Also, don’t forget that Rupert Murdoch contributed to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

I have been attending many Republican events in the last year or so, and one thing that encourages me greatly is the number of really young enthusiastic students and voters who are actively supporting Dr. Paul—age notwithstanding. They like his message!

…and I know countless young and elderly folks that cannot even stand to hear him speak.

It ain’t going to happen, trust me.

Taking into account of your location, I fail to see that your views are very representative of the rest of Americans.

South Carolina is awash in federal money, without it they’d be just another Arizona. A poor state with a bunch of ill tempered, perpetually disgruntled white folks that thinks the world was created on their birthday and their home the center of the universe.

Yep! That makes sense to me Bob! That is the reason we are the #2 retirement area in the country!!

Your ignorance of SC is self-evident.

Sounds about right! What ta hell does retirement mean to you?

I know what it means to me.

Like I said, without Federal money in all it’s many forms, even the rats would be leaving South Carolina.

And you boast?

bob – I think you’ve been hanging around karolyn too long…

Well Bob, the facts are, our state is a magnet for new businesses, plain and simple. We have a highly trained, educated and productive workforce that is FREE of the UNION thug mentality.

In fact, we have BMW here(UNION FREE) and since your ignorance of our state is self-evident, maybe you should do a little research about WHO is coming to Charleston. An before you cast anymore of you bigoted stones, maybe you should check and see who we elected as GOVERNOR.

Shazaam, it’s not a “White Man”. In fact, it is a highly capable VERY INTELLIGENT WOMAN of INDIAN descent! Who would have THUNK it?

What is retirement you ask? People who have worked VERY hard and saved and invested THEIR hard earned money so as not to place a burden on their fellow citizen. i.e.; Self-reliant, honest, hard working people.

You got anymore questions about the great state of SC, I would be more than happy to address them.

I’d like to see Ron Paul get a shot at it. ~ I see him in contention for the title.

I see it as a PLUS in RP favor that the GOP in their wisdom (chuckle) has pushed him off, unwilling to love and embrace a redheaded stepchild.

The GOP brand is tainted goods in many peoples minds today as they flop all over the place and fail to deliver the goods while toting a dismal track record on all major fronts with a strong perpetuity to say one thing and do another while feathering their nest.

The final results of the upcoming general election will be largely determined by the independent and student vote. In the end, it is they that will carry the day. Ron Paul like no other is in the best position to capitalize on that block of voters.

One thing at a time I guess, but this could be the beginning of a popular third party and the de-tusking of a tired old elephant that has succumb to disease and infection while growing mean and nasty in the process.

I know such thoughts won’t sit will with some and think I’m absurd and crazy. But one thing for certain, the GOP is in the self destruct mode as we see time and again, “their boomerang DOES come back”

Vigilant, Once again, logical assessments are hard to find.

Well done and factual!

Put a warring Greece under Alexander’s brief military campaign for fifty years instead of thirteen and see how it fares. While the rules of war were slightly different back then and people were still allowed to plunder their conquered foes, there’s only so much plunder to go around when you have a standing army and no ability to print money. So that is not a valid example. In fact, historically there was already dissent in the ranks before Alexander died. His empire was on the verge of difficulties even after a mere thirteen years, and it would have only gotten worse. Especially when the booty ran out.

Number 1: Your “explanation” does not contradict what I said. Adding qualifying statements doesn’t deny the truth of my assertion.

Number 2: It’s pretty much what I expected from someone who, in the face of the source documents and facts, still believes the Civil War was caused by tariffs and not slavery.

You’re entitled to your own opinions, but not your own “facts.”

Personally I think the Civil War was ALL about the 10th Amendment.

APN,

You’re entirely right. It’s a shame that their championing of the 10th Amendment was a cover for preserving what they called their “domestic institutions,” translated, “slavery.”

The South never threatened secession over anything else but slavery. See the platform of the Democratic Party in 1856:

“Resolved, That we reiterate with renewed energy of purpose the well considered declarations of former Conventions upon the sectional issue of Domestic slavery, and concerning the reserved rights of the States.

1. That Congress has no power under the Constitution, to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several States, and that such States are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the Constitution; that all efforts of the abolitionists, or others, made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences; and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people and endanger the stability and permanency of the Union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend of our political institutions.”

… no argument from me. You state just the facts and I like it!!!

Refreshing!

The Civil War started in April, 1861. Lincoln announced his intent to issue a formal emancipation of slaves in the Confederate States in September, 1862, a year and a half after the start of the Civil War. The Emancipation Proclamation itself was issued as an executive order in January, 1863, almost two full years after the start of the Civil War. No such act or intent had been issued or executed prior to the Civil War, and the platform of the Republican Party at the time of the 1860 presidential election was to limit the expansion of slavery to new territories, not to abolish it. The anti-slavery sentiment had existed as far back as 1787 and played a dominant role clear through the 1850s. So the cause of the Abolitionists, while a concern for the South, was hardly a new debate.

Slavery, in terms of economic productivity for the South, was most certainly part of the issue that preceded the war. But you are mistaken if you choose to ascribe the Civil War wholly to that one issue. Northern tariffs had been a significant issue in the years preceding the war.

Now, I don’t condescend to you. It would be greatly appreciated if you would stop condescending to me. More often than not you talk to me like I’m some idiot who read one paragraph on wikipedia or something. Offense intended, I’m a little more well read than that. I don’t expect deference. Everyone is entitled to their own interpretation of information, and I don’t fool myself into believing that I know everything. But some respect and acknowledgement for my actual study and research would be appreciated. Comments like, “It’s pretty much what I expected from someone who … [add insulting statement here]” are just unnecessary. Dont’ be such a c*nt.

The revisionist argument takes this direction: it states the premise that the North did not go to war with the South as a direct result of slavery. It points to Lincoln’s assumed “indifference” to slavery, and therefore concludes that slavery was not the proximate cause of the war. So what did cause the war?

The revisionists rely on a few half-truths and one outright lie to fabricate their web of deception. First half-truth: that it was those evil, greedy crony capitalists in the North who wanted to squeeze the South to death with exorbitant tariffs and taxes. Second half-truth: that Abolitionist sentiment was growing in the North. Third half-truth: that the North was attempting to deny the “reserved rights” of the states through abrogation of the 10th Amendment.

And the BIG lie? That Abraham Lincoln was a tool of the mercantile interests who used the pretext of war to consolidate the centralization of power in the Federal government.

Let’s take one at a time:

On the premise that slavery was not the most important cause for the war, the revisionists are dead wrong. The unfinished Constitutional issue from 1787 was the failure to establish the slaves as “persons.” The crux of the violent (and sometimes bloody) arguments from the 1820s upward was over the extension of slavery into the territories that would some day apply for statehood.

The South NEVER wavered from its contention that slaves were chattel, and that slaveholders had a perpetual and perfect right to move their “property” along with them to the new territories. If you don’t believe me, take a gander at the constitution of the CSA.

The Lincoln-Douglas debates frequently addressed the volatile issue, as did the original Northwest Ordnance, Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850. It was the number one source of contention between North and South. By 1861, there were 19 free states and 15 slave states. The South saw the handwriting on the wall and was not about to give up its claims.

Lincoln was not indifferent to slavery. He considered it an evil institution. It is stipulated that he felt the whites to be superior to the Negro, as did most in the nation at that time, north and south. But that’s a far cry from saying he did not recognize the abominable institution for what it was, a failure of the nation to recognize the promise of the Declaration of Independence regarding the famous Creator-endowed rights expressed by Jefferson.

First half-truth: that it was those evil, greedy crony capitalists in the North who wanted to squeeze the South to death with exorbitant tariffs and taxes.

“King Cotton” was the greatest business move ever conceived in America. Everyone in the elites (Southern planters and Northern industrialists/bankers) was getting rich off the fruits of slave labor. There was certainly no burning desire on the part of the Northerners to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. The Tariff of 1828 was designed to protect Northern business concerns from bankruptcy as a result of lower priced imports. There’s no doubt it hurt the Southern agrarian economy, but it lasted less than five years (and a growth of industry and an increase in GDP was the result).

In 1833, “The tariff rates were reduced and stayed low to the satisfaction of the South, and the states’ rights doctrine of nullification had been rejected by the nation. By the 1850s the issues of the expansion of slavery into the western territories and the threat of the Slave Power became the central issues in the nation.” (Wikipedia).

Second half-truth: that Abolitionist sentiment was growing in the North. Even Richard Shenkman, a debunker of American myths, has said “[Abolitionism] had little to do with the secession of the South or the coming of the Civil War. What sparked southern rage was the movement to limit slavery to the places where it already existed. Almost no one in a prominent position seriously considered abolishing it outright.”

Third half-truth: that the North was attempting to deny the “reserved rights” of the states through abrogation of the 10th Amendment. In a purely Constitutional sense, the South would have been correct if the North were trying to outlaw slavery. But we’ve already established that no such Abolitionist sentiment held sway with any major political faction in the nation.

I call it a half-truth for the following reason: As patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, so it was with the South. In their appeal to the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (which, by the way, was not Constitutional law), and in wrapping themselves in the Constitution, they were painting lipstick on a pig.

The “pig,” of course, was slavery. “King Cotton” could not survive without it. And for all their lauding of the 10th Amendment, they were regularly violating the Constitutional mandate to discontinue the importation of slaves. Thousands were smuggled in after 1808.

The South had enjoyed, since 1789, the inordinate and immoral voting power of “representing” in Congress millions of slaves that had no power of choosing their representatives. The 3/5 compromise gave them a larger say in the running of the nation’s affairs than they were morally entitled to. Constitutionally legal? Of course. Morally reprehensible? For certain.

And the BIG lie? That Abraham Lincoln was a tool of the mercantile interests who used the pretext of war to consolidate the centralization of power in the Federal government.

Here’s where it’s amusing to see the revisionists argue against themselves without even realizing it. In their overriding desire to assassinate Lincoln’s character, they proudly point to his endorsement of the original 13th Amendment as evidence of his racism. The Congress had passed the Amendment for ratification (which never came), an amendment that would have legalized slavery in the states in perpetuity.

Lincoln. In his first inaugural address, said “I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution . . . has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.”

Now does that sound to you like Lincoln was itching for war? Another amusing argument from the Lincoln-haters: that his famous letter to William Lloyd Garrison in which he says he would either outlaw slavery or keep it in existence if it would save the Union, is evidence of his pro-slavery sentiments.

What is missing from the argument is the key to the whole character of Lincoln: that he took it upon himself to PRESERVE THE UNION at almost any cost. No matter what the feeling was about slavery in northern circles, the overriding cause celebre was to preserve the Union, and that’s what the war was all about from a Northern perspective.

Garrison himself went through a number of changes of opinion about Lincoln. While he excoriated him about the famous letter (1861), he came to realize the compassion and sense of justice in Lincoln after an 1864 interview with him. Says Garrison, “”There is no mistake about it in regard to Mr. Lincoln’s desire to do all that he can see it right and possible to do to uproot slavery, and give fair play to the emancipated …I was much pleased with his spirit, and the familiar and candid way in which he unbosomed himself.”

And in February, 1865 he writes to the President: ”God save you, and bless you abundantly. As an instrument in his hands, you have done a mighty work for the freedom of millions who have so long pined in bondage in our land – nay, for the freedom of all mankind.”

Garrison’s enhanced understanding of Lincoln, in light of the 13th Amendment (passed by Congress in January 1865) is something you won’t hear about from the Lincoln-haters and Civil War revisionists.

Vigilant, pretty interesting post, my friend. It appears that some things I though were “facts”,well, just may not be.

Time to re-do a little FACT checking.

Greatly appreciated!

APN, I much appreciate your reading of those long posts.

I’ve learned much about Lincoln over the years, much of it surprising because it doesn’t conform with the “Lincoln Cult” view that he was close to a saint. On the other hand, the Lincoln-haters want us to take it to a new level, and they’ll use any journalistic trick to do it.

Obviously, Lincoln was neither saint nor demon. He was a human being with many foibles, but while I can take the exposing of “good myths” about him, I cannot in good conscience stand by and see his character assassinated by a few pseudohistorians who want nothing left of his memory but “bad myths.”

I know that South Carolina has some good reasons for being mad at the North; another myth of history is that Sherman did his worst in Georgia, but history shows, as you know, that S. Carolina took the punishment from Sherman much more than did Georgia. For Sherman it was symbolic: As SC was the first to secede, he wanted to make them an example. Not fair, perhaps, even in war, but his forays in the South helped to bring the war to a close (and helped re-elect Lincoln by a greater margin than his first electoral victory).

Vigilant, Yep, we had a standing army from the North in SC for 12 years after the end of the civil war, I think? That was after the fact that we had been BURNED to the GROUND, raped and pillaged. Most of the wealth that had been acquired through slavery in the South was TRANSFERRED to the North. I wonder if it was re-distributed to the SLAVES that suffered at the hands of their MASTERS? I think not!!!

Bottom line, it took us about 100+ years for us to rebound from the civil war. We are doing VERY WELL now and fortunately this part of our HISTORY is in the PAST. Folks in SC now are united as a “Peoples” regardless of race or gender. We are very proud of our Governor and she represents the “New South”. Bottom line, we could care LESS about a person’s race or gender! We are looking for LEADERS that LOVE AMERICA and FREEDOM!

Good quality information Vigilant.

For the record, I’m not a revisionist. I read the history and formed my own conclusions. The issue of slavery as viewed from someone in the 21st century is one of morality. The same issue as viewed from the point of view of a plantation owner in 1860 is one of economics.

Slaves were a tool in the South, as much as a tractor is today. They were legally owned property. Morality issues notwithstanding, a campaign to restrict slavery in territories newly added to the union was no different to the South then as it would be to add new territory today and tell the South that they couldn’t cultivate the land with tractors or other gas powered machinery they already owned.

That’s the part of the Civil War issue that people don’t get. Many claim that they understand it. But if they really did, the argument would be universal that the Civil War was fought over economics rather than slavery. For the North, there was perhaps some sentiment for the morality issue of slavery. For the South, slaves were property, and the federal government was trying undermine their property rights. The union, according to the Federalist Papers, was to ensure mutual protection and a single system of government in order to simplify government and law. The union was ratified.

And part of the constitution of that union was that citizens would be secure in their possessions, that they would be secure against unreasonable seizures, and that private property would not be taken without just compensation. The tenth amendment also protected the citizens’ authority. All states’ rights aside, the citizens had rights to authority.

To reduce the Civil War to something so simple as the morality issue of slavery is naive. The South wasn’t fighting for their right to own other human beings. They were fighting against an encroaching federal government that sought to ultimately deny them of their legally owned and obtained property.

And to put it into perspective, just divorce yourself from the idea that it is a human being. Imagine instead that the issue was ox labor, and it makes a lot more sense.

This is not to say that blacks are no better than oxen, but to a plantation owner in the South in 1860, that’s precisely what his slave was. And the Republican party was pushing to restrict the use of ‘oxen’ in the newly developed territories, which the South new would ultimately lead to the extinction of the ‘oxen’ trade. They were trying to tell ‘oxen’ owners that if they brought their ‘oxen’ into states that did not permit ‘oxen’ ownership that the ‘oxen’ would have to be set free.

Anyone would agree that if someone owned an ox, that ox is their property. Wherever they take the ox, the ox remains their property. If they want to put the ox to work at 5:00 a.m. and plough the field until 9:00 p.m., that’s their right and their business. If the ox gets sick and needs to be put down, the ox has no rights and can be put down at the discretion of the owner. Any offspring coming from that ox belong to the owner of the ox. You don’t house the ox with you and your family, but put it in a barn. If the ox gets loose, the owner has the right to fetch it. If someone tried to keep and hide the ox that got loose, that would be theft. If the ox were constantly acting up, the ox might get whipped.

This may be brutish to us today to think that human beings were treated in such a manner, but that was the perception of the South. So make no mistake, the issue over slavery was an economic issue of property rights, rightly argued in that time period, and aside from the ‘human being’ aspect of the argument, the South was absolutely right. The federal government had no authority to do as they did. I would personally be pissed at the government if they tried to tell me that I couldn’t own my dog anymore. The argument is no different. Except that we’re dealing with human beings.

However, slavery wasn’t a new trade. So again, while we see the practice as barbaric, it was normal to them. Slaves have existed from the beginning of written history.

To be clear, I’m not an advocate for slavery. I think it’s a horrible institution, and I can’t imagine being someone’s property.

But that’s what the war was about. The North was already crushing the South with tariffs to “protect” Northern industry. Then the North wanted to deprive them of their property, which would not only have cost them a fortune due to the property loss itself, but would have equally cost them a fortune in paid labor versus slave labor. It was a triple whammy. Tariffs, ‘equipment’ loss, and an increased cost of production. Add to that the North’s interference with the South’s trade with foreign nations, and you have a complete strangle hold on the South’s agricultural industry.

THAT is what brought on the war. NOT the absurd notion that the South thought that negroes should stay slaves.

Excellent post, Alex.

I apologize for so quickly painting you as someone you are not, and I hope you will accept the apology. My wrong assumption was that you were part of the “DiLorenzo Crowd” of Lincoln-haters, which you obviously are not.

Your “take” on the slavery question as a matter of economics is entirely correct. We (media, politicians, teachers and the man on the street) so often make the egregious error of overlaying our modern sense of ethics and morality on the actions of people who lived so many years before us.

Many don’t realize, for example, that the famous Roger Taney SCOTUS decision regarding the Fugitive Slave Law (Dred Scott), while reprehensible from a modern viewpoint of morality, was an impeccably correct decision given the Constitution as it existed in those times. To have ruled differently would have been unconstitutional judicial activism, something we rightly excoriate today.

It will forever remain a question whether the unfinished business of the 3/5 Compromise and the Constitutional treatment of slaves as property could have been resolved over time without a Civil War. Given the spirited passions of the time, and the South’s dependence upon “King Cotton” for a livelihood, I tend to doubt it.

Government compensation to slaveholders for emancipating their charges was an option, but would that not, in itself, have violated the 10th Amendment by appropriating funds at a Federal level for apportioned payments to individuals? Moreover, the band aid of compensation would not have been effective in the long term as long as the Constitution remained unamended. Just some speculations on my part.

Hllsdale is indeed a National Treasure. The liberals hate it because they take no Federal money, and therefore they are free to teach American History, etc., without the inevitable strings that Gov’t attaches to its largesse.

Gov’t long ago created the co-dependancy with the states as a means of bypassing the Constitution. Pandering politicians at all levels fully understood the impact of the Fed’s de facto control of education, which should be purely a state and local matter.

…and it came back to bite them. School districts are suffering big time because the Feds are running out of bucks, and local school budgets, bloated to the tune of 75-80% with union goodies, are forced into raising taxes to make ends meet.

Not sure I take your meaning.

Yep, especially when it comes to HIM building in PORK in a bill and then voting against that bill, and then reaping the REWARDS for those who elected him through earmarks. WASHINGTON ACCOUNTABILITY!!!! The DEVIL made HIM do it!!! I bet it was all those republican NEO-CONS!!! Or maybe the RINOS!!!! Which of the two is he?

HOW MANY YEARS HAS HE BEEN THERE NOW? 32, 34, 50, 100+ ???? So much for TERM limits!!!

“Don’t the winners of the Iowa caucus USUALLY go on to be the nominee?”

Answer: the results are spotty. Primary states often buck the caucus results. Huckabee won the Iowa caucus last go around.

Rhondar,

I can assure you that how Iowa votes will have ZERO affect on we citizens in SC. I can also assure you that RP will not win this state.

Pepper maybe Steve will go away!I think he’s just looking for attention by being contrary

….AND THE VERY SAME COMMENTS COULD BE equally APPLIED TO YOU!

Yep! Pretty simple stuff! That’s why this must be changed beginning with the family, community and local governments. Then and only then will we be on the right tract. RP is not the answer, we are!

exactly

WON’T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE CHANGING CONGRESS . MITT ROMNEY SAID 2 MONTHS AGO , NOW RON PAUL HAS SAID IT , BOTH IN I O W A , THEY ARE BOTH FIGHTING FOR THE ” STATE DELEGATE ” VOTE , SINCE THE STATE DELEGATES TELL THE PEOPLE WHO WE ARE ” ALLOWED ” TO VOTE FOR . ALL ELECTIONS ARE RIGGED . HAVE BEEN ALL ALONG . NO ONE EVER HEARD OF OBAMA TILL HE WAS GIVEN A SENATORS SEAT IN ILLIONIS , DURING MID TERM ELECTIONS . THEN HE BECOMES PRESIDENT , OVERNITE , BECAUSE CONGRESS PROMISED THE WELFARE PEOPLE A BETTER LIFE AFTER THE ELECTION . NOW , ADD THE AMNESTY TO IT . TEACHERS UNION AND A F L LABOR UNIONS ENDORSED OBAMA , ALL BECAUSE OF PARTY …HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH DOING THE RIGHT THING . RON PAUL WAS ON THE BALLOT LAST ELECTION . DID NOT GET ENOUGH STATE DELEGATE SUPPORT . THE MEDIA AND THE STATE DELEGATES TELL THE PEOPLE WHO WE ARE ALLOWED TO VOTE FOR . ASSOCIATED PRESS QUOTED ROMNEY 2 MONTHS AGO , HE IS NOT CONCERNED WITH THE PEOPLES CHOICE VOTE . HE IS DESPERATE FOR STATE DELEGATE VOTES . C N N SAYS THERE ARE ABOUT 2 5 0 0 STATE DELEGATES REPRESENTING THE REPUBLICAN PARTY , DECIDING WHO CONGRESS WILL WORK WITH , AFTER THE ELECTION . DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS SAME NUMBER . GET RID OF STATE DELEGATES , STOP DEBATING WHO IS BEST , GET RID OF TERM LIMITS , GET RID OF ELECTRONIC VOTING PROCESS , GIVE US BACK PAPER BALLOTS , AND A SECURITY GUARD TO GUARD EACH BOX. THE ELECTRONIC PROCESS IS SO EASY TO CHANGE . ..LET US PEOPLE DO OUR JOB . VOTE OUT THE CROOKS . I HOPE TO SEE RON PAUL AND RICK PERRY TEAM UP . My name is T i m

….and just who will these security guards be and where do you find such people?

