Here’s the story from the Richmond Examiner.

Almost time for preseason football.  GEAUX SAINTS!

The Baroness asserted that there was no weapons of mass destruction and that Iraq had no ties to 9/11.  Then she said (I am trying to write this from the video best I can):

“It’s highly significant.  By 03/04 we were receiving an increasing number of leads to terrorist activity from within the UK and our involvement in Iraq radicalised, for want of a better word, a whole generation of young people, some of them British citizens, not a whole generation, a few among a generation, who saw our involvement in Iraq on top of our involvement in Afghanistan as being an attack on Islam.  *  *  *  Although the media had suggested [that the various terrorist attacks in the UK were a surprise that UK born persons were involved] that is not the case.  Because, really, there has been an increasing number of British-born individuals,…attracted to the ideology of UBL and saw the West’s activities in Iraq and Afghanistan as threatening their fellow religionists…”

Baroness Manningham-Buller also stated there was a Iraqi jihad brought about by the West’s invasion.  She also said that while the overthrow of Saddam Hussein prevented his regime from using weapons of mass destruction against the West but it did not prevent such an attack from other avenues.  She also stated that while quick strategy to improve the lives of the Iraqi people after the military victory might have reduced the terror threat, there was a clear increase of the terrorist threat against UK targets:

“…the focus was not foreigners, the rising and increasing threat was the threat from British citizens,…Al-Qaeda had not focused on the UK [until after the Iraq invasion].”

There could be the motive of the Tories seeking to hurt the Labour regime and former PM Tony Blair.  But, the Tories strongly supported Blair in both wars!  So it is still significant.  Besides, Baroness Manningham-Buller seems like a credible witness without an axe to grind politically.  She even admitted she did not specifically advise the PM [Blair] about her concerns prior to the war.  So how does this relate to Ron Paul?

Let’s go back to 2007.  The First South Carolina debate.  the mini-debate between Cong. Paul and former NYC Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.  Here’s some pertinent items from the Council on Foreign Relations site (yes I am quoting the enemy!  But it helps Ron Paul!) transcript:

MR. GOLER: Congressman, you don’t think that changed with the 9/11 attacks, sir?

REP. PAUL: What changed?

MR. GOLER: The non-interventionist policies.

REP. PAUL: No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We’ve been in the Middle East — I think Reagan was right.

We don’t understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we’re building an embassy in Iraq that’s bigger than the Vatican. We’re building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?

REP. PAUL: I’m suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we’re over there because Osama bin Laden has said, “I am glad you’re over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.” They have already now since that time — (bell rings) — have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don’t think it was necessary.

MR. GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That’s really an extraordinary statement. That’s an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don’t think I’ve heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)

And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn’t really mean that. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Congressman?

REP. PAUL: I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem.

They don’t come here to attack us because we’re rich and we’re free. They come and they attack us because we’re over there. I mean, what would we think if we were — if other foreign countries were doing that to us?

 Many laughed and sneered at Paul’s assertion of blowback.  But it appears that he was right again.  Intervention has risks.  It can and should only be used when it is in the national interest.  Liberty and the Ron Paul R3volution are on the march!  Be  encouraged.  Every day more and more come to our position.  Is it 2012 yet?  I can’t wait for that exploratory committee to be formed.

Also Johnson is a serious candidate; a former governor with a stellar record of cutting spending and personal liberty.  He could be President if he had to serve. 

I say this due to the ronpaul.com web site’s poll for who will be VP.  Go vote there.

The Board of Supervisors sent a strong message protecting the rights of undocumented children Tuesday night by passing a resolution by an 8-to-3 vote in favor of adopting the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Wait there’s more!

The resolution came about because of concerns about police treatment of undocumented minors.

“Cases are charged up,” said Supervisor Bevan Dufty, referring to the practice of charging suspects with more serious charges then they are eventually convicted of. “The police have an enormous amount of discretion in booking and charging. The current way is fundamentally unfair.”

Dufty said police book suspects on felony charges, and many are later convicted of misdemeanors.

The effort was to prevent San Francisco police from reporting undocumented children/juveniles to ICE.  The usual arguments were made:

“There’s systematic racial profiling going on in this country,” said Evelyn Sanchez of the San Francisco Immigrant Rights Defense Committee. “Due process is being violated. Human and city rights are being violated,” said the Mission District resident. After the meeting she was pleased with the board’s vote.

Even my boyhood hero, Cesar Chavez came up:

After the meeting Campos said it was fitting for this to happen on Cesar Chavez’s birthday.

“I think his spirit was in the room,” said Campos. “Progressives are in control.”

