Ron Paul

Ron Paul is reaching out to us, I guess. (or Clark is acting on his own. I don't know.) I decided to vote for him months ago, but I hold no delusions. He is a politician, after all. And we are instructed by the Church to, "Put not your trust in princes or sons of men in whom there is no salvation". So having said that, and fully expecting the enemies of God, the Church, and humanity to prevail in the elections, let me say HOOOORAYYYY!!!! For Ron Paul!! (You have my vote, Paul! But it won't be enough.) and direct you to the letter below. An Open Letter to Orthodox Christians, on Behalf of Ron Paul by Clark Carlton Dear Brothers and Sisters: The 2008 US presidential election is almost a year and a half away, and yet the various campaigns are in full swing. With states vying to move the primary season up into late 2007, it is time that we as citizens of the United States start to think about who we would like to see elected to the White House next year. Before I express my own thoughts about the upcoming election, let me begin with a couple of obvious, but nonetheless vital, observations. First of all, reasonable people – and certainly the reason-endowed sheep of Christ’s flock – can disagree about political philosophies and the relative virtues and vices of particular candidates. I do not believe that there is one "Orthodox" answer to some of the questions that I will raise below. In other words, I will question neither the purity of your faith nor the sincerity of your commitment to Christ if you disagree with my thoughts. Such circumspection is necessary because our Lord did not deliver to us any particular "political philosophy." When the Pharisees tried to trap Him with a question about money He replied simply, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s." Later, the Pharisees accused Him of trying to put Himself in the place of Caesar. When Pilot asked Him about this He replied, "My Kingdom is not of this world." St. Paul admonished Christians to obey those in civil authority – even though they were pagans – but later writers, living under intense persecution, were somewhat less enthusiastic about their allegiance to the Roman Empire. Finally, in the fourth century the Roman Empire underwent a slow and sometimes painful process of Christianization. (Eusebius’ rose-colored version of events needs to be taken with a grain of salt.) This eventually gave rise the Byzantine theory of "symphony" between Church and state. There is no question that the conversion of the Empire had many benefits, chief among them the development of a genuinely Orthodox culture – with all of its artistic, literary, and architectural achievements – and greatly increased missionary expansion. At the same time, however, there was always a very real danger of identifying – confusing, really – the state with the Kingdom of God. Indeed, the actual history of Roman Orthodox symphonia is a decidedly mixed bag. Our calendar is full of saints who suffered exile and even torture at the hands of the "most pious Christian Emperors" (Athanasius, Chrysostom, and Maximus to name but three). The point is that Orthodox Christians throughout history have lived all over the world under quite diverse political circumstances. While Byzantine symphonia holds an honored place within the history of the Church, one cannot claim with any theological seriousness that this is the only Orthodox political philosophy. This leads me to my second observation, which is that contemporary American culture is far removed from that which has developed within traditionally Orthodox lands. Therefore, I do not for one minute believe that the political principles that I shall advocate below are necessarily exportable to other cultures. Frankly, I would be delighted to see the restoration of an Orthodox monarchy in Russia. (For the record, I do not subscribe to the Third Rome theory.) However, there is absolutely no chance whatsoever of such a thing happening over here. And frankly, I would not want it to happen even if it were possible because our culture is so profoundly different from the Russian culture, which is the product of a thousand years of Orthodox influence. Keeping these observations in mind, we must begin with the principles that make the American system unique in the world. Certainly most of the nations of the developed world could be termed "democracies" in some sense, and yet it is clear that our political culture is quite different from that of France or Germany, or even Mother England for that matter. The political principles that undergird the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are technically known as "political liberalism" and go back to the empiricist philosopher John Locke. ("Liberalism" in this sense is quite different from the typical modern use of the word.) The differences between Locke’s approach and that of Continental philosophers like Rousseau and Kant are crucial to understanding the uniqueness of the American political system. According to Locke and his spiritual heirs such as Thomas Jefferson, the function of government is to secure the liberty of individual citizens. Thus, the American political philosophy begins with the individual. Of course, for the Orthodox, individualism is a very problematic notion, one that is intimately connected to our understanding of the Fall of Man. Yet, we must keep in mind that no secular political philosophy could possibly do justice to the Orthodox concept of persons-in-communion. Given the choice between secular individualism and secular collectivism, a good case can be made that individualism is preferable. The belief that the purpose of government is to secure the liberty of its citizens necessarily entails limited government. The equation is quite simple: the bigger the government is, the more it tries to do, the less freedom is available to its citizens. The purpose of government within the American tradition, then, is neither to make its citizens righteous nor to take care of them from the cradle to the grave, but to protect their God-given liberty. The American form of political liberalism is not a perfect system by any stretch of the imagination, and we must always be wary of granting America a sort of messianic status as some Evangelical Protestants have done. Nevertheless, I firmly believe that given our political, social, and cultural history, the kind of government envisioned by Jefferson is by far the best form of government for Orthodox Christians in America who wish to live their lives in pious obedience to the Gospel and the Tradition of the Church. This political system will not guarantee righteousness – no government can – but it does guarantee the fundamental conditions of liberty in which a life of true evangelical righteousness can blossom. Neither will this system guarantee that every citizen is "taken care of." Yet, we must not forget that the admonition to feed the hungry and clothe the naked was addressed to the Church, not to Caesar. Sometimes we confuse the two and expect the government to do our work for us. This is an abdication of our evangelical duties to the poor, not their fulfillment. At any rate, a limited government would mean a more expansive role for the Church within society, whereas an expansive government necessarily means a diminished role for the Church. For example, the Roman Catholic Church in California has had to alter its participation in the state’s adoption system because of state rules regarding same-sex couples. Government involvement always involves government regulation. This example, however, illustrates the fact that the kind of government we have now at all levels bears little resemblance to the system envisioned by Jefferson and the other founders of our Republic. All three branches of the federal government – branches that were created precisely as checks on each other’s power – systematically ignore the limits imposed upon the federal government by the Constitution. The Congress passes all manner of legislation not authorized by the Constitution, limiting the freedom of the public through an ever-increasing network of laws and taxes, while at the same time almost completely abdicating its constitutional duties in regard to foreign policy and war. Presidents, for their part, routinely abdicate their duty to veto unconstitutional legislation and act as a check on congressional spending and instead have taken to themselves the almost monarchical power to promulgate their own laws (Executive Orders) and to wage war without a congressional declaration. (The last time Congress declared war was 1941.) And rather than keep the other two branches of government in line with the Constitution, the judicial branch instead rewrites legislation or invents new laws simply by fiat. (That is how we ended up with Roe vs. Wade.) In short, the problem we face is that while the constitutional form of government envisioned by Jefferson may well be the best form of government within our cultural context, yet, quite clearly, this is no longer the kind of government we actually have. The question is whether or not this form of government can be restored to the American people. I believe that it can and that the presidential election of 2008 is the key to this restoration. I am 43 years old and for the very first time I will be voting for a presidential candidate rather than against the other guy. I am convinced that Congressman Ron Paul of Texas, a candidate from the Republican Party, is the single most important presidential candidate in my lifetime. I make this bold statement because he is the first presidential candidate that I have ever heard who clearly understands the philosophical foundations of our republic and who is committed to governing in accordance with the Constitution – including abiding by the limitations placed on the power of the president. In more than seventeen years as a US congressman, Ron Paul has never voted for an unbalanced budget. He has never voted for legislation that is not authorized by the Constitution. He does not even participate in the congressional pension plan. His consistent, principled stand for constitutional government has earned him the nickname, "Dr. No." While opposing runaway congressional spending, Congressman Paul has also been an indefatigable opponent of runaway executive power. Committed to the constitutional principle that only Congress can declare war, he voted against the resolution approving of President Bush’s war plans for Iraq. (Congress refused to actually declare war, so they passed the buck by granting the president the "authority" to go to war.) Furthermore, he voted against the Patriot Act, which represents one of the gravest threats to individual liberty in American history. He stood almost alone among Republicans in this. (He also opposed President Clinton’s illegal war against our brother Serbs!) Some have tried to portray this position as being contrary to conservative and Republican principles. Yet, Congressman Paul knows well that non-interventionism is the traditional Republican stance. The foreign policy of the present Republican administration is designed by a clique of former Trotskyites who have embarked on an imperialistic program of perpetual war abroad and ever-greater government power at home. Ron