Conspiracy Realists - Wilton D. Alston

I have had some disagreements with a couple of the Lew Rockwell regulars about what happened on 9/11. Not that I have a specific theory. But I certainly find certain things terribly wrong with the official story. Of course, the events of that day in 2001 were no different than any other crisis event of the past 20 years. Even some of the players are the same. For instance, Controlled Demolition, Inc. was the company paid to destroy the Murrah building in Oklahoma City, ultimately denying evidence to an independent investigation.

That same company was given the contract to cart off the evidence at the WTC complex on September 22, 2001 - a mere 11 days after the event transpired.

My point in mentioning this is that anyone who dares even consider that the government isn't telling the whole story is considered a complete whack job. I note that even Lew Rockwell, who has gladly posted other articles by Alston, and isn't somebody I would consider as timid, won't allow much talk on his blog unless it is critical of folks in the 9/11 truth movement.

Wilt Alston has a wonderful, well-reasoned article about this.

Enjoy (Conspiracy Realists of the World Unite!). Thanks to Karen DeCoster for pointing it out.

Fred Thompson's Campaign of Terror

I have been saying for years that the real terrorists are those in Washington who continually attempt to instill terror in the hearts of their constituency. It is our "representatives" who hate our freedom, not so-called Muslim extremists. Fred Thompson proves me right. Again.

In South Carolina, Thompson spoke to a crowd of 400, with very little in his speech, if anything, addressing substantial issues but this caught my eye.

In his speech, Thompson assailed "unbearable tax burdens," called for restrained spending, and argued for a smaller federal government. He expressed his opposition to the immigration bill in Congress and decried the flow of illegal immigrants from Cuba, saying: "I don't imagine they're coming here to bring greetings from Castro. We're living in the era of the suitcase bomb."

As Giuliani has shown his utter ignorance regarding matters of foreign policy blowback, so too is Thompson. Is it accidental when one uses such blatant misinformation in order to scare people into voting for them?

There has been only one nation to ever develop a nuclear weapon that could be delivered by "hand", and that is....yup..The United States.

While it is infinitely popular in the media and in political circles to perpetuate this myth, it is just so much hogwash. The fact that Thompson even made the inference disqualifies him as being a serious choice for the Presidency since he either:

• Knows that there is no such thing as a 'suitcase nuke' and wants to perpetuate the myth for purely selfish reasons.
• Is completely ignorant of this fact and is himself scared to death.

In short, he is either a liar or a brainless coward. Not my idea of a President anyone should entrust with a nuclear arsenal.

You Ain't Seen Noting Yet (Ron Paul is just getting Warmed Up)

An Excellent interview of Ron Paul can be found here, and boy is Dr. Paul preaching it.

Muckraker Report: Where do you stand on Guantanamo?

Congressman Ron Paul: Shut it down. The current rationale at Guantanamo is based on the false premise that detainees are not entitled to due process protections. I support court decisions recognizing fundamental human rights, such as habeas corpus. Again, this is an issue that flies in the face of our civic and legal traditions as outlined in the Constitution. As such, I see no purpose for continuing the facility.

John Larson (D - Connecticut) "Ron Paul.. nerve..without fear"

Iowans for Tax Relief: Not Credible

I have no idea who Jennifer Reynolds is, but she makes some interesting sobservations in this article.

Apparently Ed Failor was supposed to take a leave of absense while running the McCain campaign in Iowa so as not to present a "conflict of interest". Rich.

Iowans for Tax relief it turns out is despised by people actually seeking tax relief in Iowa. Why am I not surprised? The organization has done nothing to actually work for tax relief, in fact quite the opposite is true.

The group "Iowans for Tax Relief" has a name that belies its purpose. It supports special interest carve-outs and corporate welfare tax subsidies that shrink the tax base and raise the rates on the rest of us. It also refuses to even consider eliminating the deduction for state income taxes in exchange for lower rates. All of this gets the Iowa tax system great publicity. Earlier this week Iowa was listed by the Tax Foundation as having one of the ten worst tax environments for business, thanks in no small part to the work of Iowans for Tax Relief.

The above article points out that Iowa has the highest business tax in the U.S. at 12%. Ouch.

Harris Poll: Ron Paul doubles support.

It may not seem like much but according to the latest Harris Poll, Ron Paul went from 2% to 4% between May and June.

