Ron Paul Questions Ben Bernanke

Ron Paul Questions Ben Bernanke - House Financial Services Committee 03-24-09



http://www.campaignforliberty.com/campaigns/auditthefed.php
http://educationalrevolution.wordpress.com/2009/03/11/end-the-fed-rallies-april-25thcoming-to-a-city-near-you/

Ron Paul vs Bernanke: Is Gold Money? - July 13, 2011
July 13, 2011 - Congressman Ron Paul questions Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke in a U.S. House Financial Services Committee Meeting shortly after reports surfaced that the Federal Reserve was preparing for a third round of quantitative easing.

Click on the following link for analysis from Campaign for Liberty:
http://www.campaignforliberty.org/profile/7677/blog/2011/07/13/ron-paul-vs-bernanke-gold-money


Federal Reserve Admits: We Have No Gold !
The following exchange between Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) and the Fed's attorney Scott Alvarez proves, without a shadow of a doubt, that The Federal Reserve has no gold backing the US dollar.

Most in the alternative news sphere suspected it - now it's fact.


Ron Paul To Ben Bernanke "I Want A Definition Of Money!"


Ron Paul Schools Ben Bernanke Yet Again on Currency Devaluation 2-27-08
Ron Paul is the smartest Man in the room and gets Helicopter Ben to admit he is right.

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.” - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Ron Paul Will Beat Barrack Obama In 2012!

Ron Paul: Why We Don’t Need FEMA

Ron Paul on Fox News Sunday

“You read the reports that came out of New Orleans and all of the wonderful things they did �“ giving checks to people who didn’t live there, sending in hundreds of millions of trailers they had to junk because they didn’t meet FEMA standards,” Paul said. “No, it is a system of bureaucratic central economic planning which is a policy that is deeply flawed. So no, you don’t get rid of something like that in one day. As a matter of fact, I have had the position for a long time and the people keep reelecting me and I have a coastal district. But I also suggested that there is different way to finance this too because FEMA is in big trouble financially. Their flood program is about $20 billion in debt.”

Paul told Wallace he would be against voting for any sort of bailout for the financially beleaguered entity unless Obama would consider cutting $2 billion from the military actions in Libya.

“Well, where does the money come from?” Paul said. “Go hat in hand to China and borrow the money? But, I would consider what I just said because I have precise beliefs in what we should do and transition out of the dependency on the federal government. But I would say, ‘Yes, Obama you want a billion dollars? Cut $2 billion and quit the war in Libya that is undeclared and unconstitutional �“ bring the troops home, save a billion dollars and put that billion against the deficit and tide our people over.”

Paul added that FEMA is one example of how government has created a culture of dependency and encourages ill-advised behavior in the private sector.

“We conditioned people that FEMA will take care of us and everything will be OK. But, you try to make the programs work the best you can, but you can’t just keep saying, ‘Oh, they need money,’” he said. “Well, we are out of money. This country is bankrupt. This idea that the bleeding heart say we have to take care of them. The whole idea of FEMA is a gross distortion of insurance. FEMA creates many of the problems because they sell insurance because you can’t buy it from a private company which means there is a lot of danger. And we pay people to build on beaches and then you have to go rescue them. So it is so far removed in the market and understanding of what insurance should be about. Insurance should major risk and not a bailout program and encourage people to make mistakes which are what we do in flood prone areas.”

http://news.yahoo.com/ron-paul-blasts-fema-dependency-created-193829671.html

Ron Paul: Abolish FEMA! Why Should Someone Else Rebuild My House?

Ron Paul on Healthcare

Having practiced medicine for over 30 years, Congressman Paul gives his perspective on the past and future of medicine in this country, and the effects of government and special interests on quality, costs and access.

Ron Paul Responds To Michael Moore

Ron Paul: Isolationism vs Non-Interventionism

The recent GOP debates have been a learning process for many of the Neo-Conservatives. First Rudy got a little education and now McCain can get some good information he can use from the good Dr. Paul about the difference between Isolationism and Non-Interventionism.. I also got a plug in here for the Austin Ron Paul Revolution. ronpaul.meetup.com
http://ronpaul.vixzur.com/?p=1109



Ron Paul: I'm a Non-Interventionist, Free Trader. Isolationist is usually a Protectionist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4Scsu679_c

Ron Paul teaches Mccain on Nonintervention



Do you back eliminating the federal income tax in favor of a national sales tax or "fair tax"?

LAKE JACKSON, Texas– Today, 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul issued a statement on the situation in Libya. See comments below.
“The current situation in Libya may be a short term victory for Empire, but it is a loss for our American Republic. And, I fear it may be devastating to the Libyan people.


