Ron Paul’s “Crazy” Supporters and Other Nonsense

This article was originally posted on Nov. 21st, 2007 at americanchronicle.com

It can be said that the English language is a living language. This is because as time goes on the language changes. Words come to mean different things. Sometimes the same word can mean one thing to some people and quite another to a different group. This is especially true of legalese, but I won’t go into that now. As a student of the English language, this facet of its growth often fascinates me. It’s amazing how the meanings of words mutate over time. I can think of several words whose meanings are wholly different than they were about fifty years ago. Gay is a prime example, but there are others.

Most recently the word crazy seems to have seriously changed its meaning. It used to mean insanity, but to many political pundits it seems to mean anyone who disagrees with their political ideology. Now, I realize there are many other definitions for crazy, some which are positive, but when these talking heads on TV or these political pundits writing for major newspapers and magazines use this word, it seldom seems to connote a positive meaning in context. No, when these people use this word they most often seem to mean insane, not enthusiastic, devoted or excited. If confronted, they would probably claim to mean these things, but we know different. Who do they think they’re fooling? Well, they’re fooling the few who are still trapped watching TV news and reading corporate newspapers, those who are unable or unwilling to seek alternative sources to get another point of view, and those who are unable or unwilling to digest an alternative point of view and use critical thinking to come to their own conclusions. There are some people out there who continue to believe that all Ron Paul supporters are insane. A good way to combat this phenomenon is to tell people who know you are sane that you are a Ron Paul supporter. In fact, the more Ron Paul supporters one meets, the more one realizes the vast majority of them are some of the sanest people on the face of the planet. In this way, those on the fence will come to realize the propaganda being spread by some in the “mainstream” media for what it is.

Yet as if this wasn’t enough, now Ron Paul supporters have been called terrorists by some media personalities. Terrorist is not a word that has changed its meaning, but it is a word that is often misused. A terrorist is someone who engages in terrorism. Terrorism is the use or threatened use of violence with the intention of coercing or intimidating societies or governments, often for political purposes. To this point, I am unaware of any use or threatened use of violence from any Ron Paul supporter as an attempt to get Ron Paul elected. I would venture a guess that 99.999999% of all Ron Paul supporters realize how futile such a gesture would be. I have seen, however, the threat of the use of force leveled against Ron Paul supporters, dissenters, anti-war protestors, and other activists. There are a few commentators on some “mainstream” media venues that repeatedly call for the force of the state to be brought against these people. There have been many calls for violence to be used against such civil disobedience. They often do this as they advocate nationalism and adherence to the latest mantra of the state. This has been particularly true lately as more and more people find the message of freedom and gravitate toward agreement with those who have in the past been labeled “fringe.” It seems that perhaps the “mainstream” media is not so mainstream anymore. It’s almost as if these commentators can see their audience exiting the theater to check out some different act and so they start shouting and name calling in an attempt to keep the audience placated. They also seem to believe that demanding the government adhere to the mandates spelled out in the constitution is somehow threatening behavior.

We might all do well to remember the reason our country’s founders penned the constitution in the first place. Its purpose was to protect the people from the government. The people who came to America were people trying to escape tyranny. They were tired of innocent people being lumped together and punished alongside those who may have advocated violence against the government. They were tired of innocents being tortured because of their religious or political views and being forced into false confessions. They were tired of being told what to think. They were tired of being told to shut up, that the king or others in power knew better than they did. They were tired of not having a voice in government. They were pretty much sick and tired of the corrupt governments that had metastasized upon the European continent. The failings of monarchal rule were fresh in the minds of the founding fathers when they wrote the constitution. This more than likely weighed in when they decided to include the bill of rights. It seems we have come full circle. As laws are passed to try to circumvent articles of the bill of rights our very own government begins to look more and more like the tyrannical monarchies our ancestors fled. If some emergency befalls our great nation and the constitutional system collapses, we will not have a new world to flee to. It behooves us, therefore, to do our best to shore up our constitution as best we can, to make certain that power does not get too centralized to the point where a very few can do whatever they please without being held accountable. I don’t believe we’ve reached that point yet, though we are close.

Supporters of Ron Paul are excited because they believe they can realize a peaceful path to change and a way to restore faith in the constitution and balance to the nation. They realize that violence and force are part of the problem, not the solution. The Ron Paul revolution catch phrase emphasizes love found in the word rEVOLution. It is disingenuous to call his supporters crazy. It is unfair to label them as terrorists. I would never stoop to calling those in the media names or suggesting that they don’t know what they’re talking about. In fact, I believe just the opposite. I believe those in the media who are trying to discredit Ron Paul and his supporters are quite intelligent and well informed. I know they are quite well paid, unlike folks like me, and it is their job (or at least is should be) to make themselves informed. This makes their motives seem quite nefarious when they decide to engage in activities such as name calling and shouting out for state sanctioned violence against Ron Paul supporters and others.

Ron Paul’s message of freedom, peace, sound money, personal responsibility and smaller government resonates with a diverse spectrum of Americans. He will of course attract some questionable characters, as will all the presidential candidates. It is unfair to paint all his supporters with the same brush, especially when most are just average Americans. Ron Paul supporters, for the most part, have no personal monetary interests in supporting him. Can those highly paid professionals in the media who dispute his ideas and deride his supporters say the same? Who provides their salaries? Perhaps the same corporate interests that donate money to and lobby nearly all the other candidates? It makes one wonder who these pundits owe their loyalties to. It will be interesting to see how things play out as more and more average Americans find Ron Paul’s message and decide to support him morally and financially. It will be just as interesting to see how many words have completely different meanings by the end of this election cycle.

Confiscating Liberty

This article was originally published on Nov. 18th, 2007 at americanchronicle.com

On Wednesday, November 14th, 2007, agents from the FBI and Secret Service raided the offices of American Liberty Dollar in Evansville, Indiana and the mint they do business with. They confiscated all their records, their gold, silver, copper and platinum. They confiscated tons of Ron Paul liberty dollars. They confiscated anything that had to do with the business. As far as any of us knows, the only records as to who is owed what, and the records of how much precious metal there was, is now in the hands of the government, a government who has time and again lied to the public in order to further their own agendas and line their own pockets. Are we supposed to trust these people now? There was a time in this country when I would have given them the benefit of the doubt. That time has passed.

This action is strangely reminiscent of the gold confiscation of 1933. In the depths of the depression, in order to keep from sinking further into monetary crisis, President Roosevelt ordered all privately owned gold to be confiscated by the United States government. This is because there was still a gold standard in place and the people of the country could use gold as an alternative to the notes issued by the Federal Reserve. The Fed wanted to control and issue all the gold, all the money the American public could spend. In that way, it could manipulate it to suit its own agenda. Roosevelt agreed with them and allowed them this monopoly over our money. They took our gold, the gold owned by the citizenry of the United States, in exchange for their paper. Perhaps the Fed feels that the Liberty Dollar was gaining too much popularity. Perhaps that is why the raid occurred. A monopoly abhors competition.

Wolf Blitzer reported on CNN that the secret service had confiscated the Ron Paul Liberty Dollars. It was suggested that the secret service considered this election tampering. It was also suggested that the practice of putting someone’s face on a coin before they were president was illegal. The Ron Paul Liberty Dollar is not legal tender, however, and everyone knows this. Bernard Von Nothaus, the creator of the Liberty Dollar, has made certain that his customers know they are not dealing with legal tender. The pure silver, copper, gold and platinum medallions he makes can be voluntarily exchanged for goods or services, just as toothpicks, cigarettes, or any other medium can be used as long as the parties in question agree to the exchange. If it’s not legal tender, the owner should be able to put anyone he wants on it. I doubt this was about keeping Ron Paul’s name out of the spotlight. If it was, then it wasn’t very well thought through as the raid actually gained Ron Paul some free publicity. It seems to me that this raid signals something far more ominous coming in the days ahead.

There are all kinds of indicators going off that the dollar is in trouble. The war in Iraq has gone on for far too long and has cost the American people far too much in terms of life and treasure. There have been far too many Federal Reserve notes printed the last few years. The purchasing power of the dollar is weaker than it has ever been. My mother pointed out to me the other day that the government leaves the cost of energy and food out of the inflation reports. She explained to me that not only would this keep the inflation rate artificially low, but that in this way the government doesn’t have to give those collecting social security the true cost of living increase they deserve. It’s sad when the cost of a war falls upon the shoulders of those who can least afford it and those who most oppose it. As the value of Federal Reserve notes continue to fall, people will be on the look out for a more stable currency. Precious metals do not lose value. They look very appealing to many right now.

