First, and Ron Paul is nuts...

SO, Glen is only 99.9% insane. Good to know......

Yuuucckkk

Ron Paul joins Glenn Beck to further his platform of eliminating taxes and the IRS.

and? i happen to agree with that.

how long will it be before ron paul supporters become commited for the rest of uses safty?

Glenn Beck may be a male of the species, but he most assuredly not a "Man" according to my dictionary.

French kiss him on the whole?

Nicole, I said “EWWWWWWWWWWWW!” on the intro and closed the media player.

:P

The "Get out of Iraq" and "No more IRS" sure sound nice as talking-points, but what about Ron Paul's Stormfront supporters and other plans?

I read the little transcript tidbit and that is all I can take.
Thanks for posting the warning Nicole.

Ron Paul is insane!

Grotty.

Isn't Beck due for a firing?

Glenn, everyone knows, only sluts french on the first date!

Can we get some abstinance-only training for Beck?

Good Christ, the quote was revolting enough, I will not subject myself to the clip. What is it with these guys? I have always thought that a homophobe is not someone who hates queers- it's someone who desperately is queer and hates themselves....eecchhh! Get a hold on yourself, Beck. What a jerk....

WashStateBlue @ 23:

Glenn, everyone knows, only sluts french on the first date!

Can we get some abstinance-only training for Beck?

HEY! Do NOT compare Glen Beck to a slut, I happen to like sluts allot.

Wow, Glenn Beck is sooooo gay, who'd a thunk it?

Wait...I thought we hated the French?

raolf, Urlll, RoooF

I thought you were joking!

Heave! gag,

I'll Sue... blurb, slaRB

LOL

Also want to add, do you really want to be living in the USA before an income tax? Before 1913? If spent wisely a fair income tax can pay for cool stuff like roads, and health care and schools and food programs.

hip bones connected to the..

old billy=herramienta jaja!

Old Billy,

Na, you made your bed, you sleep in it. You have a problem with Tom whoever, you deal with it.

And you sort of missed the whole pissing match analogy, which kind of fits here. (See earlier reference) Not surprized. But you haven't given up on the lame humour and sarcasm. I guess if you did, you would have no tools to participate in this discussion. So I understand.

Tools, whoops, sorry, hope I haven't offended you.

And ya, Ron Paul is akin to a robber baron, right, unlike Hillary or Obama, who are white as the driven snow, right? Is that what you are trying, lamely, to imply. Unlike Hillary and Obama who voted to have your sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, die in foreign lands? For what, even most Democrats can't tell me. Hillary and Obama, who invited the bankruptsy of the country in foreign wars for foreign interests? Unlike Ron Paul who has never supported this war or many others the US has got itself into. Ya, he's a heartless robber baron who wants all our kids to work in sweatshops, right? Unlike every other presidential hopeful on either side of the aisle.

On second thought, any serious thinking may cause your brain to explode. You may not quite have the neural connections required to have anything of substance to expand upon.

Let this be a warning to the rest of you: Staid and stale thinking, as displayed by Old Billy, leads to the lowering of your standard of living, an inability to see the world for what it is as opposed to what you want it to be and a significant drop in one's ability to think outside of the box your government, media and business community have put you in. It also hurts the ones you love. Deeply.

If anything, Old Billy, I thank you for this exchange, because it has motivated me even more to reach out to others and try, with whatever means are at my disposal, to create environments where the free and open exchange of ideas central to our futures can be discussed.

In your case, though, I am reminded of the biblical passage: "Don't cast pearls before swine" which roughly translated means don't waste time with people who don't want to know.

Good luck to you sir.

And again, Merry Christmas.

Agent Provocateur @ 343:

Ron Paul people, why not provide Kucinich with the same amount of support if not more? He offer's every one of Ron Paul's positives (foreign policy, upholding the constitution) but where Paul lacks Kucinich has him covered in spades (healthcare, abortion, the environment, worker's rights, etc...).

I think a major portion of the Ron Paul supporters do like Dennis Kucinich and would probably want him as VP...If Not Bruce Fein...
Bruce Fein would be another JPS on the supreme court also..

Most liberals think John Paul Stevens is a liberal.
He is a moderate Republican placed by Gerald Ford...
This is the type of Republican Ron is.

wow its now considered loony to be a strict constitutionalist

milquetoast @ 362:

tom tom club foot @ 357:

milquetoast @ 354:

xoites defends Constitution @ 314:

Gasoline taxes pay for roads... federal and state.

Renters and property owners pay property taxes that pay for schools.

Income tax enables our (govt/corporations)to go to (undeclared) war, while Terrorising us...and to build a police state around us.

yeah!

(thanks milktoast)

lol

actually...most of the "income" tax that people volunteer to pay the govt every year is used to pay interest on the National debt.

One correction:

ALL Income tax goes to pay for the INTEREST created by our national debt and does nothing to reduce it..
One of the biggest lies told to Americans is that our income tax goes to pay for our national debt...

They leave out "pays for interest ONLY on our National debt..

rockyb @ 369:

ALL Income tax goes to pay for the INTEREST created by our national debt and does nothing to reduce it..
One of the biggest lies told to Americans is that our income tax goes to pay for our national debt...

They leave out "pays for interest ONLY on our National debt..

So what, you claiming we can default then?
Since it's not paying the principle we shouldn't pay at all, is that your stance?

