Home Page

Contents

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul conservative Book of Ron Paul conservative State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the first session of the 105th Congress has been completed and the third year of the conservative revolution has passed. Current Congressional leadership has declared victory and is now debating on how to spend the excess revenues about to flow into the Treasury. conservative State Of The Republic 28 January 1998    1998 Ron Paul 2:40 It has been especially tempting for Members of Congress to accept the projection of higher revenues as a panacea to our budgetary problems. The prevailing attitude in Washington as 1997 came to a close was that the limited government forces had succeeded. The conservative revolution has won, and now it is time to move on and make government work more efficiently. conservative Three Important Issues For America 11 February 1998    1998 Ron Paul 7:21 Now, these are very important comments to be considered, especially when we are getting ready to do something so serious as to condone the bombing of another country. Just recently in The Washington Post, not exactly a conservative newspaper, talked about what Egypt’s opinion was about this. This is interesting, because the interview was done in Switzerland at the World Economic Forum, and the interview was made by Lally Weymouth, and she talked to Egypt’s Foreign Minister, Amre Moussa, the Foreign Minister of Egypt, our ally, a country that gets billions of dollars from us every year. conservative Conference Report on H.R. 1757, Foreign Affairs Reform And Restructuring Act Of 1998 26 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 28:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, last year’s attempts by some in Congress to tie the Mexico City Policy to the issues of funding for the United Nations (UN) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) this week come back to haunt those of us who believe in the sanctity of human life, the inviolability of US Sovereignty, and the rights of the U.S. taxpayers to keep the fruits of their own labor. This week, we see, the “grand deal” struck which will see liberals back down from their opposition to Mexico City Language in exchange for conservative members voting to support funding of the United Nations, affirmative action, peacekeeping activities, and the National Endowment for Democracy. conservative Conference Report on H.R. 1757, Foreign Affairs Reform And Restructuring Act Of 1998 26 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 28:4 In fact, the deficiencies of the Mexico City Policy are such that the pro-family conservative group Concerned Women for America has withdrawn its support for the Mexico City Policy all together. This, in part, due to the fact that while the policy requires more creative accounting, it does not, by any stretch of the imagination, prohibit funding of many abortions. conservative Conference Report on H.R. 1757, Foreign Affairs Reform And Restructuring Act Of 1998 26 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 28:8 THE SO-CALLED “BARGAIN” The so-called bargain here is maintaining the flawed Mexico City language in exchange for paying the alleged back-dues to the United Nations. But this, from a true conservative standpoint, is a double negative. In a world of so-called give-and-take, this is a double-take. This is no bargain at all. Obviously, the Mexico City policy is riddled with fungibility holes in the first place. Moreover, it is morally repugnant to undermine our nation’s integrity by trading votes in this fashion. Worse still, it is now apparent how willing “some” members have become to water the Mexico City Policy down still further in order to get President Clinton to sign legislation which shouldn’t exist in the first place. Even the abortion restrictive language has been diluted to state that “the President could waive the restriction on funding groups that perform or promote abortion, but such a waiver would automatically reduce total U.S. funding for family planning activities to $356 million, 11% less then current appropriations. In other words, Abortion is A-O-K if done with 11% fewer taxpayer dollars. Now that’s not worth compromising principle. conservative Conference Report on H.R. 1757, Foreign Affairs Reform And Restructuring Act Of 1998 26 March 1998    1998 Ron Paul 28:13 CONCLUSION Fortunately, many genuinely conservative pro-life and pro-sovereignty groups are making it known that they do not support this so-called “compromise.” I, for one, refuse to participate in any such illusion and oppose any effort to pay even one penny of U.S. taxpayer dollars to the United Nations, subsidize family planning around the world, and intervene at U.S. taxpayer expense in every corner of the globe. conservative Federal War On Drugs Bad Idea 5 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 45:6 In 1937, and I am sure some of my conservative colleagues might be interested in this because it was the great FDR who decided to impose a great tax on marijuana, putting $100 tax on a pound of marijuana, essentially making it illegal. And even today those States who would like to legalize marijuana even for the sick and dying AIDS patients and the cancer patients are not even permitted to. It is because we have carelessly assumed that all regulation and all controls and all policing activities should be done here in Washington. conservative Wasting Money On War On Drugs 5 May 1998    1998 Ron Paul 46:3 I have many conservatives say we have an educational problem, and all they want to do is throw more money at it. I cannot see how this is different. Yes, we have a major problem. But it gets worse, and all we do is throw more money at it with exactly the same programs. conservative Can’t Vote For Amendment 4 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 55:3 I am in entire agreement with the authors of this amendment in their concern for the systematic attack on religious expression throughout the country. There is no doubt hostility exists, especially against conservative religious expression. It is pervasive and routinely expressed in our courts. conservative Campaign Finance Reform 23 June 1998    1998 Ron Paul 64:11 Take, for instance, some of the groups that have tried in the past to get on and become known but are frustrated by all these rules. There are Independents, Socialists, Greens, Taxpayers Party, Populists, Libertarians, Constitutionalists, Reform Party, Natural Party, American Party, Liberal Party, Conservative Party, Right to Life, Citizens Party, New Alliance Party, Prohibition Party, States Rights Party. All these people have been totally frustrated because they have so many obstacles put in their way by the requirement of huge numbers of signatures on ballots. conservative Supports Impeachment Of President Clinton 19 December 1998    1998 Ron Paul 125:9 The public’s acceptance of the President’s behavior may reflect the moral standards of our age, but I’m betting there’s a lot more to it. It is true that some conservative voters, demanding the Republicans in Congress hold the President to a greater accountability, “voted” by staying home. They did not want to encourage the Republicans who were seen as being soft on Clinton for his personal behavior and for capitulating on the big government agenda of more spending, and more taxes. But hopefully there is a much more profound reason for the seemingly inconsistent position of a public who condemns the President while not having the stomach for punishing him through impeachment. conservative Closer To Empire 25 March 1999    1999 Ron Paul 24:6 To conservatives, I want to recall the founding of our Republic, our nation’s breaking from the yoke of empire in order that we might realize the benefits of liberty and self-determination, and that we might obtain the blessings that flow naturally from limitations on centralized power. Empire reflecting the most perfect means yet devised to concentrate power in the fewest hands. conservative Opposing Supplemental Appropriation 18 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 48:2 The President came to us and asked us to fund the NATO war, asked for $7.9 billion, but we in the conservative Congress have decided that not only would we give it to him, but we would bump that up to $15 billion, which does not make a whole lot of sense, especially if Congress has spoken out on what they think of the war. conservative Quietly Restoring Funding For War In Kosovo 27 May 1999    1999 Ron Paul 53:6 It might be well to also note that this bill does not do much more for fiscal conservatives. The President asked for a certain amount for the defense of this country, but we have seen fit to raise him more than $8 billion, spend more money, more money that is so often not spent in our national defense. At the same time, we must also remember that when we vote on this bill, and this rule allows it, more than $10 billion will be in excess of the budget agreement of 1997. conservative Selective Service System 5 August 1999    1999 Ron Paul 89:8 I would like to remind many of my conservative colleagues that, if we brought a bill to this floor where we would say that we would register all of our guns in the United States, there would be a hue and cry about how horrible it would be. Yet, we casually accept this program of registering 18-year-old kids to force them to go and fight the political wars that they are not interested in. This is a very, very serious idea and principle of liberty. conservative The Appropriation For The Selective Service System Should Not Be Reinstated 8 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 90:3 I would like to remind my conservative colleagues that Ronald Reagan had a very strong position on the draft and selective service. He agreed that it was a totalitarian notion to conscript young people and strongly spoke out against the draft whenever he had the opportunity. conservative The Appropriation For The Selective Service System Should Not Be Reinstated 8 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 90:4 I also would like to remind my conservative colleagues that if somebody came to the House floor and asked that we register all the guns of America, there would be a hue and cry about why this would be unconstitutional and unfair, and yet they are quite willing to register their 18- and 19-year-olds. I do not understand why there is less respect given for 18- and 19-year-olds than they give for their own guns. conservative Selective Service System 8 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 92:10 It is very important that we consider not only this vote on fiscal reasons and where we are taking the money. Quite frankly, I would much rather see this money stay in the programs where, as a fiscal conservative, I would not have otherwise voted for those funds nay. But any funding of that sort is so much better on principle than voting to perpetuate a system that has no purpose other than to conscript. conservative East Timor 28 September 1999    1999 Ron Paul 99:8 Under number 13, there is another part that concerns me a great deal. In the 1970s, we passed the War Powers Resolution. Both conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats endorsed the notion that Presidents should be restrained in their effort to wage war without declaration. conservative Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999 (H.R. 2260) 27 October 1999    1999 Ron Paul 111:8 Another thing is this sets up a new agency. For those conservative colleagues of mine who do not like the nationalization of medical care, what my colleagues are looking at here is a new agency of government setting up protocols, educating doctors and hospitals, and saying this is the way palliative care must be administered. My colleagues will have to answer with reports to the Federal Government. conservative A Republic, If You Can Keep It – Part 2 2 February 2000    2000 Ron Paul 5:66 The welfare system has mocked the concept of marriage in the name of political correctness, economic egalitarianism, and heterophobia. Freedom of speech is still cherished in America but the political correctness movement has seriously undermined dissent on our university campuses. A conservative or libertarian black intellectual is clearly not treated with the same respect afforded an authoritarian black spokesman. conservative Fiscal 2000 Supplemental Appropriations/DEA Funding Cuts Amendment 30 March 2000    2000 Ron Paul 23:8 This is the furtherest stretch of the imagination to believe that what we are spending here on this budget, especially what we are going to do in Colombia, has anything to do with national security. What are we worried about? Are the Colombians going to attack us? This is not national security. This is special interest spending. This is conservative welfarism; that is what it is. conservative WHAT IS FREE TRADE? May 2, 2000    2000 Ron Paul 29:31 Now, it is also true that some who object to membership in the World Trade Organization happen to be conservative free enterprisers, and others who object are coming from the politics of the left. But there is agreement on both sides of this issue dealing with this aspect, and it has to do with the sovereignty issue. conservative CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:7 The cliche Third Way has been used to define the so-called compromise between the conventional wisdom of the conservative and liberal firebrands. This nice-sounding compromise refers not only to the noisy rhetoric we hear in the US Congress but also in Britain, Germany, and other nations as well. The question, though, remains: Is there really anything new being offered? The demand for bipartisanship is nothing more than a continuation of the Third-Way movement of the last several decades. conservative CHALLENGE TO AMERICA: A CURRENT ASSESSMENT OF OUR REPUBLIC — February 07, 2001    2001 Ron Paul 7:29 If liberals want $46 billion for the Department of Education and conservatives argue for $42 billion, a compromise of $44 billion is a total victory for the advocates of federal government control of public education. “Saving” $2 billion means nothing in the scheme of things, especially since the case for the constitutional position of zero funding was never entertained. When the budget and government controls are expanding each year, a token cut in the proposed increase means nothing, and those who claim it to be a legitimate victory do great harm to the cause of liberty by condoning the process. Instead of it being a Third Way alternative to the two sides arguing over minor details on how to use government force, the three options instead are philosophically the same. A true alternative must be offered if the growth of the state is to be contained. Third-Way bipartisanship is not the answer. conservative Conscription Policies 13 June 2001    2001 Ron Paul 42:5 This bill was an excellent proposal that should have never been needed. The dovish Hatfield’s arguments in promotion of the bill constituted what is actually the conservative position on the item. In its defense, Hatfield asserted that we need career military men who can adapt to system changes within the context of weaponry. Short-term draftees, maintained Hatfield, would not be particularly adept at utilizing modern technology. More recent efforts to overturn the Selective Service Act have similarly stressed efficiency. conservative Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:38 Today, few decry the debt, except for the purpose of political demagoguery when convenient. The concern about deficits expressed by liberal big spenders does not merit credibility, but even conservative spenders now are less likely to decry deficits and some actually praise them. conservative Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:39 Just recently, the conservative Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI) announced in a national press release: “National debt can lead to a growing economy,” claiming government borrowing, “produces steady long-term growth, greater security, and a higher standard of living.” conservative Stimulating The Economy February 7, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 5:40 This wouldn’t be so bad if it came from a typically Keynesian think tank. But this is the growing conventional wisdom of many conservatives whose goal is to generate government revenues, painlessly of course, not to drastically shrink the size of government and restore personal liberty. conservative Statement Opposing Military Conscription March 20, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 20:9 President Reagan and Daniel Webster are not the only prominent Americans to oppose conscription. In fact, throughout American history the draft has been opposed by Americans from across the political spectrum, from Henry David Thoreau to Barry Goldwater to Bill Bradley to Jesse Ventura. Organizations opposed to conscription range from the American Civil Liberties Union to the United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society, and from the National Taxpayers Union to the Conservative Caucus. Other major figures opposing conscription include current Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman. conservative Predictions 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 25:20 The Congress and the President will shift radically toward expanding the size and scope of the Federal Government. This will satisfy both the liberals and the conservatives. conservative Predictions 24 April 2002    2002 Ron Paul 25:21 Military and police powers will grow, satisfying the conservatives. The welfare state, both domestic and international, will expand, satisfying the liberals. Both sides will endorse military adventurism overseas. conservative Statement Opposing the use of Military Force against Iraq October 8, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 96:36 Reality: Iraq is but one of the many countries that have not complied with UN Security Council resolutions. In addition to the dozen or so resolutions currently being violated by Iraq, a conservative estimate reveals that there are an additional 91Security Council resolutions by countries other than Iraq that are also currently being violated. Adding in older resolutions that were violated would mean easily more than 200 UN Security Council resolutions have been violated with total impunity. Countries currently in violation include: Israel, Turkey, Morocco, Croatia, Armenia, Russia, Sudan, Turkey-controlled Cyprus, India, Pakistan, Indonesia. None of these countries have been threatened with force over their violations. conservative Oppose The New Homeland Security Bureaucracy! November 13, 2002    2002 Ron Paul 101:1 Mr. Speaker, when the process of creating a Department of Homeland Security commenced, Congress was led to believe that the legislation would be a simple reorganization aimed at increasing efficiency, not an attempt to expand federal power. Fiscally conservative members of Congress were even told that the bill would be budget neutral! Yet, when the House of Representatives initially considered creating a Department of Homeland Security, the legislative vehicle almost overnight grew from 32 pages to 282 pages- and the cost had ballooned to at least $3 billion. Now we are prepared to vote on a nearly 500-page bill that increases federal expenditures and raises troubling civil liberties questions. Adding insult to injury, this bill was put together late last night and introduced only this morning. Worst of all, the text of the bill has not been made readily available to most members, meaning this Congress is prepared to create a massive new federal agency without even knowing the details. This is a dangerous and irresponsible practice. conservative Republic Versus Democracy 29 January 2003    2003 Ron Paul 6:112 But there is also a problem with economic understanding. Economic ignorance about the shortcomings of central economic planning, excessive taxation and regulations, central bank manipulation of money, and credit and interest rates is pervasive in our Nation’s Capital. A large number of conservatives now forcefully argue that deficits do not matter. Spending programs never shrink no matter whether conservatives or liberals are in charge. Rhetoric favoring free trade is cancelled out by special interest protectionist measures. Support of international government agencies that manage trade such as the IMF, the World Bank, the WTO, and NAFTA politicizes international trade and eliminates any hope that free-trade capitalism will soon emerge. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:1 The modern-day limited-government movement has been co-opted. The conservatives have failed in their effort to shrink the size of government. There has not been, nor will there soon be, a conservative revolution in Washington. Party control of the federal government has changed, but the inexorable growth in the size and scope of government has continued unabated. The liberal arguments for limited government in personal affairs and foreign military adventurism were never seriously considered as part of this revolution. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:4 One thing is certain: conservatives who worked and voted for less government in the Reagan years and welcomed the takeover of the U.S. Congress and the presidency in the 1990s and early 2000s were deceived. Soon they will realize that the goal of limited government has been dashed and that their views no longer matter. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:5 The so-called conservative revolution of the past two decades has given us massive growth in government size, spending and regulations. Deficits are exploding and the national debt is now rising at greater than a half-trillion dollars per year. Taxes do not go down—even if we vote to lower them. They can’t, as long as spending is increased, since all spending must be paid for one way or another. Both Presidents Reagan and the elder George Bush raised taxes directly. With this administration, so far, direct taxes have been reduced—and they certainly should have been—but it means little if spending increases and deficits rise. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:7 Many present-day conservatives, who generally argue for less government and supported the Reagan/Gingrich/Bush takeover of the federal government, are now justifiably disillusioned. Although not a monolithic group, they wanted to shrink the size of government. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:11 That remnant—imperfect as it may have been—was heard from in the elections of 1980 and 1994 and then achieved major victories in 2000 and 2002 when professed limited-government proponents took over the White House, the Senate and the House. However, the true believers in limited government are now shunned and laughed at. At the very least, they are ignored—except when they are used by the new leaders of the right, the new conservatives now in charge of the U.S. government. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:12 The remnant’s instincts were correct, and the politicians placated them with talk of free markets, limited government, and a humble, non-nation-building foreign policy. However, little concern for civil liberties was expressed in this recent quest for less government. Yet, for an ultimate victory of achieving freedom, this must change. Interest in personal privacy and choices has generally remained outside the concern of many conservatives—especially with the great harm done by their support of the drug war. Even though some confusion has emerged over our foreign policy since the breakdown of the Soviet empire, it’s been a net benefit in getting some conservatives back on track with a less militaristic, interventionist foreign policy. Unfortunately, after 9-ll, the cause of liberty suffered a setback. As a result, millions of Americans voted for the less-than-perfect conservative revolution because they believed in the promises of the politicians. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:23 None of this happened by accident or coincidence. Precise philosophic ideas prompted certain individuals to gain influence to implement these plans. The neoconservatives—a name they gave themselves—diligently worked their way into positions of power and influence. They documented their goals, strategy and moral justification for all they hoped to accomplish. Above all else, they were not and are not conservatives dedicated to limited, constitutional government. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:24 Neo-conservatism has been around for decades and, strangely, has connections to past generations as far back as Machiavelli. Modern-day neo-conservatism was introduced to us in the 1960s. It entails both a detailed strategy as well as a philosophy of government. The ideas of Teddy Roosevelt, and certainly Woodrow Wilson, were quite similar to many of the views of present-day neocons. Neocon spokesman Max Boot brags that what he advocates is “hard Wilsonianism.” In many ways, there’s nothing “neo” about their views, and certainly nothing conservative. Yet they have been able to co-opt the conservative movement by advertising themselves as a new or modern form of conservatism. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:77 The fact that neo-conservatives ridicule those who firmly believe that U.S. interests and world peace would best be served by a policy of neutrality and avoiding foreign entanglements should not go unchallenged. Not to do so is to condone their grandiose plans for American world hegemony. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:79 We know those who lead us—both in the administration and in Congress—show no appetite to challenge the tax or monetary systems that do so much damage to our economy. The IRS and the Federal Reserve are off limits for criticism or reform. There’s no resistance to spending, either domestic or foreign. Debt is not seen as a problem. The supply-siders won on this issue, and now many conservatives readily endorse deficit spending. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:81 Instead of the “end of history,” we are now experiencing the end of a vocal limited-government movement in our nation’s capital. While most conservatives no longer defend balanced budgets and reduced spending, most liberals have grown lazy in defending civil liberties and now are approving wars that we initiate. The so-called “third way” has arrived and, sadly, it has taken the worst of what the conservatives and liberals have to offer. The people are less well off for it, while liberty languishes as a result. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:82 Neocons enthusiastically embrace the Department of Education and national testing. Both parties overwhelmingly support the huge commitment to a new prescription drug program. Their devotion to the new approach called “compassionate conservatism” has lured many conservatives into supporting programs for expanding the federal role in welfare and in church charities. The faith-based initiative is a neocon project, yet it only repackages and expands the liberal notion of welfare. The intellectuals who promoted these initiatives were neocons, but there’s nothing conservative about expanding the federal government’s role in welfare. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:86 I realize that all conservatives are not neoconservatives, and all neocons don’t necessarily agree on all points—which means that in spite of their tremendous influence, most Members of Congress and those in the administration do not necessarily take their marching orders from the AEI or Richard Perle. But to use this as a reason to ignore what neoconservative leaders believe, write about it and agitate for—with amazing success I might point out—would be at our own peril. This country still allows open discourse—though less everyday—and we who disagree should push the discussion and expose those who drive our policies. It is getting more difficult to get fair and balanced discussion on the issues, because it has become routine for the hegemons to label those who object to preemptive war and domestic surveillance as traitors, unpatriotic and un-American. The uniformity of support for our current foreign policy by major and cable-news networks should concern every American. We should all be thankful for CSPAN and the internet. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:88 If the neoconservatives retain control of the conservative, limited-government movement in Washington, the ideas, once championed by conservatives, of limiting the size and scope of government will be a long-forgotten dream. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:89 The believers in liberty ought not deceive themselves. Who should be satisfied? Certainly not conservatives, for there is no conservative movement left. How could liberals be satisfied? They are pleased with the centralization of education and medical programs in Washington and support many of the administration’s proposals. But none should be pleased with the steady attack on the civil liberties of all American citizens and the now-accepted consensus that preemptive war—for almost any reason—is an acceptable policy for dealing with all the conflicts and problems of the world. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:91 We’re at the point where we need a call to arms, both here in Washington and across the country. I’m not talking about firearms. Those of us who care need to raise both arms and face our palms out and begin waving and shouting: Stop! Enough is enough! It should include liberals, conservatives and independents. We’re all getting a bum rap from politicians who are pushed by polls and controlled by special-interest money. conservative Neo – CONNED ! July 10, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 73:93 Spending, borrowing and printing money cannot be the road to prosperity. It hasn’t worked in Japan, and it isn’t working here either. As a matter of fact, it’s never worked anytime throughout history. A point is always reached where government planning, spending and inflation run out of steam. Instead of these old tools reviving an economy, as they do in the early stages of economic interventionism, they eventually become the problem. Both sides of the political spectrum must one day realize that limitless government intrusion in the economy, in our personal lives and in the affairs of other nations cannot serve the best interests of America. This is not a conservative problem, nor is it a liberal problem—it’s a government intrusion problem that comes from both groups, albeit for different reasons. The problems emanate from both camps that champion different programs for different reasons. The solution will come when both groups realize that it’s not merely a single-party problem, or just a liberal or just a conservative problem. conservative Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:31 We do hear some talk about monetary policy and criticism directed toward the Federal Reserve, but it falls far short of what I’m talking about. Big-spending welfarists constantly complain about Fed policy, usually demanding lower interest rates even when rates are at historic lows. Big-government conservatives promoting grand worldwide military operations, while arguing that “deficits don’t matter” as long as marginal tax rates are lowered, also constantly criticize the Fed for high interest rates and lack of liquidity. Coming from both the left and the right, these demands would not occur if money could not be created out of thin air at will. Both sides are asking for the same thing from the Fed for different reasons. They want the printing presses to run faster and create more credit, so that the economy will be healed like magic- or so they believe. conservative Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:35 There are also many conservatives who do not endorse central economic planning as those on the left do, but nevertheless concede this authority to the Federal Reserve to manipulate the economy through monetary policy. Only a small group of constitutionalists, libertarians, and Austrian free-market economists reject the notion that central planning, through interest-rate and money-supply manipulation, is a productive endeavor. conservative Paper Money and Tyranny September 5, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 93:72 The odds aren’t very good that the Fed will adopt a policy of not inflating the money supply because of some very painful consequences that would result. Also there would be a need to remove the pressure on the Fed to accommodate the big spenders in Congress. Since there are essentially only two groups that have any influence on spending levels, big-government liberals and big- government conservatives, that’s not about to happen. Poverty is going to worsen due to our monetary and fiscal policies, so spending on the war on poverty will accelerate. Our obsession with policing the world, nation building, and pre-emptive war are not likely to soon go away, since both Republican and Democratic leaders endorse them. Instead, the cost of defending the American empire is going to accelerate. A country that is getting poorer cannot pay these bills with higher taxation nor can they find enough excess funds for the people to loan to the government. The only recourse is for the Federal Reserve to accommodate and monetize the federal debt, and that, of course, is inflation. conservative Introduction Of The Steel Financing Fairness Act 10 September 2003    2003 Ron Paul 97:7 Ironically, many of the supporters of these foreign giveaways claim to be promoters of free trade. This claim makes as much sense as a supporter of higher taxes and spending claiming to be a fiscally conservative supporter of limited government. Free trade is the peaceful exchange of goods and services across borders unhampered by government interference. Taxing American workers to support their overseas competitors is not free trade. Instead, it is corporatism designed to benefit certain politically powerful interests at the expense of American entrepreneurs and workers. conservative We Cannot Afford Another $87 Billion in Iraq September 16, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 98:1 Mr. Speaker, the neo-conservative media machine has been hard at work lately drumming up support for the $87 billion appropriation to extend our precarious occupation of Iraq. Opposition to this funding, according to the Secretary of Defense, encourages our enemies and hinders the war against terrorism. This is a distortion of the facts and is nothing more than attacking the messenger when one disapproves of the message. conservative We Cannot Afford Another $87 Billion in Iraq September 16, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 98:10 Mr. Speaker, I guess we shouldn’t worry because we can find a way to pay for it. Already we are charging our wounded soldiers $8.10 a day for food when recuperating in a hospital from their war injuries. We also know that other soldiers are helping out by buying their own night vision goggles, GPS devices, short wave radios, backpacks, and even shoes! So I suppose we can fund the war that way. It does not seem like much of a bother to cut veterans’ benefits. Besides, many conservatives for years have argued that deficits do not really matter, only tax rates do. So let us just quit worrying about deficits and this $87 billion supplemental. Of course I’m being sarcastic. conservative Are Vouchers the Solution for Our Failing Public Schools? September 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 103:2 The basic reason supporters of parental control of education should view Federal voucher programs with a high degree of skepticism is that vouchers are a creation of the government, not the market. Vouchers are a taxpayer-funded program benefiting a particular group of children selected by politicians and bureaucrats. Therefore, the Federal voucher program supported by many conservatives is little more than another tax-funded welfare program establishing an entitlement to a private school education. Vouchers thus raise the same constitutional and moral questions as other transfer programs. Yet, voucher supporters wonder why middle-class taxpayers, who have to sacrifice to provide a private school education to their children, balk at being forced to pay more taxes to provide a free private education for another child. conservative Are Vouchers the Solution for Our Failing Public Schools? September 30, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 103:7 Several private, Christian schools in my district have expressed concerns that vouchers would lead to increased government control of private education. This concern is not just limited to Christian conservatives; the head of the Jewish Anti-Defamation league opposed the recent DC voucher bill because he feared it would lead to “...an unacceptable effort by the government to monitor and control religious activities.” conservative Borrowing Billions to Fund a Failed Policy in Iraq October 17, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 110:5 There has been some discontent among conservatives about the $20 billion reconstruction price tag. They fail to realize that this is just the other side of the coin of military interventionism. It is the same coin, which is why I have consistently opposed foreign interventionism. There is a lesson here that those who call themselves fiscal conservatives seem to not have learned. There is no separation between the military intervention and the post-military intervention, otherwise known as “nation-building.” Fiscal conservatives are uneasy about nation building and foreign aid. The president himself swore off nation building as a candidate. But anyone concerned about sending American tax dollars to foreign countries must look directly at military interventionism abroad. If there is one thing the history of our interventionism teaches, it is that the best way for a foreign country to become a financial dependent of the United States is to first be attacked by the United States. conservative Borrowing Billions to Fund a Failed Policy in Iraq October 17, 2003    2003 Ron Paul 110:9 Conservatives often proclaim that they are opposed to providing American welfare to the rest of the world. I agree. The only way to do that, however, is to stop supporting a policy of military interventionism. You cannot have one without the other. If a military intervention against Syria and Iran are next, it will be the same thing: we will pay to bomb the country and we will pay even more to rebuild it - and as we see with the plan for Iraq, this rebuilding will not be done on the cheap. The key fallacy in the argument of the militarists is that there is some way to fight a war without associated costs - the costs of occupation, reconstruction, “institution-building,” “democracy programs.” conservative Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:14 There have been others, in particular the neo-conservatives who have been very influential in foreign policy the last several years and who have been associated with the Project for a New American Century. They have been explicit in their goals. And one of their explicit goals has been to redraw the lines of the Middle East and to have preemptive regime change. These are serious beliefs that they have; and everybody has a right to their beliefs. Their beliefs that we have this obligation to remove regimes that we do not like and to redraw lines and to spread our way of life and our democracy by the use of force, they sincerely hold those beliefs; and I sincerely disagree with them. conservative Misguided Policy Of Nation Building In Iraq 17 October 2003    2003 Ron Paul 111:52 I have a copy of their statement of principles. More than 100 individuals are involved, mostly professors and other academicians and think-tank people. I do not know if there are any politicians in there. Hopefully, no politicians will be involved. But this is important. This is important because they want to get together and try to change the tone and the nature of the debate. Now, are they liberals or are they conservatives? Are they libertarian or are they constitutionalists? All of them. It is a mixture. They do not want just the liberal flavor or just the right-wing conservative flavor. It is anybody who is willing to sit down and talk about the disadvantage, the practical disadvantage of this road to empire and why we come up on the short end and that this moral obligation of us policing the world really is not a wise idea. conservative A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:9 Conservatives Who Spend: Conservatives for years have preached fiscal restraint and balanced budgets. Once in charge, they have rationalized huge spending increases and gigantic growth in the size of government, while supporting a new- found religion that preaches deficits don’t matter. According to Paul O’Neill, the Vice President lectured him that “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.” Conservatives who no longer support balanced budgets and less government should not be called conservatives. Some now are called neo-conservatives. The conservative label merely deceives the many Americans who continuously hope the day of fiscal restraint will come. Yet if this deception is not pointed out, success in curtailing government growth is impossible. Is it any wonder the national debt is $7 trillion and growing by over $600 billion per year? Even today, the only expression of concern for the deficit seems to come from liberals. That ought to tell us something about how far astray we have gone. conservative A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:12 Following the Constitution—Arbitrarily, Of Course : Following the Constitution is a convenience shared by both liberals and conservatives — at times. Everyone takes the same oath of office, and most Members of Congress invoke the Constitution, at one time or another, to make some legislative point. The fact that the Constitution is used periodically to embarrass one’s opponents, when convenient, requires that no one feel embarrassed by an inconsistent voting record. Believing that any consistency, not just a foolish one, is a philosophic hobgoblin gives many Members welcome reassurance. This allows limited-government conservatives to massively increase the size and scope of government, while ignoring the deficit. Liberals, who also preach their own form of limited government in the areas of civil liberties and militarism, have no problem with a flexible pragmatic approach to all government expenditures and intrusions. The net result is that the oath of office to abide by all the constitutional restraints on government power is rarely followed. conservative A Wise Consistency February 11, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 2:29 When the definition of terrorism is vague and the enemy pervasive throughout the world, the neo-conservatives — who want to bring about various regime changes for other reasons — conveniently latch onto these threats and use them as the excuse and justification for our expanding