Ron Paul Mania!
To the consternation of the right wing blogosphere, Ron Paul raised 4.2 million dollars to stay in the Presidential race, a GOP record. I'm supporting the Democratic candidates for President, but If I had donated to the Paul campaign---I'd email Red State and ask them why they discount you...And you all know how Charles Johnson feels...Captain's Quarters responds...
Updated: Glenn Greenwald digs a bit deeper...
By far the most significant and interesting political story of the past 24 hours is the extraordinary, record-breaking outpouring of support for Ron Paul's presidential campaign. Therefore, it is being ignored by much of our establishment press...read on
And the Great Orange Satan, Markos writes: The most impressive online campaign this cycle...
This is the single biggest example of people-power this cycle. And as annoying as it is that we're seeing it from a Republican -- and a crazy one at that -- it's nevertheless a beautiful thing to behold.
WTF!
its nice that on this obviously democracticly biased( i don't care ) website your giving ron paul some neutral attention >:)
Ron Paul? Good Lord!
Listen to his rhetoric! He is a republican through and through.
VOTE DEMOCRATIC!!
I don't think anyone on this blog actually is supporting Ron Paul. But it is very nice to see a Republican discussing foreign policy in an honest manner.
People power? No, it's just trust fund babies who think they're hip that don't want to pay the inheritance tax.
This is so funny.
"Red State" is going to censor anyone who discusses Ron Paul on their Blog. What a bunch of morons. Fascism at work. Just tells you what the Repulsivican Party is all about.
I'm convinced that without the MSM directing the narrative as they think it should be, we'd be looking at a Ron Paul -Dennis Kucinich election.
There are alot of C&L regulars who donated to Ron Paul yesterday.
good point. it is, always, inspiring to see.
Backhanded compliments abound! Jesus h. Christ, people. OPEN YOUR EYES. The man is trying to think outside the box to solve problems that quite possibly could destroy our country . Calling him "A crazy one at that" is childish. Perhaps Markos and Kucinich can take us up into their spaceships and we can all smoke pot and sing hippie tunes, and get NOTHING DONE.
Just because you don't agree with all of Ron Paul's policies doesn't mean you should dismiss all the ones you do agree with by assisting in attempting to marginalize him.
KUCINICH SEES UFOS, MARKOS. MOST OF YOUR GEEKDOM ARE KUCINICH SUPPORTERS.
Filthy Harry @ 7:
This is true. On election day, as soon as you think one of these "fringe" candidates like Ron Paul or Kucinich could actually have a chance, all the MSM zombies will come out and vote for Hillary/Rudy. Same thing happends every election. The MSM basically picks our candidates. THere's no doubt.
I'm curious to see if Ron Paul gets more than 10% of the nomination vote.
Corporate America would never allow a Kucinich presidency. But yes, they would welcome a Ron Paul presidency. Hmmm.
Snowball @ 5:
yep....it's all about their money..Ron Paul is nuts.Who needs Social Security,Welfare,Medicare,the dept of EDUCATION......the arts,he thinks all we need is our own money........but on a bright note...he is showing us that all the repug candidates are worthless.
I don't agree with all the libertarian platform threads but Dr Paul is a high integrity individual and would be the best GOP candidate.
I usually vote Democratic but I'm so disgusted with current group sans Kucinich and Ravel.
Paul, Kucinich and Ravel are the only candidates that aren't backed by the CFR. If you think that's conspiracy crap, its time to pull your cranium out of the portal in your posterior.
2 years ago I would have told you that Hillary was a good choice. But even at my age, I haven't lost the ability to do my own research and reach my own conclusions. Nothing personal, but she is not electable.
well, ron paul is old-school libertarian republican ... compared with the neocons, rethugs, and raptureheads of nowadays, that's bad, but not evil ^^
also he's described as having geek appeal : he's got one special area of interest, he sticks to it, and he knows it by heart and not only by bumpersticker, bullet point, or market group. which gets him respect or even acceptance. (short : you mustn't agree with his stuff, but you gotta agree that he knows his stuff). also he's the genuine thing, has been for the last 30 years. very refreshing among all those flip-flopping votemongers.
Zeta @ 13:
Don't be so sure. He'd take away all their corporate welfare.
Don't want to pay the inheritance tax? Why would they? The inheritance, property, and income taxes are all slightly different ways that the government steals our substance, and pisses it away. Kleptocracy in action.
There's no point in asking Redstate why they discount us, they're hardcore statists, just a different breed of nannycrat. Apparently they have no tolerance for differing viewpoints. And for people who protested long and loud that they wanted to hear no more about Ron Paul, they sure couldn't stop writing about him. That smelled like a cheesy ploy to drive up their hit count.
We just want our Constitutional freedoms, and yesterday we voted with our wallets. Whoever you plan on voting for, please sign every petition for election accountability: http://freedomjoyadventure.blogspot.com/2007/08/stop-election-theft-paperless-voting-is.html
There really isn't anything remarkable about Pauls rise or the funds he's raising. It's called....THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE HAD ENOUIGH and they are going to take back their country from both the wing nuts and the spineless Democrats.
Like the corporations that have become the shadow government give a damn about the people. But there are those in the world like Ron Paul who realize that we have waundered a bit too far off the deep end as far as our constitutional rights are concerned as well as righting a number of wrongs that were foisted against the American people like the Federal Reserve and the I.R.S. niether which are called for in the Constitution.
The spineless Dems continue to disappoint by being brain dead when it comes to what we put them in office for and all the Republicans can seem to do is blow things up. This shouldn't be a polorized country and the sooner we as a people realize that WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER regardless of party affiliation, maybe we can begin to right a number of significant wrongs.
Hillary Clinton is just George Bush in a pants suit. She said she "might" rollback the presidential powers. "might" Hillary took money from Indian lobbyists (more outsourcing anyone??) and votes similar to the neo-cons. 20 years of bush-clinton. yuck!
mudshark @ 14:
Regardless of the need for Social Security, it doesn't exist and president Ron Paul would have a Democratic House and Senate and would be a good counter weight.
The strawmen keep coming.
Yes Ron Paul may be crazy and there are a lot of things about him that rub me the wrong way but the fact is, with the glaring exception of Kucinich and Edwards to some extent, they're all focking crazy and absolutely corrupt to the very core.
If I couldn't get Kucinich or Edwards to vote for, I would not mind Ron Paul as President. Better a half-kook than any smart criminal, especially as this time in our history.
Aside from leaving Iraq, Ron Paul doesn't have an idea worth wiping one's ass with!
I was under the impression most Ron Paul supporters were 13 years old. Who is giving him this money? I know that Catholics are starting to support him, and of course Corporations would love to have him as President...
p.s. : considering the seeing UFOs thing, that doesn't frighten me as much as the current prez who not only talks to Jesus, but says that Jesus answers...
Karen@ 17 Says:
Only to let them have unlimited, unabated power. No thanks!
Capital is coercive!
Uh I'm not a Democrat or a Republican, I'm an American. What the heck happened to the rest of you? Ron Paul for President 08!
I'm not quire sure how Ron Paul can be called "crazy." Thank you to Joe Dimartis for stating what few refuse to accept - that Hillary will be more of the same. 20+ years of only two families in the White House. Sound like a closet dictatorship to me.
Back to Ron Paul. Is it crazy that he believes the Constitution is a contract with the People? Is it crazy that he supports getting back to the gold standard? Yeah I know, with the debt we are in this wouldn't be advisable, but it's the debt that is crazy, not wanting to get back to solid market economy. Is it crazy that he wants to get rid of taxes? Sure, there are some things as a Democrat that I don't support, oh well, every candidate will have things you don't agree with. The whole point to is find someone who can govern well. At this point I salivate at the idea of a Jeffersonian candidate running for President.
The Main Stream Media definitely has a corporate agenda in their reporting and therefore the Ron Paul story is framed appropriately if covered at all. Sad how influenced so many Americans still are by the Press. I guess if they don't have the Internet they don't have much choice. http://www.speedmatters.org
The Republicans don't like any of their candidates. Why? They want one that will cut spending ron Paul style, cut taxes, preach fundamentalism, and go "kick arab ass" all at the same time. Right now, there are no Republicans that can meet all those criteria.
Why are we even having a Ron Paul debate on the Historic Impeachment day?
What does Dennis have to do to get a good clean honest post on what he is doing?
This is what we've all been screaming about all these years and here it is. Push People!
Where the F#@% are the rest of the candidates...fund-raising?
DJK'08!
Ron Paul will get our troops out of Iraq, and cut off all funding for Israel. Those reasons alone are enough for me to support him despite my dissagreements.
spiritcatcher @ 25:
That's funny because I talk to Jesus and he tells me Bush is defaming him.
mo_dems @ 24:
35,000 people gave him small amounts of money. The web site that started the Nov 5th fundraiser is not associated with the Paul campaign. Dr Paul stated he would like to meet the people who organized this.
They have raised another 1 million today.
Las Vegas is picking Paul to be the GOP candidate.
He is getting alot of network coverage.
And in case you missed it, our dollar is in almost full collapse. Our military is also nearing collapse.
Say, "we are the world's only superpower" three times and it will be so.
GonzoD @ 23:
Gonzo, that is just flat out bullshit. You apparently have studied monetary policy have you.
E Ryno @ 21:
Moreover, Paul has said that he would not single-handedly dismantle any of these social programs overnight, even if he could. He has said that he recognizes that people do depend on them, and that it would not be fair merely to destroy them to fulfill and ideological agenda. He would rather they be phased out over time.
I do not support Ron Paul. I'm a libertarian progressive, not a Libertarian. However, I'll echo the frustrations of those who perceive stereotypes and straw men. Not all libertarians are of an I-got-mine-so-fuck-off mindset, just like progressives are not monolithically gung ho for tax-and-spend-throw-money-at-every-problem idealists.
E Ryno @ 34:
"Las Vegas is picking Paul to be the GOP candidate."
link?