Interestingly enough, Harris is throwing in non-candidates such as Colin Powell (28%) and Newt Gingrich (14%). Not that this would make a difference in the numbers but since Newt has indicated he won't run and Powell isn't running, what's the point in including them?

Don't look now but it looks like that "internet-only" support is spreading to the "real world."

Bet on Ron Paul? Odds are moving in his favor

According to sportsbook.com:

Noteworthy News Regarding Sportsbook.com Online Gambling:

• Hillary Clinton at 2 to 1 odds for a Payout of $2 for Every $1 Bet or $200 for Every $100 Bet
• Mayor Michael Bloomberg Goes From 150 to 1 Odds to 2 to 1 odds in just days
• Fred Thomas Betting Odds Open at 20 to 1 with a Payout Potential of $2000 for Every $100 Bet
• Ron Paul Odds Slashed Dramatically From 200 to 1 to 15 to 1 in Just One Month - Payout $1500 for every $100 bet

Ron Paul's Campaign watched in Australia

In an article published by YourGuide, the Washington correspondent for Batemansbay, Anne Davies, writes about the internet phenomenon in both American and Australian politics.

Very interesting was this bit apparently coming from pollsters regarding younger voters.

But the real value of internet campaigns is they can energise young voters, who have had relatively low participation rates compared with those over 65.

Thanks to the Iraq war and rising college tuition fees, a record number of voters aged 18 to 29 is likely to turn out to vote in next year's election.

I personally dismiss the notion that young people are voting, as seems implied here, because they want free college tuition. However, all of the pundits shoving down neocon (R) and noecon-lite (D) down our throats, do not seem to mention this remarkable statistic when talking about Ron Paul's internet success.

In fact, CBS news reported after the 2004 that the predictions were true. More importantly that they showed up to vote for Kerry. Were they all liberals or were they showing up to kick out George Bush?

Andrew Sullivan's speculations seem to have much more merit than detractors of the Ron Paul Revolution would have us believe. And yes, they are also more likely to have cell phones. So what we are seeing in the pre-election polls is what we have always seen and it doesn't reflect reality.

Also of interest is that shortly after the election, the Main Stream Media had reported the youth vote didn't show up. According to Mike Connery at futuremajority.com, the story I linked above was actually corrected only after the "damage was done".

As usual, you can expect the MSM to spin things in whatever way will leave the electorate dejected and apathetic. "Leave the hard decisions up to the experts..."

Ms. Davies continues to report about Ron Paul:

Perhaps the biggest surprise of the cyber campaign is Ron Paul (ronpaul2008.com), an outsider in the Republican race according to all the published official polls, which put his support at about 2 per cent. But not according to the internet.

On Technorati, which tracks activity in the blogosphere, Ron Paul is up there among the most searched terms with Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, YouTube and iPhone.

The obscure Texan congressman and former gynaecologist is a true libertarian: he's a low-tax, small-government man, which also extends to keeping government out of foreign policy forays such as the Iraq war, which he opposed from the outset. He also opposes abortion. According to Republican strategists, the reason for his popularity is that his libertarian views are appealing to the small but vocal groups of Republicans that gravitate to the internet.

Others say it's the result of "freeping" or "spamming" by his tech-savvy supporters - something Mr Paul's communications director, Jesse Benton rejects. "We just have much more passionate supporters online."

Whether the support is real or confected, the internet has so far served Mr Paul well.

Great Article/Interview at the Fairfield County Weekly

Phil Maymin had an article published that was part commentary, part interview. Lew Rockwell's blog also has a link to this excellent article.

Everybody talks about freedom, peace, smaller government, fiscal responsibility and so on. The Republican Party traditionally talks about it and when people vote for them, as with the Contract with America, or Ronald Reagan, they do practically nothing of what they promised. Once we vote for them, the size of government increases and the debt increases. Why should we believe you now? Can you offer something more than just promises?

Excellent question: As a ten-term Congressman active in public life for three decades, my record has been one of consistency. I say what I mean and mean what I say even if I’m the only correct vote in the congress.

Bikers, Punkers and Democrats...Oh My

Ron Paul arrived in Austin shortly after the South Carolina debates for a fund raiser. Expecting 350, what they actually got was 700 at the Bob Bullock Museum. The NBC Affiliate in Austin covered his arrival which included a local biker group as escort, a nice welcome by punk rockers and democrats as well as the usual Ron Paul libertarians and republicans who support him. Enjoy.