Paul understands that… There is nothing conservative about an undeclared war against a country that has not threatened us. There is nothing conservative about threatening other countries (Iran) with a pre-emptive nuclear strike. There is nothing conservative about "spreading Democracy" at gunpoint. There is nothing conservative about suspending or ignoring habeas corpus. There is nothing conservative about warrantless searches. On the contrary, these are all the actions of leftist, totalitarian governments. The failures of the Bush administration are not the result of traditional Republican principles; they are the result of the abandonment of traditional Republican principles. Quite frankly, Ron Paul is the only traditional Republican in the race. Now I am not claiming that Ron Paul is perfect, and neither is he. Paul is not running for "Savior of the World," but for president of the most powerful nation on earth – a nation that is so far removed from its founding principles that it is now one of the greatest threats to freedom in the world, both at home and abroad. The United States has certainly become a threat to our Orthodox brethren around the world. Witness the US-backed persecution of our brethren in Kosovo and Palestine. Certainly the Christians in Iraq are much worse off now than they were before the US invasion. Furthermore, if current policies continue in place, we will be headed for an inevitable confrontation with a resurgent Russia. Our children and grand-children may be in for another Cold War – only this time we may just be the Evil Empire. I believe that Ron Paul is uniquely qualified to turn our country from this disastrous course and return her to her constitutional foundations. In particular, he possesses two character traits essential for this task. These are traits to which every Orthodox Christian should aspire: personal integrity and humble obedience. It is a sad commentary on our society that integrity is not a trait we have come to expect from our politicians. As the GOP candidates crawl all over themselves to claim the flag of being for "family values," it is fascinating that the (current) top four candidates (including Fred Thompson) have seven wives between them. Ironically, the Mormon is the only one who is not a serial bigamist! In addition to the fact that Ron Paul has been married to the same woman for fifty years (five children, seventeen grandchildren), his voting record after more than seventeen years in Congress is the very picture of consistency and principled dedication. Indeed, he seems to be from another century altogether. The Scripture enjoins us: "Let your ‘yea’ be ‘yea,’ and your ‘nay’ be ‘nay.’" Whether you agree with all of Ron Paul’s positions or not, you know exactly where he stands today and can be assured that he will not change his principles tomorrow for the sake of political expediency. Within our ascetical literature, one virtue stands out as the surest way to achieve Christ-like humility and love, and that is the virtue of obedience. When Ron Paul became a US Congressman he took an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States." That oath has determined every vote he has cast in the House of Representatives. In other words, he placed himself in obedience to the Constitution. He has never voted for a House bill that is not specifically authorized by the Constitution. Again, I am not suggesting that Congressman Paul is an Orthodox saint; he isn’t. But his humble obedience to his oath of office is an example for us all. He certainly behaves as "one under authority." (Imagine how much better off our Church would be in North America if our bishops always acted in accordance with the canons!) Furthermore, as a conservative Protestant and as an obstetrician by trade, Congressman Paul has consistently opposed abortion – far more consistently than most of the other Republican candidates. Most importantly, however, Paul opposes abortion on sound constitutional as well as religious grounds. This means that he will be able to make a clear and credible case why the most fundamental right of all – the right to live – must be guaranteed to the unborn. I have never contributed to a presidential campaign before. I have never put a political bumper sticker on my car before. And I have never written a letter like this before. I have done all three because for the first time in my life I truly believe that there is a chance to return this nation to the rule of law under the Constitution. Traditional Republicans feel betrayed by the Bush Administration, and anti-war and pro-civil liberties Democrats are beginning to see through the hypocrisy of their own candidates. The time is right for a man like Ron Paul, and Ron Paul is precisely the man we need for these times. As Judge Andrew Napolitano recently commented after reviewing a litany of tyrannical, post 9/11 "homeland security measures": "We need a Ron Paul in the White House more desperately now than we ever have at any time in our history." If you are interested in learning more about Ron Paul, please go to RonPaul2008.com. Asking for your prayers for our Nation, I remain, Yours in Christ, Clark Carlton ----- Dr. Clark Carlton is assistant professor of philosophy at Tennessee Technological University in Cookeville, TN. A graduate of Carson-Newman College, St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, and the Catholic University of America, he is a sought-after speaker on Orthodox issues. He is the author of the five-volume Faith Series from Regina Orthodox Press, and his weekly podcast, "Faith and Philosophy," can be heard on the Internet at Ancientfaithradio.

