Romney vs Paul

With the formal suspension of Santorum’s campaign today,  we are down to Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.

Although Gingrich has not formally suspended his campaign yet, he’s on the ropes.

Ron Paul and Mitt Romney were the only two who had a national campaign and appeared on all 50 states’ ballots.

Does the campaign now boil down to something as simple as this, the conservative underdog vs. the establishment moderate?  It seems so.

There have been a few interesting developments recently.  I came across this odd one this weekend where Russell Pearce stated that Romney and his immigrations positions are  virtually the same.    I find this hard to believe as Romney has been a supporter of the “DREAM” Act as well as amnesty:

Example 2

Example 3

That said, Pearce’s “internal enforcement” theory relies on a fundamental of Romney’s amnesty plan, that everyone has to get a national id card and workers (incl. *citizens*) cannot get a job unless the federal government first gives permission.  (Where’s THAT in the constitution?  Actually, that was the Clinton plan from 1993.)

5 term Rep. Chris Cannon (R, UT-3) was turfed out of his incumbent position by the Tea Party last cycle for just such duplicity on immigration, stating “tough” positions on immigration while promoting national id cards, federal tracking of citizens and amnesty while in DC.

Here’s Ron Paul’s position.  The irony is that Ron Paul’s (40 year unwavering) position on immigration sounds like what Russell Pearce *says* his platform is.  Except note, Ron Paul’s maintains constitutional integrity, individual constitutional rights for *citizens* while providing a zero-exception rule to amnesty, i.e. NO amnesty, no ids cards, no exceptions.

Some other information presented for your consideration.

Mitt Romney has not returned Gun Owners of America’s questionnaire–after three requests:

Here’s GOA’s evaluation of Ron Paul: GOA says Ron Paul has “guts” and is a “Second Ammendment Champion”. They give him an A+ rating.

Here are GOA’s 2012 Republican Presidential candidate ratings:
Ron Paul: A+ Santorum: B- Gingrich: C Romney: D- (based on his previous positions)

This is an interesting one.  Watch the crowds.  Watch the median age.  Look at these young Republicans who embrace individual responsibility, the constitution, the founding fathers and individual liberty.   Crowds of 8000?  See for yourself:


On the day Rick Santorum dropped out of the presidential race, it was Ron Paul — not presumptive front-runner Mitt Romney — who stole the show at the do-over Republican caucus in one of Missouri’s largest and most conservative counties.


  1. Ron Paul is the Champion of the Constitution!

    • Conservative American says

      “Ron Paul Suddenly Doesn’t Want to Talk to Reporters About His Racist Newsletters”

      “Ron Paul furrowed his eyebrows before storming off completely during a CNN interview addressing allegations that he made money and won fame with the help of a sometimes racist series of newsletters back in the 1990s.”

      “Borger, like a good journalist, pressed on for a few seconds before urging Paul to react to what people are saying about the two decade old allegations. “These things are pretty incendiary,” Borger said. “Because of people like you,” Paul snapped back, just before he pulled of his microphone and headed for the door.”

      Is this how a president Ron Paul would handle his news conferences?

      • David Robertson says

        Does it give you pleasure to defame an honest decent man who has done you no harm and about whom you know nothing?  Do you revel in your role as a water carrier for the military industrial complex that is running riot all over the world killing millions and bankrupting your country?  What kind of a human being are you?

        Dr. Paul did not “storm out” of an interview. The interview was edited to make it appear as though he did and CNN later ran the full interview after receiving many complaints which demonstrates that he was simply removing his mike after the interview was over. Like you CNN smear Dr. Paul because their owners are threatened by his incorruptibility and his refusal to be influenced by the special interests who run Washington.

        • Conservative American says

          Does it give you pleasure to misuse the word “defame” when confronted with documented facts with a link to the source so that you can verify those facts for yourself?

          Let’s settle this once and for all. Here is a link to the entire interview in question, uncut and unedited. Ron Paul supporters claim it shows that Ron Paul did not “storm off” but there is a lot more revealed in the interview than simply questions about storming off or not storming off. Let SA readers view it and decide for themselves.

          • No the documented facts point to another, Ron Paul is only guilty of not reviewing everything which is the norm for pretty much every paper like his at the time. He has already apologized for as much.

            You are in fact defaming him, you ignore the facts and attempt to push your line of propaganda while ignoring facts and even simple logic. This nonsense has been shot down countless times since 2008 it is not even worth responding to anymore outside of pointing out your a liar or just extremely ignorant of the facts.

        • fiscal conservative says

          Yeah, I saw the full interview also and don’t blame Ron Paul at all. The reporter was setting him up and he reacted as politely as anyone reasonably would. I would not be so nice in the same situation. I’ve seen him in the debates too…very polite, very poised, very gentlemanly.

          • Conservative American says

            Good! You saw the video and drew your own conclusions. I disagree with your conclusions but that is how America works when people like MadArizonan don’t try to impose a petty tyranny of censorship.

      • Still harping about the newsletters, huh? Didn’t you see that CNN falsified their clip about Dr. Paul “storming” off the set. That was a complete lie. Ron Paul is the antithesis of racism; the real racist in DC is Barry Soetoro, the usurper residing in the People’s House.

