Senator Jim DeMint: Listen to Ron Paul

In 1975 the Republican Party and the conservative movement in general in the U.S. were still close enough to the original principles of the American conservatism and the ideology of the Founding Fathers for Ronald Reagan to be able to write the following words:

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

There was no reaction against these words of Reagan at the time. All Republicans understood that Reagan was right, and that he wasn’t inventing a new Republicanism but only following in the steps of the previous generations of true conservatives. While libertarianism has different shades and different views about specific points of policy, conservatives at the time knew that conservatism and libertarianism are the same. Five years later, Reagan won the elections and change the course of America. It is debatable whether his policies really followed his rhetoric. But still, the libertarian ideas were conservative ideas, period, and no Republican at the time could get in trouble or be spoken of negatively is they professed libertarian ideas.

It is in the tradition of Ronald Reagan that Senator Jim DeMint, the man in Washington DC with the greatest political contribution to the Tea Party movement in the last elections, the most conservative member of the Senate, warned the Republican Party that saying negative things about Ron Paul hurts the Republican Party. While the Republican establishment has been eager to point to Ron Paul’s libertarianism as a “proof” that he is not a true conservative (what would they say to Reagan then?), Jim DeMint called the party back to its true ideological roots. He said that the refusal of the other candidates to listen to Ron Paul is to “our detriment.” Jim DeMint added the most interesting comment one can find these days within the Republican field, that the debate within the Republican Party he is most comfortable with is between conservatives and libertarians.

This must give food for thought to the more conservative voters in the Republican Party. So far the establishment has been dismissing Ron Paul, but every alternative candidate has a record of big-government statism and business as usual. Some like Santorum have even openly declared that one of the foundational rights given by our Creator, as written in the Declaration of Independence – the Pursuit of Happiness – is what is destroying America. Others, like Gingrich, have worked to introduce legislation to make internal passports compulsory for all Americans within the United States. Of course, at the end, the call for more government intervention in the society is not different from the liberals’ own version of statism – or the differences are only in the details but not in principle.

DeMint may have another point too: The astounding difference in the average age of the voters for Ron Paul and the voters for the establishment candidates. The establishment likes to dismiss this with the words, “Ah, young people just want legal weed.” But such demeaning attitude won’t help the GOP. In a few years, the party’s main adversary will be the average life-span in the US, not any political opponent; the only mass influx of fresh blood is through the Ron Paul rallies. Alienating these crowds of enthusiastic young people may prove to sign the death certificate for the GOP in the next few years. And contrary to the establishment propaganda, these young people don’t “just want legal weed.” They want much more: liberty. And they see that liberty in the old conservative principles that Reagan wrote about, and Ron Paul is preaching and defending.

Jim DeMint, after all these years in the Senate, has proven to be a wise man of strong convictions. When the Republican field was still uncertain as to what they should do about the Tea Party, and even Michelle Bachmann was debating whether she should speak to the Tea Party rallies, DeMint threw his full weight of a conservative politician behind it, calling the Tea Party a “spiritual revival,” and that “people are awaking to the fact that government is not and can not be god.” And now, while disagreeing with Ron Paul on specific points, DeMint is able to see that only the message of liberty can save the Republican Party from its current state of a country club gerontocracy. The Republican establishment – and the Republican voters too – better take his advice.


Comments

comments

About Bojidar Marinov
A Reformed missionary to his native Bulgaria for over 10 years, Bojidar preaches and teaches doctrines of the Reformation and a comprehensive Biblical worldview. Having founded Bulgarian Reformation Ministries in 2001, he and his team have translated over 30,000 pages of Christian literature about the application of the Law of God in every area of man’s life and society, and published those translations online for free. He has been active in the formation of the Libertarian movement in Bulgaria, a co-founder of the Bulgarian Society for Individual Liberty and its first chairman.
  • Peter

    I wish I could make every "Republican" read this.

    • LibRep

      Especially the self-professed "Reagan Republicans." (ie Sean Hannity)

    • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

      As evidenced by some of the comments further down, even if they read it some still remain willfully blind. They are NOT conservatives though they love to wear the label, they will betray liberty every time for the chance to go blow something up overseas.

    • Jonathan Gartner

      And I wish I could make all you Paul bots listen to logic I am a Reagan Conservative twits we had to deal with the insanity of liberatarians back then to you certainly have not changed still first cousins to anarchy and chaos

      • tricky

        Well, obviously you are not a Reagan Conservative if you disagree with Reagan.

        • Jonathan Gartner

          Hardly I disagree with your and Paul's description of Reagan and what he stood for and what he did. Go to Micheal Reagan or Col. Edwin Meese III they will tell you what actually happend not some waste like libertarian Paul

      • Mark in LA

        Of course you are a Reagan Repulican - you believe in deficits as far as the eye can see, expansion of the police state, expansion of affimative action, free-trade, needless warmongering, amnesty for illegals, letting neoconm filth make public policy, guest workers and whoring for Wall Street and the bankers. Ron did all of these. Reagan was no Ronald Reagan.

        • Jonathan Gartner

          Lets see like you demoncrat promising 3 dollars in cuts for every 1 dollar in new taxes??? we are still waiting for the cuts. Needless warmongering spoken like a true dead head libertarian which Paul is

      • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

        I rest my case.

  • Frank

    "... the only mass influx of fresh blood is through the Ron Paul rallies. Alienating these crowds of enthusiastic young people may prove to sign the death certificate for the GOP in the next few years. And contrary to the establishment propaganda, these young people don’t “just want legal weed.” They want much more: liberty."

    Listen to Se. DeMint or the GOP is headed for extinction... to be replaced with a small government, Constitution-loving new 3rd Party so as to give the voters a real choice: more of the same big government & less liberty or less government & more liberty. Our present system of big government is collapsing anyways. We'll probably go bust or hit hyperinflation soon. Fiscal reality will eventually hit, although it can be postponed.

    • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

      The establishment will do anything and everything to maintain their stranglehold. This may include, but is not limited to: demonization of opponents in the propaganda organs a.k.a. news media; indefinite detention of dissidents; censoring or dismantling the Internet; martial law and curfews.

      Read history people. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Specifically Germany, 1937-1945.

  • Bill

    Ron Paul said that Michele hates all Muslims and wants to go get them, He also said that Rick hates gays and Muslims. He lied about Gingridge and Santorum and does not support Israel. He is an isolationist and could care less if Iran goes nuclear and destroys the apple of Gods eye 'Israe'l. Sorry but I cant by your logic.

    • Peter

      So, your one of those people who are offended when you think your candidates position has been misrepresented but you have no problem misrepresenting Ron Paul's position? Nothing like a fresh dose of hypocrisy in the morning.

    • tricky

      He he, Ron Paul is a liar but Slick Rick, Santorum, and Gingrich aren't. Who needs comedy shows with comments like that.

      BTW, I am an isolationist too. I don't break into other people's houses to make a mess there.

    • GUEST

      I Don't Support Israel Either'! $3.5 Billion Of My Christian Money To PROP Up A Genocidal Government. YOU LIE'! Dr.PAUL Is a Non-INTERVENTIONIST""! YOU WANT WAR''? GO AND FIGHT FOR ISREAL BY YOUR DUMB "GOYIM" SELF''''!

      • GQ4U

        Money is Christian? No!
        Genocidal Government? Who Israel? Not true! One-third of Israel's citizens & voters are Palestinian.
        "DUMB GOYIM SELF"? Name calling is a low level Liberal tactic employed when facts fail you.
        Dr.PAUL Is a Non-INTERVENTIONIST? Your only correct statement.
        If you truly are a Paul supporter take the high road using facts and leave the derogatory episodes to his opponents.
        I support Dr Paul but many of his supporters cause him more harm than good.
        [old saying] "You will catch more flies with honey than vinegar"

    • Planetaryhub
      • Jonathan Gartner

        Then care to explain why his economic policy is from a anti-semite of some reknown and why a news letter with Pauls name and he made money off of it is anti-semite along with his general libertarian ideals of chaos and anarchy??? Obama wishes to put us under his boot of law and Pauls amoral stance is just as bad with as little law as possible both roads to destruction of the United States

        • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

          Why bother explaining. You've swallowed the media talking points and have your ears plugged.

        • Jonathan Gartner

          Media??? hardly I have been following Paul for 30 years he is the perfect example of libertarians and the down falls of that particular form of belief you might want to study what you are saying before opening your pie hole

    • Jonathan Gartner

      Bill to many paul bots here. To end the discussion robots of Paul he is nothing like Ronald Reagan period Micheal Reagan has said so a gentleman by the name of Snow and hopefully Col. Meese will also come out and say the same. Paul and his interpetation of Constitution is amoral as Obama's is immoral and unethical. He has a terrible record with only one bill in 23+ years passed out of over 600+ his economic plan is written by a racist and he claims military service with being a flight surgeon who slept in a warm bed with warm food give me a break the man is a whacko

      • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

        If I am a "paul bot" then you are a "neocon shill" and if you think a measure of success in Congress is how many bills get passed you are sadly mistaken. We would all be a lot better off if they passed many less bills, and actually read the ones they do pass.

        Don't worry though, we'll just keep on electing the Globalist Puppets and everything will be fine. See you in Gitmo, hope your cell is comfortable.

        • Jonathan Gartner

          Hardly a shill of course you parrot words like Paul does without real knowledge of what they mean. Paul is a amoral Libertarian always has been reads the Constitution with out the morals and ethics that the founding fathers meant it to have read the Federalist Papers or read Matt 5:14 one of Ronald Reagans favorite passages

    • barry

      Bill, Prove it!!! He did no lie about either of them.I am tired of paying for isreal's friendship... There is no provision for giving American tax dollars to any one. nor any country.

      • Anthony San Diego

        Israel's friendship? After their attack on the USS Liberty who wants it?
        We don't need or want friends like that.

    • Ann Wilson Kingsley

      Please do your research!

