Ron Paul - What has he accomplished?

[iamse7encaptain of 1,000]

Though it mocks me, I find it hilarious...

[Neil Ruckercaptain of 100]

Ron Paul in the last debate in his closing remarks said something you will never hear a politican say and that is our liberty is granted from our creator not government. Thats not taught in schools. I hear so many people say "Oh there not americans so they have no rights under the constitution" Once you start believing that you really don't understand gods laws.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

....sorry about the repetition. Trying to pull a couple deep dives all together in one post under a relevant thread title....I won't bounce around any more....

PART I:

Who Wrote Ron Paul's Newsletters?

Ron Paul doesn't seem to know much about his own newsletters. The libertarian-leaning presidential candidate says he was unaware, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, of the bigoted rhetoric about African Americans and gays that was appearing under his name. He told CNN last week that he still has "no idea" who might have written inflammatory comments such as "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks"—statements he now repudiates. Yet in interviews with reason, a half-dozen longtime libertarian activists—including some still close to Paul—all named the same man as Paul's chief ghostwriter: Ludwig von Mises Institute founder Llewellyn Rockwell, Jr.

Financial records from 1985 and 2001 show that Rockwell, Paul's congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982, was a vice president of Ron Paul & Associates, the corporation that published the Ron Paul Political Report and the Ron Paul Survival Report. The company was dissolved in 2001. During the period when the most incendiary items appeared—roughly 1989 to 1994—Rockwell and the prominent libertarian theorist Murray Rothbard championed an open strategy of exploiting racial and class resentment to build a coalition with populist "paleoconservatives," producing a flurry of articles and manifestos whose racially charged talking points and vocabulary mirrored the controversial Paul newsletters recently unearthed by The New Republic. To this day Rockwell remains a friend and advisor to Paul—accompanying him to major media appearances; promoting his candidacy on the LewRockwell.com blog; publishing his books; and peddling an array of the avuncular Texas congressman's recent writings and audio recordings.

Rockwell has denied responsibility for the newsletters' contents to The New Republic's Jamie Kirchick. Rockwell twice declined to discuss the matter with reason, maintaining this week that he had "nothing to say." He has characterized discussion of the newsletters as "hysterical smears aimed at political enemies" of The New Republic. Paul himself called the controversy "old news" and "ancient history" when we reached him last week, and he has not responded to further request for comment.

But a source close to the Paul presidential campaign told reason that Rockwell authored much of the content of the Political Report and Survival Report. "If Rockwell had any honor he'd come out and I say, ‘I wrote this stuff,'" said the source, who asked not to be named because Paul remains friendly with Rockwell and is reluctant to assign responsibility for the letters. "He should have done it 10 years ago."

Rockwell was publicly named as Paul's ghostwriter as far back as a 1988 issue of the now-defunct movement monthly American Libertarian. "This was based on my understanding at the time that Lew would write things that appeared in Ron's various newsletters," former AL editor Mike Holmes told reason. "Neither Ron nor Lew ever told me that, but other people close to them such as Murray Rothbard suggested that Lew was involved, and it was a common belief in libertarian circles."

http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/w ... newsletter

I look forward to the press conference at which someone, perhaps Rothbard/Ron Paul associate Lew Rockwell, tries to explain how philosophical principle logically led the same group of people to ally with the Black Panthers, sympathize with the Viet Cong, co-found free-market thinktanks, and flirt with racist militias over a period of twenty years or so (any port in a storm, basically). And I’m not saying I won’t find that hypothetical speech persuasive, either. I’m just saying I would enjoy that press conference. (It could happen any day now.)

Regardless of who (possibly Rockwell) penned the racist passages in the newsletters, it’s no coincidence, I’m sure, that they seem to have occurred mainly around the time the Cold War was ending and Rothbard was fumbling around trying to create a “paleolibertarian” alliance (that is, a union of libertarians and local-tradition-defending paleoconservatives along the lines of Pat Buchanan). And then – perhaps more tellingly – such passages seem to have stopped by 1995, the year:

(A) Rothbard died (and I do not mean for a moment to give the impression I relish his passing – I even attended the New York memorial service for him and still recall wondering whether it was in bad taste for a friend of mine to wear a Starfleet insignia pin to the event),

(B) Oklahoma City put an end to many people’s brief fascination with the “militia” movement, and

(C) I noticed the Mises Institute’s Free Market newsletter, which started coming to me in the mail around then, sticking to econ and, to my great relief, being devoid of the racist taint of some of the earlier Mises Institute material (I hadn’t then seen the really rough stuff from the earlier Ron Paul survivalist newsletters but had noticed a somewhat fishy passage or two in the Rothbard-Rockwell Report, which existed roughly in between the Paul newsletters and the current version of Free Market – and so was relieved to see that, whatever those unpleasant and stupid tangents had been, the group seemed to have worked it out of their system).

Is it possible that the reason Rockwell hasn’t fallen on his sword in spectacular fashion over the whole newsletters thing is that it was mainly Rothbard himself who inspired (or even wrote) them? Admitting Rothbard went awry in his final years would be as difficult for some libertarians as denying their indebtedness to Ayn Rand, not so much out of dogmatism (Rothbard was too strange and eclectic to be truly dogmatic about) but just because no decent person wants to look like an ingrate.

http://www.toddseavey.com/2011/12/ussr- ... -week.html

...here is an in-depth analysis of the letters with corresponding links -
http://ronpaulsurvivalreport.blogspot.c ... er.html#q1

...I'm more concerned with the connections and figuring out who the inner circle is than the racism bent...

Rockwell met Murray Rothbard for the first time in 1975, while working for Hillsdale. Rockwell credits Rothbard with convincing him to reject statism completely:

"It was clear to me at the time that Murray Rothbard was Mises's successor, and I followed his writings carefully. I first met him in 1975, and knew immediately that he was a kindred spirit.... I cannot remember the day that I finally came around to the position that the state is unnecessary and destructive by its nature – that it cannot improve on, and indeed only destroys, the social and economic system that grows out of property rights, exchange, and natural social authority – but I do know that it was Rothbard who finally convinced me to take this last step."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Rockwell

Ludwig von Mises Institute [founded by Rockwell in 1982 after serving as Ron Paul's Chief of Staff for 4 years]

The Institute's stated goal is to "undermine statism*** in all its forms". [in other words pro-anarchy]

***Statism (French; étatisme) is a term used by political scientists to describe the belief that, for whatever reason, a government should control either economic or social policy or both to some degree.

In December 1981, Ludwig von Mises's widow Margit gave her approval to Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. to found the Mises Institute. It was formally established in October 1982 and located in Auburn, Alabama. Today, Rockwell serves as chairman and Douglas French is the president.

http://mises.org/page/1448/About-The-Mises-Institute

....a little history on Mises president Doug French -

Douglas E. French is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. He received his master's degree under the direction of Murray N. Rothbard at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, after many years in the business of banking.

http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Doug_French

I dropped out of college in my third year out and worked as a bartender and bar manager for ten years. During that time I returned to college to finish my undergraduate degree with a major in economics and finance.

After moving to Las Vegas in 1986, I took an entry-level job at a bank and ultimately worked in the banking business in Nevada for 22 years. In the fall of 1989 I decided to enroll at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas (UNLV) and pursue a masters in economics. In the fall of 1990 I took "History of Economic Thought" with Murray Rothbard and my life was changed forever. I took "U.S. Economic History" with Murray as well and wrote my masters thesis under his direction. While researching and writing my thesis on early speculative bubbles I became interested in Austrian Economics, especially Austrian Business Cycle Theory.

Lew Rockwell and the late Burt Blumert asked if I would come to work for the Institute in the fall of 2008.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/french/french130.html

Federal regulators charged a former local bank executive Friday with misconduct for his role in the failure of Silver State Bank, which was seized in September 2008. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. accused Douglas E. French in a 26-page complaint of being associated with bad loans that cost the Henderson-based real estate lender more than $10 million. In the complaint issued Dec. 17 but made public Friday, the FDIC said it was seeking a fine of $125,000 and barring him from working at any FDIC-insured bank without prior approval from the FDIC or other federal regulators.

French was the bank's executive vice president and real estate manager until he resigned on May 15, 2008. The FDIC sized Silver State, a subsidiary of Silver State Bancorp, about four months later.When French left the bank, Silver State publicly said it was for "personal reasons." However, subsequently, French testified that he was "asked to leave" the bank, the complaint said.

The FDIC said French "violated various federal laws and regulations" involving certain loans that went into delinquency, costing the bank about $10 million. The federal agency said French had been paid $98,000 in loan fee commissions involving failed loans, several of which involved the bank's largest borrower, real estate developer Thomas Jurbala.

http://www.lvrj.com/business/fdic-charg ... 28709.html

At the center of Silver State's lending spree stood French. As VP for commercial real estate lending, he brought customers in, receiving commissions on their loans. And as a senior executive, he also played an important role on the six-person committee that approved loans.

Most of the loans French brought the committee were approved, according to two former Silver State loan officials who requested anonymity because they still work in the industry. "Doug pretty much ran the loan committee," says one. "They signed off on everything he did."

The Jurbala loan contained what's called an interest reserve, which with loan fees and closing costs amounted to $2.34 million of the total. The use of "interest reserves" is a common practice in construction loans but also one prone to abuse. When a bank makes an interest reserve loan to a developer, it hands the builder both the principal and the interest on the loan. The bank pays itself the interest and books it as revenue. Eventually, if everything goes right, the builder will finish the project, sell or lease the property, and pay back the money. But as the past few years have made clear, things don't always work out so smoothly in real estate.

George Burns, who heads Nevada's Financial Institutions Division, says interest reserves were a significant factor in recent bank failures in his state. (First National Bank of Nevada also failed in 2008.) "You are just creating money," he says. "I call it 'faux income.'"

Interest reserves can remove an important checkpoint on a borrower's project. If a homeowner misses a mortgage payment, the bank knows it has a problem and can come up with strategies to collect -- renegotiating the loan's terms, for example. When a builder gets an interest reserve loan, the bank typically isn't paid anything for 12 months or more. By that time the developer may have folded, leaving the bank on the hook.

In addition to the hefty fees Silver State charged Jurbala, approximately $8.8 million of the $24 million loan was slated to pay down other loans Silver State made to Jurbala for different developments, one of which would fall into bankruptcy two months later.

Jurbala says he still owes Silver State $34 million and is negotiating a payment plan with the FDIC. According to the developer, the FDIC is having difficulty deciphering the loan documents left in Silver State file cabinets, complicating the negotiations.

Douglas French earned a bonus of $175,000 and a raise that brought his salary to $260,000 in 2007. French also sold stock for a little more than $1.8 million before share prices plummeted. The Silver State vice president says he was forced to sell because the stock was declining and margin calls were coming in.