Washington Post on Ron Paul's Campaign

First, to my readers who don't care about politics, are favoring other candidates, or who my be worried that I am spending so much time on politics during Advent, let me offer a bit of an explanation. Back in the early 1980s I becme a Republican. I was only 14 but my dad fanagled a ticket for me to hear President Reagan speak to the National Association of Evangelicals. I heard that speech and believed what he said. And shortly after that I also read Reagan's bookand Bastiat's "The Law". The Speech and the books influenced me greatly. From then on I was pro-life and pro-liberty. In the 26 years since that speech I have watched my party, the Republicn Party, give lip service to the pro-life movement without actually ending abortion, when to do so is an easy thing. I've watched government and debts grow. which limit liberty. I kept holding out hope, though. They talked a good game, surely they would eventually get around to passing andsigning the bills I cared about. But in 26 years they haven't. Liberty has diminished, abortion is still legal, debts havepiled up and we have even waged anagreesive unprovoked war. I has always bothered me that the pro-lifepresidents Reagan,Bush, and Bush would not appear at the annual pro-life rallies, but would phone in their support. In 2004 I realised that G.W.Bush isn't really pro-life. And with the passage of the Patriot Act I realised that he isn't really pro-liberty. And I looked hard at the Republican candidates on my ballot in 2004 and came to the conclusion that most republicans were not pro-life and pro-liberty. Like the Democrats they were pro-lobbyist, pro-status quo, pro-what ever program their biggest campaign donors wanted. And I dind't vote for any of them. I voted my conscience instead. I figured I would never vote for another republican ever again. But then I heard about Ron Paul. And for the first time in almost four years I think that there is a chance to get some one into the OVal Office who will fight (and it will be a fight) with Congress and the monnied interests to roll back programs, end a federal right to an abortion, bring our troops home (My son is paratrroper), and begin to pay off the national debt. Mitney won't do it. Huckabee won't do it. Giuliani won't do it. Certainly no Democrat will do it. But if Paul is elected I am sure that he will do it, or go down fighting. My hope is in Heaven, but for the time being, I live here, and just as it would be a sin for an annointed Orthodox Christian monarch to abdicate his duty, I believe it would be a sin for me,a citizen in a rebublic not to be involved in politics. So, following St. Paul's advice, I am staying busy until the Lord returns.

If you are reading this on December 16, 2007 please, go to this site and help Ron Paul become the next President of the United States.

Now, here is the the article from the Washington Post about Ron Paul.

And here is a video:

Louisiana GOP Caucus - Victory for Life and Ron Paul

(There is an update to the post below. Apparaently, the Louisiana GOP is trying to defeat Ron Paul. See the ABC Report here.) I hate it that everything in Americarequires lawyers to be involved. I guess it's better than the old way of solving problems, but only barely.)

--
The Results in Louisiana are looking good.

#1 "pro-life uncommitted" (which means anyone but Da Mayor)
#2 McCain
#3 Dr.Ron Paul

Now why is this such good newsfor the GOP and the USA if Paul isn't going to win? two reaons:

1. It confirms that at least in Louisiana, The GOP is the Pro-Life party.
2. Because of Ronald Reagan. Every Republican remebers the 1976 Campaign when Gerald Ford was nominated to run for President, but he asked his primary challeger, Ronald Reagan to speak to the Convention. It was that 1976 speech that made everyone in the room say, "uh oh! We nominated the wrong man." It was that speech in 1976 that made Ronald Reagan the nominee in 1980. The speech was delivered without a teleprompter, without notes, and Ronald Reagan didn't even know he was going to be giving it. I won't put the text of the speech here, but I urge you to read it. Now why is this important to the Conservative movement? Because if the number of paul delegates at the convention is great enough, he will get the podium and others like him, real Conservatives, will be speaking - we will have an opportunity to push the Neo-Cons and the RINOs back into the slime.

