The [Ron Paul] Revolution Is Underway

eyer

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Posts
21,263
The Revolution Is Underway

by Lt Col (USAF-Ret) Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D.

The ongoing media blackout on all things Ron Paul is somewhat curious. One blogger calls the Meet the Press crowd knuckleheaded for their omissive reporting of winners and losers. Headlines blare, "Bachmann First, Pawlenty Third!" as if, by not saying Ron Paul’s name and crediting him with his earned reward, they can create an alter-reality.

Second is not first. Bachmann’s and Dr. Ron Paul’s 28.6% and 27.7%, respectively – less than a percentage apart, is a great horse race. Bachmann won by a nose, they would say. If this were the Kentucky Derby, we’d be on the edge of our seats focused entirely on Paul and Bachmann, not focusing excessively about horses at the back of the back, or those hoping to race later.

Real horse races start off at the same point in time and space. Bachmann may have had a bit of a head start in Iowa – although familiarity may also breed contempt, so the degree of that advantage is not known. The Bachmann campaign’s purchase and distribution of 6,000 straw poll voting tickets (where a third of those went uncast) also sheds real light on the fundamental power of the very different Paul strategy, and the wide and compelling appeal of his liberty, peace, and small government message.

The omission and outright denial of the intense and growing Ron Paul phenomenon is useful because it tells us many things – some we knew, and some we may not realize.

Mainstream media and the GOP itself seems to be ignoring that the Iowa Straw poll showed, for the first time in this poll’s history, a whopping 56% of the voters chose budget hawks, with a proven record of voting "No" on more borrowing. The Cut, Cap, and Balance baloney was pushed by the Republicans in Name Only on every other party member. Paul and Bachmann were among a handful that resisted. Iowa voters, in a state as heavily subsidized and dependent on federal largesse as any other state, seem to appreciate the need for Washington to spend less, borrow less, promise less, receive less.

Media analysts are also not talking about the fact that Paul and Bachmann are popular because they are seen as calmly uncompromising. In Dr. Paul’s case, we have a wise, kind and gentlemanly statesman who is always gentle in his policy rebukes, preferring to educate everyone he can on the hows and the whys of limited government. Bachmann, to her credit, promotes an image of a politician who will hold to her principles, not bend to the party elders, or to the good old boys in the House of Representatives. She has been ladylike in her reaction to a number of slights from her fellow GOP’ers, the paranoid left, and government-co-opted media. Many of the attacks on Bachmann have been sexist, related to her photogenicism, her aches and pains, her husband’s activities, and her similarities to Sarah Palin rather than whether her candidacy can be categorized as neoconservative, social conservative or populist.

The Iowa straw poll also indicates that there is major division in the GOP – conservatives in and out of the Republican Party, independents, constitutionalists and libertarians find themselves searching for representation. These people – the majority of voters in this country when taken altogether – want a kind of honest simplicity in their politicians. This majority of Americans believe that war should be fought only in defense of America, and that lobbyists, massive international banks and corporations should not be creating policy in D.C. This majority of Americans value the idea of independence and self-ownership. They also value the idea of community helping those in need. This majority of Americans want an equal opportunity on an even playing field, and I suspect, more than anything they want their money’s worth from our extremely expensive federal government. They want to know that the government won’t inflate away their entitlements, but they also want to know that their children and grandchildren will not suffer for decades of baby boomer excess now that the bills are coming due.

This may be a major reason for media and GOP silence – and outright mockery – of Ron Paul and his rock solid and growing constituency across the land. Paul’s popularity today is glaring proof of American disgust with years of Republican Party lies about their frugality, honesty, common sense, and good stewardship of the Republic. Of course, many who fell for Obama’s program in 2008 are also disgusted, and they now see that most politicians and presidents say whatever they think we wish to hear, only to conform with an inherited status quo, and willingly compromise, sit, roll and beg.

