The Hope: A True Conservative Republican Candidate Who Can Defeat Barack Obama
Christians, social conservatives, economic conservatives, and others
sought to find a candidate to rally behind as an alternative to Mitt
Romney. Candidates took turns rising to the top, only to eventually
fall back for one reason or another. There is little in the national
media to suggest that Romney has anyone still competing with him for the
Republican nomination. Yet recent events indicate that Dr. Ron Paul is
still in contention to become that elusive solid conservative
Republican presidential candidate–
if conservatives seize the
opportunity to rally around him. To do so, they must (1) become aware
of the window of opportunity before them, (2) be convinced that Ron Paul
is a genuine conservative who supports Christian and constitutional
values (3) know that Ron Paul is the best candidate to defeat President
Obama, and (4) understand that Dr. Paul still has a shot at capturing
the Republican nomination.
Recent Ron Paul Victories and Advances
Before proceeding further in this article, I urge a look at this
three-minute video
which powerfully unfolds the reason that Ron Paul’s candidacy should
now be seriously considered by all conservative Republicans. Then,
because it is scriptural and wise to listen to contending points of view
and to examine the teachings of even the most trusted leaders (Acts
17:11), please use the links in the text below to get a broader view of
any points on which you have misgivings about Dr. Paul.
Recent Ron Paul
victories in
Minnesota,
Iowa,
Louisiana,
Alaska,
Colorado,
Maine, and
Nevada are beginning to get a bit of notice in the mainstream press. Despite questionable tactics by the party establishment in
Georgia,
Missouri,
Alaska,
Nevada,
Maine,
Oklahoma, and
elsewhere.
Rachel Maddow and
FOX News
have reported Ron Paul’s Iowa and Minnesota victories and essentially
“inevitable” wins in a minimum of five states to put his name into
nomination. Dr. Paul even had major delegate wins in Mitt Romney’s home
state of
Massachusetts.
For the last month or more, while the media has asked “Where is Ron
Paul?” and did not report on his massive rallies, Dr. Paul has been
consistently drawing
thousands upon
thousands to rallies at
Urbana-Champaign, IL,
Madison, WI,
University of Maryland,
Columbia, MO,
Chico, CA,
UCLA,
Berkely, CA,
Texas A&M,
Fort Worth, TX,
San Antonio, TX,
Ithaca, NY,
University of Rhode Island,
University of Pittsburg,
Philadelphia, PA,
Houston, TX,
El Paso, TX,
Austin, TX.
Fullerton, CA,
Davis, CA, and
San Diego, CA.
For accurate updates on the status of the Ron Paul campaign, which the
mainstream media seldom give, a good source is
Doug Wead The Blog.
Mr. Wead is a Presidential historian and senior adviser to the Ron Paul
campaign. For a realistic and more accurate delegate count than the AP
count nearly all the media use, see
The Real 2012 Delegate Count. Reporter Ben Swann does a superb job of seeking the truth on these issues in his
Reality Check program.
Who can defeat Barack Obama?
Ron Paul often polls as well or better than
Mitt Romney against President Obama. A recent
Rasmussen poll has Ron Paul defeating President Obama, while Romney ties. A recent
Public Policy Polling survey also found Ron Paul more electable than Mitt Romney when pitted against Barack Obama.
Recent polling
often has Romney trailing Obama in a general election match up.
Remember that everything Ron Paul accomplishes is without media
assistance. Besides his competitiveness with Obama (the media constantly
says, “Ron Paul can’t win.”), did you ever hear anything in the media
about
Ron Paul polling second nationally
to Romney, ahead of Gingrich and Santorum, as recently as February of
this year? If you think the media is liberal, perhaps you should wonder
why essentially only one candidate never got a media boost.
Unify to Strengthen Romney?
Some fear that continued competition for the Republican nomination
will weaken Romney and hurt Republican chances to defeat Obama. Bear in
mind that any criticism of Romney from conservative opponents will be
insignificant compared to the barrage of advertising President Obama
will unleash with his massive political war chest which will approach $1
billion. If Romney cannot stand up to scrutiny from his own party, how
will he fare against a ruthless, well-funded media blitz? Look at
this ad already produced by Democrats for a taste of what is coming.
What happens even if Romney wins? Will that mean 4, 8, or even 12
years of conservative compromise and a further erosion of conservative
principles in the Republican party? There is some serious food for
thought in
The Twelve-Year Conservative Compromise.
And consider the tendency of Republicans to support their president
even if he waters down conservative values. Sadly, the Republican party
seems to stand up for principle much better when it is opposing a
Democrat than when it has a “moderate” Republican president in office.
For a solid critique of Mitt Romney from an evangelical viewpoint, Steve Baldwin’s post
The Case Against Mitt Romney is substantial. Here is one small selection:
Thanks to stupidity, naiveté and conflicts of interest on
the right, we have created the Romney monster and given him the
credibility he does not deserve. The chances are Romney will win the GOP
nomination, but this could be disastrous since there’s a large block of
Christian right and Tea Party voters who will not vote for Romney, thus
increasing the chance of an Obama victory. They believe, with good
reason, that a worldview-free President Romney will just swing with the
wind and not make the bold decisions necessary to save America. Many
also believe that a Romney Presidency will do so much damage to the
Republican brand — by governing as a
“lets-make-big-government-work-more-efficiently” technocrat – that it
may be better if Obama won reelection with both houses hopefully
controlled by Republicans willing to shut his agenda down.
For one of the most complete and well-documented sites regarding Mitt Romney’s positions, go to
The Mitt Romney Report
by a Massachusetts pro-family group which has closely followed Mitt
Romney’s record on a range of issues over the years as a Presidential
candidate (2007-present), Governor of Massachusetts (Jan. 2003 – Jan.
2007), candidate for US Senate (1994), and businessman. This report
includes many
videos
of Romney in his own words on abortion, “gay” rights, stimulus, illegal
immigration, getting money from DC, identifying himself as a
“progressive,” guns, and more.
Romney and Obama Similarities
Perhaps, therefore, an even more important question is “How different
is Mitt Romney from Barack Obama?” Although there is some humor in
this story, watch the video that follows it and ask yourself, “Do Romney
and Obama have the same speech writer?” Watch here:
Scientists reveal Romney and Obama are actually clones. Here is a similar compilation:
Mitt Romney vs. Barack Obama First Debate Preview.
Issues of Importance to Christians
Having looked at the practical question of whether Ron Paul still has
a chance to win, and whether continued campaigning for a conservative
alternative to Romney is wise, we need to now look at issues of
importance to Christians. If Ron Paul was the obvious alternative to
Mitt Romney from the start, why did Christians not rally behind him? If
they had misgivings about him before, will they be able to overcome them
now that Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have sidelined their
campaigns?
Many Christians are now taking a serious look at Ron Paul. Consider this
letter to fellow Christian leaders
by Justin Machacek, an Emmy award winning television producer,
independent faith-based filmmaker, and promotional creative. He serves
as the president of Reel Deal Productions, Inc. in Fort Worth, Texas and
as the Senior On Air Producer for Daystar, one of the largest Christian
media networks in the world. Justin has worked closely with many of the
most prominent Christian ministries and faith-based media organizations
in America. Mr. Machacek recently participated in a conference call
with Ron Paul and concerned Christian leaders. One Christian businessman
who participated said,
“There can be little doubt that if
evangelicals were made aware of his views and heard first hand his
explanations on abortion, gun rights, gay marriage, our monetary system,
defense etc… that the move towards the RP camp would be dramatic.”
Pastor Voddie Baucham of Grace Family Baptist Church has an excellent post “
Why Ron Paul?” as does Michael Eversden in “
A Biblical Case for Ron Paul on Four Issues of Importance to Christians“. Both are important articles for Christians newly considering Ron Paul. The
Evangelicals for Ron Paul Blog is a thoughtful site, as well.
Let’s examine some of these issues.
Abortion
Although Dr. Paul is a strongly pro-life physician who has personally
delivered over 4,000 babies without performing an abortion, some had
the impression that a candidate such is Rick Santorum was more staunchly
pro-life than Ron Paul. Of course, Mr. Santorum himself encouraged
that impression when
he stated in debate that Ron Paul only had a
50% pro-life voting record–about
the same as Democrat Harry Reid. Mr. Santorum did not lie, but neither
did he explain that he was speaking of Dr. Paul’s 55% National Right to
Life rating in 2005/2006. During this period Dr. Paul agreed with NRTL
on 5 of 6 issues. However, the one issue he disagreed on was voted on 4
times, and every time was counted as a separate vote–thus giving him a 5
of 9 record instead of 5 of 6. Dr. Paul explained in
detail why he voted as he did on that one issue.
Gun Rights
This isn’t even a contest. Here’s Gun Owners of America’s evaluation
of Republican presidential candidates. Santorum and Gingrich will be
included in some of these comparisons, as well, to demonstrate that Dr.
Paul deserved more consideration even before they dropped out:
Dr. Paul A+, Santorum B-, Gingrich C, Romney D-.
GOA says,
“Guts. That is the one word which describes Rep. Ron Paul of Texas
best. Perhaps the most consistent vote in the Congress, he can be
expected to oppose any unconstitutional expansion of government, no
matter how politically difficult that vote might be.” Read the link for
more details.
Our Monetary System and the Federal Reserve System
Although many people still do not see the Federal Reserve System as
much of an issue, Dr. Ron Paul has fought almost alone for years to make
the immorality and failure of our central banking system a fundamental
political issue. To get some concept of the relationship of “millions”
to “trillions” (it’s jaw-dropping!) look at this
graphic depiction in $100 bills. To understand the magnitude of this issue that has been kept quiet for decades, just try to fathom that
$16 trillion was secretly loaned at no interest to big banks and their cronies.
That’s about 20 times the amount of the TARP bail outs voted by
Congress! Do you suppose it is truly David vs. Goliath when private
bankers have the legal right to create such sums essentially out of thin
air and secretly distribute them? And $5 trillion went to foreign
banks. That’s more than the U.S. budget (including deficit spending!)
for an entire year! No wonder
Henry Ford said,
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our
banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a
revolution before tomorrow morning.”
Steve Forbes has gone so far as to say Ron Paul should be the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve System.
For more on this tremendously important issue, which only Ron Paul has the courage and knowledge to tackle, refer to
The Official Counterfeiter:
As “the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil” (1
Tim. 6:10, NIV), it would be wise to scrutinize the current monetary
system of the United States, which is presently the reserve currency of
the world.
Vic Lockman, a former Disney cartoonist with economic and biblical insight, has given his permission to put his 1969 booklet The Official Counterfeiter
on line. Although it is dated, I think you will find all the essential
facts still very relevant to today. With evangelical voters exerting a
major influence on Republican presidential politics, Mr. Lockman’s work
can go a long way towards educating us about a very fundamental, but
(before Ron Paul) misunderstood and unnoticed issue.
This unique work makes a major contribution to making sound, biblical
economics comprehensible to a non-technical audience. It is a great
tool for learning to discern what “just weights and balances” are in the
modern world (Lev. 19:36; Proverbs 11:1, 16:11; Ezek. 45:10). This is a
crash course in economics for everyone. We do well to understand how
the world really works so we can make biblically and economically
informed decisions in casting our votes for national leaders. Download the free PDF here.
An event worth serious consideration, The Financial Services
Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology, chaired by Rep.
Ron Paul, chairs a
hearing to examine six legislative proposals that either reform or abolish the Federal Reserve System.
Israel
Many Christians believe that God blesses those who bless Israel.
Hearing the claim that Ron Paul wants to stop aid to Israel, they
believe he opposes Israel. However, Ron Paul wants to halt U.S. aid to
all
countries, not just Israel. He believes it wrong to borrow money we do
not have (largely from China) to give to other countries. He also
points out that we give at least four times more aid to potentially
hostile nations surrounding Israel. Cutting aid to all countries would
be to Israel’s distinct advantage. Not only would cessation of all
foreign aid help Israel more than its foes, but it would also allow
Israel to make its own defense decisions without U.S. approval. In line
with supporting Israel’s right to it’s own self-determination, Ron Paul
also supports Israel’s right to designate
Jerusalem as its capital.
In 1981, when Israel bombed the Iraq nuclear reactor, Ron Paul was
one of the only congressmen to refuse to condemn Israel for doing so.
Dr. Paul believes
Israel, not the U.S.A., should determine what is best for Israel.
A well-written article on Ron Paul’s relation to Israel is
Ron Paul and the Israel Question. Another very informative article is
Ron Paul on Israel
by the former vice president of Christian and Jews United for
Israel–who is now a senior adviser to the Ron Paul campaign. For those
who want some “let’s get real” talk from a Baptist pastor and former
Constitution Party presidential candidate, I also recommend Chuck
Baldwin’s
Ron Paul’s Israel Problem.
Nuclear Iran
Connected with the Israel question is the
claim that Iran is developing nuclear weapons which it would use to attack Israel and the U.S.A. However, it is
doubtful that Iran ever threatened either country with nuclear destruction. U.S. intelligence continues to find
no evidence
that Iran is developing, or even wants to develop nuclear weapons. Even
if it would turn out that Iran did possess nuclear weapons,
ex-chief of Mossad Meir Dagan
spoke out against a preemptive strike against Iranian nuclear
facilities anytime soon. He says the Iranian regime is rational in its
own way. .
Please understand clearly that Ron Paul is not against military defense of our country. However, he feels the
greater danger now, with no solid evidence that Iran even
wants
a nuclear weapon, is over-reaction. A pre-emptive strike on another
country is not the prerogative of the president. War should be declared
by congress, not decided by the president, unless the president is
forced to act in self-defense with no time for consultation. Ron Paul
adheres to the
Christian just war concept.
National Defense
It has been sometimes mentioned, but often forgotten, that our
national debt is a major national security issue.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who seriously confronts the debt issue.
As the Bible says, the borrower is a slave to the lender, and we are
becoming increasingly dependent on other countries such as China.
Other candidates talk of cutting the debt–while increasing military
spending and maintaining Social Security, Medicare, and a host of
federal agencies and programs. The fact that maintaining both at
current levels is unsustainable is confirmed by conservative Republican
Senator Jim DeMint. Realistically, if Ron Paul is not correct about the
fact that we can actually strengthen our defense by reducing morally
questionable, budget-busting, counterproductive meddling in the internal
affairs of foreign nations, then our national defense is destined for a
severe blown when our economy eventually collapses due to
deficit spending. Fortunately, as Douglas A. Macgregor, Ph.D. Colonel (ret), U.S. Army, says,
more money does not necessarily mean better defense. Romney’s willingness to spend far more than our national deficit on just
military alone does not bode well for anyone wanting to save this country from imminent bankruptcy.
Perhaps it is sometimes forgotten that U.S. foreign policy may have
an indirect but very substantial effect on Christian communities and
missions overseas. A thought-provoking article on this influence is “
Christian Massacres: A Result of U.S. Foreign Policy“.
Iraq and Afghanistan
It is frequently said, “I like Ron Paul except for his views on
defense.” Some are under the impression that Dr. Paul “blames American”
for 9-11. Actually, Ron Paul blames the terrorists who perpetrated the
attacks, and he voted to pursue Bin Laden and submitted a bill to go
after terrorists themselves, rather than invading countries. He
believes that to properly deal with a problem you must understand its
causes. Although the 9-11 attacks on innocent Americans were
reprehensible and unjust, we should still examine the motives of those
perpetrating the crime if we want to understand and combat them. Just
as most Americans were unaware of the CIA overthrow of Iran’s elected
government in 1953, most were unaware of any U.S. actions that could
provoke the terrorists to strike against us. U.S. Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright said in a
60 minutes interview
that the death of 500,000 Iraqi children due to U.S. economic sanctions
was worth it. Seventeen of the nineteen terrorists were from Saudi
Arabia and none from Iraq, but we invaded Iraq.
Regime change in Iraq was a U.S. policy before 9-11.
Ron Paul first began speaking against it in 1998. Former
CIA Head of the Bin Laden Unit Michael Scheuer said
that Ron Paul’s correct position on the reason’s for 9-11 would have
worried Bin Laden and his allies, but they thrived under the view held
by all other candidates. It is often said that good theories can be
tested by their ability to predict. Everyone must watch
Ron Paul’s famous Predictions speech from April 24, 2002, to understand his wisdom. In this five-minute speech you will see a decade of history predicted with
amazing precision! Then, if you want to hear Ron Paul speaking candidly about foreign policy, go to this
national defense page.
Col. Macgregor recently granted a
detailed interview on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars which is comprehensive and enlightening. Here is a small excerpt:
Iraq and Afghanistan are disasters and anyone who asserts
otherwise is misinformed. I recently met with someone who is an
advocate for Mitt Romney and he was unhappy with me because I
pointed out that the differences between Governor Romney and President
Obama are marginal at best. He was trying to demonstrate how profoundly
different they were. He was unsuccessful but one of the things he
insisted on was that Obama had somehow or another sacrificed our great
gains in Iraq. I looked at him and said, “You can’t be serious.” He
said, “What do you mean?” He seemed to be completely unaware, as many
Americans are, that Iraq is effectively a satellite for Iran. That the
United States Army and it’s generals did a brilliant job of
consolidating the power and influence of Iran inside Iraq, by backing
Mr. Maliki who is always Tehran’s chosen candidate and utterly
destroying the Sunni Arab population’s influence and power.
Who do the troops vote for with their campaign contributions–
Ron Paul or Mitt Romney?
National Defense Authorization Act
The NDAA authorizes indefinite imprisonment, without charges, and
without the right to a lawyer solely on the secret determination that a
U.S. citizen is
suspected of a terrorist threat or has had some indefinite connection to a terrorist. This essentially removes
Bill of Rights protections from
every U.S. citizen. There’s not much more to say, but read it again until it sinks in! For more details, read this
Forbes article. Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul all answered
a question about NDAA in a debate.
War on Drugs
Voters often do not realize that Ron Paul acknowledges the right of
states and localities to pass laws regulating the use and possession of
drugs. Ron Paul conscientiously adheres to his oath to defend the
Constitution. To enact federal prohibition of alcohol required an
amendment to the Constitution. His position is that the federal War on
Drugs is unconstitutional, and, in fact, is a failure that exacerbates
the problem–just as prohibition did with alcohol. Drug prohibition
increases the price of drugs on the black market, creating the climate
conducive for the formation of drug lords, cartels, and the resulting
increasing violence. The U.S. has the
largest prison population in the world both in number and percentage, and the drug war is a
major cause.
Dr. Paul points that imprisonment of minorities for drug offenses has
affected minorities greatly disproportional to their percentage of
conviction of drug crimes. Many countries, groups, and noted
individuals agree with Dr. Paul on the failure of the War on Drugs,
including
Britain,
Latin American, the
Global Commission on Drug Policy,
law enforcement groups,
Pat Robertson,
Judge Jim Gray, Nobel Prize economist
Milton Friedman, and
500 U.S. economists. I strongly recommend
Milton Friedman’s short video interview for those particularly interested in the
moral questions involved. The
experience of countries who have tried drug decriminalization demonstrates the soundness of this approach.
Marijuana itself may not even be the main factor in its criminalization. There are far bigger
economics and politics involved than the smoking of marijuana. One major factor may be
the competition hemp poses to the oil industry.
Ron Paul points out that the federal government is overriding state
laws that allow medical use of marijuana. The different views of Mitt
Romney and Ron Paul are contrasted in a short
video of their responses to a medical marijuana user whose five doctors affirm it is his only relief.
Health and Nutrition Freedoms
What many conservatives seem to overlook is that
federal
laws and regulations among the biggest threats to our most cherished
freedoms. Again, bear in mind that saying federal (national)
legislation in a given area is unconstitutional does
not mean
that states and localities cannot legislate on these matters. It is
their proper and intended jurisdiction. Thus, while it may sound
conservative and moral to fight drugs at the federal level, this opens
the door to other federal legislation that can remove our most
fundamental liberties.
As Milton Friedman said above, if the federal government can
criminalize marijuana because it is deemed bad for one’s health, why not
raw milk (Amish farmers have been arrested at gunpoint for selling it),
free speech in nutritional information,
nutritional products,
not eating a federally prescribed diet (yes, a girl was not allowed to eat her sack lunch because it did not meet federal diet “guidelines”), selling
raw almonds, etc. Besides what the federal government can prohibit, there are also concerns over what it can fund or mandate–
psychiatric screenings of children, for example. Granted, there may be some
arguments for and against
many of these issues. But federalizing issues leaves no room for
error. If a state makes a mistake, other states are not forced into the
same mold, but federal laws affect the whole country and stifle the
creativity inherent in multiple individual state approaches. There is a
growing protest of state and federal regulations that restrict what appear to many as basic rights in the area of food and nutrition.
Also, however well-intended, centralized government agencies will
naturally be targets of special interests who can buy influence to favor
their products or protect themselves from competition by placing
sympathetic personnel in government regulatory agencies. Ron Paul talks
of this when he says the
FDA and drug companies are in bed together. The award-winning
Burzynski movie
is a real eye-opener for anyone places total confidence in the
capability of the federal FDA to protect and promote our best health
interests. One can look at a site like
Natural News
for a critical look at many federal health initiatives, if only to be
aware that there is often a credible alternative viewpoint that may
receive scant positive news coverage.
Local Control of Education
Education is an area that receives far less attention than it
deserves from Christians and conservatives. There has been a recent
movement in the nation’s largest protestant denomination, The Southern
Baptist Convention, to consider alternatives to public schooling. “Dr.
Morris H. Chapman, president and chief executive officer of the Southern
Baptist Convention’s Executive Committee,
criticizes the public school system
for increasing secularism and moral erosion….” saying, “All Christians
should note this sea-change in sentiment within the SBC. The spiritual,
moral, and intellectual pathologies of the government school system are
now obvious even to casual observers. Christian parents and pastors need
to ask themselves just how much longer they intend to render our
children to Caesar’s spiritually dark, morally decaying, and physically
dangerous government schools.”
Whether spiritually, morally, politically, culturally, safety, or
educationally speaking, it would seem parental and local control over
what our children are being taught is of prime importance. While Mitt
Romney may talk of block grants and reforming the Department of
Education, Ron Paul advocates its essential abolition. Ron Paul is a
strong advocate of freedom of education under parental control,
including the option to home school.
Dr. Paul sees no Constitutional authority for a federal role in education.
Prayer in schools, creation vs. evolution, abortion, sex education,
history, politics, math and reading strategies, religion, sexual
orientation, marriage, and other issues that can provoke strong
differences of opinion are best decided at a local level and ultimately
left in the hands of parents who have the right to chose the school
their children attend–or teach them at home.
Dr. Paul says such issues cannot be discussed on their merits in an
educational environment where each side attempts to use the force of law
and imposed curriculum to impose its views on all. Dr. Paul would be a
strong advocate for Christians rights of free speech and association.
Religious Freedom
Of course without the educational freedom and parental control Dr.
Paul so strongly advocates, religious freedom is actually a fading
entity. If a government school’s “neutral” education denies any speech
about God or Christian values to be spoken, children will by default
receive a secular education. Likewise, churches under federal tax rules
are steered away from any political speech or any moral pronouncements
that could be considered discriminatory to individuals practicing acts
that Christians may deem sinful. Ron Paul believes that the
Constitution grants the federal government no authority to impose
morality upon the nation as a whole. This type of legislation is
reserved to the states and localities. Ron Paul would defend Christians
from federal imposition upon their right of free speech and
association. Christians and churches could promote their biblical
morality and freely choose to associate or not associate in their
churches. Christians would not be accused of hate speech or
discrimination for preaching biblical teachings. They would not be
forced by federal intrusion to hire or retain personnel deemed immoral
by their standards. They would be free to proclaim and practice their
teachings and win converts through persuasion. Rather than engaging in
the legislative battle to impose moral values through federal
legislation (the
states do have authority to take up such
matters), Ron Paul would strive instead to preserve the freedoms of
speech and association for everyone–and also prohibit the federal
government from imposing one state’s standards upon another state.
Marriage and Gay Rights
Ron Paul’s position on the issue of marriage (he has been married to
his wife, Carol, for 55 years) is consistent with his Constitutional
approach. He says, in opposing a constitutional marriage amendment, and
endorsing The Defense of Marriage Act,
Ironically, liberal social engineers who wish to use federal government power to redefine marriage will be able to point to the constitutional marriage amendment
as proof that the definition of marriage is indeed a federal matter! I
am unwilling either to cede to federal courts the authority to redefine
marriage, or to deny a state’s ability to preserve the traditional
definition of marriage. Instead, I believe it is time for Congress and
state legislatures to reassert their authority by refusing to enforce
judicial usurpations of power.
I suggest Christians and conservatives look more closely at Dr.
Paul’s Constitutional reasoning, rather than making quick judgments that
he’s against marriage. His positions are decidedly constitutional, and
would most often have yielded superior short-term and long-term
practical results. His position on
gay rights is reasoned similarly.
Economic Policy
Ron Paul proposes to cut $1 trillion dollars his first year, and
balance the budget by his third year. He will essentially abolish five
federal agencies, eliminating them by attrition and transfer rather than
abrupt cuts. All others want to balance the budget sometime beyond the
end of their term (usually many years beyond). Dr. Paul says the only
budget we can really control is this year’s–refreshing candor and truth.
No more kicking the can down the road. It is called his
Plan to Restore America.
Many conservatives, for example
Rush Limbaugh,
Sarah Palin, and
Sean Hannity,
endorse Ron Paul’s economic plan and recognize his economic expertise
and solid track record in this area. There really is no peer to Dr.
Paul in knowledge and consistency in economic matters among any of the
candidates who have run in this year’s race. Dr. Paul has been praised
by
David Stockman (Ronald Reagan’s former Director of the Office of Management and Budget), the independent
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget,
Nassim Taleb (“Black Swan” author),
Dr. Iris Mack (celebrated Harvard alum),
The Club for Growth, and many others.
How about a 0% Income Tax?
Wall Street Journal editorial board director
Stephen Moore explains why Rep. Ron Paul’s ideas on economics are correct and must be accepted in the mainstream GOP platform. Mr. Moore says, “
…you would see the most insourcing of jobs into America in the history of the world.”
Although Rick Santorum made some comments based on creative
interpretations of data in a debate, the independent and respected
National Taxpayers Union (NTU) issued a
press release to clarify its
presidential candidate ratings. For Mitt Romney’s evaluation compare the
NTU evaluation of candidate budget proposals. Between Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul, NTU said Ron Paul’s proposal dwarfed others’ proposals in deficit reduction.
Social Security and Medicare
Related to the deficit situation is the funding of Social Security
and Medicare. Christians and conservatives generally find it morally
unjustified to pass on immense debt to their children and grandchildren.
However, senior citizens are rightly concerned about whether the funds
they have been contributing to throughout their lives will remain sound
into their retirement years. Ron Paul’s cuts in overseas spending offer
the only plan to cut our deficit and balance the budget while not
cutting Social Security and Medicare for those who will be dependent on
it. Other candidates plans to maintain Social Security and Medicare,
increase military spending,
and balance the budget do not
compute. Note well that those seniors on fixed retirement incomes and
dependent on savings are hurt tremendously by the inflationary Federal
Reserve policies that cause the value of the dollar to fall and,
therefore, the prices of goods to rise.
For more on this, including some interesting and relevant light on
Newt Gingrich’s claims to have helped balance the budget four times, see
Dr. Ron Paul: Champion of the Senior Citizen!
Talking Points
For those who have not looked seriously at Ron Paul previously, here is a recent
comparison of Ron Paul with Mitt Romney, a
comparison of Ron Paul with Barack Obama, and some bullet points highlighting his consistent record over twelve terms in the U.S. House of Representatives:
- He has never taken a government junket
- He does not participate in the lucrative Congressional Pension Program
- He returns a portion of his annual Congressional Office Budget every year
- He has never voted to raise taxes
- He has never voted for an unbalanced budget
- He voted no to the bankster bailout
- He always voted no on raising the debt ceiling
- He warned us against The “Super Congress” legislation that resembles both an “Enabling Act” and a “Politburo”
- He has never voted to restrict gun ownership
- He has never voted to raise Congressional Pay
- President Paul will take a yearly salary of $39,336, the average US worker’s salary, instead of the President’s $400,000 salary
- He will cut One Trillion Dollars from the budget in the first year and balance the budget in three years
- He will Return Power to the States as set down in the 9th and 10th Amendments (Bill of Rights) to the Constitution
- He never voted to increase Executive Branch Power
- He will Reinstate The Constitution and Save The Republic
- He will audit and eventually end the unconstitutional Federal Reserve System
- He will phase out the unconstitutional IRS beginning immediately
- He will secure the borders
- He will limit Big Government in your private affairs
- He will stop Illegal immigration and birthright citizenship, grant no amnesty, and defend our borders
- He will protect internet freedom and our Bill of Rights