Ron Paul takes to the House floor, August 22, 2011.

“There is no doubt that Moammar Gadhafi is a bad guy, and that he has brought harm and misery to his country. However, our involvement in another country’s civil war is costly and unconstitutional.

“We have spent over $1 billion on a war that this administration has fought not with the consent of Congress but under a NATO flag and authorization from the United Nations.

“It is a serious thing for a President to engage us in a war. He is bound by our Constitution to seek authority from the People, through our Congress, prior to engaging in any military action unless that action is to address an imminent threat to our safety and security. The situation in Libya is a civil war contained within that country’s sovereign borders, and it presented no imminent threat to the United States.

“And so, our government continues to spend trillions of dollars in overseas foreign wars while we face unsustainable debt, a looming dollar crisis, and our Constitution seems to lose any meaning. These actions will sink our country if we do not reverse course.

“Meanwhile, we must beware of any ‘Mission Accomplished’ euphoria. The conflict in Libya is far from over, and there could very well be war in Libya for a long time to come.

“While I hope and pray that the hostility draws to a close and the people there find peace, I fear this is only wishful thinking. We face a situation where a rebel element we have been assisting may very well be radical jihadists, bent on our destruction, and placed in positions of power in a new government.

“Worse still, Gadhafi’s successor is likely to be just as bad, or worse, than Gadhafi himself. Alternately, Libya may descend into anarchy like Somalia after the overthrow of dictator Siad Barre. Much like when we removed Saddam Hussein, another thug in Iraq, the likelihood of either a new brutal dictatorship or tribal violence and a protracted insurgency are much more likely than the peaceful transition to democracy we are all hoping for.

“With all these problems and the predictable chaos that will likely ensue, we must ask why this administration was so eager to embark on this Libyan operation in the name of ‘humanitarianism.’ Governments in Bahrain and Yemen have this year used military force to put down democratic protestors. The Saudi regime, which practices Sharia Law, has also been repressive, yet we have not intervened there. These countries continue to sell us oil, while Libya had begun to turn their exports toward Russia, China, India, and Brazil. Could this war largely be about protecting our oil interests at the expense of our Constitution?

“This episode is all too familiar. We were already involved in two wars that have dragged on years longer than the people who led us into them initially predicted. We can no longer afford to police the world, in terms of both dollars and American lives. We will destroy ourselves if we do not stop, build a strong national defense at home, and focus on trade and commerce with the world instead of Empire.”

Alex Jones And Ron Paul Are The Voices of Reason And Dissent Inside Babylon

"TRUTH IS IN HISTORY, BUT HISTORY IS NOT THE TRUTH." - NICOLÁS GÓMEZ DÁVILA

"Take it to the wilderness
Into the jungle sun
Lookin' for the voice of reason
Inside this babylon." - Jefferson Starship, from the song "Layin' It On The Line."

"The truth would certainly do well enough if she were once left to shift for herself. . . .Errors, indeed, prevail by the assistance of foreign and borrowed succors. But if Truth makes not her way into the understanding by her own light, she will be but the weaker for any borrowed force violence can add to her." - John Locke, as quoted in the book, "Courting the Abyss: Free Speech and the Liberal Tradition," by John Durham Peters.


http://disquietreservations.blogspot.com/2011/08/alex-jones-and-ron-paul-are-voices-of.html

Ron Paul: True Liberty vs. Perfect Safety

Recent incidents of violence in Norway and London have made us understandably uncomfortable here at home, as many fear that a worsening economy will lead to violence and unrest in American cities. This is why Congress must view the economy as its first priority and a matter of national security: unless and until we get our fiscal house in order to foster economic growth, civil society will continue to deteriorate.

The fundamental lesson every American should learn from these incidents is that government cannot protect us. No matter how many laws we pass, no matter how many police or federal agents we put on the streets, a determined individual or group can still cause great harm. Both Norway and England have strict gun control laws, and London in particular has security cameras monitoring nearly all public areas. But laws and spy cameras are useless in the face of lawless mobs or sick mass killers. Only private individuals on the scene could have prevented or lessened these tragedies. And we should remember that theft, arson, and property damage were not the only criminal acts in London–innocent bystanders were assaulted and killed as well. In those instances deadly force used in self-defense would have been fully justified.

Perhaps the only good that can come from these terrible events is a reinforced understanding that we as individuals are responsible for our safety and the safety of our families. This means, frankly, that we must safely own and use firearms to deter or prevent criminal assaults on our homes and persons. It is absurd to think police or government agents can protect 310 million Americans around the clock.