      Regarding Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy:
      The Israeli Mossad says Iran does not pose a threat to Israel. http://in.news.yahoo.com/iran-no-threat-israel-mo...
      A former head of the Mossad warned that Iran should not be attacked because it will set off a regional religious war. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/for...
      Lt. Colonel Shaffer says Ron Paul’s Iran Policy Most Accurate http://by170w.bay170.mail.live.com/#n=1259539391&...
      Israel has 100s of different kinds of nukes. Ron Paul is trying to keep American tax payers from having to spend more money on wars when we are not being attacked.
      Ron Paul is for a strong military:
      Ron Paul receives more political donations from military personnel than all other candidates combined. “The libertarian congressman boasts more donations from military members than any other 2012 presidential candidate. The claim was determined “true” by Politifact, after the fact-checking group looked at Federal Election Commission filings.” Santorum has a grand total of $750 from all branches of the military combined! $750!!! Gingrich has an “impressive” $4,900! Romney has a whopping $13,300! Ron Paul has $95,567! I wonder who’s foreign policy the military agrees with! We actually know what’s going on over seas, and many of us support Paul! If you want to stop the endless nation building wars, support who the troops support!
      Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/05/santorum-compar...
      The military supports Ron Paul because he wants to end obsolete bases and military hardware, and he is for advanced technological weaponry research. Ethical American soldiers do not want to fight wars against countries that have not attacked the United States. Ethical people do not attack others without extreme provocation.
      Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/04/ron-paul-gingri...

      Vote for Ron Paul!

      • Jonathan Gartner

        The vast majority of the military does not support Paul any more than they support Obama. Your version of ethics of course could be disscussed along with Pauls which falls in to the libertarian slot which includes anarchy and chaos of no law. Ethical and moral people defend themselves and others against evil something Paul does not.

        • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

          Paul advocates obeying the Constitution! How is that anarchy?

          What we have now is trampling of the Constitution and lawlessness!

          Wake up!

        • Jonathan Gartner

          Obeying and understanding are two different things again the amorality of Paul and his ideals are as bad as not following it at all such as Obama's immoral and unethical methods.

  • Amy D

    Dr. Paul is our only hope of restoring our Republic to its Constitutional legitimacy. Thomas Jefferson said that we should trade with all and make alliances with none. That's not isolationism, nor is Dr. Paul's desire to get us out of places we don't belong and are not wanted. The natives of the "middle east" have been fighting over that little piece of land for more than 2000 years, and they are all the same race - semites - whether Arab or Jew. Let them settle it among themselves without involving us. Israel's current defence minister, as well as the previous one, has stated they don't want or need our help, so why are so many people over here still trying to interfere?

  • Amy D

    Jim DeMint would make a terrific vice presidential candidate on Dr. Paul's ticket

    • Randall

      I think that what will happen is that in 2016 Sen. Rand Paul will run and will take the Republican nomination and his choice for VP will be either Sen. Jim DeMint or Sen. Marco Rubio.

  • Anne

    Folks, you can't solve extremism with extremism. Obama is the extremism of ultra liberal while Dr. Paul is the extremism of ultra conservatism. Both seek to dismantle America: Obama into Socialism, Paul into "Let's through everything out and start over." Everything INCLUDES the Constitution: http://tinyurl.com/89hhyby

    Where I agree that conservatives need to stop fighting among ourselves, we need to focus on what is truly important, and which candidate can come the closest to fulfilling those needs. Voting records speak volumes: http://www.eagleforum.org/Scoreboard/

    We need to make INFORMATIVE decisions and we cannot rely on the media(controlled out of the White House), to give us real, unbiased information. That will also include mass e-mails and internet postings. Be wise, be informed, and make YOUR OWN intelligent decision with regards to the candidate that will best serve WE THE PEOPLE.

    • Jonathan Gartner

      Nicely said in essence Obama is immoral and unethical while Paul is amoral both paths lead to a null result. Good luck with the Paul bots

    • Ann Wilson Kingsley

      Anne, please do your research. Such gross misrepresentation of Ron Paul's policies is unbecoming a Christian. You did direct us to a Christian web site. I am an Evangelical Ron Paul supporter. He is the only strict Constitutionalist in the race. Not only does Ron Paul support family values, his policies would end government support of vice and the consequences of vice. Also, the Scoreboard to which you directed us does not indicate Ron Paul's 100% Fiscal and economic Conservative stance. I will not vote for a family issue only candidate. That is irresponsible. It is also irresponsible to irrationally obscure the national debate with family values. Americans need to start accepting that Communists and Socialists work from both sides at times. I was livid when the "Right to Life" movement began screaming back in the late 1970s when our economy was crashing. Our banks were bankrupted by defaulting loans to developing countries, and our country was literally being destroyed by Socialism. What I saw was that a bunch of fanatical Christians were co-opted by Communists to obscure the economic situation, attracting attention away from the consequences of bad Socialist policies. News to Christians is that Socialism is the problem. If you are really honest about "Right to Life", then get rid of Socialism or shut up. I'm an Evangelical for Ron Paul, not a "Right to Life" Socialist/Communist.

    • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

      Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. - Barry Goldwater, 1964

      Republicans used to believe in this radical freedom and small government stuff. I don't know what we are anymore but we're not conservative and we're not republicans.

      By the way, the scoreboard you linked to rates Dr. Paul very highly. I'm not sure what you're getting at there.

