Campaign Blog
Don’t miss Linda on WTCM Radio Today at 9:30am!
Linda will be on WTCM Radio today at 9:30am to discuss her candidacy for the Michigan 1st district seat, and her opponent Bart Stupak’s recent vote for the healthcare bill.
You can Listen Live here.
Help Linda Defeat Stupak!
On March 21, 2010, Congressman Bart Stupak, a self-proclaimed “conservative, pro-life Democrat” rejected the views of those he represents and delivered the block of votes necessary to pass the ObamaCare legislation, including a provision allowing for publicly-funded abortions. Linda Goldthorpe a staunch pro-life advocate and conservative constitutionalist, is running to replace Bart in November.
Please consider donating to Linda’s campaign to beat Bart Stupak!
Also Check out SmashStupak.com for Live coverage of the latest Stupak News:
Phyllis Schlafly on the health care bill/ The Myth of the “pro-life” Democrat
Schlafly: Health Care Vote Set to Expose the Myth of the ‘Pro-Life Democrat’
WASHINGTON, March 21 –
“Not only would an Executive Order be rendered meaningless in the face of Congress passing legislation which actively provides for the massive expansion and funding of abortion services, but anyone who doubts the abortion tsunami which awaits this bill becoming law lives in a fantasy world.”
“Barack Obama has lined every existing federal agency with the most dedicated pro-abortion ideologues, and we know that he will continue this pattern of pro-abortion appointments when it comes time for him to fill the over-100 bureaucracies created to administer his socialized health care program.”
“Any formerly pro-life Democrat who casts a ‘Yes’ vote for this Senate health care bill tonight will be forever remembered as being among the deciding votes which facilitated the largest expansion of abortion services since Roe v. Wade.”
“Mr. Stupak and his Democrat followers have now clarified that you cannot be pro-life and be a Democrat. If abortion was truly their biggest issue, they wouldn’t willfully align themselves with the Party of Death.”
“This vote will expose the myth of the ‘pro-life Democrat.’ With this single vote, the Democratic Party will divide our nation into the Party of Death and the Party of Life, and future elections will never be the same.”
CONTACT: Suzanne Bibby, (610) 608-6303
SOURCE Phyllis Schlafly
What is the role of government? My candidate survey response:
First semester of law school you learn that the Constitution is the “supreme law of the land.” Then you pay for a zillion classes teaching you how to circumvent the constitution. As a freshman, I couldn’t understand Administrative Law, where you learn about all the agencies. “The Constitution says the legislature makes laws. Why is it that now agencies make laws?” The answer was, “they don’t make laws, they promulgate rules.” “Yeah, but you can go to jail over these rules, right?” “Yeah, but…”
This is not OK. This is not how our founding fathers intended things to be. Presidents are not supposed to issue executive orders. The IRS is not supposed to have a standing army. We are supposed to be permitted to choose the water capacity of our own toilets. We are not supposed to be FORCED to pay for fossil research in Argentina and radio advertisements telling teenagers to conserve (that’s cute, right?) energy by turning the stereo off! Things are out of control.
We’re supposed to have a little government. We’re supposed to be permitted to live our own lives without having to even think about the government. That is not the case.
My favorite Jefferson quote sums up what little impact government should have on our lives:
“A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”
I’ll not elaborate about the frugality component, because “I hold these truths to be self-evident”, however our government is not wise, either. The United States has troops in 130 countries. We regularly intervene in international affairs and the lives of our own citizens. We discourage
thrift, industry, enterprise, production, and self-responsibility. We meddle, meddle, meddle.
According to the supreme law of the land, our government is illegal. The constitutional requirements for government are very few. They should protect us, which they don’t when our borders are wide open. They should coin money, which they don’t since 1913 and theestablishment of the Federal Reserve. They should run the post office, which they’ve donepoorly 6 days a week, and now wish to reduce to 5. Basically, the only thing government is supposedto do is protect our liberty.
The one thing government does well is tell us how to live. That is the one thing government was absolutely not intended to do. It is unconstitutional. It is immoral. And it is intolerable.
Google everybody!
I see the same people all the time: GOP candidates. I’ve been to events where candidates outnumbered “civilians”, 3 to 1. We could save a lot of money if we just rented a bus and all the candidates rode together. Sometimes, we wouldn’t even have to stop at the event, just pick up a couple people and bring the microphone right on the bus!
Candidates are often asked why we decided to run. One candidate for the US House of Representatives said that he wants to “fix Michigan”. This is obviously an impossibility from an office in Washington while the state government is still home getting into trouble! But worse, this response fails to recognize that the US Constitution doesn’t permit the federal government to fix Michigan. (That means it’s illegal.) Federal government is constrained to a MUCH smaller role than that, as any Republican should know and insist.
But, the saddest thing about this candidate’s response, I recognized from making hiring decisions: he hasn’t even considered the job description for the seat he wants!
I’ve come up with my new answer for another common question, “what makes you different from your opposition”?
“Our difference is our goals. While others may be smarter, or have more experience, these attributes often translate into a desire to make decisions for other people. My only goal is to clear the road for us to make our own decisions, ourselves. That’s liberty. And I’ve been fighting for it for 20 years”
I encourage you to investigate before you vote. The Bible tells us to “know those who labor among you”. Any businessman will tell you: You’ve got to REALLY know those who labor FOR you!
I turned the Census lady away today. “I prefer not to take this test.” John Taylor Gatto
Great article by Ron Paul about why he voted “No” to encouraging people to participate in the 2010 census.
By Dr. Ron Paul
March 9, 2010
Last week Congress voted to encourage participation in the 2010 census. I voted “No” on this resolution for the simple, obvious reason that the census – like so many government programs – has grown far beyond what the framers of our Constitution intended. The invasive nature of the current census raises serious questions about how and why government will use the collected information. It also demonstrates how the federal bureaucracy consistently encourages citizens to think of themselves in terms of groups, rather than as individual Americans. The not so subtle implication is that each group, whether ethnic, religious, social, or geographic, should speak up and demand its “fair share” of federal largesse.
Article I, section 2 of the Constitution calls for an enumeration of citizens every ten years, for the purpose of apportioning congressional seats among the various states. In other words, the census should be nothing more than a headcount. It was never intended to serve as a vehicle for gathering personal information on citizens.
But our voracious federal government thrives on collecting information. In fact, to prepare for the 2010 census state employees recorded GPS coordinates for every front door in the United States so they could locate individuals with greater accuracy! Once duly located, individuals are asked detailed questions concerning their name, address, race, home ownership, and whether they periodically spend time in prison or a nursing home – just to name a few examples.
From a constitutional perspective, of course, the answer to each of these questions is: “None of your business.” But the bigger question is – why government is so intent on compiling this information in the first place?
Continue reading »
Linda Featured in the Daily Beast!
)
AP and Getty Images The GOP has signed up woefully few female candidates this year. But CPAC hero Ron Paul is helping to close the gap. Liz Goodwin talks to Paul about his followers now running in their own right.
On Tuesday, a relatively unknown and poorly financed retired nurse named Debra Medina siphoned off almost 19 percent of the vote from heavyweights Gov. Rick Perry and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in the Texas Republican gubernatorial primary. Medina’s surprisingly strong finish is partly attributable to the surge of Tea Party support around the country, a movement Medina is associated with, as well as to general anti-incumbent feeling. But her 18.6 percent may also owe something to the support and political endorsement of CPAC hero and fellow Texan Ron Paul. Paul wrote an open letter soon after Medina—a top campaign volunteer in Paul’s 2008 presidential race—announced her candidacy, calling her a “defender of liberty” and “role model for Texans across our state.”
Congressman Paul, who handily fended off his own primary challenge Tuesday with 80 percent of the vote, is usually associated with a fleet of college-age, testosterone-fueled supporters. But Medina is just one of a trio of female former Paul volunteers who are waging their own campaigns this year, and advancing Paul’s libertarian brand of Republicanism. In addition to Medina, Valerie Meyers in Georgia and Linda Goldthorpe in Michigan are both seeking U.S. House seats.
Asked if his past as an OB-GYN makes him feel more comfortable around women and vice versa, Paul said, “I hope I’m comfortable. I have a lot of empathy, and I assume they feel some of that.”
Paul, a former OB-GYN with a strong anti-abortion stance, says his message attracts women to his campaign. “Historically, people have always commented that women might be more pro-peace than pro-war, and I think my message has excited a lot of women,” he says. (Paul doesn’t support spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.) “I’m pleased that they’re running,” he says of the three candidates. But he was quick to say it’s just a coincidence that he tends to have women in important staff positions. “People have kidded me over the years… I’ve had a lot of key personnel who have been women. It’s always been coincidental.” Asked if his past as an OB-GYN makes him feel more comfortable around women and vice versa, Paul said, “I hope I’m comfortable. I have a lot of empathy, and I assume they feel some of that.”
His contribution to the field is especially notable this year—which has been a dismal one for the recruitment of Republican women candidates, despite the GOP’s bright prospects overall. The National Republican Congressional Committee’s “Young Guns” program, which recruits and trains the prospects the party deems most likely to win, features only four women, in a class of 64. Adding insult to injury, the Republican National Committee’s co-chairman, Jan Larimer, explained the shortfall in a controversial way: “Women sometimes need a little more hand-holding, or they need their friends to help them make a decision.” She said they were working to recruit more women via workshops, but her words seemed unlikely to help the GOP close its gender gap in Congress any time soon. Republicans lag behind Democrats not only in numbers but also percentages of women in Congress; of the 17 women now serving in the U.S. Senate, only four are Republican; of the 73 women in the House, only 17 caucus with the GOP, according to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers.
For his part, Paul insists he isn’t actively recruiting a fleet of female mini-Rons to run for office. “I don’t personally recruit,” he said. “I encourage everyone to be involved, and when they ask me what to do, I say, ‘That’s your decision.’” Paul became a cult hero during his 2008 campaign for the presidency, when he argued that much of America’s social spending was unconstitutional—a claim that has only gained currency since then, as the Tea Party movement formed in the wake of the federal bank bailout and the Obama administration’s health-care plans. The three Paul devotees may not be as purist as their former boss, but all believe in lowering taxes, abolishing or limiting the Department of Education, auditing or abolishing the Federal Reserve, and opposing the “federal takeover” of health care. The Paul agenda–often ignored by the mainstream right-wing–is on the rise; at CPAC last month, 31 percent of the conservative conference-goers backed him as their presidential candidate for 2012.
Paul was quick to come to the defense of Medina, his former top campaign volunteer who lost yesterday’s primary against Perry and Hutchison. Medina, who ran on the platform of abolishing private property taxes and the notion that Texas should be able to ignore “unconstitutional” federal laws, was surging in the polls before Glenn Beck asked her on his radio show if she was a 9/11 “truther.” She didn’t disavow the possibility that the government had something to do with the attacks, and was quickly denounced by Beck. (“The fastest way back to 4 percent. Holy cow,” Beck said after hanging up with her.)
“I think she was unfairly punished by it for those that read more into it,” Paul said. “He sort of set her up for that. At the same time, the followups, the people who wrote about it and just assumed she committed the greatest crime in the world: I think the reaction was every bit as a big of a problem as the question. Why would a question like that be asked in a governor’s race in Texas?”
Paul’s support may have helped her surge in the polls at first, but Paul, who is also derided as a 9/11 truther, was perhaps not the best mentor when it came to the issue that ultimately tripped her up. Medina has distanced herself from Paul, not directly referring to him as a “mentor” and quickly pointing out her other influences.
“Like Ron Paul, I draw my political ideology from many of the same historic figures and align myself heavily with the U.S. Constitution,” she said in a statement. “I’m a strong supporter of freedom and liberty. Dr. Paul has been my congressman for many years and his political direction has had an influence on me, as it has many others.”
Medina was underfunded in her bid for the governorship, a problem that likely faces two other Paul-ites running in 2010.
Valerie Meyers, who’s running for a Georgia House seat against Democratic incumbent Jim Marshall, describes herself as a Ron Paul Republican, and was a coordinator for her congressional district during Paul’s 2008 presidential bid. Meyers has signed a Club for Growth pledge to repeal any “federal health-care takeover” if passed, and would like to abolish the Department of Education and audit the Federal Reserve, among other Paulian goals. She is also pro-gun rights and strongly against abortion, though she says she differs with Paul on his pro-earmarks stance. “I consider Congressman Paul to be one of the most important figures of the 21st century, both politically and economically,” Meyers told The Daily Beast in an email. She added that she’s only met Paul in person twice, and that he seemed supportive of her candidacy, but “also realistic about the challenges a self-identified ‘Ron Paul Republican’ will face, particularly in a state where he only received 3 percent of the vote in the 2008 presidential primary.” She has not yet filed her campaign-finance report.
Former Paul volunteer Linda Goldthorpe, who writes on her campaign Web site that she thinks Paul is “the only truly constitutional member of Congress,” is running for a House seat in Michigan, and Paul has officially endorsed her. (Goldthorpe did not respond to requests for comment.) Goldthorpe is an attorney and ran for the seat in 2008, as well, but lost. “I look at the country with fear,” she said then. “Look at the national deficit. … We are bombing other countries and our own borders are open. Our rights are being decimated.” Now that the Tea Party has moved closer and closer towards the mainstream, that sentiment seems likely to find a more receptive audience today than it would have two years ago.
Liz Goodwin is an assistant editor at The Daily Beast. She has written for the New York Sun, GothamSchools, the Tico Times, and Fodor’s Travel Guides.
For more of The Daily Beast, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.
Open letter to Gladwin County
To the people of Gladwin county:
I did a bad thing by not showing up for the meet and greet scheduled for last week. It was imperative that I be home as soon as possible, and I went. I’m sorry that some of you didn’t even hear that I’d called to cancel.
I can’t ask you to forgive me, and certainly not for your votes. But, some things are more important than votes.
I’m very sorry.
Linda Goldthorpe
Thomas Jefferson back from the grave in Sault Ste. Marie!
Logan Reed was awesome:
Thomas Jefferson came back from the grave to deliver us this important message. Strangely enough his bizarre resurrection took place in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan on 9/12/2009. Spread this video!
Marx (Groucho) was right
Groucho Marx used to say he wouldn’t be part of any club that would have him as a member. I used to laugh at what seemed to be merely self-deprecating jest. Now I seriously agree with him.
Clubs are formed by people with the same principles. But, these principles soon take a back-seat to the needs of the club. Be it a religious or political organization, contributions of time or property are soon used to promote the club. Before long, monetary donations are spent to print letters asking for more money! Things settle down, people settle in, and only one person remains unsettled: the true believer.
True believers are unwelcome in clubs. They mess with the system. They don’t obey. They question. They torment. They want truth!
Truth seekers are always climbing unexplored mountains and encountering dangerous beasts. Their lives are unusual and offensive to the clubs. A truth-seeker of even the most gentle temperament, is deemed dangerous and revolutionary. Nowadays, that may be true. Orwell said, “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
I say, with Eric Cadeau of the Northern Michigan Liberty Alliance, (you do know that we have modern-day Thomas Jeffersons and Patrick Henrys in our midst, don’t you?) “It is my right to be uncommon.” I embrace that right. And I demand it. Although there is strength in numbers, the current revolution is not about political parties, or about tea-party groups. It is about individuals. It is about individual liberty, and individual responsibility. Didn’t Christ and the Republican party endorse those things, long ago?
They say you can tell a pioneer by the arrows in his back. But, be of good cheer. I say with assurance to every truth-seeker, of any creed, God has your back.
