Want Change? Be A Weapon of Mass Dissent - Read "The President"
Monday, June 20, 2011
Ron Paul: I'm not a fringe candidate [NBC: 6-20-2011]
Read Ron Paul's book entitled The Revolution: A Manifesto
Strange Definitions of War and Peace - By Ron Paul - June 20, 2011
Last week I joined six Republican and three Democrat colleagues to file a lawsuit against the Obama administration over its illegal war against Libya. Now that more than 90 days have passed since the president began bombing Libya, no one can seriously claim that the administration has complied with the clear requirements of the 1973 War Powers Resolution.
In a remarkable act of chutzpah, the administration sent to Congress its response to the growing concern over its abuse of war powers. Its argument, in a nutshell, is that the War Powers Resolution is not relevant because US armed forces are not actually engaged in hostilities because Libya is so militarily weak it cannot fight back! This explanation would be laughable if not so horrific. The administration wants us to believe that there is no real violence because the victim cannot fight back? Imagine if this standard was applied to criminal law in the United States! I am sure Libyans on the receiving end of US and NATO bombs feel hostilities are quite definitely taking place.
We must recall the origins of these attacks on Libya. The Obama administration made no claim that Libyan leader Gaddafi was killing his civilian population. Rather, the claim was that Libya might begin killing its civilians in the future. One need not defend Gaddafi's regime -- and I most certainly do not -- to object to this flimsy and dangerous rationale for violating the sovereignty of another country. Imagine a scenario where the UN approves military action against the United States as a preventative humanitarian measure over US enforcement of its immigration laws, for example!
Now in Libya we see the possible use of depleted uranium shells, we see infrastructure destroyed, we see universities bombed, we see all the "collateral damage." Yet, this is a "humanitarian intervention”?
In our lawsuit against the administration, among other critical issues we are demanding that the courts provide relief and protection to the country from the administration's policy that a president may commit the United States to a war under the authority of the United Nations and NATO without authorization from Congress, and that previously appropriated funds by Congress may be used for an unconstitutional and unauthorized war in Libya or other countries. These are fundamental Constitutional issues and I expect the judicial branch to treat our challenge with the same level of gravity as we do in the legislative branch.
Remember, we were told that this attack would last "days, not weeks" and we are already three months and likely nearly a billion dollars into it. As the bombings obviously target Gaddafi's houses, even killing some of his family members, we can see that the real goal is regime change rather than protection of civilians. Do we know much about the rebels whose side we have taken in what is, in fact, a civil war?
Although it is a bit late, I am pleased to see that congressional leadership has started to listen to our constituents, who are solidly against this war on Libya. I commend Speaker Boehner's expressions of dissatisfaction with the administration over this war and I sincerely hope he will use the full constitutional authority granted to the legislative branch to bring into check an administration clearly out of control.
Polls show that the American people increasingly favor a truly conservative foreign policy: one that rejects the leftist, utopian doctrines of nation building and preemptive war, and one that is NOT funded by debt. Forcing the Obama administration to obey the clear letter of the law is one step towards restoring a traditional, patriotic foreign policy that serves American interests.
Read Ron Paul's latest book, Liberty Defined
In a remarkable act of chutzpah, the administration sent to Congress its response to the growing concern over its abuse of war powers. Its argument, in a nutshell, is that the War Powers Resolution is not relevant because US armed forces are not actually engaged in hostilities because Libya is so militarily weak it cannot fight back! This explanation would be laughable if not so horrific. The administration wants us to believe that there is no real violence because the victim cannot fight back? Imagine if this standard was applied to criminal law in the United States! I am sure Libyans on the receiving end of US and NATO bombs feel hostilities are quite definitely taking place.
We must recall the origins of these attacks on Libya. The Obama administration made no claim that Libyan leader Gaddafi was killing his civilian population. Rather, the claim was that Libya might begin killing its civilians in the future. One need not defend Gaddafi's regime -- and I most certainly do not -- to object to this flimsy and dangerous rationale for violating the sovereignty of another country. Imagine a scenario where the UN approves military action against the United States as a preventative humanitarian measure over US enforcement of its immigration laws, for example!
Now in Libya we see the possible use of depleted uranium shells, we see infrastructure destroyed, we see universities bombed, we see all the "collateral damage." Yet, this is a "humanitarian intervention”?
In our lawsuit against the administration, among other critical issues we are demanding that the courts provide relief and protection to the country from the administration's policy that a president may commit the United States to a war under the authority of the United Nations and NATO without authorization from Congress, and that previously appropriated funds by Congress may be used for an unconstitutional and unauthorized war in Libya or other countries. These are fundamental Constitutional issues and I expect the judicial branch to treat our challenge with the same level of gravity as we do in the legislative branch.
Remember, we were told that this attack would last "days, not weeks" and we are already three months and likely nearly a billion dollars into it. As the bombings obviously target Gaddafi's houses, even killing some of his family members, we can see that the real goal is regime change rather than protection of civilians. Do we know much about the rebels whose side we have taken in what is, in fact, a civil war?
