Ron Paul

[Paulie]

Intervention,...you mean accept defeat don't you? He is not even an issue anyhow, so he will not matter when it's all said and done. Sorry bout that!

RON PAUL IS A NON-FACTOR!

Still haven't answered the question. Because you can't, can you? You can't explain why he's not a republican, as you claim. He was a republican before January, 2001, but now he's not, as you would claim.

You're a joke.

 

[LOki]

Things I don't like about him:

He wants to establish Health Savings Accounts (HSA) for everyone.

No he doesn't.

(If one does not work, will they still get one of these accounts?...

They'd be allowed to have one, I suppose.

Who will pay for it if so?)

You can, if you'd like.

He voted against the Patriot Act
(The Patriot Act has not violated my civil liberties by any means, and the PA has been effective.)

The PATRIOT Act is a violation of your civil rights, despite not having been used as such...yet. Wait until Hillary is elected. (The PATRIOT Act has been effective at what? circumventing FISA?)

He voted against the Iraq war. (What would he do,...sweet-talk evil?)

He voted against an undeclared war; he voted against a war that he felt was propagated in an unconstitutional manner. (What would you have him do? Defile the Constitution?)

I worry about liking Ron Paul, but these things are not on my list.

 

[midcan5]

Why?

Because he is too far from the core republican platform. Republicans preach small government and other cliches but that is smoke and mirrors to fool the common folk while they enter the back door with their corporate buddies to rob steal and pillage. Libertarianism is not a viable political platform for the same reason conservative politics is not, both cannot govern. The idea that things just take care of themselves if left on their own doesn't work. If nothing else, the numerous fluctuations of the economy prove regulation by a centralized government is essential for our livelihood and personal freedom. While I am exaggerating do we really want to live in a world of armed people with Enron mentalities and will that lead us to the promised land? But I think he is a decent man, just very naive given his experience and that surprises me.


http://www.amconmag.com/2005_03_14/article1.html

 

[LOki]

Because he is too far from the core republican platform.

Corporatism?

Republicans preach small government and other cliches but that is smoke and mirrors to fool the common folk while they enter the back door with their corporate buddies to rob steal and pillage.

I see we are going to agree.

Libertarianism is not a viable political platform for the same reason conservative politics is not, both cannot govern.

Perhaps your premise for government is faulty.

The idea that things just take care of themselves if left on their own doesn't work.

I don't know what "things" you're talking about, but people can actually take care of themselves, and each other, if you can manage to just leave them alone.

If nothing else, the numerous fluctuations of the economy prove regulation by a centralized government is essential for our livelihood and personal freedom.

This is just authoritarian nonsense.

While I am exaggerating do we really want to live in a world of armed people with Enron mentalities and will that lead us to the promised land?

But this is what we have. And while I exaggerate some myself, this is the world we are living in; this is the world embraced by the Republican/Fascist/Corporatist vs Democrat/Socialist/Communist paradigm that is currently accepted.

But I think he is a decent man, just very naive given his experience and that surprises me.


http://www.amconmag.com/2005_03_14/article1.html

Libertarianism just is not anarchy--so you can stop. Ok?

 

[Detmurds]

No he doesn't.
They'd be allowed to have one, I suppose.
You can, if you'd like.

The PATRIOT Act is a violation of your civil rights, despite not having been used as such...yet. Wait until Hillary is elected. (The PATRIOT Act has been effective at what? circumventing FISA?)

He voted against an undeclared war; he voted against a war that he felt was propagated in an unconstitutional manner. (What would you have him do? Defile the Constitution?)

I worry about liking Ron Paul, but these things are not on my list.

Hey, you need to read in Ron Paul's site before you tell me that I am wrong!

 

[eots]

Hey, you need to read in Ron Paul's site before you tell me that I am wrong!

you're so wrong that one might find ones self pondering "how much more wrong could detmurs be" ?

 

[Detmurds]

This is from Ron Paul's site:

It is time to take back our health care. This is why I support:

Making all medical expenses tax deductible.
Eliminating federal regulations that discourage small businesses from providing coverage.
Giving doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care.
Making every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and removing the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy before opening an HSA.
Reform licensure requirements so that pharmacists and nurses can perform some basic functions to increase access to care and lower

 

[Detmurds]

This is also from his site:

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

 

[eots]

This is also from his site:

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

wow ! what a patriot ! what a true statesmen !!!!! someone who votes consistently on what he believes ! you convinced me he has my vote !

and you can vote for your raise tax,unbalanced budget,gun control ,seeking pay raise,paid junket taking,drunk on power,anti-constitution,information controlling ,nation building interventionist candiate...you have a wide field to choose from

 

[Detmurds]

I didn't say Ron Paul sucks or anything like that, actually he has some good thoughts on what to do with the country, but I question how realistic it would actually be? Mark my word, he won't even finish as one of the top 5 Republicans.