I doubt very much this raid was done as a result of any crime perpetrated by American Liberty Dollar. This raid was not in response to a specific coin being minted. This raid is an attempt to keep precious metal out of the hands of the American people. These men have confiscated not the materials of one man who should eventually be vindicated. Much of the precious metal confiscated was already sold. It belongs to the individuals that paid for it. Most of the coins confiscated were also paid for. These agents of the state have confiscated the precious metal owned by the people. They have confiscated your right to use whatever method any given citizens agree upon to use for barter. They have confiscated our liberty. They have confiscated one of our God given rights, the right to freely associate. This is the true nature of the raid on American Liberty Dollar. Don’t be surprised if agents of the state come knocking upon your door sometime soon and ask for your gold.

If Dr. Seuss Wrote for Dr. Ron Paul

This article was originally published on Nov. 13th, 2007 at americanchronicle.com

George was on the net one day,

He thought he’d take some time and play.

To youtube he decided to surf,

He came upon Ron Paul’s turf.

He saw a video at the mall,

Where on the dais stood Ron Paul.

Ron Paul spoke true and he spoke loud,

Below him gathered quite a crowd.

He said “I will end all the wars,

I’ll bring our troops back to our shores.

We shall no longer fund an empire,

Which sucks up money like a vampire.

We need our people here at home,

Not in Baghdad, Kabul or Rome.

The world we don’t need to police,

Our tax payers we don’t need to fleece.

Our founders warned us to beware,

Keep out of alliances that are unfair.

With the world we shall peacefully trade,

Our coffers we shall fill, not raid.”

George listened long and he sat back,

What he heard made his jaw go slack.

He wondered about the video with dread,

He shook his head and then he said,

“I will not join your revolution,

I don’t believe in the constitution.”

Ron Paul continued with his speech,

The masses he intended to reach,

More people came from near and far,

They came by foot and bike and car.

“I will rid us of the IRS curse,

Who dips its fingers in everyone’s purse.

They should not tax the labor of a man,

On that there needs to be a ban.

Sound money we should start to mint,

The Federal Reserve needs to get a hint.

An economy that is based on debt,

Will one day collapse you can bet.

Fiscal responsibility is what we need,

Not private bankers full of greed.

Government money based on gold,

Is constitutional, so I’m told.

But if there must be privatization,

Money competition should be in this nation.”

George could not believe what he heard,

His disbelief grew with every word.

What could be done against such truth,

He stiffened his jaw and hurt a tooth.

“I will not join your revolution,

I do not believe in the constitution.”

And to this story there was more,

Ron Paul, he still had the floor,

The more he spoke of government sin,

The more donations came rolling in.

For the Nation’s people showed concern,

And for freedom they did yearn.

Self reliance they wish they had,

Not a government acting like a dad.

“I will reject intrusive laws,

And from your lives remove government paws.

I’ll work to repeal unconstitutional acts,

And make the government reveal hidden facts.

To the constitution we all take an oath,

To honor that helps the country’s growth.

The government we must work to shrink,

There are programs we must rethink.

The dependent have nothing to worry about,

But the young will get a chance to opt out.

For a voluntary government is what works best,

Not fear, nor force nor a big brother’s nest.”

George still watched and became mad,

He rejected the notion he had been bad.

The famous neocon would not admit wrong,

And he disagreed with Ron Paul’s song.

“I will not join your revolution,

I don’t believe in the constitution.”

But to him Ron Paul did not speak,

His words were meant for the ears of the meek.

He knew that to check those in power,

The people needed to stand, not cower.

To the masses he did appeal,

Okay, folks, now here’s the deal.

“Join us in this revolution.

Let’s reinstate the constitution.”

