The establishment media is once again attempting to smear Ron Paul as anti-American following Paul’s simple observation during the debate last night that foreign occupations increase the risk of terrorist attacks, when in reality the Texan Congressman’s views are endorsed by US military personnel more than any other Republican candidate.
“Republican Presidential Candidate Rep. Ron Paul was booed at last night’s CNN/Tea Party debate while explaining his view on why America was attacked on September 11, 2001,” reports ABC News.
The corporate media instantly seized on the boos, made by a gaggle of neo-con “Tea Party” members, as a tool through which to portray Paul as un-American, with one acerbic headline even asking whether the Congressman was defending Al-Qaeda.
It’s a common smear to equate not supporting foreign occupations as anti-American or against conservative principles, despite the fact that the founding fathers consistently warned against becoming involved in foreign entanglements.
But like a lot of the myths circulated by the establishment about Ron Paul, reality reflects a very different picture.
Given the fact that Ron Paul has received more money in donations from active duty military personnel than all of the other Republican candidates combined and more than Barack Obama himself, his views on foreign occupations are supported by the very U.S. troops that neo-cons constantly invoke to support maintaining such foreign occupations.
Paul’s contention that the troops should be brought home from Afghanistan and Iraq, and that US bases around the world should be closed, is supported by those very same troops.
“Paul’s campaign told Politifact that Paul raised $34,480 from people in the military, compared with $19,849 for Obama and $13,848 for the other GOP presidential candidates,” reports USA Today.
“The Center for Responsive Politics says $11,350 of Paul’s military donations come from people who work for the Army. In the 2008 campaign, the center found that individuals employed by the Army, Navy and Air Force were Paul’s top three sources of campaign donations.”
But it’s not just military service people who are growing tired of America’s unaffordable foreign empire. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, conservatives in general are losing their appetite for war.
Only 15 per cent of of likely U.S. Voters think the situation in Afghanistan will improve over the next six months, while more voters than ever before – 59 per cent – now want an immediate troop withdrawal or a firm timetable to be set for ending the occupation. Republicans are more pessimistic than Democrats about the future course of operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
The 59 per cent figure represents a significant swing from less than two years ago in September 2009, when just 39 per cent wanted the troops pulled out of Afghanistan.
Crucially, a slim majority of Republicans now want the troops brought home from Afghanistan, 43 per cent to 42 per cent. Wars launched during the administration of George W. Bush have now become Obama’s wars. Indeed, there are more troops deployed under Obama than there were at any time under Bush.
In addition, a mere 13 per cent of Republicans support US military intervention in Libya to topple Colonel Gaddafi.
The myth that Republican candidates must not deviate from the neo-con dogma of supporting America’s unsustainable foreign occupations and the ludicrous policy of pre-emptive warfare in order to be electable is disappearing fast.
Although a gaggle of self-proclaimed “conservatives,” who in reality have nothing in common with the founding fathers, may have booed Paul’s explanation last night, the majority of Americans, and indeed the majority of US Military servicemen and women, were applauding him.
Article written by Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Filed under Campaign Trail, War by 
The Revolution PAC is on a mission to support the rare political candidate who defends the great American principles in public life. Their intent is to make use of the talents of the rising generation of activists, writers, speakers, graphic designers, and more who are committed to these great principles of the traditional American republic. Already, they have found the talent they need to package this message for the American public. All they need is your support.
While the mainstream media pounds the drum of "Ron Paul cannot win", the truth is Ron Paul can win if the American people will stand for liberty, seek out the truth about the candidates, and support the only candidate that will turn this country back to path of freedom, liberty, and prosperity.
Filed under Campaign Trail by
His responses absolutely make the interview as he gives Chris Wallace (and the voters) a lesson.
Filed under Campaign Trail by
Ron Paul told Lou Dobbs that the inflation tax – printing more money and expanding the monetary base – will result in people going in the street.
Paul made his comment following large demonstrations and riots in Europe in response to the engineered global economic implosion.
In France, on May Day, more than three million people attended 300 rallies against President Nicolas Sarkozy’s economic recovery plan. The demonstrations followed Sarkozy’s announcement that the French government plans to implement austerity measures, including spending cuts and tax increases.
“There’s going to be an inflation tax to hit us and I am just afraid there will be people in the streets when they don’t get what they want,” Paul told the Fox Business Network.
