Ron Paul - What has he accomplished?

[Jason]

Jason,

What did Mormon and Moroni accomplish, aside from writing? Their government fell, the war was lost, the people were annihilated ... but they still participated.

Sorry...but I don't see what point you are trying to make. Weren't they witnesses like Ether? To record the results of wickedness and the history of the results of bad choices?

In terms of a direct corollary to our day....I look to 3 Nephi 8 and the preceding history chronicling a take over of government via secret combinations...and it took 53 years from when they obtained sole management of the government until the government collapsed into tribes....and another 3 years prior to the Savior's return.

And in reference to the topic of this thread....what role does Ron Paul play in this moment of theater???

[Col. Flagg]

Ron Paul is the best choice we have for president right now - he is the most worthy candidate of our vote by a country mile and I weep for those who cannot see and understand why.

[Jason]

Ron Paul is the best choice we have for president right now - he is the most worthy candidate of our vote by a country mile and I weep for those who cannot see and understand why.

Yeah that's what his CFR buddy and PNAC steering committee member says as well...

I also weep for those who cannot see and understand....

[Col. Flagg]

Ron Paul is the best choice we have for president right now - he is the most worthy candidate of our vote by a country mile and I weep for those who cannot see and understand why.

Yeah that's what his CFR buddy and PNAC steering committee member says as well...

I also weep for those who cannot see and understand....

Who are these CFR and PNAC guys Jason? I GUARANTEE you Ron Paul has no affiliation with PNAC whatsoever (it's the think tank that came up with 9/11 for crying out loud) and if one of their stooges says he supporting Ron Paul, it's probably because the revelation will make him look bad, which you are falling for. You ever heard Ron's 4 minute speech on the house floor of the evils of war, the truth about the 'war on terror' and the military-industrial complex from February, 2009? If not, Google it - it ain't from a man being steered by PNAC!

[moonwhim]

Ron Paul is the best choice we have for president right now - he is the most worthy candidate of our vote by a country mile and I weep for those who cannot see and understand why.

Yeah that's what his CFR buddy and PNAC steering committee member says as well...

I also weep for those who cannot see and understand....

So do these two people control Ron Paul? Have they brain-washed him to become their stooge?

[Jason]

Ron Paul is the best choice we have for president right now - he is the most worthy candidate of our vote by a country mile and I weep for those who cannot see and understand why.

Yeah that's what his CFR buddy and PNAC steering committee member says as well...

I also weep for those who cannot see and understand....

Who are these CFR and PNAC guys Jason?

Lewis Lehrman....I see you haven't gone through the previous posts....you might start here and work through these (should get you up to speed as quickly as possible) -

Part I
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 50#p259921" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Part II
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 50#p260042" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Addendum
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 80#p260706" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 80#p260753" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 80#p260789" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 80#p260835" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 10#p261067" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... 10#p261901" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...and in response to your added comments....sure please do some digging and let me know what you find concerning the relationship between Lewis Lehrman and Ron Paul....love to learn more (no matter which side it falls on).

So far all I've seen is ignorant rants while providing no additional information....like moonwhim above whom I've challenged to do some digging via this response (below - and also is the last link in the above section)....and have yet to get a response...

Libertarianism is a fraud...or maybe not. Is this history true?

Mr. Anonymous & The Libertarian Movement
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0812/S ... vement.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Eyes on the Prize (Sidebar to Mr. Anonymous)
http://www.thebellforum.com/content.php ... -the-Prize" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Col. Flagg]

Jason, Ron Paul's voting record and track record are impeccable when it comes to the Constitution, freedom, liberty, morals, ethics and fighting for we, the people while the other GOP stooges' special interest groups, lobbyists, corporate interests, banks and Wall Street thugs come first (Romney included). I don't care if Satan himself came out and encouraged us all to vote for Ron Paul - I still would! Ron has not allowed himself to be compromised... all the other GOP candidates are. Ron is genuine, honest, sincere, he cares about his country, he cares about all that is good, he cares about the de-valuation of your money by a criminal banking cartel (the 'Fed') - good grief man - for anyone to go on a witch hunt about Ron Paul says more about that individual than anything else. :ymblushing: :ymapplause: You may as well go after anyone who is trying to make a difference in a world of corruption.

[Jason]

Jason, Ron Paul's voting record and track record are impeccable when it comes to the Constitution, freedom, liberty, morals, ethics and fighting for we, the people while the other GOP stooges' special interest groups, lobbyists, corporate interests, banks and Wall Street thugs come first (Romney included). I don't care if Satan himself came out and encouraged us all to vote for Ron Paul - I still would! Ron has not allowed himself to be compromised... all the other GOP candidates are. Ron is genuine, honest, sincere, he cares about his country, he cares about all that is good, he cares about the de-valuation of your money by a criminal banking cartel (the 'Fed') - good grief man - for anyone to go on a witch hunt about Ron Paul says more about that individual than anything else. :ymblushing: :ymapplause: You may as well go after anyone who is trying to make a difference in a world of corruption.

....or he's a promoted stooge who just tells people what they want to hear....and he's going after a targeted demographic....supported by members of Bilderburg Group, CFR, PNAC, Bush family inner circle of close friends, Heritage Foundation, LewRockwell.com, CFEE, MISES, CATO Institute, etc etc etc

But join the crowd and rant away....or do some research...the choice is yours...

[Col. Flagg]

Jason, Ron Paul's voting record and track record are impeccable when it comes to the Constitution, freedom, liberty, morals, ethics and fighting for we, the people while the other GOP stooges' special interest groups, lobbyists, corporate interests, banks and Wall Street thugs come first (Romney included). I don't care if Satan himself came out and encouraged us all to vote for Ron Paul - I still would! Ron has not allowed himself to be compromised... all the other GOP candidates are. Ron is genuine, honest, sincere, he cares about his country, he cares about all that is good, he cares about the de-valuation of your money by a criminal banking cartel (the 'Fed') - good grief man - for anyone to go on a witch hunt about Ron Paul says more about that individual than anything else. :ymblushing: :ymapplause: You may as well go after anyone who is trying to make a difference in a world of corruption.

....or he's a promoted stooge who just tells people what they want to hear....and he's going after a targeted demographic....supported by members of Bilderburg Group, CFR, PNAC, Bush family inner circle of close friends, Heritage Foundation, LewRockwell.com, CFEE, MISES, CATO Institute, etc etc etc

But join the crowd and rant away....or do some research...the choice is yours...