I simply think that he doesn't have a chance because he is first and foremost a Libertarian, not a REPUBLICAN,......... and won't get nominated by REPUBLICANS.

I support the Patriot Act, and this Holy War that we are now in.

Is there anyone who posts in this message board who has had their civil rights violated? I doubt it.

 

[eots]

Ron Paul Smashes Record With $6 Million Plus Haul
Expect hit pieces to go into overdrive as media tries to spin momentous day

December 17, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson

Ron Paul has smashed the all-time record for political donations on one day, beating John Kerry's previous effort as he hauled in over $6 million dollars during a 24-hour period that coincided with the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. The true figure could even tally up to near $7 million once all donations have been fully processed.

As of 12 Midnight EST, Paul campaign headquarters confirmed the total to be over $6 million while others had the figure at around $6.4 million. That total just represents processed credit card donations. The final total is likely to be closer to $7 million once checks, Paypal e-checks, and money orders are fully processed.

At 6am CST, several news agencies such as Reuters were still reporting that Paul had raised just $4.5 million, which is a little odd considering the fact that writers are employed around the clock.


Paul campaign spokesman Jesse Benton confirmed that the average donation was around $50 dollars. Over 107,000 individual donors contributed to the sum of almost $18 million for the quarter and counting.

The Congressman is on course to quadruple his fundraising in comparison to the $5.1 million raised during the third quarter which itself was a doubling of the second quarter total.

We now expect the media spin machine to go into overdrive and hit pieces to swarm in the final week before Christmas.

An early CNN report on the record breaking fundraiser still sardonically refers to Paul as a "long shot" and fails to underline the true significance of yesterday's watershed and history making events.

 

[LOki]

This is from Ron Paul's site:

It is time to take back our health care. This is why I support:

Making all medical expenses tax deductible.
Eliminating federal regulations that discourage small businesses from providing coverage.
Giving doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care.
Making every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and removing the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy before opening an HSA.
Reform licensure requirements so that pharmacists and nurses can perform some basic functions to increase access to care and lower

You see Detmurds, there is a distinct difference between making every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and establishing one for everyone, as you claimed; just as there is a distinct difference between cutting and pasting from a web site, and actually reading and understanding it.

BTW: Making text red doesn't make it read.

 

[eots]

I didn't say Ron Paul sucks or anything like that, actually he has some good thoughts on what to do with the country, but I question how realistic it would actually be? Mark my word, he won't even finish as one of the top 5 Republicans.

I simply think that he doesn't have a chance because he is first and foremost a Libertarian, not a REPUBLICAN,......... and won't get nominated by REPUBLICANS.

I support the Patriot Act, and this Holy War that we are now in.

Is there anyone who posts in this message board who has had their civil rights violated? I doubt it.

A SELF PROCLAIMED JEHADIST ! I suppose you also believe that if a solider dies in battle he is rewarded with a new life in a magical place in the clouds in the land of milk and honey

 

[Paulie]

I simply think that he doesn't have a chance because he is first and foremost a Libertarian, not a REPUBLICAN,......... and won't get nominated by REPUBLICANS.

Libertarian is one of the ideologies that he loosely follows. He's not extreme on it, he has the amount of Libertarianism in him that has always historically been required to consider yourself a "Republican". A few quotes from that Wiki link:

Today, the Republican Party supports a pro-business platform, with further foundations in economic libertarianism and a brand of social conservatism increasingly based on the viewpoints of the Religious Right.[2]

Current ideology

Further information: Factions in the Republican Party (United States)

The Republican Party includes large numbers of fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, and libertarians.

The Republican Party is the more socially conservative and economically libertarian of the two major parties

You need to properly understand what your party represents, before you go making claims like you have. There's nothing non-republican about Ron Paul. NOTHING.

I support the Patriot Act, and this Holy War that we are now in.

Is there anyone who posts in this message board who has had their civil rights violated? I doubt it.

Anyone who has ever gone out to canvass politically, or to protest anything, and has been told by authorities that they are confined to a specific area called a "free speech zone", has had their civil rights violated.

This entire COUNTRY is a FREE SPEECH ZONE.

That is only one example, and that HAS happened to me.

 

[Annie]

Not quite so Republican on some economic issues:

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/10/ron_pauls_record_on_economic_i.php

Club for Growth Releases Seventh Presidential White Paper
Ron Paul: The Perfect as the Enemy of the Good

Washington - Today, the Club for Growth released its presidential white paper on Republican presidential candidate Representative Ron Paul (see PDF). The seventh in a series of white papers on the pro-growth records of presidential candidates, the attached report provides an extensive summary of Ron Paul's economic policies during his years in the U.S. House of Representatives.