Great Ron Paul Profile

Michael Brendan Dougherty, Editor at the American Conservative, wrote a great profile on Ron Paul which was picked up by the Sacramento Bee. You can read it here.

You can't Make this stuff up folks. Mitt Romney's Ideas on Saving America from Terrorists

Mitt Romney wants the metro sexual vote apparently. He saw "Team America: World Police" and is too dense to understand that it was a piece of satire.....

Included in this strategy is the creation of a new force to defeat Jihadist efforts and win hearts and minds. Governor Romney will establish a Special Partnership Force (SPF), with the leadership core drawn from Army Special Forces and Intelligence personnel.

This Force would work hand-in-glove with local host governments. Together, they would seek to target and separate terrorists from the local population, and to disrupt and defeat them. They would have the authority to call in all elements of civil assistance and humanitarian aid. Where they felt it was necessary, they could call in Delta and SEAL military resources. Their goal would be to build national institutions of stability and freedom, and to promote the rule of law and human rights.

The Special Partnership Force must be driven by intelligence, highlyw integrated with all our sources of power and with those of other nations, and coordinated with the host country and in full partnership with it. This can not be another one-off capability. It must be a sustainable capacity that is a fixture of our war against violent Jihadism.

The "Special Partnership Force?" Oh man that is funny. And so, well...gay. I guess it sounds gay to me because it reminds me of "domestic partnerships" which are the alternative to marriage for gays in those states that allow it. I really hoped he was kidding but he's serious.

"Hi fella. We're special partners from the government and we're here to HELP you! Hit it girlth...."

Y----MCA...it's fun to stay at the....

My Ron Paul Testimonial

At the Daily Paul, manystrom asks: "Please Help: Why is Ron Paul THE Internet Candidate??"

If you want some more evidence as to why Ron Paul is going to win in a lanslide, read the comments there.

Here's my story:

I first found out about Ron Paul before Tim Berners Lee (not Al Gore) created the internet. Back then, the "internet" was usenet. Ron Paul's speeches and columns were often posted to talk.politics.guns. Living in California as I did, this was a big issue for me. That was 17 years ago.

In 1998 or so, I discovered free republic. I had changed my party affiliation to Libertarian and found lots of Ron Paul articles posted there. At the time the Free Republic community was very activist and libertarian leaning and Paul's articles got mixed reviews. The libertarians loved him and the country club republicans despised him.

Well, in 2000 I moved into Ron Paul's district. By then, Jim Robinson had purged most of the libertarians and packed the site with establishment republican supporters.

Shortly after 9.11, those of us left on FR with libertarian leanings saw that we were going to be demagogued into war. One of my friends on FR was friends with Kent Snyder of the Liberty Committee and believed that a military action was not the way to go in this case. Telegraphing your intent and then actually acting 3 months later (it takes along time to mobilize the army of an empire) made no sense.

Since I was in Paul's district, I was nominated to approach Ron Paul with a proposal that we re-institute a constitutional approach - Letters of Marque and Reprisal.

That was on September 14th. The smoke was still rising when 'Uriel' proposed the idea. The thread is still there:

CAPITALISM AT ITS FINEST... A Modest Proposal for Citizen's War

I called Ron Paul's office as his constituent and let them know that the Liberty Committeewould be forwarding a proposal and would he please consider the proposal because it was currently the only sane thing I had heard in the days following the attacks.

On October the 10th, Ron introduced two bills the details of which I posted on Free republic here:

Breaking: Ron Paul introduces Marque and Reprisal Bills in House

Another post from that time is here: Freepers! Mount UP! Letters of Marque and Reprisal: How YOU can help stop terrorism!

Name me any other politician who would have responded with seriousness to what was being proposed.

"That's nice, here's a form letter."

This is why I will forever be grateful and loyal to Ron Paul. He's the one guy there in Washington who gets it.

The Fiat Money System (Money as Debt)

Here's a great video called Money as Debt.

If you are at all curious as to Ron Paul's "kooky" stance on the Federal Reserve system, and why he wants to abolish it, this video explains the insanity of current US Monetary policy. And in reality the world's monetary policy since it was just a couple of years ago that the last hold-out, Switzerland finally was bullied into abandoning the gold standard.

