Let me start out saying, that this is not completely my letter, but was fwd to me from a friend. I've tweaked it a bit, but for the most part this is the work of a Georgia Tech graduate named: Eamon Causey. He wrote it so eloquently I have decide it is simpler to repost it.
Most of you know that I am a fan of Dr. Ron Paul. I believe he is the only candidate that represents a real change from the establishment politicians like Romney and Obama. After a 20%+ finish in both Iowa and New Hampshire, he is surging in the national polls and fast becoming the anti-establishment candidate to challenge Romney for the Republican nomination. In fact, just in the past week his polling numbers in South Carolina have gone from 9% to 20% and he has just started to campaign there. You might not know, but all of Ron Paul's campaign funding comes from grassroots activists like you and me, and not from the special interests - banks, lobbyists, wall street, etc. In fact, Ron Paul's three biggest donors right now are the US Army, US Navy, and US Airforce - he has received twice the money from active duty military personnel than all of the other Republican candidates combined! Meanwhile, Romney's biggest donors are Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, and Morgan Stanley, the Wall Street special interests who all got bailed out during the financial crisis.
My Addition:
Many of you are concerned with the growing gap of prosperity between the rich and the poor. When Wall Street got its bailout the middle class paid for it, while the rich got richer. When the value of the dollar declines, which inevitable happens when you are 15 trillion in debt, do the rich get hurt or do the poor? A strong dollar, that once earned can be kept is the best way to rebuild the middle class.
As many of you are I too am concerned with the direction President Obama has taken America and I know that on all South Carolinians minds is who can beat Obama and restore America now. CNN, Foxnews, and many other news agencies would have you believe Mitt Romney is the only candidate that can beat Obama. Do you remember 2008? Obama swept the Independents and under 30 crowd and that is why he won. Look it up. There is only one candidate who beats Obama in this age group and that is Ron Paul. Mitt can’t beat Obama because he can’t win this group of Americans. If you are under 30, talk to your parents and grandparents about why you are voting for Ron Paul. If you are a parent or grandparent ask you child why they are voting for Ron Paul, there response may surprise you. SC Senator Tom Davis recently endorsed Ron Paul saying, ““I’m also endorsing him because unlike what the pundits have led you to believe, he is the candidate who gives the Republican Party the best chance to beat Barack Obama in November.””
Back to Eamon:
Today there is a money bomb for Ron Paul's campaign. I would urge of all you to look into Ron Paul's platform, watch his youtube videos, and research his plan to Restore America. If you agree as I do that he represents real change and a challenge to the status quo, then today is the day to donate - $10, $20, $50, $100 - whatever you can manage. I've put my money where my mouth is and gave $100 to the campaign today.
You can donate here: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/
For Liberty,
Robert Bortins
p.s. - for those of you not as familiar with Ron Paul, here are some videos that will help explain his positions:
Ron Paul Movie (1 hour documentary about the beginning of the Revolution in 2007)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GR4WYqabTxU
Jon Stewart on the Media Ignoring Ron Paul
http://gawker.com/5831167/jon-stewart-why-is-the-media-ignoring-ron-paul
You Like Ron Paul, Except Foreign Policy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4a__tcfFug
Debate Highlights 1/7/12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fByaNBLYaU
Speech after New Hampshire
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da6irSCvnZY
New Hampshire Town Hall (look at that crowd!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZ3U3Qp_3d8
Monday, January 16, 2012
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Should Homeschoolers vote for Santorum?
Should Homeschoolers vote for Santorum?
Santorum is a homeschooling dad, the obvious question is should homeschoolers vote for Santorum? At first glance it is east to say “yes” and I did just that. I thought he would be a better president than Mitt Romney. I still do, but I now see him as a bad alternative to Romney. I do believe from a temporary view point he would be good for homeschoolers, but I don’t think he will do much to increase freedom in the US or around the world and that will harm homeschooling in the long run.
Santorum is an old testament Christian who will seek to destroy Islam through the use of our young people and the military. His statements are filled with hate and racism, although I doubt he knows what he is saying. This will make other leaders in countries where homeschooling is not welcome even more wary of adding it. As a Christian Conservative, I could not vote from Santorum. Christ’s message was of hope and love, not of a conquering empire. We know what Love is, because He first loved us. Love does not hate, it does not envy, and it certainly doesn’t seek to destroy entire nations.