French didn't stick around to see the end. A little more than three months before the bank went under, a company press release announced that he had resigned for "personal reasons." In truth, French now says, he was fired for "mismanagement of financial real estate."

"The board of directors decided that they would sleep better if I wasn't there," he says.

http://www.propublica.org/article/the-s ... ust-090126

In January, the federal regulators revealed they had proposed to fine French $125,000 and bar him from working for any FDIC-insured bank without the prior approval of the FDIC and other federal bank regulators.

In the settlement disclosed Friday, French didn’t admit or deny charges of unsafe or unsound banking practices and breach of fiduciary duty, but agreed to the employment ban and to pay the $35,000 "civil penalty."

The FDIC didn’t say in Friday’s announcement why it agreed to the smaller fine. Such settlements typically are entered to avoid the costs of lengthy litigation.

French, who was paid $652,000 in 2007, was accused by the FDIC of using inflated appraisals, having a conflict of interest with an appraiser and approving questionable loan disbursements. He was linked by the FDIC to at least $10 million in loan losses at the Henderson-based bank, the failure of which is expected to ultimately cost the FDIC more than $450 million once all its bad loans are resolved.

http://www.vegasinc.com/news/2011/dec/3 ... ettlement/

The other two former Silver State executives investigated by the FDIC are Douglas E. French and Steven D. Haynes. French, the bank's former executive vice president and real estate manager, agreed last month to pay $35,000 to settle his lawsuit with the FDIC.

http://www.lvrj.com/business/regulators ... 18569.html

...speaking of Murray Rothbard (Ron Paul's self described mentor and founder of the The Rothbard-Rockwell Report which became LewRockwell.com) -

Society Without a State
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard133.html

The Origins of Individualist Anarchism in America
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard107.html

Are Libertarians "Anarchists"?
http://mises.org/daily/2801

Anarcho-capitalism

Economist Murray Rothbard is credited with coining the term.[8][9] In an anarcho-capitalist society, law enforcement, courts, and all other security services would be provided by voluntarily-funded competitors such as private defense agencies rather than through taxation, and money would be privately and competitively provided in an open market. According to anarcho-capitalists, personal and economic activities would be regulated by the natural laws of the market and through private law rather than through politics. Furthermore, victimless crimes and crimes against the state would not exist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism

Ron Paul's Constitutional Minarchism vs Murray Rothbard's Anarchist-Capitalism

Ron Paul's argument (in the short to medium run) is to push all gov't out to the state level save: Naval Oversight.

Minarchism must "eventually" lead to anarcho-capitalism. Because people are very clever on how to avoid taxation.

Gov'ts only role is to collect and distribute revenue -- the "evil" is that they are not altruistic Saints; which we know they have to be to never touch the money.

Conclusion -- Ron Paul Minarchist Transition into Rothbardian-Capitalism (Anarchist-Capitalism).

http://www.dailypaul.com/98919/ron-paul ... capitalism

....let's take a couple statements directly from Rothbard -

Well, how do we look at all this? Do we say that David Rockefeller's prodigious efforts on behalf of certain statist public policies are merely a reflection of unfocused altruism? Or is there pursuit of economic interest involved? Was Jimmy Carter named a member of the Trilateral Commission as soon as it was founded because Rockefeller and the others wanted to hear the wisdom of an obscure Georgia governor? Or was he plucked out of obscurity and made President by their support? Was J. Paul Austin, head of Coca-Cola, an early supporter of Jimmy Carter merely out of concern for the common good? Were all the Trilateralists and Rockefeller Foundation and Coca-Cola people chosen by Carter simply because he felt that they were the ablest possible people for the job? If so, it's a coincidence that boggles the mind. Or are there more sinister political-economic interests involved? I submit that the naïfs who stubbornly refuse to examine the interplay of political and economic interest in government are tossing away an essential tool for analyzing the world in which we live.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard170.html

In the end, Nelson was not to achieve his heart's desire, and Jimmy Carter was sworn in as President. But if Nelson never achieved his seeming destiny as our Caesar, he did have the satisfaction of having his longtime personal foreign policy adviser, Henry Kissinger, serve as the unchallenged foreign policy czar of both the Nixon and Ford administrations. And the further satisfaction of seeing Henry the K. succeeded by brother David's crew from the Trilateral Commission, from Carter and Mondale down through Brzezinski and the top layers of the State and Treasury departments. At the end, Nelson and the other Rockefellers had to fall back on their time-honored tactic of achieving power through others, but perhaps, as usual, they accomplished more that way than they could have on their own.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard256.html

....now here is where it gets interesting...

It is here that what is left of the natural elites comes into play. True intellectuals, like Mises and Rothbard, can not do what they need to do without the natural elites. Despite all obstacles, it was possible for Mises and Rothbard to make themselves heard. They were not condemned to silence. They still taught and published. They still addressed audiences and inspired people with their insights and ideas. This would not have been possible without the support of others. Mises had Lawrence Fertig and the William Volker Fund, which paid his salary at NYU, and Rothbard had The Ludwig von Mises Institute, which supported him, helped publish and promote his books, and provided the institutional framework that allowed him to say and write what needed to be said and written, and that can no longer be said and written inside academia and the official, statist establishment media.

Once upon a time, in the pre-democratic age, when the spirit of egalitarianism had not yet destroyed most men of independent wealth and independent minds and judgments, this task of supporting unpopular intellectuals was taken on by individuals. But who can nowadays afford, single-handedly, to employ an intellectual privately, as his personal secretary, advisor, or teacher of his children? And those who still can are more often than not deeply involved in the ever more corrupt big government-big business alliance, and they promote the very same intellectual cretins who dominate statist academia. Just think of Rockefeller and Kissinger, for instance.

http://mises.org/etexts/intellectuals.asp

Many readers may be surprised to learn the extent to which the Graduate Institute and then Mises himself in the years immediately after he came to United States were kept afloat financially through generous grants from the Rockefeller Foundation. In fact, for the first years of Mises’s life in the United States, before his appointment as a visiting professor in the Graduate School of Business Administration at New York University (NYU) in 1945, he was almost totally dependent on annual research grants from the Rockefeller Foundation. Even after he finally landed the position at NYU, where he remained only a visiting professor until his retirement in 1969, his salary was paid for not by NYU, but from funds contributed by generous private supporters.

http://www.independent.org/publications ... .asp?a=692

The Austrian School had been founded by Carl Menger (1840-1921), a retainer of the Hapsburg and Wittelsbach royal houses of Austria and Bavaria, who was a fanatical opponent of Prussia's industrialization policies, which were modelled on the American System of Political Economy. Menger was the first of the Austrian free market economists to equate these American System ideas with state socialism, lumping Friedrich List together with Henri St. Simon, G.W. Hegel, and Karl Marx.

Menger trained a generation of Austrian School economists, including Eugen von Boehm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises, and Friedrich von Hayek. Before his brief New York City venture, von Hayek attended the Boehm-Bawerk seminars at Vienna--along with future Bolshevik leader Nickolai Bukharin. This convergence of radical free market and Bolshevik personalities under the Vienna School tutelage was not as strange as it might seem on first reflection. Boehm's insistence on the inevitability of the collapse of capitalism due to ``over-production'' caused by the reinvestment of profit into new infrastructure, research and development, and other capital improvements through the mechanism of credit, was stolen directly from Karl Marx. And Boehm fully subscribed to the superiority of the pre-capitalist feudal guild society over the modern industrial state, a theme Bukharin would elaborate in his own 1914 work, The Economic Theory of the Leisure Class.

Von Hayek totally rejected the principle that man was created in the image of God. In fact, he traced his own philosophical roots to the early eighteenth century Satanist, Bernard Mandeville. In a lecture he delivered at the British Academy on March 23, 1966, von Hayek lauded Mandeville as a ``master mind,'' as the inventor of modern psychology, and as the true intellectual forbearer of David Hume, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, Carl Savigny and Charles Darwin.

http://american_almanac.tripod.com/vonhayek.htm

at the end of the 1920s, Mises recommended mathematical economist Ewald Schams for a Rockefeller Fellowship, praising him as “one of the ablest younger economists of our country.”65 He also recommended Paul Lazarsfeld—the director of a small private outfit dedicated to research into economic psychology66—who advocated methodological and political views almost the opposite of those cherished by Mises.67

More than any of his fellow students, Hayek was an adventurer. His peers Haberler and Voegelin were anxious not to leave the well-trodden career route. They eventually left Vienna to study in the United States when prestigious Rockefeller stipends became available for Austrian students in 1924.7

Hayek’s teacher Wieser had been the main contact of the Rockefeller Foundation among the academic economists in Vienna. He made sure that Hayek was granted the first Rockefeller fellowship, while he was still in Manhattan. But the notification reached the young man only after he had already returned to Vienna.11 By then he was unwilling to accept the fellowship. Mises then tried to hire Hayek for the Kammer library, but it was Haberler who eventually obtained the position.12

After 1926, when he succeeded Wieser as the main contact of the Rockefeller Foundation in Vienna, Mises had the opportunity to provide or withhold material benefits, but he did not use this power to raise epigones. Noble as this attitude was, it gave a competitive edge to some of his rivals who did not have the same scruples.

The year 1926 brought another improvement in Mises’s good fortune. He started cooperating with the Rockefeller Foundation and established an Austrian Institute for Business Cycle Research, which allowed his young political allies—most notably Friedrich Hayek—to earn a living in economic research. In the following years, Mises also became involved with various European free-trade organizations and used the International Chamber of Commerce as a platform for networking and for promoting classical-liberal policies.

He later recalled that the Rockefeller Foundation had “taken a kind interest in my teaching and research work.”8

Thanks to funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, it also published a series of monographs on problems of business cycle theory that became the most visible outlet for the work of the coming generation of Austrian economists.26

http://mises.org/books/lastknight.pdf

President Garfield openly declared that whoever controls the money supply controls the people. After only four months in office, President Garfield was shot at a railroad station on July 2, 1881. Why? This is exactly why the Constitution says we the people have this right through a representative Congress.

"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812), founder of the House of Rothschild.

I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.--Nathan Rothschild

Doesn't matter what the money supply is. Paper or Gold. It's who controls it. And when they control it there will always be compound interest.

Napoleon said: "When a government is dependent for money upon the bankers, they and not the government leaders control the nation. This is because the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Financiers are without patriotism and without decency."

Lincoln, Franklin, Jefferson, Jackson, Garfield spent there lives fighting the money masters and warning the people. Today there good names are either forgotten or smeared because they identified the root of the problem.

Here is a statement which shows Ron Pauls true colors.. this article titled "The Beginning of the End of Fiat Money."