Jason, you obviously do not know the character of Ron Paul - I don't think I'm the one who needs to do some homework here. The fact that you've listed PNAC as a group that supports him invalidates your information as Ron has been the most outspoken critic of the MIC in DC. And to insinuate that the Bush family is an 'inner circle' that supports him??? Where do you get this stuff? ) If what you indicate is true, Ron would not get marginalized, minimized, ridiculed, scoffed at and demonized by the mainstream media, debate mods or even DC as a whole... but he has, so what does that tell you? Even Glenn Beck plays the game of 'bring Ron on to your show when it's not an election year, but when it is, crucify him'. :ymapplause: =;

[Jason]

Jason, Ron Paul's voting record and track record are impeccable when it comes to the Constitution, freedom, liberty, morals, ethics and fighting for we, the people while the other GOP stooges' special interest groups, lobbyists, corporate interests, banks and Wall Street thugs come first (Romney included). I don't care if Satan himself came out and encouraged us all to vote for Ron Paul - I still would! Ron has not allowed himself to be compromised... all the other GOP candidates are. Ron is genuine, honest, sincere, he cares about his country, he cares about all that is good, he cares about the de-valuation of your money by a criminal banking cartel (the 'Fed') - good grief man - for anyone to go on a witch hunt about Ron Paul says more about that individual than anything else. :ymblushing: :ymapplause: You may as well go after anyone who is trying to make a difference in a world of corruption.

....or he's a promoted stooge who just tells people what they want to hear....and he's going after a targeted demographic....supported by members of Bilderburg Group, CFR, PNAC, Bush family inner circle of close friends, Heritage Foundation, LewRockwell.com, CFEE, MISES, CATO Institute, etc etc etc

But join the crowd and rant away....or do some research...the choice is yours...

Jason, you obviously do not know the character of Ron Paul - I don't think I'm the one who needs to do some homework here. The fact that you've listed PNAC as a group that supports him invalidates your information as Ron has been the most outspoken critic on the MIC.

Do your research....and then rant please. You can start with Ron Paul's gold book buddy Lewis Lehrman who was on the steering committee of PNAC during 9/11....did I mention that he's also a close family friend of the Bush family???

Now if you want to present some research to the contrary....I'm all ears....also evidence versus gum running is preferred....since we know plenty of politicians who claim one thing but in reality support another like the "christian" Bush family or the supposedly opposed to each other (left vs right politically - Hegelian dialectic) gadiantons who have sworn blood oaths to uphold each other (Skull and Bones)...as well as how it fits or doesn't fit into the predetermined solution.

[Col. Flagg]

Now if you want to present some research to the contrary....I'm all ears....also evidence versus gum running is preferred....since we know plenty of politicians who claim one thing but in reality support another like the "christian" Bush family or the supposedly opposed to each other (left vs right politically - Hegelian dialectic) gadiantons who have sworn blood oaths to uphold each other (Skull and Bones)...as well as how it fits or doesn't fit into the predetermined solution.

Jason, Ron was associated with Lehrman over 30 years ago back in 1981 when they co-authored a book on the gold standard together. Nice try though. Even if he is a friend of the Bush family... Presidents' Hinckley and Monson once coddled both Bush and Cheney and met with them annually in Salt Lake for a few years, so does that mean we should go after them as well? These relationships are by association only with each having their own purpose for them. By their fruits shall ye know them and Ron's fruits are honorable. You are grasping at straws to defame a good and decent man. :ymblushing:

[Jason]

Now if you want to present some research to the contrary....I'm all ears....also evidence versus gum running is preferred....since we know plenty of politicians who claim one thing but in reality support another like the "christian" Bush family or the supposedly opposed to each other (left vs right politically - Hegelian dialectic) gadiantons who have sworn blood oaths to uphold each other (Skull and Bones)...as well as how it fits or doesn't fit into the predetermined solution.

Jason, Ron was associated with Lehrman back in 1981 when they co-authored a book on the gold standard together. Nice try though. Even if he is a friend of the Bush family... Presidents' Hinckley and Monson once coddled both Bush and Cheney and met with them annually in Salt Lake for a few years, so does that mean we should go after their characters? These relationships are by association only with each having their own purpose for them. You are grasping at straws to defame a good and decent man. :ymblushing:

So your saying they've had nothing to do with each other since 1981? That they don't have similar view points? No other connections?

Links would be very nice...

FYI....that is just one of myriad connections. I provided the links and history for you....also since when have the prophets shared the same viewpoint as gadiantons and written books together???

[SempiternalHarbinger]

Now if you want to present some research to the contrary....I'm all ears....also evidence versus gum running is preferred....since we know plenty of politicians who claim one thing but in reality support another like the "christian" Bush family or the supposedly opposed to each other (left vs right politically - Hegelian dialectic) gadiantons who have sworn blood oaths to uphold each other (Skull and Bones)...as well as how it fits or doesn't fit into the predetermined solution.

Jason, Ron was associated with Lehrman over 30 years ago back in 1981 when they co-authored a book on the gold standard together. Nice try though. Even if he is a friend of the Bush family... Presidents' Hinckley and Monson once coddled both Bush and Cheney and met with them annually in Salt Lake for a few years, so does that mean we should go after them as well? These relationships are by association only with each having their own purpose for them. By their fruits shall ye know them and Ron's fruits are honorable. You are grasping at straws to defame a good and decent man. :ymblushing:

With all due respect Col. Flagg, why do I always get the impression you hold Ron Paul on a higher pedestal than the Lord's anointed? I have never heard you once question Ron Paul on anything! Yet, I have seen you call out many Prophets and apostles. You have me for a loss of words. I know no man is perfect, you have said so. But to me, it seems if there is one person who is as close to perfect as one could be it would be your beloved Ron Paul. Which nothing could be further to the truth.

[Jason]

I'm going to attempt to flush out some connections here yet further on the many institutes and foundations (no small task) as well as some of the key people behind them (really an attempt to follow the money and see who's funding all of this)....it probably won't make much sense for awhile (bold and underline just for my reference) until I can get all the information collected on this post and tie the connections together (if possible) -

The Foundation for Rational Economics and Education (FREE) is an American nonprofit, nonpartisan foundation dedicated to public education on the principles of the U.S. Constitution, free-market economics, sound money, limited government, and foreign policy. It was founded in 1976[1] by U.S. Congressman Ron Paul while he was serving on the House Banking Committee, as a vehicle to increase understanding of the economic principles of a free-market society. President is Henry K. May and Vice President is Mary Jane Smith, both of Lake Jackson, Texas.