@Tim and @ATM: In 2005, I agreed to be a poll worker at my county’s election (and did it for 4 more elections). I had been a poll watcher in 1964 when the ballots were the size of an unfolded newspaper and voters X’d with a rubber stamp. When polls closed, the precinct board opened the ballot box, counted the votes for each candidate, and conveyed the report to the County Registrar. NO hanky panky.

In 2005, when I took my first training class, I made a comment about hand-counting, and the instructor looked at me with a sneer and made a caustic comment about collusion and stealing the vote with manual count.

I served as precinct “inspector” (just head of the team–I didn’t inspect anything) for 5 elections. LA County needs to hire about 19,000 workers to man the polls, and getting help is hard. The likelihood that any poll worker could engineer collusion during one day and a manual count under those circumstances is a big fat zero!

By contrast, get hold of a video (on DVD from BlackBoxVoting.org) called “Hacking Democracy.” It demonstrates how ONE hacker or party insider can get into the counting centers, hack the electronic counting machines, and flip a vote in seconds! The video shows it being done. I personally believe it was done on Diebold machines in So. Dakota in 2006 when they had a proposition on their ballot that would make judges more accountable. (Look up JAIL4Judges.org.)

Counties have now spent millions on these untrustworthy machines so we can have election results before the 11 p.m. news, and they aren’t going to toss them out. But we could have a dual count–first a manual count in the precincts, followed by a computer count. Each count would keep the other one honest! Election day is long and exhausting, and a manual count would add an hour or two, but I’d be willing to go back and work the polls again and do that extra time if it could help insure HONEST results!

….and where do you get all these RP clones to replace them with?

Truthseeker writes, “He can easily lead this nation back to liberty and freedom again.”

I beg to differ. No single president, no matter how dedicated to the Constitutional principles (as is Dr. Paul) can EASILY lead this country anywhere without the cooperation of the other two branches of government.

Obama’s and Holder’s total disregard for the Constitution could have been stopped dead if the Congress and SCOTUS had stepped up to their responsibilities. If the Tea Party wave that began in 2010 would gain steam in 2012 and succeeding elections, we might begin to see some changes for the better, but that’s unlikely to happen.

I caution everyone to stop placing their Messianic hopes in one person. Unless and until officials at ALL levels of government (and in both parties) are held to Constitutional principles, you will see no change worth a damn. A Paul presidency without concurrent change in the Congressional mix would result in nonstop vetoes and gridlock previously unseen in this country.

@ Vigilent, You are correct and I humbly accept being corrected. It won’t be ” easy ” at all. It will take much more effort to correct the problems we are in now. I believe Ron Paul will turn us back in the right direction almost immediately after taking office. How long will it take to bring us back to Liberty, Justice, and Freedom? Depends on the individual decisions of millions of Americans.

Vigilant, VERY well put!! Point in case, our current Messiah, KING AMABO. How’s that working out for us?

Most of the posts I read here are constitutionally driven with a total lack of understanding as to how the three separate branches of government really work.

RP, as President, can do nothing other than wear out his VETO stamp that would eventually throw the nation/world into chaos. If he is true to his words, and I think he is, then invoking the EO for change would be against his own beliefs, therefore, all he has is VETO power. He sure as heck will never get HIS agenda through congress.

Latest news, RP has surged in the POLLS!!!!! Well, given the status of those contenders that have held the #1 position in the polls, I can assure you that his numbers will change drastically as well. Just give him time to cook.

Especially given the fact that the POLITICAL WAR MACHINE has basically ignored this individual thus far. That is about to change and we will soon get to hear about all HIS baggage.; i.e.; Earmarks, Pork Barrel spending, etc, etc, etc.

The etc etc etc will be all the things that have ZERO substance or nothing to do with any REAL facts but it will STICK when the PWM puts enough money and power behind it. RP will be a victim of his own negative campaign tactics, TRUST ME, that is just how things work in life. i.e.; What goes around comes around. You reap what you sow.

I lost all my respect for him when he went negative and it will prove to be the fatal mistake in his ambitions to become President. You can include MB in that category as well. People just do not want people of the same party to sling mud at each other. It’s damaging and it will result in a loss to BO in November.

I think the last debate pretty much summed up is inability to understand the WORLD in general, our enemies and all the other pertinent issues involved in modern day foreign policy. Naive would be the understatement of the century.

I have considered this individual for a long while and the last debate is proof positive in my mind that he is not electable. He rambles on like a mad man never making a real point of anything. This negative factor has nothing to do with his honesty, principles or anything else but has everything to do with his inability to effectively communicate the issues at hand.

Bottom line, he will never draw the country together through a majority consensus therefore he cannot WIN or GOVERN if he did. For all those who “Think” that a constitutional government, as outlined by our forefathers can be re-instituted by ONE man. Good luck with that one!

In fact, unless the TP movement continues to grow, not a chance in xell it will ever happen, just wishful thinking. I frankly do not see any ONE man changing the course of this “Progressive Socialist Nightmare” through the office of the Presidency, congress or the current Supreme Court. It will require WE THE PEOPLE starting at the grass roots level in our LOCAL governments, not Washington. Once enough local governments are changed, then and only then will you see positive change at the state and federal levels of government.

Our entire form of government has been flipped upside down by the “Progressives” and power has been consolidated in Washington, then the States and then MANDATES come down to our local communities. That is about 180 degrees out of phase with our founding principles and has to be changed.

