Since his election in 2010, Justin Amash (RLC-MI) has been one of our big successes in the House of Representatives. He has been a consistent voice for liberty and fiscally responsible government and has set a new standard of accountability which ought to be an inspiration for everyone in public office. Since he was elected he has posted multiple updates to his Facebook page every day that the House is in session detailing the issues being voted on and explaining his votes and his decision making process.

Rep. Amash has had his position in the 2012 election weakened by a redistricting plan designed to strengthen the positions of big-government incumbents in his state by transferring some of his voters to their districts and saddling him with more Democrat votes. It’s still a very winnable district, but he needs all the help he can get.

The key to winning elections for liberty candidates when fighting the entrenched system of perpetual incumbency is to raise money from outside of a single district and to reach out to Liberty Republicans all over the nation for support. With Ron Paul retiring we need to hold on to every seat we can. I don’t do this often, but I’m sending out a plea to Republican Liberty Caucus members and supporters nationwide to do what they can to help keep Justin Amash in Congress.

The best way to donate is through his 48-hour moneybomb which ends tomorrow. You can donate at AmashforCongress.com.

The Minnesota Chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus is proud to host a Welcome Social for the Midwest Leadership Conference. Guests from near and far are invited to join us, regardless of attendance at the conference. We look forward to seeing you for fellowship and networking on the eve on the Leadership Conference.

When: Thursday October 6, 2011, 6:00pm - 9:00pm
Where: Poor Richard's Commonhouse, 8301 Normandale Boulevard, Bloomington
Hors d'oeuvres and cash bar.  $10 suggested donation ($5 RLC members)

RSVP on Facebook.

Enjoy the entertainment from Chris Lomheim, Jason Peterson Delair, and Jana Anderson, who has toured extensively as a backing vocalist for some of the music industry's biggest names, including Stevie Nicks, Don Henley, Fleetwood Mac, and Jewel. Jana has also performed on almost every major television variety show, such as the Tonight Show and Late Night with Conan O'Brien. She has sung on recordings by Prince, Don Henley and the “Live in Boston” DVD/CD by Fleetwood Mac.

Shuttle service is available for out-of-town guests staying at the Double Tree.
Email info[at]rlcmn.org to arrange transportation.

 

Chat Live with Special Guests During the Debate

Welcome to our live online event for the FoxNews Republican Presidential Debate in Tampa Florida. The debate begins at 9pm eastern time on Thursday the 22nd and our live coverage will begin a little bit before that. We’ll have live chat commentary which you can participate in with capacity for hundreds to take part and share their observations during the debate, plus a post mortem after the debate which may feature a special guest. Drinking games during the debate are not only authorized, but encouraged. The chat application is right below and some information on the candidates fills out the rest of this article.

The debate is being sponsored by the Republican Party of Florida at their Presidency 5 straw poll event in Orlando, but you don’t have to pay $175 to attend (or have Ron Paul pay it for you).  You can watch it on cable on FoxNews and get the blow by blow commentary here.  It’ll be just like being in the audience. There will also be a livestream of the debate to watch on the web.

Prior to the debate you can submit your questions for the candidates on video through YouTube or just vote on the questions you like the best.

The Contenders

Gary Johnson is making big news right before the debate, because after being excluded from the last two debates, he battled his way back in with a 1% oor higher showing in five recent polls, plus he’s still outpolling Rick Santorum and John Huntsman.  In fact, in a current FoxNews online poll Johnson has surged ahead and is now tied for third with Rick Perry and ahead of Michelle Bachmann and Mitt Romney.  Interestingly, Johnson’s inclusion in the debate is over the objections of the Republican Party of Florida which has had a troubled history in dealing with the libertarian-leaning wing of the party which Johnson represents.  If Johnson can bring the kind of dynamism to this debate which he has shown in recent television appearances he could become a major contender again.

Rick Perry is the longest serving governor in the history of the state of Texas and has launched a campaign based around strong statements on states rights and getting Washington off the backs of the people. His statements are somewhat in contrast to his long record as a government insider and supporter of federal programs. He is perhaps best known in Texas for his friendliness to large corporations and the inside deals and special favors which have been hallmarks of his administration. This is Perry’s first debate and there is some speculation that he is not well prepared and may suffer based on his history of being a weak debate performer, or may even duck out at the last minute citing the wildfire crisis in Texas as a reason not to attend.

