My Senator is a Co-author of a Bill to End the Constitution: S.1959

[SteveMartin]

http://justanothercoverup.com/?p=389

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=122942&page=1

If this bill passes we are all "terrorists."

I live in Senator Susan Collins's home county, and I took on her key aide at one of our county meetings a few weeks ago over this bill. How far should I go? I am already at considerable risk, I believe, for having done so.

I am considering even running for the Senate with this (and her total RINO status) as my key campaign issues. However, I am hesitating because I lack Ron Paul's level of personal integrity (no police record or anything, but just saying...) and because I am a virulent "911 truther."

What do you guys think?

[yongrel]

Run, Steve, run!

And give her a good swift kick in the shins.

[FreeTraveler]

Focus on the bill. If you bring up truth in a campaign, you might as well not bother to run. It's a shame, but it's also the way it is.

[SteveMartin]

Well, it's not that simple. I was out with 2 documentary videos on 911 before Alex Jones even got rolling on the topic, and may have been the guy that inspired him to get rolling. You see he invited me to be a guest on his show for one hour back in March (or maybe April) of 2002, and the response on his lines was so overwhelming he held me over for the full 3 hours.

I am not tooting any horns here, guys...I am just saying. Even if I don't bring it up, my "whacky conspiracy theory" status is bound to come up if I run. Do you want that?

[limequat]

US Senate is a big office. You'll need 300,000 votes to win. I suggest talking to your local GOP to see if they'll back you. It's an uphill fight. If you choose to undertake it you'll have many friends and many enemies.

[limequat]

Well, it's not that simple. I was out with 2 documentary videos on 911 before Alex Jones even got rolling on the topic, and may have been the guy that inspired him to get rolling. You see he invited me to be a guest on his show for one hour back in March (or maybe April) of 2002, and the response on his lines was so overwhelming he held me over for the full 3 hours.

I am not tooting any horns here, guys...I am just saying. Even if I don't bring it up, my "whacky conspiracy theory" status is bound to come up if I run. Do you want that?

How many truthers are in Maine?

[SteveMartin]

The local GOP in my county (the county chair, etc.) will definitely not support me. They are neocons. However, it could be that I could carry the county based on how well RP did here (he swept) and based on the fact that the activists around here are sick of the local leadership. I know I would have the full support of at least one of our state representatives here as well (he's a member of my meetup group.)

What I am really struggling with is the risk to my family, and the fact that I know my 911 truth involvement will come out, even if I never mention it. I don't know if RP would endorse me because of that, and I can not run without his endorsement. I also fled the country for a few months in 2002 because of threatening phone calls over my 911 work. My wife was visited by the MIB several times while I was gone, and our computers were rifled one day while she was at work.

I was "debriefed" by the FBI, BATF, state police when I cam back and the FBI guy told me he had watched my videos and read a lot of my stuff and that "everything you said is protected by the First Amendment." They also asked me about possible links to overseas terrorists (I HAVE NONE) and seemed satisfied, but who knows...

[SteveMartin]

I would think that the truth movement in Maine is slightly stronger than the average nationally.

[SteveMartin]

This was just printed this morning in Maine's 4th largest daily....just to give you any idea of what the "washed and holy" pundits here are saying. Remember, to them, I would be further "out there" than RP:

The radical world of Congressman Ron Paul

Joseph R. Reisert

02/22/2008

He is, after all, one of the three -- not two -- men still in the race for the Republican nomination. He has raised millions of dollars just this quarter, and the money continues to pour in to fuel his campaign. And a lot of young Republicans love Ron Paul with the sort of passion Barack Obama inspires among young Democrats.
So why don't the media -- why don't I -- take Ron Paul seriously as a presidential candidate?

Because he is not a serious presidential candidate.

The reason is not, or not only, that his poll numbers have been consistently low, generally in the neighborhood of 5 or 6 percent, although such low poll numbers would be a sufficient reason for dismissing any candidate's chances as less than serious.

What particularly marks Ron Paul as a non-serious presidential candidate is, paradoxically, the very thing that his most fervent supporters find inspiring about him: He is utterly uncompromising in his attachment to his principles.

Congressman Paul's principles are radical, in the literal sense that he proposes a return to the roots, to the ideas of individual liberty that, in his view, animated the American founding.

He is sharply critical of the "big-government" innovations of the twentieth century -- the Federal Reserve System, the intrusion of federal regulation into the economy and the environment, and the intervention of the federal government into such things as health care and education. He argues for the abolition of such mainstays of the modern welfare state as the Department of Education, which he regards as unconstitutional.

On matters of foreign policy, too, Ron Paul would chart a course that hews more closely to the ideals of George Washington's "Farewell Address" than to the strongly internationalist and interventionist course the United States has pursued since the end of World War Two. He would bring American forces home from Iraq and withdraw the United States from any international agreements and organizations, such as the WTO, NAFTA, and the UN that he regards as diminishing American sovereignty.

The candidate himself evidently regards his inflexible dedication to his libertarian principles as a virtue, because his website boasts that one of his colleagues in Congress has said of him: "He makes it clear that his principles will never be compromised, and they never are."

Compromise, however, is a necessary part of democratic politics. Compromise is necessary because it is impossible to get anything accomplished without winning the support of a majority, and in a world full of different sorts of people with differing priorities and differing ideas, the only way to assemble a majority is by negotiation and compromise. In other words: I will support the policies you most care about, if you support the ones I most care about.

We are rightly suspicious of unprincipled politicians, those who will compromise on every issue and who tailor their positions to fit the temporary contours of public opinion. Such politicians are not leaders, but followers. We may reasonably suspect that such people care more about having power than about the uses to which it will be put.

But too little flexibility is just as bad as too much.

Ideological rigidity is not the same thing as integrity. The uncompromising politician, who cares less about getting anything done than about remaining ideologically pure, is more like a spoiled child who won't share his toys than a principled leader.

Principled leaders never compromise on their core convictions, but they are willing to accept that progress in the direction they want to move the country will necessarily be slow. They do not reject as unprincipled those half-measures that only incrementally move the country towards the goal they hold dear. Instead, they accept them -- and then push for more.

If Ron Paul wanted to be taken seriously as a presidential candidate, he would have to show that he is willing to move the country, if only in small steps, towards the small-government ideal he holds.

But he is not really running for president; that is to say, he is not trying to form a coalition of people who will support some movement in the direction he favors. Instead, he is using his presidential campaign to spread his libertarian political philosophy.

It's a free country: he's got every right to run for president as a publicity stunt. But the rest of us should feel equally free to treat it as one.

Joseph R. Reisert is associate professor of American Constitutional Law and chairman of the Department of Government at Colby College in Waterville.

http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/view/columns/4788464.html

[yongrel]

I don't care if you're a Truther. Run for office and win.

After you're elected is the time to make crazy speeches on the floor of the Senate. :D

[SteveMartin]

yongrel,

I don't know. I can't run without RP's personal endorsement. Do you think a truther would get that?

I could call him, but I am honestly very torn here.

Is it even best for our campaign to get RP elected for me to even declare???

[yongrel]

yongrel,

I don't know. I can't run without RP's personal endorsement. Do you think a truther would get that?

I could call him, but I am honestly very torn here.

Is it even best for our campaign to get RP elected for me to even declare???

Ask the campaign. If you are serious about running for national office, call them up.

[limequat]

yongrel,

I don't know. I can't run without RP's personal endorsement. Do you think a truther would get that?

I could call him, but I am honestly very torn here.

Is it even best for our campaign to get RP elected for me to even declare???


I don't think you'll hurt RP, if that's what you're worried about. Everyone already knows that the truthers support him.

I'm concerned that you might be biting off more than you can chew. I apologize if I'm mistaken, as I know virtually nothing about you, but would it make sense to start a little lower? You mention that RP won your county. Maybe it would be better to start with a US representative race or even a state rep spot?

[me3]

Don't make your campaign about 9/11 Truth. I never understood that anyways, the absence of proof, is not proof. I'm all for a new independent investigation, but any "inside job" stuff needs to be kept quiet until the investigation is complete.

You need to run Steve, or identify someone else who can run and you can support.

I'm totally down with all of the people running, but for everyone else, you should be able to do enough local activism to shame incumbent candidates for their unconstitutional votes, pork spending and conflict of interest positions.

Handbills, talk to groups, go to Meetings and rallies to challenge the incumbents, letters to the editor, (if appropriate) a web campaign. Make them work for re-election. We have to start sending a message to these people, that they are not above their constituents. They will answer to us, or they will seek new employment.

[ronpaulblogsdotcom]

How many Representative Districts are there in Maine? Any coming up that do not have a GOP running or as incumbent?

I think Rep is much easier but Maine is so small maybe there are few Reps.

Remember Ron Paul lost in his attempt for a Senate spot....

[SteveMartin]

There are only two US Rep slots from Maine. I actually ran against the liberal Dem who is holding that seat once before (Michael Michaud) for State Senate a few years back and got crushed (23% of the vote is all I got--without the Republican establishment support, and without spending a dime, however.)

I never thought I would be saying this, but he would be harder to beat as a conservative Republican because he is much closer to our views than the Republican Senator, Collins. He was against the Iraq War from the beginning, against NAFTA, etc.