Ron Paul Revolution: We Have Not Yet Begun to Fight

This article was originally published on Nov. 9th, 2007 at americanchronicle.com

During the War for Independence fought by the thirteen original colonies of these United States of America, a hero rose from the ranks of the populace by the name of John Paul Jones. I believe most Americans have heard of this gentleman, but without going into too much detail he was a captain in the newly formed navy of the United States and it is claimed that at one point in a battle being fought off foreign shores against a supposedly superior British force he was offered a chance to surrender by an over confident English commander. It is reported that this offer was made at a time when the outcome of the battle was still uncertain and that Capt. John Paul Jones made the reply, “I have not yet begun to fight.” His ship and others went on to win that battle, though his own ship was lost.

During Ron Paul’s candidacy, there have been many who have discounted him. The mainstream media has never given him his due. Early on they did their best to ignore him, and they continue to try to ignore him (but that is getting harder with each passing day and each victorious milestone his campaign achieves.) They have constantly claimed him as a lower tier candidate with no chance of winning. They have written off his supporters as “Internet supporters” as if they weren’t real people, but only existed in the cyber world. They called him names, and called his supporters names, some even going as far as to label his supporters as crazy. There have been battles of words fought in the blogosphere between Ron Paul’s supporters and his detractors in which the insults fly heavily between the two factions. All this has served as mere distraction as they to try to sink his candidacy. Those who would rather have one of the authoritarians on the Republican ticket become the next great Decider, those who wish to abdicate their personal responsibility so that the government can take care of them, have oft times offered Ron Paul and his supporters the chance to surrender before battle was even truly engaged. Well, my friends and fellow Ron Paul supporters, my answer to them is the same resounding answer that echoes across the waves of time; We have not yet begun to fight.

On November 5th, 2007, Ron Paul supporters gave their candidate 4.2 million dollars. This was huge. Despite this, there were some that tried to minimize its impact. One such person was Kevin Drum. Mr. Drum, apparently some well respected political blogger and supported by CBS news, resorted to the juvenile tactic of name calling in order to try to convince people that Ron Paul is still insignificant. The blog I’m referring to can be found here.

The title itself, Ron Paul, Fruitcake, should immediately tell the reader that the article will contain nothing of any real value in terms of civil discourse into issues facing this nation today. It starts out by stating that Ron Paul raised a “buttload” of money, a term I would expect to hear from my thirteen year old son. Then he goes onto say that it really doesn’t change a thing and “everyone” knows it. Hmm, I wish something so meaningless as raising 4.2 million could happen in my life. And everyone knows it. I’m part of everyone and I didn’t know that. Thanks for clarifying that for me, Kevin. He then goes on to ask if “we can stop pretending to be political infants.” Well, Kevin, that might happen when you stop pretending that raising 4.2 million dollars in one day is insignificant and doesn’t change a thing. He then states that Ron Paul’s positions are extreme, uncompromising and meaningless. Is obedience and loyalty to the constitution meaningless? Are freedom and liberty so extreme? If they are, then these United States of America is no longer the bastion of opportunity and hope that caused so many to flock to its shores in the past. But, to him, we hard working blue collar workers who support Ron Paul and are struggling to get by in this world are merely pretending that these principles have meaning. Sadly, perhaps he’s right about that. But there is at least one man working in congress for whom these principles do have meaning, and that man is Ron Paul. Mr. Drum then manages to insinuate that only technophiles are using the Internet as a political tool and that they are mostly libertarians. So, you remember that all you everyday Joes that are happening onto this Internet on a daily basis.

Mr. Drum continues his diatribe by suggesting that Ron Paul doesn’t know what he’s talking about when it comes to economics. I saw him interviewed tonight on Kudlow & Company on CNBC. Three of the four panel members, including Mr. Steve Forbes, and Mr. Kudlow himself agreed with much of what Ron Paul had to say. Hmm, perhaps the Mr. Drum, a political analyst, doesn’t know as much about economics as he thought he did. My mother, a certified financial planner, called me after watching the interview to let me know how well Dr. Paul had done in the interview and to tell me she had an much improved opinion of Dr. Paul. She told me that he wasn’t as radical as she thought he would be. Mr. Drum finishes his article by asking a simple question; “Seriously, folks. Can we all please grow up?” Ron Paul supporters believe in personal responsibility and self reliance. We wish to have the power to make our own decisions. We don’t want the government taking care of us. We don’t need the nanny state. We have grown up, Mr. Drum sir, it is you who seems to be suffering from terminal adolescence.