    • Conservative American says

      The principle problem with the above article is that MadArizonan is removing any comments which disagree with his support for Ron Paul. I guess that kind of censorship cleraly demonstrates which Ron Paul supporters stand for.

      • I can attest to that blatent censorship which provided proof of a false posturing regarding any genuine concern about Constitutional rights.

        Ron Paul is gettiing a nice supplemental salary as long as he stays an official candidate, is that not correct?

        • TruConserv says

          And yet those comments seemingly remain.

          Further, at least he is allowing comments.

          The coward Wanumba disables comments on his articles.

          • Well, you know, if it wasn’t for his “moderation” of comments, his articles on Sonoran Alliance would lead to blood-drenched anarchy in the streets, the collapse of the Yuan and the Dollar, a mountain crashing into the sea, and 1/3 of all crops dying in the fields.

            Really, we should be thankful for wanumba’s steady hand on the tiller.

          • It was no comments or yours, which are nul, if no comments were made at all. So what’s the difference?


  2. Ron Paul has never been the champion of any presidential primary…LOL!

  3. Conservative American says

    Let’s hear what Ron Paul himself has to say:

    “There’s been a coup, have you heard? It’s the CIA coup. The CIA runs everything, they run the military. They’re the ones who are over there lobbing missiles and bombs on countries. … And of course the CIA is every bit as secretive as the Federal Reserve. … And yet think of the harm they have done since they were established [after] World War II. They are a government unto themselves. They’re in businesses, in drug businesses, they take out dictators … We need to take out the CIA”

    You can see and hear Ron Paul saying these words by clicking on this link:

    So the man who would be president says, “We need to take out the CIA”.

    THAT is Ron Paul!

    • Regardless of how you or I feel about the CIA, Paul is a man of his word and a man of the WORD of the constitution. Can you find the CIA in the constitution? Can you post what section and paragraph?

      Again, regardless of how one FEELS about it, you just posted one more piece of evidence that Paul does what he says and that’s to adhere to the WORD of the constitution and founding fathers, not one’s interpretation of it, but what they actually WROTE.

      That’s what a constitutional conservative is.

      • Conservative American says

        Ron Paul has stated that we should “take out” the CIA. So are you saying that if Ron Paul were to become president and actually “take out” the CIA that you would think that to be a good thing and be happy about it?

        • David Robertson says

          Everything Dr. Paul has stated about the CIA is the truth. He has been endorsed by Michael Scheuer who is Jewish and the former head on the CIA bin Laden unit. It is the actions of the CIA that have resulted in “blowback” from those nations in which they have been interfering.

          This is why the American public is shocked and angry when American interests are attacked. They have been kept in the dark about the actions of the CIA. This is what Dr. Paul is talking about and what many Americans are now realising is the truth. This is why he wants to cut back the CIAS and end the wars caused by their actions.

          The intelligence establishment of the United States is a bloated bureaucracy and former CIA officers have stated that useful intelligence gathering can be achieved more efficiently and with less interference and the use of deadly force in the affairs of other nations. Dr. Paul is well informed of these facts and Americans would do well to listen to him. He is the most knowledgable of all the Presidential candidates on all the issues that have brought about the present wars and financial crisis.

          • Conservative American says

            You are avoiding the issue.

            Ron Paul has stated, and SA readers can see and hear Paul saying it on the video, that “We need to take out the CIA.” Here is the link to the video:


            If Ron Paul should become president and actually “take out” the CIA, do you really believe that would be a good thing for America and for the security of Americans? Yes or no.

            • fiscal conservative says

              There had been much talk about election fraud taking place in many states. Did everyone see the video about MO where the rules were negated? Wasn’t there a do over? What happened there, anyone know?

              • Christian conservtive says

                The Missouri do-over was yesterday and Ron Paul took all the delegates.

            • David Robertson says

              You ought to read my answer to your original comment. It addresses the issues you raised and clarifies the position that Dr. Paul will take as President. One thing he will not do is leave America defenceless. By bringing all the military home they will be Stateside to protect the homeland and give a great boost to the economy.

              Many military experts agree with Dr. Paul that the mission of the armed forces can be better defined and cost much less. The Pentagon is a black hole for Federal money and is completely unaccountable. Remember Defense Secretary Rumsfeld’s confession on September 2001 that they could not find $2.3 trillion of Pentagon appropriations that had gone missing. The area of the Pentagon where the investigation was being done on the missing money was fortuitously destroyed the very next day by what was claimed to be a terrorist hijacked airliner.

              The CIA will be downsized since as I said they are a bloated bureaucracy and their black ops are creating all kinds of problems for the People without their knowledge. They are long overdue for a “take down”.

            • How secure is a bankrupt society anyway?

            • To (Conservative American: Absolutely, yes. President Ron Paul eliminating the CIA would be a good thing. So would bringing ALL of our personnel home from 150+ countries. And eliminating the Federal Reserve.

        • For Liberty says

          Who did the CIA answer to with regards to the 1953 Iranian coup d’etat?

          Why was the Democratically Elected Government overthrown?
          If a country is Sovereign, can it establish it’s own Oil Pricing Policies?
          Why is the completion of Trans-Afganistan Pipeline and US Troop Withdraw scheduled for 2014?
          Will this energy source be used to provide cheap power to Pakistan, India, and China?
          Would cheap energy allow developing countries to compete with US manufacturing?

          • Conservative American says

            You are avoiding the issue.

            The issue is that Ron Paul has stated that “We need to take out the CIA.” Would you really want a President Paul to “take out” the CIA? That is what Paul says that we need to do. If elected president, would you hope that he would do that and do you really think that would be beneficial for America and for the security of the American people?

            • fiscal conservative says

              security in America is a big joke for anyone who has eyes. Been at the airport and gotten groped lately or irradiated. Seen little children scream while getting molested or grandmothers frisked? I sure don’t feel safer.

            • I would usually agree; but in such an extreme, let’s look at his record to see how likely he would do that.

              I’m not seeing it. Seems to me he’s a practical man, and I’m an objectivist .

            • Christian conservtive says

              The Bush family runs the CIA and international shipping of illegal opium and drug trade. Our soldiers are GUARDING the poppy fields. Romney and Obama are related to Bush’s. We have been under the control of one elite family for a lot of years. My question is which Romney will we get if he is elected? The moderate or the one that claims he’s conservative? Why do we have the rule of law and constitution if nobody wants to follow it? I beg you all to do a little research beyond the main stream media. There are huge lawsuits against out there against the Bush family- look up the whitehatsreport. Trillions of dollars of American wealth has vanished in to off shore accounts. Look up Lord Blackheath speech to the House of Commons. This is an on going investigation- really big- worldwide and it is going to crash our economy. I watched the House Oversight committee meeting that Paul headed up and the gist was we are headed for a fiscal cliff on Jan. 1, 2013. We need a minimum of 3 trillion in cuts in spending and they have stolen over 7 trillion in homeowner equity. Paul’s question was “To what end are these bond swaps and advantage?” Fed Reserve reply- It increases our balance sheet. Peace and freedom Leviticus 25:10

            • seniorforRonPaul says

              The CIA is not a benevolent organization, nor is it effective in collecting “intelligence”. It has become a meddling organization with its own agenda and has caused great damage around the world. This is not something that can be learned via mainstream media, or the CIA would not have been as effective in overthrowing governments that are deemed threatening to the corporate interests of wealthy Americans and globalists. The CIA has been highly effective in protecting the “rights” of wealthy corporations and has supported situations which have led to violence and the loss of many American lives. Would Americans, “regular” Americans, be better off without the CIA? Yes. There would be fewer wars, certainly.

              But the bottom line for a conservative American is that the CIA is not authorized by the constitution. There are no checks and balances for this organization.

    • Now explain what is wrong with dismantling a corrupt clandestine organization that is undermining the better interests of our country and people?

    • Yes, and Dr. Paul is absolutely correct; the CIA is a criminal entity.

  4. Is this a joke? The primary is now over.
    The choice now is Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. For any conservative, the only choice is Romney.
    All the Ron Paul supporters who say they will never vote for Romney might as well vote for Obama and stay out of Republican politics.

    • You said that 4 years ago about McCain. You were wrong then and you’re wrong now.

    • By the way, Bill, it’s interesting how you try to relate amnesty with conservatism. Nice try though!

    • If you’re conservative then why would you vote for Romney? Just because he’s under the Republican ticket? If Obama changed parties and ran as a Republican would you vote for him?

    • fiscal conservative says

      Obama and Romney are one of the same. Look at their policies. Different wrapper, same filling.

      • Conservative American says

        That’s an easy one to prove wrong. Romney supports the Defense of Marriage Act and Obama does not.

        • David Robertson says

          So does Dr. Paul and he voted for it while Romney only gives lip service to it. However Romney also supports the NDAA and all the other restrictions on personal liberty like the Patriot Act. I think you will find that whatever you believe Romney will do when he is in office is probably the opposite of what he will do.

          Ron Paul put out his comprehensive Plan to Restore America in November or December 2011. It cuts $1trillion from the budget and balances it in three years.

          He will also audit and then phase out the Fed, whose charter comes up for review next year, and introduce competing currencies including gold and silver.

          He will stop enforcing all non-Constitutional executive orders and legislation and reduce the Federal Register i.e. regulations by at least 40% immediately. He will reduce the Federal work force by 10% through natural attrition.

          He will end all the wars and bring the troops home from the over 900 bases in 150 countries. He will completely end all foreign aid. He will take the US out of NATO and similar military alliances. He will take the US out of the UN, WTO, NAFTA, all similar trade agreements, the IMF and the World Bank.

          He will eliminate five Federal Departments returning their functions to the States and while maintaining the Bush tax cuts will work to eliminate the IRS and repeal the 16th. Amendment. He will cut corporate tax to 15% and allow companies with foreign operations to repatriate all their profits to the US tax free..

          He will end the War on Drugs returning their regulation to the States and pardon all Federal prisoners serving time for non violent drug related offences…about one million prisoners.

          He will maintain Social Security, Childcare benefits and Medicare restoring the COLA increases removed by Obama. He will return most welfare programmes to the States with block grants for their administration. He will allow anyone 25 or younger to opt out of Social Security.