[SteveMartin]

me3,

I would never make my campaign about 911 truth. But you know the media would. I will see if there is anyone else who would challenge her.

With regard to running for Maine office, my local state rep is a Reagan Democrat and one of my best friends. We use his law offices for our Ron Paul Meetup group meetings, so that is out...My local state senator is a party hack but a good guy and a fiscal conservative. He knows me well. Don't think I could beat him either because he is from here, and I am (even though I've lived here 12 years) a "flatlander" originally from southern Maine...

Collins is beatable if we found the right person, without some of my baggage.

[SteveMartin]

Hamadeh,

Yea...well....my documentaries would make keeping 911 out of the debate impossible. The MSM will pound me on it unmercifully.

I will look for someone else to support against her.

Another big thing we have against her (though we may not want to bring it out) is that she is a protege (and former top aide) to Trilateralist traitor Senator William Cohen. We can never change her, we can only replace her.

[limequat]

me3,

I would never make my campaign about 911 truth. But you know the media would. I will see if there is anyone else who would challenge her.

With regard to running for Maine office, my local state rep is a Reagan Democrat and one of my best friends. We use his law offices for our Ron Paul Meetup group meetings, so that is out...My local state senator is a party hack but a good guy and a fiscal conservative. He knows me well. Don't think I could beat him either because he is from here, and I am (even though I've lived here 12 years) a "flatlander" originally from southern Maine...

Collins is beatable if we found the right person, without some of my baggage.

Well, if we already have good people in for state rep, and state senate, I say go for it!

[Highstreet]

There are only two US Rep slots from Maine. I actually ran against the liberal Dem who is holding that seat once before (Michael Michaud) for State Senate a few years back and got crushed (23% of the vote is all I got--without the Republican establishment support, and without spending a dime, however.)

I never thought I would be saying this, but he would be harder to beat as a conservative Republican because he is much closer to our views than the Republican Senator, Collins. He was against the Iraq War from the beginning, against NAFTA, etc.

You should run.

Don't worry about if you get Paul's endorsement or not. Set up a website and advert thru the network here. As long as your platform is the same as Paul's then you will still get the same kind of support. Spread it to all the Maine Meetups also. They will be more important than Paul's endorsement. They know you. They don't have to check you out, like Paul would, to make sure you are the real deal.

All those people on the Pauliticians list are not endorsed by Paul.

And don't let the truther stuff keep you down. Just say that you always like to have a healthy skepticism of what the govt does. Everyone agrees with that. Asking questions keeps the Govt honest. And that's why you want to return, to keep the Govt accountable to it's constituents.

[SteveMartin]

Oh, and I would never denounce the truth. Sorry....

[Cleaner44]

Steve, if you run and don't even come close to winning it is still good. It will give you a platform to spread your message. Use the free media attention to shine the light on this bs.

[SteveMartin]

Cleaner44,

Right....that is the only reason I would run if I did. I just don't want people here thinking I might do it to promote my 911 views. Those who have followed my work for RP over the past 10 months+ know I have rarely even mentioned my involvement in that on any RP forum, so, I hope that would be proof of my good intentions there. However, I would answer truthfully regarding my views if I ran, so that is the question. Should some one like me even run as a RP Republican?

[Libertytree]

Steve,

You could run as an RP Constitutionalist or as an Indy for that matter.

If you believe in it stand by it.

I think lots of people are more receptive to opening their eyes, on many topics, than in any time in the recent past. If you got 23% without spending a ¢ that is awsome! Double that with just a little bit of $ and you're golden.

[Chester Copperpot]

Well, it's not that simple. I was out with 2 documentary videos on 911 before Alex Jones even got rolling on the topic, and may have been the guy that inspired him to get rolling. You see he invited me to be a guest on his show for one hour back in March (or maybe April) of 2002, and the response on his lines was so overwhelming he held me over for the full 3 hours.

I am not tooting any horns here, guys...I am just saying. Even if I don't bring it up, my "whacky conspiracy theory" status is bound to come up if I run. Do you want that?

Doesnt matter.. because even if you DIDNT do these things theyd probably make up stories.

You know what Patrick Henry said "If this be treason, make the most of it."

I want to run for Congress down here in NJ on a sound money platform (and everything else Ron Paul as well) even though I know somebody will make up stories about me, etc...

I figure if I knock on 50,000 doors and speak to 50,000 people I might not win, and all those people might not vote for me.. But dammit. a good 5,000 - 10,000 will be woken up to liberty and the truth about how things are supposed to work.

[Chester Copperpot]

Cleaner44,

Right....that is the only reason I would run if I did. I just don't want people here thinking I might do it to promote my 911 views. Those who have followed my work for RP over the past 10 months+ know I have rarely even mentioned my involvement in that on any RP forum, so, I hope that would be proof of my good intentions there. However, I would answer truthfully regarding my views if I ran, so that is the question. Should some one like me even run as a RP Republican?

