PDA

View Full Version : Doug Wead Blog Series - A MUST READ for anyone serious about Ron Paul 2012!




Thomas
11-29-2010, 09:30 PM
The Mouse that roared: Why Ron Paul won the election


Well now, Republicans say, we have a nominee. That may very well be but there was only one clear winner in the confusing GOP nominating contest and it was not John McCain. The winner was Ron Paul. And the effects of his win will be felt for years to come.

Ron Paul made a classic political mistake. He told the truth. In debate after debate he pointed at his party, his president, his fellow contenders for the GOP nomination, shouting aloud like the little boy in the proverbial story, “they have no clothes” and lo and behold, we looked and they didn’t. They were all naked.

He showed that the conservative movement has lost its way, its moral authority and its logic. He showed us that we have become a red team versus blue team. That since we have decided that this is a political war and all normal rules are suspended, conservatives can do liberal things to win it. Conservatives can run up big deficits if it helps their side win. They can dole out needless pork if it elects another “conservative” to congress. They can go to war if it makes their president look like a leader and secures him another term.

But in the process, Ron Paul showed us, that we have lost our way. We are no longer conservatives. We are fighting for power not for principles. We have become corrupted by the process and the only way back is to retrace our steps and find all the things we discarded along the way.

Barry Goldwater lighted a similar fire with his Conscience of a Conservative. Its truth and arguments were so obvious and so honest that one laughed aloud while reading it. But Goldwater, himself, was doomed to political defeat. And Ron Paul had no chance to win this election either. One could see that when he first opened his mouth.

And yet, the words and arguments of Ron Paul are still resonating. They still hang over this election. They are haunting and troubling. They are producing blogs and papers and books and like Goldwater’s revolution they will one day very likely produce their own Ronald Reagan. And when those heady days happen a small but hearty band of pioneers, who first had the nerve to join him and start shouting from the street, “They aren’t wearing any clothes,” will be able to say that they could see what the country missed. They were there when history was made.

John McCain and his poorly chosen words, of staying in Iraq a hundred years, have almost guaranteed that he will be the answer to the trivia question, who was the Republican candidate who lost to the ticket that claimed the first woman and black for the presidency? Another question may very well be, “What other candidate ran that year and launched the movement that has dominated national politics for the last generation?”

And the answer will be Ron Paul.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/02/06/the-mouse-that-roared-why-ron-paul-won-the-election/



Ron Paul for President in 2012

Now, more than ever. Here’s why.

When Ron Paul accepted the idea that, intended by our forefathers or not, we were a nation locked into a two party system and one had better accept that idea or be hopelessly marginalized, he guaranteed that his neo-libertarian ideas would be heard on a national stage. In 2008 he shunned the idea of doing the third party thing, entered the Republican Party presidential race and won a whole new generation of devotees.

Oh, there were purist critics to be sure, old friends of his on the paranoid right. How can you submit to the two party system? They were outraged at this compromise, this constitutional carnality. But before they could grieve too long over the loss of Brother Paul, he skyrocketed to incredible, cult like, popularity and things they had been saying and advocating for years were suddenly racing along the wireless highways of Al Gore’s marvelous invention.

By the way, many of those critics were there in Minneapolis, at his Campaign for Liberty convention, (Ron Paul has a big heart,) selling their books, and admitting to Ron Paul groupies at their tables that, “Yes, he is quite a guy.” And inwardly rolling their eyes and muttering under their breathes to their wives, “I could have done this years ago but I have way too much integrity.”

And their obedient wives were thinking, “Yeah, that’s why we only earned $30,000 last year off your dwindling mailing list of idiots. Thank God, for Ron Paul. Now, at least, we are selling some of your 1960’s ‘classics.’ We may actually be able to get all those boxes out of our garage and park the car in there.”

The fact is, by running for the GOP nomination in 2008, Ron Paul compromised nothing. Unless you think Jesus compromised when he said, “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar.”

Sure, he has to be sensitive to sacrificing principle to win when that is the very reason people support him and the very reason they are angry at Democrats and Republicans. But the fact is that Ron Paul has lifted the whole, aging, stifling, outdated Neanderthal right wing out of the ditch and up onto dry ground and hitched it to a populist, neo-libertine wagon train. And he has done all of this single handedly, on his broad generous, courageous shoulders. And he has done it without breaking the China.

Oh, there is much, much more. He has woven a slender thread through the crimson cloth of Evangelical Christians and the pink cloth of Gay America, making one garment out of a people who have decided that they never really wanted or needed power, just the guarantee that government would stay out of their lives and not intrude. Who would have thought that this was politically possible?

He has gathered the hurt and wounded families of America who have suffered the extremes of our glorious “War on Crime,” which has become almost Soviet in its unintended consequences.

It is an amazingly diverse and complicated political fabric, with great demographic possibilities.

Still, the question remains, what did it all accomplish? Were the national debates the high watermark? What happened to our new Paulista congressmen and school board members and the remaking of the GOP?

The political reality is this, just as Ron Paul accepted the fact that he had to run in a two party system, he now must accept the fact that he cannot oversee the remaking of the GOP as a coach on the sidelines. Surely the lesson of 2008 made that clear. He has to get in the game. He has to play quarterback. He has to run for president. Again.

The fact is that a successful run for president is the only way to reform the GOP and the only way to take control of the party and the only way to get new congressmen elected. People will only get off the ground if they are shooting at the moon. They need the inspiration of a big dream.

Well, you say, the conditions were right in 2008. We had an unpopular war in Iraq and an unpopular president. And Ron Paul’s moment was great theatre. In one of my earlier blogs I compared it to the little boy who cried, “The Emperor has no clothes.” Ron Paul’s arguments were breathtaking. He was reading the collective minds of millions and saying publicly what they were barely able to admit to themselves, let alone to a spouse or a friend. It came as relief to find that these instinctive feelings, these unconscious worries, rested on a bedrock of principle that someone had been tending and fussing over for years. And when the debates ended, 32 million, grateful, dollars came pouring into the Ron Paul Campaign.

But to relegate the Ron Paul phenomenon to a lucky confluence of events, to say it cannot happen again, is to say it was only a parlor trick and never was an argument based on principles. It is to deny ourselves.

Indeed, the one big, frightening collective thought that has come to the Paulista nation in recent months is the reality of all that he and others have been warning us about. All those things they have been saying about the Federal Reserve and the house of cards of this global world economy are now upon us. If Ron Paul cannot get a political head of steam going in this environment then who can? And if not now, when the daily news confirms their prescience, then when would they ever be able to do it?

We who believe in the original American idea, or even some remote version of it, or ever believe in a free markeplace, must rally now, or forever resign from public life. What will we tell our grandchildren? We didn’t try because we didn’t think we could win? Shouldn’t the American people be given that choice? Shouldn’t the media be forced to confront it as well? Remember, our currently serving lame duck president is a “conservative Republican.” And he willingly “socialized” the American banking system to buy a few good days on the stock market for the Republican nominee.

After being warned about all of this for years, it is still chilling to see it all disappear so quickly, like bath water down the drain. The fact is that Ron Paul must run for president again. He must.

Note: Is he too old? Hell yes, but I will talk to that on Wednesday. And how could he possibly win? I will address that on Thursday or maybe next week. I just got home from an around the world speaking tour, gotta get a nap in before trying to save America.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/ron-paul-for-president-in-2012/


Is Ron Paul too old to run for president?


He will be 77 in the year 2012.

Consider; Charles de Gaulle was president of France at the age of 79. Some say he was the greatest modern leader in French history.

Ditto for Konrad Adenauer, declared by many to be the greatest chancellor of the German Republic in its modern history. Compare him to Helmut Kohl, for example, who presided over the reunification of Germany and was in the process of a Shakespearian moment, with greatness thrust on him, only to self implode in the midst of a tawdry, greedy scandal. Adenauer served Germany with wisdom and class until the age of 87.

Remember, the last “old” president America had was Ronald Reagan, who left office at 78.

Nor is old age the end of creativity. Michelangelo began his monumental work as architect of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome at age 71. By age 89, the year of his death, he was still at it.

This is a concept of biblical power. Moses first saw the vision of freeing the Israeli slaves at age 80. He finally brought them to the Jordan River at the age of 120.

Well, but you say, shouldn’t Ron Paul be able to enjoy his retirement? Doesn’t his wife, who has been ill, deserve to have some time with him, all to herself? And his children? And grandchildren?

That depends on whether they want to have him dead or alive. If he retires, his lifespan will shrink accordingly. If he has a vision, if he seeks the presidency, he will probably live longer. And what a romance, what an adventure, it would be, both as a couple and as a family.

Age is not the problem. Getting the issues right and having the courage to take a stand is the problem. And Ron Paul has proven to be up to both.

Coming Up: How he could pull it off.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/is-ron-paul-too-old-to-run-for-president/


How Ron Paul Wins in 2012: Step One

As far fetched as it sounds, Ron Paul can actually win the Republican nomination in 2012 and change history. Step One: Win the Iowa Straw Poll in 2011.

Well, this is a multi-post memorandum and some of what I have to say I won’t be saying publicly at all – because it is proprietary. So what I will say, is what is obvious, and what the experts in opposition research for any of Ron Paul’s opponents already know and have already considered and already told their principals, okay? No secrets here. But, believe me, this will be educational. So here we go…

For Ron Paul, it all comes down to the Iowa Straw Poll, what used to be called “The Cavalcade,” a political popularity contest, which will be held next in Ames, Iowa the summer of 2011, before the primary season begins in 2012. This event is used as a Republican fundraiser for the Iowa State GOP.

Ron Paul should not be distracted by the other straw polls, raise several million dollars and throw it all into the pot to win this contest. Every volunteer, every employee, every relative, every dollar should be focused on a win at the Cavalcade. It all should roll on the dice in Ames.

Why?

You may point out that G. H. W. Bush won the Poll in 1980 but Reagan won the nomination and the presidency. Pat Robertson won the Poll in 1988 but G. H. W. Bush won the nomination and the presidency. Mitt Romney won the Poll in 2008 but John McCain won the GOP nomination.

But this time, with this candidate, the circumstances are different.

1.) Ron Paul needs to win something meaningful if he is to awaken that vast pool of latent supporters who agree with his positions but doubt the efficacy of his candidacy.

2.) Because this win, as opposed to other straw polls and early contests, will transport his message and his candidacy into national prominence.

3.) Because it is far easier and less expensive to win the Iowa Straw Poll that it is to win any of the Caucuses and Primaries that follow. They only get tougher after this one. But winning it will trigger the flow of money and allow him to compete in the others. Losing, or coming in fifth, will end any real chances for his candidacy.

4.) Because the Straw Poll is such a small universe that the spending of money beyond a certain threshold will be redundant and ineffective. And Ron Paul can meet that threshold, which neutralizes the money factor entirely.

5.) Because winning this event is not only about money, it is about organization. No matter how much money you have you still have to have real live people with Iowa driver’s licenses. Ron Paul’s followers are true believers, activists, who are much more likely to work in Iowa earlier than the followers of Palin, Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich or others, who are essentially just in it for the horse race. Why not put this Ron Paul advantage to work?

Sure, there are no delegates from the Straw Poll, but the lift is enormous and there is the possibility, with this lift, to win it all. It is an old formula made famous by Jimmy Carter, who used the Democratic Jackson Day straw vote in the summer of 1975 as his launching pad for his surprise dark horse victory in 1976. And it is a perfect fit for Ron Paul and his followers.

Like past winners of the Iowa Straw Poll he will likely appear on the cover of TIME and NEWSWEEK, which in itself will pay back a couple of the million dollars spent on the event, and for the next few months he will be considered the front runner for the coming Iowa Caucus in January, if not the front runner for the nomination itself.

The beauty of winning the Poll is the long time between it and the next big event. The Poll is in the late summer of 2011. The Iowa caucus comes in January, 2012, followed within a week by New Hampshire and thereafter by one primary after another. Say for example that Sarah Palin makes a comeback from the Poll and wins the Iowa Caucus in January; she has only a few days to enjoy her lead for fundraising purposes. If Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich beat her in New Hampshire they only enjoy their frontrunner status for a few days before Mike Huckabee or Bobbie Jindal ambushes them in South Carolina.

But remember, there are no delegates from the Poll. So the idea is to win it and use the victory and status to raise a ton of money, which translates into winning the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary back to back in January.

Can it be done? That is, can Ron Paul translate a win in a straw vote in Iowa into something more? Well, that will depend on the money raised afterward. But remember, if he wins, for almost half a year he will be able to raise money while the other candidates will have to explain their loss.

“Yes, he won the Iowa Straw Poll,” Mike Huckabee will say, “but that is because he has a small cadre of devoted followers but he cannot go all the way.” Chuckle, chuckle, “Remember Mitt Romney won the Cavalcade last time and I won the Iowa Caucus and we both got beat by John McCain.”

Sarah Palin will say, “Yes, he won the Poll in Iowa but he is fifth in the national polls and I am leading. He can win a small contest but he can’t win a big one.”

They will all have their rationale for losing but it sure would be nice to be the winner, this time, the one who doesn’t need all those excuses.

There is more. If Ron Paul wins this Poll he will become the darling of the national media during these crucial five months of campaigning and fundraising. Yes, you heard me. The media will be amused by the Ron Paul surge, just as they enjoyed the Pat Buchanan insurgency against a GOP incumbent in the White House in 1992. Why? Because, like Buchanan, they will see Ron Paul as unwinnable in a general election. They will believe that Ron Paul is a safe nominee to face their beloved Barack Obama, who by then will be the second coming of FDR in American newsrooms. Ron Paul’s victory in the Iowa Straw Poll will be trumpeted to the highest heavens and he will be given every advantage. At least during the nominating process. But it will all depend on winning in Ames.

But don’t all the other candidates know that too? Can’t they do the same? Yes and no. They have different assets, priorities and needs. For example, Rudolph Giuliani skipped Iowa altogether because it is an Evangelical state and he would have been quizzed about his personal life. Mitt Romney poured in a ton of money and was in the lead but saw that lead evaporate as Evangelicals slipped away from him, probably because he was Mormon, to support Mike Huckabee, one of their own.

If you review the list of five reasons above you will see that neither Palin nor Huckabee nor Romney nor anyone else would benefit as much as Ron Paul from a Straw Poll win. Ron Paul is the leader of a movement, he offers a different option altogether, whereas Palin and Huckabee and others will simply be in a personality contest. If they win in Ames, it is only one of many more contests to follow. If Ron Paul wins in Ames, he awakens a whole political movement.

Then there is the mighty mistress of American politics…. expectations. Ron Paul would be a sensation, the talk of the country, because his emergence would be a surprise to the mainstream. For example, Palin and Huckabee would not benefit as much from a NEWSWEEK of TIME cover story because they have already had them and they probably will have had them again before the Cavalcade. Heck, Ron Paul garnered some headlines in 2007 when he came in fifth in that contest. A win would be big news.

And what about that all important Iowa Evangelical vote? This time, Huckabee and Palin, both Evangelicals, might have to split that vote, along with a resurrected Newt Gingrich and even a popular, born again Christian, Bobby Jindal, governor of Louisiana, who may not even enter the Straw Poll because his re-election as governor is in the fall of 2011.

Anyway, Ron Paul will get a big chunk of those Evangelical voters because I am going to help him, if he wants it. He is Christian, pro-life, married to the same wife forever and he wants the government out of our lives, believe me, it will work. And I know how to win that vote big.

For a history of the born again vote see: http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/the-history-of-the-evangelical-vote-in-presidential-elections/

So how does Ron Paul harness his army and raise the money to win the Iowa Cavalcade? And if he won, where would he go from there? That discussion is coming in future posts. All I know is this… if Ron Paul can raise $32 million and get 15,000 people to buy tickets to his convention in Minneapolis after the nomination was already decided, then he has a very real chance of winning in the small universe of Ames, Iowa in 2011 and that win, my friends, would catapult him and his movement into the stratosphere.

(If you want to follow this rather complicated series on how Ron Paul can actually win, go all the way, do it, be elected and change the world…. Sign up to follow Doug Wead on twitter. http://twitter.com/dougwead1234 )

The next step? http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/ron-paul-and-karl-rove-dont-mix/

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/11/how-ron-paul-wins-in-2012-step-one/


Ron Paul and Karl Rove don’t mix.

Okay, this is about hiring the right people at the right time and how that is critical for Ron Paul. But there is no way you will even comprehend what we are talking about unless you get caught up. So, if you haven’t read the following posts, start with the first one. If you are a veteran of this chain, skip the links below and dig right in.

Previous posts in this chain:

1.) Why he should run for president?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/ron-paul-for-president-in-2012/

2.) But isn’t he too old?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/is-ron-paul-too-old-to-run-for-president/

3.) How Ron Paul Wins: The Iowa Straw Poll.

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/11/how-ron-paul-wins-in-2012-step-one/

And now….. for your reading pleasure

4.) Immediately hire an inexpensive political advisor.

To win, Ron Paul has to hire the right people. There are only 24 hours in a day and he cannot do it all. Others have to think things through for him and present him with options. And, of course, he cannot run his own campaign. He will be too busy. He needs help.

Well, you say, shouldn’t he hire his political advisor before he commits to wining the Iowa Straw Poll? Isn’t hiring the first step? Answer? Nope.

In the first place, he has to decide about the Iowa Straw Poll right away because it affects the decision on whom he hires. He will want someone who agrees with the plan and who can bring something to the table to help make it work. Finally, if the person he hires doesn’t see the Iowa Straw Poll as a no brainer, he shouldn’t hire him or her anyway. So that is why I list the hiring of the political advisor after the ISP (Iowa Straw Poll) commitment.

Keep in mind, there are several kinds of hires Ron Paul may have to eventually make. There is the big shot political pro who has run numerous presidential campaigns and will cost a fortune and will have a brother in law or girlfriend who will have to be allowed to get rich off of commissions selling the television advertising and there is the less expensive, worker bee, who will stay in the trenches and get things done. The later is almost always a woman. They are the only people who work in political campaigns. And, shame oh shame, they are less expensive.

You say, well doesn’t Ron Paul need to get the very best? A real professional? Not now. That’s like walking into PricewaterhouseCoopers and asking them to do your taxes. And they say, “Okay, well put together a list of all your donations for the year and medical expenses and make sure you have receipts and cancelled checks for them, and travel for business, with the boarding passes if you can….”

And you say, “Whooooa. Wait a minute, hold on. That’s why I am hiring you. YOU… do my taxes. I will pay you to do all that.”

The point is, you really don’t want to be paying $600 an hour for someone to be ransacking your house looking for cancelled checks. “Do you keep them in this drawer maybe?”

As odious as it may be, there are some things you have to do yourself and you can do it in thirty minutes instead of three weeks. And if you can’t, you hire someone at $15 an hour to do it in three weeks, not the fellow from PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Ron Paul needs someone like Sydney Hay, who just lost her congressional run in Arizona, but who has experience running presidential campaigns. At this stage of the game she is more important than the big shot political advisor with the national name. Why? Because she knows more. She ran Alan Keyes presidential campaign which had to operate on a shoestring, which means she did the FEC filings herself at a kitchen table over days and nights of sleepless work. She got him registered in every state, in spite of the complex, arcane state party rules designed to keep pretenders off the ballot. And like any pol, she brings something to the table, in this case the whole Right to Life movement in Iowa.

Big shots don’t know how to file FEC financial reports. Karl Rove wouldn’t know. James Carville wouldn’t know. Charlie Black wouldn’t know. They outsource that sort of thing to specialists. They just know how to bluster, “You better be doing this right. That’s all I’ve got to say. Harrumph.”

So with Sydney, or someone like her, and by the way, I haven’t talked to Sydney about this, you get someone who is a generalist, a rare breed, someone who knows a little about all of it and a lot about some of it. This is critical. Because everyone else on staff are specialists. One is pulling you to this constituency and a second is pulling you to another. One worker says you have to do a fundraiser tonight, another says you have to have a private dinner with the State Chairman. Yet another says you have debate practice. Only the candidate and the generalist know enough to make the call.

Right now, he needs an economical, reasonably priced political advisor with experience in Iowa and the whole national scene, so he or she can prioritize with the congressman. It is a good hire until you break into the national spotlight and hire your prima donna, famous, celebrity advisor, who gives you credibility, makes a lot of noise as a surrogate on television, raises you some money, makes a few good calls and some bad ones and drains your pocket book. You want him, yeah okay, or her. You just don’t want him or her now. He is not only not worth it, he can do more harm than good at this stage. First get your act together, find your receipts and then go to PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Well, you say, but Sydney Hay ran the Alan Keyes campaign and he lost.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

I hate to tell you this but they have all lost. Anyone you hire with experience has lost. The only political advisors who have won are Rahm Emmanuel and David Axelrod, both headed for the White House, Karl Rove who is under contract with FOX and a major publisher, Ed Rollins who won Reagan’s re-election (Ho hum,) and lost Huckabee’s bid in South Carolina, James Carville and Paul Begala who are Democrats. And even these geniuses have all lost, it’s just that they once won a big one, which makes them all high priced.

The big shot whom Ron Paul eventually hires will also be a loser. That’s not so bad. The all lose before winning. They don’t lose on purpose. They try. And eventually some of them win.

But sometimes, those early, less expensive hires, bond with the candidate, learn while they are on the job and become national names. All of the biggies started small at one time.

Finally, you don’t want someone who is only Iowa. You need someone who has done it national. And there aren’t very many.

I once quizzed Jimmy Carter about his race to the White House and what he had that no one else did. He mentioned Iowa, of course, how he came to the state with a 2% name recognition. And then he said that the difference between him and the other campaigns is that he had a national plan. He had several alternate scenarios of how he could win it all, while the others were taking it one state at a time.

So I am not suggesting that Ron Paul not have the national plan. I am just saying that if he finishes fifth in the Iowa Straw Poll in the summer of 2011, he is out, no matter how good his national plan may be on paper. But if he wins….. or even threatens, look out. All hell will break lose. And he better have a plan ready to go all the way.

So he needs both. He needs a national plan tucked away somewhere, drawn up by a generalist and he needs to focus on the next football game as if nothing else matters. And the next football game, the big one, the only game, is the Iowa Straw Poll in August of 2011.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/ron-paul-and-karl-rove-dont-mix/

Thomas
11-29-2010, 09:34 PM
Ron Paul and Iowa in 2011


Note to reader: This is a nice little series with about five thousand followers. But you have to read them in order to know what we are talking about. If you are following these posts dig right in. If not, the chain is listed at the bottom of this post. Take them on, one by one and then come back to read this one.

The general thesis is that Ron Paul can best change the Republican Party by running for president again, that more people respond to a big vision than to a call to get involved at the precinct level, and that there is a way, however unlikely, that Ron Paul can put his activist army to work and set in motion events that could lead to his nomination.

Here we go….

Ron Paul and Iowa 2011:

If Ron Paul wins the Iowa Straw Poll (ISP) in 2011, and that is a big “IF” which we will address later, he will be in a favorable position to win the Iowa Caucus the following January. Because, Ron Paul, unlike Palin, Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich and others, will be awakening a movement.

The others will be debating how much the government’s latest bailout should be. Or whether there should be six more or three more. They can’t very well say there shouldn’t have been any since they are already on record. Only Ron Paul can be saying that the nationalization of the insurance industry or the banks or the car industry and all the others that will follow represented an abandonment of the free market system and the Swedenization of America at a time when even Sweden has backed away from socialism as a failed model.

People say, well Ron Paul was an aberration. He only “took” with an activist’s segment because of the unpopularity of the Iraq War. But by 2012 the American economy could very well be in chaos over the decisions we are making now.

Take for example the supply of money. Trillions of new dollars are being printed. Eventually, as this continues, our own dollars will be watered down and diluted. It is like a wave out there that is on its way and will someday soon hit the shore. It has already been set in motion and it will come. Every time they print more money it is like a tax on the money in your pocket because they are diminishing from its value. So George W. Bush, the great conservative, who refused to raise taxes, spent so much money that we didn’t have that he was forced to just print more. Ironically, we all got taxed by default, by losing the value of the money we had.

President Elect Obama has already said that we should use the new money we are printing to hire the unemployed to rebuild our roads and infrastructure. Sounds like a good idea. Anyone who had traveled around the world has seen how American highways and bridges and airports and train routes have deteriorated compared to other countries and regions, especially Western Europe, where the strain of distances is not so great. But the newly printed money that we put in the pockets of these workers will compete for food and fuel, driving up prices and diluting the power of the money being earned by workers in the free marketplace. Those American workers who are productive and doing business based on natural supply and demand and who are hiring out of need, not out of charity, will see their capital diminished setting in motion a further need for the government to nationalize and hire and tax or print more money to further prop up its artificially created market.

The American middle class, bearing the brunt of all of this, could very well be in an uproar in 2012, ready to listen to someone who saw this coming for decades and warned against it.

And all the other candidates will be arguing over the details of the involvement in our latest war and who supports the troops the most and what strategies should have been employed. And what we should do now. Only Ron Paul will have warned against foreign intervention in the first place.

Romney won the 2008 ISP but lost in the Caucus because he failed to secure any understanding with Evangelical leaders. Like Steve Forbes in 2000, he gobbled up every Movement Conservative for sale in Washington D.C., hiring them or giving them titles and bringing them onboard. But like Forbes, they dominated the conservative talk radio and television for their candidate but had little or no impact in Iowa. It is because almost all of these leaders are Catholic and while they have some impact in New Hampshire, and a lot as conservative opinion makers, they have little impact on the Southern Baptist South or the Pentecostal – Charismatic states like Iowa.

The key Iowa evangelical activists and political operatives that Romney brought onboard could deliver very little. As a Mormon he should have understood that Iowa Evangelical activists and leaders are linked to their national leaders of influence. If James Dobson would have given his “okay,” for example, it would have been far more powerful than to have some local, Iowa, Family Research Council director weigh in. And even Dobson wouldn’t have been as important as a Pentecostal or Charismatic leader who could have awakened the locals.

Romney had the talented Mark DeMoss carrying his water as an Evangelical on the national scene but while that might have eventually helped him in some southern states it had little influence with the Pentecostal-Charismatic circles in Iowa. It may have even hurt. DeMoss was seen by the leadership as Jerry Falwell’s sidekick, during the Baptist “raid” of PTL.

Ironically, Governor Mike Huckabee, a Baptist, understood this and courted the Pentecostal television preacher Kenneth Copeland, flying to Texas and appearing on his show. Long before it aired, the news was out in Iowa.

Ron Paul will have the right socio-cultural plan in place because he has friends now who support him and can help him craft it. And Ron Paul will be right on the issues because his views are immovable, based on principle. His ship is guided by the stars and so it knows where it is on any issue and any time.

The formula that allows him to win the ISP, which we will visit in an upcoming post, will allow him to win the Caucus too. Because if he wins the ISP, he will awaken the giant. A new movement will be born. A new purpose for the Republican Party will emerge and the political lines will be totally rescrambled. And the same formula that wins the ISP, will work for the caucus as well.

So what’s the next discussion, New Hampshire? No. There are two other things we have to talk about first. The debates, which were the key to his emergence last time and the fundraising power of the ISP win.

The debates will take another post but we can talk about the fundraising right now. Immediately after a win in the ISP, Ron Paul must embark on a national victory fundraising tour. Remember, the value of winning ISP is the time you have before the next big contest. He must use that time to raise money. He must have his picture taken at $1,000 a pop with every supporter in the nation. He must autograph 20,000 copies of his TIME magazine cover story. He will need all the money he can get to pour into Iowa for a caucus win the next January. This will raise the ante ever further. He must max the limits of advertising in Iowa and neighboring states with TV buys that have big cross boarder viewing audiences and have in place a national fundraising system to milk an Iowa Caucus win for that one precious week of fundraising before New Hampshire.

But again, all of this depends on an Iowa Straw Poll win in the summer of 2011 and that is highly unlikely but possible because it is a small universe where he meets the money threshold and where his activist advantage kicks in. More in the next post on how he can actually pull that off and thus trigger the explosion of a national movement.
If you need to catch up, here are the previous posts in this chain:

1.) Why he should run for president?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/ron-paul-for-president-in-2012/

2.) But isn’t he too old?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/is-ron-paul-too-old-to-run-for-president/

3.) How Ron Paul Wins: Step One, the Iowa Straw Poll.

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/11/how-ron-paul-wins-in-2012-step-one/

4.) Ron Paul and Karl Rove don’t mix. Who he needs to hire and why.

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/ron-paul-and-karl-rove-dont-mix/

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/24/ron-paul-and-iowa-in-2011/


Now drafting Ron Paul for president.


Ron Paul really has a chance. To be president, I mean. Really.
Because we are now in uncharted waters and things could go terribly wrong. All that new money we are printing will eventually hit the shore and inflation will result. And the tens of thousands of workers, soon to be hired by the government to rebuild the infrastructure and paid with even more new paper money, will spend that money on food and other essentials which will drive up prices. The productive people will see their income and their profits diluted. And by then, it is entirely possible, that the country will be ready to listen.

And they will not want to hear a debate about whether the next bailout should be $600 billion or $700 billion. They will be ready to hear again the arguments in favor of or against a free marketplace. How it should work? Why foreign wars should be avoided and how they can bankrupt us?

There is a growing since of unease, a feeling that we have passed some Rubicon. That we have launched into unchartered territory, led by politicians and economists and journalists who really don’t know what they are doing, and even openly warn us of this fact.

President Obama seems to be sincere and a nice fellow and we are still glowing over the idea of having elected an African American as president. The country that was last to end slavery and grant full civil rights has now leapfrogged societies in Europe and Latin American and Asia, with their class systems and layers of social strata.

But it is becoming clear that the “changes” we wanted are not going to be ushered in by Barrack Obama. If anything, he is feeling the need to reassure the establishment and the institutions of his political base, the unions and other constituencies and the liberal clique on Capitol Hill, that it is not risky to put an African American at the helm. What we are getting is old liberalism, a 1960’s, Lyndon Johnson liberalism. Re-cycled programs that we have already tried and have seen fail. We are seeing the treasury used to pay off political debts to unions and other constituencies. There is increased spending, centralization of power in Washington, D.C. New regulations. The Swedenization of America. And it is coming at a breathtaking pace.

The economic crisis is like the Reichstag fire, which allowed the Nazi’s to change everything in the name of a national emergency. But instead of using the economic crisis to be better managers, we are told we must spend more money, the very thing that got is in this mess in the first place.

The normal checks and balances are not in place. The media watchdog is fighting for its life, newspapers and magazines folding as people turn to the internet. Television news has become entertainment. And sometimes the audience itself dictates the stories and the journalists obediently respond or else. It is scary.
And while the conventional wisdom is that Barack Obama is the second coming of FDR and the economy will likely bounce back in time for his re-election, (that it would bounce back even if George W. Bush were in office,) the new open-the-floodgates spending round may not solve the problem, even temporarily. It may aggravate the crisis. There is no guarantee that this time the economy will automatically rebound at its appointed, politically demanded time.

Over the years, only one national politician has been warning about this coming crisis, clearly and consistently, while others smirked and laughed at him, secure in their knowledge that “the experts” on Wall Street knew what they were doing. And that politician was Ron Paul.

So if the Republican Party gets back to its basics and abandons its failed effort to outspend and out-war the Democrats then there is only one choice. Republicans will either choose among their old, tired politicians, another “Democrat lite,” and call him or her a “conservative,” or they will make a fundamental turn to a free marketer, to a constitutionalist, to someone who sees an America less arrogant in world affairs. And if they make that turn, they will have only one choice.

Can Ron Paul really be elected president? Yes. It can happen.

Note: This is part of an ongoing series. If you need to catch up, here are the previous posts in this chain:

1.) Why he should run for president?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/ron-paul-for-president-in-2012/

2.) But isn’t he too old?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/is-ron-paul-too-old-to-run-for-president/

3.) How Ron Paul Wins: Step One, the Iowa Straw Poll.

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/11/how-ron-paul-wins-in-2012-step-one/

4.) Ron Paul and Karl Rove don’t mix. Who he needs to hire and why?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/ron-paul-and-karl-rove-dont-mix/

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/now-drafting-ron-paul-for-president/

Coming soon? Ron Paul’s greatest weakness


Watch for an important post coming next week. Ron Paul’s greatest weakness and what can be done to overcome it.

Meanwhile, Monday is Presidents’ Day. I will be making some television appearances and trying to humbly add a little to the discourse. Here is a link to last year’s segment for the Fox News Channel.
YouTube - Presidents Day - Doug Wead (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uiic1_IZ4c)

(Meanwhile, If you want to follow this rather complicated series on how Ron Paul can actually win, go all the way, do it, be elected and change the world…. Sign up to follow Doug Wead on twitter.http://twitter.com/dougwead1234 )

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2009/02/13/coming-soon-ron-pauls-greatest-weakness/

Sarah Palin: Frontrunner


Okay sports fans, here we go. As of now, who is the front runner for the GOP nomination in 2012? And the answer is pretty simple. Sarah Palin. She is not only the most likely to win the nomination, she is also probably the only one who could beat Barack Obama.

Actually, no one can beat Barack Obama. He will have to beat himself or a perfect economic storm will have to take him out. I’ll get to that but first, let’s talk about Palin.

Here’s what she has going for her….

1.) She is the front runner, which translates into money. And because the GOP primaries have been front loaded, with big states appearing early, the candidate with the most money will win the nomination. And while people are less likely to give this early it still gives her months and months to collect.

2.) She has name recognition, which also translates into money. It works like this. Your friend is having a fundraiser, a thousand dollar a pop. You get your picture taken with the candidate. Would you cross the street for a picture with Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Rudolph Giuliani or Sarah Palin? Most would pick Palin and that is why she will raise so much money.

And after most candidates get their money they have to spend it on name recognition which Palin already has. I’ll put it this way, your local news station in Iowa says, “We’ll be right back with the story of Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty’s visit to town.” Will you stay tuned? A Sarah Palin visit to your town will get more press. Name recognition begets name recognition.

3.) She is a woman and a “born again” Christian. 50.7% of the country are women and many of them saw a double standard in the media treatment of Sarah Palin. And 42% of the country claim to be born again Christians, many of whom did not take kindly to the attacks on her religion.

4.) The first contest is in Iowa, a state loaded with Evangelical Christians. This is where George W. Bush astonished the audience by saying that his favorite “political or philosophical figure” was “Jesus Christ because he changed my heart.” His debate opponents who chose names like Winston Churchill cried foul, Jesus wasn’t a political figure, what was Bush doing? But it was too late. (What George W. Bush was careful not to make public until all his lifetime of elections were over was revealed in a recent interview when he announced that he doesn’t believe the Bible is really true. Hmmmm.)

5.) The media and the public will be very reluctant to let Obama go. It will take scandal and economic collapse but we have already seen signs that both are possible. If that happens, they will not feel good about passing the White House onto a white male. The transition to a woman, in this case Sarah Palin, will be more acceptable.

Yes, yes, I know. Mitt Romney had money last time. And Mike Huckabee was a born again Christian who won Iowa. And Rudolph Giuliani was the front runner for a year. And all three lost the nomination. But that is oranges and apples and I will tell you how they are different and how Sarah Palin could dispatch them all tomorrow. And what about the Ron Paul insurgency? Tomorrow.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2009/02/18/sarah-palin-frontrunner/

Sarah Palin and her opponents


Okay, now for a little bit of calibration. Yesterday I stated a fact, that Sarah Palin is the front runner for the GOP in 2012. That made some people happy and some people angry. It doesn’t have to remain that way. But whether you like it or not it is a fact. And being front runner is an advantage.

You say, wait a minute. Edmund Muskie and John Conally were front runners too. But the times are different. Because so many big states have gotten in on the action and moved their primaries and caucuses early it takes money, lots of money to win. Retail politicking once created a Jimmy Carter but he couldn’t do it today. He would need money to buy television ads in New York, California and the South where he wouldn’t have time to shake enough hands.

Well, Rudolph Giuliani was a front runner last time. Yes, but because of the personal issues in his life he passed on Iowa where Christian activists would have demanded details. Notwithstanding the big states that loom soon after, the road to the nomination still passes through Dubuque and Davenport and Des Moines. You don’t have to win there but you better stop and say, “Hi.” Palin will be strong in Iowa which is an Evangelical state.