Although it is a bit late, I am pleased to see that congressional leadership has started to listen to our constituents, who are solidly against this war on Libya. I commend Speaker Boehner's expressions of dissatisfaction with the administration over this war and I sincerely hope he will use the full constitutional authority granted to the legislative branch to bring into check an administration clearly out of control.
Polls show that the American people increasingly favor a truly conservative foreign policy: one that rejects the leftist, utopian doctrines of nation building and preemptive war, and one that is NOT funded by debt. Forcing the Obama administration to obey the clear letter of the law is one step towards restoring a traditional, patriotic foreign policy that serves American interests.
Read Ron Paul's latest book, Liberty Defined
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Why I’m suing the Obama administration over Libya - By Ron Paul
There is no issue more serious than war. Wars result in the loss of life and property. Wars are also expensive and an enormous economic burden.
Our Founders understood that waging war is not something that should be taken lightly, which is why Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution gives Congress — not the president — the authority to declare war. This was meant to be an important check on presidential power. The last thing the Founders wanted was an out-of-control executive branch engaging in unnecessary and unpopular wars without so much as a Congressional debate.
Unfortunately, that’s exactly the situation we have today in Libya.
That’s why I’ve joined several other members of Congress in a lawsuit against President Obama for engaging in military action in Libya without seeking the approval of Congress.
Of course, in 2007, then-Senator Obama spoke passionately about the need to go after the Bush administration for violating the War Powers Act — the very same thing he’s doing now. In fact, while speaking at DePaul University in October of 2007, then-Senator Barack Obama said the following:
“After Vietnam, Congress swore it would never again be duped into war, and even wrote a new law — the War Powers Act — to ensure it would not repeat its mistakes. But no law can force a Congress to stand up to the president. No law can make senators read the intelligence that showed the president was overstating the case for war. No law can give Congress a backbone if it refuses to stand up as the co-equal branch the Constitution made it.”
We are now taking Barack Obama’s past advice and standing up to the executive branch.
Of course, the War Powers Act is hardly an improvement on the U.S. Constitution because it does allow the president to go to war without the approval of Congress. But President Obama refuses to follow this law.
If a president does go to war unilaterally, the War Powers Act requires him to seek Congressional approval within 60 days. The president can get an extension of up to 90 days if he asks for more time — but President Obama did not do this.
His time is up.
The Obama administration recently issued a 38-page paper stating that Obama is not in violation of the War Powers Act because “U.S. operations do not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve U.S. ground troops.” Under this argument, President Obama could preemptively launch nuclear weapons against any country in the world without Congressional approval. Obviously, this is not what the Founders intended!
But even aside from violating the Constitution, it makes no economic sense for us to be engaged in yet another war overseas — especially during such tough economic times. For years now, we’ve been sending foreign aid to the very same Libyan government we’re now spending $10 million a day to fight. And it has been recently discovered that the Federal Reserve’s bank bailouts even benefited the Libyan National Bank. Now, we’re taxing the American people to bomb the very nation that we taxed them to prop up.
This makes no sense at all.
The Founding Fathers did not intend for the president to have the power to take our nation to war unilaterally without the approval of Congress.
It’s time for the president to obey the Constitution and put the American people’s national interest first.
Our Founders understood that waging war is not something that should be taken lightly, which is why Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution gives Congress — not the president — the authority to declare war. This was meant to be an important check on presidential power. The last thing the Founders wanted was an out-of-control executive branch engaging in unnecessary and unpopular wars without so much as a Congressional debate.
Unfortunately, that’s exactly the situation we have today in Libya.
That’s why I’ve joined several other members of Congress in a lawsuit against President Obama for engaging in military action in Libya without seeking the approval of Congress.
Of course, in 2007, then-Senator Obama spoke passionately about the need to go after the Bush administration for violating the War Powers Act — the very same thing he’s doing now. In fact, while speaking at DePaul University in October of 2007, then-Senator Barack Obama said the following:
“After Vietnam, Congress swore it would never again be duped into war, and even wrote a new law — the War Powers Act — to ensure it would not repeat its mistakes. But no law can force a Congress to stand up to the president. No law can make senators read the intelligence that showed the president was overstating the case for war. No law can give Congress a backbone if it refuses to stand up as the co-equal branch the Constitution made it.”
We are now taking Barack Obama’s past advice and standing up to the executive branch.
Of course, the War Powers Act is hardly an improvement on the U.S. Constitution because it does allow the president to go to war without the approval of Congress. But President Obama refuses to follow this law.
If a president does go to war unilaterally, the War Powers Act requires him to seek Congressional approval within 60 days. The president can get an extension of up to 90 days if he asks for more time — but President Obama did not do this.
His time is up.
The Obama administration recently issued a 38-page paper stating that Obama is not in violation of the War Powers Act because “U.S. operations do not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve U.S. ground troops.” Under this argument, President Obama could preemptively launch nuclear weapons against any country in the world without Congressional approval. Obviously, this is not what the Founders intended!
But even aside from violating the Constitution, it makes no economic sense for us to be engaged in yet another war overseas — especially during such tough economic times. For years now, we’ve been sending foreign aid to the very same Libyan government we’re now spending $10 million a day to fight. And it has been recently discovered that the Federal Reserve’s bank bailouts even benefited the Libyan National Bank. Now, we’re taxing the American people to bomb the very nation that we taxed them to prop up.