“There’s nothing to fear from globalism, free trade and a single worldwide currency. But a globalism where free trade is competitively subsidized by each nation, a continuous trade war is dictated by the WTO, and the single currency is pure fiat, fear is justified. That type of globalism is destined to collapse into economic despair, inflationism and protectionism, and managed by resurgent militant nationalism."





He continues...

The effort in recent decades to unify government surveillance over all world trade and international financial transactions through the UN, IMF, World Bank, WTO, ICC, the OECD, and the Bank of International Settlements can never substitute for a peaceful world based on true free trade, freedom of movement, a single but sound market currency, and voluntary contracts with private property rights….

Wait! What is this crap, a "single but sound market currency?" Would this be the same world currency we don't need to fear? Perhaps gold? Yeah, now we can see Ron Paul is in fact some sort of a globalist himself, or at the very least harbors some affection towards a one world view so long as it's under his Austrian School free-market golden ideology. And this is somehow different from the other globalism? Oh, that's right, this is a peaceful globalism. No thanks! I believe in America!

And to add insult to injury he says this garbage..

"The ultimate solution will only come with the rejection of fiat money worldwide, and a restoration of commodity money. Commodity money if voluntarily and universally accepted could give us a single world currency requiring no money managers, no manipulators orchestrating a man-made business cycle with rampant price inflation.” — Ron Paul, Congressional Record, March 13, 2001
http://www.singleglobalcurrency.org/governments.html

There you have it. Ron Paul does indeed support a global single currency so long as it's golden, and free from any political regulation such as implied in Article 1, Section 8, of the US Constitution, which you pretend he actually supports.
The power to coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures...

viewtopic.php?f=20&p=259143#p258255

...now an excerpt from one of LoveIsTruth's posts -

Ron Paul: A Most Unusual Politician
by Murray N. Rothbard
...
"Ron Paul, in short, is that rare American, and still rarer politician, who deeply understands and battles for the principles of liberty that were fought for and established by the Founding Fathers of this country. He understands that sound economics, moral principles, and individual freedom all go together, like a seamless web. They cannot be separated, and they stand or fall together."

The only genuine solution to the evil of inflation, then, is to separate money from the State, to make money once again a market commodity instead of a fiat ticket issued by the central government. The dollar must once again be what it was originally until it was, in effect, nationalized. The dollar must once again be simply a name for a unit of weight of gold coin. Only this kind of fundamental reform will cure the ravages of inflation. ... Ron Paul is one of the few men in public life who truly understands the problem and is willing to fight to cure it..."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard187.html

...does that leave a new impression on you then? We take money away from "the state" which used to be a collective representation of the people via elections (franchise to vote - i.e. remaining hair thin thread)....so in other words take the power to create money away from the people.....and turn it over to the market. Who owns the market in this world??? Does that sound like a good thing....or a really nasty subtle propaganda campaign???

....look back at the people vs. the bankers in the late 1800's with silver vs. gold (The Wizard of Oz).....do you think the gold position has consolidated even much further since then (especially with the governments selling their gold)??? Again you have all the vagaries and adversities of doing business with a hard currency....so what is this global institution (cartel) that will control the notes representing the gold???

Case for Gold: A Minority Report of the United State Gold Commission [Ron Paul & Lewis Lehrman]
http://www.amazon.com/Case-Gold-Minorit ... 0932790313

Money and the Coming World Order: The Creation of International Monetary Order by Lewis E. Lehrman
http://www.thegoldstandardnow.org/image ... -Order.pdf

Ron Paul's $1 Trillion Restore America Austerity Plan
http://mediaroots.org/ron-pauls-$1-tril ... y-plan.php

Ron Paul and Lewis Lehrman have been right all along, never more so than in this age of massive debt.

Much of this history and argument is covered in a new book by Lewis E. Lehrman, a scholar, philanthropist, and longtime student of monetary policy. Titled The True Gold Standard, it is being published by his own Lehrman Institute in New York, a public policy foundation. Independently wealthy (the Rite Aid drugstore fortune), Mr. Lehrman has been a student of public policy for many years. He ran for governor of New York in 1982, losing in a tight race to Democrat Mario Cuomo. Among his many endeavors was his service on Ronald Reagan's Gold Commission in 1981. He collaborated on the minority report titled, "The Case for Gold."

That report might have made a bigger impact had it been issued two years earlier. Beset by the great inflation of the late 1970s, which cast early doubt on the future of the fiat dollar, Jimmy Carter acknowledged his existential political problem by hiring banker Paul Volcker as Fed chairman with instructions to restore order. That he did at the cost of a sharp but short recession. His necessary bloodletting was firmly supported by Mr. Carter's successor, Ronald Reagan.

The Volcker fix lasted for 20 years and it looked like the fiat dollar might serve after all. But then came the big asset inflation of the 2000s, followed by the 2008 bust. This put the progressives back in power and instead of fixing the dollar, they embarked on a new social spending binge—Obamacare et al.—and ran up the government deficit to its present astronomical level. The dollar is again shaky, with inflation at times nearing the rate it was running, just over 4 percent, when Bretton Woods crashed.

Gold pretty much dropped out of the monetary debate during the 20-year dollar hiatus, but it is back now with a vengeance as prices rise and securities markets are roiled by the massive global overhang of sovereign debt.

The time is ripe for Mr. Lehrman's new book. That's because it goes well beyond making a persuasive case for a return to the gold standard and provides a detailed road map for how to get there. When the time comes for a new U.S. administration and Congress to seriously consider monetary reform—and it will come sooner rather than later if the Fed pursues its current course—Mr. Lehrman's book will serve as a valuable guide.

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/1 ... anda/print

Part II
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=18158&start=150#p260042

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

....while Ron Paul's views of limited government may be enticing (especially in light of our awful situation)....the principles he is espousing are not in alignment with God....nor are Ron Paul's actions. He is approaching life in true libertarian/anarchist fashion....he's looking out for himself. Those poor idiots who are crushed by the IRS despite being right and having the truth......well they are idiots for not recognizing the powers that be. I won't even touch his unwillingness to donate to his own campaign....

Thus Ron Paul is no solution to the problems at hand (moral decay and wickedness) and all he provides is another angle of wickedness. There is no political savior to a wicked people intent on pursuing wickedness! Ask Ron Paul about the importance of morals and natural law.....might start with homosexuality and the military!

All valid concerns...thank you for the documentation on the Austrian school, Von Mises, and Hayek...

So Jason....given your feelings on Ron Paul...who if any persons should we be voting for (start with presidential candidates)? Or are we all screwed? I know our options are essentially Mass Repentance or Destruction (fire from Heaven is my favorite remedy). There's got to be something more we can do, in addition to filling our lamps with spiritual oil, and hunkering down with our food storage...

[JasonI am a nobody!]

....while Ron Paul's views of limited government may be enticing (especially in light of our awful situation)....the principles he is espousing are not in alignment with God....nor are Ron Paul's actions. He is approaching life in true libertarian/anarchist fashion....he's looking out for himself. Those poor idiots who are crushed by the IRS despite being right and having the truth......well they are idiots for not recognizing the powers that be. I won't even touch his unwillingness to donate to his own campaign....

Thus Ron Paul is no solution to the problems at hand (moral decay and wickedness) and all he provides is another angle of wickedness. There is no political savior to a wicked people intent on pursuing wickedness! Ask Ron Paul about the importance of morals and natural law.....might start with homosexuality and the military!

All valid concerns...thank you for the documentation on the Austrian school, Von Mises, and Hayek...

So Jason....given your feelings on Ron Paul...who if any persons should we be voting for (start with presidential candidates)? Or are we all screwed? I know our options are essentially Mass Repentance or Destruction (fire from Heaven is my favorite remedy). There's got to be something more we can do, in addition to filling our lamps with spiritual oil, and hunkering down with our food storage...

I personally pray for the return of the King, Jesus. If you want actual presidential candidates....I'm now leaning more towards Bill Still although I don't know tons about him and need to do more research. He obviously has just about zero press coverage (and that's comparing him to Ron Paul's press coverage). But the reality probably is that the voting machine companies will make the decision anyways....

The other reality that is an actuality and not just a probability....is we have a wicked people at the end of their credit rope. No matter who gets into office....they will be faced with the decision to either clamp down controls on the people (rule with an iron fist - think Lincoln on a century worth of steroids as well as technology - reign of the drones).....OR.....let it all descend into chaos and anarchy (which might happen anyways as the judgments of God get serious and break supply chain).

The two candidates that scare me the most are Mitt and Ron. Ron for the anarchy path (whilst the enemies like Russia/China gear up to fill the vacuum we leave in the world...and perhaps even greater ambitions whilst we collapse upon ourselves in violence and hate).....and Mitt for basically being Mormon while the ship goes down and provides the scapegoat/blame to ratchet up hate and discontent towards the church (they catch him or set him up for anti-religion practices like cheating on wife or some other similar thing to discredit him as well as blaming a bunch of pre-calculated bad decisions on him). For example its been quite obvious via information transfer as well as assorted other avenues like global institutions that they have been subtly working to sink the US ship. From Reagan's groundwork (major funding ramp-up) for the United Nations (and other assorted global institutions) to Clinton's allowing the Chinese to hedge currency as well as increasing direct information transfer. Now we have China getting Iraq contracts after Americans bled and died to obtain the country. Up until Obama there has always been others serving as president of the UN Security Council including multiple Russians during the Vietnam war to whom we were reporting all of our key military information.

Barack Obama is set to become the first-ever U.S. president to chair the United Nations' 15-member Security Council when it meets later this month.

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics ... 22432.html

Anyways to get back to the point....Mitt seems to be happy enough to be their little puppet boy and do their bidding....but in his zealous quest to be president (multiple choice Romney)....I fear he will indeed be a tool in their hands in ways he never imagined (at least trying to give him the full benefit of the doubt in terms of being a conspiring Gadianton).

[moonwhimcaptain of 1,000]

Wow Jason, back on your anti Ron Paul track again! So now that you have attempted to destroy Ron Paul.....so what?? Do you recommend that we vote for a priesthood holder like Orrin Hatch, Harry Reid, Mitt Romney, Jon Huntman?.....all great constitutionalists and anti new world order!!?? You quote someone saying that "Alex Jones and Ron Paul both are poised to make huge profits on the New World Order and are well connected to the New World Order." It is nice to finally learn that Alex and Ron are only in it to make lots of money from their connections to the Gadiantons.....well, then I am not going to listen to Alex or Ron any more, they are just filling us with NWO propaganda! So what and who do "you" recommend??? Please don't leave us hanging.

