Ron Paul Revolution!!!!

[yumone]

do you believe that being a veteran from a war makes you a more qualified political candidate? (not talking about flight surgeon jsut serving in general)

[lord_casek]

do you believe that being a veteran from a war makes you a more qualified political candidate? (not talking about flight surgeon jsut serving in general)

i believe it puts you in the mindset of knowing what kind of hell war is, and makes you (hopefully) much more careful about getting your country into bullshit wars...

there is a heavy price we pay for war...a very heavy price.

mccaine, i believe, doesn't know this...he would like us to be in iraq for 100 years (as quoted from a recent town hall)

[yumone]

so you are admitting that beign a veteran in fact doesn't teach you this , since Mccaine is not only a veteran but an ex-pow of the veit cong.

I htink you;re right about it having that effect on a lot of people (not necessarily politicians as history shows, Kennedy, Bush, Eisenhower etc). Read some Kurt Vonnegut books if you want soem great perspective on war from a veteran of WW2

[lord_casek]

so you are admitting that beign a veteran in fact doesn't teach you this , since Mccaine is not only a veteran but an ex-pow of the veit cong.

I htink you;re right about it having that effect on a lot of people (not necessarily politicians as history shows, Kennedy, Bush, Eisenhower etc). Read some Kurt Vonnegut books if you want soem great perspective on war from a veteran of WW2

well, i admit it to a point. i think dr. paul knows well the price of war. i think mccaine is a douche who sold out his country and forgot the price we pay in exchange for money and power via bush and company.


vonnegut is excellent, but i haven't read much. slaughterhouse 5 was one...

did you know he's a "truther"?

[yumone]

did you know he's dead?

[lord_casek]

did you know he's dead?

*was

yeah, i heard an interview from a year or so ago. i had forgotten that he passed away, though.

[lord_casek]

new video from NH
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8fr3bauSyM

[yumone]

big loss for the world, so it goes...

[lord_casek]

from germany to michigan to cast ballot for ron paul
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS54220+06-Jan-2008+BW20080106?rpc=64

[lord_casek]

spontaneous rally in NH
http://blip.tv/file/582985

[the.crooked]

Crooked - Recognize that our "winning" this conversation is not necessarily a good thing. Ron Paul is one of the best Republican candidates to come our way. Welcome to the end of the hype everyone - what can be done in the next few weeks? He still can do it...

The real question is though, where do his followers go if he loses?

For some reason it was not until just now that it dawned on me what you were sayin.


The way I look at it is this.

I do not give a fuck about the republican candidates at all. I'd rather have Mike Huckabee as the GOP candidate. It would all the more increase the chances of Obama getting an undecided vote if he were to when the primary for the Dems.


Basically, this shit has been a pipe dream from the beginning.

I am just enjoyin watchin the smoke rise.

[angelofdeath]

i've been realistic about ron paul winning all along. dont get me wrong, i hope he does win and i will keep on supporting him and will write him in if he drops out, but i know deep down that americans dont want freedom. they are too dependent on big brother. and i think the .gov will do everything in their power to not let this patriot get in office. who knows if he wins, there might be a sudden 'emergency' where the .gov has to 'temporarily suspend' the presidency.... haha. who the hell knows.

[lord_casek]

http://i3.tinypic.com/6prhsgw.jpg

[lord_casek]

hannity runs from ron paul supporters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yF-a56IDzM

[El Mamerro]

Do you have any idea how stupid that kind of shit makes Ron Paul supporters look?

[lord_casek]

Do you have any idea how stupid that kind of shit makes Ron Paul supporters look?


do you have any idea what electioneering is and how stupid that makes fox news look?

[El Mamerro]

Most people don't see anything wrong with Fox. The same kind of people who view gung-ho radical protest types with disdain, and the same kind of people Ron Paul must convince to earn his nomination. With his supporters acting like that they're gonna make it much more difficult.

[lord_casek]

Most people don't see anything wrong with Fox. The same kind of people who view gung-ho radical protest types with disdain, and the same kind of people Ron Paul must convince to earn his nomination. With his supporters acting like that they're gonna make it much more difficult.


fox news has had more than three excuses as to why ron paul wasn't allowed at their NH debate. all of them lame. all of them pop up at times when their other excuses are blown.

most people do see something wrong with fox news. especially real conservatives. they see the lies, they see that fox news pushes for middle east wars, they see that fox news is anti gun.

that is why the new hampshire GOP dropped its support for the fox news NH debate.

that is why people are dropping fox stocks like mad. 3 billion lost in a couple of weeks time.


as the youngsters (wiggers) say: REAL TALK.

[swedish erotica]

fox news is pretty bad, but its pretty much cable media in general.

[El Mamerro]

fox news has had more than three excuses as to why ron paul wasn't allowed at their NH debate. all of them lame. all of them pop up at times when their other excuses are blown.

most people do see something wrong with fox news. especially real conservatives. they see the lies, they see that fox news pushes for middle east wars, they see that fox news is anti gun.


Yeah, but that's not who you're supposed to be reaching and convincing. Average Mr. Joe Conservative is not the same as "real" conservatives. He loves Fox News, and thinks Ron Paul is nuts. That's the guy you gotta win over, and that's the guy currently getting annoyed by those wacky "Paulites" and the pesky "Ronulans". I mean, you guys have been given fucking Star Trek alien names, and all you can think of is how to come up with more loud and ridiculous ideas like renting zeppelins and chasing Sean Hannity with pickets while screaming "FOX SUCKS!".

[grim540]

This got spammed on my myspace bulletins today at least 6 times today. I was wondering what some of you more well researched members here have to say about some of these accusations. Some of these things I could care less about but some of them like the legislation to repeal OSHA got my attention. I have worked in some places where we had to call in OSHA because our bosses were to lazy to follow the guidelines and some people were getting severely injured. On the other hand some of this stuff is BS as well.

10 reasons NOT to vote for Ron Paul!!

1. Ron Paul does not value equal rights for minorities. Ron Paul has sponsored legislation that would repeal affirmative action, keep the IRS from investigating private schools who may have used race as a factor in denying entrance, thus losing their tax exempt status, would limit the scope of Brown versus Board of Education, and would deny citizenship for those born in the US if their parents are not citizens. Here are links to these bills: H.R.3863, H.R.5909, H.J.RES.46, and H.J.RES.42.


2. Ron Paul would deny women control of their bodies and reproductive rights.Ron Paul makes it very clear that one of his aims is to repeal Roe v. Wade. He has also co sponsored 4 separate bills to “To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.” This, of course, goes against current medical and scientific information as well as our existing laws and precedents. Please see these links: H.R.2597 and H.R.392


3. Ron Paul would be disastrous for the working class. He supports abolishing the Federal minimum wage, has twice introduced legislation to repeal OSHA, or the Occupational Safety and Health Act and would deal devastating blows to Social Security including repealing the act that makes it mandatory for employees of nonprofits, to make “coverage completely optional for both present and future workers”, and would “freeze benefit levels”. He has also twice sponsored legislation seeking to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act which among other things provide that contractors for the federal government must provide the prevailing wage and prohibits corporate “kick backs.” Here are the related legislative links: H.R.2030, H.R.4604, H.R.736, and H.R.2720


4. Ron Paul’s tax plan is unfair to lower earners and would greatly benefit those with the highest incomes.He has repeatedly submitted amendments to the tax code that would get rid of the estate and gift taxes, tax all earners at 10%, disallow income tax credits to individuals who are not corporations, repeal the elderly tax credit, child care credit, earned income credit, and other common credits for working class citizens. Please see this link for more information: H.R.05484 Summary


5. Ron Paul’s policies would cause irreparable damage to our already strained environment. Among other travesties he supports off shore drilling, building more oil refineries, mining on federal lands, no taxes on the production of fuel, and would stop conservation efforts that could be a “Federal obstacle” to building and maintaining refineries. He has also sought to amend the Clean Air Act, repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977, and to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to “restrict the jurisdiction of the United States over the discharge of dredged or fill material to discharges into waters”. To see for yourself the possible extent of the damage to the environment that would happen under a Paul administration please follow these links: H.R.2504, H.R.7079, H.R.7245, H.R.2415, H.R.393, H.R.4639, H.R.5293, and H.R.6936


6. A Ron Paul administration would continue to proliferate the negative image of the US among other nations. Ron Paul supports withdrawing the US from the UN, when that has not happened he has fought to at least have the US withdrawn from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. He has introduced legislation to keep the US from giving any funds to the UN. He also submitted that the US funds should not be used in any UN peacekeeping mission or any UN program at all. He has sponsored a bill calling for us to “terminate all participation by the United States in the United Nations, and to remove all privileges, exemptions, and immunities of the United Nations.”

Ron Paul twice supported stopping the destruction of intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the United States. He also would continue with Bush’s plan of ignoring international laws by maintaining an insistence that the International Criminal Court does not apply to the US, despite President Clinton’s signature on the original treaty. The International Criminal Court is used for, among other things, prosecution of war crimes. Please see the following links: H.R.3891, H.AMDT.191, H.AMDT.190, H.R.3769, H.R.1665, H.CON.RES.23, and H.R.1154



7. Ron Paul discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation and would not provide equal rights and protections to glbt citizens. This is an issue that Paul sort of dances around. He has been praised for stating that the federal government should not regulate who a person marries. This has been construed by some to mean that he is somewhat open to the idea of same sex marriage, he is not. Paul was an original co sponsor of the Marriage Protection Act in the House in 2004. Among other things this discriminatory piece of legislation placed a prohibition on the recognition of a same sex marriage across state borders. He said in 2004 that if he was in the Texas legislature he would not allow judges to come up with “new definitions” of marriage. Paul is a very religious conservative and though he is careful with his words his record shows that he is not a supporter of same sex marriage. In 1980 he introduced a particularly bigoted bill entitled “A bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955 A direct quote from the legislation “Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds to any organization which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style.” shows that he is unequivocally opposed to lifestyles other than heterosexual.


8. Ron Paul has an unnatural obsession with guns. One of Paul’s loudest gripes is that the second amendment of the constitution is being eroded. In fact, he believes that September 11 would not have happened if that wasn’t true. He advocates for there to be no restrictions on personal ownership of semi-automatic weaponry or large capacity ammunition feeding devices, would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act (because we all know our schools are just missing more guns), wants guns to be allowed in our National Parks, and repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968. Now, I’m pretty damn certain that when the Constitution was written our founding fathers never intended for people to be walking around the streets with AK47’s and “large capacity ammunition feeding devices.” (That just sounds scary.) Throughout the years our Constitution has been amended and is indeed a living document needing changes to stay relevant in our society. Paul has no problem changing the Constitution when it fits his needs, such as no longer allowing those born in the US to be citizens if their parents are not. On the gun issue though he is no holds barred. I know he’s from Texas but really, common sense tells us that the amendments he is seeking to repeal have their place. In fact, the gun control act was put into place after the assassinations of JFK, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy. Please view the following links: H.R.2424, H.R.1897, H.R.1096, H.R.407, H.R.1147, and H.R.3892.


9. Ron Paul would butcher our already sad educational system. The fact is that Ron Paul wants to privatize everything and that includes education. Where we run into problems is that it has been shown (think our current health care system) that this doesn’t work so well in practice. Ron Paul has introduced legislation that would keep the Federal Government “from planning, developing, implementing, or administering any national teacher test or method of certification and from withholding funds from States or local educational agencies that fail to adopt a specific method of teacher certification.” In a separate piece of legislation he seeks to “prohibit the payment of Federal Education assistance in States which require the licensing or certification of private schools or private school teachers.” So basically the federal government can’t regulate teaching credentials and if states opt to require them for private schools they get no aid. That sounds like a marvelous idea teachers with no certification teaching in private schools that are allowed to discriminate on the basis of race. He is certainly moving forward with these proposals!

Remember his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955? Guess what? He basically advocates for segregation in schools once again. It “Forbids any court of the United States from requiring the attendance at a particular school of any student because of race, color, creed, or sex.” Without thinking about this statement it doesn’t sound bad at all. But remember, when desegregating schools that this is done by having children go to different schools, often after a court decision as in Brown Vs. Board of Education. If this were a bill that passed, schools would no longer be compelled to comply and the schools would go back to segregation based on their locations. Ron Paul is really starting to look like a pretty bigoted guy don’t you think?


