas before reconsidering such a bill. Brown is a democrat and they are traditionally laggards when it comes to bank reform. If he is anything like Mitt Romney, he receives most of his political donations from big banks, so why should he want to change anything?

Six to eight other states are currently interesting in passing similar legislation. It would be modeled on North Dakota's 90-year-old state bank which is a non-profit facility to pay for infra-structure and to put profits back in state coffers to benefit all of the people--not the bankers.

"Banks must become competitive," Still said, which is not the case today. They can buy a U.S. bond for ten dollars and turn around and leverage it to loan ten times that amount. That's Fractional Reserve Lending (FRL). He said he wasn't against banks, they are still free to loan and make money through their services.

Ben Bernanke's form of FRL allows him to leverage his loans to banks a million or a trillion times, if he wants. In fact, he has no reserves--no money--against which to lend foreign countries (illegally) and our country big bailout money. It's called creating money out of thin air. Today, virtually all countries have Central Banks and are in the same "pickle" America finds itself.

Mr. Still is a newspaper publisher, writer, highly honored documentary creator, writer, and producer. He created the CDs "The Secret of the Wizard of Oz" and "Money Masters." He believes ending the Fed won't solve the problem, but here is what will:
1) Ending the current Fractional Reserve Lending system which allows the Central Bank to print debt money
2) Get Congress to pass a bill prohibiting government borrowing
3) Have government print its own debt-free money--take back the money power
4) Make Congress responsible to the people for the amount of money in circulation, not some independent banking system.

There in the Beehive State while speaking at a money conference in Utah his head cleared. It became clear to him that he should offer his name as a candidate for the Libertarian Party candidate for president to break through into the large media television and radio barricade and get his word out to the masses.

If elected president, he promises to:
1) Put an end to government borrowing
2) Reprint debt-free U.S. Notes
3) Call a special session of Congress to begin debate on a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Government doesn't need to borrow money to survive. With such an amendment it will be unable to borrow funds. Thus, there would never be a need for voodoo money, the likes of which Ben Bernanke uses.
4) Replace Fractional Reserve Lending with the new Dollars of Capital System. This means we will not have debt money, replacing it with debt-free, interest-free money. He will wipe out the national debt the Fed has amassed by printing debt-free U.S. notes to pay for Ben Bernanke's broken promises and for citizens to use for commerce, savings, foreign purchases and other things.
5) He will appoint a special prosecutor to prosecute those who have in the past fraudulently misused their power regarding borrowing, government loans, and a variety of fraud committed by citizens and groups. Thus, he will start by making an example of those who have misused the system and who would be most likely to misuse it again under the new system of Dollar Capital.
6) Bill Still said he would abolish the personal progressive income tax and replace it with a flat tax, excise taxes, corporate taxes--the same way money was raised by the Colonialists in the beginning.

Get Volume Two of Don White's Important Book "Patriot Call"

2012-01-18T10:07:00.000-08:00

This is a photo of the cover of Patriot
Call of Ron Paul Volume 2 that is now
available at Barnes and Noble
and at Amazon.com

Can We Trust Any Candidate Other Than Ron Paul?

2012-01-16T13:09:00.000-08:00

What Is Election Truth?

13 Behold, my brethren, he that prophesieth, let him prophesy to the understanding of men; for the ^aSpirit speaketh the ^btruth and lieth not. Wherefore, it speaketh of things as they really ^care, and of things as they really will be; wherefore, these things are manifested unto us ^dplainly, for the salvation of our souls. But behold, we are not witnesses alone in these things; for God also^espake them unto prophets of old.

Book of Mormon

Jacob 4:13,

We hear a lot of Politicians claiming, listen up, this is the truth during this election cycle. But there are also a lot of lies bandied around. How can we Latter-day Saints—even all mankind whether Christian or not—know what to believe and what not to believe?

Don’t you know? The Spirit of Christ is given to all men, if they will accept it.

What is the truth?

Can someone give us a correct definition? The above definition of “truth” above from the Book of Mormon is the closest anyone has ever come. It means “ truth is…things as they really are and things as they really will be.”

The spirit speaketh truth for all to hear, but particularly to those Latter-day Saints who proclaim to bear the priesthood of God and say they are recipients of baptism by emersion by one having authority, followed by the laying on of hands for the reception of the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The Holy Ghost testifies of all things to those in tune with God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.

