Skunks in the Chicken House!

What is a United States Senator doing sticking his nose in somewhere I don't think it yet belongs. Why is a senator trying to disrupt the vote that is first set and truly should first come forward in the House? No, really! Why? I don't get it.

Senator Rand Paul started his attention seeking theatrics weeks ago. He was dead set to paint the new healthcare bill as something disastrous. He was the first one to call it "Obamacare Light", wasn't he? Well, he was successful in bringing the damage he sought. The bill failed and he couldn't be happier. What was that all about? Why wasn't he working to make the bill something more successful, instead of aggressively fighting it every step of the way?

The Freedom Caucus (conservative members of the House) was very influential and indeed successful in getting some important changes to the bill. If the citizens had been educated about those changes, they surely would have wanted their representatives to support it. But I just don't think people understood. The misinformation out there that comments on social media reveal is unbelievable. I do understand why it was so difficult though. I really, really had to work at finding the correct information. It was terribly confusing. I was beginning to think no one understood.

But aligning themselves with Democrats, those that think of themselves as the most conservative members are, in fact, the ones that caused this bill to fail. It was extremely disappointing for me, because many of these conservatives are usually the people I like to support. But for them, the bill simply wasn't "pure' enough so they voted "no". They wanted it their way or the highway. They wanted it all or nothing. But actually, when does 100% ever work in government? It doesn't, and it never has. They were successful in making it look like it was only the efforts of the evil RINO's (Republicans In Name Only) who were pushing this bill forward and seeking passage. That simply isn't the case. I am tired of the intended division that is caused by name-calling and finger-pointing. The truth is, in my opinion, is that the members that voted "no", were far more concerned that they would lose their legislative seats, than passing this legislation. That fear seems to have controlled them and appeared more important to them than taking the time to educate their constituents about what the bill entailed. Politics before what is best for our nation.

There is no one that understands Constitutional Law with a Christian perspective better than Jay Sekulow and the American Center for Law and Justice. They came out in support of this bill. On Friday before the vote, Jay and his son, Jordan, did an excellent live review of the law and the reasons they supported it. It made more sense than anything I have seen, read, or heard. You can view it here and I recommend it to everyone.

 

Here is a quick break down in terms of the bill that someone as simple minded as me can understand:

• It got rid of the individual mandate.
• It got rid of the employer mandate.
• It put things back in state control.
• It rolled back taxes. This would have been repealed and taxes RETURNED!
• It eliminated the issues that were a problem for businesses like Hobby Lobby.
• It eliminated funding of Planned Parenthood.
• It would have helped the economy!

Many people have said they were concerned about the apparent rush to push the bill through the House. They lamented that it was happening so fast. But there was a reason for that. Federal funding comes up in April. Now that this bill has failed, Planned Parenthood will once again be funded. The passage of this bill would have prevented that funding and time was of the essence.

The points in the above list are the simple terms that are important to me. These are the facts that I can relate to and figure out for myself. Below is a post I took from Facebook. It is written by someone that knows a whole heck of a lot more than me. I am sorry I did not get his name. He has outlined the bill and the three phases it was designed to reach in more official terms. He demonstrates what was to happen in each of the three phases that would have occurred had this first phase passed. This is what the gentleman wrote:

"Bottom line you and other Freedom Caucus members only want to repeal Obamacare with no replacement. That will require 60 votes in the Senate.

Executive summary of what you did not support:

The Three Phase Approach to Repeal and Replace Obamacare ...

Phase 1 ...

REPEAL AND REPLACE OBAMACARE ...
(Budget reconciliation process requiring 51 votes in Senate):

▶ Eliminate Obamacare’s mandates and penalties.▶ Dismantle the trillion dollars of Obamacare taxes.
▶ Provide real assistance for the middle class through tax credits to help individuals and families purchase the insurance they want.
▶ Put Medicaid, the Federal Government's primary health care program for low income individuals and families on a sustainable foundation.▶ Give individuals and families more control over their healthcare dollars and decisions by expanding Health Savings Accounts (HSA).▶ Provide resources and flexibility to States to empower them to bring premiums down and help their vulnerable citizens.

Phase 2 ...

PROVIDE ESSENTIAL REGULATORY RELIEF ...
(HHS/Tom Price):

▶ Adopting regulatory reforms to stabilize insurance markets and increase coverage choices for patients, including insurance portability and purchasing across state lines beginning as early as 2018.
▶ Loosening restrictions on the financial structure of insurance plans offered on the Obamacare exchanges, which will give individuals and families access to lower premium options.
▶ Improving choices for patients and putting downward pressure on prices by curbing abuses of the enrollment processes and encouraging full-year enrollment.

Phase 3 ...

REFORM HEALTHCARE THROUGH ADDITIONAL LEGISLATION ...
(Outside of budget reconciliation process that requires 60 votes in Senate):

▶ Allow health insurance to be sold across state lines.▶ Allow Americans to use the money in their HSAs to pay for more healthcare costs.
▶ Streamline processes at the FDA, removing the red tape that slows down approvals of generic competitors to high-price drugs in order to lower the cost of medicine.
▶ Allow small businesses to band together, through Association Health Plans, and negotiate for lower health insurance costs for their employees .
▶ Reform the medical malpractice lawsuit system by ending doctors’ incentives to practice unnecessarily costly medicine.

Return power to the states to:

▶ Set the safeguards and other parameters governing their own health insurance markets, including repealing any of Obamacare’s insurance market distortions that could not be included in a budget reconciliation bill .
▶ Set priorities and enact creative solutions for serving their most vulnerable citizens in the Medicaid program.
▶ Lower premiums for everyone in their state through the use of high risk pools, reinsurance, health savings accounts, and other solutions, and provide assistance to lower income people."

Sounds pretty darn good to me.

So many (including Sean Hannity) were saying: "The Republicans have had 7 years to get this done!" Blame, blame, blame! "Why didn't they have something ready?" is the oft repeated refrain.

But the truth is Republicans did have the bill ready. It was the previously written Tom Price Bill and President Trump strategically appointed Tom Price as Director of Health and Human Services. The bill WAS ready! They were using the previous bill that Tom Price had helped prepare.

The attitude that we saw, yesterday, in the few Republicans that wouldn't support this bill is what kept it from moving forward and it is a dangerous attitude, in my opinion. It is the same attitude that we saw in 2008 and 2012 when the Ron Paul agenda so badly divided conservatives that people stayed home in the general election, rather than get out and vote for someone that Ron Paul had deemed as a RINO (Republican In Name Only). Because of that divide we got Obama - not just once, but twice. Yeah that claim to "purity" really worked well, didn't it?

Why is it always the Paul's that do the disrupting? Why is it yet another Paul that once again keeps a conservative plan, strategy, or answer from moving forward? You know, the Paul's that keep claiming to be not really Republican, but libertarian?

I still suspect a skunk in the chicken house, just as I did in 2008 and 2012. It is interesting to me it is two of the same name. Surely their disruptive efforts and continued success to those ends are just coincidental, but I am really getting tired of it. 

Rand's bill is supposedly ready; waiting in the wings to move forward. It remains to be seen if it is indeed anymore conservative than this one was, or if it will even get anywhere. It will be interesting to see. If it isn't, we can safely assume all the distraction and dissatisfaction Rand created was only about Rand and getting his name on the bill. That name. Things smell like a skunk to me.

 

It Wasn't Us!

There’s another new argument among Idaho Republicans. I only thought they couldn’t get more divided.

On November 6, 2012, Idaho Republicans experienced their very first voter caucus.  Very simply, it didn’t go well. Voters waited in line for hours (many until midnight) for the opportunity to finalize their vote. There were a lot of frustrated people, many having to give up and go home, because they simply couldn't be out that late. But as bad as all that was, it has only recently become apparent just how bad the caucus system actually is. The worst of it was the way in which it disenfranchised voters: the military, the elderly, the night-shift or early morning worker, the ill. Certainly, one must have a lot of extra time on their hands in order to sit through a primary caucus.

For the counties in the north, their disappointment was compounded when because of the heavy Mormon influence in the southern part of the state; a Mormon candidate; and a time difference of an hour, voters heard the outcome of the election even before the northern counties were finished with their vote.

Idaho had been an open primary state up until this point. An open primary allows one to vote either side of the aisle. It is kept private with no need to register your party preference.

On the other hand, in a closed primary, one must legally register their party affiliation. Ones' vote then, is no longer private and one can only vote for candidates of the party for which they are registered.

It is also interesting to note, that it is in fact the more liberal states that have adopted the closed primary system: New York, Washington, California, and Oregon, just to name a few. There are now 20 in all; you can see which states support the closed primary here. In reality, it is up to the party to decide, (Democrat or Republican) and you will find in some states the parties differ in their choice of primary system.

Now that the 2014, May primaries are upon us, we are hearing a lot of debate about who initiated the confounded caucus system in Idaho in the first place. It was such a mess and so unpopular no one wants to lay claim to the change.

