It is no secret that I am a huge Ron Paul fan–and I have been for many years. Do I agree with him on every single issue? Of course not. And I don’t have to agree with him on every single issue to know Ron Paul is the only true constitutionalist in the Presidential field–from either major party. And when a President (or any other public office holder) takes his or her oath of office, they do not swear to be a good conservative, or to be a good Christian, or to support the state of Israel, or to “create jobs,” etc., etc. They swear to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. That is their solemn oath before God and the American people. Nothing more. Nothing less. And for over two decades, Congressman Ron Paul has demonstrated his fidelity to that oath. And for that, I can and must support him.

In spite of Dr. Paul’s stellar congressional record, however, there are large numbers of Republicans and “conservatives” that are his fiercest critics. I’ve even heard some “conservatives” say that they would rather see Barack Obama reelected than for Ron Paul to become President. Such is the lunacy of many so-called “conservatives” today.

So, what is it about Ron Paul’s detractors that cause them to despise him so much? What is their beef? They would never say that they would rather Obama be reelected than to see Mitt Romney, or Newt Gingrich, or Rick Santorum elected President. In fact, most of them spout the antiquated mantra, “Anybody but the Democrat (whoever it happens to be at the time).” Or, “At least Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, etc., won’t take us over the cliff quite as fast as Obama.” But when discussing Ron Paul, many “conservatives” take the position, “Anybody but Ron Paul.” Why is this? What is it about this good man that so many good people can have such animosity toward him?

I am convinced that these “conservatives” who oppose Ron Paul reveal much more about themselves than they do about Dr. Paul. Let me proffer a few observations.

Observation Number One: We Have A Constitutionally Illiterate Society

Many “conservatives” are woefully ignorant of the US Constitution, and when a constitutional scholar such as Ron Paul interjects the Constitution into the political debate, he is speaking a language that many of these “conservatives” simply do not understand. He might as well be speaking Spanish or French. To many “conservatives,” the Constitution is a foreign language.

For the better part of the Twentieth Century, the Constitution was ignored and neglected. Pastors have never studied the Constitution. Businessmen have never studied it. High school teachers and college professors have never studied it. Policemen and sheriff deputies have never studied it. Even attorneys and judges haven’t studied the Constitution. Let’s be honest: we have a constitutionally illiterate society today. As a result of this constitutional ignorance, people (including Christians and “conservatives”) simply cannot fathom–much less appreciate–constitutional solutions to America’s political woes.

Dr. Paul knows the Constitution. He has studied it. He has read what America’s Founding Fathers and framers have written about the Constitution. He has studied the enlightenment philosophers, theologians, and teachers–you know, the same ones that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison studied. He knows that the reason America is in the mess it is in today is because the Constitution has been abandoned. And he also knows that the only way to fix it (politically) is to return to constitutional governance.

Therefore, when Dr. Paul talks about drugs, foreign policy, military adventurism, or even social issues, he does so from a constitutional point of reference. And the Constitution is clear when it comes to these matters. Domestic drug laws are the exclusive responsibility of the states–as is virtually every other law enforcement matter. Foreign entanglements, empire building, turning our military personnel into the world’s policemen, etc., are all anathema to constitutional government. And the longer our political leaders continue to ignore the Constitution, the more America will continue to slide down this slippery slope in which we now find ourselves.

Ron Paul’s position on these matters is in historical agreement with America’s Founding Fathers and the US Constitution. The following report outlines Dr. Paul’s sagacity regarding so-called “social conservatism” and the proper role of constitutional government (the title of the news report notwithstanding):

http://tinyurl.com/82slxzf

Dr. Paul’s detractors demonstrate that they do not truly understand the US Constitution.

Observation Number Two: Many “Conservatives” Have A Misguided Perception Of Ron Paul’s Position On The State Of Israel.

How many times have we heard Dr. Paul’s critics say that Ron Paul is “against Israel”? Too many times to count. I have been with Ron Paul in public and private many times, and I have never heard the first anti-Semitic word come out of his mouth.

Theologically speaking, you could not get a consensus of opinion from among the leading Biblical scholars and theologians regarding the modern state of Israel and Biblical prophecy if your life depended upon it. Many sincere Christians believe that the Biblical promises to Israel have all taken place in history past. Many sincere Christians believe that there are many promises to Israel that are yet future. And of these groups, many believe that the modern state of Israel is the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, while many others believe that the modern state of Israel has no relationship whatsoever to the future Davidic Kingdom. And the fact is, when it comes to America’s foreign policy, it doesn’t matter!