10. Ron Paul is opposed to the separation of church and state. This reason is probably behind every other thing that I disagree with in regards to Paul’s positions. Ron Paul is among those who believes that there is a war on religion, he stated “Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view.”1 Though he talks a good talk, at times, Ron Paul can’t get away from his far right, conservative views. He would support “alternative views” to evolution taught in public schools (i.e. Intelligent Design.) We’ve already taken a look at his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955 Besides hating the gays he takes a very religious stance on many other things. He is attempting to force his beliefs on the rest of America, exactly what he would do as president.

So there you have it, my 10 reasons not to vote for Ron Paul. Please take the time to thoroughly review the records of the people running for office so you know where they really stand. Ron Paul has good rhetoric and he opposes the war but he’s not a good man in the human rights sense of the phrase. He is pretty much like every other Republican but more insidious

[Some1]

Actually a friend of mines band put the big ron paul sign on the back of their trailer and hand out info on Ron Paul at shows. They are all well versed in his policies and do alot to spread the word without discouraging people and making themselves look crazy...

[lord_casek]

Yeah, but that's not who you're supposed to be reaching and convincing. Average Mr. Joe Conservative is not the same as "real" conservatives. He loves Fox News, and thinks Ron Paul is nuts. That's the guy you gotta win over, and that's the guy currently getting annoyed by those wacky "Paulites" and the pesky "Ronulans". I mean, you guys have been given fucking Star Trek alien names, and all you can think of is how to come up with more loud and ridiculous ideas like renting zeppelins and chasing Sean Hannity with pickets while screaming "FOX SUCKS!".




no, those people are called noeconservatives. and the name calling is immature. they are not aware of the issues and probably never will be.
they still think the iraq war was warranted, and somehow iraq was connected to 9/11. they will never wake up. real conservatives know the deal with fox news. "joe neocon" is not and still thinks sean hannity is a journalist and bill o'rly is "fair and balanced".


grim: i think AOD would be someone who can answer all of those questions without researching. i can tell you that better than 70% of that is lies.

dr. paul is also an advocate of the 2nd amendment...the NRA is eroding it as we speak. constantly lobbying against us (gun owners).

and he does support separation of church and state, as it is in the constitution of the united states.

i can tell you that the UN is a fraud and the US should get out while the getting is good.

[El Mamerro]

no, those people are called noeconservatives. and the name calling is immature. they are not aware of the issues and probably never will be.
they still think the iraq war was warranted, and somehow iraq was connected to 9/11. they will never wake up. real conservatives know the deal with fox news. "joe neocon" is not and still thinks sean hannity is a journalist and bill o'rly is "fair and balanced".



I'm not disagreeing with any of this, all I'm saying is that THAT's the kind of voter Ron Paul needs to convince in order to win. I don't see how the tactics being employed by his supporters are going to achieve that.

[lord_casek]

I'm not disagreeing with any of this, all I'm saying is that THAT's the kind of voter Ron Paul needs to convince in order to win. I don't see how the tactics being employed by his supporters are going to achieve that.

what you and i are witnessing is something that is not new for our country, but it hasn't been seen in awhile. the people want change and we're all kind of pissed off that we aren't getting it.

i was just arguing with you for the hell of it. it makes for interesting back and forth.

[angelofdeath]

ah, those 10 points are from a socialist journal arent they? 10 reasons not to vote for ron paul from a socialists view?

i would love to debate each point, but i guess it would probably be easier to say that my point is proven. americans dont want freedom. and those socialist talking points are why, because americans think that is government is decentralized, everyone will die.

[angelofdeath]

"1. Ron Paul does not value equal rights for minorities. Ron Paul has sponsored legislation that would repeal affirmative action, keep the IRS from investigating private schools who may have used race as a factor in denying entrance, thus losing their tax exempt status, would limit the scope of Brown versus Board of Education, and would deny citizenship for those born in the US if their parents are not citizens. Here are links to these bills: H.R.3863, H.R.5909, H.J.RES.46, and H.J.RES.42."


the smallest minority on the planet is the individual. liberty lovers do not support group rights as in reality, they dont exist. only individual rights do, like life, liberty, property. but this is usually called 'racist' by the statists. as for the citizenship thing, the 14th amendment was written to give slaves equal rights and to allow them to be citizens because they had no way of actually going through legal channels to become citizens of the several states when they were chained up. what paul is targeting is illegal aliens hopping the border, having a child, then the child is a citizen. the writers of the 14th amendment would be agast at this perversion the courts have thrown on us.


"2. Ron Paul would deny women control of their bodies and reproductive rights.Ron Paul makes it very clear that one of his aims is to repeal Roe v. Wade. He has also co sponsored 4 separate bills to “To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.” This, of course, goes against current medical and scientific information as well as our existing laws and precedents. Please see these links: H.R.2597 and H.R.392"

as president, paul would have no constitutional authority to decide abortion for the 50 states. nor does anyone in the federal government. roe v wade was pulled out of a magic hat. no federal right to abortion exists. using the 10th amendment, the 2 coasts would legalize abortion and most southern and western states would prohibit it. if you want to have national abortion, atleast amend the constitution as you are supposed too, such as how ron paul introduced a bill to make life begin at conception, to allow everyone to vote on this matter and change it through the proper channels. he also introduced an iraq war declaration.... guess he is pro war too??


"3. Ron Paul would be disastrous for the working class. He supports abolishing the Federal minimum wage, has twice introduced legislation to repeal OSHA, or the Occupational Safety and Health Act and would deal devastating blows to Social Security including repealing the act that makes it mandatory for employees of nonprofits, to make “coverage completely optional for both present and future workers”, and would “freeze benefit levels”. He has also twice sponsored legislation seeking to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act which among other things provide that contractors for the federal government must provide the prevailing wage and prohibits corporate “kick backs.” Here are the related legislative links: H.R.2030, H.R.4604, H.R.736, and H.R.2720"

this is great. repealing the minimum wage will not destroy the working class it will help it. as of right now, any job that is below the federal minimum wage, is essentially outlawed. the minimum wage isnt a floor on wages it is a jump. you have to be able to do a certain amount of marginal revenue product to hop this hurdle. right now people with disability or no skills, dont have jobs if they cant hop the federally mandated minimum wage. couple the min. wage with welfare and you have a sure fire recipe for joblessness, lack of work ethic, and incentives to not get married and raise children properly.


"4. Ron Paul’s tax plan is unfair to lower earners and would greatly benefit those with the highest incomes.He has repeatedly submitted amendments to the tax code that would get rid of the estate and gift taxes, tax all earners at 10%, disallow income tax credits to individuals who are not corporations, repeal the elderly tax credit, child care credit, earned income credit, and other common credits for working class citizens. Please see this link for more information: H.R.05484 Summary"

i would check your facts on those tax 'credits.' usually in DC tax 'credits' are nothing more than more taxes. sort of like when they 'cut' something it just means they dont expand the budget on something. ron pauls plan is indeed unfair to low wage earners because he would eliminate 90% of federal taxes if he could which would in turn not allow the low paid workers to use govt services and not pay into it because there wouldnt be any 'govt' services. right now 'low' paid workers pay no taxes on their income. you see ron paul wants to cut taxes everywhere and anywhere and wants to abolish the IRS and not even replace it with a fair tax. so if cutting taxes is detrimental to working citizens, i simply dont know what to tell you.


"5. Ron Paul’s policies would cause irreparable damage to our already strained environment. Among other travesties he supports off shore drilling, building more oil refineries, mining on federal lands, no taxes on the production of fuel, and would stop conservation efforts that could be a “Federal obstacle” to building and maintaining refineries. He has also sought to amend the Clean Air Act, repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977, and to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to “restrict the jurisdiction of the United States over the discharge of dredged or fill material to discharges into waters”. To see for yourself the possible extent of the damage to the environment that would happen under a Paul administration please follow these links: H.R.2504, H.R.7079, H.R.7245, H.R.2415, H.R.393, H.R.4639, H.R.5293, and H.R.6936"

you know, if the green zealots have their way they would rid the earth of all people. what peeves me with armchair environmentalists is that they nearly all live in the city, all use cars, all impact the earth, all overpopulate the earth... but they have it within their capacity to eliminate one person from the population, themselves, but they never do. they keep driving cars. with the set up we have now, no one can sue a corporation for polluting their property. liberals complain about high fuel prices, yet they continue to raise taxes on fuel. then they dont want to increase the supply by safely drilling in a tundra that is inhabited by hardly anything. outstanding.


"6. A Ron Paul administration would continue to proliferate the negative image of the US among other nations. Ron Paul supports withdrawing the US from the UN, when that has not happened he has fought to at least have the US withdrawn from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. He has introduced legislation to keep the US from giving any funds to the UN. He also submitted that the US funds should not be used in any UN peacekeeping mission or any UN program at all. He has sponsored a bill calling for us to “terminate all participation by the United States in the United Nations, and to remove all privileges, exemptions, and immunities of the United Nations.”

that is one of the best things that could happen. the UN is nothing more than a world government body that wants to impose its will on american citizens. its law subverts the constitution. they force us to rewrite our laws to follow thier mandates. its rediculous. we didnt fight a war in 1775 to throw off one imperial power to allow another imperial power to rule us.

"6. Ron Paul twice supported stopping the destruction of intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the United States. He also would continue with Bush’s plan of ignoring international laws by maintaining an insistence that the International Criminal Court does not apply to the US, despite President Clinton’s signature on the original treaty. The International Criminal Court is used for, among other things, prosecution of war crimes. Please see the following links: H.R.3891, H.AMDT.191, H.AMDT.190, H.R.3769, H.R.1665, H.CON.RES.23, and H.R.1154"


again, undermining of US sovereignty.



"7. Ron Paul discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation and would not provide equal rights and protections to glbt citizens. This is an issue that Paul sort of dances around. He has been praised for stating that the federal government should not regulate who a person marries. This has been construed by some to mean that he is somewhat open to the idea of same sex marriage, he is not. Paul was an original co sponsor of the Marriage Protection Act in the House in 2004. Among other things this discriminatory piece of legislation placed a prohibition on the recognition of a same sex marriage across state borders. He said in 2004 that if he was in the Texas legislature he would not allow judges to come up with “new definitions” of marriage. Paul is a very religious conservative and though he is careful with his words his record shows that he is not a supporter of same sex marriage. In 1980 he introduced a particularly bigoted bill entitled “A bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955 A direct quote from the legislation “Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds to any organization which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style.” shows that he is unequivocally opposed to lifestyles other than heterosexual."

ron pauls bill simply removed a highly controversial social issue from the central governments authority. the 10th amendment makes these issues, state issues. the only time the left likes decentralized government is when states legalize drugs. dont you realize that this is a very important principle? it means people can live their lives and in communities as they see fit with out other people telling them what to do. simple federalism can solve lots of issues.


"8. Ron Paul has an unnatural obsession with guns. One of Paul’s loudest gripes is that the second amendment of the constitution is being eroded. In fact, he believes that September 11 would not have happened if that wasn’t true. He advocates for there to be no restrictions on personal ownership of semi-automatic weaponry or large capacity ammunition feeding devices, would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act (because we all know our schools are just missing more guns), wants guns to be allowed in our National Parks, and repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968. Now, I’m pretty damn certain that when the Constitution was written our founding fathers never intended for people to be walking around the streets with AK47’s and “large capacity ammunition feeding devices.” (That just sounds scary.) Throughout the years our Constitution has been amended and is indeed a living document needing changes to stay relevant in our society. Paul has no problem changing the Constitution when it fits his needs, such as no longer allowing those born in the US to be citizens if their parents are not. On the gun issue though he is no holds barred. I know he’s from Texas but really, common sense tells us that the amendments he is seeking to repeal have their place. In fact, the gun control act was put into place after the assassinations of JFK, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy. Please view the following links: H.R.2424, H.R.1897, H.R.1096, H.R.407, H.R.1147, and H.R.3892."

do i even need to go into this? gun free school zones are nothing but disarmed victim propaganda camps. ron paul is the anti drug pro drug legalization candidate. he is no compromise pro gun candidate who only owns one gun. its called liberty folks. guns are for nothing more than personal protection and ultimately the defense of a free citizenry. ask the 170 million people killed by their own governments that were disarmed first, how they feel about guns.