Santorum would sacrifice our financial future and our countries security in order to perform his own crusade, much like the Catholic Church did centuries ago. As a Christian our job is to bring people to Jesus Christ, by preaching the good news, which is the gospel, not send people to Hell. I hope that those who homeschool and are Christians will stand with me and not vote for Santorum.
Santorum is a homeschooling dad, the obvious question is should homeschoolers vote for Santorum? At first glance it is east to say “yes” and I did just that. I thought he would be a better president than Mitt Romney. I still do, but I now see him as a bad alternative to Romney. I do believe from a temporary view point he would be good for homeschoolers, but I don’t think he will do much to increase freedom in the US or around the world and that will harm homeschooling in the long run.
Santorum is an old testament Christian who will seek to destroy Islam through the use of our young people and the military. His statements are filled with hate and racism, although I doubt he knows what he is saying. This will make other leaders in countries where homeschooling is not welcome even more wary of adding it. As a Christian Conservative, I could not vote from Santorum. Christ’s message was of hope and love, not of a conquering empire. We know what Love is, because He first loved us. Love does not hate, it does not envy, and it certainly doesn’t seek to destroy entire nations.
Santorum would sacrifice our financial future and our countries security in order to perform his own crusade, much like the Catholic Church did centuries ago. As a Christian our job is to bring people to Jesus Christ, by preaching the good news, which is the gospel, not send people to Hell. I hope that those who homeschool and are Christians will stand with me and not vote for Santorum.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Should Homeschoolers Vote for Ron Paul
A well respected, by me and the homeschooling community, homeschool defense lawyer. He recently wrote a piece on Ron Paul and how he was an enemy of the laws that let him help make homeschooling legal, mainly the 14th amendment versus the 10th amendment. Now he is a wonderful Lawyer and has much more legal knowledge then I and I believe he has thoughtfully contemplated the field, so it is important for me to think over what he has said and see what I believe. He has done as much for homeschooling in the US as anyone else, if not more.
He later clarified his original statement and stated that he doesn’t believe Ron Paul would do anything to hurt homeschooling as president and if he understood what he had to do to keep Homeschooling legal that Paul would likely rethinking his stance. So I respect him for clarifying his stance.
So my first questions would be to look worldwide who bans homeschooling in other countries? It is the national government. So this would lead me to think in a long term look the national government changing their position would potentially be a big issue.
I may be wrong, but I’d think that the Federal Lawyers, besides using the Commerce Clause, may be looking to the 14th amendment to make Obamacare Legal. If anyone can comment on that, if I’m wrong or not, that would be very helpful, and I would like to state that this paragraph is purely speculation at this point.
The next question I would have is would it not be better if the State protected our homeschooling rights? Should we not seek that now while it is legally safe and homeschool friendly legislators are in office? If the 10th amendment was given more precedence does anyone believe states would run to make homeschooling illegal? States save $5000-$10,000 for every student who homeschools and are fighting budget deficits. It is highly unlikely any legislators would attempt to pass these laws and if they tried it is highly unlikely they would pass. Would Ron Paul not help form other legislation to ensure the liberties of homeschoolers?
As the world gets smaller, the UN continues to play a major role in American legislation. Obama has given the UN even more power over the US, Mitt would likely continue to give our rights away. The UN is filled with countries that are against homeschooling. If our country continues down this path it is currently on it is likely the Federal government could be the greatest threat to homeschooling. So it is important to get the States to make sure it Homeschooling legality will always be maintained.
So I believe the Lawyer has a very good point, from where he is coming from,and I also believe that he is taking a super worst case scenario to attack Dr. Paul.
In the end I am still endorsing Ron Paul. He will make homeschooling legally stronger, not weaker as President. He is for personal liberty, that is his platform and to make a statement that he would do otherwise would go against everything Dr. Paul has ever fought for and if we know anything about the presidential race is that there is only one GOP candidate who stands for Liberty and who has done so without flip flopping and that is Ron Paul.
