Will the Real Rick Santorum Please Stand Up?

    On the show yesterday I played four clips. Here they are. The first video shows Santorum saying how much he dislikes and works against Libertarian tendencies and Tea Party influence in the Republican Party, the second clip is more freedom-bashing as called-out by the Great Judge Napolitano on Freedom Watch, and the third and fourth clips come from the last video (Santorum’s CPAC speech) where he claims to love freedom and be a Tea Partier! Isn’t lying a sin Mr. Holy-Than-Thou?
    Santorum saying he has a problem with the Tea Party…
    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLQnoVpkyqc]
    Santorum saying the government should NOT stay out of our bedrooms…
    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhtep2_Mw9Q]
    Rick Santorum at CPAC calling himself a Tea Partier (between 3:00 minutes and 3:30) and saying he wants to keep government out of our lives (between 10:00 minutes and 10:30). Oh and as an added bonus he starts the speech saying that conservatism hasn’t failed the country, rather conservatives failed conservatism. Sorry to let you down, buddy.
    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pdy09iQrNw&feature=related]

Excerpts from Last Week's Show: Republicans Better Wake Up to the Ron Paul Movement!

Don’t miss the Monica Perez Show Saturday nights from 10pm -12m ET on 750am News/Talk WSB or listen to it streaming live at showtime from here. In the meantime, here are a couple of excerpts from last week’s show. Monica Perez: Republicans Better Wake Up to Ron Paul Monica Perez Discusses Ron Paul with Callers

Ron Paul Newsletters: "Reality Check"

The New Yorker is the latest publication to attack Ron Paul for his newsletters. Over a brief period of time in the early 1990s, a handful of Ron Paul’s thousands of newsletters contained offensive passages. It’s highly unfortunate that some short-sighted and opportunistic people sullied Ron Paul’s name this way and it was totally negligent (or similarly opportunistic) of Dr. Paul to let material go out under his name that did not reflect his own views.
Should Dr. Paul be forgiven this transgression? It has been almost twenty years since this misstep and neither before nor after that time have Dr. Paul’s own words or actions shown any sign of the attitude that was presented in these newsletters. As a matter of fact, a video from around the time the controversial newsletters were published clearly shows that Dr. Paul viewed the newsletters as financial and economic in nature with a focus on monetary policy in Washington. The voters must decide the seriousness of the matter and its relevance to Dr. Paul’s candidacy. The media, of course, would like this issue to be a deal-breaker for the Ron Paul campaign–after all, Dr. Paul is not their friend.
The January 27th New Yorker piece by Alex Koppelman, Ron Paul’s Filthy Lucre, claims that Lew Rockwell, “who remains close to Paul,” wrote the offensive articles. Koppelman bases this claim on speculation in a 2008 reason magazine article, Who Wrote Ron Paul’s Newsletters? It is hard to believe, however, that Koppelman has not seen the recently revealed photocopies of the main newsletter in question, which clearly shows Lew Rockwell not to be the author. Of the six newsletters that contain offensive statements, one in particular contains most of the incendiary language. This newsletter, though widely cited and reprinted, had always appeared without a “by line,” as if the author were unknown. As early as January 5th, however, the author was revealed: James B. Powell. Although several sites claim this is the same James B. Powell who is a senior editor at Forbes and a fellow at the Cato Institute (and this seems most likely), there is another James B. Powell who is a publisher of investment newsletters even now. I have not found any definitive evidence as to which of these two James B. Powells wrote the newsletters, or if it was a different James B. Powell altogether. In any case, the author is most definitely not Lew Rockwell, nor Ron Paul.
Should Koppelman be forgiven for being negligent or perhaps opportunistic in his article? Perhaps his career should be over. After all, he is a journalist who knowingly or negligently reported something misleading. (I’m going to put a note in my calendar to bring this up again in twenty years, especially if Koppelman keeps his nose clean and turns out to be a good guy, assuming our politics are still different.)
For a more complete version of the Ron Paul Newsletter story, check out the following video, “Ben Swann Reality Check,” which lays out a more complete picture of the Ron Paul Newsletter controversy before the byline was revealed. The second video is a follow up discussing the byline.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGH77lZsglU]
And here’s Ben Swann’s follow up after the James Powell byline was revealed.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DOS9WwKAqA]

Ron Paul Enjoys Luxury at Taxpayers' Expense?