"9. Ron Paul would butcher our already sad educational system. The fact is that Ron Paul wants to privatize everything and that includes education. Where we run into problems is that it has been shown (think our current health care system) that this doesn’t work so well in practice. Ron Paul has introduced legislation that would keep the Federal Government “from planning, developing, implementing, or administering any national teacher test or method of certification and from withholding funds from States or local educational agencies that fail to adopt a specific method of teacher certification.” In a separate piece of legislation he seeks to “prohibit the payment of Federal Education assistance in States which require the licensing or certification of private schools or private school teachers.” So basically the federal government can’t regulate teaching credentials and if states opt to require them for private schools they get no aid. That sounds like a marvelous idea teachers with no certification teaching in private schools that are allowed to discriminate on the basis of race. He is certainly moving forward with these proposals!"

again people seem to think that without federal aid and control schools wouldnt exist, art wouldnt exist or that energy wouldnt exist. its rediculous really. all increased federal control in schools does is glorify moscow on the potomac and teaches that anyone that believes in liberty is the enemy. they take away the right of local control of schools and its curriculum from local citizens.

"9. Remember his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955? Guess what? He basically advocates for segregation in schools once again. It “Forbids any court of the United States from requiring the attendance at a particular school of any student because of race, color, creed, or sex.” Without thinking about this statement it doesn’t sound bad at all. But remember, when desegregating schools that this is done by having children go to different schools, often after a court decision as in Brown Vs. Board of Education. If this were a bill that passed, schools would no longer be compelled to comply and the schools would go back to segregation based on their locations. Ron Paul is really starting to look like a pretty bigoted guy don’t you think?"

abolishing forced integration is promoting segregation? in the 1950's schools were segregated by many states. when schools were desegregated they attended schools where they lived. people associated with who they wanted too. then along came the central planners saying that desegregation wasnt enough, but we need to centrally plan who goes to what schools, which was forced integration. they said you need to have a certain number of his race mixed with this race. this completely obliterated the right of free association.


"10. Ron Paul is opposed to the separation of church and state. This reason is probably behind every other thing that I disagree with in regards to Paul’s positions. Ron Paul is among those who believes that there is a war on religion, he stated “Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view.”1 Though he talks a good talk, at times, Ron Paul can’t get away from his far right, conservative views. He would support “alternative views” to evolution taught in public schools (i.e. Intelligent Design.) We’ve already taken a look at his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955 Besides hating the gays he takes a very religious stance on many other things. He is attempting to force his beliefs on the rest of America, exactly what he would do as president."

i agree with him. they dont want people to live their lives and practice religion as they see fit. he is opposed to a church state merger. how allowing people to use their first amendment rights is abolishing separation of church and state is rediculous. the separation of church and state isnt even constitutional. the only thing the constitution says is congress shall write no law establishing religion and there shall be no religious test. it does not mean that people arent allowed to practice religion as they see fit. there is also no right not to see nativity scenes on someone else's private property.

[Juan Fuentes]

hey!
fox excluding RP out of their debate/forum was more of a win for Paul...

many stations and tv shows wouldnt have been talking about it the day after if it wasnt for Faux.
i heard on the cuban american radio the callers talking about the issue, non were againt the man, all talking knowledge, it seemed unreal....from the miami cubans? yeah...


I HAVE NOTICE SOMETHING THOUGH
regular people, on the net, that they themselves are not into the neocon NWO agenda. like commies and some democrats going for even kucinich are hating on paul big time.
started attacking him after iowa, and i also see it happening here with that obama revolution thread. come on, the dude has a bunch of braindead cheerleaders as supporters, and he wont make change the country like Ron Paul would do.
look at thinksmall comment on obama's wife.^^^^

[diamond encrusted jesus]

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca

[lord_casek]

on leno last night
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-fwEAf6M1U&eurl=http://www.dailypaul.com/node/22712.com/node/22712

[the.crooked]

hey!
fox excluding RP out of their debate/forum was more of a win for Paul...

many stations and tv shows wouldnt have been talking about it the day after if it wasnt for Faux.
i heard on the cuban american radio the callers talking about the issue, non were againt the man, all talking knowledge, it seemed unreal....from the miami cubans? yeah...


I HAVE NOTICE SOMETHING THOUGH
regular people, on the net, that they themselves are not into the neocon NWO agenda. like commies and some democrats going for even kucinich are hating on paul big time.
started attacking him after iowa, and i also see it happening here with that obama revolution thread. come on, the dude has a bunch of braindead cheerleaders as supporters, and he wont make change the country like Ron Paul would do.
look at thinksmall comment on obama's wife.^^^^

yup, im a vegetable


fuck off juan.

[thinksmall]

YOU IZ VEGTBLE?!?!

[thinksmall]

Obama's wife is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Clinton, Clinton, Bush, and Bush are too. Sure the things Obama said were profound, but so was Bush's humble foreign policy - And well that didnt turn out so good did it? Bill Clinton was a pro at presenting himself to be favorable too, dont conform to the same mistakes that were made before.

Letterman crushing O'rly was fun too.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

I'm not disagreeing with any of this, all I'm saying is that THAT's the kind of voter Ron Paul needs to convince in order to win. I don't see how the tactics being employed by his supporters are going to achieve that.

The problem with this is, you can't control random groups of people running around supporting Ron Paul. The average person has to realize this and not blame Ron as if he is running around organizing these things.

The media however will take what these idiots are doing and portray it as if Ron supports it 100%, which isn't the case. Which brings us full circle because what I think is the reason those idiots are being idiots in the first place, is because the media doesn't actually do the job it's supposed to do.

[thecoldmidwest]

For some reason it was not until just now that it dawned on me what you were sayin.


The way I look at it is this.

I do not give a fuck about the republican candidates at all. I'd rather have Mike Huckabee as the GOP candidate. It would all the more increase the chances of Obama getting an undecided vote if he were to when the primary for the Dems.


Basically, this shit has been a pipe dream from the beginning.

I am just enjoyin watchin the smoke rise.

A lot of people are not going to vote for someone who's not going to change shit. In this election cycle that means that these people are only going to vote for Paul.

[lord_casek]

mccain wins NH? not yet, but jeeeezus....



and hilary? something is wrong with NH.

ron paul with 10% so far, 72% reporting

[El Mamerro]

The problem with this is, you can't control random groups of people running around supporting Ron Paul. The average person has to realize this and not blame Ron as if he is running around organizing these things.

The media however will take what these idiots are doing and portray it as if Ron supports it 100%, which isn't the case. Which brings us full circle because what I think is the reason those idiots are being idiots in the first place, is because the media doesn't actually do the job it's supposed to do.

I think it's less about that mindset and more about the "People who support Ron Paul act like morons, I'd be a moron if I supported him too" mode of thinking.

[thecoldmidwest]

It's frustrating to see a candidate that you like not get the media coverage he deserves. Some people really do care about the future of this nation and they get pissed off that others don't.

[I was born here]

It's frustrating to see a candidate that you like not get the media coverage he deserves. Some people really do care about the future of this nation and they get pissed off that others don't.

Dude I empathize with you completely, I'd like to see Ron Paul get more attention. Fuck Fox.

[lord_casek]

I think it's less about that mindset and more about the "People who support Ron Paul act like morons, I'd be a moron if I supported him too" mode of thinking.

mamerro, what you call "acting like an idiot" isn't really. it's more a protest, the type that the united states of america is about. i know it looks weird, but it's how we started. protesting the people who try to shit on liberty.
deep back in ourselves (americans), we remember how our country was founded. it's in our bones, we had just forgotten, and let that feeling slip back. when we see tyranny and falsehood, we naturally rebel.
i think that's how all cultures are, but americans have a shorter history. it's newer.
i know i want that respect we once had in the world back. those relationships took a long time to solidify.

viva la liberte'

[lord_casek]

this was a comment on another site:

"I am glad Ron Paul lost. I was afraid we would stop dismembering children with 'precision' guided bomb. America is the winner in this election.. and Lockheed."

[+WAR+]

8% BAH!!!! comeon.. The little fucking puke rat for 9%...

[frankiefiver]

mccain wins NH? not yet, but jeeeezus....



and hilary? something is wrong with NH.

ron paul with 10% so far, 72% reporting

McCain is clearly a nut, another Bush or worse!
I honestly dont understand how more than 6 years after sept 11, a presidental candidate can say something to the effect of, " I will get Bin Laden if I have to follow him to the gates of hell!" and get a hefty round of applause. Not to mention 37% of the states republican vote.

[+WAR+]

It wont matter if McCain is the GOP candidate.. This election there are at least twice as many Democrats voting then Republicans voting.. Its a one party race.

[thinksmall]

aww. come onn.

[thecoldmidwest]

hillary is just as bad as giuliani, and she's going to win..

[El Mamerro]

mamerro, what you call "acting like an idiot" isn't really. it's more a protest, the type that the united states of america is about. i know it looks weird, but it's how we started.

That's fantastic and all, but I don't think that's how the average American feels. The average American is annoyed by protesters and radical mindsets, and seeing supporters that fall into that type of behavior is off-putting to them. I'm not saying that's good, just the way it is.

[Some1]

After NH last night I think I am going to have to move to canada soon...

[thecoldmidwest]

After NH last night I think I am going to have to move to canada soon...

Why?

[Some1]

All of the candidates are promoting change none of them are going to change anything except ron paul. Other than him they are all puppets or promoting the some NWO we are going to continue to police the world and piss people off. If Mccain is actually voted we are fucked we should just keep Bush in office. If Hillary is voted in she is going to lift up her skirt whip out her penis and fuck the entire world trying to show how strong she is. If Obama gets in he is just going to be a fucking puppet for somebody elses agenda. Whose you ask? I don't fucking know and that just scares me. I figure I'll put in my citizenship papers early and beat the rush. Maybe find a nice apartment in montreal while they are still available...

[thecoldmidwest]

Canada's the same shit the states are, if anything it's in deeper.

[lord_casek]

looks like dr. paul got cheated. town of sutton NH...he got 31 votes, they reported 0.
i wonder how many others had discrepancies just as fucked up?

[thecoldmidwest]

Major allegations of vote fraud in New Hampshire are circulating after Hillary Clinton reversed a mammoth pre-polling deficit to defeat Barack Obama with the aid of Diebold electronic voting machines, while confirmed votes for Ron Paul in the Sutton district were not even counted.

According to a voter in Sutton, New Hampshire, three of her family members voted for Ron Paul, yet when she checked the voting map on the Politico website, the total votes for Ron Paul were zero.
http://www.bostonnow.com/blogs/boston911truthorg/2008/01/09/major-allegations-of-vote-fraud-in-new-hampshire

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Why are ya'll going to Canada, don't you know about the NAU we be all the same now mang.

I don't know if I'll ever leave here even though, if I were to go it would probably be Sweden.

[lord_casek]

Why are ya'll going to Canada, don't you know about the NAU we be all the same now mang.

I don't know if I'll ever leave here even though I want to, if I were to go it would probably be Sweden.


i came to the dance with her, and i'll leave with her.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

I'm not going anywhere certainly anytime soon. I'm just saying IF I were to leave thats probably where I'd end up.

[lord_casek]

I'm not going anywhere certainly anytime soon. I'm just saying IF I were to leave thats probably where I'd end up.


gotcha.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Ya let me edit what I had said previously it gives off the wrong impression.

[MayorMeanBeans]

ok do any of you guys no more about this issue of the racist newsletters that ron paul had endorsed in the 80s and 90s. i dont know much about it, i just read this article:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2008/01/paul_burier.cfm

here are a couple quotes from the newsletter (not the article):

"A mob of black demonstrators, led by the "Rev." Al Sharpton, occupied and closed the Statute of Liberty recently, demanding that New York be renamed Martin Luther King City "to reclaim it for our people." Hmmmm. I hate to agree with the Rev. Al, but maybe a name change is in order. Welfaria? Zooville? Rapetown? Dirtburg? Lazyopolis? But Al, the Statue of Liberty? Next time, hold that demonstration at a food stamp bureau or a crack house. Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began
I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.
If you have to use a gun on a youth, you should leave the scene immediately, disposing of the wiped off gun as soon as possible. Such a gun cannot, of course, be registered to you, but one bought privately (through the classifieds, for example).
I've been told not to talk, but these stooges don't scare me. Threats or no threats, I've laid bare the coming race war in our big cities. The federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS (my training as a physician helps me see through this one.) The Bohemian Grove--perverted, pagan playground of the powerful. Skull & Bones: the demonic fraternity that includes George Bush and leftist Senator John Kerry, Congress's Mr. New Money. The Israeli lobby, which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica."






damn- that is some rugged ass shit, and i don't want that to be my president. discuss.

[MayorMeanBeans]

i just checked his campaign's response to it, and its to the effect of, "it's not my words i had nothing to do with that literature. i just put my name at the top"

he says that his only fault was that he didn't read what he was endorsing. anyone know why he would endorse stuff like that, especially if he didn't even bother to read it?