The Prince of Pot (Ron Paul Supporter)

Marc Emery is fighting for his life. His only real hope to avoid a life term in an American Prison is if Ron Paul becomes President. Marc lives in Canada and has had a thriving marijuana seed business that has drawn the ire of the DEA. He has also been a Ron Paul supporter for years. He points out what I've been talking about here. Ron's support is real and it covers a wide swath of demographics.

Our magazine circulates 85% of its 66,000 copies in the USA, and believe me, the vast majority of my pothead audience is not right wing or Republican or conservative. But they are registering to vote, affiliating Republican and swallowing every natural bias against neo-con Republicans and doing whatever it takes to get Ron Paul the nomination.

What the DEA is doing to Marc is criminal.

Ron Paul is Going to Win

I am old enough to have worked for the Reagan Campaign. I was 18 in 1980 and I was excited to be a part of his campaign. So were a lot of people I knew. 4 years earlier I had begged my mother to vote for Carter. Hey, he was smart and I thought he answered questions honestly. Given the choice between Ford and Carter, I just liked Carter more. He inspired me. Then again, I was 14. What the hell did I know?

In my junior year of high school, we had 21% interest rates, gas lines and a general sense that the government and our big American corporations were choking under federal regulations. Carter was saying he had a plan and Reagan was saying that the government was not the solution but the problem. That line went through my skull like a lightning bolt.

27 years later, with much cynicism washed under the bridge, I have the same feeling of excitement that I did in 1980. Had I actually looked at Reagan's record, I would have noticed some baggage. Like the Assault Weapons ban that he signed as Governor of California.

Ron Paul has no baggage. Not a blemish on his 20 year congressional record. Not a stain on his principles. Not an acceptance of cash from a donor dedicated to anti-libertarian causes.

It is his record which is the foundation for his success. Whereas, his competitors in the Republican and Democrat parties are allied with whomever has the highest bid, Ron Paul cannot be bought. I saw somebody comment that Ron Paul was the best thing to happen to the Congress in 20 years. I thought "twenty years ago" that was true. Twenty years ago and more was when he was first elected to Congress. He was way ahead of his time. He certainly has been long overdue.

What constitutes the proof in my mind that Ron will win is the broad, fanatic support Dr. Paul has garnered from every imaginable demographic. We tend to think that the internet phenomenon includes the white-collar crowd. Nope. This is an anecdotal example, but I've seen enough evidence of the same here in Austin as that of the Lawrence, Kansas painting contractor pictured above. He's excited, motivated and he initiated a clever ad campaign for Ron Paul. And there's lots of others like him. You can find new uploaded videos every day on youtube with similar themes. Ron Paul not only has a chance, he's going to win. And he's going to win in a landslide.

The sleeping giant is waking up and it won't take anything less than "Dr. No" for an answer.

ronpaul demidog

Great Letter to the Editor: Paul is Different

From the Wichita, Kansas Eagle.

Paul is different

I must take issue with Jim Borgman's editorial cartoon (June 9 Opinion) showing an elephant sitting in front of many bowls of vanilla ice cream. It was obviously meant to convey the idea that all the GOP presidential candidates are uniformly similar and bland.

This is not the case regarding Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who is currently serving his 10th term.

Paul, also a physician, has a voting record in Congress that is consistently and strictly according to the U.S. Constitution. He never votes for a bill that goes beyond what the Constitution allows and is known as "Dr. No" for this reason.

Paul has never voted for increased taxes, an unbalanced budget, going to war (although he did vote to allow the military to go after al-Qaida following the Sept. 11 attacks), and he has voted against the Iraq war, the USA Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act (which stripped us of the right of habeas corpus).

Paul has not accepted any increase in pay since returning to Congress. He returns a large portion of his allotment for staff and office expenses each year to the U.S. Treasury. No lobbyists darken his door, as they know they are wasting their time.

Borgman was dead wrong. Paul is no bowl of the same old vanilla the rest of the crowd is serving up. He is not just another politician, but rather a statesman of a kind all but extinct in this day and age.

Please go to the Web site RonPaul2008.com for more information on this rarity in American politics.

STEVEN A. ROSILE Wichita

Ron Paul on MSNBC with Chris Jansing

Here. And it's a very good interview.

Paris Hilton Endorses Ron Paul

Lauer asked if she had made any lasting relationships among the other inmates.

"I don't know. Only God knows. I've been praying lots as you probably know already from my interview with Barbara Walters. I told the girls that if we don't see each other after we get out, it's basically, you know, like up to God and stuff. He's in charge of like everything! But even if God decides we can't be friends after we get out of jail, we can think of each other as we go into the voting thingy and know we're voting for Ron Paul together."