He later clarified his original statement and stated that he doesn’t believe Ron Paul would do anything to hurt homeschooling as president and if he understood what he had to do to keep Homeschooling legal that Paul would likely rethinking his stance. So I respect him for clarifying his stance.
So my first questions would be to look worldwide who bans homeschooling in other countries? It is the national government. So this would lead me to think in a long term look the national government changing their position would potentially be a big issue.
I may be wrong, but I’d think that the Federal Lawyers, besides using the Commerce Clause, may be looking to the 14th amendment to make Obamacare Legal. If anyone can comment on that, if I’m wrong or not, that would be very helpful, and I would like to state that this paragraph is purely speculation at this point.
The next question I would have is would it not be better if the State protected our homeschooling rights? Should we not seek that now while it is legally safe and homeschool friendly legislators are in office? If the 10th amendment was given more precedence does anyone believe states would run to make homeschooling illegal? States save $5000-$10,000 for every student who homeschools and are fighting budget deficits. It is highly unlikely any legislators would attempt to pass these laws and if they tried it is highly unlikely they would pass. Would Ron Paul not help form other legislation to ensure the liberties of homeschoolers?
As the world gets smaller, the UN continues to play a major role in American legislation. Obama has given the UN even more power over the US, Mitt would likely continue to give our rights away. The UN is filled with countries that are against homeschooling. If our country continues down this path it is currently on it is likely the Federal government could be the greatest threat to homeschooling. So it is important to get the States to make sure it Homeschooling legality will always be maintained.
So I believe the Lawyer has a very good point, from where he is coming from,and I also believe that he is taking a super worst case scenario to attack Dr. Paul.
In the end I am still endorsing Ron Paul. He will make homeschooling legally stronger, not weaker as President. He is for personal liberty, that is his platform and to make a statement that he would do otherwise would go against everything Dr. Paul has ever fought for and if we know anything about the presidential race is that there is only one GOP candidate who stands for Liberty and who has done so without flip flopping and that is Ron Paul.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Ron Paul and his Problem with Iran
I got a request on how I’d argue against Joel Rosenberg, and others who say Ron Paul’s policy on Iran is dangerous.
Before you say I am for Iran, I think the world would be a safer place if they were a democracy like ours. Their leader was a Christian man with strong principles and so were all its people. Now lets take a look of how Iran is likely feeling right now. Lets put the shoe on the other foot for a few moments as they say.
Iran is making more news as they threaten to close down Strait of Hormuz.
The first thing I would say, is let us look at the human element. Does anyone believe that Iran’s leader is willing to die for his cause? I’m sure he is willing for others to die, but he doesn’t want to be killed. So unless it is a last ditch effort to save himself or he knows he is going to be killed imminently he won’t do anything to upset his position of power and wealth.
Second issue is the missiles they are testing. Well they go about 90 miles, when they work, the US has missiles that go across the world in a matter of hours. It is the equivalent of you building a BB gun while the school bully holds an AR 15 and bazooka to your head. Now you could argue that eventually they will have a better weapon that is why they need to be stopped now. I grew up in a system where you were innocent until proven guilty system of justice, I don’t see how you can justify prosecuting someone from crimes they might commit.
Iran has supplied fighters in Iraq/Afghanistan with weapons. Well if we didn’t invade those countries, which I believe most Americans think we should not have, they wouldn’t be doing that. We are going to spend nearly 3 Trillion dollars on those wars. Well over $6000 per US Citizen, so if you are a family of 4, you owe the US Government $24,000 for the wars – do you think you got your monies worth? Are you willing to spend another $10-20,000 to preemptively attack Iran?
What if that money was home, do you think we would have safer neighborhoods with 4% unemployment or with homeless neighbors who will do anything to feed their family? Do you think that 20,000 could have been better spent over here and we would still be safer?
I like to bring out a neighborhood analogy. You sit in the middle of two houses. A person across town comes over and breaks into your neighbors because he thinks they are evil. You don’t think they are, but you don’t really like them so you don’t do anything about it. Now that same person breaks into your other neighbor’s house, because they are evil. You don’t think they are, but you don’t really like them. While they invade your neighbors, they hint that you will be next, because you are evil. What do you do? Do you help out your neighbor or just wait? After all, the person breaking into these homes is much richer and powerful than you are. You are the bad guy and they are the good guy.
