Why the Republicans overlook things about Ron Paul that resonate with those thinking the only legitimate purpose of centralized government is to protect the poor from want and from overreaching of the wealthy and powerful, and to protect the wealthy and powerful from each other. Liberty of life choices applying otherwise, as to childbearing if not done to an excess threatening sustainability of life on earth, choice of life partner(s), and how you want to dress.

Ron Paul avoids many of the traps set against people and aimed to subordinate and enslave their lives and freedoms to government gross power or to private sector wealth and excess. Not perfect by any measure, one recent example of sanity is at this link:

Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution begs to differ. It clearly states that the power to declare war rests within the legislative branch - the branch closest to the people. The founders were a war-weary people, and the requirement that it would take an act of Congress to go to war was intentional. They believed war was not to be entered into lightly, so they resisted granting such decision making authority to one person. They objected to absolute warmaking power granted to Kings. It would be incredibly naïve to think a dictator could not or would not wrest power in this country.

Our Presidents can now, on their own: order assassinations, including American citizens; operate secret military tribunals; engage in torture; enforce indefinite imprisonment without due process; order searches and seizures without proper warrants, gutting the 4th Amendment; ignore the 60 day rule for reporting to the Congress the nature of any military operations as required by the War Power Resolution; continue the Patriot Act abuses without oversight; wage war at will; and treat all Americans as suspected terrorists at airports with TSA groping and nude x-rays.

Americans who are not alarmed by all of this are either not paying close attention, or are too trusting of current government officials to be concerned. Those in power right now might be trustworthy, upstanding people. But what of the leaders of the future? They will inherit all the additional powers we cede to the current position holders.

Put all that thinking into accord with an expanded Bill of Rights, a Rights of Man and of the Citizen, and freedom from hunger, homelessness, oppressive labor, and denial of basic medical needs such as innoculations, preventative checkups, dental health, and routine surgeries. Extreme medical measures may be optional, and market determined, subject to regulation to prevent gouging. The wealth to assure this for every human, given sensible population growth policy, exists and the protections can be instituted, it being a matter of will and not resource limitations. "Rights" do not reach to automobiles, four wheelers, marble flooring, hot tubs, liquor, tobacco or other troublesome drugs.

Ron Paul has a large part of things correctly analyzed, and he totally misses the boat on other things. Yet he does have that part-way understanding lacking in most who have journeyed in search of power to DC. Dayton correctly analyzed it as a cess pool, and now he's not one lone ignored legislative voice, but top dog. He must be happy with the challenge of trying to stamp out all forms of meanness and idiocy from that advanced perspective, and not from a lesser one.

Greedy money grubbing bottom feeding scum suckers, who probably will skate.

And it has nothing to do with City of Ramsey politics.

Here.

Here.

Getting rich the old fashioned way. Even the Clintons would be ashamed to be that raw. That obvious. That in-your-face disdainful.

To avoid confusion by too many words - bagging a Landform commission has to be a subordinate Landform concern to what's honestly best for the City.

This link, at the part about the fiduciary duty of an advisor, owed and to be expected, can be most simply stated. Darren and the Landform people, and their hunger for a Flaherty-Collins commission, must be suppressed and subordinated to serving the honest best interest in the deal of the City of Ramsey. Darren has no place pitching putting the city into a precarious second lien position.

He can tell the council of that being an option, and, if true, represent that Cronk's employer, Flaherty-Collins, will hike if the City does not assume the position, but he cannot pitch for it to happen so that his commission moves from potential to actual. That latter advocacy stance is not an agent serving the best interest of his principal with undivided loyalty.

Cronk, trying to serve two masters with conflicting interests should simply stay home in Indiana where his bosses do business. And quit any other fiction such as trying to say with a straight face that the interests do not conflict. Not when one party's loss is another's gain.

You cannot fairly coach the Packers and Vikings in the same game. It is impossible.

Things GOP.

Pawlenty, this Google. One interesting return on Googling = "Pawlenty," names "Perry."

Two Sixth District right-wing pundits have their say, here and here. A local loyalist and a realist it seems, loyalist saying-

The serious people who will decide the winner understand that Tim Pawlenty and Rick Perry are the true options to defeat President Obama in 2012.

[...] That said, pundits haven’t said that Mitt’s a dead man walking yet. The polls notwithstanding, Mitt’s presidential campaign ended with Romneycare. When Mitt started talking about MMGW, that set his feet in cement. When Mitt refused to back away from his MMGW statements, that set his feet in thicker cement.

