Top Stories

Open letter to readers: Today and tomorrow

By Lynda Waddington | 11.17.11

Wednesday was a difficult day for The American Independent News Network, which is the larger entity that operates The Iowa Independent. Our chief executive and founder announced two of our sister sites would close and their content would be moved to The American Independent.

ACS lockout continues; plan emerges to repeal sugar protections

By Virginia Chamlee | 11.15.11

A recently introduced bill could have far-reaching impact on the U.S. sugar industry, including American Crystal Sugar, a farmer-owned cooperative that locked out 1,300 Midwest workers on Aug. 1.

Cain campaign: Farmers know more about regulations than EPA

By Andrew Duffelmeyer | 11.15.11

The chairman for Herman Cain’s Iowa effort says the campaign “relied more on the word of farmers than Washington regulators” in deciding to run an ad containing claims the Environmental Protection Agency says are false.

Mathis wins, Democrats maintain Senate control

Liz Mathis
By Lynda Waddington | 11.08.11

The Iowa Senate will remain under the control of a slim 26-25 Democratic majority when it reconvenes in January 2012.

Press Release

PR: Nation should work to address veterans’ challenges

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

BRUCE BRALEY RELEASE — As US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan ends, it’s more important than ever that our nation works to address the challenges faced by the men and women who fought there.

PR: Honoring veterans, help in hiring

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

CHUCK GRASSLEY RELEASE — A difficult job market is challenging the soldiers, sailors and airmen who have protected America’s interests by serving in the Armed Forces.

PR: In honor of America’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

TOM LATHAM RELEASE — No one has done more to secure the freedom enjoyed by every single American than our veterans and those currently serving in the armed services.

PR: Honoring and supporting our nation’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

DAVE LOEBSACK RELEASE — Veterans Day is an opportunity to reflect on the service of generations of veterans and to honor the sacrifices they and their families have made so that we may live in peace and freedom here at home.


Perry campaign strikes back at Ron Paul

'Paul's 1987 resignation letter indicates Reagan drove him from GOP'
By Lynda Waddington | 09.06.11 | 3:47 pm

A newly released ad by Ron Paul‘s presidential campaign took a swipe at Rick Perry’s Democratic roots while emphasizing Paul’s links to President Reagan, but Perry’s campaign is now accusing the Paul team of seeing the past through rose-colored glasses.

“Ronald Reagan was one of the most significant presidents of our generation, and a proven fiscal conservative,” Perry spokesman Mark Miner said. “Like President Reagan, Gov. Perry has cut taxes and freed employers from government regulations that kill jobs.”

The Perry campaign has uploaded a screen shot of page 11 of the March/April 1987 Libertarian Party News. The page features the text of a letter sent to Frank Fahenkopf, then-chairman of the Republican National Committee, by Paul, who made the switch from GOP to Libertarian.

“Rep. Paul’s letter is a broadside attack on every element of President Reagan’s record and philosophy. Paul thought President Reagan was so bad, he left the GOP,” said Miner. “It will be interesting to hear Rep. Paul explain why Reagan drove him from the party at tomorrow’s debate on the grounds of the Reagan Library.”

In the letter, Paul discusses how he supported Reagan in 1976 and again in 1980, but “since 1981 … [has] gradually and steadily grown weary of the Republican Party’s efforts to reduce the size of the federal government.”

Since then Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party have given us skyrocketing deficits, and astoundingly a doubled national debt. How is it that the party of balanced budgets, with control of the White House and the Senate, accumulated red ink greater than all previous administrations put together? Tip O’Neill, although part of the problem, cannot alone be blamed.

Tax revenues are up 59 percent since 1980. Because of our economic growth? No. During Carter’s four years, we had growth of 37.2 percent; Reagan’s five years have given us 30.7 percent. The new revenues are due to four giant Republican tax increases increases since 1981.

All Republicans rightly chastised Carter for his $28 billion deficit. But they ignore or even defend deficits of $220 billion, as government spending has grown 10.4 percent per year since Reagan took office, while the federal payroll has zoomed by a quarter of a million bureaucrats.

… It was tragic to listen to Ronald Reagan on the 1986 campaign trail bragging about his high spending on farm subsidies, welfare, warfare, etc. in his futile effort to hold on to control of the Senate. … Reagan’s foreign aid expenditures exceed Eisenhower’s, Kennedy’s, Johnson’s, Nixon’s, Ford’s and Carter’s put together. …

The chickens have yet to come how to roost, but they will, and America will suffer from a Reaganomics that is nothing but warmed-over Keynesianism. …”

In the letter, Paul attacks the growth of the Internal Revenue Service under Reagan’s oversight, as well as a Republican attack on personal and financial privacy through the war on drugs.

“If Ronald Reagan couldn’t or wouldn’t balance the budget, which Republican leader on the horizon can we possibly expect to do so?” asked Paul. “There is no credibility left for the Republican Party as a force to reduce the size of government. That is the message from the Reagan years.”

Follow Lynda Waddington on Twitter


  • sector7

    Did I miss something here? Perry is trying to slam Paul because he endorsed Candidate Regan up until 1980, then in ’81 stopped endorsing him because Regan didn’t do what he said he was gonna do. Wait. What?

  • Anthony

    Come on Perry, if there is one thing you can not hold against Ron Paul, its his consistency with in his political ideologies. As stated in the letter, Reaganomics soon turned into “warmed over Keynesianism.” How can you fault Ron Paul, a libertarian who believes strongly in the Austrian school of economics?

  • Reaganite

    Paul’s letter hits the mark. Candidate Reagan made great pledges. Sadly these weren’t fulfilled – probably due VP Bush and his ilk.

    Paul is running to implement the Reagan pledges – better late than never!

  • saul

    “Strike back” ? In fact, it SUPPORTS AND HELPS RON PAUL CAMPAIGN BECAUSE IT PROVEN ONE MORE TIME that RP is a small goverment guy. THANKS PERRY.=)

  • saul

    Ron Paul I am proud of you ! =) always firm with his principles ! =)

  • Joe M

    Wow, he was attacking Keynesianism BY NAME even back in 1987? That’s awesome!

  • Brian

    Great job Perry… the media will print whatever nonsense you say, on the front page. So you have just applauded Ron Paul to actually do what Reagan promised to do, but did not.

  • Joe M

    Also, does anyone else want to weep over the idea that a $28 billion deficit was a big deal back in the 1970s? That would be a golden age compared to now, with a deficit 50 TIMES as big.

  • John

    Ron Paul to Perry: You are a liberal big government hack.

    Perry to Ron Paul: You are more conservative than Ronald Reagan.

  • Jon D

    Rick Perry, calling out Ron Paul for not supporting Big Government when the Republicans want to do be expanding it.

    Okay… ?

  • d phillips

    stupid ron paul supprters. paul doesnt has a chance. hes a crooked politician who lies in his tv ads just like the democrat liberals. rick parry is the frontrunner basically a shoein so you guys can just go home to your moms basement and cry about it . lol.

    freakin retards.

  • MT

    This is genius on the part of Paul. They must have obviously known that the response from Perry’s camp would be that Paul then turned on Reagan in the late 80′s. This is fairly well-documented and was obviously known by those in Paul’s camp. But by referencing Paul’s resignation letter, the only thing that comes to light, is Paul’s consistent principles of limited government and how Reagan turned away from his late 70′s campaign promises which Paul endorsed and supported. Perry’s attack only reinforces Paul’s credibility on limited government.

    It’s also genius for Paul’s campaign to try and pick a fight with Perry. Perry’s camp knows they want no part of Paul and would only hope they can ignore him at all costs. Otherwise, Perry is going to get exposed big-time and once the public fully see his record, his numbers should inevitably fall back to earth. Then it leaves the only 1 true conservative… Ron Paul.