Some people think Paul isn't a real conservative, or think he isn't electable. If you think he isn't I'd like you to consider these...

Ron Paul: The New Ronald Reagan?

In 1976 Ronald Reagan ran for President of the United States but lost the Republican nomination to Gerald Ford.  Ford was one of the nicest men to ever serve as President.  He was an Eagle Scout, a war hero who charged below decks to fight a fire after the order to abandon ship had been given, a boxer and a football player, and nobody didn't like him.  (Very impressivley, he's one of three U.S. Presidents about whom there has never even been a roumor of adultery.)

After a hard fought campaign for the nomination of the Republican Party, in a geasture of peacemaking and friendship that I think was genuine, Ford invited his opponent for the nomination to speak to the Convention.  In just a few words, Ronald Reagan pointed out that the future of humanity depended on what that Convention did, and on who America chose to be President.  And the feeling in the auditorium, according to people who were there, even the supporters of Gerald Ford who had worked so hard to defeat Ronald Reagan, knew they had just nominated the wrong man.

Gerald Ford lost the general election and Jimmy Carter presided over a national malaise that lasted until 1981 when Ronald Reagan finally moved into the White House.  Ronald Reagan, who summarized his position on the global communist conspiracy with the words "We win.  They lose." was able to cut through all the verbage politicians like to hide behind.  He identified the Soviet Union as an evil empire.  While in office he wrote and published a book on the national sin of legalized abortion.  He saw threats to life and liberty, and he drew a line in the sand.

But line drawers are not often liked.  They are often hated by people who just want to go along and get along.  But sometimes, after sounding the warning, after staying on message year after year, of not getting distracted, even in the face of electoral defeat a line drawer is elected.  Ronald Reagan was one of those men. Ron Paul is such a man.

Ron Paul, is not a lawyer, which means he is not professionally trained to be mealy-mouthed.  His position on communism in America is known.  He says it is wrong.  His position on abortion is known.  He says it is wrong.  His position on the hubris of elected officials is known.  His postion on fiscal irresponsibility is known.  His position on oppressive taxation is known.  His positions on the federal leviathan, on internationalism, on war for money, and on fiat currecny are known.  He says they are wrong.  He won't have to appoint a commission a month like President Obama does before he can say what he thinks is right.  Why?  Because he is 76 years old and has spent his life doing what is right.

And, like Ronaldus Magnus, he has run for President and lost.  He lost but didn't give up.  In fact, he lost twice but did not give up.  And each time he ran the message of small government, human dignity, fiscal restraint, and individual responsibility become more popular.   Ronald Reagan, an actor from California saved America from malaise in 1981.  It is possible that Ron Paul, an obstetrician from Texas can pull America back from the brink of oblivion in 2013.

Ron Paul in New Hampshire

CNN did a scientific telephone poll on Thursday.
Ron Paul is only six percent away from second place.
If he can take 2% from McCain and 1% from each of the others he is in second place.

Huckabee 24%
Thompson 17%
Giuliani 16%
Romney 16%
McCain 13%
Paul 11%


In other news I got the Ron Paul banner stretched over the northbound lanes of Hwy 101 at Moffat Blvd.

Ron Paul Meet Up

I went to a Ron Paul Meet up tonight. It was a of fun. Its interesting that there are so many different kinds of people supporting Ron Paul. There was a hanyman, a copy writer for Bebe, a college student, and about 30 other people. Some were there because of Iraq, some because of 1st Ammendment issues, some because of abortion, some for the gold standard. It was definitley an eclectic group of people. I left with a bunch of fliers, bumperstickers, and a sign to hang over the freeway. Much good!

Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss

In 1971 the British rock band, The Who had a big hit with their song Won't Get Fooled Again. It reminds me of the words I sing in church every week, "put not your faith in princes or sons of men, in whom there is no salvation. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; In that very day his thoughts perish." Today Donald J. Trump took over as President of the United States.