"Ron Paul's record contains some very laudable components," said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. "On taxes, regulation, and political speech, his record is superb. His spending record is impressive, though Paul has recently embraced pork-barrel projects in direct contradiction to his vociferous opposition to unconstitutional appropriations by the federal government."

Unfortunately, his stubborn idealism often takes Ron Paul further away from achieving the limited-government, pro-growth philosophy he advocates. This is certainly the case with school choice, free trade, tort reform, and entitlement reform, in which he votes against vital free trade agreements, competitive school choice initiatives, and tort reform proposals.

"While we give Ron Paul credit for his philosophical ideals, politicians have the responsibility of making progress, and often, Ron Paul votes against making progress because, in his mind, the progress is not perfect," Mr. Toomey continued. "In these cases, although for very different reasons, Ron Paul is practically often aligned with the most left-wing Democrats, voting against important, albeit imperfect, pro-growth legislation. Ron Paul is, undoubtedly, ideologically committed to pro-growth limited-government policies, but his insistence on opposing all but the perfect means that under a Ron Paul presidency we might never get a chance to pursue the good too."

 

[Paulie]

Not quite so Republican on some economic issues:

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/10/ron_pauls_record_on_economic_i.php

In other words, he's not PERFECT. Which no one ever claimed he was.

Kathianne, this is probably the best piece you've posted which breaks down RP. A pretty fair assessment of him. I'm even learning some things about him on here, but I have to admit though, some of their assessments of his voting seemed biased and out of context.

Still though, the main key Republican points are where he does score excellent, even as per this article.

The Tort reform bills I agree with him on. It shouldn't be a federal issue to deal with individual cases of litigation all over the country. States would be in a much better position to handle their own affairs legally, politically, and financially, if they weren't being held hostage to federal regulation/funding.

Not quite sure what to think of the pork, except to say most of it started this year, and it may be due to his increase in recognition. If there's a member of congress responsible for less pork though, I'd like to see it. Some of that pork seemed like it would be helpful economically, or at least for a good cause. Maybe I'm wrong, though. I'm willing to admit as much.

They still just don't seem like big enough issues to take out a candidacy. If they were, the media would be hitting on them. But if they did THAT, they'd have to hit on the much broader and larger one's that the top-tier candidates are guilty of.

EDIT: I've also yet to see it be explained why any of the Free trade agreements should be considered "vital". You can't just say they're "vital", and knock him for not supporting them. Tell us WHY they're vital. I happen to think they undermine our sovereignty.

 

[Detmurds]

A SELF PROCLAIMED JEHADIST ! I suppose you also believe that if a solider dies in battle he is rewarded with a new life in a magical place in the clouds in the land of milk and honey

No, ....I will just keep believing in God ok.

And, LOki,...HSA is what he wants. Don't beat it up.

 

[eots]

No, ....I will just keep believing in God ok.

And, LOki,...HSA is what he wants. Don't beat it up.

a god that blesses the troops for killing of iraqs women and children
in the name of a holy war ?

 

[William Joyce]

Storm Front, and anti-semitism. I think you've noticed.

1. According to Don Black of Stormfront (you can listen to his talks from the site), RP is "not one of us," i.e., pro-white.

2. Even if he were, why would this be a BAD thing? Do you have any idea what the biggest underswelling issue in America is right now? It's the dispossession and displacement of what was America's majority population, whites, for nearly 400 years. The fact that the nation's pro-whites are supporting, in large measure, this one candidate, DESPITE that candidate not sharing their racial views (but being seen as best option), should tell you where we are headed. Not for the goddamn candyland that Newt Gingrich promises, I can tell you that. Jesus Conservatism a la Huckabee, military support a la McCain, economic/crime fighting/terrorism conservatism a la Giuliani, anti-immigration a la Tancredo and freedom a la Paul... they're ALL just SUBSTITUTES for the once and future white racial consciousness.

 

[Annie]

1. According to Don Black of Stormfront (you can listen to his talks from the site), RP is "not one of us," i.e., pro-white.

2. Even if he were, why would this be a BAD thing? Do you have any idea what the biggest underswelling issue in America is right now? It's the dispossession and displacement of what was America's majority population, whites, for nearly 400 years. The fact that the nation's pro-whites are supporting, in large measure, this one candidate, DESPITE that candidate sharing their racial views, should tell you where we are headed. Not for the goddamn candyland that Newt Gingrich promises, I can tell you that.

You know I like ya, I've made that clear enough when you come up for air. On the other hand, we'll never agree on the white man's mantra.