This makes my blood boil.  The Constitution is clear:  States and localities cannot defy Federal law or have their own foreign policy.  The UNCRC resolution, in fact, sanctuary city policies in general, violate Article I, Section 10 of the original Constitution:

“No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation…”

This is why we need positive legislation to stop this bad UN law (an oxymoron!) before it can be adopted in this nation.  Thanks to parentalrights.org for this outrageous report.

That is great news and my readers in Alaska and Kansas should call or email Senators Murkowski, Brownback and Roberts thanking them for their support of national sovereignty and to stop bad UN (redundant perhaps!) law. 

What I want to know is:  Where’s the Democrats?  No Democrat has signed on. 

There are several more conservative members – Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), Ben Nelson (D-NE), and my own senator:  Jim Webb (D-VA).  They could and should support the DeMint resolution. 

Especially Senator Jim Webb:

Webb is a former sub-cabinet secretary under Reagan; he has a reputation to be strong on defense and ought to be concerned about sovereignty issues.  He’s something of a maverick (I wish he’d been more of one especially on Obamacare) so I sent him an email on this question; he responded with a standard response: 

Thank you for contacting my office regarding the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Children Treaty. I appreciate your taking the time to share your views with me. Currently there are no plans to consider this treaty. However, please be assured I will keep your thoughts in mind should this or a related issue come before the U.S. Senate. As a member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, I appreciate your taking the time to share your concerns. I would also invite you to visit my website at www.webb.senate.gov for regular updates about my activities and positions on matters that are important to Virginia and our nation.

 But the treaty is before the Senate, Senator Webb!  You can show leadership and sign on to Senator DeMint’s resolution.  Stand for Virginia parents and our sovereignty – do what President Reagan would have done!  Our Scotch-Irish forebears would never have stood for foreigners telling us what to do.  I urge ALL my tea party/Ron Paul readers in Virginia to email and call Senator Webb to support the DeMint resolution!

If you are in a state where your senators have not signed on to this resolution, contact them!  They’ll see the light when they feel the heat!  Especially in Nebraska and Connecticut.

Didier played for the Redskins in at least one Super Bowl; I’ll let the readers sort out the football details but his bio says he was a 12th round draft pick.  12th rounders usually have a short pro career.  Didier beat the odds. 

His positions on the issues are great.  I like this quote to start with on Didier’s web site:

Our founders were wise men who laid out the original “game plan” for America – our Constitution – based on their knowledge of thousands of years of world history. The issues we face today cannot be properly addressed without first recognizing and honoring this document. We became the most prosperous nation in world history because of this profound new governing concept.

Didier is a constitutionalist:

As your U.S. Senator, my first question on every bill that comes before me will be – Is it authorized under the U. S. Constitution?  If not, it will get my NAY vote.

We need a Senator NO!  Some more Didier “hits”:

No nation has been more inventive and creative than America. Our ability to create, coupled with our industrial might, is unmatched in the annals of history. Free enterprise made this happen. This governing philosophy made America the most prosperous nation ever, fostered individual liberty, and, at the same time, raised the standard of living and economic vitality of the entire world.

Didier is a staunch non-interventionist:

America cannot be the world’s police force. The sheer expense of quartering troops in over a hundred nations is depleting our wealth and our national spirit. It was the collective wisdom of our Founders that we lead by example. Is it our place to tell other nations how to manage their affairs, or dictate their form of government?

It is NOT our place to do so!  Even better, Didier believes in a SOVEREIGN US!

While great importance should always be attached to sitting down with other nations to work out differences, I will never vote to sell out our sovereignty through approval of any United Nations treaty that usurps our Constitution. I believe the United Nations has failed in its original mission and has now become a promoter of collective-socialism that stands in sharp contrast to America’s ideal of individual liberty. I would like to see the United States out of the United Nations, and the United Nations out of the United States.

AMEN!  Preach it, Clint!  I am just sorry you did not stay in Virginia!  On education, Didier is right on again:

Presently dollars sent back to Washington for programs such as transportation or education, come back to us at approximately $0.35 cents on the dollar. When the U. S. Dept. of Education was first instituted, we were ranked in the top ten academically among industrial nations. Today we rank 33rd. What good has that done us?  With few exceptions, needed programs can be implemented much more efficiently at the State or local level.

Didier is for repealing Obamacare, against amnesty and favors the right to bear arms for the right reasons:

Our founders stated many times, and in many places, an armed citizenry is the last line of defense against tyranny. 

After experiencing a dreadful fight for freedom, they knew this to be true.