This makes no sense at all.
The Founding Fathers did not intend for the president to have the power to take our nation to war unilaterally without the approval of Congress.
It’s time for the president to obey the Constitution and put the American people’s national interest first.
Rand Paul & Dennis Kucinich Talk About Obama Libya Lawsuit On CNN
Read Ron Paul's book entitled Liberty Defined
Ron Paul "Bernankee Has A Completely Different Understanding Of What Caused The Depression"
Read Ron Paul's book entitled Mises and Austrian Economics: A Personal View
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
10 Congressmen (incl. Ron Paul) And A Law Professor Just Sued To Stop The War In Libya
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley and a handful of students filed a legal challenge today on behalf of 10 members of Congress protesting America's involvement in Libya.
According to a press release today, Turley filed the litigation on behalf of:
John Conyers, Jr (D., Mich)
Dan Burton (R., Ind.)
Mike Capuano (D., Mass.)
Howard Coble, (R., N.C.)
John Conyers, (D. Mich.)
John J. Duncan (R., Tenn.)
Tim Johnson (R., Ill.)
Walter Jones (R., N.C.)
Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio)
Ron Paul (R. Tex.)
See the whole story at: http://www.businessinsider.com/robert-johnson-gw-law-professor-just-filed-a-legal-challenge-to-us-involvement-in-libya-2011-6
According to a press release today, Turley filed the litigation on behalf of:
John Conyers, Jr (D., Mich)
Dan Burton (R., Ind.)
Mike Capuano (D., Mass.)
Howard Coble, (R., N.C.)
John Conyers, (D. Mich.)
John J. Duncan (R., Tenn.)
Tim Johnson (R., Ill.)
Walter Jones (R., N.C.)
Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio)
Ron Paul (R. Tex.)
See the whole story at: http://www.businessinsider.com/robert-johnson-gw-law-professor-just-filed-a-legal-challenge-to-us-involvement-in-libya-2011-6
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
A Little History on Romney's so called job creation skills as a Venture (I mean Vulture) capitalist
posted by Greg Chamberlain
As someone who has spent nearly my entire life in various aspects of the music business, I have been disgusted with those like Edgar Bronfman Jr., a wealthy trust fund brat and heir to the Seagrams liquor fortune. He is one man who single handedly destroyed much of the creative energy in the music business and turned it into a more vastly corporate business that litigated against nearly anyone with a creative bone, in his weak effort to grab and seek control.
Just came across a great article by Howie Klein, a former head of a Warner Bros. Records division known as Reprise Records. He get's into detail about how Mitt Romney's vulture capital company, Bain Capital, participated in assisting those such as the above mentioned Bronfman in the further destruction of another great music entity.
READ ARTICLE HERE: http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2011/06/is-mitt-romney-job-creator-or-job.html
As someone who has spent nearly my entire life in various aspects of the music business, I have been disgusted with those like Edgar Bronfman Jr., a wealthy trust fund brat and heir to the Seagrams liquor fortune. He is one man who single handedly destroyed much of the creative energy in the music business and turned it into a more vastly corporate business that litigated against nearly anyone with a creative bone, in his weak effort to grab and seek control.
Just came across a great article by Howie Klein, a former head of a Warner Bros. Records division known as Reprise Records. He get's into detail about how Mitt Romney's vulture capital company, Bain Capital, participated in assisting those such as the above mentioned Bronfman in the further destruction of another great music entity.
READ ARTICLE HERE: http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2011/06/is-mitt-romney-job-creator-or-job.html
Monday, June 13, 2011
Beth Reinhard of National Journal out of touch with reality after CNN GOP Debate
At the article linked just below on Yahoo News, Beth Reinhard of National Journal uncritically analyzed the GOP Presidential debate held by CNN on Monday June 13, 2011. She had the gall to write, "Ron Paul, the Texas congressman who has run for president before, did little to shake his image as a fringe candidate by talking too fast and dropping obscure subjects like "Keynesian bubble'' and "monetary policy'' into the conversation."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_exclusive/20110613/pl_yblog_exclusive/romney-bachmann-dominate-gracious-gop-debate
Sadly, Beth Reinhard is wildly of touch with reality. Ron Paul is well known to have called the booms and busts long before the majority in Congress saw what was coming. To discount his talk is downright ignorant and a blatant rah rah for the status quo. In my humble opinion, Ron Paul out-shined all of the candidates with substance. In fact, all of the candidates almost mimicked what Ron Paul has been talking about for about three decades. They should be on their knees bowing to him for the tea party movement which has given the GOP a leg up, I must add.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_exclusive/20110613/pl_yblog_exclusive/romney-bachmann-dominate-gracious-gop-debate
Sadly, Beth Reinhard is wildly of touch with reality. Ron Paul is well known to have called the booms and busts long before the majority in Congress saw what was coming. To discount his talk is downright ignorant and a blatant rah rah for the status quo. In my humble opinion, Ron Paul out-shined all of the candidates with substance. In fact, all of the candidates almost mimicked what Ron Paul has been talking about for about three decades. They should be on their knees bowing to him for the tea party movement which has given the GOP a leg up, I must add.