      Where we are, it took 200+ years to get to. There's no way Ron Paul can destroy all that socialistic goodness in only four years. I say give him a chance. At the very least it sends a clear message "We the people are sick and tired of going in this direction, it is time to try something else."

  • http://outlookexpress pokey

    We're already living in a socialist or communist nation. All of those elected to Washington swear to uphold our constitution yet on a daily basis operate outside it. The people vote and approve something that is of importance to them to have a liberal government judge overturn it. The public better wake up before it's too late. Those that are supposed to be working for you are set to destroy you and will do so if not stopped.

    Those enabling government better wake up as when the private sector is destroyed there will be no more funds coming into the government coffers to give the handouts. When this stops what position do you think you will have with your masters. It's about them and what they can steal; you will then become a liability.

    • Joyce

      I agree with you except for one small correction. Communisiam is where the government OWNS the businesses. We're not to that point yet.

      • Anthony San Diego

        Correct Joyce, not yet, but after the General Motors takeover how far away is it?

      • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

        The word is Fascism. Same word used to describe the "Nazional Socialists" in Germany when the government had control of private business interests. And passed "enabling" laws like PATRIOT, NDAA and SOPA so that everything Hitler did was legal when he did it.

        • Jonathan Gartner

          Not quite. The Germans were looking for order in a state that no longer had any the Weirmar Republic. They were used to Imperial Order that was gone and the only other way was communism in Germany they were truly caught between a rock and a hard place.

        • Hook24

          Yes...the Germans were looking for order...much the same way you are. Fascists are very ordered, and I hear the trains run on time.

      • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

        No, where we are is fascism, with a militaristic empire building foreign policy. Basically the same thing we fought against in Europe during WWII. An American dictator now or soon will have all the tools he needs: PATRIOT, NDAA, SOPA. Don't forget the bad things the guy with the ugly moustache did. Every one of them was legalized before he did them.

        Sorry, the other one didn't show up for three hours so I didn't realize it got posted.

        • Hook24

          Exactly correct. I would only add that fascism, socialism, and communism are all collectivist in nature and have more in common than that which distinguishes one from the other.

  • GUEST

    BILL"""" Your Reading The TALMUD""? YES""? IF NOT TRY...........THEY HATE YOUR "KIND". Go To: http://www.realjewnews.com

  • Blair Franconia, NH

    We can't dismiss Ron Paul's moonbat supporters for fear Ron Paul, a racist, might run for President on as a third-party candidate?
    Ain't gonna happen! Ron Paul would be committing a murder-suicide.

    • Jonathan Gartner

      Try to explain that to them and they will get ugly. It is not age that has made him that way he was that way 30 years ago along with his libertarian ideas are not what the founding fathers wanted he is words without morals or ethics

      • Anthony San diego

        And you sir are moral and ethical?

        • Jonathan Gartner

          Both actually I anyalzed information for the government through logic and the law I had a 95% success rate doing such when the demoncrats came in they did not want the truth through observation they wanted marxism through take over.

    • Patriot Diva

      First of all, Ron Paul is not racist. That card has been so overused, it's pathetic. Second, Ron Paul has always been a registered republican even though he has libertarian leanings. He is not running third party. Please get your facts straght.

  • Carol

    This is also what Ive been saying. When the libertarian viewpoint was actually explained to me, I was surprised. I mean, not explained by just saying, oh thats crazy. Its actually constitutional. Personal liberties. Isnt this what we all want? That doesnt give people the right to hurt others nor does a good defense plan leave us open to attacks. We are being lied to by the GOP

    • Jonathan Gartner

      Obviously who ever explained the libertarian view to you left out the point that they do not hold also to the morals and ethics of the founding fathers. Do your own research you will find these people as unsavory as obama as their path leads to the same destination.

      • Hook24

        Is it moral to use the force of government to take from one individual and give to another? Is it moral to borrow to fund a war that future generations will have to pay for? Is it moral to debase currency so that the purchasing power of all individuals is reduced without their consent? Is it moral to sexually assault individuals without probable cause in the name of "security" (ever heard of innocent until proven guilty?)? Is it moral to spray our skies with contaminates (chem-trails) that affect the health of all who live under those skies? Is it moral to arrest citizens for buying and selling raw milk? Is it moral enforce the laws of foreign nations without regard to the laws of our nation (Gibson guitar factory raid)? Is it moral for our government to lie to us (unemployment is really closer to 20% and inflation is above 10% for the last 2 years)? You are the unsavory individual...you are the one who is afraid to stand for the removal of these immoral conditions in our society. Thank GOD for Ron Paul...he is without fear.

  • SEAN MURRY

    i havent picked my canadiate yet.

    • Jonathan Gartner

      Of course an honest statement will bring the ire of the Paulbots I gave you a thumbs up for having your own mind no matter who you vote for that is the way of true self government whether I like it or not.