Bottom line, BO would slaughter RP in the general election and then have 4 more years to finish us off, completely. BYE BYE AMERICA! Welcome comrades to the Union of Socialist States of America. USSA.

Just my opinion of things, as reality dictates.

Well sure he does! Who do you think the left wants to run against in November? It certainly isn’t Newt or Romney!

….and I think your brain just had a “Boop”.

You said what??? “He is one of those that have caused our countries health problems right now.”

Are your referring to OUR country or many countries??? I’m confused.

You ever thought about having your brain checked out? How the heck can Newt create our Country’s health problems??? Are you a “Progressive”???

“Looks dead and a fat hog” What??? If that is the case, then what does RP look like to you? DEAD AND DRIED UP???

And to think, you can vote!

Beam me up!

Boop, you are so far off base. It is not a person’s age or how they dress that makes a person. It is in the heart of that individual who reflects their morals/ethics. Obummer or any of the other candidates do not care about the American people. Get it through your head. RP will have to fight congress, but he most definitely will. It is our job to replace all the marxists in congress.

That is a big IF, Tim. Ain’t going to happen! Now that RP has moved up in the polls, it will be his time in the hot seat. The political war machine has given this guy a pass until now but that is going to change, quickly. Then and only then will you see the real numbers.

RP made a big mistake going negative and it will come back on him in the very near future, HARD. Wait and see.

RP will be slaughtered by AMABO in November.

No doubt in my educated mind.

…not yet!

To be very frank with you, given the last debate, If RP is our nominee, I would vote for Obama without a doubt and I am a life long registered republican. I would at least possibly have a GOP controlled congress to balance Obama.

At least I know Amabo will defend our Nation, when called to do so. He has even proven that he is capable of being PROACTIVE not REACTIVE like RP, which would only result in MILLIONS of we Americans killed.

Bottom line, I know what to expect out of Obama but RP????? Your guess is as good as mine! Chaos!

“At least I know Amabo will defend our Nation, when called to do so.”

So would Ron Paul… only he would go to Congress to get a Declaration of War, endorsed by the American people, instead of acting like a dictator and thrusting the country into war against the will of the people.

“He has even proven that he is capable of being PROACTIVE not REACTIVE like RP, which would only result in MILLIONS of we Americans killed.”

That is called PREEMPTIVE not “proactive”, and it is immoral … attacking someone based on your fear that they will attack you. America should not go in search of monsters to destroy. You sound like a Fascist, not a Republican.

“Bottom line, I know what to expect out of Obama but RP????? Your guess is as good as mine!”

Having the most solid voting record of any politician we’ve ever seen, we know exactly what to expect from Ron Paul. He would actually follow and defend the Constitution of this country, rather than shredding it like Obama.

I fear for my country most when I hear fools like you.

TML….Right on!! I have no fear of being perceived as a “weak” country under Ron Paul’s leadership.
I can’t believe we have so many nut cases in this country that think we should be at war constantly. We’ll end up with the rest of the world hating us and our economy in ruins. Not to mention many of our best and brightest young people dead for no good reason.

TML said: That is called PREEMPTIVE not “proactive”, and it is immoral … attacking someone based on your fear that they will attack you. America should not go in search of monsters to destroy. You sound like a Fascist, not a Republican.

A PREEMPTIVE strike is a result of a PROACTIVE DEFENSE PROTOCOL so obviously you have no idea of what you speak. We aren’t living in 1776 anymore so the game is no longer muskets and black powder cannons at point blank range. RP is obviously living in 1776 but we aren’t!!!

Did the President of Iran say he would destroy American and Israel or not?? Has he let the WORLD know that he is in fact building a Nuclear Warhead and WILL USE IT!!!! This is the the head of state that has threatened both us and Israel numerous times on the floor on the UN!
Maybe you should attempt to understand the issues before you spew YOUR FASCIST hatred around. In fact, I think the fascist here is the aforesaid tyrant in Iran. Take him lightly at your own peril!

Preach to some other DUMMY that would vote for RP, not me. The man is naive when it comes to our defenses and is dangerous.

Yep, and I hear that common sense will get you a cup of coffee and a donut in Washington.

so…we should BORROW money to give to our friends?

Do you do that? I don’t. If I don’t have the money to give them they can borrow their own money.

How many “friends” have you successfully bought? It is the same with countries. Frienship to the higest bidder? Let’s let our friends pick us! Let’s set an example of independence and freedom, not meddling and bribery! Then we will have true friends and allies.

he won’t beat Obama though…then we end up with 4 more destroying years with him…disaster!!!!!!

How do you figure he can;t beat Obama. You have to think for yourself and quit believing the propaganda you keep hearing that he can;t beat him. Vote for him and see. Vote for Ron Paul. Newt will just hand the presidency to Obama like McCain did. McCain didn’t even try during the debates against Obama and I could see it, it was quite disheartening. If given a chance to debate Obama, Ron Paul will tear him up. And that is what the media is afraid of.

very well said “lost in paradise”.Its great to hear more people with common sense like yours!The people that don’t understand Ron Paul’s message shouldn’t vote at all!

The people that are telling you that Ron Paul “can’t beat Obama” are mainstream REPUBLICANS! They are in favor of a REPUBLICAN dictator instead of a Democrat dictator. Take some initiative and learn the issues, the candidates’ positions on those issues and then look at their records to see if they are lying!
The economy or the dollar are going to collapse short term, one or the other, as PRINTING MONEY is the only way to keep the (stock)market going. The more money printed the more severe the dollar collapse will be when it occurs. It is inevitable and will happen, it is just when that is the question.
Learn the evils of the MONEY PRINTERS (FED) and learn the proper solutions to all the problems facing America today. Then it will be clear that RON PAUL is the candidate to take on Obama, as the others just change the brand (Republican/Democrat) of dictator we will have.
Freedom is really what this primary election is about. If we get to Nov. 2012 and have a mainstream Republican insider as a candidate, WE ALL LOSE NO MATTER WHICH ONE WINS!

