Paul: GOP Doesn’t Care About Presidents Who Assassinate American Citizens
Steve Watson Prisonplanet.com
Republicans “trying to out-militarize” Obama
GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul said on CBS’ Face The Nation Sunday that he is determined to continue his campaign in an effort to “save the Republican Party from themselves”.
The Congressman declared that there was no way he would quit because he is the only candidate who wants to restore the Republican party to its founding principles of limited government.
“I am talking to a whole generation, which is expanding,” Paul said.
“When I can get 52,000 people out on a college campus as wildly enthusiastic to hear the message of liberty and freedom and less war and curtailing the Federal Reserve, there is no way I’m going to quit speaking out on this and there is no way I’m going to give up on the effort to get the Republicans back to their roots.”
“In some ways they say, ‘well why don’t you give up and this will help the Republican Party.’ The truth is I’m trying to save the Republican Party from themselves because they want perpetual wars,” Paul added.
“They don’t care about presidents who assassinate American citizens, they don’t care about searching our houses without a search warrant and these are the kind of things that people care about.
“I think Republicans have dug a hole for themselves because they’re trying to out-militarize the President, saying we should do more,” Paul said.
“Yet 75 percent of the American people have said we’ve had enough, it’s cost us too much money, it’s time to come home.”
When asked by Host Bob Schieffer if he would support Romney should he win the nomination, Paul responded: “I haven’t made that decision yet, I’m still campaigning.”
The Congressman also once again addressed the far flung notion that he could be invited to take on the role of vice president on a Romney ticket:
“I don’t see how that would happen. There’s too many disagreements … I have no common ground on economics.” Paul said.
Watch the interview below:
Republicans “trying to out-militarize” Obama
The Congressman declared that there was no way he would quit because he is the only candidate who wants to restore the Republican party to its founding principles of limited government.
“I am talking to a whole generation, which is expanding,” Paul said.
“When I can get 52,000 people out on a college campus as wildly enthusiastic to hear the message of liberty and freedom and less war and curtailing the Federal Reserve, there is no way I’m going to quit speaking out on this and there is no way I’m going to give up on the effort to get the Republicans back to their roots.”
“In some ways they say, ‘well why don’t you give up and this will help the Republican Party.’ The truth is I’m trying to save the Republican Party from themselves because they want perpetual wars,” Paul added.
“They don’t care about presidents who assassinate American citizens, they don’t care about searching our houses without a search warrant and these are the kind of things that people care about.
“I think Republicans have dug a hole for themselves because they’re trying to out-militarize the President, saying we should do more,” Paul said.
“Yet 75 percent of the American people have said we’ve had enough, it’s cost us too much money, it’s time to come home.”
When asked by Host Bob Schieffer if he would support Romney should he win the nomination, Paul responded: “I haven’t made that decision yet, I’m still campaigning.”
The Congressman also once again addressed the far flung notion that he could be invited to take on the role of vice president on a Romney ticket:
“I don’t see how that would happen. There’s too many disagreements … I have no common ground on economics.” Paul said.
Watch the interview below:
Trial: Priest joked about abusing 3 boys in week
By | Associated Press
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Jurors in a landmark priest-abuse trial heard Monday about a priest-turned-camp prowler and another who allegedly bragged about having sex with three boys in one week.
Also Monday, two jurors were replaced by alternates, but a gag order prevents lawyer from discussing the reasons for the move.Monsignor William Lynn is on trial for child endangerment and conspiracy. Lynn, 61, is the first Roman Catholic church official in the U.S. charged for his handling of priest-abuse complaints. Prosecutors say he helped the church bury them in secret files, far from the prying eyes of investigators, civil attorneys and concerned Catholics.
In the day's most startling testimony, a detective read internal church memos about a priest who allegedly "joked about how hard it was to have sex with three boys in one week." His accuser also stated that the priest had a "rotation process" of boys spending time sleeping with him.Defense lawyers argue that Lynn tried to address the problem as secretary for clergy from 1992 to 2004, but was blocked by the late Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua and others in the Philadelphia archdiocese.