But isn’t Mike Huckabee also an Evangelical Christian who won Iowa last time? Yes but he is a Southern Baptist, who hailed from the moderate theological wing of the SBC and thus had opposition from some of its leaders. It wasn’t fair. I’m not saying it was pretty but it is a fact. It is partly why he got beat in South Carolina where a SBC leader of influence turned his back on him. And anyway Iowa is a Pentecostal – Charismatic state. They went with Huckabee last time when there was no other Evangelical to choose from but this time they have Sarah Palin who shares their same background. Pentecostal-Charismatics make up 51% of the born again vote. (See sources below.) And then Huckabee has some real enemies in the economic conservatives’ camp, such as Rush Limbaugh. They will nag him all the way. But I am not through with Huckabee, he has a chance. There is a way he can win. I will be doing Huckabee soon.

And what about Mitt Romney? If Palin’s potential fundraising prowess is so important didn’t Mitt Romney raise more early money than any of them and lose anyway? Yes, but his money was not the problem. It was the baggage of his Massachusetts record of pro choice and gay rights which didn’t translate well in Iowa and the South. And then, Romney’s faith was a factor, which bigots in Iowa and the South used against him.

This time, Romney has a very good chance. His faith and flip flops are both diminished as issues. He remained consistent through the 2008 election cycle. But he will be facing Sarah Palin who is a skilled pugilist. And his big money credentials, which were a net plus last time, could be a bit of a drag this time around. The country is soured on big corporate bosses and hedge fund guys. Finally, there is South Carolina. Romney can’t get any traction there at all. He didn’t even try last time. And it is pretty hard to win the GOP nomination without South Carolina, which follow close on the heels of Iowa and New Hampshire and is the harbinger of how the South will vote. But I am not through with Mitt Romney either. I donated the max to him last time and he has a chance to win this. I will be doing Romney soon too.

Then there is Newt Gingrich. Friends on FOX TV will keep his name in the news and he will tease again about a presidential run and may even try it. Appearing in the debates is good for book sales and speaker’s fees. But Gingrich, like Giuliani, will have to answer questions about his personal life. Palin is a scrapper. She will not let such issues go untouched.

And finally there is Ron Paul. I am still in the middle of a Ron Paul blog series. He is positioned to win the “I told you so” award for what is happening in the economy and offers the most succinct economic and philosophic alternative to what we have been through and where we should now go. He leads a movement, has die hard supporters and can raise money. If the country falls apart and Palin and Huckabee get deadlocked in a battle for the Iowa Christians, Paul, himself a pro-lifer, could try an ambush. But Palin, will surely tag Paul with his views on legalizing Marijuana and fair or not, the boomlet could die because of it.

And that is part of the problem that all of Palin’s opponents have. She is tough. And this last campaign made her tougher. She can learn how to survive a thirty minute “gotcha” interview with a network anchor but no one can learn how to fight like that. That is inborn. And she has it. She will attack. Huckabee, Romney, Giuliani, Paul, none of them will get a free pass this time. And while such attacks make a white, male politician look mean, and they all better be careful about counterpunches, it makes Sarah Palin only look like “a hockey mom.”

Now, all of these are glib, quick observations. Actually, any one of the above can win the nomination. And add Tim Pawlenty, Charlie Crist and Bobby Jindal to the mix, although the latter might have to give up the governor’s mansion to do it, not likely. And then there is the unannounced billionaire who has yet to get in, the Bloomberg-Perot-Forbes type candidate, whose money and non political status makes him a player. He or she will be a factor simply because of the money.

If things go wrong for Barack Obama, and the media must allow someone to take his place, they may be more inclined toward Sarah Palin, whom they have already crucified once. It will be easier for them to let a woman follow the first African American president and not another white male.

Will she run? Absolutely, of course she will run, because the next time she may not be the front runner. It’s called “good stewardship.” It was how she was raised. It’s part of the Alaskan frontier culture. It’s a page out of Proverbs. If you are given something you better put it to use.

Now, it’s way too early, anything can happen, a nuclear terrorist attack on Washington, D.C.? And Jeb Bush could win. But again, barring the obscene, here are the Wead odds on the 2012 GOP nominee, dated this February, 2009, three years out and counting.

Sarah Palin 3-1
Mike Huckabee 9-1
Mitt Romney 12-1
Ron Paul 25-1
Newt Gingrich 33-1
Rudolph Giuliani 38-1

Sources:
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/the-history-of-the-evangelical-vote-in-presidential-elections/
For figures on Baptists and Pentecostals-Charismatics see bottom of…
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/a-fox-within-a-fox/

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/sarah-palin-and-her-opponents/

Is Ron Paul too old to be President?

YouTube - Reagan and the age issue (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJhCjMfRndk&feature=player_embedded)


Ron Paul Shall Rise Again


Yesterday on Meet the Press they reviewed the declining prospects for the Republican Party. And the yawning conclusion was that no one can really challenge Barack Obama in 2012 and no one can revive the G.O.P. They assessed the prospects of all the possible candidates but there was one glaring omission. Guess who?

Mitt Romney and Lindsey Graham were the Republican guest commentators. Romney has already made it clear that only an Obama owned recession will allow him back in. And if Obama can’t get a temporary bump in the stock market, after trebling the money supply, well, we might as all start selling apples right now. And one by one, on the Russertless Meet the Press, they ticked off all of the reasons why Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee won’t be returning after all.

Of course, the weekly news dominated and they bemoaned the loss of yet another possible G.O.P. standard bearer for 2012. Mark Sanford, the governor of South Carolina, is now out. His dalliance in Argentina means he is damaged goods. Can’t you just see the governor sitting at a side walk café in Buenos Aires, with this nagging worry in the back of his head, “What if they are looking for me right now? What if I am on CNN? Naaa.” Indeed, the Sanford episode brings back all the painful narrative surrounding the infidelities of Newt Gingrich and Rudolph Giuliani. Is there no one left to lead the G.O.P.?

Meet the Press cannot be blamed for omitting the one man who is still on everyone’s lips, as in “you know, I think he may have been right, after all.” The one man who predicted the economic collapse, who suggested that the Federal Reserve needed an audit itself, who warned that electing a Democrat or Republican was pretty much the same thing; there would still be a war where we don’t need one. The lobbyists would still rule. The government would still intrude.

On May 18, 2009 Time magazine ran a cover story on the Republican Party, entitled “Endangered Species.” They had a Michael Grunwald article on “How the Republicans Lost Their Way.” And an article by Joe Scarborough on “How They Can Come Back.” Not once did the magazine even mention the name of the man who raised $32 million with a single call. The man who was first to recognize and announce that Republicans had lost their way, their heart, their soul.

What made the Mark Sanford loss so regrettable to many in the press was the fact that he was emerging as a bit of a populist figure. He had been able to articulate some of the views and the ideas of the one man whom Meet the Press and Time Magazine and the rest of the establishment so studiously ignore. And Sanford had been able to pick up the mantle without all the odious, dangerous extra baggage that makes the people at the television networks recoil in horror. Like actually auditing the Federal Reserve.

The fact is that Mark Sanford was never really a true clone to that man, who like Lord Voldemort, cannot be named. The man who would shake Wall Street and Capitol Hill to their foundations. I am speaking, of course, of Congressman Ron Paul of Texas

No, he is not dead, much as Meet the Press and Time would have you believe. Tim Russert is dead. Michael Jackson is dead. Farrah Fawcett is dead. And now even, Billy May is dead.
Ron Paul lives.

And as long as Ron Paul lives, the heart of the Republican Party beats strong and an alternative to the new Socialist Republic of America still exists.

Make sure you read…. Is Ron Paul too old?

And see Reagan and the age issue.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2009/06/29/ron-paul-shall-rise-again/

Thomas
11-29-2010, 09:41 PM
Ron Paul is back!


Once more, after being written out of the script by the newspapers and television producers, the scrappy congressman from Texas, Ron Paul is back in the mix. And big time. Sarah Palin, of all people, put him there.

After turning down thousands of speaking invitations over a six month period Sarah Palin finally accepted a gig for the National Tea Party, a grass roots phenomenon that owes its life to that unstoppable old man from Texas. And then the news that she is endorsing Rand Paul, the congressman’s son, and an emerging star in the Kentucky Senate race. Who says Sarah Palin is dumb? She is tapping into the hottest political movement going.

This is no accident for it is Ron Paul, the old congressman, not Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee, or Newt Gingrich that now stands between her and a shoe-in for the GOP nomination.

Palin is a fighter. She will quickly approve TV ads blasting away on Romney’s flip flops from his Massachusetts gubernatorial days. He is already reportedly moving more to the center, writing off some southern states. Using that momentum she will likely push him all the way off the leftist edge. Her commercials will make Huckabee’s 2008 Iowa Romney attack ads look puny by comparison. And as for Huck? After the Arkansas parole board scandals he will see those revolving door – Willie Horton ads resurrected and showing ad nauseum on untraceable You Tubes. Newt Gingrich can go on James Dobson’s radio show and repent as much as he wants, he can even publicly cry like Jimmy Swaggart, but Palin’s people will anonymously spoon feed Dateline and 20/20 every tiny morsel of his private life. Palin is no softy.

The fact is, Sarah Palin can only be stopped on her way to her GOP coronation by a Ron Paul ambush in Iowa. Only Paul has activists who will fall on their swords for him and will go to work early enough to make a difference.

Yes, I know. Ron Paul is too old. And he did not poll well last time. But his base only really discovered him late in the process and they have been very busy since. He has grown on a lot of people. What looked nutty in 2008, like actually auditing the Federal Reserve, is now widely accepted as common sense. The national Tea Party sprang from his loins.

But the biggest and most powerful issue that separates Ron Paul from the pack is the ongoing War on Terror. Every major candidate in both parties buys into the idea of a “just war.” Palin praised Obama’s speech to the Nobel Prize Committee in Oslo, actually claiming that the President had picked up on themes she, herself, had written in her memoir Going Rogue.

“Wow, that really sounded familiar,” Palin said to USA Today. Newt Gingrich was quoted as saying President Obama gave a “very historic speech.”
Ron Paul would say, “Hogwash.”

He believes that by waging wars in distant lands we create ten new terrorists for every one we kill. And only Ron Paul, among all public figures, states this clearly and has held this position consistently. While former vice president Dick Cheney and current vice president Joe Biden argue over degrees and who supported the surge when, only Ron Paul says that “no war” is better than any new and improved version.
Now this is significant for a very important reason. For the first time last summer national polls showed that a majority of Americans, 51% agreed that the war is not working. Less than half, 47% thought it was worth the price we were paying in dead Americans.

Can Ron Paul, the fringe candidate of 2008 actually emerge in the upcoming presidential election? Well, here is some simple arithmetic for you to ponder.

Obama, Palin, Clinton, Biden, Huckabee, Romney, Gingrich, Cheney and all the rest can split the 47% of the American public who think that it is economical sound and morally effective to spend $500 million and 50 young lives to re-conquer for the third time a windswept city of 100,000, where the Taliban once lived but have now mostly abandoned. And they will not even notice when we give the city back again next year.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul, alone will speak for the 51% who would bring back our boys. Does he have a chance? If the war becomes the issue, Ron Paul, who appeals to right and left, young and old, Democrat and Republican, gay and straight can pull an upset.

When Palin appeared at the Tea Party event last week all the television networks and major newspapers covered the moment. But not a single journalist even mentioned that this grass roots phenomenon was inspired by the Ron Paul movement. No one dared suggest that Sarah Palin was trying to co-opt the incorruptible old, iconoclastic congressman from Texas. The media remains fiercely disciplined in excluding Ron Paul from any exposure, even when his absence is itself newsworthy. The people paying those media salaries apparently don’t want to see an audit of the Federal Reserve or an end to government subsidized banks or an end to profits from foreign wars.

But nothing they write or say or fail to write or fail to say can hide the truth from the millions of Americans who have heard the clarion call. In 2008 Ron Paul slipped through their nets and onto television in the Republican Debates. And America will never be the same.

Sarah Palin has the right idea, and give her credit for trying. But I know Ron Paul. He is a friend of mine. And Sarah Palin, you are no Ron Paul.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/ron-paul-is-back/

Ron Paul Wins! (So who appears on Meet the Press?)


Texas Congressman Ron Paul handily won last Saturday’s CPAC presidential straw poll in Washington, D.C. It was an event that former Governor Mitt Romney had dominated in years past, but this time Romney wasn’t even close and neither was Palin, Huckabee or Gingrich.

So who did NBC invite onto Sunday’s Meet to Press to talk about it all? Answer? Minnesota Governor, Tim Pawlenty, who came in fourth place and won 6% of the votes. Another typical day for the Rodney Dangerfield of American public life.

