Soldiers stand guard

Soldiers of Pakistan army and police officer stand guard after a bombing in Shabqadar near Peshawar, Pakistan on Friday, May 13, 2011. A police officer says the death toll in a pair of explosions outside a security force training center in northwest Pakistan has risen to 80. Liaqat Ali Khan says 66 victims in the attack Friday were recruits for the Frontier Corps. The attack is the bloodiest in Pakistan since the U.S. raid that killed the al-Qaida chief on May 2. Ahsanullah Ahsan, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, has said the attack was in retaliation for bin Laden’s death.

Soldiers of Pakistan army at bombing site

Soldiers of the Pakistan army at the bombing site in Shabqadar near Peshawar, Pakistan on Friday, May 13, 2011. A police officer says the death toll in a pair of explosions outside a security force training center in northwest Pakistan has risen to 80. Liaqat Ali Khan says 66 victims in the attack Friday were recruits for the Frontier Corps. The attack is the bloodiest in Pakistan since the U.S. raid that killed the al-Qaida chief on May 2. Ahsanullah Ahsan, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, has said the attack was in retaliation for bin Laden’s death.

Soldiers of Pakistani paramilitary force

Soldiers of Pakistani paramilitary force, check a damaged vehicle at the site of a bombing outside a paramilitary training center in Shabqadar near Peshawar, Pakistan, Friday, May 13, 2011. A pair of suicide bombers attacked recruits leaving a paramilitary training center in Pakistan on Friday, killing 80 people in the first retaliation for the killing of Osama bin Laden by American commandos last week.

Supporters of Pakistani religious group Jamiat …

Supporters of Pakistani religious group Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam chant slogan during an anti U.S. rally in Abbottabad, Pakistan on Friday, May 13, 2011. Pakistan is facing pressure from inside the country and abroad to explain why Pakistani intelligence didn’t know that bin Laden was hiding in their country and whether some Pakistani officials knew and protected him. The placard in center top reading as ‘Osama your blood will bring revolution’.

______________________________

Clothing and other items are seen

Clothing and other items from victims are seen collected and put in a pile at the site of a suicide bomb blast in Charsadda, northwest Pakistan May 13, 2011. Pakistani Taliban suicide bombers killed at least 80 people at a paramilitary force academy in the northwest on Friday, and vowed further bloodshed in retaliation for the death of Osama bin Laden in a U.S. raid in the country.

Pakistani security official shows photographs

A Pakistani security official shows photographs he found in the luggage of soldiers after a bombing in Shabqadar near Peshawar, Pakistan on Friday, May 13, 2011. A police officer says the death toll in a pair of explosions outside a security force training center in northwest Pakistan has risen to 80. Liaqat Ali Khan says 66 victims in the attack Friday were recruits for the Frontier Corps. The attack is the bloodiest in Pakistan since the U.S. raid that killed the al-Qaida chief on May 2. Ahsanullah Ahsan, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, has said the attack was in retaliation for bin Laden’s death.

Pakistani security officials

Pakistani security officials visit the site of bombing at a gate of training school in Shabqadar near Peshawar, Pakistan on Friday, May 13, 2011. A police officer says the death toll in a pair of explosions outside a security force training center in northwest Pakistan has risen to 80. Liaqat Ali Khan says 66 victims in the attack Friday were recruits for the Frontier Corps. The attack is the bloodiest in Pakistan since the U.S. raid that killed the al-Qaida chief on May 2. Ahsanullah Ahsan, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, has said the attack was in retaliation for bin Laden’s death.

Pakistani security officials

Pakistani security officials collect caps and uniforms of their colleagues at the site of bombing in Shabqadar near Peshawar, Pakistan on Friday, May 13, 2011. A police officer says the death toll in a pair of explosions outside a security force training center in northwest Pakistan has risen to 80. Liaqat Ali Khan says 66 victims in the attack Friday were recruits for the Frontier Corps. The attack is the bloodiest in Pakistan since the U.S. raid that killed the al-Qaida chief on May 2. Ahsanullah Ahsan, a spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, has said the attack was in retaliation for bin Laden’s death.

