December 24, 2007 journal, Christmas Eve with high destructive winds in Los Angeles. America finds itself in an endless foolish war while winter blizzards blanket the Midwest. Thousands of flights are canceled and the political rat race gets sticky with Mormon Mitt Romney called a phony by a major New Hampshire newspaper. This will be impossible for him to overcome as it will follow him to every state in this global information age. I can see the end of corrupted politics developing and it may be like in Romney's case self-destructive. He did not need to say what he said but he did and now he is suffering from lying about his father marching with Martin Luther King. Front runner Republican Rudy Guiliani is recuperating after being hospitalized for mysterious illnesses. What a phony! Santa Claus is not expected to be as generous this year as fascism is being ushered in. Christmas bells are being replaced by the sounds of the gavels dropping on foreclosure. The greedy banks are having their Christmas bonanza and it may be their very last one. Gift cards are all the go because they are purchased on credit cards making it easy to do shopping by letting the receiver do the shopping. If I get one this year I plan to ask for a refund from the store because I resent gift cards. Media reports today say that retailers love gift cards because first of all only 60 percent are ever redeemed and at the full price. To get the full benefit they must buy extra items and pay more. I write a check for my gifts and I recommend giving cash if available so the receiver is not bound to one store. They say Republicans are looking for another candidate yet they make no mention of Ron Paul as being a candidate. I question if there is any hope for this country at all available. The History Channel had on the program on Bible Code December 24th at 10:00 p.m. This is the first time I have heard that 9*1*1 was predicted in the Bible code. You can probably get it from the Internet of the History Channel. Sir Isaac Newton tried to break or discover the code years earlier than a Jewish Rabbi did it after the Second World War. Santa Claus has now gone global which makes him even more mysterious and powerful in this economic whirlwind. Santa is worshipped and regarded much higher than Christ. This year however the merchants are complaining that their business is bad and they are offering major discounts already just to get their money back. Wall Street is busy trying to spin this economic dilemma into something positive so as to not awaken their prey to facts. The American people are like suckers on a string being pumped full of propaganda. Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Claus in America's imagination and the bankers guarantee. Yes Virginia, Maryland, New York, Iowa and New Hampshire, there is a Santa Claus coming to your state with vague promises but no means to keep. Every state will get a visit soon from Santa Claus offering a long list of goodies but it is only multiple dilutions. For a country that has removed Christ form Christmas it is called hypocrisy in real world. The red horse of war, the Red Dragon beast of Satan and Santa Claus have something in common. Santa Claus is a symbol of Antichrist taking the place of Christ just as much as the Pope or the dollar bill. These are all idol symbols of god's for which this country has committed fornication and its people will pay the price for not recognizing Satan in his beautiful attire all red and luxurious. Recognize it through the media and recognize it through the churches. Recognize it through Bible prophecy culminated by Revelation. Our economy, our food supply and very existence seems to rest on people's spending. Why not just give everybody a hundred thousand $ dollars since the Fed is so generous and can perform miracles like Santa Claus. They can just print it like they do for USA to fight the war or to save the stock market daily, not actually print, just authorize it will do. December 22, 2007 journal, Representative Ron Paul on Meet the Press of Tim Russert. RUSSERT: Let me ask you about 'drugs' & go back again to your '90-'88 campaign and see where you stand today. "All 'drugs' should be decriminalized. 'Drugs' should be dis-tributed by any adult to other adults. There should be no controls on production, supply or purchase for adults." Is that still your position? REP. PAUL: Yeah. It is sort of like alcohol. Alcohol's a deadly drug, kills more people than anything else. And today the absurdity on this war on 'drugs', Tim, has just been horrible. We now, the federal govern-ment, takes over and rules--overrules state laws where state laws permit medicinal mari-juana for people dying of cancer. The federal government goes in & arrests these people, put them in prison with mandatory, sometimes life sentences. The war on 'drugs' is totally out of control. If you want to regulate cigarettes and alcohol & 'drugs', it should be at the state level. That's been my position, and that's where I stand on it. But the federal govern-ment has no, no prerogatives on this. They-when they wanted to outlaw alcohol, they had enough respect for the Constitution to amend the Constitution. Today we have all these laws and abuse, and they don't even care about the Constitution. I azm defending the Constitution on this issue. I think drugs are horrible. I teach my kids not to use them, my grandchildren, in my medical practice. Prescription