CD @ 33:
Does Jesus still hang out with the American Indians?
Let's see...
Ron Paul is peeling off some libertarians...
and Rudy Giuliani is pissing of the evangelicals, who also don't like Romney,
are we seeing the disolution of the Rove coalition?
Just asking.
Milo
Snowball @ 26:
I don't disagree that laissez faire capitalism will lead to its own form of tyranny. I wasn't supporting Ron Paul -- just the seemingly unsophisticated notion that corporations must love him.
GOPBullshit @ 32:
Although I thing those are wonderful things, America would be faced with a different type of terrorism if we cut off funds to Israel and stopped fighting their wars. I wish it were that simple to solve all the problems in the Mid-East. The fact is, if we took a fair approach to the region the Israelis and the mossad would become our new Al Qaeda. They wouldn't take it lightly.
I used to be a teacher and was dismayed when, back in college, my professor showed me what had become of the Department of Education. A huge beurocracy, soaking up money that should be going to the schools, teachers and students. This was back in the early 1990's, and it's gotten even worse. Today, in international comparisons, the achievement of U. S. students ranges from the lower middle of the rankings in reading to the very bottom in science, math and geography. Are you sure Ron Paul is crazy?
Ru Paul 2008!
Orangutan. @ 35:
As a matter of fact, I have! I don't trust anyone who wants to let the markets take care of everything!
do you really believe RP will be any different than any of the previous repugs...he'll make it worse,from the inside out.
I really hope Ron Paul does really well in the GOP primary.
So much so that it sends a message to the GOP establishment that maybe the double Gitmo/bomb Iran/pro-torture platform was not the way to go.
Actually, he is the only sane gop candidate.
He may win New Hampshire to make the wingnut heads explode.
Explainer @ 31:
I was actually wondering whether C&L would cover the impeachment resolution. I'd like them to. Some of Steny Hoyer's comments about the whole thing are worthy of highlighting.
E Ryno@ 21 Says:
No strawman argument needed. Ron Paul has stated flat out he wants to do away with Social Security. You'll take that away from my ailing mother over my dead body. He also wants to do away with the inheritance tax (I prefer to call it the Paris Hilton tax) insuring an idle all powerful American oligarchy. We have enough of that already. How about regulating polluting industries? You could kiss that idea goodbye as well. Global heating? No problem, just ignore it.
Again: No thanks!
Ron speaks for himself.
Also, Kucinich has won the DFA Pulse Poll.
Our support for Israel is the reason why we have terrorists attacking us in the first place. Why don't Sweeden and Iceland never get attacked or the rest of Europe. If the goal of the terrorists were global domination which is what the neocons say then Europe would be a better location strategically since it's closer.
Cutting off support for Israel would be the greatest blow to terrorism as the terrorists would lose their number 1 recruitment propaganda.
it's all a republican scheme to discredit the blogs as backers of marginal/crazy politicians.
i love it! it's got all the trolls shitting in their pants. why don't you trolls pray to one of your queer evangelical leaders to stop all this secular heresy?
Snowball @ 49:
link?
Ruthless People @ 43:
What a simply FABULOUS Idea!
65% of Republicans still think the war is great. The other 35% might vote for Paul. He might have a chance if Rudy, Fred, John, and Mit, split up the tough-guy vote fairly evenly.
"Great Orange Satan"
LOL
Dimples @ 42:
Great observation. Read "A Compulsory Mis-Education". I cannot remember the authors name right now. But he describes very well how schools have become a kind of industrial complex to theselves. I don't know what they're teaching there anymore but they have never been big on teaching skills (like European schools do). Abolishing the Dept of Edumacation is a good start.
Milo @ 39:
Golly, I hope so. To have evangelical authoritarians and old school libertarians in the same coalition marks more than strange bedfellows. It's barking mad.
Hillary Clinton gave a speech in front of AIPAC saying about Iran that "no options are off the table" to thunderous applause. You seriously think she's going to get us out of IRaq? What a joke.
getalife @ 47:
god let it be o'reilly, hannity, hume, the rest of the fox nazi.
fun!
GOPBullshit @ 52:
Yes, you're right, the Muslim world would love us again. But my point was the Israelis would start committing terrorism of various forms if we ever actually started treating the mid-east with even hands.
E Ryno @ 55:
Google.com. Use it.
The money was donated to Ron Paul on Guy Fawkes day. Guy Fawkes was executed for a plot he was involved in to blow up parliament and the king. He was really a patsy. The plot was hatched by the king's chancellor in order to justify going to war with the Spanish Empire in 1605
Ron Paul is the only candidate I know of who has spoken of false flag terrorism. He is also the only candidate who has addressed the New World Order.
I'm not voting for him but I respect him and the other candidates (Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel) not under the thumb of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commision and the Bilderbergers.
I'm voting for and donating money to Kucinich.
John Samsonite @ 10:
So did Reagan. So did Carter. I once saw a light in the sky that I could not explain. Big deal. I would rather have Kucinich negotiatiing with the Iranians that Ru Paul. They'd walk out on him. The plain truth is that the rest of the world community takes Kucinich much more seriuosly than Paul. That's just one of many key differences.