New Hampshire Presidential Debate 2012 - June 13, 2011
Questions and Answers featuring Ron Paul only (See videos below for entire debate with all candidates)
========================================
ENTIRE NEW HAMPSHIRE GOP DEBATE FEATURING ALL THE CANDIDATES FROM BEGINNING TO END
========================================
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
Part VI
Part VII
Part VIII
Part 9
Part 10
Read Ron Paul's Book entitled The Revolution: A Manifesto
========================================
ENTIRE NEW HAMPSHIRE GOP DEBATE FEATURING ALL THE CANDIDATES FROM BEGINNING TO END
========================================
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
Part VI
Part VII
Part VIII
Part 9
Part 10
Read Ron Paul's Book entitled The Revolution: A Manifesto
The Amazingly Accurate Predictions of Ron Paul
This video reveals Ron Paul's opinion about the "housing bubble" in 2001 and 2007, his opinion of the rationale and threat from Iraq in 2002, his amazing statement in 2007 at a presidential debate that Osama bin Ladin was hiding in Pakistan, and additional predictions that are coming true today.
If you're tired of electing officials who don't know what they are doing, take a look at Ron Paul. No other candidate for President has his principled voting record, and nobody else has his amazingly accurate record of predictions (culled from his knowledge of history and the Austrian school of economics).
Read Ron Paul's book entitled Liberty Defined
If you're tired of electing officials who don't know what they are doing, take a look at Ron Paul. No other candidate for President has his principled voting record, and nobody else has his amazingly accurate record of predictions (culled from his knowledge of history and the Austrian school of economics).
Read Ron Paul's book entitled Liberty Defined
Who's an 'Isolationist?' - by The Southern Avenger
When the Wall Street Journal dubbed the 87 House Republicans who voted to withdraw from Libya "isolationist" a lesson in terminology was in order. - by Jack Hunter a.k.a. The Southern Avenger
Read Ron Paul's Book: A Foreign Policy of Freedom
Read Ron Paul's Book: A Foreign Policy of Freedom
Ron Paul talks with David Asman Regarding Obamacare
Read Ron Paul's book entitled The Revolution: A Manifesto
The Keys to Economic Growth - by Ron Paul
Recent economic data show that U.S. job growth in May was negligible, while the official unemployment figure-- at least the figure the Labor Department admits to-- rose to 9.1%. The real unemployment figure, however, as compiled by economist John Williams, may well be higher than 20%. It is clear the U.S. economy is in terrible shape, and that no amount of government spending or Federal Reserve quantitative easing can reduce unemployment, increase real productivity, or address our debt fiasco.U.S. jobs and productivity are dependent on the accumulation of private capital to finance existing businesses or fund new entrepreneurial activity. Private capital-- whether accumulated by profitable U.S. businesses, invested by private equity and venture capital firms, or attracted from abroad-- is the key to economic growth and new jobs. But we cannot create jobs if we demonize profits, punish risk-taking capitalists, and stay hostile to foreign investment.
The steps to encouraging capital investment and creating new jobs in America are simple, though not easy:
· First and foremost, we must create a sound U.S. currency backed by gold or some other commodity respected by the market. No nation in history with a rapidly depreciating currency has attracted private capital. Unless and until we prohibit the Treasury and Federal Reserve from essentially creating money and credit from thin air, we cannot restore the U.S. economy.
· Second, we must create a favorable regulatory environment for U.S. business. This cannot be stressed enough. When businesses don’t know what’s coming next from the EPA, when Obamacare spikes their healthcare costs, or when the Dodd-Frank bill adds almost unknowable regulatory compliance burdens, businesses simply will not expand and hire. It is time to start shrinking the federal register.
· Third, we must stop spending trillions of dollars overseas on foreign wars. There is no point in debating a foreign policy we cannot afford. It no longer matters what neoconservatives want. Our interventionist foreign policy is financed on credit, and our credit limit has been reached. Our economy would be infinitely better off if those trillions of dollars had never been removed from the private economy or added to our debt.
· Finally, we must completely revamp the U.S. tax system and move to a territorial model that does not tax foreign source income. U.S. corporations are sitting on more than a trillion dollars in foreign earnings that cannot be repatriated to the U.S. because of taxes. We need to stop taxing unpatriated funds to bring those earnings home. Better yet, we need to abolish the income tax altogether.
The U.S. economy is in deep trouble. Congress needs to act immediately to restore the rule of law and create an environment that rewards, rather than punishes, the critical components of any healthy economy: capital accumulation and investment.
In this struggling economy it is essential for politicians to take a step back and think about what government has been doing to business in this country. In less than 200 years, the free market, property rights, and respect for the rule of law took this nation from a rough frontier to a global economic superpower. Today, however, our nation and our economy clearly are headed in the wrong direction.