          His guide will be the Constitution of the United States which restricts the Federal Government to certain duties with all others being reserved to the States or the People.

          These actions by Dr. Paul should result in a powerful recovery in the United States and then the world within a relatively short time.

          • fiscal conservative says

            Anyone who voted for NDAA is anti-American! What leader will vote to have their people indefinitely detained without trail, without legal representation??? This is treason against the people. Who’s left in this race? Obama, Romney, Paul, Gingrich. Which one voted for NDAA?

          • Conservative American says

            So Romney gives “lip service” to it. How is this for “lip service”?

            “Ron Paul On Gay Marriage”

            “John Stossel: Homosexuality. Should gays be allowed to marry?”

            “Ron Paul: Sure.”

            Then there’s this:

            “In his newest book, Liberty Defined, Paul’s chapter on “Marriage” states, “In a free society…all voluntary and consensual agreements would be recognized.” He adds, “There should essentially be no limits to the voluntary definition of marriage.”


            Who is giving “lip service”?

            • If I don’t agree with mormonism; but allow them to practice, is that lip service? It’s protecting the Church from the State which are currently being forced to pick gay couples to adopt. That would stop and become completely in the Church’s power again.

              • Conservative American says

                We are not talking about Mormonism, we are talking about Ron Paul’s position on marriage.

            • Christian conservtive says

              As a christian, you can’t force people to do right. They have free will. Judge not lest ye be judged. Sometimes you have to LOVE people right where they are. Have faith and know that in the end ALL knees will bow to the Glory of the Lord.

            • Ron’s position on marriage is that it is between those getting married and their church, and the State has no business being involved. During that Stossel interview Ron states that he doesn’t want to be forced to recognize something as a marriage if it’s against his faith. That is the crux of the issue – the *State* should have no right to force individuals to recognize same-sex marriages. Should individuals be able to exercise freedom of religion, even if not everyone agrees with that religion? Yes, and that was what Ron was saying when he agreed homosexuals should have the right to be married *by their church*. Ron was not saying that the State had the right to force recognition of those marriages.

            • David Robertson says

              You do not appear to know the meaning of “lip service”. Here it is: ‘giving approval or support insincerely’.

              Ron Paul is always truthful and sincere. All one needs to do is study his books and listen to his speeches on the public record. You will find he is completely consistent and faithful to his declared Constitutional positions and his libertarian conservative philosophy.

              He is also a recognised authority on Austrian economics which predicted the present financial crisis. Romney cannot come close to Dr. Paul’s depth of understanding of the problems facing America and the solutions for them. America would be blessed indeed if he were to be elected to the Presidency.

            • Isn’t it strange that a country that was founded on the ideals of liberty and individual freedom has so many prople willing to dictate to others their own moral code and conscience? The problem with mandating morality is that sooner or later, someone in power will decide that you or me also don’t fit into their idea of what can or cannot be believed and try to madate that we believe or worship like they do!

              ron Paul has simply stated that it is none of the governments business and it’s not, no more than it isn’t of the governments business to mandate what you eat, where you work, who you can associate with or what you wear.

            • Ron Paul believes all social issues are none of the federal government’s business. He believes that all marriage, yes, even gay marriage, is not the business even of state governments, but is the business of the parties and their God, to whom they answer. It does not mean that he condones sodomy. He believes in decriminalizing drugs, but does not condone drug use. The War on Drugs is a cover for the biggest drug trafficker on the planet, the CIA. People need to understand that a government cannot legislate morality or behavior.

      • Obama and Romney are both supported by Goldman Sachs and other corrupt organizations and business that set out to take advantage of the people. The majority of Ron Paul’s Money is grassroots money. from Mcdonalds/Walmart workers to Small Business owners. Why would any sane person vote for Obama or Romney? I shake my head at all this nonsense.

    • David Robertson says

      Dr. paul has said he wants to return the Republican Party to its Constitutional roots, i.e. the original ideals of Jefferson and Madison. The present Republican Party was taken over by former Trotskyists in the 1980’s with the help of the Christian Moral Majority who were blinded and deceived by their allegiance to Israel into supporting an anti-Christain policy of pre-empive war.

      These so-called neo-conservatives are the source of the present foreign policy developed by the Bush supported think tank Project for the New American Century. It is focused on a military strategy of cultural destruction in order to create chaos and to remake the world in the image of the Marxist synthesis. This is why they have demonised the Muslims and every so often some individual bogey man like Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Moammar Qadhafe, Bashir Assad or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to justify their interventionist objectives.

      In order to control all these parameters they provoke and manage the natural Muslim outrage at their actions. They are presently fomenting an al Qaeda takeover of the entire North Africa/Middle East region using both armed insurrectionists and unarmed civilian protesters organised by the AYM organisation directed by the US State Department.

      Most Republican rank and file members are I am sure (I hope) unaware of this history and would be aghast to learn that they have been so deceived into supporting a communist takeover of their Party.

    • Unfortunaely, what you will get when you vote for Romney is a continuation of the ObamaBush policies, which will take this technically bankrupt country into effective bankruptcy! Romney will make some cosmetic changes in the same way that Obama made, but essentially nothing will change!

      Old Right Conservatives recognize that the only Conservative is Ron Paul, that is why there has been so much force used against him to prevent his nomination, he would make the most essential and necessary changes to ensure the restoration of this country, to ensure that America was first and foremost on the governments table, that these shores would be defended, that the economic well-being of the American People would be given a chance to prosper instead of borrowing and printing money to waste and give away!

      Ron Pauls platform closely resembles that of the 1952 Republican Party Platform, when Conservatism was real Old Right Consevatism, where America was the first and foremost concern for the government.

  5. I am really trying to figure out what differences there are between Romney and Obama. I guess one is that Obama has been a dictator in his first four years, knowing he would try to run for a second term, so there’s no telling what the man would do with four more years.

    After all, he wouldn’t have to worry about re-election in 2016 so he’ll be even worse this time..

    But the things that make me consider him a bad president, are also things that Romney supports. NDAA, for instance. Come on, do we really want our (grand)children growing up under such a law?

    Obama said that even though he now had the power, he didn’t intend to “use” it. Romney supports NDAA, do we know if he would use that power? He could.

    It’s horrible that Obama signed that garbage knowing he’d try for re-election, but it’s just as scary to me that Romney openly supports that law when he’s not even the president yet.

    I was a registered Democrat until this year. The bailouts were the final straw for me. I know several people that lost their homes in this horrible economy, and instead of them getting help, the banks did.

    I’ve been reading up on Romney and honestly, I still don’t know why he wants to be the president. It’s not for money, the man has six mansions already. He says he wants to create jobs, but I’ve not seen a clear plan to do that.

    The fact that Goldman Sachs is helping fund Romney and Obama’s campaigns is truly frightening to me too. They were one of the bailed out banks.

    I’m afraid we’re just heading toward more of the same.

    • Conservative American says

      One difference between Romney and Obama is that Romney supports the Defense of Marriage Act and Obama does not.

      • Conservative American, I was a resident of MA when Romney was governor. He trounced our state constitution by carrying out the State Supreme Court’s decision on the Goodrich case when he didn’t have to. That’s the decision that said same-sex marriage should be legal in MA. The legislature was given a deadline by the court (as if they had to listen to such a thing), and when that deadline passed with no action by the legislature to actually legalize marriage, Romney just went right ahead and required town clerks to issue party A/party B marriage licenses, on pain of losing their jobs. I don’t care if Romney says he supports DOMA, his support of same-sex marriage in MA was shameful. Go to and read The Romney Deception, which is their report of Romney’s years long support of same-sex agendas.

      • Woop-D-Doo! That is certwinly going to make a difference in the way this country is governed, in the future of our lives and whether or not this government and country, which now teeters on the brink of bankruptcy. Yeah, thats a great reason to choose Romney!

    • Romney is another puppet of the New World Order. He is a war monger, so he will support the take-down of any and all governments who do not cooperate with the plan. He will also support the UN’s Agenda 21, which will take away our right to private property and personal vehicle ownership. Because Obama is not an American, he has absolutely no loyalty to the U.S.; he has been a good puppet, with one exception. His falsified curriculum vitae has caused him to become a liability. Even with exceptional efforts to conceal his past, over 65% of Americans doubt that he is constitutionally eligible to serve as POTUS. Now, the foreign press has begun printing articles about his illegitimacy and how dumb Americans must be for electing him. I think the globalists are planning to throw him under the proverbial bus.

  6. I haven’t checked into Ron Paul that much because I didn’t think he would be a big contender since he wasn’t winning primaries, but I do know my grandkids sure like the guy. My grandson is in the military and he said there’s a lot of support there.

    I know he did pretty well when it was just him and Romney on the ballot (Virginia, I believe). My state hasn’t voted yet and I see a lot of Ron Paul signs here in my town.

    Can someone point me to a reputable site or newspaper where I can learn more about him?

    • For Liberty says
    • fiscal conservative says

      QT, I bet your grandkids would be able to point you in the right direction in finding more about Ron Paul. Google his name and there are tons of info.

      Unbelievable that he’s talking about auditing the FEDs and reeling in the IRS, ending income tax. I’ve always dreaded when tax time came around. I’d know what I’d do with all the money I’ve been paying to the IRS. I wouldn’t have to work 2 jobs, that’s for sure. What happened with Ron Paul’s bill to audit the FEDs anyways?

    • David Robertson says

      One of the very best where you can find detailed descriptions of his policies is There is also his campaign website at

  7. Conservative American says

    Here are the facts. Here is how Ron Paul voted:

    “Voted NO on establishing nationwide AMBER alert system for missing kids. Voted NO to mandatory life sentences for two-time child sex offenders. Voted NO to making visual illustrations of child pornography a crime. Voted NO to making it a crime to take a trip to a foreign country to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor. Apr 21, 2007”

    This was the bill and the vote number:

    “Vote number 2003-127 establishing nationwide AMBER alert system for missing kids
    on Apr 10, 2003 regarding bill S 151 Child Abduction Prevention Act
    Results: Conference Report Adopted 400-25: R 225-1; D 175-23
    Vote to adopt the conference report on the bill that would assign a national coordinator for AMBER alerts. AMBER alerts is an alert system for missing children, make available additional protections for children and set stricter punishments for sex offenders. Two-time child sex offenders would be subjected to mandatory life sentence. The measure would make it a crime to pander visual illustrations of children as child pornography. It would increase maximum sentences for a number of specified crimes against children. It would also make it a crime to take a trip to foreign countries and engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor. It also would enlarge law enforcement’s wiretap and electronic surveillance abilities in investigations of child pornography.”