Symes @ 371:

rockyb @ 369:

ALL Income tax goes to pay for the INTEREST created by our national debt and does nothing to reduce it..
One of the biggest lies told to Americans is that our income tax goes to pay for our national debt...

They leave out "pays for interest ONLY on our National debt..

So what, you claiming we can default then?
Since it's not paying the principle we shouldn't pay at all, is that your stance?

We must reduce (dratically)....Do you realize Paul would cut 1 Trillion in Military spending alone?

scoot @ 338:

Agent Provocateur @ 315:

You want the most solid stance on abortion?...

BLITZER: Let's go down the whole panel, and if you could give me a short yes or no, would you insist on a Supreme Court nominee supporting abortion?

Congressman?

KUCINICH: A Kucinich appointment to the Supreme Court would have a litmus test on abortion. It's a question of a woman's right to choose and a right to privacy.

But a president has to do more than that. A president has to be a healer. And this has been one of the great divides in our country. And so I want to let the American people know that I'll stand for prenatal care, postnatal care, child care, a living wage, universal health care, sex education, birth control...

(APPLAUSE)

BLITZER: All right.

KUCINICH: We can make abortions less necessary if we have a healer in the White House. And we can also protect a woman's right to choose. We can do both.

BLITZER: Thank you, Congressman.

Ron Paul's idea? Criminalize the doctor and let the "free market" take care of the woman and child.

WOW the idiocracy never ceases to amaze. he has never advocated criminalizing abortion, quite the contrary, KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF IT. keep voting for the pro lifer reid but turn a blind eye to the constitution, and the guy who may just save it. you dems are as bad as the repugs....

Dude. Is this a serious reply? When exactly did I ever vote for Reid, when would I have the chance, and why would I? Did I black out and defend him at some point? Or any of the Dems(aside from Kucinich)? Good bluff though troll. And as if I havent fed you enough here is from Pauls own mouth...

---
In the event that abortion becomes illegal and a woman obtains an abortion anyway, what should she be charged with, and what should her punishment be? What about the doctor who performs the abortion?

Cooper: Congressman Paul, 90 seconds.

Paul: You know, it's not a federal function to determine the penalties for a crime of abortion if it's illegal in a state. It's up to the state, it's up to the juries. And it should be up to discretion because it's not an easy issue to deal with. But the first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don't need a federal abortion police. That's the last thing that we need.

(Applause)

But for the ...

Cooper: Should a woman be charged with a crime?

Paul: Pardon me?

Cooper: Should a woman be charged with a crime?

Paul: I don't personally think so. I'm an O.B. doctor, and I practiced medicine for 30 years, and I of course never saw one time when a medically necessary abortion had to be done.

But so I think it certainly is a crime. But I also understand the difficulties. I think when you're talking about third trimester deliberate abortion and partial birth abortions, I mean, there has to be a criminal penalty for the person that's committing that crime. But I really think it's the person who commits the crime. And I think that is the abortionist.

Cooper: So you're saying a doctor should be punished.

What sort of punishment should they get?

Paul: Well, I think it's up to the states. I'm not in the state -- I'm not running for governor. And I think it's different, and I don't think it should be all 50 states the same way. So, I don't think that should be up to the president to decide that.

---

So you see he want's the Feds out of it but does think that it should be a criminal act which, yes Virginia, would "advocate criminalizing abortion".

Damn man do you even know your own candidate?

rockyb @ 372:

Symes @ 368:

tom tom club foot @ 367:

wow its now considered loony to be a strict constitutionalist

No, it's considered loony to come to a progressive blog begging for Republican votes.

We ARE progressives YOU TWIT!!!

I dont tell you who to vote for, dummie, I tell you to who look at!
You NEVER offer anyone better!
Why?

Why do you see a disconnect?

Where do you think half your base has gone?
Oh you dont see them as missing?
HERE WE ARE!!!!
The ones that are here prove it!
Im progressive, but certainly not DEMOCRAT....
Why do Democrats draw a link to those two?
Why do Republicans draw a link to conservatism?

To DEVIDE SHEEPLE YA BIG DUMMIE!

Progressives begging for a Republican vote, god you clowns are dense!
I didn't say what YOU are, just what you are DOING and WHERE.
As in :

No, it's considered loony to come to a progressive blog begging for Republican votes.

If you can't even distinguish that much then your opinions on RP (or most other things for that matter) are worthless.

Go back to school and take some reading comprehension courses, this is the 4th time I have had to point out RP supporters inability to read what is actually written in this thread alone.

Asshat.

rockyb @ 373:

Symes @ 371:

rockyb @ 369:

ALL Income tax goes to pay for the INTEREST created by our national debt and does nothing to reduce it..
One of the biggest lies told to Americans is that our income tax goes to pay for our national debt...

They leave out "pays for interest ONLY on our National debt..

So what, you claiming we can default then?
Since it's not paying the principle we shouldn't pay at all, is that your stance?

We must reduce (dratically)....Do you realize Paul would cut 1 Trillion in Military spending alone?

And without taxes it will be payed how?

Old Billy @ 349:

tom tom club foot @ 341:

Agent Provocateur @ 331:

Ron Paul can't help lead in the process to hold the criminals that hijacked this country accountable. How can he be expected to actually lead the country its self?

Paul said that Bush should be impeached not under the umbrella of partisan vengeance but for ceaselessly breaking the laws of the land.