I follow politics pretty closely, and I pretty well thought I understood just exactly how the caucus was brought to Idaho. Still, those I thought responsible were denying it was them. I decided I needed to do a little research so we would know once and for all who gets the credit, or if you prefer (I do) the blame.

It took a little digging to get to the bottom of it, but for a political/news junkie like me, it really wasn’t much trouble. I don’t suppose the “average Joe”/Jane would bother, which is why I decided to make it easy for people to read in this blog, if they are curious as to what happened.

It started with a guy by the name of Rod Beck. He had tried without success, three times since 2000, to run for an office in Idaho. He finally decided to take matters into his own hand. So armed with his own determination and the backing of his fellow Ron Paul supporters, he went after it. You can read about it here in a 2010, article at CNS. The lawsuit against the state began in 2007. However, it was dismissed by a federal judge who ruled the lawsuit must be brought by the state Republican party rather than individuals.

As the Republican Party became more and more fractured across the nation, but especially in Idaho, some believed it was really due to this divide that the change in the primary system was sought. The well-known divide was conveniently labeled as Ron Paul supporter vs "RINO", which has hopefully now more accurately been revealed as "Libertarian vs true Conservative". Despite the success the Paul campaign had in convincing voters that libertarians are the more conservative faction, in fact the opposite is true as revealed in this chart, as well as voting records one can view at this site.

Regardless, in 2010, the lawsuit was brought again by the Idaho Republican Central Committee now controlled by precinct committeemen that the Paul campaign had been successful in enlisting, and yes voted on by the public. However, most were uncontested races due to the lack of voter knowledge about the position of "Precinct Committeman". It was a very smart move by the Paul campaign. Finally, the lawsuit was "won" by "The Republican Party" i.e. the Republican Cental Committee, in 2011, just in time for the Presidential election.

While Democratic states typically favor the closed primary, (as I said before, most Democratic states are closed) Democrats in Idaho, do not support a closed primary. From that, I guess we could surmise it is the underdog in any given state that would support an open, rather than a closed primary. This thought is also revealed in the above article.

Personally, I feel the reason that was given to change to a closed primary – to prevent members of the other party from skewing the vote in the primaries with a cross-over vote – happens so rarely, that it is in no way worth the inconvenience of the caucus system and the amount of voters who are disenfranchised because of it.

The truth of the matter is that the Paul campaign in both 2008 and 2012, worked very hard to get their people into the precinct committeeman position. They were by and large successful. The precinct committeemen make up the Republican Central Committee and it is they who are responsible for bringing this vote, lawsuit and eventually effecting this change.

In a heavily Mormon state, with a Mormon candidate on the ballot, the caucus didn’t work out as anticipated for those that desired this change.  As an end result, we are left with a big, fat mess for which no one wants to admit responsibility.

The divided Idaho Republican saga continues.

Resources:

• http://boisestatepublicradio.org/post/idaho-primary-why-gop-closed-its-ballot
• http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/idaho-gop-reshaped-tea-party-outrage
• http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2007/11/judge_rejects_lawsuit_seeking.html
• http://grassrootsidgop.wordpress.com/list-of-states-with-open-and-closed-primaries/

 

Keep 'Em Leaning Right

A couple comments on Facebook got me thinking, today.  Former Senator Rick Santorum has created a wonderful site called Patriot Voices. Check it out if you get the chance; I think you will like it. I have joined this site on Facebook, so comments people have posted to Patriot Voices show up on my personal Facebook page. If you are familiar with Facebook, you know how it works.  Anyway, someone posted in regard to Mitt Romney’s Presidential campaign on Senator Santorum’s previous comment about endorsements. Referring to Romney, the fan posted, “Keep him leaning right, Rick! Thanks for all you do!”

I “liked” it! I couldn’t agree more!  What an awesome encouragement! And it is exactly what Senator Santorum is doing. It is what we all should be doing, if we want our politicians to stand up for our standards and values. I have noticed lately that Mitt Romney is now a new member of The National Rifle Association (NRA), as well as the conservative educational group, HSLDA – Homeshool Legal Defense Association. So obviously, something is helping Romney to lean right!

Senator Santorum is also helping elect conservative candidates.  He has boldly stepped out in favor of certain candidates, endorsing those that have policies and ideas that are aligned most closely to our United States Constitution.

This constructive trend doesn’t begin and end with Rick Santorum; Governor Sarah Palin, and Michelle Bachman as well as others, have also worked diligently in this manner.