Karen @ 36:
Hello Karen...thanks for responding..I respect your opinion and think you are a very intelligent person.......for me..theres too much at stake to risk the future of the country on this guy...I'd like to go back to someone in the mold of BC or JFK...but that ain't gonna happen...I don't think that we have many options....Obama?Edwards? Hillary(can't go there...Murdoch)DK I wish....Biden...hmmmm?....this one is tough.
Che's Lounge @ 66:
I think Samsonite's point was that his having seen a UFO was not reason to dismiss him outright.
Since you promoted the issue, please accept a second (slightly edited for length) version of my reporting on Ron Paul's opposition to the International Criminal Court, and to international law itself.
--
Here is RP’s amendment against the International Criminal Court.
http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.CON.RES.23:
“107th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. CON. RES. 23
Expressing the sense of the Congress that President George W. Bush should declare to all nations that the United States does not intend to assent to or ratify the International Criminal Court Treaty...
Whereas the International Criminal Court Treaty would establish the International Criminal Court as an international authority with power to threaten the ability of the United States to engage in military action to provide for its national defense;
Whereas former President Clinton’s designee signed the International Criminal Court Treaty on December 31, 2000;
Whereas the term `crimes of aggression’, as used in the treaty, is not specifically defined and therefore would, by design and effect, require the United States to receive prior United Nations Security Council approval and International Criminal Court confirmation before engaging in military action, thereby putting United States military officers in jeopardy of an International Criminal Court prosecution;
Whereas the International Criminal Court Treaty creates the possibility that United States civilians, like United States military personnel, could be brought before a court that bypasses the United States Government…”
“Whereas the term `crimes of aggression’, as used in the treaty, is not specifically defined and therefore would, by design and effect, require the United States to receive prior United Nations Security Council approval and International Criminal Court confirmation before engaging in military action,” — RP
AT LEAST TWO LIES. Prior UNSC approval is already required by the UN Charter (which RP opposes). The ICC has no authorizing function whatsoever. And:
“The International Criminal Court (ICC or ICCt)[1] was established in 2002 as a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, although it cannot currently exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.[2]” –wikipedia
ICC prosecutions include those for “genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes,”
The US has signed the Genocide treaty (RP would withdraw from it). There is no independent US law barring genocide (or for that matter for warcrimes). There are no US laws barring crimes against humanity (separate from international treaties which RP opposes). And there clearly is very little ability under US law to try warcrimes.
“an international authority with power to threaten the ability of the United States to engage in military action to provide for its national defense;” –RP
A LIE. The UN Charter already provides that countries have the right to defend themselves against active threats.
“The Court can generally exercise jurisdiction only in cases where the accused is a national of a state party, the alleged crime took place on the territory of a state party, or a situation is referred to the Court by the United Nations Security Council.[7] The Court is designed to complement existing national judicial systems: it can exercise its jurisdiction only when national courts are unwilling or unable to investigate or prosecute such crimes.[8][9] Primary responsibility to investigate and punish crimes is therefore left to individual states.[10]” –wikipedia
Pretending that RP will stop US militarism which violates the UN Charter by withdrawing from the UN Charter (and the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Conventions, the UN Charter, the Genocide Convention, the pending Ban on Mercenaries, etc.) is silly in the extreme.
Oh, did I say EXTREME? H’yeah, Ron Paul is AN EXTREMIST. He would remove all international barriers to whatever the fuck the US wants to do in the world. Which will really help a lot.
Oh, and as far as "fazing out" Social Security, I expect I'll be needing it when I'm old and feeble and can't work anymore. We can fix it. The social safety net wasn't created in a vacuum, it was created out of necessity. If you like robber barons, mass poverty, privatized police forces and gated communities for the wealthy elite, you'll love Ron Paul.
Explainer @ 31:
Watched it on C Span today.
Great stuff.
Too bad Conyers is with the corrupt dem leadership against impeachment.
I think his campaign song should be "Three Little Birds" by Bob Marley.
"Every little thing's, gonna be alright."
It will go well with his legalization of drugs.
Karen @ 68:
Oh really?
Perhaps Markos and Kucinich can take us up into their spaceships and we can all smoke pot and sing hippie tunes, and get NOTHING DONE.
Snowball @ 70:
When you need it there wont be any money in it.
Think about that for a moment.
Snowball @ 70:
Alan Greenspan said that had the Clinton policies been left in place...SS would have been solvent past the middle of the century...
Ron Paul has a healthy distrust of the state. Listen to this speech when he voted against the war in 2002.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5792391565012624048&hl=en
How many democrats voted against the war in 2002??
I went over to dailykos and read what he had to say about Ron Paul's campaign effort. He really thinks that it's all centralized and masterminded, and the discussion is all technical about how to creatively link. He's missed it entirely.