I will add to Patriot with a suggestion to read his book ‘End the Fed’ from a few years ago. Dr. Paul has been POUNDING the warning drum for decades that the fed is a despotic tool of our corrupt government. He makes several inrefutable cases against central banks and our fed at the end of his book.

Dr. Paul has the strongest convictions of any of the candidates and he will do what he says. He is raising money, he is getting his positions and solutions out there at the same time while making his case against the other nominees.

Learn for yourselves.

Regulated and Vigilant
JC in CA

Ron Paul can bring together the largest coalition of voters of anyone, including Obama. If we can get Ron Paul elected as the Republican candidate, he is a shoo-in. Do you really think any republicans will vote for Obama instead of Ron Paul? Haven’t you heard all of the “Anybody but Obama” crowd? He also has the support of the anti-war crowd, the liberty crowd, the OWS. Many young people (who voted for Obama in 2008) like Ron Paul. Based on what I’ve heard and seen, it could be a blow out.

To see some left-leaning people that also support Ron Paul do an internet search for Ron Paul on the Daily Show or on The View. You’ll be amazed at the support & cheers from the hosts and the audience. The truly amazing thing is that the Republicans (who claim to be for small government & the constitution) are the ones really bashing Ron Paul.

Ron Paul must win the Republican primary, then he’s got smooth sailing.

most of the “chosen” candidates like obubummer does is tell you what you want to hear. its been going on forever in this country. ron paul seems a little more serious. if president he’d have to get past congress that have all of our bought off reps.

As much as hate to admit it we Ron Paul. This nation will collapse if something is not done. Ending all money to other governments and the UN would put some money back into the system. Getting rid of the quasi-central bank (The Federal Reserve) will also help. These are the things Dr.Paul has been talking about for 30+ years.

Amen

Sharia law not sharia law its not our business what the middle east decides. I know egypt wants secular government, not sharia law. We have been hyped by the media that they are a danger, a bunch of crazy people. I have been to the middle east, they are not at all like they portray. Are there nut cases sure, and we have our crazies too. So relax, the enemies are not across the ocean 10,000 miles away, they are right down the road, in Washington D. C.

Well said Lost in Paradise, If its not Ron Paul 2012, We might as well keep Obama.It would be very little change with either of the others

Here! Here! If ew do not regain our self sufficiency and independence, we will not matter. Our America as I have known and believed in for 70 plus years will be gone. Ron Paul, or we are history.

Excellent post, APN.

For 26 out of the 38 years I served my country, I was living outside of the USA. I never said or felt that I was ashamed to be an American, and I always felt a wonderful sense of homecoming every time I returned to my own country. My ancestors came here in 1754, fought in the Revolution and every war since. I will NEVER be ashamed of the dream and promise of America.

LostinParadise should read Edward Everett Hale’s “Man without a Country.” Saying you are ashamed is the same as turning your back on your country. One does not leave another he/she truly loves just because the loved one has problems. You work with that loved one and, with God’s grace, you overcome the problems.

Well said Vigilant and I love this country equally as much. My family has a long history of service to this GREAT nation. Even when I consider ALL the issues that we have in this country, we are still a beacon of hope for the world.

MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA and remind us that our FREEDOMS flow from HIM and not from men.

Right on, Diva! This is exactly what every person should do before marking a ballot!

Lori,

Just how specifically will he do that given his take on foreign policy? When Iran gets a NUKE and then uses it on us then what will he do?

Certainly you don’t think that if we elect RP as President that Iran and all the other Islamic fools on this planet, that HATE we infidels and want us DEAD, will just magically leave us be, do you? If you do think that, then maybe you should try to get a better grasp on the nature of our enemies intent.

Just curious how RP will prevent us from being attacked and drawn into war. Especially given the fact that he opposes having any kind of military presence around the world not to mention the Patriot act.

Given his anti-war and anti-patriot act doctrine, how long will it be before the remainder of the world falls into the hands of these Islamic radicals and when will we fall? How will he go about identifying those Islamic sleeper cells we ALREADY have in this country? My idea of effective National Security is proactive not reactive like RP’s. I don’t need to see a 1,000,000 Americans killed in a Nuclear attack to understand just how REAL this threat is.

Bottom line, we will be REQUIRED to deal with Iran sooner or later, it is inevitable and the future will prove that fact. When you have a complete insane FOOL in charge of Nuclear arms, then that is a BIG problem. We can face it now or face the consequences later.

You better re-think this one.

Are you really defending the unconstitutional Patriot Act? Truth in advertising laws require it to be called the “nullify the 4th amendment Act”. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probablye cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The unPatriot Act authorizes “National Security Letters” which are self written search warrants. Anyone served a NSL cannot tell anyone, including spouse, priest, or a court of law, that they were served or they can be sent to jail. These NSLs have been used to go after peoples bank & CC transaction, track them via their cellphones, etc. You have no idea the government is going after you and no way to defend yourself.

In an attempt to make ourselves safe from some terrorist in a cave halfway around the world, we have made ourselves unsafe from our own government. “Those who would trade liberty for a little security, deserve neither liberty nor security” –Benjamin Franklin.

Yep, I am very well versed on what ole Ben said. Ben, however, had no idea what the 21st century would present to our FREEDOMS, nor would he have any CONCEPT of a Thermo-nuclear warhead in the hands of an AMERICAN hating, GOD hating ISLAMIC INSANE FOOL. Heck, he wouldn’t have any concept of WWII much less the modern day world!

