Ron Paul - What has he accomplished?

[Jason]

WHAT HAS RON PAUL ACCOMPLISHED?

Apparently, Ron Paul wasted no time jumping into the pool of candidates, running for the Presidency 2012. As I understand it, this is his third time running for president, and has been elected 12 terms as Congressman from Texas. This means he has conducted 15 political campaigns.

My question what has he accomplished? He has held a seat of power in Congress 24 years, while this country has been on a fast track slide into Socialism. What has he done to stop it or even slow it down?

No need to remind me he has an ongoing campaign to audit the feds. A farfetched notion, that takes up time and space and goes no place. Anyway, the feds are already audited. Seems to me if anyone really wanted to change that government boondoggle in effect since 1913, it would be more logical to change the laws to do away with it. This country thrived and did well before it was established.

What is his voting record? Is there anything in it, that presents any evidence Congressman Paul has done anything of any significance to salvage the Principles upon which this nation was founded?

There are 535 congressmen elected to occupy a seat of power in Washington. These representatives took an oath to uphold the Constitution. All of them draw substantial salaries, and most, if not all, maintain offices in Washington and their home state with staff. They all have travel expenses and other perks of expense. Occupying this seat of power for 24 years, conducting all the political campaigns, must have cost the citizens of this country a lot of money.

What has Congressman Paul done to curtail the trillions of indebteness, as one of the 535 who have deliberately placed this once great nation this far in debt? What has he done for victory of the unwinnable wars the Congress has backed, lo these many years?

The school system in this country has an annual cost of 100 billion, and does not educate, instead indoctrinates young children into the tenets of Socialism. What has Congressman Paul done in past 24 years to effect any change in this system? Just to mention a few questions.

In his campaign speeches, debates, newsletters, and TV interviews, I hear what he says, and he is quite well informed about economics, but what has he done to effect changes for the better in any areas of the ditch this country is in? He talks the talk but does not walk the walk.

I’m just absolutely amazed at all the current hoopla over his latest announcement, i.e., candidate for President of United States, by so many well-intentioned, intelligent people in this country. Where is the rationale of pinning hopes for a solution to the crisis we face, on one individual who has occupied a position of power over the citizenry for over 24 years, at a cost of untold millions, showing no meaningful solutions nor results?

Despite all the propagandi to the contrary, each passing year, month, and day, conditions in this country go from bad to worse. Are we living in a pepetual Emperor’s Clothing parade, or what? Why is there such a huge blindspot and denial of who and what got us to this place in history? Why does the average person refuse to recognize the truth about what got us here, and insist upon repetitition?

And more importantly, how come the majority thinks we can vote ourselves out of the ditch we voted ourselves into? Ours is not a nation of stupid people, but why the repetition of stupid acts? Who out there has not heard what Einstein said? “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results.” What is it about that simple statement of fact, so difficult to understand?

Why is it so many are listening and supporting Ron Paul, when after 24-plus years, being one in a position of power to effect positive changes, just simply continues being part of the problem, talking the talk, and not walking the walk. To consider taking off rose-colored glasses, I suggest going back and reading my posted article during last election cycle and reading “Debates & Dear John Letter.” The problem and solution so simple a child can understand it.

Alexis de Tocqueville said: “All those who seek to destoy the liberties of a democratic nation, ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish that.”

http://www.octogenariansblog.com/ron-pa ... issue-571/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting proposition....what has he accomplished???

[Jason]

There's this -

That a Congressman who is regarded by his peers as a highly principled eccentric could get a bill to audit the Federal Reserve accepted by a substantial majority in the House of Representatives is nothing short of sensational. He was the right man at the right time.

The timing was created by Alan Greenspan, whose policies created the bubbles, followed by Ben Bernanke, who had no clue that his stabilization of the monetary base in 2006 and 2007 would create a near-collapse of the banking system.

There was Ron Paul, running for President, saying that this would happen. He was dismissed as a crank. Then it happened in one 60-day period: early September to early November, 2008. He is now perceived as a kind of prophet.

He targeted the FED. Millions of people heard him. They had not previously heard of the FED, let alone its threat to the economy. Then the crisis came, before the election. He had seen it coming. No one else with a public presence had.

Ron Paul analyzed things accurately. He had warned about the Federal Reserve ever since his first term in 1976. He stuck to his guns for 32 years. Then . . . boom! The FED's policies blew up in plain sight . . . and plain sites.