Those statements might help Mitt connect with the Lindsey Graham/Susan Collins wing of the GOP but they’ll also cripple him with regards to Main Street Republicans.

At the end of the day, Rick Perry and Tim Pawlenty represent the mainstream of Republican Party/TEA Party politics.

Interestingly, Gross names Perry. You will know he's serious in that direction if/when Perry gets added to the sidebar list. If Andy has spoken the "Perry" word I missed it.

Romney, without direct use of the term, seems characterized as too RINO for the district. Or at least for its two foremost GOP pundits who both eschew the word, for now.

Reader help. What does MMGW mean. The right-wing is now talking in code.

Gross uses the term. Huh?

MMGW: animal, vegetable or mineral?

RAMSEY: This evening's opening of the regular council meeting. The mayor used the word "hope" regarding his Town Center rehab efforts, and declined to answer Margaret Connolly's question.

Margaret asked if there was a limit to how much would be spent before deciding enough is enough. Not those exact words, but that's the basic question. He said they'd spend their way to success. No other council members wanted to touch that third rail consideration. The mayor said there are multiple exit strategies under consideration. Matt Look used the "Vietnam" exit strategy. He called it a success and got out of there before the test of time.

Bruce Nedegaard had hope. He was reported in 2003 in Strib as hoping to build "a billion-dollar urban village." He also had his exit. I doubt it was a "strategy."

_______________UPDATE_______________
Curiously, all the folks at the council table, the wing men and women included, denied that Ryan Cronk works for Flaherty & Collins. Ryan Cronk says otherwise:

I guess the city of Ramsey people having their story to tell know more about Cronk than Cronk knows about Cronk. But - does that mean they are characterizing Cronk as one spreading falsehoods? About who he is and who he represents? Cronk?

Wow, if he spreads falsehoods about something as clear and basic as the boss who calls his shots, the Ramsey contingent better watch out! How can you trust a guy like that in advising you?

She has her twelve reasons, and I have one more - it too comes with videos you can watch and evaluate.

My reason, none of the other candidates have had a barf bage in their image. And it was not simply given her. She earned it.

Do not miss the videos. This link.

Watch the videos. Use a barf bag.

Libertarian views. The GOP will not run Ron Paul.

If Paul were to be a candidate, and win, and institute or try for the international banking reform he's preached, they likely will shoot him.

Or so some think.

Supporters of government power under the "Patriot Act" would have cause to dislike a Paul presidency. Same source, get out of Libya. Paul is widely reported to dislike foreign intrigue and entanglements, and use of war as an instrument of foreign policy.

I have not seen any Paul statement on the new FBI ruses, but I expect he'd opt for more not less liberty and freedom from intrusiveness.

And then there is banking. Everyone has an opinion.

From here onward, two Ron Paul specific links. From the "Daily Paul" website, which might not be the best source for Paul's thinking but is hot for others' thinking which they'd attribute to Ron Paul. Here and here. Next, a read and believe what you choose set of links, which will make someone happy, someone else resentful, etc.

Okay: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.

This post is for any reader tired of stuff about Ramsey.

Here, here, here, here - again not about Ramsey.

More of the same: here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.

Had enough? Can you handle the Deets?

Johnny Northside.

Jordan Hawkman. Don Allen, here, here, and point-counterpoint here vs. here.

So readers, you see, I do not obsess over things Ramsey, but have a wide spectrum of intellectual web reading  to offer Crabgrass followers who may have grown tired of the routine stuff.

______________UPDATE_____________
I do not want to leave a wrong impression. I am not belittling Ron Paul. His big problem is the press will marginalize him. As they did with Kucinich. Ron Paul is the only Republican I would ever for a moment think to vote for (aside from Natalie Steffen, who last general election had my vote for the Anoka County Dist. 1 board seat, and Hendriksen having my primary vote).

Ron Paul is dead wrong on abortion. He wants to deny people the liberty of choice. Inconsistently so, in light of his other dogma. He's wrong on medical care in opposing single payer. But somebody wanting to break the banking cartel and how it can cycle the economy into the doldrums at any whiff of wages ever going up in the US of A has to be accorded much respect.

I do not believe we have had a President since Roosevelt with that intent to override the banking cartel, Kennedy perhaps, and that's one of a host of causes that some cabal did him in; multiple shooters and all. I believe that was a factor along with his not wanting to escalate Vietnam. But you see that thought marginalized too. The "why" of Kennedy's shooting is not touched by mainstream media. It never has been. A lone kook gunman. A story told and retold as if telling it enough makes it believable.