Thanks to our media and many government officials, however, Americans have become conditioned to view the state as our protector and the solution to every problem. Whenever something terrible happens, especially when it becomes a prominent news story, people reflexively demand that government do something. This impulse almost always leads to bad laws, more debt, and the loss of liberty. It is completely at odds with the best American traditions of self-reliance and individual responsibility.

Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, and metal detectors? Do we want to imprison every disturbed or alienated individual who fantasizes about violence? Do we really believe government can provide total security? Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security?

Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference unless they use force or fraud against others. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons.


http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-liberty-is-more-important-than-the-illusion-of-safety/

REVEALED: The Ron Paul Stock Portfolio

Ron Paul held, and no surprise, he likes gold.

Lots of it.

Here are the stocks he owns.

• Agnico Eagle Mines
• Alumina Common
• Anglo Gold Ashanti Ltd.
• BrigusGold Corp. Com MPV (formerly Apollo Gold Corp)
• Barrick Gold Corp.
• Claude Research Inc
• Coeur D'Alene Minds Corp.
• Gold Corp Inc
• El Dorado Gold Corp.
• IAM Gold Corp.
• Kinross
• Lexam Explorations Inc.
• Mag Silver Corp.
• Metalline Mining Co.
• Mutual Securities Inc.
• Newmont Mining Corp.
• Pan American Silver
• Petrol Oil and Gas
• Silver Wheaton Corp
• Virginia Mines Inc.
• Vista Gold Corp.
• Viterra Inc
• Wesdome Gold Mines Ltd.
• Allied Nevada Gold Corp.
• Hecla Mining Co.

Looks like he's doing well these days.

Click here to see what some of his fellow Representatives are holdings as well.

 http://www.businessinsider.com/what-ron-paul-invests-in-2011-6


Ron Paul: Über Bear ?
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/08/ron-paul-uber-bear/

Ron Paul: Corporations Are NOT People

Ron Paul Breaks With Mitt Romney: ‘People Are Individuals…Not Companies’
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/15/295646/ron-paul-mitt-romney-corporations-people/

KEYES: What did you make of Mitt Romney’s statement that “corporations are people” yesterday?

PAUL: Obviously they’re not. People are individuals, they’re not groups and they’re not companies. Individuals have rights, they’re not collective. You can’t duck that. So individuals should be responsible for corporations, but they shouldn’t be a new creature, so to speak. Rights and obligations should be always back to the individual.

If Mitt Romney fails to win the White House, it likely will be because of five words:

“Corporations are people, my friend.”

Romney uttered those now-infamous words while campaigning Aug. 11 at the Iowa State Fair. He was engaging with some hecklers about his unwillingness to raise taxes on people. When the hecklers yelled back that corporations should be taxed more, that’s when Romney said the words that reverberated around the Internet.

Romney tried to explain further, that money that corporations control ultimately goes to the people who work for them. The explanation brought hollow laughter from the hecklers — who were identified as liberal activists (who are also people, despite what you’ve heard from Fox News).

This fine point was completely lost, though, as the five words took on their own life.

Romney’s GOP rival Ron Paul responded that “people are individuals, they’re not groups and they’re not companies.” Meanwhile, jokes abounded on Twitter, a thousand sarcastic questions about whether corporations could marry in Massachusetts or whether Soylent Green is a corporation (following the logic that if corporations are people, and Soylent Green is people, ergo …).

But Romney’s fateful five words — beyond demonstrating that his Guy Smiley man-of-the-people campaign persona is a thin veneer covering an affection toward corporations, and showing that Romney is really bad at off-the-cuff campaigning without talking points or a TelePrompTer — raise two important questions: Are corporations people? And, if so, what kind of people are they?

The U.S. Constitution, which sets forth the rules by which government is supposed to abide, never mentions the word “corporation.” (Take that, Tea Partiers!) It took the Supreme Court, in the 1819 case Dartmouth College v. Woodward, to declare that corporations had the same right to enter into contracts — and have those contracts honored — as natural persons. This idea was expanded in 1886, in the case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, in which the court ruled that the equal-protection clause of the 14th Amendment protected corporations the same way it did people.

 http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/entertainment/52398562-81/corporations-romney-corporation-cricket.html.csp


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dartmouth_College_v._Woodward

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v._Southern_Pacific_Railroad

New Ron Paul TV Ad - "The One Who Can Beat Obama"

Ron Paul released a new 60-second TV spot this morning. It goes live in Iowa and New Hampshire today.