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Ya that guy thinks Obama is a bigot too.

http://www.indegayforum.org/news/show/31387.html

/NH

That's not Ron's message, he doesn't even speak like that.

[lord_casek]

i just checked his campaign's response to it, and its to the effect of, "it's not my words i had nothing to do with that literature. i just put my name at the top"

he says that his only fault was that he didn't read what he was endorsing. anyone know why he would endorse stuff like that, especially if he didn't even bother to read it?

his vocal response was that the newsletter was large, ron paul sometimes only got one article in there, the rest were contributions and staff hired to write. ron paul was deeply upset by that article that went out in his newsletter.
i know he doesn't show it too much, but he's a very christian man. he walks the walk. it's not christian to be a racist. and if it's not chrisitan, i don't see ron paul doing it. but that's personal life. he knows that his religion shouldn't affect his politics. that's the way it should be. not like huckster, who flashes that he's a preacher like it's something that would play a role in his "politickin'".

[MayorMeanBeans]

^casek the fact of the matter is that i would never ever allow my name anywhere near that crap. if you weren't aware what you were endorsing/your audience (a very related question), thats bad. the fact that he didn't proofread is real bad.

the fact that he is even affiliated with that crap is enough for me not to vote for him. then again, he'll get the racist vote. so maybe hell come out on top.

[lord_casek]

^casek the fact of the matter is that i would never ever allow my name anywhere near that crap. if you weren't aware what you were endorsing/your audience (a very related question), thats bad. the fact that he didn't proofread is real bad.

the fact that he is even affiliated with that crap is enough for me not to vote for him. then again, he'll get the racist vote. so maybe hell come out on top.

i know that, and now he does, but he is a very busy guy. has been for a long time.
it is unfortunate that he has to have that shit connect to his name, but shit happens.

but hell, hillary has bodies connected to her, so if ron paul just has one bullshit article in some old newsletter that was 30 pages thick, hell....

[tellurian]

The Bible is full of racism. The curse of Ham. The Isaac/Ishmael schism.
The bible has been used to justify slavery.

[Some1]

Mccain's Votes were switched with Ron Paul's... polls are wrong possible fraud...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV6qAGigGYY

[thecoldmidwest]

We've got one decent politician running for office and all anyone can do is look for ways to smear him. Way to do what your tv told you to.

[lord_casek]

fucking insane. something is seriously wrong here.

[I was born here]

Ron Paul responds to racism allegations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLUmfZWIZsc&watch_response

[spectr]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/index.html

ron paul exposed as a possible racist... I don't believe his answers either... I mean come on believing him here is like believing barry bonds never took steriods or we invaded iraq cause they had weapons of mass destruction....

[thinksmall]

OR.. its like believing Gulf of Tonkin was for real for real. OR.. believing that iraq was about wmd's when it was really about oil.

Saying a libertarian is racist is like saying JFK plotted his own death - which would be awe-inspiring but illogical.

[the.crooked]

hehe.


oh man.

[russell jones]

yup, im a vegetable


fuck off juan.

I guess, I'm a veggie too. Must be the institutionalized propaganda machine that is the modern higher education. Whoops, I'm part of it, don't listen to a word I say.

[the.crooked]

I forgot i posted that and for a second thought that you had changed it in the quote.


I was very confused as to why you did that.


then I remembered the context.

[swedish erotica]

yikes

[thecoldmidwest]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/index.html

ron paul exposed as a possible racist... I don't believe his answers either... I mean come on believing him here is like believing barry bonds never took steriods or we invaded iraq cause they had weapons of mass destruction....

"The presidential hopeful described the newsletter revelations as a "rehash" of old material dug up by his opponents because he is gaining ground with black voters due to his stance against the war in Iraq and the war on drugs.

"I am the anti-racist because I am the only candidate -- Republican or Democrat -- who would protect the minority against these vicious drug laws," he said.

"Libertarians are incapable of being a racist, because racism is a collectivist idea."

- From that article

"or we invaded iraq cause they had weapons of mass destruction...""

- Yet you oppose the only candidate who would get us out. HYPOCRITE!

[MayorMeanBeans]

^okay ron paul can manipulate meanings of the word for days. sure he's not 'capable' of being racist, but he sure as hell is prejudiced.


racism does not depend on political systems, its also a social phenomenon. and no libertarian this/no-affirmative action that is going to change the fact that much of our country is prejudiced.

and what's wrong with opponents of ron paul saying, he is not the best candidate because he has had prejudiced words attributed to him in the past? should we just ignore it?

ron paul heads crack me up sometimes.

[lord_casek]

^okay ron paul can manipulate meanings of the word for days. sure he's not 'capable' of being racist, but he sure as hell is prejudiced.


racism does not depend on political systems, its also a social phenomenon. and no libertarian this/no-affirmative action that is going to change the fact that much of our country is prejudiced.

and what's wrong with opponents of ron paul saying, he is not the best candidate because he has had prejudiced words attributed to him in the past? should we just ignore it?

ron paul heads crack me up sometimes.

maybe it's because most of them have bodies in their closets.

[thinksmall]

First of all, Menino, you are a doofus.

Second of all, Hillary and Obama have ratified legislations that impose two social classes of slaves and masters.

Third of all, Ron Paul is said to have used prejudiced words by opponents falsely. Paul used it in a statistical way, he was actually supporting minorities. What you're implying is like saying Wired Magazine supports murder because they had an article that showed statistics of how deaths happen.

The philosophy of libertarianism doesn't necessarily have to be involved with politics. That's what i meant. Example: Cain and Abel. Human vs. Human Machine. Policy vs. No Policy.

I dont fucking understand how people believe that Ron Paul will do evil to the world. He's one of the far-left-wing guys.........

[the.crooked]

ugh.

[lord_casek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLjRXoH2nbc


this gave me a little tear in the eye.

[MayorMeanBeans]

First of all, Menino, you are a doofus.

glad you think so.

Second of all, Hillary and Obama have ratified legislations that impose two social classes of slaves and masters.

what legislation are you referring to? it's fine to be informal like this in 12oz, but in any serious discussion you can't just say something like that without being prepared to articulate yourself.

Third of all, Ron Paul is said to have used prejudiced words by opponents falsely. Paul used it in a statistical way, he was actually supporting minorities. What you're implying is like saying Wired Magazine supports murder because they had an article that showed statistics of how deaths happen.

this is faulty logic. using your example (statistical figures on causes of deaths) is far from an accusation that there is a federal-homosexual cover-up conspiracy. one is an explanation/depiction of figures, while the other one asserts a cause for such figures, therefore analysis. additionally, i disagree with you in saying that ron paul supports minorities. his disparagement of social programs goes completely against my politics. are welfare states unconstitutional? maybe, but i believe that extensive social programs (not even extensive, i'm living in quebec right now and they have an adequately extensive program. granted taxes are high, i bitch about them a lot, and there are still social ills, but the general population is in much better shape. sure ron paul treated poor people for free, but he is one of a small minority. prescribing libertarian principles that he subscribes to would fail for the simple reason that most people are more self-motivated than ron paul.

The philosophy of libertarianism doesn't necessarily have to be involved with politics. That's what i meant. Example: Cain and Abel. Human vs. Human Machine. Policy vs. No Policy.

libertarianism is a political theory/ideology. i'm not following your examples (maybe if there were social programs in cain and abel's time cain wouldn't have gotten jealous over abel's favor with god ie material possessions (meat), and killed him. instead, there would have been some system of wealth redistribution). its sort of like when realists say that machiavelli is one of them.

I dont fucking understand how people believe that Ron Paul will do evil to the world. He's one of the far-left-wing guys.........

you called me a doofus right? left wing is about social programs where the government intervenes in the economy and society more to 'level the playing field'. ron paul is about the exact opposite of that.

[MayorMeanBeans]

maybe it's because most of them have bodies in their closets.

that very well might be, and i encourage anyone who thinks so to produce the evidence. i'm not going to disregard something that ron paul was involved in simply because i assume tha t "whatever bad he did, everyone else did worse", even though i don't have concrete evidence (such as a newsletter) to support it. i'm not concerned with the length of time passed, because as far as i'm concerned, dude was a man then, and should have had the sense to not endorse something he disagreed with (if he agreed with it, its even worse).

[lord_casek]

that very well might be, and i encourage anyone who thinks so to produce the evidence. i'm not going to disregard something that ron paul was involved in simply because i assume tha t "whatever bad he did, everyone else did worse", even though i don't have concrete evidence (such as a newsletter) to support it. i'm not concerned with the length of time passed, because as far as i'm concerned, dude was a man then, and should have had the sense to not endorse something he disagreed with (if he agreed with it, its even worse).

it was a large newsletter, there were many writers, politicians don't have time to read everything they put their names on...same with sports stars, celebs, etc.
they should read stuff they endorse, but not the case all of the time.

and one little goof like that is not the end of the world. ghouliani abandoned 9/11 first responders, hillary is connected to murders via her husband, mccain just passed a bill he
sponsored making sure no one with PTSD can get a gun and no one who has been prescribed an SSRI can get a gun. meanwhile, huckster let a guy convicted of murder out of prison so he could murder again, obama has a wife in the CFR, i could go on. those are serious, one newsletter that ron paul didn't write but one article for isn't.

[MayorMeanBeans]

you see i guess we have different priorities. i got no problem with ptsd or ssri people not having guns. violation of the constitution? yes, but ptsd didn't exist when the constitution was written, so you have to do your best. and for people who don't have all their marbles, that sucks you can't have a gat, but i dont care because im in favor of strict ass gun control. too many people in my neighborhoods have gotten killed by guns that serve no purpose except to kill humans. hunting is one thing, i dont care what montana does. but i dont think guns belong in cities.

what murders are you talking about with the clintons? do you know something that the fbi doesn't, or are you referring to civilian deaths in sudan/afghanistan/somalia/kosovo?

i m not saying that the newsletter is the reason why i wouldn't vote for ron paul, because i wouldn't for a whole host of reasons. i think isolationism on the part of superpowers is flawed at times (for humanitarian reasons), and that if practiced correctly (not the way bush had it), an active foreign policy is very good for the us and many other countries. we're going disagree on this point. furthermore, much the same way that people talked about pnac and bushs associates, i think its fair to say that paul's associates are the authors of that newsletter.

if i wasn't so sure that ron paul stood no chance i'd be scared.

one more thing- i was thinking about how thinksmall was saying that ron paul is the most leftist candidate out- if you stack policy prescriptions of paul and kucinich side by side you'll see what a leftist candidate would look like.

[lord_casek]

man, you are educated....so you must know that now days they say anyone who has seen combat has PTSD? retarded.

as for the guns in your neighborhood, those are criminals with guns. if citizens can't have the same shit as criminals so they can defend themselves, what the fuck have you got? the cops? fuck that. as far as i'm concerned, cops are cleanup crew. they aren't going to get here quick enough to do shit to protect me.

clintons have a lot of bodies on their hands. do you not remember? the "suicicdes" etc?
america has short term memory loss.

do some more reading. who are they thread....

[vanfullofretards]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLjRXoH2nbc


this gave me a little tear in the eye.

what was it?

[thinksmall]

Hillary and Obama have ratified legislations that impose two social classes of slaves and masters. Read The New State by Mary Parker Follett, mother of Reinventing Government (see the Al Gore's program, the National Partnership for Reinventing Government). Read Reinventing Government by David Osborne and Ted Gaeble.

http://www.unu.edu/news/wto/bretton.htm
“The process of globalization has given rise to new problems and governance needs.” - creating governing legislation through false flag occurrences.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=71e6cda5-802a-23ad-4190-146f21acf013
" Clinton, Obama Sign Onto to Boxer’s $4,500 Climate Tax on American Families" - exactly that.

Watch Transformers again. As much terrible things humans have done, and as much as they don't deserve anything... they deserve the choice. Lol, can't believe i just said that. But it's Left vs. Right, Autobots vs. Decepticons

Masters and Slaves; Governors and the Governed.. Remember how in America, the people are spose' to govern themselves?

[thinksmall]

This is a game of soccer. Dudes are wearing the team colors, but kicking it into the wrong goal.

[thinksmall]

http://www.gafam.org/upload/School_Choice.pdf

Public School is fundamentally wrong. Vote Ron Paul '08. You guys are stupid doofs'.

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=71e6cda5-802a-23ad-4190-146f21acf013
" Clinton, Obama Sign Onto to Boxer’s $4,500 Climate Tax on American Families" - exactly that.