The testimony Monday also included a 1992 complaint about a different priest who allegedly molested boys at a church-owned camp three decades earlier.Several junior counselors complained in the early 1960s that the priest was on the prowl at night, molesting them in their tents. They said it was a well-known secret among teen counselors for several years.
The priest remained in ministry, working at three archdiocesan high schools and serving as assistant superintendent of Catholic schools through 2004. Confronted after a man complained to the archdiocese in 1992, the priest admitted to the "sin" of masturbation and said he had read up on that subject because so many people were mentioning it in the confessional.
Few victims or members of the public have been attending the trial in downtown Philadelphia, but retired Philadelphia detective Arthur Baselice III of Mantua, N.J., turned out Monday.
His 28-year-old son, Arthur Jr., died of a drug overdose in 2006, after his civil lawsuit against the church accusing his high school principal of molesting him was thrown out because of legal time limits. The former principal, a Franciscan friar, is in prison for stealing nearly $900,000 from the school and the Franciscans, some of which fed the younger Baselice's drug addiction, according to prosecutors.Prosecutors are detailing allegations made against nearly two dozen priests since 1948 to show that Lynn and other archdiocesan officials kept suspected predators in jobs around children.
On cross-examination Monday, defense lawyers Jeffrey Lindy and Thomas Bergstrom had detectives concede that Lynn promptly interviewed both complainants and accused priests, and sent the priests to a church-run hospital for mental health evaluations and treatment.
The man who wrote to the archdiocese in 1992 about the camp prowler was by then 44, a married father of five girls. His alleged molester was chaplain of a suburban Philadelphia girls' high school.
He remained there until 2004, when a church panel reviewing complaints in the wake of the national priest-abuse scandal found the allegations against him credible. The priest only then admitted molesting three boys, and explained earlier denials on the fact he had confessed and moved past it.
The archdiocese restricted his ministry — 40 years after the camp allegations first surfaced.
___
Associated Press writer JoAnn Loviglio contributed to this report.
Learn Where PA State Legislative Candidates Stand On Liberty Issues
Consider the following headlines from recently reported events:
- Police shut down lemonade stand run by two little girls
- SWAT team raids Amish farm for selling milk straight from the cow
- Federal Bureaucrats fine Missouri family $4 million for son’s sale of $4500 worth of rabbits
Government bureaucrats seem to have gone off the deep end while they blatantly ignore the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Innocent citizens merely wanting to fly across the country are groped and irradiated by thugs with a badge. Elderly cancer patients are forced to remove adult diapers, and parents are required to submit their toddlers to invasive enhanced body searches.
The TSA, first under George Bush and continued by Barack Obama, treats the area between the ticket counter and the door to the airplane as a Constitution-free zone—your right to privacy and presumed innocence is of no concern to them.
It is imperative that we work to repeal the laws that bureaucrats are using to trample our rights.
That is why the Pennsylvania Campaign for Liberty is working on a Candidate Survey Program. Each candidate for the State legislature has received a survey of seven important questions—questions that will put candidates on the record on liberty issues.
Candidates were asked where they stand on:
- Real ID (also known as Dangerous ID)
- Red light cameras
- Constitutional Carry
- Nullifying ObamaCare
- No-knock warrants
- TSA pat downs
- State healthcare exchanges
As we work toward liberty, it is critical to have current and potential legislators on record concerning important issues. Therefore, it is vital that we receive responses from as many candidates as possible.
Some candidates don’t want to go on the record—they are using evasive maneuvers to avoid responding to our questions.
If the candidates in your area have not responded to our survey, please contact them and ask that they complete and submit the Campaign for Liberty Survey.
In Liberty,
Deb Wells
Interim State Coordinator
Pennsylvania Campaign for Liberty
P.S. Click here to learn where your candidates stand on liberty issues.