military presence throughout the Middle East and the Caspian Sea region. This is something they have been anxious to do all along. Already, plans are being laid by neo-conservative leaders to further expand our occupations to many other countries, from Central America and Africa to Korea. Whether it’s invading Iraq, threatening North Korea, or bullying Venezuela or even Russia, it’s now popular to play the terrorist card. Just mention terrorism and the American people are expected to grovel and allow the war hawks to do whatever they want to do. This is a very dangerous attitude. One would think that, with the shortcomings of the Iraqi occupation becoming more obvious every day, more Americans would question our flagrant and aggressive policy of empire building. The American people were frightened into supporting this war because they were told that Iraq had: “25,000 liters of anthrax; 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin; 500 tons of sarin, mustard, and VX nerve gas; significant quantities of refined uranium; and special aluminum tubes used in developing nuclear weapons.” The fact that none of this huge amount of material was found, and the fact that David Kay resigned from heading up the inspection team saying none will be found, doesn’t pacify the instigators of this policy of folly. They merely look forward to the next regime change as they eye their list of potential targets. And they argue with conviction that the 500-plus lives lost were worth it. Attacking a perceived enemy who had few weapons, who did not aggress against us, and who never posed a threat to us does nothing to help eliminate the threat of terrorist attacks. If anything, deposing an Arab Muslim leader — even a bad one — incites more hatred toward us, certainly not less. This is made worse if our justification for the invasion was in error. It is safe to say that in time we’ll come to realize that our invasion has made us less safe, and has served as a grand recruiting tool for the many militant Muslim groups that want us out of their countries — including the majority of those Muslims in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the entire Middle East. Because of the nature of the war in which we find ourselves, catching Saddam Hussein, or even killing Osama bin Laden, are almost irrelevant. They may well simply become martyrs to their cause and incite even greater hatred toward us. conservative Federal War On Drugs Threatens The Effective Treatment Of Chronic Pain 11 February 2004    2004 Ron Paul 4:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, the publicity surrounding popular radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh’s legal troubles relating to his use of the pain killer OxyContin will hopefully focus public attention on how the federal War on Drugs threatens the effective treatment of chronic pain. Prosecutors have seized Mr. Limbaugh’s medical records in connection with an investigation into charges that Mr. Limbaugh violated federal drug laws. The fact that Mr. Limbaugh is a high profile, and often controversial, conservative media personality has given rise to speculation that the prosecution is politically motivated. Adding to this suspicion is the fact that individual pain patients are rarely prosecuted in this type of case. conservative Rush Limbaugh and the Sick Federal War on Pain Relief February 12, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 5:1 Mr. Speaker, the publicity surrounding popular radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh’s legal troubles relating to his use of the pain killer OxyContin hopefully will focus public attention on how the federal drug war threatens the effective treatment of chronic pain. Prosecutors have seized Mr. Limbaugh’s medical records to investigate whether he violated federal drug laws. The fact that Mr. Limbaugh is a high profile, controversial, conservative media personality has given rise to speculation that the prosecution is politically motivated. Adding to this suspicion is the fact that individual pain patients are rarely prosecuted in this type of case. conservative Undermining First Amendment 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 16:6 I would like to close by quoting someone who is obviously not a libertarian and obviously not a liberal who has great concern about what we are doing, and he comes from the conservative right, Rush Limbaugh. He said: “If the government is going to ‘censor’ what they think is right and wrong, what happens if a whole bunch John Kerrys or Terry McAuliffes start running this country and decide conservative views are leading to violence? I am in the free speech business. It is one thing for a company to determine if they are going to be a party to it. It is another thing for the government to do it.” conservative Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:9 The nation’s leading conservative radio broadcaster, Rush Limbaugh, has expressed opposition to a federal crackdown on radio broadcast speech that offends politicians and bureaucrats: conservative Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:10 If the government is going to ‘censor’ what they think is right and wrong . . . . what happens if a whole bunch of John Kerrys, or Terry McAliffes start running this country. And decide conservative views are leading to violence? conservative Providing For Consideration Of H.R. 3717, Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act Of 2004 11 March 2004    2004 Ron Paul 17:13 H.R. 3717 should also be rejected because it is unnecessary. Major broadcasters’ profits depend on their ability to please their audiences and thus attract advertisers. Advertisers are oftentimes “risk adverse,” that is, afraid to sponsor anything that might offend a substantial portion of the viewing audience, who they hope to turn into customers. Therefore, networks have a market incentive to avoid offending the audience. It was fear of alienating the audience, and thus losing advertising revenue, that led to CBS’s quick attempt at “damage control” after the Super Bowl. Last year, we witnessed a remarkable demonstration of the power of private citizens when public pressure convinced CBS to change plans to air the movie “The Reagans,” which outraged conservatives concerned about its distortion of the life of Ronald Reagan. conservative The Lessons of 9/11 April 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 27:7 The neo-conservative defenders of our policy in Iraq speak of the benefits that we have brought to the Iraqi people: removal of a violent dictator, liberation, democracy, and prosperity. If all this were true, the resistance against our occupation would not be growing. We ought to admit we have not been welcomed as liberators as was promised by the proponents of the war. conservative The Lessons of 9/11 April 22, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 27:9 Failing to understand why 9/11 happened and looking for a bureaucratic screw-up to explain the whole thing — while using the event to start an unprovoked war unrelated to 9/11 — have dramatically compounded the problems all Americans and the world face. Evidence has shown that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and the guerilla attacks on New York and Washington, and since no weapons of mass destruction were found, other reasons are given for invading Iraq. The real reasons are either denied or ignored: oil, neo-conservative empire building, and our support for Israel over the Palestinians. conservative In Support Of The Gutierrez-Paul Bill 28 April 2004    2004 Ron Paul 30:2 Expanding the jurisdiction of OCC necessarily infringes on the ability of State lawmakers to determine their own consumer protection standards. One-size-fits-all policies crafted in Washington cannot serve the 50 diverse States well. Different States and markets have different needs that are better understood by State and local legislators. Congressional conservatives, in particular, should not endorse an expansion of the Federal regulatory power at the expense of States’ rights. The Tenth Amendment is clear: regulatory powers not specifically granted to Congress remain with the States. Congress should stop usurping State authority and leave consumer protection laws to those with far more experience and expertise. conservative Mourning The Death Of Ronald Reagan 9 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 38:2 I was one of the millions attracted to Ronald Reagan by his strong support for limited government and the free-market. I felt affinity for a politician who based his conservative philosophy on “. . . a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom . . .” I wish more of today’s conservative leaders based their philosophy on a desire for less government and more freedom. conservative Mourning The Death Of Ronald Reagan 9 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 38:3 Ronald Reagan was one of the most eloquent exponents of the freedom philosophy in modern American politics. One of his greatest achievements is the millions of Americans he helped convert to the freedom philosophy and the many he inspired to become active in the freedom movement. One of the best examples of President Reagan’s rhetorical powers is his first major national political address, “A Time for Choosing.” Delivered in 1964 in support of the presidential campaign of Barry Goldwater, this speech launched Ronald Reagan’s career as both a politician and a leader of the conservative movement. The following excerpt from that speech illustrates the power of Ronald Reagan’s words and message. Unfortunately, these words are as relevant to our current situation as they were when he delivered them in 1964: conservative Mourning The Death Of Ronald Reagan 9 June 2004    2004 Ron Paul 38:10 While many associate Ronald Reagan with unbridled militarism, he was a lifelong opponent of the draft. It is hardly surprising that many of the most persuasive and powerful arguments against conscription came from President Reagan. One of my favorite Reagan quotes comes from a 1979 article he wrote for the conservative publication Human Events regarding the draft and related “national service” proposals: conservative A Token Attempt to Reduce Government Spending June 24, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 43:7 In 1974, during debate on the Congressional Budget Reform and Impoundment Control Act, Congressman H.R. Gross, a libertarian-conservative from Iowa, eloquently addressed the flaws in thinking that budget process reform absent the political will to cut spending would reduce the size of government. Mr. Speaker, I would like to conclude my remarks by quoting Mr. Gross: conservative Financing Operations, Export Financing, And Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2005 15 July 2004    2004 Ron Paul 60:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, the author of the amendment, and I am a coauthor of it, mentioned that it has a broad spectrum of individuals supporting it. He mentioned progressives and liberals and conservatives and moderates, but he forgot the libertarians. conservative Cultural Conservatives Lose if Gay Marriage is Federalized September 30, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 73:5 Conservatives in particular should be leery of anything that increases federal power, since centralized government power is traditionally the enemy of conservative values. I agree with the assessment of former Congressman Bob Barr, who authored the Defense of Marriage Act: conservative Cultural Conservatives Lose if Gay Marriage is Federalized September 30, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 73:6 “The very fact that the FMA [Federal Marriage Amendment] was introduced said that conservatives believed it was okay to amend the Constitution to take power from the states and give it to Washington. That is hardly a basic principle of conservatism as we used to know it. It is entirely likely the left will boomerang that assertion into a future proposed amendment that would weaken gun rights or mandate income redistribution.” conservative Honoring Phil Crane November 17, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 78:2 As a conservative professor, author, and activist, Phil was already a nationally known conservative leader before he ran for Congress. Two of his books, “The Democrat’s Dilemma” and “The Sum of Good Government” stand out as conservative classics that educated and motivated many conservative activists. Among the attributes that have made Phil a hero to the free-market movement is his understanding of sound economics. Phil is one of the few members of Congress who is well versed in the teachings of great free-market teachers such as Ludwig von Misses. This country would be much better off if more representatives understood economics as well as Phil Crane. conservative Honoring Phil Crane November 17, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 78:3 When Phil Crane came to Congress in the late sixties, there were only a handful of members supporting free-markets. This was a time when a “conservative” president imposed wage and price controls and “conservative” representatives and senators called for balancing the budget with tax increases rather than spending cuts. Thanks in large part to Phil’s effort; the political and intellectual climate of the nation became more receptive to free-market ideas. Phil’s work with groups such as the American Conservative Union, the Free Congress Foundation, and the Republican Study Committee (which he founded) played a major role in growing the movement for individual liberty. Phil’s service as an advisor to Young Americans for Freedom and as a director of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, Hillsdale College, and the Ashbrook Center helped inspire new generations of young people to become active in the movement for liberty. conservative Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:4 The biggest difference involved their views on moral and family values. It was evident that the views regarding gay marriage and abortion held by Senator Kerry did not sit well with a majority of American voters, who were then motivated to let their views be known through their support for President Bush. This contributed to the “mandate” the President received more than any other issue. But it begs the question: If the mandate given was motivated by views held on moral values, does the President get carte blanche on all the other programs that are much less conservative? It appears the President and his neo-con advisors assume the answer is yes. conservative Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:17 More important was the reaction of the international exchange markets immediately following the election. The dollar took a dive and gold rose. This indicated that holders of the trillions of dollars slushing around the world interpreted the results to mean that even with conservatives in charge, unbridled spending will not decrease and will actually grow. They also expect the current account deficit and our national debt to increase. This means the economic consequence of continuing our risky fiscal and monetary policy is something Congress should be a lot more concerned about. conservative Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:42 The 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling caused great harm in two distinct ways. First, it legalized abortion at any stage, establishing clearly that the Supreme Court and the government condoned the cheapening of human life. Second, it firmly placed this crucial issue in the hands of the federal courts and national government. The federalization of abortion was endorsed even by those who opposed abortion. Instead of looking for state-by-state solutions and limiting federal court jurisdiction, those anxious to protect life came to rely on federal laws, eroding the constitutional process. The authors of the Constitution intended for criminal matters and acts of violence (except for a few rare exceptions) to be dealt with at the state level. Now, however, conservatives as well as liberals find it acceptable to nationalize issues such as abortion, marriage, prayer, and personal sexual matters — with more federal legislation offered as the only solution. This trend of transferring power from the states to the federal government compounds our problems — for when we lose, it affects all 50 states, and overriding Congress or the Supreme Court becomes far more difficult than dealing with a single state. conservative Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:44 To argue the invasion and occupation of Iraq is pro-life and pro-moral values is too much of a stretch for thinking Americans, especially conservative Christians. conservative Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:64 Ironically, this fight over religious values and interpretations in the Middle East encourages a similar conflict here at home among Christians. The conservative Christian community too often sounds militantly pro-war. Too many have totally forgotten the admonition “blessed are the peacemakers.” This contrasts with the views of some Christians, who find pre-emptive war decidedly un-Christian. Though civil, the two Christian views are being more hotly contested every day. conservative Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:66 It’s clear the Christian conservative turnout was critical to the President’s re-election. Though many may well have voted for the family/moral values touted by the President and mishandled by Senator Kerry, most agree with the Christian Right that our policy of pre-emptive war in the Middle East is not in conflict with pro-family and pro-life values. This seems strange indeed, since a strong case can be made that the conservative Christian Right, those most interested in the pro-life issue, ought to be the strongest defenders of peace and reject unnecessary pre-emptive war. conservative Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:67 Here are a few reasons why conservatives ought to reject the current policy of pre-emptive war: conservative Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:72 5. America faces a 7.5 trillion dollar national debt that is increasing by 600 billion dollars per year. Fiscal conservatives cannot dismiss this, even as they clamor for wars we cannot afford. conservative Where To From Here? November 20, 2004    2004 Ron Paul 81:78 Conservatives who profess to uphold the principle of right-to-life should have little trouble supporting the position of the Founders and the Constitution: a foreign policy of “peace and commerce with those who choose and no entangling alliances.” conservative National ID 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 7:10 In many ways I understand how well intentioned this is, but to me it is sort of like the gun issue. Conservatives always know that you do not register guns, that is just terrible, because the criminals will not register their guns. But what are we doing with this bill? We are registering all the American people, and your goal is to register the criminals and the thugs and the terrorists. conservative Family Education Freedom Act 26 January 2005    2005 Ron Paul 9:4 According to a June 2001 poll by McLaughlin and Associates, two-thirds of Americans believe education tax credits would have a positive effect on American education. This poll also found strong support for education tax credits among liberals, moderates, conservatives, low-income individuals, and African- Americans. This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education. conservative Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:9 The Nation’s leading conservative radio broadcaster, Rush Limbaugh, has expressed opposition to a Federal crackdown on radio broadcast speech that offends politicians and bureaucrats: conservative Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:10 If the government is going to “censor” what they think is right and wrong. . . . what happens if a whole bunch of John Kerrys . . . start running this country. And decide conservative views are leading to violence? conservative Regulating The Airwaves 16 February 2005    2005 Ron Paul 22:13 H.R. 310 should also be rejected because it is unnecessary. Major broadcasters’ profits depend on their ability to please their audiences and thus attract advertisers. Advertisers are oftentimes “risk adverse,” that is, afraid to sponsor anything that might offend a substantial portion of the viewing audience, who they hope to turn into customers. Therefore, networks have a market incentive to avoid offending the audience. It was fear of alienating the audience, and thus losing advertising revenue, that led to CBS’s quick attempt at “damage control” after the last year’s Super Bowl. Shortly before the 2004 Super Bowl, we witnessed a remarkable demonstration of the power of private citizens when public pressure convinced CBS to change plans to air the movie “The Reagans,” which outraged conservatives concerned about its distortion of the life of Ronald Reagan. conservative Hypocrisy and the Ordeal of Terri Schiavo April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 34:12 Though the left produced some outstanding arguments for the federal government staying out of this controversy, they frequently used an analogy that could never persuade those of us who believe in a free society guided by the constraints of the Constitution. They argued that if conservatives who supported prolonging Terri’s life would only spend more money on welfare, they would demonstrate sincere concern for the right to life. This is false logic and