Straight-up. Ron Paul is the only person in Washington who's there to actually represent the people. As in ... fight the government! The very purpose of representation.
Paul has consistently fought high taxes, profligate spending, and countless other government abuses. Paul is also the one and only representative in Washington to consistently go after the ultimate central planner ... the Federal Reserve.
Paul is a modern day Robert "Mr. Republican" A. Taft. Quite frankly, I find it intellectually and philosophically dishonest to claim oneself a conservative and yet, be against Ron Paul. Yeah, sure ... the "popular kids" don't like Ron Paul. But so what? Who cares what they think? They only like Big Government types anyways.
Ron Paul is the philosophical soul of the conservative movement. That is, the conservative movement of Taft, Goldwater, and Reagan. Paul never compromises, he doesn't stick his finger in the air to see which way the political winds blow, and whether you agree with him or not, you always know he's telling the truth.
He's also the only person in Washington who understands economics, and the only person in Washington who fights for genuine liberty too. How anyone could call themselves a conservative and be against this man, is beyond me.
The war you say? He's against the war? Gasp!
War may be inevitable, but war is also mass slaughter. Personally, I can respect a man who's against the mass slaughter of human lives. And let's be real about "nation building" ... What we're doing in Iraq, is nothing less than the New Deal expanded overseas, and paid for by the hard work of Americans.
Paul did support the initial invasion after 9/11, but let me ask you this:
Knowing where we are today, which is trillions of dollars in debt from bailouts and "stimulus" (which Bush was a big part of), unemployment is climbing faster than a space shuttle, and we just suffered a terrorist attack on our home soil ...
So, would you rather have the war in Iraq, with the inflation needed to fund it (that eventually blew in a housing bubble), economic turmoil, and obscene federal debt? Or would you rather have sound domestic and economic policy?
Just askin' ...
I'll get into my position on the war another time.
The following video features Ron Paul schooling the hosts on this mornings CNBC Squawk Box.
Anything Less Than Full Disclosure is Unacceptable
Last week a new bill was introduced in the Senate to audit the Federal Reserve. Some backers of my bill HR1207 and the existing Senate companion bill S.604 were a little miffed at this, but depending on how you think about it, this new legislation poses no great threat to our efforts.
With the economy in shambles, people are looking for answers - not just because of lost savings on Wall Street, but because of lost houses on Main Street. Because of the many problems we face, the Federal Reserve and its powers over the economy have come under scrutiny. This translates into a lot of political pressure on Congress. With all the House Republicans signed on as co-sponsors and over half of the Democrats, HR 1207 has enormous bipartisan support. It would be disingenuous for Washington not to embrace the principles behind this bill after all the promises for transparency. How can one credibly argue for more transparency in government in one breath and defend the secrecy of the Federal Reserve in the next?
However, there is still very powerful resistance to the disclosures that HR 1207 would require and efforts to weaken it will continue to pop up before this issue is settled.
The good news is that Washington is responding and the Federal Reserve has become the issue. Concerned Americans need to keep the pressure on by continuing to define what we want, and what we do not want.
One major concern is that HR 1207 constitutes some kind of power grab for Congress. Congress would not do a better job dictating interest rates or managing money supply growth than the Federal Reserve does for exactly the same reasons: Congress is not the free market. Any select group of people, no matter how wise and educated, simply cannot replace the wisdom of the market. HR 1207 does not seek to replace the wisdom of the Fed with the wisdom of Congress. That would be a giant step backwards. HR 1207 simply asks for full disclosure, and I am agreeable to allowing for a reasonable lag time to calm the fears that Congress intends to dictate monetary policy.
What we do want, what we insist upon, is that no longer will decisions that carry so much economic weight be made in absolute secrecy. We want to know what arrangements the Fed makes with other governments and central banks. We want to know who is benefitting from the actions of the Fed and what deals are being made. The Fed is already reacting to pressure by scaling back its liquidity facilities and returning to more traditional monetary policy through direct asset purchases. With nearly $800 billion in mortgage-backed securities on its books already, $800 billion in Treasury securities, and no real limit to what the Fed can acquire, there is a tremendous opportunity for malfeasance. We need to know who the Fed deals with, what they buy, how much they spend, and who benefits. As good as any step towards Federal Reserve transparency is, anything less than full disclosure at this point is unacceptable.
by Ron Paul (10-26-2009, 12:11 PM)