[AGStackercaptain of 100]

Jason - You are absolutely wrong in declaring Ron Paul an anarchist. I suggest you go home and read the Constitution tonight. Your analysis of Ron Paul is so off base and so wrong it is boggling where you get this disinformation.

Sad when latter day saints clearly can't see that Ron Paul is not a wolf yet he is the greatest defender of liberty currently living in America. Yeah, even more so than the saints.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

Wow Jason, back on your anti Ron Paul track again! So now that you have attempted to destroy Ron Paul.....so what?? Do you recommend that we vote for a priesthood holder like Orrin Hatch, Harry Reid, Mitt Romney, Jon Huntman?.....all great constitutionalists and anti new world order!!?? You quote someone saying that "Alex Jones and Ron Paul both are poised to make huge profits on the New World Order and are well connected to the New World Order." It is nice to finally learn that Alex and Ron are only in it to make lots of money from their connections to the Gadiantons.....well, then I am not going to listen to Alex or Ron any more, they are just filling us with NWO propaganda! So what and who do "you" recommend??? Please don't leave us hanging.

Not attempting to destroy anyone...just looking at connections, history, etc etc etc.

Draw from it what you want....I strive to provide information and although I digress at time into my own opinion....I aim for mostly information.

I already said - Jesus!!!

[JasonI am a nobody!]

Jason - You are absolutely wrong in declaring Ron Paul an anarchist. I suggest you go home and read the Constitution tonight. Your analysis of Ron Paul is so off base and so wrong it is boggling where you get this disinformation.

Sad when latter day saints clearly can't see that Ron Paul is not a wolf yet he is the greatest defender of liberty currently living in America. Yeah, even more so than the saints.

Time will tell the story as to who's vision is obscured....for better or worse....

[moonwhimcaptain of 1,000]

Not attempting to destroy anyone...just looking at connections, history, etc etc etc.

Draw from it what you want....I strive to provide information and although I digress at time into my own opinion....I aim for mostly information.

I definitely appreciate your hunt for, and presentation of information.

[HeirofNumenorthe Heir Of Numenor]

Okay I admit Jesus IS a GREAT choice In 1996, a girlfriend told me that she would always write in Elder L. Tom Perry when she voted....

Of those in the running....
While Mitt is a worthy priesthood holder, his bloodlust/warmongering, general lack of Constitutional understanding, and overall flip-flopping disqualifies him outright - in my book.

Ron Paul has too much of a reliance on the freemarket/gold standard, and doesn't stand up to the PTB, but at least if seems to understand and reverence the US Constitution...

which if any is right? Only God can answer that....

Or no matter what.....
do we get one last gasp to change? or have we already passed the day of our repentance? WE certainly don't have the numbers - unless numbers needed are drastically reduced by massive cleansing...

[lundbaekcaptain of 1,000]

Ron Paul is getting to more and more Latter-day Saints, and I am glad to see this. In the October 1979 Geneeral Conference Ezra Taft Benson said, "Men who are wise, good, honest, who will uphold the Constitution of the United States in the tradition of the Founding Fathers, must be sought for diligently." Presidents David O. McKay, J. Reuben Clark, Ezra Taft Benson, and other Church leaders could not get but a very few LDS people going on these things. Perhaps the greatet thing Ron Paul has accomplished is to awake more and more Latter Day Saints to their responsibility to defend, uphold and adhere to the Constitution.

[moonwhimcaptain of 1,000]

Ron Paul is getting to more and more Latter-day Saints, and I am glad to see this. In the October 1979 Geneeral Conference Ezra Taft Benson said, "Men who are wise, good, honest, who will uphold the Constitution of the United States in the tradition of the Founding Fathers, must be sought for diligently." Presidents David O. McKay, J. Reuben Clark, Ezra Taft Benson, and other Church leaders could not get but a very few LDS people going on these things. Perhaps the greatet thing Ron Paul has accomplished is to awake more and more Latter Day Saints to their responsibility to defend, uphold and adhere to the Constitution.

ditto

[JasonI am a nobody!]

Ron Paul is getting to more and more Latter-day Saints, and I am glad to see this. In the October 1979 Geneeral Conference Ezra Taft Benson said, "Men who are wise, good, honest, who will uphold the Constitution of the United States in the tradition of the Founding Fathers, must be sought for diligently." Presidents David O. McKay, J. Reuben Clark, Ezra Taft Benson, and other Church leaders could not get but a very few LDS people going on these things. Perhaps the greatet thing Ron Paul has accomplished is to awake more and more Latter Day Saints to their responsibility to defend, uphold and adhere to the Constitution.

How do you do that by ignoring it???

Unless you didn't catch the market managed (i.e. those who control the banks) money vs. Congressional (people's representation) mandate???

Or did you just mean most of the Constitution (no concern for morality it was founded upon and only those things which won't succeed like presidential requirements or that don't matter - control the money/control the laws)...

[linj2flycaptain of 1,000]

Okay I admit Jesus IS a GREAT choice In 1996, a girlfriend told me that she would always write in Elder L. Tom Perry when she voted....

Of those in the running....
While Mitt is a worthy priesthood holder, his bloodlust/warmongering, general lack of Constitutional understanding, and overall flip-flopping disqualifies him outright - in my book.

Ron Paul has too much of a reliance on the freemarket/gold standard, and doesn't stand up to the PTB, but at least if seems to understand and reverence the US Constitution...

which if any is right? Only God can answer that....

Or no matter what.....
do we get one last gasp to change? or have we already passed the day of our repentance? WE certainly don't have the numbers - unless numbers needed are drastically reduced by massive cleansing...

If only.....(praying and pleading here, too; although, it's a little scary to notice that various Nephite communities were destroyed once they'd kicked out the righteous--either by death or expulsion).

'one last gasp' reminds me of this illustration of Abinadi by David Bowman:


His t-shirt says, "Repent Already!" My kids love Bowman's illustrations.

[Istand4truthcaptain of 100]

We can only make these important decisions based on the previous actions of the candidates. I look at their lives. What they have done. How they have voted on important bills. Ron Paul is the only candidate who has voted in favor of the Constitution. I believe he will continue to vote in favor of the Constitution as POTUS. I see no indication that he would not. He is definitely the most honest man running right now. I see nothing in his past that would dissuade me from voting for him. Mitt Romney has openly spoken of his support for the Federal Reserve and bailouts. The other candidates running would be globalist puppets also. The only constitutional choice is Ron Paul.

[SempiternalHarbingercaptain of 1,000]

Ron Paul is getting to more and more Latter-day Saints, and I am glad to see this.

Now that is a scary thought!

Jason - You are absolutely wrong in declaring Ron Paul an anarchist. I suggest you go home and read the Constitution tonight. Your analysis of Ron Paul is so off base and so wrong it is boggling where you get this disinformation.

Sad when latter day saints clearly can't see that Ron Paul is not a wolf yet he is the greatest defender of liberty currently living in America. Yeah, even more so than the saints.

Why don't you address the issues presented instead of rolling your eyes? Maybe you should be the one reading the Constitution. Disinformation? Well, prove it than. And I don't know if you are aware of this, most of where Jason has got his "disinformation" from, is from Ron Paul himself, and websites and institutes that support Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is the greatest defender of liberty currently living in America?? If that's the case we are all doomed! But your the one who is way off the mark! Is that why he continues to ignore the only way to end Obama care? Do you even know that the Republican House Majority has the power to end Obama care today?? Not tomorrow, but today! But Ron Paul won't tell you that! Is that why he continues to say Obama is a constitutional expert and President? Both lies! I guess it takes one expert to see it in another. Is that why he continues to mock those who want the constitution upheld? We have an unconstitutional, usurper, infidel, communist, as our president, who is an enemy of the state, who is all about destroying our country and Ron Paul has done jack squat to stop it. How many time has he called for the impeachment of Obama? Is that not what the law requires? I have heard Ron Paul time and time again say what Obama is doing is Un-Constitutional? When one breaks the laws of the land you are punished. But yet he is not calling for impeachment?? The Rule of law means nothing anymore. Is that why when asked about operation fast and furious a month or so ago he said it was not an important issue?? If a direct attack on the 2nd amendment is not an important issue than I don't know what is The real question is where are you getting you disinformation from?

Oh, he also voted yes in granting China most favored nation status TWICE! Even though he is now against those votes it doesn't change the fact that his votes screwed America forever! He also supported Obama the usurper in repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Even though Obama decision had nothing to do with the constitution but help destroy it, Ron Paul supported it.

Great job Jason! Truth can hurt sometimes. Especially when one has so much invested! But in order to make the correct decision one must have the true facts!

[JasonI am a nobody!]

....split into parts now

PART II:

...now a lot of 9/11 truther's support Ron Paul....what's his stance?








Ron Paul Forcefully Denies Ever Supporting 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ron-pau ... -theories/

...of course these don't have anything to do with it...

FBI: 9/11 Truthers Should Be Treated As Possible Terrorists
http://theintelhub.com/2012/02/13/fbi-9 ... errorists/

Potential Indicators of Terrorist Activities Related to Sleepers Sleepers Sleepers
http://www.columbuspolice.org/Units/TEW ... rifold.pdf

...now we might ask why considering some of the historical context that LewRockwell.com and the Mises Institute puts out.....perhaps it has to do with Ron Paul's long time buddy Lewis Lehrman???

A small minority of dimwits who believe that Ron Paul is too good to be true and represents nothing more than an establishment puppet have seized upon a 15-year-old affiliation with a Neo-Con to charge that the Congressman is a "Zionist shill" in the latest pathetic attempt to scrape the barrel and sling mud at the presidential candidate.

Lewis E. Lehrman, the co-author of Ron Paul's 1993 book "The Case for Gold," was later a signatory to the infamous Project For a New American Century document, a pre-9/11 Neo-Con blueprint which yearned for a "new Pearl Harbor" to justify U.S. military expansionism across the globe.

The fact that the book itself is a sober argument for a return to the gold standard is ignored while Paul's affiliation with Lehrman is seized upon as evidence that Ron Paul is a "Zionist shill" and "part of the New World Order."

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/de ... inging.htm

....hmmm are we off base here???

The evidence at this point is pretty overwhelming to any reasonable person (which I understand does not apply to the core of Ron Paul’s support): if you are a 9/11 truther and you can catch Ron Paul in a situation where he doesn’t realize that he’s being recorded or think that his statements will get out to the press, he will wink and nod and let you know that he’s really on your side. When he’s in front of the mainstream press, however, he has to play the game and pretend like he’s not an insane conspiracy theorist (only Ron Paul is so very full of crazy conspiracy theories that sometimes he can’t help himself and they burst out on national television during a debate).

http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/201 ... f-racists/

....question is....Who's side of the game is he on???? Who's getting sold a bill of goods???