But there is another reason for the noticeable government and mainstream media silence on Ron Paul’s repeated success, and his ever-growing popularity. Ron Paul can win, and if he achieved the GOP nomination he would be our next president. Ron Paul can cut short what will otherwise be an eight-year term of Obama, and end what has been a frantic 12 year federal spending spree that will ultimately lead to serious default, renegotiation and writing down of major categories of debt, and an inflation-ravaged entitlement collapse at home. Gold, guns and survival skills, private security forces, underground food networks, and an explosion in decentralized alternate energies – along with a collapse of governing structures, services, and public schools in many rural or otherwise under populated areas – all this is coming. Leaders who understand how this future was constructed, leaders who engender trust and confidence, and leaders who can wisely and quickly oversee the federal retrenchment that must and will occur – such leaders are few and far between.

Ron Paul is such a leader. We see the field – it contains the sadly overwhelmed Obama, as arrogant, as fascist-friendly and as warlike as FDR, and all the strident Keynesians clawing to the microphone, calling themselves Republicans, and Ron Paul. Of all the men or women we could choose to gently deliver this country through its very difficult rebirth into a new constitutionalism, a new liberty, and a new era of prosperity – Ron Paul is the people’s choice. If the people were truly free to choose, they would choose Ron Paul. This is the idea that so terrifies the parasitical political class, and its media handmaids. They cannot bear to say his name. But you can trust that they are closely watching the Ron Paul revolution unfold across the country, as they nervously feed on the decimated and rotting carcass of a once proud Republic.

Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D. is a retired USAF lieutenant colonel and is currently running for Congress in Virginia's 6th district.

http://lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski272.html
 
I was watching some news blather show the other night, this one commentator's face became visibly pained when the subject of Paul came up.

It was almost funny how he literally couldn'ts hide his distain for Paul, his jaw tensed up, his lip got all funny, even his voice changed as he called him all kinds of names and said he was basically an unelectable loon. If he's just an unelectable "loon" um, why get so psychosomatic about it? :D
 
During the recent Ames, Iowa straw poll gathering, Presidential candidate Ron Paul was asked:

"Do you think Americans are justified in thinking that HR 645 could lead to detainment camps for American citizens during martial law?"

Paul: "I don't know those numbers; you'll have to tell me what it is."

"Yeah, it's the Emergency Center Establishment..."

Paul: "Yeah, I know that's their goal. They're setting up the stage for violence in this country; no doubt about it."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiCdMFB2iPw&feature=player_embedded
 
Paul vs. Kucinich, 2012!

Time for real politicing, not pandering.
 
We see the field – it contains the sadly overwhelmed Obama, as arrogant, as fascist-friendly

It actually wasn't a bad c+p. Right up to there. Pity, because now the author just looks like another fucking idiot.
 
Ron Paul has a huge problem with the press corp and the talk radio people.



His followers. They are fucking rabid, relentless, and vicious.

That's why you see media types get those "looks."



They know the calls, letters and emails are on the way...
 
I'd say that as much of the "Ron Paul Revolution" as was ever going to take place has already occured, since his anti-Fed, Mises.org, goldbuggery is now G(T)OP writ.

The man himself is of course unelectable.
 
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else. ... there is only one remedy: time. People have to learn, through hard experience, the enormous disadvantage there is in plundering one another."
Frédéric Bastiat

__________________
Why can't Liberals (, Blue Dogs and Republican moderates) stomach the Tea Party?
Because it requires a strong Constitution!

A_J, the Stupid
 
Ron Paul and I have a few things in common. We both like the outdoors, we both like guns, we both enjoy barbeque. We also have the same chance of getting elected as president.

To all the people who think he has golden testicles and will usher in a new age remind me how many primary states did he win?
 
The reason why Paul is more popular this presidential election cycle than last is that the country's situation has become closer to what he's consistently spouted (especially financial developments).

And, if you consider that of the 16,000+ votes cast in the traditionally considered uberconservative straw poll in Ames, Iowa, Bachmann and Paul - the top 2 vote getters separated by only 152 votes - received almost 60% of the total over 7 other candidates...

...and that they are the only two Republican presidential candidates who stated they weren't in favor of raising the debt ceiling, and actually didn't vote for that legislation.