    This is Ron Paul’s rationale for voting against the bill:

    “However, Mr. Speaker, I am concerned that making the AMBER Alert system a Federal program is neither constitutionally sound nor effective law enforcement. All Americans should be impressed at the demonstrated effectiveness of the AMBER system in locating missing and kidnapped children. However, I would ask my colleagues to consider that one of the factors that makes the current AMBER system so effective is that the AMBER Alert system is not a Federal program. Instead, states and local governments developed AMBER Alerts on their own, thus ensuring that each AMBER system meets the unique needs of individual jurisdictions. Once the AMBER Alert system becomes a one-size-fits all Federal program (with standards determined by DC-based bureaucrats instead of community-based law enforcement officials) local officials will not be able to tailor the AMBER Alert to fit their unique circumstances. Thus, nationalizing the AMBER system will cause this important program to lose some of its effectiveness.”

    • David Robertson says

      Just because he opposed Federalising an existing State level programme and imposing mandatory sentences for certain behaviours does not mean he condones the behaviour. He simply wants the States to regulate those actions since that is the correct Constitutional path.

      To oppose Dr. Paul on these issues is to oppose the highest Rule of Law, the Constitution of the United States. The alternative which is being imposed more and more is socialistic fascism. This lawlessness is what Dr. paul wants to bring to an end. He wants to restore the Republic. Why is this controversial?

    • fiscal conservative says

      Isn’t this about chipping children like animals?

    • If our Republic is to survive, we have to pare down the size of the federal government and relegate all social issues to state and/or local governments. If it is NOT FEDERAL, Ron Paul will be against making it FEDERAL, no matter how he views the issue. Simple as that. Ron Paul is a Godly man, honest, Christian, pro-life .. and his detractors cannot take that away from him.

  8. How will that fix our economy?

    It doesn’t take away from the fact that NDAA is so disturbing, either. That one is a deal maker/breaker for me.

  9. Thank you for this great post. There’s no hope if we choose to put forward 2 establishment BIG government candidates to America. Obama and Romney both fully support Constitutional and Natural rights violations such as NDAA, Patriot Act, HR 347, ect… Both have either opposed gun rights or are very poor in fighting for them. Both support the Federal Reserve’s destruction of our currency and our sovereignty, and its funding of BIG government and massive anti-rights agencies.

    Ron Paul has been the champion of the Constitution for YEARS. He took his OATH TO THE CONSTITUTION long before entering office, is a Veteran, and receives MORE MILITARY DONATIONS THAN OBAMA + ALL GOP CANDIDATES. He has stood up for the 2ND Amendment, the Bill of Rights,Constitution, Defense, Rights….He has opposed NDAA, the Patriot Act, Obamacare/Romneycare, Massive spending, massive agencies and gestapo regulations and laws, IRS, FDA, EPA, and the list goes on.

    THIS IS THE MAN WHO CAN BEAT OBAMA. Check out his rallies in California last week, 10,000+ at 1 rally! His rallies have stayed and increased into the thousands in the last month, he has a dedicated group of supporters who will stay up day and night to win this election, and he is on every ballot and has the financial support.

    THIS IS THE CONSTITUTIONAL CANDIDATE WE NEED. We cannot go through another lesser of two evils, we are at the end of the road people, we need the Constitution back or we will end up in a fully socialist government run economy and we will not have our religious/personal freedoms.

    Everyone is entitled to their opinion; I’ll be voting for the Pro Second Amendment, Pro Sound & Constitutional money, Pro Constitutional and STRONG Defense, Pro Bill of Rights and Constitution, and Veteran Ron Paul.

    • Conservative American says

      This is the “Marriage Pledge” of the National Organization for Marriage:

      “Support sending a federal marriage amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the states for ratification.”

      “Nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court and federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and to applying the original meaning of the Constitution, appoint an attorney general similarly committed, and thus reject the idea our Founding Fathers inserted a right to gay marriage into our Constitution.”

      “Defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act vigorously in court.”

      “Establish a presidential commission on religious liberty to investigate and document reports of Americans who have been harassed or threatened for exercising key civil rights to organize, to speak, to donate or to vote for marriage and to propose new protections, if needed.”

      “Advance legislation to return to the people of the District of Columbia their right to vote on marriage.”

      Ron Paul has refused to sign this pledge and when asked if people of the same sex should be permitted to marry, Ron Paul said, “Sure”.

      • fiscal conservative says

        I don’t get it, why shouldn’t people of the same sex be permitted to marry? Isn’t this freedom what made America great?

