Only The Truth Will Do

Economy

2011-08-21T07:20:00.000-07:00

2008-07-30T17:19:00.000-07:00

HOW LONG DOES THE USA HAVE?

2008-02-12T02:47:00.001-08:00

This is the most interesting thing I've read in a long time. The sad thing about it, you can see it coming.

I have always heard about this democracy countdown. It is interesting to see it in print. God help us, not that we deserve it.

How Long Do We Have?

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'

'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.'

'From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.'

'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years'

'During those 200 years, those
nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;

2. From spiritual faith to great courage;

3. From courage to liberty;

4. From liberty to abundance;

5. From abundance to complacency;

6. From complacency to apathy;

7. From apathy to dependence;

8. From dependence back into bondage'

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:

Number of States won by:
Gore: 19
Bush: 29

Square miles of land won by:
Gore: 580,000
Bush: 2,427,000

Population of counties won by:
Gore: 127 million
Bush: 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Gore: 13.2
Bush: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: 'In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country.
Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..' Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the 'complacency and apathy' phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the 'governmental dependency' phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.

If you are in favor of this then delete this message if you are not then Pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.
Thanks for reading.

This is Super

2008-02-07T05:21:00.000-08:00

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

The Super Tuesday Winner

PLEASE DIGG THIS STORY TO SPREAD THE WORD TO OTHER SUPPORTERS!!! =========>>>>>

So what is the strategy for Super Tuesday? Who will win BIG on today's Super Tuesday of voting? Will it be Senator McCain? (The crowd begins to cheer!) Will it be Governor Romney? (The crowd continues to cheer!) How about Governor Huckabee? (The crowd cheers again!) Or how about that US Constitutional guy... err... what's his name... Congressman... oh yah, Ron Paul? (The crowd starts to laugh!) -- Yes, sounds familiar, right? And so the media continues to report "who won what" and so on and so forth, with of course, no mentioning of that silly Congressman anywhere.

And as the Ron Paul supporters continue to fight back their tears while questioning, "How can this be? I don't get it! I thought we'd make a dent by now?!!", the Ron Paul Headquarters begins to board the "The Ron Paul Express Train", with nothing but confident smiles, because after all, you need a freight train to carry the message of freedom, and more importantly... ALL THE DELEGATES THAT COME WITH IT!!!

"I don't understand -- what do you mean? He lost the delegates in the states because FOX NEWS reported it that way!" Yes, I know... and they also reported that Al Gore won as President -- or have you forgotten? Isn't it funny how IGNORANT Fox News really is? Well, I say ignorant and maybe that isn't really fair -- so let's just say that they choose to show their viewers what they want the people to see. You see, the results we are seeing on TV is not really what is actually occurring, but the media likes to "dumb it down" for America because it would take too much time to explain how the Delegates really choose their candidate, and so they try and keep it simple. And many people like simple -- because simple is good. Heck, I like simple too. However, sometimes keeping things too simple, as is the case with an election, can be very misleading. Yes I know, it sounds complicated and I was once there myself -- so allow me to further explain.

Have you heard of the expression that all of this is really a "Beauty Contest?" Well, this is true, because nothing is set in stone yet. The reason why the media is keeping it simple is because MANY of the states are a winner-take-all state, meaning if a candidate wins the popular vote of the state, they get to keep all the delegates that come with that state -- however, what the media isn't telling you (because statistically speaking, it's highly unlikely) is that ANY DELEGATE can change their mind and vote for whomever they want when it comes time at the convention -- which is when the voting REALLY MATTERS.

"I see. But I still don't understand the whole primary/caucus thing, choosing delegates and how or why it's important?" Let me break that down for you in a nutshell.

First, let me describe what a Delegate is. Delegates are the people who you trust to do the voting at the GOP convention on your party's behalf, so to speak. So basically, you vote on a delegate who supports the candidate you want to win. Anyone can be a delegate as long they fulfill the requirements set out by the state. If you want to be a delegate (which is important to the Ron paul campaign), you can just announce it at the caucus meeting. But you have to bring enough people to vote for you to be a delegate. The more delegates you have in a district, the better, because then there are caucuses for state delegates -- whereby all the district delegates vote on who will be a state delegates. States are assigned a certain number of "state delegates" to represent the state, which is what the whole "Beauty Contest" is about -- it sort of help determines which candidate will receive those delegates. Since many states are a "winner takes all" -- this means that all the delegates will go to the popular vote winner, whereas some states award delegates by percentages.

A caucus is basically a convention held in districts whereby party members gather to hear speeches made about the candidates. The people that attend the caucus (which can be ANYONE) then vote for delegates to represent the candidates at the party's convention. Each district has a certain number of delegates, which depends on who gets voted by the people. State rules and regulations do vary, as some only allow voters to participate in their party’s primary (such as you must be registered as a republican to vote in the republican primaries), while other states have no party restrictions and allow voters to participate in any single primary they choose. Now this is important to understand -- because the more delegates your candidate has, the better. And in MOST (if not all) situations, the turnout of these caucuses are spread so thin because very few people show up to be a delegate, that someone can utterly "steal" the victory away from the popular vote winner (if awarded by percentage) because they had more delegates in a certain district representing them. An example would be Obama in Nevada, who lost by popular vote, but actually received more delegates because the districts by which he won had more delegates than Clinton did. But we'll come back to this a little later.

Now a primary is what most of us are used to. Voters go to the polls, select their candidate and help determine the percentage of the state's delegates. The person who wins the state (if by the winner-take-all policy) supposedly wins all the delegates too -- but here's the rub... do they really win all the delegates? In a typical situation, this is likely the case. The percentages of a state's delegates are broken down to show how many delegates are from each of the candidates running. For example, in Maine, Romney won the popular vote by a landslide right? Therefore, he is rewarded all the delegates of that state. McCain came in second with Ron Paul coming in a very close third place. However, Ron Paul had A LOT MORE DELEGATES that supported him than McCain did, so realistically speaking, Ron Paul came in second in the delegate count. How is this important? It isn't YET, but patience Grasshopper, and you will begin to see the light.

Ok, so I said I would come back to how someone can "steal" a victory. From what I know, this is how it works -- in a brokered convention, ANY STATE DELEGATE IS NOT BOUND TO VOTE FOR ANY PARTICULAR CANDIDATE. Did you get that? While they were selected to best represent their own candidate, what would happen if their candidate dropped out? Their candidate would likely endorse another candidate, right? And it makes sense that the state delegates would support whomever their candidate endorsed, right? But here's where it gets sticky... would they really support whomever their candidate endorsed? A perfect example of that would have been Giuliani who endorsed McCain after he dropped out -- which should have added to the popular vote count for McCain to easily win the state of Maine since he had Giuliani supporters too, right? But McCain lost to Romney. As I said in a previous article, this is not a typical election and there is clearly no real front runner -- at least not what the media is making it out like.

It is my opinion that people are awake now and are not voting in the typical mannerisms of the past elections. People are very angry right now, confused right now and are still unsure of who they would support -- but more important than that, they now understand that it's ok to change their minds and actually vote who's right for office rather than vote for who's right for the party. If there was a clear front runner, then someone would have an enormous lead by now, yes? But this is not the case. And according to the GOP rules, a candidate must enter the convention in September with 51% of the delegates from all the states or else the election will go to a brokered convention... and that is where the pay off will be, because delegates will now have to make things right by voting. BUT, the question is, "Who will they vote for?"

Is your eyebrow raising? Are you getting it yet?!! You're starting to smirk, aren't you? Yessssss, suddenly, all those supposed state delegates that the candidate "thought" he had in the bag from the states (according the media and beauty contests) now suddenly don't look too promising, because they (the delegates) now have the power, and more importantly, the right to change their mind. Now here's the beauty of it all -- there is NOTHING anyone can do about it.

"Yes, I get it now, but c'mon, what are the odds these delegates will vote for Ron Paul?" Well, there is no guarantee -- but let's look at it this logically... this will likely create negative publicity for the so called "front runner", as this candidate will now be seen BY MANY PEOPLE as being weak, not to mention careless, because HE DIDN'T SEE IT COMING. And nobody wants a weak, let alone careless President. A brokered convention hasn't occurred since God knows how long ago - which is why many people still disagree and say it won't happen. However, I believe the odds are in favor this year for one to happen, as do many others, and here's the funny part... if it does, can you imagine the media coverage on that one? The media, all which completely blacked out Ron Paul, is actually responsible for making it all happen because he slipped in "under the radar."

This is why the likelihood of a 3rd party run by Ron Paul is not realistic nor in the playing cards. Statistically speaking, he has a better chance of getting those unsure delegates to vote for him than he would at getting a majority to win during a third party run for Presidency. Third party runs are very expensive and get zero media coverage and aren't likely to be invited for debates -- but winning the Republican nomination gets him the best seat in the house, to relay his thoughts on the issues at hand and to eventually prove to America that he is the best choice for President.

So who's the big winner of Super Tuesday? I think it's more like who's the big WEINER of Tuesday. All Aboooooard!!!

2008-01-02T10:01:00.000-08:00

The Magic Surrounding Ron Paul is About to be Revealed

The run up to the presidential primaries of 2008 has been nothing less than a marvel of intrigue for the Republican candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul. This mystic of politics has created a mirage of ubiquity so realistic that it can literally be seen around the world, all while simultaneously remaining shrouded in a cloak of anonymity.

No other candidate has managed to appeal to a broader spectrum of the electorate. No other candidate in this race has attracted such a worldwide audience. No other candidate has been researched as much as this presidential contender. No other candidate has as many apathetic voters, first-time voters, and even party-switching voters pledging their unwavering support on Election Day.

This candidate, Ron Paul, has accomplished not one, but two, record breaking 24 hour fundraisers. In fact, he’s raised more money in this final quarter than any of his Republican opponents. It’s also interesting to note that this non-interventionist also receives the most contributions from military personnel.

Though unpretentious and unscripted, Ron Paul has dominated online polls, straw polls, and post-debate polls. No other candidate generates more calls, emails, or protests of support. Such allegiance is likely due to the fact that no other candidate has the same consistency in their voting record, their message, and their manner.

No other candidate in either party has amassed the grassroots support that Ron Paul has been able to inspire. No other candidate has as many signs, banners, or bumper stickers percolating across the nation. No other candidate has inspired as many videos, blogs, or songs.

No other candidate has as many people wearing apparel that bears their name. No other candidate has as many vehicles painted or decorated with their name. No other candidate has a blimp, a hot air balloon, and airplanes routinely filling the skies with their name.

No other candidate has as many meet-up groups. No other candidate has as many sign-waving’s and rallies. No other candidate has as many boots on the ground going door-to-door on their behalf. No other candidate has as many fans going out of their way to show their support by staking out strategic locations to hold up a sign or banner at a sporting event, a live news feed, or even a competitor’s engagement.

However, the greatest feat in this amazing performance may not be what has been witnessed by the masses, but what has been hidden from them. For this phenomenal candidate has attained this profound notoriety while being virtually censored by every major establishment, including his own party.

Ron Paul is certainly the most magical presidential candidate in the race. Yet, he owes his accomplishments to genuine transparency, not sleight of hand. If he fails to produce a top tier finish right before your very eyes, it will only demonstrate that the prodigious conjuring of the American media has trumped him with a spellbinding illusion that he was simply no match for.

AMAZING VIDEO/AUDIO !

2008-01-02T05:53:00.000-08:00

VIDEOS

Ron Paul Interviewed by Glenn Beck 12-18-2007 (6 Parts)

part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0oa0k4us8U

part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buPSE-_gLMs

part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSx6pvFrsdQ

part 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28p_MHf-sdM

part 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7DlrP65etk

part 6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I13gK7EGWzg

Ron Paul on MSNBC's Morning Joe 12-18-2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUgftueSyuc

Ron Paul on Fox News 12-18-2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxh7U6cASqs

Ron Paul on CNN 12-18-2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-efGfbf0W78

Ron Paul Interviewed by Jan Mickelson in Des Moines, Iowa 12-18-2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3p6xJJsmypg

Ron Paul on MSNBC's Morning Joe 12-18-2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUgftueSyuc

Ron Paul on CNN Headline News 12-18-2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SF8Z9o4X3M

Ron Paul Interviewed by Houston Chronicle in Lake Jackson, TX
12-15-2007
(5 Parts)

* Great Candid Interview

part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLz63bBYYl8

part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC5ReFA-FK4

part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAI0k5BTlmk

part 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE98uY0B6gA

part 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPL9Q24W5mo

Ron Paul Discussed on CBS Evening News 12-18-2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDm0W-beVig

Ron Paul Discussed on CNN 12-08-2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSbIToQZHVc

Dr. Rand Paul Speech at Boston Tea Party 12-16-2007 (2 Parts)

part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cflovYEoEu0

part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xrSSewba8A

Dr. Robert Paul Speech at Oklahoma State Capitol Building

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdVxAwWFR0k

Oklahoma State Representative Charles Key Endorses Ron Paul at
Oklahoma
State Capitol Building

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aa5sCO-3ly0

Ron Paul Supporter Todd Johnston

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhf5TNgqwp4

AUDIO

NPR: Ron Paul's $6 Million Haul Makes History

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17332414

ARTICLES

The Washington Post: Wag the Blog - What Does Ron Paul's Support
Mean?

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/12/wag_the_blog_what_does_ron_pau.html?nav=rss_blog

Orange County, CA Register: Fiscal Conservative May Sink the GOP Ship

http://horserace08.freedomblogging.com/2007/12/18/fiscal-conservatives-could-sink-the-gop-ship/

Boston Daily: Holiday Cheer Means Wearing a Red Sweater

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/blogs/boston/2007/12/18/holiday-cheer-means-wearing-a-red-sweater/

Kennebec, Maine Journal: Maine's Ron Paul Fans Get Organized

http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/blogs/politics/019829.html

Press TV: Paul - Bush Betrayed People's Trust

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=35498&sectionid=3510203

Free-Market News: Hedge Mogul Larry Lepard to Buy Ads Across New
Hampshire for Ron Paul

http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=52741

The New York Times: More Hiring and Advertising Ahead for Paul
Campaign
as the Donations Pour In

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/us/politics/18paul.html?_r=2&ref=politics&oref=slogin&oref=sloin

In Liberty,

-VoteRonPaul.com

Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee
http://www.RonPaul2008.com 1-877-RON-PAUL (1-877-766-7285)

VoteRonPaul.com
http://www.VoteRonPaul.com
Independent Grassroots Support Network

* VoteRonPaul.com is 100% grassroots and is not paid for nor approved
by any candidate.

Vote Ron Paul

2007-12-31T06:04:00.001-08:00

Ron Paul Rising

2007-12-27T12:51:00.001-08:00

Ron Paul The Sound of Silence by eLIB3RTY

2007-12-21T05:20:00.001-08:00

What a day for Ron Paul!

2007-12-17T14:08:00.001-08:00

December 17, 2007

What a day! I am humbled and inspired, grateful and thrilled for this vast outpouring of support.

On just one day, in honor of the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, the new American revolutionaries brought in $6.04 million, another one-day record. The average donation was $102; we had 58,407 individual contributors, of whom an astounding 24,915 were first-time donors. And it was an entirely voluntary, self-organized, decentralized, independent effort on the internet. Must be the "spammers" I keep hearing about!

The establishment is baffled and worried, and well they should be. They keep asking me who runs our internet fundraising and controls our volunteers. To these top-down central planners, a spontaneous order like our movement is science-fiction. But you and I know it's real: as real as the American people's yearning for freedom, peace, and prosperity, as real as all the men and women who have sacrificed for our ideals, in the past and today.

And how neat to see celebrations all across the world, with Tea Parties from France to New Zealand. This is how we can spread the ideals of our country, through voluntary emulation, not bombs and bribes. Of course, there were hundreds in America.

As I dropped in on a cheering, laughing crowd of about 600 near my home in Freeport, Texas, I noted that they call us "angry." Well, we are the happiest, most optimistic "angry" movement ever, and the most diverse. What unites us is a love of liberty, and a determination to fix what is wrong with our country, from the Fed to the IRS, from warfare to welfare. But otherwise we are a big tent.

Said the local newspaper (http://www.thefacts.com/story.lasso?ewcd=36475b4d132fc0a1): "The elderly sat with teens barely old enough to vote. The faces were black, Hispanic, Asian and white. There was no fear in their voices as they spoke boldly with each other about the way the country should be. Held close like a deeply held secret, Paul has brought them out of the disconnect they feel between what they know to be true and where the country has been led."

Thanks also to the 500 or so who braved the blizzard in Boston to go to Faneuil Hall. My son Rand told me what a great time he had with you.

A few mornings ago on LewRockwell.com, I saw a YouTube of a 14-year-old boy that summed up our whole movement for me. This well-spoken young man, who could have passed in knowledge for a college graduate, told how he heard our ideas being denounced. So he decided to Google. He read some of my speeches, and thought, these make sense. Then he studied US foreign policy of recent years, and came to the conclusion that we are right. So he persuaded his father to drop Rudy Giuliani and join our movement.

All over America, all over the world, we are inspiring real change. With the wars and the spying, the spending and the taxing, the inflation and the credit crisis, our ideas have never been more needed. Please help me spread them https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate in all 50 states. Victory for liberty! That is our goal, and nothing less.

Sincerely,

Ron

Message From Ron!

2007-12-15T16:13:00.001-08:00

December 15, 2007

What an amazing mission you and I are on. What great ideas we uphold -- the legacy of the most important thinkers of liberty in our country's history, and the most important doers of liberty in America. At the top of that list are the donors and volunteers of this campaign.

I could spend all my time thanking personally you and everyone who has done so much for our country's future, and not scratch the surface of what justice demands. But I want you to know how much I owe you, and everyone dedicated to the real America. You and I know our real country -- the America of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, of economic, civil, and personal liberty, of strong families and communities, of great businesses and professions, of strong peace and low taxes and sound money-all of which are under assault by the politicians who occupy our nation's capital.

With your help -- and I can't do anything without your help https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/ -- I want to change all that. Together, we can restore our constitutional republic, and oust the mountebanks who violate the ideals of the Founders with income taxes, Federal Reserve inflation, deficit spending, preemptive wars, torture, secret prisons, and abolition of habeas corpus.

How thrilling too are all the great Independent efforts in this cause, involving so many tens of thousands of patriots. Of course, since they are Independent, the election laws to do not allow me to coordinate with them in any way. But I will mention that this Sunday, I am really going to enjoy my tea at a party!

We are making real progress. And goodness knows we need to. Help https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/ me keep our revolution going and growing. For freedom, peace, and prosperity, for the real America, all our
generosity and hard work are justified.