Now, how does this pertain to what is going on in America today? If a candidate tells you he is an honest man, check his record. Take Mitt Romney, for example. He was a Latter-day Bishop and Stake President. That puts him at a somewhat higher plane than the average Mormon, for he is the leader of what other Christian churches call a parish. He did that kind of work for several years, perhaps ten years, while he was working his regular job at, say, Bain Capital, creating new companies and tens of thousands of jobs which he did very well.

But when you come down to which GOP or Democratic candidate would best serve America, they can say they did this or would do that; but in truth, it comes down to which candidate is the most honest.

Which one has a consistent set of ethics and always governs others and lives by those standards. While in the vernacular, Santorum, Romney and Obama are just as honest as Ron Paul. But held to a higher standard, such as Jacob 4:13 of the Book of Mormon which Romney and other members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are held to, they are not honest men. Someone who says one thing and does another is not honest and has little or no truth in him. Newt Gingrich fits into that definition. He violates the rules of honesty almost each time he opens his mouth. Lack of honesty is why Newt is failing as a presidential candidate. Americans aren’t stupid, they can tell.

Romney, Santorum, and Obama have been criticized for abusing the truth, being all over the board with what they say. We call them flip-floppers or people lacking truth. I understand it is not possible for mere mortals to say the truth all the time—I guess it’s not. But God holds members of his church up to a higher standard. He can’t even get a temple recommend or a permission card to enter a Mormon temple, if he lies. Some of the temple interview questions pertain to that, including the one that is asked about whether a man or woman has been honest in their relations with other people. Do you treat all people fairly? How can you if you don’t live the standard of truth expected of you in your own church? No, you can’t. It’s impossible.

I don’t know of any dishonesty by Ron Paul—and believe me I have studied and written about him extensively. I suppose it is because he lives his religion as a member of the Baptist Church, which I must admit doesn’t have the same stringent honesty requirements as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He also lives his political convictions as a true conservative. I have studied his convictions politically and I would have to say he has never varied from his set of conservative-libertarian virtues. He alone can say this. Thus, qualifying him for the presidency? No, not just that alone, but that serves as a firm foundation for him to debate anyone about what he believes. Others including the above mentioned candidates have real problems with that kind of thing.

Take Barak Obama, for example. His dad and mom were communists. He says he is not a communist, but a Christian. But the record speaks volumes to the contrary. Just think of the large number of communist and Marxist rules his White House has produced—written by actual self-avowed Communists in the White House. Who else may have a similar problem? Rick Santorum, who, like Obama, had parents and grandparents—some still living—who are Italian Communists. What’s to say if he is elected that he won’t operate just as Obama operates—with Marxist principles and dogma? I’m afraid of having another communist president in the White House.

Romney is no Communist, but he is a “flip-flopper” on the issues. On Rush Limbaugh’s radio show today, January 16, 2012 for example, they played a recording of Mitt saying that if a teen ager below age 18 wanted an abortion contrary to her parents’ wishes, she should be able to find a judge to give her permission to have that abortion. And this is contrary to the wishes of the parents. But LDS Church doctrine says just the opposite. If Romney has been misquoted, I invite him or one of his assistants to explain it and I will print a retraction, or at least something to explain what he thinks he really said. Just beware of digging holes, Mr. Romney.

Children who have not gained their majority are subject to their parents’ decisions and the child or teenager should honor their parents’ wishes. That's LDS Church policy, teaching, and dogma.

Why did a man who was leader of a large LDS ward and stake (parish) go against LDS Church policy?

Only he can answer. But, do you know what? If you asked him today if he believed what he said on the recording he would disavow it. He would say, perhaps, that he never said that or that he was misquoted. But, folks, I heard Mitt Romney’s recorded voice. As far as anyone knows, it wasn’t edited or tampered with. If it was, let’s see some proof of that.

If LDS Church policy was truth when the general authorities, through revelation, proclaimed it years ago, then it is truth and should be church doctrine today. Any attempt to teach others from the pulpit that child or minors’ abortions can be had at the say-so of a Judge contrary to the parents’ wishes is a vast distortion of Church policy. It was years ago, and it remains so today. That’s a big chink out of Candidate Romney’s armor, isn’t it? If he operates as commander in chief in that way, this country is in for more of the same shim-sham governance that we are getting from Barak Obama today.