does nothing to build the case for a local government solution to a feeding tube debate. conservative Hypocrisy and the Ordeal of Terri Schiavo April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 34:16 Conservatives on the other hand are equally inconsistent in their arguments for life. There’s little hesitation by the conservative right to come to Congress to promote their moral agenda even when it’s not within the jurisdiction of the federal government to do so. Take for instance the funding of faith-based charities. The process is of little concern to conservatives if their agenda is met by passing more federal laws and increasing spending. Instead of concentrating on the repeal of Roe vs. Wade and eliminating federal judicial authority over issues best dealt with at the state level, more federal laws are passed, which strictly speaking should not be the prerogative of the federal government. conservative Honoring Pope John Paul II- A Consistent Pro-life Figure April 6, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 36:4 Others who cheered the Pope’s opposition to abortion and euthanasia were puzzled or hostile to his opposition to war. Many of these “pro-life supporters of war” tried to avoid facing the inherent contradictions in their position by distorting the Just War doctrine, which the Pope properly interpreted as denying sanction to the Iraq war. One prominent conservative commentator even suggested that the pope was the “enemy” of the United States. conservative Bad Policy For Base Closings 25 May 2005    2005 Ron Paul 52:2 Some Members wonder why I would support this amendment, considering the fact that I am the most fiscally conservative Member of Congress and vote for the least amount of spending. But I think this amendment is a good amendment, and I think the closing of these bases represents bad policy. I do not have a base in my district that is being threatened to be closed. conservative United States Should Leave World Trade Organization 9 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 57:5 Now this always bewilders me, when my conservative friends and those who believe in limited government are so anxious to deliver this to another giant international body. For instance, the WTO employs over 600 people. Free trade, if you are interested in free trade, all you have to do is write a sentence or two, and you can have free trade. You do not need 600 bureaucrats. It costs $133 million to manage the WTO every year. Of course, we pay the biggest sum, over $25 million for this, just to go and get permission or get our instructions from the WTO. conservative United States Should Leave World Trade Organization 9 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 57:12 So my message is to appeal to those who believe in limited government, free markets, free trade and the Constitution. I appeal to those who want to use tariffs in a protective way because they defend the process. But I am really appealing to the conservatives who claim they believe in free trade, because I do not believe what we have here is truly free trade. conservative The Hidden Cost of War June 14, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 58:37 The neo-conservatives who took us to war under false pretenses either didn’t know or didn’t care about the history and traditions of the Iraqi people. Surely they must have heard of an Islamic defensive jihad that is easy to promote when one’s country is being attacked by foreign forces. Family members have religious obligations to avenge all killings by foreign forces, which explains why killing insurgents only causes their numbers to multiply. This family obligation to seek revenge is closely tied to achieving instant eternal martyrdom through vengeful suicide attacks. Parents of martyrs do not weep as the parents of our soldiers do; they believe the suicide bombers and their families are glorified. These religious beliefs cannot simply be changed during the war. The only thing we can do is remove the incentives we give to the religious leaders of the jihad by leaving them alone. Without our presence in the Middle East, whether on the Arabian Peninsula or in Iraq, the rallying cry for suicidal jihadists would ring hollow. Was there any fear for our national security from a domestic terrorist attack by Islamists before we put a base in Saudi Arabia? conservative Belief In The Constitution Is A Conservative View 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 60:2 I think the points the gentleman made about the issue of whether the conservative position is for the war or against the war is, I think, very appropriate, because too often it is assumed if there is a war going on, the conservative position is you have to promote that war. conservative Belief In The Constitution Is A Conservative View 14 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 60:3 As a matter of fact, sometimes I like to think of the term, which is conservative, and that is belief in the Constitution, which is a very conservative view. I believe if we adhered more strictly to the Constitution, we would probably be involved much less so in these kinds of wars. conservative Amendment No. 11 Offered By Mr. Paul 16 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 66:9 But I, quite frankly, do not believe that if the U.N. reform bill gets anyplace, that there is any way, since the President is opposed to it and so many individuals are opposed to it, that any funds will ever be cut. But I do believe a bill could get passed, and, that bill, also changes policy, which I think that too many of my conservative colleagues on this side of the aisle have failed to look at, and that is what I am concerned about, the policy changes. conservative Foreign Aid 28 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 81:2 Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment. I would only ask my colleagues on this side of the aisle, where have all the conservatives gone? Where are the fiscal conservatives? A decade or so ago, the conservatives on this side of the aisle voted against all foreign aid. Now they are the champion of foreign aid. conservative Congress Lacks Authority To Sell Unocal 30 June 2005    2005 Ron Paul 82:3 If in the United States a private company does not have the right to be sold on the free market, should we really be criticizing the lack of freedom in China? Many conservatives who have decried the recent Supreme Court decision that severely undermines the principle of private property in the United States are now on the other side, cheering this blatant Congressional attempt to do something that may be even worse than Kelo vs. New London. conservative The Republican Congress Wastes Billions Overseas July 20, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 86:2 Now we have a Republican-controlled Congress and White House, and foreign spending soars. It was not that long ago when conservatives looked at such cavalier handling of US tax dollars with consternation. Now it seems that they are in a race with the Left to see who can spend more. conservative Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:5 In 1998 Congress capitulated to the desires of the Clinton administration and overwhelmingly passed the Iraq Liberation Act, which stated quite clearly that our policy was to get rid of Saddam Hussein. This act made it official: “The policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein.” This resolution has been cited on numerous occasions by neo-conservatives as justification for the pre-emptive, deliberate invasion of Iraq. When the resolution was debated, I saw it as a significant step toward a war that would bear no good fruit. No legitimate national security concerns were cited for this dramatic and serious shift in policy. conservative Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:9 Behind the scenes many were quite aware that Israel’s influence on our foreign policy played a role. She had argued for years, along with the neo-conservatives, for an Iraqi regime change. This support was nicely coordinated with the Christian Zionists’ enthusiasm for the war. conservative Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:10 As these reasons for the war lost credibility and support, other reasons were found for why we had to fight. As the lone superpower, we were told we had a greater responsibility to settle the problems of the world lest someone else gets involved. Maintaining and expanding our empire is a key element of the neo-conservative philosophy. This notion that we must fight to spread American goodness was well received by these neo-Jacobins. They saw the war as a legitimate moral crusade, arguing that no one should be allowed to stand in our way! In their minds using force to spread democracy is legitimate and necessary. conservative Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:19 Finally, after years of plotting and maneuvering, the neo-conservative plan to invade Iraq came before the U.S. House in October 2002 to be rubber-stamped. Though the plan was hatched years before, and the official policy of the United States government was to remove Saddam Hussein ever since 1998, various events delayed the vote until this time. By October the vote was deemed urgent, so as to embarrass anyone who opposed it. This would make them politically vulnerable in the November election. The ploy worked. The resolution passed easily, and it served the interests of proponents of war in the November election. conservative Why We Fight September 8, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 95:51 The neo-conservatives who want to remake the entire Middle East are not interested in the pertinent history of this region. Creating an artificial Iraq after World War I as a unified country was like mixing water and oil. It has only led to frustration, anger, and hostilities-- with the resulting instability creating conditions ripe for dictatorships. The occupying forces will not permit any of the three regions of Iraq to govern themselves. This is strictly motivated by a desire to exert control over the oil. Self-determination and independence for each region, or even a true republican form of government with a minimalist central authority is never considered-- yet it is the only answer to the difficult political problems this area faces. The relative and accidental independence of the Kurds and the Shiites in the 1990s served those regions well, and no suicide terrorism existed during that decade. conservative Amendment No. 6 Offered By Mr. Paul — Part 2 26 October 2005    2005 Ron Paul 110:6 A lot of people complained about the problems we had with Enron, and we needed that as an excuse to pass a lot more regulation. The truth is the market dealt with Enron. Enron was dealt with rather cruelly by the marketplace before the regulators got there. What we need to do is not, and especially as Republicans and conservatives, talk about a world-class regulator and that it is going to solve all of these problems. conservative We Have Been Warned October 26, 2005    2005 Ron Paul 114:1 We have been warned. Prepare for a broader war in the Middle East, as plans are being laid for the next U.S. led regime change-- in Syria. A UN report on the death of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafig Hariri elicited this comment from a senior U.S. policy maker: “Out of tragedy comes an extraordinary strategic opportunity.” This statement reflects the continued neo-conservative, Machiavellian influence on our foreign policy. The “opportunity” refers to the long-held neo-conservative plan for regime change in Syria, similar to what was carried out in Iraq. conservative Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:58 Though many Americans are starting to feel the economic pain of paying for this war through inflation, the real pain has not yet arrived. We generally remain fat and happy with a system of money and borrowing that postpones the day of reckoning. Foreigners, in particular the Chinese and Japanese, gladly participate in the charade. We print the money and they take it, as do the OPEC Nations, and provide us with consumer goods and oil. Then they loan the money back to us at low interest rates, which we use to finance the war and our housing bubble and excessive consumption. This recycling and perpetual borrowing of inflated dollars allow us to avoid the pain of high taxes to pay for our war and welfare spending. It is fine until the music stops and the real costs are realized, with much higher interest rates and significant price inflation. That is when outrage will be heard and the people will realize we cannot afford the humanitarianism of the neo-conservatives. conservative Iran, The Next Neocon Target 5 April 2006    2006 Ron Paul 21:68 Conservatives, libertarians, constitutionalists, and many of today’s liberals have all at one time or another endorsed a less interventionist foreign policy. There is no reason a coalition of these groups might not once again present the case for a pro-American nonmilitant noninterventionist foreign policy dealing with all nations. A policy of trade and peace, and a willingness to use diplomacy is far superior to the foreign policy that has evolved over the past 60 years. It is time for a change. conservative Introduction Of The Steel Financing Fairness Act 15 June 2006    2006 Ron Paul 44:6 Ironically, many of the supporters of these foreign giveaways claim to be promoters of free trade. This claim makes as much sense as a supporter of higher taxes and spending claiming to be a fiscally conservative supporter of limited government. Free trade is the peaceful exchange of goods and services across borders unhampered by government interference. Taxing American workers to support their overseas competitors is not free trade. Instead, it is corporatism designed to benefit certain politically powerful interests at the expense of American entrepreneurs and workers. conservative Why Are Americans So Angry? June 29, 2006    2006 Ron Paul 52:8 In the United States over the last century we have witnessed the coming and going of various intellectual influences by proponents of the free market, Keynesian welfarism, varieties of socialism, and supply-side economics. In foreign policy we’ve seen a transition from the founder’s vision of non-intervention in the affairs of others to internationalism, unilateral nation building, and policing the world. We now have in place a policy, driven by determined neo-conservatives, to promote American “goodness” and democracy throughout the world by military force — with particular emphasis on remaking the Middle East. conservative Marriage Protection Amendment 18 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 58:5 Conservatives in particular should be leery of anything that increases federal power, since centralized government power is traditionally the enemy of conservative values. I agree with the assessment of former Congressman Bob Barr, who authored the Defense of Marriage Act: conservative Marriage Protection Amendment 18 July 2006    2006 Ron Paul 58:6 “The very fact that the FMA [Federal Marriage Amendment] was introduced said that conservatives believed it was okay to amend the Constitution to take power from the states and give it to Washington. That is hardly a basic principle of conservatism as we used to know it. It is entirely likely the left will boomerang that assertion into a future proposed amendment that would weaken gun rights or mandate income redistribution.” conservative Mr. Bush, Meet Walter Jones 17 January 2007    2007 Ron Paul 18:1 Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I would like to place the following article written by eminent conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. In this fine op-ed, Mr. Buchanan makes reference to the recent efforts by my colleague and good friend, Rep. WALTER JONES, JR, to derail the march to war with Iran. I am very pleased to have been an original co-sponsor of the legislation referenced by Mr. Buchanan, H.J. Res. 14, which puts forth the very simple idea that if we are going to have a war with Iran we must follow the Constitution. The resolution clarifies the fact that the President shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of military force against Iran. I hope my colleagues will read this article closely and consider what Mr. Buchanan has written — and what Rep. JONES is trying to do. conservative Statement On The Iraq War Resolution 14 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 26:1 Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in support of the resolution and in opposition to the escalation in Iraq. I want to thank the gentleman from North Carolina for his very determined and principled effort to end this ill-advised and dangerous war, and I am very pleased that he brought together a group of Members today who are representing the traditional conservative position on war and peace and I deeply appreciate that. conservative Statement On The Iraq War Resolution 14 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 26:7 Those on the right should recall that the traditional conservative position of nonintervention was their position for most of the 20th century, and they benefited politically from the wars carelessly entered into by the left. Seven years ago, the right benefited politically by condemning the illegal intervention in Kosovo and Somalia. At the time, the right was outraged over the failed policy of nation building. conservative Introduction Of The Family Education Freedom Act 14 february 2007    2007 Ron Paul 29:4 According to a poll by McLaughlin and Associates, two-thirds of Americans believe education tax credits would have a positive effect on American education. This poll also found strong support for education tax credits among liberals, moderates, conservatives, low-income individuals, and African-Americans. This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education. conservative Statement for Hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy” 15 February 2007    2007 Ron Paul 32:16 Explain how interest rates are set. Conservatives profess to support free markets, without wage and price controls. Yet the most important price of all, the price of money as determined by interest rates, is set arbitrarily in secret by the Fed rather than by markets! Why is this policy written in stone? Why is there no congressional input at least? conservative Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Is Excessive 29 March 2007    2007 Ron Paul 38:7 My message to my colleagues is simple: If you claim to support smaller government, don’t introduce budgets that increase spending over the previous year. Can any fiscal conservative in Congress honestly believe that overall federal spending cannot be cut 25 percent? We could cut spending by two-thirds and still have a Federal Government as large as it was in 1990. conservative In The Name Of Patriotism (Who Are The Patriots?) 22 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 55:8 Liberals, who withhold their taxes as a protest against war, are vilified as well, especially by conservatives. Unquestioned loyalty to the state is especially demanded in times of war. Lack of support for a war policy is said to be unpatriotic. Arguments against a particular policy that endorses a war, once it is started, are always said to be endangering the troops in the field. This, they blatantly claim, is unpatriotic, and all dissent must stop. Yet, it is dissent from government policies that defines the true patriot and champion of liberty. conservative In The Name Of Patriotism (Who Are The Patriots?) 22 May 2007    2007 Ron Paul 55:14 Because the crisis atmosphere of war supports the growth of the state, any problem invites an answer by declaring war, even on social and economic issues. This elicits patriotism in support of various government solutions, while enhancing the power of the state. Faith in government coercion and a lack of understanding of how free societies operate encourages big government liberals and big government conservatives to manufacture a war psychology to demand political loyalty for domestic policy just as is required in foreign affairs. conservative Unanticipated Good results (When We leave) 6 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 57:15 We’re told we can’t let this happen or we’ll lose control of the oil and gasoline prices will soar — exactly what has happened with our invasion. And if the neo-conservatives have their way there will be an attack on Iran. If that occurs, then watch what happens to the price of oil. conservative Calling On The United Nations Security Council To Charge Iranian President With Certain Violations Because Of His Calls For Destruction Of Israel 18 June 2007    2007 Ron Paul 70:4 I strongly urge my colleagues to consider a different approach to Iran, and to foreign policy in general. GEN William Odom, President Reagan’s director of the National Security Agency, outlined a much more sensible approach in a recent article titled “Exit From Iraq Should Be Through Iran.” General Odom wrote: “Increasingly bogged down in the sands of Iraq, the US thrashes about looking for an honorable exit. Restoring cooperation between Washington and Tehran is the single most important step that could be taken to rescue the U.S. from its predicament in Iraq.” General Odom makes good sense. We need to engage the rest of the world, including Iran and Syria, through diplomacy, trade, and travel rather than pass threatening legislation like this that paves the way to war. We have seen the limitations of force as a tool of U.S. foreign policy. It is time to try a more traditional and conservative approach. I urge a “no” vote on this resolution. conservative Opposing Further Sanctions On Iran 30 July 2007    2007 Ron Paul 78:4 We must keep in mind that Iran has still not been found in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Furthermore, much of the information regarding Iran’s nuclear program is coming to us via thoroughly discredited sources like the MeK, a fanatical cult that is on our State Department’s terror list. Additionally, the same discredited neo-conservatives who pushed us into the Iraq war are making similarly exaggerated claims against Iran. How often do these “experts” have to be proven wrong before we start to question their credibility? conservative Honoring Marshall Fritz November 19, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 69:7 In 1990, Marshall stepped down as President of the Advocates to found the Alliance for the Separation of School and State, an organization focusing on the vital issue of parental control of education. Thanks in large part to Marshall’s work, the idea that parents, not the government, should control education is no longer excluded from public debate as a ”fringe“ notion. One of the features that most impresses me about the Alliance is the way that Marshall brought libertarians, conservatives, and liberals together to work for education freedom. conservative The Austrians Are Right November 20, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 71:8 Similar mistakes were made in the 1930s and ushered in the age of the New Deal, the Fair Deal, the Great Society and the supply-siders who convinced conservatives that deficits didn’t really matter after all, since they were anxious to finance a very expensive deficit-financed American empire. conservative The Austrians Are Right November 20, 2008    2008 Ron Paul 71:12 Over and above this are those who understand that political power is controlled by those who control the money supply. Liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats came to believe, as they were taught in our universities, that deficits don’t matter and that Federal Reserve accommodation by monetizing debt is legitimate and never harmful. The truth is otherwise. Central economic planning is always harmful. Inflating the money supply and purposely devaluing the dollar is always painful and dangerous. conservative WHAT IF? February 12, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 15:11 What if conservatives, who preach small government, wake up and realize that our interventionist foreign policy provides the greatest incentive to expand the government? conservative WHAT IF? February 12, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 15:12 What if conservatives understood once again that their only logical position is to reject military intervention and managing an empire throughout the world? conservative Federal Reserve Monetizes Debt April 1, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 41:7 If we understood the tenth amendment, we wouldn’t be doing all of this. We wouldn’t have a deficit. If we understood monetary policy, we wouldn’t have a monetary system that encourages all of this that gets us off the hook because conservatives like to spend a lot of money, and liberals like to spend a lot of money. And they don’t have to worry. We raise taxes. We borrow it. And we do it, and we’ve been doing it for decades and getting away with it. But it’s coming to an end because we’ve always been dependent on the Fed to come in and monetize the debt. conservative FAMILY EDUCATION FREEDOM ACT April 2, 2009    2009 Ron Paul 43:4 According to a survey conducted by Education Next/Harvard PEPG, the majority of Americans support education tax credits. This poll also found strong support for education tax credits among liberals, moderates, conservatives, low-income individuals, African- Americans, and public-school employees. This is just one of numerous studies and public opinion polls showing that Americans want Congress to get the federal bureaucracy out of the schoolroom and give parents more control over their children’s education. Texas Straight Talk conservative - Fear of IRS misplaced, real problem is the system 20 April 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 April 1997 verse 12 ... Cached Diverse groups, ranging from small churches in Texas to the NRA, are reporting that the threat of the IRS has been held over their heads unless they repent of their often conservative views. conservative - Fear of IRS misplaced, real problem is the system 20 April 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 April 1997 verse 13 ... Cached The hypocrisy is palatable: Vice President Al Gore can go to a Buddhist Temple and hold a fundraiser without an official eye being batted. President Clinton regularly invited speaks at churches, and Jesse Jackson actually makes political fundraising speeches from pulpits, yet the IRS takes no action. The unions spend millions of dollars - without any opposition - promoting liberals and bashing conservatives. conservative - Fear of IRS misplaced, real problem is the system 20 April 1997    Texas Straight Talk 20 April 1997 verse 14 ... Cached Yet conservative groups and churches have lately come under intense scrutiny by the IRS. All of them are groups which tend to hold views opposite those of the President, Vice President and the Democrats. conservative - Line-Item Veto violates separation of powers, threatens America's constitutional form of government 18 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 1997 verse 4 ... Cached While Congress is not in session for the month of August, important business does continue in Washington. Even though I'm in Texas for the month, I am intrigued by an historic event of the past week: Bill Clinton became the first US President to wield the line-item veto -- a power which I believe is a major stain on the legacy of the so-called conservative revolution of the 104th Congress, two years ago. conservative - Line-Item Veto violates separation of powers, threatens America's constitutional form of government 18 August 1997    Texas Straight Talk 18 August 1997 verse 10 ... Cached On April 15 of this year, I addressed the House of Representatives to oppose the line-item veto. As I told my colleagues, I was pleased to have been able to serve in Congress for four terms in the '70s and early 80s. During that time I was lobbied on a few occasions by presidents regarded as much more conservative than the current holder of that office. conservative - Neutrality and dialogue, not intervention, will secure peace 24 November 1997    Texas Straight Talk 24 November 1997 verse 12 ... Cached A popular conservative talk show host has suggested that the solution to the dilemma might be an alliance with Iran, for the purpose of destroying Iraq. This reflects the senselessness of foreign policy in the region. In the early 1980's, when Iraq was using poison gases against Iran, we were Iraq's allies. In essence, we subsidized the very weapons we now want to kill Hussein for possessing. conservative Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 4 ... Cached Recently, there have been attempts to tie the bare-minimum pro-life "Mexico City" Policy to the issues of funding for the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund. But those attempts are now coming back to haunt those of us who believe in both the sanctity of human life and the inviolability of US sovereignty. I expect that very early in this second session of the 105th Congress, which begins Tuesday, January 27, we will see a "grand deal" struck which will see liberals "back down" from their opposition to a revised Mexico City Policy in exchange for conservative members voting to support funding of the United Nations and IMF. conservative Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 7 ... Cached In fact, the deficiencies of the Mexico City Policy are such that the pro-family conservative group Concerned Women for America has withdrawn its support for the Mexico City Policy all together. This, in part, due to the fact that while the policy prohibits funding of some abortions, it does not prohibit funding of all abortions, and creates large loopholes. conservative Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 13 ... Cached Worse still, it now appears that conservative congressmen are willing to water the Mexico City policy down still further in order to get President Clinton to sign legislation which shouldn't exist in the first place. Thus we have Congressional leadership again backing down from President Clinton, giving in to his demand for unrestricted public funding of abortion even while compromising America's sovereignty by providing further taxpayer funds to organizations such as IMF and the United Nations. conservative Abortion and National Sovereignty: No Compromises 26 January 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 January 1998 verse 14 ... Cached Fortunately many conservative pro-life and pro-sovereignty groups are making it known that they do not support this so-called "compromise." I will vocally oppose any effort to pay even one more penny of US taxpayer dollars to the United Nations or IMF. Although I believe that this "grand deal" has already been struck between the leadership of Congress and the White House I believe it is incumbent upon men and women of conscience to contact their representatives and speak out against this scheme. conservative Methods employed by Congress as bad as the legislation 30 March 1998    Texas Straight Talk 30 March 1998 verse 7 ... Cached Further, it was argued by some conservative "right-to-life" advocates that the legislation was worth passing - despite so many flaws and shortcomings - because it contained anti-abortion language purported to be "stronger than ever" and would finally be codified. Unfortunately, the reality is that the meager "abortion" language was weaker than ever before with a convenient, gaping loophole to allow the president to continue taxpayer-funding of countries and groups that actually perform and promote abortion: this is language which is now to be codified. That's no pro-life victory; in fact, one could barely describe it as a compromise. conservative The Ominous Budget Deal 26 October 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 October 1998 verse 4 ... Cached More than 8,000 pages of small print governmentese make up the Omnibus spending package recently approved by the US Congress, over the objections of myself and numerous other conservatives from Texas and around the country. The devilish details hidden in the package will remain obscured for weeks or months, until Americans have the chance to scour through the pages. conservative The Ominous Budget Deal 26 October 1998    Texas Straight Talk 26 October 1998 verse 11 ... Cached One of the most egregious expenditures is $17.9 billion for the International Monetary Fund. Conservatives have battled for the past year to stop more money from going to this corrupt organization that props-up the failed economies of two-bit dictators the world-over. conservative Privacy tops agenda 09 November 1998    Texas Straight Talk 09 November 1998 verse 3 ... Cached With the 1998 election completed and there being several weeks before the start of the 106th Congress, this is a prime opportunity to examine what will be my legislative priorities for the coming session. To paraphrase a conservative activist of the 1960s, a priority should be erasing the bad laws, not creating new ones. conservative Orwellian rules face major opposition 01 February 1999    Texas Straight Talk 01 February 1999 verse 13 ... Cached Congressmen are signing on these measures due in large part to the growing chorus of Americans who are saying, to paraphrase our founding fathers' cry, "don't tread on my privacy rights!" Dozens of organizations, ranging from banking and technology groups to conservative family-values coalitions to the liberal ACLU, are joining in the fight to oppose these regulations. conservative Contentious debate produces rubber-stamp of Kosovo 15 March 1999    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 1999 verse 7 ... Cached In this current debate, liberal Democrats cannot oppose military action in Kosovo (despite their better instincts to avoid wars) because to do so would reflect badly on a president of their party. Meanwhile, the conservative Republicans (who are finally coming around to a sensible understanding of proper defense policy) must endure charges of hypocrisy if they now oppose missions similar to those rubber-stamped under Republican administrations. conservative Tragedy begets tragedy 14 June 1999    Texas Straight Talk 14 June 1999 verse 11 ... Cached People who are ordinarily our allies in the defense of liberty have been mislead into supporting HR1501 and amendments that turn federalism and the Constitution on its head. These conservatives are promoting several new "gun control" measures, such as mandatory trigger locks, expanding the background checks, and more. conservative Time To Get Serious With Big Government 17 April 2000    Texas Straight Talk 17 April 2000 verse 9 ... Cached My approach is to end the World Trade Organization. Although there is considerable sympathy for this approach, the groups and people who express their agreement seem content to work on minor side issues. Or, they refuse to work together with others who they distrust. This latter concern was suggested to me when I spoke to a coalition of the leaders of top conservative groups in Washington about the WTO this week. conservative Helping Cancer Patients and the Terminally Ill is a Moral Imperative 15 May 2000    Texas Straight Talk 15 May 2000 verse 7 ... Cached "This bill would allow such individuals to keep their resources for those purposes without adversely affecting their ability to collect benefits. Rather than forcing people who are in such dire situations to continue paying taxes for a retirement they may never live to see, we need to free up resources for them now, without any penalty accruing to them if they can beat these terrible diseases. I have spoken with patients who have suffered from these illnesses, which put such a terrible strain on them and their loved ones. Even when they have health care coverage (and many do not), they still incur all kinds of costs ranging from transportation to and from care centers and certain prescription drugs which may not be fully covered, to hiring sitters to watch their children while they receive treatment. The list is nearly endless. In the legislation I introduced, if the disease goes into remission and all related costs are paid, the employee would again resume paying the payroll tax. This is a conservative program designed to reduce the tax burden of those fighting these dreaded illnesses. We need to offer compassion to those who suffer, but we also owe it to them to stop taking away the resources which can help people beat breast cancer, AIDS or other terrible health problems. conservative The Bush Administration Must Honor its Commitment to Smaller Government 18 December 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 December 2000 verse 6 ... Cached Still, it is important to understand that the calls for "bipartisanship" really are nothing less than political threats aimed at president-elect Bush. Mainstream media and collectivist politicians want to create an atmosphere where adherence to principles and ideology is mischaracterized as mean-spirited or divisive. In other words, they are warning Bush not to pursue a conservative, limited government agenda. The not-so-subtle threat is that the administration will face a political firestorm unless it continues Clinton era policies, which are incorrectly presented as "bipartisan." For example, one prominent Senator recently called on Bush to insure passage of a "patient's bill of rights," which he insisted was mandated by widespread bipartisan support. This is nonsense, of course; most Americans rightfully oppose the terrible trend toward a government controlled health care system. Yet we are led to believe that Bush must accept and even endorse such proposals to expand the government's role in medicine in order to demonstrate "bipartisan cooperation." conservative The Bush Administration Must Honor its Commitment to Smaller Government 18 December 2000    Texas Straight Talk 18 December 2000 verse 8 ... Cached Specifically, he must honor his pledge to end the estate tax and eliminate the marriage tax penalty. It is far more important, politically and morally, for Bush to keep his campaign promises than it is for him to appease his opponents in Congress. He should be prepared to ignore the chorus of voices, including some Republicans, urging him to abandon tax cuts. Tax relief is the primary reason why many Americans vote Republican. Bush knows this, but the pressure to surrender will become intense. Abandoning tax cuts may make the president-elect more popular with the liberal establishment, but it also would offend his conservative base. conservative The Ashcroft Controversy Exposes Disdain for Conservative Principles 22 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 22 January 2001 verse 2 ... Cached The Ashcroft Controversy Exposes Disdain for Conservative Principles conservative The Ashcroft Controversy Exposes Disdain for Conservative Principles 22 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 22 January 2001 verse 3 ... Cached The Senate conducted hearings this week concerning the nomination of John Ashcroft for the position of Attorney General in the Bush administration. As anticipated, the debate has been rancorous and bitterly partisan. The longstanding practice by the Senate of generally approving cabinet nominees, thus allowing a new President the spoils of his victory, has eroded almost completely in the past two decades. The old standard for Senate approval simply was competence for the job, without regard to a nominee's personal politics. Mr. Ashcroft clearly is competent and very highly qualified for the job of Attorney General. In the new era, however, his political views are the primary focus of his opponents. Certain Senators, special interest groups, and the media have made it quite clear: the left will attack and characterize as unfit for high public office anyone who adheres to conservative principles. Their true goal is to create a precedent for the automatic disqualification of future cabinet nominees who disagree with their view of the proper role of the federal government. "Will he enforce all the laws?" they intone endlessly. What they really are asking is: "Will he question our efforts to continually expand the size and scope of the federal government?" conservative The Ashcroft Controversy Exposes Disdain for Conservative Principles 22 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 22 January 2001 verse 4 ... Cached The real question for Mr. Ashcroft or any federal official is simple: will you abide by your oath to uphold the Constitution? The rhetoric from the Senate and the media leads the public to believe the Attorney General has a duty to Congress directly, that he must enforce any law passed by Congress without regard to the Constitution or legal precedents. In truth, however, the Attorney General is counsel for the American people, not Congress or the President. He is sworn to uphold the highest law in the land, the Constitution. Under no circumstances may he enforce a law that clearly contravenes the Constitution, regardless of whether Congress or the President demands it. Would we expect Mr. Ashcroft to enforce a law passed by Congress today suspending First Amendment assembly and speech rights at this weekend's inauguration? Of course not. The possibility of an independent-minded conservative Attorney General threatens the left, however, because they want a federal administration which will rubber stamp the laws they support, many of which are unconstitutional. conservative The Ashcroft Controversy Exposes Disdain for Conservative Principles 22 January 2001    Texas Straight Talk 22 January 2001 verse 5 ... Cached The code word used by the left to attack Ashcroft's personal politics is extreme, which is repeated like a drumbeat until it is embedded in the minds of the public. We are told his views on abortion are extreme because he "opposes a women's right to choose," despite the utter lack of any such right in the Constitution, and despite the agreement of millions of Americans with Mr. Ashcroft. We are told he is extreme because he opposes some gun control laws, despite the obvious unconstitutionally of all gun control laws. We are told his support for the death penalty is extreme, although millions of Americans and the Supreme Court disagree. Worst of all, the left has gotten away with using "extreme" as a code word for "racist." The exceedingly thin "evidence" given for the racism allegation is that Ashcroft once voted against the nomination of a federal judge who happened to be black. Never mind that more than 50 other Senators voted with Ashcroft; the left is all to eager to assure us that the only conceivable rationale is that Ashcroft is a racist. This type of smearing, aided and abetted by a complicit media, is at the heart of the left's efforts to demonize conservatives who dare oppose their unconstitutional agenda. conservative IRS Church Seizure is a Tragedy for Religious Liberty 26 February 2001    Texas Straight Talk 26 February 2001 verse 6 ... Cached The state-loving media scarcely mentioned the IBT story, with brief articles predictably portraying the church as a fringe organization that avoided its taxes. This follows an established pattern of characterizing