After a forceful buildup, the ad comes to a triumphant conclusion with these powerful words: “Ron Paul: The one who will stop the spending, save the dollar, create jobs, bring peace. The one who will restore liberty. Ron Paul: The one who can beat Obama – and restore America now.”

Transcript

It’s the story of a lost city, lost opportunity, lost hope. A story of failed policies, failed leadership, a story of smooth-talking politicians, games of “He Said, She Said,” rhetoric, and division.

One man has stood apart, stood strong and true, voting against every tax increase, every unbalanced budget, every time. Standing up to the Washington machine, guided by principle, Ron Paul, the one who will stop the spending, save the dollar, create jobs, bring peace. The one who will restore liberty. Ron Paul, the one who can beat Obama and restore America now.

Ron Paul: I’m Ron Paul, and I approve this message.

1. To Create Jobs, Government Should Get Out of the Way! Date: 10/25/2010 Government and Job Creation by Ron Paul As the current economic downturn shows...
2. Restore America Now: End the Fed, Stop the Wars, Abolish the Income Tax! Date: 06/13/2011 The Keys to Economic Growth by Ron Paul Recent economic data show that...
3. Ron Paul’s Pro-Life Speech in Ames, Iowa Transcript This is a rush transcript. Can you help us out and proofread the transcript...

Ron Paul Iowa Debate Highlights

Ron Paul’s message hits America
Last night the GOP presidential candidates went head to head in a debate. Many of the issues plaguing the US were talked about but one voice emerged over the rest. Ron Paul was given a lot of air-time to make his points which some people have complained about. Is a new era of political thought around the bend?



Last night the GOP presidential candidates went head to head in a debate. Many of the issues plaguing the US were talked about but one voice emerged over the rest. Ron Paul was given a lot of air-time to make his points which some people have complained about. Is a new era of political thought around the bend? Kristine Frazao is in Iowa to tell us more.

Follow Kristine on Twitter at http://twitter.com/#!/Frazzie

Ron Paul on FOX News 08/12/11



Ron Paul 2012 Official Campaign Website http://ronpaul2012.com/

Ron Paul Gives Rick Santorum a History Lesson on Iran
Ron Paul gave Rick Santorum a history lesson last night at the Ames, Iowa, GOP debate. After Paul said there is no evidence the Iranians are developing nuclear weapons and the United States should mind its own business, Santorum launched into the standard establishment narrative.



He said Iran “must be confronted,” in other words the U.S. must go to war against the Islamic nation, and then described Iran’s government as “a mullahcracy that tramples the rights of women, tramples the rights of gays, tramples the rights of people all throughout their society — and is the greatest supporter of terrorism in the Middle East and around the world.”

Paul then gave the former Pennsylvania senator a history lesson. Anthony Gregory, writing for Antiwar.com, filled in the details:

First, Santorum says Iran has been at war with the United States since 1979. Ron points out that the bad blood between Americans and Iranians began in 1953, when a CIA coup installed the Shah. Indeed, we should remember that before 1953, the Iranians tended to look very warmly upon the Americans, who, unlike the British, had left the Iranians alone. Their democratically elected leader Mohammad Mosaddegh, partly for his popularity due to his resistance to British corporate imperialism, was even Time Magazine‘s Man of the Year in 1951.

Not only did the U.S. install the Shah two years later; the CIA taught his secret police force, Savak, how to torture. Savak went on to imprison and torture tens of thousands of political prisoners, adopting such practices of nearly unfathomable brutality as using broken glass and boiling water on subjects’ rectums, mutilating women’s breasts, and cooking victims alive.

After years of being ruled by this U.S.-backed regime, the Iranians overthrew the Shah and the Islamic Revolution of 1979 swept the nation. But, despite what the propagandists say, Iranians still did not hate Americans for our freedom — only for our government’s foreign policy. All the attempts to get Iranians angry at Americans for our culture or modernity failed, Michael Scheuer, former CIA counterterrorism expert, points out.

Read the rest of Gregory's post
http://original.antiwar.com/anthony-gregory/2011/08/12/rick-santorum-targets-iran/

Mohammad Mosaddegh
http://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Mohammad-Mosaddegh.pdf

Even the establishment newspaper, the Washington Post, is now sheepishly admitting the obvious – Ron Paul is a front-runner in the race for the GOP nomination. The Post is still in denial, however. It says Michele Bachmann will come out on top. It predicts Bachmann, Tim Pawlenty, and Paul will tussle to become winners of both the debates and the Ames Straw Poll scheduled for later today.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/could-ron-paul-wins-the-ames-straw-poll/2011/08/12/gIQA4wn5AJ_blog.html