P.P.S. Campaign for Liberty does not support or endorse candidates for office. The goal of the Campaign for Liberty Survey is only for keeping candidates true to their word should they be elected. It should not be construed as an endorsement of any candidate.
You are encouraged to view the websites and statements of each candidate to make an informed decision on candidate positions.
Do Republicans really want to defeat Obama?
Photo: Wikimedia Commons Reawakening Liberty by Thomas Mullen
TAMPA, Fl., April 2, 2012 —The Republican Party has energized its base around the idea that Barack Obama must be defeated to save America from “socialism.” They won a majority in the House in 2010 by focusing on Obamacare. They claim that this election is a turning point. Obama must be defeated or America will be “fundamentally changed.”
There is only one problem. All of the candidates they are running will lose to Obama, with the exception of Ron Paul.
In order to win the general election, the Republicans need independents and Democrats. They also need a media narrative that shows a clear contrast between their candidate and Obama. They get all of this with Paul and none of it with Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich.
During the 2010 elections, Republicans pulled off a rhetorical coup. They successfully labeled Obamacare as “socialism” while at the same time mobilizing millions of senior citizens against the program because it would hurt Medicare. Hats off to their spin doctors. It won’t be that easy this year. If they want to attack Obama on Obamacare, they can’t run a candidate who signed the same program into law in Massachusetts (Romney), who supported its individual mandate for twenty years (Gingrich), or who voted for the Medicare prescription drug benefit (Santorum).
Santorum hasn’t endorsed the individual mandate, but Obama can argue that he’s all for government healthcare and “spreading the wealth around” because of Medicare Part D. The Republican base might swallow Santorum’s rebuttals, but for the rest Obamacare gets neutralized.
In contrast, Ron Paul can hammer Obama from both directions. He can argue the traditional conservative position that Medicare shouldn’t exist at all, but that he has the only plan that won’t cut off current beneficiaries. He can offer something new by allowing young people to opt out of Medicare and finish with the rejoinder “as long as we don’t start new government programs, as you have done, President Obama.” Ron Paul wins that debate by knockout. The other candidates lose.
Republicans have a short memory. John McCain lost to Obama in 2008 because he was perceived as another George W. Bush. Bush was reviled by voters for nation-building in the Middle East, for spying on Americans, and for being too cozy with Wall Street. Obama campaigned against all of that, but once in office he’s been Bush III.
Mitt Romney said that he would have signed the last NDAA bill, empowering the president to arrest American citizens and hold them indefinitely without due process. Santorum is on the record supporting the new power Obama has assumed to assassinate American citizens. Newt Gingrich says not only that the Patriot Act has to be strengthened, but that Americans must accept it for the rest of their lives. None of these candidates can attack Obama on civil liberties.
Ron Paul can. Voters can watch videos of Paul’s resistance to the Patriot Act before it was passed and review Paul’s numerous speeches, op-eds, and congressional votes against Bush’s policies. Only Ron Paul wants to repeal the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, and the controversial provisions of the NDAA. He can excoriate Obama as Bush III and convince independents and Democrats to vote for him.
Only Paul can attack Obama for filling up his cabinet with Wall Street insiders. Obviously, that argument won’t fly with Mitt Romney. Santorum and Gingrich have both been lobbyists out of public office. Obama will point that out. Paul has a long history of opposing corporatism and again adds something new, his oppositions to the Federal Reserve. Paul can point to the trillions in bailouts of foreign banks by the Fed and hammer Obama for not doing anything about it.
After running as a peace candidate and collecting a Nobel Prize, Obama has started new wars and expanded existing ones. He has deployed troops in Australia and may yet get more involved in Syria. Romney, Santorum and Gingrich cannot attack Obama on this. They have all eliminated that possibility with their unrelenting hawkishness during their campaigns.
Paul’s foreign policy is not only what got Obama elected in 2008; it is what got George W. Bush elected in 2000. Bush ran on a “humble foreign policy” and won. When he broke that promise, his party was routed in 2006 and 2008. Obama won on an anti-war platform in 2008. He broke that promise and his party lost big in 2010. Only Ron Paul can capitalize on this in 2012. He’s the only one proposing less war. He’s the only one that can cite a consistent anti-war record.