    Brilliant move on the part of Paul’s campaign.

  • Ron CJ

    Yea! You show em Perry! You show em how honest he is! How he likes to stand by his principles!

    Seriously, Perry…Get out of the race while you still can.

  • Ron CJ

    Hey Joe, very good point. When I saw that figure, I nearly choked on the apple I was eating!

  • George Whitfield

    I am glad there is still a Libertarian Party who will have a Presidential candidate in the General Election should the Republican Party lack the wisdom to nominate Ron Paul.

  • Louwhan

    @ Joe M. Hi Joe, 28 billion in the 70s is worth about 15 trillion today. Value of the dollar has been sooo watered down by QE over the past 3-4 decades thanks to the Fed/Keyens.

  • Jah Red

    BigUps to Ron Paul..

  • Chris

    I hope that Iowans can see through Perry’s bs and vote for the only REAL candidate this year. Iowans – you are the first on a front line in a revolution. If Paul wins Iowa, he will win the nomination. It will be a domino effect.

  • Citizen Patriot

    Ron Paul, he’s our man. If he can’t do it , no one can.

  • Gary

    Ron Paul thought Reagan wasn’t conservative ENOUGH, and Perry thinks that’s a
    BAD thing about Paul??!!

  • Lindsay NC


  • Mike

    Dingleberry Perry just got owned.

  • Dusty

    I was Rick Perry because Rush Limbaugh told me to, but after doing a little bit of homework, I’ve decided that Ron Paul is the best man for the job!

  • SamG

    Not sure if I approve of Paul getting involved in petty personality politics. One part of me says that he has to, the other says it’s a violation of his principles. Once you begin smearing your opponents, you invite petty power play to to derail serious policy discourse and scrutinising candidates.
    We have enough demagoguery and meaningless spectacle already. It doesn’t help that debates are asinine product commercials which encourage brainless, whimsical evaluations of delegates.
    Ron Paul is supposed to be above this sort of thing.

  • JOhn

    RON PAUL 2012!!!!

  • Skip


    The entire “attack Rick Perry” ad concept was designed to get RP far more free media than the ad could ever hope to achieve on its own. Very smart. Who could have expected the foolish misstep by the Perry campaign to announce to the world RP’s conservative bonafides. For RP, it’s Christmas in September.

  • Gunthar

    Reads like a back-handed compliment to Paul, in a way. Thanks for the post, Lynda. Nice to know that at least some of the media are leaning towards Ron Paul this cycle. Now, if we can just convince those yokels over at Fox News.

  • FamilyForce6

    SamG, I disagree that this is “petty personality politics”. Perry is trying to come off as a conservative that holds tea party principles. This ad exposes him as a liberal who supported HillaryCare, raising taxes and running deficits (like he’s doing now in Texas). Republicans should be made aware of this guys roots (another W.Bush neocon, corporate wellfare pushing big gov’t supporter)

  • dC

    In my immediate sphere of family and friends there are about 15 of us that are huge Ron Paul supporters. We are college graduates, Doctors, Real Estate Agents, Financial Investors, stay at home moms and members of society and community who take to heart the ideas of freedom and peace. We are the 99% that have grown tired of the corruption by the 1%, which includes both Obama and Bush.

  • jadixon

    Incase some of you havn’t seen this about Perry. He is on a youtube site where he is trying to get his driver out of a ticket. Yes he’s abusing his power and says something very bad about the people of his state. Rick Perry says “I’m not like the other people of this state”. So if he’s abusing his power now think about what he would do as president. We can’t trust anyone that’s running for president except Ron Paul because he cares about your freedom more than you. Ron Paul 2012

    Here is the link to the state trooper dash cam showing Rick Perry abusing his power-

  • Jared Rowley

    The funny thing about Perry’s rebuttal is that it brings attention to how Ron Paul was right. The chickens are currently coming home to roost and the worst isn’t over. Our currency is in serious danger as a result of these and similar policies. Ron Paul was right then and is right today.