religious conservatives who protest the federal government as dangerous extremists, implicitly associated with militias and racists. Imagine the national media coverage, and resulting public outrage, if a minority church was seized over a refusal to pay taxes. Protestors supporting left-wing causes like abortion, affirmative action, environmentalism, feminism, AIDS, and animal rights consistently are shown as courageous martyrs fighting for principle against an unfeeling society and government. Conservative protestors, however, are shown as sinister bigots who selfishly refuse to follow benign laws and politically correct social rules. conservative Religious Liberty Thwarted by the Supreme Court 04 June 2001    Texas Straight Talk 04 June 2001 verse 7 ... Cached The sad result of this misinterpretation of the Constitution is a legal and political landscape which is unnecessarily hostile to religion. Popular culture and media mirror this hostility in their inaccurate and unflattering portrayals of religious conservatives and fundamentalists. The message is always the same: conservatives want to force their religious beliefs upon society. The truth is that secular humanists have forced their beliefs upon a largely religious nation. In schools, in government, and in the courts, secular values dominate. Secularism, wrongly characterized as neutral toward religious faith, has become the default philosophy for our society. The Supreme Court, by refusing to consider the Elkhart case, has furthered the cause of those who wish to see religion eliminated from American life. conservative Legislation Needed to End the IRS Threat to Religious Freedom 13 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 13 August 2001 verse 3 ... Cached Are the political beliefs of churchgoers the business of the IRS? Not according to North Carolina Congressman Walter Jones, who recently introduced legislation that addresses the very serious issue of IRS harassment of churches that engage in conservative political activity. Specifically, the bill changes the tax code to clarify that no church or religious organization will lose its tax-exempt status because it participates in political campaigns or works to influence legislation. This bill is badly needed to end the IRS practice of threatening certain politically disfavored faiths with loss of their tax-exempt status, while ignoring the very open and public political activities of other churches. While some well-known leftist preachers routinely advocate socialism from the pulpit, many conservative Christian and Jewish congregations cannot present their political beliefs without risking scrutiny from the tax collector. The "Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act" (HR 2357) will end this political favoritism and government interference with free speech. I'm pleased to report that the Act already has been sponsored by more that 50 members of Congress. conservative Legislation Needed to End the IRS Threat to Religious Freedom 13 August 2001    Texas Straight Talk 13 August 2001 verse 5 ... Cached Speech is speech, regardless of the setting. There is no legal distinction between religious expression and political expression; both are equally protected by the First amendment. Religious believers do not drop their political opinions at the door of their place of worship, nor do they disregard their faith at the ballot box. Religious morality will always inform the voting choices of Americans of all faiths. The collectivist left, however, seeks to impose the viewpoint that public life must be secular, and that government cannot reflect morality derived from faith. The collectivist left is threatened by strong religious institutions, because it wants an ever-growing federal government to serve as the unchallenged authority in our society. People of faith tend to put their religious convictions ahead of any allegiance to the government, particularly when that government displays such hostility towards religion in general. In other words, the collectivists fear that some Americans' deeply held religious beliefs will stand in the way of the continued growth of secular big government. So the real motivation behind the insistence on a separation of church and state is not based on respect for the First amendment, but rather on a desire to diminish the influence of religious conservatives at the ballot box. conservative Military Tribunals Put Our Justice System on Trial 03 December 2001    Texas Straight Talk 03 December 2001 verse 6 ... Cached Some, even conservatives, have offered the example of President Franklin Roosevelt's use of a military court to try a group of Nazi saboteurs during World War II. It is curious to see FDR as a model for conservatives, but nevertheless we were in a declared war and those captured were agents of a country with which we were in an active state of war. We are not currently in a state of war, despite what pundits might claim. conservative Were the Founding Fathers Wrong about Foreign Affairs? 15 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 15 April 2002 verse 4 ... Cached I was immediately attacked for offering such heresy. We’ve reached the point where virtually everyone in Congress, the administration, and the media blindly accepts that America must become involved (financially and militarily) in every conflict around the globe. To even suggest otherwise in today’s political climate is to be accused of "aiding terrorists." It’s particularly ironic that so many conservatives in America, who normally adopt an "America first" position, cannot see the obvious harm that results from our being dragged time and time again into an intractable and endless Middle East war. The empty justification is always that America is the global superpower, and thus has no choice but to police the world. conservative Predictions for an Unwritten Future 29 April 2002    Texas Straight Talk 29 April 2002 verse 23 ... Cached Congress and the President will shift radically toward expanding the size and scope of the federal government. This will satisfy both the liberals and conservatives. Military and police powers will grow, satisfying conservatives. The welfare state, both domestic and international, will expand, satisfying the liberals. Both sides will endorse military adventurism overseas. conservative Congress Spends, Future Generations Pay the Bills 03 June 2002    Texas Straight Talk 03 June 2002 verse 4 ... Cached The problem is simple: Congress spends way too much. 2002 federal revenues are down compared to previous years, but Congress needs money to fund the post-September 11th spending spree. Faced with this pesky economic reality, Congress must do what any other organization does when spending exceeds income: borrow money. However, federal law sets a limit on the total amount of debt the Treasury can carry, and the limit- a whopping $5.95 trillion- has been reached. Since Congress apparently cannot control spending, the debt limit must be raised, this time by $700 billion. Yet no member, especially those who promote themselves as fiscal conservatives, wants to be on record as voting to increase the national debt. conservative The Case against War in Iraq 09 September 2002    Texas Straight Talk 09 September 2002 verse 3 ... Cached First, there are practical military reasons not to initiate a war in Iraq. Our military has been severely weakened over the last decade. Conservative estimates call for 200,000 troops to mount a successful invasion of Iraq. Placing 200,000 soldiers in Iraq- with hundreds of thousands already deployed around the globe- will further dilute our ability to defend our own shores. conservative Homeland Security is the Largest Federal Expansion in 50 Years 25 November 2002    Texas Straight Talk 25 November 2002 verse 4 ... Cached Ironically, many in Congress who usually champion limited government were enthusiastic supporters of the largest federal expansion in 50 years. Twenty years ago President Reagan revitalized conservatives across the country by appealing to their Goldwater roots, promising to slash the size of government and eliminate whole departments. Yet the promise of a smaller government went unfulfilled, and today Congress passes budgets even larger that those of the Clinton years. conservative What Really Divides Us? 23 December 2002    Texas Straight Talk 23 December 2002 verse 7 ... Cached Conservatives and libertarians should fight back and challenge the myth that collectivist liberals care more about racism. Modern liberalism, however, well-intentioned, is a byproduct of the same collectivist thinking that characterizes racism. The continued insistence on group thinking only inflames racial tensions. conservative Conscription is Collectivism 13 January 2003    Texas Straight Talk 13 January 2003 verse 4 ... Cached So why is the idea of a draft even considered? One answer is that our military forces are spread far too thin, engaged in conflicts around the globe that are none of our business. With hundreds of thousands of troops already stationed in literally hundreds of foreign nations, we simply don’t have enough soldiers to invade and occupy every country we label a threat to the new American empire. Military leaders conservatively estimate that 250,000 troops will be needed to invade Iraq, while tens of thousands already occupy Afghanistan. Add another conflict to the mix- in North Korea, the Balkans, or any number of hot spots- and our military capabilities would quickly be exhausted. Some in Washington would rather draft more young bodies than rethink our role as world policeman and bring some of our troops home. conservative Welfare for the Left, Welfare for the Right, Welfare for the World 03 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 03 February 2003 verse 4 ... Cached The State of the Union speech delivered last week showed little enthusiasm for the kind of real spending cuts our nation so desperately needs. Instead, it outlined a federal budget that grows at a rate of 5 to 7 percent each year, and in the twilight zone of Washington this is deemed to show spending restraint! Much of this lack of restraint will take the form of good old-fashioned welfare, whether for liberal social causes or conservative corporate causes. conservative Support the President's Tax-Free Savings Plan 10 February 2003    Texas Straight Talk 10 February 2003 verse 3 ... Cached Sadly, however, the President’s own Republican leadership in the House of Representatives opposes the new savings accounts. Some members have told the White House that they will not fight to ensure passage of the proposal, preferring instead to tinker with the current retirement plan rules. This is truly unfortunate, because the President and our nation desperately need real anti-tax conservatives crafting legislation in the House. conservative Assault Weapons and Assaults on the Constitution 21 April 2003    Texas Straight Talk 21 April 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The Bush administration recently surprised and angered many pro-gun conservatives by announcing its support for an assault weapons ban passed in 1994. The law contained a ten-year sunset provision, and is set to expire in 2004 unless reauthorized by Congress. A spokesman for the administration stated flatly that the President “supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law.” conservative So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 2 ... Cached Just six short months ago the Republican party won a stunning victory in the 2002 election, increasing its majority in the House of Representatives and retaking the Senate. With Republicans controlling both Congress and the White House for the first time in fifty years, many assumed legislators would push a socially and fiscally conservative agenda. conservative So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 3 ... Cached Yet nothing could be further from the truth, as an embarrassing vote last week clearly demonstrated. The supposedly conservative Congress overwhelmingly passed a foreign aid bill that could have come straight from the desk of the most liberal Democrat. The legislation sends $15 billion of your tax dollars to Africa, ostensibly to fight AIDS by distributing condoms, providing sex education, and funding abortion providers. Needless to say the bill gives money to some very questionable organizations and programs, and will undoubtedly pad the bank accounts of some of the worst governments in the world. conservative So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 4 ... Cached House leadership, often characterized in the mainstream press as far-right wing, actively promoted and praised the bill. A Republican press release after the vote gushed that “This bill is a moral crusade… to save a continent from the Great Plague of our age.” So much for the socially conservative agenda of the GOP! conservative So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Opposition to the bill was minimal, although 40 Republicans did cast principled votes against it. Other conservatives who were slightly uncomfortable with the vote satisfied themselves by passing an amendment that requires some of the $15 billion to be spent on abstinence programs. Yet does anyone honestly think we can control how our dollars are spent once they reach Africa? Obviously money is fungible anyway, so “earmarking” funds for pet conservative programs does nothing. Furthermore, Republican leaders completely ignored efforts in committee to forbid funding for abortion in the bill. conservative So Much for Social Conservatism in Congress 05 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 05 May 2003 verse 9 ... Cached Sadly, this $15 billion expenditure comes even as Congress is cutting funding for veterans by roughly the same amount. The Treasury is running record deficits, the Pentagon is engaged in enormously expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and veterans’ programs are badly underfunded- yet still Congress is sending billions overseas for yet another dubious and unconstitutional program. This should anger every American who still believes in the true conservative tenets of limited government, fiscal restraint, and private charity instead of social welfare programs. conservative The Phony Tax Cut Debate 12 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 12 May 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Republicans argue that tax cuts will raise revenues by increasing economic activity, thus providing Congress with even more money to spend. It should hardly be the goal of conservatives to increase federal revenues! Real income tax cuts of 30 or 50 percent would reduce revenues, which is exactly what Congress needs to restrain its terrible spendthrift habits. Increased revenues or not, however, no one argues for serious cuts in spending. After all, the latest Bush budget spends 22% more than the last Clinton budget only three years ago. conservative The Federal Government Bully in State and Local Elections 26 May 2003    Texas Straight Talk 26 May 2003 verse 7 ... Cached Those who favor strict drug laws should understand that federal preemption is a double-edged sword. For example, if a socially conservative state like Utah wanted to enact harsh drug policies to reflect its community standards, federal law could actually prevent the enactment of such policies. When the American people give up state and local authority over any issue, whether its marijuana, abortion, or gun control, they give up most of their power to affect policy. It’s far easier to influence, and hold accountable, state and local officials. Once the federal government takes the opposite side of an issue, however, good luck changing things. conservative Declining Dollar, Declining Fortunes 23 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 23 June 2003 verse 3 ... Cached Of course capitalism is based on the premise that centralized economic planning is bad. I’m always amazed that otherwise pro-market conservatives, who rightfully scorned disastrous Soviet economic policies, are so willing to accept centralized monetary planning by the Fed. True capitalism requires a free market for money and interest rates, just as surely as it requires a free market for wages and prices. conservative HillaryCare, Republican Style 30 June 2003    Texas Straight Talk 30 June 2003 verse 2 ... Cached In a late-night vote last week, the Republican congress managed to do what Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy tried to do ten years ago: take the next big step toward socialized medicine in America. More specifically, Congress voted for a huge expansion of Medicare that enriches pharmaceutical companies, fleeces taxpayers with billions in new spending, and forces millions of seniors to accept inferior drug coverage. Conservatives might ask themselves whether this is what they had in mind when the party of “limited government” gained control of the House, Senate, and White House. conservative What Happened to Conservatives? 14 July 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 July 2003 verse 1 ... Cached What Happened to Conservatives? conservative What Happened to Conservatives? 14 July 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 July 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The so-called conservative movement of the last 20 years, starting with the Reagan revolution of the 1980s, followed by the 1994 Gingrich takeover of the House, and culminating in the early 2000s with Republican control of both Congress and the White House, seems a terrible failure today. Republicans have failed utterly to shrink the size of government; instead it is bigger and costlier than ever before. Federal spending spirals out of control, new Great Society social welfare programs have been created, and the national debt is rising by more than a half-trillion dollars per year. Whatever happened to the conservative vision supposedly sweeping the nation? conservative What Happened to Conservatives? 14 July 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 July 2003 verse 3 ... Cached One thing is certain: those who worked and voted for less government, the very foot soldiers in the conservative revolution, have been deceived. Today, the ideal of limited government has been abandoned by the GOP, and real conservatives find their views no longer matter. conservative What Happened to Conservatives? 14 July 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 July 2003 verse 4 ... Cached True limited government conservatives have been co-opted by the rise of the neoconservatives in Washington. The neoconservatives- a name they gave themselves- are largely hardworking, talented people who have worked their way into positions of power in Washington. Their views dominate American domestic and foreign policy today, as their ranks include many of the President’s closest advisors. They have successfully moved the Republican party away from the Goldwater-era platform of frugal government at home and nonintervention abroad, toward a big-government, world empire mentality more reminiscent of Herbert Hoover or Woodrow Wilson. In doing so, they have proven that their ideas are neither new nor conservative. conservative What Happened to Conservatives? 14 July 2003    Texas Straight Talk 14 July 2003 verse 21 ... Cached Those who love liberty, oppose unjustified war, and resent big-brother government must identify the philosophy that is influencing policy today. If the neoconservatives are wrong- and I believe they are- we must demonstrate this to the American people, and offer an alternative philosophy that is both morally superior and produces better results in terms of liberty and prosperity. It is time for true conservatives to retake the conservative movement. conservative Federal Courts and the Imaginary Constitution 11 August 2003    Texas Straight Talk 11 August 2003 verse 2 ... Cached It’s been a tough summer for social conservatives, thanks to our federal courts. From “gay rights” to affirmative action to Boy Scouts to the Ten Commandments, federal courts recently have issued rulings that conflict with both the Constitution and overwhelming public sentiment. Conservatives and libertarians who once viewed the judiciary as the final bulwark against government tyranny must now accept that no branch of government even remotely performs its constitutional role. conservative Trust Us, We're the Government 25 August 2003    Texas Straight Talk 25 August 2003 verse 10 ... Cached The attorney general’s blatant flip-flop can of course be ascribed to partisan politics. Like many conservatives, Mr. Ashcroft correctly understood that the Clinton Justice department did not believe in the rule of law and terribly abused its power. Yet even after the Janet Reno debacles, he wants us to believe that his Justice department- and future departments- can be entrusted with more power. conservative Your Money in Iraq 29 September 2003    Texas Straight Talk 29 September 2003 verse 16 ... Cached Criticism of this foreign aid spending in Iraq is not restricted to the political left. Conservative groups and politicians are increasingly angry at the administration’s exorbitant spending. For example, Congressman Zach Wamp of Tennessee sits on the Appropriations committee, which is responsible for all spending bills. He has a modest idea: insist the reconstruction money be paid back as a loan when Iraq’s huge oil reserves resume operation. Similarly, Congressman Jeff Flake of Arizona wants to offset every dollar spent reconstructing Iraq with spending cuts in others areas, especially given the amount of wasteful pork in the federal budget. But the White House is adamantly opposed to both ideas. Why is a supposedly conservative administration resisting even the slightest attempts at fiscal restraint? conservative The Appropriations Process 27 October 2003    Texas Straight Talk 27 October 2003 verse 11 ... Cached Of course politicians in Washington like to talk about the need for fiscal restraint, but they never vote for it. Talk is one thing; the true test of any politician is how he votes. The only real measure of any member of Congress who claims to want smaller government is whether he votes NO on every appropriations bill. If he votes yes, he’s voting for bigger government. It’s that simple. A true fiscal conservative votes for less spending, not more. conservative GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 1 ... Cached GOP Abandons Conservatives conservative GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 2 ... Cached The Medicare prescription drug bill passed by Congress last week may prove to be a watershed event for political conservatives in America. This latest expansion of the federal government, potentially the largest in our nation’s history, is firmly in keeping with the failed New Deal and Great Society programs of the utopian left. This leaves true conservatives, who believe strongly in limited government and identify with the Goldwater- era Republican party, wondering whether they still have a political home in the modern GOP. In the eyes of many conservatives, today’s GOP simply has abandoned its limited-government heritage to buy votes and gain political power in Washington. conservative GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 4 ... Cached Consider that Mr. Bush has not vetoed a single bill, nor does he even bother to employ conservative rhetoric. Chris Edwards of the CATO Institute says this about the President: “I’ve never seen him give a speech in which he says government is too big and we need to cut costs.” Furthermore, the outlook for spending restraint during a second Bush term is nil: “When you have a president who has a bunch of his own spending initiatives like education and the Medicare drug bill, it makes it difficult for him to go out and say that Congress is being wasteful,” Mr. Edwards states. conservative GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 5 ... Cached Columnists have coined the phrase “Big-Government Republicans” to describe the current crop of free spenders now controlling the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives. Many of the president’s closest advisors are Big-Government Republicans, former leftists who have no qualms about spending huge amounts of money both at home and abroad to achieve supposedly conservative ends. conservative GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 6 ... Cached The irony is that conservatives suffered through decades of Democratic control of Congress, always believing that liberals were to blame for the relentless growth of the federal government. When Republicans finally took control of Congress in 1994, many saw an opportunity for a real conservative revolution. But first, conservatives were told, the Democratic administration had to be removed. In the meantime, spending continued unabated throughout the 1990s. When Republicans won the White House in 2000, another opportunity seemed at hand. The Senate, however, was still in Democratic hands-- the last possible GOP scapegoat. Finally, in 2002 the GOP took control of the Senate and increased its majority in the U.S. House. Surely this was the moment conservatives had been waiting for! Yet the past year has seen more spending than ever, including the disastrous Medicare bill that will cost trillions over coming decades. The latest line is that the GOP needs a filibuster-proof Senate of 60 Republicans, and then, finally, the party can begin to implement a conservative agenda. conservative GOP Abandons Conservatives 01 December 2003    Texas Straight Talk 01 December 2003 verse 7 ... Cached At what point will conservatives stop accepting these excuses? When does the conservative base of the GOP, a base that remains firmly committed to the principle of limited government, finally demand new leadership and a return to conservative values? Will conservatives abandon the party when they realize the GOP, at least under its current leadership, is simply not interested in reducing the size and scope of the federal government? With Republicans controlling the administration and the legislature, and nominally controlling the Supreme Court, the party has run out of other people to blame. One thing is certain: Republicans who support bigger entitlement programs and bigger federal budgets have lost all credibility as advocates for limited government. conservative Government and Marriage 19 January 2004    Texas Straight Talk 19 January 2004 verse 6 ... Cached The failed history of welfarism and socialism in America shows that government programs ultimately erode our culture by damaging personal virtue. When government ostensibly attempts to promote culture, it always further erodes liberty. The administration’s proposal only expands the reach of the federal welfare state, even if for supposedly conservative ends. Healthy marriages are not the result of government programs. Healthy marriages are the result of individual conviction and personal responsibility, neither of which can be mandated by government. conservative Spending and Lying 02 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 02 February 2004 verse 4 ... Cached Some conservatives have criticized Mr. Bush’s spending requests, but their votes don’t always match their words. True fiscal conservatives in Congress have only one choice: Vote NO on all spending bills, especially the 13 annual appropriations bills. This is the only honest measure of whether any member of Congress truly wants smaller government. It’s galling to hear members who voted for the Medicare bill and huge increases in 2004 agency budgets complain about excessive spending. conservative Congress Goes AWOL 09 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 09 February 2004 verse 5 ... Cached Various weak and disingenuous arguments have been made claiming that watered-down congressional resolutions authorizing force are adequate, and that war has been waged in the past without express declarations. But the letter of the Constitution trumps political expediency, and past sins hardly justify ignoring the rule of law today. It is pathetic to hear supposedly strict-constructionist conservatives use Clintonian verbal gymnastics to justify their party’s unconstitutional actions. conservative Congress Goes AWOL 09 February 2004    Texas Straight Talk 09 February 2004 verse 8 ... Cached The president stated in a speech last week that had Saddam Hussein remained in power, the United Nations resolutions and condemnations would be “scraps of paper amounting to nothing.” In the eyes of many conservatives and libertarians, it is our own Constitution being treated as a meaningless scrap of paper. conservative Gay Marriage Quicksand 01 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 01 March 2004 verse 8 ... Cached It is great comedy to hear the secular, pro-gay left, so hostile to states’ rights in virtually every instance, suddenly discover the tyranny of centralized government. The newly minted protectors of local rule find themselves demanding: “Why should Washington dictate marriage standards for Massachusetts and California? Let the people of those states decide for themselves.” This is precisely the argument conservatives and libertarians have been making for decades! Why should Washington dictate education, abortion, environment, and labor rules to the states? The American people hold widely diverse views on virtually all political matters, and the Founders wanted the various state governments to most accurately reflect those views. This is the significance of the 10th Amendment, which the left in particular has abused for decades. conservative Gay Marriage Quicksand 01 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 01 March 2004 verse 9 ... Cached Social problems cannot be solved by constitutional amendments or government edicts. Nationalizing marriage laws will only grant more power over our lives to the federal government, even if for supposedly conservative ends. Throughout the 20th century, the relentless federalization of state law served the interests of the cultural left, and we should not kid ourselves that the same practice now can save freedom and morality. True conservatives and libertarians should understand that the solution to our moral and cultural decline does not lie in a strong centralized government. conservative Congressional Indecency 15 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 2004 verse 5 ... Cached There’s nothing new about this latest congressional attack on expression. The political right wing has always embraced censorship, believing that government can foster and protect moral values through strict regulation of speech. But this curious attitude conflicts with the central tenet of conservatism, namely a healthy mistrust of government. Why do conservatives feel compelled to have a federal nanny state protect their children from indecency? Why do conservatives, who once questioned and resisted the growing involvement of government in our lives, now trust FCC bureaucrats to determine moral standards? Conservatives should know that a decent society is rooted in strong families, churches, and civic institutions, not government control of broadcasting. conservative Congressional Indecency 15 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 15 March 2004 verse 7 ... Cached Conservatives must understand that the powers they grant the FCC today may one day be used against them. It is not hard to imagine a future where criticism of abortion is deemed hate speech against women, or criticism of affirmative action considered an unlawful attack on minorities. It is not hard to imagine President Hillary Clinton ordering the FCC to shut down Rush Limbaugh for using the term “feminazi.” Already a petition has been filed with the Justice department to investigate The Passion of the Christ for possible hate crimes against those who dislike the film’s theology! Big-government conservatives will learn that heavy-handed federal control of speech is far more likely to result in a rigidly secular, politically-correct society than a moral society imbued with Christian virtue. conservative Iraq One Year Later 22 March 2004    Texas Straight Talk 22 March 2004 verse 5 ... Cached One justification was that Saddam Hussein ignored United Nations Security Council resolutions. Whether this was true or not was none of our concern. America should never act at the behest of the UN or help enforce its illegitimate edicts. America should never commit troops to any UN action. We should not even be a member of the UN, but rather should ignore it completely. Membership in the UN is incompatible with our Constitution and national sovereignty. It was nonsensical for conservatives suddenly to cite Iraq’s purported lack of cooperation with the UN as justification for war. conservative Torture, War, and Presidential Powers 14 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 14 June 2004 verse 8 ... Cached Conservatives should understand that the power given the president today will pass to the president’s successors, who may be only too eager to abuse that unbridled power domestically to destroy their political enemies. Remember the anger directed at President Clinton for acting “above the law” when it came to federal perjury charges? An imperial presidency threatens all of us who oppose unlimited state power over our lives. conservative Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 3 ... Cached House leaders knew the spending control bill had little chance of passing. In fact, that’s why they allowed the vote to happen. The real goal was to appease fiscal conservatives in Congress, some of whom have become increasingly uncomfortable with the unrestrained spending contained in the proposed 2004 budget. Some of these conservatives supported an alternative budget that merely spent about 1% less than the proposed budget, and even that nominal act of rebellion earned them the ire of House leadership. The spending control measure considered last week was merely a symbolic gesture designed to quash their complaints and ensure cooperation when the final budget vote is cast later this year. After all, those members now can tell their constituents they voted to keep a lid on spending, even as they please their party bosses later. conservative Why Can't Congress Stop Spending? 28 June 2004    Texas Straight Talk 28 June 2004 verse 7 ... Cached The words of H.R. Gross, the great libertarian-conservative congressman from Iowa, ring as true today as they did during a budget debate in 1974: conservative Saving the World with Your Money 19 July 2004    Texas Straight Talk 19 July 2004 verse 5 ... Cached The Millennium Challenge Act is designed to appease fiscal conservatives and defense hawks by appearing to single out friendly, well-behaved nations for aid payments, ostensibly creating a carrot-and-stick approach. But the Act merely puts a shiny new label on the same old failed policy of trying to remake the world using welfare. Welfare has never worked at home and it’s never worked abroad, no matter what “incentives” Congress tries to attach. conservative A Texas Platform for the GOP 30 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 30 August 2004 verse 2 ... Cached As the 2004 national GOP convention begins Monday, we should be prepared to hear a Republican agenda that sounds more like FDR or Woodrow Wilson than Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan. A party that once defined itself by the fundamental conservative principle that government power should be used sparingly and judiciously, now supports a program of bigger government at home, more militarism abroad, and less respect for constitutional freedoms. An examination of the Texas state GOP platform reveals just how far the national Republican party has strayed from true conservative principles and the ideal of limited constitutional government. conservative A Texas Platform for the GOP 30 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 30 August 2004 verse 6 ... Cached When it comes to 2nd amendment rights, the Texas GOP platform is uncompromising. It calls for outright abolition of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. It also calls for repeal of all laws infringing upon 2nd amendment rights. This is another example of grassroots conservatives in Texas taking a position that Republicans in Washington lack the courage to endorse. conservative A Texas Platform for the GOP 30 August 2004    Texas Straight Talk 30 August 2004 verse 7 ... Cached Education? The Texas GOP platform calls for the abolition of the Department of Education. Taxes? Texas Republicans urge the repeal of the 16th amendment and the abolition of the IRS, an agency the platform says is “Unacceptable to taxpayers.” On dozens of other issues, from abortion to activist judges to religious freedom, the Texas Republican party promotes true conservative values and strict adherence to the Constitution. Real conservatives should demand the same from the national Republican Party this week in New York. conservative The Imperial Judiciary 04 October 2004    Texas Straight Talk 04 October 2004 verse 6 ... Cached The ultimate solution to the problem of unbridled judicial activism at the federal level is clear: Congress must reassert its constitutional authority to define and restrict the jurisdiction of federal courts. This power is plainly granted in Article III, and no constitutional amendments are required. On the contrary, any constitutional amendment addressing judicial activism would only grant legitimacy to the dangerous idea that social issues are federal matters. Remember, when social issues are federalized, conservatives always lose. Giving more authority over social matters to any branch of the federal government is a mistake, because a centralized government is unlikely to reflect local sentiment for long. If anything, the marriage amendment would have given the secular left an excuse to impose gay marriage on all of us in future years, as the issue would have been irrefutably federalized. conservative Raising the Debt Limit: A Disgrace 22 November 2004    Texas Straight Talk 22 November 2004 verse 4 ... Cached It’s particularly galling when members of Congress pledge never to raise taxes, but then vote to increase the debt limit. By doing so, they are voting to raise taxes on future generations pure and simple. Debt does matter, despite the flawed arguments of the supply-siders. It will have to be repaid by future generations who did not incur it. To hear supposed conservatives argue the case for more federal debt is disgraceful, quite frankly. Deficit spending is the antithesis of conservatism. conservative Ignoring Reality in Iraq 13 December 2004    Texas Straight Talk 13 December 2004 verse 8 ... Cached Even opponents of the war now argue that we must occupy Iraq indefinitely until a democratic government takes hold, no matter what the costs. No attempt is made by either side to explain exactly why it is the duty of American soldiers to die for the benefit of Iraq or any other foreign country. No reason is given why American taxpayers must pay billions of dollars to build infrastructure in Iraq. We are expected to accept the interventionist approach without question, as though no other options exist. This blanket acceptance of foreign meddling and foreign aid may be the current Republican policy, but it is not a conservative policy by any means. conservative Another UN Insult 03 January 2005    Texas Straight Talk 03 January 2005 verse 5 ... Cached The oil-for-food scandal brewing in the United Nations also has provoked long-overdue denunciations of the organization from several pundits and politicians on the right. Of course most of you didn’t need a scandal to convince you that the UN is anti-American, or that it egregiously wastes our tax dollars. I’m glad more Republicans are finally catching on to what many Constitutionalists, libertarians, Birchers, Goldwaterites, and religious conservatives have been saying for decades: we should get out of the UN, and get the UN out of America. I certainly agree with these newly minted critics, having advocated getting out for twenty-five years. This growing anti-UN sentiment provides an opportunity to make a larger point, namely that participation in the organization is fundamentally incompatible with American sovereignty and the Constitution. conservative UN Scandals Are Not the Issue 17 January 2005    Texas Straight Talk 17 January 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Two weeks ago I discussed the growing sentiment among conservatives in America that we should consider getting out of the United Nations. Much of this sentiment has been generated by the oil-for-food scandal, but this strikes me as misguided. Sovereignty is the issue, not scandals, and many newly-minted critics of the UN were happy to support the organization when it did our foreign policy bidding. conservative What does Freedom Really Mean? 07 February 2005    Texas Straight Talk 07 February 2005 verse 11 ... Cached The political right equates freedom with national greatness brought about through military strength. Like the left, modern conservatives favor an all-powerful central state-- but for militarism, corporatism, and faith-based welfarism. Unlike the Taft-Goldwater conservatives of yesteryear, today’s Republicans are eager to expand government spending, increase the federal police apparatus, and intervene militarily around the world. The last tenuous links between conservatives and support for smaller government have been severed. “Conservatism,” which once meant respect for tradition and distrust of active government, has transformed into big-government utopian grandiosity. conservative What does Freedom Really Mean? 07 February 2005    Texas Straight Talk 07 February 2005 verse 12 ... Cached Orwell certainly was right about the use of meaningless words in politics. If we hope to remain free, we must cut through the fog and attach concrete meanings to the words politicians use to deceive us. We must reassert that America is a republic, not a democracy, and remind ourselves that the Constitution places limits on government that no majority can overrule. We must resist any use of the word “freedom” to describe state action. We must reject the current meaningless designations of “liberals” and “conservatives,” in favor of an accurate term for both: statists. conservative Pro-Life Politics? 