I believe more Americans are moving away from the corrupted political axiom that the most important thing is winning, no matter the compromises that must be made to do so (look at the party euphoria of Obama winning, and now the dissatisfaction of the same voters with the compromises they believe he's made on the actual job; see the exact same scenarios re: both Bushs).

More and more Americans understand that whoever wins isn't the crucial thing anymore...

...it's how true to the principles a candidate stays to what s/he actually runs on that really matter.

If that trend continues and grows, our political process will automatically mature because of the natural lessening of the current, collective, widespread disingenuousness...
 
Our country's founders cherished liberty, not democracy.
- Ron Paul

Liberty for the Ron Paul Generation

"The stark reality about the Ron Paul revolution is that the power elites could not survive in a society based upon individual liberty. Nevertheless, this statement does not imply that a Paul presidency would guarantee the elimination of the oligarchy. The faint memory of what a free nation could be or even what our country once was, could be revived under certain circumstances. Imagine the abolishment of the Federal Reserve and the fractional debt created money system. Consider a non-interventionist foreign policy that allows for actual national defense and secures the borders. Or, best of all, a limited government culture that is based upon the principle that government exists to serve citizens in their pursuit of freedom. Thomas Jefferson’s soul lives within the Ron Paul generation."

More @

http://www.batr.org/totalitariancollectivism/082111.html

The Unofficial Ron Paul 2008 Campaign Song

He's got brains and he's got balls...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L-t_YD-sDhw#!
 
The Revolution Is Underway

by Lt Col (USAF-Ret) Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D.

The ongoing media blackout on all things Ron Paul is somewhat curious. One blogger calls the Meet the Press crowd knuckleheaded for their omissive reporting of winners and losers. Headlines blare, "Bachmann First, Pawlenty Third!" as if, by not saying Ron Paul’s name and crediting him with his earned reward, they can create an alter-reality.

Second is not first. Bachmann’s and Dr. Ron Paul’s 28.6% and 27.7%, respectively – less than a percentage apart, is a great horse race. Bachmann won by a nose, they would say. If this were the Kentucky Derby, we’d be on the edge of our seats focused entirely on Paul and Bachmann, not focusing excessively about horses at the back of the back, or those hoping to race later.

Real horse races start off at the same point in time and space. Bachmann may have had a bit of a head start in Iowa – although familiarity may also breed contempt, so the degree of that advantage is not known. The Bachmann campaign’s purchase and distribution of 6,000 straw poll voting tickets (where a third of those went uncast) also sheds real light on the fundamental power of the very different Paul strategy, and the wide and compelling appeal of his liberty, peace, and small government message.

The omission and outright denial of the intense and growing Ron Paul phenomenon is useful because it tells us many things – some we knew, and some we may not realize.

Mainstream media and the GOP itself seems to be ignoring that the Iowa Straw poll showed, for the first time in this poll’s history, a whopping 56% of the voters chose budget hawks, with a proven record of voting "No" on more borrowing. The Cut, Cap, and Balance baloney was pushed by the Republicans in Name Only on every other party member. Paul and Bachmann were among a handful that resisted. Iowa voters, in a state as heavily subsidized and dependent on federal largesse as any other state, seem to appreciate the need for Washington to spend less, borrow less, promise less, receive less.

Media analysts are also not talking about the fact that Paul and Bachmann are popular because they are seen as calmly uncompromising. In Dr. Paul’s case, we have a wise, kind and gentlemanly statesman who is always gentle in his policy rebukes, preferring to educate everyone he can on the hows and the whys of limited government. Bachmann, to her credit, promotes an image of a politician who will hold to her principles, not bend to the party elders, or to the good old boys in the House of Representatives. She has been ladylike in her reaction to a number of slights from her fellow GOP’ers, the paranoid left, and government-co-opted media. Many of the attacks on Bachmann have been sexist, related to her photogenicism, her aches and pains, her husband’s activities, and her similarities to Sarah Palin rather than whether her candidacy can be categorized as neoconservative, social conservative or populist.