Sincerely,

Ron

This is Ron Paul

2007-12-13T12:13:00.000-08:00

Declaration of Independence

2007-12-04T16:52:00.000-08:00

Florida GOP Official Threatens Ron Paul Straw Poll Voter with Violence

2007-12-03T03:05:00.001-08:00

Florida GOP Official Threatens Ron Paul Straw Poll Voter with Violence

The
Pinellas County Republican Executive Committee planned to hold a straw
poll on the night of the CNN-sponsored Youtube Republican debate in St.
Petersburg. In October the REC Board announced the straw poll and
advised its members that only 1,200 tickets would be available and sold
for the straw poll. Anyone would be allowed to vote in the straw poll
as long as they were over 18 years of age and held a Florida driver's
license. They were also told that they should snap up the tickets
quickly if they were interested in participating in the poll since the
committee anticipated a large voter turnout.

Ron Paul supporter and Pinellas County REC member Sophie (last name
withheld for privacy) of Clearwater, Florida was concerned about the
limited number of tickets available and was considering purchasing a
block of tickets that she could then individually resell to other Paul
supporters. She telephoned the local REC office and spoke with a
Marilyn. She asked about the possibility of buying tickets in bulk. The
woman advised her that she could purchase a block of 50 tickets. Later
Marilyn contacted Sophie and informed her that she would be able to
purchase as many tickets as she would like. Sophie then purchased
several hundred tickets and resold the prepaid tickets to fellow Paul
supporters. In the end she managed to resell about 2/3 of the tickets
she had bought.

Once at the straw poll, Sophie and others noticed that Mitt Romney
supporters were voting for their candidate dozens of times each. The St. Petersburg Times
would later document this in an article. Sophie was upset that the
rules she had been told were not the rules after all. On Thursday, the
day after the debate, she called chairman of the Pinellas County
Republican Executive Committee, Tonoy DiMatteo to inform him of the
misdeeds that had occurred at the straw poll. She was shocked when he
answered: "It's too bad for you, and if you start any trouble you will be hurt." (Watch Sophie's account of the incident here.)

Obviously upset by the incident, Sophie called her local Meetup
group organizer, Paul Bourgeois, who said that Romney even had
5-year-old kids voting in the straw poll. Paul had, at an earlier time,
discussed the rule changes with Tony. Mr. DiMatteo made it very clear
to Paul that he and Sophie had not better take this any further or else.

If you would like to call or write Tony DiMatteo (who is, perhaps
not surprisingly, a Giuliani supporter) and let him know that you will
not stand for this criminal activity, have at it:

Pinellas County Republican Executive Committee

Tony DiMatteo (Chairman)

727.539.6009

pinellasgop@verizon.net

Doesn't Mitt get it? This only makes the revolution stronger. They ain't seen nothin' yet.

Paul showing ideas have place in campaign

2007-11-24T05:39:00.001-08:00

By Michael Morris

The Facts

Published November 23, 2007

Congressman Ron Paul not only has emerged from
darkhorse status to player in the race for the 2008 Republican
presidential nomination, he is doing it with a campaign method that is
out of the dark ages.

He’s saying what he truly believes. Off the cuff. Straight off the top of his head.

How
unusual is that in today’s age of scripted sound bytes? In modern
politics, candidates are trained to repeat phrases as though they are
voicing a See-N-Say. Point the arrow to the picture of an illegal
immigrant, pull the handle and hear, “We must protect our borders.”

That’s
not the case with Paul, the Lake Jackson Republican who two decades ago
ran at the top of the Libertarian Party ticket. Say what you will about
his politics that veer from the safety of conventional thought or lack
of signature legislation he has sponsored being passed during his time
in Congress, there is no nuance or hedging in his stances.

His true beliefs are turning thousands of Americans into true believers in his brand of politics, if not his ideology.

If only we could trust all presidential candidates to be as unscripted and genuine.

Of
course, we can’t. They stick to their message, their practiced phrases
which appear to answer a question but are so superficial they really
commit to nothing.

Watching Paul during a debate or interview is
refreshing for voters. They appreciate his honesty and the passion with
which he presents his case. And they have responded by contributing
millions of dollars to his campaign, much of it through the Internet.
This grassroots support is shocking to the pundit crowd in Washington
and, in some ways, the candidate himself.

These supporters —
largely a blend of young adults participating in their first
presidential election, those who had tuned out past campaigns and
Republicans who believe the party has abandoned its principles — are
saying they are tired of the way the country is headed and those who
are heading it that way. Paul’s case that we need to return to the
ideas of the Founding Fathers resonates with them.

Consider it the perfect marriage of old-school politicking and new-school idealism.

As
we have said before, being pragmatic, we do not expect our favorite son
to win the Republican nomination. With his stark differences from the
other GOP hopefuls, it is unlikely he would be chosen — or accept —
being in the second spot on the party ticket or be considered for a
Cabinet post should Republicans retain the White House.

But for
the time being, we should relish the forthrightness of Paul, who is
doing more than making the presidential race interesting. His
unconventional campaign shows that someone with genuine, heartfelt
ideas can have a voice among the tap-dancing, polished politicians.

Americans
have heard Paul’s message and responded. Is it too much to hope the
other presidential hopefuls will hear Americans’ message about what we
want from our candidates?

This editorial was written by Michael Morris, assistant managing editor of The Facts.

Land of the Free

2007-11-17T04:48:00.000-08:00

Candidate FaceTime

2007-11-16T05:55:00.001-08:00

Candidate FaceTime: Measuring Presidential Contenders’ Web-Wide Efforts

Written by Matt Pace (e-mail) -- November 15th, 2007 | Listen | EMail This Post

The rise in popularity of social networking and video sharing websites in the years since the last US presidential election has created a myriad of new ways for candidates to reach and engage voters. The leading candidates all have, for example, MySpace and facebook profiles, flickr pages, and their own YouTube channels. Combined, the candidates have posted over 2,500 videos to their YouTube channels since January.

As candidates’ move beyond the walls of their official websites, traditional metrics used in past elections to track the effectiveness of their online efforts (e.g. page views and unique visitors to a campaign’s website) have been rendered largely obsolete as they report on only a slice of an ever-expanding pie. There has yet to be a single, simple means for comparing the candidates across all of these leading sites.

That changes today. Compete is proud to unveil Candidate FaceTime^TM, offering a holistic, web wide means of measuring how well the candidates are using all of these channels to get “face time” with voters. Harnessing the depth and breadth of Compete’s 2 million member US panel, the metric quantifies the total amount of time voters spend online with candidates each month. Every minute counts in this race as every minute spent with a candidate is one less minute that might have been spent with a rival.

The table below shows each candidate’s FaceTime in October, their share of their party’s FaceTime, and the percentage of all hours spent with a candidate that occurred on his or her official website. Below the table are trended charts comparing each candidate’s share of monthly FaceTime since January.

Findings:

While long claimed by his supporters, the extent of Ron Paul’s online support is finally and clearly evident with this data. In total, voters spent nearly 170,000 hours learning about, connecting with and supporting Paul in October. While that was more the Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton combined, more striking during the looming primary contests is that Paul’s total was more than all of the other GOP candidates combined. Over a quarter of Paul’s FaceTime occurred on meetup.com, a testament to his supporters’ determination to marshal their online momentum into off-line action.
Aside from Ron Paul, Mitt Romney was the only other leading candidate from either party to get more than 40% of his total FaceTime on sites other than his official website in October. One area where Romney is leading all candidates is in the number of videos posted on Youtube; 452 at last count.
Fred Thompson missed his opportunity to capitalize on the momentum he had early in the summer, when his FaceTime was growing, when he delayed entering the race. After announcing his candidacy in September, Thompson’s FaceTime careened 73% in October when his campaign stumbled out of blocks and GOP voters, in search of a conservative favorite, kicked Thompson’s tires and apparently moved on.
Mike Huckabee was the GOP flavor-of-the-month in October and benefited the most from Thompson’s struggles. Huckabee’s FaceTime surged 92% in October, pulling from Thompson, Romney and Rudy Giuliani who all saw drops in their time with voters.
Compared with the fluid GOP race, the Democratic contest has been very consistent in terms of FaceTime, with little movement among the candidates. Barack Obama leads all rivals and has steadily drawn roughly 38% of all Democratic FaceTime since March. It will be interesting to see next month whether Obama or John Edwards can capitalize on Hillary Clinton’s recent stumbles and get voters to spend more time considering them as viable alternatives.
Candidates who are struggling to get FaceTime with voters are also having difficulty raising enough money to compete in the race. Sam Brownback dropped out of the contest last month after drawing the least FaceTime among the GOP rivals for months. Could candidates such as Ton Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson be next? Dodd and Hunter, like Brownback, have been largely unsuccessful at reaching voters beyond their own websites.

FBI and Secret Service agents raided the Liberty Dollar office in Evansville

2007-11-15T11:59:00.001-08:00

FBI Raids Liberty Dollar

US Mint - Paper is legal (Click to View PDF)

Search Warrent (Click to View PDF)

Seizure Warrent (Click to View PDF)

Agent Information (Click to View PDF)

Click to View Local Article

Dear Liberty Dollar Supporters:

I sincerely regret to inform you that about 8:00 this morning a dozen FBI and
Secret Service agents raided the Liberty Dollar office in Evansville.