Of course, America has never enjoyed absolute free-market capitalism: creeping government intrusion and special interest political patronage have existed and increased since our founding. But America historically has permitted free markets to operate with less government interference than other nations, while showing greater respect for property rights and the rule of law. Less government, respect for private property, and a relatively stable legal environment allowed America to become the wealthiest nation on earth.
By contrast, the poorest nations almost always demonstrate hostility for free markets, private property, and the rule of law. Capital formation, entrepreneurship, credit, and wealth accumulation are uniformly discouraged in poor countries. Private contracts are not reliably enforced, and private property is not secure in the hands of owners. The predictable result is widespread poverty and misery.
Read Ron Paul's latest Book entitled Liberty Defined
The steps to encouraging capital investment and creating new jobs in America are simple, though not easy:
· First and foremost, we must create a sound U.S. currency backed by gold or some other commodity respected by the market. No nation in history with a rapidly depreciating currency has attracted private capital. Unless and until we prohibit the Treasury and Federal Reserve from essentially creating money and credit from thin air, we cannot restore the U.S. economy.
· Second, we must create a favorable regulatory environment for U.S. business. This cannot be stressed enough. When businesses don’t know what’s coming next from the EPA, when Obamacare spikes their healthcare costs, or when the Dodd-Frank bill adds almost unknowable regulatory compliance burdens, businesses simply will not expand and hire. It is time to start shrinking the federal register.
· Third, we must stop spending trillions of dollars overseas on foreign wars. There is no point in debating a foreign policy we cannot afford. It no longer matters what neoconservatives want. Our interventionist foreign policy is financed on credit, and our credit limit has been reached. Our economy would be infinitely better off if those trillions of dollars had never been removed from the private economy or added to our debt.
· Finally, we must completely revamp the U.S. tax system and move to a territorial model that does not tax foreign source income. U.S. corporations are sitting on more than a trillion dollars in foreign earnings that cannot be repatriated to the U.S. because of taxes. We need to stop taxing unpatriated funds to bring those earnings home. Better yet, we need to abolish the income tax altogether.
The U.S. economy is in deep trouble. Congress needs to act immediately to restore the rule of law and create an environment that rewards, rather than punishes, the critical components of any healthy economy: capital accumulation and investment.
In this struggling economy it is essential for politicians to take a step back and think about what government has been doing to business in this country. In less than 200 years, the free market, property rights, and respect for the rule of law took this nation from a rough frontier to a global economic superpower. Today, however, our nation and our economy clearly are headed in the wrong direction.
Of course, America has never enjoyed absolute free-market capitalism: creeping government intrusion and special interest political patronage have existed and increased since our founding. But America historically has permitted free markets to operate with less government interference than other nations, while showing greater respect for property rights and the rule of law. Less government, respect for private property, and a relatively stable legal environment allowed America to become the wealthiest nation on earth.
By contrast, the poorest nations almost always demonstrate hostility for free markets, private property, and the rule of law. Capital formation, entrepreneurship, credit, and wealth accumulation are uniformly discouraged in poor countries. Private contracts are not reliably enforced, and private property is not secure in the hands of owners. The predictable result is widespread poverty and misery.
Read Ron Paul's latest Book entitled Liberty Defined
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Ron Paul: Conversation with The Candidate (55 Minute Interview)
Great 55 Minute interview on several important issues with Ron Paul held by WMUR TV in New Hampshire.
Read Ron Paul's latest book entitled Liberty Defined.
Read Ron Paul's latest book entitled Liberty Defined.
Ron Paul: NATO and the U.N. Has No Authority to Send Our Kids Off to War
Read Ron Paul's book entitled A Foreign Policy of Freedom
Monday, June 6, 2011
Holding the President Accountable on Libya - By Ron Paul
Last week, more than 70 days after President Obama sent our military to attack Libya without a congressional declaration of war, the House of Representatives finally voted on two resolutions attempting to rein in the president. This debate was long overdue, as polls show Americans increasingly are frustrated by congressional inaction. According to a CNN poll last week, 55 percent of the American people believe that Congress, not the president, should have the final authority to decide whether the U.S. should continue its military mission in Libya. Yet for more than 70 days Congress has ignored its constitutional obligations and allowed the president to usurp its authority.
Finally, Congressman Dennis Kucinich was able to bring to the floor a resolution asserting that proper constitutional war power authority resides with Congress. His resolution simply stated that "Congress directs the President to remove the United States Armed Forces from Libya by not later than the date that is 15 days after the date of the adoption of this concurrent resolution."
Opponents of the withdrawal resolution said the 15 day deadline was too abrupt. But as I pointed out during debate, the president attacked Libya abruptly – he didn't even bother to consult Congress – so why can't he order an end to military action just as abruptly? When members of Congress took an oath of office to defend the Constitution, we did not pledge to defend it only gradually, a little bit at a time. On the contrary, we must defend it vigorously and completely from the moment we take that oath. I was pleased that 87 Republicans were able to put the Constitution first and support this resolution.