Energetic America by Lewis E. Lehrman

Lewis E. Lehrman is partner at L.E. Lehrman & Company and co-chairman of the American Security Project

http://www.newamericancentury.org/global-20030923.htm

Project for The New American Century - info and sources:
http://www.opednews.com/new%20american%20century.htm

Lehrman is a former President of Rite Aid and conservative activist. He is a former member of the Board of Directors of the Project for the New American Century, as well as a Trustee to the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation. Lehrman was a managing director of Morgan Stanley in the late 1980s. After Morgan Stanley, in 1991, he established an investment company, L.E. Lehrman & Co. He was also an investor in George W. Bush's Arbusto Energy. He and Gilder were awarded the National Humanities Medal in an Oval Office ceremony on Thursday, November 10, 2005. The Medal was presented by President George W. Bush.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Lehrman

Lewis Lehrman is a member of the "Austrian group," as is Ron Paul. Both collaborated with Murray Rothbard when they were members of the 1981 Gold Standard Commission, resulting in the book The Case For Gold, summarizing their arguments on the Commission.

http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archiv ... 11711.html

One of the original supply-siders back in the days we were inventing it was Lewis Lehrman, a Pennsylvanian who made a fortune as a founder of Rite-Aid Corporation. Lew drove around the northeast signing up drug stores for the chain and spent his motel evenings reading books on classical economics. He became a big fan of Jacques Rueff, Charles de Gaulle’s finance minister, and a true believer in the gold standard. In the mid-1970s and 80s, the Lehrman Institute at 71st street off Park Avenue became official headquarters for a return to gold, with regular dinner meetings and round-table debates in the posh town house. When Ronald Reagan won the presidency in 1980, we were sure we could get Lew a high post at Treasury, but Milton Friedman and his monetarist allies used their clout with Reagan aide Ed Meese to block any appointment. Lew said he would gladly settle for janitor at the Council of Economic Advisors, if he could get his two cents in, but even that was too much for the currency floaters. So Lew ran for governor of New York in 1982 and narrowly lost to the Democrat, Mario Cuomo. What you will read here is the first part of a lecture he delivered at Hillsdale College in Michigan, in the Ludwig von Mises “Champions of Freedom” series, soon after the 1979-82 experiment with Friedman’s monetarism failed miserably in a deflation even deeper than the one we are now experiencing. Part II will run next Friday. At 63, still a dozen years younger than Alan Greenspan, Lew would make a wonderful Fed chairman when Alan retires.

http://www.polyconomics.com/index.php?o ... &Itemid=31

In 1980, the Mont Pelerin Society met at the Hoover Institution, with 600 members and guests present. Ralph Harris was guest speaker. As Margaret Thatcher's director of economics, he had been made Baron Harris of High Cross in 1979. Count Max Thurn, permanent secretary of the Society, also addressed the meeting. He is a member of the wealthy Thurn und Taxis family, closely related to the British royal family.

The Encyclopaedia of Associations lists the Mont Pelerin Society, c/o Edwin Feulner, treasurer, Box 7031, Alexandria, Va; secretary Dr. Max Thurn, Elizabethstrasse 4, Vienna. Feulner is president of the Heritage Foundation, served as confidential asst. to Secretary of Defense 1969-70; adm asst. Phil Crane 1940-44, public affairs fellow Hoover Institution 1965-67, chmn Institute Europan Strategy and Defense Studies London since 1979.

Heritage Foundation, part of the network of "conservative" groups, sponsored Reagan's posthumous award of the Medal of Freedom to Whittaker Chambers in March 1984. Its directors are:

Shelby Cullom Davis, director of Hoover
Joseph Coors, director of Hoover
Midge Decter, exec. director Committee for a Free World, her husband is "neo-conservative" Norman Podhoretz, editor of Commentary magazine
Robert Dee, chmn Smith Kline drug firm, director United Technologies with William Simon
William Simon, director Citibank, former Secretary of the Treasury
Lewis E. Lehrman, head of the Lehrman Institute
John D. Wrather, heir to an oil fortune, head of the entertainment conglomerate Wrather Inc. and director of Hoover.

Lewis Lehrman, director of Heritage Foundation, and founder of the 1000 store Rite Aid drug chain, set up his own foundation in 1978. After agonizing over a trenchant attention-getting name, he chose the obvious, Lewis Lehrman Institute. Its president is Robert W. Tucker, member of the Council on Foreign Relations, professor at John Hopkins School of International Studies, which was made famous by the tenure of Owen Lattimore, denounced by Sen. McCarthy as a leading Soviet agent. Director of Lehrman Institute is Barton Biggs of Brookings Institution. Lehrman spent $13.9 million campaigning to be elected Governor of New York, but was easily beaten by Mario Cuomo, who only spent $4.8 million. The New Republic Dec. 5, 1983 featured an article by Sidney Blumenthal, "How Lewis Lehrman Plans to Take Over America."

Other directors of Ford Foundation are Harriet S. Rabb, asst. dean Columbia U. Law School, director of the NAACP Legal Fund since 1978. Her husband Bruce Rabb is partner of the Wall Street law firm, Stroock Stroock & Lavan, organized the Lehrman Institute and has been secretary of it since 1978. His father, Maxwell Rabb is also partner of this law firm; he was adm. asst. Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge 1937-43, Secretary of the Cabinet 1953-58 under Eishenower, joined Stroock Stroock & Lavan 1958, now Ambassador to Italy, chmn U.S. delegation to UNESCO. Other partners of this firm are William J. van den Heuvel, former law partner of Gen. Donovan, and his assistant when he was Ambassador to Thailand, campaign manager Jimmy Garter 1976; Rita Hauser, director Brookings Institution; and Robert B. Anderson former Secretary of Navy and Secretary of Treasury. Stroock Stroock & Lavan specializes in handling the family finances of wealthy old line Jewish families, and is trustee of all three Warburg foundations.

http://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Art ... rder&C=7.4
http://www.whale.to/b/mullins46.html
http://iamthewitness.com/books/Eustace. ... 0Order.pdf

The Mont Pelerin Society, Ford Foundation and Tavistock Institute
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio ... Ch07-4.htm

...so you basically have the Lehrman Institute highly focused on the re-education of teachers spending a small fortune to help in the re-engineering of the education system with connections to Yale (is Lehrman Skull n'Bones member?) along with Richard Gilder as well as Yale man (Skull and Bones?)....

....I'm going to branch out just a little from the Ron Paul connections (individual as well as foundations) to a little background on education, history, Skull and Bones, etc...very informative series so I hate to digress too much but its good stuff stumbled upon whilst trying to discover if there was a Skull and Bones connection to Richard and/or Lewis -














...some resources from Charlotte Iserbyt and others involved -
http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/pa ... loads.html
http://www.americandeception.com/index. ... t&catid=34

....notice how the political "left" and the political "right" are well represented in the Skull and Bones...the forth video mentions Skull and Bones William Buckley so just for memories sake -

Plan To Return America To the Gold Standard Set To Be Offered at Washington

The architect of the plan, Lewis Lehrman, a businessman and scholar, will present his program in an address October 5 at a conference in Washington on the how to return to a stable dollar. He will outline a five-step program to return America to a gold-backed currency within five years.

http://www.nysun.com/national/plan-to-r ... set/87495/

....imagine what your debt in gold will be like? Who owns/controls all the gold again???

http://goldbasics.blogspot.com/2009/08/ ... arket.html

[Richard]Gilder’s longstanding interest in American history had already made him a key funder of Civil War battlefield preservation when he became friends with another Yale-educated history buff, Lewis Lehrman. Lehrman had recently stepped down as president of his family’s Rite Aid drugstore chain to run for governor of New York, losing by a whisker to Mario Cuomo. Lehrman, who has taught history at Harvard and has recently published the splendid Lincoln at Peoria, had been collecting American historical documents ever since his undergrad days at Yale.

http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/t ... h_investor

Lewis Lehrman is an investment banker, one-time New York gubernatorial candidate, and former drugstore executive who has dabbled in conservative economic theory, U.S. history, and neoconservative philanthropy and activism. An executive at the Greenwich-based investment firm L. E. Lehrman & Co., Lehrman has supported a number of influential rightwing policy groups, having served as a trustee of the American Enterprise Institute, the Manhattan Institute, and the Heritage Foundation. [1]

Lehrman’s advocacy experience also includes serving as a board member of the Project for a New American Century—a neoconservative pressure group founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan that played a high-profile role pushing support for the invasion of Iraq after the 9/11 attacks—and co-founding Citizens for America, a group created in 1983 at the urging of President Ronald Reagan that supported his hardline anti-communist agenda.

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Lehrman_Lewis

The young Bush worked to expand his industry by soliciting speculators who contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars. Many of these people were recruited by Bush's uncle, Jonathan Bush, a New York City stockbroker and the brother of former President Bush. Bush went to family friends to invest in the new company. More than 50 investors eventually raised nearly $5 million for Arbusto's oil and gas drilling endeavors. Prudential-Bache Securities CEO George Ball invested $100,000. Celanese Corporation CEO John Macomber, CEO of Celanese Corporation. Macomber, a friend of Uncle Jonathan Bush, tossed in $79,500. William Draper III invested $172,550. Subsequently, both were given political appointments to the Export-Import Bank during the Reagan and Bush administrations. Lewis Lehrman, a multimillionaire from New York and founder of Rite-Aide Parmacies, gave $47,500. Lehrman narrowly lost the 1982 governor's race to New York's Russell Reynolds Jr., a leading corporate headhunter from Greenwich, Connecticut, invested $23,250. FitzGerald Bemiss, a childhood friend of President George H. Bush and godfather to George W.'s brother Marvin, invested $80,000. Other Bush family members kicked in $180,000. Bush's grandmother gave him $25,000.

http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/jphuck/Book4Ch.3.html

....so Lehrman is actually a close family friend of the Bush family? Ron Paul's 9/11 stance make more sense?





...supported Ronald Reagan??? endorsed by Milton Friedman??? The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post - i.e. Ruppert Murdoch????

"As you know, I am entirely sympathetic with the objectives of your Monetary Reform Act...You deserve a great deal of credit for carrying through so thoroughly on your own conception…I am impressed by your persistence and attention to detail in your successive revisions..Best wishes, Milton Friedman" Nobel Laureate in Economics; Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace

http://www.themoneymasters.com/

Milton Friedman 1912-2006 by Ron Paul
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul352.html

....wasn't it Milton Friedman who supposedly coerced Nixon into going OFF the gold standard??? Create the problem so that you can present a solution later on???

An advisor of Richard Nixon and a friend and associate of most Administration economists, Friedman has, in fact, made his mark in current policy, and indeed reciprocates as a sort of leading unofficial apologist for Nixonite policy.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard43.html

David Rockefeller's Invisible Hand: Milton Friedman - Legitimizing Butchery
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1 ... ze_leg.pdf

Now consider the process you have to go through to get to a unified currency. In order to have a truly unified currency, not a collection of separate national currencies joined by temporarily fixed exchange rates like the European Monetary System or the International Monetary Fund was in its earlier days - in order to have a truly unified currency, you either need to have no central bank, as with a commodity currency like a gold standard for example, or you need to have at most one true central bank: one authority that can issue money. In the United States that authority is the Federal Open Market Committee of the Federal Reserve System. It's one. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis issues currency notes on which the bank's name appears, but you can't decide how much to issue. That decision is made in Washington by the Federal Open Market Committee.

In order to have a comparable situation in Europe, you have to eliminate the Bank of France, the Bank of Italy, the Deutsche Bundesbank, the Bank of England and so forth. You have to have one true central bank with full authority. The plans that are being made call for such a central bank, but it's a long cry from calling for it and having it.

http://thecounterpunch.hubpages.com/hub ... serve_Bank

In 1985 D. Gale Johnson of the University of Chicago (Rockefeller donation), a colleague of Milton Friedman, the author of this free trade idea, co-authored a seminal report for David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission that was the blueprint for what they called “market-oriented” agricultural reform. It provided the framework for the US position in the coming GATT Uruguay Round negotiations. The Rockefeller group and its think tanks were the architects of “agricultural reform”.

The European Union finally agreed in 1993 to the GATT Uruguay Round, requiring a major reduction of national agriculture protection. Central to the Uruguay Round deal was agreement on one major change: national grain reserves as a government responsibility were to be ended. The elimination of national grain reserves in the USA and EU and other major OECD industrial countries set the stage for elimination of agricultural commodity derivatives regulation, allowing unbridled unchecked speculative manipulations. Under the Clinton Treasury (1999 – 2000) the elimination of grain reserves was formalized by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) — the government body charged with supervising derivatives trade in exchanges such as the Chicago Board of Trade (dominated by the Rothschilds for 140 years, infiltrated by John D. Rockefeller and still run by Rockefellers) or NYMEX (a Wall Street partner)— and legislation was drafted by Tim Geithner (now treasurer) and then Secretary of the Treasury, Larry Summers. Besides, the CFTC deregulated trading in derivatives for everything, including grain – which led to the 2007 collapse.

Indeed, FAO estimates that since 2004, world food prices on average have soared by an unprecedented 240%. In the period from May 2010 through May 2011 the price of wheat rose again some 85%. One result has been a predictably rapid rise in starvation, hunger and malnutrition in poorer populations around the world.
Engdahl informs that speculators like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, HSBC, Barclays or numerous offshore hedge funds now outnumber bona-fide agriculture industry hedgers four-to-one.

http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2011/07 ... %E2%80%9D/

Leo Strauss (1899—1973), the Jewish German-born émigré who taught political theory at the University of Chicago for over three decades, has been a topic of particular interest in recent years, ever since people began to discover the influence his disciples wielded within the present Bush administration, not to mention the administrations of Bush I and Reagan.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods28.html

Milton Friedman had no idea that his six-day trip to Chile in March 1975 would generate so much controversy. He was invited to Santiago by a group of Chilean economists who over the previous decades had been educated at the University of Chicago, in a program set up by Friedman’s colleague, Arnold Harberger. Two years after the overthrow of Allende, with the dictatorship unable to get inflation under control, the "Chicago Boys" began to gain real influence in General Augusto Pinochet’s military government. They recommended the application of what Friedman had already taken to call "shock treatment" or a "shock program" ­ immediately halting the printing of money to finance the budget deficit, cutting state spending twenty to twenty-five percent, laying off tens of thousands of government workers, ending wage and price controls, privatizing state industries, and deregulating capital markets. "Complete free trade," Friedman advised.

Friedman and Harberger were flown down to "help to sell" the plan to the military junta, which despite its zealous defense of the abstraction of free enterprise was partial to corporatism and the maintenance of a large state sector. Friedman gave a series of lectures and met with Pinochet for 45 minutes, where the general "indicated very little indeed about his own or the government’s feeling." Although he noted that the dictator, responsible for the torture of tens of thousands of Chileans, seemed "sympathetically attracted to the idea of a shock treatment."

Friedman returned home to a firestorm of protest, aggravated by his celebrity as a Newsweek columnist and ongoing revelations about Washington’s and corporate America’s involvement in the overthrow of Allende. Not only had Nixon, the CIA, and ITT, along with other companies, plotted to destabilize Allende’s "democratic road to socialism," but now a renowned University of Chicago economist, whose promotion of the wonders of the free market was heavily subsidized by corporations such as Bechtel, Pepsico, Getty, Pfizer, General Motors, W.R. Grace, and Firestone, was advising the dictator who overthrew him on how to complete the counterrevolution ­ at the cost of skyrocketing unemployment among Chile’s poor.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2006/11/17/ ... m-serfdom/

....economic hitman???





...oh and Milton Friedman also happened to be a member of the Heritage Foundation along with Lewis Lehrman who Ron Paul partnered with on the gold book

The Heritage Foundation bids goodbye to a leading intellectual light of the 20th century whose powerful ideas continue to transform our world. Milton Friedman's economic, philosophical, and political writing inspired decades of Heritage work in such diverse areas as Social Security reform, competition in education, and tax policy. We are particularly indebted for his role in championing economic freedom, and that effort lives on in the Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal annual Index of Economic Freedom.

http://www.heritage.org/research/report ... ic-freedom

President George W. Bush called him a "revolutionary thinker" and one of America's "greatest citizens." Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher heralded him as an "intellectual freedom fighter."

http://www.heritage.org/events/2007/07/ ... of-freedom

....then we have Ron Paul advocating throwing the control of money completely to the market....the opposite of what the founding fathers set up and yet we have this "Constitutionalist"...





....but the Constitution specifies that Congress coin the money....not the private corporation controlled economy. Little subtle lie???

....are his predictions much like other insiders who know the game plan? Why does he support globalization and a one world currency of gold? Who has all the gold?


Let's be Realistic about Ron Paul - Ron Paul is a dream-come- true for corporations who want free trade unrestricted by regulation or taxation
http://www.henrymakow.com/ron_paul.html

The Greatest Plot Against the Ron Paul Camp To Date
http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2011/08 ... p-to-date/

...Is Bruce Fein really a threat....or just another network friend??? Who is Bruce Fein???

Bruce Fein is a lawyer in the United States who specializes in constitutional and international law. Fein has written numerous articles on constitutional issues for The Washington Times, Slate.com, The New York Times, Legal Times, and is active on the issues of civil liberties. He has also worked for the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation, both conservative think tanks, as an analyst and commentator.[1]

Fein is a principal in a government affairs and public relations firm, The Lichfield Group, in Washington, D.C..[2] He is also a resident scholar at the Turkish Coalition of America.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Fein

....that Heritage Foundation just seems to keep popping up....hmm a principal in The Lichfield Group....who are they???

The most objective indication, over many years, of The Lichfield Group’s reputation may be found in the quality, commitment and continuity of its client base. Representative clients include: over 32 governments; major international institutions; and over 120 of the world’s leading multinational corporations and financial institutions.

http://lichfieldgroup.org/?page_id=2303

...reads like a who's who of global power brokers....

The Lichfield Trust was established in 1957 to address exclusively the global issues of world hunger.

http://lichfieldgroup.org/?page_id=1326

...of course all they are concerned about is global hunger....

Lichfield Corp. is a global food advisory firm, based in London UK, which draws upon a macro expert network to advance its clients’ interests at the nexus of economics and politics, business and governments.

http://lichfieldgroup.org/?page_id=1860

...except the primary interest is in advancing clients' interests....hmmm

How Ron Paul Could Win After All

Despite never having won a single primary or caucus, Texas Congressman Ron Paul could either win the GOP presidential nomination or force his hand through a brokered convention, based on a strategy of collecting delegates.

The plan counts on having enough Ron Paul supporters stay around after each state vote has been counted, and official Republican Party business is done. It is at that point that people are chosen to represent the state as delegates for the GOP national convention, scheduled to be held in Tampa Bay, Florida in late August.

Doug Wead, Senior Adviser to the Ron Paul campaign, has concluded that, because of this strategy, they may have actually won Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado, Nevada, and maybe even Missouri, despite not winning the votes in those states.

http://www.therightperspective.org/2012 ... after-all/

...who's this senior adviser Doug Wead???

Doug Wead is a motivational speaker, a Bush family friend, and was a campaign adviser to George H.W. Bush in the 1988 presidential election.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... /wead.html

He was Special Assistant to U.S. President George H. W. Bush, and is the author of more than thirty books, including the New York Times best-seller All the Presidents’ Children: Triumph and Tragedy in the Lives of the First Families.[2] He has authored a sequel which examines the parenting of presidents of the United States, The Raising of a President: The Mothers and Fathers of Our Nation's Leaders.[3]

In 1979, Doug Wead joined entertainer Pat Boone and Dan O’Neill in co-founding Mercy Corps. In 1991, Wead provided initial funding to help launch a Mercy Corps economic recovery program in the newly formed Republic of Kazakhstan.[4]

In the 1980s, Wead organized the Annual Charity Awards, now under the name International Charity Association.[5] Ten First Ladies and Presidents have served as honorary chairpersons of this prestigious event, including Lady Bird Johnson, Gerald Ford, Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter, Ronald and Nancy Reagan, George H. W. and Barbara Bush, and George W. and Laura Bush.

In 1992, Wead was the Republican candidate for U.S. Congress in Arizona's 6th Congressional District. Despite having lived in Arizona for only a few years, Wead won the Republican nomination after championing a tax limitation initiative and airing a television commercial featuring praise by former President Ronald Reagan for his humanitarian efforts.[6]

Wead was an active behind-the-scenes player in the 2000 United States presidential election, receiving some credit for George W. Bush's victory in the Iowa straw polls of 1999.[9] From 1984 to 2000, he served as an on-and-off adviser to both presidents George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush.

Time magazine called Wead an insider in the Bush family orbit and "the man who coined the phrase 'Compassionate Conservative.'"[10] George W. Bush first picked up the term “Compassionate Conservative” in 1987 from Wead.[11] In 1979, Wead gave a speech titled “The Compassionate Conservative” at the annual Charity Awards Dinner, and tapes of the speech were later sold across the country at corporate seminars.[12]

In March 2008, Wead helped create the website Religious Freedom In America,[13] focusing on government threats to religious observance.

He now serves as an adviser for the Ron Paul 2012 Campaign.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Wead

...founded Mercy Corps for work in the new Republic of Kazakhstan???? sounds like a CIA black ops...

