Ron Paul's Statement to the Nation

[galtgulch]

<<<"Ron Paul’s Statement to the Nation

By tmartin • September 10, 2008

The coverage of the presidential election is designed to be a grand distraction. This is not new, but this year, it’s more so than ever.

Pretending that a true difference exists between the two major candidates is a charade of great proportion. Many who help to perpetuate this myth are frequently unaware of what they are doing and believe that significant differences actually do exist. Indeed, on small points there is the appearance of a difference. The real issues, however, are buried in a barrage of miscellaneous nonsense and endless pontifications by robotic pundits hired to perpetuate the myth of a campaign of substance.

The truth is that our two-party system offers no real choice. The real goal of the campaign is to distract people from considering the real issues.

Influential forces, the media, the government, the privileged corporations and moneyed interests see to it that both parties’ candidates are acceptable, regardless of the outcome, since they will still be in charge. It’s been that way for a long time. George Wallace was not the first to recognize that there’s “not a dime’s worth of difference” between the two parties. There is, though, a difference between the two major candidates and the candidates on third-party tickets and those running as independents.

The two parties and their candidates have no real disagreements on foreign policy, monetary policy, privacy issues, or the welfare state. They both are willing to abuse the Rule of Law and ignore constitutional restraint on Executive Powers. Neither major party champions free markets and private-property ownership.

Those candidates who represent actual change or disagreement with the status quo are held in check by the two major parties in power, making it very difficult to compete in the pretend democratic process. This is done by making it difficult for third-party candidates to get on the ballots, enter into the debates, raise money, avoid being marginalized, or get fair or actual coverage. A rare celebrity or a wealthy individual can, to a degree, overcome these difficulties.

The system we have today allows a President to be elected by as little as 32% of the American people, with half of those merely voting for the “lesser of two evils”. Therefore, as little as 16% actually vote for a president. No wonder when things go wrong, anger explodes. A recent poll shows that 60% of the American people are not happy with the two major candidates this year.

This system is driven by the conviction that only a major party candidate can win. Voters become convinced that any other vote is a “wasted” vote. It’s time for that conclusion to be challenged and to recognize that the only way not to waste one’s vote is to reject the two establishment candidates and join the majority, once called silent, and allow the voices of the people to be heard.

We cannot expect withdrawal of troops from Iraq or the Middle East with either of the two major candidates. Expect continued involvement in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Georgia. Neither hints of a non-interventionist foreign policy. Do not expect to hear the rejection of the policy of supporting the American world empire. There will be no emphasis on protecting privacy and civil liberties and the constant surveillance of the American people. Do not expect any serious attempt to curtail the rapidly expanding national debt. And certainly, there will be no hint of addressing the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationship with big banks and international corporations and the politicians.

There is only one way that these issues can get the attention they deserve: the silent majority must become the vocal majority.

This message can be sent to our leaders by not participating in the Great Distraction - the quadrennial campaign and election of an American President without a choice. Just think of how much of an edge a Vice President has in this process, and he or she is picked by a single person - the party’s nominee. This was never intended by the Constitution.

Since a principled non-voter sends a message, we must count them and recognize the message they are sending as well. The non-voters need to hold their own “election” by starting a “League of Non-voters” and explain their principled reasons for opting out of this charade of the presidential elective process. They just might get a bigger membership than anyone would guess.

Write-in votes should not be discouraged, but the electoral officials must be held accountable and make sure the votes are counted. But one must not be naïve and believe that under today’s circumstances one has a chance of accomplishing much by a write-in campaign.

The strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two-party system, which in reality is a one-party system with no possible chance for the changes to occur which are necessary to solve our economic and foreign policy problems. This can be accomplished by voting for one of the non-establishment principled candidates - Baldwin, Barr, McKinney, Nader, and possibly others. (listed alphabetically)

Yes, these individuals do have strong philosophic disagreements on various issues, but they all stand for challenging the status quo - those special interest who control our federal government. And because of this, on the big issues of war, civil liberties, deficits, and the Federal Reserve they have much in common. People will waste their vote in voting for the lesser of two evils. That can’t be stopped overnight, but for us to have an impact we must maximize the total votes of those rejecting the two major candidates.

For me, though, my advice - for what it’s worth - is to vote! Reject the two candidates who demand perpetuation of the status quo and pick one of the alternatives that you have the greatest affinity to, based on the other issues.

A huge vote for those running on principle will be a lot more valuable by sending a message that we’ve had enough and want real change than wasting one’s vote on a supposed lesser of two evils.

—

“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.”

Carroll Quigley – Author of Tragedy & Hope">>>

[BaalChatzaf]

The system we have today allows a President to be elected by as little as 32% of the American people, with half of those merely voting for the “lesser of two evils”. Therefore, as little as 16% actually vote for a president. No wonder when things go wrong, anger explodes. A recent poll shows that 60% of the American people are not happy with the two major candidates this year.

The alternatives are either tyranny or mob rule.

C'thuluh in 2008. Why settle for the lesser of evils?

Ba'al Chatzaf

[sbeaulieu]

The system we have today allows a President to be elected by as little as 32% of the American people, with half of those merely voting for the “lesser of two evils”. Therefore, as little as 16% actually vote for a president. No wonder when things go wrong, anger explodes. A recent poll shows that 60% of the American people are not happy with the two major candidates this year.

The alternatives are either tyranny or mob rule.

C'thuluh in 2008. Why settle for the lesser of evils?

