United Liberty
Ron Paul: “I am the Commander in Chief”
Tue, 06/14/2011 - 1:25pm | posted by Rick Fisk
Watching the CNN-hosted New Hampshire debate on Monday evening, it became clear just how much different the 2012 Replican primary race is from 2008 and yet, how it is the same.
Like 2008, the field is littered with so-called conservatives who have been indelibly influenced by the rise of the neoconservatives, which peaked in 2004 and has, unbeknownst to its members, been in free-fall decline ever since.
At around the same point in the race four years ago, Ron Paul was relatively unknown except for a few hard-core followers. He made an impression back then in one of the early debates by repeating something he has said for years, that he would abolish the income tax given the chance.
His famous exchange with Rudy Giuliani at another debate propelled him even further. But because Paul didn’t have nearly the financial backing his opponents had in the early part of the campaign, his showing in Iowa and New Hampshire, two key states, seemed to doom his attempt to electoral failure. In all other ways, however, he has secured a victory that no other person with whom he’s shared a stage before or since has even remotely approached.
He’s made it possible for people to associate themselves with the Republican party and be proud to do so. As long as they can do so by defining themselves as “Ron Paul Republicans” that is. So, in this respect, the 2012 cycle is vastly different .
The June 13th, 2011 debate started off rather dully for all of the candidates, including Paul. There was very little time given to answer and Dr. Paul’s timing seemed slightly off as he tried to deliver as much information as he could in the very short time allotted for answers.
But this is of no consequence really because in any debate, it only takes one defining moment. If there’s anyone who knows how to seize the moment and own the debate it is Ron Paul. His moment came, coincidentally enough following a moment eerily similar to the debate of October 10, 2007.
In that debate, the question of whether or not the President should be required to seek Congressional approval before launching military strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities was posed by Chris Matthews. Romney’s response was of a person enamored with hearing himself talk while not really understanding the words emanating over his too-perfect choppers. Romney suggested that he would consult with lawyers to discover the proper course of action.
This sort of answer is in and of itself proof of not only complete ignorance, but also cover for actions that may be in complete contradiction to previous statements. Any deviation later can be blamed on the advice of whomever one is consulting.
The question this time was from a military veteran who asked when it would be time to bring home the troops from Afghanistan. Romney, using an almost carbon-copied answer of his response in 2008 (at least he’s consistent about some things) suggested that he couldn’t answer properly until he had spoken with the generals.
I can’t speak for what was going through Ron Paul’s head right then, but his most viable opponent in this race had just handed him, on a silver platter, the opportunity to put a stake through the heart of his presidential aspirations.
After all, if that is how a President makes decisions, then he is no President at all but a puppet. Romney has made no bones accepting the role of puppet. He has great teeth, speaks well and in any given situation, does what he’s told. The real question is, who is he trying to convince that he’s fit for the job? Certainly not the voters.
All Ron Paul had to do was to make this perfectly clear. And he did so with six words: “I am the Commander in Chief,” he continued, “the generals take their orders from me…”
And with that, Mitt Romney’s danger as a political foe vanished, to the chagrin of a few Pentagon officials who salivate at the thought of such a weak-minded person “commanding” the military.
Ron Paul owned that whole debate. The time that was given to him, which was not a lot, he was able to educate the masses and wake up some people. The msm is afraid of an educated public that can think for themselves and not listen to the corporate media, like cnn, msnbc and fox.
This blog is so nice to me. I will keep on coming here again and again. Visit my link as well..
slide software movie maker
I am very happy to discover your post as it will become on top in my collection of favorite blogs to visit. visit loans rated
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
rouse hill
Ron Paul 2012!
If we’ve followed Ron Paul ideas (instead of our military intelligence) since the begining Osama Bin Laden would be still alive. Romney is right, the president has not all knowledge and could not compromisse the nation security based upon private ideology or popular politics.
I would trade any American soldiers life for that of Osama’s (and save billions of dollars by pulling out of Iraq and Afghan). He (Osama) has not been a decision maker nor a threat for a significant time now and his death is simply a pat on our back for being war mongers. There is very little benefit beyond that.
We continue to spend billions of dollars on a war that does little to help us recover from our debt. It’s time to end the antics and bring the soldiers home.
Have you heard of being institutionalized? Many of the commanders are just that. They have been at war for so long that it is all they know. Get it together, you can’t predict things so you don’t really know if Bin Laden would be dead or not. Ron Paul is for all the American people’s rights, and not just the rich americans rights.
Ron Paul inbtroduced a bill that would have killed or captured UBL and a bunch more of the terrorists alot sooner than the 10 years we have wasted. In addition, his way was constitutional.
His bill would have authorized $40 Billion to get the job done. Here is the text of the bill:
To authorize the President of the United States to issue letters of marque and reprisal with respect to certain acts of air piracy upon the United States on September 11, 2001, and other similar acts of war planned for the future.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) That the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 upon the United States were acts of air piracy contrary to the law of nations.
(2) That the terrorist attacks were acts of war perpetrated by enemy belligerents to destroy the sovereign independence of the United States of America contrary to the law of nations.
(3) That the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks were actively aided and abetted by a conspiracy involving one Osama bin Laden and others known and unknown, either knowingly and actively affiliated with a terrorist organization known as al Qaeda or knowingly and actively conspiring with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, both of whom are dedicated to the destruction of the United States of America as a sovereign and independent nation.
(4) That the al Qaeda conspiracy is a continuing one among Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and others known and unknown with plans to commit additional acts of air piracy and other similar acts of war upon the United States of America and her people.
(5) That the act of war committed on September 11, 2001, by the al Qaeda conspirators, and the other acts of war planned by the al Qaeda conspirators, are contrary to the law of nations.
(6) That under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, Congress has the power to grant letters of marque and reprisal to punish, deter, and prevent the piratical aggressions and depredations and other acts of war of the al Qaeda conspirators.
SEC. 3. AUTHORITY OF PRESIDENT.
(a) The President of the United States is authorized and requested to commission, under officially issued letters of marque and reprisal, so many of privately armed and equipped persons and entities as, in his judgment, the service may require, with suitable instructions to the leaders thereof, to employ all means reasonably necessary to seize outside the geographic boundaries of the United States and its territories the person and property of Osama bin Laden, of any al Qaeda co-conspirator, and of any conspirator with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda who are responsible for the air piratical aggressions and depredations perpetrated upon the United States of America on September 11, 2001, and for any planned future air piratical aggressions and depredations or other acts of war upon the United States of America and her people.
(b) The President of the United States is authorized to place a money bounty, drawn in his discretion from the $40,000,000,000 appropriated on September 14, 2001, in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorists Attacks on the United States or from private sources, for the capture, alive or dead, of Osama bin Laden or any other al Qaeda conspirator responsible for the act of air piracy upon the United States on September 11, 2001, under the authority of any letter of marque or reprisal issued under this Act.
(c) No letter of marque and reprisal shall be issued by the President without requiring the posting of a security bond in such amount as the President shall determine is sufficient to ensure that the letter be executed according to the terms and conditions thereof.
Actually Dr. RP supported going after OBL in Afghanistan but withdrew support later because they changed their goal of getting OBL and instead invaded Iraq and they let OBL go at Tora Bora. He also proposed a marque and reprisal bill to go after OBL. XE/Blackwater could have gotten OBL with just a couble of billion dollars with this tool.
Actually, you are dead wrong. Ron Paul was intent on apprehending him back at Tora Bora, but Bush let him get away, so he could shift focus to the Iraq War. If Ron Paul had been president, we wouldn’t have been distracted from apprehending Osama, because there would have been no Iraq War.
You might be right. Osama might be alive. On the other hand there is no doubt in my mind that he would have at least been in US custody without deployment of troops as his initial solution was to issue letters of marque and reprisal and allowed privateers to bring him in. This would have saved some 20 trilllion dollars and would not have telegraphed our intentions. Now, instead of just speculation that Osama was the mastermind, a public trial (it’s ok for Saddam Hussein but not Osama?) would have brought to light all of the ACTUAL evidence we had against him. I’d like to see that and I think the American public deserves to see that evidence.
Utterly wrong. If we had followed Ron Paul’s course of action, by issuing Letters of Marque and Reprisal against bin Laden, he would have been dead in 6 months.
And doing so would have been a Constitutionally legitimate act, unlike those taken by Bush and Obama.
You are wrong sir. If we had followed Ron Paul’s advice, a small cadre of soldiers would have found and eliminated Osama Bin Laden soon after 9/11. That would have saved billions in dollars and many lives.
HR 3076 presented by Ron Paul in 2001
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3076:
Osama would have been either captured or dead a long time ago! When the Army notified Bush they had Osama in their sights Bush told them to let Osama alone. Look up Dr. Paul’s comments after this was made public knowledge. He was outraged at Bush’s order.