For approximately six hours they took all the gold, all the silver, all the
platinum and almost two tons of Ron Paul Dollars that where just delivered last
Friday. They also took all the files, all the computers and froze our bank
accounts.

We have no money. We have no products. We have no records to even know what was
ordered or what you are owed. We have nothing but the will to push forward and
overcome this massive assault on our liberty and our right to have real money as
defined by the US Constitution. We should not to be defrauded by the fake
government money.

But to make matters worse, all the gold and silver that backs up the paper
certificates and digital currency held in the vault at Sunshine Mint has also
been confiscated. Even the dies for mint the Gold and Silver Libertys have been
taken.

This in spite of the fact that Edmond C. Moy, the Director of the Mint,
acknowledged in a letter to a US Senator that the paper certificates did not
violate Section 486 and were not illegal. But the FBI and Services took all the
paper currency too.

The possibility of such action was the reason the Liberty Dollar was designed so
that the vast majority of the money was in specie form and in the people’s
hands. Of the $20 million Liberty Dollars, only about a million is in paper or
digital form.

I regret that if you are due an order. It may be some time until it will be
filled... if ever... it now all depends on our actions.

Everyone who has an unfulfilled order or has digital or paper currency should
band together for a class action suit and demand redemption. We cannot allow the
government to steal our money! Please don’t let this happen!!! Many of you read
the articles quoting the government and Federal Reserve officials that the
Liberty Dollar was legal. You did nothing wrong. You are legally entitled to
your property. Let us use this terrible act to band together and further our
goal – to return America to a value based currency.

Please forward this important Alert... so everyone who possess or use the
Liberty Dollar is aware of the situation.

Please click HERE to sign
up for the class action lawsuit and get your property back!

If the above link does not work you can access the page by copying the following
into your web browser. http://www.libertydollar.org/classaction/index.php

Thanks again for your support at this darkest time as the damn government and
their dollar sinks to a new low.

Bernard von NotHaus

Monetary Architect

Its Your Money With Ron Paul

2007-11-09T06:56:00.000-08:00

The End of Dollar Hegemony

2007-11-07T14:11:00.001-08:00

HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS

Before the U.S. House of Representatives

February 15, 2006

The End of Dollar Hegemony

A hundred years ago it was called
“dollar diplomacy.” After World
War II, and especially after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, that policy
evolved into “dollar hegemony.” But
after all these many years of great success, our dollar dominance is coming to
an end.

It has been said, rightly, that
he who holds the gold makes the rules. In
earlier times it was readily accepted that fair and honest trade required an
exchange for something of real value.

First it was simply barter of
goods. Then it was discovered that
gold held a universal attraction, and was a convenient substitute for more
cumbersome barter transactions. Not
only did gold facilitate exchange of goods and services, it served as a store of
value for those who wanted to save for a rainy day.

Though money developed naturally
in the marketplace, as governments grew in power they assumed monopoly control
over money. Sometimes governments
succeeded in guaranteeing the quality and purity of gold, but in time
governments learned to outspend their revenues. New or higher taxes always incurred the disapproval of the
people, so it wasn’t long before Kings and Caesars learned how to inflate
their currencies by reducing the amount of gold in each coin-- always hoping
their subjects wouldn’t discover the fraud.
But the people always did, and they strenuously objected.

This helped pressure leaders to
seek more gold by conquering other nations.
The people became accustomed to living beyond their means, and enjoyed
the circuses and bread. Financing extravagances by conquering foreign lands
seemed a logical alternative to working harder and producing more.
Besides, conquering nations not only brought home gold, they brought home
slaves as well. Taxing the people
in conquered territories also provided an incentive to build empires.
This system of government worked well for a while, but the moral decline
of the people led to an unwillingness to produce for themselves.
There was a limit to the number of countries that could be sacked for
their wealth, and this always brought empires to an end.
When gold no longer could be obtained, their military might crumbled.
In those days those who held the gold truly wrote the rules and lived
well.

That general rule has held fast
throughout the ages. When gold was
used, and the rules protected honest commerce, productive nations thrived.
Whenever wealthy nations-- those with powerful armies and gold-- strived
only for empire and easy fortunes to support welfare at home, those nations
failed.

Today the principles are the
same, but the process is quite different. Gold
no longer is the currency of the realm; paper is.
The truth now is: “He who prints the money makes the rules”-- at
least for the time being. Although gold is not used, the goals are the same: compel
foreign countries to produce and subsidize the country with military superiority
and control over the monetary printing presses.

Since printing paper money is
nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of the international currency must
always be the country with the military might to guarantee control over the
system. This magnificent scheme
seems the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that
issues the de facto world currency. The
one problem, however, is that such a system destroys the character of the
counterfeiting nation’s people-- just as was the case when gold was the
currency and it was obtained by conquering other nations.
And this destroys the incentive to save and produce, while encouraging
debt and runaway welfare.

The pressure at home to inflate
the currency comes from the corporate welfare recipients, as well as those who
demand handouts as compensation for their needs and perceived injuries by
others. In both cases personal
responsibility for one’s actions is rejected.

When paper money is rejected, or
when gold runs out, wealth and political stability are lost.
The country then must go from living beyond its means to living beneath
its means, until the economic and political systems adjust to the new rules--
rules no longer written by those who ran the now defunct printing press.

“Dollar Diplomacy,” a policy
instituted by William Howard Taft and his Secretary of State Philander C. Knox,
was designed to enhance U.S. commercial investments in Latin America and the Far
East. McKinley concocted a war
against Spain in 1898, and (Teddy)
Roosevelt’s corollary to the Monroe Doctrine preceded Taft’s aggressive
approach to using the U.S. dollar and diplomatic influence to secure U.S.
investments abroad. This earned the
popular title of “Dollar Diplomacy.” The
significance of Roosevelt’s change was that our intervention now could be
justified by the mere “appearance” that a country of interest to us was
politically or fiscally vulnerable to European control.
Not only did we claim a right, but even an official U.S. government
“obligation” to protect our commercial interests from Europeans.

This new policy came on the heels
of the “gunboat” diplomacy of the late 19^th century, and it meant
we could buy influence before resorting to the threat of force.
By the time the “dollar diplomacy” of William Howard Taft was clearly
articulated, the seeds of American empire were planted.
And they were destined to grow in the fertile political soil of a country
that lost its love and respect for the republic bequeathed to us by the authors
of the Constitution. And indeed
they did. It wasn’t too long
before dollar “diplomacy” became dollar “hegemony” in the second half of
the 20^th century.

This transition only could have
occurred with a dramatic change in monetary policy and the nature of the dollar
itself.

Congress created the Federal
Reserve System in 1913. Between
then and 1971 the principle of sound money was systematically undermined.
Between 1913 and 1971, the Federal Reserve found it much easier to expand
the money supply at will for financing war or manipulating the economy with
little resistance from Congress-- while benefiting the special interests that
influence government.

Dollar dominance got a huge boost
after World War II. We were spared
the destruction that so many other nations suffered, and our coffers were filled
with the world’s gold. But the
world chose not to return to the discipline of the gold standard, and the
politicians applauded. Printing
money to pay the bills was a lot more popular than taxing or restraining
unnecessary spending. In spite of
the short-term benefits, imbalances were institutionalized for decades to come.

The 1944 Bretton Woods agreement
solidified the dollar as the preeminent world reserve currency, replacing the
British pound. Due to our political
and military muscle, and because we had a huge amount of physical gold, the
world readily accepted our dollar (defined as 1/35^th of an ounce of
gold) as the world’s reserve currency. The
dollar was said to be “as good as gold,” and convertible to all foreign
central banks at that rate. For
American citizens, however, it remained illegal to own.
This was a gold-exchange standard that from inception was doomed to fail.

The U.S. did exactly what many
predicted she would do. She printed
more dollars for which there was no gold backing. But the world was content to accept those dollars for more
than 25 years with little question-- until the French and others in the late
1960s demanded we fulfill our promise to pay one ounce of gold for each $35 they
delivered to the U.S. Treasury. This
resulted in a huge gold drain that brought an end to a very poorly devised
pseudo-gold standard.

It all ended on August 15, 1971,
when Nixon closed the gold window and refused to pay out any of our remaining
280 million ounces of gold. In
essence, we declared our insolvency and everyone recognized some other monetary
system had to be devised in order to bring stability to the markets.

Amazingly, a new system was
devised which allowed the U.S. to operate the printing presses for the world
reserve currency with no restraints placed on it-- not even a pretense of gold
convertibility, none whatsoever! Though
the new policy was even more deeply flawed, it nevertheless opened the door for
dollar hegemony to spread.

Realizing the world was embarking
on something new and mind boggling, elite money managers, with especially strong
support from U.S. authorities, struck an agreement with OPEC to price oil in
U.S. dollars exclusively for all worldwide transactions.
This gave the dollar a special place among world currencies and in
essence “backed” the dollar with oil. In
return, the U.S. promised to protect the various oil-rich kingdoms in the
Persian Gulf against threat of invasion or domestic coup.
This arrangement helped ignite the radical Islamic movement among those
who resented our influence in the region. The
arrangement gave the dollar artificial strength, with tremendous financial
benefits for the United States. It
allowed us to export our monetary inflation by buying oil and other goods at a
great discount as dollar influence flourished.

This post-Bretton Woods system
was much more fragile than the system that existed between 1945 and 1971.
Though the dollar/oil arrangement was helpful, it was not nearly as
stable as the pseudo gold standard under Bretton Woods.
It certainly was less stable than the gold standard of the late 19^th
century.