US citizens tend to think that we are the good guys and that everyone else is the bad guys. I have a feeling that most of Iran thinks they are the good guys, and we are the people across town coming to their neighborhood breaking into houses. Iran is responding the same way our Government would respond if something similar was happening over here. At least I pray to God that is how our government would respond. If I thought we were going to be invaded, I’d want our Government to puff up our chest and do anything it took to make us feel secure. That is all Iran is doing.
At least Iran, if you put themselves in their shoes, has a reason to think they are in imminent danger (sanctions, threats) of invasion. While we are speculating on what we think they are thinking of thinking about.
On the Funding Issue, Ron Paul isn’t talking about bringing our Defense budget to 0, just to bring our troops home and closes bases that have been expensive and meaningless since the 80s. Let us put it this way, you are a rich politician in the 1800’s. You have a ranch that is Twenty miles from town. Your mode of transportation is a Horse. You might own your ranch and a house in town, because it is a full days ride to get there and sometimes you need to be there for an extended time period. Now you own a car and you live 20 miles from where you work, it takes 10 minutes to get to town. Do you still need a house next to you office? Does it make sense to maintain it and go bankrupt doing so? That is essentially what our military offices overseas are, are homes that we don’t need, but refuse to give up. Eventually you will lose both homes because you can’t afford to keep both up.
Is America safer with dwindling funds and bases all over the world? Or is America safer with a strong economy and strong bases at home?
Is America safer by invading all the countries we don’t like? Or is America safer by giving other countries respect and no reason to fight us?
If we remember China's rising power used to be scary, but through economic ties we have grown closer to them and their people have become freer.
You can also look at the parallels of the Roman Empire and the US Empire. Traditional thinking is with more land comes more power, but Roman fell because it took too much land and the people of those lands rebelled against them. Roman gave them education, sewer, and roads. They didn’t care, they wanted their own leaders. What does the US do? Well we try and give them education and infrastructure. Can we learn anything from Roman? Are we so arrogant that we think we can do better? Are our leaders studying Roman and other Empires to see what led to their collapse so it won’t happen here?
If you are happy we had the Korean war, Vietnam war, Iraq war and Afghanistan war and how they went then Rick Santrum, Mitt Romney, or Rick Perry is you man. If you think we should learn from these wars and look at how we handled the USSR and China then Ron Paul is your man.
Oh and the last time Iran tried to close the Strait, the neighboring countries took care of that problem. Guess what, they would do it again. Not acting is empowering those countries to stand on their own and makes them stronger. Want Iran not to be a threat? Allow those around them to get stronger.
To say the Left or the Right has a strangle hold on good ideas is to say your boss has the only good ideas for the company.
Consider this illuminating exchange between Fox News anchor Bret Baier and Rep. Paul where Paul happily concedes that if he were to win the GOP nomination, he would be
“to the left of President Obama” on the Iran issue.
Maybe for once, being Left of the President is good for US prosperity.
Before you say I am for Iran, I think the world would be a safer place if they were a democracy like ours. Their leader was a Christian man with strong principles and so were all its people. Now lets take a look of how Iran is likely feeling right now. Lets put the shoe on the other foot for a few moments as they say.
Iran is making more news as they threaten to close down Strait of Hormuz.
The first thing I would say, is let us look at the human element. Does anyone believe that Iran’s leader is willing to die for his cause? I’m sure he is willing for others to die, but he doesn’t want to be killed. So unless it is a last ditch effort to save himself or he knows he is going to be killed imminently he won’t do anything to upset his position of power and wealth.
Second issue is the missiles they are testing. Well they go about 90 miles, when they work, the US has missiles that go across the world in a matter of hours. It is the equivalent of you building a BB gun while the school bully holds an AR 15 and bazooka to your head. Now you could argue that eventually they will have a better weapon that is why they need to be stopped now. I grew up in a system where you were innocent until proven guilty system of justice, I don’t see how you can justify prosecuting someone from crimes they might commit.