There have been other bloggers trying to minimize Ron Paul and the mainstream media still seems to be having a tough time acknowledging Ron Paul’s significance. Fox News immediately comes to mind as one media outlet still trying to pretend he doesn’t exist. The polls they cite are still somehow slanted against Ron. Yet these things matter little. We know the support is there. The most important factor of the events of November 5th is the number of people that gave. I doubt that Hillary Clinton in her wildest dreams would expect 37,000 people to donate to her campaign in a single day. I doubt any Republican candidate could get one tenth of that number to donate in a single day. Their message just isn’t powerful enough. The common man is tired of the status quo and he’s certainly not going to donate to someone who wants to keep the same old, same old. We of the middle class finally have an honest politician who is on our side and willing to lead us in a revolution to restore power to the people, and we will rally behind him. We have not yet begun to fight.

Ron Paul’s message is getting heard. Everyday, more and more people come across Ron Paul’s message and find they agree with it. Everyday new people donate to his campaign, people who have never donated to a political campaign in their lives. Everyday new people lose their apathy and discover that fighting for their freedom is worthwhile. People want smaller, less intrusive government. They want personal responsibility and self reliance. They want to see the constitution honored. They want to once again live in the America they and our forefathers dreamed of. Ron Paul embodies this spirit. Ron Paul’s supporters are working tirelessly, volunteering their time and efforts, to make sure as many people as possible see or hear this message regardless of the efforts of those who would try to misinform, misrepresent or otherwise try to sully Ron Paul’s candidacy. There is still much that needs to be done to carry this battle to victory. We have not yet begun to fight.

Random Thoughts of a Hopelessly Human

This article was originally published on Nov. 9th at americanchronicle.com

I have to admit, I am hopelessly human. I am fallible. I’ve made my share of mistakes in my life, some small and some rather significant. We all make mistakes, it’s part of being human. Making mistakes is how we learn. The important things are that we learn how not to make the same mistake again and we strive to better ourselves. It is also important to recognize the fault in yourself, forgive yourself for that fault, and move on. It can be very unhealthy to dwell upon past mistakes. We should endeavor to do this for others also. Forgive others for their mistakes as you would yourself. This does not mean I think one should not be held accountable for their mistakes, but once amends have been made all should be forgiven and forgotten. Of course, if the same mistake is made time and time again, it should no longer be considered a mistake so much as a character defect. I may or may not have my character defects also, but that should be determined by who is voluntarily interacting with me and how much they are willing to tolerate. This should be true of all relationships.

I have my needs. I need to be loved. I need to be accepted. But I also need to be independent. I need to be my own man. What is love if it costs me my freedom? What is acceptance if I am to be a slave? I need to measure my needs against the costs of obtaining them. If I die in the wilds a cold and lonely man, I would not have lived in vain, for I would have gotten to know myself better, to love myself, and to accept myself. I need to breathe, to eat and to drink clean water. All this nature can provide for me but if I obtain sustenance in the jungle of modern society through hard work, so much the better, for nature can be a harsh mistress. I need to accept and love myself before I can accept and love others. I need to live peacefully with my demons that dwell beside me in this body before I can live peacefully beside the demons that dwell beside me in the physical world.

I have my wants and desires. I want to be rich. I want to be well known. I desire companionship. These things may or may not come with time. They may or may not reflect the value of my work in this physical world. I have worked hard for little gain. I have also experienced large gains through only little work. I have had many friends in my life, and I have had times of extreme isolation and loneliness. It all seems to come with the heartbeat of life, the sine wave that our bodies naturally emit. There are peaks and valleys, good times and bad, triumphs and defeats. We all laugh sometimes, and sometimes we cry. In life, the important things are not necessarily what we earn, but how we work and what we leave behind. This may not necessarily be something one has built physically, but can be something one has built spiritually. Will I leave others that have known me with good memories? Will I be an influence on future generations after I’m gone? Will my being here make this world a better place, or will others suffer for my existence? What good are all the riches in the world if I must lose my soul to obtain them? I can’t go through life anonymously so long as I have had a friend. I will never be alone if I can find a companion in myself.