Ron Paul is probably the highest profile candidate. He is a 10 term Congressman from Texas known by his colleagues as “Dr. No” for his consistent opposition to any growth of government spending or programs and any legislation of questionable constitutionality. Paul ran for president in 2008 and his campaign launched the Tea Party movement and pioneered non-traditional fundraising methodology which has been adopted by other insurgent campaigns since then. Paul is a conservative libertarian politically who believes in minimal government and strict adherence to the Constitution and for his outspoken, sometimes irascible style.

Mitt Romney is a perceived frontrunner, but he has been running a very low profile campaign and losing ground to more active candidates. The former governor of Massachusetts has a strong business background and a successful record in office. He ran for president in 2008 and has high name recognition, but is somewhat tainted by his association with President Obama’s public health care plan which was largely based on a plan Romney instituted in Massachusetts which has been plagued by budget overruns. This debate is Romney’s opportunity to confirm that he is a frontrunner or end his campaign quickly with a bang.

Michelle Bachmann is a controversial Congresswoman from Minnesota who is best known for her association with the Tea Party movement and her extreme religious views which include strong opposition to gay rights and a call for a federal ban on pornography. Bachmann has a strongly fiscally conservative record and was a top contender in the polls until a few weeks ago when her numbers dropped into the single digits, possibly because of the entry of Rick Perry into the race and his appeal to the same demographic.

Herman Cain is the former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, a syndicated columnist and a former federal reserve board chairman.. Until recently he was a nationally syndicated radio talkshow host, but is on hiatus during his campaign. He is from Atlanta and has degrees in mathematics and computer science. He is a strong fiscal conservative with relatively pragmatic positions on social issues. He is an experienced and dynamic public speaker and brings powerful credentials as a very successful businessman to his campaign.

John Huntsman is the former Governor of Utah and most recently was President Obama’s Ambassador to China. He is seen as a moderate Republican with an appeal to independents, though so far his lack of media exposure and relatively low public profile have held him back from any success in national polls. If he performs well here it may take him from the back bench to being a more major contender.

Rick Santorum served two terms as Senator from Pennsylvania and two terms in Congress representing suburban Pittsburgh. He is Roman Catholic and has a reputation as an extreme religious conservative. He tried to legislate the teaching of intelligent design at the federal level and has made controversial statements on a variety of social issues. He is known for his aggressive and confrontational style and for not shying away from controversial positions.

For more information on the candidates, their statements and their records see Project Vote Smart.

MILWAUKEE – RLC-WI Chairman, Michael S. Murphy, publicly announced today that he will not seek another term as RLC-WI Chairman when his current term expires in January 2012.  In a statement issued by Murphy, he explains:

“Although I have had an exciting and knowledgeable experience acting as Chairman of the RLC-WI, I have made a personal decision not to seek re-election as the RLC-WI Chairman, come January 2012.  This is a decision that took quite sometime for me to consider, but now I must stand firm with my choice.”

Murphy further stated,

“Let it be known that my decision to step down as Chair has nothing to do with the RLC or its mission.  I shall always stand by the efforts of the RLC in trying to help foster the Liberty message within the Republican Party.”

Murphy did not elaborate extensively on why he is choosing to step down, but only briefly mentioned that he arrived at the decision because of “personal reasons”. 

Murphy, who held the office of Vice Chair at the time the Wisconsin Chapter was created in December 2009, assumed command of the RLC-WI when former State Chair, Ted Story, abruptly resigned from the organization in February 2010.  Since then, Murphy proceeded in growing the chapter, while also getting the RLC-WI active in the 2010 elections.

In the start of his term, Murphy assisted in making the first public appearance of the RLC-WI at the Republican Party of Wisconsin’s State Convention on May 22, 2010 in Milwaukee, WI. At the convention, Murphy and other RLC-WI board members conducted candidate outreach, promoted the RLC-WI chapter, and conducted general recruitment for the RLC-WI. 

For several months after the convention and leading up to the November 2010 elections, Murphy helped facilitate the endorsements of twenty Liberty-Minded Candidates for offices ranging from Senate to Sheriff in 2010, and an additional two in 2011 thus far.  From those endorsements, seven RLC-WI endorsed candidates went on to the Wisconsin State Assembly.