Meanwhile, inside the beltway commentators, who in previous years touted a CPAC win as an important initiation rite for any future GOP nominee, were quick to explain to us dummies that the Ron Paul victory was unimportant. The Washington Post’s favorite blogger warned us to “be careful.” We were told “not to read too much — or much at all — into these results.”

During live coverage of the CPAC event Fox News commentators were endlessly apologetic, explaining how Ron Paul accidently won the vote, apparently embarrassed that they were covering an event where he would triumph.

But no matter how deep the denial of the American media you can be sure that Ron Paul’s victory sent shock waves through the rest of the American establishment. While it is unlikely that anyone at the Federal Reserve has actually started the process of shredding documents the idea has surely crossed some minds. And young staffers at the Justice Department may have asked, “Can the government seize our e-mails? Hold on a minute, we are the government.” Some fat billionaire bankers on Wall Street had chest pains Saturday night. Others wondered aloud if they shouldn’t petition the Obama administration for another bailout while there is still time. (To save the country, of course.)

A tiny few savvy political literates actually paused and took note of the fact that Ron Paul won this with actual votes of ordinary convention attendees. And young ones at that. Always a bad sign. And he did it without hiring the people who did the voting, as Romney had done in years past. And so a few, not many, but a few are considering a worst case scenario. What if he does this at the Iowa Cavalcade? Another small universe that usually precedes a win at the caucus. And then maybe New Hampshire. Egad, what if someone like him actually wins the presidency?

Such a worst case scenario could mean an end to American wars abroad and fat war profits for favored insiders at home. An end to young men sacrificed on foreign battlefields to assure re-election victories for incumbent presidents. An end to the draining the US Treasury for political supporters. An end to cronyism, where billionaires give soft money, get positions and honors and favorable laws in return and after it’s all over, offer their private jets to whisk the former president around the world at their expense. Imagine Lew Rockwell as Secretary of Commerce and Judge Andrew Napolitano as Attorney General and you get the idea.

Now some of these elitist rich Americans, the ones whose wealth has been fattened over the years by our diminishing IRA’s and other retirement vehicles, are big owners of media stock. Some actually sit on the boards of those media entities, as well as the banks that we all now work for and for which our children and grandchildren will also work for throughout their lifetimes. So you can imagine the dilemma at NBC.

“Should we get Ron Paul for Meet the Press?”

“Are you kidding me? Are you nuts? Isn’t your dad on the board of directors? He would have a fit if we did that. Gregory won’t want that. Tim Russert would never have allowed that.”
“Yes, but Ron Paul won the CPAC election.”

“Doesn’t matter. He wouldn’t win an election in our newsroom or anybody else’s, I can tell you that.”
“But maybe we should have him on and expose his idiotic ideas? A little overexposure and we kill the whole thing?”

“That’s what they did in the 2004 presidential debates and it was the biggest, most moronic, most asinine mistake they ever made. Don’t you get it? The people in this country actually agree with Ron Paul. How do you think he won at CPAC without buying the votes? Listen kid, you’ve got to think ‘Lord Voldemort.’ He who cannot be named.”
“Oh my God.”

“What? What are you looking at? Brian Williams? What did he say? Did he mention Ron Paul by name? Did I just hear his name?
“Oh my God.”

“Come on kid. Doesn’t matter. What could he do? I mean Ron Paul won. So it just slipped out. Now, snap out of it. Who will Gregory want? What would your daddy want? Focus. If it’s Sunday it’s Meet the Press.”
“Sarah Palin?”

“Born again Christian. And she won’t do it anyway.”
“Mike Huckabee?”

“Another born again Christian, and he’s on FOX remember?”
“Mitt Romney?”
“We’ve had him on five times now.”
“Hmmm, how bout Tim Pawlenty?”

“Perfect kid. Someday you will make a great television producer. Okay, we’ll see if Gregory wants Tim Pawlenty.”

2010 CPAC Straw Poll Results
Ron Paul 31%
Mitt Romney 22%
Sarah Palin 7%
Tim Pawlenty 6%
Mike Pence 5%
Newt Gingrich 4%
Mike Huckabee 4%
Mitch Daniels 2%
John Thune 2%
Rick Santorum 2%
Haley Barbour 1%

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2010/02/23/ron-paul-wins-so-who-appears-on-meet-the-press/

He can actually win!


Today’s Rasmussen Poll Rocks the Washington Establishment. Ron Paul can actually win!
According to a Rasmussen Poll released today, if the 2012 presidential election were held now Barack Obama would defeat Ron Paul by a narrow margin of 1% of the national vote. It would be 42%-41%. Only a sliver separates the popular president, beloved by the media and the national establishment, from an insurgent candidacy that calls for an end to foreign interventionism, government intrusion into our private lives and bailouts of big banks and private businesses.

Even more stunning, according to the poll only 11% prefer some other candidate and 6% are undecided.
This is earth shattering news in the corridors of power of New York and Washington, D.C. Hey, it is stunning news in Peoria, Illinois.

Two years ago I wrote a blog entitled The Mouse that Roared. It told the surprising story of how a little known congressman from Texas, Ron Paul, had surged too late to win the Republican nomination but not too late to awaken the nation to his remarkable political platform. Just as the John McCain clinched the nomination Paulistas appeared everywhere, like mushrooms after the rain. The GOP went into emergency mode to change state party rules and sometimes shut down their own conventions to kill the embarrassing phenomenon of Ron Paul supporters winning delegates after the mathematical certainty of the McCain win was in the bag. (See How a GOP conspiracy continues to hurt Ron Paul.)

Even as the Republican Party experienced the Sarah Palin boomlet and then tanked in the general election the Paulistas were growing and spreading across party lines. Republican and Democrat, conservative and liberal, Evangelical and Gay, Black and White, old and young, Ron Paul’s message of limited government had wide appeal.

When the Obama Stimulus plan appeared to be nothing more than a looting of the US Treasury for unions and narrow Democrat activist groups, and none of the most basic tweaks of the mortgage crisis were addressed, the Paulistas began to pick up steam. How could the public turn to establishment Republicans when the Bush administration had started the most recent mess? And yet, what was Barack Obama doing? Looting the treasury for his party at a time when unemployment was still soaring?

Ron Paul offered something different. It appeared to most to be a libertarian message, although Paul himself pointed out that it was pure Republicanism, a message that has been missing from the public debate since the days of Robert Taft. Ronald Reagan had espoused much of the same thing but the pragmatic realities of the Cold War had put his plans on the back burner. Ron Paul was saying that in the name of one emergency or another America was playing loose with the constitution, that our foreign policy was out of control. It was time for America to back away from its arrogant “rule the world” philosophy.

We were going bankrupt, he warned.

“Why are we borrowing $10 billion from China,” Paul asked, “Only to give it to Musharaf [in Pakistan,] who is a dictator, who overthrew an elected government, and then we go to war to promote democracy in Iraq?” Good question.

But nothing drew more support than Ron Paul’s campaign against the inside power brokers of the American establishment. Paul was making the point that no group of men and women, no matter how important or well connected, had the right to loot the US Treasury or devalue the money supply by printing more money, all without accountability. His calls to audit the Federal Reserve were portrayed as “goofy” until citizens began asking the obvious question, “Well, why not. It’s our government, our money. Who is the Federal Reserve?” It was like a scene out of the Emperor’s Clothes and the public was saying that the Wall Street Princes of Power were naked. And so they are.

If you have been reading this blog you have followed this unlikely, Cinderella story for the last few years. You learned how Ron Paul heroically stood up in the Republican Nation Debates in 2004. (See Ron Paul’s best YouTube moment. ) How his opponents will try to defeat him. (See Is Ron Paul too old?) And how he can pull an upset? (How Ron Paul Wins.) But who would have thought the numbers would look this good this early?

During the 2008 Fox News Debate, an anchor brought up the dilemma, “Congressman Paul, another question about electability. Do you have any sir?” There followed raucous laughter and ridicule at the congressman’s expense. But Ron Paul patiently let the laughter pass over him and then made his passionate point, that he would win when the American people began to see the truth. Well, it has begun to happen. Ron Paul is not only in double digits, he is 1% away from the incumbent president.
GOP experts were quick to dismiss his recent win at CPAC as meaningless. Only the result of young voters. But 41% of the American electorate represents a lot more than that.

Welcome to the revolution.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2010/04/14/he-can-actually-win/

Ron Paul or Rand Paul? That is the question.


Ron Paul or Rand Paul? Who do we help first?

Paulistania is in a flux. The little Paulistas are running here and there in a panic. Where do we go? Where do we put our money? For which Paul do we work first? If we help Ron will we hurt Rand? Which is more important? The long shot, Quixotic Ron Paul presidential possibility? Or the more likely win and the future of the movement, the Rand Paul senate race in Kentucky?

The Ron Paul presidential possibility is igniting a national movement. One could say that there never would have been a Rand Paul opportunity if the father’s campaign had not struck a chord. Things are only getting better, or I should say worse. The economy is in the tank and we are sliding into a permanent dependency on the Chinese, the only communist super power left on earth. The Obama administration has not even touched the mortgage crisis, not even made the most obvious, easiest fixes. Unemployment is widespread and the only jobs being created are from the government itself. Understandably, taxes are soaring. A citizen in these United States pays at a rate of three times that of his Russia counterpart.

Our wars are unrelenting. We are building new nations in Iraq and Afghanistan, with that borrowed money, of course, careful not to touch any Iraqi oil money lest we appear exploitive to French and Germans, who were cheating the UN boycott of Saddam Hussein by their own deals. Our boys are dying in Afghanistan in our newly defined effort to supplant their 2,000 year old culture with our own, more reasonable, up to date version of women’s rights. State Department officials now actually accompany military officers on the battlefield, as communist party officials were once assigned to look over the shoulders of their Soviet officers on the German front in World War Two.

We now have 700 military bases and soldiers on the ground in 140 nations. American foreign policy could not be more screwed up. And only Ron Paul is demanding a change. Obama, Clinton, Palin, Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich are only arguing about how to fight our unlimited wars. Only Ron Paul is calling for an end to the American Global Empire, warning that we are bankrupting the country, and that it isn’t working anyway. For every terrorist we manage to kill, we create ten more.

Politically, Ron Paul is winning everything within sight. The CPAC straw poll, online, spur of the moment, contests. He is in double digits in the national polls. Everything his activists have ever dreamed of is happening before their eyes. He is within reach of an Aymes, Iowa Cavalcade surprise showing, which could be the door to the GOP nomination. And who would have dreamed that the party’s last nominee, John McCain, would be fighting for his political life in a primary battle against a Tea Party challenger?
If anyone, ever has a chance to break the cycle of corruption, break the power of the establishment, then who? And if ever there was a chance for it to happen, then when? The answers to those two questions are “Ron Paul” and “now.” So no, we cannot afford to withhold our support of Ron Paul, not now, when the impossible can happen.

But wait a minute. Isn’t Rand Paul a more highly evolved version of his father? Isn’t Rand free from the more controversial baggage, issues like the legalization of Marijuana? Whatever its merits, it is an issue that will almost assuredly be seized upon by the power establishment to sew fear in the heartland and doom a Ron Paul presidential run. And since Rand Paul is younger doesn’t he give the movement more time? And won’t his election now give the movement six years to build and grow? And wasn’t that Ron Paul’s goal in the first place, to get others to run for offices? And won’t all the establishment enemies rise up to try stop Rand Paul? Won’t television news demonize him? Shouldn’t we all band together and support him now, as our best hope? Won’t support for Ron’s longshot presidential run, drain away precious dollars and hours for Rand’s very imminent, real possibility?

If anyone, ever has a chance to break the cycle of corruption in Washington, if anyone was ever close to getting inside “the club” to expose all the secret deals, then who? And if ever there was a chance for it to happen, then when? The answers to those two questions are “Rand Paul” and “now.” So no, no, we cannot withhold our support of Rand Paul now, when a breakthrough is possible.
So to whom do we send our dollars? And to which campaign deserves our activism?

The very clear answer is both. We support Ron and we support Rand and we do not slack for either one. If one falters hopelessly it can feed the other. And if they both succeed? All the better.

For years the incestuous business lobbies have donated to both Republican and Democrat campaigns, with the reasoning that one of them is bound to win. True libertarians should not bemoan the fact that we have two superstars shining in the firmament. We should support them both and enjoy the exploding fireworks as they light up the sky and send the evil barons into exile, the men and women of power who have stolen from the retirement funds of the elderly and the future earnings of the young to fatten their own, selfish, exorbitant salaries.

Here’s to Ron and here’s to Rand. May Paulistania be at peace. And may we put our money where our mouths are.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2010/06/10/ron-paul-or-rand-paul-that-is-the-question-2/

Democrats, Republicans and Ron Paul

There are Democrats and Republicans and then there is Ron Paul. His time has come. The numbers don’t lie.

Last night’s NBC Evening News showcased the stunning results of the Hart/McInturff poll of the American electorate. It was conducted by NBC and the Wall Street Journal. It included 1,000 adults but unlike many recent polls, they properly factored in 200 by cell phone as well. My “insider experience” with NBC polls tells me that they may have actually used even more numbers. Sometimes they do, even with the extra cost, just to add to their reputation for accuracy. And Hart/McInturff are the best.

Here is the bottom line. The Democrats are in trouble. Ho hum. But then there is this additional stunner. The Republicans are in trouble too. Well, okay, we knew that. But no, big time. Bigger than we thought. The American people don’t want either one of them. (Hey, are the American people smart or what?) And, get this, the American people kind of like the Tea Party. Not just conservative Republicans, all of them, across the board. It seems they like the idea that things are being shaken up a bit.

Well, I think you know where I am going with this. The title of this blog gives it away. Yep, there are Democrats and there are Republicans and then there is Ron Paul. The man who started the Tea Party, or I should say, the man for whom the Tea Party was started.

Wow. Two years ago I was blogging that the time was right for Ron Paul. And that was too bad because the election was over. He had peaked too late. The nation was so enchanted by our first African American president that no one was paying any attention. But those who could see clearly knew he had been right about the wars and right about the economy. It couldn’t get any better for him. Except, of course, again, the election was over.

I speculated on what the world would be like in two years and how the Obama administration would jack up the economy with all the spending and buy itself more time, at the expense of future generations. That Ron Paul would once more be a voice in the wilderness, misunderstood by all but the most savvy. That the nation would be fooled by the artificially inflated economic numbers. But wow, was I wrong.

Yep, Obama has spent and spent and spent but he gave most of it away to his own constituents. The mortgage crisis was not even touched, even the most obvious things were left undone. And it still lingers, ready to do more damage in the last quarter of his second year. Who would have ever dreamed that this would be ignored so long?

Unemployment is stuck. And the numbers in Ohio? Remember the state that would be the showcase? It was at 6.6% in September, 2008, as Obama and McCain jousted with Joe the plumber. It now stands at 10.4%. The Democrats, themselves, cut off unemployment benefits to millions. The war has heated up and this war is all Barack Obama’s war, with State Department advisers on the ground, lecturing soldiers at the company level, on whom they can kill and whom they cannot. Vietnam redu. What a mess.

And there is so much more. The dollar? Only Ron Paul, the voice in the wilderness, called that one right. Now, two years into the Obama administration, it is collapsing before our eyes. There is no better time to sell your Rolex.

So, will the American people really re-elect Barack Obama in 2012?

They wouldn’t do it today. In fact, it looks like he planned all along to be a one term president. He would get in, take the country as far left as possible, get all the money he could for unions, teachers, gays, geographical regions that voted Democrat, illegal aliens and any others who would support the Left and then get out. Let the country scream and complain, so what. If they are still stupid enough to do it all over again for another four years, well, okay. If not, he can go private and make a fortune from the Middle East, with speaking fees and consultancy contracts for Oil Corporations. Hey let’s get some of that money flowing back to an American taxpayer. Maybe he will run for the United Nations’ Secretary General. Let Hillary have the White House thing.

But they wouldn’t elect Hillary either. Not today.

And if NBC is right, they surely don’t want Sarah Palin (although, they would love to have their picture taken with her,) Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney or any of the others. What would they do any different than George W. Bush? So what’s the point? They all support “the wars without end, amen.” They all supported TARP and only picked at pieces of the Obama Stimulus Package.

What the American people want is something new. Someone who will not mortgage away their futures. Someone who will pay the bills. Someone who will not spend trillions of dollars on foreign adventures that make more enemies than friends. Someone who will not use government to rule their lives. Someone who will honor the constitution and the original ideas of liberty that directed the Founding Fathers. Those issues cut across Democrat and Republican.

What the American people want is Ron Paul.

They just don’t know it yet.

But they will. You’ll see. They will. It’s coming. Numbers don’t lie. And I’m going to be a part of it this time.

Well, you say, will Ron Paul even run for president? Sure he will. He can count better than any of us. So keep your powder dry. Don’t sign up for anyone else. This will be the big show, the real show, the fund one, the change you can count on. Yes, it’s true, this is America’s darkest hour. We are hocked up to the wazoo. And yet, ironically, this is the best chance Liberty has ever had in my lifetime.

(See below, from the first days, boy was I understated.)

YouTube - Obama stimulus package: Doug Wead (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Opi-pxJlxfI&feature=player_embedded)

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/democrats-republicans-and-ron-paul/

Thomas
11-29-2010, 09:44 PM
Who Won the 2010 Election? Ron Paul


You can say, Ron Paul lost the election in 2008 but won the revolution in 2010.

What do we learn from tonight’s election? And what does it mean for 2012?

We learn that Barack Obama’s re-election as president is now far more problematic. Sure, anything can happen. The whole world can change in 30 days. But right now, Obama is in trouble.

But didn’t Reagan and Clinton suffer setbacks in the congressional elections during their second years in office and still recover, winning re-election?

Yes, but this setback is more severe and it is more intense. Polling shows that. I’ll put it this way, neither Reagan nor Clinton had a gubernatorial candidate from their own party tell them to take their endorsement and shove it.

And then there is the issue of where the battles took place. The Republicans won big in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin and even the governor’s office in Michigan. These are all critical, key presidential swing states. With two exceptions, you didn’t see that in the Reagan – Clinton off year congressional losses.

So will Obama not follow the Reagan – Clinton playbook and try to govern more from the middle? Will he compromise his agenda, work with the Republicans? Abandon the more radical elements of his plans?

Given his personal record in the Senate, that is unlikely. He would often go it alone, with four other colleagues, rather than compromise his more liberal agenda. But then there is this other problem. In a sense, it’s too late. President Obama has already achieved most of his agenda, including its most radical elements, while, by comparison, Reagan and Clinton were not even half finished with their respective programs. This election was like closing the barn door after the horses got out. So the electorate is furious and they may not be finished.

So what can the Democrats do now? What will work for them now?

Well, keep in mind that President Barack Obama has the vast majority of the national media still behind him. And the best wishes of many Americans who are still infatuated with the idea of an African American president. They want it to work. And they want him to be successful. And things can change quickly. And the economy rarely stays down this long. So even with mismanagement, there is enough creativity left in the marketplace to allow it rebound, at least a little.

If it doesn’t, it might not matter. President Obama may not care. He may not even run for re-election. It is very likely that all along he intended to achieve as much of his radical agenda as he could in a first term and he has done it.

Who was the big winner in the 2010 elections?

Redistricting for Republicans was the big winner.

Because of a combination of the new census and now Republican power in several key state legislatures as well as the governor’s mansions, the Republicans will help draw the electoral maps. This will impact Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, and even to an extent, in New York, where the most outrageous liberal plans are now likely to be usurped. This will shape congressional power for years.

Yes, but among the presidential candidates. Who were the big winners? What personalities came out ahead?

Sarah Palin was a big winner. But in a sense this was really a moment for Ron Paul, the most unlikely candidate last time around. You can say, Ron Paul lost the election last time but won the revolution this time.

The Tea party really started as a Ron Paul fundraiser, although it was co-opted by Sarah Palin. (And you have to give her credit for that.) And all that Ron Paul said about the economy, the dollar, our dependency on China, the bailouts, things that were laughed at two years ago, became the standard campaign language of last night’s winners. And remember, Paul turned his army loose after his big convention in Minneapolis. He charged them to go out and run for office themselves. And they did.

An NBC poll released Monday showed the number one message the Tea Party wants to send to congress is to get back to the basics of the Constitution. It sounds like a Ron Paul sound bite. Oh yes, Rand Paul, the congressman’s son, won election as the new U.S. Senator from Kentucky. All in all, it was a good night for the U. S. Constitution.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2010/11/03/who-won-the-2020-election-ron-paul/



The Ron Paul Girl strikes again


Ha, here it is the real “Ballad of Ron Paul.” You gotta love it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZSvKWVp-kY&feature=player_embedded

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2011/02/09/the-ron-paul-girl-strikes-again/



Ron Paul on Israel

Ron Paul and Israel

I am a “born again Christian” and like most from my culture I support Israel’s right to live at peace behind secure borders.

I am also a strong supporter of Ron Paul because he, more than any other public figure, fights for personal liberty. Christians don’t need to take power. They had power in England and France and Spain and it didn’t work. All power, even Christian power, corrupts. Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty. And the idea of liberty is what gave birth to the American experiment. This country has seen many of the greatest spiritual awakenings in modern history not because we seized government and used it to promote our agenda but because government stayed out of the way.

So I am deeply disappointed at my good friend, Gary Bauer, for a misleading fundraising letter smearing Congressman Ron Paul and suggesting that he wants to cut off aid to Israel. The letter was sent out last month but I am still having it forwarded onto me by well intentioned, but misled, evangelical friends.

Here is the opening paragraph of the Gary Bauer letter, sent out to “Friends and Supporters.”

“Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) has just introduced an amendment to end all U.S. aid to Israel. The amendment could be voted on before the day is over. I need your help right now to stop this ill-conceived proposal! “

Now, here is the truth:

Congressman Ron Paul never introduced legislation calling for an end to U.S. aid to Israel. What he did introduce was legislation that would have ended foreign aid to ALL countries.

Ron Paul sees foreign aid as taking money from poor people in rich countries and giving it to rich people in poor countries. It was this foreign aid that made Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak and his family wealthy.

The United States is in the middle of a desperate financial crisis and we are still acting like we are the world’s rich uncle, picking up the restaurant tab for every meal.

But Bauer’s letter discounts this idea:

“Don’t be deceived. This Ron Paul proposal would not lower our budget deficit. By abandoning Israel while its enemies are gaining strength, the risk of a major war in the Middle East would increase. A major war would cost the U.S. billions and billions of dollars as we have already seen in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Now for the dirty little secret that Evangelical Christian Washington lobbyists don’t want you to know. While America’s foreign aid package gives Israel $ 3 billion in loans, it also gives Israel’s collective Arab enemies four times as much, more than $ 12 billion in direct aid.

Far from abandoning Israel, Ron Paul’s legislation would have given Israel a net $ 8 billion advantage over the status quo. One could have just as easily sent out a fundraising letter saying that Gary Bauer is promoting a policy that will give the enemies of Israel four times the aid we give her.

Such demagoguery is not just ridiculous, it is wrong.

Ron Paul’s principled stands have been consistent and logical and unchanging.

In the 1980′s, when Republicans and Washington power elites were pushing for a deal that would sell AWACS to Saudi Arabia, Ron Paul was a defiant, lonely voice trying to block the sale. The pressure was on and most evangelical leaders abandoned Israel, rationalizing their position. Not Ron Paul.

In recent years he has urged congress to end all corporate subsidies to companies that do business with Iran and other nations bellicose to Israel. Few if any evangelicals recognize the importance to Israel of this ongoing struggle involving billions of dollars and corporate corruption and powerful Washington lobbyists. And he continues to fight the growing protectionist sentiment in our country to ensure we maintain the freest possible exchange of trade and commerce with Israel.

Most of all, Ron Paul believes that American should mind its own business and let Israel make her own decisions without interference and control from Washington. He recognizes that Israel has one of the best trained, most elite armed forces in the world and he believes that we should NEVER try to use our influence to stop Israel from defending herself. Ron Paul refused to vote to condemn Israel during the 2006 war with Lebanon. And he will never try to pressure Israel into accepting a “land for peace” compromise before the Israelis themselves decide.