I think, sometimes too much, sometimes too little. I’ve done smart things, and I’ve been stupid. Sometimes I’m stupid because I’m trying to be smart. Sometimes I say the wrong thing, or I don’t say anything at all when I should. I have also said things that have earned me praise from my fellow man. I can make others laugh, I can make them cry, I can make them angry, I can make them glad, I can make them think, and hopefully at times I can make them care. This is all part of the human experience. I’m glad I’m hopelessly human. It has to be better than being hopelessly protozoan.

As a hopelessly human, I ask a few things. I ask that I be allowed to live my own life. I ask that I be allowed to make my own decisions. I ask that I be allowed to celebrate my victories and regret my mistakes. I ask that I be given a chance to learn from them. I ask that I be allowed to keep what I earn. I ask that I be allowed to decide who to do business with and who to interact with. I ask that I be allowed to utilize and pay for only the services I choose. I ask to be as free as possible in a society that longs for freedom, yet at times wants to give it up for security. I think that, given the chance, we will find a greater degree of security wrapped in the openness of the transparency of freedom than we will find under the cloak of secrecy the tyrant uses to hide his misdeeds in the name of societal protection. Grant these things for all and we will be able to blossom into the best possible humans we can become. Deny them, and we all shrivel into something less under the watchful eye of the jealous controllers as they dictate our evolution. We are all hopelessly human. Let us all hope to become the best humans possible.

Human Interaction and the Federal Government

This article was originally published on Nov. 5th, 2007 at americanchronicle.com

When humans are born, they are helpless. They are forced to depend on others for survival. Infants quickly learn who their parents are as these are the people who will feed and protect them. They may come to know an extended family, brothers and sisters, grandparents, uncles and aunts, for the same reason. As the child grows, he learns to interact with these people. He learns to assert himself. He begins to understand that he can interact with people voluntarily, or he can be forced to interact with them. He also learns that people can interact with him voluntarily, or he can force himself upon them. He learns the different methods, subtle and overt, to control himself and others as he grows to adulthood. These are skills he will use for the rest of his life.

As adults we are often called upon to interact with each other. We usually do this in what we think is a voluntary manner. We go to work so that we may collect paychecks. We do business with each other and exchange goods and services for money or for other goods and services. We play games with each other, or talk to each other, or otherwise just hang out with each other so that we can enjoy being in the company of other humans. Some people, however, interact with others on a different level. These people force themselves on others. These are the kind of people who want something from you without giving you anything in return. Some will point a gun at you and take your money. Some may try to blackmail you. Some will simply get in your face and not leave you alone when asked to. Some may try to con you. Still others are far more subtle. They'll try to control your life through fear and intimidation, and some people will never even recognize what is going on. These are the kind of people we as a society want to be protected from. These people are the control freaks of the world, and many of them seem to become politicians.

I believe most people are basically good. They seem to understand on an instinctual level that we should treat each other with respect and dignity. They do business together honestly for the most part. So it is somewhat interesting that corruption is so rampant in politics, especially at the highest levels. Why is it we seem to accept the innate criminality of our so called leaders? Why do they get away with doing things anyone else would be thrown in prison for doing? Why can they breach the public trust and get away with it? The answer is power. Power corrupts. But more than that, power creates an illusion of legitimacy to enable those that wield it to force their will upon others. Government is power and force. Its icy fingers wrap themselves around every thread in one's life and use threats to pull the threads and coerce one into behaving as they would like. In this way one's will is slowly eroded.

When one's will is eroded, they become easier to mold. The state makes one compliant by constantly pounding at him with propaganda and the illusion of "normal behavior." It appears to us all that we are going about our lives as free individuals interacting with each other voluntarily when under the surface there is an almost imperceptible finger of force prodding us to behave in ways we would normally question. For instance, there are merchants and employers acting as collection agents for the federal and various state governments, without getting paid for their services. There are people showing their papers to strangers for no particular reason other than these strangers wear uniforms and carry guns. There are those who spy on their fellow citizens for the government because they are forced to. These are people who are forced to do these things under the auspices of law. They do these things not because they are morally right or because they have voluntarily decided these things needed to be done, they do these things because if they don't they run the risk of being kidnapped by armed agents of the state and imprisoned. They do these things because if they don't they will be forced to give a greater percentage of their wealth than they would have otherwise. This is no way to interact with others. It is morally wrong to force one's will upon another.