  • Joyce

    Ron Paul reminds me of the old saying about the little boy with the curl in the middle of his forehead: "When he was good, he was very good and when he was bad he was horrible." That's Ron Paul. Although I agree with a lot of what he has to say, this country would not survive his "head in the sand" attitude. I would absolutely love it and believe that the world SHOULD all live within our borders and love its neighbors. Since history is no longer being taught in our schools and the young have no idea of what history is all about, it is not surprising that they swallow his eutopia never never land hook line and sinker. Perhaps a little reminding is in order:
    Before WW II (not very long ago) this nation was much like Ron Paul would like us to be now -- issolationist. We had little military and directed our attention inside this country and there was much reason for it since we were trying to recover from the Depression. We were minding our own business just as RP wants us to do today. Now recall Germany as they ran over or conquered nation after nation in Europe. (to be continued in next email as this was too long)

    • Bankslay

      Joyce you overtly ignore some basic facts one is we are broke and our level of deployment is unsustainable, that the military members, who's life literally depends on getting military history right give more money to Ron Paul than all other Republican candidates combined. You are cherry picking only points to prove your point of view, points from the side that won.
      We funded, backed trained and armed many if not most of these so-called threats so it's our own intervention back-firing on us, most if not all the time. As far as WWII you seem to be forgetting WWI and the treaty of Versailles and that Congress put the U.S. public monetary system in the hands of private bankers with secret interests and secret nationalities. We set up a war time emergency monetary system in 1913 to fund WWI BEFORE it started sticking our nose in the business of British imperialism and the French socialism competing with Germany's new technology and steel mills, against the will of the people who were either neutral or favored Germany, we fought to be free of British imperialism.

      • Jonathan Gartner

        Oh come on now Germany's Imperialism was much worse that Britians give me a break twit. I should know my family name is Hohenzollern cadet branch of that imperial family please study WWI before bringing such ignorance to the table.

    • http://www.rnpaheadquarters.org Karl Hand

      Please don't bother. I can't bear long winded people even if it's by e-mail. This is not 1940s. Today, the US has troops in 160 out of 192 nations. It is the US , not Germany or Japan, that is militaristic, with a defense budget greater than the rest of the world. Come home America, come home.

    • Jonathan Gartner

      Good luck with trying to explain logic to Paul bots. You might want to go into the cold war and why it was so important to have a strong military. It is even more important now that Europe has gone the way of social welfare states and is even incapable of sustaining a action against Libya because of it. We are now engaged with an enemy that is not rational nor a state such as we know it Islam is the pinnacle of rants and raves and dangers to all free people.

    • Patriot Diva

      Obviously you are believing all of the lies being written about Ron Paul. He is NOT an isolationist. He is a non-interventionist. In other words, if it's not in the interest of national security, we stay out of it. Makes sense to me.

      • Jonathan Gartner

        I believe in what I can prove with facts and the facts once know are not kind to Paul. As for isolationist and non-interventionist one means that you will protect yourself when attacked but you will not defend a friend against an enemy that is over whelming to them when attacked very amoral and a incorrect reading of the Constitution

        • Hat

          I think it's very ignorant to claim that under a Paul presidency we would not "defend a friend." The constitution clearly sets out the procedure for going to war. President Paul would go to the congress for a declaration of war, we would go in with clearly defined goals, win, and come home. You are the one displaying an unfortunate misunderstanding of the constitution my friend.

  • Joyce

    (Coninuing from previous email re WW II) And Japan wanted to get us before Germany did. They needed land and resources as they had not been table to take them from China. We were considered to be weak and had little military gear or soldiers. We surprised them, because we made lipstick factories into shell factories and geared up encredibly quickly. We were fighting for our very existence because if Germany took England, we would be next. Germany's submarine capabilities were superior to ours. They had started to manufacture missles. We had none.
    The upshot of this is: There will always be a country who will want to take over others. Certainly Osama Ben Laden has said that the USA will eventually convert to Muslim or die -- the Koran says it is okay to kill infadels -- THAT folks is anyone who is NOT a Muslim. There are no moderate Muslims in countries where they rule as it seems that the radicals are in charge. Christians are being killed and running for their lives in many of those nations. So much for moderate Muslims.
    Back to RON PAUL, name where he has shown leadership, passed a plethora of bills in congress or any other accomplishments. Yes, he talks a wonderful talk. I wish it were so. Sigh!

    • Anthony San Diego

      Joyce, have you any idea of America's military might or our technological capabilities?
      This thing with Iran isn't about a bomb, it's about money. To be specific, it's about controlling
      Iran's national bank the same way Libya's invasion was about controlling their national bank.
      Research the United Nation's first mandate regarding Libya after the insurrection was over.
      Hint, it had to do with Libya';s national bank and who would control it.
      As for leadership, take a good long look at Ron Paul's philosophy and his plan to remove
      the waste in government then talk to me about leadership quality.

      • Joyce

        Anthony San Diego, Will a chair with 3 legs stand up on it's own if 1 leg is missing? I will REPEAT: Ron Paul has some excellent ideas and some horrible ideas that won't work. Many of Ron Paul's philosophies are excellent! I wish we could all live in this world and all remain inside our borders. If EVERYONE would do that, his ideas would work.
        As for the removal of waste in government, I have always wondered why nobody ever seems to do that. Let me see: Has Ron Paul EVER passed even one bill in the House to do stop graft, corruption or waste? You should look at what he has accomplished in the from 1997 to the present, to know what he can do in the future. _As for controlling Iran's bank, when did that occur? Years ago or recently. _How do YOU propose that we stop Iran from doing what they say they will do? And if not us, who?_I think you said "United Nation's, the last time I heard our name is the United States.__

    • C.Davis

      Joyce,You've been reading the "approved " history books again. There's no excuse for that any more since the internet.
      Every conflict you mentioned and virtually every other since 1776 we were dragged into to serve the Zionist Rothschild banking empire's agenda.They financed and instigated the Japanese into their war with Russia, then financed the Bolshevik revolution and its attendant horrors which held sway for the whole first half of the century. They've engineered radical Islam for the same agenda and until we remove the ball and chain around our ankle that is their federal reserve, we will never enjoy the peace and prosperity that our founders envisioned for us, their spiritual progeny. Ron Paul's genius is that he's never failed to vote against unconstitutional legislation and feeding the beast with more of our tax dollars. Uninformed people think a quantity of bills is a good thing. Every time congress passes a bill it costs US money. and a plethora of politicians and lobbyists are always pushing each other out of the way to belly up to the trough.with the riders they've attached. Ron Paul is devoted to America enough to put his life on the line as the face of the Fed's nemesis. He may not survive it, but others will pick up the banner. It's just a matter of time.
      Edify yourself. Learn at the knee of a true American Patriot and statesman. Ron Paul 2012

      • Jonathan Gartner

        Actually the Bolshevik revolution was funded by the German Government to destablize Russia. Japan had desires for empire within both their culture and society please read history. Ron Paul has had 23+ years over 600 bills and one passed for a memorial in his own state. I knew Uncle Ron 30 years ago as a nut case and little has changed including his libertarian ideals which are first cousins to anarchy and chaos. Child

      • Joyce

        C Davis, I applaud part of what you say. However, like Ron Paul, you have want to live in eutopia. I so wish we could live there. This is the real world.

  • Ray

    I have always respected but Sen Jim DeMint, but he has lost my respect on this. Ron Paul has as much if not a whole lot more baggage than any of the other candidates on the platform. If you want to talk about attacks, Ron Paul is a pace setter, and truth has no bearing on his accusations, and I don't hear the reaction to his attacks on the rest of the candidates that have been subject to by him and his avid supporters.

    • Jonathan Gartner

      To me they resemble the lock step of the third reich just as bad as obama and even further to the left.

      • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

        If you're talking about the rest of the republican candidates who want to make the government even bigger and fight even more wars, I agree with you.

    • Ann Wilson Kingsley

      Please do your research. Ron Paul is known to be an honest moral man of upright character. He has a near 100% fiscal conservative voting record, and advocates an end to government support of vice and consequences of vice.

    • Hook24

      Ron Paul has not attacked other candidates. He has run ads pointing out who they really are, but he uses their own words, so to call this an attack is not accurate. When the other candidates ran attack ads against Romney and his record at Bain Capital, Ron Paul's response was that it only showed how little these candidates understood about how capitalism really works. Mitt Romney is his only real opponent, yet he defended him because the attacks were championing a false ideology (fascism?) and misleading. He is truly a man of principle and moral character. Your depiction of him is nothing but a smear and truth has no bearing on your accusations to use a phrase a read recently...

  • http://testra.com John Hart

    RINO 6:41 "Focus on the speck in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own!" Hanging queers led to gay marriage" punishing unwed mothers brought on abortion and prohibition empowered organized crime.

  • P. Henry

    Best article I've ever read here. Now if some of the commenters would just get their facts straight concerning Rep. Paul it would be much better. Take the time to study what freedom and liberty are, and what the Founders intended this country to be. We have strayed from the Constitution so much that when someone suggests that we actually adhere to it it sounds a bit crazy. Educate yourselves. http://ladyliberty1776.blogspot.com/2011/11/i-thi... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuoHHumO3Hw&fe... http://www.campaignforliberty.org/ http://www.dailypaul.com/ http://runronpaul.com/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivcsZ38KMUU Rep. Ron Paul PREDICTS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detai...
    My ancestors fought in the War for American Independence, and I'll do everything I can to educate fellow citizens as to why!
    "Humanity seems to have an infinite capacity for self-delusion. We pray for peace and vote for war."
    Ron Paul receives more contributions from active military personnel than all other candidates COMBINED! Think about it.

  • P. Henry

    Ron Paul PREDICTS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detai...
    Almost like having a crystal ball. Another good reason to listen to him.

  • P. Henry

    Combine these two lines for the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?
    feature=player_detailpage&v=zGDisyWkIBM

