Ron Paul - FYI

[M Dogg™]

this guy right here is who Paul reminds me of. Kucinich is the liberal version of him, just with a liberal slant. Reality is, even though both did great in the debates, neither will win. Get ready for Guiliani/Clinton, and as a Democrat, I'm voting Guiliani, because I hate monachies. My support, Obama, if you want real change, vote for someone who actually is real change.

Why concede so early on?  Because he's not endorsed or given fair airtime my mainstream media?  I'm sorry man, but FUCK THAT.  The internet is 1000x more powerful than any mainstream media shenanigans (which is why all these fake ass politicians want to control and regulate it).  Think about it - Ron Paul is ABC / NBC / CBS's worst nightmare because he is proof that people can get the TRUTH about America and The World without going through a middle man w/ an agenda.

If you think America is in an INCREDIBLY dangerous and potentially fatal situation (which it is), Ron Paul is the answer, imo.  Spread the word man and don't concede defeat.

I don't think Ron Paul is the answer. I perfer Kucinich anyday over Ron Paul, but I'm a liberal.

I have decided though, that if Clinton wins the Republican nomination, I'm voting Green. I was thinking Guiliani, but his too dangerous, and will basically be a pro-life version of Bush, who right now America hates. But if America hates Bush, but supports Guiliani who will be the same, it makes you wonder, does America think it knows what it wants.

Now Ron Paul is in a bad situation, it will be hard for him to win the Republican nomination. He reminds me of Pat Buchanan. Pat against Bush I, and basically tried to get the Republicans to go back to what they stand for. Same with Paul, his a TRUE Republican. Republicans use to be all like Ron Paul during the 70's-2000, then Bush tried to change it with his Compassionate Conservatism, which is neither compassionate or conservatism.

Harsh reality, Only Republican who has a chance at change is Mitch Rommy, he is the only one that can challenge Guiliani. Ron Pauls only hope on being on the balliot in Nov. 2008 is on a third party ticket. Also, the internet is powerful, and when our generation gets into power, the internet will be unstoppable. But right now, the Baby Boomers are in power, and their numbers are larger than the Millenials (a.k.a. Gen Y), and since the Reagan years, they've chose the president.

[J @ M @ L]

I perfer Kucinich anyday over Ron Paul, but I'm a liberal.

I have decided though, that if Clinton wins the Republican nomination, I'm voting Green. 

Republicans use to be all like Ron Paul during the 70's-2000, then Bush tried to change it with his Compassionate Conservatism, which is neither compassionate or conservatism.

You prefer Kucinich over Ron Paul BECAUSE you're a liberal... not in spite of the fact.

Clinton = Democrat

No, Republicans didn't all use to be like Ron Paul during the 1970-2000 years.

[virtuoso]

So that is why you have been dissed so many times recently Jrome speaking of course about your karma taking a pounding lol obviously your screen name has that type of impact!. I respect the fact that you have taken the time to really look into this politician he is what the people need and this is therefore why the media are launching a blackballing campaign against them. I understand the justification you gave about perhaps sour grapes on the part of the media but it goes much deeper than that the major media corporations are affiliated with the republicans or democrats and their ideology goes right to the core of this. In political circles Ron Paul is something of a renegade what he stands for can cause a great deal of harm to the very interests which currently wield so much power and that is why they are trying to stop him. I don't think he is under any illusions here he knows that he got could get shot for this just like Kennedy was (referring to the recently released E Howard Hunt confessions.

This is what makes his stance all the more commendable because he is putting himself in very dangerous waters....it's nothing for him to be assasinated, that's not paranoia or crazy talk it's just fact. I really wish there was a comparable person in British politics but instead the candidates are a joke who simply play a dog and pony show which in truth when you skim past the rhetoric their policies are exactly the same and this is admitted by former politicians on both sides when pressed on the issue. Ron Paul needs to be elected president not just for americans but for everyone, the geopoliticial ramifications would be absolutely enormous, Obama is scum and that is the truth why else would he vote in favour of HR166, an act which allows the U.S to declare any U.S citizen an enemy combatant, Guliani it's been well documented by the first responders how he completely abandoned them, Hilary is unashamedly a war mongerer.

Which is where these political tags like conservative liberal begin to look very worn because in truth these candidates do the complete opposite to what is says on the tin. Notice how a continual semantical word battle is being waged in which they have simply tried to redefine these terms i.e. Kuzinich is described as a liberal and yet he wants to enforce a complete gun ban. The right to bear arms is protected under the constitution and under the constitution these are your god given rights, whether you believe in god is irrelevant to the principle of the constitution  As for this notion that a well regulated militia describes the national guard thus citizens have no legal right to bear arms, that is simply untrue. If you look more into Jeffersons writings you can find many instances where he explicitly details every man having a gun to protect himself against the dangers of tyranny i will find some of his quotes. Also of course hypothetically speaking it would mean Kuzinich would be swearing an oath to uphold the consititution and yet would then be committing open treason.

Here is a few example;

No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
---Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.

[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
---James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.

Zacharia Johnson argued that the new Constitution could never result in religious persecution or other oppression because:
"[T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them."