        • Conservative American says

          No, homosexual “marriage” is not the freedom which has made America great. The issue here is Ron Paul’s stated position and people may agree or disagree with it. That is the kind of choice which elections are about.

          • Ron Paul’s position is return marriage back to the churches; the restore their own duties. I’m not sure where the disagreement is? Because he won’t put the gay people in jail for joining Scientology?

          • seniorforRonPaul says

            actually, I am not so sure what is now so “great” about America. At least half of all marriages end in divorce, and at least half of all children born are born without the benefit of marriage.

            I am a decades-long married (only once) person with a family. Marriage is God-ordained. It should be community supported, not state regulated. Government interference in marriage has certainly not provided more security for children; otherwise why would there be so many single mothers and so many children who come from broken homes. More regulation is not going to safeguard the practice of marriage; only the changing of hearts can safeguard the practice of marriage. As for the practice of homosexuals “marrying”, marriage is God-ordained. If a particular religion wants to go against that and grant homosexuals within its “fold” the “right” to marriage, then that particular religion will have to be responsible for God. The big problem that I, as a monogamous senior citizen see, is that legislation has not “fixed” the marriage and family problem in the United States. Throwing more legislation at an obviously heartbreaking problem is not going to correct it; the hearts of people must be changed. I, personally, do not “believe” in homosexual marriage, because marriage is for the intent to protect children born to a couple, and homosexual “couples” can not create babies. As to what consenting adults do in private circumstances, having the government become involved in that would be creating the sort of situation that would lead to increased regulation (such as what happened during the Prohibition) and possible violence. Many Americans who consider themselves to be conservative would be alarmed to see how the “nanny state” has changed the perspective of allowing people to be personally responsible and suffer the consequences of their own choices. In our current society no amount of legislation is keeping children safe. Only loving adults can keep children safe, whether speaking of marriage or of any practice that is family friendly. This over-regulated society in which we now live has an increasing number of abused and abandoned and neglected and “lost” children. Regulation is not the answer. Dr. Paul has deep religious personal convictions and believes that more government control is not the answer to immorality. “Conservative” politicians can always promise more regulation to those who want to see society become more moral, but those regulations only hamper law-abiding citizens, give more work to police forces and weigh down the coffers of the American people.

            • seniorforRonPaul says

              should have been “responsible ‘to’ God”, not “responsible ‘for’ God”–

              in line 10 of the second paragraph above–

              • Just FYI, for those of you who are voting on marriage, our economy is being destroyed, our dollar has lost 98 percent value, our rights are being withered away with the Patriot Act, NDAA, HR 347, and our Troops are being sent off to endless wars that just unify and strengthen the enemy and endanger us and our soldiers at the waive of a king and his tyrants-in-office.

                The government completely politicizes issues like marriage, abortion, healthcare so we don’t focus on the real issues that provide the funding for those things among other more important things.

      • David Robertson says

        This because Dr. Paul believes marriage is not within the purview of the state. It is a personal covenant between two people and is protected by contract law just as is any other contract. It is also a religious matter that is governed by the churches and other religious organisations. Within these institutions the members share, broadly speaking, the same moral beliefs with regard to marriage and Dr. Paul believes that should be protected .

        Dr. Paul believes individuals should be free to enter into relationships with whomever they wish. He supports the Defense of Marriage Act because it prevents the Federal Government mandating same sex marriage from the Federal level which is almost certain to happen in the current moral climate. He believes that marriage should be between one man and one woman as defined in that Act.

        Ideally he would like to see the state withdraw from any regulation of relationships. Most conservatives would do well to heed what he is saying if they wish to avoid the intrusion of government into their personal lives to compel them to act in ways that offend their conscience. This is already well established here in the UK and elsewhere and it is only by paying attention to what Dr. Paul is saying that conservative Americans, especially Christians, can avoid the same fate.

        Dr. Paul has said that people with good morals can make good laws but good laws cannot make people with good morals. This is a sound Christian perspective and should be heeded by Christians everywhere.

    • fiscal conservative says

      Wow, 10,000 people at Ron Paul’s rally? Where? Romney could barely get 200 people to attend his rally, even though he was passing out free sandwiches or something like that.

      • UCLA, before that is was 5k-7k at the previous 3-4 events, he sells out to standing room only at all of his events and stills has many waiting outside in long lines in hopes of seeing him.

      • Conservative American says

        And so we now know that Ron Paul has the ability to have big rallies. Do you think that would serve the people of America well should Paul become president?

        • David Robertson says

          It simply demonstrates that his support among the People is much greater than the controlled media wish to let on. Certainly support among the People is vital if he is to accomplish his goals. He is no collectivist tyrant like Obama and Bush and he will abide faithfully by the highest law of the land, the Constitution.

          You really ought to read his books and get up to speed on his platform. This is a good place to start: ; even if only to assemble better arguments against him. So far everything you have implied you would support is against the Constitution and that is Dr. Paul’s guide. He is after all a Federal politician not a State politician and one must hear him with this in mind.

          It is impossible to be a collectivist and a conservative. The two are mutually exclusive. It is however possible to be a conservative and a libertarian just as were Madison and Jefferson the founders of the original Republican Party. It is the ideals of that Party that most Americans think of as being American ideals and it is to these ideals that Dr. Paul is calling his countrymen back.