Paul made his comment as Federal Reserve boss Bernanke travels to Jackson Hole, Wyoming, amid rumors that the privately held banker outfit that passes for a federal agency will engage in more quantitative easing, banker-speak for money printing.
Economists predict Bernanke will not announce QE3 at the bankster Economic Symposium in Wyoming, but will be obliged to crank up the printing presses in the near future.
On Friday, Martin Weale, a member of the Bank of England monetary policy committee, signaled that the central bank stands ready to do the same in response to reports of flat GDP growth.
Ron Paul told Infowars.com journalist Robert Wanek at the Iowa State University during the recent Ames straw poll that the federal government is preparing for civil unrest and martial law in the United States.
On August 19, Paul Joseph Watson reported on plans by NYPD to prepare for civil unrest following the riots in the United Kingdom.
After then IMF director Dominique Strauss-Kahn warned of economic riots and widespread civil unrest in December of 2008, police departments around the country began to prepare for violence.
As we reported earlier this month, talk of CONPLAN 3502 circulated in the media following the UK riots. The secret Pentagon Civil Disturbance Operations plan calls for the round-up and detention of protesters and activists following a national emergency.
Filed under Economy by
TIME magazine has published a five page spread on Ron Paul’s presidential campaign that hits newsstands yesterday. While some are declaring this a lifting of the veil on media coverage of the Congressman, the reality is that the piece will go out of its way to convince readers that Paul is a fad and has no chance of winning.
More on TIME Magazine Pens Five Page Spread To Convince America Ron Paul Can’t Win
Filed under Campaign Trail by
In Part 2 of this Special Report, Alex speaks with Lew Rockwell on the Ron Paul 2012 phenomenon, the entrance of establishment favorite Gov. Rick Perry into the race, the End of the Dollar and more.
Filed under Campaign Trail by
Ron Paul warns of a monetary collapse and ensuing social unrest. He also warns of possible government actions.
Filed under Civil Liberties by
Recent incidents of violence in Norway and London have made us understandably uncomfortable here at home, as many fear that a worsening economy will lead to violence and unrest in American cities. This is why Congress must view the economy as its first priority and a matter of national security: unless and until we get our fiscal house in order to foster economic growth, civil society will continue to deteriorate.
The fundamental lesson every American should learn from these incidents is that government cannot protect us. No matter how many laws we pass, no matter how many police or federal agents we put on the streets, a determined individual or group can still cause great harm. Both Norway and England have strict gun control laws, and London in particular has security cameras monitoring nearly all public areas. But laws and spy cameras are useless in the face of lawless mobs or sick mass killers. Only private individuals on the scene could have prevented or lessened these tragedies. And we should remember that theft, arson, and property damage were not the only criminal acts in London–innocent bystanders were assaulted and killed as well. In those instances deadly force used in self-defense would have been fully justified.
Perhaps the only good that can come from these terrible events is a reinforced understanding that we as individuals are responsible for our safety and the safety of our families. This means, frankly, that we must safely own and use firearms to deter or prevent criminal assaults on our homes and persons. It is absurd to think police or government agents can protect 310 million Americans around the clock.
Thanks to our media and many government officials, however, Americans have become conditioned to view the state as our protector and the solution to every problem. Whenever something terrible happens, especially when it becomes a prominent news story, people reflexively demand that government do something. This impulse almost always leads to bad laws, more debt, and the loss of liberty. It is completely at odds with the best American traditions of self-reliance and individual responsibility.
Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, and metal detectors? Do we want to imprison every disturbed or alienated individual who fantasizes about violence? Do we really believe government can provide total security? Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security?
Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference unless they use force or fraud against others. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons.
Filed under Civil Liberties by
I figure Ron Paul supporters must feel pretty low these past few days. The attention Paul enjoyed on network news after the first debate in South Carolina was stupendous but for the past few weeks, Ron Paul seems to be a ghost on the news channels. This made me wonder why. Why was mainstream media so obviously ignoring this potential candidate? Could it be that Paul's radical message is a bit too far off the reservation to be taken seriously?
After President Obama gave the order to raid a sovereign nation and kill a known enemy of the state, Ron Paul said that he would not have issued the kill order on Bin Laden. That's right, if Ron Paul were president at the time, Bin Laden would still be alive. Now a statement like that can ruin a guy's chances to get nominated if not tarred and feathered by Rush Limbaugh himself.