I don’t recommend you vote for Mitt Romney or Barak Obama. Vote for Ron Paul, the most honest, truthful candidate out there. He is the only man who can get us out of this deep depression and make America free and independent once again. He understands the monetary system. If he is not selected by Republicans to go against Obama in the November elections, then use you conscience as your guide. Pray and listen to the still small voice for advice. Seek the help of the Holy Ghost and the spirit of Christ.

But remember, truth is “things as they really are and things as they really will be.”

Romney Volunteer Service To America Is Very Admirable

2012-01-16T03:14:00.000-08:00

Interesting factual background of Mitt Romney that the liberal news media fails to publish. Neither does Newt Gingrich or the other candidates in the GOP Primary for that matter !!
Why is it that they cannot be sued for slander?

Subject: Re: Mitt Romney
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 23:49:25 -0700

I agree, Mitt Romney is an impressive man in more ways than just his money-making ability. He has served without pay for many years and is honest and upstanding. I believe another man, Ron Paul, has those same attributes as publicized in this forum previously, such as not taking the full $172,000 salary while in Congress etc. These are the kinds of men we want serving our country, no question about that.

My main reason for supporting Ron Paul over Mitt Romney, however, is I have an abiding faith that Ron Paul will actually cut the size of government and solve our money problems. Why don't I have that same feeling about Romney? It is because he has a history of liberality in politics. His health care bill is item number one. His ability to be all things to all people is another. One day he's a moderate, the next he says he's a conservative. I truly believe Romney is an honest person, but that he is easily persuaded by people who have their own agendas. I question whether he will cut government enough to make a difference. I don't question that with Ron Paul.

Don White

Subject: Mitt Romney
Mitt Romney from his Mitt Romney 2012 Site: After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law Schoolsimultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar, but never worked as an attorney. As a venture-capitalist, Romney’s first major business deal involved investing in a start-up office supply company with one store in Massachusetts that sold office supplies. That company, called Staples, now has over 2,000 stores and employs over 90,000 people. Romney or his company Bain Capital (using what became known as the “Bain Way”) would go on to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino’s,Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others…Got your calculators handy? Let’s recap. Volunteer campaign worker for his dad’s gubernatorial campaign – 1 year. Unpaid intern in Governor’s office – 8 years. Mormon missionary in Paris – 2 years. Unpaid bishop and stake president for his church – 10 years. No salary as president of the Olympics – 3 years. No salary as MA governor – 4 years. That’s a grand total of 28 years of unpaid service to his country, his community and his church. Why? Because that’s the kind of man Mitt Romney is.

Another Endorsement in South Carolina For Ron Paul: Notice, It Came From Tom Davis Who Said Paul Was The Only Candidate Who Really Meant It When He Said He Would Cut Government

2012-01-16T02:54:00.000-08:00

Dear Don,

In only his first term, Senator Tom Davis has become a respected Tea Party leader and the most outspoken advocate for limited government, fiscal responsibility, and conservative principles in the South Carolina state legislature.

At a rally that just wrapped a little while ago in Myrtle Beach, SC, Senator Davis announced he is endorsing me for the Republican nomination!

Senator Davis has been one of the most sought-after endorsements in this South Carolina primary race.

Matter of fact, one of my establishment opponents, Rick Santorum, recently told The Hilton Head Island Packet that, “To get an endorsement from someone like Tom Davis is a big deal. It would speak volumes to folks and make them take notice and give us a look.”

After closely evaluating the records of each candidate, Senator Davis has decided to support my campaign because he knows I’m the only candidate serious about reining in spending, shrinking government, and returning prosperity to America – and that I’ve got the consistent conservative history to back up my word.

I’m proud to have the support of such a well-respected leader, and I look forward to working with Tom Davis and other principled legislators to return our country to its core beliefs of limited government, individual freedom, sound money, and personal responsibility.

And I hope I’ll have your support as our campaign undertakes one final push in South Carolina this week.

A Conservative Idea That Can Really Save Money

2012-01-14T13:32:00.000-08:00

Rand Paul gives treasury $500,000 saved from office expenses

Posted on January 13, 2012 by Cowboy Byte This is fantastic. It shows that each of our 435 House members could save the same amount of their office expenses each two years. If they did, the U.S. would save $217 million over two years. Why aren't all of the Congressmen and women interested in doing this? It's because they're in it for the money and prestige, and if that is true we should get rid of them in the November, 2012 elections.

