Ron Paul Has Raised 5 Million in 2 months

[Gunny]

What do you base this conclusion on?

Please don't say you base it on anything you see in the mainstream media. They won't even benignly cover Ron unless it's during the day when everyone's at work, or it's to marginalize and discredit him.

He's a threat to the interests of corporate America, which are usually NEVER the same interests of the people.

He is the kind of man that the people of America really want in office, but the problem is that he doesn't get the same kind of exposure as the corporate stooges.

Please stop making it a party issue. So many people that i've talked to are switching party's to vote for Ron.

I campaign for this man in my area, and you would be amazed at the response we get from people. He has people doing this all over the country, and actually in 5 other countries. He has about half the amount of money as the corporate candidates, which all comes from individuals.

Whats so hard to accept about this man? If a bill isn't legal constitutionally, he votes NO. Why is that considered bad?

Why is it considered bad to not want to intervene in another sovereign nation's business? This doesn't make him an "isolationist" as he is so unfairly labeled. There is a huge difference between non-interventionism, and isolationism. Right now, the government picks on countries that have absolutely no means of posing any type of national security risk to the US, but we don't touch countries like North Korea, who actually shoot missiles.

Could it be that there is no real economic benefit to pre-emptively invading, and changing regimes in North Korea? Don't you think if Iran was doing the same thing as NK, we would have already invaded?

Why is it so hard for people to see what the real intentions are when it comes to the U.S. foreign policy?

I don't believe I commented on Paul's stance of foreign policy. My comment is based on US political reality. At best, he's just going to accomplish what Ross Perot did ... assure the Dems a minority vote win.

 

[red states rule]

This is funny, dont you mean they are trying to drive the US out of the region so they can have control over their own region?

Everyone seems to accept that we are there and its OK. Iraq does not belong the US. the US is the invading force.

The Blame America First crowd bellows once again

 

[red states rule]

I don't believe I commented on Paul's stance of foreign policy. My comment is based on US political reality. At best, he's just going to accomplish what Ross Perot did ... assure the Dems a minority vote win.

No he won't. He will be out of money and out of the picture soon enough

 

[onedomino]

No, it's not AMERICA's fault. It's the fault of the short-sighted, protection of corporate profits and government tax revenues by governments in Europe and America since oil became the fuel for economic growth. Jesus, you're dense.

First you say, "No, it's not America's fault." Then in the very next sentence you say, "It's the fault of...governments in Europe and America..." You are self-contradictory from one sentence to the next. Yep, it's all about oil; especially Afghanistan. You are right Bully. We should have been long-sighted and let the Soviets, Chinese, or Mullahs control the Gulf. To hell with the energy needs of Western Europe and Japan. They shoud have been made to fend for themselves. It would have been great if they had spent tons of money on weapons and contested for the Gulf themselves. That would have led to stability. Thanks for explaining the difference between "it's not America's fault" and "it's the fault of...governments in Europe and America..." You are right, I am dense, because I did not grasp that at first. All these years wasted protecting energy resources for the West...and we would have been so much safer with Don Quixote or Ron Paul at the helm.