With stands like these, it is no surprise that Ron Paul has ENDORSED Clint Didier for US Senate from Washington State.  For whatever it’s worth, I do too.  If you can help him, try to do so.  There is  an establishment candidate and again the tea party/Ron Paul libertarians need to unite and arise to support constitutionalist candidates that can win.  I am seeing blog support.  Didier can win the general election. 

Baker is fabulous; he’s a software engineer by education and training.  He entered politics through activism:  He helped found the Cobden Centre with the goal of, as it states in its mission statement:

Our vision is of a peaceful, open and free society based on a stable, sustainable economy in which everyone has the opportunity to participate in constantly growing real prosperity.

Based on sound scholarship, we argue that such a society must be built on honest money.

Honest money means an end to credit expansion and false booms followed by financial crises with appalling human cost. It means an end to inflation of the money supply and hence prices. Honest money is the key to social progress in the 21st century.

Therefore:

We believe that social progress comes when private property is secure and all people enjoy an increase in their real income.  We believe that the reduction of relative poverty and the increase of general prosperity will make society more orderly, stable and free.

We believe that, today, the first condition to secure private property, to diminish widening wealth inequality and to establish a stable, sustainable economy for the benefit of all is honest money.

We believe that the method of increasing real income for all people is a social system of independence, interdependence and mutual cooperation: the free market.

We believe, with Richard Cobden, that with honest money and free trade, international peace and social progress will follow. We endorse Cobden’s view that:

Peace will come to earth when the people have more to do with each other and governments less.

I can agree with that; I suspect most of my libertarian/tea party readers will do so, too.  So who is Cobden? 

Richard Cobden was a Nineteenth Century British MP and activist who fought for free trade and relations between nations.  Here’s what the Cobden Centre says:

Richard Cobden (1804-1865) was an entrepreneur and politician who stood for honest money, free trade and peace. He opposed war and profligate military adventurism. Cobden played a leading role in the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846, to the general benefit of the working man.

An anti-interventionist free trader for peace?  Imagine that!  To learn more, here’s the webpage for the Cobden Centre.  The Cobden Centre also endorses Austrian economics (think von Hayek and Mises).  This is the man Steven Baker wants to honor.  In his maiden speech in Parliament on June 8, Baker called for sound money:

Artificially lowered interest rates increase the demand for credit, and decrease the supply of savings, but the legal privilege granted to banks means that they can meet demand by extending credit that is unbacked by real savings. There is a good argument to say that that causes the boom-and-bust cycle, the misdirection of resources in the capital structure of production, and over-consumption by consumers. That is the biggest problem that we face today.

They called Ron Paul a nut job and worse for speaking on inflation as a hidden tax and abolishing the Federal Reserve.  But here is an intellectual defense of sound money in the House of Commons!  There’s more:

Today, money is a product of the state. The Bank of England controls the price, quantity and quality of money. Perhaps if we were talking about any other commodity, there would be far less confusion over and questioning of the cause of the crisis. If money is a product of the state, we should ask ourselves, “Is this a good idea?”

Cong. Paul has called for alternative legal currencies; we do have such a currency whether people agree with it or not:  It’s called gold.  Many turn to gold in times of trouble.  But Baker said more; he said the UK (and by extension the US) is headed for financial catastrophe (I thank the Institute for Economic Affairs):

Using impeccable analysis and respected (ONS and Bank for International Settlements) data sources, Mr. Baker painted a frightening scenario in which the fiscal policies of western governments are unsustainable, and were even before the recent crisis erupted.  

The government can’t borrow much more, it can’t spend much more and it can’t tax much more; nor can it grow the economy out of its current mess (as if it ever could!). The only other way to pay off its debts is by massive inflation, which would produce a catastrophe reminiscent of the Weimar Republic after World War One.

Steven Baker is an asset for the British Parliament; I am honoured to introduce him as a Young Turk and we’ll keep up with him as well.  Here’s his personal website.  Thank you, Deep Tory for the idea!  Ron Paul ideas are on the march!

Seriously, Ron Paul is that rare item in American politics:  A cult icon.  He does not have many of the traits that most cult icons such as charisma or telegenic ability.  But the strength is the ideas he expresses:  Liberty.  Non-intervention.  Free trade.  Sound money.  Honesty and integrity. 

I think there is an issue to resolve:  What to do with Gary Johnson.  He’s a very fine candidate.  Former governor of New Mexico who vetoed over 700 bills.  He has credibility on spending issues.  However, there are too many constitutencies to merge together to make a Johnson run feasible in 2012.  We would be starting over again.  For example, I would have to rally my fellow believers and social conservatives again to support Gary Johnson.  But if Paul selected Johnson as his running mate at the time of his announcement, this would merge the two groups together and make it possible for Johnson to run on his own in 2016. 

