• Ron Paul 2012
  • Committees of Safety
  • Recent Posts

  • Retake Congress!
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • RSS LewRockwell.com

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • Ron Paul 2012
  • Pages

  • December 2007
    M T W T F S S
    « Nov   Jan »
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930
    31  
  • Meta

Emergency Call To Help Ron Paul VoteWatch

With the exclusion of Ron Paul from the Fox News Forum to be held two days before the New Hampshire primary, there is little question that groups are and will be using some fraudulent tactics attempting to alter the COUNT of the Ron Paul vote. Voter fraud in Iowa and New Hampshire is pretty much guaranteed.

Why is voter fraud nearly guaranteed? Questionable reliability of voting machines, questionable ballot security, and the voter fraud that blatantly occurred during the straw polls and during previous elections. There is a real threat of the final vote counts being manipulated at some level.

Watch the Vote 2008.com is asking for people to volunteer in Iowa and New Hampshire to help ensure accurate, legitimate vote counts. Follow this link to SIGN UP TO VOLUNTEER TO WATCH THE VOTE.

Volunteers can also help the VoteWatch by double-checking the vote counts from your home computer. Sign up at Vote Watch 2008.com.

More information about what the volunteers are being asked to do can be found here. Read the following excerpt about why the vote watch is needed in Iowa:

The danger is that the results called in by the local people will be falsified at the state level. This is what happened in the 1996 Iowa Presidential Caucuses, on February 12, 1996 . The local Iowans conducted themselves with integrity and honor: they did their job. They voted by paper ballot, and immediately counted the results in front of everyone present in each precinct. The leader then accurately called the votes into the state level operatives. THIS IS WHERE THE DANGER OF VOTE FRAUD IS IN THE IOWA CAUCUSES.

The state GOP headquarters of Iowa designated Voter News Service of New York City to take the phone calls from the local county and precincts leaders at the Iowa Caucus that year. This whole event is recounted in the article, A House Without Doors, available online.

Voter News Service is a corporation then owned jointly by ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and AP wire. (FOX did not exist in 1996, but became part of the cabal in 1998.) Voter News Service, based in New York City , then simply falsified the results and sent them out over AP wire. The major media published the false results from AP wire, which “results” have stood to this day. A team in Dubuque , Iowa proved via eyewitnesses that Voter News Service stole 13% of Presidential Patrick Buchanan’s vote in Dubuque County alone. (870 Buchanan votes were reduced by Voter News Service to 757 votes.)

The idea in 2008 is for citizen correspondents to watch all 99 counties in Iowa , instead of just the one county of Dubuque County, Iowa .

Digg!

Ron Paul Will Finish Top Three in Iowa

This according to the final GOP Power Rankings in today’s Iowa Independent:

Ron Paul – Rival campaigns are beginning to nervously speculate that Paul will finish in the top three on January 3. Paul broke double digits in at least two polls for the first time this week and he seems particularly strong in areas of the state where the media has less of an impact on political deliberations — especially in rural northwest and southern Iowa. Check out a Ron Paul supporters’ websites and you’ll see detailed discussions about caucus rules and strategy. The Paulites are more ready for caucus night than most observers realize.

I don’t put a lot of stock in the polls — especially considering the underestimating and undercounting they’ve done of Ron Paul’s supporters — but this is still great news!

Read more: Iowa, Get Out and VOTE FOR RON PAUL!!!

Further Analysis of Mike Huckabee

The American Thinker has done some interesting writing on Huckabee, his political history as governor of Arkansas, and the policies he would implement if elected. These articles ad further support to the conclusion that Huckabee is not the candidate best suited to be our next president.

James Lewis writes in Huckabee’s Amazing Coincidences:

Huckabee is not a conservative. He is a populist, like Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Hewey Long. He started off as a very successful radio preacher. Huckabee has years of practice doing off-the-cuff repartee with radio listeners. He is a master of the exploding sound-bite. But Huck is no Rush Limbaugh, and he’s certainly no Reagan. He could be the Rush from the Dark Side, using those awesome talents to undermine conservatism, rather than build it up.


In The Church of Huck: Growing Government in the Name of Religion Selwyn Duke (himself a professed Christian) lays out evidence that Huckabee “would impose statism in the name of religion through government”:

It’s not that Huck would impose religion through government. No, his actions would truly offend you. He would impose statism in the name of religion through government.While Huck will say what you want to hear to win office, he will not hear what you want to say once there. He will make tone-deaf Bush seem like a maestro…

Huck invokes faith to justify ambitions ranging from the insidious to the idiotic. For the former, look no further than immigration, where Huck espoused the Christian principle, “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you,” while advocating an apparent open-door policy. This, despite the fact that if any good Christian were to find himself in a country illegally, he would expect its citizens to demand he return home.

Ron Paul: Don’t subsidize or overthrow governments in Pakistan

Remembering the fact that the U.S. government is beyond broke right now, Ron Paul’s policy on Pakistan is the only one that makes any sense.

Merry Socialist Christmas

I almost put this in the Political Humor section but decided not to — it’s just too darn creepy.

Ron Paul’s Hour With Glenn Beck

After equating Ron Paul supporters with terrorists and alienating them from his viewership, Beck seemingly has offered an olive branch to Dr. Paul (and Paul’s supporters) giving him a full hour on Beck’s CNN show.

Whether or not the interview is completely unbiased is probably not the main issue, as there were definitely some questions from Beck that weren’t the most appropriate — or intelligent for that matter. As Paul has said about media, “they have their right to be biased.” Sometimes I just wish the media would be less biased and more eager to exercise their right to be fair and truthful. Nevertheless, Beck did let Paul answer his questions and say what he wanted to.

Ultimately it gave Dr. Paul an opportunity to present his positions in greater detail and to a wide audience. Beck deserves some credit at least for allowing that. It was interesting to hear Beck again reference Cleon Skousen’s book, “The 5000 Year Leap.” (Especially given the fact that Skousen’s nephew Joel recently said Beck “isn’t a legitimate conservative,” likely referring to Beck’s comments equating Ron Paul supporters with terrorists.)

Finally! Ron Paul Gets Fair Mainstream Media Coverage

Well, maybe not 100% fair coverage, but it’s about as close as Dr. Paul has gotten yet. Here is a great ten minute interview with Ron Paul on MSNBC.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.