Follower of The Way

Ron Paul: The New Braveheart

Posted in Government & Politics by sosipater on June 7, 2007

  Check out the featured blog post today on  Here it is and it is about Ron Paul.  Do yourself a favor.  Read the post, scroll down to the YouTube clip of Tucker Carlson from MSNBC and watch the whole thing.  Especially the last sentence by Tucker where he says he needs to have Ron Paul on periodically to teach people about freedom. 

Why is the media and the neo-conservatives (this would be Bush and all the anti-freedom politicians who call themselves conservatives) so against Ron Paul?  Think about it.  It has to do with freedom.

Folks, look around you.  I’m not an alarmist because ultimately my faith in God secures me, but we are losing freedoms everyday, or at least the propositions are being made.  We have to make serious changes to our legislating bodies. 

Henceforth on this blog, Ron Paul will be known as the Braveheart candidate!

Ron Paul, “Hope for America”

Ron Paul, “Project Freedom”

Ron Paul Wiki

Ron Paul Myspace

Ron Paul Lew Rockwell archive


7 Responses to 'Ron Paul: The New Braveheart'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Ron Paul: The New Braveheart'.

  1. Ron Paul: The New Braveheart

  2. kennicon said,

    Ron Paul is the best candidate, but is dangerously close to being eliminated in my view because of his libertarian stance on abortion — leaving it up to the states. He’s obviously pro-life and has called Roe v. Wade unconstitutional, but murder is not a state decision. The Federal Government needs to take that role.

    Otherwise, Ron Paul is a great candidate. I’m not a single issue voter, but I will eliminate my willingness to vote for a candidate on a single issue, namely their stance on abortion.

  3. sosipater said,


    Paul is correct that, constitutionally, it should be up to the states. But his stance is unashamedly Pro-life, and he makes the argument from an “act of agression against a fetus” stance.

    From Wikipedia (take if for what it is worth):

    An obstetrician by trade, Paul is pro-life. Paul holds that the United States Constitution does not grant the federal government any authority to legalize or ban abortion. He believes that his pro-life stance aligns with his libertarianism, by viewing abortion as aggression against a person. “Under the 9th and 10th amendments, all authority over matters not specifically addressed in the Constitution remains with state legislatures.”[51] Nevertheless, in order to offset the effects of Roe v. Wade, he voted in favor of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. He has also introduced H.R. 4379 that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling on issues relating to abortion, birth control, the definition of marriage and homosexuality and states that the court’s precedent in these areas would no longer be binding.[52] He once said, “The best solution, of course, is not now available to us. That would be a Supreme Court that recognizes that for all criminal laws, the several states retain jurisdiction.”[53]

    During a May 15, 2007 appearance on the Fox News talk show Hannity and Colmes, Ron Paul argued that his pro-life position was consistent with his libertarian values, asking, “If you can’t protect life then how can you protect liberty?” Furthermore, Dr. Paul argued in this appearance that since he believes libertarians believe in non-aggression, libertarians should oppose abortion because abortion is “an act of aggression” against a fetus (which he believes to be alive, human, and possessing legal rights). He also briefly discussed his view of the proper role of the federal government and states in regulating abortion.[54]

  4. sosipater said,


    Also, see the link below, where Paul calls abortion a “barbaric procedure” and seeks to “restore freedom of conscience and the sanctity of human life.”


  5. daxw said,

    I really appreciate you putting these posts up about Ron Paul. I know that it kind of strays away from the real purpose of your blog. It is an important issue, though. I really thought that CNN would give Dr. Paul more airtime because of his stance on the war, but that obviously was not the case. Just shows you that the media has great influence on how people perceive things. It also shows that there is great influence behind the scenes on what they keep in the forefront. They talk about the big three candidates for both parties. I have to laugh because they try so hard to try and find high points for their favorite candidates and are really grasping at straws. It alarms me that Rudy Giuliani can say that our military needs to be trained in nation building. Twenty years ago they would have yanked him off the stage at a Republican debate for saying that. The neo-cons keep playing on the fear of the American public and apparently it is working. The media could easily push Paul,Tancredo, and Huckabee to the front of the race if they wanted, but obviously that won’t happen. Neo-conservatism is full of warmongering imperialists that looks alot like Great Britain before their fall. Now, I’m no passifist. We need intelligent dialogue on all of these issues, but FauxNews and CNN will not allow it. Ron Paul is the only true American statesmen on the stage with nothing but politicians. He obviously stands out. The fact that he’s 71 and could easily go home and retire, but he would rather fight for his country and the last few freedoms we have speaks volumes to me. Sorry for the lengthy response.

  6. sosipater said,

    I have been waiting anxiously for you to comment. 🙂
    I completely agree with you. But you know what, this is the purpose of my blog. For us to think Biblically about all issues, political ones too. I was thinking this morning about the idea of a just war, a Christian war, and the Iraq war just doesn’t seem to fit the bill. Nation building does not fit the bill. It is like Dr. Paul said in the debate, we should spread liberty and freedom, but not by gunpoint. It is ridiculous.
    But what is most ridiculous is the neo-con’s (I use that term non-emotionally to describe a political philosophy) vicious and untruthful characterizations of those of us who would oppose a particular war, but not all war, as pacifists or whatever. You’re right, the media obviously has an agenda and has a huge impact on which candidates can get their message out. That is why I felt it important to get the word out as much as possible on Dr. Paul, and let people make informed decisions.
    My web hits have risen like 25 times normal since I started posting about Dr. Paul! Awesome.

  7. daxw said,

    I was in Greenville,SC for a conference. It’s good to be home.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: