Twitter rumor I missed about Ron Paul

I just read an article by Doug Wead that there was apparently a rumor going around on Twitter yesterday about Ron Paul's demise. I missed the rumor, thankfully it wasn't true. I wanted to link to the article and share this paragraph, it says a lot:

The good news is this. If the death rumors were spread by the political opposition it is an admission that nothing short of death will stop him. Rumors of infidelity would not work or be believed. Ron Paul is faithful. Rumors of discovered flip flops and YouTube’s of old speeches with different positions would not work or be believed. Ron Paul is consistent. Rumors of taking money from lobbies or think tanks to say what they want would not work or be believed. Ron Paul is honest.

And those are the very reasons I support Dr. Ron Paul. If you have a few moments, read the whole article, it's not very long but good.

Newt Gingrinch - Serial Hypocrisy

Beware the leaven of the pharisees. In this warning, the leaven was hypocrisy. I just watched a good 2 and a half minute video by the Ron Paul campaign about Newt Gingrich, so I thought I'd post it here. I've actually liked some of what Mr. Gingrich has said during a couple of the debates I've watched, but as I frequently heard growing up, actions speak louder than words.

I also posted another message back in May that you may want to reference.

Title 26 is not the Internal Revenue Code... ? Then what is it?

I discovered the Adask law blog a few months ago, and it has some very interesting articles on it. I wanted to link one piece in particular right now, since it ties in with the theme of this blog. That article is titled Title 26 is not the Internal Revenue Code. It raises some very interesting questions. I think getting answers to those questions would be very helpful.

The notion that the status quo must hold is unconscionable.

I'm reading an opinion piece by Ron Paul on the USA Today web site, and I'm not even done with it yet, but I decided to post a link to it here. One reason I really like and support Rep. (Dr.) Ron Paul is because he tells it like it is. I may not agree with him 100%, but I do agree with more than 75%. I'm not really thrilled with the picture of him they used, but... what can you do? I'd quote a paragraph or two, but I don't want to deal with possible copyright issues. This blog article title is a sentence from the article, about student loans. So here's the link to the editorial: http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2011-10-27/ron-paul-budget-plan/50963452/1?csp=34news

Ron Paul and Islam

I just saw this video on WND (World Net Daily) by Molotov Mitchell and thought I'd share it here. My favorite part was where he clarified that Dr. Paul does not just want to cut aid to Israel, but that he wants to cut aid to everybody!

I didn't time it, but I think it's about 5 minutes. Enjoy!

Media cowards

Apparently they've decided to start treating Dr. Ron Paul as though he doesn't exist a bit earlier in the election cycle than they did 4 years ago. Why? Well, my guess is because if he won, his policies and ideas might slow down or stop the 'gravy train' they're riding on. Four years ago most news stories about Ron Paul began by stating that he 'has no chance of winning'. So of course, people who watch the t.v. news or read news stories begin to get that message (subliminal?), and when you talk to them about Dr. Paul they say things like 'I like him and I'd vote for him, but he has no chance of winning...'

In other words, they're basically saying 'I'm going to let the mainstream news organizations decide who can win and who I should vote for...' It's pathetic is what it is. My advise is: Vote for the best candidate! The lesser of 2 evils is still evil. And it wouldn't be the first time the 'experts' got it wrong.

I'll finish that rant for now, I wanted to share a link to a good story, as well as embed a video by Jon Stewart on this very topic. This sums up my feeling as well, from the article where I found this video: Jon Stewart continues to be my favorite liberal. Not because I like liberals—but because I respect honesty and integrity.

I learned a couple of things from this article by Doug Wead titled Ron Paul's Iowa success and the media cover up. Here's a paragraph, but do check out the whole article. It's not terribly long.

To give you an idea of how staggering Paul’s victory was, and why the national media risks a total disconnect with its readers and viewers in their effort to ignore it, he won twice as many votes as Tim Pawlenty and almost as many votes as Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, New Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman combined.

I would think that would be quite news-worthy, but it was apparently ignored by the national media.

The Daily Show video below is just over 4 minutes.

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Government Lies 1

I wasn't sure what to call this post, so I thought 'Government Lies' was appropriate. But then I know it won't be the last time I want to use that title, so I'll just start numbering them. I just found this article on the Energy News site, and thought I'd link to the actual article. It's called Fukushima brings big radiation spikes to B.C. (Canada). Here's the kicker -- I remember shortly after the world heard about damage to the nuclear reactors (plural, not one reactor but 4 of the 6 are badly damaged), we were told by our government and the press that there was no need to worry. They reported that people were buying iodine pills, but there was no need for them. Not that they'd measured the amount of radiation or anything, but that even if there was a lot of radiation it would all dissipate (like magic?) by the time it made it's way across the Pacific Ocean. It turns out they lied. Whether it was out of ignorance or malice, I don't know. And now that the damage is mostly done we get news reports that tell us a revised story than what was originally told. And, as far as I can tell large amounts of radiation continue to be released from the plants. And that radiation is continuing to make it's way across the Pacific Ocean. (See updates for Jul 6 and June 23.) I am actually beginning to believe that if there is any 'man made global warming' or 'climate change' it is due to nuclear energy and NOT carbon emissions. Some people in the Energy News comment section place the blame on 'profits above people' which is mostly true. Then they blame capitalism, which to me isn't to blame. I would blame fraud, cover-ups and deception. It's not like the 'leaders' in a communist, socialist or Marxist system are any better.

Ron Paul Ad - Conviction

This ad is just over a minute -- it's really good so I thought I'd add it here.

here's the direct you tube link: http://youtu.be/UUNIeOB0whI

1040 Has No Legal Basis in Law

I wanted to link to a somewhat lengthy article from 2008, which was taken from an update from the We The People Foundation website.

Democrats warn: Beware Ron Paul!

Here's another good video by Tom Woods. In this case I decided to link to it because it mentions Social Security, which I call a smoke & mirrors ponzi scheme. When I hear politicians talk about the so-called 'trust fund' I start yelling at the t.v. Here's the truth: All of the funds collected under the guise of 'social security', as well as the Medicare tax that's deducted go into the 'general fund'. They may have some book-keeping gimmicks around it but that's where it ends up.

There have been huge surpluses in the SS collections column that helped reduce the rest of the 'budget deficit' for years. That's because they raised the payroll taxes in the 1980's (just as I was starting to work for a living...) to help fund the so-called trust fund for the 'baby boomers' (of which I am one, I'm on the tail-end). I'll stop ranting on that for now. Here's a link to an article about the Social Security myth that is linked on the Tom Woods web site. The video is just a few seconds over 9 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oaI26gY-eQ&NR=1

Tom Woods video - Thought Controllers Call Ron Paul "Extreme"

I had only heard about Tom Woods about 2 or 3 months ago and have watched a few of his online videos. I think I'm a new fan! I wanted to share this video, it's a little over 26 minutes.

Newt Gingrich - Conservative or Wolf-in-sheep's-clothing?

I wanted to post a link to this blog post, since it has some very interesting information. I started leaning away from the Democrat party towards the Republican party right around the mid-1990's when Newt was Speaker of the House. (Bill Clinton and the press reaction to Monica Lewinsky and related issues was, to me, so disgusting I couldn't stomach being a Democrat any more.) I did notice with Mr. Gingrich that the actions didn't quite match the rhetoric.

Here are a couple of paragraphs from the article, but it's definitely worth reading the whole thing.

Newt Gingrich wrote in many of his official bio’s for conservative causes that his degree was in “history.” In actuality, it was in the New Age full employment program of “Environmental Studies.” In the mid 1980s, Mark Satin, author of NEW AGE POLITICS and NEW OPTIONS newsletter gave “Internationalist” rankings for Congressmen. Heading the list with the best “internationalist” voting records in Congress were Newt Gingrich and Marci Kapteyn, a Congresswoman from Toledo, Ohio.

Another interesting analysis of Newt Gingrich appeared in a 1986 edition of the Los Angeles Times. It noted how he was most likely a left leaner, but learned that the right got the votes. Ergo, he suddenly veered course to the right. That analysis troubles me more than the Alvin Toffler, Heidi Toffler, Environmental Studies analyses which are a red flag of New Age danger in and of themselves.. It suggests a man who is more amoral than immoral. Such a person to my way of thinking is most dangerous of all – he does nothing from conviction or reason, but does all from a analysis of personal advantage.