Mercy Corps is a global aid agency engaged in transitional environments that have experienced some sort of shock: natural disaster, economic collapse, or conflict. People working for it move as quickly as possible from bringing in food and supplies to enabling people to rebuild their economy with community-driven and market-led programs. To lay the groundwork for longer-term recovery, Mercy Corps focuses on connecting to both government and business for the changes they would like to see. "We actually focus on access to financial services as the critical element for helping to move people out of poverty", Nancy Lindborg, Mercy Corps President.[1]

Mercy Corps, in the last 14 years, has founded 12 different finance institutions.[1] Since 1979, Mercy Corps has provided more than US$1.95 billion in assistance to people in 107 nations.[2] Supported by headquarters offices in North America and Europe, the agency's unified global programs employ 3,700 staff worldwide and reach nearly 16.7 million people in more than 40 countries.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercy_Corps

UNDP documents seen by FOX News raise those questions, and others about the relationship between UNDP and the humanitarian group Mercy Corps, also known as Mercy Corps International. The documents show millions of dollars allocated to Mercy Corps International for North Korea seem to have escaped normal UNDP oversight.

Nonetheless, according to the internal documents seen by FOX News, close to $2 million in UNDP money was disbursed to Mercy for a project clearly labeled “MCI-DPRK” (the acronym for Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, as North Korea is formally known), and numbered in the UNDP book-keeping system as 12431.

The payments stretch from 2004 to January 2007 — or just weeks after accusations were first raised by U.S. diplomats concerning the hard-currency UNDP payments to the Kim regime. More than $200,000 was released to the Mercy Corps project at the end of January 2007.
Additional documents seen by FOX News seem to indicate that much more money — roughly $5.9 million — was budgeted by UNDP over the same 2004-2007 period under the MCI-DPRK rubric.

And intriguingly, most of the funds — roughly $4.6 million — are listed on the UNDP budget as coming from the U.S. Since 2002, the Bush Administration has expressly forbidden that any of the roughly $100 million it donated annually to UNDP be used on any project connected with the North Korean regime. (The U.S. government contribution is currently about $125 million.) UNDP has always declared that it honored those wishes.

Both UNDP and Mercy Corps readily acknowledge that they operate a UNDP-financed project on the Chinese side of the China-North Korea border, known as “Poverty Alleviation and Humanitarian Assistance in the Tumen River Area.”

http://undpwatch.blogspot.com/2007/12/f ... unnel.html

Other NGOs— such as CARE, World Vision, Mercy Corps, and Save the Children—have contact with foreign governments as needed for security and practical reasons, but are careful to distinguish their work from that of government in their dealings with the local population.[8] Yet another group—which includes International Medical Corps and the new faith-based NGOs—has no reservations about cooperating with foreign governments and forces. They see themselves as implementers of policies decided and funded in the capitals of wealthy nations for the shared purpose of relieving suffering in developing countries or regions in crisis.

Money is one of the factors that create the distinctions. Few NGOs are able to fund their activities entirely out of private donations. World Vision—now the largest US NGO, with annual revenues of $700 million—and Oxfam-US, for example, receive about 20 percent of their revenue from the government, mainly from AID’s Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA).

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for- ... NGOs_5.htm

When is an ‘NGO’ not an NGO? Twists and Turns Beneath the Cairo Skies

“Egypt, along with other countries, is likely to be far better off if it prohibits American IGOs from operating freely within its national territorial space, especially if their supposed mandate is to promote democracy as defined and funded by Washington.”

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/02/15 ... airo-skies

....well he's a Ron Paul guy now...
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/
http://www.dailypaul.com/213986/doug-we ... nbc-9pm-et

It should be noted the taxation of land was not only supported by the founding fathers, it was also supported by the Bible. I have provided several quotes showing the support of the Bible and the founding fathers for the taxation of land. Removing the taxation of land allows for the New World Order to monopolize land tax free, turning Americans into rent slaves to the land barons. While Alex Jones was screaming about Texas giving Texas land to Spain and transnational corporations for a transnational corridor running the heart of Texas for a secret North American Union, Alex Jones and Ron Paul were hard at work trying to give the Texas land tax free to transnationals.

It was found out by truthers in Austin that Catherine Bleish, a truther activist and member of the Ladies of Liberty Alliance, previously worked for the United Nations. Many Libertarian writers and activists and truthers are known to be funded by the Church of Scientology. Psyche Truth and the Ladies of Liberty Alliance in Austin is known to be funded by the Church of Scientology. I am sure with more research, we can find several more libertarian and truther activists funded by the Church of Scientology. You can probably find similar funding of John Bush and Texans for Accountable Government. I suspect that the Church of Scientology is funded by either Peter Thiel or Soros. Soros is known to fund Libertarian projects. It is also known that Peter Thiel is a Bilderberger and Ron Paul’s biggest contributor.

Alex Jones and Ron Paul both are poised to make huge profits on the New World Order and are well connected to the New World Order. It also seems that the New World Order looks like the Old World Order, which came about when the Roman Empire went onto a gold standard and collapsed into the Dark Age of feudalism and serfdom, where those with all the gold and land enslave the masses.

http://libertyrevival.wordpress.com/201 ... er-agenda/

Ron Paul's Biggest Supporter Is A Bilderberger, International Financier
http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedpolitic ... lderberger

...okay...who's this Peter Thiel that was Ron Paul's top donor in the 2008 run (both presidential and congressional)....as well as Rand Paul???

Peter Andreas Thiel (October 11, 1967)[1] is an American business magnate, venture capitalist, and hedge fund manager. With Elon Musk and Max Levchin, Thiel co-founded PayPal and was its CEO. He currently serves as president of Clarium Capital, a global macro hedge fund with under $700 million in assets under management, and a managing partner in The Founders Fund, a $275M venture capital fund that he launched with Ken Howery and Luke Nosek in 2005. He was an early investor in Facebook, the popular social-networking site, and sits on the company’s board of directors. Thiel was ranked #365 on the Forbes 400 in 2010, with a net worth of US$1.5 billion.[2] However, this number now underestimates his wealth as his Facebook share alone, at a 2010 valuation, is worth US$1.7bn.[3] Peter Thiel lives in San Francisco, California.[4]

When asked about his political beliefs in a 2006 United Press International interview, Thiel stated, "Well, I was pretty libertarian when I started [in business]. I'm way libertarian now."[26][27] In December 2007, he endorsed Ron Paul for President.[28]

In a two-part article for the Cato Institute, Thiel wrote: "I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible."[29] Thiel later clarified several of his initial statements in a follow-up essay, stating that, "While I don’t think any class of people should be disenfranchised, I have little hope that voting will make things better."[30]

Thiel is listed as a member of the Steering Committee of The Bilderberg Group, a controversial group of influential business and government leaders who meet annually behind closed doors under a media blackout to discuss world issues.[25]

Thiel, who is openly gay, has also supported gay-rights causes such as the American Foundation for Equal Rights and GOProud.[34]

In 2012, Thiel, along with PayPal co-founder Luke Nosek and Scott Banister, an early adviser and board member, put their support behind the Endorse Liberty Super PAC, alongside Internet advertising veteran Stephen Oskoui and entrepreneur Jeffrey Harmon, who founded Endorse Liberty in November 2011. Collectively Thiel et al gave $3.9 million to Endorse Liberty, whose purpose was to promote Texas congressman Ron Paul for president in 2012. As of January 31, 2012, Endorse Liberty reported spending about $3.3 million promoting Paul by setting up two YouTube channels, buying ads from Google and Facebook and StumbleUpon, and building a presence on the Web.[37]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel

PayPal founder Peter Thiel gives $900K to Ron Paul PAC
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/72256.html

Peter Thiel Makes Down Payment on Libertarian Ocean Colonies
http://www.wired.com/science/planeteart ... ntPage=all

Official 2008 Bilderberg Participant List

USA Thiel, Peter A. President, Clarium Capital Management, LLC

http://www.infowars.com/?p=2564

....I've been critical of Ron Paul previously in this thread about his unwillingness to contribute to his own campaign and Ron Paul supporters have chastised me saying that this is a job and he is working for us....well if he's working for a paycheck....who exactly is he working for???

Looking for a sign of the “super PAC” sea change in campaign finance? Even Texas Rep. Ron Paul—whose official campaign has been bolstered by legions of small donors—stands to benefit from an outside group that can spend unlimited donations in secret until after a string of key nominating contests occur.

The pro-Paul “Revolution PAC” confirmed it will join other candidate-specific super PACs backing Gov. Rick Perry, Gov. Mitt Romney and Rep. Michele Bachmann in filing its next financial disclosure report on Jan. 31—after planned votes in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and Florida.

Mary Putnam, Revolution PAC’s spokeswoman, said the group hopes to report a haul of $10 million. That would be an extra boost to the official Paul campaign, which Wednesday announced more than $8 million raised for the third financial quarter.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/06 ... t-20111006

....and why are billionaires pushing libertarianism??? (Koch brothers funding CATO Institute, etc)

The Cato Institute is a libertarian think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C. It was founded in 1977 by Edward H. Crane, who remains president and CEO, and Charles Koch, chairman of the board and chief executive officer of the conglomerate Koch Industries, Inc., the second largest privately held company by revenue in the United States.[3][4]

Libertarian economist Murray Rothbard was a core member of Cato's founding group and coined the institute's name. Rothbard served on its board until leaving in 1981.[25]

Still, some critics have accused Cato of being too tied to corporate funders, especially during the 1990s. Such critics report that Cato received funding from Philip Morris and other tobacco companies during this period and that at one point Rupert Murdoch served on the boards of directors of both Cato and Philip Morris.[85]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Institute

In 2010, the Cato Institute reported support by some 60 plus foundations[76] including:

Atlantic Philanthropies
Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation
Earhart Foundation
JM Foundation, founded by businessman Jeremiah Milbank
John M. Olin Foundation, Inc.
Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation
Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
Castle Rock Foundation (formerly known as The Coors Foundation)
Scaife Foundations (Sarah Mellon Scaife, Carthage)
Ford Foundation
Ploughshares Fund
Marijuana Policy Project

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Institute

...Ford Foundation??? Let's check out the 2010 Annual report -
http://www.cato.org/about/reports/annua ... t_2010.pdf

...corporations like FedEx and Volkswagen....CARNEGIE CORPORATION OF NEW YORK....Ford Foundation...interesting...well back to the globalist libertarian Ron Paul...




4.05 - "What do you say to people who advocate for self government, rather than a return to the Constitution?"

Ron Paul: "Great. Fine. That is really what my goal is."

Ron Paul wrote the forward to Judge Andrew Napolitano new book; "Lies the Government told you." -

"One of the most important lessons Judge Napolitano exposes is how both the Conservatives war on Marijuana and the Liberals war on tobacco are manifestations of paternalism.- The Idea that government has a legitimate authority to stop adults from doing bad things, like smoking substances that politicians& bureaucrats do not approve of. Of course smoking, weather of marijuana or tobacco, does have negative health consequences- but respecting the right of individuals to be wrong, as long as they do not interfere with the rights of others, is one of the pillars of society."

Actually the pillar of any society should be Laws of Nature and Nature's God....or else it isn't much of a pillar. What Ron Paul is saying is that everyone can violate the Law's of Nature to their hearts content as long as they don't interfere with the rights of others. Of course you have to ask yourself....who gave everyone their rights? It certainly wasn't the Constitution!

Are we interfering with the rights of children to prohibit them from tobacco, marijuana, pornography, alcohol, etc???

Alan Keyes summed it up in the following manner -

The Constitution is founded upon the Declaration of Independence. The first premise of the Declaration of Independence is that morality is defined by God's will, not (collective or individual) human will. If you reject that premise, you reject what follows from it, which is the whole idea of government limited in its exercise of power by respect for right, as endowed (which is to say provisioned) by God not human (individual or collective) will. The provisions made for human laws and government must therefore respect the provisions of God's law and sovereignty.

Government is all about the use of force to assure respect for "the laws of nature and of nature's God."

The idea of natural right doesn't lead to a world in which all human (sexual or other) preferences must be treated as equal. Rather it guarantees security only for those who exercise right, i.e., choose to act rightly, as determined by the standard of nature, i.e., the way the Creator made human beings to be.

Nature is not a human preference or choice. It is a consequence of the Creator's choice. Natural rights are not about respecting human whims. They are a consequence of respect for the limits and boundaries whereby God defines the distinct possibility of human existence, and in so doing sets human nature free. Therefore, the basis for constitutional government in the United States is not respect for equality regardless of right. It is respect for the equality of all who act rightly, which is to say in a way that preserves human nature by observing the limits and boundaries that make its existence possible.

The founders of the United States referred to God. They stated that rights and the authority of law are endowments by the Creator. They relied on Divine Providence and appeal "to the Supreme Judge of the World [ a phrase drawn directly from Locke, as I recall ] for the rectitude" of their intentions. (Rectitude means "rightness", so they regard the Supreme Judge as the final arbiter of what is right, and therefore of the meaning of rights.)

Without God reason is a ruler with no standard by which to mark its length, good only as kindling for the flames of unruly passion.

The Republic is government based on God's law.

Samuel Adams said - "Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself!"

James Madison - "Limited government alone -- inadequate for a Nation"

John Adams - "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

George Washington - "...reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

Benjamin Franklin - "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."

Proverbs 14:34 "Righteousness exalteth a nation"

Expecting a free market economy and limited government under a Republic (Rule of Law - God's Law) to endure without morality is expecting the impossible!!!

http://yophat.blogspot.com/

....while Ron Paul's views of limited government may be enticing (especially in light of our awful situation)....the principles he is espousing are not in alignment with God....nor are Ron Paul's actions. He is approaching life in true libertarian/anarchist fashion....he's looking out for himself. Those poor idiots who are crushed by the IRS despite being right and having the truth......well they are idiots for not recognizing the powers that be (as his mentors have done and as perhaps he himself has done - hence the silence on 9/11, Obama's legal ability to be president, etc). I won't even touch his unwillingness to donate to his own campaign....

Thus Ron Paul is no solution to the problems at hand (moral decay and wickedness) and all he provides is another angle of wickedness (Korihor - no right for government to legislate morality?). There is no political savior to a wicked people intent on pursuing wickedness! Ask Ron Paul about the importance of morals and natural law.....might start with homosexuality and the military (how did that vote go again?)...

[AGStackercaptain of 100]

SempiternalHarbinger - "Oh, he also voted yes in granting China most favored nation status TWICE! Even though he is now against those votes it doesn't change the fact that his votes screwed America forever!" Haha! This is some great stuff. What it comes down to is that you are not able to discern the right from the wrong.

It is easily discernible through God's spirit that Ron Paul is a patriot and has consistently defended the Constitution.

Screwed America forever! Give me a break.

[AGStackercaptain of 100]

Jason - You need to start from square one. How you equate freedom with anarchy is amazing to me.

[SempiternalHarbingercaptain of 1,000]

SempiternalHarbinger - "Oh, he also voted yes in granting China most favored nation status TWICE! Even though he is now against those votes it doesn't change the fact that his votes screwed America forever!" Haha! This is some great stuff. What it comes down to is that you are not able to discern the right from the wrong.

It is easily discernible through God's spirit that Ron Paul is a patriot and has consistently defended the Constitution.

Screwed America forever! Give me a break.

Well isn't it ironic that Ron Paul is now against granting China most favored nation status? Right, even though he voted in favor of it twice. go figure. But all is well because he is now against it.. Man just open your eyes bro... Go read what Ron Paul thinks of it now?? He HATEs it. He is now (with his mouth) against it even though he help create and establish it. We are consumers now not manufacturers. How do you like them apples? If you can not see the cause and effects of this than that is your problem bro not mine. He voted in for it not me. Give me a break.

[linj2flycaptain of 1,000]

Jason...I appreciate you compiling all of that. Definitely some stuff there that deserves consideration and needs to be weighed in the balance, though...I'm not ready to jump ship yet; still need to do some more homework.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

Jason...I appreciate you compiling all of that. Definitely some stuff there that deserves consideration and needs to be weighed in the balance, though...I'm not ready to jump ship yet; still need to do some more homework.

Homework is good.....very good in fact! I greatly appreciate your response (especially having been jumped on and judged constantly by those who haven't done theirs here as of late). Please do share your findings....no matter which side of the fence they happen to fall on!!!

[AGStackercaptain of 100]

Harbinger - What exactly are you saying? I am not familiar with him granting China this status and does his vote actually grant them anything besides this title?

China is actually helping their people by allowing them to be regulated very little economically. That is why their standard of living is increasing even if it is still below standards.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

Harbinger - What exactly are you saying? I am not familiar with him granting China this status and does his vote actually grant them anything besides this title?

China is actually helping their people by allowing them to be regulated very little economically. That is why their standard of living is increasing even if it is still below standards.

Please explain or demonstrate how the government of China is very little involved (regulation) in their economy!!!

fyi -

In the 1990s, continued most favoured nation status for the People's Republic of China created controversy because of its sales of sensitive military technology. China's most favoured nation status was made permanent in 2000. All of the former Soviet states, including Russia, were granted most favoured nation status in 1992. On a bilateral level, however, the United States cannot grant MFN status to some members of the former Soviet Union, including the Russian Federation, because of the Jackson-Vanik amendment. This presents an obstacle to those countries' accession to the WTO.[3]

In the United States, "most favored nation status" has been renamed "permanent normal trade relations" (NTR) in 1998 as all but a handful of countries had this status already, making it a misnomer. (The impetus for the change in terminology came from irritation voiced by some Americans that various totalitarian governments around the world enjoyed being a "most favored nation" of the United States).[citation needed]

The ideas behind MFN policies can first be seen in US foreign policy during the opening of Japan in the mid to late 1850s, when they were included as a clause in the Commercial Treaty of 1858, which signalled the opening of the Japanese market.

Since 1998, the term normal trade relations (NTR) has replaced most-favored-nation in all U.S. statutes. This change was included in section 5003 of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-206). However, Title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-618) established conditions on U.S. MFN/NTR tariff treatment to certain non-market economies, one of which is certain freedom-of-emigration requirements (better known as the Jackson-Vanik amendment). The act authorizes the president to waive a country’s full compliance with Jackson-Vanik under specified conditions, and this must be renewed by June 3 of each year. Once the president does so, the waiver is automatic unless Congress passes (and sustains a presidential veto of) a disapproval resolution.

MFN/NTR status for China, a non-market economy, which had been originally suspended in 1951, was restored in 1980 and was continued in effect through subsequent annual Presidential extensions. Following the massacre of pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989, however, the annual renewal of China’s MFN status became a source of considerable debate in the Congress; and legislation was introduced to terminate China’s MFN/NTR status or to impose additional conditions relating to improvements in China’s actions on various trade and non-trade issues. Agricultural interests generally opposed attempts to block MFN /NTR renewal for China, contending that several billion dollars annually in current and future U.S. agricultural exports could be jeopardized if that country retaliated. In China’s case, Congress agreed to permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) status in P.L. 106-286, President Clinton signed into law on October 10, 2000.[4] PNTR paved the way for China’s accession to the WTO in December 2000; it provides U.S. exporters of agricultural products the opportunity to benefit from China’s WTO agreements to reduce trade barriers and open its agricultural markets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_favoured_nation

[JasonI am a nobody!]

Today, the US total debt rose by $32 billion touching on a new record high of $15.392 trillion. As a reminder this is just the beginning: as we noted yesterday, according to the president's own budget total US debt is now expected to surpasses the greatest and final debt ceiling of $16.4 trillion just around September, and likely sooner with the addition of the $160 billion in additional debt needed to fund the extension of the Bush temporary yet perpetual tax cut through the end of 2012.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/us-debt-h ... t-issuance

Sprott strategist John Embry has never been a fan of the existing financial system. Today, he makes that once again quite clear in this interview with Egon von Grayerz' Matterhorn Asset Management in which he says: "I think that the current financial system, as we know it, will be totally destroyed, probably sooner rather than later. The next system will require gold backing to have any legitimacy. This has happened many times in history."

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/sprotts-j ... d%E2%80%9C

by design???

[AGStackercaptain of 100]

Have you heard of The Road to Roota theory? Sure there are peeps in the top both good and bad. I said Greenspan went to the dark side but it may be possible he tried to free Americans more quickly by destroying the NWO's hold with more debt.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

Have you heard of The Road to Roota theory? Sure there are peeps in the top both good and bad. I said Greenspan went to the dark side but it may be possible he tried to free Americans more quickly by destroying the NWO's hold with more debt.

fyi- there hold hasn't been destroyed with more debt

[AGStackercaptain of 100]

I understand that. I didn't say I believe it 100%. I don't like the direction we are going. Honoring the Constitution from the beginning was a far better route. The American people are enslaved in debt and only destroying the entire system is there a possible chance of destroying this burden.

[JasonI am a nobody!]

I understand that. I didn't say I believe it 100%. I don't like the direction we are going. Honoring the Constitution from the beginning was a far better route. The American people are enslaved in debt and only destroying the entire system is there a possible chance of destroying this burden.

Does destroying the entire system mean destroying the government, constitution, etc etc etc??? Ron Paul is going to do that???