drugs are a greater danger than, than hard drugs. MR. RUSSERT: But you would decriminalize it? REP. PAUL, I would, at the federal level. I don't have control over the states. That's what the Constitution's there. MR. RUSSERT: Let me ask you about race, because, I read a speech you gave in 2004, the 40th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act. And you said this: "Contrary to the claims of" "supporters of the Civil Rights Act of" '64, "the act did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of" '64 "increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty." That act gave equal rights to African-Americans to vote, to live, to go to lunch counters, and you seem to be criticizing it. REP. PAUL: Well, we should do, we should do this at a federal level, at a federal lunch counter it'd be OK or for the military. Just think of how the government, you know, caused all the segregation in the military until after World War II. But when it comes, Tim, you're not compelled in your house to invade strangers that you don't like. So it's a property rights issue. And this idea that all private property is under the domain of the federal government I think is wrong. So this--I think even Barry Goldwater opposed that bill on the same property rights position, and that--and now this thing is totally out of control. If you happen to like to smoke a cigar, you know, the federal government's going to come down and say you're not allowed to do this. RUSSERT: But you would vote against... REP. PAUL: So it's... Pachmann RUSSERT: You would vote against the Civil Rights Act if, if it was today? REP. PAUL: If it were written the same way, where the federal government's taken over property--has nothing to do with race relations. It just happens, Tim, that I get more support from black people today than any other Republican candidate, according to some statistics. And I have a great appeal to people who care about personal liberties and to those individuals who would like to get us out of wars. So it has nothing to do with racism, it has to do with the Constitution and private property rights. RUSSERT: I was intrigued by your comments about Abe Lincoln. "According to Paul, Abe Lincoln should never have gone to war; there were better ways of getting rid of slavery." PAUL: Absolutely. 600,000 Americans died in a senseless civil war. No, he shouldn't have gone, gone to war. He did this just to enhance and get rid of the original intent of the republic. I mean, it was the--that iron, iron fist.. RUSSERT: We'd still have slavery. PAUL: Oh, come on, Tim. Slavery was phased out in every other country of the world. And the way I'm advising that it should have been done is do like the British empire did. You, you buy the slaves and release them. How much would that cost compared to killing 600,000 Americans and where it lingered for 100 years? I mean, the hatred and all that existed. So every other major country in the world got rid of slavery without a civil war. I mean, that doesn't sound too radical to me. That sounds like a pretty reasonable approach. RUSSERT: You're running as a Republican. In your--on your Web site, in your brochures, you make this claim: "Principled Leadership. Ron was also one of only four Republican Congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan for president against Gerald Ford in" '76. There's a photograph of you, Ronald Reagan on the right, heralding your support of Ronald Reagan. And yet you divorced yourself from Ronald Reagan. You said this: "Although he was once an ardent supporter of President Reagan, Paul now speaks of him as a traitor leading the country into debt and conflicts around the world. "I want to totally disassociate myself from the Reagan Administration." And you go on to The Dallas Morning News: "Paul now calls Reagan a `dramatic failure.'" REP. PAUL: Well, I'll bet you any money I didn't use the word traitor. I'll bet you that's somebody else, so I think that's misleading. But a failure, yes, in, in many ways. The government didn't shrink. Ultimately, after he got in office, he said, "All I want to do is reduce the rate of increase in size of government." That's not my goal. My goal is to reduce our government to a constitutional size. Completely different. I think that--matter of fact, he admitted in his memoirs that he had a total failure in Lebanon, and he said he relearned the Middle East because of that failure. And so there--he--you know, he... MR. RUSSERT: But if he's a total failure, why are you using, using his picture in your brochure? PAUL: Well, because he, he ran on a good program, and his, his idea was a limited government. Get rid of the Department of Education, a strong national defense. MR. RUSSERT: George Herbert Walker Bush, this is according to Ron Paul: "`Bush is a bum,' Paul wrote in" "November" 15th, "1992 issue of his newsletter, the `Ron Paul Political Report.'" And asked about the current President Bush, whether he voted for him in 2004: "Paul says no: `He misled us in 2000.'" Asked if he voted for Bush in 2000. No, "`I didn't vote for him then, either. I wasn't convinced he was a conservative.'" And actually, in 1987, you submitted a letter of resignation to the Republican Party: "I therefore resign my membership in the Republican Party and enclose my membership card." If Reagan's a failure, Bush 41 is a bum, and you didn't vote for Bush 41--41's a bum and 43 you didn't vote for, and you resigned from the Republican Party, why you running as a Republican candidate for president? REP. PAUL: Because I represent what Republicanism used to be. I represent the group that wanted to get rid of the Department of Education, the part, that part of the Republican Party that used to be non-interventionists overseas. That was the tradition, the Robert/Taft wing of the party. There was a time when the Republicans defended individual liberty and the Constitution and decreased spending. So the radicals, the ones who really don't belong in the Republican Party and why the Republican Party is shrinking, why the base is so small, is because they don't stand for these ideals any more. So I stand for the ideals of the Republican Party. I've been elected 10 times as Republican. I've been a Republican all my life except for that one year that I ran as a Libertarian. But, no, I represent the Republican ideals, I think, much more so that the individuals running for the party right now. RUSSERT: If, if you do not win the Republican nomination for president, will you run as an independent in 2008? PAUL: I have no intention to do that. . RUSSERT: Absolute promise. REP. PAUL: I have no intention of doing that. RUSSERT: Well, but no intention's a wiggle word. PAUL: Well, OK, I deserve one wiggle now and then, Tim. I mean, what the devil... RUSSERT: So no--so no Shermanesque statement. PAUL: You know, I... RUSSERT: "I will not sun as an independent." PAUL: Well, I can be pretty darned sure that I have no intention, no plans of doing it, and that's about 99.9 percent. I don't like people who are such absolutists, "I will never do this, or I will win, I'm going to come in first." I don't like those absolutists terms in politics. RUSSERT: But the door's open a little bit. REP. PAUL: Not very much. It really isn't. I, I don't--Tim, we just raised $10 million in two days. We haven't even had a race, we have February 5th coming up. We have a campaign to run. Why--do you ask all the other--how many other candidates have you asked, "Are you going to run as a third party candidate if you don't win?" Have you asked John McCain that? RUSSERT: Well, if someone has a history of running as a third party candidate, sure. You ran in '88 as a Libertarian. PAUL: Yeah, well, I know... RUSSERT: It's a logical question. PAUL: ...but there are independents. So I--ask them, too. RUSSERT: I will. Before you go, Mike Huckabee, Republican candidate for president, ran this commercial for Christmas and many thought that the shelf in the back looked like a cross. You were asked about it on CNN and this is what you said. PAUL: It reminds me of what Sinclair Lewis once says. He said when fascism comes to this country, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross. RUSSERT: What does that mean? PAUL: What? Fascism or the definition of fascism? RUSSERT: Do you believe that Mike Huckabee is... REP. PAUL: Oh, I didn't say that. I said it reminded me--as a matter of fact they caught me completely cold on that. I had not seen the ad, and they just said there was a cross there. And, you know, it was an instantaneous reflex because I knew of Sinclair Lewis about being cautious, because, you know, I--what prompts this is things like the Patriot Act. You know... RUSSERT: Let me go back... PAUL: No, no. If you're not a patriot... RUSSERT: But let me go back to this ad. You do not believe that Mike Huckabee, that ad commercial represents the potential of fascism in the form of a cross. PAUL: No. But I think this country, a movement in the last 100 years, is moving toward fascism. Fascism today, the softer term, because people have different definition of fascism, is corporatism when the military industrial complex runs the show, when the--in the name of security pay--pass the Patriot Act. You don't vote for it, you know, you're not patriotic America. If you don't support the troops and you don't support--if you don't support the war you don't support the troops. It's that kind of antagonism. But we have more corporatism and more abuse of our civil liberties, more loss of our privacy, national ID cards, all this stuff coming has a fascist tone to it. And the country's moving in that direction. That's what I'm thinking about. This was not personalized. I never even used my opponents names if you, if you notice. RUSSERT: So you think we're close to fascism? REP. PAUL: I think we're approaching it very close. One--there's one, there's one documentary that's been put out recently that has generated a lot of interest called "Freedom to Fascism." And we're moving in that direction. Were not moving toward Hitler-type fascism, but we're moving toward a softer fascism. Loss of civil liberties, corporations running the show, big government in bed with big business. So you have the military industrial complex, you have the medical industrial complex, you have the financial industry, you have the communications industry. They go to Washington and spend hundreds of millions of dollars. That's where the control is. I call that a soft form of fascism, something that is very dangerous. RUSSERT: For the record, the Sinclair Lewis Society said that Mr. Lewis never uttered that quote. PAUL: But others refuted that and put them down and said that--and they found the exact quote where it came from. RUSSERT: To be continued. Dr. Ron Paul, be safe on the campaign trail. Thanks for sharing your views. PAUL: Thank you. Nice to be here. " END