Fernickus Bronst strikes again.

GOP Changes Its Name

From the Spoof

Who is Fernickus Bronst anyway?

ronpaul demidog GOP satire

Carol Paul: Ron Paul's Life Story

Carol Paul writes an article about Ron's life.

ronpaul

Fred Thompson's Web Presence

Somebody has been working overtime setting up Fred Thompson's on-line presence. But there appears to be a stark difference in what is going on with Thompson's presence and Ron Paul's.

It's a facade. Literally.

Somebody planted in the media (specifically Jay Lenno) that Fred's "army" call themselves "fredheads" but looking at the facade they've erected, it is more likely that one of Thompson's campaign staffers came up with the term and hired a few web consultants to create a "presence" and craft Leno some scripted questions to promote the idea of a grass roots campaign.

For instance, fredheads dot com (registered on May 29 of 2007 by somebody in Fred's home state of TN) went live on June 7. Apparently this serves up the "fredheads" forum. Since then, there have been a whopping 109 posts by by 63 users (about 1 post every 2 hours). Based on the content (Hollywood Fred: What's your favorite Fred Thompson role!) it could well be that the 63 users are his staffers hoping to generate enough "buzz" to attract real users...

This was my favorite post by 'admin':

Subject: I can say WOW

We are getting some amazing email from both members and non-members of this board. There is a genuine feeling of excitment about this campaign and we are the initial groundswell of support. [sic]

I can say "wow" too, but it wouldn't be about Fred's internet 'groundswell'.

Interesting to me is the timing. Fred Hasn't announced yet but there is this concerted effort behind the scenes to organize an internet presence disguised as a grassroots effort by "fredheads." Hmmm. Contrast that with Ron Paul's presence which has taken place at already popular sites such as MySpace, technorati, Youtube, Meetup etc. These sites are the natural social networking arenas on the web.

Sure there are some unofficial Ron Paul forums and sites out there but the bulk of the activity is taking place in the blogosphere and on the social networks. Where are the Thompson supporters on Youtube?

Thompson's bizarre video response to Michael Moore is on youtube with about 59,000 views but Thompson's campaign hasn't put up a presence in the YouDecide2008 channel. And that response! Not only does it contain a veiled threat, it's a professional production. A pure Hollywood script with the scene opening on Thompson turning to the camera while reading what *must* be an important briefing to tell Michael Moore he has no time on his schedule to debate him. However, Michael, when you go visit your buddy Castro, keep in mind the last documentary film maker that went down there spent years getting electro shock treatment in one of Castro's mental institutions.

Fade to black while Thompson picks up his important briefing and turns back away from the camera.

I'm pretty sure that Fred made the video especially for the only fans he has on the internet at Free Republic.com.

There are other videos that have been put up over the past year but most have less than 5000 views.

Lawyers for Thompson (registered privately with go daddy on May 31 ) is a good example of the facade. With links running down the sidebar representing every state, all but a few of the "affiliates" use the same blog layout and font and like the main site virtually no comments. Perhaps lawyers don't visit the web or don't do a lot of grassroots political activity. Or maybe aren't that interested in Fred's campaign....

The main "fredheads site" is fredheads usa dot org. It is exactly the same layout and design as the lawyers for Thompson site and is also registered privately with go daddy.

It is also conspicuously void of any significant activity other than by whomever is populating it with blog entries. There is a lot of activity (creating facades) in the past few weeks for a guy who hasn't decided to run yet. But not much in the way of actual traffic. It's early yet but doesn't look too promising.

fredthompson ronpaul

Il Douche!

Check out this great cartoon of the baffon Guliani....from The libertarian enterprise

Pew research suggests Ron Paul's Internet Success may well translate to real votes

Great analysis here by associated content regarding a recent Pew Research poll about where Americans are getting their political news.

The Pew study concluded that although many Americans do still get their political news from mainstream media sources (both online and through TV and newspapers), more and more voters are choosing to use the internet to find out more about the potential candidates. This would certainly help the case of "underdog" candidate Ron Paul, who thus far seems to be winning the election on the internet.

I'm sure part of the reason that people are turning to the internet is due to the mainstream media's refusal to actually cover candidates in depth. Part of that is most certainly due to the vast majority of the candidate's lack of depth but also due to other factors such as government pressure, bias and entertainment value. In spite of the fact that news is a big part of the media's budget, politics is boring to most viewers.