House Speaker John Boehner offered his own resolution on the same day, which declared that Congress would not support the insertion of US ground troops into Libya. Although this unfortunately was far from adequate to satisfy our constitutional obligations, it certainly was a step in the right direction and I am pleased that it passed in the House. Just days before Speaker Boehner's resolution, an amendment to the defense authorization act prohibited the president from using any funds in the bill to insert US troops into Libya. A separate amendment last week prohibiting any funds appropriated to the Department of Homeland Security from being used to attack Libya came within just a handful of votes from passing. All of these votes demonstrate that members of Congress increasingly understand that our foreign wars are deeply unpopular with their constituents. We are broke, and the American people know it. They expect Congress to focus on fixing America's economic problems, rather than rubber stamping yet another open-ended military intervention in Libya.
I believe these resolutions and amendments indicate that the tide is turning in the right direction. I am confident we will see Congress move toward ending our unconstitutional wars. The American people are demanding no less. The president's attack on Libya was unconstitutional and thus unlawful. This policy must be reversed.
Buy a copy of Ron Paul's excellent book entitled A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce and Honest Friendship
Finally, Congressman Dennis Kucinich was able to bring to the floor a resolution asserting that proper constitutional war power authority resides with Congress. His resolution simply stated that "Congress directs the President to remove the United States Armed Forces from Libya by not later than the date that is 15 days after the date of the adoption of this concurrent resolution."
Opponents of the withdrawal resolution said the 15 day deadline was too abrupt. But as I pointed out during debate, the president attacked Libya abruptly – he didn't even bother to consult Congress – so why can't he order an end to military action just as abruptly? When members of Congress took an oath of office to defend the Constitution, we did not pledge to defend it only gradually, a little bit at a time. On the contrary, we must defend it vigorously and completely from the moment we take that oath. I was pleased that 87 Republicans were able to put the Constitution first and support this resolution.
House Speaker John Boehner offered his own resolution on the same day, which declared that Congress would not support the insertion of US ground troops into Libya. Although this unfortunately was far from adequate to satisfy our constitutional obligations, it certainly was a step in the right direction and I am pleased that it passed in the House. Just days before Speaker Boehner's resolution, an amendment to the defense authorization act prohibited the president from using any funds in the bill to insert US troops into Libya. A separate amendment last week prohibiting any funds appropriated to the Department of Homeland Security from being used to attack Libya came within just a handful of votes from passing. All of these votes demonstrate that members of Congress increasingly understand that our foreign wars are deeply unpopular with their constituents. We are broke, and the American people know it. They expect Congress to focus on fixing America's economic problems, rather than rubber stamping yet another open-ended military intervention in Libya.
I believe these resolutions and amendments indicate that the tide is turning in the right direction. I am confident we will see Congress move toward ending our unconstitutional wars. The American people are demanding no less. The president's attack on Libya was unconstitutional and thus unlawful. This policy must be reversed.
Buy a copy of Ron Paul's excellent book entitled A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce and Honest Friendship
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Ron Paul on CNN State of the Union
Excellent Ron Paul interview with CNN
Pick up Ron Paul's latest book entitled Liberty Defined
Pick up Ron Paul's latest book entitled Liberty Defined
Saturday, June 4, 2011
The Federal Reserve They make the Rules and the Money. What Candidate will challenge them?
48 years ago today, on June 4, 1963, a little known attempt was made to strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest. On that day President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. Mr. Kennedy's order gave the Treasury the power "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This meant that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation. In all, Kennedy brought nearly $4.3 billion in U.S. notes into circulation. The ramifications of this bill are enormous. Kennedy was assasinated not long after signing Executive Order No. 11110. No sitting President has challenged the Fed since. Ron Paul is the only 2012 candidate that will.
Read Ron Paul's bestselling book, END THE FED
Read Ron Paul's bestselling book, END THE FED
Media fraud, putting Romney as frontrunner. He has little actual draw at live events compared to Ron Paul
posted by Greg Chamberlain
I can't help but think that the mainstream media outlets and pollsters are perpetrating a major fraud upon the American people when they declare that presidential candidates such as Mitt Romney are frontrunners. It does not take a genius to realize, upon looking at actual footage from any Romney campaign event, that he has little actual support by actual people who are willing to show up to any campaign event. Any time Ron Paul shows up anywhere, great numbers of people show up and are loud. Romney's supporters are subdued and small in numbers. Case in point:
I can't help but think that the mainstream media outlets and pollsters are perpetrating a major fraud upon the American people when they declare that presidential candidates such as Mitt Romney are frontrunners. It does not take a genius to realize, upon looking at actual footage from any Romney campaign event, that he has little actual support by actual people who are willing to show up to any campaign event. Any time Ron Paul shows up anywhere, great numbers of people show up and are loud. Romney's supporters are subdued and small in numbers. Case in point:
Ron Paul "We Should Not Have These Perpetual Wars!"
Congressman Paul speaks to Faith & Freedom Coalition in Colorado on June 3, 2011
Friday, June 3, 2011
Paul on Debt Ceiling, Spending: Political Capital With Al Hunt on Bloomberg News
Ron Paul speaks with Al Hunt on Bloomberg News regarding Debt Ceiling. He explains that the government HAS defaulted on the debt by forced inflation through the printing of money, contrary to the lie being spread by pundits that the U.S. has never defaulted.
