Ron Paul in the General Election


When have the RiNOs not tended to blow Presidential elections?

There is this common myth that a “moderate” Republican — a big government interventionist — is the best choice for a general election. They are called the most “electable”…by the Big Government advocates in the media.

As proof of this, we can look to how well Bob Dole and John McCain did. Conservatives compromised their principles, and nominated a Liberal Republican, and then won the general election…

Oh…wait…they lost. In fact, “moderates” almost always do.

Yes, as FDR once pointed out, “me-too Republicans” like Dole, McCain, and Romney almost always lose, because you might as well vote for a Democrat as for someone who is imitating one. He used this argument against John Dewey, with great success.

In fact, the last three decisive turnouts for Republicans were all for “extremist Conservative” positions: 2010 with the TEA Party, 1994 for the Contract with America, and 1980 with the “unelectable” Ronald Reagan.

In fact, in 1980, the “moderate” Republicans ran a spoiler Republican in the general election, as an “Independent”. John Anderson, whom they would have preferred be nominated because he was an “electable moderate”, was supposed to split the vote, giving Carter the win.

Yes, the RiNOs actually preferred Carter over Reagan.

But what actually happened, of course, is that Reagan won in a landslide, even with a “moderate” Republican trying to steal his votes in the general election.

That shows just how much more electable a real Conservative is, than a “moderate”.

Americans still believe in the American principles that a Reagan/Goldwater sort of Conservative espouses, and will turn out in record numbers to support that, when it’s actually available in our false dichotomy of a two-party system.

And the only major candidate running for President today who has that form of American Conservatism — conserving the principles of liberty of the Founding Fathers — is Ron Paul. As Reagan put it:

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" ~Barry Goldwater

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals — if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories.

The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
— Ronald Reagan, interview with Reason Magazine (1975)

The claim is that Romney would win with independents (who are a plurality of the population, more numerous than Republicans or Democrats) and Democrats. But in both Iowa and New Hampshire, Ron Paul won among independents, and beat Romney among Democrats who crossed over to vote.

Paul would win a in landslide akin to the TEA Party, the Contract with America, and Ronald Reagan.

Romney will lose in a landslide akin to John McCain, and Bob Dole.

Egypt: Told You So


The people of Egypt are revolting against their brutal, repressive dictator, Hosni Mubarak. We Americans are glad. We hate tyranny, and oppose it whenever we can.

If only the political class of the Federal government felt the same.

This dictator is same one in the five photographs at the right…one of each president since 1980.

The one that the US has helped keep in power for over thirty years, handing out $2,000,000,000 to their tyrant each year. If you adjust for inflation, this feeble country’s tiny economy has benefited from over one hundred billion dollars in American taxpayer dollars, plus military aid, technology, et cetera. How much interest in the National Debt has accumulated because of this?

Each time I’m listing the evil tyrannies the Federal government has supported in our name abroad, I mention Hosni Mubarak. And the neocon types carefully ignore it. But now we see why.

When Mubarak is, hopefully, overthrown by the people of Egypt, will they forget that we’re one of the main reasons they suffered under this evil regime for all these years?

The Iranians didn’t forget. They were forced to turn to the Soviet-funded Islamic Revolution, because we supported the Shah of Iran, their own tyrant. They then, rightfully, saw the US government as having made itself their enemy, by having supported their dictator.

Now the Egyptians may well turn to Islamic Fundamentalist movements of their own, against their own US Government-supported tyrant.  Should the next Egyptian government feel any different than the Iranians?

Sure, real Americans have never actually supported this kind of promotion of tyranny…but we’ve stood by and allowed our government to do it in our name, in violation of everything American.

How long are corrupt Federal bureaucrats going to keep supporting evil around the world, while we real Americans reap the blowback when people finally find a way to strike back against it?

We just gave more military aid to the tyrants ruling Saudi Arabia, for example. They are hated not only by their own people, but by almost all Muslims around the world, who see them (correctly) as a foreign-supported monstrosity, occupying their holiest city. How long before this chain reaction of revolution against American-supported dictators reaches Saudi Arabia? If their next regime hates us, who could blame them?

We need, as an increasing number of Americans are beginning to say aloud, to stop violating other countries in ways that we would not want other countries to do to us, like supporting tyranny abroad.

%d bloggers like this: