Additional Titles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other Guest Articles:

Jury Rights! Jury
Nullification

Where Will We Get Our Food?

Constitutional
Tools No
Longer Valid

More Guest Articles:

 

 

 

 

 

 

FORMER WORLDNETDAILY COMMENTARY EDITOR ENDORSES RON PAUL

 

 

 

 

By Tom Ambrose

November 3, 2007
NewsWithViews.com

Despite long ago repenting from being a Republican and from voting for Republicans, I must confess I am momentarily backsliding: I will be voting for Ron Paul. People from all parts of the political spectrum - including many people from the so-called "third parties," like myself - will be voting for him as well. Because of this, he has a legitimate shot at winning the presidency and doing what needs to be done to fix our nation. Why?

  • Because his stands on issues are based on what the Constitution says rather than on what sounds good or on what increases his personal power and financial gain.

  • Because his views are backed up by what is widely acknowledged as one of the most consistent voting records in Congress in terms of his stands on the issues. In other words, he practices what he preaches - almost unheard of in any level of government.

  • Because he consistently supports property-owner rights and gun-owner rights. He is also an advocate for the rights of homeschooling parents and the right of unborn children to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

  • Because he has diligently worked - and will continue to work - to revamp our broken Social Insecurity system, our out-of-control government spending, our national health-care crisis, and our unjust, unconstitutional tax laws - rather than offer empty promises backed up by hot air and political posturing.

  • Because he is not a globalist. He has fought strongly to secure our borders. And he is the only presidential candidate on record as not being in bed with the United Nations, an organization riddled with Islamist and socialist sympathizers who would love nothing better than to see America's way of life destroyed.

  • Because he is the only presidential candidate who has steadfastly opposed the war in the Middle East.

In short, Ron Paul is not a bellicose politician paying lip service to win an election. He is a patriot who actually believes in our national sovereignty and our liberty, and in faithfully adhering to the U.S. Constitution.

Unlike Ron Paul, I do think we were obliged to destroy Saddam and his miscreant children - as well as Osama (who still is not captured) - in what should have been a quick, surgical police action. Despite what the mainstream media has said, Saddam was unequivocally linked to terrorism and terrorists, not to mention the brutalization of his own people. As such, it was clearly in the interest of the United States to protect our nation from the very real threats posed by these spawn of Hell.

Nobody is perfect, even Ron Paul. But that said, Ron Paul is factually correct about the current status of our war in the Middle East.

  1. There was no constitutionally required congressional declaration of war (Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution) though Congress initially - but lukewarmly - supported Bush's actions in the afterglow of the smoldering World Trade Center.

  2. Bush never got buy-off from the American people, never mind Congress, about what has become known as "nation building," i.e., rebuilding a Muslim nation as a democracy - something even conservative Islamic scholars see as akin to trying to force a square peg into a round hole. Bush has no congressional authority - and more importantly, no constitutional authority - for nation building. Moreover, Bush is using this nation-building scheme to justify his ongoing, illegal war in the Middle East.

Even worse, Bush has - with the complicity of Congress - completely undermined the sovereignty of our nation by neglecting our southern border, as well as by his efforts to pass the treasonous Law Of the Sea Treaty (that is now dangerously close to becoming reality) and that would cede much of our sovereignty to the treacherous United Nations.

People in the border states have been pleading for years for help because they have been abandoned by the Bush administration - they are being raped and otherwise assaulted, their yards are being littered with trash and human excrement, their homes are being broken into, robbed and vandalized. Meanwhile Bush has continued to hamstring our Border Patrol agents - including prosecuting them for doing their jobs when Mexico has asked him to do so! - in order to facilitate his plans with Mexico to complete the malignant NAFTA superhighway and the merger of Western currencies, including the U.S. dollar, into the insidious "amero" (just as Europe combined their currencies into the "euro").

It should be further noted that since relatively unsophisticated Mexican nationals can cross our borders by the millions, it doesn't take any imagination to realize that highly trained terrorists can also do so. Just as a simple matter of common sense, even if one chooses to ignore the Constitution, why are we fighting terrorists in Iraq but leaving our back door wide open for them to slither in and kill us?

In short, Bush has, factually and deliberately, flouted the rule of law, and our nation is the weaker for it, even if one thinks Iraq is better off. But the president's sworn obligation - as per his Oath of Office (Article 2, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution) - is to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution, not to play God with other nations, nor to pursue his nightmare of global government.

As a former Republican who has held elected office, I know it's tempting to want to believe President Bush is doing the right thing - especially a Republican president if you are a Republican voter. But our U.S. Constitution says otherwise. And one's political party affiliation ought to take a distant second place to our central, critical obligation as citizens to support and defend the U.S. Constitution - the only political barricade that stands between We The People and self-serving, unprincipled politicians.

Interestingly, I've communicated with several dozen veterans about the war over the past few years, and only two of them were supportive of what Bush has done. But please don't construe my comments to mean that they or I are not 100 percent behind our people in uniform - just the opposite. Two of my family members have already honorably served in the military, and other friends, or their children, either are already serving or are planning to serve in our nation's military services. I am deeply and sincerely proud of them all.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!


Enter Your E-Mail Address:

However, despite all the hype and presidential cheerleading, the truth is that honorable men and women are dying, and families are being destroyed, to support an unlawful war. Bush should not have put our military in this position to begin with. Unfortunately, people tend to overlook this important issue until they see their children, siblings, and spouses returning home in body bags. Ron Paul will put an end to this insanity if we have the courage to elect him. God have mercy on us if we elect one of the pretender wannabes instead.

2007 - Tom Ambrose - All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale



Tom Ambrose is a former commentary editor of WorldNetDaily and reporter for the Business Times.

E-Mail: tomambrose2010@yahoo.com



 

Home

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ron Paul will put an end to this insanity if we have the courage to elect him. God have mercy on us if we elect one of the pretender wannabes instead.