“I would have trouble arguing that he’s been a Constitutional President and once you violate the Constitution and be proven to do that I think these people should be removed from office.”

Opining that the U.S. had entered a period of “soft fascism,” Paul noted that the legacy of the Bush administration has been the total abandonment of Constitutional principles.

Sure, that's what he says; but what did he do?

He voted to table Kucinich's House Resolution 799 to impeach Dick Cheney. He failed at doing what he and his supporters have gone on and on and on about; protecting the constitution.

OZ @ 327:

Margaret Sanger was the founder of planned parenthood and the "mother" of birth control. A eugenecist who fawned over hitler and his population control programs. She wanted to get rid of the undesirables, poor, mentally retarded, blacks, jews and you. But of course wrap it into a neat feminist package and my right to choose. Look up the "negro project" and Sanger. I know I'm a nut sorry for trying to be informed. Keep fighting over stupid issues while your liberties are taken away.

Haha. What a bunch of bullshit. Anti-abortion propaganda from nuts who want to keep women barefoot and pregnant.

Rob231 @ 162:

"once paul dismantles the fda, the sec, irs, fcc, usda, epa, etc. it will be nearly impossible for individuals to be self-dependent. why? b/c we will be 100%, totally dependent on corporations."
WRONG: i am self dependant, i take 0 money from the public coffers and pay tens of thousands of dollars a year in taxes, work in a privately owned business, cook my own meals etc etc. 28 and an independant productive citizen in society who would of thought.

"News for you private health care DOES NOT work. It’s there to MAKE A PROFIT for it’s share holders NOT to help those who’ve paid into it. It makes a profit by denying services and proceduresto those who’ve paid into it and depended on it. That’s what happened to my friend"

WRONG: government intervention and mandates required the healthcare providers to service for free. Medical costs skyrocket. Big Pharma lobbies for all sorts of protections, increasing drug costs. tt used to be you got sick, you called a doctor he came to your house, you got serviced, he got cash. end of story. this profit you complain of is cause by government intervention not from lack of it.

people are turning around and asking 'what the hell happened to this country', 'how did we get like this'.
reality is: huge FEDERAL government and coporate power brought us to this, and this power was directly attained through legislature and taxation passed by our FEDERAL government and their slow power grab spanning decades.

now the system is so out of control, and the people are so brainwashed and economically stressed into dependancy that we can no longer comprehend things like small FEDERAL government and personal responsibility.

return the FEDERAL government to its original power status, and give power back to the STATE and local level so people can govern themselves again. disbanding the department of education will not close schools. STATEs run the schools, the federal government taxes state's citizens then gives the money back to the state under certain conditions. does this make sense to anyone?

So you'd like more rat droppings and human flesh in your hot dogs . . . the USDA is there for a reason and that reason is what was happening in the early 1900s

and you must like unsafe work conditions because we all know the Triangle Shritwaste factory fire couldn't EVER happen again

And we all know that all those mine tailings from the late 1800 and early 1900s that are polluting rivers wouldn't ever happen again

And we all know that we'd like to have the medical care system of the earlier 1900s, sans x-ray machines, blood work, pulse oximeters, etc.

but your medicine is sky rocketing argument falls f;at when you look at other countries that have socialize medicine.

you are so naive and wrong in just about everything you've said and written. Have you even looked at hte conditions that brought regualtions about???

tom tom club foot @ 361:

hip bones connected to the..

old billy=herramienta jaja!

Ooo... you sneaky bastard, I had to go look that up just to realize you called me a tool!

Don't I feel used. :)

tom tom club foot @ 386:

Symes @ 382:

Felix Culpa @ 376:

I’ll leave aside the fact that a presidential candidate is endorsing citizens break existing laws as a “reasonable civil disobedience”

no, please, don't leave that aside. i'd like to see how you rationalize opposing peaceful civil disobedience to unjust laws. it'd be especially interesting in this case, given that the income tax is only a law by virtue of enforcement.

So shut the fuck up and don't pay this year OK?
Show us how it is done already.

Be sure to blog from your new digs next year, tell us how the food is and all.

so the opposite of that is "shut the fuck up and PAY"?

lets all just shut the fuck up and go along with the agenda..hey its worked so great so far!!!

Okay, I'll go first. I'm out of here. Y'all just remember: vote early, vote often.

So you'd like more rat droppings and human flesh in your hot dogs . . . the USDA is there for a reason and that reason is what was happening in the early 1900s

and you must like unsafe work conditions because we all know the Triangle Shritwaste factory fire couldn't EVER happen again

And we all know that all those mine tailings from the late 1800 and early 1900s that are polluting rivers wouldn't ever happen again

And we all know that we'd like to have the medical care system of the earlier 1900s, sans x-ray machines, blood work, pulse oximeters, etc.

but your medicine is sky rocketing argument falls f;at when you look at other countries that have socialize medicine.

you are so naive and wrong in just about everything you've said and written. Have you even looked at hte conditions that brought regualtions about???

you are the naive and wrong one if you think the usda is looking out for YOUR best interest..rat turd is still allowed in cereals and a bunch of other stuff ..pus in milk ? its ok with the usda..hormones? thats fine!..yeah they really look out for us..

medical system of the 1900s..no x rays...?? whos advocating for that? ron paul doesnt have a time machine which would magically erase all technology

you sound as loony as hmm...who else is called a loony on this website..

you are the naive and wrong one if you think the usda is looking out for YOUR best interest..rat turd is still allowed in cereals and a bunch of other stuff ..pus in milk ? its ok with the usda..hormones? thats fine!..yeah they really look out for us..

medical system of the 1900s..no x rays…?? whos advocating for that? ron paul doesnt have a time machine which would magically erase all technology

you sound as loony as hmm…who else is called a loony on this website..