I was in a meeting when he swore the oath and when one of the men in the meeting (he was listening to a device in his ear) announced that we had a new Prsident the other 60 people in the room began clapping and cheering. (About the meeting: I quit my job as a teacher after last semester and took a job a a salesman for a general contractor. I sell roofs, windows, doors, concrete, solar energy systems, and insulation now. Much more money than teaching.) I am glad Trump is our President but I don't for a minute think he is going to usher in an age of justice and prosperity. I think he'll do less damage to us that Biden did but that is all.

I haven't been excited about a presidential candidate since Ron Paul ran for President. Although, I must admit that the last time Trump was President he did appint good judges to the U.S. courts, but I think that is mainly because he didn't have strong opinions about judges, and just asked the Federalist Society who they want him to appoint. Admittedly, that is a pretty good way to pick people to be federal judges. Gosh, It was fun campaigning for Ron Paul. It's too bad he didn't win.

Super Tuesday Delegate Prediction

Who will win which states?

Ron Paul shall place first in Alaska and West Virginia. (Did you know he won the most degates in Maine?  I bet you didn't hear that on the news.)

Romny shall place first in Massachusetts, Utah and Colorado

Huckabee shall place first in Arkansas, Tennessee and Georgia

McCain shall place first in all other states (although my precint is overwhelmingly for Romney)

I predict minimum delegate wins as follows:

Ron Paul shall win no fewer than 30 

Romney shall win no fewer than 300 (taking a sizable chunk of California's  173 delegates)

Huckabee shall win no fewer than 150 

McCain shall take no fewer than 450

On Wednesday morning (when I shall review my predictions) we will not know who the nominee is going to be.  I am hoping that we won't know until the last day of the convention.

In other news today, February 4 is my birthday.  I am 39.  My wife made a pecan pie for me.

Working for Paul

Basil and I walked up and down Castro Street today; handing out literature and trying to round up votes for Ron Paul. Many people took the flyers. A few people said they were already planning to vote for him. A few people looked at us likewe were filth. All in all, it was a good day.

Paul Beats the Da Mayor and the Lobbyist in Michigan

"Well, he's hanging in there. Not only that, but Rep. Ron Paul thumped two reputed Republican heavyweights in the Michigan primary -- former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani."

Read the whole fabulous wonderful article in the LA Times

Ron Paul Song

A million dollars to give away

Many times in my life I have seen needs that I wanted to give money to meet. In fact, just today I recieved an appeal from the Russian Children's Home but tossed it in the trash because my wife had just told me not to spend anymore money. Most of my life I have not had money to give like I want to give. But tonight I came acrosssomething interesting while checking out the libertarians in my facebook networks. (I was checking to see if they were going to support Ron Paul)

One of the Libertarians in the Silicon Valley network runs an interesting blog.

"For most of us, having a million dollars liquid — that is, available for our use at any time, and easily convertible into cash — is the stuff of pure fantasy. But after talking to a few of my friends about decisions they were making, I was able to easily articulate one way we can all have $1 million in cash — liquid, available cash — in our lifetimes.

"No, this isn’t some “get rich quick” scheme, and it doesn’t require anything illegal or immoral. It’s actually quite simple. The one catch is that it’s easier to do earlier in your life. But it’s something anyone can do, and is easily within the range of most Americans. You have to follow some rules to make this work. But once you do, you’ll be a millionaire.
What is the decision?

"Buy a cheaper car, and invest the difference."


Read the details and review her math here.

Who the World would elect

Ron Paul seems to be the choice of most of the world.
Benin, China, and Belarus are pulling for Kucinich.
Boznia-Herzegovina is going for Obama.
Fred Thompson is way ahead in Chile. Why?

You can vote here.

That's The Way to Deal With Communists!!

Did you catch the story in the Sun-Herald about Sen. McCain visiting the Sandinistas? (Disclosure: I raised money for the Contras in 1988 and 1989) The thing to remember, and the story doesn't say it, is that McCain's arms are crippled because of what the Communists did to him in Vietnam. So the fact that he was able to do what he is reported to have done is very impressive.