Did you know that Ron Paul is talking a congressional salary of only about $34,000, which is the poverty level in America? He's not a rich man, but he has not taken a full salary for several years. What a great example for the rest of Congress. Follow him, support him. He needs your help in getting the conservative word out. The other GOP candidates are not conservatives, they are all impostors and should be soundly defeated. Don White

U.S. Sen. Rand Paul announced Thursday that he will return to the federal treasury $500,000 of his office budget that was not used.

Paul, a Republican from Bowling Green, is a staunch proponent of federal spending cuts, but he said many of his efforts to reduce spending through legislation have failed to pass Congress.

“This is the one thing I have control over,” Paul said during a news conference at the St. Matthews Community Center on Ten Pin Lane off of Shelbyville Road.

This month, Paul intends to propose legislation that would offer incentives to civil servants, such as bonuses, for doing something similar — leaving a portion of their budgets unspent, he said

Ron Paul Will Cut $1 Trillion, Balance Budget, Eliminate 5 Departments

2012-01-12T12:57:00.001-08:00

Dear Fellow Conservative,

My campaign's incredibly strong second-place finish in New Hampshire has the national media stunned.

Add that to my top-tier showing in Iowa, and it's clear I'm the one Republican candidate who can take on and DEFEAT both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.

The race is becoming more clearly a two-man race between Mitt Romney and me.

So the question is: Do you want a Republican presidential nominee who agrees with Barack Obama on the $700 BILLION TARP debacle, stripping away our God-given Second Amendment rights, forcing Americans to buy only the health insurance government says they can carry, or ripping millions of dollars away from our families to hand over to Planned Parenthood?

Fellow Republican, as a father of 5 and a grandfather of 18 who was privileged to grow up in a strong Christian household, I'm outraged at how often Republicans have caved to Big Government politicians like Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi to wreck our economy, bankrupt our futures, and endanger our national security.

I'm simply FED UP with being told that the U.S. Constitution is outdated and no longer needs to be followed.

And I'm writing to tell you today that you and I don't have to take it any longer.

Freedom is popular, and we can win!

The truth is, there is only one true conservative choice in this race.

You see, unlike Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, and Jon Huntsman, I won't have to spend precious time in the general election apologizing for agreeing with the President on many of his disastrous policies!

Instead, I'll present a clear conservative, constitutional alternative to Barack Obama.

I'll run on my record - not away from it.

And I'll lay out my Plan to Restore America, which:

*** CUTS $1 trillion in federal spending during the first year of my presidency without taking one penny from our seniors, our veterans, or our national defense;

*** BALANCES the federal budget in my third year;

*** ELIMINATES FIVE federal departments, including the bloated Department of Education, which Newt Gingrich voted to create, and Rick Santorum voted to dramatically expand;

*** REDUCES the federal workforce by 10%, slashes congressional pay and perks, curbs excessive federal travel, and lowers my salary as President from $400,000 to $39,336 - which is roughly equal to the median personal income of the American worker.

No other candidate has put forth such a serious proposal for real change.

No other candidate has received as much support as me from those who know we cannot afford to select Mitt Romney as our nominee.

Matter of fact, many of my opponents have struggled to get on the ballot in several states - or completely missed doing so all together.

So I urge my opponents who have been unsuccessfully trying to be the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney to unite behind my candidacy.

And I urge you to please support my campaign today with a contribution of $100, $50, $25, $10, or whatever you are able to give.

National Inflation Assn. Wants Paul To Beat Romney

2012-01-11T10:21:00.001-08:00

Ron Paul finished 2nd place tonight in New Hampshire. With 73% of the votes counted, Ron Paul has 39,773 votes or 24% of the vote, behind Mitt Romney who has 64,122 votes or 38% of the vote, and ahead of Jon Huntsman who finished 3rd with 28,244 votes or 17%.

When Ron Paul finished 3rd in Iowa's popular vote the other day, a countless number of people in the mainstream media along with political experts in Washington declared Ron Paul's finish a high watermark for his campaign during the GOP primary season. Just one week later, Paul has already proved them wrong with a 2nd place finish. NIA believes that once Americans learn the truth about Paul and what he represents compared to Romney who is a puppet of the Federal Reserve, Paul has a real chance of becoming the nominee to take on Obama.