Roger Sherman, during House consideration of a militia bill (1790):

[C]onceived it to be the privilege of every citizen, and one of his most essential rights, to bear arms, and to resist every attack upon his liberty or property, by whomsoever made. The particular states, like private citizens, have a right to be armed, and to defend, by force of arms, their rights, when invaded.

14 Debates in the House of Representatives, ed. Linda Grand De Pauw. (Balt., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1972), 92-3.

Many more quotes can be found here .

[Teddy Roosevelt]

So that is why you have been dissed so many times recently Jrome speaking of course about your karma taking a pounding lol obviously your screen name has that type of impact!. I respect the fact that you have taken the time to really look into this politician he is what the people need and this is therefore why the media are launching a blackballing campaign against them. I understand the justification you gave about perhaps sour grapes on the part of the media but it goes much deeper than that the major media corporations are affiliated with the republicans or democrats and their ideology goes right to the core of this. In political circles Ron Paul is something of a renegade what he stands for can cause a great deal of harm to the very interests which currently wield so much power and that is why they are trying to stop him. I don't think he is under any illusions here he knows that he got could get shot for this just like Kennedy was (referring to the recently released E Howard Hunt confessions.

This is what makes his stance all the more commendable because he is putting himself in very dangerous waters....it's nothing for him to be assasinated, that's not paranoia or crazy talk it's just fact. I really wish there was a comparable person in British politics but instead the candidates are a joke who simply play a dog and pony show which in truth when you skim past the rhetoric their policies are exactly the same and this is admitted by former politicians on both sides when pressed on the issue. Ron Paul needs to be elected president not just for americans but for everyone, the geopoliticial ramifications would be absolutely enormous, Obama is scum and that is the truth why else would he vote in favour of HR166, an act which allows the U.S to declare any U.S citizen an enemy combatant, Guliani it's been well documented by the first responders how he completely abandoned them, Hilary is unashamedly a war mongerer.

Which is where these political tags like conservative liberal begin to look very worn because in truth these candidates do the complete opposite to what is says on the tin. Notice how a continual semantical word battle is being waged in which they have simply tried to redefine these terms i.e. Kuzinich is described as a liberal and yet he wants to enforce a complete gun ban. The right to bear arms is protected under the constitution and under the constitution these are your god given rights, whether you believe in god is irrelevant to the principle of the constitution  As for this notion that a well regulated militia describes the national guard thus citizens have no legal right to bear arms, that is simply untrue. If you look more into Jeffersons writings you can find many instances where he explicitly details every man having a gun to protect himself against the dangers of tyranny i will find some of his quotes. Also of course hypothetically speaking it would mean Kuzinich would be swearing an oath to uphold the consititution and yet would then be committing open treason.

Here is a few example;

No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
---Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.

[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
---James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.

Zacharia Johnson argued that the new Constitution could never result in religious persecution or other oppression because:
"[T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them."

Roger Sherman, during House consideration of a militia bill (1790):

[C]onceived it to be the privilege of every citizen, and one of his most essential rights, to bear arms, and to resist every attack upon his liberty or property, by whomsoever made. The particular states, like private citizens, have a right to be armed, and to defend, by force of arms, their rights, when invaded.

14 Debates in the House of Representatives, ed. Linda Grand De Pauw. (Balt., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1972), 92-3.

Many more quotes can be found here .

You covered a lot here. But let me bring up a point about this gun control issue. I'm kind of in split on the issue of gun control, but it is irelevent what Jefferson (and a few others) felt about militia and guns. He wasn't the one who approved the constitution alone. In order to find out what is meant by this amendment, you'd have to look at the views of all people who voted for the constitution. Even then it is open to interpertation by the courts.

[virtuoso]

With Alberto Gonzalez anything is possible!! he makes ashcroft look like an absolute saint. a perfect example of this Ted

Lol it doesn't get much sicker than this....

Responding to questions from Sen. Arlen Specter at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Jan. 18, Gonzales argued that the Constitution doesn't explicitly bestow habeas corpus rights; it merely says when the so-called Great Writ can be suspended.
  "There is no expressed grant of habeas in the Constitution; there's a prohibition against taking it away," Gonzales said.

   Gonzales's remark left Specter, the committee's ranking Republican, stammering.

[jeromechickenbone]

I pretty much agree w/ Jefferson on the right to bear arms thing.  America is in a crazy situation right now.  You've got people in power trying to silence the opposition and it's not gonna work.  You can't deny the natural evolution of people, and that's what the internet is.  Shit could potentially get ugly.

[M Dogg™]

I pretty much agree w/ Jefferson on the right to bear arms thing.  America is in a crazy situation right now.  You've got people in power trying to silence the opposition and it's not gonna work.  You can't deny the natural evolution of people, and that's what the internet is.  Shit could potentially get ugly.

America has always been in a crazy situation, the wild west, slavery, the Depression, we have always been a country that was one good invasion away from showing an invading country not to fuck with us. The only time we where not was between WWII and 9/11, and that's about it.