If nothing else, Republicans should be able to attack Obama on spending, but Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich can’t win this fight either. None of them propose any spending cuts. Their supposed “cuts” merely reduce proposed increases in federal spending in future years. Obama can argue that those proposals amount to endorsement of his spending now and he’d be correct.
Ron Paul already has already released his first year budget and it cuts $1 trillion. Combined with Obama’s proposed 2013 deficit, Paul can argue that electing Obama will cost Americans over $2 trillion dollars in one year. Now, that is a contrast that makes good headlines and will play with voters.
If defeating Obama is truly important, Republicans have to offer someone different. Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum propose only to tweak Obama’s policies. Voters don’t want to hear that. They want to hear about fundamental change, remember? Only Ron Paul can pull it off in 2012.
It isn’t too late. New York, California, Texas and other states still haven’t held their primaries. If the Republican Party could catapult Gingrich and Santorum into the lead when their campaigns had no money and no ground game, they could do the same for Paul now. Wins in any of the big states can still result in a brokered convention which Paul can win. The Republican Party must learn from its mistakes during the Bush years or they will be defeated again. Only Ron Paul can beat Obama in 2012.
Ignore the smokescreen; you and I are funding abortion
As investigations by your National Pro-Life Alliance and other pro-life and law enforcement groups have shown, Planned Parenthood staff across the country have again and again:
*** Actively abetted minors in avoiding laws that require parental notification -- even if the minor girl is a likely victim of rape.
*** Concealed life or death information on the risks of surgical and drug abortions and the proven health consequences of both.
*** Covered up sex trafficking of young girls in violation of laws requiring them to advise authorities.
*** Kept such shoddy accounting practices that it is a lie for them to say that no taxpayer funds are used for abortion.
But that begs the question. Are the claims by Planned Parenthood true that their so-called "women's health centers" really service women's health needs?
Or are their claims merely a smoke screen for maximizing the money they spend to perform and promote abortions?
Looking at the evidence, it's clear to me that the second interpretation is true.
As you and other NPLA members know, Planned Parenthood gets your tax dollars both in direct government grants and as reimbursement for "costs" of abortion.
But they get even more of your tax money, supposedly for "other services."
But in case after case, evidence shows these other services are a sham.
For example, in Texas, former Planned Parenthood director Abby Johnson has filed a whistleblower lawsuit, charging that the Houston area Planned Parenthood knowingly sent in some $6 million in false claims to Medicaid and covered up its actions.
The suit states the Houston area abortion facility sent in more than 87,000 reimbursement claims for services that were "false, fraudulent, and/or ineligible."
Secondly, in California, former Planned Parenthood financial officer, Victor Gonzalez, says his internal audit estimated Planned Parenthood overcharged California taxpayers $180 million since late 1990's in the Los Angeles area alone.
And these two examples are just the tip of the iceberg, as more whistleblowers continue to come out of the woodwork.
The bottom line is, it doesn't matter how Planned Parenthood gets their hands on tax dollars.
Whenever taxpayer dollars flow to Planned Parenthood, you can be sure they will find a way to use them to subsidize their deadly abortion business.
That's why Planned Parenthood must not see a penny from taxpayers for any reason and why your continued support of NPLA efforts is so important.
And also why I hope you will help ratchet up the pressure to cut the taxpayer funding completely and crank up the heat in Congress to pass the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" to end ALL taxpayer funding for abortionists.
Please sign the petition to end taxpayer funding of abortion by clicking here.
With the politicians looking for votes this election year, there is no better time to remind them that we voters demand a complete end to taxpayer funding of abortion.
For Life,
Martin Fox, President
National Pro-Life Alliance
P.S. If you can, please chip in with a contribution by clicking here, because your National Pro-Life Alliance is entirely dependent on voluntary contributions to keep our vital programs running.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)