Steve heres something you might want to read.. Its from the Mises Institute.. Ive been a subscriber there for a couple years.. And this is an old article from the 70s about the conspiracy theory of history.. It gives very logical reasons why people that believe in political conspiracies are more logical than those who dont.

http://www.mises.org/story/2809

[SteveMartin]

Thanks for the encouragement, Mike!

[TruthAtLast]

That article said that RP in uncompromising. That actually isn't true, which is why Ron Paul would vote FOR the FairTax. It would be a first step to his ultimate goal.

[MsDoodahs]

Any "truther" linkage in your background and you will not get far. Years and years from now (decades) then MAYBE it won't hurt those who decide to run. But for now, any whiff of "truther" in your background .... you'll be crucified.

Plus, it's a closed system and you won't be "allowed" to win anyway.

Read here:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north605.html

And here:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north21.html

Finally, what a huge waste of MONEY that you could be USING to make our "free" ISLAND/STATE (county?).

:)

[Fyretrohl]

Steve...I find it kinda easy to look at...

"Yes, I believe there is more to the truth than we know. As a Senator, it would be my job to make sure the truth is know. My opinion is not what matters. My desire to know the whole truth would drive me to ensure it comes out. If after a fair and honest investigation, it comes out, then we would know and my opinion would be proven or disproven. The issue is, we don't have the whole truth yet."

[Ex Post Facto]

Steve...I find it kinda easy to look at...

"Yes, I believe there is more to the truth than we know. As a Senator, it would be my job to make sure the truth is know. My opinion is not what matters. My desire to know the whole truth would drive me to ensure it comes out. If after a fair and honest investigation, it comes out, then we would know and my opinion would be proven or disproven. The issue is, we don't have the whole truth yet."

Yes, your drive for he truth is what is important. Sometimes you may get it wrong, sometimes right. I'd rather have someone in office that provides strict oversight of laws and questions motivations. Passing a law should never be as easy as reaching across the isle and promising a vote on another issue for a vote on your proposed issue. You vote on principle. If the bill stinks, and isn't debated properly no matter the intention or purpose of the bill, then that is grounds to continue questioning.

[Bern]

http://justanothercoverup.com/?p=389

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=122942&page=1

If this bill passes we are all "terrorists."
...
What do you guys think?

Whether you win or lose the election, you have the opportunity to educate the voters about HR1955 and other important issues. If you do campaign, I'd be careful about what sources I quoted though. Perception is reality to a lot of people.

[JoshLowry]

Run for office.

The more people that run, the better.

Just do it.

[cybloo]

I think you should run.

I'm not one who really believes 9/11 conspiracies, though I feel like we don't have all the questions answered. That would be a good point to get across that, yes, this is what you believe, but it is such a minor detail in comparison to what you also believe in (the constitution, etc).

Even if you didn't have the background that you say you do, they would still come up with anything and everything to bog you down with. At least, this way, you'll have a head start to keep the political spin machine from completely damaging you.

I think that the best thing to be with voters (and this is actually what I look for in a candidate) is honest about yourself. Come forward with your beliefs in 9/11 but do it in a way that will not be damaging for you (I think a poster said something that would be good to do -- that this is what you believe and it could be wrong, but you'd rather have an independent investigation tell you than the government).

Being completely honest with your potential voting pool will endear you to some, turn you off to others - but the important thing is to control the spin of which this kind of story could take. If you start off with trying to hide it by not mentioning it, it will most certainly come out and bite you in the butt.

I think I might be rambling now...

Bottomline - do it. We need more people like you involved in our government.

[LandonCook]

If you are going to be in the public eye I suggest you put away the truther talk...

[Fyretrohl]

Landon is somewhat right. Don't make it your platform, but don't deny it. It is your opinion. But, you job as a Senator is not to make your opinion policy. It is to make sure that Policy is sound, follows the law, and the truth is made available. Why any other candidate would be afraid of the truth......

[CGMike]

Steve if you do decide to run, I'll even circulate your nomination petitions down here in P-Town. I'm having a hard time mustering up the support for Ed Cohen (who is running already as a Ron Paul Republican against Collins) He's just pissed off too many people including some who would have been amongst his strongest supporters.

Our current candidate running against Collins (http://www.politickerme.com/tags/ed-cohen)

[itshappening]

surely you can find someone to run in Maine otherwise they will expose your truthing activities......

End the constitution?? is she insane or what??

[dannno]

I don't care if you're a Truther. Run for office and win.

After you're elected is the time to make crazy speeches on the floor of the Senate. :D

:D I can't wait!