Additionally, today as I browsed Facebook, there were some comments on another “friends” status that I found interesting. This discussion was about Ron Paul. As is almost always the case, the comments were pro Ron Paul, without actually stating why.  The comments mostly bashed Americans for being ignorant, and not moving to “line-up” with Ron Paul and his stances.  Obviously the people commenting were frustrated, and opining about their intentions to vote for Ron Paul regardless, come Election Day as a “matter of principle”.  

I hate to say it, but lamenting and regurgitating all they have heard about the ills of America seems to be the mantra of many Paul supporters.  Saying Paul is the “only true Constitutionalist” while running down others is the norm. When one points out the error of their facts, some (not all) quite often respond viciously – not with verification of their facts, but unfortunately with more attacks. There have been many times I can do nothing but shake my head in regard to the name calling and negative comments I have endured when I have commented on Ron Paul sites. And I continue to believe that I rarely hear Ron Paul and his supporters ever say anything positive about America! 

After participating in the Ron Paul discussion on my friend’s Facebook page - though no one attacked me there – I really got to thinking. After seeing the woman’s post on Senator Santorum’s page: (“Keep him leaning right!”) I couldn’t help but see the dichotomy!

Senator Santorum, Sarah Palin, and Michelle Bachman have chosen to do something constructive with their platform.  They have not given up on America and they have only praised America’s attributes, while noting her failures with a hopeful attitude of correction by using a strong and effective rule of law.

Ron Paul on the other hand, in my opinion, has done nothing but “stir the masses” it seems. He has stirred up and torn down, criticizing America almost as much as the Obama’s. Many of his supporters seem to be in a state of frenzy with no idea of how to do anything constructive for America. Some take credit for the Tea Party movement - and there were indeed many Paul supporters that were involved with that - but things seemed to fizzle when others that joined that movement didn’t agree with much of Paul’s ideologies. Even the Tea Party movement was divided, including a Paul sect, along with those that were traditional, conservative Republicans. Foreign policy seemed to be the most divisive issue when it came to support for Ron Paul.

Now, as election time draws nearer, Paul and his supporters continue to attack fellow Republicans when at this point in time we should be joining forces in order to generate a positive outcome at election time.

Even the bitter battles during the primaries between Romney and Newt; and Romney and Santorum did not prevent these two class acts from following through with an endorsement of Mitt Romney – solely for the benefit of the GOP!

Come on, Dr. Paul; what’s your real agenda? When closely observed, some of your actions seem more likely to divide. If you are a Republican, get on board! If not, work from your own party of choice…oh, that’s right; you said you couldn’t win if you did that, and that it would cost too much money to try that. Well guess what?  You aren’t winning…but you do continue to divide and you don’t seem to be offering any solutions to your supporters. They stand faithful to you and that is a wonderful thing, if you offered solutions that would aid in restoring America….I will stand with Patriot Voices and others that continue to believe in America and are working to restore America.

Not Backing Down

The issue was largely unreported in our area. I follow closely, so I caught a small article in the local paper, and followed through with research to see what exactly was happening.

The issue? The Ron Paul campaigns strategy to take over the delegates in Idaho.
For starters, Idaho recently changed to a caucus state just this year, so this is the first time voters voted with the caucus system.  That was a nightmare in itself, but that will be for another post.

The caucus vote  revealed that Mitt Romney won the majority of votes in Idaho at 62%.  Santorum garnered a few more votes than Paul for 18.2% and Paul came in third receiving 18.1% of the vote. Newt Gingrich was far behind at 2.1%. The vote awarded Romney the state’s 32 national delegates which in this state are binding.

Then came the controversy!  It was reported (and many were aware of this strategy for sometime) that the Paul campaign had a plan to take over the state delegates at the National Convention in Florida.  They had a plan in place to elect as many committee precinctmen as possible, who in turn would be the ones to nominate the delegates that would vote in favor of Paul at the convention. Legal? Yes. Underhanded? I would say so; at the very least – entirely without good character.

Finally, the Paul campaign due to negative publicity, issued a statement that they did not support this “take over” in Idaho. You can read their entire statement here.  That's commendable if it were believable, but past actions show otherwise.

But a summary of their opinion can be read in this one sentence from the Paul campaign:

“Therefore, the Ron Paul 2012 Presidential campaign condemns efforts to expand its influence in the Republican Party in Idaho and beyond when these activities are couched as vengeful, underhanded, or markedly distasteful.”

The Idaho Statesman had several articles concerning the issue; and though the Statesman reported exactly what was happening in Idaho, some within the Paul campaign painted the newspaper's reporting as unfair and incorrect. However, one can read the strategy from the website of Paul supporters in Idaho, Idaho for Liberty , and it is exactly as the Statesman reported.

