The Southwest Missouri Ron Paul Meetup Group (Formerly Joplin Ron Paul Meetup Group) held a sign waving rally in Joplin at the intersection of Rangeline and 7th street. The local news media was there and did positive stories on Ron Paul. When you do anything, be sure to get the local media involved. They have been really good to us here in Joplin. Watch the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a70RI5M1_f0 and bump this post often: http://www.dailypaul.com/node/30287
We are planning a 3rd sign waving event next Saturday (2-2-2008 2pm to 4pm) and have again invited the local media. They have aired stories both weekends and we hope they do again. This next time, the Joplin Globe will be there as well. We invite Rocky Comfort and Springfield to come and join us and make this the MOST awesome showing of support. Please let me know if you can make it so we can tell the media how much the local support has grown. We had 45 people the first weekend (thank you Rocky Comfort) and 25-30 people this last weekend, with many new supporters. If we could get 100 people on this intersection, what a statement we would make!! Right before February 5th this is a good way to remind people of Ron Paul and gain those who are still undecided. With all of our canvassing, calling etc this one last time to get the RP name out I believe will really help. With MSM ignoring us the local news can be a great way to advertise free!
Thanks to Richard Graves for the Update & all the great work!
28 January 2008
25 January 2008
Ron Paul Continues to Gain Legitimacy
The general consensus in American politics has been that Ron Paul’s explanation of how he would fix the United States economy is not clear. Some argue that voters do not care because they simply do not understand how the economy works. The fact is that Ron Paul is simply diagnosing the problem with the economy; his cure would simply be to let the market’s built in immune system cure itself through his free market approach. Asking politicians to give solutions to the struggling economy is similar to asking the generals in the Pentagon the best way to fix the situation in Iraq, when most likely the situation would be solved most efficiently by the people who are suffering; the Iraqi people.
The same holds true for the US market. While other politicians, namely Clinton, Bush and Obama think they have the right potion to give the economy a “shot in the arm” to use Bush’s phrase, Ron Paul would simply allow the market to fix the market. He would do the same with Iraq by “giving the Iraqis their country back.” He argues that the constant tinkering done by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Government in attempts to manipulate the United States economy only protects the interests of the elite class in this country while the poor are simply given a few crumbs and brushed aside.
As this election year moves forward and candidates like Fred Thompson begin to cash their checks and go home because their message is a carbon copy of their opponents, the only difference being what they choose to highlight and emphasize, Ron Paul continues to gain legitimacy.
With this article appearing on nationalreview.com yesterday http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2Q5MDM2NzZkNzU5ZDEwYTI3ODg5YjY2YWZlMjFkYTc=
the Republican establishment is finally starting to sit up and take notice and publicly coming to terms with the fact that Ron Paul is going to be around much longer than they had hoped. This is a significant change because as more and more of the respected members within the GOP give the OK to give Ron Paul a look and justify him as a legitimate option, the stigma will be lifted from his candidacy and then Ron Paul will find himself in a great position.
The only weapon that has had any success against Ron Paul is not letting his message be heard and when it begins to be heard, to drown it out with laughter, so as publications like the National Review begin to soberly analyze his views it is tough to see how there is any hope for the Romney’s of the world.
The same holds true for the US market. While other politicians, namely Clinton, Bush and Obama think they have the right potion to give the economy a “shot in the arm” to use Bush’s phrase, Ron Paul would simply allow the market to fix the market. He would do the same with Iraq by “giving the Iraqis their country back.” He argues that the constant tinkering done by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Government in attempts to manipulate the United States economy only protects the interests of the elite class in this country while the poor are simply given a few crumbs and brushed aside.
As this election year moves forward and candidates like Fred Thompson begin to cash their checks and go home because their message is a carbon copy of their opponents, the only difference being what they choose to highlight and emphasize, Ron Paul continues to gain legitimacy.
With this article appearing on nationalreview.com yesterday http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2Q5MDM2NzZkNzU5ZDEwYTI3ODg5YjY2YWZlMjFkYTc=
the Republican establishment is finally starting to sit up and take notice and publicly coming to terms with the fact that Ron Paul is going to be around much longer than they had hoped. This is a significant change because as more and more of the respected members within the GOP give the OK to give Ron Paul a look and justify him as a legitimate option, the stigma will be lifted from his candidacy and then Ron Paul will find himself in a great position.
The only weapon that has had any success against Ron Paul is not letting his message be heard and when it begins to be heard, to drown it out with laughter, so as publications like the National Review begin to soberly analyze his views it is tough to see how there is any hope for the Romney’s of the world.
23 January 2008
Ron Paul is making steady progress
All the hard work and efforts made by Dr. Paul's many thousands of grassroots supporters is paying off with steady progress... Yet another 2nd place finish - this time in Louisiana!
From the USA Daily article:
If we only had the time, we could help every truly patriotic American to eventually see the truth - that Ron Paul is the best candidate for president we've had in our lifetime. But even with the current "challenges" facing us, we may yet win the endgame by helping enough people learn the truth... Even if not enough to win the nomination outright in the primaries, then perhaps by the time of the Republican conventions Ron Paul will actually be able to win a brokered convention. That means you need to get involved and find a way to become a delegate in your state GOP.