"McCain was down at the end of the table and we were talking to the head of the guerilla group here at this end of the table and I don't know what attracted my attention," [Sen.]Cochran said. "But I saw some kind of quick movement at the bottom of the table and I looked down there and John had reached over and grabbed this guy by the shirt collar and had snatched him up like he was throwing him up out of the chair to tell him what he thought about him or whatever. I don't know what he was telling him but I thought, good grief, everybody around here has got guns and we were there on a diplomatic mission [to the Sandinistas]. I don't know what had happened to provoke John but he obviously got mad at the guy and he just reached over there and snatched him." (You can read the whole story here.)

YEAH, Baby!!! That's some John Wayne action for you. If the President's first job is, as I think it is, to convince our enemies that attacking us in not in their interest, and failing that to hunt them down and kill them, then McCain seems to have what the job needs.

So, that's 55% of the job of being President. We already know he can't do the public speaking part. Thankfully, that is only 10% of the job. On abortion I guess he gets 8% out of a possible 10%. But that is definitely better that Sen. "babies are punishment" Obama. (Obama has 100% ratings from NARAL the last three years. I wouldn't leave him alone in a room with a pregnant woman.) On Economics, which I think makes up 10% of the President's job, I don't know. He says he isn't as conversant in the field as he should be. But he has a reputation for being a deficit hawk. We'll have to look at who he chooses for advisers. Finally, he was baptized as an Episcopalian but attends a Baptist church. I'm not sure what to think of that either. The Baptists do not accept his Episcopalian Baptism yet he has not been re-baptized. That is puzzling.

All in all, McCain isn't perfect. (I wish Ron Paul had not dropped out of the race.) But he is dramatically better than the Democratic Party's candidate.

This just in From the Alaska Desk...

Good news (maybe), frinds of the Constitution.

Ron Paul is leading in one unscientific Poll in Alaska. Read here.

For all my Calvinist and Reconstructionist Friends

I know some of you are waiting for Jean or Rousas to come back from the dead and establish an ecclisiocracy, but until then, take a look at what Gary North is saying about Ron Paul. (I don't agree with North on much, but you guys do. So pay attention, please.)

"We are seeing a political phenomenon like no other in history. We are seeing the creation of an army of volunteers who have not been actively recruited. This is as close to Hayek's concept of the spontaneous order as politics has ever provided. It is Isaiah's job in action.

Back in 1937, Albert Jay Nock wrote an essay titled "Isaiah's Job." It dealt with the strategic error of starting a political movement to save America. It will not work, Nock said. The kind of people who you need in order to change America cannot be attracted by active political recruiting. Such people will seek out those leaders who they approve of. He called them the Remnant.

We are now seeing what Nock did not foresee: the coming together of a grass roots army. It is assembling itself. The Internet's technology is making this possible.

The Remnant is forming."

(You can read the whole thing here.)

Changing my party again

Currently, I am member of the California Independent Party. But I saw a bumper sticker for Ron Paul yesterday and looked him up on the web just now. All I have to say is WOW!

-He is a veteran.
-He is a westerner.
-He is an OB/GYN in private practice with over 4000 deliveries.
-He is pro-life.
-He has never voted to raise taxes.
-He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
-He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
-He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
-He has never taken a government-paid junket.
-He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
-He voted against the Patriot Act.
-He voted against regulating the Internet.
-He voted against the Iraq war.
-He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
-He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

I am going to change my registration to Repubican so I can vote for him in the February primary. If my wife and I had not agreed years ago not to give money to candidates I would be writing my check now.

Working the Phones

So I'm calling all the Republicans in my precinct today; trying to get them to vote for Ron Paul.  I've called about 40 people so far, and I've had pretty good response.  One guy has agreed to vote for him and another asked me to call him back tonight to talk about it some more.  Now here is what is interesting:  There are only 87 Republicans in my precinct.   This means that, probably, this pricinct will go to whichever candidate gets 20 votes.  That is amazing to me.  So few people have so much power.  And these are just ordinary joes like me.  This is a great country.

In the 1980s did you "Want My MTV?" Maybe you should want Ron Paul.

Ron Paul Update