I skimmed through the report this headline is based on just now, and this is a blurb that obviously is written with a bias hiding behind the MIT name.

The math in the headline is the most extreme it can be (going by the report, I didn't read the actual law), but it also is evenly applied to every tax grade, rather than applied according to income and use of carbon emitting vehicles. None of that is a given from what I can tell, so the use of the four family household in the headline is simply an attention grabber. Even the authors of the paper show that it is used simply an illustration:
"For this purpose we have simply divided the population by 4 as if the population were
divided into four-person households and then divided the total revenue by this artificially
constructed number of households."

And as I said, the amount in the article is at the most $4560 by 2015:
"The amount ranges from about $1630 to $4560 in 2015, and ranges from about $2520 to $5190 in 2050."



I read and wanted to start addressing the broader issues of the report, but it is a lot to say on a little message board combined with the fact that some of the academics were too much to. The law was not a tax for the sake of a tax - anyone have a link to the law itself or academic articles discussing it? I wasn't 100% clear on the main part of the discussion (and the law) regarding biofuel. I'm burning out...

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

http://www.unu.edu/news/wto/bretton.htm
“The process of globalization has given rise to new problems and governance needs.” - creating governing legislation through false flag occurrences.


And while I disagree with you, I won't attack the root of your position because the Ron Paul thread is not the UN thread, but don't use sources to infer a conclusion that is so completely your own bias but with a link attached. This news release is basically asking that the veto powers of the G8 be reviewed (and the other ways the major powers dominate the UN) because their influence feeds the overall misdirection of the UN and undermines the power of the other hundred+ countries involved. Like it or leave it, the article itself is not some radical idea, it's relatively logical within the frame work of the UN.

"The U.N. suffers from a “democratic deficit” that was “an integral part of the original design” but needs to be remedied now, the study says, adding that the U.N.’s moral authority is “seriously undermined because its laws or principles are enforced selectively when it suits the interests of the rich and the powerful. Circumventing the veto granted more than 50 years ago to the five permanent Security Council members and enlarging the membership of that body are “imperative" for the U.N.’s continued credibility."



Did I miss something in the article that perhaps is more devious?

[thinksmall]

Calculate for me the number Americans that have trouble with maintaining energy, throw in inflation and recession.. then work the numbers in with the climate tax.

I don't understand you. Ron Paul wants to take America significantly out of the hands of the U.N. No other candidate, really, has good understanding of the need to complete this. Most candidates actually support the global right-wing domination of the U.N.

“The process of globalization has given rise to new problems and governance needs.” - See Al Gore and climate change. The right want a bureaucratic global system of governance, to accomplish this they will create false occurrence to make YOU want it also. The need to implement a climate tax is just that. Its the liberals who are ratifying it.

See the connection?

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

We influence the UN far more than the UN influences us which is exactly what your posted article is about. I do not believe their is a conspiracy (and I haven't seen any credible proof)nor a problem in theory with the existence of a world platform for negotiations of finance, war, aid, and environment. As to the climate change issue, again you're right if all taxes are applied as if every person need pay the same. However, the math is done to illustrate the price on a more familiar level to the reader and is not meant to explain literally that the tax would be applied in this fashion...at least that's how I understood it, if I'm wrong on that, show me.

You guys seem to have similar views held by the neo-cons on many of these issues, all you do is paint it a different color by calling it a conspiracy. Start a UN thread.

[thinksmall]

No, there is no conspiracy. But you must remember how its only been around 200 years since the boom of the socialist movement.

The US does have great influence on the UN. Remember President Wilson. But what is happening between the US, UN, and the world is the UNNATURAL evolution of bureaucratic government. (Communism is theorized to be the natural evolution, Karl Marx implies this about the American system of governance.)

The unnatural evolution happens the same way any evolution happens. A 'need' is presented, a 'change' is given. The need is organization (which goes back to the creation of government) and some believe that the answer is bureaucracy. This evolution is unnatural because its going against nature, that free humans will govern themselves... and because the 'need' is artificially created.

- Read about Roosevelt and international governments after WW2. Some leaders believed that humans do not deserve choice, because they realized what happens when humans are completely free. Roosevelt disagreed, he implied a system of organization (government) where people can be free.

The natural evolution happens patiently, it just flows. The original American Republic would have evolved into the American Commune. A sustained Capitalist society will become Communist, because there is no way around it. BUT if you change the route by creating unnatural bureaucracy, the natural evolution wont happen. The unnatural evolution that many institutions like the CFR, NPR, UN, CEIP, ESU.. I should write a list, but would that be too absolutist?

Also remember, the constitution is a set of rules of how organization can be achieved without the limit or removal of natural choice.

[the.crooked]

the problem with a climate tax is that it is a punishment.


it is not structured as though it is to help the people. it is to tax them for something they necessarily need. extortion really.



things like the carbon trading system for corporations. that is a much more effective and brilliant structure than imposing a tax on people.

[thinksmall]

Then is there any form of tax that is not structured to do such? Now we're getting somewhere.

[the.crooked]

I mean, yes. thus the issue most people have with them in general.


But so long as government's work through money, we will need them.


I just think this specific tax is not the best thought out.

[thinksmall]

Okay. Small steps is cool too. Can we rule out the logic in voting for Obama and Hillary then?

For the disbelievers, the new world order is happening. Accept it or fight it, cool? Cool.

|
|
V
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b/102-9661827-4691337?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=new+world+order&x=0&y=0

[lord_casek]

Okay. Small steps is cool too. Can we rule out the logic in voting for Obama and Hillary then?

For the disbelievers, the new world order is happening. Accept it or fight it, cool? Cool.

|
|
V
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b/102-9661827-4691337?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=new+world+order&x=0&y=0




to be fair, the elite don't call it "the new world order" i think they call it global governance...but yeah, same thing.

[the.crooked]

i will say again, i think global governance is not a bad thing.



but whatevs.


i know we are not going to go anywhere with that dicsussion.

[lord_casek]

i will say again, i think global governance is not a bad thing.



but whatevs.


i know we are not going to go anywhere with that dicsussion.

nah, we won't. it's a big debate. but we all know that that kind of power is a very dangerous thing.

[the.crooked]

i think it is just foolish to believe we will ever go in the opposite direction as the population increases in every country.

[lord_casek]

they can try. the people will decide. our guns will carry the message.

[thinksmall]

I dont think global governance is a bad thing either. Even Marx believed that it would happen in the means of communism. BUT what is currently happening is not of the sorts, its a global BUREAUCRACY - its the evolution where Victorian Elites take the world, not the people.

[grim540]

i will say again, i think global governance is not a bad thing.



but whatevs.


I know we are not going to go anywhere with that discussion.

No global gonvernece is not nessicarly a bad thing, but that all depends on how a global governemt comes into power. If it's through lies, us of force, or something like that then its going to be a very bad thing.

[the.crooked]

see, i think we will be led the way to it through market corrections and the internet.

[angelofdeath]

you see i guess we have different priorities. i got no problem with ptsd or ssri people not having guns. violation of the constitution? yes, but ptsd didn't exist when the constitution was written, so you have to do your best. and for people who don't have all their marbles, that sucks you can't have a gat, but i dont care because im in favor of strict ass gun control. too many people in my neighborhoods have gotten killed by guns that serve no purpose except to kill humans. hunting is one thing, i dont care what montana does. but i dont think guns belong in cities.


thats like saying... 'back in 1787 people didnt know that people in 2008 would be saying viscious racist things, so therefore in 08 we must revoke free speech. or that the right to habeus corpus was ok back THEN, but in 08, those damn enemy combatants... we cant take the chance. its all retarded if you ask me. gun control is nothing but a huge victim disarmament scheme. in america, if you disarm the law abiding population, you will have an armed criminal population. so then the law abiding citizens will have no means to defend themselves. dial 911? sure. dial 911 and die. if you support gun control, then support a constitutional amendment. atleast you acknowledge that you hate the constitution and everything it stands for.

i m not saying that the newsletter is the reason why i wouldn't vote for ron paul, because i wouldn't for a whole host of reasons. i think isolationism on the part of superpowers is flawed at times (for humanitarian reasons), and that if practiced correctly (not the way bush had it), an active foreign policy is very good for the us and many other countries. we're going disagree on this point. furthermore, much the same way that people talked about pnac and bushs associates, i think its fair to say that paul's associates are the authors of that newsletter.

for humanitarian reasons... hmmm. wishing for a government that can only do great deeds is like wishing for a lion that only purrs and cuddles or a rattle snake that only provides percussive accompaniment to mariachi music. it cant be.



"libertarianism is a political theory/ideology. i'm not following your examples (maybe if there were social programs in cain and abel's time cain wouldn't have gotten jealous over abel's favor with god ie material possessions (meat), and killed him. instead, there would have been some system of wealth redistribution). its sort of like when realists say that machiavelli is one of them. "

libertarianism can be summed up in one belief. its not ONLY a political theory, its a way to live your life. dont initiate force against someone unless in self defense. that means keep your mitts to yourself unless you are attacked. and that applies to everyone, including governments.

[angelofdeath]

global governance is a really really bad thing. all one has to do is look at the the nazi death camps, soviet gulags and mao's china. that is what global government will be like. it will be one huge centralized bureaucratic totalitarian dictatorship with endless wars into every country that dissents from the elites party line. any last vestige of freedom will be gone in the world. count on that. if the UN every comes to these united States of America, refer to casek's post

[the.crooked]

you aren't saying why this has to be the way it works.

quit acting like a sensationalist and say something real.

[lord_casek]

NAACP AUSTIN PRESIDENT ON RON PAUL
http://infowars.com/articles/us/ron_paul_naacp_president_rp_not_racist.htm

[thinksmall]

^ lol. If the NAACP president says that Ron Paul is not a racist... I'm sure we'll all agree.

the.crooked, read Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg if you ever want to dwel deeper into local or global socialist governments; what they mean and such.

[angelofdeath]

"you aren't saying why this has to be the way it works.

quit acting like a sensationalist and say something real."

i did say something real. ALL governments grow. all governments move toward totalitarianism. like i said, it is like wishing for a lion that only purrs and cuddles. it is against their nature to only do good things. it is totally 100% impossible for the whole world to be ruled by one centralized government and liberty be preserved. i think my county government is too centralized.

[thinksmall]

crooked,
It is true that all governments move toward totalitarianism as AOD says.. but there are many systems of totalitarianisms, including Communism. Marx believed that Capitalism would not last, it would evolve into Communism; theres no way around it. It's evolution not revolution that would take Capitalism there though. It would be natural occurrence. In a future Marxism, liberty can be preserved - with none of the flaws that American Democracy has.

Though, we are obviously not moving towards Communism as much as we are moving towards Liberal Fascism nowadays. This is because of unnatural occurrences that have been implemented into the natural free market, which is now unnatural (remember economy is the backbone of all this, not ideology). Though, it is the ideology of Liberal Fascism that is why some of us human folks are worried about the certain global governance taking place.

Most societal forms of organization want to take over the world, because they have a certain set of beliefs on how the world should be. They try very hard to achieve it. Some fall. Some rise. They are mostly totalitarian.

Sorry if me and my terms are making me look like a douche. I try sufficiently.

[Dawood]

22 pages of arguing about man made laws just to find out Gods law is going to rule the lands in the long run.

[yumone]

22 pages of arguing about man made laws just to find out Gods law is going to rule the lands in the long run.

yeah god's law as created by some arab dudeZ :D

[lord_casek]

yeah god's law as created by some arab dudeZ :D

if it had been an australian, we'd all be drunk on sunday morning

[lord_casek]

michigan
http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-011508.html

[Theo.Huxtable]

that was fucked up how fox news shunned ron paul from the republican debates.

they're afraid of the truth?

[lord_casek]

http://i12.tinypic.com/7292uiu.jpg

[vanfullofretards]

Less than 1% reporting homie...

[lord_casek]

Less than 1% reporting homie...

doesn't matter, look at how the skew it.

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

With 95% reported, Paul and McCain tied at 13% and Romney took the state.

[lord_casek]

With 95% reported, Paul and McCain tied at 13% and Romney took the state.


yeah, i was just searching for the numbers, thank you.

did you know maccains wife got in trouble for some narcotics trader shit?

[lord_casek]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21229219

2nd place beotches!

[vanfullofretards]

doesn't matter, look at how the skew it.

Yeah, thats a prime example of why Paul isn't leading the GOP.

[lord_casek]

Yeah, thats a prime example of why Paul isn't leading the GOP.


yep, they just don't want to admit he is a front runner.

makes them look bad.

