Let’s face it folks, Obama is going to lose this next election. He’s going to lose to whoever wins the Republican nomination. That’s a given. You’d really have to have your head buried pretty deep to not have accepted this by now.

Easy Cheese, with a Birth Certificate!

Frankly, he would lose to a can of Easy Cheese, assuming that it were able to provide documentation to meet the age requirement. I hear you can accomplish that for under $20 online.

So, assuming you’re intelligent enough to accept that Obama is going to lose, your decision is now which Republican from those that are seeking nomination will actually represent you for the next four years.

• If you’re a progressive, you’re pretty much out of luck.
• If you’re a RINO, you’ve got quite a few options which, I’m sure, the Mainstream Media  will do their absolute best to pick the best one for you. With so many to choose from, it could take months.
• If you’re a conservative, there’s only one choice.
• If you’re a liberal, there’s only one choice. Coincidentally, it’s the same one.

Who? The invisible man, of course!

The Mainstream Media would have you believe that Ron Paul doesn’t exist. That he hasn’t won every straw poll (from Values Voters Summit  to Iowa to Florida). The thing is, he does. Not only does he have a strong following, the highest voting  consistency of any politician in the last hundred years and experience in both his own business and congress, he’s the only potential nominee that could actually gain true bipartisan support – and actually make both sides happy.

Why? Ron Paul supports states rights. He believes government has no business legislating morality, nor imposing upon the rights of human beings. While he is Pro-Life, his position is that government should not be imposing this decision on the states.

Further, Ron Paul is a Christian, but his belief in the separation of church and state is an indivisible principle. Marriage is a religious ceremony, and thus it’s  dependent on the religion to determine what is a compatible relationship. If you take government out of that equation (as it should be), there’s nothing preventing a civil union between members of the same-sex.

Unlike Obama, who has started several wars since receiving his Nobel Peace Prize, Ron Paul would actually  get America  out of the nation building business.  And since there aren’t formal declaration’s of  war for any of them, we’d have most of our men home  within 30 days.  We wouldn’t be invading other nations, either. That’s not to say Dr. Paul is against war. As a former Flight Surgeon in the Air Force, Ron Paul  has served this man’s military and  has  seen first-hand the harm it causes.  Should the USA really police the world? Of course not.

Unlike both Bush and Obama, who increased the invasions into the privacy of ordinary citizens, Ron Paul has consistently voted against any legislation  that violates the premises of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Ron Paul voted against the US PATRIOT Act (that’s a misnomer if ever there was one), and said “Everything we have done in response to the 9-11 attacks, from the Patriot Act to the war in Iraq, has reduced freedom in America.”

Unlike all the other hopefuls,  Bush and Obama –  Ron Paul  acknowledges the issues of the War on Drugs. A war against a large number of the population simply can not be “won”, and should not be waged.

Ron Paul has also made clear his plans to abolish the Fed, the  Department of Education, the Food and Drug Administration and bring our troops home.

Ron Paul opposes the subsidization of businesses here and abroad, and the government sponsored crony capitalism that it encourages. Cronyism, for example, is why two and a half cents worth of medication can be sold for a profit of 500,000% here in the USA.

Ron Paul supports homeschooling, a balanced budget and developing energy sources here at home, and true fiscal sanity that will encourage business growth and jobs in every community in America, possibly even saving some of those businesses left in the wake of a visit by Obama!

Assuming you haven’t completely thrown in the towel, and you’re not stupid enough to actually want a President Perry, you need to vote for Ron Paul in the Republican Primaries. For that to happen, you have to be registered Republican. Depending on the state you’re in, you need to change parties up to three months in advance.

Change now. Vote Paul. Save America.

Related articles

• Ron Paul wins Values Voter Summit straw poll (hotair.com)
• Ron Paul Wins Values Voter Summit Straw Poll; Bachman Near Top of VP List (cnsnews.com)
• GOP Strategist: Ron Paul Could Win Republican Nomination (destructionist.wordpress.com)

Florida GOP excludes Alan Keyes from Orlando debate

Uses non-existent polling data as requirement

Des Moines, IA — In what he called "a major abuse of the electoral process," former Reagan administration diplomat and long-time national conservative activist Alan Keyes has been blocked by the Florida GOP from participating in Sunday’s Fox News presidential debate in Orlando.

The Florida party used a 1% or better showing in polls from three of six polling firms as their criterion for inclusion in the event, even though none of the selected polling firms included Keyes, the latest entry in the presidential race, in any of their statewide surveys to date.

However, had Keyes been included in these polls, objective observers — including staff of some of the polling firms in question — agreed, based on past electoral performance in Florida, and on current polling that is taking place in other states, that he would have received a percentage meeting or exceeding the threshold.

In 2000, in the last contested GOP presidential primary, 32,354 — or nearly five percent — of Florida Republicans, and about one million voters nationwide, cast their vote for Keyes. He was included in the Values Voter Debate in Fort Lauderdale last month, after only three days in the race. In the post-debate straw poll, Keyes surpassed all the other candidates in the GOP field except Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul.

The Des Moines Register’s Iowa Poll, the most-recognized media measure in the first-in-the-nation caucus state, was released during the time period in question, showing Keyes at 2% after only two weeks in the race, equaling or surpassing several long-time GOP candidates, all of whom received invitations to the Orlando debate.

When asked about his exclusion from Sunday’s debate on the Adam McMannus radio program Wednesday, Ambassador Keyes said, "Rather than thinking about what they should be doing to make sure that voters are informed and able to get a clear idea of the choices available to them, [some party officials] are doing their best, I think, to make sure that articulation of the kind of conservatism that corresponds to what is on the heart and mind of most grassroots Republicans is not there."

In later comments, Keyes asked, "Why such an effort to assure that the so-called top-tier candidates don’t have to face me? Do they fear me because they’re not good enough for the job that needs to be done, or because they don’t represent the conscience and heart of the Republican Party or of the American people?"

To register your opinion concerning Dr. Keyes’ exclusion from this debate, call the Florida Republican Party and Chairman Jim Greer at (850) 222-7920, send a fax to (850) 681-2063, or email the party using the form at www.rpof.org

You can learn more about Alan Keyes at www.AlanKeyes.com

Florida GOP excludes Alan Keyes from Orlando debate

by: Walter E. Williams

We often hear the claim that our nation is a democracy. That wasn’t the vision of the founders. They saw democracy as another form of tyranny. If we’ve become a democracy, I guarantee you that the founders would be deeply disappointed by our betrayal of their vision. The founders intended, and laid out the ground rules, for our nation to be a republic.

The word democracy appears nowhere in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution — two most fundamental documents of our nation. Instead of a democracy, the Constitution’s Article IV, Section 4, guarantees “to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” Moreover, let’s ask ourselves: Does our pledge of allegiance to the flag say to “the democracy for which it stands,” or does it say to “the republic for which it stands”? Or do we sing “The Battle Hymn of the Democracy” or “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”?

So what’s the difference between republican and democratic forms of government? John Adams captured the essence of the difference when he said, “You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe.” Nothing in our Constitution suggests that government is a grantor of rights. Instead, government is a protector of rights.

In recognition that it’s Congress that poses the greatest threat to our liberties, the framers used negative phrases against Congress throughout the Constitution such as: shall not abridge, infringe, deny, disparage, and shall not be violated, nor be denied. In a republican form of government, there is rule of law. All citizens, including government officials, are accountable to the same laws. Government power is limited and decentralized through a system of checks and balances. Government intervenes in civil society to protect its citizens against force and fraud but does not intervene in the cases of peaceable, voluntary exchange.

Contrast the framers’ vision of a republic with that of a democracy. In a democracy, the majority rules either directly or through its elected representatives. As in a monarchy, the law is whatever the government determines it to be. Laws do not represent reason. They represent power. The restraint is upon the individual instead of government. Unlike that envisioned under a republican form of government, rights are seen as privileges and permissions that are granted by government and can be rescinded by government.

How about a few quotations demonstrating the disdain our founders held for democracy?

James Madison, Federalist Paper No. 10:

In a pure democracy, “there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual.”

At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Edmund Randolph said,

” … that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”

John Adams said,

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”

Chief Justice John Marshall observed,

“Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”

In a word or two, the founders knew that a democracy would lead to the same kind of tyranny the colonies suffered under King George III.

The framers gave us a Constitution that is replete with undemocratic mechanisms. One that has come
in for recent criticism and calls for its elimination is the Electoral College. In their wisdom, the
framers gave us the Electoral College so that in presidential elections large, heavily populated states
couldn’t democratically run roughshod over small, sparsely populated states.

Here’s my question. Do Americans share the republican values laid out by our founders, and is it
simply a matter of our being unschooled about the differences between a republic and a democracy? Or is it a matter of preference and we now want the kind of tyranny feared by the founders where Congress can do anything it can muster a majority vote to do? I fear it’s the latter.

Creators Syndicate, Inc.
The Christian Underground