  • C.Davis

    For all the "anyone but Obama" crowd: Obama will gut Obamney like a trout. If you think that masses of Christians will vote for a mormon you are simply deluding yourself. The best strategy for defeating Obama is the Anti- war candidacy of Ron Paul. Even if it weren’t it would be the moral option for anyone of conscience. But it is logically the only viable option for ousting the usurper. The strategy of falling into line for the globalist appointed “front runner” will work exactly as well as it did in ’08. How’s that workin’ out for ya?
    Marion Berry won the mayor’s post in D.C. 3 times despite being a convicted cocaine dealer. Why? Because 60% of the citizens worked for the government.
    The only way any republican will pull any voters off of Obama is if they are against the military adventurism. That’s what got Obama elected in the first place. He swore to put an end to it. Why do you think they’re crowing about pulling out of Iraq? So he can claim that he’s delivered, and hoodwink all the independents into not jumping ship. To me it’s a sad commentary on the state of the national intellect that this is not generally recognized. So the hidebound GOP zombie party will follow their designated piper, arms outstretched, piling up against the chain link fence of its own hubris. Principled conservative republicans, virtually all independents and third party voters along with disenchanted democrats will wage the battle against Obama under Ron Paul’s banner if the GOP leaders succeed in disenfranchising them. Will this result in the re-election of Obama? Perhaps, but at least there’s a chance. The GOP has NO chance(it doesn’t matter to them if they own both parties) without Dr. Paul as their candidate. Maybe we still have time to inform their rank and file of this fact, it remains to be seen.
    If this results in an Obama victory the media will be pointing their fingers at Ron Paul’s followers, but the blame will lie with them as it did in ’08. Republican voters would do well to ponder Einstein’s definition of insanity BEFORE their primaries.

  • tncdel

    I don't fathom Jim DeMint sticking up for Ron Paul, who is NOT a true Conservative like DeMint is. Paul has a RINO streak a mile wide when it comes to Islam and illegal aliens. He was rated the WORST of any GOP candidate on illegal immigration. See: https://www.numbersusa.com/content/action/2012-pr...?

    I wish DeMint would run for president instead, and ask Allen West to be his VP...or vice-versa. THAT would be a true Conservative ticket.

    • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

      Because Paul is consistent regarding the Constitution, he votes "no" when presented with unconstitutional legislation, simple as that. The things NumberUSA used to make their determination would have required "yes" votes on bills that were rife with unconstitutionality. Simple as that.

      As with any problem, if lawmakers are serious about solving the immigration issue, they need to come up with legitimate constitutional ways to do it instead of letting lobbyists write bills for them.

    • Jonathan Gartner

      Good luck trying to explain libertarian ideals here and why they are akin to Obama and his plans for us. Paul reads the Constitution very nicely but not the morals or ethics of the founding fathers typical libertarian anarchy and chaos

      • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

        I really would love for you to explain just what in the world you mean by that since you keep saying it over and over. Ron Paul is a compassionate man who, as far as I can tell, loves his family and his country and wants to restore freedom and liberty in America.

        By "morals or ethics" I can only guess that you mean taking money by force to give to the poor or something like that.

        • Jonathan Gartner

          Hardly you truly do not understand the terror of libertarians and their wants of anarchy and chaos. Read John Stuart Mills on the tyranny of the majority and minority I have observed his rants and raves and they have gone on almost 30 years read on his history. As far as I and many others are concerned Paul's libertarian ideas are a bad dream as is libertarianism as a whole. His liberty would be just as bad as Obama all done in the name of the Constitution does this mean the Constitution should be ignored??? hardly but I want my translation done with someone who actually understands both it and the Founding Fathers Paul understand neither and would use it as a club as surely as Obama uses marxism

        • Hook24

          Anarchy isn't as you describe it. I refuse to accept your definition of this term. You seem to be an advocate of police state tyranny. A law for everything, strictly enforced, with cruel and unusual punishment for all offenders. Anarchy means without control. It doesn't mean chaos. Of course Libertarians do believe in laws at the same time. After all in order to protect individual liberty there must be laws that protect private property, which Dr. Paul supports. What he doesn't support is taking the wealth earned legally by one individual and giving it to another individual, which you apparently subscribe to as one of those non-anarchy measures to bring order to chaos. Our Constitution was very carefully crafted to limit the ability of government to infringe on the freedoms of the individual. Little by little these safe guards have been peeled back giving us the police state we now live in (flown lately?). What do you really believe in? How do you define what you believe in? What constitutes freedom to you? Remember that freedom is a negative concept that requires the elimination of coercion in order to exist at all, just as peace can only be obtained when war is ended.

  • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

    DeMint is right, let me explain it for you.

    The GOP needs to listen to Ron Paul's ideas, and then nominate and support candidates who embrace those ideas. Right now that means nominating and supporting Ron Paul because no other true constitutionalist is running.

    If the GOP does not nominate Ron Paul, they lose to Obama. Is that what you want? It is simple math and logic.

    If Ron Paul is the nominee, he gets votes from:
    - traditional GOP voters who always pull the "R" lever
    - All the people screaming "anybody but Obama" if they are actually truthful when they say that
    - fiscal conservatives who want lower taxes and actual spending cuts
    - libertarians
    - angry Democrats and independents who watched "hope and change" morph into "more of the same crap we've had for 100 years"
    - voters who want to end the wars
    Bottom line, the Republicans win the White House, Obama is gone, and we can start the work of getting our freedom and liberty back.

    If Ron Paul is NOT the nominee, the GOP gets:
    - traditional GOP voters who always pull the "R" lever
    All the other groups vote third party, not at all, or for Obama. You lose. Four more years of Obama.

    Call it a threat, extortion, whatever. The simple truth is that the GOP has lost its way and needs to return to the principles that made America great. Establishment Puppet (R) is functionally equivalent to Establishment Puppet (D) and I will vote for neither. The more you marginalize, mock and berate Paul supporters, the more you drive them away to your own detriment.