I have spoken with Dr. Ron Paul about Israel, He recognizes the special relationship between Israel and the United States based on our shared values and Judeo-Christian history. As the former vice president of Christian and Jews United for Israel, I would strongly argue that Ron’s position of friendship, free trade, ending support for Israel’s enemies and a cessation of meddling in Israel’s internal affairs would provide for a stronger U.S.- Israeli relationship and a net advantage for the Israelis.

As a “born again Christian” I have been amused at the willingness of our power brokers to conveniently embrace presidential candidates who have had four marriages or have been bitter opponents to our own people facing nomination in the Senate or who flip flop on the issues just in time for Iowa, all because the candidate will do a radio show or appear at a university or a political briefing – fund raiser.

Well, Ron Paul is the real deal. Raised as a Lutheran, (now attending a Baptist church in Lake Jackson) he puts his Christian faith into practice. He has always been pro life, always been married to the same wife and always been the nation’s premier advocate for liberty.

As we see our liberties being stripped away by the courts and by government agencies and by presidential fiat, we need to speak carefully and truthfully about those few men and women in Washington who have the integrity to defy the temptations of power. Ron Paul is just such a man. We should cherish his independence from the corruption and partisanship of Washington, D. C.. and instead of distorting his positions on the issues we should celebrate his courage to speak the truth.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/ron-paul-on-israel/



Ron Paul just makes good sense

Well, I made it. Today, May 17th, I am sixty five years old.

I love being old. At least I think I do. I have lost my short term memory or my long term memory. (I can’t remember which one. ) Sometimes I think I have my short term memory or else I wouldn’t know that I had lost it. And then at other times I think, well, maybe this has been going on for a long time.

When I was a young man I had a great memory but I didn’t know anything. So I ask you. What’s so great about remembering nothing? At least now I have lots of things that I have forgotten.

I like George Smiley, the old spy in the John LeCarre trilogy. He had to be called back to save the situation. That’s kinda how I see congressman Ron Paul. If there was someone younger who was right on the issues we wouldn’t need to bother him, but sorry, Ron, you are needed once again. Come back and save your country.

People who say that Ron Paul is too old to be president, that old people are forgetful, need to consider this.

He remembered his wedding vows. Not many presidential candidates can claim that. He’s been married to the same woman for 51 years. Politicians try to convince us that private promises don’t matter. A person’s personal life is not relevant to their public duty. But if they lie to their wife and children what makes you so sure they are telling YOU the truth?

Ron Paul has always remembered to pay his taxes. Almost half of President Barack Obama’s cabinet, including his own secretary of the treasury can’t claim that. Oh they say that they will make it all good now but what if they hadn’t been named to the cabinet? You mean there are thousands of people out there who just ignore the rules and get away with it? Only suckers like me pay taxes?

Ron Paul points out some very obvious, common sense things that you can’t get out of your head. For example, according to the constitution the U. S. Congress is supposed to write the legislation and debate it and spend the money but the Federal Reserve actually spends more money than the U. S. Congress. Huh? Nobody elects them or even audits them and their board meetings are closed. I wonder if any of them pay their taxes? Until Obama appoints them to something that requires Senate confirmation we will never know. Not that it matters. They not only have “insider” information, they are the “insiders.” Ha. When they are thinking they are getting insider information. And they can literally make money. I’m not bitter about that. Just troubled by the corruption of the American constitution and troubled for the nation.

Ron Paul may be the oldest candidate but he seems to care more about the youth of this country than any of them. He is the only one who seems to remember that the young people will have to pay for the money we are now borrowing. He is the only one who would stop the endless wars and bring our boys home. That one percent who are dying for the rest of us and seeing their marriages break up and their children bitter and their suicide rates spike.

He is the only one who points out the absurdities of our foreign policy. We give $ 3 billion to Israel and $12 billion to her avowed enemies. We invade Afghanistan because they are harboring Osama Bin Laden. Our war results in the death of thousands of civilians and coalition soldiers. But when Bin Laden crosses the border into Pakistan we give that country close to $12 billion in aid. I guess that was to pay for the food for Bin Laden and his three wives. Not to mention, his cable bill, all the extra thumb drives and his porno movie downloads. Even now, only ron Paul is calling for us to stop this nonsense. As of today, we are still giving money to Pakistan. Ron Paul seems to be the only person in public life who remembers what our mother’s taught us about the playground. If you have to pay money to your friends, then they aren’t your friends.

Most of all, Ron Paul still remembers the U.S. constitution and he knows it by heart. And believes in it. You can’t say that about Barack Obama or any of the other Republican candidates. There are the candidates and then there is Ron Paul. He stands alone.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2011/05/17/ron-paul-just-makes-good-sense/


Ron Paul to Obama: Quit ordering Israel around!

In a statement released after the president’s speech, Thursday, May 19, 2011, Congressman Ron Paul took Barack Obama to task. “Unlike this president, I do not believe it is our place to dictate how Israel runs her affairs.”

Ron Paul’s statement, released immediately after the speech, reflected the congressman’s long held views against American leaders meddling in the affairs of other countries. “Israel is our close friend,” the statement reads, “While President Obama’s demand that Israel make hard concessions in her border conflicts may very well be in her long-term interest, only Israel can make that determination on her own, without pressure from the United States or coercion by the United Nations.”

Paul argues that America must stop trying to rule the world and dictate policy to foreign capitals and bring its armies home from its endless wars. Warning that the country is facing annual deficits of $ 2 trillion the congressman’s statement read in part, “Our military’s purpose is to defend our country, not to police the Middle East.”

Ron Paul has been at the forefront of a growing movement of Americans who feel that our national interventionism has gone to extreme and is making us enemies all over the globe. In the 2008 presidential debates, while Mitt Romney and John McCain argued over how long American troops should stay in Iraq, Paul was alone in saying that they shouldn’t have gone into the country in the first place.

It was a shocking statement at the time and both Romney and McCain smirked condescendingly, but today polls show two-thirds of the American people calling for a full withdrawal of American troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan.

“When will our leaders finally do what’s right for America,” Ron Paul’s statement asks, “And rethink this irrational approach we’ve followed for far too long?”

Paul has been critical of American’s foreign aid suggesting that it is conflicted and the money misused. He once described it as money taken from poor people in a rich country and given to rich people in poor countries. Paul has pointed out the absurdity of our policies. “We give $3 billion to Israel and $12 billion to her enemies.”

Obama’s stunning statement, siding with the Palestinian position, calling for Israel to return to its 1967 borders would mean among other things the loss of the Golan Heights and most of Jerusalem.

The statement comes only hours before his Friday meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Many devout Christians and Jews saw the return of Jerusalem to Israel in 1967 as a fulfillment of Bible prophecy. An NBC report from Cairo Thursday night showed little enthusiasm among Middle Easterners for President Obama’s speech.

It remains to be seen how deep the anger will be in America. President Obama’s decision may have come at a heavy political price at home with little gain in the Islamic world.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/ron-paul-to-obama-quit-ordering-israel-around/


Ron Paul steals the show at Faith Coalition

Ron Paul surprised delegates at the Faith and Freedom Coalition conference last week by quoting long portions of the Bible to buttress his political views. Romney, Bachman, Pawlenty and most of the other GOP presidential hopefuls showed up at the event. The Faith and Freedom Coalition is organized by Ralph Reed and is referred to by some as the new Christian Coalition. But while some of the speakers stumbled uncomfortably over Christian buzzwords, likely supplied by their handlers, and other speakers ignored the special character of their audience altogether, Ron Paul launched into a scriptural defense of his views.

Paul reminded his audience of the Biblical story of 1 Samuel chapter 8 when the Israelites demanded a king and God warned them what would happen. They would be burdened with taxation and the King would take their sons away to die in distant wars.

“I don’t think we need a king,” Paul told the audience, “and we don’t need Washington to act as if they’re the king of this country.” His speech evoked the largest applause and cheers of the day.

Ron Paul’s recent appearance and the reaction of his audience reflects a growing trend among evangelicals who see the erosion of the constitutional right of freedom of religion to be the new threat.

“This is no longer about Christians trying to force prayer in schools or an end to abortion,” a famous televangelist told me. ”While we have been busy talking about those things we have had the constitution stolen right before our eyes. This is now about whether or not we have the right to worship freely. The battle is now over the constitution itself.”

Last year Ron Paul was criticized by some Christian leaders for defending the rights of Moslems to build a Mosque in New York City. Libertarians, who defend the congressman point out that less than 1% of the American population is Islamic. 76% are Christians. If the government is given the power to decide where and when a house of worship can be built the Christians, not the Muslims, will suffer most. In recent years Christian pastors and denominational leaders have grown frustrated as State and County governments use zoning boards to block the construction of new churches, keeping the land on the property tax roles. In some of the largest counties in America a new Christian church cannot be built.

“More and more Christians are seeing the critical importance of Ron Paul’s message,” says Brian Jacobs, a former consultant for the Billy Graham organization. “If we compromise the constitution, even to promote something we want, in the long run, we are undercutting ourselves.” Jacobs helped arrange the meeting between Billy Graham and George W. Bush in Jacksonville, Florida, the day before the national election in 2000. Jacobs is now actively supporting Ron Paul’s candidacy.

Bill Spiegel, a former member of the Senior Bush President’s Economic Council and the Southern Baptist Liaison for George H. W. Bush says, “Much of the money that was going to evangelical lobbies in Washington is now going to Ron Paul. And the Christian leaders in Washington have been taken by surprise. It is because the people are seeing what the leaders are missing. They don’t want power they want to be left alone to worship in freedom and Ron Paul is the only candidate who is defending that right consistently.”

Ron Paul shared with the Christian activist audience his own experience as an OB doctor, delivering more than 4,000 babies. And why he supports Right to Life. ”Let me tell you,” the congressman said, “life does begin at conception.”

Perhaps his biggest applause came when he told the audience, “We have, as a people, lost our confidence and our understanding of what true liberty is all about and where it comes from. It doesn’t come from the government. Our liberties come from our Creator.”

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/ron-paul-steals-the-show-at-faith-coalition/

Kotin
11-29-2010, 10:10 PM
thanks for posting this.. but fuck you for making me read this much..


kinda a mixed bag.. :D

guitarlifter
11-30-2010, 01:05 PM
I loved reading this blog! It was cool to see the progression of how the movement of Ron Paul has been picking up speed over time since 2008. Let's just hope that this continues into a presidency.

Joseph
11-30-2010, 08:43 PM
I absolutely loved this. We certainly need an Ames Straw Poll victory, but we also need to ensure that we transfer the visual support into physical votes in each of the state Caucasus. Last time round the visual support was phenomenal but the physical votes cast were much lower than expected. We also need to find a way to distinguish Ron Paul as the better choice when it comes to Sarah Palin.

As for the Evangelical vote, that is certainly tough because for some reason they are just so deaf to candidates who don't act like the old Pharisees who do everything they can to try to show publicly how religious they are. That's ironic considering Jesus said that those were the hypocrites and His real followers were the ones who prayed in secret. They are deaf to candidates who talk about anything other than abortion and gay marriage. It makes me sad and as a Christian it's rather embarrassing to see them act that way. If we can show them why they need to be looking at the core issues, if we can show them that Jesus was called the Prince of peace not the Prince of war, if we can show them that it's what the politicians do and how they vote not what they say, if we can show them that faith without works is dead then we can win the evangelical vote and doing so would be an enormous victory for Ron Paul.

This was a very well done blog and Doug Wead is a great and intelligent man.

driller80545
11-30-2010, 09:43 PM
Sarah Palin is all over the television and Ron Paul is not. This needs to change right now.

Paul Or Nothing
12-05-2010, 03:59 PM
Phew! That was a long read but a good one for the most part. I hope Paul takes Wead on-board his campaign, he really likes Paul it seems as he's even compared Paul to Thomas Jefferson.

nc4rp
12-19-2010, 12:04 PM
i agree



then he has a very real chance of winning in the small universe of Ames, Iowa in 2011 and that win, my friends, would catapult him and his movement into the stratosphere.

ejigga
01-06-2011, 08:02 AM
what Paul really has going for him are young, passionate people who will do the "dirty work" for no pay. They're not looking for big appointment or high-powered jobs to follow; they're/we're looking for the right man to live in the White House, and we know that's him. Has he launced an official exploratory committee yet? Done fundraising campaigns for a lot of small donors like Obama did so successfully? It's true there are so many "passive" voters out there who won't vote libertarian b/c they think it's a lost cause, and won't vote Republican because most of the party has lost it's core principles--but they will come out to vote for Dr. Paul! He needs to be out there, yesterday. Too many of us are ready, willing and able to put our time and/or $ behind him. We CAN do this!!

handyman96792
01-15-2011, 01:36 PM
I have been so disgusted with my senior leadership for so long...Ron Paul has given me reason to believe that I can make a difference. I will work like a dog to see this patriot elected. If you read this and are in need of assistance that can be provided over the internet in support of Ron Paul's election, please don't hesitate to email me at handyman96792@yahoo.com.