Iran has supplied fighters in Iraq/Afghanistan with weapons. Well if we didn’t invade those countries, which I believe most Americans think we should not have, they wouldn’t be doing that. We are going to spend nearly 3 Trillion dollars on those wars. Well over $6000 per US Citizen, so if you are a family of 4, you owe the US Government $24,000 for the wars – do you think you got your monies worth? Are you willing to spend another $10-20,000 to preemptively attack Iran?
What if that money was home, do you think we would have safer neighborhoods with 4% unemployment or with homeless neighbors who will do anything to feed their family? Do you think that 20,000 could have been better spent over here and we would still be safer?
I like to bring out a neighborhood analogy. You sit in the middle of two houses. A person across town comes over and breaks into your neighbors because he thinks they are evil. You don’t think they are, but you don’t really like them so you don’t do anything about it. Now that same person breaks into your other neighbor’s house, because they are evil. You don’t think they are, but you don’t really like them. While they invade your neighbors, they hint that you will be next, because you are evil. What do you do? Do you help out your neighbor or just wait? After all, the person breaking into these homes is much richer and powerful than you are. You are the bad guy and they are the good guy.
US citizens tend to think that we are the good guys and that everyone else is the bad guys. I have a feeling that most of Iran thinks they are the good guys, and we are the people across town coming to their neighborhood breaking into houses. Iran is responding the same way our Government would respond if something similar was happening over here. At least I pray to God that is how our government would respond. If I thought we were going to be invaded, I’d want our Government to puff up our chest and do anything it took to make us feel secure. That is all Iran is doing.
At least Iran, if you put themselves in their shoes, has a reason to think they are in imminent danger (sanctions, threats) of invasion. While we are speculating on what we think they are thinking of thinking about.
On the Funding Issue, Ron Paul isn’t talking about bringing our Defense budget to 0, just to bring our troops home and closes bases that have been expensive and meaningless since the 80s. Let us put it this way, you are a rich politician in the 1800’s. You have a ranch that is Twenty miles from town. Your mode of transportation is a Horse. You might own your ranch and a house in town, because it is a full days ride to get there and sometimes you need to be there for an extended time period. Now you own a car and you live 20 miles from where you work, it takes 10 minutes to get to town. Do you still need a house next to you office? Does it make sense to maintain it and go bankrupt doing so? That is essentially what our military offices overseas are, are homes that we don’t need, but refuse to give up. Eventually you will lose both homes because you can’t afford to keep both up.
Is America safer with dwindling funds and bases all over the world? Or is America safer with a strong economy and strong bases at home?
Is America safer by invading all the countries we don’t like? Or is America safer by giving other countries respect and no reason to fight us?
If we remember China's rising power used to be scary, but through economic ties we have grown closer to them and their people have become freer.
You can also look at the parallels of the Roman Empire and the US Empire. Traditional thinking is with more land comes more power, but Roman fell because it took too much land and the people of those lands rebelled against them. Roman gave them education, sewer, and roads. They didn’t care, they wanted their own leaders. What does the US do? Well we try and give them education and infrastructure. Can we learn anything from Roman? Are we so arrogant that we think we can do better? Are our leaders studying Roman and other Empires to see what led to their collapse so it won’t happen here?
If you are happy we had the Korean war, Vietnam war, Iraq war and Afghanistan war and how they went then Rick Santrum, Mitt Romney, or Rick Perry is you man. If you think we should learn from these wars and look at how we handled the USSR and China then Ron Paul is your man.
Oh and the last time Iran tried to close the Strait, the neighboring countries took care of that problem. Guess what, they would do it again. Not acting is empowering those countries to stand on their own and makes them stronger. Want Iran not to be a threat? Allow those around them to get stronger.
To say the Left or the Right has a strangle hold on good ideas is to say your boss has the only good ideas for the company.
Consider this illuminating exchange between Fox News anchor Bret Baier and Rep. Paul where Paul happily concedes that if he were to win the GOP nomination, he would be
“to the left of President Obama” on the Iran issue.
Maybe for once, being Left of the President is good for US prosperity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)