At the time I read the harsh criticism of Idaho supporters from Paul’s campaign manager, John Tate, I questioned whether it would lead to any further action. Apparently I was right. The insincerity of the statement is revealed when the Paul campaign asked for more money  for their delegate strategy the next day.  You can read about that in this article at the Idaho Statesman. So much for "commendable".

Another troubling statement from the Idaho for Liberty website reads:

“The issue, though, is not a lack of following the rules, but rather, a strategy of following the Party rules which are already in place. These rules allow any faction or coalition to benefit from a supermajority at the convention. Some Ron Paul supporters are motivated, in part, by the State’s winner-take-all decision. They view it as unfair and contrary to the National GOP rules, which dictate that proportional delegates should instead be given. Santorum’s people had a similar concern. Additionally, with over 2000 voting procedures that go into a party’s delegate selection process some believe it is morally wrong to bind any delegate based on the results of a single caucus vote because it would make the entire process meaningless.”

The Paul campaign doesn’t like this part of Idaho’s legal process which was voted upon this past year. So it seems they are going to ignore it and use this as their reason for “stealing” the delegates. It seems for the Paul campaign, “states rights” is only important when it benefits them!  The Ron Paul campaign is always quick to defend states rights (issues such as the marriage amendment, legalization of drugs etc.) until the state doesn’t agree with them…then it’s unfair.

Another inaccurate statement from that site states:

“Regardless of whether one agrees with Ron Paul’s ideals to restore this country, it is undeniable that he has the ability to defeat Barack Obama, as evidenced in national polls. Furthermore, Ron Paul is the candidate who will have the strongest backing from the entire GOP, Constitutionalists, Libertarians, Blue Republicans, Independents and other factions when running against Obama. As you’ve seen, the attendance and diversity at Ron Paul events is unparalleled. Add to that the support of the remainder of the GOP, and you have an unbeatable force.”

This is unequivocally false.  If it were true, Paul would have received above 12% of the vote through out the majority of the states. He did not! As I said before, even in Idaho, he only received 18.1%! Taking into consideration the totals of the other candidates, 82% of voters In Idaho did not vote for Ron Paul!  That hardly gives the Paul camp rights to take over the delegates.  Even in Idaho, where Paul support was one of his strongest states during the 2008 campaign, he acquired only 27% of Idaho's vote at that time. That was one of his highest ranking states!  Isn’t it time to speak the truth about Ron Paul’s minimal nation wide support?

“A recent article in our local newspaper, The Idaho Statesman (read it here), describes how the Establishment GOP are plotting against and attacking the Ron Paul supporters. We need your immediate help to ensure that liberty has a voice and fair influence over the election process. Please click the paypal “donate” button (below) to make a generous donation to help us win our campaign races across the State of Idaho. Monetary donations to precinct candidates do NOT fall under the Sunshine laws, hence they can be anonymous.”

They call this an inaccurate attack…It is not!  It is exactly what the Paul campaign said they are doing! Using the system to their benefit without regard to what is morally right. They use the system once again, in regard to the "Sunshine Laws".

A quick google of what is taking place in Idaho among Paul supporters will reveal they are not backing down from this strategy. While some of the comments on these newspaper and blog pages are over the top, (as they often are from SOME Paul supporters), the intent is clear: this group has no intentions of giving up or backing down.  To back up what is being said in this article, simply read the comments of readers posted to these pages, and you will see what I mean. Most are out of touch, and they continue to blame the establishment for their lack of success. It simply isn’t true.

It’s time for unity, but we are not going to get it. It seems the Paul camp will continue in the same manner that they did in the 2008 election.  Paul actually endorsed the liberal left Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney at one point, before throwing any support to the Republican Party. He eventually told his supporters to cast their votes for the Constitutionalist candidate Charles Baldwin.

So if you hate the Republican Party so much, Dr. Paul, get out of it!! You are not helping this nation by your antics; you are helping destroy it!  It is the height of hypocrisy, in my opinion, and I continue to be disgusted by Ron Paul and his antics.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Further Links (Take your pick!):

“Idaho flashpoint”

Ron Paul's Army

A simple video explanation of the delegate strategy

The Nutshell

A well-written, easy to understand story about the Idaho delegate strategy

Before You Vote...

This video is Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech to AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) last night after his visit with President Obama. Well worth listening to as we consider our Biblical mandate to support Israel. I know you will be impressed with this strong, diplomatic leader that understands the importance of defending his nation.

This video is Ron Paul's view on Iran acquiring nuclear weapons during one of the Presidential debates this winter.