Who Won the 2010 Election? Ron Paul


You can say, Ron Paul lost the election in 2008 but won the revolution in 2010.

What do we learn from tonight’s election? And what does it mean for 2012?

We learn that Barack Obama’s re-election as president is now far more problematic. Sure, anything can happen. The whole world can change in 30 days. But right now, Obama is in trouble.

But didn’t Reagan and Clinton suffer setbacks in the congressional elections during their second years in office and still recover, winning re-election?

Yes, but this setback is more severe and it is more intense. Polling shows that. I’ll put it this way, neither Reagan nor Clinton had a gubernatorial candidate from their own party tell them to take their endorsement and shove it.

And then there is the issue of where the battles took place. The Republicans won big in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin and even the governor’s office in Michigan. These are all critical, key presidential swing states. With two exceptions, you didn’t see that in the Reagan – Clinton off year congressional losses.

So will Obama not follow the Reagan – Clinton playbook and try to govern more from the middle? Will he compromise his agenda, work with the Republicans? Abandon the more radical elements of his plans?

Given his personal record in the Senate, that is unlikely. He would often go it alone, with four other colleagues, rather than compromise his more liberal agenda. But then there is this other problem. In a sense, it’s too late. President Obama has already achieved most of his agenda, including its most radical elements, while, by comparison, Reagan and Clinton were not even half finished with their respective programs. This election was like closing the barn door after the horses got out. So the electorate is furious and they may not be finished.

So what can the Democrats do now? What will work for them now?

Well, keep in mind that President Barack Obama has the vast majority of the national media still behind him. And the best wishes of many Americans who are still infatuated with the idea of an African American president. They want it to work. And they want him to be successful. And things can change quickly. And the economy rarely stays down this long. So even with mismanagement, there is enough creativity left in the marketplace to allow it rebound, at least a little.

If it doesn’t, it might not matter. President Obama may not care. He may not even run for re-election. It is very likely that all along he intended to achieve as much of his radical agenda as he could in a first term and he has done it.

Who was the big winner in the 2010 elections?

Redistricting for Republicans was the big winner.

Because of a combination of the new census and now Republican power in several key state legislatures as well as the governor’s mansions, the Republicans will help draw the electoral maps. This will impact Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, and even to an extent, in New York, where the most outrageous liberal plans are now likely to be usurped. This will shape congressional power for years.

Yes, but among the presidential candidates. Who were the big winners? What personalities came out ahead?

Sarah Palin was a big winner. But in a sense this was really a moment for Ron Paul, the most unlikely candidate last time around. You can say, Ron Paul lost the election last time but won the revolution this time.

The Tea party really started as a Ron Paul fundraiser, although it was co-opted by Sarah Palin. (And you have to give her credit for that.) And all that Ron Paul said about the economy, the dollar, our dependency on China, the bailouts, things that were laughed at two years ago, became the standard campaign language of last night’s winners. And remember, Paul turned his army loose after his big convention in Minneapolis. He charged them to go out and run for office themselves. And they did.

An NBC poll released Monday showed the number one message the Tea Party wants to send to congress is to get back to the basics of the Constitution. It sounds like a Ron Paul sound bite. Oh yes, Rand Paul, the congressman’s son, won election as the new U.S. Senator from Kentucky. All in all, it was a good night for the U. S. Constitution.

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2010/11/03/who-won-the-2020-election-ron-paul/

jake
02-06-2011, 11:00 PM
hear hear, hell, I'm a Canadian and I am prepared to donate funds to legal non-campaign activism any reasonable non-fiancial efforts. It's time to put up team. RP2012; All aboard! 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011... 2-0-1-2 ; imagine the pride, the inaugural speech of RON PAUL as PRESIDENT of the United States of America!!!

Thomas
02-22-2011, 07:17 AM
everyone please take the time to read this

Thomas
02-24-2011, 07:10 AM
morning www.libertypac.com

pacelli
02-24-2011, 07:48 AM
cut & paste bump

randomname
04-26-2011, 12:57 PM
bumpity bump

Thomas
05-18-2011, 12:18 AM
bump

Qdog
05-18-2011, 12:24 AM
I have been so disgusted with my senior leadership for so long...Ron Paul has given me reason to believe that I can make a difference. I will work like a dog to see this patriot elected. If you read this and are in need of assistance that can be provided over the internet in support of Ron Paul's election, please don't hesitate to email me at handyman96792@yahoo.com.

Congrats on your first Post!

civusamericanus
05-18-2011, 12:31 AM
Ron Paul and Iowa in 2011


Note to reader: This is a nice little series with about five thousand followers. But you have to read them in order to know what we are talking about. If you are following these posts dig right in. If not, the chain is listed at the bottom of this post. Take them on, one by one and then come back to read this one.

The general thesis is that Ron Paul can best change the Republican Party by running for president again, that more people respond to a big vision than to a call to get involved at the precinct level, and that there is a way, however unlikely, that Ron Paul can put his activist army to work and set in motion events that could lead to his nomination.

Here we go….

Ron Paul and Iowa 2011:

If Ron Paul wins the Iowa Straw Poll (ISP) in 2011, and that is a big “IF” which we will address later, he will be in a favorable position to win the Iowa Caucus the following January. Because, Ron Paul, unlike Palin, Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich and others, will be awakening a movement.

The others will be debating how much the government’s latest bailout should be. Or whether there should be six more or three more. They can’t very well say there shouldn’t have been any since they are already on record. Only Ron Paul can be saying that the nationalization of the insurance industry or the banks or the car industry and all the others that will follow represented an abandonment of the free market system and the Swedenization of America at a time when even Sweden has backed away from socialism as a failed model.

People say, well Ron Paul was an aberration. He only “took” with an activist’s segment because of the unpopularity of the Iraq War. But by 2012 the American economy could very well be in chaos over the decisions we are making now.

Take for example the supply of money. Trillions of new dollars are being printed. Eventually, as this continues, our own dollars will be watered down and diluted. It is like a wave out there that is on its way and will someday soon hit the shore. It has already been set in motion and it will come. Every time they print more money it is like a tax on the money in your pocket because they are diminishing from its value. So George W. Bush, the great conservative, who refused to raise taxes, spent so much money that we didn’t have that he was forced to just print more. Ironically, we all got taxed by default, by losing the value of the money we had.

President Elect Obama has already said that we should use the new money we are printing to hire the unemployed to rebuild our roads and infrastructure. Sounds like a good idea. Anyone who had traveled around the world has seen how American highways and bridges and airports and train routes have deteriorated compared to other countries and regions, especially Western Europe, where the strain of distances is not so great. But the newly printed money that we put in the pockets of these workers will compete for food and fuel, driving up prices and diluting the power of the money being earned by workers in the free marketplace. Those American workers who are productive and doing business based on natural supply and demand and who are hiring out of need, not out of charity, will see their capital diminished setting in motion a further need for the government to nationalize and hire and tax or print more money to further prop up its artificially created market.

The American middle class, bearing the brunt of all of this, could very well be in an uproar in 2012, ready to listen to someone who saw this coming for decades and warned against it.

And all the other candidates will be arguing over the details of the involvement in our latest war and who supports the troops the most and what strategies should have been employed. And what we should do now. Only Ron Paul will have warned against foreign intervention in the first place.

Romney won the 2008 ISP but lost in the Caucus because he failed to secure any understanding with Evangelical leaders. Like Steve Forbes in 2000, he gobbled up every Movement Conservative for sale in Washington D.C., hiring them or giving them titles and bringing them onboard. But like Forbes, they dominated the conservative talk radio and television for their candidate but had little or no impact in Iowa. It is because almost all of these leaders are Catholic and while they have some impact in New Hampshire, and a lot as conservative opinion makers, they have little impact on the Southern Baptist South or the Pentecostal – Charismatic states like Iowa.

The key Iowa evangelical activists and political operatives that Romney brought onboard could deliver very little. As a Mormon he should have understood that Iowa Evangelical activists and leaders are linked to their national leaders of influence. If James Dobson would have given his “okay,” for example, it would have been far more powerful than to have some local, Iowa, Family Research Council director weigh in. And even Dobson wouldn’t have been as important as a Pentecostal or Charismatic leader who could have awakened the locals.

Romney had the talented Mark DeMoss carrying his water as an Evangelical on the national scene but while that might have eventually helped him in some southern states it had little influence with the Pentecostal-Charismatic circles in Iowa. It may have even hurt. DeMoss was seen by the leadership as Jerry Falwell’s sidekick, during the Baptist “raid” of PTL.

Ironically, Governor Mike Huckabee, a Baptist, understood this and courted the Pentecostal television preacher Kenneth Copeland, flying to Texas and appearing on his show. Long before it aired, the news was out in Iowa.

Ron Paul will have the right socio-cultural plan in place because he has friends now who support him and can help him craft it. And Ron Paul will be right on the issues because his views are immovable, based on principle. His ship is guided by the stars and so it knows where it is on any issue and any time.

The formula that allows him to win the ISP, which we will visit in an upcoming post, will allow him to win the Caucus too. Because if he wins the ISP, he will awaken the giant. A new movement will be born. A new purpose for the Republican Party will emerge and the political lines will be totally rescrambled. And the same formula that wins the ISP, will work for the caucus as well.

So what’s the next discussion, New Hampshire? No. There are two other things we have to talk about first. The debates, which were the key to his emergence last time and the fundraising power of the ISP win.

The debates will take another post but we can talk about the fundraising right now. Immediately after a win in the ISP, Ron Paul must embark on a national victory fundraising tour. Remember, the value of winning ISP is the time you have before the next big contest. He must use that time to raise money. He must have his picture taken at $1,000 a pop with every supporter in the nation. He must autograph 20,000 copies of his TIME magazine cover story. He will need all the money he can get to pour into Iowa for a caucus win the next January. This will raise the ante ever further. He must max the limits of advertising in Iowa and neighboring states with TV buys that have big cross boarder viewing audiences and have in place a national fundraising system to milk an Iowa Caucus win for that one precious week of fundraising before New Hampshire.

But again, all of this depends on an Iowa Straw Poll win in the summer of 2011 and that is highly unlikely but possible because it is a small universe where he meets the money threshold and where his activist advantage kicks in. More in the next post on how he can actually pull that off and thus trigger the explosion of a national movement.
If you need to catch up, here are the previous posts in this chain:

1.) Why he should run for president?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/1...ident-in-2012/

2.) But isn’t he too old?

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/1...for-president/

3.) How Ron Paul Wins: Step One, the Iowa Straw Poll.

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/1...2012-step-one/

4.) Ron Paul and Karl Rove don’t mix. Who he needs to hire and why.

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/1...rove-dont-mix/

By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2008/1...-iowa-in-2011/

Everyone able to help in Iowa needs to sign up!
http://www.iowaforronpaul.com/get-involved.php

Thomas
06-02-2011, 06:48 PM
bump!

Thomas
06-09-2011, 03:42 PM
updated

Michigan11
06-10-2011, 10:27 PM
Thank you Thank you Thank you for posting these.

After reading these, I don't know how else to get this across, but every single supporter of this movement needs to read this and read them carefully. I fully respect Doug Weed and I feel he fully comprehends what this movement and Ron Paul is, and where it is going and how to get there. This movement is never ever going away, it is growing and growing and is going to be what fixes this nation for good. That is the truth.

truthdivides
06-11-2011, 12:31 AM
These blogs are excellent!

harikaried
06-12-2011, 03:05 PM
Ron Paul on Israel
By: Doug Wead
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/ron-paul-on-israel/
You've copy/pasted the "Ron Paul on Israel" post twice.

Interesting to see in the comments for "Ron Paul just makes good sense":
"I really hope the campaign contacts you."
Doug Wead: Of course I will help. Thanks for the encouragement.
http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2011/05/17/ron-paul-just-makes-good-sense/#comment-5611

Thomas
06-27-2011, 09:18 PM
bump