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

He really isn't though is he? After this, where does he stand with the other states factored in?

[lord_casek]

He really isn't though is he? After this, where does he stand with the other states factored in?



still in the top 5. maybe four. but definitely five.

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

According to wikipedia (sorry) he is ranked 5th:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Republican_presidential_candidates,_ 2008

[lord_casek]

i think doctor paul has more delegates than that

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21660914

He has 4...

[the.crooked]

i love how yall throw out the doctor as to make him more prestigious.



it are lolz.

[lord_casek]

i love how yall throw out the doctor as to make him more prestigious.



it are lolz.


do you go around calling dr.'s by their first name?
it's a show of respect. if obama was a dr., i'd refer to him as
dr. obama.

stop making mountains out of shakiras tits.

[yumone]

its pretty crazy that soemone can get like a quarter of the vote in a single delegate. The american federal votign system is teh stupidz

[the.crooked]

do you go around calling dr.'s by their first name?
it's a show of respect. if obama was a dr., i'd refer to him as
dr. obama.

stop making mountains out of shakiras tits.

In some settings I will use the academic title. When a person is a political candidate in which their doctorate means nothing for the position being considered then no, no I will not refer to their educational title.

[the.crooked]

It is a nickname you use to feel more chummy with him. To convince yourself that you have an attachment beyond some hollow vote.


We all do this. I am not saying it is bad. I just noticed it and thought it was funny.

[lord_casek]

It is a nickname you use to feel more chummy with him. To convince yourself that you have an attachment beyond some hollow vote.


We all do this. I am not saying it is bad. I just noticed it and thought it was funny.

funny, i don't feel chummy with him. anyway, it is a title he earned. i figure "hey, he spent years longer in school than i would, he deserves to be called dr."
someone else tried to tell me i was all chummy feeling with dr. paul, by calling him dr.
i didn't fall for it that time, either.
it's a sign of respect. that is all. why make something so simple so very complicated?
it doesn't help or hurt either way.

[the.crooked]

i just don't think it is respect when it has nothing to do with the matter at hand.


but anywho.


ima be in the abstracts thread in untitled. that's where my drunk self is at right now.

[lord_casek]

http://bp0.blogger.com/_8qDP032vyY4/R5LBs6NFLII/AAAAAAAAAhI/hyVAkdd8X3I/s1600-h/Paul_Second.png

2nd place in nevada. fuck you fred thompson and john mccain.

[the.crooked]

fred thompson...


hehe.

[lord_casek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyxhD20IRjs

[russell jones]

Paul must be drinking his carrot juice, he looks young for 72.

[TheSpicyGrassHopper]

*sings* fu-uuuuuck roo-ooooon p-aaaaa-ooooullllll

no joke

[lord_casek]

i negative propped you because just saying "fuck so and so"
and providing no reason is just plain stupid.

at least give a reason.

[TheSpicyGrassHopper]

i dont like him,his supporters, or what he stands for

[lord_casek]

i dont like him,his supporters, or what he stands for


you mean liberty and the constitution? get out of my country.
no joke.

[Blood Feast Island Man]

Paul must be drinking his carrot juice, he looks young for 72.

yeah he's aged well. I didn't realise he was that old.

[I was born here]

you mean liberty and the constitution? get out of my country.
no joke.

Hopefully he was being sarcastic.

[thecoldmidwest]

http://bp0.blogger.com/_8qDP032vyY4/R5LBs6NFLII/AAAAAAAAAhI/hyVAkdd8X3I/s1600-h/Paul_Second.png

2nd place in nevada. fuck you fred thompson and john mccain.

My radio told me that McCain got 2nd. Unbelievable. It wasn't until I went online........

[lord_casek]

My radio told me that McCain got 2nd. Unbelievable. It wasn't until I went online........


seems MSM is trying to lie and say mccain and paul tied, when paul actually got 2nd place. funny.

in other news, hillary cheats.
http://obama.3cdn.net/3fbea8417e1ef78148_fam6ynbbh.pdf

the obama people would love this, i'm sure. fuck them. damn commies.

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

^Thank you comrade for such an insightful link. You have helped bring control of the motherland that much closer to totalitarian socialist rule!

But no, seriously though, a blow to the electoral process is a blow to everyone. I don't see exactly what you're thinking on this link, can you help me out? Guides like that are not uncommon so in reading it I expected something to grab me. Did I miss it?

[lord_casek]

^Thank you comrade for such an insightful link. You have helped bring control of the motherland that much closer to totalitarian socialist rule!

But no, seriously though, a blow to the electoral process is a blow to everyone. I don't see exactly what you're thinking on this link, can you help me out? Guides like that are not uncommon so in reading it I expected something to grab me. Did I miss it?

showing up at 11:00 and kicking people out of line at 11:30, etc.

[Oliver Clothesoff]

http://hilldabeast.com/hillpics/babyeater.jpg

[russell jones]

http://hilldabeast.com/hillpics/babyeater.jpg


I prefer my baby raw as well. Cooking the baby robs it of all of its flavor.

[russell jones]

Interesting critique of libertarianism here...
http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html

Telling quote

"This is no surprise, as libertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right. If Marxism is the delusion that one can run society purely on altruism and collectivism, then libertarianism is the mirror-image delusion that one can run it purely on selfishness and individualism. Society in fact requires both individualism and collectivism, both selfishness and altruism, to function. Like Marxism, libertarianism offers the fraudulent intellectual security of a complete a priori account of the political good without the effort of empirical investigation. Like Marxism, it aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics. And like Marxism, it has its historical myths and a genius for making its followers feel like an elect unbound by the moral rules of their society."


The article also has interesting passages dealing with the nature of freedom.

[lord_casek]

our founding fathers would weep.

[russell jones]

that's not an argument.

[lord_casek]

that's not an argument.


i didn't feel like saying much more.

i will if you'd like. first, let's define libertarian.



||}The term libertarianism usually refers to a political philosophy maintaining that all persons are the absolute owners of their own lives, and should be free to do whatever they wish with their persons or property, as long as they allow others the same liberty.



ok, so, that's done. these people are calling it communist to want to own your own life? and that the idea of freedom is marxist?

and liberty:


autonomy: immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority: political independence
freedom of choice; "liberty of opinion"; "liberty of worship"; "liberty--perfect liberty--to think or feel or do just as one pleases"; "at liberty to choose whatever occupation one wishes"
personal freedom from servitude or confinement or oppression
shore leave: leave granted to a sailor or naval officer
familiarity: an act of undue intimacy

yeah, jeez, that sounds horrible and communist....

[russell jones]

Casek,

Read the criticisms of the writer. He compares Marxism to Libertarianism in three ways, the first, that Marxism and Libertarianism idealize the capabilities of the collective and individuals respectively, that both apply basically economic theories to society as a whole, and that the followers of each tend to canonize the originators of the philosophy.

The last criticism is not fair though. However, it can be said that both Libertarian and Marxist theory lean on the idea that their tenets are supported by immutable scientific laws.

[thinksmall]

People have been discussing that since Marx came out with his treatise, its not as much a controversial issue as it is a scholarly issue. Marx believed that free market society would evolve into a Marxist society. His political views are very similar to those who believe in the free market and his true followers were not fans of collectivism - they were for liberty. Marx would probably chill with Ron Paul if dude was still living.

Economically, Marx believed that the free market wouldn't last and that it would force recessions and depressions. And that to fix this the wealthy elite would make almost-temporary solutions and serve the working class fictionally.... which he believed would not work; he thought there'd be a violent overthrow of a temporary remedial elitist dictatorship that would occur.

^Super para-phrased. You should really read his writings and shit.

I'm not sure if its a criticism when you're comparing a not very known ideology to one of the most revolutionary ideology in the world; one which was so favored that half the world believed in it. Marx is one of the greatest scholars in like, ever.

Look at Liberals and Fascists is what you should do... haha. Current Liberalism is almost exact to some Marx's predictions.

[russell jones]

Marx's over emphasis of economics is a very common academic criticism of his work.

BTW, I am aware of his importance.

[Blood Feast Island Man]

our founding fathers would weep.

weren't they all freemasons?

[lord_casek]

weren't they all freemasons?

not all of them. george washington later distanced himself from freemasonry. he thought it got a little too fucked up.

masons are responsible for the boston tea party....

obviously, not all masons are bad people. just the 33 degrees....and up.

[russell jones]

http://gravybread.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/rolling-rock-back-pledge.jpg

connection?

[lord_casek]

btw: russell, i'm reading up more on the marxist/libertarian criticism that you posted. i don't understand enough of it right now to comment. just letting you know so i don't get mistaken for avoiding the issue. just need to know more to be able to argue.

[russell jones]

cool beans.

Just a warning, there is plenty of bullshit to sift through to find the good arguments.

[angelofdeath]

i read that marxism of the right article the week it came out when i used to subscribe to american conservative. i thought it was a good article. i recognize the points that are made, but i reject alot of them. it is also safe to say, that i have turned more libertarian than conservative in the past couple years.

the heart of the debate between conservatives and libertarians, (im talking conservatives of the russell kirk mold, not the bush mold) is the degree of which the state should interfere with legislating morals. some libertarians are essentially anarchists. that is fine and dandy, but they also support limited government. if they didnt, it would be stupid. it would be like not supporting tax cuts when you support no taxes at all.

i digress...
the conservatives have said that local communities can regulate things like strip clubs in the communities or prostitution, etc.
libertarianism gets the label of being utopian because of the extreme consistency in the philosophy. most people are not that consistent.

i have however become convinced that liberty is the mother of order and not its daughter.
but you can safely say that true conservatives and libertarians are so similar on 90% of things that the rest is miniscule. but all you hear about is those 2 groups hacking each other apart over that last 10%. the same arguments can be seen today in ron pauls candidacy. where as ron paul is a right libertarian and supports decentralized pro life positions and control, the left libertarians support open borders and pro choice positions.
good link though russell. im gonna have to sort through that stuff one day.

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

Ya know MRL.. you still didnt answer me. Do you support a war with Iran? I feel like I'm arguing with scientologists.. hahahaha

Figured I'd take this discussion here. How do you all feel about Iran?

In my mind if they truly are directly supporting attacks against the troops, it should be considered, but it seems there isn't much taalk about that anymore - though news and fact are not the same. I'm reluctant though because what limited news I've read on it never provides proof, but insteads quotes a government official obliged to support the claim (thank you news outlets). The nuke argument has debunked and I think if we did attacked it would be a war with little support anywhere, including here. I'm not against the use of our military, but it is over extended and used for political reasons that often cyclically lead to threats against us which leads to a need for further military action. Iran is an example of this so to move against it should be a last resort...


*edit to clarify

[Juan Fuentes]

George Washington distanced himself from the masons? i didnt know that, but i think i heard it before.

it comes with influence of good friends or family that you enter masonry. but a free thinker always gets out of it.
for example, Simon Bolivar, the great liberator of South America, the man who is mentioned by Chavez a lot was a mason too, but later in life wrote letters and manifested saying the masons were a bunch of "crazies", locos.


the lower degrees of masons are a smoke screen to divert attention from the higher levels of masonry which are the ones causing the evil on earth. we know that right?

[thinksmall]

Figured I'd take this discussion here. How do you all feel about Iran?

In my mind if they truly are directly supporting attacks against the troops, it should be considered, but it seems there isn't much taalk about that anymore - though news and fact are not the same. I'm reluctant though because what limited news I've read on it never provides proof, but insteads quotes a government official obliged to support the claim (thank you news outlets). The nuke argument has debunked and I think if we did attacked it would be a war with little support anywhere, including here. I'm not against the use of our military, but it is over extended and used for political reasons that often cyclically lead to threats against us which leads to a need for further military action. Iran is an example of this so to move against it should be a last resort...


*edit to clarify

I guess thats an answer. I still feel unsettled though. And I still hate you. Whatevs.. DR. PAUL '08!!

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

Things are only black and white in Ron Paul world.

[lord_casek]

Things are only black and white in Ron Paul world.


explain yourself.

[yumone]

weren;t all of the founding fathers teh uber 33 degree masons?

[lord_casek]

weren;t all of the founding fathers teh uber 33 degree masons?


no, only some were masons. and hardly any were high degree's. washington later distanced himself form the masonic order, jefferson wasn't real big into it, etc. (this deja vu?)

[thinksmall]

Martin Luther King and Ron Paul!!!!!!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=SAWClI8zsH4

Ron Paul Rising!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=MRTDynbHVYQ

lol dude's videos are silly. but i liike. mm.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

He don't make them bra'. His supporters do it.

Most of them are pretty passionate about what they believe in, which is why the video's come out like they do, but yeah most of them get me to.

[MY ROTTING LIVER]

http://www.poolparty.com/quotes/images/2007/04/28/rupaul.jpg

This is who youre voting for. JK...

[thinksmall]

lol............................

And ilots, my usage of the word dude was referred the dude who made the video, dude. But whatevs.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Gotcha. I thought you meant that he was putting out those videos. Some of them can be a tad ridiculous, just making sure.

[thinksmall]

“Ron Paul knows the Constitution…and I’m with that.”
- John Mayer

“I think I’m going to vote for the libertarian — Ron Paul”
- David Letterman

“Ron Paul is talking about the issues. These other candidates and these parties don’t want to talk about the fact that this superpower is spending hundreds of billions of dollars carrying out a global war–it’s unsustainable. So there’s no discussion….These candidates are not being straightforward.“
- Lou Dobbs

“He’s my guy! I love Ron Paul!”
- Chris Matthew

“It’s refreshing to interview a politician who doesn’t mince words. It’s even more refreshing to interview one who understands the benefits of limited government.”
- John Stossel

"“There are 535 people on Capitol Hill whose job it is to write the laws that govern all of us, and he is one of them. There are 535 people on Capitol Hill whose job it is to preserve the Constitution, and he is one of them. There are 535 people on Capitol Hill whose job it is to preserve our liberties, and he is one of them. But in his heart and in his head, in his character and in his intellect, and in what he has done and in what he will become — the Thomas Jefferson of our day — Ron Paul is one of us!”
- Andrew P. Napolitano

“Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”
- Ronald Reagan

“You know who I’m digging is that Ron Paul guy… I didn’t know anything about him until a few days ago. I was watching something on Fox News… and they were interviewing Ron Paul… So I’m listening to the dude and afterwards, you know Beth is sitting next to me, and I didn’t say anything, but then all of a sudden I went ‘You know I think I agree with everything that dude just said.’ And then she goes, ‘I did, too!’ I go, ‘I don’t know who that guy is… he wants us out of Iraq, like, I mean, Day 1… he’s a Republican… I just found out yesterday because somebody wrote me after I talked about the guy, that he’s the only Congressman — he’s the only one who stood up for us abot the FCC, saying that they should have complete freedom on the radio — and, he’s for abolishing the FCC!”
- Howard Stern

“You’re working for the most honest man in Congress.”
- John McCain

“Congressman Ron Paul, you appear to have consistent, principled integrity.”
- John Stewart

“He’s a major player…quite appealing as a politician, when he speaks about ending the IRS and the personal income tax.”
- Gore Vidal

“[Ron Paul’s] a great guy. I really like him. I have been a friend of his for 10 years. I attend what’s called the Liberty Caucus every Thursday in his office. We have a great time, it’s very stimulating.”
- Tom Tancredo

“I always feel like I’m out there by myself criticizing this institution that everybody thinks is like a holy temple, when the reality is these are just men and women like you and me except for they’re making policy with no checks and balances,” Cramer tells the GOP presidential candidate. “I wish you the best of luck, sir, with your campaign. You are changing things with what you’re saying.”
- Jim Cramer

“I think an enormous part of the Republican Party believes that Ron Paul was the only man who was right on Iraq. He opposed going in, he opposes a foreign policy or interventionism, he’s the one candidate who goes after the neoconservatives and says their influence has got to be removed. And I think wisely in his judgment, he will bring troops home from Cold War commitments of long ago where they don’t belong.
“I like him personally, I know him personally… I will say that he is also the one candidate that everybody knows who fought against big government. He voted against unsure Medicare, the prescription drugs, and No Child Left Behind. He’s consistent, he’s courageous.”
- Patrick J. Buchanan

“The Ron Paul people are all over the country. They are. They’re all over the country and obviously very enthusiastic.”
- Giuliani

“Ron Paul is the most extraordinary statesman in American history. His peaceful revolution is undoing a century of statism and war.”
- Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., President of the Ludwig von Mises Institute

“I mean, obviously in the end I’ll vote for Ron Paul.”
- Tucker Carlson

[lord_casek]

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MWI2ZjJkOTI2MzBlMTgxNmY2ZDQ3ODlmZTZkOTE5YjY=

[ironpark]

do you people actually support him?
hes a fuckign lunatic
and not in a good way

[the.crooked]

that point won't be well served in this thread.


some of us have even tried to back up this claim. but to no standard of acceptability apparently.

[grim540]

do you people actually support him?
hes a fuckign lunatic
and not in a good way

oh god i cant believe I'm saying this....


STFU NOOB!

[Some1]

God I love CT!!!!

CONNECTICUT IS RON PAUL COUNTRY!!!!
http://www.courant.com/news/custom/topnews/hcu-midprezpoll-0128,0,6657460.story

[lord_casek]

do you people actually support him?
hes a fuckign lunatic
and not in a good way

what the fuck is your problem with our constitution?

[Some1]

do you people actually support him?
hes a fuckign lunatic
and not in a good way

I think you should tell us why he is a lunatic...

[the.crooked]

again, some of us have tried, but few of you pay attention to reason.

[lord_casek]

again, some of us have tried, but few of you pay attention to reason.



why do you hate freedom?

[the.crooked]

I don't hate freedom, Fox Casek.


John Cena hates freedom.

[lord_casek]

I don't hate freedom, Fox Casek.


John Cena hates freedom.


mein freund, i don't watch fox news. i don't watch the news except
when there is something extremely important, but i definitely don't watch the KGB newsx...
i mean fox.

i just think it's silly that you call the man who votes constitutionally every single time, a lunatic.

you don't have to want to vote for him, i won't pressure you either way, but you should respect that he has our country in mind when he votes.

[the.crooked]

I do respect that. I just think it is a foolish perspective on the country.


It is antiquated and not robust enough to deal with contemporary times and upcoming issues.


I called you fox casek because that sort of tactic is complete bullshit.

To ask me "why do I hate freedom?"

Assuming that because I dislike the politics of Ron Paul that it is sufficient reason to attribute a disdain for personal liberty is the same type of confrontational buffoonery that the pundits on that channel regularly engage in.

It is a strong rhetorical tactic but holds no real validity as logical argumentation.

Also, we both know I ain't votin. So don't worry I don't feel any pressure from you to agree with all of this.

[lord_casek]

i know, i've been reading up on tactics of how to win an argument.


i thought you were an obama fan?

[Some1]

Honestly dudes for freedom, giving power back to the states to allow common people a little more power when it comes to fighting the gov, he wants to back our economy on the gold standard instead of nothing, This is why I want ron paul...

[lord_casek]

Honestly dudes for freedom, giving power back to the states to allow common people a little more power when it comes to fighting the gov, he wants to back our economy on the gold standard instead of nothing, This is why I want ron paul...

same reason, with some more, personal security, personal liberty, our nations good name restored in the eyes of the people and the world, no more federal interference in schooling of our children, etc.

[the.crooked]

ehh.

I mean. I pay attention to the game and I have my favorites to win.


But I do not vote out of principal.

I am not going to sign into the social contract that voting is.

I do not agree with the government of current days and I do not agree with engaging with a system that ignores my concerns anyways, regardless of who I vote for.


So I do not vote.


simply stated.


there is more. but I am hungry.

[the.crooked]

same reason, with some more, personal security, personal liberty, our nations good name restored in the eyes of the people and the world, no more federal interference in schooling of our children, etc.

I just do not think ya'll understand how ineffective he would be. How he would fuck things up even further. At a point in time when our country is on edge domestically and abroad, splitting the country even further by creating mini-sovereignties within the US itself is a horrible idea.

We do not need the gold standard.

We need to compeltely re-evaluate not only our economy as its own entity, but the notion of it as only a minute integral part of a larger economy. Money needs to change, and change drastically.

The definition of monetary value will soon change in a big way I think, and retrogressive thinking like Paul's will not bring us to a place that is politically viable to deal with the things that will occur within the next many years.

[lord_casek]

ehh.

I mean. I pay attention to the game and I have my favorites to win.


But I do not vote out of principal.

I am not going to sign into the social contract that voting is.

I do not agree with the government of current days and I do not agree with engaging with a system that ignores my concerns anyways, regardless of who I vote for.


So I do not vote.


simply stated.


there is more. but I am hungry.

i used to feel the same way, until ron paul came along.
i don't want to infomercial this up or anything, but i do feel that way.

he just seems like someone you could talk to, mitt, hillary, huchleberry, etc. do not seem that way to me. obama, maybe, but i doubt he'd care.

i think that program hugo chavez has on tv is pretty neat. you call in and talk to your leader. complain, bitch, moan, whatever. that is fucking cool. bush would be far too afraid
to do such things. or his handlers wouldn't let him.

it'd be comedy gold every time it came on, though.

[lord_casek]

I just do not think ya'll understand how ineffective he would be. How he would fuck things up even further. At a point in time when our country is on edge domestically and abroad, splitting the country even further by creating mini-sovereignties within the US itself is a horrible idea.

We do not need the gold standard.

We need to compeltely re-evaluate not only our economy as its own entity, but the notion of it as only a minute integral part of a larger economy. Money needs to change, and change drastically.

The definition of monetary value will soon change in a big way I think, and retrogressive thinking like Paul's will not bring us to a place that is politically viable to deal with the things that will occur within the next many years.

in my opinion, you are wrong. you're following the wrong path to a solution that will ultimately fuck us over.

but then again, you're for open borders and a NAU. not the thing we need. we need to remain sovereign.

and i'm not attacking you on that, i just think you have some learning to do. where these ideologies come from, etc.

you're a smart guy, i know you can see the bad things that can come of this shit.

dr. paul wants what was intended for our nation. states rights, personal rights, etc.
not such a bad thing. we don't need the federal govt in our bidness.

look at what kind of ineffectiveness they have in doing other things.

[the.crooked]

I personally think it is bullshit when people say things like "he seems like someone you could talk to."

Not to call you out.


I just think it is a delusion to believe anyone of them care that much about each of our thoughts.

At the same time. I just don't give a fuck if I can talk to obama in an informal manner or to paul in one, or in a formal manner. It is not their personability with me or the access I have to them that I care about. It is purely policy. Paul's policy ideals do not in any way resonate with me as being correct or forward thinking.

They resemble a time past and an ideal which is impossible to conceive of in contemporary society.
\

[the.crooked]

in my opinion, you are wrong. you're following the wrong path to a solution that will ultimately fuck us over.

but then again, you're for open borders and a NAU. not the thing we need. we need to remain sovereign.

and i'm not attacking you on that, i just think you have some learning to do. where these ideologies come from, etc.

you're a smart guy, i know you can see the bad things that can come of this shit.

dr. paul wants what was intended for our nation. states rights, personal rights, etc.
not such a bad thing. we don't need the federal govt in our bidness.

look at what kind of ineffectiveness they have in doing other things.

Yes, but you as well must believe in the possibility of ideological iteration. That is to say while some conceptions haven't quite worked, other versions seem to be working quite well.


Again I refer you to the EU. Why is the Euro that much stronger than our dollar?

Monetary competition is going to be a huge issue for America. If we want our dollar strong, lose it in favor of buying into a necessarily larger and stronger more stable monetary currency.

That is what I am saying about seeing ourselves as part of a larger whole. This isolationist bullshit that ya'll seem to work under will get us no where but further fucked in the future.

We need to seriously seriously rethink things.

[lord_casek]

I personally think it is bullshit when people say things like "he seems like someone you could talk to."

Not to call you out.


I just think it is a delusion to believe anyone of them care that much about each of our thoughts.

At the same time. I just don't give a fuck if I can talk to obama in an informal manner or to paul in one, or in a formal manner. It is not their personability with me or the access I have to them that I care about. It is purely policy. Paul's policy ideals do not in any way resonate with me as being correct or forward thinking.

They resemble a time past and an ideal which is impossible to conceive of in contemporary society.
\


well, we cna't have the govt trying to track our each and every move, our reading habits, our driving habits, our spending habits, etc.
it goes against everything our forefathers (and our fathers and grandfathers in some cases) fought for.

i don't think that is a good way to pay tribute to the people who their spilled blood on our soil for our freedom

never have, never will.

and we certainly can't maintain this "policing of the world" policy. we aren't the worlds personal bodyguards.

we also can't keep giving money to israel, pakistan, etc they aren't going to pay us back. $10 billion form china to pay a tyrannical leader in pakistan...for what? nothing.

meanwhile, our country is slipping into a monetary crash. (it already has, they just don't want to let on yet)

[lord_casek]

as for the EU, tracking, everywhere. secrets. signing into it without the peoples consent....
closed door meetings.....ugh.

the euro is higher because they are backing it with precious metals.