During the 1970s the dollar
nearly collapsed, as oil prices surged and gold skyrocketed to $800 an ounce. By
1979 interest rates of 21% were required to rescue the system.
The pressure on the dollar in the 1970s, in spite of the benefits accrued
to it, reflected reckless budget deficits and monetary inflation during the
1960s. The markets were not fooled
by LBJ’s claim that we could afford both “guns and butter.”

Once again the dollar was
rescued, and this ushered in the age of true dollar hegemony lasting from the
early 1980s to the present. With
tremendous cooperation coming from the central banks and international
commercial banks, the dollar was accepted as if it were gold.

Fed Chair Alan Greenspan, on
several occasions before the House Banking Committee, answered my challenges to
him about his previously held favorable views on gold by claiming that he and
other central bankers had gotten paper money-- i.e. the dollar system-- to
respond as if it were gold. Each
time I strongly disagreed, and pointed out that if they had achieved such a feat
they would have defied centuries of economic history regarding the need for
money to be something of real value. He
smugly and confidently concurred with this.

In recent years central banks and
various financial institutions, all with vested interests in maintaining a
workable fiat dollar standard, were not secretive about selling and loaning
large amounts of gold to the market even while decreasing gold prices raised
serious questions about the wisdom of such a policy. They never admitted to gold price fixing, but the evidence is
abundant that they believed if the gold price fell it would convey a sense of
confidence to the market, confidence that they indeed had achieved amazing
success in turning paper into gold.

Increasing gold prices
historically are viewed as an indicator of distrust in paper currency.
This recent effort was not a whole lot different than the U.S. Treasury
selling gold at $35 an ounce in the 1960s, in an attempt to convince the world
the dollar was sound and as good as gold. Even
during the Depression, one of Roosevelt’s first acts was to remove free market
gold pricing as an indication of a flawed monetary system by making it illegal
for American citizens to own gold. Economic
law eventually limited that effort, as it did in the early 1970s when our
Treasury and the IMF tried to fix the price of gold by dumping tons into the
market to dampen the enthusiasm of those seeking a safe haven for a falling
dollar after gold ownership was re-legalized.

Once again the effort between
1980 and 2000 to fool the market as to the true value of the dollar proved
unsuccessful. In the past 5 years
the dollar has been devalued in terms of gold by more than 50%.
You just can’t fool all the people all the time, even with the power of
the mighty printing press and money creating system of the Federal Reserve.

Even with all the shortcomings of
the fiat monetary system, dollar influence thrived. The results seemed beneficial, but gross distortions built
into the system remained. And true
to form, Washington politicians are only too anxious to solve the problems
cropping up with window dressing, while failing to understand and deal with the
underlying flawed policy. Protectionism,
fixing exchange rates, punitive tariffs, politically motivated sanctions,
corporate subsidies, international trade management, price controls, interest
rate and wage controls, super-nationalist sentiments, threats of force, and even
war are resorted to—all to solve the problems artificially created by deeply
flawed monetary and economic systems.

In the short run, the issuer of a
fiat reserve currency can accrue great economic benefits.
In the long run, it poses a threat to the country issuing the world
currency. In this case that’s the United States.
As long as foreign countries take our dollars in return for real goods,
we come out ahead. This is a benefit many in Congress fail to recognize, as they
bash China for maintaining a positive trade balance with us.
But this leads to a loss of manufacturing jobs to overseas markets, as we
become more dependent on others and less self-sufficient.
Foreign countries accumulate our dollars due to their high savings rates,
and graciously loan them back to us at low interest rates to finance our
excessive consumption.

It sounds like a great deal for
everyone, except the time will come when our dollars-- due to their
depreciation-- will be received less enthusiastically or even be rejected by
foreign countries. That could
create a whole new ballgame and force us to pay a price for living beyond our
means and our production. The shift
in sentiment regarding the dollar has already started, but the worst is yet to
come.

The agreement with OPEC in the
1970s to price oil in dollars has provided tremendous artificial strength to the
dollar as the preeminent reserve currency.
This has created a universal demand for the dollar, and soaks up the huge
number of new dollars generated each year. Last year alone M3 increased over $700 billion.

The artificial demand for our
dollar, along with our military might, places us in the unique position to
“rule” the world without productive work or savings, and without limits on
consumer spending or deficits. The
problem is, it can’t last.

Price inflation is raising its
ugly head, and the NASDAQ bubble-- generated by easy money-- has burst.
The housing bubble likewise created is deflating. Gold prices have
doubled, and federal spending is out of sight with zero political will to rein
it in. The trade deficit last year
was over $728 billion. A $2
trillion war is raging, and plans are being laid to expand the war into Iran and
possibly Syria. The only
restraining force will be the world’s rejection of the dollar.
It’s bound to come and create conditions worse than 1979-1980, which
required 21% interest rates to correct. But
everything possible will be done to protect the dollar in the meantime.
We have a shared interest with those who hold our dollars to keep the
whole charade going.

Greenspan, in his first speech
after leaving the Fed, said that gold prices were up because of concern about
terrorism, and not because of monetary concerns or because he created too many
dollars during his tenure. Gold has
to be discredited and the dollar propped up.
Even when the dollar comes under serious attack by market forces, the
central banks and the IMF surely will do everything conceivable to soak up the
dollars in hope of restoring stability. Eventually
they will fail.

Most importantly, the dollar/oil
relationship has to be maintained to keep the dollar as a preeminent currency.
Any attack on this relationship will be forcefully challenged—as it
already has been.

In November 2000 Saddam Hussein
demanded Euros for his oil. His
arrogance was a threat to the dollar; his lack of any military might was never a
threat. At the first cabinet
meeting with the new administration in 2001, as reported by Treasury Secretary
Paul O’Neill, the major topic was how we would get rid of Saddam Hussein--
though there was no evidence whatsoever he posed a threat to us.
This deep concern for Saddam Hussein surprised and shocked O’Neill.

It now is common knowledge that
the immediate reaction of the administration after 9/11 revolved around how they
could connect Saddam Hussein to the attacks, to justify an invasion and
overthrow of his government. Even
with no evidence of any connection to 9/11, or evidence of weapons of mass
destruction, public and congressional support was generated through distortions
and flat out misrepresentation of the facts to justify overthrowing Saddam
Hussein.

There was no public talk of
removing Saddam Hussein because of his attack on the integrity of the dollar as
a reserve currency by selling oil in Euros.
Many believe this was the real reason for our obsession with Iraq.
I doubt it was the only reason, but it may well have played a significant
role in our motivation to wage war. Within
a very short period after the military victory, all Iraqi oil sales were carried
out in dollars. The Euro was
abandoned.

In 2001, Venezuela’s ambassador
to Russia spoke of Venezuela switching to the Euro for all their oil sales.
Within a year there was a coup attempt against Chavez, reportedly with
assistance from our CIA.

After these attempts to nudge the
Euro toward replacing the dollar as the world’s reserve currency were met with
resistance, the sharp fall of the dollar against the Euro was reversed.
These events may well have played a significant role in maintaining
dollar dominance.

It’s become clear the U.S.
administration was sympathetic to those who plotted the overthrow of Chavez, and
was embarrassed by its failure. The
fact that Chavez was democratically elected had little influence on which side
we supported.

Now, a new attempt is being made
against the petrodollar system. Iran,
another member of the “axis of evil,” has announced her plans to initiate an
oil bourse in March of this year. Guess
what, the oil sales will be priced Euros, not dollars.

Most Americans forget how our
policies have systematically and needlessly antagonized the Iranians over the
years. In 1953 the CIA helped
overthrow a democratically elected president, Mohammed Mossadeqh, and install
the authoritarian Shah, who was friendly to the U.S. The Iranians were still fuming over this when the hostages
were seized in 1979. Our alliance
with Saddam Hussein in his invasion of Iran in the early 1980s did not help
matters, and obviously did not do much for our relationship with Saddam Hussein.
The administration announcement in 2001 that Iran was part of the axis of
evil didn’t do much to improve the diplomatic relationship between our two
countries. Recent threats over
nuclear power, while ignoring the fact that they are surrounded by countries
with nuclear weapons, doesn’t seem to register with those who continue to
provoke Iran. With what most
Muslims perceive as our war against Islam, and this recent history, there’s
little wonder why Iran might choose to harm America by undermining the dollar.
Iran, like Iraq, has zero capability to attack us.
But that didn’t stop us from turning Saddam Hussein into a modern day
Hitler ready to take over the world. Now
Iran, especially since she’s made plans for pricing oil in Euros, has been on
the receiving end of a propaganda war not unlike that waged against Iraq before
our invasion.

It’s not likely that
maintaining dollar supremacy was the only motivating factor for the war against
Iraq, nor for agitating against Iran. Though
the real reasons for going to war are complex, we now know the reasons given
before the war started, like the presence of weapons of mass destruction and
Saddam Hussein’s connection to 9/11, were false.
The dollar’s importance is obvious, but this does not diminish the
influence of the distinct plans laid out years ago by the neo-conservatives to
remake the Middle East. Israel’s
influence, as well as that of the Christian Zionists, likewise played a role in
prosecuting this war. Protecting
“our” oil supplies has influenced our Middle East policy for decades.