Never mind that invading a sovereign nation and starting a firefight means breaking a few important international laws and is pretty much an act of war against the people and government of Pakistan. Never mind that the international community sees us as imperialists who feel we can do anything we want to anyone we want anywhere we want.
Never mind that capturing Bin Laden alive and trying him in court is the only honest American thing to do. Never mind that killing Bin Laden is a magnificent waste of intelligence information that may have saved countless American lives.
You see, there is a beautiful and true logic behind Ron Paul's policies. Going in to kill Bin Laden was a terrible waste of resources. What good is he to us dead? Oh sure we get to celebrate, dance in the streets and act like hyenas but that has put a serious strain on our already tumultuous relationship with Pakistan while telling the world that sovereignty means absolutely nothing to us.
Imagine a few Chinese military helicopters circling your neighborhood and finally hovering above one of your neighbor's houses. Imagine black-garbed storm troopers zipping down from those helicopters to engage in a firefight with whoever is inside. It's a kill mission so just go in blazing. The point is, America would want someone's head on a platter if such an infraction on our sovereignty were committed. There would be no acceptable excuse or reason for it.
Mainstream media loves to take these wacky sounding statements from Ron Paul because they hurt his chances to be president if they do not allow him to fully explain the logic behind his statements. My thought is that if Ron Paul really wants to be nominated, he better keep those radical statements to himself until he can put them out there with a full explanation of it.
The trouble is, Ron Paul is just too honest a man to even hide the truth or his feelings even if it means throwing himself into the fire. When asked questions, he will answer them with honesty and truth in his heart. He will not refuse to answer until his political advisers can give him an answer to spew forth like all the other candidates do. He will give you his opinion when you ask it and if that's not good enough, then so be it.
Maybe America isn't ready for a Ron Paul presidency but it sure would be nice to feel like our leader was honest and brave enough to tell us how things are for a change. Who knows what we could accomplish with a president that didn't treat us like a foe, or worse yet, children. It would be nice if our President felt as if he were a part of our American community rather than ruler of it. I think America is actually in dire need of a leader like that.
If you are a Ron Paul supporter, you will be delighted by the beautiful and patriotic Ron Paul Shirts and Tea Party shirts available at CuriousInkling.com
Tom Robinson is a writer, designer, publisher and maker of the best chili you can find anywhere this side of the Mississippi River.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Thomas_C_Robinson
Filed under Campaign Trail by
The establishment effort to keep Presidential candidate Ron Paul out of the public conscience has failed and desperation tactics have set in.
Politico has taken it upon itself to dredge up an old and thoroughly debunked story in an attempted attack on the Congressman’s character.
“…there are reasons why Paul, and his fan base, might be grateful for the minimalist coverage that he’s received,” writes Maggie Haberman.
“… a more thorough vetting of the kind that mainstream candidates generally receive would invariably lead to some of the newsletters that bore his name (if not his byline or direct authorship) decades earlier.”
Haberman links to a three year old New Republic report which suggests that Ron Paul was responsible for racist and bigoted newsletters that were written in his name in the 1990s.
This is the exact same desperate tactic that was employed when Paul ran for president in 2008.
Amongst the ludicrous smears directed toward Paul at the time by The New Republic was the claim that Paul had referred to Martin Luther King as a “gay pedophile”.
In reality Paul has noted King as one of his heroes on many occasions. Indeed, the only time that the Congressman has ever voted for something that is not explicitly authorized in the Constitution, it was for America to recognize Martin Luther King day as a public holiday.
“Once again, the establishment is trying to flog a lame, tired 20 year old story that has been explained ad naseum in campaign after campaign.” writes Paul’s campaign adviser Jesse Benton.
“These items were not written by Dr. Paul and they are anathema to belief in human liberty.” Benton added.
Similar tactics were employed by the establishment last year, in a last ditch effort to reverse Rand Paul’s exponential popularity surge. It failed miserably as Congressman Ron Paul’s son comfortably won his Kentucky Senate seat.
The fact that the media has dredged up this rotting corpse of a non-story AGAIN in an attempt to smear Paul indicates complete desperation and only serves to highlight that unlike most of his political opponents, Ron Paul’s record and his character remain clean as a whistle.
The Congressman appeared on Fox News yesterday to discuss the media attempts to derail his campaign. Paul also conducted a longer sit down interview on the subject with KTRK-TV in Houston. Watch both these interviews below.
Article written by Steve Watson
Infowars.com
Aug 17, 2011
Filed under Campaign Trail by
Recent Comments