Symes @ 379:

rockyb @ 373:

Symes @ 371:

rockyb @ 369:

So what, you claiming we can default then?
Since it's not paying the principle we shouldn't pay at all, is that your stance?

We must reduce (dratically)....Do you realize Paul would cut 1 Trillion in Military spending alone?

And without taxes it will be payed how?

What part of cutting 1 trillion from our military spending to pay for SS and Medicare and reduce debt dont you understand?

currently:
$325 Billion for Israel every year.
625 Billion military budget
$800 billion for war
$150 Billion for Saudi Arabia
$75 Billion for Egypt

and on and on and on!!!
Now do you see what will cut our debt and pay off interest?
Cut spending.

Tweety.......you're forgiven!!

Slaw @ 31:

Wait...I thought we hated the French?

He meant to say "Freedom kiss".

Next up for Glenn....

An interview where he tells Rudy he wants to "spank his bare bottom" for losing his huge lead in California?

Yes Glenn Beck is an ass..... But Ron Paul is correct about the Fed. Do some research. Google "America from Freedom to Fascism". Our income tax dollars go directly to the federal deficit, not to infrastructure. Watch this documentary and them see what you think about the BANK that is not part of the govenment, that is in control of our money.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173&q=america+f...

Andrew @ 38:

Get back to basics first whether you agree with Paul or not. As has be proven in several Supream Court cases over the years, not one person who works for the I.R.S. can show you any law that states that a persons labor is to be taxed. There was however a tax on company profits.
Some form of tax will always have to be raised in order for spending to take place to maintain a standing army, but if you look at what has happened since the creation of both the Federal Reserve as well as the I.R.S. in 1913, we have become slaves to our own government with all of the social program handouts that have been created. So a mind set developed over the years that we deserve these programs and those we elect each cycle say that's okay, we'll bring home the bacon, but understand that it is you the tax payer who is going to pay for it.
If you think for a moment that our taxes are going for all of these programs, guess again. The reality is that most of our tax dollars goes to pay down the interest on the national debt. So where does the rest of it come from? The Fed prints it out of thin air with nothing to back it. What we all have to ask ourselves is whether we as a people really need all of these government programs, or do we forever remain in debt as we are now.
Just look at what has happened with Social Security. When Greenspan was aked how to protect SS, he said " move it out of Washington". If politicians can spend it, they will just as they have with SS. The more money you print, the less value it has which is why everything we buy today is rising in price and that's an inflationary effect when you print money that has no value.
The founders knew this so they created a US Treasury under the Constitution with gold and silver as our tue money, not fiat that was made legal tender for debts by Congress. You can thank the Wilson administration for selling us out to a banking cartel that has been raping us ever since it was created. I would go as far a Paul would as many politicians always over shoot the mark. But in reality, our government wasn't established to be a system of handouts and we today now suffer from a give me syndrome that is going to be very hard to undo.

I ment to say....I wouldn't go as far as Ron Paul would. But the bottom line is that we have to reign in spending and take a look at our real priorities.

I'm curious if any of the people who wonder

"how are we gonna pay" with no income tax,

understand the history of a national bank and their relationship to the US Gov?

rockyb @ 395:

Symes @ 379:

rockyb @ 373:

Symes @ 371:

We must reduce (dratically)....Do you realize Paul would cut 1 Trillion in Military spending alone?

And without taxes it will be payed how?

What part of cutting 1 trillion from our military spending to pay for SS and Medicare and reduce debt dont you understand?

currently:
$325 Billion for Israel every year.
625 Billion military budget
$800 billion for war
$150 Billion for Saudi Arabia
$75 Billion for Egypt

and on and on and on!!!
Now do you see what will cut our debt and pay off interest?
Cut spending.

Sure, but if you eliminate taxes like I keep seeing all over the RP bot posts then you eliminate the funds as well.

Do you see where I am coming from? Of course eliminate the BS waste and graft to other countries. But the debt still exists and if there is no money coming in to pay it then you are in default.

It's like stopping a spending spree with your credit card after you've already max'd it out, then quiting your job because it was the paychecks that gave you the money to start with.

How do you guys even survive in the real world?

Screw y'all
Im voting Paul

Symes @ 392:

tom tom club foot @ 386:

Symes @ 382:

Felix Culpa @ 376:

So shut the fuck up and don't pay this year OK?
Show us how it is done already.

Be sure to blog from your new digs next year, tell us how the food is and all.

so the opposite of that is "shut the fuck up and PAY"?

lets all just shut the fuck up and go along with the agenda..hey its worked so great so far!!!

No really! Just don't pay, it's what you are advocating so do it already. Put your money where your mouth is and see how long you remain a free citizen.

Otherwise YES, STFU and pay and drop this asinine line of reasoning.
It is law until the judges say otherwise, got it?

If you don't agree then don't pay and argue your losing case in court.

Yeah sure Symes I guess you think the boston tea party boys should have stayed home and wrote letters betwixed themselves huh?

