article i wrote on why to elect ron paul..would love to get it circulatedSubmitted by Liberty79 on Tue, 08/30/2011 - 08:54
Why should we elect Ron Paul?
It is not too often that a country, run amuck by corporatism and cronyism, has a chance to nominate and possible elect a statesman like Dr. Ron Paul. Paul, who entered politics in the 70's due to his interest in economics and the gold standard, has seen himself survive numerous administrations spanning three decades. Amazingly, his positions haven't changed slightly, which makes him the most consistent, straight talking congressman this nations has ever seen. Paul began speaking about the issues of the dollar after Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard. Paul began to wonder how the United States would be able to prosper if the solution to their monetary policy was printing money out of thin air. Paul was one of few in Washington who paid attention to the dealings and workings of the Federal Reserve. It is accurate to point out that he is one of first politicians to aggressively go after the Federal Reserve(in other words fighting for every citizens dollar and purchasing power). The Fed, which was created in 1913, is a privately owned central bank that assumes the position as economic planner. Few have questioned the authority of the Fed, accept for Paul. Paul, a noted follower of Austrian economics, basically predicted the whole housing bubble, market crisis, and devaluation of the dollar. Its quite interesting to hear Paul rant about the Weimar Republic (1918-1933). Paul often cites real life stories from family members who dealt with obscene hyperinflation and the devaluing of their currency. He took this lesson back to the states and has been preaching the idea for 30-40 years.
Ron Paul hasn't been discouraged by the naysayer or the aloof press. In 1988, one could have witnessed Ron Paul on the Morton Downey Jar show being assaulted by audience members too ignorant and naive to receive his message. The good doctor would never compromise his positions in the hopes of pandering to the media, masses, or the political parties. Anyone could see the fight this man had as a young 52 year old Congressman, fighting as he was being laughed and chastised by all around him. They tried ignoring and wrote him off for years before his brilliant predictions came to fruition. Ron Paul's time had come.
Paul made a speech to the house warning about the bubbles, the booms, and the busts. He tried to warn congress that the easy, predatory lending was going to come back around and do in the American economy. Again, nobody listened to a word the man had to say. Instead, the same politicians who could wind up on the Super Congress were there pushing bigger government, more printing of money, no transparency with the Fed, and even worse, indebting the nation to the point of no return. The only one not fooled by this whole mess was Ron Paul. Remember, he saw it coming.
Paul is STILL ignored and discriminated against by the media. They truly have it in for him. A country is in a seriously sad position when the media is hand picking its presidents and leaders. The media manipulates the masses and they do not allow ideas to circulate. Instead, the media chooses what information is spread and who will be able to spread it Lets look at the 2008 election. We were told the frontrunners were Clinton, Obama, McCain, Romney, etc. Is it no coincidence that they basically hand picked the 2 primary winners in the election? If people don't realize the power the media and news agencies have over our republic, then we are seriously missing out on an important aspect of our political dog and pony show. When the media actually gives Paul some airtime, they always throw in a sentence stating "sir do you know you are unelectable, 'sir do you really have a chance," etc. If America fails to realize on its own the dangers of censorship and media sponsored political terrorism, then this country is in worse shape then thought. Paul would be the most electable and frontrunner if the media covered him the same as the media sponsored front runners. It was clearly obvious that the media hijacked the Ron Paul’s campaign after the Iowa straw poll. Here was Ron Paul, finishing a close second to homophobe Michelle Bachman by a mere 152 votes, yet the media was nowhere to be found. On the Faux news channel, candidates like Rick Santorum and Jon Hunstman (69 votes) were discussed over Paul and his 4,000 votes. The whole scenario is absurd. The American people deserve a lot more from their media. They are supposed to help keep government in check and report on government gone wild. Unfortunately, we get the direct opposite.
