The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!
10 votes

A Baby Step Toward Liberty

Good afternoon, Liberty patriots! I am a Republican Precinct Committeeman in Volusia County, Florida, and therefore a voting member on the Republican Executive Committee, the leadership for the Volusia County Republican Party. This past Tuesday, April 23, at the monthly REC meeting, I introduced a resolution supporting last month's "drone strike" filibuster by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. There were approximately 75-100 REC members present; while the resolution is only symbolic, I am pleased to report that it passed unanimously. The text of the resolution is below (Note: Ron DeSantis is my Congressman)...



WHEREAS, on March 6, 2013, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky took a bold stand when seeking an answer to his question concerning Executive authority and American drone policy; and

WHEREAS, Senator Paul led a nearly 13-hour filibuster on the floor of the United States Senate, striking a chord with Americans across the political spectrum who were impressed with his sincere, honorable, and steadfast position; and

WHEREAS, Senator Paul took a passionate and determined, yet gracious and statesmanlike, stance in support of the United States Constitution and against unchecked Executive power; and

WHEREAS, Senator Paul was supported in this important endeavor by Senator Marco Rubio and Congressman Ron DeSantis; and

WHEREAS, God-given rights, limited government, separation of powers, and the rule of law are foundational American, and Republican, principles; and

WHEREAS, the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution declares that "no person shall be... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

WHEREAS, on March 7, 2013, Attorney General Eric Holder capitulated to Senator Rand Paul’s request by conceding that President Obama does not have the authority to order drone strikes against non-combatant American citizens on American soil; therefore, be it

RESOLVED, that the Volusia County Republican Executive Committee affirms that the Constitution of the United States forbids the Federal Government from carrying out a drone strike on American soil that targets an American citizen, unless that citizen is engaged in conduct which poses an immediate and deadly threat to the United States; and

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Volusia County Republican Executive Committee applauds Senator Rand Paul for his courageous leadership and commends the support provided by Senator Marco Rubio and Congressman Ron DeSantis; and

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Volusia County Republican Executive Committee calls on all Volusia County Federal, State, and local Republican officials to "Stand with Rand" by continuing to fight for the principles of God-given rights, limited government, separation of powers, and the rule of law.

Approved and adopted this day April 23, 2013, in Daytona Beach, Volusia County, Florida.

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was unanimously adopted by the Volusia County Republican Executive Committee.

E. Tony Ledbetter, Chairman


While I cannot be sure, I doubt that such a resolution would have passed unanimously prior to this year (indeed, it might have failed to pass at all). From my vantage point, the GOP, both nationally and locally, is beginning the process of correction after the disastrous "wrong turn" it took in nominating George W. Bush in 2000, and in supporting his Neoconservative agenda when he became President (not that the GOP was a paragon of Liberty prior to 2000). Rand Paul is now considered a credible contender for the Presidential nomination in 2016, and I, for one, think that this is a very hopeful sign.

Those of us who are Christians must put our trust in God, rather than in men. However, God often works through the hearts of men, whether small or great:

The king’s heart is like channels of water in the hand of the Lord; He turns it wherever He wishes. - Proverbs 21:1 NASB

While it is true that America is in a time of crisis, it is also true that God is in control of all events...

In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. - Ephesians 1:11-12 NIV

... and will use all events for the spiritual benefit of those he calls to faith:

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. - Romans 8:28-30 NIV

I think that there is cause for optimism in the current political situation; consecutive defeats in Presidential elections are causing the GOP to reassess its ideology, and therein lies an opportunity for the Liberty Movement. Regardless, "God is our refuge" (Psalm 46:1), and he is in complete control of our current situation, no matter who is arrayed against us:

Love the Lord, all his faithful people! The Lord preserves those who are true to him, but the proud he pays back in full. Be strong and take heart, all you who hope in the Lord. - Psalm 31:23-24 NIV

Psalm 46 (referenced briefly above) has served as the inspiration for multiple songs over the years; I will conclude with this contemporary adaptation:

Questions or observations, Liberty patriots? Thank you and God bless.

P.S.: Another copy of this article is posted on the Agape' Forum, along with other writings of mine, music videos, and Scripture readings.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

How did I miss this?! Way to Go, Andrew! (((Andrew)))

That is a huge victory!

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Thank you for the kind words, (((Libera_me)))

Although this is pretty much just a symbolic victory, it is a step in the right direction. One step at at a time...

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

(((((((Andrew Jetton))))))) Congratulations!!!

Job well done!!! Very inspiring! Did you see this?


I looked at the video that you linked to. Having also seen the entire video clip within which Sen. Paul made his "I don't care if he is killed by a drone, or by a cop" comment, my conclusion is that he failed to make clear that his "$50 and a gun" hypothetical was meant to portray:

1. An armed robber engaged in the ongoing use of deadly force (to which a response of deadly force would be appropriate);

2. A drone strike being used by local law enforcement (not the Federal Government);

3. For the purposes of his hypothetical, he was choosing to ignore the potential for collateral damage.

Had the three points above been made clear, I think that Sen. Paul's message would then have been understood:

1. The circumstances under which deadly force can be used matters;

2. The entity using the deadly force matters (Fed vs. local);

3. Once the potential for collateral damage is accounted for, the technology used to apply the deadly force does not matter.

Lest we be too hard on Sen. Paul for not making himself more clear, we should remember that what he is trying to accomplish is hard. It is difficult to "go live" on camera and consistently get your message across in 10-15 second soundbites, in response to unsympathetic interviewers who would love to trip you up. I think that, all things considered, Sen. Paul does a very good job of communicating within that format (much better than his father does, frankly), especially considering that Sen. Paul has only been doing this since 2010. If we expect a flawless, mistake-free performance every time, we expect too much.

I hope I have adequately addressed the concern that prompted you to link me to the video. If I have missed your point, then please let me know and I will try again.


I hope that you will not be offended, lady patriot, if I offer up the following prayer (hopefully, it will be in accord with Catholic teaching). Not knowing anything about your brother, I will keep the focus on you:

Dear Lord Jesus, please draw my sister Granger into your arms. Comfort her in this time of grief, forgive her of her sins, heal her wounds, and transform her into the beautiful, holy being that you will be pleased to spend eternity with. When she comes forward during Mass to commune with you, fill her with your very self, imparting your life-giving Divine nature so that she, and your whole Church, will become the wife that you are worthy of. Keep this glorious destiny always in her sight, and graciously guide her, and all of your redeemed, safely to the blessed day when we will see you face to face. Prepare her for an eternity of experiencing your love in all its fullness, Lord God Husband. Amen.

God bless, dear sister.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

God Bless YOU (((((Andrew Jetton))))))

Thank you for the response. I think it's pretty easy to repeat oneself to where one assumes they are saying the same thing, and he took for granted everyone knows his page.. so I think this is a great lesson for him, as he seems to be the type to learn from mistakes, and this is very small.

Thank you for the prayer for my baby brother and me. Greif is a sureeal experience and God has not abandoned me. THANK YOU ((((((Andrew Jetton)))))))

BTW.. Our preist has been wonderful, announced yesterday he was being transfered in July.. another blow, deep sigh.

You are welcome, (((((Granger)))))

So the content of my prayer was "kosher" from a Catholic perspective?

I was a "wanna-be" Catholic for a while when I was in law school (I graduated in 2002); at the time, my theology was moving in a more sacramental direction (toward where it is today), and becoming Catholic seemed the appropriate thing to do. I never actually made it in; among other things, my wife was previously divorced, and so she would have needed to get an annulment of the prior marriage. I did attend on-campus Mass fairly regularly for the last two years of law school, however, and had many hours of discussions with a Catholic professor and students (all of this was at Pat Robertson's law school, mind you!). I still have a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church published during the Pontificate of John Paul II.

May the day soon come when God restores full communion, so that we can all receive Christ's love together. I am confident that it will be so in heaven; Lord willing, may it also be so on Earth. God bless you, dear Catholic sister, and may he send another good priest to your parish.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

I had a thought (((((AJ))))))

Your story here, is something I believe many same sex couple do not understand.. that not even hetrosexuals always get the Church wedding of their choice.

Catechism of the Catholic Church woke me up. For other I guess it's Alex Jones?

That's an amazing vision, in the minds' eye, full communion. WOW!

Thank you dear brother for sharing your faith in such a beautiful way. And Thank you for leading me to this thread.

You are very welcome, (((((Granger)))))

I hope that you don't mind me coming to your aid in the other forum. It bothers me when I see a man talking to a woman the way that Mr. Freeman was talking to you, and I tend to want to intervene when I see it.

The forum we were in seemed to suddenly "crash." Maybe the mods took it down? And was there something in particular you wanted to ask me about Israel?

I think it is really cool that, even though you are Catholic and I am not, we seem to have very similar spiritual emphases. Would you agree, dear sister? God bless.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

I have a question about

I have a question about Israel, why are hypocrites so enamored with her?

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

Mr. Freeman, I will treat your question as serious and genuine

... and will attempt a substantive, thoughtful response. If you do likewise, we can have a dialogue. If not, then you will have the last word, and that will be that. In addition, please do me the courtesy of reading the entire post, as it is not that long, before responding.