In 1989, FREE established the National Endowment for Liberty (NEFL) in order to develop programs that take advantage of electronic media. NEFL developed and produced the At Issue television series that was seen on the Discovery Network and CNBC,[1] which examines American institutional interaction with Constitutional principles. The endowment has received three grants from the Rodney Fund,[5] operated by Mackinac Center for Public Policy board member James Rodney.[6] FREE also has continuously published 30-second radio spots for economic and social-issue education.[2]

In 2006, the organization had Form 990 revenue of $632,396 and net assets of $458,996.[2] It is categorized for tax-exempt purposes as "religious organization", "publishing activities", and "television" (National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities).[7][8] Its publications are distributed by Partners Publishers Group.[9] FREE obtains graphic design services for its newsletters from Mark Elam,[10] as president of M&M Graphics and Advertising; Elam also printed more politically-charged newsletters as an officer of the for-profit group Ron Paul & Associates (RP&A).[11]

Media Transparency reported, without further elaboration, that the 9/11 Public Discourse Project was connected with FREE and NEFL.[13] This project, a nonprofit organization of the ten 9/11 Commissioners,[14] received a $25,000 grant from the Smith Richardson Foundation on December 31, 2004, to allow Commissioner Christopher A. Kojm to "lead an effort to educate the American public on the findings of the 9/11 Commission. He will organize a series of nationwide briefings by the members of the commission at which they will discuss the implications of their findings for U.S. national security."[13]

In 2007, FREE published A Foreign Policy of Freedom, a collection of thirty years of Paul's statements on foreign policy. Paul and the book were featured on a crowded Tonight Show on October 30, 2007, and host Jay Leno was able to get Paul to autograph his copy after the show.[15]

On January 8, 2008, FREE was implicated by James Kirchick in the controversy surrounding several newsletters published in Paul's name, in that they contained language showing "obsession with conspiracies" and "deeply held bigotry".[4] While most of the more serious newsletters were published by RP&A (the for-profit group) between 1987 and 1992,[11] Kirchick also cited the original FREE newsletter's accusations of conspiracy, such as its statement that the Trilateral Commission "is no longer known only by those who are knowledgeable about international conspiracies, but is routinely mentioned in the daily news.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation ... _Education" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The 9/11 Public Discourse Project was a non-governmental organization with 501(c)(3) nonprofit status, started by the ten members of the 9/11 Commission after the commission disbanded on August 21, 2004. Intended as a public education campaign which focused on making America safer and more aware of existing and potential dangers, the project ceased operations on December 31, 2005.

The project received a $25,000 grant from the Smith Richardson Foundation on December 31, 2004, to allow Commissioner Christopher A. Kojm to "lead an effort to educate the American public on the findings of the 9/11 Commission. He will organize a series of nationwide briefings by the members of the commission at which they will discuss the implications of their findings for U.S. national security." Media Transparency reported, without further elaboration, that the Project was connected with the Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Publi ... se_Project" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Foundation for Rational Economics and Education (FREE) is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt, non-profit, non-partisan educational foundation founded in 1976 by Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.), the Distinguished Counselor to the Ludwig von Mises Institute. FREE is "dedicated to public education on the principles of free-market economics, sound money and limited government," its website states.[1]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?ti ... _Education" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Foundation for Rational Economics and Education in Lake Jackson, Texas
http://think-tanks.findthedata.org/l/20 ... -Education" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The National Endowment for Liberty (NEFL), a separate project of FREE, was established in 1989 to develop programs that take advantage of the enormous potential of electronic media to pursue the mission of FREE. We believe that through mass communication we can attract public interest and significantly strengthen awareness of the moral, cultural and institutional foundations of the American political system.

NEFL developed and produced the "At Issue" television series that was seen on the Discovery Network and CNBC national cable television networks.

The National Endowment for Liberty (NEFL) is a project of:

The Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, Inc.

http://www.free-nefl.com/html/introduction.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Mackinac Center for Public Policy is a free market think tank headquartered in Midland, Michigan. It is the USA’s largest state-based free market think tank.

The genesis of the Mackinac Center is described on its Web site as follows: “The Mackinac Center was founded in 1987 by a group of citizens who met on Mackinac Island and shared an interest in making Michigan a better place to live and work. They were concerned about the state's direction and the fact that no institution in Michigan was developing policy ideas that harnessed the benefits of our free enterprise system.” This group formed what ultimately became the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, so named after Mackinac Island, which is considered to be an iconic Michigan image.[3] The Center began operations in 1987 with no office or full-time staff, but formally opened offices in Midland in 1988 with its first president, Lawrence W. Reed, an economist, writer, and speaker who had chaired the economics department at Northwood University. The Lansing-based Cornerstone Foundation provided early direction and some funding. The first budget under Reed was $80,000. In 1997 the Mackinac Center moved from rented offices to its current headquarters after having raised $2.4 million to renovate a former Woolworth’s department store on Midland’s Main Street.[4] Lawrence Reed served as president from the Center’s founding until September, 2008, when he assumed the title President Emeritus and also became the president of the Foundation for Economic Education. Former Chief Operating Officer Joseph G. Lehman was named the Mackinac Center’s president on September 1, 2008.[5]

The Center was created with funding by the Cornerstone Foundation.

Federal law does not require 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations to disclose the identity of their donors, and in National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama the U.S. Supreme Court turned back efforts to force such disclosure by nonprofits, although that case involved the publication of member lists, not donor lists. In 2004 the Michigan Court of Appeals threw out a lawsuit filed against the Mackinac Center by the Michigan Education Association against the Mackinac Center in which one of the remedies sought by the union was a list identifying the Center’s donors. The court ruling was based on the MEA's failure to show actual malice. It did not reach the question of whether the Mackinac Center's donor lists should be made public.[9]

When asked by Detroit’s Metro Times in 1996, the Center’s President Lawrence Reed said: "Our funding sources are primarily foundations … with the rest coming from corporations and individuals," but that "… revealing our contributors would be a tremendous diversion…"[10]

In Strategic Grantmaking, Foundations and the School Privatization Movement, Richard Cohen estimates that one-half to two-thirds of all corporate grantmaking is: “made through the CEO’s office or the marketing department, for which there is no public disclosure requirement.”[12]

The Mackinac Center often cites work by three Nobel Laureates who are unaffiliated with the Mackinac Center: Milton Friedman, who first proposed the concept of school choice, which is now promoted by the Center’s Education Initiative; F.A. Hayek whose ideas about spontaneous order and inability of government central planners to create thriving economies are seen in the Center’s criticism of targeted tax credits and corporate subsidies used by government economic development bureaucracies; and James M. Buchanan, whose work in public choice economics has informed many of the organization’s critiques of state government programs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation ... _Education" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lawrence W. (Larry) Reed (born September 29, 1953) is president of the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), headquartered in Irvington-on-Hudson, New York, a position he has held since September 1, 2008. Before joining FEE, Reed served as president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a Midland, Michigan based free-market think tank. To date, he remains Mackinac’s president emeritus.[1][2]

An advocate for free market solutions to national and global issues, Reed has authored over 1,000 newspaper columns and articles, 200 radio commentaries, as well as dozens of articles in magazines and journals in the United States and abroad.[5] His articles have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Christian Science Monitor, Baltimore Sun, Detroit News, Detroit Free Press and USA Today, among numerous others.[6][7]

During a 2003 address on the floor of the House of Representatives, Congressman Ron Paul paid tribute to Reed, acknowledging him as "one of America’s leading advocates for liberty", and remarked that Reed's writings "reflect his unswerving commitment to limited government and the free market as the best way to promote human happiness."[8]

He has cited the 1968 event between the Czechs and the Soviets known as the "Prague Spring", as the genesis for his interest in liberty and freedom, and has referred to the Czech cause as a “flowering of liberty.” As a result of interactions with FEE in his teen years, Reed became exposed to the ideas of F.A. Hayek, Ludwig von Mises and others from the Austrian school of economics.[9]

In December 2007, the Washington, D.C. based Heritage Foundation named Reed Visiting Senior Fellow.[14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_W._Reed" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank located in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1973, it works to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.