While I understand that this site is geared mainly towards those who seek to elect a Democrat for president, it is most disheartening to hear the same sorts of polemic being spewed in support of that position as that heard from the opposing camp. Can't we all simply look at what is really going on, avoid any knee-jerk reactions and use our collective heads for something other than a hat-rack? (Thinking deeply and carefully, doing more research, etc...)

The facts speak for themselves. Those that insist that Dr. Paul is going to "deny women their right to choose" or "let the corporations take over" have neither read or listened to any thing he has said on those subjects, nor educated themselves as to the actual conditions under which we are currently living in. Anyone who thinks his idea of free market capitalism is somehow going to make corporations more powerful hasn't even bothered to listen (or read) his discussions on that subject. To insist that you know a candidate from the rhetoric being provided by any of our main stream media outlets is to fall prey to the same ignorance you claim the other side is guilty of.

Read. Read not only what Dr. Paul has said, but read what Thomas Jefferson and his peers were saying at the formation of this singular grand experiment in self-governance. Study the history of political parties, the rise of corporatism and it's influence on government, then re-read what Dr. Paul has said on those subjects. Not just one line taken out of context, but his whole, context included, discussions of those subjects. Then, if you still disagree, fine. Discuss the substance of those ideas, but please, for the sake of our nation, stop the personal attacks against his supporters and the candidate himself. This is exactly what you decry in the discussions from the main stream media; why contribute to it?

Please: Discuss the issues, get the facts straight. Quit arguing from points that are so easily refuted by simply referring to the actual statements and writings under discussion. And for the sake of us all, READ THE CONSTITUTION! Without it, self-governance, the very foundation of our nations original move towards independence, will be lost to mankind forever.

In Love,
Jim

Old Billy @ 355:

xoites defends Constitution @ 352:

HILLARY 2008 @ 350:

will you kids quit babbling about no hopers like kucinich and ron paul ?

get behind hillary now !

or we are f***** !

Hillary is Rudy in a pants suit. Come to think of it sometimes Rudy is too.

Now, be fair, Hillary looks much better than Rudy in a pants suit.

If I have to, I'll vote for Hillary.

Not me, I write in Dennis if I have to....

Symes @ 397:

rockyb @ 395:

Symes @ 379:

rockyb @ 373:

And without taxes it will be payed how?

What part of cutting 1 trillion from our military spending to pay for SS and Medicare and reduce debt dont you understand?

currently:
$325 Billion for Israel every year.
625 Billion military budget
$800 billion for war
$150 Billion for Saudi Arabia
$75 Billion for Egypt

and on and on and on!!!
Now do you see what will cut our debt and pay off interest?
Cut spending.

Sure, but if you eliminate taxes like I keep seeing all over the RP bot posts then you eliminate the funds as well.

Do you see where I am coming from? Of course eliminate the BS waste and graft to other countries. But the debt still exists and if there is no money coming in to pay it then you are in default.

It's like stopping a spending spree with your credit card after you've already max'd it out, then quiting your job because it was the paychecks that gave you the money to start with.

How do you guys even survive in the real world?

Personally, I live within my means.

...unlike (most)of the rest of credit happy Americans.

John @ 318:

Whoever respects the Bill of Rights (including the 2nd Amendment) I will support.

Dennis Kucinich has a lot of redeeming qualities, however he is very anti 2nd Amendment. He wants to ban all handguns. Yeah, BAN.

Symes @ 406:

tom tom club foot @ 402:

Symes @ 398:

tom tom club foot @ 396:

Here ya go, took me 1 minute to find it.

http://www.irs.gov/taxpros/article/0,,id=159932,00.html#_Toc153765504

Now shove that lame ass argument.

yeah ill take their word for it.if my arguement is that the irs is a corrupt illegal entity then why should i expect their words to reflect truth? ..whatever..i gotta adjust my tin foil kangol

You wanted the law, there it is. If the law as written is not good enough for you I don't know what to say.

You asked, I produced.

What law books do you think the law is going to be in anyway? It's fucking tax law! It is going to be in the IRS statutes that by the way ARE LAW.

If your willing to ignore that then you are willing to ignore anything. Whatever you have to say about RP is highly suspect at this point.

this . is . the. law.. you must obey now! even if it enslaves you!

Agent Provocateur @ 375:

scoot @ 338:

Agent Provocateur @ 315:

You want the most solid stance on abortion?...

BLITZER: Let's go down the whole panel, and if you could give me a short yes or no, would you insist on a Supreme Court nominee supporting abortion?

Congressman?

KUCINICH: A Kucinich appointment to the Supreme Court would have a litmus test on abortion. It's a question of a woman's right to choose and a right to privacy.

But a president has to do more than that. A president has to be a healer. And this has been one of the great divides in our country. And so I want to let the American people know that I'll stand for prenatal care, postnatal care, child care, a living wage, universal health care, sex education, birth control...

(APPLAUSE)

BLITZER: All right.

KUCINICH: We can make abortions less necessary if we have a healer in the White House. And we can also protect a woman's right to choose. We can do both.

BLITZER: Thank you, Congressman.

Ron Paul's idea? Criminalize the doctor and let the "free market" take care of the woman and child.

WOW the idiocracy never ceases to amaze. he has never advocated criminalizing abortion, quite the contrary, KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF IT. keep voting for the pro lifer reid but turn a blind eye to the constitution, and the guy who may just save it. you dems are as bad as the repugs....

