FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 22, 2007

ARLINGTON, VA – The United Republicans of California (UROC) have
unanimously endorsed Congressman Ron Paul for president of the United
States. UROC, formed in 1963 to support Barry Goldwater, represents the
traditional conservative wing of the California Republican Party.

“The unanimous endorsement from the United Republicans of California
proves what the campaign has been saying all along,” said campaign
chairman Kent Snyder. “Ron Paul is the only true conservative and real
Republican in the race.”

In their official statement endorsing Dr. Paul, UROC called him “the
leading advocate for freedom in our nation’s capital” and recognized
that:

Ron Paul’s voting record demonstrates that he has voted against:

· raising taxes;
· unbalanced budgets;
· a federal restriction on gun ownership;
· raising congressional pay; or
· increasing the power of the executive branch.

His voting record demonstrates further that he voted against:

· the USA Patriot Act;
· regulating the Internet; and
· the war in Iraq.

Dr. Paul is the only candidate with a record that matches the UROC’s
platform.

“Whether the issue is life, the Second Amendment, foreign policy,
spending or taxes, Ron Paul is the only traditional conservative
candidate,” continued Snyder. “Traditional conservatives across the
country should support Ron Paul for president.”

---------------
momentum is building everybody...

I'll look at him some more, devinci, but Im leaning towards Edwards
right now...

fanta...I liked Edwards till he kneeled down to IPAC...too bad he did
that...

I appreciate the fact the two of you keep updated postings on our
candidates...

thank you Lily

Im looking at Ron Paul devinci, and my choice isnt set in stone yet!
I believe Edwards honesty though. I dont believe any man is exempt from
a little white lies, but if he can tax the rich, (him) he cant be too
bad. I also saw him answering Questiond in a town hall meeting. I know,
I know they were probably all hand picked, but when I watch him I dont
believe hes capable of lying that good. We will see though.

ron paul had a cspan speech on utube talking about liberty...he takes on
the neocons
and the fed reserve...and the patriot act..very interesting...20 min
speech dated
may 22 I believe...

Not a commited conservative myself...but I definitely feel we need to
save the
constitution...which makes Paul appealing to me..

Da Vinci, what is IPAC?

Thanks for the Ron Paul post. I would mostly question his anti-tax
raising stance. IT seems to me that taxation has to vary based on the
needs of the country. Sometimes the collectivity known as the US needs
more centralized funds, sometimes less. So either a pro- or anti- tax
stance seems to unwisely tie our hands.

I do like the balanced budget requirement, and would like to see a
specification that future generations cannot be burdened with debt by
current generations. A lot of people don't realize that the massive Bush
war budgets are being funded by massive debt -- which will all fall on
the shoulders of future generations.

In the past, the US ONLY incurred debt in times of war, and this was
rapidly paid off after the war. Reagan and the current Bush all broke
this rule, and I have been waiting to see which conservatives and
liberals might call them on this.

Do you know if Paul has said anything explicit about national debt
policy?

Oceans

Oceans...Ron Paul has the courage to remind us that the Fed reserve is
not a government body...but bankers printing money for us..and that the
fed reserve act is in reality illegal..(read more of this from writings
of Senator Lindbergh or the confessions of Woodrow Wilson who admitted
that he may have singehandedly destroyed america).Paul does talk about
money being backed by gold/silver as outlined in the constitution...most
would say outrageous to think about changing...other presidents that
have talked about the same thing include Kennedy, Lincoln,
Jackson...controlling money in america has been an issue for a long long
time...
I will find specific words from him about the national debt...but his
voting record has been consistently along constitutional lines so that
should give an indication...

I'll find something from him for you..

IPAC...is the Israeli lobby...unless I have the abbrevation wrong..
It is interesting that we give by far more foreign aid to Israel and
they by far give more PAC money to our bloated representatives..so in a
way as tax payers we are paying our reps to vote in Israels favor...what
a great system...

ron paul on debt & taxes:

Debt and Taxes
Working Americans like lower taxes. So do I. Lower taxes benefit all of
us, creating jobs and allowing us to make more decisions for ourselves
about our lives.

Whether a tax cut reduces a single mother’s payroll taxes by $40 a month
or allows a business owner to save thousands in capital gains taxes and
hire more employees, that tax cut is a good thing. Lower taxes allow
more spending, saving, and investing which helps the economy – that
means all of us.

Real conservatives have always supported low taxes and low spending.

But today, too many politicians and lobbyists are spending America into
ruin. We are nine trillion dollars in debt as a nation. Our mounting
government debt endangers the financial future of our children and
grandchildren. If we don’t cut spending now, higher taxes and economic
disaster will be in their future – and yours.

In addition, the Federal Reserve, our central bank, fosters runaway debt
by increasing the money supply – making each dollar in your pocket worth
less. The Fed is a private bank run by unelected officials who are not
required to be open or accountable to “we the people.”

Worse, our economy and our very independence as a nation is increasingly
in the hands of foreign governments such as China and Saudi Arabia,
because their central banks also finance our runaway spending.

We cannot continue to allow private banks, wasteful agencies, lobbyists,
corporations on welfare, and governments collecting foreign aid to
dictate the size of our ballooning budget. We need a new method to
prioritize our spending. It’s called the Constitution of the United
States.

Davinci, if you keep talking that trash, you are going to push me into
the Libertarian camp. I agree. Don't
have a heart attack though!

I already did the heart deal in Mayo 4 yrs ago..I'm their miracle
man...near transplant to health w/o surgery...and now w/o
medication...quite an adventure

DaVinci, I think the 'IPAC' is AIPAC -- the American-Israeli Political
Action Committee. It is ranked by congressional staff as the second most
powerful lobby in the US, after the AARP.

They are dedicated to making sure that the US supports Israel at all
costs, and are hand-in-glove with the neocons. There are MANY Israeli
lobbying organizations and 'think tanks', but AIPAC is the biggest and
most powerful one. Each election, they target US congresspeople and
senators who are not sufficiently pro-Israel, and they have been able to
defeat several; US politicians now fear them and adjust their votes
accordingly.

AIPAC has also been directly involved with Israeli espionage against the
US and serves as a conduit for US secrets to be passed to the Israeli
government. Recently, two senior officials of AIPAC were caught passing
Defense Department secrets to the Israeli embassy here in Washington.

AIPAC's main activities are influencing US policy, and AIPAC, through
its Israel-first neocons (like Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, David
Wurmser, Scooter Libby, Eliott Abrams, etc.) were the ones who
manipulated us into invading Iraq. The blood of our soldiers, and the
costs to US taxpayers, and the loss of our influence internationally and
the growing anger at the US can all be laid at AIPAC's feet.

I hope this info on AIPAC helps.

Now I have to go back and see what you said about Ron Paul and AIPAC!

Oceans

Ah, you said that Edwards kneeled down to AIPAC. Yes, he did, as have
most of the other presidential candidates, including Clinton, Biden,
McCain, and Giuliani.

It is pretty shameful.

Anything specific on Paul and Israel/AIPAC? As an opponent of the war
on Iraq, Paul would find himself on the outs with AIPAC, that's for
sure.

Oceans

there are some who think AIPAC is actually running the country...and
yes..all candidates..
at least so-called upper tier candidates have already sold out...Ron
Paul is a no....

academia and their sell out to the erron style accounting practices,
baffles the hell out of me- these are supposed to be learn'ed peoples.

i believe unless that I am incorrect, the US occurred a deficit during
franklin's reign before WWII even kicked off, funding the CCC and thus
the phrase "another day another dollar", sure theres other times as
well, but i will research it more before stating as fact.



I would not be too opposed to ronny, i think tho to push in its totality
the stauncg repub platform would be a mistake, there is room under the
unbrella for a lot of americans, but to stick with a religious
foundation and "morally right" stances on homosexuals and abortions do
more to separate than it does to intergrate. thas why im kinda leading
towards rudy, but the race is in its infancy right now, so like fanta
said im not set in stone.

think that separation or out right turning their backs on a majority of
americans will prove to be the down fall of the democratic party- sorry
oceans, but they dont want normal america in the pocket, they are riding
on the wave put in motion by there predecessors-- you know the mentality
of, once a member always a member. dems of today are nothing like the
dems of the past in the mold of a roosevelt.

live and let live- i am the face of the new republican party,,,, my
biggest concerns, taxation, immigration, campaign finance reform, doing
away with welfare system that doesnt work and put a new one in that
does, same with social security system (that initially really wasnt
meant to help out at all),tort reform, and you know what, i sure wouldnt
mind giving america back to americans making english the national
language with a constitutional admendment. imagine how much monet could
be saved not having to print ballots in 43 different languages in places
like california.

but hey who cares what an american want anymore?

How will you give a person that has obtained Citizenship LEGALLY but
doesn't yet speak english the right he/she is intitlet to (voteing) so
that their voice can be heard IF YOU DON'T PUT THE DARN CHOICES IN A
LANGUAGE THEY CAN UNDERSTAND. They earned the right to vote yet you
would limit them.

I can't go for that. My blood for their rights also they are Americans.

to become a citizen in this country the person must meet certian
criteria.

my roommate is a legal alien who is earning his citizenship the right
way... so my knowledge of this is based soley on his dealings with
immigration and naturalization services.

from speaking with him;

you must demonstrate in interviews and in test forms that you understand
the unofficial language of the US.

now if they can find away to make it thru this proccess, i would venture
to say that if they wanted to participate then they would concentrate
and do so.

wow, are we that sensative? really? and yet we still get touted as being
uncaring- wish they would decide which it is.

I hear you AB- im just frustrated, no one seems to really give a shlt
anymore....let alone the ones coming in to this country.

Adventure, your'e barking up the wrong fruit tree there pal. My father's
parents came here from Germany and while they spoke German at home, they
desired to learn english, and did. My Mother came here from Santa Clara,
Cuba. She learned to speak English. You have your take on immigration
and they have theirs. Theirs is MUCH different than yours. While it is
admirable to maintain your traditions of your birth country, it is
equally as important to assimilate into the new country you have chosen
to be a citizen of. What's next? Subtitles in other languages on the
crawler at the bottom of the TV screen? To be politically correct, we
must now state our ancestor's country of origin before America. That
would make me a European Cuban American? Why do we keep trying to create
division? We call all blacks African Americans. Did their ancestors come
from Africa? How do you know? I have a friend from Barbados and he hates
that. He calls it glorified racism. Another way to segregate. Here's an
idea, why don't we just simply call all of our fellow citizens
AMERICANS? What a concept. Continually strive for unity, NOT DIVISION!!!
¡Mi Dios! ¿Qué siguiente? (getting off my soap box now)
Davinci, the more I read about Ronnie, the more I am liking
him.

Estoy apesadumbrado. Soy americano. ¿Usted habla español? Leo y
voto.