Nuclear mayhem

I've been keeping up with news about the earthquake and resulting nuclear disaster in Japan last month, and now a month later it doesn't look good. There's been next to no information from the 'public health' authorities, so it appears we're on our own, for the most part. I don't see how on earth we can claim some justification for sending bombers into Libya, but stay 'hands-off' with Japan's disaster when the weather patterns are sending nuclear radiation all around the northern hemisphere, landing first on the U.S. west coast (where I happen to live). Thankfully I have a Savior, but that's more of a topic for my other blog. I have never been a fan of nuclear power, and while it may be 'clean' when everything is working without problems, we do not now and never will live in a 'problem-free' world. Now that I'm done ranting, I wanted to link to an article titled: Nuclear's green cheerleaders forget Chernobyl at our peril. Here's a few sentences I wanted to highlight:

The authorities reassure us by saying there is no immediate danger and a few absolutist environmentalists obsessed with nuclear power because of the urgency to limit emissions repeat the industry mantra that only a few people died at Chernobyl – the worst nuclear accident in history. Those who disagree are smeared and put in the same camp as climate change deniers. I prefer the words of Alexey Yablokov, member of the Russian academy of sciences, and adviser to President Gorbachev at the time of Chernobyl: "When you hear 'no immediate danger' [from nuclear radiation] then you should run away as far and as fast as you can."

The author of the article then goes into some details about a trip he made to the still highly contaminated areas of Ukraine and the Belarus border 5 years ago. In general, it highlights with some detail that the 'official numbers' of those affected by Chernobyl is grossly understated. Definitely worth reading.

TheTinyDot video

Below is a video by Larken Rose, it's just under 7 minutes. The conclusions he makes can be applied to other areas besides taxes (such as health care, etc.). I thought it was funny and sadly very true at the same time.

Dr. Ron Paul and national security

I was just reading this article about the YAF national board expelling Dr. Ron Paul from their advisory board, and all I can say is: Wow!

For those who don't know my views, back in 2008 I spent some time volunteering for Dr. Paul's primary campaign for President and posted some articles and embedded a couple of YouTube video's on my other blog. Basically, he's as pro-U.S. Constitution as any politician you'll find. So for them to claim that he's not is just ridiculous. When it comes to war and national defense, from what I've heard him say he (rightly) says that we shouldn't be sending our citizens into battle unless we follow the Constitution and Congress votes for a declaration of war.

And otherwise he would follow a non-interventionist foreign policy. However he would secure our borders, which is rightfully a government function. He would cut foreign aid (and that topic pulls in the US AID agency, which I have discovered ties into the deception of the application of the tax code in a big way, but I digress...), as it's not a legitimate government function under the Constitution.

I think these few sentences sums up their reasoning:

The United States is the world's leader--a beacon of light for the wretched and the oppressed. God has blessed the United States with liberty and the strength and heart to spread that liberty to all of his children. Rep. Paul has abandoned this mission, abandoned the United States' citizens, and abandoned the citizens of the world in their quest for their God-given natural rights."

From what I gather from that statement, they expelled him because he's supposed to assist the citizens of the world in their quest for their God-given natural rights? Really? Is that what he took an oath to do? And who gets to decide how that is supposed to be accomplished? Wow.

Rich take from the poor

I wanted to point to an article on another blog I visit now & then since it really makes me angry. If you can afford to buy off some politicians apparently it's easy to 'game the system' and guess who pays for it? Here's the link to the article: Rich take from poor.

Welcome to the Tax honesy blog

I have another blog about using EFT and spiritual warfare, which didn't seem like the right place to post some of the things I'd like to rant or write about related to taxes and/or politics.

I had been thinking about starting a blog on this topic for at least the last couple of months, and due to the nature of the tax-collectors and their 'friends', I wasn't sure if perhaps it might be safer to be anonymous. I decided that while it might be 'safer' in some respects I didn't want to stoop to their level. What made me decide to start the blog now was that I saw an article on Rose Lear's blog that I wanted to link to, and didn't want to put it on my other blog, and that will be the 2nd post on here.

I don't know if I'll post a lot on here or not, but I'll throw up some links to other sites and probably comment about books I read and some online radio shows I listen to now and then. So, welcome to the blog!