The FED is on the defensive for the first time. Three men made this possible: Greenspan Bernanke, and Paul. Only Paul has profited from this.

He really did create a revolution in the literate public's perception of the Federal Reserve System. The FED will never get the anti-FED toothpaste back in the tube. Not with YouTube.

http://www.garynorth.com/public/5389.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is this value added???

[Jason]

and this

What Ron Paul did in his career was to stand firm for the philosophy of limited government as his own party stampeded away from it the moment they took power. By definition, the voice in the wilderness is not the leader of the pack. But if we ever find ourselves in a country where a politician can say, "Government is not the solution to the problem, government *is* the problem," without being derided as a racist kook, Ron Paul will be remembered as a great keeper of that flame.

In 1982, Dr. Paul co-authored with Lewis Lehrman The Case For Gold, which was a monetary history of money and banking in America. Magisterial in its scope, the book brilliantly lays out the reasons why a commodity money such as gold is mandatory if freedom and economic stability are to be our goals.

1996
He successfully won the seat from the 14th Congressional district of Texas. In the seven years since then, he has reasserted himself as America's foremost patriot-constitutionalist and advocate of a return to the Founders' vision of limited government.

He has personally sponsored over 40 legislative bills designed to reduce government, strengthen the bulwarks of freedom, and restore sound monetary policy to the country. Some of his notable legislative bills are: 1) H.J. RES. 15: To abolish personal income, estate, and gift taxes.2) H.R. 220: To ban the Federal Government from use of National ID numbers for citizens.3) H.R. 1146: To end membership of the United States in the United Nations.4) H.R. 1547: To restore first amendment protections of religion and religious speech.

He has voted repeatedly for term limits. He has pushed for a repeal of the withholding tax function of the Federal Government. He has sought to get the U.S. to leave the phony World Trade Organization. He was one of only 67 who voted against the USA Patriot Act.

And about four years ago, he organized 20 of his colleagues in Congress into The Liberty Committee to fight the authoritarians on all fronts -- legislative, educational, and activist.

Once again, yet another comment that proves my point.

He wrote a book in 1982.
"He successfully won ..."
"He has personally sponsored ..."
"He has voted repeatedly ..."
"He has pushed for ..."
"He has sought ..."
"He was one ... who voted against ..."
"He doggedly assails ..."
"... he organized 20 of his colleagues ..."

Unamazingly, the question remains unanswered: what has he accomplished?

http://thelightbulbblog.blogspot.com/20 ... ished.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

List of Ron Paul's Legislative Accomplishments

This would be both good to know and useful when discussing Dr. Paul. I'll kick it off with these three.

1. Consistently votes against higher taxes, while explaining why, thus discouraging others from raising taxes.

2. Brought up the issue of monetary policy, which is incredibly important, and is now being discussed for the first time in many years.

3. Introduced legislation to restore Constitutional restrictions against government abuses.

Note that things not directly related to legislation will still affect it.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread ... plishments" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In my previous article titled “Run Paul Run – Back to Texas,” I asked the question, What has he done? What is his record after being elected to a position of power in Congress 12 times, and his third run for the Presidency? As I view it, he has written a number of books, made a lot of speeches, drawn a high salary, maintained offices in Washington & Texas, retained a staff of workers, and become quite wealthy.

What has he done to sustain the Principles upon which this nation was founded? What has he done to keep us out of expensive un-winnable wars? What has he done to stop or slow down the train wreck of Socialism, this once great nation has been reduced to? After all, he has occupied a position of power in Congress for past 24 years. Other than talk the talk, what has he done to qualify him to be elevated to a higher position of power?

He seems to say things most want to hear, with seemingly well-intentioned ideas, but what has he done? Some response to this question from my previous article, but zero answers to that question. The number one problem, articulated by most candidates, is the economy, and it appears Ron Paul is more informed than most about economics, but what has he done, to rescue this country from the trillions of debt?

I did receive one comment from a Facebook reader of my article, who said this: “Patrick Henry himself couldn’t change much with one vote out of 535. If one Congressman could make big changes despite all the rest vehemently opposing him, we wouldn’t be a representative Republic.”