Those who are interested in politics will not find satisfaction from mainstream outlets by and large.

Ron Paul II?

Great piece here by Dan Sullivan at the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review regarding Giuliani's unintended consequences or "blowback". (Oh the irony!)

Then came the blowback. Fox's own post-debate Internet poll showed Paul out-polling Giuliani. Paul was praised by Pat Buchanan, featured on Bill Maher's HBO show and on Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show." Ron Paul Internet videos now dominate Republican candidates on YouTube and Paul's campaign chest is growing.

Suddenly the Paul campaign is on a roll, thanks to the blowback Giuliani's arrogance generated. Most of all, Giuliani proved Paul's point.

It is a terrible mistake for those on top to bully the less prominent. It's terrible foreign policy, and it's a terrible campaign strategy.

Still, it's better to see it from Candidate Giuliani than from President Giuliani. We've had enough arrogance in the Oval Office.

Zing!

Open Letter to Thomas L. Knapp: Please....

Thomas, give me a break.

You cannot possibly believe that Ron Paul is a racist and this 15 year old newsletter is truly representative of his views.

I accept his explanation and I also accept his statement that he accepts responsibility for the newsletter since it bore his name. Absolutely nothing he has ever said before or after that newsletter was published is racist in even the slightest way.

You may not remember me from back in the libertyforum or free republic days before then, but I was one of Harry Browne's staunchest supporters. I was at the antiwar Convention in 1999 and covered Harry and Patrick Buchanan. To my chagrin, I missed Ron Paul's speech.

Your tack here is much like Jacob Hornberger's was with Harry. And frankly, I think that Jacob was stirring the pot to get himself attention which is why I accused you of the same. If you are not now trying to take advantage of the overwhelming growth of interest in Ron Paul's candidacy on the net, then you are extremely sloppy.

If you had researched the allegations against Paul you'd know that there is nothing more there than an unfortunate blemish that reflects upon Paul's judgment years ago but not upon his character.

And while we're on the subject of strange things you're saying lately; for you to claim that libertarian ideals depend on a party apparatus is absurd. You wrote this on the 14th:

1) If one believes that the Republican Party cannot be reformed into a libertarian party, and that on the other hand the Libertarian Party is the only vehicle through which it is even remotely likely that libertarian ideals may -- sooner or later -- be translated into public policy, then Paul's campaign is worthy of denunciation by virtue of the fact that it will inevitably cause some people who are looking for a libertarian political party to mistake the GOP for that kind, or potentially that kind, of political party, at the expense of the LP.

The message of liberty needs no party. Furthermore, what's worse? That people might mistake the GOP as being libertarian, or that the message of liberty will be left solely in the hands of the LP and all of about 500 thousand people who will hear it?

Really now Thomas. The reason that Ron Paul is garnering so much support is because there isn't anyone on the planet who would mistake the current GOP as being even remotely libertarian, unless of course you consider dispensing "democracy" at gunpoint and bankrupting the nation, libertarian. His refreshing viewpoints and life-long, consistent dedication to libertarian principles are what makes him attractive to voters. He has no baggage. He has not wavered from his principles, he has served his community and his country and at 71, is still showing boyish enthusiasm for the message of liberty.

How many times have you denounced the "you're either with us or agin us" mentality only to now espouse it (albeit couched in flowery terms)?

Whether or not a libertarian runs under the Republican or Libertarian party banner is irrelevant. Though, it is absolutely true that under the Republican banner, there is no time or energy wasted on ballot access.

The Libertarian party has not in 30 years learned how to win elections. In the last 30 years Ron Paul has actually won 10 elections to Congress. I' will grant you that this is due partly because he hasn't had to waste a thin dime on ballot access.

You must have been just as disappointed as I when quite a few libertarians came out in favor of voting for Bush in 2000 because they were afraid of Gore and had no faith in their own party.

Or how about when so-called libertarians started coming out in favor of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Well this attack from you is about as disappointing to me. To see such a valued libertarian thinker as yourself resort to a low-grade, petty, smear of a man who deserves more respectful consideration, is extremely disappointing.

Not that you care, but I would recommend to Steve Kubby and other big-ell libertarians that it is time to go "all in" and support the one libertarian who actually has a chance to win the election - and has a track record of winning elections.