[the.crooked]

I don't see how my position is counter to any of the statements you just made.

[thinksmall]

Can you elaborate crooked? I can't see how any of Paul's plans will have any bad affect whatsoever. His unpractical plans are actually the most practical - because his plans are natural.

Ron Paul does care about people's thoughts. It's why he's such an favorable politician. He doesn't run to to make America the way it should practically be, he runs to make America the way it naturally is - which will work.

He's smart enough to know that being practical to contemporary society's needs will only bring losses.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

He wants to get rid of the CIA, the Federal Reserve and end the war in Iraq, I think thats all of the forward progress I need for now, how about the rest of you guys?

[the.crooked]

If you look back through this thread, I have posted my thoughts regularly on different issues I find with his platform.

[lord_casek]

He wants to get rid of the CIA, the Federal Reserve and end the war in Iraq, I think thats all of the forward progress I need for now, how about the rest of you guys?


yep. best thing he could do is get rid of the fed and the cia.
i'd be happy if it was just those two things.

[thinksmall]

I just searched this thread for all your posts. So... lol I don't feel I've reached anywhere. It's cool if you don't want to sh.. sha.. share though. =[

Pillars of Prosperity by Ron Paul
http://www.mises.org/books/prosperity.pdf
- Recent book that will help ya fit into his shoes. Please read.

[thinksmall]

Also, just for kicks.. I want to point out how much of an unpractical person is, and how much of a scholar it has helped him become. Ron Paul is a doctor, author, scholar, economist, and politician.. In no pragmatic progressive contemporary environment could a person like that happen.

Paul for Prez!

[thecoldmidwest]

I have yet to see a legitimate argument made against Paul in this the thread. In fact, I have yet to see a legitimate argument brought up against Paul anywhere...

[Theo.Huxtable]

GOOD NEWS! LOOKS LIKE GHOULIANI MIGHT DROP OUT!

[lord_casek]

GOOD NEWS! LOOKS LIKE GHOULIANI MIGHT DROP OUT!


it certainly looks like he put all his eggs in floridas basket. haha. now he's out of money.

[thecoldmidwest]

I just do not think ya'll understand how ineffective he would be. How he would fuck things up even further.
Really? Getting us out of Iraq right away. Getting rid of the various money sucking institutions like the irs, cia, etc. that do no good for the common man. That's really going to fuck things up for the little guy.:rolleyes:
At a point in time when our country is on edge domestically and abroad, splitting the country even further by creating mini-sovereignties within the US itself is a horrible idea.
That's the way the states used to be, and it's under this new governing system where the federal government has absolute power, that things started to get fucked up.
We do not need the gold standard.
Without the gold standard our money is worth less then the paper that it's printed on...
We need to compeltely re-evaluate not only our economy as its own entity, but the notion of it as only a minute integral part of a larger economy. Money needs to change, and change drastically.
What kind of monetary change? A new currency that's also not backed with nothing?

The definition of monetary value will soon change in a big way I think, and retrogressive thinking like Paul's will not bring us to a place that is politically viable to deal with the things that will occur within the next many years.

And what kind of monetary policy to you suggest?

[thinksmall]

Pillars of Prosperity by Ron Paul
http://www.mises.org/books/prosperity.pdf
- Recent book that will help ya fit into his shoes. Please read.

bump.

[lord_casek]

coldmidwest: the crooked is down for the amero type currency.

[lord_casek]

thinksmall: thanks for the book. hadn't read it.

[Juan Fuentes]

coldmidwest: the crooked is down for the amero type currency.

you kidding?
exaggerating?

[the.crooked]

nope.


juan, you and i both know we have no where near similar views on things.

[thinksmall]

So you're pragmatic, progressive, deconstructivist, or postmodern (or fascist... but I wont go there, haha.. yeah..).

I should probably search.. but I'm guessing you're for eugenics then? If so... that would seriously clear things up.

[Gimmie Yo Panties]

Think small, where'd you find that book online? on another side note completely unrelated, anyone know of a site I can find books that are in pdf format online?

[the.crooked]

So you're pragmatic, progressive, deconstructivist, or postmodern (or fascist... but I wont go there, haha.. yeah..).

I should probably search.. but I'm guessing you're for eugenics then? If so... that would seriously clear things up.

no.

i am not deconstructivist either.

postmodernism was a fool's joke.



pragmatic, yes.




progressive.... i hope.



facist- naw.




euginics..... cmooooon. no. i have the worst allergies ever. 500 years ago i probably would have died from being defective.

[thinksmall]

Richard Rorty has related Nietzsche, Heidegger, James, and Dewey as all part of the same end. There are also many of each philosophies who have come to the same conclusion, while many of them still speak inconclusively about their own philosophy (my observations of their writings).

What I believe is wrong about pragmatism is that it's end is totalitarianism. It's cool if you're cool with it though. In a practical world, people who do hard labor won't have to know that the earth revolves around the sun. Doctors wouldn't understand economy (Ron Paul ftw) and most likely conform to the political game. Almost every profession and hobby becomes single through pragmatism. Dewey and his followers have managed to effectively change the educational system to be this practical, after all they're pragmatists.

Also, eugenics is the work of pragmatism. Liberal progressives were the ones who created the institutions to complete it.




It is understood that a large group of people would not conform to such 'evolution', so that's why most of what pragmatists do must not be seen by the public.

The worts part about pragmatists, i believe, is that they don't want the majority to understand them. That sort of mass knowledge would be unpractical.. In a world where everyone were pragmatists it would be nothing like modern pragmatism, it would be so far off that it wouldn't be even called pragmatism.

If pragmatism achieves complete centralization, human thought wouldn't exist. It's also no coincidence that Ludwig von Mises along with thousands of Laissez-faire scholars have criticized pragmatism and liberalism to end in full centralization/dictatorship/totalitarianism.

When your goal is 'pragmatism', it becomes practical to ignore your opposing opponents. That is the opposite of libertarianism, where disagreement is suggested.. what naturally lessens bizarro disagreements is free education and the destruction of artificial dogma (a creation of pragmatism that existed long before pragmatism was coined).

Disagreement is a creation of civilization. Centralization removes disagreement, it makes everyone 'one'. If you live in a society where everyone is 'one', you will live in a deconstructivist society -- because you will be submissive to uncivilized acts (violence, ignorance, obedience, emotionless, joyless...).

[thinksmall]

If only Ron Paul was black..

[the.crooked]

there are many types of pragmatism.

[thinksmall]

Uhm. Okay. Thats cool.

Roe who wanted to reverse Roe vs. Wade, endorses Ron Paul
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/22/599487.aspx

.. waahahaha. This is a fucking breakthrough. Pro-choice peeps should just back up with heads down.

[Juan Fuentes]

nope.


juan, you and i both know we have no where near similar views on things.

isn't creation beautiful?

[Juan Fuentes]

ive been thinking of a strategy, Ron Paul stays all the way till the end. not dropping out, so he raises awareness. then runs independent.

what yall think?

[vanfullofretards]

He's not going to run as an independent.

[MayorMeanBeans]

^he has no money, therefore no exposure. he won't be able to participate in national debates. he'll be scrutinized way too much.

he'll lose, and waste everyone's time money and energy that was involved.

[lord_casek]

^he has no money, therefore no exposure. he won't be able to participate in national debates. he'll be scrutinized way too much.

he'll lose, and waste everyone's time money and energy that was involved.

he'll have plenty of money. the people are amazingly generous.

[Theo.Huxtable]

What's up with Anderson Cooper snubbing Ron Paul and Huckabee during their debates? That dude was mainly focusing his attention on McCain and Romney.

[Some1]

I stopped watching after the first hour. My friend totaled up the time Ron Paul got about 8mins out of a hour and a half debate.

Fuck the media I am voting for Ron Paul no matter what now and then I am never going to vote or participate in anything with our gov unless we are going to war against it to give the power back to the people. I am more rapidly giving up on our country its all about big business fuck the little people they don't matter. Our country is being sold out from under us by our own gov. They borrow more and more money getting us further in debt our economy will never change until the chinese or other gov want to take back the money they let us borrow and then they will own the US...

[thinksmall]

^he has no money, therefore no exposure. he won't be able to participate in national debates. he'll be scrutinized way too much.

he'll lose, and waste everyone's time money and energy that was involved.

Waste of time, money and energy? You need to be informed dawg. Dr. Paul's movement has and will help revitalize the Montessore/Holt education system. The supporters of his ideology don't and won't need to play the political game to succeed.

[boogie hands]

What's up with Anderson Cooper snubbing Ron Paul and Huckabee during their debates? That dude was mainly focusing his attention on McCain and Romney.

better question. why is anyone from an abortion like CNN allowed to host a presidential debate in the first place?

anyway, its over with for this guy. ron paul should quit trying to make a point and just run as an independent if he really wants to have a decent shot at anything. we all know what he thinks the republican party should represent but its not going happen. learn to pick your battles or just shut the fuck up. its just getting retarded at this point.

[thinksmall]

http://www.paulunteer.com/ron-paul-supporters-in-their-own-words/mitt-romney-ron-paul-deserves-to-be-laughed-at-video/
Radio host goes tangent for Ron Paul: No Mitt Romney, you deserve to be laughed at! wahaaha


http://www.ronpaulbookbomb.com/
http://www.amazon.com/Revolution-Manifesto-Ron-Paul/dp/0446537519/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201805546&sr=8-1
The Revolution: A Manifesto
#174 book on amazon, before it's even available and going for #1.

[boogie hands]

Uhm. Okay. Thats cool.

Roe who wanted to reverse Roe vs. Wade, endorses Ron Paul
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/22/599487.aspx

.. waahahaha. This is a fucking breakthrough. Pro-choice peeps should just back up with heads down.

seriously, when are you going to stop posting in here?

"jane roe" is a fucking mental disaster who was courted by fundamentalists with an agenda and was too stupid to see them for what they were. she started out as a prop for a team of lawyers and ended up getting taken advantage of slimy pro-lifers. there is nothing relevant to discuss about this woman so lets just go ahead and drop whatever uninformed point you were trying to make.

[lord_casek]

highlights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbHUjMFzr-c&eurl

[Theo.Huxtable]

Thanks for the link Casek. I was loving the expressions on McCain's face as he was getting owned by Paul...

I definitely agree with Paul's constitutionalist assertion that the country should only get involved in wars only through a declaration -- that would mean the US would mobilize its full resources to win that war. Such an expectation would mean the US would get involved in far fewer military conflicts, which would mean less military spending, less lives lost, and a higher regard of US foreign policy through the eyes of countries around the world.

[lord_casek]

Thanks for the link Casek. I was loving the expressions on McCain's face as he was getting owned by Paul...

made me want to strangle mccain and romney for smirking when they fucking know dr. paul is correct. they act like he's talking about alien lizards from atlantis here to take our white women.

[yumone]

RP pwns the other candidates so hard on actual agendas rather than just spinning bullshit and they all realise this, the only thing is they know that the masses don;'t so they just sit there with big smirks on their faces knowing they're full of shit but they'll win the election anyway

[vanfullofretards]

WHAT THE FUCK IS UP WITH YOUTUBE? SHIT PLAYS FOR A COUPLE SECONDS THEN STOPS!


I know I'm not the only one that has this happening to them.

[10sicz.chick]

Wow...when i joined the forum, i would never expected to find Pauler's that were writers, any Paulette's too?

I am working on a concept for a mass stencil bomb for the next freeway banner attack here in LA.

[lord_casek]

Wow...when i joined the forum, i would never expected to find Pauler's that were writers, any Paulette's too?

I am working on a concept for a mass stencil bomb for the next freeway banner attack here in LA.


you're the only one.

we needed some fresh blood in here.

[thinksmall]

woot. share pictures when ya get em.

[vanfullofretards]

http://www.htloz.net/forums/grill/olde-tits_or_gtfo.jpg
seriously.

[Juan Fuentes]

show some respect Van

[10sicz.chick]

thanks Juan, its kewl... i am use to it. Nothing i don't here every friday or saturday nite if i am not buck naked already.

i really got to stop getting drunk on the weekends

[thecoldmidwest]

Yesterday's debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQ3-Xa2Ivxg