Ba'al Chatzaf

I wonder what H. P. Lovecraft would have to say about this?

~ Shane

[kiaer.ts]

I wonder what H. P. Lovecraft would have to say about this?

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

[galtgulch]

I wonder what H. P. Lovecraft would have to say about this?

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

You gentlemen never fail to disappoint. I thought Objectivists take ideas seriously! Ron Paul has awakened a virtual army of over 100,000 individuals who share his concern about the direction this country is going in. They are aware because of Ron Paul that America is off the rails in the sense that the politicians entrusted to uphold the Constitution, which contains the rules of the game, have ignored the limits to Congressional power enshrined in Article 1 Section 8.

Ron Paul supporters will be fielding candidates in the years to come. Here is another piece of the Ron Paul agenda:

<<<"Paul, Baldwin, McKinney, Nader: We Agree

By tmartin • September 10, 2008

The Republican/Democrat duopoly has, for far too long, ignored the most important issues facing our nation. However, alternate candidates Chuck Baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, and Ralph Nader agree with Ron Paul on four key principles central to the health of our nation. These principles should be key in the considerations of every voter this November and in every election.

We Agree

Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.

Privacy: We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We must repeal or radically change the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA legislation. We must reject the notion and practice of torture, eliminations of habeas corpus, secret tribunals, and secret prisons. We must deny immunity for corporations that spy willingly on the people for the benefit of the government. We must reject the unitary presidency, the illegal use of signing statements and excessive use of executive orders.

The National Debt: We believe that there should be no increase in the national debt. The burden of debt placed on the next generation is unjust and already threatening our economy and the value of our dollar. We must pay our bills as we go along and not unfairly place this burden on a future generation.

The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other financial institutions. The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests must be ended. There should be no taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds.">>>

galt

Edited September 13, 2008 by galtgulch

[BaalChatzaf]

I wonder what H. P. Lovecraft would have to say about this?

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

You gentlemen never fail to disappoint. I thought Objectivists take ideas seriously! Ron Paul has awakened a virtual army of over 100,000 individuals who share his concern about the direction this country is going in. They are aware because of Ron Paul that America is off the rails in the sense that the politicians entrusted to uphold the Constitution, which contains the rules of the game, have ignored the limits to Congressional power enshrined in Article 1 Section 8.

Ron Paul supporters will be fielding candidates in the years to come.

galt

And getting skunked every year.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Brant Gaede]

Well Galt, you seem to be confusing ideas with policies.

--Brant

[kiaer.ts]

I find the two-party establishment abominable and unconstitutional. Most people in the US seem to think that Democrats and Republicans have a right to be on the ballot. Look at the NJ Supreme Court Decision putting Lautenberg on the senate ballot when Menendez dropped out after the ballot process was closed.

But this "true believer" stuff about Ron Paul makes the Obama messiah complex look tame in comparison. Ross Perot did a lot more to help and to hurt the chances of third parties than Paul will ever do.

Since the primary role of the President is commander in chief, I cannot abide Obama, and even then would prefer Obama to Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is no Objectivist. He is perfect where he is in the House.

[Chris Grieb]

Your last sentence about Ron Paul remaining in the US House as my complete agreement.

I would raise the question if Cynthia McKinney has any idea what she has agreed to with the document she signed with the other third party candidates.

As of now I have no great hopes that Bob Barr will break any new ground for the Libertarian Party.

Edited September 13, 2008 by Chris Grieb

[algernonsidney]

You gentlemen never fail to disappoint. I thought Objectivists take ideas seriously! Ron Paul has awakened a virtual army of over 100,000 individuals who share his concern about the direction this country is going in. They are aware because of Ron Paul that America is off the rails in the sense that the politicians entrusted to uphold the Constitution, which contains the rules of the game, have ignored the limits to Congressional power enshrined in Article 1 Section 8.

It's a lot easier if you have just have really low expectations. Still, it's hard to bring them down after the very high expectations I had in 1995 when I first attended an IOS seminar. When you do meet the shrinking minority of good ones, you are then pleasantly surprised.

The greatest enabler of the duopoly is the legacy media. Their hold on people is already starting to crack. I get most of my news from the new mainstream media--the Internet.

[Selene]

Galt:

"You gentlemen never fail to disappoint. I thought Objectivist's [sic] take ideas seriously! Ron Paul has awakened a virtual army of over 100,000 individuals who share his concern about the direction this country is going in. They are aware because of Ron Paul that America is off the rails in the sense that the politicians entrusted to uphold the Constitution, which contains the rules of the game, have ignored the limits to Congressional power enshrined in Article 1 Section 8."

No offense Galt, but I would not storm a day care center with the "virtual army", which I might add sounds quite contradictory!

Adam

P.S. At least read Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals", so that at least you would have a chance on the street.

Adam

[Brant Gaede]

Is Ron Paul trying to retire campaign debts?

--Brant

[algernonsidney]

Is Ron Paul trying to retire campaign debts?

He doesn't have any campaign debts.

[algernonsidney]

Since the primary role of the President is commander in chief, I cannot abide Obama, and even then would prefer Obama to Ron Paul.

We knew it would come to this eventually. A so-called Objectivist would rather vote for a communist than a capitalist.

[Brant Gaede]

Since the primary role of the President is commander in chief, I cannot abide Obama, and even then would prefer Obama to Ron Paul.

We knew it would come to this eventually. A so-called Objectivist would rather vote for a communist than a capitalist.

Maybe rather a whore than an ideologue.

--Brant