The Iowa straw poll also indicates that there is major division in the GOP – conservatives in and out of the Republican Party, independents, constitutionalists and libertarians find themselves searching for representation. These people – the majority of voters in this country when taken altogether – want a kind of honest simplicity in their politicians. This majority of Americans believe that war should be fought only in defense of America, and that lobbyists, massive international banks and corporations should not be creating policy in D.C. This majority of Americans value the idea of independence and self-ownership. They also value the idea of community helping those in need. This majority of Americans want an equal opportunity on an even playing field, and I suspect, more than anything they want their money’s worth from our extremely expensive federal government. They want to know that the government won’t inflate away their entitlements, but they also want to know that their children and grandchildren will not suffer for decades of baby boomer excess now that the bills are coming due.

This may be a major reason for media and GOP silence – and outright mockery – of Ron Paul and his rock solid and growing constituency across the land. Paul’s popularity today is glaring proof of American disgust with years of Republican Party lies about their frugality, honesty, common sense, and good stewardship of the Republic. Of course, many who fell for Obama’s program in 2008 are also disgusted, and they now see that most politicians and presidents say whatever they think we wish to hear, only to conform with an inherited status quo, and willingly compromise, sit, roll and beg.

But there is another reason for the noticeable government and mainstream media silence on Ron Paul’s repeated success, and his ever-growing popularity. Ron Paul can win, and if he achieved the GOP nomination he would be our next president. Ron Paul can cut short what will otherwise be an eight-year term of Obama, and end what has been a frantic 12 year federal spending spree that will ultimately lead to serious default, renegotiation and writing down of major categories of debt, and an inflation-ravaged entitlement collapse at home. Gold, guns and survival skills, private security forces, underground food networks, and an explosion in decentralized alternate energies – along with a collapse of governing structures, services, and public schools in many rural or otherwise under populated areas – all this is coming. Leaders who understand how this future was constructed, leaders who engender trust and confidence, and leaders who can wisely and quickly oversee the federal retrenchment that must and will occur – such leaders are few and far between.

Ron Paul is such a leader. We see the field – it contains the sadly overwhelmed Obama, as arrogant, as fascist-friendly and as warlike as FDR, and all the strident Keynesians clawing to the microphone, calling themselves Republicans, and Ron Paul. Of all the men or women we could choose to gently deliver this country through its very difficult rebirth into a new constitutionalism, a new liberty, and a new era of prosperity – Ron Paul is the people’s choice. If the people were truly free to choose, they would choose Ron Paul. This is the idea that so terrifies the parasitical political class, and its media handmaids. They cannot bear to say his name. But you can trust that they are closely watching the Ron Paul revolution unfold across the country, as they nervously feed on the decimated and rotting carcass of a once proud Republic.

Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D. is a retired USAF lieutenant colonel and is currently running for Congress in Virginia's 6th district.

http://lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski272.html

President Romney will nominate Ron Paul to the U.S. Supreme Court.
 
Paul and Romney are destined to be FOX contributors like Huckabee and Palin.
 
I'm all for the Libertarian platform (well, maybe half of it, more than any other party), but Ron Paul is probably the more boring person in politics. Sorry, you Paulbots, but he is not a leader.
 
The most Constitutional candidate of them all?

Ron Paul: "Let The People Who Have Lived Beyond Their Means Go Bankrupt; Let The Liquidation Occur"

Presidential candidate on FEMA, government intervention, the Federal Reserve, Libya and the Constitution: "We are out of money. This country is bankrupt."

Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) appeared on "FOX News Sunday" for his turn in the show's continuing series of interviewing Republican presidential candidates vying for the party's nomination.

The segment began with Ron Paul giving his opinion on FEMA and what the federal government's response to a natural disaster should be.

Rep. Paul trashed FEMA as "deeply flawed" and continues the path of dependency on the government. "It's a system of bureaucratic central economic planning, which is a fallacy that is deeply flawed. FEMA has been around since 1978. It has one of the worst reputations for a bureaucracy ever," Mr. Paul said. "I want to transition out of this dependency on the federal government."

Ron Paul says the states should decide if they need federal help instead of the government forcing itself on states that are threatened by natural disasters.

"We are out of money. This country is bankrupt," Paul stressed after explaining FEMA was in "big trouble financially" as well as the federal government itself.

Paul says the U.S. intervening in Libya is unconstitutional, again stressing that the nation is bankrupt.

Moderator Chris Wallace displays the Gallup poll showing Mr. Paul in third place nationally in the Republican primary with 13% and receiving 45% to President Obama's 47% in the general election. Paul is asked to explain why he is resonating with Americans.

Chris Wallace: "Your libertarian views are certainly somewhat unconventional but they have picked up growing support and lets take a look at the numbers if we can. [poll shown]

"Question, what's going on here? Why are you gaining traction this year?"

Rep. Ron Paul: "Well because it's a good idea and it's the American ideal. But I'm fascinated with your word unconventional. Isn't it strange that we can apply that word to freedom, and liberty, and the Constitution, limited government and a balanced budget?

'You're proposing this unconventional idea of government!' Well, I think you're right about it. Under today's circumstances it has been unconventional for probably 50 years. But right now, the Tea Party movement and the Independents in this country and the people who are caring about our bankruptcy, they think what we had is unconventional with regards to our Constitution and the principles of liberty.

"So, yes, people are waking up and they're saying 'Yeah, Ron Paul's right. Why are we fighting all these undeclared wars? Why do we have a Federal Reserve that bails out the rich and dumps on the poor? And why is it that deficits don't really matter and politicians just stand around and talk that they're going to nibble away at a budget deficit that is 10 years out.' So, no, this is a very popular philosophy.

It is not my philosophy, it is the philosophy of the Constitution. It's the philosophy of liberty, property rights and not dependency on government. That's the big thing. People are supposed to assume the responsibility for themselves in a free society.'



Ron Paul responded to a common criticism that 'if he hates the government so much, why does he want to be president.' Here's what the Congressman said:

"Yes, I am in it to win it. … I want a new approach, at least from current standards for the presidency. I want to obey the Constitution and follow its very great restrictions on the government. The Constitution was written to restrict the government, not to restrict the people. Now its turned around: We use government to restrict the people in all matters. So, I would like to reverse that."



Candidate Paul continued his criticism of the Federal Reserve, the central bank of the United States. Paul, who believes the Fed is unconstitutional, tells them to get rid of artificially low interest rates, quit printing money and stop bailing their "buddies" out:

"Take your hands off of it. Let the people take care of it. Let the people who have lived beyond their means let them go bankrupt. Let the liquidation occur. Get rid of the malinvestment (artificially low interest rates and printing of money) like we did in 1921. We recovered. It's not, it's hardly even in our textbooks about the Depression of 1921 which was a natural consequence of the inflation for World War I.

"So, we want our hands off. The depression lasted 17 years because we wouldn't do that. Japan, has had 'hands on.' They've been in the doldrums for 20 years and so, we're now into this one. It's a lot more than 5 years, we've basically been in it over 10 years that our economy has been slipping. So, they would say 'hands off, give us a sound currency, free up the markets, property rights, enforce contracts. And make sure people go bankrupt when they're bankrupt. And don't bail out their buddies. Don't let the Federal Reserve create money out of thin air and bail out their buddies.

"The most important thing about Austrian economics is the artificially low interest rates which cause business people, savers and consumers to do the wrong things. They make mistakes. It's sort of like a price control that causes all the problems."

Video and article here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...ns_go_bankrupt_let_the_liquidation_occur.html

Why would I totally rather read the transcript...

...than watch/hear him speak?
 
A blast from the past (April 16, 2002)...