During the 2010 campaigns, with the help of the Dan Sebring For Congress Campaign, Murphy was instrumental in helping to publically expose the WI Congressional Delegation’s “Unwritten Rule” on endorsements.  The “Unwritten Rule” is a Ruling Class protectionist agreement between current WI Congressional Members, not to endorse any challenger who campaigns against another sitting Congressional incumbent regardless of partisanship. This agreement has been ongoing for several years amongst the entire Wisconsin Congressional Delegation. From the time the “Unwritten Rule” was publicly exposed, Murphy also saw to it that a resolution was crafted at his own County Republican Party in Milwaukee denouncing the “Unwritten Rule”, and ensured that the resolution made it all the way to a vote on the floor at the 2011 Republican Party of Wisconsin State Convention in Wisconsin Dells, WI., on May 21, 2011.

When not focusing on endorsements and helping to be the “Conscience of the Republican Party”, Murphy assisted in efforts to help champion legislation regarding the legalization of raw milk, the passage of Constitutional Carry in Wisconsin, and promoting WI Governor Scott Walker’s Budget Reform Bill.  On a couple occasions, Murphy also gave statements on behalf of the RLC-WI to national news sources such as “Politico” and the “Wall Street Journal” relating to Wisconsin politics.

With all the activism Murphy helped create and assist with, his efforts led him to receive the award for “Outstanding Activist for 2010” presented by the Republican Liberty Caucus at their National Convention, which was held in Arlington, VA., on February 12, 2011.

Murphy’s term, as well as all other RLC-WI Board Member terms, will soon expire at the RLC-WI’s Regular Convention in January 2012.  The exact date, time and location have not been set as of yet. According to RLC-WI bylaws, candidates for Officer shall have been Regular members of the Charter for at least one year prior to their nomination. Candidates for Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall have been Regular members for at least two years and members of the Board of Directors for at least six months prior to their nomination.

-30-

With GOP contenders battling it out for the chance to face President Barack Obama in 2012, the once “cult-following” of Texas Congressman Ron Paul has turned into a base large enough to consider him one of the frontrunners. Having a massive Facebook following, the second highest 2nd quarter funds raised after former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and recent poll victories such as the Southern Republican Leadership Conference straw poll; Paul’s more than 30 year old message of individual liberty, sound money and free markets is resonating with an ever larger audience.

Of course with this popularity comes criticism. Too many Republican voters and self-described “Constitutional conservatives”—at least those I’ve come across—have been quick to describe the libertarian-minded congressman as “kooky” and a “crazy old man”. Their primary focus is on foreign policy but some on economics as well. Despite Paul’s fervent belief in Thomas Jefferson’s philosophy of avoiding “entangling alliances”, these conservatives often paint him as a “liberal”. Perhaps liberal in the classical sense like John Stuart Mill, but certainly not in the modern-day so-called liberalism of persons like President Obama, Ed Schultz, and Alan Colmes.

Many rumors are spread by the anti-Paul conservatives. Paul supporters are often referred to as “PaulBots”—ironically similar to author Jason Materra’s term “Obama Zombies” used in the book of the same name—although save for a few kooky and loud conspiracy theorists, Paul supporters tend to be better at justifying their support for the jolly old man than do the Obama Zombies. Paul is often mischaracterized as a bigot, even though there is no evidence to support this ad hominem attack.

But what the anti-Paul conservatives—usually of the interventionist line of foreign policy thinking that is commonly referred to as neoconservatism, though having its roots in Woodrow Wilson—fail to do is actually look at what Paul’s foreign policy positions are and have been and see if they have any connection to reality.  Paul’s years of studying the Austrian School of Economics have had a surprising effect on his analytical skills when it comes to foreign policy.

Recently, Ron Paul supporters posted a video to Youtube entitled “Ron Paul the Master”. It shows a collection of speeches and interviews in which Ron Paul makes some stunning predictions about our current economic woes and even international conflicts of the present. And he does this as far back as 2002. Of course no one gave him the time of day.

Let’s analyze one of these speeches, which begins at 3 minutes into the video and was presented before congress on April 24, 2002.

“Our government intervention in the economy and in the private affairs of citizens, and the internal affairs of foreign countries, leads to uncertainty and many unintended consequences. Here are some of the consequences about which we should be concerned.

The United States, with Tony Blair as head cheerleader, will attack Iraq without proper authority, and a major war, the largest since World War II, will result.

 

 

Major moves will be made by China, India, Russia, and Pakistan in Central Asia to take advantage of the chaos for the purpose of grabbing land, resources, and strategic advantages sought after for years.”

This is absolutely true. The chaos gave us many unexpected problems. Al Qaeda’s presence in Iraq grew after the invasion. And the country is now under Shiite control, moving it dangerously close to Iran. In 2002, Iran’s president was the more philosophically minded Mohammed Khatami…but now we have an anti-Semitic loudmoth, Ahmedinejad. Russia has moved into Iran to build an energy alliance. Vladimir Putin, and his cronies in Gazprom and Lukoil would love to gain control of the natural resources in Iran and Russia has been helping the Islamic Republic develop nuclear technology which US intelligence believes is being developed for destructive purposes. Let’s hope and pray they are wrong.

China and Pakistan have certainly taken advantage of the chaos. Not only is their alliance stronger, but the oil contracts in Iraq are going to—guess who—China! Kind of debunks the whole left-wing moonbattery that Iraq was “blood for oil”.

You can find more detail in these articles:

http://money.cnn.com/2007/04/05/news/international/iraq_oil/index.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/28/AR2008082802200.html

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2010/June/China-Benefits-from-Oil-Deals-with-Iraq/

“Current Israeli-United States policies will solidify Arab Muslim nations, this will include those Muslim nations that in the past have fought against each other.

 

Some of our moderate Arab allies will be overthrown by Islamic fundamentalists.”

What exactly do you think the “Arab Spring” is? Peaceful democratic people overthrowing dictators? Not quite. The Muslim Brotherhood, a precursor to Hamas, has founded its own political party in Egypt; it is possible these theocrats will gain significant power in the new government. Let’s not forget that Libyan and Yemeni rebels have been linked to Al Qaeda. Just the other day the new Al Qaeda cheif Ayman Al-Zawahiri was lauding the rioters in Syria.

And certainly the dictators—such as Gaddafi and Mubarak—aren’t moderate in the eyes of their own people, but often American politicians have viewed them as such. Useful when we need them, disposable when we don’t as Mobutu Sese Seko and Saddam Hussein once were.

“Many American military personnel and civilians will be killed in the coming conflict.

 

The leaders of whichever side loses the war will be hauled into and tried before the International Criminal Court for war crimes. The United States will not officially lose the war, but neither will we win. Our military and political leaders will not be tried by the International Criminal Court”

This wasn’t entirely true, Saddam was tried by his own people. But did we really “win” the war. We turned the country over to the Shiite theocrats instead of secularists and now those people are getting close to Iran.

“An international dollar crisis will dramatically boost interest rates in the United States.”

 

Price inflation, with a major economic downturn, will decimate U.S. Federal Government finances, and exploding deficits and uncontrolled spending.”

Ah yes, remember when that Burger King value meal was around $3.

“Federal Reserve policy will continue at an expanding rate, with massive credit expansion, which will make the dollar crisis worse. Gold will be seen as an alternative to paper money as it returns to its historic role as money.”

Though Bernanke has kept interest rates low, there is the prospect of T-Bill interest rates going up with the forthcoming debt crisis. There has been a dollar devaluation of 40% against the Euro since this 2002 speech, nearly 14% since June 2010 alone according to an article in The Washington Post.

Quantitative easing most definitely contributed to the high gas prices we see today. If you think it was all the fault of this “Arab Spring”, take a look at the Commodity Price Index some time. This freshly “recycled” dough being put in the hands of speculators causes them to artificially drive up the price of oil and other commodities, some of which are being bought as a hedge against the falling dollar; quite the vicious cycle.

As for gold, when Congressman Paul gave this speech gold was roughly $300 per ounce and today it stands at more than $1615 per ounce; you can check out the historical data on gold prices here.

That’s a whopping 438% increase.

“Erosion of civil liberties here at home will continue as our government responds to political fear in dealing with the terrorist threat by making generous use of the powers obtained with the Patriot Act.

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.

 

 

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.”

The president today has the power to order the assassination American citizens, as in the case of Anwar Al-Awlaki—traitorous as he may be, this is wrong. The Constitution has rules for punishing those who commit treason. But President Obama has ignored this and has ordered him to be killed if possible with drone strikes in Yemen.

The welfare state has expanded significantly. A new, unaffordable addition to Medicare under Bush 43 was passed. We saw more than a trillion dollars of so called economic stimulus under Nancy Pelosi and the combined presidencies of Bush and Obama, and that’s not even including Obama’s wasteful and unpopular health care overhaul. Not to mention billions of foreign aid to countries, some of which—such as Pakistan—are less than trustworthy.

“This is the most important of my predictions: Policy changes could prevent all of the previous predictions from occurring. Unfortunately, that will not occur. In due course, the Constitution will continue to be steadily undermined and the American Republic further weakened

During the next decade, the American people will become poorer and less free, while they become more dependent on the government for economic security.

 

 

The war will prove to be divisive, with emotions and hatred growing between the various factions and special interests that drive our policies in the Middle East.”

The middle east is on fire right now. The Israelis are more concerned for their security than ever before. Meanwhile the Saudi lobby pushes us to deal with Iran, with the hopes that they can beat the Islamic Republic in terms of spheres of influence in this theocratic mess of a region.

“Agitation from more class warfare will succeed in dividing us domestically, and believe it or not, I expect lobbyists will thrive more than ever during the dangerous period of chaos.”

This one is self evident. Class warfare is a weapon of distraction used by those who wish to expand the size of government while fat cats at firms such as General Electric, Goldman Sachs, and BP fatten their wallets thanks to government’s policy of picking winners and losers via loopholes and subsidies. The administration may talk the talk, but just take a look at Obama’s campaign contributions and how cozy he is with Jeffrey Immelt; how GE almost got away with paying no taxes, and how a former Goldman Sachs legal adviser with no judicial experience now sits on the Supreme Court.

In addition, a piece was posted two days later, here, containing more words than in the video, which appears as if it may have been cropped to save time. Some of the predictions in that post, such as a reinstatement of the draft did not come true (thank God), but there is one of note that have somewhat come to fruition

“Some European countries will clandestinely support the Muslim countries and their anti-Israel pursuits.”

If you go on YouTube and read the comments sections on almost any video relating to middle eastern politics, you will find that it is a cesspool of anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rhetoric, and many of the people making these comments are living in Europe. You can take my word for it as a person of Middle Eastern descent who keeps up with these things, or you can check it out yourself. The barbaric theocrats of Hamas are given the benefit of the doubt by many YouTube in the UK, France, Germany and Greece, while the Israelis are fallaciously smeared as “genocidal” and heartless.

Ron Paul’s predictions show a deep understanding of not just economics, but human emotions in the geopolitical world. Those who dismiss him as a “nut” and on the fringe would be wise to thoroughly read this article before making such a judgment. The facts are on his side, and he truly does seem to know what he is talking about.

Dr. Paul concludes with:

“I have no timetable for these predictions, but just in case, keep them around and look at them in 5 to 10 years. Let us hope and pray that I am wrong on all accounts. If so, I will be very pleased.”

Well, 2012 will be ten years in. You weren’t wrong on all accounts Ron, in fact, you were right on a great many of them. We should all be most displeased that these predictions came true.

————————————————————————————————

Aaron Alghawi is a senior economics major at Texas A&M University, as well as an alternate board member and  Director of Student Outreach for the Republican Liberty Caucus.

Photo of Presidential Candidate Ron Paul (R, TX) by: Gage Skidmore (CC BY-SA 2.0)”]

CONCORD, N.H.–To bolster Republicans’ progress toward responsible government in the House of Representatives, the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire is endorsing David Simpson for state representative in a Hillsborough District 3 special election on Tuesday, Sept. 20.

Simpson, who is running for a vacant House seat representing the towns of Peterborough, New Ipswich, Sharon and Greenville, would bring important experience to reinforce the already impressive efforts of the Republican majority in restoring the common sense principles of limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility, free enterprise and adherence to the state and federal constitutions.

“The Republican majority has demonstrated that they are dedicated to bringing prosperity back to New Hampshire, and David Simpson will be a valuable addition to that effort,” said Andrew Hemingway, chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire. “David’s experience, primarily in the areas of finance, budgets and small businesses, will be important as we continue to undo the economic damage wrought by years of Democrat control and public mismanagement.”

On his Web site, www.davidlsimpson.org, Simpson makes clear his commitment to improving the business climate in New Hampshire, which will lead to economic and job growth. He says he wants to work to protect the New Hampshire Advantage by maintaining a reasonable regulatory balance, making business tax rates more competitive and protecting individuals right to work free from union coercion.

“David Simpson will strengthen Republican efforts to restore common sense government in Concord,” said Hemingway. “He is unwavering in his commitment to the welfare and prosperity of our state, and he understands that the only way to get the state back on the path to prosperity is by returning to our legacy of responsible, honest and limited government.”

In general, endorsed RLCNH candidates are strong proponents of limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility and free enterprise. They have shown their dedication to these ideals with their score on RLCNH’s 20-question candidate survey and their reputation among liberty activists. Endorsed candidates must score 80 percent or higher on the survey and they must have a strong character recognized by their peers.

For more information about David Simpson’s candidacy, please visit www.davidlsimpson.org.

by Rebekah Sharp

The FHFA (Federal Housing Financial Authority) has instituted seventeen separate law suits in the state of New York on behalf of Fraudie Mac and Phoney Mae (that’s us, as both of these institutions are in receivership) against the seventeen major banks (trusts/securities) for the massive fraud that perpetrated the biggest ponzi scheme in the history of our nation that has flat lined our economy. Since the filing of these suits, the fifty attorney general investigations and settlements (ooops I mean forty-nine now, they ousted Sniederman from New York because he was too tough on the banks) has been halted with the major banks walking out of the settlement meetings. That has me very busy and quite frustrated on two counts. First, didn’t like the settlement terms as it would let the banks off the hook for their criminal and civil liability, leaving homeowners without legal recourse to pursue a remedy and a collective settlement amount of only twenty billion to be divided up among the fifty states leaving a mere four hundred million for each state in the hands of, in our case Pam Bondi. Once the fees and cost for this investigation, which has already taken over one year, are paid back, that doesn’t leave much for the folks and there is no specifics in the plan of how much or who will be the recipient of what is left. So maybe it’s a good thing the banks walked out of the settlement meetings. But is it? No, it is not because there have been no penalties imposed for their walking out and that clearly tells us all just exactly who is in charge, the banks and not the attorney generals. Pam Bondi either doesn’t have a clear understanding of the problem or she too is in bed with the banks as throughout this year-long investigation she has lead the disruption (along with four of her contemporaries) of the settlement stating boldly and loudly that the deadbeat homeowners should not be rewarded for their irresponsibility by not paying their mortgages. Part of the original deal was the majority of the attorney generals wanted to make the banks reduce the principal amount of the loans to current market value and reduce the interest rate to a fixed four percent on homesteaded property. Ms. Bondi was against that too and fired the two assistant attorneys’ general, June Clarkston and Teresa Edwards, because they were too aggressive when pursuing the banks and the companies aiding the fraud. This has lead to an investigation into their wrongful termination. More of your tax dollars at work.

You may remember HB1191 the Fair Foreclosure Bill that it was subsequently killed in the 2011 Florida legislative session. That’s the bill that would make the State of Florida a non-judical state leading to the abolition of our homestead exemption and leave homeowners without legal recourse to pursue the massive fraud and the threat of eviction in twenty-four hours, rather than the current seventy-two hour requirement. Passidomo (R), of Tampa, has reintroduced The Fair Foreclosure Act of 2012 to be taken up in January’s session. This is the third year she has presented this bill. We must stop it once again, however this time will be the most difficult as the bank lobbyists have been very busy bees stuffing our representative’s coffers with career bonuses and promises of more for their 2012 re-election campaigns . This is a non-partisan problem…surely you see if this bill passes it will strip Floridians of so many of their liberties. The elderly are already having a very difficult time making their property tax payments, as with the rest of the state with their unemployment rate is so high.

We, at RLCNEF are committed “restore” the peoples liberties, and take our country back. Conservatives stand for the rule of law, and as such we hold the position that no citizen shall be deprived of property except by that same rule of law. Accordingly, we also hold that sufficient laws already exist in the state of Florida. We must stay on careful watch and not allow any more of our liberties to be taken and I sincerely feel that is role is to combat the Unfair Foreclosure Act of 2012. I am working day and night on this ONE project. Please help me.

The seventeen lawsuits filed in New York on behalf of the people, is yet another smoke and mirrors game to allow the folks to think that finally something serious is being done to make the banks pay back the money they stole from this country. Surely it will end in yet another settlement with most of the language written in such legalese as to exonerate the banks of all their civil and criminal liabilities at a huge cost to taxpayers. Let’s consider the expense to file, maintain and bring to a conclusion seventeen lawsuits in New York. The J.P. Morgan complaint filed is two hundred, seventy-seven pages long. I know because I read it. Imagine how much that document alone cost us to prepare and file. It’s nice to see so many attorneys employed in this country while the remainders of the folks eke out a living day by day. Let’s not forget that Fraudie Mac and Phoney Mae engaged in the exact same illegal and fraudulent behavior as the folks they are suing (and continue to engage in as I write this) and that will certainly be raised during the course of these suits. There is already talk of banks filing suit against them. So it goes that Wall Street has begun the in-fighting between themselves, all pointing the finger at each other.