There are many wars being fought in this world today. There's a war against drugs. There's a war against terror. There's a war against young men having consensual sex with young women if that young woman is under 18. Soon, there might be a war against those who think for themselves as the various alphabet agencies of these United States continue to gather information on all of us and may just decide it doesn't like dissenters roaming about freely. These are wars against people, wars that have ruined countless lives. We have gone a long way down this road and the wars have become bloated and costly. The time has come for us to re-examine the way we operate. Wouldn't it be better to let people run their own lives and decide for themselves where to spend their money? There has to be a better, more innovative way to handle personal interactions that have gone wrong than through the federal government. The government has shown time and time again that it is inefficient, unfair for the most part, and not looking out for the best interests of the people. It's time to take the power from it and vest that power back in the people. It's time for us to take back our freedoms and liberty and live in the paradigm of personal responsibility and self reliance. We can lead freer, healthier, happier lives with less government involvement. We can prove to all that people can interact with each other on a voluntary basis and once again become the envy of the world. In this way we will all be richer and the world will be a safer, more productive place.

Ron Paul Gets Much More Than 15 Minutes

This article was originally published on Nov. 4th, 2007 at americanchronicle.com

This article refers to a blog by the editors of Foreign Policy which can be found here:

http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/mboyer

Mike Boyer is a blogger for Foreign Policy magazine. In a recent blog entry he asserts that Ron Paul's fifteen minutes of fame should be up. Of course, when Andy Warhol originally made the statement that in the future everyone would have fifteen minutes of fame, he was referring to the common man, not politicians or other public figures. But, whatever. Mr. Boyer apparently believes that everyone, no matter what their stature in life, is only allotted fifteen minutes, no more. Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news Mr. Boyer sir, but Ron Paul has already had more than fifteen minutes. The Ron Paul girl has had her fifteen minutes, but, like it or not, Ron Paul is working on at least his second hour of fame and will continue racking up the minutes whether or not he wins the presidency. So, even though you might close your eyes and wish Dr. Paul would go away, there are many, many of us who would like to see him stick around for quite a bit longer and hope his fame grows to biblical proportions.

Normally, I wouldn't bother with some blogger discounting Ron Paul's candidacy, but this is from an establishment publication and the establishment still seems to be trying to bury Ron Paul's relevancy even as he appears on TV shows such as The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. Like CNBC, Foreign Policy Magazine is doing its best to minimize Ron Paul. This gentleman starts his blog by stating that Ron Paul is a seductive mistress. Hmmm. I've never really thought about Ron Paul that way. Well, to each his own I suppose.

Mr. Boyer goes on to ask whether or not people understand what Ron Paul stands for. He then lists five of Ron Paul's policies that are "fraught with danger." He lists the first policy as "Foreign Policy and the Constitution." I suppose that these things can be fraught with danger and I can understand why some people would be very frightened of them. If you don't like freedom and want the government to take care of you and protect you from the big bad world, then the government obeying the constitution and the foreign policy Dr. Paul espouses can be quite terrifying indeed. But Mr. Boyer asserts Dr. Paul's understanding of the Constitution and the vision of the founding fathers is profoundly flawed. He then goes on to suggest that Ron Paul believes that the founders vested absolute authority for foreign-policy making in the congress and not in the executive. He then goes on to use the opinion of someone else to complete his argument that suggests that Dr. Paul is wrong. I simply decided to look at what it says in the constitution. You see, I have the ability to read that document and decide for myself what it says without having to look to someone else to interpret it. Article II Section 2 (presidential powers) reads as follows:

"The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session."

I don't see anything there about the president creating foreign policy except that he can make treaties "provided two thirds of the Senators present concur."Everything else he does is by and with the advice of the senate. On the other hand, taken from the Constitution, the congress has these powers:

"To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;"

It appears to me as if Dr. Paul, with his twenty years experience as a congressman, does know a little bit more about the constitution and what it says than the journalist gives him credit for.

