Posted on 01/11/2007 6:06:07 PM PST by Rodney King
Texas Congressman Ron Paul files for GOP presidential bid
HOUSTON -- Ron Paul, the iconoclastic nine-term congressman from southeast Texas, took the first step Thursday toward launching a second presidential bid in 2008, this time as a Republican.
Paul filed incorporation papers in Texas on Thursday to create a presidential exploratory committee that allows him and his supporters to collect money on behalf of his bid. This will be Paul's second try for the White House; he was the Libertarian nominee for president in 1988.
Kent Snyder, the chairman of Paul's exploratory committee and a former staffer on Paul's Libertarian campaign, said the congressman knows he's a long shot.
"There's no question that it's an uphill battle, and that Dr. Paul is an underdog," Snyder said. "But we think it's well worth doing and we'll let the voters decide."
Paul, of Lake Jackson, acknowledges that the national GOP has never fully embraced him despite his nine terms in office under its banner. He gets little money from the GOP's large traditional donors, but benefits from individual conservative and Libertarian donors outside Texas. He bills himself as "The Taxpayers' Best Friend," and is routinely ranked either first or second in the House of Representatives by the National Taxpayers Union, a national group advocating low taxes and limited government.
He describes himself as a lifelong Libertarian running as a Republican.
Paul was not available for comment Thursday, Snyder said.
But he said the campaign will test its ability to attract financial and political support before deciding whether to launch a full-fledged campaign. Snyder said Paul is not running just to make a point or to try to ensure that his issues are addressed, but to win.
Paul is expected to formally announce his bid in the next week or two, Snyder said.
Snyder said Paul and his supporters are not intimidated by the presence of nationally known and better-financed candidates such as Sen. John McCain of Arizona or former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.
"This is going to be a grassroots American campaign," he said. "For us, it's either going to happen at the grassroots level or it's not."
Paul limits his view of the role of the federal government to those duties laid out in the U.S. Constitution. As a result, he sometimes casts votes that appear at odds with his constituents and other Republicans. He was the only Republican congressman to vote against Department of Defense appropriations for fiscal year 2007.
The vote against the defense appropriations bill, he said, was because of his opposition to the war in Iraq, which he said was "not necessary for our actual security."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not b
Immigration and the Welfare State, by Ron Paul
The only issue that I am a one issue voter is defense. Without a strong defense the other issues mean nothing. That alone would keep me from supporting him so I don't think I will waste my time on him. Thanks anyway.
Wow, better than I thought. thanks.
That's the problem, too much money is being made by those 'connected', and solving the problem in Iraq puts an end to the gravy train.
What this country needs is: not another 'insider'. Connections be damned, we, the people haven't been connected to our "Constitution" in a long time.
If I could, I'd vote for someone who's never held public office in their life while having a good understanding of 'government by the people'.
Cindy Sheehan's favorite is running. You must be so proud.
Somebody tell Paul that if we leave Iraq, Ahmadinejad and bin Laden will celebrate.
Problem is he doesn't seem to think a military is necesary. That's probably where he would cut.
"Our most important task is to focus on effectively patrolling our borders. With our virtually unguarded borders, almost any determined individual- including a potential terrorist- can enter the United States. Unfortunately, the federal government seems more intent upon guarding the borders of other nations than our own. We are still patrolling Korea’s border after some 50 years, yet ours are more porous than ever. It is ironic that we criticize Syria for failing to secure its border with Iraq while our own borders, particularly to the south, are no better secured than those of Syria."
"We need to allocate far more of our resources, both in terms of money and manpower, to securing our borders and coastlines here at home. This is the most critical task before us, both in terms of immigration problems and the threat of foreign terrorists. Unless and until we secure our borders, illegal immigration and the problems associated with it will only increase."
"If we took some of the steps I have outlined here - eliminating the welfare state and securing our borders - we could effectively address the problem of illegal immigration in a manner that would not undermine the freedom of American citizens."
If Paul were smart, not exactly an attribute I've seen him demonstrate of late, he'd worry more about his next Congressional run. I find it hard to believe his district will exactly embrace his cut and run attitude. Of course he can always change parties again and just run as another cut and run Democrat.
Compared to the people the media are hyping, he'd have my vote!!
I totally agree. A whole lot of people more innocent than muslims died in Dresden and Hiroshima. Not one singe American lost thier life in those cities, and the war was WON.
Sounds like you know the rodent.
Articles by Ron Paul:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html
My personal favorite:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1554737/posts
Ron Paul - Scandals are a Symptom, Not a Cause
House Web Site ^ | 1-9-2006 | Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX)
Posted on 01/09/2006 1:44:33 PM EST by jmc813
The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. James Madison
The Washington political scandals dominating the news in recent weeks may be disheartening, but they cannot be considered surprising. We live in a time when the U.S. government is the largest and most powerful state in the history of the world. Today's federal government consists of fifteen huge departments, hundreds of agencies, thousands of programs, and millions of employees.
It spends 2.4 trillion dollars in a single year. The possibilities for corruption in such an immense and unaccountable institution are endless.
Americans understandably expect ethical conduct from their elected officials in Washington.
But the whole system is so out of control that it's simply unrealistic to place faith in each and every government official in a position to sell influence. The larger the federal government becomes, the more it controls who wins and who loses in our society.
The temptation for lobbyists to buy votes-- and the temptation for politicians to sell them-- is enormous. Indicting one crop of politicians and bringing in another is only a temporary solution. The only effective way to address corruption is to change the system itself, by radically downsizing the power of the federal government in the first place.
Take away the politicians' power and you take away the very currency of corruption.
Undoubtedly the recent revelations will ignite new calls for campaign finance reform.
However, we must recognize that that campaign finance laws place restrictions only on individuals, not politicians. Politicians will continue to tax and spend, meaning they will continue to punish some productive Americans while rewarding others with federal largesse. The same vested special interests will not go away, and the same influence peddling will happen every day on Capitol Hill.
The reason is very simple: when the federal government redistributes trillions of dollars from some Americans to others, countless special interests inevitably will fight for the money. The rise in corruption in Washington simply mirrors the rise in federal spending. The fundamental problem is not with campaigns or politicians primarily, but rather with popular support for the steady shift from a relatively limited, constitutional federal government to the huge leviathan of today.
We need to get money out of government. Only then will money not be important in politics.
It's time to reconsider exactly what we want the federal government to be in our society. So long as it remains the largest and most powerful institution in the nation, it will remain endlessly susceptible to corruption.
THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!
The only reason we are jacking up the # of troops is so that the contractors can continue to cash in. Bush and many of his buddies are heavily invested in these private companies that are over there!
A lot of FReepers dont see this and think Bush is a real conservative. Even thought I dont agree with Ron Paul on everyhting, he is a hell of a lot closer to a real conservative than Bush will ever be.
We have too many rush Limbaugh echoers on here. They think that if Rush says it, it must be true! I do listen to him sometimes.. However i take what he says with a grain of salt. I prefer Mike Savage.
Well I am just venting! Hope you agree!
Tom
I like his speech where he blames Christians for the war on terror.
How much is our Iraq adventure costing us? 4-5 billion a month? It's a lot of cash, just don't know the amount. Whatever it is, it's a lot of 'opportunity' going out the window, too.
Looks like '08 is going to be an interesting year.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.