I must admit, that is one of the strangest comments I have ever received, out of the 87,000 I have received from 570 articles I have written. I have tried to figure out what the commenter had in mind, by his correlation of Patrick Henry and the absence of any meaningful actions of Ron Paul in Congress for 24 years because of opposition to his one vote. Even more puzzling is the remark, “We wouldn’t be a representative Republic.” Inasmuch as the design was for a Constitutional Republic. That is ruling by Law and not men.

I’ll be listening tonight to hear anyone say “I’m all for following the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and stand for individual Freedom, and the Capitalistic, Free-enterprising System this nation was built upon, originally.” Further, I’ll be listening for the word Freedom used in the context of individuals, from any candidate.
My visceral feeling from the comment left me thinking the commenter was offended because I dared criticize Ron Paul for being an elected official, sitting in a position of power 24 years, while the direction of this country has been on a fast track towards socialism. Not that his absence of doing anything meaningful means he is alone, but he is the lone person, running for President, after being in a position of power for 24 years.

Further, stating “If one Congressman could make big changes, despite all the rest vehemently opposing him—–,” implies one vote does not count for anything, when that’s all anyone has for anything. The problem of what is Right for this Country does not lie in numbers, but stems from a basic premise of morality as set forth in the Ten Commandments, the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.

Truth is that which is – the absence of a lie. If there is anyone out there qualified to lead this once great Nation out of the ditch, it will be the person who speaks truth, and stops lying. Who among the slew of candidates qualifies?

And more importantly, when are “We the People” going to demand truth as a requirement to lead? Definitely not so long as we make excuses for their actions and lies. When I wrote the previous article about Ron Paul, asking the question “what has he done?” – I was seeking answers, not excuses for his failure to take any meaningful actions to halt this onslaught of insult to Personal Freedom and private Property ownership in this country.

Without apology, I tell it like it is as I see it. With deep concern for the future of my children, already paying exorbitant taxes, and grandchildren coming along to do the same, plus concern for this entire country and all those burdened with effects of the nanny state, and all the Socialistic programs, embraced by so many.

We did not arrive in this hellish state of trillions in debt, promoting and funding un-winnable wars, with unprotected borders for terrorists and drug dealers to cross to kill; forking over billions to other countries, lining up young men and women to kill or be killed in some foreign country, and the residual effects from these conditions, by some unseen, nebulous unknowable enemy. It all has a recognizable face.

We know what it is, where it is, why it is and who it is. Why do we insist on a state of denial? Why are we all lined up on the Emperor’s clothing parade route, waiting to ooh and ah, over the naked lie? “While Congress shall have the power to…..”

Alexander Hamilton said: “Can any reasonable man be well disposed toward a government which makes war and carnage the only means of supporting itself?”

http://www.octogenariansblog.com/tonigh ... issue-572/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

An old southern country saying: “One does not go to the fox, to find out how to save the chickens.”
http://www.octogenariansblog.com/debate ... mber-88-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Original_Intent]

Ron Paul has consistently voted correct principles.

The fact that almopst nothing that he has attempted has come to fruition is largely because often in a 534-1 vote, he was the one.

I hear what you are saying about actual accomplishment, Jason, however, in a body of 535, one can only be held responsible for the positions HE has supported, you cannot blame him for failing to convince a majority, and certainly you cannot blame him for anything he supported which did not then pass the Senate.

Also reggarding your statement about the Fed - Ron Paul for years has called for the End of the Fed (as you suggest) and that has only recently morphed into Audit the Fed (because he believes that an audit is more acceptable to people and that once exposed that the people will have the will to demand an end to it.

Also, we have the campaign for liberty, the Tea Party - if there had been no Ron Paul there is a good chance there would have been no Mike Lee, and certainly no Rand Paul. The debt ceiling fight would likely never have happened and almost certainly it would be lost by now.

I am familiar with your recent rants regarding the fact that he is now heading the banking comittee, and where are the trials for the money laundering, etc. That's a valid question that I don;t have an answer for. Maybe you should ask his campaign? (Have you?)

Frankly, we are in a car heading for a cliff at 100 miles per hour, and you are criticizing the one person who has even made the attempt to do anything about it, because he has only slowed the vehicle down to 99 mph.

As with us all, duty is ours, results are up to God. I know you feel Ron Paul has not done anything but run off his mouth. I think that is sad and either disingenuous or ill informed. Most of that "talk" was an attempt to educate enough citizens to actually effect real change...otherwise he remains a voice in the wilderness.