In addition to individual contributions, The Heritage Foundation receives funding from a variety of corporations and associations, including AIG, Altria Group (Philip Morris), Lockheed Martin, and ExxonMobil.

http://mediamattersaction.org/transpare ... Foundation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[moonwhim]

So far all I've seen is ignorant rants while providing no additional information....like moonwhim above whom I've challenged to do some digging via this response (below - and also is the last link in the above section)....and have yet to get a response...

So asking you a hardballed question like I did above: "So do these two people control Ron Paul? Have they brain-washed him to become their stooge?" That to you is just an ignorant rant? Look, you are throwing tons of material at us, so I am giving you a chance to answer a bottom line question. Personally I don't have the time to do all the research.and if you don't know the answer than just say so....but don't call me an ignorant ranter. Your impatience and rudeness with Bluemoon5 and others on this forum seems to be becoming a staple with you.

There is evidence that the Heritage Foundation and others like that are definitely in the Neocon camp.
Your Volker article only had 4 footnotes from wikipedia, and it should have had a lot more for all the conjecturing that was in it.

Hey, I'm happy for all your research, and have benefitted from it. Keep it up. But don't jump to conclusions about Ron Paul unless you can nail them down more succinctly.

[Jason]

So far all I've seen is ignorant rants while providing no additional information....like moonwhim above whom I've challenged to do some digging via this response (below - and also is the last link in the above section)....and have yet to get a response...

So asking you a hardballed question like I did above: "So do these two people control Ron Paul? Have they brain-washed him to become their stooge?" That to you is just an ignorant rant? Look, you are throwing tons of material at us, so I am giving you a chance to answer a bottom line question. Personally I don't have the time to do all the research.and if you don't know the answer than just say so....but don't call me an ignorant ranter. Your impatience and rudeness with Bluemoon5 and others on this forum seems to be becoming a staple with you.

There is evidence that the Heritage Foundation and others like that are definitely in the Neocon camp.
Your Volker article only had 4 footnotes from wikipedia, and it should have had a lot more for all the conjecturing that was in it.

Hey, I'm happy for all your research, and have benefitted from it. Keep it up. But don't jump to conclusions about Ron Paul unless you can nail them down more succinctly.

Yeah you are right....I'm running out of patience with ignoramuses who "don't have time" to do the homework but have more than plenty of time to respond with criticism or repeatedly ask ignorant "hardball" questions when 2 minutes of time clicking a couple of links in the post just previous (perhaps 5 minutes maybe with reading) would answer those same questions for themselves (rather than 5 sets of questions and consternation over the corresponding short brief answers).

...since those same individuals don't accept my opinion anyways and repeatedly (and seemingly automatically) make ignorant contentious statements of refute of said opinion....declaring that such opinion can't possibly be reality...all while completely ignoring (for the most part) all the evidence that has been submitted with no attempt at correction of what must obviously be numerous errors in research/evidence for said persons to arrive at such opposing opinions.

Nope....just blanket statements/judgments with overly emotional drivel....like declarations of jumping to conclusions and not nailing stuff down succinctly...when the person already stated (just a few sentences previously) that they hadn't taken the time to do hardly any research on said items of contention....so obviously clueless (or nearly so) as to what is exactly nailed down and what isn't....yet more than quick to jump to the offensive.

Kind of like reading a reference article (2 out of the ????) and criticizing the references (or lack thereof) when a few minutes spent in google could confirm or deny most of what the author presents in the article.....not to mention the more extensive list of references at the reference page (see bottom of Wiki page). But yeah that takes just a little bit of effort and time....and even a little more time to post opposing evidence if such exists.

You called it...my bag! I apologize for so rudely wasting your time with my impatient drivel...I'm sorry!

Probably shouldn't be writing this at 1 am with a throbbing leg....but that one's off my chest now!

[Col. Flagg]

Now if you want to present some research to the contrary....I'm all ears....also evidence versus gum running is preferred....since we know plenty of politicians who claim one thing but in reality support another like the "christian" Bush family or the supposedly opposed to each other (left vs right politically - Hegelian dialectic) gadiantons who have sworn blood oaths to uphold each other (Skull and Bones)...as well as how it fits or doesn't fit into the predetermined solution.

Jason, Ron was associated with Lehrman over 30 years ago back in 1981 when they co-authored a book on the gold standard together. Nice try though. Even if he is a friend of the Bush family... Presidents' Hinckley and Monson once coddled both Bush and Cheney and met with them annually in Salt Lake for a few years, so does that mean we should go after them as well? These relationships are by association only with each having their own purpose for them. By their fruits shall ye know them and Ron's fruits are honorable. You are grasping at straws to defame a good and decent man. :ymblushing:

With all due respect Col. Flagg, why do I always get the impression you hold Ron Paul on a higher pedestal than the Lord's anointed? I have never heard you once question Ron Paul on anything! Yet, I have seen you call out many Prophets and apostles. You have me for a loss of words. I know no man is perfect, you have said so. But to me, it seems if there is one person who is as close to perfect as one could be it would be your beloved Ron Paul. Which nothing could be further to the truth.

Semp, no, I do not hold Ron Paul in a higher regard than the brethren. Is Ron Paul perfect or do I agree with him 100% on everything? No, but he is the best chance we've got at turning this country around (if it all still possible) as he is a good, honest, decent man and we've been counseled by the church to seek out men with these qualities for office (for obvious reasons). The only issues I've questioned the brethren on are why they haven't been speaking up and out more with regard to all things evil (especially abortion) and challenging these evils which are plaguing society and allowing/inviting modern-day LDG's to speak at BYU while outting other members of the fold for their courage to speak and expose the truth. Anyway - I am not naive to the point of thinking Paul is perfect for pete's sake - that is just plain silly, but he is the best we've got and he is on target 99% of the time.

[linj2fly]

I have alot to say, and so I hope you'll bear with me as I make several consecutive posts, hopefully keeping to distinct topics so they can be responded to separately...

First, I want comment on what I consider 'outlying' fruit (the main fruit I consider to be who controls the money supply. This will be the bulk of my posts, and will get to it soon...)

***************************************************************************************************************(that was fun!)

CAMPAIGN FOR LIBERTY AND STUDENTS FOR LIBERTY

These two organizations are NON-PROFIT:
http://studentsforliberty.org/about/ 501(c)(3)
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/faq.php#type 501(c)(4)

The above link for C4L also has a link to their 2008 IRS filing. Unfortunately it hasn't been updated to show the last 2 years filings, but one can email them for a copy. Ron Paul is listed as receiving no compensation from this entity. The highest wage of $53,500 goes to Director John Tate. The biggest expense ~$1.6 Million went to put on the Rally for the Republic, the alternative convention to the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis.

[linj2fly]

Ron Paul recently stated in a debate that he does not plan to release his income taxes and that his financial information is already available to the public as required by congress. So I checked it out here:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/candloo ... =n00005906 (couldn't find the .gov version so please post if you find it.)

Nothing too exciting; income is from his medical retirement. You’ll notice, not surprisingly, that he has a lot of gold investments in his portfolio.

As to contributing to his own campaign, you can search http://www.fec.gov" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. I don’t particularly enjoy finding info on .gov sites b/c they are more tedious to use, but this one’s not so bad. I could not find any individual contributions from Ron paul to himself. There are some transfers from his Re-election committee (named Ronald E Paul, as opposed to his pres committee: Ronald Paul) to his presidential committee $500,000 for this cycle, but I can't find any initial contributions from himself into his Ronald E. Paul committee).

I looked up a few of his supporters to see if they contributed; Schiff donated the max in 08 and 12. Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods, and Gary North did not donate in 08 or this election cycle. Doug French donated last cycle but not this time around. Doug Wead donated the max ($2300) to Mitt Romney last time (even though he reportedly supported ron paul, and spoke at the rally for the republic). He as donated $250 this time, under the name “roy Douglas wead;” lives in haymarket, va.)

The searches include donations to the individual campaign AND super pacs. Not a dime from the LRC and mises people. Not even his son, Rand, has donated. Also, every other pres candidate has donated to himself. Even santorum has donated to himself repeatedly in small chunks. Surely RP, who has a lot of money tied up in gold investments, could cash out some and donate to his campaign.

This search is a good one to use when searching for individuals who contributed to anyone (individuals and PACS alike):

http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/norindsea.shtml

[linj2fly]

ON THE 9/11 ISSUE…
Here is a great link with a run down of his statements regarding 9/11. If you want a new investigation with full subpoena, you owe it to your self to check out this link (some of the links don’t work, or youtubes are removed, but can easily be found with a google search of the video/topic title)
http://www.examiner.com/la-county-liber ... ical-order

He has stated that there was cover-up, there was ineptness, etc, but always downplays or flat out rejects govt involvement.

In this video he states:
Kyley: Ok and one last thing. Why don't you come out about the truth about 9/11?
[After a pregnant pause and a glance around his himself, Paul answered this way]
Ron Paul: Because I can't handle the controversy. I have the IIF, the Federal Reserve to deal with, and the IRS to deal with. Because, no I just have work-- too many things on my plate. Because I just have too much to do.
http://911blogger.com/node/20636

and here with Jake Tapper he vehemently denies believing the govt was involved some way:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ron-pau ... -theories/
(a VERY SHORT excerpt...won't take long to view)
I was really surprised by his forcefulness.

By contrast here's congresswoman McKinney's grilling of Myers and Rumsfeld:



Even RP doesn't grill Bernanke like this.

Now, as far as 9/11 goes, I can see both sides of this argument. Unfortunately the media has shaped the questioning of the govt's story and calls for a new investigation to mean that one automatically thinks the govt did it. This line of media interviewing was a death knell to Debra Medina's campaign (also a staffer at the C4L). A year after Cynthia McKinney's grilling of Rumsfeld and friends, she had an alleged altercation with a capital police officer, and thereafter lost her re-election bid. I have been sympathetic to RP being reluctant to talk about it...but at the same time, 9/11 was THE CRIME OF OUR GENERATION---and it WAS NOT TREATED LIKE A CRIME SCENE. Bush drug his feet on an investigation, and then it was poorly funded. To me, this great crime is right up there in priority with the monetary system and our civil rights. Justice was completely subverted.

I don't think that RP would lose many followers if he pushed this issue, especially since most americans still have their doubts/questions about the official story. Also, he is very good at turning media questions around appropriately, like saying things such as 'the question should really be,' in an attempt to reframe the debate. He has been very successful with this, and I don't understand why he couldn't do it with this topic.

[linj2fly]

Now, getting to the meat.

We've all heard RP talk about hard money, gold and silver, and we've heard a few of his ideas about how to implement this via a transition. He's been pretty consistent on this.

Jason and Semp have brought up Article 1 Sec 8, which is a list of the enumerated powers of congress; this being the one in contention:

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

In and effort to understand the intent of this clause, I did a little research into the convention minutes, federalist papers, and other contemporary commentaries to see what I could learn. I hardly consider myself an expert on original intent (OI), so if anyone has anything regarding OI to add to this discussion, please do so. I feel that it is a good place to start.

I was surprised to find there is no discussion or debate about this power during the convention, a finding that is not lost on Justice Story in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States:

...indeed, the whole clause,as it now stands, does not seem to have attracted any discussion in the
convention.
http://www.constitution.org/js/js_317.txt Paragraph 1112

In fact, the only discussion I found touching on this clause was the decision to strike 'emit bills of credit' (paper currency) from the draft:

August 16, 1787 A.D., Constitutional Convention, Philadelphia, PA:
"Mr. Govr. Morris moved to strike out 'and emit bills on the credit of the United States' If the United States had credit such bills would be unnecessary: if they had not, unjust & useless."

"Mr. Butler, 2ds. the motion."

"Mr. Madison, will it not be sufficient to prohibit the making them a tender? This will remove the temptation to emit them with unjust views. And promissory notes in that shape may in some emergencies be best."

"Mr. Govr. Morris. striking out the words will leave room for notes of a responsible minister which will do all the good without the mischief. The monied interest will oppose the plan of Government, if paper emissions be not prohibited."

"Mr. Ghorum was for striking out, without inserting any prohibition. if the words stand they may suggest and lead to the measure."

"Col. Mason had doubts on the subject. Congs. he thought would not have the power unless it were expressed. Though he had a mortal hatred to paper money, yet as he could not foresee all emergencies, he was unwilling to tie the hands of the Legislature. He observed that the late war could not have been carried on, had such a prohibition existed."

"Mr. Ghorum. The power as far as it will be necessary or safe, is involved in that of borrowing."

"Mr. Mercer was a friend to paper money, though in the present state & temper of America, he should neither propose nor approve of such a measure. He was consequently opposed to a prohibition of it altogether. It will stamp suspicion on the Government to deny it a discretion on this point. It was impolitic also to excite the opposition of all those who were friends to paper money. The people of property would be sure to be on the side of the plan, and it was impolitic to purchase their further attachment with the loss of the opposite class of Citizens."

"Mr. Ellsworth thought this a favorable moment to shut and bar the door against paper money. The mischiefs of the various experiments which had been made, were now fresh in the public mind and had excited the disgust of all the respectable part of America. By witholding the power from the new Governt. more friends of influence would be gained to it than by almost any thing else. Paper money can in no case be necessary. Give the Government credit, and other resources will offer. The power may do harm, never good."

"Mr. Randolph, notwithstanding his antipathy to paper money, could not agree to strike out the words, as he could not foresee all the occasions which might arise."

"Mr. Wilson. It will have a most salutary influence on the credit of the United States to remove the possibility of paper money. This expedient can never succeed whilst its mischiefs are remembered, and as long as it can be resorted to, it will be a bar to other resources."

"Mr. Butler. remarked that paper money was a legal tender in no Country in Europe. He was urgent for disarming the Government of such power."

"Mr. Mason was still adverse to tying the hands of the Legislature altogether. If there was no example in Europe as just remarked, it might be observed on the other side, that there was none in which the Government was restrained on this head."

"Mr. Read, thought the words, if not struck out, would be as alarming as the mark of the Beast in Revelations"

"Mr. Langdon had rather reject the whole plan than retain the three words '(and emit bills)'"

"On the motion for striking out N. H. ay. Mas. ay. Ct. ay. N. J. no. Pa. ay. Del. ay. Md. no. Va. ay.* N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay."

"The clause for borrowing money, agreed to nem. con." _______________________

"*This vote in the affirmative by Virga. was occasioned by the acquiescence of Mr. Madison who became satisfied that striking out the words would not disable the Govt. from the use of public notes as far as they could be safe & proper; & would only cut off the pretext for a paper currency, and particularly for making the bills a tender either for public or private debts."

August 28, 1787 A.D., Constitutional Convention, Philadelphia, PA:

Art: XII. being taken up. Mr. Wilson & Mr. Sherman moved to insert after the words coin money the words 'nor emit bills of credit, nor make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payments of debts' making these prohibitions absolute, instead of allowable(as in the XIII Art:) with the consent of the Legislature of the U.S.

Mr. GORHAM thought the purpose would be as well secured by the provision of art XIII which makes the consent of the Gen. Legislature necessary, and that in that mode, no opposition would be excited; whereas an absolute prohibition of paper money would rouse the most desperate opposition from its partizans.

Mr. SHERMAN thought this a favorable crisis for crushing paper money. If the consent of the Legislature could authorize emissions of it, the friends of paper money, would make every exertion to get into the Legislature in order to license it. The question being divided; on the 1st part "nor emit bills of credit" N. H. ay. Mas ay. Ct. ay. Pa. ay. Del. ay. Md. divd. Va. no. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

There is a compilation of the discussion on paper money here:
http://www.angelfire.com/ut2/lrtopham/convention.html

Now on to the clause........

[linj2fly]

Drawing on Federalist paper 42, Blackstone, Smith, Madison, and others, Justice Joseph Story discusses the power to coin money, regulate it's value, and fix the standard of weights and measures in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States:

CHAPTER XVIII

POWER TO COIN MONEY AND FIX THE STANDARD OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.

§ 1111. THE next power of congress is "to coin money, regulate the value
thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures."

§ 1112. Under the confederation, the continental congress had delegated
to them, "the sole and exclusive right and power of regulating the alloy
and value of coin struck by their own authority, or by that of the
states," and "fixing the standard of weights and measures throughout the
United States." It is observable, that, under the confederation, there
was no power given to regulate the value of foreign coin, an omission,
which in a great measure would destroy any uniformity in the value of
the current coin, since the respective states might, by different
regulations, create a different value in each. [1] The constitution has,
with great propriety, cured this defect; and, indeed, the whole clause,
as it now stands, does not seem to have attracted any discussion in the
convention. [2] It has been justly remarked, that the power "to coin
money" would, doubtless, include that of regulating its value, had the
latter power not been expressly inserted. But the constitution abounds
with pleonasms and repetitions of this nature. [3]

§ 1113. The grounds, upon which the general power to coin money, and
regulate the value of foreign and domestic coin, is granted to the
national government, cannot require much illustration in order to
vindicate it. The object of the power is to produce uniformity of value
throughout the Union, and thus to preclude us from the embarrassments of
a perpetually fluctuating and variable currency. Money is the universal
medium or common standard, by a comparison with which the value of all
merchandise may be ascertained, or, it is a sign, which represents the
respective values of all commodities. [4] It is, therefore,
indispensable for the wants and conveniences of commerce, domestic as
well as foreign. The power to coin money is one of the ordinary
prerogatives of sovereignty, and is almost universally exercised in
order to preserve a proper circulation of good coin of a known value in
the home market. In order to secure it from debasement it is necessary,
that it should be exclusively under the control and regulation of the
government; for if every individual were permitted to make and
circulate, what coin he should please, there would be an opening to the
grossest frauds and impositions upon the public, by the use of base and
false coin. And the same remark applies with equal force to foreign
coin, if allowed to circulate freely in a country without any control by
the government. Every civilized government, therefore, with a view to
prevent such abuses, to facilitate exchanges, and thereby to encourage
all sorts of industry and commerce, as well as to guard itself against
the embarrassments of an undue scarcity of currency, injurious to its
own interests and credits, has found it necessary to coin money, and
affix to it a public stamp and value, and to regulate the introduction
and use of foreign coins. [5] In England, this prerogative belongs to
the crown; and, in former ages, it was greatly abused; for base coin was
often coined and circulated by its authority, at a value far above its
intrinsic worth; and thus taxes of a burthensome nature were laid
indirectly upon the people. [6] There is great propriety, therefore, in
confiding it to the legislature, not only as the more immediate
representatives of the public interests, but as the more safe
depositaries of the power. [7]

§ 1117. The other power, "to fix the standard of weights and measures,"
was, doubtless, given from like motives of public policy, for the sake
of uniformity, and the convenience of commerce. [12] Hitherto, however,
it has remained a dormant power, from the many difficulties attendant
upon the subject, although it has been repeatedly brought to the
attention of congress in most elaborate reports. [13] Until congress
shall fix a standard, the understanding seems to be, that the states
possess the power to fix their own weights and measures; [14] or, at
least, the existing standards at the adoption of the constitution remain
in full force. Under the confederation, congress possessed the like
exclusive power. [15] In England, the power to regulate weights and
measures is said by Mr. Justice Blackstone to belong to the royal
prerogative. [16] But it has been remarked by a learned commentator on
his work, that the power cannot, with propriety, be referred to the
king's prerogative; for, from Magna Charta to the present time, there
are above twenty acts of parliament to fix and establish the standard
and uniformity of weights and measures. [17]
http://www.constitution.org/js/js_317.txt

Footnotes 5 & 6 in Paragraph 1113 reference the Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith, at this link:


http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/sm ... of%20Money
PARAGRAPH 1.4.7 Referencing abuses found in what we would call the free market (about half into the para)
PARAGRAPH 1.4.10 Referencing the abuses (debasement) of the currency by the sovereign kings and princes

James Madison states why multiple currencies (issued by the States) would cause confusion and animosity, and also condemns paper money (bills of credit)in the 3rd and 4th paragraphs of Federalist Paper 44, found at this link:

http://constitution.org/fed/federa44.htm

In summary, of all the clauses and issues in the drafted Constitution which were debated, and many fiercely so, the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures given exclusively to the legislature, was harmoniously/unanimously agreed to.