The Founding Fathers Were Right About Foreign Affairs

by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX)

April 16, 2002

Last week I appeared on a national television news show to discuss recent events in the Middle East. During the show I merely suggested that there are two sides to the dispute, and that the focus of American foreign policy should be the best interests of America – not Palestine or Israel. I argued that American interests are best served by not taking either side in this ancient and deadly conflict, as Washington and Jefferson counseled when they warned against entangling alliances. I argued against our crazy policy of giving hundred of billions of dollars in unconstitutional foreign aid and military weapons to both sides, which only intensifies the conflict and never buys peace. My point was simple: we should follow the Constitution and stay out of foreign wars.

I was immediately attacked for offering such heresy. We've reached the point where virtually everyone in Congress, the administration, and the media blindly accepts that America must become involved (financially and militarily) in every conflict around the globe. To even suggest otherwise in today's political climate is to be accused of "aiding terrorists." It's particularly ironic that so many conservatives in America, who normally adopt an "America first" position, cannot see the obvious harm that results from our being dragged time and time again into an intractable and endless Middle East war. The empty justification is always that America is the global superpower, and thus has no choice but to police the world.

The Founding Fathers saw it otherwise. Jefferson summed up the noninterventionist foreign policy position perfectly in his 1801 inaugural address: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none." How many times have we all heard these wise words without taking them to heart? How many champion Jefferson and the Constitution, but conveniently ignore both when it comes to American foreign policy? Washington similarly urged that the US must "Act for ourselves and not for others," by forming an "American character wholly free of foreign attachments." Since so many on Capitol Hill apparently now believe Washington was wrong, they should at least have the intellectual honesty to admit it next time his name is being celebrated.

In fact, when I mentioned Washington the other guest on the show quickly repeated the tired cliche that "We don't live in George Washington's times." Yet if we accept this argument, what other principles from that era should we discard? Should we give up the First amendment because times have changed? How about the rest of the Bill of Rights? It's hypocritical and childish to dismiss certain founding principles simply because a convenient rationale is needed to justify foolish policies today. The principles enshrined in the Constitution do not change. If anything, today's more complex world cries out for the moral clarity provided by a noninterventionist foreign policy.

It's easy to dismiss the noninterventionist view as the quaint aspiration of men who lived in a less complicated world, but it's not so easy to demonstrate how our current policies serve any national interest at all. Perhaps an honest examination of the history of American interventionism in the 20th century, from Korea to Vietnam to Kosovo to the Middle East, would reveal that the Founding Fathers foresaw more than we think.

http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul30.html
 
During the recent Ames, Iowa straw poll gathering, Presidential candidate Ron Paul was asked:

"Do you think Americans are justified in thinking that HR 645 could lead to detainment camps for American citizens during martial law?"

Paul: "I don't know those numbers; you'll have to tell me what it is."

"Yeah, it's the Emergency Center Establishment..."

Paul: "Yeah, I know that's their goal. They're setting up the stage for violence in this country; no doubt about it."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiCdMFB2iPw&feature=player_embedded

Who's "they"?
 
I liked this one.

Better Broads make prettier porno propaganda.

One thing I never hear from any of the candidates hopefuls is, the Presidents role as executive of the Law. He is the one who must supervise the Atty General and the Justice Department, so he is ultimately responsible to see that the Law is respected by all.

As we have seen, the really high classed criminals are seldom punished, due to Appeals, delaying tactics and any number of excuses. I offer the Bankers who drove our economy into the ditch and then wanted us to make sure they didn't miss their performance bonuses. Not one of the Casino of Wall Street operators is in the street for that fuck up. It's as if the SEC and the rest of the Regulatory Bureaucracy, was working for the Banks?
 
I was watching some news blather show the other night, this one commentator's face became visibly pained when the subject of Paul came up.

It was almost funny how he literally couldn'ts hide his distain for Paul, his jaw tensed up, his lip got all funny, even his voice changed as he called him all kinds of names and said he was basically an unelectable loon. If he's just an unelectable "loon" um, why get so psychosomatic about it? :D

It's not Paul, it's his supporters.

They are loud, rude and come off, in their passion, as absolute lunatics...

They hound the media with the same plaintiff wail every election cycle, "Why don't you pay more attention to DOCTOR Paul..."
 
Back
Top