If the administration and president bush was’nt president and Ron Paul was our boarders and our intelligence would have been noticed and we would’ve taken care of things here at home . No one would even no bin lain even existed
This statement that you made marcelo is absolutely true. But first you have to convince the rest of us that some bearded Joker living in a shanty somewhere out in the hills of god knows where holds the key to civil unrest and social sanity in the Free World. It is so obvious to all of us that his death means NOTHING! Great, hes dead. The TSA is still gonna feel you up at the airport and our Gov is still going to tap our phones and guess what it’s not like we have any less enemies. Obama=The new Bush. Ron paul is the only one that can break this cycle…or at least is willing to die to do it. He will “call out” the CIA in public! AT LEAST Pray for this man’s life if you choose to not vote for him.
Osama has been dead for years wake up. Prove me wrong. While we are at it how many wars did we start “LOOKING” or how many BILLIONS did we spend? He is dead but apparently we are still “LOOKING” for him.
“Those who sacrifice their freedom for security deserve neither”. Ben Franklin
“To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.” — Abraham Lincoln
Maybe you have heard of them
You are so wrong, that I almost fear replying to you. It might make me seem stupid for arguing with a fool. The truth is that under Ron Paul’s leadership, Bin Ladin would be in the same condition he is now… DEAD. Ron Paul has actually served in the military and has plenty of experience and understanding that would have helped him get Bin Ladin, but also not piss off people who have been working with us.
When Ron Paul spoke about getting Bin Ladin, he only spoke negatively of the methods used for the operation. He did not say he would not have gotten Bin Ladin, he said he would have gotten him in conjunction with the Pakastani’s. He then went on to provide examples of situations where the Pakastani government helped us get other known terrorists. Although the nature of the mission required extreme secrecy, the Pakastani government would never have “tipped Bin Ladin off” or anything else that would have helped Bin Ladin escape. The level of political problems that would have caused for the Pakastani government would be tantamount to them declaring war on the U.S..
Had the U.S. gone through the Pakastani government to carry out the Bin Ladin mission, we would still be allowed to have our operatives in Pakastan, and we would have fostered a political companionship that would have helped us be in a better position to fight terrorists in the long run. Ron Paul was right about this. Listen to what he said rather than the “quotes” the major media throws at you.
If we had been following Ron Paul’s advice since he had started saying it, 9/11 WOULDN’T HAVE HAPPENED!!!
Suck on that.
Its not private ideology, its what the fathers of this nation advised.
If Ron Paul had been President back in 2001, we would have invaded Afghanistan and captured Osama a.s.a.p. It would not have taken 10 years to do so. This is the only military action that Ron Paul has condoned since that time. He realized the threat, and would have followed through with Osama’s capture, trial, and execution. We were justified, and we would have had the support of the world behind us. Then we would have swiftly retreated out of Afghanistan, and never entered Iraq. We also wouldn’t have experienced the disaster we faced in Sept. of 2008, when it was finally admitted that everything Ron Paul had been saying about our economy for years was true!
‘Osama Bin Laden would be still alive’
In a dictatorship, a man can be killed on the word alone of a ruler; in a republic, all individuals are given a fair trial so as to prove innocence/guilt; Candidate Paul likewise leads by striving for virtue while exercising good will and self-discipline
Marcelo, you’re either willfully ignorant or have a hard time with facts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65j0WCGEp4g Just in case you choose not to click, that’s Ron Paul in 2003 saying that Bin Laden was most likely in Pakistan. A point he made several times over the years. And to say that Bin Laden wouldn’t have been found, is asinine. Paul has said time and time again he would have pursued him, but he would not violate another nations sovereignty to do so. US relations with Pakistan have been strained over the years precisely because of our disrespect to their national sovereignty. And compromise the safety of the nation? Really? What do you think our foreign policy for the last 60 years has done? The trouble with you is you don’t know much of what you think you know.
Revenge got us nothing. The 10 year hunt for the man was precisely what the terrosits had originally planned for. They won by causing our economy to cripple in blowing Trillions of dollars just to try and wipe out one man. That’s all terrorism is is a move to disrupt everyday society. They did it. And they got the pot of gold. It was a stupid war in the beginning and it’s still a stupid war, whether we caught Laden or not.
Ron Paul is the only candidate that will end all the wars. Both Republicans and Democrats support endless Wars for Israel, it all started nearly a decade ago under a false flag attack.
9/11 and Israel, here:
http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000190526
to all the osama commenters, OSAMA IS DEAD NOW? WHY ARE WE STILL THERE !? you got your prize bring the kids home but no you wanna leave them there until another beirut incident happens, im from beirut i know the other side of the story BRING THEM HOME RON PAUL 2012
Constitutionally, legislatively, and morally, Ron Paul has no equal. His 22 year voting record speaks for itself.
Mr. Paul has not survived in politics for 22 years and maintain the ethics and morality he has by being anything other than stellar.
If You refute the above comment, then I please invite You to listen to him speak about key issues. It is amazing how well he comes across because he doesn’t have to remember lies like other politicians. He understands what is happening in the world and knows how to apply the basic principles of liberty to achieve the real change that America so desperately deserves.
American to American we are all on the same team. So I present Mr. Ron Paul as my Candidate for 2011 and invite anybody to meaningfully and respectfully debate why he is not the best for American and its people in 2012.
Ron Paul = A real change, not for special interest, but for America’s Interests!
Thank You for Your time
Ron Paul 2012
Couldn’t agree more, watching last night’s debate, Ron Paul was the only one who didn’t side-step; he was the only one who offered real, tangible solutions instead of rhetorics that amounts to nothing. People, try really listen to him and I’m sure you’ll come to the conclusion that we truly need someone like Ron in the oval office in order for us to dig out of the holes we’re in and make US a stronger nation. Ron Paul 2012!
Ron Paul is the most boss candidate out there.
Ron Paul 2012 is getting my vote and my donation money. Im tired of puppets like Rommeny who are all shine with no substance. This country is sick and needs the good doctor! he’s the only one who knows how to fix it and has more integrity then all of the other canidates. Ron paul 2012!
amen!
Double Amen!
“The June 13th, 2001 debate started off rather dully for all of the candidates, including Paul.”
It’s 2011. not 2001.
Thank you! I’ve corrected the date.
This article reflects exactly how I feel. I will definitely be coming to this site more often.
I’m always amazed at how many comments a RP post gets, heh. Wish they’d come out en masse for all the other posts, too!
You and me both!
Here is the deal, straight-up. If you don’t vote for Ron Paul and support him NOW… you a coward. You are for the status-qo
Ron Paul! Be Brave America!!
Ron Paul 2012!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXO4wPEvytA
Ron Paul is the only one who makes any sense, but they will never allow him to be president!
Hes winning the polls right now @ foxnews.com/politics/index.html
Vote Ron Paul!!!
Just remember this:
They DO indeed have the money, but WE have the votes. That is in fact the one weakness of the corporocracy. We can reach a lot of people, enough to win if they can just HEAR about Ron Paul. It will take a lot of different things - your time, your willingness to participate, your contributions, your bumper, your yard… get the picture? We have to build not NAME recognition, but IDEOLOGICAL recognition. Reducing the plague of regulations and taxes on people doesn’t mean you’re “some crazy libertarian”. Wanting to stop our war adventures around the world does NOT make you “soft on defense”. In fact, the fairest way to categorize Dr. Paul’s philosophy is that he wants to treat you like an adult and expects you to act that way. Is that so wrong?
Oh my goodness! Is it American to have so much faith in one man? I suppose you want to annoint Ron Paul king. I respect Ron Paul a great deal but if its true that he wouldn’t consult the Generals before making a large military decision, I certainly am in favor of one who would. There is nothing weak about admitting you would consult others who may know more about a subject before making a decision. That is just common sense.
He wasn’t talking about making a military decision. He was talking about making a moral and political decision. A political group of generals, who want their budgets to increase until time immemorial, are not the people who should be answering such questions. They have a vested interest in staying there.
Nicely put!
I agree with you Rick, that’s called job security.
Exactly. Each soldier be they an officer or grunt, gets more money in their paychecks for being sent to war. Since an officer makes more than an enlisted soldier as it is, simply imagine how much these generals are making, and would continue to make by simply giving the advice that we should stay entrenched in these wars.
Great article, Rick. While I wholeheartedly agree with Ron Paul’s statement and that the reasons for leaving Both AO’s are moral and political, I can’t say that the generals’ interest in staying are personal/selfish in nature.
As a veteran of many years, I can say that - to some extent - service members sometimes get caught up in the pursuit of their enemy. More importantly, when you know a bad guy is there, and that you have the capability to take him out, it’s hardly an option to do nothing. Plus, orders are orders. (once again, not all soldiers feel this way)
The solution: take our troops out of those situations. As Oscar Wilde said, “I can resist everything but temptation.”
We are not the world’s police, and we should not be “nation building.”
The military is a hammer, and not all of the worlds problems are nails. Ron Paul is the only politician who seems to understand this!!!
The media is trying so desperately hard to spoonfeed this Obama-lite HIMBO Mitt Romney into our faces and it’s really getting pathetic! Ron Paul has fresh ideas and is telling American people the truth. I love that he has been consistent from the day he got into office. There are areas where he has changed views but he’s open and honest and explains what changed in his thinking. The is the fork in the road for America. If America blows it, we’re done!
Post new comment