Men bring coffins

Men bring coffins to a hospital morgue in Peshawar, for the victims of a suicide bomb blast in Charsadda May 13, 2011. Suicide bombers attacked a Pakistani paramilitary academy on Friday killing 80 people in revenge for the death of Osama bin Laden as Pakistani anger over the U.S. raid to get the al Qaeda leader showed no sign of cooling.

Member of paramilitary forces stands guard

A member of the paramilitary forces stands guard with a rocket launcher at the site of a suicide bomb blast in Charsadda, northwest Pakistan May 13, 2011. Suicide bombers attacked a Pakistani paramilitary academy on Friday killing 80 people in revenge for the death of Osama bin Laden as Pakistani anger over the U.S. raid to get the al Qaeda leader showed no sign of cooling. REUTERS/Fayaz Aziz

Site of suicide bomb blast is reflected

The site of a suicide bomb blast is reflected in the side mirror of a damaged vehicle in Charsadda, northwest Pakistan May 13, 2011. Pakistani Taliban suicide bombers killed at least 80 people at a paramilitary force academy in the northwest on Friday, and vowed further bloodshed in retaliation for the death of Osama bin Laden in a U.S. raid in the country.

Townspeople look on

Townspeople look on as a member of the paramilitary forces cordons off the site of a suicide bomb blast in Charsadda, northwest Pakistan May 13, 2011. Pakistani Taliban suicide bombers killed at least 80 people at a paramilitary force academy in the northwest on Friday, and vowed further bloodshed in retaliation for the death of Osama bin Laden in a U.S. raid in the country

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself at 5:24 pm CST on May 11, 2011.

Senator Rand Paul on Feb 7, 2011 wrote the article “A Modest $500 Billion Proposal: My spending cuts would keep 85% of government funding and not touch Social Security,” Wall Street Journal and he observed:

Here are some of his specific suggestions:

Labor
Agency/Program Funding Level Savings % Decrease
Labor $135.676 B $2.803 B 2%
In recent years, the Department of Labor has expanded substantially, with a large of amount of the increased funding coming from the expansion of unemployment benefits of up to 99 weeks. While this proposal exempts unemployment benefits from receiving funding cuts, the program will need to be reformed in the future, including a re-evaluation of the emergency unemployment benefits, as well as the extended unemployment benefits that provide up to 99 weeks – or nearly 2 years of unemployment benefits. Many economists have warned that prolonged unemployment benefits
can increase unemployment duration by delaying individuals’ incentive to search for work.
The proposal exempts the Employment and Training Administration (including UI benefits), Mine Safety and Health, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. However, this proposal eliminates all other Department of Labor programs.

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself at 10pm CST.

Senator Rand Paul on Feb 7, 2011 wrote the article “A Modest $500 Billion Proposal: My spending cuts would keep 85% of government funding and not touch Social Security,” Wall Street Journal and he observed:

Here are some of his specific suggestions:

Interior
Agency/Program Funding Level Savings % Decrease
Interior $3.111 B $10.934 B 78%
The Department of Interior is responsible for managing millions of acres of land, forests and parks, as well as building
dams. The department has consistently been given poor management ratings by the White House’s Office of
Management and Budget, and provides many functions that could be reduced or privatized. This proposal includes
taking many programs back to FY2008 levels, and includes additional cuts or elimination of certain programs,
including the Land and Mineral Management, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Geological Survey, the National Park
Service, and Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Land and Mineral Management: Reduce 50 percent
The management of public lands and resources is best left up to the states. States have firsthand knowledge about
what is good for them and the best ways to use their lands for energy, recreation, and natural beauty.

Bureau of Reclamation: Eliminate
Established in 1902, the Bureau of Reclamation has held a majority of the dams, hydroelectric power plants, and
canals in the western most 17 states. They are the largest wholesaler of water in the country and provide water for
farmers in those states.

Owning a majority block of energy and water resources is not the business of the federal government. Water rights
should be controlled by the states and agreements can be made between the states to ensure water supply to all.

U.S. Geological Survey: Reduce 29 percent
The U.S. Geological Survey is the largest water, earth, and biological science civilian mapping agency in the United
States. Though these are important activities, they can be given to state researchers at our colleges and universities,
without having large numbers of regional executives and multiple offices.

National Park Service: Reduce 42 percent
In 2009, repairs were performed on the Vietnam Memorial and those repairs were done without the use of taxpayer
funds. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund took over the duties of preserving the memorial because the National
Park Service did not have the resources from the federal government.
Every year the amount of appropriations increase to the National Park Service, yet both the GAO and the
Congressional Research Services have stated that NPS’s backlog on projects and maintenance would cost several
billion dollars to the American taxpayer. National Parks have seen a decrease in visitors and campers each year due
to trash, lack of facilities, or even safety. Returning these public lands back to the states and or the private sector
would allow an increase in quality, safety and a reduction in government spending each year.
Bureau of Indian Affairs: Eliminate
For far too long, the Bureau of Indian Affairs has swindled and mismanaged billions of dollars in Indian trust funds.
Former Special Trustee Thomas Slonaker in 2004 testified that they Department of the Interior and the BIA were
incapable of reform and were unwilling to hold people accountable for their actions. In addition, Paul Homan also has
testified before Congress saying that a “vast majority of upper and middle management at the BIA were incompetent.
Instead of wasting taxpayer funds throwing money into a bureau of corruption and incompetency, eliminate them and
allow the tribes to manage their own trust funds independently without government intervention.

First GOP Presidential Debate Part 4

The first GOP presidential debate for 2012 was held in South Carolina the evening of May 5, 2011. Participants were Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, businessman Herman Cain, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson.

First GOP Presidential Debate Part 2

The first GOP presidential debate for 2012 was held in South Carolina the evening of May 5, 2011. Participants were Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, businessman Herman Cain, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson.

According to the Huffington Post Ron Paul “certainly has the most enthusiastic fan base.”

Can Ron Paul win? Back in 2007, Dr Murray Sabrin wrote:

“Ron’s political base is fiscal conservatives, anti-tax citizens, anti-war Republicans, Democrats and Independents, constitutionalists, hard-money advocates, small business owners, civil libertarians, anti-universal healthcare physicians, pro-lifers, parents who home school, and anyone else who considers himself a real patriot. In other words, if Ron’s substantial base provides him with volunteers, contributions and votes, he would be a very competitive candidate.”

Most libertarians have prochoice views, but Ron Paul is pro-life.  This is one of the reasons I really like Ron Paul.

The LA Times reported:

Ron Paul, the conservative congressman from Texas known for his small-government beliefs rooted in Libertarianism, told an audience Monday in Iowa that government should dictate what happens in the womb of pregnant women.

Speaking at the Iowa Family Leader’s presidential lecture series in Sioux City, Paul, an obstetrician and a Christian, explained that he disagreed with the popular belief that to be a Libertarian means having a laissez faire attitude of “it’s the woman’s body; she can do whatever she wants.”

“Life comes from our creator, not our government,” Politico reported Paul as saying. “Liberty comes from our creator, not from government. Therefore, the purpose, if there is to be a purpose, for government is to protect life and liberty.”

Paul’s stance on abortion won him the endorsement in 2008 of none other than “Jane Roe” from the landmark Roe v. Wade legal case of the ’70s.

“Roe,” whose real name is Norma McCorvey, became a pro-life advocate a decade ago and supported Paul in the last presidential election specifically because of his views on abortion. “I support Ron Paul for president because we share the same goal, that of overturning Roe v. Wade,” McCorvey said. “He has never wavered … on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it. He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn.”

When Paul accepted the endorsement he said, “As much as I talk about economic liberties, and civil liberties and trying to avoid the killing overseas, I think the issue of life is paramount.”

_______________________________________

I probably loved this next article about Ron Paul because I too am a Christian and love liberty. In the article ,”Will Ron Paul Be the Candidate of the Christian Right?,” Laurence Vance writes:ce M. e

In the typical presidential election, conservative Christians who have some understanding of the benefits of liberty and limited government and don’t blindly follow the Republican Party do one of three things: they don’t vote, they “waste” their vote on a third party, or else they hold their nose, close their eyes, stop their ears, and fight a gag reflex as they vote for the Republican candidate because they consider him to be the lesser of two evils. But most of these Christians have short memories, for when the lesser evil turns out to be just as evil as the greater evil, or sometimes even worse, they generally repeat the process all over again.