  10. I am afraid I will not vote for Romney, or Obama. I was leaning toward Santorum, but that’s a bust now. I guess I better learn more about Ron Paul because he will probably win my vote by default.

  11. Does Ron Paul support NDAA?

    • No he was and is completely against NDAA, he is also against the poorly named Patriot act which was the predecessor of NDAA and is also an abomination that has stolen our liberties. The list of terrible criminal bills he has stood against often alone is extensive as he has nearly 30 years in congress with the most constitutional voting record there “a widely accepted fact”

      Hope this helps you make the right choice.

  12. I was being facetious. This grandma did watch the debates. 🙂

    • Michael C. says

      Oh, you’re a grandma? Current and imminent Social Security recipients actually have the most reason to support Paul as he’s the only one committed to cutting other gov’t spending to protect the commitments to SS recipients. Robmney would cut benefits, raise taxes, and lead the economy over a cliff. If you’re still looking for info on Paul, here he is in his own words–interviewed by AARP:

  13. Ron Paul said a fence will not work, I do not care build it. His Libertarian platform states that Free trade of goods and services which is amnesty. His Foreign policy is abysmal, and I am tired of being told by Ron Paul supporters they will not accept or vote for anybody else. Just remember you will be reelecting Barack Hussein Obama.

    • No those not supporting Paul will be those re-electing Obama.

      We said from the very start that we would support no one else, while the vast a majority of you who supported other candidates flip flopped back and forth between all the others as they rose and fell the each dropped out. We said from the start in fact all the way back to 2008 we will not support anyone else
      you knew it you were warned and are given warning constantly and consistently we have not faltered and will not falter that means the blame falls squarely on those listing to the lies of the lame stream media not us.

  14. Two things:
    (1) Russell Pearce does NOT support a national I.D. card. He has debunked that notion from day one.
    (2) A vote for Ron Paul–or any third party candidate (or not voting at all)–is a vote for Obama. How can you claim to be a supporter of the Constitution and allow Obama to be re-elected? Even if you only agree with 50% of what Romney says, you cannot in good conscience support Obama or allow him to be re-elected. If you support the Constitution, there is very little you can agree with Obama on; certainly much less than 50%. I’ll take skim milk if I can’t have whole milk. It’s better than poison.

    • A vote for an Unconstitutional candidate is a vote for an unconstitutional candidate, period. Romney & Obama are no different. Our dollar is about to completely go down the drain with 98 percent devaluation now that the federal reserve (supported by both establishment REPS/DEMS) has been given the power over our economy.

      BOTH romney and the king support not just the federal reserve’s massive spending policies, but also rights violations like NDAA, the Patriot Act…

      BOTH have NO plan to actually attack the debt, not just the budget, which they use to say they are cutting “x” amount over 10 years, but really, they’re just cutting from proposed increases. They don’t take the debt crisis seriously and this is the BIGGEST THREAT TO NATIONAL DEFENSE.

      BOTH plan on sending our Troops off to endless wars that only strengthen and unify the enemy, while our Troops die at the waive of a king and tyrants, our treasury is drained, and the war is used to take away Essential Liberty for Temporal “security”.

      I cannot in good conscience support candidates who openly before even entering office promise us that they will violate the Constitution and continue the same policies that are about to destroy us.

      Dr. Paul understands and studies the founder’s ideology, the Constitution, Capitalism, Natural Rights, and RESPECTS it, my activism, support, money, and vote go to him.

      • Ahmed: If too many voters approach this election as you do, you can kiss the Constitution good-bye. Don’t tell me Romney and Obama are the same. They are not. Those are just radical talking points–from the far left and the far right. If nothing else, Romney will do two things that Obama will not do: (1) overturn (or at least prevent the implementation of) Obamacare, and (2) appoint more conservative Justices and federal judges. If Obama is re-elected he will be untethered to go more radical than anyone can now imagine. He will have his mandate and we will thank you and the Ron Paul sychophants for it. God help us all.

        • I see the exact opposite, if they approach it the way you did I see the demise of the constitution. It is the steady incremental erosion that has been destroying it and Romney and most republicans in fact are guilty of it just as the democrats are.

          It is a dead stop in abusing the constitution now by choosing Paul now or the last shreds which are all but gone now get finished off by Romney or Obama does not matter which finishes it off.

        • Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. Romney would merely continue the same NWO agenda; he and Obama are both supported by Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs and their pals rule the world; they will decide whether the U.S. Constitution dies, or if our economy and currency crash. Nobody goes against the banksters and lives to talk about it. If Dr. Paul’s popularity continues growing, we all need to pray for his safety.

  15. David Robertson says:
    April 11, 2012 at 5:22 am
    This is a sound Christian perspective and should be heeded by Christians everywhere.


    Is it now? With Ron Paul’s base as Democrats/Indies who vote Obama in the general, maybe Christians need to heed “know them by their fruits.”

  16. Wouldn’t it be nice if the Republicans could get their crap together and put on events like this?

    99% Spring Action Training

    Event sponsor: Arizona Dream Act Coalition, the Somos America Coalition, & LUCHA

Leave a Reply