[jeromechickenbone]

I pretty much agree w/ Jefferson on the right to bear arms thing.  America is in a crazy situation right now.  You've got people in power trying to silence the opposition and it's not gonna work.  You can't deny the natural evolution of people, and that's what the internet is.  Shit could potentially get ugly.

America has always been in a crazy situation, the wild west, slavery, the Depression, we have always been a country that was one good invasion away from showing an invading country not to fuck with us. The only time we where not was between WWII and 9/11, and that's about it.

Totally different ballgame my brotha.  While those situations were in fact "crazy situations" the shit going on right now is on a whole 'nother level.  America is now ran as a company with the president being the CEO.  That is a huge problem.  Anybody that doesn't fall in line w/ the current dictatorship is blackballed.  And I'm not speaking solely about Bush, I'm talking about Romney, Clinton, Obama, pretty much any candidate that is annointed as a "real" candidate by the mainstream media.  Why do they chose who is a realistic candidate?

Why is Romney the only chance?  He's Bush all over again.  He's a neocon who justifies all his actions as divine rite.  The media makes ridiculous claims that he's gonna be our next president because "he looks the most presidential".  Are you fucking kidding me?  The guy has nice haircut and looks good in his suit and therefore the media annoints him as the leader of our country?  This isn't fucking American Idol.

[M Dogg™]

I pretty much agree w/ Jefferson on the right to bear arms thing.  America is in a crazy situation right now.  You've got people in power trying to silence the opposition and it's not gonna work.  You can't deny the natural evolution of people, and that's what the internet is.  Shit could potentially get ugly.

America has always been in a crazy situation, the wild west, slavery, the Depression, we have always been a country that was one good invasion away from showing an invading country not to fuck with us. The only time we where not was between WWII and 9/11, and that's about it.

Totally different ballgame my brotha.  While those situations were in fact "crazy situations" the shit going on right now is on a whole 'nother level.  America is now ran as a company with the president being the CEO.  That is a huge problem.  Anybody that doesn't fall in line w/ the current dictatorship is blackballed.  And I'm not speaking solely about Bush, I'm talking about Romney, Clinton, Obama, pretty much any candidate that is annointed as a "real" candidate by the mainstream media.  Why do they chose who is a realistic candidate?

Why is Romney the only chance?  He's Bush all over again.  He's a neocon who justifies all his actions as divine rite.  The media makes ridiculous claims that he's gonna be our next president because "he looks the most presidential".  Are you fucking kidding me?  The guy has nice haircut and looks good in his suit and therefore the media annoints him as the leader of our country?  This isn't fucking American Idol.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/1gMlHv2lDqA" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/1gMlHv2lDqA</a>

[Narrator]

Yes, I will say that the only good thing, and I do mean the ONLY good thing, about Ron Paul is his pro-2nd Amendment stance.  I like the 2nd Amendment because it allows me to acquire enormous quantities of weapons for my revolution.  However, if you aren't out on the streets bucking crackers down with ya chopper, you ain't down with me, and therefore you too shall have to perish in a hail of AK rounds on Judgment Day.

But, yeah...support the 2nd Amendment so that I'll have enough guns to kill whitey!

[Teddy Roosevelt]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/MgjI_WROg6w" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/MgjI_WROg6w</a>

[Sparegeez]

Wow are you guys serious about this guy? Some people really need to open their eyes. Is the income tax making you guys poor? Is it starving you idiots like the kids in Africa and South America? How are we gonna fund our schools? That will mean less money to the public schools and more money to the private schools. If they take away the income tax, they will tax something else. And I can guarantee it won't be something you guys will like.

If you wanna take away taxes, take it from the poor and middle class. Tax the rich. They're the ones using up most of our recources anyways.

And if this idiot takes away the benefits from illegals, like free education, it would be chaos. Where do you think these illegal youth will go on school hours? There will be more crime on the street, more poverty and will only make the situation worse. This is fine for republicans because you idiot don't give a fuck about big cities because most of your fan base comes from hicktowns.

[Primo]

^^^ Ron Paul is only running under the republican name. He is a views and political stance are Libertarian. Listen, the income tax is illegal and does NOT fund our schools. So that problem is gone. Paul is an isolationist and wants America to stop policing the world. Do you have any idea how much money is spent on this Neo-Con Globalist agenda. Its money  best spent at home.

[virtuoso]

That simply is not true many of the taxes raised are allocated directly towards the pockets of the federal reserve, the federal reserve prints the money out of thin air borrows it to the government for it's spending and then charges a very sizeable interest rate thus your taxes keep increasing to repay this burden. This is one of the many reasons why Ron Paul wants to reintroduce the gold standard as a competing factor against the fed.

[Teddy Roosevelt]

Wow are you guys serious about this guy? Some people really need to open their eyes. Is the income tax making you guys poor? Is it starving you idiots like the kids in Africa and South America? How are we gonna fund our schools? That will mean less money to the public schools and more money to the private schools. If they take away the income tax, they will tax something else. And I can guarantee it won't be something you guys will like.

The Federal government supplies minimul funding for schools. Like So Glorious said, the goverment spends a lot more money on wars and foriegn intervention (something Ron Paul is against) then it does on education.