PDA

View Full Version : Please critique a Ron Paul speech I'm going to deliver today




PaulineDisciple
12-16-2007, 03:05 AM
I am going to be delivering a 10-15 minute speech here in KC for the Ron Paul Tea Party rally. I would like for any additions, subtractions or re-phasings if you would be so kind to do so. They asked me to speak on a topic, so I told them that I was going to speak on why I support Ron Paul as a Christian.

As a Christian I support Ron Paul because:

We both agree that our rights come from the fact that we are created in God’s image and as our founding fathers believed that it was because of this fact that we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights. These rights as our founders so aptly expressed were the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Ron Paul is the only candidate that will faithfully protect these rights. I intend to illustrate this claim by the following examples.

First of all, Ron Paul is the only candidate that is making a strong principled stand for life. As a gynecologist, he knows that unborn babies are a human life with legal rights and protections. He believes that in cases where a human life is being taken that these cases should be taken care of in a similar fashion as murder cases are handled and that is on the local level. Ron Paul believes as do I, that the case of Roe vs. Wade was a case where the federal government overstepped its bounds and gave a single federally mandated solution to this very complex problem. Ron Paul will work hard to end this tyranny of the federal courts. He is also the only one that is trying to defend the lives of our troops and innocent civilian’s over-seas. He has done this through his strong insistence on continuing the Biblical principle of just war theory and by opposing preemptive war to protect certain corporate interests in other nations at the cost of American lives and massive amounts of debt borrowed from the Chinese. He also insisted that the congress follow the constitution and vote on going to war, but instead they abdicated their responsibility and gave this unconstitutional power to the president. Therefore, it is for these reasons that I can confidently assert that Ron Paul is the only candidate that has a strong stance on defending life.

Secondly, Ron Paul is the only candidate that will protect our liberties. He is one of the few that voted against that deceptively misnamed “patriot act”. Ron Paul also opposed the The Military Commissions Act which permits torture, or what politicians like to call “enhanced interrogation techniques”, it allows for the arbitrary detention of American citizens as unlawful enemy combatants at the full discretion of the president and without the right of Habeas Corpus, and grants warrantless searches by the National Security Agency. It also gives to the president the power to imprison individuals based on secret testimony. These assaults on our liberties are outrageous and Ron Paul is the only candidate in this race that has shown the intestinal fortitude to stand against these attacks.

Thirdly, Ron Paul is the only candidate that will protect our pursuit of happiness, otherwise known as our right to keep an own property. As a mature Christian statesman, Ron Paul recognizes that the Bible only gives government a very limited role in society. He realizes that the civil governments role is limited to protecting these individual rights that God has granted to us in lieu of our status as human beings created in His image, and when a government violates these rights, through whatever means, they are breaking God’s law and liable for such offenses. In God’s eyes theft is still theft, even though civil laws may be passed to make it legal for the government to engage in it. Therefore Ron Paul is very cautious not to engage in these unlawful acts against humanity. In one radio interview, Ron Paul has agreed that Biblically speaking it is not the role of the civil government at any level, federal, state or local to house, clothe, feed or educate anybody, for in doing so, they would have to violate the rights of individuals by forcibly taking from some individuals in order to give to others. To give you an idea of why these politicians would do such a thing, studies have shown that 60-70 percent of this money goes into their pockets and only 30-40 percent actually gets to the people in need. This demonstrates that centralizing these benefits is in fact the most inefficient way to provide them. The Biblical way to help the needy is for the local Church to provide for them. I have personally witnessed that when a Church provides for the needy, over 90 percent of the money goes to those in need. Here are just a few ways in which Ron Paul has demonstrated his refusal to engage in the many forms of theft that our government is currently involved in. He has never voted to raise taxes. He has never voted for an unbalanced budget. He has never voted to raise congressional pay. He has never taken a government-paid junket. He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program. He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year. He opposes the actions of the FED that think nothing of stealing our money by devaluing it when they print money out of thin air. This is usually done to allow politicians to funnel this money to the military-industrial complex, all of which makes our money worth less and therefore should also be considered a form of theft.

One last related item that affects me personally is Ron Paul’s understanding that those that object to having the government educate our children for religious reasons should have that portion of our taxes returned to us. Here are some quotes from Ron Paul’s speech on the house floor introducing these bills on educational freedom.

"Mr. Speaker, to be a home schooling parent takes a unique dedication to family and education. In many cases, home school families must forgo the second income of one parent, as well as incurring the costs of paying for textbooks, computers, and other school supplies. Home schooling parents must pay these expenses while, like all American families, struggling to pay state, local, and federal taxes." "In order to help home schoolers, and all parents, devote more of their resources to their children's education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935). This bill provides all parents a $3,000 per child tax credit for K-12 education expenses. This bill would help home school parents to provide their children a first-class education in a loving home environment."

"The reality, though, is that parents - not "well-meaning" politicians - know what options are best for their kids' education. Unfortunately, America has been saddled with a tax system which limits the ability of parents to pursue the academic options best suited for their children's individual situations. With combined taxes taking almost 50 percent of the average family's income, there is little left over for low- and middle-class parents to even consider other educational opportunities."

In particular, the resolution refers to American `democracy' and the `democratic' principles upon which this country was founded. However, this country was founded not as a democracy but as a constitutional republic. Madam Speaker, the distinction between a democracy and a republic is more than just a matter of semantics. The fundamental principle in a democracy is majority rule. Democracies, unlike republics, do not recognize fundamental rights of citizens (outside the right to vote) nor do they limit the power of the government. Indeed, such limitations are often scored as `intrusions on the will of the majority.' Thus in a democracy, the majority, or their elected representatives, can limit an individual's right to free speech, defend oneself, form contracts, or even raise ones' children. Democracies recognize only one fundamental right: the right to participate in the choosing of their rulers at a pre-determined time.

[End of Quotes]

So Ron Paul understands that Christian parents are the ones responsible for raising their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord and not in the nurture and admonition of the state. The so-called “neutrality” in the classrooms that has removed all catechisms, Bible readings and prayers are anything but neutral. What this is teaching children is that their religion is irrelevant to everyday life. Well whether you realize it or not, this has the effect of indoctrinating this nation’s children into a religion known as secular humanism. So much for separation of Church and state, I can only wish that they would separate their church from “we the peoples” state. Education is unavoidably religious in nature and your view of human nature, philosophy or theology, history, political or natural science are greatly affected by your view of reality and so are your desired outcomes of the educational process. Everyone has to ask the question, “what kind of person am I trying to produce.” To which my answer to that question and the governments answer to that question are diametrically opposed with each other. Therefore I do not believe that the government has the right to take from me in order to educate my or anyone else’s children.

I am convinced that what is happening in this nation is what is known as Statism or Nationalism. Over the last hundred years, we have seen individual rights eroding away and government power expanded. As individual rights have diminished and government powers have expanded, the level of government corruption as a result has escalated at the same rate. The Marxism and Socialism that has been in the universities for decades is finally permeating all levels of government. I also believe that with the dollar on the verge of collapse, the national debt insurmountably high coupled with the government acting as if we are not in serious trouble as a prescription for a disaster.

I believe that now is the time to continue the revolution that our founders started with tyrannical governments. Only I am not calling for the kind of bloody revolution that our founders fought, but a revolution that is calling on all Americans to repent. Repentance from people that would take innocent lives, as well as those that approve of the taking of innocent lives. Repentance from those that take away our liberties, as well as those that sit idly by and allow our liberties to be taken. Repentance from politicians that would steal from the people as well as those that accept that which is stolen. You see, I think we all need to change, not just those that lead us. As Ron Paul put it so well, “we need to change our ideas about what the role of government ought to be.”

So please join in on the revolution to restore the constitution and if you can, donate to the Ron Paul campaign and send our government a shot that will be heard around the world.

Thank you, and God bless.

Chester Copperpot
12-16-2007, 03:07 AM
You may not like this suggestion but if you throw away your speech and just speak from your heart youll touch alot more people with emotion.. Maybe just bring a piece of paper with the topics you want to talk about and then just let your gut take over.

That one reason Paul reaches people.. You never see him reading a speech.

me3
12-16-2007, 03:08 AM
I would change Thirdly to Third, and Secondly to Second.

If you can throw in something about how government cannot legislate morality, that churches teach morals, not government programs.

Also, change gynecologist to OB/GYN and make sure you mention his santity of life bill, and how it would immediately repeal Roe v. Wade.

bc2208
12-16-2007, 03:26 AM
Do you expect to say all that in 10 minutes?

Slist
12-16-2007, 03:29 AM
You may not like this suggestion but if you throw away your speech and just speak from your heart youll touch alot more people with emotion.. Maybe just bring a piece of paper with the topics you want to talk about and then just let your gut take over.

That one reason Paul reaches people.. You never see him reading a speech.

I second that. Speak by heart. Don't read. Maybe memorize, but don't read from a paper. Use it as a backup though.. this will make you feel safer...

greves
12-16-2007, 03:41 AM
I second that. Speak by heart. Don't read. Maybe memorize, but don't read from a paper. Use it as a backup though.. this will make you feel safer...

Don't memorize. Don't "read off the back of your eyeballs." Just write a few key points for reminders, and talk about them!

JDeVriese
12-16-2007, 03:51 AM
I agree with the aforementioned, if you are comfortable with yourself in front of an audience, pitch the paper...it'll sound much more sincere and genuine. If not, just bullet your speech (MAX 5 BULLETS).

One more recommendation: you'll want some Biblical passages to back up your points, make these into the bullets.

-JD

boondoggle
12-16-2007, 08:37 AM
Do whatever you want. You wrote great.

If you wrote it from the heart, I trust you can read it from the heart.

Good luck!

Thomas Paine
12-16-2007, 08:40 AM
I hear what everyone is saying about not reading a speech. However, Winston Churchill began reading his speeches (still using bodily gestures to eccentuate various points of his speeches) for the rest of his political career after he froze and forgot the rest of his speech right in the middle of it during an important debate in the House of Commons. (This is before he became PM.)

rfbz
12-16-2007, 08:41 AM
hey if you need to read it, I think that will still be just as good. Your emotion will still shine through. I'm one of those people who gets lost in my thoughts if I'm giving a speech without at least some notes, so if you're anything like me it's best to have that with you as a guide.

Kingfisher
12-16-2007, 08:55 AM
hey if you need to read it, I think that will still be just as good. Your emotion will still shine through. I'm one of those people who gets lost in my thoughts if I'm giving a speech without at least some notes, so if you're anything like me it's best to have that with you as a guide.

I agree. Do what you are comfortable with.

hocaltar
12-16-2007, 09:21 AM
Yeah, use an outline.

Get rid of the secondly, thirdly, etc. It sounds too "highschoolish." I can blather on about Ron Paul's views for 10 minutes easy. Sadly, having to write 10 pages worth of the Good Dr's views would take too long to write out. Far easier just to think about a topic and turn your brain over to youtube mode.

For example,

Christians are supporting Dr. Ron Paul because he believes that God is the author of liberty, and that we get our rights from our creator, not the government. He believes that our nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values and that we are losing one of the things we value the most: our Liberty. We must remember that when we sacrafice liberty for security we will lose both, and that has already begun.

As an OBGYN Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4000 babies. He understands well the importance of life and the importance of nominating strict constructionist judges who recognize state's rights when dealing with issues. He believes it's high time the supreme court stopped making new laws and left creating new legislation to the people, as it was intended in the Constitution.

Dr. Paul believes that preventive war is wrong and can NOT be justified in accordance with the 'Christian Theory of Just War'. I think back to what to President Eisenhower said, "Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing." Sadly, we haven't been listening. Today, we are hearing about nuclear pre-empitve strikes, torture, and invasion. We are a good people. We are a great nation. But if we let ourselves become the thing we fight, we are no different than it in the end.

webber53
12-16-2007, 09:23 AM
I agree with the aforementioned, if you are comfortable with yourself in front of an audience, pitch the paper...it'll sound much more sincere and genuine. If not, just bullet your speech (MAX 5 BULLETS).

One more recommendation: you'll want some Biblical passages to back up your points, make these into the bullets.

-JD

+1

matratzac
12-16-2007, 09:34 AM
take off the "god bless," it just sounds so fake because no one in real life says that... and if they said it to me i would laugh and it would seem condecending

just sounds unnatural

Libertarian
12-16-2007, 09:54 AM
Great job...I sliced out a few parts and made some minor edits. Please consider these changes (I spent 30 minutes doing them, lol).. Your speech will sound great :)



"He has done this through his strong insistence on continuing the Biblical principle of just war theory and by opposing preemptive war" **End the sentence here. The rest is too long and off topic**

"It also gives to the president the power to imprison individuals based on secret testimony. These assaults on our liberties are outrageous" **I would say "disgraceful" instead of outrageous**

Before the next sentence, add something like "As conservatives, we should ALL be against giving the government this type of power."

(Try to involve your audience a little more like that. Make them think your arguments are their own. That is how to persuade people.)

"Thirdly, Ron Paul is the only candidate that will protect our pursuit of happiness, otherwise known as our right to keep and own property. As a mature Christian statesman, Ron Paul recognizes that the Bible only gives government a very limited role in society. and that the civil government's role is limited to protecting these individual rights that God has granted to us *end sentence**

**new sentence**When a government violates these rights by whatever means, they are breaking God’s law and liable for such offenses...

"In one radio interview, Ron Paul has agreed that Biblically speaking it is not the role of the civil government at any level, federal, state or local to house, clothe, feed or educate anybody, for in doing so, they would have to violate the rights of individuals by forcibly taking from some individuals in order to give to others. To give you an idea of why these politicians would do such a thing, studies have shown that 60-70 percent of this money goes into their pockets **I would say "fades into the bureaucracy" instead** and only 30-40 percent actually gets to the people in need...


"Education is unavoidably religious in nature and your view of human nature, philosophy or theology, history, political or natural science are greatly affected by your view of reality and so are your desired outcomes of the educational process. Everyone has to ask the question, To which my answer to that question and the governments answer to that question are diametrically opposed with each other. "

**change to "YOU have to ask the question" “what kind of person am I trying to produce. Your answer to that question and the governments answer may be diametrically opposed with each other...”** (again, involving the audience more)


"I believe that now is the time.." **Don't say "I believe"...Start firmly. -- "NOW is the time!" **to continue the revolution that our founders started..."

"So please join in on the revolution to restore the constitution and if you can, donate to the Ron Paul campaign and send our government a shot that will be heard around the world."

**take out "if you can"**

"So please join in on the revolution to restore the Constitution, and to restore this great nation. Donate all you can to the Ron Paul campaign, and send our government a shot that will be heard round' the world!! <--end with a BANG :)

PaulineDisciple
12-16-2007, 10:57 AM
Liberterian,

That was great advice. I incorporated virtually all of your comments. Thanks!!

hawks4ronpaul
12-16-2007, 11:16 AM
I would change Thirdly to Third, and Secondly to Second.

If you can throw in something about how government cannot legislate morality, that churches teach morals, not government programs.

Also, change gynecologist to OB/GYN and make sure you mention his santity of life bill, and how it would immediately repeal Roe v. Wade.


Try "medical doctor."


http://hawks4ronpaul.blogspot.com/

Scott Wilson
12-16-2007, 11:44 AM
I rewrote your speech using parts of your speech, an article written by David Gornoski and the Dear American Letter I wrote. I think it is much clearer and concise now and I hope you don't mind.