After Iowa, the media declared Santorum the only candidate with the ability to defeat Romney, despite the fact that most Americans have never heard of Santorum and he doesn't have the infrastructure in place to win a nationwide campaign. NIA said that out of the three best performing candidates in Iowa, only Romney and Paul have the infrastructure in place to win the nomination on a nationwide level. The truth is, Paul tied Romney and Santorum in Iowa for first place, because they will each receive 7 delegates from the state. The delegates are what determines the winner of the GOP nomination.

After tonight's results in New Hampshire, Paul is now in second place alone behind Romney in terms of delegates. Santorum only received less than 10% of the votes in New Hampshire, about the same as Newt Gingrich. If Paul finishes strong in South Carolina on January 21st, it is likely that many of the other candidates will drop out and all of the attention will be on just Romney and Paul. NIA predicts that at that point, Romney will refuse to debate Paul.

NIA's new video 'The Romney Con' is receiving rave reviews and has already been viewed over 115,000 times in just 4 days. 'The Romney Con' exposes the truth about Mitt Romney and why America needs to support Ron Paul. The best way that we can support Ron Paul besides donating is spreading the word about 'The Romney Con' so that as many Americans watch the video as possible: http://inflation.us/videos.html

NIA's staff spent countless hours away from their families throughout the holiday season putting 'The Romney Con' together in order to help Ron Paul (even working on Christmas and New Years Eve). So that Romney supporters don't accuse us of bashing Romney's name to promote our organization, NIA doesn't discuss itself in the video except for its logo being displayed for half a second at the very end.

This message was sent to dusanotes@yahoo.com from:

National Inflation Association | 96 Linwood Plaza #172 | Fort Lee, NJ 07024

Ron Paul Places Second In New Hampshire

2012-01-11T04:14:00.000-08:00

The following is from writer David Brody of CBN News.

Ron Paul’s detailed agenda for America will be disclosed next week and a senior official with his campaign tells The Brody File that it includes eliminating five governmental departments, cutting $1 trillion in spending, and Dr. Paul would take a presidential salary of just $39, 336, which is the median salary of the American worker (The President’s base salary is normally $400,000).

The five departments that would be abolished are the Departments of Education, Energy, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce and Interior. However, while the departments would be eliminated, the plan would be to roll certain functions into other departments. For example, the Department of Education would be done away with but Pell grant programs would be phased in somewhere else.

There’s a lot more details to come but those will be unveiled Monday in Las Vegas.

The mainstream media wants to continue to discount Ron Paul even though his poll numbers are healthy, his fundraising is strong, and his message is resonating. Now, in this 2012 campaign, he has developed a new wrinkle as he tries to make a concerted pitch to pro-life social conservatives by talking up the value of human life.

Ron Paul is not called Dr. Paul for nothing. He’s an obstetrician.

Coming off his big straw poll victory at the Values Voter Summit, he’s now out with an extremely compelling pro-life ad.

Watch below.

While Ron Paul may not win the nomination, his constitutional conservative beliefs have already won him something far more valuable and long lasting: changing the discourse in American politics.

My guess is the godfather of the Tea Party would rather have that be his legacy than becoming president of the United States. The media scoffed at him in 2008 but who’s having the last laugh?

The Brody File will be interviewing Ron Paul next week in Las Vegas.

Romney Didn't Win Iowa, Hawkeye Citizens Lost

2012-01-04T08:23:00.000-08:00

January 3, 2012
by Don White

Presidential Candidate Ron Paul

I watched the Iowa Caucuses and was extremely pleased at how well the truth that Ron Paul has taught us has permeated into the minds of some of the people--especially the young voters of America.

While Dr. Paul, technically, did not "win" the caucuses, he came in third behind Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, both moderate to liberal candidates who masquerade as conservatives. It's not "winner take all" in Iowa, so Paul comes away with 23% of the vote which will go with him as he is entered in all 50 primary elections across the country.

Newt Gingrich, who came in fourth with 13 percent of the vote despite constant hammering by the mighty Romney superPacs, called Romney a liar on national television. I'll go one better. I'll call all but Paul liars because they don't represent the truth in their statements and all but Dr. Paul, if elected president, will break campaign promises and won't govern from the right. That's just a fact of life, live with it. If you vote in a moderate-liberal like all of these but Paul, you must live with the consequences of losing more rights and never curtailing the spending, never getting at the core of the problem which is our monetary problem in America.