Now the trillion dollar question is: How is any of this helping the economy, the homeowners or the rest of the American people? This is just another attempt to divert the public from the simple and plain solution put all the bankers in handcuffs. All these suits filed to avoid the obvious conclusion that what they have done is immoral, illegal both criminally and civilly and arresting each and every one and freezing their assets, both on shore and off shore, would solve the problem. Then, require the principal reduction to all homestead property to five percent below the Net Market Value (NMV), leaving a five percent equity position in the home. This very simple solution would get the economy back on track as homeowners can make their payments, plus fix up the homes they are allowing to deteriorate due to fear of foreclosure. Lowes, Home Depot, all kinds of businesses would improve and so would the real estate sector. Home values would go up, or at least stop going down and would serve to get this country back on track again.

I am committed wholeheartedly to this cause and will stand with the millions of others who have been and continue to be affected by this tragedy. If you agree please sign the petition to kill this bill: http://signon.org/sign/do-not-support-the-florida?source=s.tw&r_by=26214

Rebekah Sharp is a member of the Executive Board of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Northeast Florida.

Today, the Republican Liberty Caucus of Minnesota, a state affiliate of the Republican Liberty Caucus, announced endorsements for five members of the state Legislature who demonstrated their commitment to fiscal responsibility and smaller, more efficient government. "These freshmen members showed strength and poise as they faced unbelievable pressure to spend more money than the state would take in this biennium," said state RLC Chair Norann Dillon.  "It was not a popular position to take in the face of a state shutdown, but doing what's right and doing what's easy are not always the same thing." Founded in 1991, the Republican Liberty Caucus works to advance the principles of individual rights, limited government and free enterprise within the Republican Party.  The Minnesota Chapter was chartered in 2003. - 30 -

Tonight’s Republican Primary Debate was the best run debate we’ve had so far.  The structure was better and Wolf Blitzer managed the back and forth between the candidates more effectively than past moderators have done.  This made it more of a real debate, but my enjoyment was  tainted by a nagging awareness that the eight candidates standing on the stage did not really represent the diversity of the Republican Party.  I had to ask myself why the Republican Party of Florida and Tea Party Express allowed CNN to pick some candidates and exclude others based on arbitrary criteria which seem to serve their interests and not those of Republicans or the nation.

This was not a debate between candidates who represent Republican voters, but rather a debate between candidates hand picked by the media to play out their fictional version of what a Republican primary campaign should be like and what kind of candidates represent the factions within the Republcian Party.  Weak Republican leaders have allowed the media to effectively take control of this election and pick which candidates we are allowed to see and ultimately who we can vote for.

At the heart of this problem is the systematic exclusion of former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson from every debate since the first one in South Carolina.  Governor Johnson is as well qualified as anyone on the debate stage.  He has an exemplary record as a two term governor in a swing state.  He is the only governor in the race who still has the support of a majority of his home state voters.  He comes from a business background and built a multi-million dollar company from nothing. He has one of the best defined issue agendas of any candidate.  He has an active campaign with state organizations nationwide and a prominent presence in New Hampshire where he’s currently focusing his efforts.

Johnson has everything it should take to be a leading candidate, but for some reason the media seems to have singled him out for exclusion.  Are they ignoring Johnson for not fitting their definition of a Republican because he’s not pro-war, pro-bailout and religiously conservative?  Do they think having two libertarian-leaning candidates legitimizes that movement too much and might get either Johnson or Ron Paul elected?  Are they afraid that as a candidate who strongly appeals to independents and crossover voters he’s too dangerous to Obama?

No one really understands their motivation, but their shunning of Johnson is blatantly transparent and became offensively obvious with this latest debate.  Prior to this debate the trick for excluding Johnson was that he wasn’t scoring high enough in enough polls to qualify, a result which was accomplished by just not including his name in most of the polls and then claiming that even though he met the criteria in the polls he was in, he didn’t do well enough in the polls from which he was excluded.  I know it sounds crazy, but this really was the argument made by NBC and Fox in the two previous debates.

