0 votes

*Found a RP-ish Senator Running in Louisiana** Check it out.

I asked him a couple questions and this is what he responded.

What do you guys think?

We need to take back our congress one seat at a time.

Dear James:

Thank you for your kind email. I apologize for the delay in responding. As you might imagine, I'm already gettting hundreds of emails asking about the campaign. I'll try to answer your questions as specifically as I can.

As my website states, I am a conservative Republican businessman. I'm a lifelong Republican who believes in a smaller federal government, less spending and lower taxes. I'm very concerned that very few in Washington can "just say no" to runaway federal spending, and the alarming expansion of the federal government into virtually every area of American life.

I grew up during the administration of Ronald Reagan, and I share his view that "the government isn't the solution to our problems, government is the problem".

I am also a strong believer in the Constitution. To me, the Constitution is to an American what the Bible is to a Christian. It is sacred. It disturbs me deeply that leaders of both parties in Washington seem to treat the Constitution like it's just a piece of paper.

With respect to your question on monetary and fiscal policy, my study of the history of monetary systems has led me to the view that nations get into trouble when governments or central banks have free reign to print money.

History is full of examples of empires and nations that collapsed or went into decline when the currency was no longer "sound" -- that is, based on tangible assets of enduring value. Countries get into trouble when politicians and central bankers have free reign to spend, borrow and print money.

We're seeing an alarming decline in the purchasing power of the dollar today as a result of irresponsible monetary and fiscal policy. The spikes we are experiencing in the price of oil, gasoline and agricultural commodities can be traced in significant measure to the collapse of the dollar.

The specific solution and steps we must take to solve our monetary problem aren't quite as easy to define. They definitely involve a smaller federal government, lower spending, and living within our means.

Significant major reform will require the emergence of a genuine political consensus involving both parties, and the American people. However, I can share several things I believe strongly:

- I am opposed to recent proposals to radically increase the power of the Fed to allow intervention into virtually every area of the economy. The integrity of our financial markets is critical to confidence in the economy, and giving the Fed free reign to intervene wherever and whenever they see fit is one of the worst ideas I've heard.

- I support mandating that the Fed again report to Congress, the people and financial markets on the M3 money supply -- the amount of money in circulation. This is one key way we can keep track of what the Fed is doing. Transparency in monetary and fiscal policy is, to me, a first key step.

- I support restoring Congressional oversight of the Fed. We need more than annual "show" hearings that contain no real oversight. The Fed needs to be accountable to the American people through our representatives in Congress.

Beyond that, I think we need to carefully analyze the various proposals for a return to a monetary system based in some way on hard assets. Whether that means precious metals, or some mix of tangible assets such as oil, or core commodities such as wheat -- I'm not certain. But we undoubtedly need a thorough, robust and open debate about these issues.

What is certain is that we cannot go on as we have indefinitely. We must have a vital and serious debate about how to return our economy and our monetary system to a sound footing.

In any event, there is no harm in having monetary and fiscal policy return to our political dialogue as a central issue. In fact, the future of the national economy depends on it.

Thank you again for your email, and your interest in my campaign for the US Senate. As we go forward, I would sincerely appreciate your support and that of your friends.

I am looking forward to the coming campaign, and a real dialogue on the critical issues facing the future of our nation.


Paul Hollis


He sounds great, it wouldn't hurt to take Mary Landrieu seat.

Senator Mary Landrieu was elected in 1996 following a recount and was narrowly re-elected in 2002 in a runoff election. Since those elections, Democrats have had to endure the loss of some reliable voters because Hurricane Katrina dispersed many African-Americans from New Orleans, although the vast majority still live within Louisiana. The state has become more Republican over the past 12 years. Louisiana elected David Vitter in 2004, the state's first Republican senator since Reconstruction. And Louisianans elected Republican Bobby Jindal as the first Indian-American Governor in the country's history in 2007. Louisiana's electoral votes easily went to George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004.

Are we going to let a democrat run as a Neo-Con, and supported by Mr. Karl Rove?

On August 27, 2007, state Treasurer John N. Kennedy announced he was switching parties from Democrat to Republican. On November 29, after being personally recruited by Vitter and former Bush administration official Karl Rove, Kennedy announced plans to challenge Landrieu in 2008.[32][33] A Ramussen poll shows Landrieu leading Kennedy 55% to 39%.

Comment viewing options

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

Sounds great Mr. Hollis. I

Sounds great Mr. Hollis. I posted your response on a Pro-Liberty Candidate's forum, and many look forward to divulging deeper into your views. I for one, and many others are very hopeful about your run. Some people requested a further explanation on your position on the War in Iraq. They like your 2nd Adm, and Healthcare views. They said your views on national security were a little vague. I appreciate your response, but I have just a few more questions. Feel free to answer the ones you have time for.