28 March 2005    Texas Straight Talk 28 March 2005 verse 7 ... Cached This federalization of social issues, often championed by conservatives, has not created a pro-life culture, however. It simply has prevented the 50 states from enacting laws that more closely reflect the views of their citizens. Once we accepted the federalization of abortion law under the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, we lost the ability to apply local community standards to ethical issues. It is much more difficult for pro-life advocates to win politically at the federal level. Those who seek a pro-life culture must accept that we will never persuade 300 million Americans to agree with us. Our focus should be on overturning Roe and getting the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters. A pro-life culture can be built only from the ground up, person by person. For too long we have viewed the battle as purely political, but no political victory can change a degraded culture. A pro-life culture must arise from each of us as individuals, not by the edict of an amoral federal government. conservative Theology, Not Politics 11 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 11 April 2005 verse 5 ... Cached Just two years ago conservatives were busy scolding the Pope for his refusal to back our invasion of Iraq. One conservative media favorite even made the sickening suggestion that the Pope was the enemy of the United States because he would not support our aggression in the Middle East. The Pontiff would not ignore the inherent contradiction in being pro-life and pro-war, nor distort just war doctrine to endorse attacking a nation that clearly posed no threat to America-- and conservatives resented it. September 11th did not change everything, and the Pope understood that killing is still killing. The hypocritical pro-war conservatives lauding him today have very short memories. conservative Theology, Not Politics 11 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 11 April 2005 verse 7 ... Cached Both conservatives and liberals cannot understand that the Pope’s pronouncements were theological, not political. He was one of the few humans on earth who could not be bullied or threatened by any government. He was a man of God, not a man of the state. He was not a policy maker, but rather a steward of long-established Catholic doctrine. His mission was to save souls, not serve the political agendas of any nation, party, or politician. conservative Theology, Not Politics 11 April 2005    Texas Straight Talk 11 April 2005 verse 8 ... Cached To the secularists, this was John Paul II’s unforgivable sin-- he placed service to God above service to the state. Most politicians view the state, not God, as the supreme ruler on earth. They simply cannot abide a theology that does not comport with their vision of unlimited state power. This is precisely why both conservatives and liberals savaged John Paul II when his theological pronouncements did not fit their goals. But perhaps their goals simply were not godly. conservative CAFTA: More Bureaucracy, Less Free Trade 06 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 06 June 2005 verse 7 ... Cached The tax bill in question is just the tip of the iceberg. The quasi-judicial regime created under CAFTA will have the same power to coerce our cowardly legislature into changing American laws in the future. Labor and environmental rules are inherently associated with trade laws, and we can be sure that CAFTA will provide yet another avenue for globalists to impose the Kyoto Accord and similar agreements on the American people. CAFTA also imposes the International Labor Organization’s manifesto, which could have been written by Karl Marx, on American business. I encourage every conservative and libertarian who supports CAFTA to read the ILO declaration and consider whether they still believe the treaty will make America more free. conservative NeoCon Global Government 13 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 13 June 2005 verse 3 ... Cached This week Congress will vote on a bill to expand the power of the United Nations beyond the dreams of even the most ardent left-wing, one-world globalists. But this time the UN power grabbers aren’t European liberals; they are American neo-conservatives, who plan to use the UN to implement their own brand of world government. conservative NeoCon Global Government 13 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 13 June 2005 verse 9 ... Cached Conservatives who have been critical of the UN in the past have enthusiastically embraced this bill and the concept of UN reform. But what is the desired end of “UN reform”? The UN is an organization that was designed to undermine sovereignty and representative government. It is unelected and unaccountable to citizens by its very design. Will UN reform change anything about the fact that its core mission is objectionable? Do honest UN critics really want an expanded UN that functions more “efficiently”? conservative Can the UN Really be Reformed? 20 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 20 June 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Congress voted last week to give the United Nations unprecedented new authority to intervene in sovereign states, under the guise of UN “reform.” The reform bill theoretically provides for Congress to withhold 50% of US dues to the UN, but this will never happen. The bill allows the Secretary of State to make the ultimate decision about payment, and the State department strongly opposes withholding our dues in the first place. In fact, the State department is the UN’s closest ally in the entire federal government. This talk about withholding our dues is nothing but hot air designed to dupe real conservatives outside Washington into believing Congress is getting tough with the UN. Nothing could be further from the truth. Both the congressional leadership and the Bush administration are firmly committed to globalism, as evidenced not only by their commitment to the UN, by also by their position on trade agreements like CAFTA. Mark my words, in five years nobody will be talking about UN reform and our dues payments will be higher than ever. conservative Can the UN Really be Reformed? 20 June 2005    Texas Straight Talk 20 June 2005 verse 5 ... Cached Many conservatives have bought into the neoconservative dream of using the UN as a tool to advance an aggressive US foreign policy. But granting more power to the UN can only serve the interests of globalists, who see national sovereignty as an obstacle to their goals. The more we involve ourselves with the UN, the more we entangle ourselves in the affairs of other nations to our own detriment. America has nothing to show for our 60 years in the UN except for tens of thousands of dead or injured soldiers, and hundreds of billions of wasted tax dollars. The 20th century-- the UN century-- was the bloodiest in the world’s history. We must stop fooling ourselves that the UN is an instrument of world peace. conservative Lessons from the Kelo Decision 04 July 2005    Texas Straight Talk 04 July 2005 verse 6 ... Cached It is folly to believe we will regain lost freedoms if only the right individuals are appointed to the Supreme Court. Republican presidents, including conservative icon Ronald Reagan, have appointed some of our very worst Supreme Court Justices. In today’s political context, it frankly matters very little whom President Bush appoints to replace Justice O’Connor. Even the most promising jurist can change radically over the course of a lifetime appointment. We are supposed to be a nation of laws, not men, and the fixation on individuals as saviors of our freedoms is misplaced. America will regain lost freedoms only when her citizens wake up and reclaim a national sense of self-reliance, individualism, and limited government. A handful of judges cannot save a nation from itself. conservative Deficit Spending and Katrina 19 September 2005    Texas Straight Talk 19 September 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Some economists estimate that rebuilding New Orleans and other areas impacted by Hurricane Katrina will cost taxpayers at least $200 billion, which may be a conservative figure considering it could takes decades to fully restore the city. The problem is that our Treasury does not have an extra $200 billion dollars on hand. This means the money either will be printed or borrowed, both of which bode ill for the American economy. Several conservatives in Congress, however, are cautioning against throwing more and more taxpayer money at the problem with no accountability. While we all want to help the victims of Katrina, we must remember that no one is better off if we create record deficits that hobble our children and grandchildren for generations. conservative Empowering the UN in the Guise of Reform 03 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 03 October 2005 verse 8 ... Cached While it may be true that the United States exerts considerable control over the United Nations at present, this may not always be the case. It is certainly conceivable that at some future date a weakened US may face a financially and militarily stronger China, for example, that demands UN action within US borders after determining that the US has not lived up to its “responsibility to protect.” This is the lesson for conservatives who are cheering on a “reform” process that is actually strengthening the United Nations. What will happen when the sovereignty we undermine through measures like this turns out to be our own? conservative Our Political Federal Courts 10 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 10 October 2005 verse 3 ... Cached The nomination of White House lawyer Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court has raised questions about her qualifications and political ideology. Conservatives and liberals alike fear that Ms. Miers will not represent their views, and will rule on issues in ways that harm our nation. But clearly we are not asking the right questions about Supreme Court nominees. The issue is not how candidates intend to wield judicial power, but rather whether they understand that the Constitution imposes limits on that power in the first place. We are guilty of permitting our federal courts to become politicized, when the proper role of those courts is to protect us from the very abuses that arise from politics. conservative Our Political Federal Courts 10 October 2005    Texas Straight Talk 10 October 2005 verse 4 ... Cached Instead of viewing federal judicial nominees as liberals or conservatives, we ought to be viewing them as activists or originalists. Judicial activism is a popular and often misused term in politics today, but if we define it properly we can better understand the problem with our courts. Judicial activism is the practice of judges legislating from the bench, by interpreting law in a manner that creates an outcome to fit their political views. But judicial activism is more than this. Activist federal judges not only craft laws, they also ignore the laws in place-- particularly the enumerated powers listed in Article I of the Constitution and underscored by the 9th and 10th amendments. By ignoring the strict constitutional limits placed on the federal government and bulldozing states’ rights, federal judges opened the door to the growth of wildly extra-constitutional government in the 20th century. Activist courts enable activist government. conservative Too Little, Too Late 14 November 2005    Texas Straight Talk 14 November 2005 verse 3 ... Cached Congress is poised to consider a budget bill this week in a vote both parties consider critical, but in reality the bill is nothing more than a political exercise by congressional leaders designed to convince voters that something is being done about runaway federal spending. Having spent the last five years out-pandering the Democrats by spending money to buy off various voting constituencies, congressional Republicans now find themselves forced to appeal to their unhappy conservative base by applying window dressing to the bloated 2006 federal budget. conservative Domestic Surveillance and the Patriot Act 26 December 2005    Texas Straight Talk 26 December 2005 verse 7 ... Cached The administration assures us that domestic surveillance is done to protect us. But the crucial point is this: Government assurances are not good enough in a free society. The overwhelming burden must always be placed on government to justify any new encroachment on our liberty. Now that the emotions of September 11th have cooled, the American people are less willing to blindly accept terrorism as an excuse for expanding federal surveillance powers. Conservatives who support the Bush administration should remember that powers we give government today will not go away when future administrations take office. conservative Federalizing Social Policy 30 January 2006    Texas Straight Talk 30 January 2006 verse 7 ... Cached Why are we so afraid to follow the Constitution and let state legislatures decide social policy? Surely people on both sides of the abortion debate realize that it's far easier to influence government at the state and local level. The federalization of social issues, originally championed by the left but now embraced by conservatives, simply has prevented the 50 states from enacting laws that more closely reflect the views of their citizens. Once we accepted the federalization of abortion law under Roe, we lost the ability to apply local community standards to ethical issues. conservative Stop the NAIS 29 May 2006    Texas Straight Talk 29 May 2006 verse 11 ... Cached NAIS means more government, more regulations, more fees, more federal spending, less privacy, and diminished property rights. It’s exactly the kind of federal program every conservative, civil libertarian, animal lover, businessman, farmer, and rancher should oppose. The House has already acted, but there’s still time to tell the Senate to dump NAIS. Please call your Senators and tell them you oppose spending even one dime on the NAIS program in the 2007 agriculture appropriations bill. conservative IRS Threatens Political Speech 24 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 24 July 2006 verse 3 ... Cached Five years ago, I wrote about threats made by the Internal Revenue Service against conservative churches for supposedly engaging in politicking. Today, the IRS is again attempting to chill free speech, sending notices to more than 15,000 non-profit organizations—including churches—regarding its new crackdown on political activity. conservative IRS Threatens Political Speech 24 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 24 July 2006 verse 5 ... Cached I agree with my colleague Walter Jones of North Carolina that the political views of any particular church or its members are none of the government’s business. Congressman Jones introduced legislation that addresses this very serious issue of IRS harassment of churches engaging in conservative political activity. This bill is badly needed to end the IRS practice of threatening certain politically disfavored faiths with loss of their tax-exempt status, while ignoring the very open and public political activities of other churches. While some well-known leftist preachers routinely advocate socialism from the pulpit, many conservative Christian and Jewish congregations cannot present their political beliefs without risking scrutiny from the tax collector. conservative IRS Threatens Political Speech 24 July 2006    Texas Straight Talk 24 July 2006 verse 9 ... Cached The political left, however, seeks to impose the viewpoint that public life must be secular, and that government cannot reflect morality derived from faith. Many Democrats, not all, are threatened by strong religious institutions because they want an ever-growing federal government to serve as the unchallenged authority in our society. So the real motivation behind the insistence on a separation of church and state is not based on respect for the First amendment, but rather on a desire to diminish the influence of religious conservatives at the ballot box. conservative Taxes, Spending, and Debt are the Real Issues 16 October 2006    Texas Straight Talk 16 October 2006 verse 5 ... Cached Many conservatives have touted the Fair Tax proposal as an issue in the upcoming election. A pure consumption tax like the Fair Tax would be better than the current system only if we truly did away with the income tax by repealing the 16th amendment. Otherwise, we could end up with both the income tax and a national sales tax. A consumption tax also provides more transparency and less complexity. But the real issue is total spending by government, not tax reform. In other words, why change the tax structure if spending stays the same? Once we accept that the federal government needs $2.7 trillion from us-- and more each year-- the only question left is from whom it will be collected. Until the federal government is held to its proper constitutionally limited functions, tax reform will remain a mirage. conservative The 2008 Federal Budget 02 April 2007    Texas Straight Talk 02 April 2007 verse 8 ... Cached My message to my colleagues is simple: If you claim to support smaller government, don’t introduce budgets that increase spending over the previous year. Can any fiscal conservative in Congress honestly believe that overall federal spending cannot be cut 25%? We could cut spending by two-thirds and still have a federal government as large as it was in 1990. conservative Earmark Victory May Be A Hollow One 18 June 2007    Texas Straight Talk 18 June 2007 verse 6 ... Cached So there is a danger that small-government conservatives will look at this small victory for transparency and forget the much larger and more difficult battle of returning the United States government to spending levels more in line with its constitutional functions. Without taking a serious look at the actual total spending in these appropriations bills, we will miss the real threat to our economic security. Failed government agencies like FEMA will still get tens of billions of dollars to mismanage when the next disaster strikes. Corrupt foreign governments will still be lavishly funded with dollars taken from working Americans to prop up their regimes. The United conservative Exposing the True Isolationists 23 July 2007    Texas Straight Talk 23 July 2007 verse 5 ... Cached In terms of modern politics, isolationism is not so much an approach to American foreign policy as it is the result of the policies enacted by proponents of globalism. From offensive statements about “Old Europe” (as differentiated from “New Europe”), necessitated by the desire to justify a military presence in Iraq, to conflicts at the WTO, the flowery rhetoric of the neo-conservatives often takes vicious turns when unrealistic policies meet with reality. conservative Exposing the True Isolationists 23 July 2007    Texas Straight Talk 23 July 2007 verse 6 ... Cached In their hopes to remake the world in their image, the globalist elite who run much of America’s policy-making apparatus simply further isolate our country from the rest of the world. By claiming a moral superiority that is so evidently absent when the effects of their policies are witnessed, neo-conservatives have made America seem hypocritical to many abroad. conservative Exposing the True Isolationists 23 July 2007    Texas Straight Talk 23 July 2007 verse 9 ... Cached Despite the protestations of the neo-conservatives, this UN program is not the only example of personal enrichment that comes to the mind of those who doubt America’s authenticity due to these policies. Does anybody remember Richard Perle’s resignation from the defense policy board? conservative As Recess Begins, Spending Spree Continues 06 August 2007    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2007 verse 3 ... Cached These last few weeks the House has been in a rush to pass spending bills before August recess. In fact, visitors walking the hallways of Congress become immediately struck by the apparent spending battle between the “conservative Democrats” of the so-called “Blue Dog Coalition,” and the Republican Study Committee, or RSC, generally representing the more conservative bloc of Republican House members. Members of each of these groups place large posters on easels outside their offices. The purpose behind this seems clear, to point the finger at the opposite party for the current budget mess that continues to threaten America’s future. conservative As Recess Begins, Spending Spree Continues 06 August 2007    Texas Straight Talk 06 August 2007 verse 8 ... Cached The federal government has a spending problem. Each year our current accounts balance gets worse and worse, and the amount of foreign held government debt has skyrocketed. Both Republicans and Democrats; conservatives, liberals and moderates, indeed nearly every single-member of the Washington political establishment, is addicted to one form of federal spending or another. conservative Aging Infrastructure 27 August 2007    Texas Straight Talk 27 August 2007 verse 9 ... Cached Even the most ardent liberal and passionate conservative can agree that when they pay gasoline taxes, the least they expect is a road and bridge system that won't crumble beneath their feet. Before any subsidies or welfare payments are paid out, before social security is handed out to illegal immigrants, or health care is given to everyone, before bridges to nowhere are built at home, or entire countries bombed and rebuilt abroad, before any other myriad of exotic government projects are even considered, infrastructure should be attended to and taken seriously. conservative The True Cost of Taxing and Spending 18 November 2007    Texas Straight Talk 18 November 2007 verse 4 ... Cached One thing taxpayers know is taxing and spending is expensive, and government cost estimates tend to be on the conservative side relative to the actual bills. However extracted and spent $3.5 trillion is an unimaginable extra burden on our economy. Texas Straight Talk from 20 December 1996 to 23 June 2008 (573 editions) are included in this Concordance. Texas Straight Talk after 23 June 2008 is in blog form on Rep. Paul’s Congressional website and is not included in this Concordance. Remember, not everything in the concordance is Ron Paul’s words. Some things he quoted, and he added some newspaper and magazine articles to the Congressional Record. Check the original speech to see. Home Page    Contents    Concordance   E-mail list.