In tonight’s debate CNN added a new twist.  Up until two weeks ago they had been including Johnson in their polls, and while he wasn’t in the top tier, he was scoring a respectable 2 or 3 percent consistently.  In their last poll before the debate Johnson scored higher than Rick Santorum and John Huntsman and tied Herman Cain.  Yet despite this, CNN invited those three candidates to participate and did not invite Johnson to the debate.  They could not be swayed by emails, letters or phonecalls from Johnson’s supporters.  Then, as the jesters cap on this political farce, they dropped him fromt the list of candidates in the poll they took right before the debate, and in the results for that poll they removed him from the comparison listing from previous polls and replaced him with “someone else.”

Frankly, I cannot imagine a more deliberate or more obvious attempt to manipulate the primary process and effectively terminate a candidacy through the power of the media.  As a Republican I find the idea that the media should exercise this sort of power over a primary which determines the future of the party and of the nation to be terrifying.  Treat a candidate like he doesn’t exist and chances are that he will go away.  It was troubling enough when the Democrats did it to George McGovern, but to have a media which isn’t even sympathetic to the interests of the GOP doing it is scandalous.

But where is the outrage?  Why is RNC Chairman Reince Priebus not descending on Atlanta with an army of lawyers?  There seems to be a passive approval of CNN’s meddling in the election from the party establishment, because they fear the challenge to their corrupt and ineffective leadership that Johnson represents.  As a governor Johnson proved that he could govern without relying on special interests and corrupt bargains, and they know that the days of party insiders brokering elections and fattening their wallets at the expense of the people and in disregard to the grassroots would be numbered if Johnson was elected.

It’s likely that Johnson’s crime is that he is too good a candidate with ideas which are too likely to appeal to a broad spectrum of voters and the forces of the status quo in the media and in the party would just as soon not have him challenging their supremacy.  They can tolerate Ron Paul because he has no history of accomplishment and can be dismissed as a bit squirrely and academic – he may stir up the rabble but he probably can’t win the election and if he did he’s such an ideologue he’d be unable to get anything done.  What they can’t tolerate is is the threat of a younger, more dynamic and less easily marginalized pro-liberty reformer like Johnson.  Johnson has a record of successful reform, has no skeletons in his closet and has practical solutions and the ability to be pragmatic enough to get them passed.

Johnson is the real thing, and like Teddy Roosevelt and Barry Goldwater before him, the elites of the media and the party have aligned against him.  He’s too dangerous to be given a fair chance in a debate, and we’ve seen a corresponding dearth of coverage in the media when compared to lower polling candidates like Huntsman and Santorum.  He is a threat to the status quo cannot be tolerated by the establishment or their media allies.

The debates are grand theatre and the people love their bread and circuses, but as Republicans and as voters we should to be outraged and we ought to demand better from CNN and from our party leaders.

A previous version of this article appeared on Blogcritics Magazine

Los Angeles, September 12, 2011 - Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul will speak in Los Angeles on Saturday at the fall convention of the California Republican Party at the JW Marriott Los Angeles L.A. LIVE, 900 West Olympic Boulevard. Paul will deliver the keynote speech at the Freedom Speaks! event hosted by the Republican Liberty Caucus of California. The event begins at 10:00am. There is no charge for the event, however the RLCCA suggests a donation of $5 to $10. “The RLCCA’s Freedom Speaks! event, with a keynote speech by candidate Ron Paul, is a wonderful opportunity for Republicans and liberty activists in the greater Los Angeles area to hear Dr. Paul first hand, and to learn about opportunities to promote liberty inside the Republican Party with the RLCCA,” said RLCCA Chairman John Dennis. Also on Saturday at the Marriott, the CRP is conducting a presidential straw poll. Any registered Republican who has paid the 2011 Fall Convention registration fee is eligible to vote ($90 online, $100 on-site). Convention attendees must show their registration badge and photo identification in order to participate. The Ron Paul campaign may be able to provide financial assistance to Ron Paul supporters, see www.rlcca.org/notices for details. “Saturday’s straw poll is a huge opportunity for California Republicans to impact the presidential race, especially because the California primary has been pushed back to June,” said RLCCA Secretary Parke Bostrom. The RLCCA works to advance the ideals of individual rights, limited government, and free enterprise within the State of California and the Republican Party. The RLCCA supports candidates and policies that uphold these principles in order to secure a free and prosperous future for ourselves and our children. Learn more at www.rlcca.org.