VoteKansas.org

The conduct of the national media and their criminal conspiracy against (Libertarian) Republican Texas congressman Dr. Ron Paul is utterly amazing. For the first time in over one hundred years we have a true "patriot" running for the office of President, and the media is totally ignoring him like he has the plague. It is obvious that those who control our national media also seek a central world government. Also included in this conspiracy are the elite private International Bankers that own the Federal Reserve, who plotted years ago to gain control over the media. They have been very successful with that endeavor.

Let's look at the facts.

1. Ron Paul stated in the first debate that he would get rid of the IRS.

   That statement alone should have made him the talk of the nation; no other candidate has stated that. Surely this is newsworthy, but not a word about it from our controlled national media.

2. In the second debate Ron Paul stated he would get rid of the inflation tax. A 1913-dollar now being worth only four cents. That statement implies he would get rid of the Federal Reserve.

   No one has had the courage to do this since 1836 when Andrew Jackson threw out the bankers, calling them exactly what they are, "You are a den of vipers and thieves." This sure seems newsworthy but still no follow-up from our controlled national media.

3. Ron Paul wants to get back on a Gold standard and actually have money that is worth something other than worthless paper.

   This country became the greatest and most prosperous nation on earth when it was on a gold standard. Again this seems newsworthy but not a word from our controlled national media.

[Invisible Patriots Web Site]

Those of you who heard my radio program back in 2001 know that I predicted then that George W. Bush would do to the Republican Party much the same thing that Bill Clinton did to the Democratic Party. However, I must confess, I could not then realize the magnitude of that prediction.

Most of us remember that it was the election of Bill Clinton in 1992 that was the impetus for the Republican revolution of 1994. If you recall, a congressional election sweep of the magnitude of 1994 had not been seen in the previous seventy years. It is a truism that Bill Clinton helped to elect more Republicans than the Republican National Committee could ever dream about. Now, the same thing is happening with George W. Bush. In spades!

[Chuck Baldwin's Web Site|Full Article|Note on Reposting]

From E-Mail:

"Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas is a fairly famous institution and for a variety of reasons:

1. John F. Kennedy died there in 1963
2. Lee Harvey Oswald died there shortly after
3. Jack Ruby-who killed Lee Harvey Oswald, died there a few years later..by coincidence

"On the flip side, Parkland is also home to the second busiest maternity ward in the country with almost 16,000 new babies arriving each year. (That's almost 44 per day---every day.)"

Dear Pat,

I agree wholeheartedly that government can't run squat. Where I disagree is in your seeming confusion about the definition of CONSERVATIVE. So what really is the definition?

For six generations my family has identified Conservatives and Republicans as synonymous. Now, six years after putting Conservatives (Republicans) into complete control (President, Senate, House, and 7 of 9 Supremes), where are we? We have seen four raises in the debt ceiling, from $4.5 trillion to $8.7 trillion. We now have a global trade deficit that defies mathematics, common sense, and even liberal comprehension. We have seen an insane push by Bush to expand this deficit to the include the globe. We have heard of plans to merge Mexico, the US, and Canada under the North American Union and build a superhighway for China and Wal-Mart's convenience. We have witnessed a was on terror overseas and a wide-open welcome mat at our borders, both north and south.

Is there anyone in rural America naive enough to believe that "Conservative" political pressure from Bush and company didn't influence our judicial system in Pickett v. IBP and the Checkoff decisions?

Missing $100 bills measured by the ton or by the plane-load and no-bid contracts amounting to nearly $260 billion don't seem "Conservative" to me.

In your Jan. 26 editorial you talked about a doctrine that could possibly shut down - or "muzzle" - "Conservative" talk shows. But I would argue that under Jewish (Abramoff) control, our Senators, life Burns and Brownback, are not muzzled but BOUGHT!

The dog and cat food deaths from wheat gluten imported from China should, but won't, change people's minds on free trade.

It's all about money. In fact, USDA paid US wheat gluten producers millions to offset losses from imports. Smart, huh?

"Midwest Grain" of Atchison, KS, annual report showed 3 years of payments.

Thanks, Taxpayers.

Recently I had the opportunity to question Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke when he appeared before the congressional Joint Economic committee. The topic that morning was the state of the American economy, and many of my colleagues raised questions about how the Fed might better "regulate" things to ease fears of an economic downturn. The tenor of my colleagues' questions suggested that Mr. Bernanke's job is nothing less than to run the U.S. economy, like some kind of Soviet central planner.

Certainly its true that Mr. Bernanke can drastically affect the economy at the drop of a hat, simply by making decisions about the money supply and interest rates. But why do members of Congress assume this is good? Why do we accept without objection that a small group of people on the Federal Reserve Board wields so much power over our economic well-being? Is centralized, monopoly control over our money even compatible with a supposedly free-market economy?

Few Americans give much thought to the Federal Reserve System or monetary policy in general. But even as they strive to earn a living, and hopefully save or invest for the future, Congress and the Federal Reserve Bank are working insidiously against them. Day by day, every dollar you have is being devalued

Full article here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul380.html

The greatest threat facing America today is not terrorism, or foreign economic competition, or illegal immigration. The greatest threat facing America today is the disastrous fiscal policies of our own government, marked by shameless deficit spending and Federal Reserve currency devaluation. It is this one-two punch -- Congress spending more than it can tax or borrow, and the Fed printing money to make up the difference -- that threatens to impoverish us by further destroying the value of our dollars.

Full article here:
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst040907.htm

The fiscal year 2008 budget, passed in the House of Representative last week, is a monument to irresponsibility and profligacy. It shows that Congress remains oblivious to the economic troubles facing the nation, and that political expediency trumps all common sense in Washington. To the extent that proponents and supporters of these unsustainable budget increases continue to win reelection, it also shows that many Americans unfortunately continue to believe government can provide them with a free lunch.

To summarize, Congress proposes spending roughly $3 trillion in 2008. When I first came to Congress in 1976, the federal government spent only about $300 billion. So spending has increased tenfold in thirty years, and tripled just since 1990.

Full article here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul379.html

Last week the House passed an emergency supplemental spending bill that was the worst of all worlds. The presidents request would have already set a spending record, but the Democratic leadership packed 21 billion additional dollars of mostly pork barrel spending in attempt to win Democrat votes. The total burden on the American taxpayer for this bill alone will be an astonishing 124 billion dollars. Democrats promised to oppose the war by adding more money to fight the war than even the president requested.

I am pleased to have joined with the majority of my Republican colleagues to oppose this bill.

Among the pork added to attract votes was more than 200 million dollars to the dairy industry, 74 million for peanut farmers, and 25 million dollars for spinach farmers. Also, the bill included more than two billion dollars in unconstitutional foreign aid, including half a billion dollars for Lebanon and Eastern Europe.

What might be most disturbing, however, is the treatment of veterans in the bill. Playing politics with the funding of critical veterans medical and other assistance by adding it onto a controversial bill to attract votes strikes me as highly inappropriate. Veterans funding should be included in a properly structured, comprehensive appropriations bill. Better still, veterans spending should be automatically funded and not subject to yearly politicking and nit-picking.

Full article here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul378.html