But, the objection is made:  No one can do it.  No place for the VP on the ballot.  No one does it like this.  But we have a new political paradigm.  Why not break the rules.  Gary can be a surrogate for Paul who would be able to double the effort.  People would be eager to meet Gov. Johnson as well. 

This would merge the Tea Party and libertarian movements together.  It also answers the age issue:  Paul is the present effort and Johnson is the future.  While there could be others like Rand Paul rising in the future, its Paul and Johnson for the next two election cycles.  John would have in effect Paul’s blessing for the future.

But the CNN article does have a few highlights.  Paul runs for ideas not glory:

All of this comes from a man who has no illusions that he can win his party’s presidential nomination, but that won’t stop him from running again in 2012 if he decides to do so.

“It is probably hard to believe, but I look at it a little bit differently than others,” Paul said in an interview during his recent visit to Iowa. “I don’t expect to be president. I don’t expect to be. That doesn’t mean I won’t run for president, but I am really energized when I think we make inroads … to broaden the outreach on the philosophy I have been talking about for 40 years.”

People are eager to support Paul and his message:

Paul’s address was bookended by standing ovations.

“I have been excited about and what he is talking about,” John Bowery, a Republican from Shenandoah, Iowa, said after Paul’s speech. “I am sorry he didn’t get more attention in 2008. I don’t know if he is going to run in 2012. If someone like him does, I will be all for it.”

He spoke to standard themes in Iowa:

On this night in Des Moines, Paul stuck to his talking points. He never mentioned a possible presidential run in 2012. Instead, Paul spoke of limited government and the need for government officials to follow the Constitution, which just so happened to be the theme of the Iowa GOP’s fundraiser.

Paul also has some organization and is supporting candidates:

For now, Paul will continue to travel the country to promote his philosophy, while his 2008 presidential campaign operation has morphed into the Campaign for Liberty, a 500,000-member organization that promotes libertarian views.

Paul also has a small political action committee that doles out contributions to “liberty-based candidates,” a spokesman said.

But I could not miss this column:  Bill Kristol must resign.  I agree.  He ought to leave the conservative movement.  He once read those unwilling to attack a nation who did not attack us in 1999 out of the conservative movement on national television.  That’s fine; I’ll be a Ron Paul libertarian.  (I’m having more fun!) 

But Coulter writes some great truths:

But now I hear it is the official policy of the Republican Party to be for all wars, irrespective of our national interest.

That about covers recent history pretty well, doesn’t it?  Coulter also alluded to Kristol’s support for McCain:

Also, John McCain. Kristol was an early backer of McCain for president — and look how great that turned out!

Coulter also accused Kristol of being for amnesty and the National Greatness Project:

Of course, if Kristol is writing the rules for being a Republican, we’re all going to have to get on board for amnesty and a “National Greatness Project,” too – other Kristol ideas for the Republican Party. 

National Greatness is another way of saying intervention in wars that are none of our business  Adam Garfinkle says it well at FPRI:

As to the formula, it is weighted heavily toward America’s role in the world. And in that domain we are told that the defense budget is too small, even though it is larger than the next dozen such budgets in the world combined. We are told that America is becoming isolationist despite the fact that since 1992 U.S. military forces have maintained a higher operational tempo than at any time in American history short of civil or world war— and we have forces stationed semi-permanently in 19 foreign countries. We must do more, we are told: get tough with China and Russia; get still tougher with proliferators; save Kosovo and Bosnia and Haiti and Burma and Rwanda; aggressively open foreign markets to our notion of rational, transparent, IMF-approved capitalism; and more, much more, besides.

Coulter says it:  Time for Kristol to quit. 

Inasmuch as demanding resignations is another new Republican position, here’s mine: Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney must resign immediately.

I strongly suspect there is a fair amount of sarcasm in Coulter’s article.  She’s a pro at it.  But great truths can be hidden in good sarcasm:

Nonetheless, Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney have demanded that Steele resign as head of the RNC for saying Afghanistan is now Obama’s war — and a badly thought-out one at that. (Didn’t liberals warn us that neoconservatives want permanent war?)

I thought the irreducible requirements of Republicanism were being for life, small government and a strong national defense, but I guess permanent war is on the platter now, too.

It wasn’t liberals that warned us about unnecessary preemptive goody-goody wars.  Ron Paul did too.  He was laughed at and cheated out of votes and delegates in 2008.  But who’s having the last laugh?  I see tea parties everywhere and Ron Paul ideas on the march.  Be encouraged!  We’re winning!