Do not be deceived. Once elected, Romney and Santorum will change their garb back into the liberal-minded lawmakers they really are. I am especially mindful of their pro-aggressive-war stands. Both are charlatans deceiving the people. It doesn't matter what they say they are, believe me, once elected they will feel it their duty to order our military into every nation's business and to continue America's 60-year role as policeman of the world. This is expensive business. It costs America more than a trillion dollars a year to maintain our many foreign bases and world military presence.

Like Ron Paul, I do advocate a cut in military spending on foreign soil. I say, bring the troops home. I even have a web site dedicated to that noble goal.http://wartalkblogspotcom.blogspot.com/ and have written widely on that subject, as has Ron Paul. My inspiration comes from this fine American leader.

Today, I am publishing Chapter 40, Security, of my book Patriot Call of Ron Paul, Part Two that will soon be out as an ebook at Barnes and Amazon.com as is Part One.http://bit.ly/tjGsUc

Chapter 40

Security

Ron Paul does not believe you should sacrifice freedoms with security. “More than 200 years ago Ben Franklin warned about it. “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety.”

“The tragedy,” says Congressman Paul, “is that the would-be tyrants …with the victims of government fear-mongering who demand ultimate safety destroy the liberties of those who are convinced that there is no need ever to sacrifice any liberty in the belief that the government will protect us from all harm.”

President George W. Bush, like Barak Obama today, was not living up to his sworn oath given to the a Supreme Court Justice with hand on Bible—as if that meant anything to Bush—because he put the “safety” of people ahead of living up to his duties spelled out in the Constitution.

No one, including the U.S. president, can provide complete protection for citizens. “George W. Bush was totally confused on this issue,” said Paul. “He claimed his prime responsibility was keeping all Americans safe, not obeying the Constitution. His legal advisor John Yoo said Bush could ignore the law and the Constitution when they interfered with his goal of striving for safety.”

I wonder if Barbara Bush taught him that too? I have met and talked with Barbara Bush and a more outwardly staunch person you will never find. But later I discovered how progressive the Bushes are and lost much of the respect I once had for her for failing to teach Constitutional principles in her own home. Consequently, George got his priorities wrong and the president didn’t know how he should behave in preserving, protecting, and defending the most sacred legal document America has.

At a recent Tea Party meeting I told a lady I was a staunch Ron Paul supporter. She replied that she couldn’t vote for Dr. Paul because she didn’t think he could adequately protect her. I was too polite. I should have told her that was not the attitude of true Tea Party members, many of whom had served in the armed forces. “Toughen up, lady. No amount of guns, tanks and planes can protect you from the enemy within—those who destroy the Constitution. If you ask to be protected above all else, you are a lily-livered progressive not fit for freedom. Do you think those original Tea Party participants were worried about their own skins when they defied King George and dumped the tea rather than obey the Stamp Act? You’re not fit to call yourself one of them. Had your kind been in power there would not have been a revolution. We would not be a free country and England would still be our master.”

In a real way, England—at least the Bank of England and the Bilderbergers—are still our masters because, together with the Fed, they control the money supply and our prosperity. We Tea Party people need to have the spleen to stand up to them, at risk of our lives if necessary.

It took mighty sacrifices to make this nation free. And it will require even greater sacrifices—even risk of life and limb—to retain our liberty. That’s what I should have said.

Fear ignites a demand to be taken care of. “In a free society,” says Dr. Paul, “where depending on government is absent or minimal, any real crisis serves to motivate individuals, families, churches, and communities to come together and work to offset the crisis…Once dependency on government for both rich and poor is ingrained in society, any perceived actual or created crisis will prompt a demand for rescue at any cost.”

Paul is right when he says, “The assumption the government can rescue us from all problems, and it’s not the individual’s duty to plan for such unforeseen circumstances, causes behavior changes that magnify all crises through a constant erosion of liberty.”

Through private means most Americans have:

1) Locks on our doors

2) Guns in our homes

3) Private insurance to cover loss

4) Privately provided alarm systems

5) Sometimes private, not homeowner association or government, security guards

“The vast government apparatus of national security does not keep us safe so much as threaten our liberties by regarding the entire citizenry as a threat. Private security does not threaten our civil liberties, but government-provided security does.”