  • egc52556

    As expected, all the comments are from Ron Paul supporters.

    If they are still paying attention, instead of moving on to the next website where they copy and paste in bullet points without reading the article, I ask my favorite “Ron Paul” question again:

    How can somebody who calls himself a libertarian think the government should impose it’s belief onto the keynote moral dilemma of our time: abortion?

    • Todd

      Dr. Paul believes that Abortion, like so many other current Federal Government unconstitutional over-reaching implementations, should be left to the States and the people to decide.  Read H.R. 1096 it’s only 4 pages long so it shouldn’t take you that long.  If you feel that this is the most pressing issue, to-which, you wouldn’t vote for Dr. Paul, meanwhile the economy is collapsing all around us, then you have serious problems Sir and you should seriously seek help; as The United States will have to do if Dr. Paul doesn’t win.

      • egc52556

        Since when are “the States” not part of the government? Why is it OK for the state of Iowa to impose its will on me but not America?

        So here’s my problem with Paul: he’s shockingly inconsistent on abortion contrasted with his other positions. Why? I find this deeply troubling… To the point that I am left to believe he’s just another insincere manipulative pol.

        • Todd

          The reason the States is because it would be easier for the people of each State to change the law apposed to trying to change a Federal Law.  So, if the citizens of Iowa decided that abortion should be banned they could do that, and if at some point afterward they decided to change their mind they could change the law.  Try changing a Federal Law. 

          Also, Iowa couldn’t force you to have an Abortion since you are a guy.  Unless you are somehow able to get pregnant. 

          However, your argument gets muted by the fact that a fetus is considered a human life in so many other instances and for one to assume that on this particular issue it is not a human life then I believe it is you who are insincere and inconsistent; Sir.

          If the fetus is considered a life in one instance than being consistent means it must always be considered a life; don’t you think that would be consistent?

          • egc52556

            What I believe about fetuses makes no difference. What matters is if the govt should be allowed to dictate that belief. A true libertarian should never allow that. Why does Paul?

          • Todd

            So then to be consistent, what you must be advocating is that if a pregnant women looses her pregnancy due to the actions of someone else, then that person should not be charged with homicide, or manslaughter; because in one instance if the government has no role in deciding then it should have no role in deciding in any instance.  Therefore, ending a pregnancy by any means, intentional or otherwise, cannot be considered killing a human being.  This is what you must be saying then, due to the fact that you are consistent; right?

            Also, the people of the States have more control over their State government then they do over the Federal Government. America as you put it in you other post is a collectivist idea. For we are The United States of America; emphasis on ‘States,’ which is a plurality not a singularity.

          • egc52556

            If a woman is injured severely enough to end the pregnancy then I would expect there to be some punishment for the attacker. But treated as homocide? No, not if we are to keep our freedoms… the freedom to decide for ourselves this most serious moral question: when does life begin.

            I don’t expect to be happy with the decisions my fellow citizens make, but that’s the price I think I must pay to be given the freedom to make my own moral decisions.

          • Todd

            The problem is that people want the protection if the women looses the pregnancy or the fetus is in someway injured while still in the womb; but for the fetus and mother to have these protections the fetus must be considered a human life.  Therefore, how can it be that the same fetus can also be considered not a human life?

            Also you said: “I don’t expect to be happy with the decisions my fellow citizens make, but that’s the price I think I must pay to be given the freedom to make my own moral decisions.” So then if your fellow citizens decided that the action which they wanted was to ban abortion, would you be ok with that? Because they are expressing their Liberty in doing that, while you have the ability to utilize your liberty to persuade them otherwise. You may not be happy with the result but both sides would be utilizing their liberty. Is that not good?

Switch to our mobile site