But the truth is that paying the
bills for this aggressive intervention is impossible the old fashioned way, with
more taxes, more savings, and more production by the American people.
Much of the expense of the Persian Gulf War in 1991 was shouldered by
many of our willing allies. That’s not so today. Now,
more than ever, the dollar hegemony-- it’s dominance as the world reserve
currency-- is required to finance our huge war expenditures.
This $2 trillion never-ending war must be paid for, one way or another.
Dollar hegemony provides the vehicle to do just that.

For the most part the true
victims aren’t aware of how they pay the bills.
The license to create money out of thin air allows the bills to be paid
through price inflation. American
citizens, as well as average citizens of Japan, China, and other countries
suffer from price inflation, which represents the “tax” that pays the bills
for our military adventures. That
is until the fraud is discovered, and the foreign producers decide not to take
dollars nor hold them very long in payment for their goods. Everything possible is done to prevent the fraud of the
monetary system from being exposed to the masses who suffer from it.
If oil markets replace dollars with Euros, it would in time curtail our
ability to continue to print, without restraint, the world’s reserve currency.

It is an unbelievable benefit to
us to import valuable goods and export depreciating dollars.
The exporting countries have become addicted to our purchases for their
economic growth. This dependency makes them allies in continuing the fraud, and
their participation keeps the dollar’s value artificially high.
If this system were workable long term, American citizens would never
have to work again. We too could enjoy “bread and circuses” just as the
Romans did, but their gold finally ran out and the inability of Rome to continue
to plunder conquered nations brought an end to her empire.

The same thing will happen to us
if we don’t change our ways. Though
we don’t occupy foreign countries to directly plunder, we nevertheless have
spread our troops across 130 nations of the world.
Our intense effort to spread our power in the oil-rich Middle East is not
a coincidence. But unlike the old
days, we don’t declare direct ownership of the natural resources-- we just
insist that we can buy what we want and pay for it with our paper money.
Any country that challenges our authority does so at great risk.

Once again Congress has bought
into the war propaganda against Iran, just as it did against Iraq.
Arguments are now made for attacking Iran economically, and militarily if
necessary. These arguments
are all based on the same false reasons given for the ill-fated and costly
occupation of Iraq.

Our whole economic system depends
on continuing the current monetary arrangement, which means recycling the dollar
is crucial. Currently, we borrow
over $700 billion every year from our gracious benefactors, who work hard and
take our paper for their goods. Then
we borrow all the money we need to secure the empire (DOD budget $450 billion)
plus more. The military might we
enjoy becomes the “backing” of our currency.
There are no other countries that can challenge our military superiority,
and therefore they have little choice but to accept the dollars we declare are
today’s “gold.” This is why
countries that challenge the system-- like Iraq, Iran and Venezuela-- become
targets of our plans for regime change.

Ironically, dollar superiority
depends on our strong military, and our strong military depends on the dollar.
As long as foreign recipients take our dollars for real goods and are
willing to finance our extravagant consumption and militarism, the status quo
will continue regardless of how huge our foreign debt and current account
deficit become.

But real threats come from our
political adversaries who are incapable of confronting us militarily, yet are
not bashful about confronting us economically.
That’s why we see the new challenge from Iran being taken so seriously.
The urgent arguments about Iran posing a military threat to the security
of the United States are no more plausible than the false charges levied against
Iraq. Yet there is no effort to resist this march to confrontation
by those who grandstand for political reasons against the Iraq war.

It seems that the people and Congress are easily persuaded by the jingoism of
the preemptive war promoters. It’s
only after the cost in human life and dollars are tallied up that the people
object to unwise militarism.

The strange thing is that the
failure in Iraq is now apparent to a large majority of American people, yet they
and Congress are acquiescing to the call for a needless and dangerous
confrontation with Iran.

But then again, our failure to
find Osama bin Laden and destroy his network did not dissuade us from taking on
the Iraqis in a war totally unrelated to 9/11.

Concern for pricing oil only in
dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam
Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding Euros for oil.

And once again there’s this
urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time
Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.

Using force to compel people to
accept money without real value can only work in the short run.
It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and
international, and always ends with a price to be paid.

The economic law that honest
exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed.
The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with
worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value.
We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand
gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros.
The sooner the better.

I say "you raised," because this historic event was created, organized, and run by volunteers.

2007-11-06T19:38:00.001-08:00

November 6, 2007

Amazing! I have to admit being floored by the $4.2 million dollars you raised yesterday for this campaign. And unlike the fatcat operations of the opposition, the average contribution from our 36,672 donors was $103.

I say "you raised," because this historic event was created, organized, and run by volunteers. This is the spirit that has protected American freedom in our past; this is the spirit that is doing so again.

Some of the mainstream media have sat up and taken notice. Others have pooh-poohed our record online fundraising. But the day is coming--far faster than they know--when they will not be able to ignore our freedom revolution.

We are working hard, with you, to spread our message far and wide-in New Hampshire, in South Carolina, in Iowa, and in every other state with a primary. And people are listening.

As you and I know, there is hope for America-in liberty and peace, and the prosperity they bring. There is hope for America--in a sound dollar, the rule of law, and the Constitution. There is hope for America--in a people's revolution that brings us all together, of whatever race and age and background.

What momentum we have! Please help me keep it up. As you and I know, and our opponents are only suspecting, we have Success on our minds, and in our hearts.

Freedom! Surely it is worth all our hard work. Please help me continue to do that work, with your continuing support https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate

Without your help, this campaign would be dead in the water. Help us keep steaming towards victory.

Sincerely,

Ron

An Appeal To My Fellow Pastors

2007-11-06T12:41:00.001-08:00

An Appeal To My Fellow Pastors
by Chuck Baldwin
November 6, 2007

Recently, Iowa pastors gathered to hear my presentation in Des Moines on
behalf of Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul. After listening to me,
they then heard ten-term Republican Texas Congressman Ron Paul himself.

Consider how Congressman Paul's message impacted Pastor Jim Hartman of the
Assembly of God church in Conrad, Iowa. "I've been supporting Mike Huckabee, but
I would say I'm leaning real strong toward Ron Paul." Hartman supported
President Bush four years ago and explained, "Up until the last six months I had
not allowed myself to imagine that we'd been let down by Bush." As for Iraq, he
said, "I don't think we were prepared to understand that culture and to work
with that culture." He said he now feels "humble and I feel kind of bad that I
haven't done a better job of being faithful to Ron Paul's kind of integrity."
[Source: MSNBC, Oct. 30, 2007]

Integrity: that is the issue drawing millions to Ron Paul, including young
people. The night before I spoke, nearly 700 students gathered at Iowa State
University in Ames to hear Dr. Paul. One of those students wrote me recently.
His name is Nathan Rockman. He wrote, "As a columnist for the Iowa State Daily
here on campus, I have seen first hand what can be described as Ron Paul fever.
Since Dr. Paul visited this past Friday, his message of freedom and liberty has
been spreading through campus like wildfire . . ."

Ron Paul doesn't recruit artisan spin writers and bloggers to wear down those
who might question his past dealings. He doesn't need to. There are no missing
hard-drives, ethics violations, and taxpayer funds used for personal use that
need to be spun away. He still refuses to participate in the lucrative
Congressional pension fund and returns a portion of his Congressional office
budget back to the U.S. Treasury each year.

This kind of integrity moved Pastor Hartman, the students at Iowa State
University, and many more like them.

Ron Paul has been fighting for the right to life from the beginning of his
public career. Dr. Paul is rock-solid on pro-life. After all, he has helped over
4,000 women deliver their babies into the world in his obstetrics practice in
Lake Jackson, Texas. He proposed the "Sanctity of Life Act of 2005" (and 2007),
which would require that "human life shall be deemed to exist from conception,
without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency."
Has he recently discovered these pro-life convictions? Not at all. Congressman
Paul introduced the Human Life Amendment in Congress in his very first term of
Congress, a couple of years after Roe v. Wade was first handed down.

Is Ron Paul a libertarian, as some use in a throw-away line, often intended
to move the listener to discard him without thought? Yes, on areas of fiscal,
economic and judicial liberty, he is. But, he is also a social conservative and
a Constitutionalist.

Ron Paul's priorities are right with marriage. He and his wife, Carol, have
been married for more than fifty years. He believes marriage should be between a
man and a woman and defends that principle with his vote, where and when he has
the Constitutional authority to do so. For example, Dr. Paul strongly supports
the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Candidly, though, Ron Paul does not believe
(and neither do I) that the U.S. Government needs to be defining that which God
has already defined in His Word.

Where pastors often become confused about Ron Paul is that when he is
resisting the unconstitutional centralization of our federal government, he is
often perceived as being anti-family. Many in these pro-family movements
themselves have been co-opted into believing that the solutions to our family
problems come in the form of more unconstitutional federal legislation and
programs. And when one does not agree with these unconstitutional remedies, they
conclude that he or she is "anti-family." Such people mean well but are
confused.

America would be much better off if we Christian pastors taught the need for
Christ-honoring resistance--at the local level--to anti-family federal
intrusions. We should call on our congregations to vote out of office any judge
who passes rulings designed to pervert the Biblical family. That doesn't take a
Constitutional amendment. It just takes courageous pastors and people who
understand that judges, too, must respect the Constitution and our Christian
heritage.

In fact, adherence to the Constitution protects our freedom of speech and
assembly; our freedom of worship; our right to keep and bear arms; our right to
a trial by jury; the right to be secure in our own homes against police
overreach; our right to witness for Christ in public, as a Christian; the right
to own property; the right to not be deprived of life or property without due
process of law; the right to face our accusers, and the right to keep government
local and limited.