Dude. Is this a serious reply? When exactly did I ever vote for Reid, when would I have the chance, and why would I? Did I black out and defend him at some point? Or any of the Dems(aside from Kucinich)? Good bluff though troll. And as if I havent fed you enough here is from Pauls own mouth...

---
In the event that abortion becomes illegal and a woman obtains an abortion anyway, what should she be charged with, and what should her punishment be? What about the doctor who performs the abortion?

Cooper: Congressman Paul, 90 seconds.

Paul: You know, it's not a federal function to determine the penalties for a crime of abortion if it's illegal in a state. It's up to the state, it's up to the juries. And it should be up to discretion because it's not an easy issue to deal with. But the first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don't need a federal abortion police. That's the last thing that we need.

(Applause)

But for the ...

Cooper: Should a woman be charged with a crime?

Paul: Pardon me?

Cooper: Should a woman be charged with a crime?

Paul: I don't personally think so. I'm an O.B. doctor, and I practiced medicine for 30 years, and I of course never saw one time when a medically necessary abortion had to be done.

But so I think it certainly is a crime. But I also understand the difficulties. I think when you're talking about third trimester deliberate abortion and partial birth abortions, I mean, there has to be a criminal penalty for the person that's committing that crime. But I really think it's the person who commits the crime. And I think that is the abortionist.

Cooper: So you're saying a doctor should be punished.

What sort of punishment should they get?

Paul: Well, I think it's up to the states. I'm not in the state -- I'm not running for governor. And I think it's different, and I don't think it should be all 50 states the same way. So, I don't think that should be up to the president to decide that.

---

So you see he want's the Feds out of it but does think that it should be a criminal act which, yes Virginia, would "advocate criminalizing abortion".

Damn man do you even know your own candidate?

It looks like you got a little bold happy... I fixed your quote for you. Take a look at the bold part... He is clearly talking about late term abortions. You know, where the baby comes out looking like a baby and crying.

Jim @ 403:

Those that insist that Dr. Paul is going to "deny women their right to choose" or "let the corporations take over" ....

Exactly.

He is not going to take away a women's right to choose, he is just going to take away their choices. Right now it is between keeping the baby or a safe legal abortion by a qualified doctor; under Paul it will merely be between keeping the baby or a back ally, black market by a criminal.

The corporations? They won't take over; when RP is President, under his "free market", suddenly the CEOs' hearts will grow three sizes that day. Gone will be their desire to simply turn a profit at any cost, why they will just want to give their products away(including healthcare) and all profits will go to feed the homeless. Health and saftey for the worker, consumer, and environment will all be top priority. The corporations operating under no rules and on the honor system? What could possibly go wrong?

Symes said:

You wanted the law, there it is. If the law as written is not good enough for you I don’t know what to say.

You asked, I produced.

What law books do you think the law is going to be in anyway? It’s fucking tax law! It is going to be in the IRS statutes that by the way ARE LAW.
---

Hmmm I just did a lookup for the full text of section 1 of the IRS tax code at:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-A-1-A-I-1.html

Unfortunately, it says not a single word about wages. Wages earned are NOT taxable income as defined by the statue you cite, so how can this possibly support your insistence that this is somehow a LAW?

Just asking. Btw, simply press CNTL-f and a search bar will open on your browser. Enter the word "wage". You will find that the word does not appear in that document. If you take the time to read it, it refers, fairly explicitly, to capitol gains, which, by definition are not the wages you earn for your labor.

In Love,
Jim

Symes, while your runnin in circles here lookin for the law that dont exist...at least give us a definition of the word "income"

Jim @ 417:

Symes said:

You wanted the law, there it is. If the law as written is not good enough for you I don’t know what to say.

You asked, I produced.

What law books do you think the law is going to be in anyway? It’s fucking tax law! It is going to be in the IRS statutes that by the way ARE LAW.
---

Hmmm I just did a lookup for the full text of section 1 of the IRS tax code at:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/t26-A-1-A-I-1.html

Unfortunately, it says not a single word about wages. Wages earned are NOT taxable income as defined by the statue you cite, so how can this possibly support your insistence that this is somehow a LAW?

Just asking. Btw, simply press CNTL-f and a search bar will open on your browser. Enter the word "wage". You will find that the word does not appear in that document. If you take the time to read it, it refers, fairly explicitly, to capitol gains, which, by definition are not the wages you earn for your labor.

In Love,
Jim

Here's the relevant information. That argument has already been ruled against:

http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/Personal/taxes/wages.htm

milquetoast @ 419:

Symes, while your runnin in circles here lookin for the law that dont exist...at least give us a definition of the word "income"

Here ya go.

26 U.S.C. § 61

[G]ross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:
(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; . . .

These are taking me less than 30 seconds a piece to find.
You RP supporters had really better slow down and take some time to think about your positions. You don't seem predisposed to such reflection.

tom tom club foot @ 422:

i didnt spend the entire thread demanding anything ..settle down.

youre so worked up you label me republican.the media hasnt said anything about ron paul except that hes crazy,and where else would i find the mans words but in his own website..haha sounds like something you said upthread.. i researched his own words and voting record.

Well perhaps it is time to research what Libertarianism is about as well. That is what he claims as his tenets.
And he is running as a Republican and you are endorsing him, so what do you think you are going to be labeled as?

Glen Beck is a neo-con piece of shit. Ron Paul on the other hand is a one of a kind constitutionalist. A lot of people don't understand why he would get rid of a lot of the agencies and departments he says he would get rid of. It's because it's a waste of money and against the constitution. Every time the federal government gets involved in a program, the cost goes through the roof and the quality goes thought the floor. They guy has been in congress for 30 years and has never voted yes to something that infringes on your constitutional rights. For this, and because he is actually a real doctor - he has earned the nick name "Dr. No". What that means is while all the other people where willing to take your rights away in order to appease elitists and huge corporations, Ron Paul - almost alone and unwaveringly, with no flip-flopping of any kind, has rejected these special interests entirely. None of the other candidates nor most of your elected representatives can say the same - which is sad.

A lot of people think the government would collapse if the IRS and the Federal Reserve where dismantled. They think the money taken from them in the income tax somehow goes to "good" things that need it. How did we survive before these agencies where created around 1920? They where installed to supposedly "create a safety net" for the currency. But this is untrue and proven by what happened less then 10 years later, the great depression.

The truth is that all of the money you pay in income tax goes directly to the Federal Reserve / IRS. Which by the way is a private bank/organization much like Federal Express is a organization and not affiliated with our government in any way. When the government needs money, it goes to the F.R. and gets a loan with interest that it must pay back. Rather than printing the money itself using the Treasury - interest free like it used to. Your income tax money goes to pay back the interest on the money the government borrowed - to fund a war lets say.

Most taxes are useful and actually go to things we need. But 99% of the time you have the choice of whether or not to pay it. For instance: If you don't drive - you don't pay the gas tax that fixes roads. If you don't own property, you don't pay property tax that goes to the local schools. If you don't smoke, you don't pay the tobacco tax, and on and on.

Income tax is actually only supposed to be for corporations, it's a tax on profit. So lets say a company sells chairs at $100 a pop. They spend $40 in material and pay a worker $10 per chair to assemble. The cost of the chair to the company is $50, the cost to the consumer is $100. The difference in cost for the company and the consumer is the profit. This is what the income tax is "supposed" to tax and not the worker as well. In more ways that one, time is money - the worker exchanged his time(money) for the companies money. It's an even exchange and no profit is made or lost, therefore it should not be applicable to the income tax.

So when Ron Paul gets out there ans says he is going to get get of the IRS and Federal Reserve, I'm all for it. The only thing that would change if those organizations where eliminated would be: A: The US Treasury would print the money interest free rather than borrowing the money from a private company. B: You would be able to keep the 30% or so of your check that goes to a worthless cause. How is that crazy?

Beck did more harm than good and I am sure that Dr. Paul will never do that gig again.
I think that Ron Paul is right...The American people, that's you and me, are footing the bill for Iraq, not corporations and their over paid executives. The government can also be funded by corporations, tariffs, etc.

tom tom club foot @ 430:

Symes @ 428:

tom tom club foot @ 426:

Symes @ 425:

i dont say i endorse anyone symes,i agree with alot of what he says i agree with kucinich as well..thats about it out of the candidates.

i just saw a lot of tool working going on and thought id throw my fart into the windtunnel of ron paul bashery ..

Hehe, Devils advocate!

Pulled my tail on that you did! :)

I like -some- of what he says as well, but I am a reformed Libertarian and I KNOW what that is about.
On another thread I called it Anarchisms evil corporate twin (I spent my youth as an Anarchist so I know what THAT means as well) and I stand by that. Neither one is tenable in a real world scenario, and any candidate that truly believes that it is (like RP does) is going to mangle the nation in the long run. Thus my resistance to his candidacy.

so who gets your nod?

I think Kucinich right now, but he sees UFO's and takes psychics seriously so I am not so sure there either.
As others have said he has all the pluses of RP and very few of the draw backs. Yeah he's tweaky about guns, but that is one thing that can easily be countered as opposed to the multitude of issues RP brings with him as a Libertarian.

That's the problem, it's not just the choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich this time: it's the choice between one stinking full cess pool of fresh filth and another one that looks identical on the other side of the fence.

Neither one deserves anything but a good cleaning out and both stink to high heaven.

Talcott @ 47:

I'm curious if any of the people who wonder

"how are we gonna pay" with no income tax,

understand the history of a national bank and their relationship to the US Gov?

Yes.

Glenn Beck is such a closet case. If there were a candidate who had ALL of the attributes Beck wanted in a president, I'm sure he'd offer to wash his ballsack and anus with his tongue.

TruthHurts @ 43:

Yes Glenn Beck is an ass..... But Ron Paul is correct about the Fed. Do some research. Google "America from Freedom to Fascism". Our income tax dollars go directly to the federal deficit, not to infrastructure. Watch this documentary and them see what you think about the BANK that is not part of the govenment, that is in control of our money.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173&q=america+from+freedom+to+fascism&total=641&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

That's exactly the point Truth Hurts. If more people would just watch Arron Russo's masterpiece, they would understand just how corrupt the sytem is as well as the deck being stacked against we the people.

the kiss of death

Clytemnestra @ 50:

So Ron Paul is against a standing army, border security, etc. etc. etc.????

Why isn't this making news?

Even if we employ nothing but private contractors the money has got to come from some where.