As a Christian I support Ron Paul because he is a man of his word. Ron Paul is a man of principle and his principles are founded upon his faith in God. Ron Paul's life reflects this faith. The Apostle James wrote, "...faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself." This means that our faith is to be demonstrated by the lives we live. Ron Paul's voting record in the congress, his life as a doctor and his pro-life stance, his faithfulness to his wife and his family testify to Ron Paul's integrity.

The United States was established on the principle of a limited government created by the people for the purpose of protecting the freedom and liberty of the individual. No other nation in history has been established strictly on this basis and it is this principle that has made the United States of America unique.

The United States prospered immensely on this foundation of liberty and freedom. These principles served as a foundation for the emancipation of the black man as well as the right of women to vote.

The Founding Fathers assembled together and wrote the Constitution for the express purpose of limiting the power of government so as to secure the individual rights of the people. Many of the States refused to ratify the Constitution unless a Bill of Rights was to be added which would go even further in expressing clearly the rights of the individual.

The President, military personnel, judicial members and many in civil service take an oath to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies whether they are foreign or domestic.

Over the years, the United States has slowly moved away from this foundation. Members of public service frequently violate the oath to uphold the Constitution, and the result is that government power incrementally grows, overstepping its mandate, interfering in many aspects of peoples lives. Many Americans have lost an understanding of their history and are thus oblivious to the changing role of government.

A large segment of the American people must again become active in supporting the principle of limited government established for the purpose of protecting individual liberty or the trend towards an all encompassing authoritarian government will continue.

Ron Paul is a man who supports, without reservation, the principles upon which the United States was firmly established. Ron Paul is a man who speaks the truth. He does not pander to special interest groups nor does he say one thing and do another.

Ron Paul is a man who studies. When Ron Paul is presented with a problem he seeks out information, studies that information and then forms a conclusion based on the facts. This is why Ron Paul has a deeper and far more accurate understanding of U.S. foreign policy and monetary issues. He has studied both intently and is not afraid to speak the truth, even when faced with overwhelming opposition and emotion.

There’s a reason why our nation’s finest, America’s military men and women, both active and veteran, have given more donations to Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul than any other candidate in either party. As a veteran, he’s the only candidate who understands how to properly defend America from its enemies, “both foreign and domestic.” His strict adherence to the Constitution and reliance on true conservative principles is the winning formula for defeating terrorism abroad.

He knows the enemy. While radical Islamic rhetoric does play a role for fundamentalist Muslims’ anger, the number one recruitment tool for terrorists by all expert accounts is perceived occupation. This fact has been stated clearly by experts and study groups over and over. It is the truth.

Ron Paul believes it is time to bring our troops home. By removing any plans for permanent bases in the Middle East, we would effectively cripple the terrorists’ number one recruitment tool: perceived foreign occupation of their lands.

Ron Paul understands the problems inherent in our monetary system. He understand that the constant borrowing of newly created money by government alongside the high level of borrowing from abroad is destroying the value of the dollar due to inflation. No other candidate even touches on this issue and yet is is one of the most important issues of our time.

By bringing our troops home around the world, Ron Paul would save hundreds of billions of dollars currently wasted maintaining such operations abroad. This money would be used to reduce our national debt and eliminate the terrorists’ attempt to cripple our economy. Ron Paul would secure our nation’s borders and prevent terrorists from entering our nation. His unrivaled respect for the 2nd amendment would ensure that companies and individuals could properly defend themselves against attack. The military would no longer be stretched thin, morale would be high and America again would once again be strong.

Ron Paul would issue something he attempted to do immediately after 9-11: a letter of marque on the heads of terrorists abroad. This tool was created by the Founding Fathers to eliminate acts of terrorism that have no national face. Ron Paul would put up a large bounty on Osama bin Laden and his operatives. With our nation’s popularity surging around the world, allies, private companies, and professionals would hunt down and take care of Osama bin Laden’s ilk.

The United States was able to stand up to the Soviet Union and its devastating arsenal of nuclear weapons due to the fact that the United States was strong and this strength was the deterrent which protected America. A deterrent which a strong United States in the future would continue to wield.

Keeping this in mind is it any wonder that Ronald Reagan had this to say about Congressman Ron Paul: “Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”

One last related item that affects me personally is Ron Paul’s understanding that those that object to having the government educate our children for religious reasons should have that portion of our taxes returned to us. Here are some quotes from Ron Paul’s speech on the house floor introducing these bills on educational freedom.

[Quotes]

"Mr. Speaker, to be a home schooling parent takes a unique dedication to family and education. In many cases, home school families must forgo the second income of one parent, as well as incurring the costs of paying for textbooks, computers, and other school supplies. Home schooling parents must pay these expenses while, like all American families, struggling to pay state, local, and federal taxes." "In order to help home schoolers, and all parents, devote more of their resources to their children's education, I have introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 935). This bill provides all parents a $3,000 per child tax credit for K-12 education expenses. This bill would help home school parents to provide their children a first-class education in a loving home environment."

"The reality, though, is that parents - not "well-meaning" politicians - know what options are best for their kids' education. Unfortunately, America has been saddled with a tax system which limits the ability of parents to pursue the academic options best suited for their children's individual situations. With combined taxes taking almost 50 percent of the average family's income, there is little left over for low- and middle-class parents to even consider other educational opportunities."

In particular, the resolution refers to American `democracy' and the `democratic' principles upon which this country was founded. However, this country was founded not as a democracy but as a constitutional republic. Madam Speaker, the distinction between a democracy and a republic is more than just a matter of semantics. The fundamental principle in a democracy is majority rule. Democracies, unlike republics, do not recognize fundamental rights of citizens (outside the right to vote) nor do they limit the power of the government. Indeed, such limitations are often scored as `intrusions on the will of the majority.' Thus in a democracy, the majority, or their elected representatives, can limit an individual's right to free speech, defend oneself, form contracts, or even raise ones' children. Democracies recognize only one fundamental right: the right to participate in the choosing of their rulers at a pre-determined time.

[End of Quotes]

Ron Paul understands that Christian parents are the ones responsible for raising their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord and not in the nurture and admonition of the state. The so-called “neutrality” in the classrooms that has removed all catechisms, Bible readings and prayers are anything but neutral. What this is teaching children is that their religion is irrelevant to everyday life. Whether you realize it or not, this has the effect of indoctrinating this nation’s children into a religion known as secular humanism. Education is unavoidably religious in nature and our view of human nature, philosophy, theology, history, political and the natural sciences are greatly affected by our views of reality as is our desired outcomes of the educational process. Everyone has to ask the question, “what kind of person am I trying to nurture.” The governments answer and my answer are diametrically opposed to each other. The government should not even be involved in answering this question in the first place. Therefore I do not believe that the government has the right to take from me in order to educate my or anyone else’s children.

The American people must again become active in supporting the principle of a limited government established for the purpose of protecting individual liberty as opposed to an authoritarian government which exists to mold society into some kind of utopia. The Bible states that "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" and this is the reason why authoritarian governments made up of men will never work, but always descend into tyranny. A limited government cannot descend into tyranny due to its limited nature.

Ron Paul does not only understand these principles but works tirelessly to implement them. Couple his leadership in national defense with the fact that Ron Paul is the strongest pro-life candidate, wants to abolish the IRS, and plans to stop the Federal Reserve from destroying the value of our dollar, and it’s clear that he is the only candidate worthy of true conservatives’ support.

For the first time in many years a man of principle is running for the highest office in the land. Let us all grab a hold of it and let us make the difference.

So please join in on the revolution to restore the constitution and if you can, donate to the Ron Paul campaign and send our government a shot that will be heard around the world.

Thank you, and God bless.

PaulineDisciple
12-16-2007, 12:15 PM
Scott, that was awsome, I did some slight tweaking, but I think I have my speech. Gota go now we are going to be heading out to the plaza in a few minutes.