The ONLY Way to know Ron Paul “Absolutely” Won’t Run Third Party.

Ron Paul supporters are dedicated to their candidate.  Most will not vote for another candidate, regardless.  They are as principled as the candidate himself, vowing not to hold their noses when they vote.  They would rather abstain, than to vote for the “status quo” be it a Republican or Democrat.

Knowing this, we can draw a few conclusions if Ron Paul DOES NOT win the GOP nomination.

1. His supporters will convince him to run third-party, and they will vote for him, or
2. Paul will not run third-party, and a large portion of his supporters either vote for another third-party candidate, or vote for no one.

Most arm-chair pundits conclude that if Paul runs third-party, it will hand the general election to Obama.  While this is not a given, he will most definitely be labeled a spoiler should this happen.  But what most Republicans don’t understand is that the “spoiler threat” does not deter “hard-core” Ron Paul’s supporters.  They will vote for him regardless, and campaign for him with all of their might in hopes of winning.

So if Paul runs third-party, the only way the GOP can assure themselves a win over Obama, is to vote for Ron Paul in the general election.

However, before we even get to that point, it must be understood, that if Ron Paul does not get the GOP nomination, and does NOT run third-party, a large percentage of his supporters will not vote for the GOP nominee.  It’s unlikely that Paul will endorse those he has called the “status quo”.  He is a man of principle, after all.

So, while it may “burn you up” that Ron Paul’s supporters are so dedicated, it really leaves the GOP with one option to cruise to a win over Barack Obama.  That is to nominate Ron Paul as the GOP nominee.

If you would like to read more about this phenomenon, check out this article.

You Like Ron Paul… Except for His Foreign Policy ?

In a long-form video released by Veterans for Ron Paul 2012, a grassroots  organization operating on Facebook and elsewhere, American militarism and  foreign policy in the Middle East is explored in depth.

Read more and view the video here.

Is Ron Paul a Racist?

Austin NAACP President Nelson Linder, who has known Ron Paul for 20 years, unequivocally dismissed charges that the Congressman was a racist in light of recent smear attempts, and said the reason for him being attacked was that he was a threat to the establishment.

Read the entire story here.

Answer 9 Questions to determine your GOP presidential candidate

Unsure who to vote for in the 2012 GOP Primary Election?

Find Your True Love!

A quiz to match you to your perfect sweetheart GOP presidential candidate

http://reason.com/quiz/GOP2011/match

Top Presidential Campaign Donors through the Third Quarter 2011

A comparison of top Presidential Campaign donors is very revealing.

Actually, many may not be surprised to see Obama receiving large contributions from academia, and Rick Perry getting donations from energy companies.  But what about Mitt Romney and his Wall Street connections?

But the most revealing, is perhaps the top 3 donors for Ron Paul.  Congressman Paul wants an end to the wars, but yet he gets more money from the armed services than any other candidate!  That’s a pretty clear message.

As they say, “follow the money”.

Source: OpenSecrets.org

Top Five Presidential Campaign Donors by Candidate

Barack Obama			Mitt Romney
Microsoft Corp	$170,323		Goldman Sachs	$354,700
Comcast Corp	$116,155		Credit Suisse Group	$195,250
Harvard University	$94,225		Morgan Stanley	$185,800
Google Inc	$90,166		HIG Capital	$176,500
University of California	$83,679		Barclays	$155,250
Rick Perry			Ron Paul
Ryan LLC	$197,800		US Air Force	$23,437
Murray Energy	$66,803		US Army	$23,053
USAA	$51,500		US Navy	$16,973
Contran Corp	$50,000		Mason Capital Management	$14,000
Ernst & Young	$45,300		Microsoft Corp	$13,398
Michele Bachmann			Herman Cain
Carbun Concepts	$15,600		Wausau Homes	$9,800
College Loan Corp	$12,400		Wells Fargo	$8,300
Hubbard Broadcasting	$10,750		Houston Texans	$7,400
Fagen Inc	$10,000		Cold Spring Granite	$6,000
Empire Office Inc	$10,000		Cinco Natural Gas	$5,200
Jon Huntsman			Newt Gingrich
Fertitta Entertainment	$32,000		Rock-Tenn Co	$25,000
Ultimate Fighting Championship	$26,500		Poet LLC	$17,000
Station Casinos	$26,000		First Fiscal Fund	$15,000
Crow Holdings	$20,000		American Fruits & Flavors	$10,000
Fresenius Medical Care	$17,400		State Mutual Insurance	$10,000
Rick Santorum			Gary Johnson
Blue Cross/Blue Shield of South Carolina	$15,500		Tower Energy Group	$10,000
Universal Health Services	$14,750		Ryan LLC	$5,000
Kimber Manufacturing	$12,300		Corriente Advisors	$5,000
Achristavest	$10,000		Welcom Products	$5,000
El Dorado Holdings	$10,000		Zyvex Corp	$2,500

Which GOP Candidate do you trust with our economy?

The U.S. economy is in shambles.  The 2012 Presidential election may be the most important in our lifetime.  The GOP primary election cycle will be even more important.

Mitt Romney has the financial institutions on his side.  Wall Street and the big banks hold much of the blame for our dire economic situation, a result of their malinvestment, and influence on Congress and government agencies.  Their influence in a Romney administration would be a continuation of the status quo, driving our economy to an eventual complete collapse.

Herman Cain served on the board of the Kansas City Federal Reserve and does not think that a full audit of the Fed is necessary.  He was clueless about the housing bubble and the financial meltdown.  His proposed 999 plan would establish another avenue of federal taxation by adding a federal consumption tax on top of the income tax.  He says the rates would be lower, but when has the government ever been able to keep its hands off of potential additional funding?  We can’t gamble our futures on whether this man can choose wise advisors, and Congress to hold down the tax rates. Herman Cain needs to be able to understand that the Federal Reserve has devalued the dollar, and that this has been happening since it’s inception, and will continue until it is ended.

Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, and Michele Bachmann have all recognized the problems the Federal Reserve has caused.  None, however; spoke openly against the policies of the Federal Reserve until long after Ron Paul began his crusade to obtain a full audit of the private banking cartel.

Ron Paul serves on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Joint Economic Committee, and the House Committee on Financial Services, and is Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology, where he has been an outspoken critic of current American foreign and monetary policy.

Congressman Ron Paul is not a slick talking career politician.  He is a medical doctor by trade who became outraged in the 1970’s when President Nixon took the dollar off of the gold standard.  This action motivated him to run for Congress to affect change.  He is a man of vision, he has impeccable family values, he supports the Constitution, and is a man of peace.

Recent polls show that Ron Paul is competitive in a head-to-head matchup with President Obama.  He can win.  He must win, if America is to prosper.

Read about Ron Paul and his stances on the issues of the economy, the Federal Reserve, taxes, and more at his campaign web site.

Herman Cain uses Liberals’ tactics to suppress the truth

It seems Herman Cain is using tactics typically employed by liberals to suppress the truth.  I know this may be shocking to some, but hear me out.

This first became apparent to me after the October 11, 2011 GOP Primary debate sponsored by Bloomberg and the Washington Post with his comments regarding the Federal Reserve.  I immediately knew he was at the very least misrepresenting past comments he had made.  However, only later did I realize he was very calculating in his responses.

Watch the following video clip of the debate and then I will comment further.

While Cain did not use the term “ignorant” in reference to those who wish to see a full audit of the Federal Reserve, he did say the following.

 “I think a lot of people are calling for this audit of the Federal Reserve because they don’t know enough about it.”

Webster’s definition of ignorant is as follows.

1 a:destitute of knowledge or education <an ignorant society>; also: lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified <parents ignorant of modern mathematics> b: resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence

2:unaware, uninformed

Herman Cain is at the very least being disingenuous.

Cain went on to say,

“We don’t need to waste money with another commission or an audit that’s not necessary; because folks, we’ve got a lot of other problems we’ve got to worry about.”

I would say that is being “rather critical” of those who would like to see an audit of the Fed, and of Ron Paul in particular.

Now there is no doubt that Herman Cain could see this confrontation coming.  Ron Paul’s supporters are extremely active and have approached Cain on numerous occasions to ask him about his past as a director of the Federal Reserve Board of Kansas City.  In fact, Cain recently made reference to this in his book, “This is Herman  Cain,” and specifically blamed the Paul Campaign as if it was a coordinated effort, as recently reported in the Daily Caller.  Cain claims Paul’s campaign “sends one of its ‘Paulites’ everywhere I show up.”

“I get the same stupid question at almost every one of these events,” Cain  writes, “I know it’s a deliberate strategy. How can a person randomly show up at  a hundred events and ask the same stupid question to try to nail me on the  Federal Reserve? It’s really becoming annoying more than anything else.”

And if this wasn’t enough, Herman Cain, in an appearance on The Jay Leno Show, called Ron Paul a “grumpy old man”.

Ok, so now back to Liberal tactics.  A while back I printed a listing of “Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation” by H. Michael Sweeney.  After the debate I suspected that Cain might have been using one or two of these tactics himself, so I went back to review the list.

I could immediately see that it could easily be argued that Herman Cain used at least 8 of the 25 tactics in his dealings with Ron Paul over the Federal Reserve!  Specifically, I found the following:

(Rules have been summarized in some cases.)

Rule #3: Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations.  Herman Cain: “You’ve gotta be careful of the stuff you get off the Internet.”

Rule #4: Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent look bad.  Herman Cain: “You have misquoted me,” he said. “I did not call any of your people  ignorant. I don’t know where that came from,” he said.  Cain went on to say that he didn’t agree with the recent actions of the Federal Reserve, and that he did not object to an audit — it just wasn’t his “top priority — 9-9-9.”

Rule #5: Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.  Herman Cain: calling Ron Paul a “grumpy old man”, and his supporters as  ‘Paulites’ who ask “stupid questions”.

Rule #8: Invoke authority.  Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae” to illustrate you are the “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.  Herman Cain: “the Federal Reserve already has so many audits it’s ridiculous”, and “I think a lot of people are calling for this audit of the Federal Reserve because they don’t know enough about it,” Cain said at the time. “There’s no hidden secrets going on in the Federal Reserve to my knowledge.” He added that “we don’t need to waste money … with an audit that’s not necessary.”

Rule #9: Play dumb.  No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues and deny they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion.  Mix well for maximum effect.  Herman Cain:  “You have misquoted me.  I did not call any of your people  ignorant. I don’t know where that came from,” he said. “You’ve gotta be careful of the stuff you get off the Internet.”

Rule #17:  Change the subject.  Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic.  Herman Cain: said he didn’t agree with the recent actions of the Federal Reserve, and that he did not object to an audit — it just wasn’t his “top priority — 9-9-9.”

Rule #18: Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents.  Herman Cain: calling Ron Paul a “grumpy old man”.

Rule #19: Ignore proof presented.  To completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources.  Herman Cain: “You’ve gotta be careful of the stuff you get off the Internet.”

Really Herman?  Even when it’s your own voice? 

Americans, do you really trust this guy?

The Crazy Ron Paul

by Marc Gallagher

It occurs to me (and many others) that if the GOP wants nothing more than to
just beat Obama then Ron Paul is the most viable candidate in the Republican
field. I’ll make a prediction. If any other candidate is the GOP nominee then
Obama will be settling in to the Oval Office for “4 more years” in 2013. That is
of course if the world doesn’t end in December of 2012… oops… did some “crazy
Ron Paul supporter” juice just leak out of me by mistake? Maybe.

There are Republicans that will only vote Republican and stand behind the
nominee no matter who it is.

There are Democrats that believe in unicorns, double rainbows, and “Yes we
can!” that will vote for Obama no matter how much his actions suggest “Oh no we
didn’t!”.

Then there are the the rest of us who will vote for the guy (Sorry Michele
and Sarah but you gals don’t have a chance… how’s that feel coming from a Ron
Paul supporter?) that actually agrees with us on approximately 80 to 100% of
what we believe in.

If Ron Paul were the GOP nominee Obama would be forced to attack from the
right on foreign policy, alienating those liberal voters who are ignorantly
sympathetic to the drone-bombing fetishist, Nobel Peace Prize winner. Obama
would be compelled to “let-me-be-clear” his way out of not being very clear on
why there are still troops in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and maybe Syria and
“Pock-ih-stohn”.

Now where would those voters turn after being stabbed in the back by their
warmonger-in-chief? That’s right, the only other candidate in the race with
years of truth and integrity spilling out of him: Ron Paul.

Nearly every question Paul received during the debate last week on MSNBC was
obviously aimed at scaring people who have become dependent on the federal
government. Even the CNN “Tea Party” debate earlier this week had some of this
as well. Don’t fall for their magic markers. Paint your own picture of who Ron
Paul is and what he believes (this video is a great start).

Newsflash: Hey MSNBC viewers, everything you despise about FOX News is
exactly what MSNBC does except the paint dries blue, not red.

You have to take the crazy out of yourself before you will notice that Ron
Paul is just not crazy. He is the candidate with the most common sense. I’m sure
that one of Paul’s trusted advisers said to him prior to the debate, “Ron, if
you look at the rest of the candidates on that stage, and you can’t find the
sane one, then YOU are the sane one.”

Continue reading

Letter: A sensible overview of Ron Paul’s beliefs on the role of government

By Alex Kelly, senior in industrial engineering

Last week I read an article in the Iowa State Daily making claims on the views of presidential candidate Ron Paul I believe are inaccurate. The article misrepresents Ron Paul, and as a supporter of his, I wish to clear up any confusion on his political stance.