And talk about a pre-911 way of thinking!!!

man u don't listen or read closely at all...

i don't agree with eliminating taxes completely, but the irs and federal reserve exist only to print money unchecked and foot the bill to taxpayers. fuck em. And Beck is showing he's a true conservative, horny for man juice.

WashStateBlue @ 49:

Talcott @ 47:

I'm curious if any of the people who wonder

"how are we gonna pay" with no income tax,

understand the history of a national bank and their relationship to the US Gov?

Yes.

Okay why did Andrew Jackson(7th president, and last veteran of the revolutionary war to serve in the whitehouse)

proclaim his greates accomplishment was killing the Bank?

If you watch "freedom from fascism" they make a pretty good case that the federal reserve and the federal income tax are unconstitutional. Juries have actually looked at the Federal Tax Law, agreed, and found people innocent for not paying income tax. The IRS code itself is pretty damning in that it specifically states "voluntary compliance". At the same time, a lot of judges don't give juries that option to decide the law so they say it's a black & white case of guilt.

When the former head of the IRS is asked simply to show the law in the movie, he can't. The IRS also compares a stop light (mandatory compliance) with the IRS term of voluntary compliance to say they are the same. That raises some serious questions in my book. Then the IRS guy actually says the older Supreme Court decisions don't matter, because the legislative law is newer. Russo almost has a heart attack when he hears that and that guy saying it was the head of the IRS. Plus, Aaron Russo shows former IRS agents stating they believe there is no real law. That makes a pretty compelling case in and of itself.

But, at the same time Russo had major tax troubles so I'm not sure what's completely true. Ron Paul does state the law is unconstitutional in that movie long before he was running for president. Ron Paul was also the only Congressman willing to go on the record in that movie so I respect that he's always had the opinion.

I think Paul's overall point is more that if you truly believe it's unconstitutional then you must disobey. And that would apply to any law and is what the framer's had in mind. We certainly do have people willing to immediately disobey laws when they feel they are truly unconstitutional because you must have standing to sue.

Now, Glen Beck doesn't understand the first thing about the constitution so he is foaming at the though of hoarding all his money and paying no tax. I understand your take on that reprehensible weasel with a 3rd grade intellect. But, I think your a little misguided on Ron Paul's motive. He firmly believes the Federal income tax is unconstitutional because it is not an apportioned tax. However, it does show a lack of spine on his part to not disobey if he truly believes that.

I recommend everyone see "Freedom To Fascism", do your own research on Income Tax law, and then make up your own mind.

Glenn Beck

you don't have to put on the red light

those days are over

you don't have to sell you body to the right

Glenn Beck

you don't have to wear that dress tonight

walk the streets for money

you don't care if it's wrong or if it's right

Glenn Beck

You don't have to put on the red light

I wish I never knew you

I can’t but talk down to you

I have to tell you just how I feel

I won't see you with another boy

I know my mind is made up

so put away your makeup

told you once I won't tell you again

It's a bad way

Glenn Beck

you don't have to put on the red light

Glenn Beck

you don't have to put on the red light

Ron Paul is a vag snooper.

Ozguy @ 66:

So, these people would seriously like to return to the economic conditions of 1912? I mean, seriously????????

I like his anti-war stuff, but in every other way Paul seems to be a howling loon.

No one is making that arguement "the economic conditions" consist of substantialy more variables than the income tax.

Please spare us 2nd grade synopsis of Dr. Paul's proposal concerning the elimination the income tax.

Talcott @ 61:

WashStateBlue @ 49:

Talcott @ 47:

I'm curious if any of the people who wonder

"how are we gonna pay" with no income tax,

understand the history of a national bank and their relationship to the US Gov?

Yes.

Okay why did Andrew Jackson(7th president, and last veteran of the revolutionary war to serve in the whitehouse)

proclaim his greates accomplishment was killing the Bank?

Hi Talcott...

Been doing the response to Tax Protestors for years, I did a paper on it while get my MBA at the U-Dub...

It's kind of boring to argue with you guys, so if there is any chance (and I doubt it) of you guys seeing the light of day, most of the good info is on places like this.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_arguments

Cause, it's really a circular argument with you folks.....

Taxes bad, Taxes Illegal, Taxes NOT in the consitution...

Same old, same old.....

why didn't Beck just get down and polish his helmet.............shit.....I mean c'mon Glenn...put your mouth where your money is.

Slaw @ 31:

Wait...I thought we hated the French?

HAHAHA!!!! :lol:

Symes @ 397:

rockyb @ 395:

Symes @ 379:

rockyb @ 373:

And without taxes it will be payed how?

What part of cutting 1 trillion from our military spending to pay for SS and Medicare and reduce debt dont you understand?

currently:
$325 Billion for Israel every year.
625 Billion military budget
$800 billion for war
$150 Billion for Saudi Arabia
$75 Billion for Egypt

and on and on and on!!!
Now do you see what will cut our debt and pay off interest?
Cut spending.

Sure, but if you eliminate taxes like I keep seeing all over the RP bot posts then you eliminate the funds as well.

Usually the people talking about eliminating all taxes are the people trying to make Ron Paul out to be the boogey man, not the RP "bots".

Ron Paul talks about cutting back on FEDERAL programs and getting rid of the FEDERAL income tax.

There are 2 key points to keep in mind here:

1.) FEDERAL does not equal ALL

2.) The FEDERAL governments revenue is not limited to ONLY the FEDERAL income tax.