I am not actually that enamored with Israel. (The reason that I "jumped in" on Granger's side is because of the way you were talking to her, not based on the merits of the conversation.) My favorite U.S. ally is South Korea (a post-WWII success story on multiple levels -- religious, political, and economic).

Regarding Israel, I see positives and negatives... On the plus side:

+ While imperfect, Israel is more democratic that any of her Arab neighbors. (And I think it is too soon to render a final verdict on the consequences of the "Arab Spring.")

+ Israel's enemies tend to be our enemies. While it was once the case that regional hostility toward Israel was led by Arab nationalists such as Nasser, it is increasingly true that Israel's most ardent foes are the same Islamic fundamentalists that would just as soon chop our heads off as well. (And I do not believe that they would stop hating us if we only stopped supporting Israel; we are the foremost non-Muslim power, and we therefore need to be dealt with if they are to successfully convert and/or subjugate the world in the name of Islam.)

+ When one takes the entirety of the Arab-Israeli conflict into account, it is clear that, in general, the Arabs have been the aggressors. And when you are the aggressor, and end up losing territory because you lost the war you started, I don't feel sorry for you. (And it isn't intellectually honest to "cherry pick" certain events, such as the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in the 1980's, and thereby argue that Israel is therefore the overall aggressor.)

Now, the negatives:

- There is a fundamental disconnect between Land and People in Israeli policy. The supporters of Israel (and especially the most ardent ones) claim that Israel has a right to the West Bank and Gaza because:

A. God gave that land to Israel 3000 years ago, and/or

B. Israel won the land fair & square by defeating the Arab aggressors.

When it comes to the people living on the land (the Arab Palestinians), however, the supporters of Israel (and especially the most ardent ones) do not want those people to be Israeli citizens, for that would transform Israel's national identity. (This is also why the Arabs who fled from Israel during the original 1948 war are not allowed to return to their homes, and are instead stuck in the Gaza refugee camps.) To resolve the Land vs. People dilemma, Israel has four theoretical options:

1. Keep the land, and displace the Palestinians off of it. (This would be morally unacceptable, just as it was when we did it to the Native Americans in the 19th Century. It would also be practically impossible, as no one would take the Palestinians off of Israel's hands.)

2. Keep the land, and allow the Palestinians to stay on it, but deny them Israeli citizenship. (I find this choice to also be morally unacceptable, as it amounts to denying citizenship rights, to those who would otherwise qualify for them, on the basis of ethnicity and/or religion. This has effectively been the status quo, however, because Israel has been unwilling, or unable, to fully commit to any of the other options.)

3. Keep the land, and make the Palestinians Israeli citizens. (For the reason already stated, this is unacceptable to Israel.)

4. Allow the Arab portions of Palestine to become an independent country. (While this is the only option that is both moral and potentially sensible, Israel has never been willing to completely follow through with it because it would require fixing the borders -- and, thereafter, an independent Palestine would not allow the border to be continually pushed back by further Israeli settlement activity. To appease current and would-be settlers, and the votes that they represent, Israel therefore maintains the semi-autonomous, and gradually shrinking, "Palestinian Authority.")

Israel's inability and/or unwillingness to completely solve the Land vs. People issue means that she continues to effectively default to position 2, which therefore means that she does not, in my mind, have completely clean hands in the ongoing Arab/Israeli conflict. (Of course, the Palestinian Arabs have been far from completely responsible actors in the choices that they have made -- the unprovoked shelling of Israeli towns from within Gaza being a prime, but not the only, example.)

- The relationship between the United States and Israel has sometimes been disturbingly one-sided. The U.S. has given Israel an abundance of military, economic, and diplomatic aid over the years -- we have been her staunchest ally and only real friend. Yet, Israel has done things like attack the U.S.S. Liberty (an incident that has never been explained to my satisfaction), and steal our state secrets (the Pollard spy case). To put it bluntly, Israel should not bite the hand that feeds her.

- Israel sometimes engages in anti-Christian policies and actions. According to a 2009 report by our State Department:

The legal defense NGO, Jerusalem Institute of Justice (JIJ), alleged again this reporting period that officials in the Interior Ministry denied services to some citizens based on their religious beliefs. The JIJ's legal defense caseload included numerous cases dealing with attempts by the Interior Ministry to revoke the citizenship of persons discovered holding Messianic or Christian beliefs, or to deny some national services -- such as welfare benefits or passports -- to such persons. In other cases the JIJ alleged that the Interior Ministry refused to process immigration applications from persons entitled to citizenship under the Law of Return if it was determined such persons held Christian or Messianic Jewish religious beliefs. On May 13, 2009, the JIJ filed a petition to the High Court on behalf of three Messianic Jews under the Law of Return whose application for immigration was blocked by the Ministry of Interior. They cited an April 2008 High Court ruling, which stated that the Government could not deny status to a person eligible to immigrate under the Law of Return on the basis of that person's identification as a Messianic Jew, provided that person was not also considered Jewish under the Orthodox definition. The case was ongoing at the end of the reporting period.