More Topics of Importance

Senator Santorum's Speech at AIPAC - A clear difference.

                            

                    Prime Minister Netanyahu to AIPAC March 2012

 

Topics of Importance

In my quest to share information about Ron Paul’s candidacy for President, I have created 12 topics revealing Paul’s position on each of these issues. They are issues, I believe that are critical to why we should or shouldn’t vote for a particular candidate.  I will continue to update these 12 pages so resources might be readily available for research. There are many like me, it seems, that hope to convince people who are “on the fence” about Ron Paul, why he may NOT be the best candidate for America.  Why do I single out Ron Paul?  Because more than any other candidate, I have found things being said about Ron Paul’s vision for America that simply are not true.  Furthermore, many of what he DOES SAY is radical and I believe dangerous to America. Paul is gaining momentum, I believe, because of a “jump-on-the-band-wagon” effect.  Many voters simply do not have the time, or desire to research deeply our Republican candidates in this primary election. There is much about this candidate if clearly revealed would shock many voters.

Also, his candidacy is changing the outcome of the Republican Primary just as it did in 2008. Ron Paul is one of the main reasons, we ended up with the more liberal John McCain in the last Presidential election. John McCain, by the way, still would have been a much better President than Obama.

But that is water under the bridge, other than we can clearly see the same thing is occurring in this campaign.  Paul has already stated he will not leave the campaign, regardless of his ratings. So far in this campaign, when other primary candidates could not reach more than 10 -12 % in the polls, these candidates graciously bowed out of the campaign; case in point – Rick Perry and Michelle Bachman.  That is as it should be.  But even though Paul has rarely garnered more than 10 or 11 % in the polls, he refuses to leave the primary which is showing to be very detrimental to the Republican Party.  It is also preventing a true conservative for becoming our party’s nomination.  Oh yeah, that’s right; Paul has made it clear he hates the Republican Party. And perhaps he doesn’t want a real conservative to win the nomination.  It has oft been said “Paul is left of Obama on many issues.” That is an easily proven statement.

I will post the topic such as “National Defense” or “Right to Life” etc. Please click on the links below to read the information I have found regarding Ron Paul's views, along with my comments, and the resources I have used to back up my statements.  I will from time to time being adding additional information to each of these pages.

Right to Life

Israel

National Defense

Foreign Policy 

Congressional Record

Faith

Character

Drugs

States Rights

Age

Supporters

Paul's Strategy

By Request

From time to time, I have had a few friends ask me to list my concerns about Ron Paul in one easily accessible place so resources might be readily available for research. Some have requested a place to go for facts that will aid them in explaining why Ron Paul is a problem for America. There are many like me, it seems, that hope to convince people who are “on the fence” about Ron Paul, why he may not be the best candidate for America.

Though I intended this blog to be for all things political as well as for current events, I have also tried to use this blog for the purpose my friends requested.

It seems there is so much to discuss regarding Ron Paul’s candidacy for President of the United States that the facts can be overwhelming and the debate about the executive competency of Ron Paul without end.

I want to make the information needed more concise, and a way to make it easier for people to find the information for which they are looking.  I also want to make sure everything is backed up with trusted resources.  I can find information from both liberal and conservative resources, but since I am a conservative I am more familiar with the conservative resources that are to be trusted.  Therefore, most of my resources will come from conservative newspapers and journalists.  Once in a while, to keep things lively, I may decide to use a liberal resource in a quote or a confirmed fact.

Regardless, one thing I know: one must be very, very careful with the information they find on the internet, television and newspapers. One can find a whole lot of spin, and sometimes downright lies while researching any topic.

I do not believe I can do this better than some of my friends. I do not believe I am always correct. What I do know is that I have the time and desire to research politics that most people do not have. But that doesn’t mean my friends don’t care or aren’t interested.  I am finding they are as concerned as I.  It is those people seeking answers, I hope to help. Again, I am not trying to argue with anyone that has already put their support solidly behind Ron Paul, but I do hope to reach some that are "on the fence" about Ron Paul and explain why I have come to the conclusions I have about this three time Presidential candidate.

I will post the topic such as “National Defense” or “Right to Life” etc. Please click on the links below to read the information I have found regarding Ron Paul's views, along with my comments, and the resources I have used to back up my statements.  I will from time to time being adding additional information to each of these pages.

Right to Life

Israel

National Defense

Foreign Policy 

Congressional Record

Faith

Character

Drugs

States Rights

Age

Supporters

Undermining Our Will

Oh my goodness!!!  Finally someone said what I have been trying to say for the last 4 years!  Finally someone can articulate and pinpoint the danger in a concise, clear way, that I have not been able to successfully do through word or pen.