Whereas the banks (and any other merchant providing goods/services in the free market) have a stake in being loyal only to it's customers/depositers and it's vendors/creditors, and kings have little accountability to the people (except what rights they'd steadily demanded and re-asserted starting with the magna carta), the legislature is accountable to the whole society as it's representatives. When the constitution was crafted, the control of money was not delegated to the executive, nor the market, but exclusively to the representatives of the people.

This is the first question...who should control the money supply/value? The framers answer unanimously: the people through their representatives.

The second question...what should our medium of exchange be?

That the framers had an aversion to paper money is evident. However, it is interesting to note that commodity money (demonstrated by Smith in above link; also clipping and sweating, punching holes in the middle and then hammering them shut) AND paper money can BOTH be debased (counterfeiting/increasing the supply arbitrarily, etc)...as a result of greed and avarice.

The seedbed of gadianton recruitment was this:

Helaman 6:17 For behold, the Lord had blessed them so long with the riches of the world that they had not been stirred up to anger, to wars, nor to bloodshed; therefore they began to set their hearts upon their riches; yea, they began to seek to get gain that they might be lifted up one above another; therefore they began to commit secret murders, and to rob and to plunder, that they might get gain.

If it is benefitting them, the greedy will look away while their leaders to debase the money here a little, and there a little.Therefore, honest, sound money is not to be found in the medium of exchange, but only in the honest hearts of the people. Honest people who keep their representatives accountable, and leaders who are honest in their responsibility.

[moonwhim]

So far all I've seen is ignorant rants while providing no additional information....like moonwhim above whom I've challenged to do some digging via this response (below - and also is the last link in the above section)....and have yet to get a response...

So asking you a hardballed question like I did above: "So do these two people control Ron Paul? Have they brain-washed him to become their stooge?" That to you is just an ignorant rant? Look, you are throwing tons of material at us, so I am giving you a chance to answer a bottom line question. Personally I don't have the time to do all the research.and if you don't know the answer than just say so....but don't call me an ignorant ranter. Your impatience and rudeness with Bluemoon5 and others on this forum seems to be becoming a staple with you.

There is evidence that the Heritage Foundation and others like that are definitely in the Neocon camp.
Your Volker article only had 4 footnotes from wikipedia, and it should have had a lot more for all the conjecturing that was in it.

Hey, I'm happy for all your research, and have benefitted from it. Keep it up. But don't jump to conclusions about Ron Paul unless you can nail them down more succinctly.

Yeah you are right....I'm running out of patience with ignoramuses who "don't have time" to do the homework but have more than plenty of time to respond with criticism or repeatedly ask ignorant "hardball" questions when 2 minutes of time clicking a couple of links in the post just previous (perhaps 5 minutes maybe with reading) would answer those same questions for themselves (rather than 5 sets of questions and consternation over the corresponding short brief answers).

...since those same individuals don't accept my opinion anyways and repeatedly (and seemingly automatically) make ignorant contentious statements of refute of said opinion....declaring that such opinion can't possibly be reality...all while completely ignoring (for the most part) all the evidence that has been submitted with no attempt at correction of what must obviously be numerous errors in research/evidence for said persons to arrive at such opposing opinions.

Nope....just blanket statements/judgments with overly emotional drivel....like declarations of jumping to conclusions and not nailing stuff down succinctly...when the person already stated (just a few sentences previously) that they hadn't taken the time to do hardly any research on said items of contention....so obviously clueless (or nearly so) as to what is exactly nailed down and what isn't....yet more than quick to jump to the offensive.

Kind of like reading a reference article (2 out of the ????) and criticizing the references (or lack thereof) when a few minutes spent in google could confirm or deny most of what the author presents in the article.....not to mention the more extensive list of references at the reference page (see bottom of Wiki page). But yeah that takes just a little bit of effort and time....and even a little more time to post opposing evidence if such exists.

You called it...my bag! I apologize for so rudely wasting your time with my impatient drivel...I'm sorry!

Probably shouldn't be writing this at 1 am with a throbbing leg....but that one's off my chest now!

As your above reply to me proves, you can really be nasty Jason!! I'm losing all respect for you. Too bad you can't control yourself a little better. And I don't care if your leg hurts or not....get a grip on yourself and temper your emotions...

[Fairminded]

Drawing on Federalist paper 42, Blackstone, Smith, Madison, and others, Justice Joseph Story discusses the power to coin money, regulate it's value, and fix the standard of weights and measures in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States:

CHAPTER XVIII

POWER TO COIN MONEY AND FIX THE STANDARD OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.

§ 1111. THE next power of congress is "to coin money, regulate the value
thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures."

§ 1112. Under the confederation, the continental congress had delegated
to them, "the sole and exclusive right and power of regulating the alloy
and value of coin struck by their own authority, or by that of the
states," and "fixing the standard of weights and measures throughout the
United States." It is observable, that, under the confederation, there
was no power given to regulate the value of foreign coin, an omission,
which in a great measure would destroy any uniformity in the value of
the current coin, since the respective states might, by different
regulations, create a different value in each. [1] The constitution has,
with great propriety, cured this defect; and, indeed, the whole clause,
as it now stands, does not seem to have attracted any discussion in the
convention. [2] It has been justly remarked, that the power "to coin
money" would, doubtless, include that of regulating its value, had the
latter power not been expressly inserted. But the constitution abounds
with pleonasms and repetitions of this nature. [3]

§ 1113. The grounds, upon which the general power to coin money, and
regulate the value of foreign and domestic coin, is granted to the
national government, cannot require much illustration in order to
vindicate it. The object of the power is to produce uniformity of value
throughout the Union, and thus to preclude us from the embarrassments of
a perpetually fluctuating and variable currency. Money is the universal
medium or common standard, by a comparison with which the value of all
merchandise may be ascertained, or, it is a sign, which represents the
respective values of all commodities. [4] It is, therefore,
indispensable for the wants and conveniences of commerce, domestic as
well as foreign. The power to coin money is one of the ordinary
prerogatives of sovereignty, and is almost universally exercised in
order to preserve a proper circulation of good coin of a known value in
the home market. In order to secure it from debasement it is necessary,
that it should be exclusively under the control and regulation of the
government; for if every individual were permitted to make and
circulate, what coin he should please, there would be an opening to the
grossest frauds and impositions upon the public, by the use of base and
false coin. And the same remark applies with equal force to foreign
coin, if allowed to circulate freely in a country without any control by
the government. Every civilized government, therefore, with a view to
prevent such abuses, to facilitate exchanges, and thereby to encourage
all sorts of industry and commerce, as well as to guard itself against
the embarrassments of an undue scarcity of currency, injurious to its
own interests and credits, has found it necessary to coin money, and
affix to it a public stamp and value, and to regulate the introduction
and use of foreign coins. [5] In England, this prerogative belongs to
the crown; and, in former ages, it was greatly abused; for base coin was
often coined and circulated by its authority, at a value far above its
intrinsic worth; and thus taxes of a burthensome nature were laid
indirectly upon the people. [6] There is great propriety, therefore, in
confiding it to the legislature, not only as the more immediate
representatives of the public interests, but as the more safe
depositaries of the power. [7]

