Only Ron Paul can beat Hillary

Take it you've seen the Orange County Register article that explains why we can't win against Hillary with a Rudy or a Mitt. I agree. There isn't too much difference between Rudy and Hillary so the elitists really don't care which one wins. They can't control someone who is his own person like Ron Paul.

In the "there's not a dime's worth of difference" category, check out this powerful article. It also opines that if we don't nominate someone like Ron Paul, we will get Hillary.

Ron Paul Fights Powerful Plutocracy
By Steven LaTulippe -- http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/ron_paul_fights_.html

Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:52:00

The more support Texas representative gains, the more the global elite are taking notice
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) is gaining steam in his presidential campaign and the establishment is preparing to stop him at any cost. His fundraising statistics reveal a blossoming, Internet-based movement that is uniting libertarians and other concerned citizens from across the political spectrum.

His performance in the media has been sharp, and his organization is honing its message. But if Paul remains a viable candidate, he faces a set of obstacles unlike any other. When evaluating his chances, it’s important to understand contemporary America: This is not a democracy and not a constitutional republic.

America is a carefully concealed oligarchy. A few thousand people, mostly in government, finance, and the military-industrial complex, run this country for their own purposes. By manipulating the two-party system, influencing the mainstream media, and controlling the flow of campaign finance money, this oligarchy works to secure the nomination of its preferred candidates (Democratic and Republican alike), thus giving voters a “choice” between Puppet A and Marionette B.

Unlike the establishment’s candidates, Paul is a freelancer running on specific ideas. The federal government must function within the strict guidelines of the Constitution, should deconstruct its empire, withdraw troops from around the world, reestablish a foreign policy based on noninterventionism, abolish the Federal Reserve Bank, eliminate fiat currency and return to hard money.

This is not a political agenda or party platform. It is a revolution. The entire ruling oligarchy would be swept away if these ideas were implemented. Every sentence, every word, every jot and tittle of this agenda is unacceptable, repellent and hateful to America’s ruling elite.

The reasons for this are obvious. Through its control of the Federal Reserve, the banking elite makes billions of dollars in unearned profits and exerts enormous influence over the American economy. Countless industries and special interest groups (both foreign and domestic) have sprung up around our so-called defense and national security budgets. The bureaucratic elites who dominate the federal government despise the Constitution’s limitations on their power and view the document as just an archaic “piece of paper.”

They will not “walk away” if Paul is elected president. When its authority over the Southern states was challenged in the 19th century, the oligarchy suspended the Constitution and launched a bloody war that killed three quarters of a million people. They arrested newspaper editors, deported antiwar congressmen, and burned down American cities.

A century later, the oligarchy nuked two Japanese cities, killing thousands of civilians in the twinkling of an eye. When its marginal interests were threatened in Southeast Asia, the oligarchy launched a devastating war that killed over a million people and left the region marinating in toxic defoliating chemicals.

To further its interests in the Middle East, the oligarchy slapped horrific sanctions on Iraq that so far have killed 250,000 children (and then trotted out Madeleine Albright—one of Clinton’s blood-stained trolls—to smugly declare that the deaths were “worth it”).

If the oligarchy would behave this way to protect its often marginal interests, what would it do to stop a devastating assault on its very existence?

The attack on Paul will begin in earnest when it appears he has an even remote possibility of winning. It will follow a fairly predictable path: The first step is already in play. The establishment will start by simply ignoring him, by using its power in the mainstream media and their influence over campaign donors. It will try excluding him from debates. This strategy is already failing. The Internet and talk radio are outside the elite’s direct control and are being used effectively by Paul to “get the message out.” The
establishment will generate ridicule and fear mongering.

Paul’s ideas will be grotesquely distorted in establishment media “hit pieces.” They’ll say he wants to permit heroin use in public schools, or that he wants old people to die in the streets without their Social Security checks, or that he wants to allow greedy industrialists to dump toxic waste into your drinking water.

The next arrow in the oligarchy’s quiver will be scandal—real or fabricated. Usually, this takes the form of pictures, billing records, etc. involving financial or sexual hi-jinks. For these folks, it would be child’s play to implicate him in some sort of phony ethical, moral, or financial skullduggery (doctored pictures, sordid media accounts from “eyewitnesses,” etc.).

If Paul somehow survives this assault, the oligarchy will move on to the criminal justice system. On some fine day, a stretch limo will pull up to the Capitol Building and one of the establishment’s hit men (Jim Baker or maybe Vernon Jordan) will ooze into Paul’s office for a “chat.”

Maybe Paul forgot to fill out Form X109/23W on his 1997 income tax return? Or drained a mud puddle when he built his new house that could be classified as a “wetland”? Or maybe a close relative is in hot water with OSHA/FDA/IRS/youname-it (federal prosecutors love to go after relatives
in order to gain “leverage”). Paul’s sentence could be lessened if he agreed to drop his candidacy as part of a “plea bargain.”

Ayn Rand once stated that the hallmark of authoritarian systems is the creation of innumerable, incomprehensible laws. Such systems make everyone an un-indicted felon and allow for the exercise of arbitrary government power via selective prosecution. If all this failed and if Paul remained a threat to win the presidency, the establishment may decide to let him take office and then use their considerable influence to ensure his presidency ended in failure—mostly through their control of Congress, the federal bureaucracy and the mainstream media.

The oligarchy’s problem with this strategy is that it entails considerable risk. As president, Paul could use the powers of the office to inflict untold damage to the imperial structure (especially if he chose to withdraw American troops stationed overseas). Worse, he could appoint anti-tyranny “ideologues” to a variety of positions in the federal government. The damage to the oligarchs could take decades to undo.

Steven LaTulippe is a physician practicing in Ohio. He was an officer in the Air Force for 13 years.

Comment viewing options

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

Sorry, maybe there's some

Sorry, maybe there's some truth to the article, but I'm really trying to avoid developing a conspiracy mindset.

Conspiracy theories often violate Occam's razor ("All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the right one", from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor ). I'm not buying the Oligarchy claim without a serious amount of evidence that truly excludes other, simpler explanations. If you want to be successful in whatever you're doing, you can't just take the explanation you like the best, you have to take the one closest to the truth. There are easier and more useful (from the perspective of getting Ron Paul elected) explanations to this oligarchy claim.

I didn't write it...

I did not write it, but was just passing it on. Some things are just not appropriate for this forum I do believe and are best left to private conversations.

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

Excellent article Jane

Agree with all of it. I just checked to see the exact definition of oligarchy in my Webster, and strangely, it's not in it.

Bob W., Naples, FL

Bob W., Naples, FL

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy

Oligarchy (Greek Ὀλιγαρχία, Oligarkhía) is a form of government where political power effectively rests with a small, elite segment of society (whether distinguished by wealth, family or military prowess). ...

Thanks screenracer

Maybe Webster's dictioanary is now being written by the CFR. :(

Bob W., Naples, FL

Bob W., Naples, FL

Protection

Very good article.

You perhaps intentionally avoided mention of the possibility of assassination. I feel the need to have our eyes open to the fact that the last President that we had, John Kennedy, who went up against both the Federal Reserve and the War Industry did not live to ever see the policies that he had set into motion: Executive Order 11110 and NSAM 267. Executive Order 11110 had called for $4.3 billion in interest-free, debt-free "U.S. Notes" to be introduced into circulation. And NSAM 267 had called for a full phased withdrawal from Vietnam (all personnel out by 1965). Kennedy had also called for a Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and a policy of bilateral disarmament with the Soviet Union in his "strategy of peace" speech in June 1963. Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States Notes were widely circulated, they would eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes.

Throughout American history other leaders who have contested the International Bank Cartel's attempts to control our currency such as Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Jackson, James Garfield, Congressman Louis T. McFadden, etc. found their lives suddenly shortened, or in Jackson's case he survived (while suffering through an "Impeachment").

Ron Paul will need to be very careful about security, not only with physical security but also vetting people that join his campaign to prevent inflitrators who could sabatoge the efforts of his campaign. I would be less worried about any type of contrived scandal actually sticking because Ron Paul is about as "clean" a candidate as there ever was.

The main thing that we can do right now is to help Paul raise $12 million dollars for this Quarter, continue to grassroots advertise with road signs, billboards, YouTube documentation of his rallies, and write letters demanding that programs such as "Meet The Press" invite him to come on their shows and talk (as they do with other candidates) and force the mainstream media into covering him.

I'm sure Ron Paul knows that he is in for a real fight. But by alerting and educating people about the type of corrupt opposition in front of us, we can turn that into a strength.

In the end, everyone loves an underdog.
In the end, most people would rather live in freedom than live under the iron thumb of an oligarchy.