* Position of America's involvement in NAFTA, the the NAFTA super highway.
* Your solution or views on the War in Iraq.
* If you would say no to a preemptive strike against Iran.
* A repelling of the so called "Patriot Act" that eroded many civil liberties endowed by our creator, and protected by the constitution.
* Your position on the Real-ID Act, and card.
* The Military Tribunal Acts signed by GWB, which ended habis corpus in America.
* The possibilty of ending the Federal Reserve, and its illicit free reign of our monetary system.
* Also final question would you be willing to read A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship, and The Revolution: A Manifesto.
* I would be willing to mail you my copies if you would like.

Thanks again, and look forward to hearing from you.

I sent him this, I will post response.

If yall could help me

If yall could help me complied a detailed list of questions to ask him, we could form a better opinion of him.

Also should I ask if he would want and or read.

Ron Paul book on Foreign Policy, and the Revolution Manifesto.

I would donate both my books to him

Good idea.

Here's some that I can think of:

1) IRS + personal income tax--abolish?
2) Patriot Act--repeal?
3) War on Drugs--repeal?
4) I'm especially interested in his position on monetary policy since he has a background in it.
a) Does he want a government managed commodity standard?
or b) is he for free-market money?

Our leaders are also

Our leaders are also entrusted to guarantee that the financial resources provided by the American people for our nation’s defense are used wisely – and not squandered by those who view war as a business.

The state of medical care for our veterans is a disgrace, and financial support for the families of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country has become an afterthought. This must change.

On September 10, 2001, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced that $2.3 trillion in military transactions could not be accounted for. These are taxpayer funds that are critical to keeping our nation safe, our troops properly trained and equipped, and their families cared for. To Paul Hollis, this is nothing short of a sacred obligation that our political leaders have all but abandoned.

The Constitutional protections of the 2nd Amendment are at the very heart of our liberty as American citizens.

The right of gun ownership as defined in the constitution is not only rooted in our right to own firearms, it is also a powerful reminder that it is the government that serves the people, and not the people who serve government.

Hurricane Katrina was an undeniable lesson in how fragile our rights are, as federal contractors went from house to house in New Orleans, demanding that homeowners give up the very guns that they needed to protect their property and families from lawlessness and chaos. As a United States Senator, Paul Hollis will make sure this never happens again.

In Louisiana, hunting is a tradition that is passed down through the generations. Paul Hollis knows that in addition to hundreds of thousands of dedicated recreational hunters, there are Louisiana families that still put meat on the table hunting wild game, ducks, and other waterfowl.

As a concerned father, Paul Hollis knows that protecting children from accidental gun tragedies is accomplished best not by government regulation, but by broad support for gun safety education, encouragement of responsible gun ownership, and a deep recognition of the long-term vigilance required of gun owners as the price of this precious Constitutional freedom.

I mean he sounds pretty good I will be asking him more about his stances on the War, but if he says the constitution is like the Bible for Christians he most oppose an Un-Declared war.

I honestly just found his website like 3 days ago, but I'm sure his position is better than the Neo-Con Karl Rove is sending in LA for senate.

He sounds okay--but what's with his pussyfooting on the Fed?

In discussion about monetary policy, why is the first thing that he says some laughable half-assed measures (M3, and more congressional oversight)?

Why can he speak like a man and have the first thing out of his mouth be that the central bank should be abolished?

It sounds like a canned Answer. I doubt he even knows what

the M3 is. He also had no clear answer on the Fed. Sadly he didnt ask him about the war. His website provides no clear position on the war. What a shame. Since the war is what most neocons say they disagree with RP on. I say the war is what defines a RP Republican
"let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our freedoms & wealth are in jeoprady"
Ron Paul

Freedom. Watch this video
Pls donate here Ron Paul can still win

Well said, his part on "national security'

is evasive. It reminded me of Bob Barr...

Give him a break, its better

Give him a break, its better than not talking about them at all.

Heres another cool thing on his site

When he was six, Paul's grandmother gave him an old, rare coin. It was valuable, and Paul learned an important lesson, sparking a life-long interest in the history of monetary systems, and the role of sound money (coinage) in building strong economies.

From one coin Paul became a serious collector, over time resulting in hard assets that are quite substantial.

Today, Paul Hollis is a successful businessman -- a nationally recognized expert on rare coins. He owns his own firm, Paul Hollis Rare Coins, and is a leader in the field. Prior to starting his own firm, Paul worked as chief coin expert at the internationally respected Blanchard & Company in New Orleans. Paul worked at Blanchard for seven years, eventually becoming their Senior Numismatist (coin expert).
Paul's interest in monetary systems has taken him all over the world, as well as to all of the US Mints, giving him important perspective on what America needs to be competitive in the global economy.

I' m just sick of the half-assed sonservatives...

He has a section on education--but why no mention of abolishing the Dept?
Enough pussyfooting geez...

He's good on Amendment 2 and healthcare though.