One thing that separates Paul from the rest of field is his foreign policy. For one, the media does an amazing job of inaccurately summarizing Paul's foreign policy. They consistently call him an isolationist. One can hear the cries from Faux news, Paul is a kook, he's an isolationist, he's going to make us unsafe. Hogwash for those whom understand US history and how America got here in the first place. Paul, who uses history as a tool to help him develop his foreign policy, gives great detailed reasoning as to why he has the positions he has. Iran, which came up in the last debate, is now being used like Iraq was in the 08 Republican primaries. Ahh, the primaries of four years ago, where Paul began to make his mark and develop his following. He stood up to the war crazy stooges, explaining to them the idea of blowback and how the CIA and government policy leads to these perverse actions around the world. It always amazed me the amount of denial in Washington in terms of our fault in this. From Washington, one would hear experts, politicians, and even the president cite the need for military action in Iraq. Remember, it was for our national security, they had WMD's. Not only did they have them, but the government made it known that they would be able to use them and execute them in an Armageddon type way. Paul dismissed this off in 08 as he is now doing in ‘11. Three years later, no WMD's found and Iraq probably has more "Al-Qaeda" then ever before. Paul recently made a statement at the debate saying it's only natural for Iran to want a nuke. The media spun it by saying, “Ron Paul wants Iran to have a nuke“! This is what the media does to this man. They take a line from a phrase and put it out there with no explanation. So imagine a voter is watching television and faux and CNN come on and say Paul wants Iran to have nukes, This is exactly what happens. The media leaves out the comments before and after that went with the original quote they cut. If anyone would just put on their brain and think, they would come to understand his foreign policy. There is a big difference in saying I want Iran to have a nuke, then saying I think Iran has a reason for wanting a nuke. It only makes sense because they are surrounded by nuclear weapons. I don't think the US would like to be surrounded by Central America and Canada and be the only one without a nuke. Oh, but in the media and neo-con world, Americans and their defense only matters. Sickening way to form foreign policy.
It seems that a large amount of our foreign policy in the Middle East is determined by the country of Israel. Israel, a self-proclaimed Jewish state, originated because of the efforts of the United States (her father) and Britain (her mother). Along with the United Nations, these two major powers after World War Two helped to create a Jewish state. A huge portion of the Jews who settled in Israel were holocaust survivors who had courageously endured the horrific concentration camps and survived Hitler's reign of terror. What is sometimes lost in this story, is the many Arabs who were pushed off their land and sent into Jordan seeking refuge and a new home. It really is no wonder that Israel has its share of problematic relationships in the region. The United States, as a nation, has always supported Israel and their expansion (stealing of more land) into boundaries that were not originally part of the UN agreement. Although many will say the Jews won this land through incessant wars, many should still question the morality of Israel even existing. Unfortunately, many people are attacked as being anti-Semitic if they ever question the validity of Israel and its founding. It is a topic that is never addressed in the media and rarely up for informative, intelligent debate. Ron Paul's stance on Israel is the only one that makes any sense.
Ron Paul believes that all countries should be treated equally. He doesn't believe in stepping in on civil wars and issues within a region. The founding fathers agreed. In Washington's Farewell Address, he specifically warns future presidents not to create entangling alliances with foreign nations or regions. Washington knew what he was talking about. Israel causes the United States more harm then good. For one, Israel and most Arab countries for that matter, get WAY too much money from the United States. Israel has the capabilities to defend itself and does not need the tax payers of the United States to pay for their defense. Many Americans will squirm at the idea. It has been pounded and repeated into the American mind that we have an obligation to take care of Israel. How can we take care of any country, let alone nuked up Israel, when we are flat out broke, have homeless and poor within in our own countries, and cant even control our own borders. If Israel had the idea to settle in the Middle East and disperse human beings out of land deeds and property they owned, then they should take care of the consequences that go along with it. I am saddened by the blowback America receives because of the behavior of this country. Many Americans who understand our foreign policy also comprehend that America has enough blowback to deal with. Whether it be the removing of the democratically elected shah in Iran (1953), inhumane sanctions (Iraq, Cuba, could go on), undeclared wars (Vietnam, Libya, Iraq, etc,) the United States has enough to worry about then the blowback caused by Israel. Ron Paul would end this lunacy and allow each sovereign nation to take of their own borders. No matter how much a person or citizen supports a nation, no foreign nation should ever be put in front of the needs of America, America can trade, be friendly, and have open discourse with nations. Knowing how much Paul cares about this country, there is no way he would ever allow a threat to go unnoticed in his administration. He would be the best in defending the United States and the Constitution..
It is clear as we make our way towards the 2012 election that there is nobody running who differs himself from the status-quo. Paul is the only one speaking about the core issues that need to be addressed in this country. He understands the military industrial complex that Eisenhower spoke about. Paul explains the important of our currency and the idea of easy money. Americans will never hear any politician speak of this as bluntly and aggressively as Paul.