Click here to see video: http://youtu.be/En7cqNxLLtA
Pick up Ron Paul's best selling book entitled End The Fed.
Click here to see video: http://youtu.be/En7cqNxLLtA
Pick up Ron Paul's best selling book entitled End The Fed.
Ron Paul interview Tonight on Bloomberg News' Politcal Capital with Al Hunt at at 7 PM Eastern
Ron Paul will be interviewed tonight, Friday June 3, 2011 at 7PM EST on Bloomberg News' Political Capital with Al Hunt about U.S. Jobs Data.
June 3 (Bloomberg) -- Al Hunt, executive editor of Bloomberg News, talks about the May U.S. employment report and its implications for the Obama administration. Hunt, speaking on Bloomberg Television's "InBusiness with Margaret Brennan," also previews his interview with Texas Republican Representative Ron Paul on "Political Capital With Al Hunt," which airs this weekend. (Source: Bloomberg)
See video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb7W9_x31o8
June 3 (Bloomberg) -- Al Hunt, executive editor of Bloomberg News, talks about the May U.S. employment report and its implications for the Obama administration. Hunt, speaking on Bloomberg Television's "InBusiness with Margaret Brennan," also previews his interview with Texas Republican Representative Ron Paul on "Political Capital With Al Hunt," which airs this weekend. (Source: Bloomberg)
See video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb7W9_x31o8
Ron Paul & Jason Chaffetz team up with Dennis Kucinich against illegal invasion attacks upon Libya
Ron Paul & Jason Chaffetz team up with Dennis Kucinich against illegal invasion attacks upon Libya to withdraw from the region on grounds that entry into Libya was ILLEGAL.
Ron Paul expects debt limit deal, but 'big trouble' ahead - Ron Paul Reuters Interview
Pick up Ron Paul's best selling book entitled "End The Fed"
Ron Paul: Interview regarding FDA Censorship and recipient of Healthkeepers Health Freedom Leadership Award
Congressman Paul interviewed regarding Health Freedom Act to end FDA censorship as well as his Unpasturized Milk Bill that would stop the FDA from banning unpasturized raw milk.
He is also the recipient of Healthkeepers Health Freedom Leadership Award
He is also the recipient of Healthkeepers Health Freedom Leadership Award
Ron Paul: Statement Introducing Health Freedom Legislation
Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce two pieces of legislation restoring the First Amendment rights of consumers to receive truthful information regarding the benefits of foods and dietary supplements. The first bill, the Health Freedom Restoration Act, codifies the First Amendment by ending the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s efforts to censor truthful health claims. The second bill, the Freedom of Health Speech Act, codifies the First and Fifth Amendment by requiring the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) to prove that health claims are false before it takes action to stop manufactures and marketers from making the claims.
The American people have made it clear they do not want the federal government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements, yet the FDA and the FTC continue to engage in heavy-handed attempts to restrict such access. The FDA continues to frustrate consumers’ efforts to learn how they can improve their health even after Congress, responding to a record number of constituents’ comments, passed the Dietary Supplement and Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). FDA bureaucrats are so determined to frustrate consumers’ access to truthful information that they are even evading their duty to comply with four federal court decisions vindicating consumers’ First Amendment rights to discover the health benefits of foods and dietary supplements.
FDA bureaucrats have even refused to abide by the DSHEA section allowing the public to have access to scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in treating diseases by claiming that every article concerning this topic is evidence of intent to sell an unapproved and unlawful drug.
Because of the FDA’s censorship of truthful health claims, millions of Americans may suffer with diseases and other health care problems they may have avoided by using dietary supplements. For example, the FDA prohibited consumers from learning how folic acid reduces the risk of neural tube defects for four years after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended every woman of childbearing age take folic acid supplements to reduce neural tube defects. This FDA action contributed to an estimated 10,000 cases of preventable neutral tube defects!
The FDA also continues to prohibit consumers from learning about the scientific evidence that glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate are effective in the treatment of osteoarthritis; that omega-3 fatty acids may reduce the risk of sudden death heart attack; that calcium may reduce the risk of bone fractures; and that vitamin D may reduce the risk of osteoporosis, hypertension, and cancer.
The Health Freedom Restoration Act will force the FDA to at last comply with the commands of Congress, the First Amendment, numerous federal courts, and the American people by codifying the First Amendment prohibition on prior restraint. Specifically, the Health Freedom Restoration Act stops the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative, mitigative, or preventative effects of dietary supplements. The Health Freedom Restoration Act also stops the FDA from prohibiting the distribution of scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against disease. The FDA has proven that it cannot be trusted to protect consumers’ rights to make informed choices. It is time for Congress to stop the FDA from censoring truthful health information.
The Freedom of Health Speech Act addresses the FTC’s violations of the First Amendment. Under traditional constitutional standards, the federal government bears the burden of proving an advertising statement false before censoring that statement. However, the FTC shifted the burden of proof to industry. The FTC presumes health advertizing is false and compels private parties to prove the ads (and everything the regulators say the ads imply) to be true to a near conclusive degree. This violation of the First and Fifth Amendments is harming consumers’ by blocking innovation in the health foods and dietary supplement marketplace.
The Freedom of Health Speech Act requires the government actually prove that speech is false before the FTC acts against the speaker. This is how it should be in a free society where information flows freely in order to foster the continuous improvement that benefits us all. The bill also requires that the FTC warn parties that their advertising is false and give them a chance to correct their mistakes before the FTC censors the claim and imposes other punishments.
Mr. Speaker, if we are serious about putting people in charge of their health care, then shouldn’t we stop federal bureaucrats from preventing Americans from learning about simple ways to improve their health. I therefore call on my colleagues to stand up for good health and the Constitution by cosponsoring the Health Freedom Restoration Act and the Freedom of Health Speech Act.
Pick up Ron Paul's latest book entitled "Liberty Defined"
The American people have made it clear they do not want the federal government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements, yet the FDA and the FTC continue to engage in heavy-handed attempts to restrict such access. The FDA continues to frustrate consumers’ efforts to learn how they can improve their health even after Congress, responding to a record number of constituents’ comments, passed the Dietary Supplement and Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). FDA bureaucrats are so determined to frustrate consumers’ access to truthful information that they are even evading their duty to comply with four federal court decisions vindicating consumers’ First Amendment rights to discover the health benefits of foods and dietary supplements.
FDA bureaucrats have even refused to abide by the DSHEA section allowing the public to have access to scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in treating diseases by claiming that every article concerning this topic is evidence of intent to sell an unapproved and unlawful drug.
Because of the FDA’s censorship of truthful health claims, millions of Americans may suffer with diseases and other health care problems they may have avoided by using dietary supplements. For example, the FDA prohibited consumers from learning how folic acid reduces the risk of neural tube defects for four years after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended every woman of childbearing age take folic acid supplements to reduce neural tube defects. This FDA action contributed to an estimated 10,000 cases of preventable neutral tube defects!
The FDA also continues to prohibit consumers from learning about the scientific evidence that glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate are effective in the treatment of osteoarthritis; that omega-3 fatty acids may reduce the risk of sudden death heart attack; that calcium may reduce the risk of bone fractures; and that vitamin D may reduce the risk of osteoporosis, hypertension, and cancer.
The Health Freedom Restoration Act will force the FDA to at last comply with the commands of Congress, the First Amendment, numerous federal courts, and the American people by codifying the First Amendment prohibition on prior restraint. Specifically, the Health Freedom Restoration Act stops the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative, mitigative, or preventative effects of dietary supplements. The Health Freedom Restoration Act also stops the FDA from prohibiting the distribution of scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against disease. The FDA has proven that it cannot be trusted to protect consumers’ rights to make informed choices. It is time for Congress to stop the FDA from censoring truthful health information.
The Freedom of Health Speech Act addresses the FTC’s violations of the First Amendment. Under traditional constitutional standards, the federal government bears the burden of proving an advertising statement false before censoring that statement. However, the FTC shifted the burden of proof to industry. The FTC presumes health advertizing is false and compels private parties to prove the ads (and everything the regulators say the ads imply) to be true to a near conclusive degree. This violation of the First and Fifth Amendments is harming consumers’ by blocking innovation in the health foods and dietary supplement marketplace.
The Freedom of Health Speech Act requires the government actually prove that speech is false before the FTC acts against the speaker. This is how it should be in a free society where information flows freely in order to foster the continuous improvement that benefits us all. The bill also requires that the FTC warn parties that their advertising is false and give them a chance to correct their mistakes before the FTC censors the claim and imposes other punishments.
Mr. Speaker, if we are serious about putting people in charge of their health care, then shouldn’t we stop federal bureaucrats from preventing Americans from learning about simple ways to improve their health. I therefore call on my colleagues to stand up for good health and the Constitution by cosponsoring the Health Freedom Restoration Act and the Freedom of Health Speech Act.
Pick up Ron Paul's latest book entitled "Liberty Defined"
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Ron Paul speaks at Rose Bowl in Mason City, Iowa May 31, 2011
Pick up a copy of Ron Paul's books "The Revolution: A Manifesto"
The Ron Paul Revolution with John Stossel
Part I
Part II
Part III
Pick up a copy of Ron Paul's latest book entitled Liberty Defined
Part II
Part III
Pick up a copy of Ron Paul's latest book entitled Liberty Defined
Congressman Paul's Monetary Policy Hearing Broadcast Live at 2 PM Today ET Today:
Congressman Ron Paul is the chairman of the House Domestic Monetary Policy Subcommittee, which is held another very important hearing on Wednesday June 1, 2011
The hearings title is: "Federal Reserve Lending Disclosure: FOIA, Dodd-Frank, and the Data Dump"
The witness list includes:
• Mr. Scott G. Alvarez, General Counsel, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
• Mr. Thomas C. Baxter, Jr., General Counsel, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
The hearings title is: "Federal Reserve Lending Disclosure: FOIA, Dodd-Frank, and the Data Dump"
The witness list includes:
• Mr. Scott G. Alvarez, General Counsel, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
• Mr. Thomas C. Baxter, Jr., General Counsel, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)