No offense to any Libertarian hopeful. I have always supported Libertarians. But this is one case where I go with Ron Paul rather than the LP. And I would never take personal shots at LP candidates even if they decide to keep running. What a waste! Why anyone would want to attack people who spread the message of liberty is beyond me.

I'll leave you with this. Back in 2001, Ron Paul personally worked with myself and others (I happened to be in his district at the time) to introduce legislation which would re-introduce Letters of Marque and Reprisal to go after Bin Laden.

Within 3 days of our request he was introducing it on the house floor. That is exactly the sort of thing which elicits such loyalty to him by his constituents. He "gets it" and he does the right thing.

Don't sell yourself short by resorting to a ridiculous smear campaign. It may elicit a lot of traffic for your blog. But I imagine in the long run it will leave a very bad taste in the mouths of those who, prior to this outburst, trusted your devotion to liberty.

Perhaps I shouldn't speak for others. Speaking strictly for myself, it is very disappointing.

Peace.

The Ron Paul Revolution: Our President

I said I was sick of politics. And I am. I am also cynical and jaded and bitter. I mean...the country elected Bush...TWICE...the second win coming after the disgusting Patriot Act was passed.

The thing is, I have been a fan of Ron Paul's since 1992 when I lived in California. I moved to his district just before it was gerrymandered and to the chagrin of the GOP, he still was able to defeat the establishment GOP challenger.

In all of the years that I've known of Ron Paul, I always wished that he could run for President though I assumed that his message would fall on deaf ears. Boy was I wrong. Just when I thought that I should start looking for places to settle as an expatriate, Ron Paul blasts on to the scene in a firestorm of excitement.

And the thing is...the people I am witnessing who "get it" are the very people I had discounted as being too disaffected to care. Young people. Old people. Black people. Brown people. White people and even Red people like myself.

The mainstream media is trying to discount Paul even though every media poll by the very media companies which televised the debates show Paul as the front runner after the debates.

Of course Gallup et al, won't even ask the people who still have land-lines if they've heard of Ron Paul or would vote for him.

I was a bit worried about that at first. However, I have thought of something that I haven't seen many (if any) of Ron Paul's supporters mention: the 100 million eligible voters that the mainstream media claims are "apathetic".

They're not apathetic. They're disgusted. And they are obviously not that influenced by the mainstream media. If they were to get excited about Ron Paul's candidacy and registered to vote....voila! President Ron Paul.

So all of you in the revolution who read this (all two of you), spread the word. Those are the people you must target if you want to insure he makes it past the primaries. Paul has proven already that he can take on the GOP machine in his own district. He can out raise them and has every time he's tried.

In fact, in 1996, he raised more money for his campaign than any house member not in leadership roles. The only two members who raised more money were Newt Gingrich and Bob Dornan and they received much from Lobbyists and special interests whereas the vast majority of Paul's donations came from individual contributers.

And that is the other way that Paul can win the GOP nomination. He can outspend them. That is, he can outspend them if you commit to helping him save our republic from the despots who have co-opted it for their own personal gain at the expense of your liberties.

Isn't your freedom worth a bit of your excess federal reserve notes? The government has been squeezing you dry through overt taxes like the income tax, the property tax, licensing fees and sales taxes. And covert ones like massive production of federal reserve notes (the true meaning of inflation) which reduces your buying power and transfers wealth into the hands of the banking and investment complex.

Ron Paul has proven that a large group of dedicated investors can beat the establishment. And he has done it consistently for 20 years. 10 terms.

Unlike prior Libertarian candidates who had great ideas but little experience in winning elections (or actually wielding the power bestowed upon them by voters), Ron Paul is very experienced. He's won 5 straight elections since 1996 against some well-connected people.

He is a winner. He is a champion of freedom. And you owe it to yourself to help purchase this election. For once in your life you can make a real difference. Your money will not be the speck compared to the multi-national corporate donations. Your, donation will be as humble or as large as thousands of other like-minded individuals who crave true freedom.

You can afford it. You can make a sacrifice for freedom. It's important. If you fail to make the sacrifice today....well....you know where this train is headed. I don't need to scare you. If you can't give money, and even if you can, talking to people about Ron Paul is the best way to give him the name recognition he will require to win the election in 2008.

Imagine what it would be like to have been involved and to be able to say to yourself , "That's my President."

Ron Paul could be our President. How cool would that be?