Please check this out! Click here.

An Element of Truth

Apparently, Ron Paul is pandering to the Latino vote while he campaigns in Nevada. Politico reported some of the off-the-wall comments Paul made while campaigning there.

An on-line journalist that I follow, Joe Newby at the Spokane Examiner is the one that first called my attention to Paul’s statement - basically comparing the treatment of illegal immigrants in the United States to what happened in Nazi Germany. Yep, really.

However, I am afraid Dr. Paul’s comments might reveal more than just an effort to try to garner votes from the high number of Hispanics in Nevada. In fact, there may be a lot more that could be revealed by what the doctor has reportedly said. Personally, I believe these comments by Paul show the deep disregard he has for the Jewish people and the Holocaust that took place in this people's history. In my opinion, Paul, by making these radical statements is actually very close to joining the Holocaust deniers. No one who has a love of Israel or a concern for that nation could use a comparison so atrocious.

Dr. Paul has always managed to excuse his stance on Israel to Christians who might question it, by saying the Constitution does not make us the watch guard of the world.  He convinces Christians looking for a reason to support him, that if America would simply withdraw the foreign aid that we send to Israel’s enemies, then that would be the best way to support Israel. And that statement is absolutely true! However, withdrawing aid from Israel’s enemies does not require that we also withdraw financial support from Israel.  We can stop giving money to enemies of Israel, while still fully supporting the only democracy and our most trusted ally in the Middle East. We do, after all, have a Biblical mandate to support Israel and her people.  Somehow Paul doesn’t get that, nor respect it. 

I believe if we could search Paul’s heart truthfully, we would find a deep-seated hatred of Israel. Why else would he believe it to be ok for Iran to have nuclear weapons, when they have vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the earth? Why else would he suggest we withdraw not only financial support, but strategic support from this country that the Bible says will become the stumbling block of the world? Why else would he be able to so easily dismiss what happened during the Holocaust, as he has done in Nevada and on a number of other occasions? Why does he receive support from questionable newspapers and financial contributors ? Why does he receive money and support from those groups that most openly and aggressively oppose the nation of Israel?

These facts are why I will NEVER support Ron Paul. Some wonder why Joe Newby and others continue to write about Paul rather than simply support with positive comments the candidate of their choice. For me, it is because Paul is getting away with making a number of comments that simply are not true.  Paul has a disturbing history in his political career that has been successfully somewhat buried. And Paul has successfully been able to gain support of a large group of conservative voters that if they knew him for who he really is, in good conscious would not be able to support him.  I believe we have a "jump on the Paul band-wagon" effect that is preventing the best candidate from winning the primary election. We are seeing a replay of the 2008 election.

Paul claims to be the only one that respects the Constitution and that alone is extremely offensive in itself.  While fiscally conservative with some good ideas that contain a lot of truth, Paul is also a social liberal, in conservative sheep’s clothing with outlandish, dangerous ideas on foreign policy. Furthermore, no other candidate blasts America the way Paul does…not even the Obama’s. No other candidate blames America for the ills of the world as Congressman Paul does. I, for one, have had my fill.

I learned a long time ago, that every lie must have an element of truth, to be believed.  Paul appears to be the master of that process. Search a little deeper and one will find things are rarely exactly as he has stated. His statements in Nevada are only one example.

I am tired of this liberal ideologue and some of his supporters bashing conservatives that don't agree with him with labels like RINO and "neo-con". I'm tired of him acting like he is the only true Constitutionalist, when he is also guilty of misrepresentations and interpretations.  His actions and his message, in truth, is one that is especially benefiting the progressive, liberal agenda. If it isn't intentional, it is certainly culminating in the same end result.

Just sayin'!

No Show; No Surprise

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why Ron Paul wouldn’t attend Governor Huckabee’s forum that aired on the Fox news channel tonight.

However, I did try to do a little research to find out if the Paul campaign was giving any kind of answer or legitimate reason.  I couldn’t find an answer. I found comments saying Paul wasn’t invited - not true; I found articles saying he was invited.  Besides Governor Huckabee isn’t stupid - he wouldn’t make the mistake of not inviting him. Some wrote that Paul didn’t attend because he wasn’t in South Carolina at the time – Right; so he isn’t going to make an effort to attend all the debates and forums? Like that’s really smart. Only more excuses from the Paul campaign that appears will say and do anything to defend him.

Believing the explanation from “the horse’s mouth”, Governor Huckabee stated at the onset of the forum that, Ron Paul turned down “repeated invitations” and that he was campaigning in Nevada instead.  The question is then, why didn’t Paul bother to show.

