ACU's Founding Principles

[JsJs24]

TweetACU is the American Conservative Union and CPAC is the Conservative Political Action Conference. CPAC is the nation's largest gathering of conservatives annually, and it is the ACU's largest conference.

Now that we know what ACU and CPAC are I thought it would be worth listing the organization's founding principles from its website.
https://www.conservative.org/about-acu/principles/

After reading through all of the principles I was left with only one conclusion, that Ron Paul was the only speaker and candidate there who directly represents all of the principles.

The following paragraph was taken from mises.org and written by James Ostowski. The article can be found at https://mises.org/daily/895/republica...big-government

Contrary to popular myth, every Republican president since and including Herbert Hoover has increased the federal government's size, scope, or power--and usually all three. Over the last one hundred years, of the five presidents who presided over the largest domestic spending increases, four were Republicans. Include regulations and foreign policy, as well as budgets approved by a Republican Congress, and a picture begins to emerge of the Republican Party as a reliable engine of government growth (mises.org).

Thus, it is plain to see why Ron Paul would not be welcomed by the party. The party does not wish to have a true Republican who has dedicated his life to defending the Constitution and always votes as a fiscal conservative. Furthermore, Paul is most likely the only member of Congress who has never compromised his principles, which are strictly in alliance with the Constitution. This is why he is referred to as the champion of the Constitution. I can't think of a single other potential candidate who has followed all of the principles that ACU supposedly follows. Even most of the freshman Tea Party candidates have already compromised their supposed principles; only eight of the forty plus have so far held true to their promise.

I doubt many people have read this far so I won't waste anymore time. I can't open peoples eyes necessarily but hopefully the facts will, which is why I have referenced my material. It is not difficult to do some research and learn how members of our government have voted, nor is it hard to learn how a president led the country. History tells us that every president has done almost entirely the opposite of the rhetoric they speak on the campaign trail. For some reason once people find themselves entrusted with power they no of nothing else to do but to turn on the very people that put them in power. One man has not done that his entire career and most likely he still won't be found worthy by the establishment to be on the Republican ticket. If her were given the chance, and the conservative media truly supported him, then there's no doubt in my mind he would win the office of President.

[FUZO]

Tweetjsjs do you think that if RON PAUL became president he would uphold every single constitution law out there and not agree with the Democrats at all to get some things done and not reach across the isle even if he had to compromise and give in on something he didnt want to do to get something passed that would help our country. Listen I respect you and you know that but Ron Paul would have to give in on something you didnt like thats just life. Is it right,hell NO. but its life its the GOV its how things got done. Now as much as you think there are a ton of REOUBLICANS that turned bad the same goes for Democrats and libertarans but I think thats what reaching across the isle is about. One hand washes the other. I dont think its 100% correct but thats just how it is. I can almost bet if ron paul got elected he would put someone on his team that did something bad in GOV that shouldnt of happen

[JsJs24]

Tweet

jsjs do you think that if RON PAUL became president he would uphold every single constitution law out there and not agree with the Democrats at all to get some things done and not reach across the isle even if he had to compromise and give in on something he didnt want to do to get something passed that would help our country. Listen I respect you and you know that but Ron Paul would have to give in on something you didnt like thats just life. Is it right,hell NO. but its life its the GOV its how things got done. Now as much as you think there are a ton of REOUBLICANS that turned bad the same goes for Democrats and libertarans but I think thats what reaching across the isle is about. One hand washes the other. I dont think its 100% correct but thats just how it is. I can almost bet if ron paul got elected he would put someone on his team that did something bad in GOV that shouldnt of happen

Fuzo bro I respect your opinion on each and every debate we have too. I also agree with you on many things but I am very strict in choosing politicians to support, which is becoming harder and harder to find any of.

I see your point and understand where you are coming from. However, in regard to Ron Paul I can only say his record is perfect in regard to the party's founding principles, which alone is something you will probably not find with any other politician. Would he compromise if in office, I seriously doubt it. Reaching across the isle can be done without going against the Constitution. The only President that came close to never going against the Constitution was Thomas Jefferson, and he went against it only once, when he did the Louisiana Purchase. He had a very tough time coming to a decision and finally buckled when pressured from his peers, but he felt it was in the best interest for the country, which it was, but still he should have held out like he had initially planned and had an amendment passed. He was pressured from the other politicians telling him that Napolean might change his mind so he needed to act soon.

I see no reason in believing that Ron Paul couldn't be just as strict in upholding the Constitution as Jefferson was. The irony of this conversation however, is that the politicians swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, which should mean that they be thrown out of office for not doing so.

In reality though Ron Paul will never be the president. I know you probably don't like to hear it but you have to pretty much be corrupt to get on the ticket, or at least be corruptible. For some reason or another the Republican Party does not like Paul. Think about how bad it is to completely ignore the American people two years in a row voting overwhelmingly for Ron Paul at the CPAC. If any other person would have won today they would have made it out to be a huge deal, but since Paul won it is nothing but a stupid pole. I find it very sad that the Republican Party casts Ron Paul out as if he is not a Republican when he clearly is. Read the principles of the ACU and you will find Ron Paul holds strongly to all of them. I'm getting tired of going on about Paul and I'm sure the members here if they are reading my posts are too. Thus I will leave it at that. I just have a lot of passion for the country and liberty, and believe the one man who deserves the chance to run is being closed out by the neocons that run the party. I see through all the lies and rhetoric. I have one rule that I always follow and that is to judge politicians by their actions and not their rhetoric. I don't need to listen to a single speech from a politician to know whether or not I support them, instead I look to their voting record as I have done with Paul. I have posted the facts on the Republican presidents since Hoover and including him, and the facts don't lie. The Republican Party is not sticking to their principles and I hold them to it. Keep in mind also that even though I am a Libertarian, the main reason is because the Republican party had not been holding to their principles.

Let me add that I agree with you entirely about other parties turning bad too. You are correct for sure. And I firmly believe the Democrat Party is the most dangerous group of politicians that our country has ever faced. I believe most of them are Marxist supporting socialists, and some communists.