From the USA Daily article:
"Paul has yet to win a primary but his second place finish in the Nevada Caucus followed by his second place in yesterday’s Louisiana Caucus has boosted his campaign. The idea of a possible brokered convention has many in the GOP taking a second look at Paul.
Paul was endorsed by Pro-Life activist ‘Jane Roe’ of Roe V. Wade, and was endorsed by former two term New Mexico governor Gary Johnson this week. Paul also has funds to compete on Super Tuesday. He raised another 1.85 million on Monday’s Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday."
If we only had the time, we could help every truly patriotic American to eventually see the truth - that Ron Paul is the best candidate for president we've had in our lifetime. But even with the current "challenges" facing us, we may yet win the endgame by helping enough people learn the truth... Even if not enough to win the nomination outright in the primaries, then perhaps by the time of the Republican conventions Ron Paul will actually be able to win a brokered convention. That means you need to get involved and find a way to become a delegate in your state GOP.
21 January 2008
Remind voters: An Election is NOT a "Horse Race"
I've been "Shocked" & "Awed" (but mostly just disgusted) at how the Big Elitist MainStream Media has gone to unprecedented lengths to manipulate this presidential primary election.
Of course, "media" manipulation of elections is nothing new. It has been around for practically as long as elections have existed, but it is the extent and form of the current manipulation that has both caught my attention and upset my stomach this past year.
In days gone past, a person could expect a newspaper with the name of, for instance: "The Arkansas Democrat" to sing the praises of their fav-rave (D) candidates, while pointing out the brothel-dwelling booze-swilling habits of all the opposing (R) candidates. That is what "partisan journalism" was all about back then, and most people understood this and kept it all in perspective.
These days, the hapless TV-addled masses have set aside all reason and discernment, and have somehow embraced the big media lie that "all MSM journalists are NON-biased, independent observers just reporting the facts for you to decide." It is enough to make you wonder how the masses can actually be so completely gullible? (Those same herds of sheep, who all believe - secretly or openly - that they actually are "politically savvy")
One important thing that has struck me recently is how the media is all about describing the current presidential election as a "Horse Race."
There are many reasons this is done, though none of them are good journalistic reasons. And, as is the norm when the MSM is involved, it is also deceitful and inaccurate.
A horse race is much different than an election.
In a horse race, the object (for the bettors) is to pick the winner before the race is over.
In an election, the object (for the voters) is to pick the right person for the job.
It is not the job of the voter to pick who is most likely to be the eventual "winner" for any particular elected position. It is the duty of the voter to place a vote for the person best suited for the position.
However, if you listen to the Big Elitist MainStream Media too much or too carelessly, you'd think that the opposite were true. With almost no exception whatsoever, the MSM goads, manipulates, and even coerces you vote for the "winner" as they see it, in their (lack of) infinite wisdom.
"After all," they say, "Americans love a winner. YOU don't want to waste your vote on a LOSER now, do you?"
The MSM, just like the burnt-out gamblers scrounging for loose change outside the stables whilst looking for their next sucker, will be HAPPY to give you the "inside poop" so you can pick the next Trifecta.
But that is not what good journalists should do, and that is not what a good election is about. The purpose of good journalism is to give the audience the best and most accurate information about all the candidates; either without blatant bias or (better yet) disclosing the sources' actual bias clearly beforehand. The purpose of the election is to cast your vote for the person that you believe (based on all the independent research you can manage) best represents the policies you believe in.
When you speak to everyone you know in these next few weeks before the primary election (and I hope you will), please remind them of their civic duty. Their duty to vote for the best person for the job, period. Not the one most likely to win according to the MSM "bookies," but simply the right man for the job.
This year, that man is absolutely and unquestionably Ron Paul.
Of course, "media" manipulation of elections is nothing new. It has been around for practically as long as elections have existed, but it is the extent and form of the current manipulation that has both caught my attention and upset my stomach this past year.
In days gone past, a person could expect a newspaper with the name of, for instance: "The Arkansas Democrat" to sing the praises of their fav-rave (D) candidates, while pointing out the brothel-dwelling booze-swilling habits of all the opposing (R) candidates. That is what "partisan journalism" was all about back then, and most people understood this and kept it all in perspective.
These days, the hapless TV-addled masses have set aside all reason and discernment, and have somehow embraced the big media lie that "all MSM journalists are NON-biased, independent observers just reporting the facts for you to decide." It is enough to make you wonder how the masses can actually be so completely gullible? (Those same herds of sheep, who all believe - secretly or openly - that they actually are "politically savvy")
One important thing that has struck me recently is how the media is all about describing the current presidential election as a "Horse Race."
There are many reasons this is done, though none of them are good journalistic reasons. And, as is the norm when the MSM is involved, it is also deceitful and inaccurate.
A horse race is much different than an election.
In a horse race, the object (for the bettors) is to pick the winner before the race is over.
In an election, the object (for the voters) is to pick the right person for the job.
It is not the job of the voter to pick who is most likely to be the eventual "winner" for any particular elected position. It is the duty of the voter to place a vote for the person best suited for the position.