How dare Ron Paul suggest that WE AMERICANS brought this on ourselves. INSANITY!!!!!

Give me one example of an American citizen that has undergone the adverse affects, as your describe them, in the PATRIOT ACT. We are in fact, AT WAR, and WAR, my friend, requires extreme measures. I would love to dress all you constitutional “patriots” up in uniform with an 80lb ruck sack and boot your butts off the back of a C130 gunship in the middle of a firefight and see how well you would be WILLING to FIGHT for YOUR “Freedoms”.

In fact, I would love to see how well all of you handle Sharia Law! How easy it is to spout off these claims when the vast majority of you have NO IDEA at the price our brave MEN have paid to “secure” YOUR FREEDOMS. Pathetic!

Get your head out of your pampered “American Made” progressive daycare mentality and start understanding the REALITY of the WORLD.

This is not 1776 when you had to face a MAN, eye to eye, before you shot and Killed him!!!

You get these bunch of Islamic Sharia Law Curs out of our Nation then we can talk about undoing the “Un-American Patriot Act”.

Get REAL!!!!

The larger governments are, the more chance there is for war. The best way to prevent war is to have smaller government. Ron Paul is truly anti-war because he promotes smaller government. The Establishment politicians must be pro-war because they promote larger government. But remember, one can be anti-war while still being strong on defense. Again, Ron Paul is the best example of this.

Ron Paul believes in a strong DEFENSE, not a strong OFFENSE! He does not want us involved in the affairs of other countries that do not affect this great nation, but, if needed, he will go to congress for a declaration of war and then defend the US as much as is needed, having a clear goal to define victory. This does not mean we would go into a foreign country and become occupiers as the current foreign policy does, much to our detriment!
Don’t believe what the media or even the Republican Party tell you about Dr. Paul, he is a real threat to them and their cronies! If he wasn’t a threat, they would not care what he says. I used to believe Rush and the other so called conservative talk radio bunch, but my eyes have been opened, they are just puppets for those in control!
Mike S.

Yeah, you’re right…we should invade and bomb every country that looks at us cross-eyed. Great policy!
After we “deal” with Iran, we’ll need to go after N. Korea and China and maybe Russia while we’re at it.
It’s real Patriotism to watch our young men and women come home in body bags, isn’t it. Not to mention we have no money to fund any more military actions. When our economy completely collapses is when we will really be vulnerable.
Quit taking the stupid pills being handed out by some of our pro-military “leaders”!

Dear Mr. Truth, I just sent Ron Paul an envelope full of cash…cause I do not want the ****** government following the expenditures on my bank card….LOL…Ron is a great guy, and looks the BEST, however, I (fear) the PTB (powers that be) will NEVER allow him to be Top Dog, simply because he is NOT corrupt..and “they” cannot figure how to “control” him….** Remember what (they) did to Kennedy, when he tried to (end) the Vietnam War, AND put this country on a silver-backed currency system ?? (speaking of which, wonder how the weather in Kennebunkport, Maine is tonight ??)……..( we want our 6+ Trillion back, mr 41st pres) …anyways, Clif High of Half Past Human’s (computer-sucking program) predicts the following for us in the next election…..”we will elect a (good guy) type person, who, unfortunately, will turn out to be (as bad) as the ones in the past ” ( This does NOT sound like Ron Paul, cause he is beyond reproach, sqeaky clean ) Just keep your head high, folks, and stay safe, no matter what…..we are on a direct timeline for the LORD to come back, anytime, any second…..My pastor has stopped watching …..he is NOW at the point where he is LISTENING….we are close to the 2nd coming….fill your lamp with oil, and everyone stay safe, and try to have a decent Christmas…..and blessings to all….

Dr. Ron Paul 2012!

For me, he is the only option. If he does not get the republican endorsement I hope he runs independent.

After John McCain screwed America over with the NDAA bill I no longer trust republicans either. Just my two cents.

@ Loyalsoxfan, Thank you for the encouragement. I too am waiting on the return of the Lord. I also believe we have a good chance to gain back our freedom. I base this optimistic view on the fact that there are more of us than there are of them ( the NWO elite fools and pawns ) and that is what they fear the most. When enough of us wise up to their intentions we can take back what was once ours. The believers win either way.

Well put, Fedup. Much of this is the result of deliberate dumbing down in our schools for the past 40-50 years. (Search for and read a free online book called “Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.” Much of it is technical, but skip to the end where it talks about keeping entertainment at 6th-grade level, don’t teach real math, real history or real economics, etc. as a way to control people.)

People are scared of Dr. Paul (as my Rep. mother was “scared” in 1964 of Goldwater) because they do not know the Constitution, so they don’t realize where Dr. Paul is coming from. My parents’ generation was so devastated by the Depression they felt they had to look to government as the savior–it wasn’t. I tried to tell her so, but she couldn’t believe “they” would ever let bad things happen. I lost her in 1976, and if she came back tomorrow, she’d never believe the state things are today.

I have a personal tradition that I adopted from a beautiful lady who passed on last year: Every July 4, I read the Declaration of Independence. I expanded this to read the Constitution every September when we celebrate Constitution Day. (The latter’s a lot for just one sitting.) As well as I know these two docs, I learn something new every reading. More people should try it before they decide for whom they’ll vote.

You are correct, Bev, that the media cannot be trusted. It’s more though than the adage “if it bleeds, it leads.” See my response above to Fedup–read the book. The LameStream Media (as I like to call them) are no longer independent journalists and researchers; they are paid lackeys for the giant corporations that own the publications or broadcast stations. If the talking heads tell the truth, they lose their jobs.