Ron Paul is resonating because of the message. His campaign didn't even have anything to do with the thisnovember5th.com effort. For that matter, I didn't have anything to do with thisnovember5th.com, but when I saw the numbers rising, I decided to pile on with $100 of my own!
That's how it's working -- individual initiative. For statists of both right and left, their passive sheep followers will never be able to duplicate what Ron Paul libertarians are able to do. When you statists see what free people can do, doesn't it make you kind of wonder just a little bit whether your model of human nature is in need of review?
mudshark @ 67:
It is tough, isn't it? I'm down to Dodd and Kucinich, and will cast my hopeless vote in California when the time comes.
Once the nominees are selected, I'm sure I'll just be voting for the Democrat. And sighing.
It's too bad that we've made presidential politics the end-all-be-all of politics. II wonder what percentage of the population even knows who represents them in Congress, or has even heard of their state representatives.
Executive power must be rolled back, and we need to completely revamp our electoral system.
I know one thing...I've been paying into SS for 27 years.......and I want my benefits....and I still have 15 years to go.
GOPBullshit @ 52:
Umm, do you follow any type of European news? There have been attacks all over Europe for hundreds of years. Jihad is an internal struggle and will not go away even if we leave the Middle East tomorrow. Yes, our presence is certainly nationalizing the region and turning otherwise moderate Muslims in to radicals, this I have no doubt. However, how can you explain Islam's battle against not just the west, but so much of the globe for hundreds of years? Are you familiar with the siege of Vienna in 1683 by Islamic jihadists? They were poised to overrun Christian Europe before they were finally repelled.
Regardless, we need to get the hell out of the Middle Eat, and fast, or we jeopardize nationalizing even more of the region. But please don't think even for a minute that our departure will change the way jihad operates within Sharia rule. It won't. Non-intervention might be our best bet at this point, I could be wrong though. Ron Paul.
Zeta @ 4:
Look at the LIES documented in #69 above. That's not 'honest' discussion of foreign policy.
There is no more important foreign policy than our support of international human rights law, the UN Charter, and efforts to bring genocidists like George Bush and his pals to the BAR OF JUSTICE.
Rep. Paul doesn't want to punish Bush. He wants to eliminate any opportunity to punish Bush. And here's our company if we go down Ron Paul's chosen route:
"The seven countries that voted against the treaty were Iraq, Israel, Libya, the People's Republic of China, Qatar, the United States, and Yemen.[20]"
Yep, that's Ron Paul's real cohort. Iraq & Libya -- why would they not want an ICC? And China! They are a bastion of civil rights. And who can forget Qatar, where (Syriana) the US now has one of the largest airbases in the world?
And, lastly, Israel. They just spread 1 million cluster bomblets all over southern Lebanon, a major warcrime. They don't want an ICC looking at their Apartheid regime, either.
Ron Paul, in good company with the KKK, Iraq, Libya, Israel, and China. Our hero.
Privatization, deregulation and cutting social spending. Right out of Freidmans handbook. I failed in Chile and thousands were killed or disappeared.
Why should the U.S. be in the United nations. Its an ineffective and bloated bureaucracy. What do they do for the U.S?
Karen @ 78:
I know what you mean...I'm in Calif....more times than not...it doesn't matter
(Whistle) We are living in revolutionary times. Forget about Censure or Impeachment, Remember Remember the 5th of November...
GOPBullshit @ 52:
That's incorrect. The primary reason, according to Bin Laden, was the US airbases in Saudi Arabia -- now removed by his pal, George.
Paul said he would consider Kucinich as a running mate.
There. Now are you satisfied?
Seriously I think that would be a great thing. It takes a radical to instigate change. Kucinich will kee him in line.
motorfingaz @ 3:
As long as Ron Paul exists as a viable Candidate, he destroys republican issue framing on "The War on Terrorism"
Liberals and Libertarians have real disagreements about real issues, like the role of government, and how to best express freedom in society... not a bunch of Religio-Family-Values-tough-on-terror catechisms. Ron Paul's existence hightens the debate.
mudshark @ 79:
ooppss....that was supposed to be...37 years........damn...that's depressing
Zeta @ 11:
Almost. The Council on Foreign Relations 'picks' the candidates. As most anyone who's a player in the MSM is a member of the CFR it amounts to the same difference. No CFR approval - no MSM approval.
Fix it, don't ditch it. Anyway, there's plenty of evidence that Social Security is not going bankrupt.
http://www.pkarchive.org/column/030504.html
http://www.factcheck.org/article305.html
mudshark @ 89:
They spent it n Iraq muddy. Sorry man. You got a plan B?
frank @ 83:
H'yeah, to hell with treaties against torture, against aggressive war, against human rights abuses, against chemical and biological weapons, against trafficking in nuclear arms!
Let's go it alone! We have more nukes! Yeehaw!!
Paul is for deregulation, market freedom and I applaud him for it yet some of you criticize him for his proposals. Don’t you really think that it’s time to radically modify the Department of Education that is dumbing down America through teaching sheer stupidity. How about Department of Transportation that together with the lobbyists and lawyers destroyed the idea of an electric car in California in the 90s. Yes, praise the government, your Congress, they are so much working for you. So as the Europeans drive cars making 50-60mpg today, SUV making 45 mpg, everyone of them can switch to CNG/LPG for a grand and buy natural gas in every European station for half the price of oil, your beloved government regulators are forcing you to spend all your savings on transportation, bankrupting some, causing pain and starvation among others, empting your wallets mercilessly, while the few, the establishment get richer, the poor get poorer in the only “empire” standing. So as you look at the traffic in every major American city, sit back and for a moment imagine the establishment, the most power of the powerful and their conspiring. As we’re nearing to the total mobile clog, the moment when the people get finally stuck in the traffic because there are simply too many of them, do you think that the Rockefelers of this world, Pharma CEOs, Financial CEOs and others are conspiring how to add an extra lane and make the people happy. I’m afraid they don’t. Thus the lead paint is served for your kids for birthday and for Christmas, poisoned food on every shelf of every store in the nation, thus 40% of the American people have no insurance to suffer more and die sooner, thus AIDS is not cured where it’s inconvenient and where the vaccinations are unpurified or switched for testing. There are many challenges facing this world. Many nations can afford to take care of their citizens, each and every one of them. That’s the whole purpose of having own, independent nation after all. To let a few responsible people govern the people, not exploit them, destroy their dreams, make their lives harder or blatantly kill them through a number sophisticated methods very few human minds could even comprehend. There is Obama, Paul, Gravel, Edwards, people who one can really try to trust in. People who, if given a chance, might change something specially for you.
curtilingus @ 92:
yeah...but I don't like it.....but I do have a house built and paid for in full...in Mexico......could be worse I suppose.
curtilingus @ 87 "It takes a radical to instigate change. Kucinich will keep him in line."
Oh sure, they can tag team.
Paul in LA @ 93:
I believe the geneva conventions were before the UN. You fail. Please try again.
I guess Ron Paul's fans skipped the LGF poll and gamed the fundraising circuit instead.
Ron Paul - Global Warming "overblown"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUm1aVwRnC0
jr @ 99:
Actually Ron Paul is an environmentalist.
Check this out.
http://greenpieceblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/ron-pauls-environmental-q.html
jim @ 94:
It's time to ELIMINATE EDUCATION ALL TOGETHER.
What has it ever done for us?
De-regulate the coal companies! De-regulate the telecoms! De-regulate nuclear energy. Oh, did anyone mention Ron Paul's support for the nuclear industry yet?
"his libertarian presidency would, among other things, allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, boost the use of coal, and embrace nuclear power. Moreover, it wouldn't do diddly about global warming because, Paul reasons, "we're not going to be very good at regulating the weather."
http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/10/16/paul/
WE have a good government. It's just staffed poorly. We can still change that part without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
E Ryno @ 38:
I was joking.
I strongly suspect though that no higher power would enjoy Bush claiming that they associate.
Really if it was own down to Paul or Clinton, you think Clinton would bring about change?
frank @ 97 I believe the geneva conventions were before the UN."
The Geneva Conventions are upheld by the UN.
Ron Paul wants to withdraw from BOTH the UN and the Geneva Conventions.
After all, why should the Swiss dictate our foreign policy? They don't even have an army.
Che's Lounge @ 101:
Laugh of the week! Thanks!
curtilingus @ 103:
It isn't down to Paul or Clinton. Clinton is going to win, that's pretty clear already. Ron Paul is one of this year's spoilers -- thankfully on the Republican side.
The only downside is if Democrats are fooled by the spin, and a lack of knowledge of his real policies.
Hey, I at least applaud Ron Paul for being honest, I just don't agree with him. Corporations are by their very nature, petty tyrannies. I believe that government is but a tool, it can be bad or good depending who controls it. Functioning democratic government can be an antidote to the tyranny of accumulated capital and corruption. We need to use the tool of our collective will to insure that corporations and concentrated economic power are directed towards the public good, not the narrow interests of a few.
jr @ 99:
The Earth is just a blip compared to the Sun. The Sun is a wild, mad entity that every once in a while gets weaker or stronger, every age or so, age meaning literally. So as we've been taught once that the ozone hole was dangerous and deadly, caused by the chimney smoke, car smoke and personal care aerosols, surprisingly the ozone hole is shrinking again and soon may be totally cured. At least that's what the latest scientific findings show. One thing is certain, the theory is so broad, flawed and flexible it simply won't hold water forever.
Well, I'm not voting for him for president, but anyone who wrote this bill is NOT crazy, John.
frank verismo @ 105:
No prob. Pink slips all around. I still thing the framers had a great idea.
before it was the UN,it was the League of Nations....and Paul in LA is right.
It is a phenomenon of sorts, and should be covered. The utter uselessness of the MSM shines through in these instances.
Ron Paul strikes me as having one good idea only: get out of Iraq.
But the approach of trying to starve the government and drown it in the bathtub, which is essentially what he stands for, doesn't work. It leads to a breakdown of society.