However, if you listen to the Big Elitist MainStream Media too much or too carelessly, you'd think that the opposite were true. With almost no exception whatsoever, the MSM goads, manipulates, and even coerces you vote for the "winner" as they see it, in their (lack of) infinite wisdom.
"After all," they say, "Americans love a winner. YOU don't want to waste your vote on a LOSER now, do you?"
The MSM, just like the burnt-out gamblers scrounging for loose change outside the stables whilst looking for their next sucker, will be HAPPY to give you the "inside poop" so you can pick the next Trifecta.
But that is not what good journalists should do, and that is not what a good election is about. The purpose of good journalism is to give the audience the best and most accurate information about all the candidates; either without blatant bias or (better yet) disclosing the sources' actual bias clearly beforehand. The purpose of the election is to cast your vote for the person that you believe (based on all the independent research you can manage) best represents the policies you believe in.
When you speak to everyone you know in these next few weeks before the primary election (and I hope you will), please remind them of their civic duty. Their duty to vote for the best person for the job, period. Not the one most likely to win according to the MSM "bookies," but simply the right man for the job.
This year, that man is absolutely and unquestionably Ron Paul.
16 January 2008
Winning On February 5th.
We can win Missouri for Ron Paul on Super Tuesday.
37 voters per precinct is enough to win. Request a list of voters from the county courthouse and being compiling your lists while there is still time.
Also, find out who your County Committeemen and women are.
37 voters per precinct is enough to win. Request a list of voters from the county courthouse and being compiling your lists while there is still time.
Also, find out who your County Committeemen and women are.
15 January 2008
Missouri Supreme Court to Hear Landmark Eminent Domain Case This Week
JEFFERSON CITY - January 14, 2008 — When the Missouri Supreme Court hears the eminent domain case of an Arnold, Mo. dentist on January 17th, the stakes will be much higher than just the fate of one dental practice - the case will affect property owners in 1200 Missouri cities. The Supreme Court’s ruling will determine whether non-charter cities like Arnold have the power to take private property for the benefit of wealthy private developers or if their eminent domain powers will be limited to traditional public uses, like roads and sewers.
For more info, contact:
The case involves Homer Tourkakis, who has operated a successful dental practice in the Arnold triangle for more than two decades. The city of Arnold wants to take Tourkakis’s property and turn it over to developer THF Reality, which is planning to put a big box store and other retail establishments in the Arnold Triangle.
Tourkakis's legal defense of his property is straightforward. At the root of it is a clause that has been in the Missouri Constitution since 1875. Article I, Section 28 says, "private property shall not be taken for private use with or without compensation". By itself, this provision would protect against the use of eminent domain for private development, but a new constitutional clause was added in 1945 that amounts to an exception to that protection.
Article VI, Section 21 authorizes the taking of private property and conveying it to a private developer if it is in an area declared to be "blighted, substandard or insanitary". But Dr. Tourkakis argues that this provision applies only to charter (home rule) cities such as St. Louis and Kansas City. Jefferson County Circuit court Judge M. Edward Williams agreed and ruled in favor of Tourkakis in May of 2007. The city of Arnold then appealed to the Supreme Court of Missouri. Two nationally-recognized public interest law firms, The Pacific Legal Foundation and the Institute for Justice, have provided legal assistance to Dr. Tourkakis.
Ron Calzone, chairman of Missouri Citizens for Property Rights (MO-CPR), argues that the Tourkakis case is more evidence that the eminent domain legislation passed in 2006 has not given property owners adequate protections. “When the eminent domain bill was passed by the Missouri legislature in 2006, most people assumed that it would put an end to eminent domain abuse,” Calzone said. “But the Arnold controversy, along with dozens of other cases in Saint Louis, Kansas City, Richmond Heights, Sugar Creek, Valley Park, Liberty and elsewhere, demonstrate that property owners are still at risk.”
The owner of a Kansas City parking lot learned the hard way that the 2006 legislation would not help when he appealed to what was supposed to be one of the stronger parts of the bill. A December 18, 2007 decision by the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, ruled in favor of a large developer who sought to use eminent domain to take the parking lot so he could build a new headquarters in its place.
Dr. Tourkakis serves on the board of MO-CPR, along with David Danforth one of a group of three Clayton property owners who successfully defended their properties in the Supreme Court last summer. Although Danforth won, the narrow decision provides no real protection for other property owners. Calzone says that a victory in the Tourkakis case would provide greater protections for property owners in non-charter cities, but it would still leave property owners in charter cities - more than half the population of the state - exposed to the same abusive tactics.
He argues that only a constitutional amendment will finally end the scourge of eminent domain for private gain for all Missourians. MO-CPR is currently recruiting volunteers and raising money to collect more than 200,000 signatures for each of two constitutional amendments.
A large crowd of concerned property owners is expected to attend the arguments in court next Thursday, which are at 9:30 AM in the Supreme Court building in Jefferson City.
For more info, contact:
Ron Calzone, chairman
Missouri Citizens for Property Rights
33867 Highway E
Dixon, MO 65459
ron@mo-cpr.org
(573) 368-1344
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)