Republican Rep. Paul has gained a large amount of support with his ideals of independence and liberty for individuals. Paul has adamantly opposed any government acts that infringe on individual freedoms. Some of his key issues include: ending foreign interventionism, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a sound money supply, reducing the size and scope of the federal government, and allowing individual states to have more freedom to enforce laws they see fit.

One area some people are confused on is his stance on abortion. In the 1960s and ’70s, Paul was an obstetrician and gynecologist and delivered more than 4,000 babies. Through that experience, among others, he developed a moral stance against abortion. Paul has sponsored a bill aiming to overturn Roe v. Wade (HR 1096) because he believes individual states should be allowed to regulate abortion and protect the lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that state.

The only crimes discussed in the Constitution are counterfeiting, piracy, treason and slavery. Criminal and civil matters were deliberately left to the states. Paul believes it is the job of the federal government to protect life, not to grant permission to take it away. Although he is morally against abortion, his intent is not to make it illegal, only to take away the federal mandate (and funding) and allow the states to regulate abortion.

Another issue discussed was his stance on Social Security and Medicare. Paul believes welfare programs such as these are immoral due to the fact that these benefits can only be granted at other individuals’ expense, thus infringing on their property rights. This transfer can only be arranged by force through taxes or inflation. Our government programs are currently funded out of deficit spending and inflating the monetary base. This devalues our currency, thus raising the cost of commodities and the cost of living, which hurts the poor and middle class the most.

That being said, Paul does not intend to immediately eradicate these programs. He has stated numerous times that they could perhaps be kept going for a while longer if we used savings from reducing our involvement overseas.

Finally I would like to address concerns over his views on the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Paul has stated he would not have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on the basis that it violates individual property rights, not because of what it sought to accomplish. He has also stated that he would have never voted for the Jim Crow laws as they violated individual rights. Paul believes that the civil rights movement was a great event in our country’s history, but made more superficial and less effective by government. He believes that “banning blatant discrimination in all government programs” makes sense, but forcing people to integrate and avoid discrimination in all private transactions only exacerbates the conflicts they are trying to eliminate. Voluntary associations are more authentic and longer lasting. Outright foolish discrimination in business and elsewhere can be quickly punished by social and economic disproval as was seen with the economic boycott in the civil rights movement.

Many believe that government intervention actually intensified much of the racial segregation in the country, through their endorsement of the Jim Crow laws and laws mandating segregation within the military and other organizations. Whenever the government writes laws segregating people by race, gender or sexual orientation, they violate one set of individuals’ rights.

Continue Reading

Ron Paul Campaign Presses Perry on Big Government Record and Fake Rhetoric

Issues open letter knocking Perry’s liberal record

LAKE JACKSON, Texas– 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul’s campaign continues to challenge Rick Perry in the lead up to tonight’s Republican presidential debate. Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton released an open letter to Gov. Perry focusing on his record as Texas head of state, pointing out inconsistencies with his new Tea Party rhetoric. See text of letter below.

Subject: Rick Perry Can’t Handle the Truth

An open letter from Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton

Dear Governor Perry,

After our campaign’s first ad highlighting your Big Government record and support for liberal Al Gore, your campaign is attacking Dr. Paul – missing the point of why your past is important.

We don’t think the fact that you used to be a Democrat is the big problem here.  The real problem is that, too often, you still act like one.  Even you yourself, Governor Perry, said of your party switch, “I will still vote the same principles, only with an R after my name.”

That’s the kind of thinking that has our country teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.  We cannot afford to nominate someone who thinks the letter next to their name is more important than what they believe.

Governor Perry, let me be clear: It is not that you supported Al Gore that worries us.

It is that you supported Hillary Clinton’s health care plan.

You pushed for federal bailout and stimulus funds.

You support welfare for illegal immigrants.

You tried to forcibly vaccinate 12-year-old girls against sexually transmitted diseases by executive order.

You raised taxes twice.

And, state debt has more than doubled in your tenure as governor, pushing Texas to the brink of our constitutional debt limit.

It’s that you supported ALL of these bad ideas that are inconsistent with how most Republicans understand conservatism, yet you now try to swagger your way into the Tea Party.

Governor Perry, with all due respect, you have used great rhetoric.  But you will have to answer to the voters of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and across the country as to why that rhetoric does not match your record.

For Liberty,

Jesse Benton
Campaign Chairman
Ron Paul 2012