Keeping government local and limited is the cornerstone doctrine of American
government. Ron Paul understands this more than any other candidate running
today.

Most of the problems that we are now dealing with socially, culturally,
financially, etc., stem from America abandoning the basic founding principle
that "the government that governs least governs best."

Accordingly, America's commitment to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness has been (and is being) systematically stripped from us--not by State
legislatures, but mostly by agencies of the federal government.

Consider how it has been federal courts that have banned prayer in school,
and legalized abortion and homosexual marriage. Even in the liberal State of
Massachusetts it was the courts (along with a compliant liberal governor, Mitt
Romney), that forced acceptance of homosexual marriage upon the people.

The solutions to these problems do not reside in more federal legislation.
All that does is strengthen the scope and power of the federal judiciary.

The only ones who have anything to fear from Ron Paul are those who believe
in Big Government.

You see, Ron Paul is actually calling on us pastors and Christians to stop
seeing the federal government as one "in whom we live and move and have our
being." Jesus Christ is our Savior and Lord, not the federal government. Have we
not, in a material way, set up the federal government as our functional Lord and
Savior? When we look to the federal government to solve our moral and spiritual
problems, that is exactly what we are doing.

When it comes to the war in Iraq, I firmly believe that Christian
conservatives have been duped by the neocons. Dr. Paul--an Air Force veteran and
proponent of a strong national defense--opposed the unprovoked and pre-emptive
invasion of Iraq, and rightly so. Time has certainly vindicated Dr. Paul's
principled position. There was a much better way to deal with al-Qaeda.

Soon after 9/11, Congressman Paul introduced H.R. 3076, the September 11
Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. According to Paul, "A letter of marque and
reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the president
the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who
wage war against the United States while limiting his authority to only those
responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is
consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping
Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such
an operation."

This is precisely what President Thomas Jefferson did when America's ships
were confronted with Barbary pirates on the high seas.

If the United States government had listened to Ron Paul, we would not have
lost nearly 4,000 American soldiers and Marines, spent over $1 trillion, and
gotten bogged down in an endless civil war from which there is no equitable
extraction. Furthermore, had we listened to Dr. Paul, Osama bin Laden would no
doubt be dead, as would most of his al-Qaeda operatives, and we would be less
vulnerable to future terrorist attacks, instead of being more vulnerable, which
is the case today.

One thing that Pastor Hartman brought up in our meeting in Iowa was the
sentiment of many Christians and pastors to defend Israel. Dr. Paul stated that
he did not believe that we do Israel any favors and we actually weaken Israel by
our constant meddling and intervention. I agree.

Ron Paul is not Israel's enemy. And neither is he the enemy to Christian
liberty and constitutional government.

Ron Paul's non-interventionist and constitutional foreign policy approach
would help, not hurt, Israel to resolve tensions with their neighbors. Remember,
Israel has more nuclear missiles to defend themselves than all of the Middle
East nations combined. Believe me, Israel knows how to defend itself. And know
this: America's constant meddling curses Israel more than it blesses.

Also consider this: according to published reports such as this one in the
Houston Chronicle http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5223477.html
, Ron Paul is receiving more donations from military personnel than any other
Presidential candidate in either party. Think seriously about this. Our active
duty and retired military personnel clearly endorse with their own contributions
Ron Paul's non-interventionist position above all others.

In the end, if the candidate is a sincere Christian, he will all the more
readily obey his or her oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution
of the United States. After all, does not our Lord tell us that our yea is to be
yea and our nay is to be nay? In other words, genuine believers are to be true
to their word. How, then, could a true Christian make a promise before God and
the American people to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution and
then turn around and ignore that promise?

Ron Paul lives his Christian faith and takes his oath to the Constitution
seriously. What more could we ask for in a Presidential candidate?

Every Christian pastor should seriously consider Congressman Ron Paul. Here
is his website: http://ronpaul2008.com

House Panel to File Miers/Bolten Contempt Papers

2007-11-05T17:07:00.001-08:00

t r u t h o u t | 11.05

House Panel to File Miers/Bolten Contempt Papers
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507R.shtml
Laurie Kellman reports for The Associated Press that, "House Democrats threatened Monday to hold President Bush's key confidants in contempt of Congress unless they comply with subpoenas for information on the Justice Department's purge of federal prosecutors last winter."

Thousands Face Down Pakistani Police
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507S.shtml
Munir Ahmad, The Associated Press, writes: "Police fired tear gas and clubbed thousands of lawyers protesting President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's decision to impose emergency rule, as Western allies threatened to review aid to the troubled Muslim nation. Opposition groups put the number of arrests at 3,500, although the government reported half that."

Millions Trapped in Their Own Country
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507T.shtml
Ahmed Ali, Inter Press Service, says that, "At least five million Iraqis have fled their homes due to the violence under the US-led occupation, but half of them are unable to leave the country, according to well-informed estimates."

Bush Vetoes Water Bill, Citing Cost of $23 Billion
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/110507EA.shtml
David M. Herszenhorn, The New York Times, writes: "President Bush on Friday vetoed a bill authorizing $23 billion in water resource projects, calling it overly expensive, and Congressional Democrats responded angrily, accusing him of insensitivity to the hurricane-damaged Gulf Coast, a big beneficiary of the legislation. They pledged to override him."

World's Coal Dependency Hits Environment
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/110507EB.shtml
The Associated Press reports: "It takes five to ten days for the pollution from China's coal-fired plants to make its way to the United States, like a slow-moving storm."

What We Learned From Washoe the Chimp
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/110507EC.shtml
The Chicago Tribune's William Mullen says that "several notable primate researchers looked back at Washoe's accomplishments as an extraordinary breakthrough. Her life permanently changed the popular perception of animal intelligence, overturning long-held assumptions about differences between humans and other great apes, and presaging the genetic revolution that would reveal that humans and chimps biologically aren't separated by much."

Riki Ott | 18 Years Later, Exxon Still Won't Pay $2.5 Billion for Valdez Spill
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/110507ED.shtml
On AlterNet, Riki Ott writes: "The Supreme Court's recent decision to hear Exxon Mobil's reasons to void the $2.5 billion punitive award in the Exxon Valdez case hit the town of Cordova, Alaska, hard. This small coastal fishing community - my hometown - along with the Alaska Native villages in Prince William Sound have borne the brunt of the largest crude oil spill in America's waters, a spill that took place more than 18 years ago, but one that continues to hold the region hostage."

Writers Begin Strike as Talks Break Off
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/110507LA.shtml
Michael Cieply, The New York Times, says, "A strike by Hollywood writers began just after midnight Monday, as last-minute negotiations between screenwriters and producers to avert a walkout failed."

Drawing a Line Between Enduring Harm and Legitimate Fear
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/110507WA.shtml
Adam Liptak of The New York Times reports on a case involving genital cutting, in which "the Board of Immigration Appeals rejected Ms. Traore's plea for asylum and ordered her sent back to Mali. It ruled that she did not face persecution there, because the cutting, while 'reprehensible,' could not be repeated."

Immigration Raids Harm Children, Report Says
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/110507HA.shtml
The Chicago Tribune's Antonio Olivo writes: "The federal government's escalating enforcement against illegal immigration is taking a heavy toll on children, a report released Wednesday argued."

Jason Leopold | Cheney Pursuing Nuclear Ambitions of His Own
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507A.shtml
Jason Leopold, reporting for Truthout, writes, "While Dick Cheney has been talking tough over the years about Iran's alleged nuclear activities, the vice president has been quietly pursuing nuclear ambitions of his own."

US Alliance With Musharraf Falls Under New Doubt
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507B.shtml
Paul Richter, reporting for The Los Angeles Times, writes: "Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf seemed to be one of the Bush administration's most valuable foreign friends after the Sept. 11 attacks, when he denounced Al Qaeda and the Taliban and joined the US-declared war on terrorism. But the value of that friendship has come into question again and again in the last six years, and may be most in doubt today."

Whistleblowers Claim Contractor Fraud Ignored
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507C.shtml
Guillermo Contreras, reporting for The San Antonio Express-News, writes: "Barrington 'Barry' Godfrey of Houston tried to get mega-contractor KBR to quit overcharging the government for thousands of troops he said the company never fed. He alleges he was forced out for raising the issue, and that the Justice Department tried unsuccessfully to keep his allegations secret and then refused to join him in a whistleblower suit."

Experts: No Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507D.shtml
Jonathan S. Landay, reporting for McClatchy Newspapers, writes, "Despite President Bush's claims that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons that could trigger 'World War III,' experts in and out of government say there's no conclusive evidence that Tehran has an active nuclear-weapons program."
 
Mexicans Appalled by Scenes From Flooded State
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507E.shtml
Elisabeth Malkin, reporting for The New York Times, writes, "Mexicans were gripped Saturday by images of dramatic rescues from flooding in the southeastern state of Tabasco, where much of the state capital, Villahermosa, was underwater and the governor said that thousands of people waited on their rooftops for help to arrive."

Dean Baker | Adjustment Assistance and Globalization
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507F.shtml
Dean Baker, writing for Truthout, says: "As Congress debates a new set of trade pacts, there is an effort to expand trade adjustment assistance as a political quid pro quo. The logic is that new trade deals may cause some number of workers to lose their jobs, but additional adjustment assistance will offset much of the pain. This reasoning seriously misrepresents the economic impact of trade, and is likely to divert the country from trade policies that benefit the bulk of the population."
 
Le Monde | The Internet and Private Life
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507G.shtml
This Le Monde editorial considers the longer-term and wider implications of a Paris court's recent decision to dismiss the suit of private plaintiffs whose sexual preferences were posted on Wikipedia.

Tom Engelhardt | Advice to a Young Builder in Tough Times
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507H.shtml
Tom Engelhardt, writing for TomDispatch.com, says: "I know. Times are tough. Here, in the United States, the bottom's threatening to blow out of the housing market. Here, construction companies are laying off employees and builders are wondering where their next jobs are likely to come from. But there's still hope that can be summed up in this bit of advice:  Go East (or West), young builder, but leave the country."

Bernie Sanders Speaks to Truthout on Frustration With Congress
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507J.shtml
The American voters' feelings of frustration at a largely ineffective Congress have beefed up in recent polls creating a tense environment on Capital Hill. The Independent senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, sat down with Truthout's Geoff Millard to discuss this frustration.

Faulty Intel Source "Curve Ball" Revealed
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507K.shtml
CBS News reports on its investigation of the Iraqi informant codenamed "Curve Ball": "Did Saddam Hussein have weapons of mass destruction? No, he did not. We've known that for some time now. So where did the intelligence come from that he was building up his arsenal? Fantastically, the most compelling part came from one obscure Iraqi defector who came in and out of history like a comet. His code name, ironically, was 'Curve Ball' and his information became the pillar of the case Colin Powell made to the United Nations before the war. Who is Curve Ball and how did he fool the world's elite intelligence agencies? 60 Minutes spent two years, and traveled to nine countries, trying to solve the mystery."

Pakistan Police Beat Protesting Lawyers
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507L.shtml
Augustine Anthony reports for Reuters, "Pakistan police baton-charged lawyers protesting against President Pervez Musharraf's emergency rule and continued to detain his opponents on Monday, despite sharp criticism from ally Washington of the clampdown."  

US Military Aid to Pakistan Misses Its al-Qaeda Target
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507M.shtml
Greg Miller, of The Los Angeles Times, reports, "Despite billions of dollars in US military payments to Pakistan over the last six years, the paramilitary force leading the pursuit of Al Qaeda militants remains underfunded, poorly trained and overwhelmingly outgunned.... rather than use the more than $7 billion in U.S. military aid to bolster its counter-terrorism capabilities, Pakistan has spent the bulk of it on heavy arms, aircraft and equipment that US officials say are far more suited for conventional warfare with India, its regional rival."

2007 Toll Nears Highest for US in Iraq
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507N.shtml
Lauren Frayer reports for The Associated Press, "With just under two months left in the year, 2007 is on course to be the deadliest year on record for American forces in Iraq, despite a recent sharp drop in US deaths."

The New York Times | Putting an End to Abusive Lending
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507O.shtml
The editors of The New York Times write: "When members of the House Financial Services committee meet this week to put the finishing touches on a bill to curb abusive mortgage lending, they need focus only on how to make a good bill better. The bill's critics - mainly the finance industry that profited immensely during the mortgage bubble - claim that new rules could sharply curtail lending. But the current credit squeeze was brought on by reckless lending. Obviously, an absence of rules is a much greater threat to the stable flow of credit than is sound regulation."

Evan Wallach | Waterboarding Used to Be a Crime
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507P.shtml
Evan Wallach writes for The Washington Post, "The United States knows quite a bit about waterboarding. The US government - whether acting alone before domestic courts, commissions and courts-martial or as part of the world community - has not only condemned the use of water torture but has severely punished those who applied it."

VIDEO | Bernie Sanders Speaks to Truthout on Frustration With Congress
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110507J.shtml
The American voters' feelings of frustration at a largely ineffective Congress have beefed up in recent polls creating a tense environment on Capitol Hill. The Independent senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, sat down with Truthout's Geoff Millard to discuss this frustration.

FOCUS | In Pakistan, Officials See Few Options for US

2007-11-04T16:42:00.001-08:00

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110407Z.shtml

Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Helene Cooper, writing in Sunday's New York Times, said that "For more than five months the United States has been trying to orchestrate a political transition in Pakistan that would manage to somehow keep General Pervez Musharraf in power without making a mockery of President Bush's promotion of democracy in the Muslim world. On Saturday, those carefully laid plans fell apart spectacularly."

Ron Paul on CNN AC 360 Nov-2-2007

2007-11-04T16:31:00.001-08:00

Ron Paul's First Action as President

2007-11-04T16:21:00.000-08:00

After a speech at Iowa State University, Ron Paul sat down with reporters for forty minutes answering questions on drug and energy policies, terrorism, and his presidency. He denied that he would run as an independent candidate. In this video, he talks about his first action as president and Commander-in-Chief of the military. He also discusses some motivations for the rise in the price of oil, the motivations of terrorists, and the private contractors and sub-contractors in Iraq.

2007-11-04T16:16:00.001-08:00

Revolution Comes to South Carolina (Day 1)

The crowds began arriving as early as 9 am for the official opening of the Ron Paul 2008 Greenville, South Carolina office. They came from as far away as North Carolina and Georgia to meet Ron Paul and to hear his message of freedom, peace, and prosperity. Pleasantville Drive was lined with campaign signs as people began to file in. It became quickly evident that the event was going to be far bigger than anyone had imagined.

Dr. Paul arrived and, as he conducted interviews in a back office with FOX and WORD radio, the people continued to pour in. By the time of the event, the crowd was so big that it had to be moved from the spacious offices out to the parking lot. When Dr. Paul took the mike, over 400 people were gathered to hear him speak.

After an electrifying speech, Dr. Paul moved inside and insisted on staying until every single person had the opportunity to file into the office, meet him, take pictures and get an autograph.

With the last hand shake, Dr. Paul was whisked away to Spartanburg for the GOP executive committee meeting. As he rolled in, he was greeted by banner waving supporters lining the street. Inside, more than 400 people packed the hall, flowing into the hallway. Dr. Paul gave a great interview from the site to CNN before addressing the Republican and Ron Paul faithful. He took numerous questions from the crowd and closed the event to a raucous standing ovation.

In high spirits, he retired to his hotel to rest for the big Clemson and Columbia Rallies on Friday.

The trip has already generated great media coverage:

Go Upstate

FOX Carolina

Greenville News

2007-11-04T16:09:00.000-08:00

Ron Paul's Straw Poll Results
Updated on November 2, 2007

Straw Poll	Date	Rank	Votes
South Sound Ronald Reagan Republican Club, Tacoma, WA	11/01/2007	1	37.7%
Springfield Metropolitan Republican Club, Springfield, MO	11/01/2007	1	77.3%
Laramie County GOP Straw Poll, Cheyenne, WY	10/28/2007	1	TBD
Values Voter Straw Poll, Washington, DC	10/20/2007	3	15.0%
Conservative Leadership Conference, Reno, Nevada	10/13/2007	1	33.0%
Jefferson County, Alabama Straw Poll	10/13/2007	1	57.8%
Washington State Republican Party Fall Dinner Straw Poll	10/11/2007	4	12.2%
Tulsa State Fair, Oklahoma	10/07/2007	1	41.5%
Oregon Straw Poll- Portland, Oregon	10/06/2007	1	67.0%
Gwinnett County GOP, Atlanta, Georgia	9/30/2007	1	36.2%
CWA New Jersey GOP Straw Poll	9/29/2007	1	77.0%
South Sound Ronald Reagan Republican Club, Tacoma, WA	9/26/2007	1	35.0%
Mackinac Island - Michigan Republican Leadership Conference	9/23/2007	3	10.8%
Oklahoma County GOP Straw Poll	9/23/2007	3	11.0%
Palmetto Family Council Straw Poll	9/20/2007	2	33.0%
Values Voters Presidential Debate Poll	9/17/2007	2	13.0%
Manchester, NH Straw Poll	9/16/2007	1	65.0%
South Dakota Straw Poll	9/03/2007	6	8.0%
Maryland Straw Poll	9/03/2007	1	27.3%
Texas Straw Poll	9/01/2007	3	16.7%
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania	8/26/2007	1	45.2%
DeKalb County, Georgia Straw Poll	8/25/2007	1	24.0%
HRCC (Minnesota)	8/22/2007	3	16.0%
Ronald Reagan Club (Washington)	8/21/2007	1	28.0%
West Alabama	8/18/2007	1	81.2%
Strafford County, NH	8/18/2007	1	72.2%
West Lafayette, Indiana	8/18/2007	4	11.7%
Illinois State Fair	8/17/2007	3	18.9%
Students for Life of America	8/16/2007	4	9.0%
Western Montana Fair	8/15/2007	6	4.0%
Gaston County, NC	8/14/2007	1	36.6%
Ames, Iowa	8/11/2007	5	9.1%
National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA), St. Louis, MO	8/06/2007	3	14.0%
FreedomWorks Straw Poll	8/03/2007	1	56.0%
Georgetown County, SC	7/28/2007	2	17.9%
New Hampshire Taxpayers	7/07/2007	1	65.3%
Cobb County, GA	7/04/2007	2	17.0%
California Republican Assembly	7/01/2007	4	12.0%
National Taxpayers Union	6/16/2007	2	16.7%
Utah GOP convention	6/08/2007	2	5.4%