The authoritarians have this motto: “Don’t ever let a crisis go to waste.” It only took 34 days from the time 9/11 occurred for Congress and President Bush to give us the damnable Patriot Act. It passed easily by both houses of congress. The people went along because of heightened fear and apprehension.

The Patriot Act:

1) Undermined the privacy of all Americans protected by our Constitution

2) Was a radical departure from the protections of the fourth Amendment

3) Allows government to seize all our records

4) Makes all Americans potential terrorists, subjecting us to unrestrained searches by our government “protectors.”

5) Allows access to library and bookstore records

6) A broader definition of “lone wolf” provisions

7) Wiretaps of civilians homes and monitoring of cell phones

The fact that an extremely unpatriotic piece of legislation was called the Patriot Act tells you something about the arrogance and cynicism that exists in Washington D.C. Congress and the people went along because of heightened fear and pressure to do something. This is no small matter. Before 9/11 we were spending about $40 billion annually on intelligence gathering. A strong argument can be made that this was a total waste of money, since that effort did not prevent 9/11 even with evidence that we now know was available.

Now we spend $80 Billion annually and I doubt we are any better off for it in terms of security. But in terms of erosion and diminishing of our freedoms, we are much the worse off. Says Paul: “Who can say that we are any better off because of this secret spending and interference in other countries?”

The added $40 Billion in security makes possible for the NSA to do surveillance on emails, telephones, mail, and all activities of Americans. There is no privacy left. The U.S. military spends far more than any country on earth. In 2009 we spent $1.53 trillion according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbook of 2010. Fully, 46.5 percent of that was spent by the U.S. The next highest expense was by China which was only 6.6 percent of the total. Ron Paul asks how much of that is spent by those countries to protect them against the United States as the perceived threat?

America is a threat? Yes, Ours is the only country that will travel thousands of miles to:

1) Drop bombs on other countries

2) To overthrow governments

3) To station troops

4) To mess in other countries’ internal affairs

The United States is the only country to have used nuclear weapons, and we are surprised that other nations regard us as a threat?

As to the threat of terrorism and wartime policies being foisted upon Americans at a time when Congress has not declared war, this is Paul’s observation:

“Conditions [in America] are ripe for some form of dictatorship to emerge. Dependency on government to care for us in all ways has caused the majority of the people and their representatives to act in a way that guarantees our problems will get worse. We are witnessing the destruction of the liberties that took centuries to establish in order to reign in the kings of old.”

On December 31, 2011, President Barak Obama, contrary to what he said he would not do, signed the controversial National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law. This is the same bill that Ron Paul recently compared to the Patriot Act but with more dire implications. "When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured," Paul said earlier this week. "The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act continues that slip into tyranny, and in fact, accelerates it significantly."

“The Fifth Amendment is about much more than the right to remain silent in the face of government questioning,” Paul continued. “It contains very basic and very critical stipulations about the due process of law. The government cannot imprison a person for no reason and with no evidence presented and without access to legal council. The danger of the NDAA is its alarmingly vague, undefined criteria for who can be indefinitely detained by the U.S. government without trial.”

“It is no longer limited to members of Al Qaeda or the Taliban, but anyone accused of substantially supporting such groups or associated forces,” Paul continued. “How closely associated, and what constitutes substantial support? What if it was discovered that someone who committed a terrorist act was once involved with a charity? Or suppose a political candidate? Are all donors of that candidate or supporters of that candidate now suspects and subject to indefinite detainment? Is that charity now an associated force?”

The White House initially threatened to veto NDAA because of the detainee language, saying it would tie the hands of law enforcement officials. But the administration dropped the veto threat before the bill passed the House, as the bill’s supporters argued that there were sufficient waivers.

“The president’s widely expanded view of his own authority to detain Americans indefinitely even on American soil is for the first time in this legislation codified in law,” Paul said. “That should chill all of us to our cores.”

“The Bill of Rights has no exceptions for really bad people or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. That is not a weakness in our legal system, it is the very strength of our legal system. The NDAA attempts to justify abridging the Bill of Rights on the theory that rights are suspended in a time of war, and the entire United States is a battlefield in the war on terror. This is a very dangerous development, indeed. Beware.” http://bit.ly/tjGsUc This is Don White's book landing page containing all of the links to Barnes and Noble and Amazon.com for Don's ebooks.