Paul’s disdain for Gov. Huckabee isn’t a secret.  Perhaps, Paul is embarrassed to face Huckabee after the lies he told about him in the 2008 Presidential primaries – one of those untruths being that Gov. Huckabee was anti-home school.  That couldn’t have been further from the truth, yet a lot of Ron Paul supporters were sucked into believing it.

Paul or his campaign has spread the same kind of dishonest rhetoric about Senator Rick Santorum this campaign, saying he is not pro-life and he is anti-second amendment.

This “rumor” really fired me up as I have watched Senator Santorum for many years, and he has always been one of the most consistently conservative members of the Senate. He is probably the most consistently pro-life candidate there is; and he has an A+ record from the National Rifle Association.

I guess what frustrates me more than anything about Paul, is the many areas of deceit he has been caught.  Yet he claims to be the only candidate with any character.  Yeah, he’s a character alright.

Of course, I guess the other reason he didn’t attend could be the fact that South Carolina is known for their evangelical, conservative base. I suspect Paul knows he doesn’t stand a chance in this state.  The polls definitely reveal that fact, with Paul placing 4^th. 

The other thing that really irritated me about Paul and some of his supporters in this forum is that it was arranged to allow questions from voters that were “undecided”, yet it was obvious that there were a few Paul supporters allowed to ask questions. One voter at the end of the forum looked embarrassed when he got caught admitting he was for Ron Paul, when they were all to have stated that they were still undecided voters.

I suspect Paul will do well in the liberal state of Nevada. I just wish the Paul campaign would tell the truth about why Paul wouldn’t attend Huckabee’s forum. More than that, I wish he would tell the truth about who he really is, and quit pretending to be a conservative. His voting record, and his many radical statements clearly show otherwise.  He is conservative on fiscal policy and nothing more.  I prefer truth.

Report Card Revelations

Interesting!  Ron Paul just beat out Obama in the ACLU’s “report card” on civil liberties. To me, with the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) being one of the most “leftist” organizations in existence, this report card only confirms my belief that in some areas, Ron Paul is indeed left of Obama.

And no, I am not impressed with the ACLU’s interpretation of the United States Constitution. This is one of the most detrimental groups there is to our American way of life, and they have long distorted our U. S. Constitution.

Yeah, I know; Paul prides himself on adhering strictly to our Constitution; often times acting like he is the only one that believes in it. He also prides himself on his civil liberties positions. Whatever. But then, there are those newsletters, which are a very troublesome stone for Paul. Revealing a little racism? I’m afraid so.  He denied writing the articles in those letters until video came out revealing that he did indeed know about them.  He, in fact, finally admitted to writing "parts of them”.

Some new information that has recently been reported about Ron Paul’s record in Congress is especially discouraging. Out of more than 20 years of "service" to our country, he has sponsored 620 pieces of legislation. Out of that 620, only 4 possible bills have made it to a vote; and only 1 of his bills has ever passed in the House of Representatives, becoming law.  Oh my goodness!  How has this man been repeatedly re-elected?

Another “news flash” – Ron Paul doesn’t know why he is so popular among young voters, especially those on college campuses. Hmmm…do you think it could be because of his position on legalizing marijuana and other dangerous drugs?  Or maybe, it’s because of his anti-war, anti-military beliefs.  We all know the liberal trend that has continued on college campuses across our nation, especially catching fire in the tumultuous decade of the ‘60’s.  Ok, Dr. Paul, if you want to pretend that you don’t understand why you are getting high marks in polls on college campuses across America, your lack of understanding is just fine with me. But I think I get it. I think in reality, you do, too.

There is more Paul doesn’t understand, I’m afraid; culminating in his recent comment about believing he can’t win the election.  Yes, he said it; I didn’t. When a reporter asked him about what he would do if he won, he simply responded, “Well I will deal with it; that’s a risk I take.”  Something to that effect anyway; I heard it with my own ears, and even though I suspected he had this attitude, it still shocked me to hear him admit it.  He makes these kinds of comments and then he wonders why some don’t take him seriously. He wonders why voters keep saying Paul can’t win! He wonders why some believe he is only in this for the power and glory!

Then there are those like me that have long believed he is only in this contest to divide the Republican Party! I happen to believe he knows full-well what he is doing.  And I merely have to watch what he says and does to come to the conclusions I have.

Nope, I won’t give up; I feel I must help sound this alarm. I believe Paul is dividing conservatives - whether intentionally or not - and he is destroying our chance to restore America.