§ 1117. The other power, "to fix the standard of weights and measures,"
was, doubtless, given from like motives of public policy, for the sake
of uniformity, and the convenience of commerce. [12] Hitherto, however,
it has remained a dormant power, from the many difficulties attendant
upon the subject, although it has been repeatedly brought to the
attention of congress in most elaborate reports. [13] Until congress
shall fix a standard, the understanding seems to be, that the states
possess the power to fix their own weights and measures; [14] or, at
least, the existing standards at the adoption of the constitution remain
in full force. Under the confederation, congress possessed the like
exclusive power. [15] In England, the power to regulate weights and
measures is said by Mr. Justice Blackstone to belong to the royal
prerogative. [16] But it has been remarked by a learned commentator on
his work, that the power cannot, with propriety, be referred to the
king's prerogative; for, from Magna Charta to the present time, there
are above twenty acts of parliament to fix and establish the standard
and uniformity of weights and measures. [17]
http://www.constitution.org/js/js_317.txt

Footnotes 5 & 6 in Paragraph 1113 reference the Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith, at this link:


http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/sm ... of%20Money
PARAGRAPH 1.4.7 Referencing abuses found in what we would call the free market (about half into the para)
PARAGRAPH 1.4.10 Referencing the abuses (debasement) of the currency by the sovereign kings and princes

James Madison states why multiple currencies (issued by the States) would cause confusion and animosity, and also condemns paper money (bills of credit)in the 3rd and 4th paragraphs of Federalist Paper 44, found at this link:

http://constitution.org/fed/federa44.htm

In summary, of all the clauses and issues in the drafted Constitution which were debated, and many fiercely so, the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures given exclusively to the legislature, was harmoniously/unanimously agreed to.

Whereas the banks (and any other merchant providing goods/services in the free market) have a stake in being loyal only to it's customers/depositers and it's vendors/creditors, and kings have little accountability to the people (except what rights they'd steadily demanded and re-asserted starting with the magna carta), the legislature is accountable to the whole society as it's representatives. When the constitution was crafted, the control of money was not delegated to the executive, nor the market, but exclusively to the representatives of the people.

This is the first question...who should control the money supply/value? The framers answer unanimously: the people through their representatives.

The second question...what should our medium of exchange be?

That the framers had an aversion to paper money is evident. However, it is interesting to note that commodity money (demonstrated by Smith in above link; also clipping and sweating, punching holes in the middle and then hammering them shut) AND paper money can BOTH be debased (counterfeiting/increasing the supply arbitrarily, etc)...as a result of greed and avarice.

The seedbed of gadianton recruitment was this:

Helaman 6:17 For behold, the Lord had blessed them so long with the riches of the world that they had not been stirred up to anger, to wars, nor to bloodshed; therefore they began to set their hearts upon their riches; yea, they began to seek to get gain that they might be lifted up one above another; therefore they began to commit secret murders, and to rob and to plunder, that they might get gain.

If it is benefitting them, the greedy will look away while their leaders to debase the money here a little, and there a little.Therefore, honest, sound money is not to be found in the medium of exchange, but only in the honest hearts of the people. Honest people who keep their representatives accountable, and leaders who are honest in their responsibility.

Thank you. Too many people spend time looking for a perfect currency, a perfect government, a perfect economy, etc. Those things are not to be found. The closest you can get to any of them is when people as a whole do their best to create a fair system, then vigilantly work to maintain it and prevent corruption.

A major problem is that whenever a good system DOES get created and shows some success, people immediately seem to say "well problem's solved, and it'll never come up again," and they stop paying attention to it until it breaks, at which time they're surprised. I wonder how it would be if, in the U.S. we had a Constitutional Convention every fifty years or so, where the entire populace openly assesses the state of the Union, then works to bring it in line with Constitutional principles.

If the people were vigilant, America could last for thousands of years, instead of collapsing to corruption in hundreds.

[Jason]

So far all I've seen is ignorant rants while providing no additional information....like moonwhim above whom I've challenged to do some digging via this response (below - and also is the last link in the above section)....and have yet to get a response...

So asking you a hardballed question like I did above: "So do these two people control Ron Paul? Have they brain-washed him to become their stooge?" That to you is just an ignorant rant? Look, you are throwing tons of material at us, so I am giving you a chance to answer a bottom line question. Personally I don't have the time to do all the research.and if you don't know the answer than just say so....but don't call me an ignorant ranter. Your impatience and rudeness with Bluemoon5 and others on this forum seems to be becoming a staple with you.

There is evidence that the Heritage Foundation and others like that are definitely in the Neocon camp.
Your Volker article only had 4 footnotes from wikipedia, and it should have had a lot more for all the conjecturing that was in it.

Hey, I'm happy for all your research, and have benefitted from it. Keep it up. But don't jump to conclusions about Ron Paul unless you can nail them down more succinctly.

Yeah you are right....I'm running out of patience with ignoramuses who "don't have time" to do the homework but have more than plenty of time to respond with criticism or repeatedly ask ignorant "hardball" questions when 2 minutes of time clicking a couple of links in the post just previous (perhaps 5 minutes maybe with reading) would answer those same questions for themselves (rather than 5 sets of questions and consternation over the corresponding short brief answers).

...since those same individuals don't accept my opinion anyways and repeatedly (and seemingly automatically) make ignorant contentious statements of refute of said opinion....declaring that such opinion can't possibly be reality...all while completely ignoring (for the most part) all the evidence that has been submitted with no attempt at correction of what must obviously be numerous errors in research/evidence for said persons to arrive at such opposing opinions.

Nope....just blanket statements/judgments with overly emotional drivel....like declarations of jumping to conclusions and not nailing stuff down succinctly...when the person already stated (just a few sentences previously) that they hadn't taken the time to do hardly any research on said items of contention....so obviously clueless (or nearly so) as to what is exactly nailed down and what isn't....yet more than quick to jump to the offensive.

Kind of like reading a reference article (2 out of the ????) and criticizing the references (or lack thereof) when a few minutes spent in google could confirm or deny most of what the author presents in the article.....not to mention the more extensive list of references at the reference page (see bottom of Wiki page). But yeah that takes just a little bit of effort and time....and even a little more time to post opposing evidence if such exists.

You called it...my bag! I apologize for so rudely wasting your time with my impatient drivel...I'm sorry!

Probably shouldn't be writing this at 1 am with a throbbing leg....but that one's off my chest now!

As your above reply to me proves, you can really be nasty Jason!! I'm losing all respect for you. Too bad you can't control yourself a little better. And I don't care if your leg hurts or not....get a grip on yourself and temper your emotions...

Obviously it went over your head....let me be blunt. I could care less whether you respect me or not....it should be quite obvious that I have near zero respect for you....so if that is what comes back....so be it! You judge in complete ignorance and yet demand respect....just doesn't fly....and obviously my patience has run out for you...leg or no leg.