A Defense of Ron Paul Controversy follows Congressman Ron Paul, (R. Tx) for his Federalist views.

I be lieve he would fit in perfectly with the strange assortment of men from the colo nies who gathered one sickeningly hot summer to create a new Constitution. Therein lies the problem: Paul's views are not those we commonly hear anymore, b ut which we ought to hear more of, from many more people. It was President Ronal d Reagan's Attorney General who started the modern quest for Originalist interpr etations of that Constitution. But it seems there are past statement attributed to Paul that don't sit well wit h anyone, such as saying that Iran should have nuclear weapons if it wants. That seems to be threatening to the supporters of Israel, if not being anti-Semitic altogether. And in an interview with Haaretz.com http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/we st-of-eden/ron-paul-tells-haaretz-i-am-not-an-anti-semite-1.404208 , an Israeli news site, "Paul reiterated his controversial positions that American support fo r Israel was one of the reasons for the 9/11 terrorist attacks." But that does n ot mean he does not condemn those terrorists. No one can call himself "libertari an" without supporting the rights of everyone to be free of aggression. Al Qaeda itself has stated that that is one of the reasons for the attack--but n ot the only one. And Paul has consistently said that Israel is one of our most i mportant friends and has a right to defend itself as it sees fit, not as its Big Brother America sees fit. He also told Haaretz that any kind of racism or anti-Semitism is incompatible w ith his philosophy, adding Ludwig von Mises, the great economist whose writing help ed inspire my political career, was a Jew [who] wrote about the folly of seeing people as part of groups rather than as individuals, Paul said. It is today's cons ervatives and especially the liberals who see people as parts of groups. "Ethnicity" was not conceived by libertarians, and in fact was not something I e ver heard about until after I had graduated high school. We didn't know about et hnic groups back then. The Houston Chron.com http://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/A-look-at-R on-Paul-s-controversial-past-1843810.php wrote: "In 1997, Paul took issue with t he concept of global warming, arguing 'the temperatures are getting cooler, on t he average.'" Look at this climatology map http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures .htm which shows four distinct cooling periods since about 2000 BCE, each getti ng colder and longer, including the last one called the "Little Ice Age", from a bout the 11th century into the 19th century. Climatologists claim we are due for another real ice age soon. Paul admitted recently when asked, that weather patt erns are changing, not cooling, and that man is partly responsible for the chang es. Even I know that if you cut down huge swaths of the Amazon rain forest, the largest weather-maker on the planet, that the weather patterns are going to chan ge. The Chron also wrote this: "[Paul] slammed government bureaucrats for using the Sept. 11 attacks as 'an excuse to seize police powers sought for decades.'" The 'excuse to seize police powers sought for decades' is not a conspiracy theor y. Only today The American Thinker http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/our_gr owing_police_state.html released an article called "Our Growing Police State". L ast year, Dprogram.net http://dprogram.net/2010/03/25/femas-growing-police-power s-concern-activists/ wrote about Fema's growing police powers. James DeMeo, Ph. D., Director of Research at Orgone Biophysical Research Laboratory, wrote about http://www.orgonelab.org/fda.htm abuse of police power over the decades by the F

DA. LewRockwell.com http://lewrockwell.com/douglas/douglas38.1.html wrote, "We n ow have sixteen publicly known secret police armies at the federal level and no doubt many top secret ones not admitted to exist, as the NSA and others were lon g top-secrets." I didn't have to search all over the net to find these. They wer e the first four in line, with many more following. Federalism has been banished in favor of a "soft fascism", the intentions of whi ch are to protect what our elected leaders and bureaucrats truly see as national threats. In some cases they may be right, but they are taking the wrong way to protect us. The police powers seized after 9/11, such as the Patriot Act allowed for, is just one more in the long progression of power-seizing, and President O bama is taking more. The Houston Cron also wrote, "Paul has advocated decriminalizing drugs, returnin g to the gold standard and eliminating the Federal Reserve, CIA, IRS and the Bur eau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms." These are not new ideas. Thomas Jefferson 's party opposed Hamilton's banking system; drugs were legal into the 20th centu ry but the remedy for the problems they created was not to turn them into contra band; and the IRS only exists because a reorganized and more liberal Supreme Cou rt overturned a previous High Court ruling that said income taxes were illegal. If President Ron Paul was to adhere to the first ruling, he would be saying he r ejects the second ruling as illegal. Any President can do the same thing. They a re, after all, sworn to uphold the Constitution, but they must do it as they int erpret it, not as others tell them they must. And the creation of the ATF, a tax collection agency, was a power grabbing move, taking it out of the IRS in 1972 and combining it with two other agencies, for the purpose of making it bigger an d more powerful. What about those racist and sexist comments in Ron Paul's newsletters 20 years a go? Paul s press secretary, Gary Howard, said Paul has stated many times that he di d not write those words because he doesn't think them and has disavowed and apol ogized for them. "Ron Paul said [on a televised radio program, in Des Moines, Thursday Dec 29] th at he accepts 'some responsibility' for controversial newsletters played up by h is opponents for the GOP presidential nomination, but downplayed the importance of the issue to voters." according to The Hill http://thehill.com/video/campaign /201701-paul-i-had-some-responsibility-for-controversial-newsletters- . Indeed, if Paul's own words and deeds are any indication, the importance to vote rs is to accept his apology for what was written in his name, but more important ly to get back to Tenth Amendment principles, the strength of Paul's appeal for the Tea Party, and for some conservatives and independents.