The newest individual to announce that he is seeking the Republican nomination for president is Ron Paul. He formally declared his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination on March 12, 2007, when he appeared as a guest on C-SPAN.

Ron Paul is a veteran. He is a physician. He currently represents the 14^th district in Texas (south of Houston) in the U.S. House of Representatives, a seat which he has held since 1997. He previously represented Texas’s 22^nd district in 1976 and again from 1979 to 1985. Dr. Paul was the Libertarian Party nominee for president in 1988. He is the former honorary chair of the Republican Liberty Caucus. He consistently scores a perfect 100 on The New American magazine’s “Conservative Index.” He has received many awards and honors during his career in Congress from organizations such as the National Taxpayers Union, Citizens Against Government Waste, Council for a Competitive Economy, and Young Americans for Freedom.

But will he be the candidate of the Christian Right? By the Christian Right’s own criteria, their candidate ought to be Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is a man of faith. He is a Protestant Christian and a regular churchgoer.

Ron Paul is pro-life. As a specialist in obstetrics/gynecology, he has delivered more than 4,000 babies. Dr. Paul is not just an opponent of partial-birth abortion; he is an opponent of abortion itself. He is also opposed to federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

Ron Paul is a believer in family values. Unlike many Christian “leaders” and Republican politicians who have admitted to adulterous affairs and/or been married multiple times, Dr. Paul has been married to the same woman for fifty years. He and his wife have been blessed with five children and seventeen grandchildren.

Ron Paul is opposed to same-sex marriage. Although he doesn’t want to strip homosexuals of their civil rights, he has voted to prohibit federal funding for the joint adoption of a child between individuals who are not related by blood or marriage.

Ron Paul is a patriot. He served as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force from 1963 to 1967. He opposes federal court jurisdiction over the question of whether the phrase “under God” should be included in the pledge of allegiance.

Ron Paul is opposed to unrestricted immigration. Because he believes that true citizenship requires cultural connections and an allegiance to the United States, he favors an end to birthright citizenship. And because he believes that it insults legal immigrants, he does not favor amnesty for illegal immigrants in any form. He opposes welfare state subsidies for illegal immigrants that alienate taxpayers and breed suspicion of immigrants. Dr. Paul also believes that all federal government business should be conducted in English.

Ron Paul is opposed to gun control. Not only does he believe that gun control makes people demonstrably less safe, he also thinks it’s a myth that gun control reduces crime. Representative Paul introduced legislation in Congress that would have repealed waiting periods and instant background checks.

Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist. He never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution. He has consistently voted to lower or abolish federal taxes, spending, and regulation. Congressman Paul was recently recognized, for the tenth year in a row, as a “Taxpayer’s Friend” by the National Taxpayers Union.

Ron Paul is opposed to the United Nations. He has introduced legislation to withdraw the United States from the UN. Dr. Paul believes that the UN is rife with corruption. It serves as a forum for rampant anti-Americanism. Instead of being reformed, the UN needs to be renounced. Dr. Paul is against any kind of world government or new world order.

Ron Paul is the premier advocate for liberty in politics today. He believes in absolute religious and political liberty for all Americans. He strongly supports private property rights. He believes that government exists to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens.

But even though he appears to live up to the usual criteria of the Christian Right, the question still remains: Will Ron Paul be the candidate of the Christian Right?

As a Christian, I admire Dr. Paul’s principled stand on many issues, but I don’t believe the leadership of the Christian Right will embrace him. I think they love centralization more than federalism. I think they love political power more than liberty. I think they love war more than peace. I think they love politicians more than principles. I think they love faith-based socialism more than the free market. And I think they love the state more than God Almighty.

April 26, 2007

Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] is a freelance writer and an adjunct instructor in accounting at Pensacola Junior College in Pensacola, FL. He is also the director of the Francis Wayland Institute. He is the author ofChristianity and War and Other Essays Against the Warfare State. His latest book is King James, His Bible, and Its Translators. Visit his website.