Mr. Boyer's second point is to suggest that Dr. Paul is an isolationist instead of a noninterventionist. He asserts that Dr. Paul is an isolationist because he wants out of some organizations formed some sixty years ago through the Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange, a system that failed in the early 1970's by the way. Let's make this clear, Dr. Paul is a noninterventionist. This means he does not believe the United States should interfere in the internal affairs of another nation. I happen to agree with this philosophy. We would not want some foreign power interfering with our internal affairs, so why should we interfere with theirs? As far as getting out of some musty old organizations that aren't doing us any good anyway, I say go for it. This doesn't mean that Ron Paul wants to stop trading with other countries. On the contrary, it means he wants to trade with them on a voluntary basis, not by force of treaty. This is how all trade should be done. The U.N. does not necessarily help accomplish this.

Mr. Boyer asserts that Ron Paul has stated he would get out of Iraq immediately. Again, Mr. Boyer is misrepresenting what Ron Paul has said. He has stated time and again that he would get out of Iraq, and indeed out of every country our military occupies, as quickly as possible. Now, if Mr. Boyer wants to assume that as quickly as possible means immediately, that's his prerogative, but Ron Paul was in the military and he realizes that he can't simply pull out, that the withdrawal has to be organized rather than chaotic. So yes, Ron Paul would begin the program of withdrawing the troops from Iraq immediately and we all know that process would take some time. That timetable is a lot sooner than all the other Republican candidates who would keep the troops in Iraq indefinitely, as we have in Germany, South Korea, etc.

Mr. Boyer's fourth point is the intimation that Ron Paul is crazy. He suggests that because Ron Paul's websites warn of a very real danger world government could pose to our sovereignty that he has lost his mind. This ploy is quite upsetting. Mr. Boyer is another mainstream journalist who exposes his own paranoia when trying to expose Ron Paul's. Mr. Boyer is obviously frightened, in my opinion, of a world where no one is allowed to paint their helicopters black. Why, to him, the thought of people even talking about helicopters being painted black is fear mongering at its worst. No talking about helicopters being painted black or you're going to the loony bin to sing songs with world leaders that never leave their own country. But seriously, does he really think that the United States leaving these organizations would mean the end of the world? Would the WTO, U.N. and other organizations fail if the United States is not a member of their little club? Perhaps it's time we just let the other countries of the world worry about their own internal affairs and they just let us worry about our internal affairs and we all agree that trade should be done on a voluntary basis.

His fifth point, that Iran might create a nuclear weapon and needs to be attacked now, is the point that sets Ron Paul apart from the crowd. He is the only Republican candidate that has come out and said that he would not start a war with Iran. We can hardly afford to keep Iraq going. Most people want out of Iraq. Iran is much bigger. It has ties with China, India and Russia. There's no telling what would happen if a conflagration was started in that country. I don't want to find out. There has been enough death and destruction caused as a result of our foreign policies, and it's time for that to end. The United States of America was supposed to be a compassionate country where the poor and the down trodden could come to make a better life for themselves, not a country that kills the poor and down trodden in the streets of their nation and destroys what little infrastructure they had in the first place. It's time to stop threatening countries, to start treating them like human beings, to start trading with them fairly, equitably and responsibly. In this way we can start influencing them diplomatically instead of forcefully at the point of a gun.

Mr. Boyer concludes by saying that play time is over. I have to agree with him. It's time for Ron Paul supporters to pull out all the stops. It's time to put your money where your mouth is. It's time to quiet all these nay sayers who think that Ron Paul's supporters are few and far between. It's time to show our strength. Donate. Put on the bumper stickers. Keep going to those rallies and holding up your signs. Keep submitting those videos to Youtube. Keep blogging. Keep writing those articles. Let those in the minority, those like Mr. Boyer, those who think that their vision is the only clear vision, let these people know that they can no longer tell us what to think. Let them know that it is time for them to worry about themselves and not about everyone else. Let them know that the majority of people want to accept responsibility for themselves and want government out of their lives. Let these people know that the ideas of freedom, liberty, smaller government and self reliance are still viable ideas today that resonate with Americans. It is time to elect Ron Paul and send the message that we wish the rest of the politicians to stop playing with our lives.