I woke up this morning to find a laughable article on Yahoo, Ron Paul’s First-Class Airplane Trips: Do as I Say Not as I Do, criticizing Ron Paul for splurging on first class flights from Houston to DC. I laughed because of the relatively minor amount of money in question: “he spent $25,000 more than he should have.” After all, Ron Paul returned over $140,000 of his Congressional budget last year alone, and John Murtha, God have mercy on his soul, spent $150,000,000 of taxpayers’ money on an airport he had built and named for himself. But the real kicker here, is that the story isn’t even true! Ron Paul upgrades using frequent flyer miles! Ends up this story was based on a total fabrication by Associated Press and had already been debunked by MSNBC by the time Yahoo published its story. Here’s the whole story:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5IJQYY9dx4]

What Is Really Going On in Iran?

There is an article in today’s Wall Street Journal titled The Mortal Threat from Iran, by Mark Helprin, which begins with this line: “To assume that Iran will not close the Strait of Hormuz is to assume that primitive religious fanatics will perform cost-benefit analyses the way they are done at Wharton.” If that didn’t get my propagan-dar pinging, nothing would. Dehumanizing the target and terrifying us with death threats are classic earmarks of war propaganda. Given that not a single dissenting voice on this issue can be heard from the mainstream media–the left-dominated TV arm and the right-dominated radio arm–one wonders why the Wall Street Journal is coming out so strongly on this. I mean, of course this country of 70 million people is working to develop a bomb they will gleefully pop off at Israel so they can cheer wildly as they watch 300 missiles rain down on themselves in retaliation–they are irrational, primitive, religious fanatics, after all, every one of whom would love to commit suicide as soon as possible. Why even bother pounding the drums, let’s just wipe them off the face of the earth and be done with it already. Oh, but what is that kooky Ron Paul always on about? “Maybe there are people over there” or some such nonsense–hmm. I know it’s a silly waste of time, but before I paint my face and grab a flag, I just want to see if there’s any possible explanation for Ron Paul’s weird position. (I mean, what kind of freak applies the Golden Rule to foreigners anyway?)
So, just for giggles, I went to Foreign Policy Journal online for an alternative viewpoint on the subject and I found one from none other than the always outspoken and never politically correct Paul Craig Roberts. This is it:
The Next War on Washington’s Agenda
by Paul Craig Roberts
Only the blind do not see that the US government is preparing to attack Iran. According to Professor Michel Chossudovsky, “Active war preparations directed against Iran (with the involvement of Israel and NATO) were initiated in May 2003.”
Washington has deployed missiles directed at Iran in its oil emirate puppet states, Oman and the UAE, and little doubt in the other US puppet states in the Middle East. Washington has beefed up Saudi Arabia’s jet fighter force. Most recently, Washington has deployed 9,000 US troops to Israel to participate in “war games” designed to test the US/Israeli air defense system. As Iran represents no threat unless attacked, Washington’s war preparations signal Washington’s intention to attack Iran.

Continue reading this article at Foreign Policy Journal.
For another view, watch Col. Shaffer on Freedomwatch:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUrX9t9v3rY]

Ron Paul Highlights from South Carolina Debate–and Fox Busted for Being Insanely Biased Against Ron Paul!

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN0cMcCK1gk&feature=player_embedded]
Ă…nd here Fox News busted as insanely biased against Ron Paul: “Ron Paul. Ron Paul way above the line. Ron Paul always tends to do well in these twitter surveys. They are not scientific, they are people voting for their favorite candidate sometimes, at other times they are a good measure of what’s being said.” How do these guys decide when it is a good measure and when it’s not? It is crystal clear the “reporter” is saying that when Ron Paul comes out ahead, it’s not a good measure but when someone else does well it is a good measure. At least this guy is busted by a fellow reporter who must have been inundated with twitter-rage!
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=KfDJfvYH6CY]

Ron Paul Speaks: "Predictions In Due Time" and "What If?"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjuUWr9vaXo

“I’m RACIST for criticizing Obama, a TERRORIST because I’m against the Bush wars, ANTISEMITIC for not supporting Israel unconditionally, a TEABAGGER for supporting the Constitution, a TRUTHER for asking unanswered questions, a TRAITOR for whistle-blowing on my corrupt government atrocities, a CONSPIRACY THEORIST for presenting documented facts, a TROLL for uploading news, videos, and quotes, and ANTI-AMERICAN for supporting a Constitutionalist like Dr. Ron Paul.”
–YouTube Comment

Ron Paul Video: "Ron Paul shames Santorum & Bachmann with Biblical argument of a Just War"

Here is a concise and lucid overview of the moral and legal bases of Ron Paul’s foreign policy position. (It really does look like Bachman and Santorum are passing notes to each other–probably saying something like, “Holy Crap! This guy actually BELIEVES this Bible stuff!”)

Here’s another video that may help correct some misperceptions of Ron Paul and his foreign policy.