In those 24 years he has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has voted against Congress "passing the buck" to the president regarding war declaration powers.
You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone in the last 4 decades who more consistently supported correct principle.

By your definition, Thomas S Monsen is a failure - I mean he is the TOP mortal in the church (not just one of 535) and yet look at the pornography problem we have in the church...oh sure he has talked about it a lot, but what has he actually ACCOMPLISHED? (This is rhetorical btw, I do not feel that way at all, I am just illustrating how ridiculous your position and expectations are.)

Thoughts?

[ktg]

Jason, since you seem to be on an anti-Ron Paul crusade, surely you have someone better in mind. Which of the candidates do you endorse and why would he/she be a better President than Ron Paul?

[Col. Flagg]

Jason, let me ask you this - if a Missionary serves an honorable full-time, two-year proselyting mission, teaching the gospel to hundreds of people without one baptism, what has he accomplished?

[Col. Flagg]

Ron Paul has consistently voted correct principles.

The fact that almopst nothing that he has attempted has come to fruition is largely because often in a 534-1 vote, he was the one.

I hear what you are saying about actual accomplishment, Jason, however, in a body of 535, one can only be held responsible for the positions HE has supported, you cannot blame him for failing to convince a majority, and certainly you cannot blame him for anything he supported which did not then pass the Senate.

Also reggarding your statement about the Fed - Ron Paul for years has called for the End of the Fed (as you suggest) and that has only recently morphed into Audit the Fed (because he believes that an audit is more acceptable to people and that once exposed that the people will have the will to demand an end to it.

Also, we have the campaign for liberty, the Tea Party - if there had been no Ron Paul there is a good chance there would have been no Mike Lee, and certainly no Rand Paul. The debt ceiling fight would likely never have happened and almost certainly it would be lost by now.

I am familiar with your recent rants regarding the fact that he is now heading the banking comittee, and where are the trials for the money laundering, etc. That's a valid question that I don;t have an answer for. Maybe you should ask his campaign? (Have you?)

Frankly, we are in a car heading for a cliff at 100 miles per hour, and you are criticizing the one person who has even made the attempt to do anything about it, because he has only slowed the vehicle down to 99 mph.

As with us all, duty is ours, results are up to God. I know you feel Ron Paul has not done anything but run off his mouth. I think that is sad and either disingenuous or ill informed. Most of that "talk" was an attempt to educate enough citizens to actually effect real change...otherwise he remains a voice in the wilderness.

In those 24 years he has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has voted against Congress "passing the buck" to the president regarding war declaration powers.
You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone in the last 4 decades who more consistently supported correct principle.

By your definition, Thomas S Monsen is a failure - I mean he is the TOP mortal in the church (not just one of 535) and yet look at the pornography problem we have in the church...oh sure he has talked about it a lot, but what has he actually ACCOMPLISHED? (This is rhetorical btw, I do not feel that way at all, I am just illustrating how ridiculous your position and expectations are.)

Thoughts?

AMEN!

[Jason]

Ron Paul has consistently voted correct principles.

The fact that almopst nothing that he has attempted has come to fruition is largely because often in a 534-1 vote, he was the one.

I hear what you are saying about actual accomplishment, Jason, however, in a body of 535, one can only be held responsible for the positions HE has supported, you cannot blame him for failing to convince a majority, and certainly you cannot blame him for anything he supported which did not then pass the Senate.

Also reggarding your statement about the Fed - Ron Paul for years has called for the End of the Fed (as you suggest) and that has only recently morphed into Audit the Fed (because he believes that an audit is more acceptable to people and that once exposed that the people will have the will to demand an end to it.

Also, we have the campaign for liberty, the Tea Party - if there had been no Ron Paul there is a good chance there would have been no Mike Lee, and certainly no Rand Paul. The debt ceiling fight would likely never have happened and almost certainly it would be lost by now.

I am familiar with your recent rants regarding the fact that he is now heading the banking comittee, and where are the trials for the money laundering, etc. That's a valid question that I don;t have an answer for. Maybe you should ask his campaign? (Have you?)

Frankly, we are in a car heading for a cliff at 100 miles per hour, and you are criticizing the one person who has even made the attempt to do anything about it, because he has only slowed the vehicle down to 99 mph.

As with us all, duty is ours, results are up to God. I know you feel Ron Paul has not done anything but run off his mouth. I think that is sad and either disingenuous or ill informed. Most of that "talk" was an attempt to educate enough citizens to actually effect real change...otherwise he remains a voice in the wilderness.

In those 24 years he has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has voted against Congress "passing the buck" to the president regarding war declaration powers.
You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone in the last 4 decades who more consistently supported correct principle.

By your definition, Thomas S Monsen is a failure - I mean he is the TOP mortal in the church (not just one of 535) and yet look at the pornography problem we have in the church...oh sure he has talked about it a lot, but what has he actually ACCOMPLISHED? (This is rhetorical btw, I do not feel that way at all, I am just illustrating how ridiculous your position and expectations are.)

Thoughts?

Well I understand and respect your reasoning. Obviously 1 vote out of 535 isn't going to cut it in terms of results....obviously the people as a whole have chosen wickedness. The questions I am more concerned about is - is he a wolf pretending to be a sheep? A slacker on the day job trying to get another year's paycheck? A true blue hero?

To get to the heart of that I'm looking for......specific details or demonstrations where he actually did his job. The Constitution is fundamentally about law and more precisely about God's law (as demonstrated by the Declaration of Independence and all of the foundation work/documents that lead to the Constitution). In upholding the Constitution or more precisely the law.....the critical factor is - does he actually uphold the law? seek to enforce the law?

Its one thing to get on the soapbox and broadly proclaim how things ought to be.....and a whole different ball of wax to actually defend the law....or seek justice by the law. Has he demonstrated that? I don't know for sure and am just getting going on this one. I've been a pretty devout Ron Paul fanatic for some time now and this change has only begun to take place in the last few months....mostly spurred by Semp's critique that got me thinking/questioning.

In this time of rampant fraud and chicanery it seems there would be a multitude tasks for one engaged in upholding the law.....and despite being few in numbers (like whistle blowers) a vast amount of evidence of one's efforts if engaged in that for 20+ years.

I think it is unfair and un-analogous to define the pornography problem in the church to President Monson's results as prophet (supporting/directing God's law) in comparison to my questions of Ron Paul. President Monson gives the law and its up to each of us whether we choose to be obedient or not. Now if President Monson failed to enforce the law/standard....would be a different matter.

Ron Paul has been placed in a positions of authority that may just include casting a vote or drawing up a bill.....he has sworn to uphold the Constitution which if that just means casting a vote...then you are correct. If on the other hand there is more involved.....like seeking justice according to the law or enforcement of the law.....then we are beginning to be at odds.

For example the Constitution sets forth the requirements for being president (natural born).....has Ron Paul followed up on that or has he compromised out of political interest....or doesn't really care about upholding the Constitution....or is it merely a case of priorities???

Obviously the laundering of drug money is a big one to me.....how can we expect change when we don't enforce the laws we have? What good will more laws or Constitutional provisions be if the ones we have aren't adhered to??? Again Ron Paul is one guy.....but he is one guy on the House Banking Committee....but maybe his hands are tied???

[Jason]

Jason, since you seem to be on an anti-Ron Paul crusade, surely you have someone better in mind. Which of the candidates do you endorse and why would he/she be a better President than Ron Paul?

Right now I think I'm going to go the write in route!

[Jason]

Jason, let me ask you this - if a Missionary serves an honorable full-time, two-year proselyting mission, teaching the gospel to hundreds of people without one baptism, what has he accomplished?

Served an honorable full-time two year proselyting mission.....hopefully being obedient to the white hand book.

Let's change up the analogy a little...

what if a police officer who has sworn to uphold the law....never arrests anyone (doesn't break the law himself and broadly proclaims how important the law is...but looks the other way)....and stays in good graces with all the citizens while collecting a paycheck for 25 years? What has he accomplished?

[Col. Flagg]

Well I understand and respect your reasoning. Obviously 1 vote out of 535 isn't going to cut it in terms of results....obviously the people as a whole have chosen wickedness. The questions I am more concerned about is - is he a wolf pretending to be a sheep?

His track record should answer that question.

A slacker on the day job trying to get another year's paycheck? A true blue hero?

The latter, not the former.

To get to the heart of that I'm looking for......specific details or demonstrations where he actually did his job. The Constitution is fundamentally about law and more precisely about God's law (as demonstrated by the Declaration of Independence and all of the foundation work/documents that lead to the Constitution). In upholding the Constitution or more precisely the law.....the critical factor is - does he actually uphold the law? seek to enforce the law?

Jason... - it's all he does... uphold and defend the Constitution!

Its one thing to get on the soapbox and broadly proclaim how things ought to be.....and a whole different ball of wax to actually defend the law....or seek justice by the law. Has he demonstrated that? I don't know for sure and am just getting going on this one. I've been a pretty devout Ron Paul fanatic for some time now and this change has only begun to take place in the last few months....mostly spurred by Semp's critique that got me thinking/questioning.

Don't let Semp sway you - Ron is a good man who deserves our support - here's a list of all the bills he has ever sponsored or co-sponsored:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#L ... osponsored" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What don't you like there?

[Col. Flagg]

Jason, let me ask you this - if a Missionary serves an honorable full-time, two-year proselyting mission, teaching the gospel to hundreds of people without one baptism, what has he accomplished?

Served an honorable full-time two year proselyting mission.....hopefully being obedient to the white hand book.

Let's change up the analogy a little...

what if a police officer who has sworn to uphold the law....never arrests anyone (doesn't break the law himself and broadly proclaims how important the law is...but looks the other way)....and stays in good graces with all the citizens while collecting a paycheck for 25 years? What has he accomplished?

I can see we're getting into a battle of analogies here - let me ask you this - if you were a U.S. Senator or Congressman, would you focus all your time and energy initiating investigations into criminal activity in our financial system? Are there other important issues to deal with? Whose responsibility is it to conduct criminal investigations? Ron is not a prosecuting Attorney - it's not his job to go after criminals - all he can do is attempt to expose them and their crimes with legislation (which is what he has attempted to do).

[Jason]

Well I understand and respect your reasoning. Obviously 1 vote out of 535 isn't going to cut it in terms of results....obviously the people as a whole have chosen wickedness. The questions I am more concerned about is - is he a wolf pretending to be a sheep?

His track record should answer that question.

A slacker on the day job trying to get another year's paycheck? A true blue hero?

The latter, not the former.

To get to the heart of that I'm looking for......specific details or demonstrations where he actually did his job. The Constitution is fundamentally about law and more precisely about God's law (as demonstrated by the Declaration of Independence and all of the foundation work/documents that lead to the Constitution). In upholding the Constitution or more precisely the law.....the critical factor is - does he actually uphold the law? seek to enforce the law?

Jason... - it's all he does... uphold and defend the Constitution!

Its one thing to get on the soapbox and broadly proclaim how things ought to be.....and a whole different ball of wax to actually defend the law....or seek justice by the law. Has he demonstrated that? I don't know for sure and am just getting going on this one. I've been a pretty devout Ron Paul fanatic for some time now and this change has only begun to take place in the last few months....mostly spurred by Semp's critique that got me thinking/questioning.

Don't let Semp sway you - Ron is a good man who deserves our support - here's a list of all the bills he has ever sponsored or co-sponsored:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#L ... osponsored" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What don't you like there?

If his job was only about sponsoring or co-sponsoring bills....I would wholeheartedly agree with you....but I think there's a bit more to it -

Paul serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee (having been on the Western Hemisphere and the Asia and Pacific subcommittees); the Joint Economic Committee; and the Committee on Financial Services (as Ranking Member of the Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology subcommittee, and Vice-Chair of the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#L ... osponsored" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

....and it could be he's simply outgunned -

Paul was on a bipartisan coalition of 17 members of Congress that sued President Bill Clinton in 1999 over his conduct of the Kosovo war. They accused Clinton of failing to inform Congress of the action's status within 48 hours as required by the War Powers Resolution, and of failing to obtain Congressional declaration of war. Congress had voted 427–2 against a declaration of war with Yugoslavia, and had voted to deny support for the air campaign in Kosovo. A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that since Congress had voted for funding after Clinton had actively engaged troops in the war with Kosovo, legislators had sent a confusing message about whether they approved of the war. Paul said that the judge's decision attempted to circumvent the Constitution and to authorize the president to conduct a war without approval from Congress.[99]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#L ... osponsored" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

....which one has to ask themselves what good will he do as President?

[Jason]

Jason, let me ask you this - if a Missionary serves an honorable full-time, two-year proselyting mission, teaching the gospel to hundreds of people without one baptism, what has he accomplished?

Served an honorable full-time two year proselyting mission.....hopefully being obedient to the white hand book.

Let's change up the analogy a little...

what if a police officer who has sworn to uphold the law....never arrests anyone (doesn't break the law himself and broadly proclaims how important the law is...but looks the other way)....and stays in good graces with all the citizens while collecting a paycheck for 25 years? What has he accomplished?

I can see we're getting into a battle of analogies here - let me ask you this - if you were a U.S. Senator or Congressman, would you focus all your time and energy initiating investigations into criminal activity in our financial system? Are there other important issues to deal with? Whose responsibility is it to conduct criminal investigations? Ron is not a prosecuting Attorney - it's not his job to go after criminals - all he can do is attempt to expose them and their crimes with legislation (which is what he has attempted to do).

If you don't uphold the laws that are already in place....what good will more laws do??? Where is the legislation to further restrict banking activities???

[Col. Flagg]

....and it could be he's simply outgunned

Bingo!

[Jason]

....and it could be he's simply outgunned

Bingo!

So what good will he do as president? If he's so outgunned...what's the point?

[Col. Flagg]

If you don't uphold the laws that are already in place....what good will more laws do??? Where is the legislation to further restrict banking activities???

http://benjaminisright.blogspot.com/201 ... otten.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billsea ... tus=&sort=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Col. Flagg]

....and it could be he's simply outgunned

Bingo!

So what good will he do as president? If he's so outgunned...what's the point?

That's the thing - I think he thinks he has to try and knows he's fighting a no-win situation (at ever becoming president because of who really runs the show) but hopes to awaken others to the truth and reality of our situation by running. If someone like him were to somehow win a nomination and be elected president, he wouldn't last long.

[truthseeker]

I have been a big fan of Ron Paul for a number of years. However, I can see where Jason is coming from. Couldn't he be doing more with the position he is in? Maybe....Maybe not. Perhaps he could take more tough stands then he does, perhaps he could start more investigations, perhaps he could be more accusatory regarding 9/11 or the birther issues.

However, in this climate, it seems that those who really go in all guns firing are often taken out one way or another. Perhaps you may say he should go all out regardless of what the consequences may be. However, he may see that the best he can do is just do enough to make a difference and to inspire others in order to try and help change the tide of things rather than being overbearing and ending up being ousted as a result.

You have to pick your battles carefully and wisely, especially in politics, and I think that may be what he has been doing.

I could also see that maybe he is there as a way to pacify the patriots through the appearance of good without the full backing of substance - however, in the absence of better options, I think we should take the best we can find.

It is better to light one small candle than to curse the darkness -- Confucius

[ktg]

Pres. Mckay said: "Next to being one in worshiping God, there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States." (CR, Oct, 1939, p. 105)

Ron Paul is the ONLY congressman to receive a 100% rating on the John Birch Society's Constitutional Scorecard for the 111th congress (from July 2009 to Oct. 2010). http://www.jbs.org/component/content/ar ... s-loughner" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And for the congress before that, "just one perfect scorer — Congressman Ron Paul of Texas — in our final index for the previous Congress (October 27, 2008 issue)" http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php ... s-congress" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I wouldn't doubt that his 12 year rating would be 100%. He has a proven record. Ron Paul is the man.

"May we be wise—prayerfully wise—in the electing of those who would lead us. May we select only those who understand and will adhere to constitutional principles." Ezra Taft Benson

"(Ron Paul) has probably been the only congressman we've ever had in this country who we could entirely trust to be immune to establishment pressures in congress." Joel Skousen

[waking]

To Jason and others ....who else has done more? Who else stands ALONE when it is a principled vote?

[Jason]

....and it could be he's simply outgunned

Bingo!

So what good will he do as president? If he's so outgunned...what's the point?

That's the thing - I think he thinks he has to try and knows he's fighting a no-win situation (at ever becoming president because of who really runs the show) but hopes to awaken others to the truth and reality of our situation by running. If someone like him were to somehow win a nomination and be elected president, he wouldn't last long.

If he's afraid to speak out about things like 9/11 because of concerns for his political career, his life, lives of his family.....how would that change as president? Why would he be so intent on becoming president? Out of concern for the truth and reality of our situation....to which he can't currently address???

The got away with it in 1963.....certainly a lot more easier today than it was then. So if he wouldn't last long....why even jeopardize his life if he is a good guy?

[Jason]

I have been a big fan of Ron Paul for a number of years. However, I can see where Jason is coming from. Couldn't he be doing more with the position he is in? Maybe....Maybe not. Perhaps he could take more tough stands then he does, perhaps he could start more investigations, perhaps he could be more accusatory regarding 9/11 or the birther issues.

However, in this climate, it seems that those who really go in all guns firing are often taken out one way or another. Perhaps you may say he should go all out regardless of what the consequences may be. However, he may see that the best he can do is just do enough to make a difference and to inspire others in order to try and help change the tide of things rather than being overbearing and ending up being ousted as a result.

You have to pick your battles carefully and wisely, especially in politics, and I think that may be what he has been doing.

I could also see that maybe he is there as a way to pacify the patriots through the appearance of good without the full backing of substance - however, in the absence of better options, I think we should take the best we can find.

It is better to light one small candle than to curse the darkness -- Confucius

I think you are right....and its more a sign of the times....and our awful situation than anything else. Just demonstrates how really deep the poo is....

[Jason]

Pres. Mckay said: "Next to being one in worshiping God, there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States." (CR, Oct, 1939, p. 105)

Ron Paul is the ONLY congressman to receive a 100% rating on the John Birch Society's Constitutional Scorecard for the 111th congress (from July 2009 to Oct. 2010). http://www.jbs.org/component/content/ar ... s-loughner" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And for the congress before that, "just one perfect scorer — Congressman Ron Paul of Texas — in our final index for the previous Congress (October 27, 2008 issue)" http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php ... s-congress" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I wouldn't doubt that his 12 year rating would be 100%. He has a proven record. Ron Paul is the man.

"May we be wise—prayerfully wise—in the electing of those who would lead us. May we select only those who understand and will adhere to constitutional principles." Ezra Taft Benson

"(Ron Paul) has probably been the only congressman we've ever had in this country who we could entirely trust to be immune to establishment pressures in congress." Joel Skousen

....he's sure been quiet on occasion....especially anything to do with gadiantons and conspiracy!

[ktg]

....he's sure been quiet on occasion....especially anything to do with gadiantons and conspiracy!

From another thread:

Some comments about Ron Paul in a recent article by G. Edward Griffin:

I am confident from past statements by Ron Paul that he is aware of a conspiracy to create a one-world dictatorship. Here are 3 such:

I’m aware of only one current U.S. Congressman who has acknowledged his awareness of a conspiracy to create a one-world dictatorship. Speaking in the House of Representatives 29 April 2003, Congressman Paul stated, as reported on his thelibertycommittee.org web page: “...Perhaps it’s time to stop trying to manipulate the UN, and start asserting our national sovereignty. If we do not, rest assured that the UN will continue to interfere not only in our nation’s foreign policy matters, but in our domestic policies as well. UN globalists are not satisfied by meddling only in international disputes. They increasingly want to influence our domestic environmental, trade, labor, tax, and gun laws. UN global planners fully intend to expand the organization into a true world government, complete with taxes, courts, and possibly a standing army. This is not an alarmist statement; these goals are readily promoted on the UN’s own website. UN planners do not care about national sovereignty; in fact they are openly opposed to it. They correctly view it as an obstacle to their plans. They simply aren’t interested in our Constitution and republican form of government.”

And at an event near Austin, Texas on August 30th, 2003, Congressman Paul was asked: “...If we can take a look at the big picture, could you tell us, the people in this room, any information that you may have of an international and deceptive conspiracy to overthrow the American Republic and its Constitution & Bill Of Rights in order to set up and usher in a totalitarian World Government likely espoused under the UN also.. ? Congressman Paul replied: He asked if there was an international conspiracy to overthrow our government. The answer is Yes . I think there are 25,000 individuals that have used offices of powers, and they are in our Universities and they are in our Congresses, and they believe in One World Government. And if you believe in One World Government, then you are talking about undermining National Sovereignty and you are talking about setting up something that you could well call a Dictatorship - and those plans are there ...

Speaking to an audience of like-minded libertarians at a Campaign for Liberty regional conference in Atlanta the weekend of January 16-17 2010, Congressman Paul said: “There's been a coup, have you heard? It's the CIA coup. The CIA runs everything, they run the military. They're the ones who are over there lobbing missiles and bombs on countries. ... And of course the CIA is every bit as secretive as the Federal Reserve. ... And yet think of the harm they have done since they were established [after] World War II. They are a government unto themselves. They're in businesses, in drug businesses, they take out dictators ... We need to take out the CIA.”