Government has a place in building and maintaining society's infrastructures and this includes health care, education, public structures such as roads and parks, courts of justice and the representative republic system of government.
Domestically, RP would kill this nation. After being in the corporate fascist stranglehold of Bush-Clinton for several decades, the American economy could not take the merciless mutilation of RP's policies. We would be a third world country in under ten years.
If government doesn't ensure equal opportunity for a good education, what happens is 1% get the good education, and rule as an elite royal class over the rest of society. If there is not health care infrastructure everyone gets sick in various ways and the population becomes unhealthy. If there is no regulation at all on business, it's back to robber baron days, this time with the planet choking to death from unregulated pollution.
The basic failure in libertarian philosophy is the idea that unregulated markets, and for that matter, unregulated populations, will somehow magically self-regulate.
They don't. They self-immolate.
After the utter, total, dismal, and complete failure of the neocon philosophy and its crippling injuries to America, we simply cannot stand to have our government and markets dissembled in the hopes that they will magically self-regulate.
I think enough people understand these things so that we will see the Ron Paul phenomenon peak out rather early. Four years ago we had Deaniacs and they were going to take over the world. Now we have Paulanistas.
They aren't going to take over the world, or even the USA.
That said, of course he has every right to run. And if Americans want to elect him, they have every right too, and I'll be proven wrong and have to eat crow.
But that's how politics is supposed to work.
99 @ 109:
OK...agreed...on the face of it it looks good...but what about the add ons..(I can't think of the proper word right now)
Snowball @ 107:
with all due respect.....Who says he's being honest?
99 @ 109:
All of which is already law. Read #69, and consider that writing a bill that has ZERO political force is a meangingless adventure.
Crazy is a value judgment. Ron Paul doesn't believe in universal human rights. His values are defective, that doesn't mean he is crazy.
I'd vote for ron paul over obama, clinton, and just about all the democrats, except for maybe kucinich.
Saying he is crazy makes you as bad as the assholes who call kucinich crazy.
http://www.mises.org/books/freedomsiege.pdf
find out what he is about before you talk bad about him.
mudshark @ 114:
Signing statements
yogi-one @ 113:
He lacks a rather more pertinent idea: GET OUT OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
mo_dems @ 24:
You know, I was of the opinion that most Democrats are socialists that belong in France. It's fine to be wrong sometimes, though.
Seriously, though: the guy is more liberal in terms of social liberties than most Dems, but he's conservative with money unlike any neocon. You people that whine "oh, but he likes corporations" because he doesn't want to place restrictions forgets this: half of our restrictions actually create monopolies or make it harder to compete against them. Then you whine "we need antitrust suits here..." or "why can't I choose my utilities?"
Ok... and just for the record: "plenty of evidence SS isn't going bankrupt?" Are you for real? Who cares anyways? Even if you do get 40% of what you paid in, it'll be worth less than 2% of what you paid at the rate we're going. Geez, even Canada's currency is worth more than ours now.
On a final note, seriously, if you want socialized medicine, please move to a country that has it. I don't want to pay for you, and it's my goddamn right to choose. When it's not, this isn't America anymore.
Che's Lounge @ 118 "Signing statements"
He meant amendments.
Che's Lounge @ 118:
thank you.
Paul in LA @ 121:
and thank you too
Emmeron @ 120 " the guy is more liberal in terms of social liberties than most Dems"
That's hilarious. He doesn't accept any federal mandate for social liberties. He wants the corrupt state gov'ts to be able to decide our basic rights. No thanks.
PIL,
I was just messing with him.
Somewhat.
Paul in LA @ 93:
Actually torture and what ever else your rant entitled is unconstitutional, so your argument and point is completely irrelevant.
What a lot of people here are missing by calling him "extremist" or "crazy, is that you are also calling the constitution crazy in the same breath, but don't realize it. If that's crazy, or extreme, then I'm a bat-sh*t insane extremist who understands what our country was founded on. And being so, I respect the lives lost, and the hardships our founding fathers went through so I could be typing this "crazy" statement. Remember, the easiest way to discredit someone is to call them, "crazy", "insane" and so on, that way anything they say can be just shed off like dead skin.
ronald @ 109 "The Earth is just a blip compared to the Sun. The Sun is a wild, mad entity that every once in a while gets weaker or stronger"
Spreading that unscientific LIE some more, I see.
IF the Sun had gotten hotter (it hasn't), then the temps on the Moon and Mars and other places would go up too (they haven't).
Hire yourself an oil or coal industry representative. You need the new spin.
ronald @ 108:
Firstly, the reason you know this is due to studies compiled by the UN (more specifically WMO and UNEP).
Secondly, the ozone layer is repairing itself due to a UN resolution (see Montreal Protocol) which limited the use of hydrochlorofluorocarbons.
However, they also warn that more severe holes may develop due to an increase in greenhouse gases (i.e. global warming).
Global warming and climate change are real and there are ways to limit its severity if we, as an international community, work together.
You gotta love it. Ron Paul doesn't divide, he gets to the root and conquers all.
Paul in LA @ 124:
Are you aware he wants the Constitution to work, he is a constructionalist? In other words, he wants the Bill of Rights back. That trumps any state interest. He actually knows what the 10th amendment reads:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
And if a state tries to break a right already inscribed to the people, the feds come down on the state. THAT is the job of the federal government.
Matt @ 126 "...I'm a bat-sh*t insane extremist..."
You got part of it right.
Reread the list of nations we side with against the International Criminal Court: Iraq, Libya, Israel, China, and Qatar.
Wow, the founders would be SO proud.
Che's Lounge @ 125:
to be honest..I thought it was amendments..but I wasn't sure...and I didn't want to make an ass out of myself......(I don't need any help there)
John,
Why is he crazy? I've been voting Democratic for years, but this time I'm backing Ron Paul. You want to know why? Because he's not a bullshitter (i.e Hillary). He's the real deal. I can't say that for any Democratic contender. If you want to call someone crazy, try Kucinich.
On a final note, seriously, if you want socialized medicine, please move to a country that has it. I don’t want to pay for you, and it’s my goddamn right to choose. When it’s not, this isn’t America anymore.
Then move. Cause we take care of our own. That's the american way.
ranch111 @ 133:
Please elaborate.
this is ot but ernie has lost big time. his swift boat smear was a total bust.
fu, righ wing nutia!
Emmeron @ 120:
Love it my way or leave it, eh? Nice. You're right. If the haves had to help out the have nots more here, it would be better than America. It would be more like Norway. And Warren Buffet would pay more than 17% in taxes.
BTW You ARE paying for me. And dearly. Much more so than if my illness had been caught early. Because I couldn't afford screening when I had a job. Sucker.
ranch111 @ 133:
Don't attribute those words to John. He was quoting Kos. You, however, may want to qualify why Kucinich is crazy (your words).
ronald @ 109:
Having lived in and around the ocean my whole life I can tell you that in fact the sea level is rising...I still go to the beach everyday...and the high tides are in fact getting higher....
Che's Lounge @ 134:
FUCKIN A RIGHT!
Paul in LA @ 131:
Just because it so happens to be [those] countries doesn't mean we side with them. Thinking linear like you do, won't led you far it life. Anyone in the custody of the US should NOT have to answer to some other power, that being the UN most likely. We have a constitution for a reason. Read it, maybe that's what's missing here.
Correlation does not imply causation.
Che's Lounge @ 134:
Wow.
First, you're wrong about that in every sense except for one: voluntary altruistic work has been a part of the American way for a long time. Only for the past 80 years have we had some crazy notion that "Robin Hood" is the government. There is nothing voluntary about our taxes, and if they are used to pay for people who do not and will not contribute to society, I'm not interested. That exists in socialist countries, and there are plenty of those to go around. Enjoy one, why don't you? Or do you figure that somehow we'll do it without going into massive debt like they are....? Heck, we can't balance a book without doing that.
Talk about "drowning government"...
http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=296
Karen @ 78:
Out of curiosity, why no Edwards on that list? "Executive power must be rolled back, and we need to completely revamp our electoral system." Sounds like one of his speeches. Not quite Ron Paul, or Noam Chomsky, but closer.
I have to admit Dodd (and Edwards) have surprised me in the last 2 debates. Dodd seems to have a solid worldview, but the rest of his campaign is light on policy (outside of a couple of really important core issues). I kind of view him as Edwards lite (only still in the Senate). I suppose he'd do OK as president, but I do see him more as a VP. Or heck, he is doing lots of good in the Senate already -- maybe he should stay.
(Please don't tell me its the haircut...)
Yes, he believes in the gold standard and that currency should be backed up by something other than the delusional system of conferred value we have now. He must be batshit crazy!!!!!
swarmofkillermonkeys @ 144:
Edward is on my list...
Ron Paul is right on about the war, but it seems it's a calculated way to gain popular support. It's worked so far, but if he was president I'm sure most Dems would not like it.
I visit C&L everyday. I am a liberal. BUT RON PAUL connects to me. He speaks to truth in my eyes. I want someone saying the truth even if its not my point of view. AT LEAST ITS THE TRUTH. I am tired of being lied to for votes. I donated to ron paul and am proud of it.
There is nothing crazy about Ron Paul. I disagree with many of his positions, but they are completely rational. There are many rational ways of running a country (and a whole bunch of irrational ones as Bushco as proved.) He is basically a small government conservative. In the 1950's his positions would not be remarkable (except that he would be considered a flaming liberal on race relations.) His positions against foreign interventions were the default Republican position for a long time, and his distrust of a powerful executive were practically the Republican mantra.
I find it interesting that the MSM portrarys the candidates who are most against the war party as crazy: Gravel, Kucinich, and Paul. There is no accident here. Obama is so far the only one who can pull a reasonably progressive line without being labled "looney tunes" -- they play the "naive" card with him.
Heres your chance my friends, you owe you're kids and grandkids this vote.
Ron Paul in 08! Anything else is bullshit.
Comments are closed on this entry