  • Carol Gerber

    Wake-Up Proud Americans If You Can Put A Mr MaGoo Ron Paul In Office , Yikeess, Lets Just Get Behind Newt Or Mitt And Let The Cards Fall. God Bless America And The Real Tea Party Patriots, With Sarah Palin And Rush Bo.

    • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

      Wow, How About Learning You Don't Have To Capitalize Every Word.

      Secondly, it's quite rude to belittle Dr. Paul based solely on your opinion of his age or appearance. Have you any knowledge of what he actually stands for?

      Pay attention to what's going on, or enjoy four more years of Obamanation.

    • Jonathan Gartner

      Beware the Paul bots Carol they are loosed upon us rants and raves rational discussion is beyond them hopefully they wake up soon.

      • Hook24

        WAKE UP!!!! The Federal Reserve is destroying our money through debasement. Who among the other candidates is calling for reform of the FED? The War in Afghanistan has lasted twice as long as WW II. How much longer should we continue to pour scare resources with alternate uses down this toilet? Do you think this war would be as popular (It does have support of 30% of the population) if we had significantly higher taxes to pay for it instead of borrowing the money and sticking the debt on future generations (how moral is that?)? I would be happy to have a rational discussion with you on these issues. I see them as the two of the most important issues in this campaign, but first you have to WAKE UP!!!! We aren't in Kansas anymore Toto...

      • http://www.stretchovision.com PepperdotNet

        If you would call that drivel posted by Carol "rational discussion" not to mention what you just posted, that is very telling indeed.

    • Hook24

      gEE wHIZ cAROL yOU sURE hAVE aN uNUSUAL sTYLE oF tYPING...

  • floyd

    Think You Know Mitt Romney..You owe it to yourself and America to watch this video..Real American citizens LOSING their jobs cause of Mitt Romney.. You better get to KNOW who the Hell your voting for..!
    http://www.webcasts.com/kingofbain/

  • Jonathan Gartner

    I dont have to use either his age or appearance his libertarian stance says volumes about him. Run Paul and you will have four more years of Obama. And you got the point didnt you we do understand both Obama and Paul different sides of the same coin

    • The Bobster

      Oppose RP and get Obongo in whiteface if our side wins.

      • Jonathan Gartner

        Actually vote for Paul and you get Obama in white face different means same destination.

  • http://www.revolutionpac.com Earle Belle
  • The Bobster

    DeMint for President 2012.

    Forget the other open-borders neocons.

    • Jonathan Gartner

      That must include Paul who has the worse record on immigration Perry for President

  • premonition010

    In a town of about 1200 voters I've personally spoken to 1/3 WILL NOT vote for any Republican but Dr. Ron Paul and to a person claim to vote third party otherwise.

    It is my view (observation) the Establishment GOP is on the verge of Political Suicide. I report this to you all as a 41 year Registered Republican. No Bull !

  • Hook24

    This race is really between two candidates, Romney and Paul. The other 4 have no organization behind them, and only exist from free publicity they gain in debates and right-wing talk shows. These 4 are not even on the ballots in several states, including Virginia in which all 4 have been left off due to lack of organization. Surely this is not the kind of leader we want to elect to run our country...someone who can't even run a campaign. So of the two remaining candidates one must choose. Are you for (Romney) or against (Paul) carbon taxes? Are you for (Romney) or against (Paul) open borders? Are you for (Romney) or against (Paul) borrowing more and more money to fund undeclared wars in the middle east (Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Sudan...and we have been in Afghanistan twice as long as we fought in WW II)? Are you for (Romney) or against (Paul) unrestricted actions by the Federal Reserve with regards to our monetary policy? Are you for (Paul) or against (Romney) cutting 1 trillion dollars from our federal budget in year one of the new presidency? Are you for (Paul) or against (Romney) cutting 5 federal agencies (Education, Commerce, Energy, Interior, HUD...although not all functions handled by these agencies would be cut)? Are you for smaller government (Paul) or the status quo (Romney)?

  • Hook24

    Senator Demint is also right about renewing the GOP. If you want to die out as the Grand OLD Party, keep doing what you are doing. The GOP will be replaced by a new invigorated 3rd party much as the Whigs were replaced by the Republicans 150 years ago. Young people aren't just for Dr. Paul because he would stop the war on drugs (a complete waste of scarce resources with alternate uses). They support him because they see no other hope for their future in the current system. Freedom is the only road to prosperity and opportunity. Ron Paul is the only candidate driving on that road.

  • Howard Hatch

    Jim DeMInt has it right. We should acknwldge where Ron Paul is telling it is.

  • Patrick Henry

    Enough of all this BS already, all politics, just back the Republican nominee, he will be MUCH, MUCH better than Oblamer!
    And give the new President a Conservative Congress to work with! Simple as that!

  • Justin

    Senator Jim Demint I find is very eloquent, balanced and would be a great republican presidential candidate.
    Although i really like Ron Paul.. I find he leans too extreme for most American tastes. Something about Demint that is very Regan-like. (slight resemblance?) He would really give Obama a run for his Goldman-Sachs-contribution money.. hehe.