Conclusion: Unlike many in the Liberty Movement, I am not categorically opposed to mutual defense treaties with other nations. However, the relationship must be truly bilateral, in that the other nation must be as committed to coming to our aid as we are to hers (the goal of such alliances should be to safely reduce our military spending, rather than increasing it). The other nation must be truly committed to peace, so as not to draw us into unnecessary conflict (South Korea, in its dealings with North Korea, has been exemplary in this regard). Finally, the other nation must share our values and have a strong track record of loyalty.

In many ways, being allied to another nation is like a marriage -- and the cost of being married to the wrong spouse can be very high. While America should stand by her true friends, such as Canada and South Korea, she can no longer afford, for financial, strategic, and moral reasons, to fund client states such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. My view is that Israel needs to address and correct the negative items mentioned above if she wants to be included in the former group, and not the latter.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Good reply!

You made a thoughtful, interesting defense. Prime Minister Netanyahu, has recently actually agreed with Ron Paul on the issue of foreign troops:"We don't need American Troops, we can take care of ourselves."

Personally, I believe all foreign aid should be eliminated, and that China should be relieved of its "Most Favored Nation" trade status, which is an affront to both Japan and South Korea. I would think it would be just fine if the government gave us our money back, and allowed us to fund other nations or not as we chose. And I agree that a more open move to the 'friend' state is in order. I'm not sure what your opinion would be of Israel retreating to 1967 borders, but I believe said border would be conventionally indefensible. The League of Nations original mandate permitted Israel to claim about 4X the land they currently hold. Britain broke that promise to Israel when they gave the Transjordan to Abdullah. So to be accurate historically, Jordan is the Palestinian state, though without the name. See the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations mandate for Palestine.

(for a good read on this topic, Joan Peters, From Time Immemorial, NY, NY,> Harper and Rowe, 1984, is one of the most through.)

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Thank you for the kind words, Libera_me!

My focus is on how the people are treated, rather than on the land that is retained. As far as I am concerned, Israel can keep the entire West Bank and Gaza... but she would then be morally obligated to give everyone who is living within those borders full citizenship rights (including the right to move freely -- people have been trapped within the Gaza refugee camps for long enough), and she clearly is not willing to do that. So, she needs to retreat to whatever borders within which she is willing to grant full citizenship rights to all, and allow the rest to become independent Palestine.

As a practical matter, negotiating a mutually agreeable border with the Palestinians could lead to a broader peace treaty and remove an issue from the table that the Islamic fundamentalists would otherwise continue to use to foment further hatred of Israel.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

((((Andrew Jetton)))) Thank you very much

I appreciate what you have writen here, and would like to see the post you responded to Ira Freeman, made as a DP original top post.

You present a great foundation of what Israel is without the U.N. and nation state's meddeling in the name of supporting Israel.

Those are the reasons and we don't know what they all are but I do know that Israel is a global trader of technology.. China is offering to host the recent Palestinian agreement put forth, as Netanyahu claimed it was worthy because it recognised Israel as a state, which hs never happened before.

Following the U.N.'s lead Google has listed palestine as a state.

((((((((Thank you for your frienship Andrew Jetton)))))))))
God Bless YOU and kep you well.

((((Granger)))), thank you for your kind words!

I don't think my post is a good candidate for a "DP Original," however, because it is personally addressed to Mr. Freeman, and I have some rather stern words for him within the post. (Speaking of Mr. Freeman... If you happen to get into another exchange with him, lady patriot, would you mind linking him to my post? I have already tried to get his attention once, and would like to see if he has anything cogent to say.)

Perhaps Libera_me could post a DP Original, as she clearly is better versed in the background of the Arab/Israeli conflict than I am, and also does not seem prone to the blatant anti-Israel bias that infects so many here on DP.

Thank you for the links to the news articles. The Lord bless you and keep you, dear sister and friend.

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand

Thank you for your efforts toward Liberty!

One baby step at a time!

I enjoyed the music too! It is nearly midnight here and my brain is out of gear so I don't have anymore words at the moment. Thank you for posting!

Thank you for your kind words...

... and for the bump, chosen lady!

A Constitutional, Christian conservative who voted for Ron and stands with Rand