Constitutionally, the President of the United States owes his loyalty and allegiance to only one country: The United States of America. He has no right to interfere with the internal affairs of any country–including Israel. He has no authority to give trillions of dollars of hard-earned taxpayer dollars of foreign aid to any country–including Israel. When Americans go to the polls this November, they will elect the President of the United States, not the Prime Minister of Israel. As far as any American President is concerned, Israel, like every other nation, should be judged on the basis of its actions, good or bad (as should our own nation be judged). Any American President should do everything in his power to cultivate peaceful trade relations with foreign countries, and to protect America’s people and territory from those nations that would attempt to harm us–no matter who that nation is.

Ron Paul’s position on Israel is a constitutional one. He knows the US should stop meddling in her affairs and let her govern herself as she sees fit. Israel is a sovereign, independent nation fully capable of conducting her own affairs. What is amazing to me about so much of this Israel debate is the way many Christians ignore the fact that for every dollar the US gives to Israel, it gives at least four dollars to her Arab neighbors. Tell me again how this “blesses” Israel? How has America’s foreign policy of manipulation and coercion into the political and commercial affairs of nations throughout the world (including the Middle East) “blessed” Israel–or any other nation, for that matter? Can anyone remember when Iran was our friend? And who was it that cut the legs out from under that friend and elevated a government that would become hostile to both the United States and Israel? The US State Department, that’s who! Who orchestrated the rise to power of both Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein? The US State Department, CIA, etc., that’s who! Who has repeatedly demanded that Israel swap “land for peace”? Various US Presidents and Secretaries of State, that’s who! And what is currently stirring the pot of strife and hostility in the Middle East today? An interventionist US foreign policy, that’s what!

It is no accident that Ron Paul receives more support from American military personnel, active and retired, than all other GOP Presidential candidates combined. See this report:

http://tinyurl.com/7gk9c4o

No matter what one’s personal view of Biblical eschatology may be, the President of the United States is obligated to put the interests and safety of the people of the United States first! Period! How dare any President pander to ANY foreign country? How dare any President elevate ANY foreign nation to a position superior to the United States? And how dare any American citizen expect that our President would do either?

Observation Number Three: Ron Paul’s Detractors Must Not Comprehend The Existence Of The New World Order (NWO).

Ladies and gentlemen, ever since the Woodrow Wilson administration, the United States has been increasingly under the influence of internationalists who desire to commercially merge the nations of the world into one global community. The United Nations is a major contributor to this agenda, as are a number of international organizations. The New World Order is not a fantasy; it is a developing reality! And Presidential administrations from both major parties have willingly collaborated with this draconian agenda. In fact, under Presidents George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, G.W. Bush, and now Barack Obama, globalization efforts have mushroomed exponentially.

The Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderbergers, etc., are major players in the creation of a NWO, as is the military-industrial complex, the Federal Reserve, and international banks on both sides of the Atlantic. Another major component of the establishment of a New World Order is the burgeoning surveillance society and police state that both major parties in Washington, D.C., seem determined to implement.

Ron Paul is the ONLY Presidential candidate from either major party that truly understands the New World Order and is determined to resist it. He’s the only one! Mark it down, neither Romney, Santorum, nor Gingrich will lift a finger to resist the power elite inside the New World Order. They will do nothing to reverse the surveillance society taking shape in America. They will do nothing to resist the federal government’s obsessive control-freaks who are running many federal bureaucracies. Either none of them understands it, or if they do, they are absolutely unwilling to lift a finger to resist it.

I can only conclude that Ron Paul’s detractors haven’t a clue about the New World Order. They must not see it. They must not understand it. They must not be able to identify it. They must be totally ignorant about it, or else they would clearly appreciate Dr. Paul’s knowledge and acumen when he seeks to warn people about it and put himself on the firing line to oppose it. Even if one disagrees with Dr. Paul regarding particular societal issues, one must admire Ron Paul’s stand against the New World Order–especially since he is the only one opposing it! It is obvious to me that the only people who cannot appreciate Dr. Paul’s courageous commitment against the NWO are those who totally do not understand it.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that everyone must agree with me and support Ron Paul for President. I know that good people can come to different conclusions in any political race. What I am saying is that it seems obvious to me that the vast majority of Dr. Paul’s vocal detractors seem to demonstrate misperceptions–or even downright ignorance–in at least one or more of the above realities.

Support him or not, vote for him or not, any honest American who understands constitutional government, who understands what a constitutional foreign policy should look like, and who understands and is concerned that America is in the throes of a burgeoning New World Order MUST at least appreciate and admire Congressman Ron Paul. And as for me, I SUPPORT, AND WILL VOTE FOR, RON PAUL!

My take: Thought I would post something like this in the wake of Whitney Houston’s tragic death.

Full Article: Statistics prove prescription drugs are 16,400% more deadly than terrorists.

My take: No kidding. Most of us independent/libertarians have know there is no difference between the two parties and there hasn’t been for many, many years. …BITB.

Congress has approved a bill that will allow military, commercial, and private unmanned drones to fly over regular US airspace.

Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Nope, it’s an unmanned drone! Congress today approved a bill that allows unmanned aircraft to fly in the same airspace as commercial airliners, private planes, and cargo jets. The legislation allocates $63.4 billion over the next three and a half years to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), $11 billion of which will be used to update air traffic control systems at 35 US airports to handle the remote-controlled aircrafts. The deadline for the systems update is June 2015.

The change to flight regulations will allow military, commercial, and private drones to fly over US territory. Currently, drones are only allowed over certain military airspace, along US borders for surveillance purposes, and to about 300 public agencies, according to the Associated Press. The FAA must submit its plan for how to safely allow wide-spread drone flight within nine months of the bill’s passage.

In addition to the bit about drones — which we find both awesome and horrifying — the FAA will also update to a more precise GPS system, known as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast, or ADS-B. Once ADS-B is in place, aircraft fitted with the new tech will have their locations updated every second, as opposed to the six to 12 second intervals allowed by the current system. This will allow planes to come into runways at a steeper decent, fly closer together, and land and take off more quickly.

The addition of ADS-B is part of a massive FAA endeavor known as NextGen. According to the FAA, the roll out of NexGen will allow for fewer delays, fewer accidents, a lower environmental impact, and stronger national security, among a slew of other benefits.

via Drones: Coming soon to an airspace near you.

My take: My favorite part is where they say that they would absolutely NOT eat the GMO food. Uh, then why make it? …BITB.

My take: They are right, we are fed up with how government cooks the books. …BITB.

President Obama’s birth certificate can be found and downloaded on the www.whitehouse.gov site here.

Besides the obvious fact that the purported birth certificate was clearly fabricated (scans to not have multiple layers–only fabricated documents have multiple layers) there are other serious issues such as:

1. Back in 1961 blacks were called ‘Negroes’. So how can the Obama birth certificate state he is ‘African-American’ when the term wasn’t even used at that time?

2. The birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama’s birth as August 4, 1961. It also lists Barack Hussein Obama as his father. No big deal, right? At the time of Obama’s birth, it also shows that his father is age 25 years old and that Obama’s father was born in “Kenya, East Africa”. This wouldn’t seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama’s birth and 27 years after his father’s birth. How could Obama’s father have been born in a country that did not yet exist? Before Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the “British East Africa Protectorate”.

3. On the birth certificate released by the White House, the listed place of birth is “Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital”. This cannot be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called “KauiKeolani Children’s Hospital” and “Kapi’olani Maternity Home”, respectively. The name did not change to Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978, when these two hospitals merged. How can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961 if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978?

4. Just prior to releasing the purported birth certificate Obama held a closed door meeting with 8 of the 9 Supreme Court Justices. Why? No information has been provided about this unprecedented meeting.

5. Obama has now spent over $1.4 million defending suits brought against him related to his ability to be President. Why? If real documentation existed, why have everything about his past sealed and why is he evading all the hard questions?

6. Why did Obama sponsor a bill in 2008 to change Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5 of the US Constitution? Obama’s sponsored bill would allow someone who had been a “US Citizen” for 35 years to become president–attempting to override this important portion of the US Constitution. This paragraph states “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Since the birth certificate is clearly a fake, why isn’t anyone in in the main-stream media or in government asking these questions?

…BITB.

My take: Read the full article. I am so impressed with Helmuth Huebener, a young LDS teen only 17 years old–a resistance fighter who boldly put out pamphlets with titles like “The Voice of Conscience,” “Hitler the Seducer,” and “Hitler the Murderer”. He was the youngest person executed by the Nazis for political resistance. He and the two other LDS youths, Karl-Heinz Schnibbe and Rudolf (Rudi) Wobbe identified and called out the “wickedness in high places” (Ephesians 6:12) they saw in the Nazi regime. Huebener paid with his life. Schnibbe and Wobbe with 3 years hard labor in a prison camp before they were freed by allied forces. I pray that my descendants are as awake to evil in high places as these three teens were. …BITB.

Full article: The Resistance Fighter Was a Mormon: 70 Years after a German Teenager’s Execution, The Debate Continues Over Obedience vs. Conscience – FASPE Journalism 2011.

My take: Here Ron Paul clearly answers why he is more Republican than all the other Neo-Cons he is running against. …BITB.