Who here likes Ron Paul?

[inmuchpain]

I am very curious?

[meatw4d]

He's got my vote. I'm advocating him at work too. Apparently a lot of people haven't even heard of him.

[thcbongman]

Overall I think Ron Paul is all right. There are some parts of his views I strongly disagree with, like reverting back to the Gold Standard, and his views on health-care. Despite that he's got my vote if he makes it. He's consistent on his tax policy and pledge to cut spending, views on states-right issues, and personal liberty.

[4.2O]

i like him and im voting for him.

[420izzle]

I like Ron Paul and will vote for him in the upcoming primaries and I will support him beyond that into the general elections and I will continue to be a part of this movement no matter what happens. The revolution is underway. We are at a precipice.

[StickyfingahZ]

Ron Paul,seems like the best so far.

[epxroot]

I like Ron Paul and will vote for him in the upcoming primaries and I will support him beyond that into the general elections and I will continue to be a part of this movement no matter what happens. The revolution is underway. We are at a precipice.

I am right with you on this one!!

[medicinal]

I am right with you on this one!!

As with some of his programs like privatization of all social programs, I have Issues, but the majority of his agenda makes sense, and I am a sensible guy. If he would just guarantee Single Payer medical and the continuation of social security, I'd be all over him.

[Vendico]

He's the only one I truly believe isn't lying when he talks.

Just youtube videos about him. You'll see that for yourself.

[swice1]

he's got my vote!

[rockon696]

Ron Paul is the only one I will vote for.

[tootsie roll]

He is the one I will vote for also.

Today driving home, I saw many lawns with his signs on them.
I'd like to surround our property with them. Any idea where I can get 30-40 signs? I'm totally on board.:hippy:

[Zimzum]

Any idea where I can get 30-40 signs? I'm totally on board.:hippy:

Ron Paul 2008 Home Page (http://www.ronpaul2008store.com)

[rebgirl420]

I like him :)

[naturelovinpuffer]

Yea i will have to say that no i do not like ron paul. he is absolutely ridiculous. I really just dont like him and his views on things.

Im for OBAMA!!! Who here is for obama?


We do not need yet another clinton in the white house though


Peace and Love
*Nature

[GrinS]

Only one candidate speaks of change.
Only one candidate has shown extreme knowledge on subjects like the federal reserve, war, foreign policy, and personal liberties.
Only one candidate has shown the overwhelming emotion, and representation of the American people.
Only one candidate is actually using the constitution to decide his side of topics, rather than his own personal opinion or the options of his religious background.

That candidate is Ron Paul.

Obama, Clinton, McCain, and etc. don't want change, they just want to keep "tweaking" this current system that has been put into places over these last few presidential terms and like so many of the Ron Paul supporter base, the American people are tired of it, and really really want change.

[angry nomad]

Me.

[angry nomad]

Overall I think Ron Paul is all right. There are some parts of his views I strongly disagree with, like reverting back to the Gold Standard, and his views on health-care. Despite that he's got my vote if he makes it. He's consistent on his tax policy and pledge to cut spending, views on states-right issues, and personal liberty.

If he makes it? He already made it. Register Republican and vote for him in the primaries.

[420izzle]

Yea i will have to say that no i do not like ron paul. he is absolutely ridiculous. I really just dont like him and his views on things.

^I'm guessing that you haven't really looked into Dr. Paul's message. You didn't offer any info to suggest otherwise...


Im for OBAMA!!! Who here is for obama?

Obama is .....well....an illusion (http://www.zmag.org/ZMagSite/Feb2007/street0207.html). he's a media darling. He is handsome and charismatic, smart and seems nice enough. His foreign policy scares me though and overall, he doesn't stand for much change...the change this country needs, IMHO. You know, he's funded in large by the same folks that support Hillary, Giuliani, and all the establishment candidates. Besides, he (and his wife (http://antinewworldorder.blogspot.com/2007/09/obamas-cfr-ties-exposed-by-swarming-ron.html)) is CFR. (http://www.nowpublic.com/obama-cfr)[/QUOTE]



We do not need yet another clinton in the white house though


Peace and Love
*Nature

I totally agree, no hillary! And Peace and LOVE

R3OLution!

But really, google Ron Paul. Just this last summer I was supporting Obama. But then I woke up.

[dragonrider]

Ron Paul wants to privatise many aspects of government that I do not think should be privatised. And he wants to deregulate many industries that I do not think should be deregulated.

I do not like Ron Paul.

[dragonrider]

Forget Ron Paul, vote RuPaul! RuPaul - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RuPaul)

[epxroot]

Ron Paul wants to privatise many aspects of government that I do not think should be privatised. And he wants to deregulate many industries that I do not think should be deregulated.

I do not like Ron Paul.

Could you please go into some more detail on this?

[dragonrider]

Could you please go into some more detail on this?

The example I probably care most about is Ron Paul's opposition to environmental regulation. He favors pursuing polluters through a private property rights approach, which I don't think works. In some cases you need an agency to oversee pollution or other environemntal degradation that occurs on private property.

[Jouryokujin]

Yea i will have to say that no i do not like ron paul. he is absolutely ridiculous. I really just dont like him and his views on things.

Im for OBAMA!!! Who here is for obama?


So you like the patriot act?...Because Obama loves it...Also, check out what he thinks about war with Iran and Pakistan. Check out his voting record. Check out his plan for "universal healthcare" (hint: it's not really universal healthcare...more like a scam to benefit insurance companies). I personally don't think Obama would even have a chance if he didn't look like he might be a young black guy (even this is up for debate!).

I wasn't sure if there has been a candidate worth voting for since Jefferson....Then Ron Paul came around.

[naturelovinpuffer]

I don't feel that we are EVER going to have universal health care I don't know if you have noticed but the government is just money hungry. I don't even think ron paul could get a act together about universal health care. America is NOT about the FAMILY and other people they are about themselves so i don't feel anyone can get universal health care for the US

[Jouryokujin]

The example I probably care most about is Ron Paul's opposition to environmental regulation. He favors pursuing polluters through a private property rights approach, which I don't think works. In some cases you need an agency to oversee pollution or other environemntal degradation that occurs on private property.

Have you ever had your emissions checked (your vehicle)? If you have, and you failed the test, you'd realize our current system of environmental protection doesn't work either. You fail that test, you pay them a fine, and you're off to go....You don't need to fix your car....you pay....and I don't think that money scrubs our air clean. As far as regulating emissions from factories, why can't states and the people do this? The only reason people are apathetic nowdays is because they've lived in a system they have no control in all their lives...when you have no control, why care? Caring in a system like that only leads to stress....

[JDMBoy420]

Im going to register and vote for Ron paul..! everyone else has there head up there culo's or trying to make their puppet masters happy.. nuff said :stoned:

[dragonrider]

Have you ever had your emissions checked (your vehicle)? If you have, and you failed the test, you'd realize our current system of environmental protection doesn't work either. You fail that test, you pay them a fine, and you're off to go....You don't need to fix your car....you pay....and I don't think that money scrubs our air clean. As far as regulating emissions from factories, why can't states and the people do this? The only reason people are apathetic nowdays is because they've lived in a system they have no control in all their lives...when you have no control, why care? Caring in a system like that only leads to stress....

I'm not sure where you live, but the emissions control doesn't work that way here --- if you don't pass, you don't get a registration tag, and the car cannot be driven. Anyway, I'm not sure where you are going with that argument. Are you saying that pollution regulations don't work well enough, so we don't need them at all? I'm pretty sure that if no one was required to pass a smog check, and we just left it all up to individuals, then most people would not bother checking if their car was running clean or not, and the air would be dirtier.

But I wasn't talking about smog checks on cars, which are already handled under state law, not a matter for presidential politics. I'm talking more about things like the endangered species act, clean air act, clean water act, and others that are handled at the federal level. Ron Paul's position is that imposing restrictions on what a person or company can do on their own land is a form of "taking" or "eminent domain" and he opposes it. He feels that if pollution or other environmental problem spills over onto someone elses land, then that other owner has a legal recourse to prevent the other person's pollution from polluting their land --- so it is all handled as a private property issue. It doesn't work. An endagnered species does not have it's own lawyers and doesn not own land, so that form of protection does not work for endangered species. Also, if you do not prevent pollution from occuring on an ongoing basis, then by the time the pollution has already occured and the second landowner decides to sue, the polluter can basically declare bankrupcy, and nothing gets done. I think sometimes a government agency is required to handle these things.

[dragonrider]

One I am female dont talk to me like i am your fucking gang buddy. and two the reason why we have a low turn out in oregon is because this is a very liberal state and well the people in oregon are smart for not voting, i feel its every man for himself completely. I.E like food stamps and welfare . . who is on that .. hmm the i think we all know. People who are lazy!!! im so sorry to say it but those people are lazy. GET off your ass and get a job, make a better life for yourself and your kids.

Peace and Green
*Nature


So to bad I wont vote just becasue people tell me i need to. their are thousands of other cazy ass people who like politics. i feel its a headache.

It's interesting that you think it should be every man for himself, but earlier you sounded like you were in support of universal health care. It doesn't seem consistent.

I personally am in favor of some kind of minimum level of universal health care. Ron Paul is not. He is definitley more of an every-man-for-himself kind of guy.

[texas grass]

ill vote for paul, but the states and polls wont let us vote for him, or hardly actnoledge him

hes the only candidate that cares of the origional constitution
hes the only candidate that shows he cares for the citizens
hes the only candidate that says the citizens should have the say so

[dragonrider]

ill vote for paul, but the states and polls wont let us vote for him


What do you mean they won't let you vote for him? Isn't he on your primary election ballot?

[naturelovinpuffer]

It's interesting that you think it should be every man for himself, but earlier you sounded like you were in support of universal health care. It doesn't seem consistent.

I personally am in favor of some kind of minimum level of universal health care. Ron Paul is not. He is definitley more of an every-man-for-himself kind of guy.


yes that is right and that is the only reason i give ron paul the time of my day. but I also agree with the universal health care-I WAS NOT SAYING IM NOT FOR IT. I am for it, I wish we could have a universal health care system, but then you get the lazy Americans just using US as their way of getting by in life. I dont want some white trash trailer trash sitting on their ass drinking a 40 of PBR belching and yelling to the wife to get him another! sorry that is just the hopeless America, now as you said I am may not sound consistent, I am a independent . . . only becuase i like everyones views on things, so i like everyone and dont like everyone for the same reasons

[StOnEdMoNk]

im voting for ron paul he has alot of interests that im for and besides hes for the legalization of marijuana thats not the only reason im voting for him tho

[Chong Version 2.0]

I'm not American but he's got my vote. :D

[dragonrider]

I'm not American but he's got my vote. :D

Oh, no! Not anonther one of THOSE elections!

[mogencho]

he seems like the best choice from what ive seen and heard, but ive only heard the good parts and im pretty sure theres are some things he wants to change that seem absurd to other people.

and isnt he legalizing marijuana??

[EbelEyes]

He looks alright, I guess. Not as bad as the other bastards.

Still, I'm not registering to vote.

[randomname4888]

i love ron paul hes got my vote.

[Blaised]

If he was not going to legalize marijuana, would he still get your vote?

[AntMan757]

i don't believe any of em

just a bunch of lies to me

its not like our votes count anymore

since all the rigging and shit

[Nailhead]

But really, google Ron Paul. Just this last summer I was supporting Obama. But then I woke up.

Same here, and I'm so glad I made the switch. I've always been more conservative anyway, I just registered democrat because up until now there hasn't been a republican I would want in the oval office.

I'm starting to get as disgusted with democrats than I am for most republicans, democrats are ignoring our economy problems with their stupid universal health care ideas, and republicans the same with perpetuating an endless war that is putting us in huge debt to China. Ron Paul seems to be the only one making sense and not just telling us what we want to hear when he talks. The rest are just actors and nobody really knows what they will do once they are behind the seat.


If he was not going to legalize marijuana, would he still get your vote?

Yes, marijuana legalization is not a high priority for a presidential candidate. It is important, but not as much as the war and the economy and our rights.

[Snorbel]

Ron Paul is riding high on the current wave of discontent over our bad government.

But his solution is less government, rather than good government. The last thing this nation needs is more dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself attitude. Makes for unfriendly people.

I might consider voting for him, if he somehow manages to get on the republican ticket. But I think that his reactionary policies to current affairs will make things worse, but then we might be able to bounce back to a happy medium after that.

He has a lot of hype going for him and the cannabis lovers love him for his stance on the drug war. And it's about time the federal government got out of that.

Just not sure the good outweighs the bad. And it's enough of an indecision to not register republican for the primaries.

[angry nomad]

i don't believe any of em

just a bunch of lies to me

its not like our votes count anymore

since all the rigging and shit

Look at Ron Paul's voting record. It has been consistent for 20 years,

[dobiepaq]

Ron Paul - President
Alan Keyes - Vice President

[Rikitikitavi]

Hes got my vote for sure.

[JDMBoy420]

Viva La Revolucion!

[Spellbound]

I'm hesitant to support him mostly because he's running on the Republican ticket. I am not a fan of them ^_^ but I do like many of his focal points so he's got my consideration, moreso than anyone else.

[dragonrider]

Ron Paul - President
Alan Keyes - Vice President

If they don't get the Republican nomination, they can form their own party: The Wackadoos.

[O. G. ganja smoker]

^communists cant find anything bad to say about good people so they just insult them how childish

[HateHeaven]

Ron Paul > ObamaHillary

[dragonrider]

^communists cant find anything bad to say about good people so they just insult them how childish

I apologize profusely for suggesting that Ron Paul and Alan Keyes could form their own party together called the Wackadoos. That was very childish of me --- probably just my communist side coming out. I'm sure those two together will make a very fine Republican ticket --- the only real question is why not Alan Keyes on TOP of the ticket? Either way they would make a great pair, with wide support across a broad swath of the country!

Thank you for setting a mature example for me and inspiring me to be more mature myself.

[chucktownbeez1]

Ron Paul has my vote, I think he's great.

[klup]

he has good ideas but hell never win when he wants to dismember all these major governments programs. you never legalize all 'drugs' anyway. at least not all at once at

[camelflauge]

Ron certainly has my vote :). My only problem with Ron is that he from Texas, I love the state, but not the presidents.

IMO, Obama is the Anti-Christ. It's the truth.

RON PAUL 08

[silkyblue]

Id drink Ron Pauls bathwater, if he gets elected prez, and legalises herby!

[HateHeaven]

Does he have the power to legalize? I know he said he would stop the feds from going against state laws, but other than medicinal goes can he legalize nationwide?

[silkyblue]

Only if hes President of the US! All theyd need to do, is not so much make it legal overnight! But

take it off! the arrest list!

[swice1]

ME! Yay for less government control.

[cherub420]

i like Ron Paul for republican (even if he doesn't win the republican primary he will be running for the libertarian party)

and i like Dennis Kucinich for democrat

[Old Stoner]

First question - would ANY of you who said you would vote for Ron Paul do so if he were ANTI-MARIJUANA?

Second question - Why?

Third question - What are your ages - the ones who want to vote for Ron Paul, and...

Fourth question - Are you registered to vote?

Now my take on this entire legalization issue.

Some of you fail to realize that Ron Paul, or ANY OTHER PERSON ELECTED PRESIDENT (not yelling, just EMPHASIZING!) - Well, whomever is elected president CAN NOT legalize Cannabis. Due to the fact in the next paragraph.

There is this little thing called the Legeslative Branch of our government to contend with. The United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. THEY make the laws. NOT the president. These people are the ones you folks need to be a little more concerned over.

Get rid of the old farts, and bring in some new blood. Ted Kennedy is 188 years old. How in the world do we keep electing people who can't even say Barack Obama correctly? (Kennedy called him "Osama" Obama by "misspeak" awhile ago. Geez...

Sure, the president has the right to veto, but in actuality, he has little to say about the legalization of anything.

I read this entire thread, and it seems to me that, and NO offense to anyone, that many of you are very young and have not researched the candidates as well as you should have.

Remember, voting is a PRIVILEGE. YOU are the one who says who's in and who's out. I urge each of you to vote with intelligence after MUCH research.

Personally, on the question of the thread - no, I will not vote for Ron Paul. Ron Paul wants to bring our troops on and quit the fight against terror - apparently he'd rather do it on the streets of New York. Hmmmm... kinda isolationist, don't ya think?

Matter of fact, it looks like we have very slim pickings again this year on ANY KIND of decent candidate.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see if those guys in Florida can figure out the ballots. ;)

[BlackHole]

Isloationist? that is quite a judgement you have there.. you must be like everyone else voting for rich evil bastards who want to police the globe... which is UNMANGEABLE we have to fix our own country, so that our own nation and other nations will RESPECT us. we have murdered almost 700,000 Iraqis do u care about those inisint YOUNG iraqis and 4000 US troops. not to mention it costs us TRILLIONS to run this greedy war Have we accomplished anything???? :wtf: NO we havent so get us the fuck back home.. and protect us while u still can... i will be tempted to leave the country for a while if ron paul looses... THE MAIN reason ron paul has a chance against these money hungry people is the US troops who lost thier friends and KNOW FROM BEING ON THE GROUND THIER that these Iraqs fight more deadly than any george bush monkey could understand. they said 6days, 6weeks mabye 6 more.. DONT U understand what the people of this nation truly are crying out for change.

[BlackHole]

u also have a the word PEACE is big letters on ur sig..but u think we should kill kill kill right?

[Esaron]

First question - would ANY of you who said you would vote for Ron Paul do so if he were ANTI-MARIJUANA?

Second question - Why?

Third question - What are your ages - the ones who want to vote for Ron Paul, and...

Fourth question - Are you registered to vote?

Now my take on this entire legalization issue.

Some of you fail to realize that Ron Paul, or ANY OTHER PERSON ELECTED PRESIDENT (not yelling, just EMPHASIZING!) - Well, whomever is elected president CAN NOT legalize Cannabis. Due to the fact in the next paragraph.

There is this little thing called the Legeslative Branch of our government to contend with. The United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. THEY make the laws. NOT the president. These people are the ones you folks need to be a little more concerned over.

Get rid of the old farts, and bring in some new blood. Ted Kennedy is 188 years old. How in the world do we keep electing people who can't even say Barack Obama correctly? (Kennedy called him "Osama" Obama by "misspeak" awhile ago. Geez...

Sure, the president has the right to veto, but in actuality, he has little to say about the legalization of anything.

I read this entire thread, and it seems to me that, and NO offense to anyone, that many of you are very young and have not researched the candidates as well as you should have.

Remember, voting is a PRIVILEGE. YOU are the one who says who's in and who's out. I urge each of you to vote with intelligence after MUCH research.

Personally, on the question of the thread - no, I will not vote for Ron Paul. Ron Paul wants to bring our troops on and quit the fight against terror - apparently he'd rather do it on the streets of New York. Hmmmm... kinda isolationist, don't ya think?

Matter of fact, it looks like we have very slim pickings again this year on ANY KIND of decent candidate.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see if those guys in Florida can figure out the ballots. ;)

1. yes
2. because its not a very major issue, and its illegal now and most of us have limited problems...
3. 19, but if it helps you, I also am a national merit finalist (outperformed 99.9% of the nation on the PSAT as a SOPHOMORE in HS), I got a 34 on my ACT, a 1570 on my SAT, and im in college and follow politics religiously (no pun intended)
4. absolutely, i registered as soon as i hit 18 because i see how all the older people see the world, and very much disagree with the majority of them.

I know about the legislative branch, and the judicial branch, along with the executive.

Dont assume that just because he wants to legalize marijuana that we are all uneducated stoners who are only concerned with smoking pot legally, when we can do it already. its icing on the cake. and regardless of what you think, just because theres a balance of power doesnt mean that the president can do NOTHING to help us get to legalization. he may be a bit unrealistic, but he CAN help to influence the different branches, he can VETO BAD DRUG LAWS, he can even pardon big drug offenders who have been made examples of.

the three branches were put there to stop one branch from gaining too much power. if what you said is true, nothing would have ever gotten done in the country. We need a figurehead who represents what we as the citizens of the US believe in.

dont be so judgemental, it seems like youre assuming we are all idiots...

[Esaron]

btw the war on terror is a joke. you know its the longest war in US history now, right? even longer than WWII? and with WWII we freed Europe from tyranny... what are we doing now? freeing middle eastern countries and their oil from... themselves? us? i mean damn, were getting nowhere, and our debt is already in the trillions... what do you think all the lenders are gonna think when we just keep accruing more debt? what do you think will happen to the dollar? our economy? its a folly to keep this war going, and its a dumb idea to WANT it to keep going. if we want to fight terror, we have to find a new kind of war, just like the terrorists have.

when throughout history has a "terrorist" plot been conceived, planned, trained for, and enacted on its target's soil? In this age of information and transportation, policing a country not because it is doing something wrong, but because some of its denizens have done something wrong, is totally and completely ridiculous. I could go on and on, but ad hominem remarks (especially in the realm of politics) get my blood boiling and i need go blow off some steam by blowing out some smoke.

[silkyblue]

whats peace? not living in a tarp, with duck tape, but having to shit in a cup
I shit in the cup instead, of pissed in a cup!!!! fuckers!

if they arent ever gonna take it off the arrest list

then quit that fucking drug testing shit!! ITS BULLSHIT MAN BULLSHIT! as she kicks the corner iron post!

all the ones gettin busted are the best dam workers this side of the delta!


jeeez

maybe everyone that takes one toke a day "come on down", we all need to come out ! everyone thats why the marijuana tax stamp law is here dah? Does anyone have a scoop on the mj tax law? Whered ya get one? online, (winks)
if we chain our asses to the court house and demand attention,
one meeting proposals,


Do we herb tokers, ya'll know who you are especially on a weed bb~ give the capital or whitehouse a contract? all they gotta do is sign it, we know what to do!

COZ I tell ya, the plant, is getting acrosse state lines, everywhere, in every state in america

we just picked up the sweetest herby ever! mmmmmmm fuck that growing crap thats for the birds!

Santas gettin in the wonkavator again!

aged 51 hubbys 40, FOR OLD STONER

[bestbet]

I don't feel that we are EVER going to have universal health care I don't know if you have noticed but the government is just money hungry. I don't even think ron paul could get a act together about universal health care. America is NOT about the FAMILY and other people they are about themselves so i don't feel anyone can get universal health care for the US

Ron Paul isn't for universal health care, he is for having a more open market for health care that will lower prices and improve the quality of service.

I support Ron Paul first and Obama second, cause Ron Paul stands for a more drastic change in the structure of the gov't.

he is very low in the polls (only about 3%) and i think its because the controlled media and big companies are doing their best and succeeding in silencing him, keeping his message from being heard and overall making him seem like a crazy old man. when in fact he knows more about the constitution and american rights than all the other republican candidates combined.

plus a vote for Ron Paul is a vote for legalization:thumbsup:

[Nailhead]

But his solution is less government, rather than good government. The last thing this nation needs is more dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself attitude. Makes for unfriendly people.

I understand where you are coming from, years of big government has ingrained this idea that only the government can take care of Americans, rather than Americans taking care of Americans without the help of the government, which is what Ron Paul is about.

The government is incredibly inefficient, always has been and always will be, so it makes more sense to let people take care of each other, rather than rely on the government to do all of our charity deeds.

Also, remember that you cannot have success if you don't have the freedom to fail. Take away a person's ability to fall and he will never work hard enough to succeed, this is why socialism doesn't work.

[bestbet]

First question - would ANY of you who said you would vote for Ron Paul do so if he were ANTI-MARIJUANA?

Second question - Why?

Third question - What are your ages - the ones who want to vote for Ron Paul, and...

Fourth question - Are you registered to vote?

Now my take on this entire legalization issue.

Some of you fail to realize that Ron Paul, or ANY OTHER PERSON ELECTED PRESIDENT (not yelling, just EMPHASIZING!) - Well, whomever is elected president CAN NOT legalize Cannabis. Due to the fact in the next paragraph.

There is this little thing called the Legeslative Branch of our government to contend with. The United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. THEY make the laws. NOT the president. These people are the ones you folks need to be a little more concerned over.

Get rid of the old farts, and bring in some new blood. Ted Kennedy is 188 years old. How in the world do we keep electing people who can't even say Barack Obama correctly? (Kennedy called him "Osama" Obama by "misspeak" awhile ago. Geez...

Sure, the president has the right to veto, but in actuality, he has little to say about the legalization of anything.

I read this entire thread, and it seems to me that, and NO offense to anyone, that many of you are very young and have not researched the candidates as well as you should have.

Remember, voting is a PRIVILEGE. YOU are the one who says who's in and who's out. I urge each of you to vote with intelligence after MUCH research.

Personally, on the question of the thread - no, I will not vote for Ron Paul. Ron Paul wants to bring our troops on and quit the fight against terror - apparently he'd rather do it on the streets of New York. Hmmmm... kinda isolationist, don't ya think?

Matter of fact, it looks like we have very slim pickings again this year on ANY KIND of decent candidate.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see if those guys in Florida can figure out the ballots. ;)

I'm 21 & just graduated college

Marijuana legalization is not at all my major reason for supporting Ron Paul.
First of all, just because a person is in support of bringing the troops home in no way means that they arent for the fight against terrorism. it just means that there is no point in having young men and women, some right out of high school continually die over a war with no end in sight, and no sign of progress made

Ron Paul
.has never voted for a tax increase
.is for reformations to the healthcare industry (although not universal healthcare)
.is for amending income taxes and inflation taxes, meaning more money in the pockets of the working class
.he is for bringing troops home and improving foreign relation policies
. is against policing the world
. is for " commerce with all, allies with none"
. etc

dont come here on your high horse and think we're all a bunch of stoned slackers
YOU should do the research and see the truth for what it really is

[Nailhead]

I just read this article and thought it would be interesting for you pessimistic people saying Ron Paul could never do what he wants to once elected, don't worry, he's getting his allies ;) The revolution is on!

Congressional Hopeful Aims to Call Attention to Ron Paul's Candidacy (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/12/AR2007121201317.html)

[Zimzum]

I see Sundance voted up on this thread :thumbsup: Rock on!

[Old Stoner]

Boy, I stirred the hornet's nest a little, right? Well, let me see if I can respond to each of you.

Blackhole, you'll be first.


Isloationist? that is quite a judgement you have there..

Nope, I've heard Paul say it HIMSELF at a speech at some liberal college in CA., maybe BEREKLEY (sic), which is also on you tube. I'm not looking for it, so anyone who wants can find it and see what I mean.


you must be like everyone else voting for rich evil bastards who want to police the globe... ?

Nope, not at all. I don't think there is candidate out there worth a Tinker's damn, to be honest with you. They will ALL lie, cheat, steal, and take a shady deal, if lucrative enough for themselves. Police the GLOBE? Someones GOT TO. Yep, if the United States didn't police the globe, then who would YOU rather police the globe? Russia? Yea, old Putin is resorting back to the old Soviet line of thinking - great choice there. China? They're like Russia; you know, big enough and strong enough. Maybe them? How about France, who, without OUR HELP, would now be a state of Germany, and, as per se, speaking German as I type this. Well, maybe India. They have nukes. They could thr4aten everyone to be good or be nuked. Ask Pakistan about that one.

Yep, WE, the UNITED STATES of America, while we DO have our own major problems, also must help others who have major problems of their own. It has happened since day one in the warfare scenario, someone has always helped someone else, when in a bind. Ask France about the U.S. and France during the Revolutionary War. Could Washington have won the war without their help? Hmmm......


which is UNMANGEABLE we have to fix our own country, so that our own nation and other nations will RESPECT us. we have murdered almost 700,000 Iraqis do u care about those inisint YOUNG iraqis and 4000 US troops. not to mention it costs us TRILLIONS to run this greedy war Have we accomplished anything??

Yep, we DO need to fix our country. We have plenty wrong, and one being the "unmaginable" war on drugs, which is bullshit to begin with. Ain't NEVER gonna be won. Period.

And let me get this straight. You are saying our troops "MURDERED" 700 grand worth of Iraqis? Firstly, might I ask, where in hell do you get THAT figure? Man, you must be getting numbers from Harry Reid...but that's another idiot's story. And secondly, which SHOULD HAVE BEEN firstly, why in the hell are you calling MY TWO SONS murderers. They have each both proudly served their country in THREE DEPLOYMENTS to Iraq. They have NEVER killed anyone who wasn't trying to kill them FIRST. I am highly offended by your immature and totally ignorant views so far. Guess, like I said above, you have made very little progress in the "research" arena. I'll go on...

There are unintended casualties in EVERY WAR, since the beginning of warfare. Nothing, no matter HOW MANY smart bombs or high tech weaponry you have, is gonna stop that. It is tyragic and sad - hell yes I care about the Iraqis, or I wouldn't support their liberation. While it is tragic innocents sometimes do die, more "innocents" are killed every day by their OWN COUNTRYMEN, HERE in the United States, than the entire weekly casualty rate in Iraq. Check your figures, son. Oh, and the surge IS WORKING, FYI.
Attacks on U.S. troops are down over 75 perecent across the board, across the country. Nuff said...

What you fail to understand is this war has NO FRONT LINES. It is a guerilla war. Many, many fronts does the war have. One is Afdghanistan/Pakistan. Another is Iraq, where, if you have even studied a little, the largest liberal publication, the N.Y. Times, stated the surge is working, attacks are down, and have finally put in print the fact that Al Queda is in Iraq, as well as most other countrys on your "globe." Even Al Queda admits to the attacks, the recruitments, and gets lots of publicity for this. Where were you when THAT memo went out?

And no, I don't care about the troops. Good grief, statements like that defy logic. Yea, I hate 'em. My sons are two of them. I was one of them. My dad, his dad, and his dad, and HIS dad, were also ones. You know, those "murderers" who served their country in the military. Those guys, you know? It ceases to amaze me how uninformed MOST American citizens are.


not to mention it costs us TRILLIONS to run this greedy war Have we accomplished anything???? NO we havent so get us the fuck back home.. and protect us while u still can...

So making the future of our children SAFE (or in my case, my grandchildren), so THEY won't have to refight this same war on terror in the future, isn't worth ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY WE SPEND, NO MATTER WHO HAS TO PAY IT, to see your children live in a peaceful world. And then, we've freed two countries from tyrannical rule, and are on our way to stabilization OF THOSE COUNTRYS. (check the history book, fellas, it took US over TEN YEARS to get ourselves together as a viable country). Ah, people so soon forget...

Sure, bring all the troops home. Run and get within our borders, and put 'em all on the borders. Have them strung out the entire length. Then, let 'em get Chicago next. Or maybe YOUR town. Huh?

Don't you think it is a GREAT IDEA to have the terrorists engaged OVERSEAS rather then New Orleans of Los Angeles? Do you ever worry about your childrens future? Hmmm....


i will be tempted to leave the country for a while if ron paul looses...

JC, ROFLMAO....


THE MAIN reason ron paul has a chance against these money hungry people is the US troops who lost thier friends and KNOW FROM BEING ON THE GROUND THIER that these Iraqs fight more deadly than any george bush monkey could understand.

This has got to be one of the most - geez, the statement defies words, ROFLMAO...Means is doesn't even rate an answer...Good grief...

Or are you saying our troops can't accomplish their mission. I'd LOVE to know.


they said 6days, 6weeks mabye 6 more.. DONT U understand what the people of this nation truly are crying out for change.


Yep.. but definitely NOT Ron Paul.

:wtf:

[Old Stoner]

Blackhole -
u also have a the word PEACE is big letters on ur sig..but u think we should kill kill kill right?


Oh, YEA, man, that's the thing to do, hey, just kill 'em all let God sort 'em out, ya know? SUUUUURRREEEEE< I wanna kill kill kill... Good grief, yet ANOTHER alleged statement putting words in my mouth. I got quite a chuckle out of that one...

[Old Stoner]

Esaron -

1. Great!

2. Not just talkin' about weed. Also was asking, WHY WOULD you vote for Paul if not for Cannabis legalization?

3. Good. But I'm not talking about a lot of book knowledge. I'm talking EXPERIENCE.

4. Trust me young 'un, when you get to be as old as I am, then YOU'LL be doing EXACTLY what I do. You'll see...

About the uneducated stoner bit you used several times - uh, I'm just a regular Joe who smokes his weed and does the best he can, and treat people as I want to be treated. Show me where I said anything close to being non-bullshit on anything I've said. Geez...

The prez can do lots of shit, but Congress is where it's at. And to think they have an even LOWER poll number than the President.

Oh, and about the part where nothing would ever have been done in this country. Hell, not much IS getting done in this country today. THAT'S the problem!

Sorry, I just can't see Ron Paul as getting anywhere, period. He won't get the nomination, and even if some wild-eyed group were to wage war of write-ins, he wouldn't get a drop in the bucket compared to the ones who'll WIN the nimination. Americans are sometimes afraid of change. Sadly, change has already been deemed a neccessity in this world already. And it sure as hell was'nt our fault.

I'm not being judgemental at all, just calling 'em like I see 'em. Kinda like the old time newspaper man.

The second post doesn't even warrent a reply. Let me just say that some will never cease to amaze me.

[Old Stoner]

Silkyblue -

I'm gonna skip your post, as I am having trouble understanding it.

[Old Stoner]

bestbet -

Glad you made it out of college alive. I almost didn't.

We have an ALL VOLUNTEER MILITARY at this time. If they join after they exit high school, or whenever, matters not. If you join the military you had damned BE SURE OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING. Have all the facts, do the research. It ain't for everyone. But one thing's for sure. I'd much rather fight 'em lver there than fight 'em over here. WE are in a war. This ain't nursery school.

And bubba, no one said anything about anyone being a stoned slacker, or anything else even closely resembling that remark. 'Tis slightly immature, in my book, of you even mentioning or even entering such a petty arguement. Hmmm...

[bestbet]

bestbet -

Glad you made it out of college alive. I almost didn't.

We have an ALL VOLUNTEER MILITARY at this time. If they join after they exit high school, or whenever, matters not. If you join the military you had damned BE SURE OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING. Have all the facts, do the research. It ain't for everyone. But one thing's for sure. I'd much rather fight 'em lver there than fight 'em over here. WE are in a war. This ain't nursery school.

And bubba, no one said anything about anyone being a stoned slacker, or anything else even closely resembling that remark. 'Tis slightly immature, in my book, of you even mentioning or even entering such a petty arguement. Hmmm...

Do you know than Osama Bin Laden said he is glad the US is in Iraq cause this way he can have both the Shiites and Sunnis unite and fight against America, and the longer the US is in Iraq the easier it is for him to do this

[Mr. Purple]

I believe that ron pauls benefits far outweigh his negatives.

This guy wants change, and for those who support the other candidates
might aswell stick their campaign signs up their asses due to the fact if someone
else becomes president were fucked.

Obama, Hilary, and the others want us to stay in iraq.

Who cares about the privatization of the government, were gaining privatization ourselfs
if this man becomes president, so stfu!

Im sry to offend but this may be the only chance we have left.

The guy does plan on legalization, but thats from the importance.

If this guy does not become president, im out of this country within the next few
yrs.

Vote for ron paul! and win a free america!

[Mr. Purple]

First question - would ANY of you who said you would vote for Ron Paul do so if he were ANTI-MARIJUANA?

Second question - Why?

Third question - What are your ages - the ones who want to vote for Ron Paul, and...

Fourth question - Are you registered to vote?

Now my take on this entire legalization issue.

Some of you fail to realize that Ron Paul, or ANY OTHER PERSON ELECTED PRESIDENT (not yelling, just EMPHASIZING!) - Well, whomever is elected president CAN NOT legalize Cannabis. Due to the fact in the next paragraph.

There is this little thing called the Legeslative Branch of our government to contend with. The United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. THEY make the laws. NOT the president. These people are the ones you folks need to be a little more concerned over.

Get rid of the old farts, and bring in some new blood. Ted Kennedy is 188 years old. How in the world do we keep electing people who can't even say Barack Obama correctly? (Kennedy called him "Osama" Obama by "misspeak" awhile ago. Geez...

Sure, the president has the right to veto, but in actuality, he has little to say about the legalization of anything.

I read this entire thread, and it seems to me that, and NO offense to anyone, that many of you are very young and have not researched the candidates as well as you should have.

Remember, voting is a PRIVILEGE. YOU are the one who says who's in and who's out. I urge each of you to vote with intelligence after MUCH research.

Personally, on the question of the thread - no, I will not vote for Ron Paul. Ron Paul wants to bring our troops on and quit the fight against terror - apparently he'd rather do it on the streets of New York. Hmmmm... kinda isolationist, don't ya think?

Matter of fact, it looks like we have very slim pickings again this year on ANY KIND of decent candidate.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see if those guys in Florida can figure out the ballots. ;)

Wow dude were not fighting terroism, notice something everything everyone asks are totally opposite of what
he believes? Why......odd.

Watch the documentary called Why We Fight.

There was never wmds, conspiracies, or any of the bullshit.

Just corrupt politicians who make wrong decisions, 9/11 was caused by what we was doing in the irag/iran, kuwait, and gulf war.

The military-industrial complex, thinks tanks, and bastards.

It comes down to business, and by business i mean economy, military, and corporate shit.

Watch the documentery why we fight!

9/11 wasn't a inside job, but we asked for it.

Its called karma.

Man this shit really fucking pisses me off, when alot of people are misinformed but thats okay though i can deal with that.

And if don't believe what im saying.

What Actually Led To 9/11 - Most Americans Simply Don't Know The Factts (http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i4911reality.htm)

Saddam Did 9/11 -- One-Third of Americans Believe the Big Lie | Center for Media and Democracy (http://www.prwatch.org/node/6427)

Its all history, and even media tell ron paul "history doesn't matter"

If this guy doesn't become president, im leaving this country for the idiot's that ruined it.

[Esaron]

stoner, seeing as how youre entire family seems like its been military, i can hardly expect a different response. however, its different today than it was when you were there. you may think you get accurate info just because "your sons" are in it, but it appears you are not. have you ever heard of blackwater? im sure you have, if you read the ny times. why dont you go ahead and explain to me why were using them. go ahead and try to give me a reasonable answer that doesnt point to a government spiraling towards oppression and corruption.

U: Show me where I said anything close to being non-bullshit on anything I've said. Geez...
U earlier: I read this entire thread, and it seems to me that, and NO offense to anyone, that many of you are very young and have not researched the candidates as well as you should have.
Remember, voting is a PRIVILEGE. YOU are the one who says who's in and who's out. I urge each of you to vote with intelligence after MUCH research.


ok... so you call us very young, and imply we are unintelligent and have not done any research. You think saying "NO offense" is going to make that ok?

U: So making the future of our children SAFE (or in my case, my grandchildren), so THEY won't have to refight this same war on terror in the future, isn't worth ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY WE SPEND, NO MATTER WHO HAS TO PAY IT, to see your children live in a peaceful world. And then, we've freed two countries from tyrannical rule, and are on our way to stabilization OF THOSE COUNTRYS.

wow... what weird logic... lets keep a war going for longer than ever before, accomplish nothing, and assume that in the end it will "save our children". refight this same war? they wont? oh i get it, thats cuz theyll still be fighting the same one. if you want your children to live in a peaceful world, dont send them to the military like dad, and dont continue to fight this war... its not our job to stabilize those countries... its their job. just like it wasnt our job to come in and "save" them.


U: Oh, and about the part where nothing would ever have been done in this country. Hell, not much IS getting done in this country today. THAT'S the problem!

There's plenty gettin done... its just either a change in the wrong direction or a slight change in other areas that we havent talked about much... like energy and fuel economy standards.

U: Sorry, I just can't see Ron Paul as getting anywhere, period. He won't get the nomination, and even if some wild-eyed group were to wage war of write-ins, he wouldn't get a drop in the bucket compared to the ones who'll WIN the nimination. Americans are sometimes afraid of change. Sadly, change has already been deemed a neccessity in this world already. And it sure as hell was'nt our fault.


I agree with you. he wont get the nomination, but that doesnt mean he shouldnt. if youre such a fan of change, then whats wrong with RP? dont like the changes he wants to make? I sure as hell do. and the only reason he WONT get the nomination is because people who could make a difference decide its not worth it because hes "not going to win"



Im starting to stop caring about this... ive learned from experience that after youve gone through the military's shit you dont ever really think the same. You can vote how you want, so can we. My point was... dont accuse us of being uninformed of the issues and dont imply that we arent intelligent. you wanna know other reasons why i like RP? go look at his website (ronpaul2008.com i think) and look under the issues tab. I agree with EVERYTHING THERE except for his private property solution to pollution... tahts a little stupid imho.

[Esaron]

just fucking wait until everyone hates us.

people who think like you will lead to the fall of the American Empire.
I know were not an empire, but look at ROME see any PARALLELS??? cuz I sure as hell do. history repeats itself, and were right at the climax of a bad rerun.

[Fencewalker]

First question - would ANY of you who said you would vote for Ron Paul do so if he were ANTI-MARIJUANA?
Yes.

Second question - Why?
Because he is a true Republican. For limited federal government and a return to following the constitution...You know, that quaint document that is supposed to be the backbone of this country. ;)

Third question - What are your ages - the ones who want to vote for Ron Paul, and...
44

Fourth question - Are you registered to vote?
Yes.

Remember, voting is a PRIVILEGE.
Wow. Just wow. No, voting is not a "privilege". It's a right.

Ron Paul wants to bring our troops on and quit the fight against terror - apparently he'd rather do it on the streets of New York. Hmmmm... kinda isolationist, don't ya think?
Not at all isolationist in my opinion. Non-interventionist, yes. We cannot continue to wage "war" against ideals. War on "Terror". War on "Drugs". War on "Poverty".

Btw, since we are measuring internet penii...My dad was in Korea, my brother was stationed in Vietnam and I was a member of the 3rd Infantry stationed in Panama in the 80's.

My brother and I support Ron Paul. My dad doesn't support anybody. :D

[EbelEyes]

btw the war on terror is a joke. you know its the longest war in US history now, right?

I'd honestly say the War on Drugs is the longest war we've been doing. This country has been demonizing and arresting drug users for quite sometime now.

[Esaron]

true, but thats not a war per se. were not fighting with guns against people with guns, were not sending tanks up against dealers... the war on drugs is even more of a joke than the war on terror... but the war on terror is a WAR

[EbelEyes]

I will agree with you, the War on Terror is a fucking joke. However war is war, and the War on Drugs deffinetly qualifies as war.

War
- Noun
1. a conflict carried on by force of arms, as between nations or between parties within a nation; warfare, as by land, sea, or air.

[Mr. Purple]

stoner, seeing as how youre entire family seems like its been military, i can hardly expect a different response. however, its different today than it was when you were there. you may think you get accurate info just because "your sons" are in it, but it appears you are not. have you ever heard of blackwater? im sure you have, if you read the ny times. why dont you go ahead and explain to me why were using them. go ahead and try to give me a reasonable answer that doesnt point to a government spiraling towards oppression and corruption.

U: Show me where I said anything close to being non-bullshit on anything I've said. Geez...
U earlier: I read this entire thread, and it seems to me that, and NO offense to anyone, that many of you are very young and have not researched the candidates as well as you should have.
Remember, voting is a PRIVILEGE. YOU are the one who says who's in and who's out. I urge each of you to vote with intelligence after MUCH research.


ok... so you call us very young, and imply we are unintelligent and have not done any research. You think saying "NO offense" is going to make that ok?

U: So making the future of our children SAFE (or in my case, my grandchildren), so THEY won't have to refight this same war on terror in the future, isn't worth ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY WE SPEND, NO MATTER WHO HAS TO PAY IT, to see your children live in a peaceful world. And then, we've freed two countries from tyrannical rule, and are on our way to stabilization OF THOSE COUNTRYS.

wow... what weird logic... lets keep a war going for longer than ever before, accomplish nothing, and assume that in the end it will "save our children". refight this same war? they wont? oh i get it, thats cuz theyll still be fighting the same one. if you want your children to live in a peaceful world, dont send them to the military like dad, and dont continue to fight this war... its not our job to stabilize those countries... its their job. just like it wasnt our job to come in and "save" them.


U: Oh, and about the part where nothing would ever have been done in this country. Hell, not much IS getting done in this country today. THAT'S the problem!

There's plenty gettin done... its just either a change in the wrong direction or a slight change in other areas that we havent talked about much... like energy and fuel economy standards.

U: Sorry, I just can't see Ron Paul as getting anywhere, period. He won't get the nomination, and even if some wild-eyed group were to wage war of write-ins, he wouldn't get a drop in the bucket compared to the ones who'll WIN the nimination. Americans are sometimes afraid of change. Sadly, change has already been deemed a neccessity in this world already. And it sure as hell was'nt our fault.


I agree with you. he wont get the nomination, but that doesnt mean he shouldnt. if youre such a fan of change, then whats wrong with RP? dont like the changes he wants to make? I sure as hell do. and the only reason he WONT get the nomination is because people who could make a difference decide its not worth it because hes "not going to win"



Im starting to stop caring about this... ive learned from experience that after youve gone through the military's shit you dont ever really think the same. You can vote how you want, so can we. My point was... dont accuse us of being uninformed of the issues and dont imply that we arent intelligent. you wanna know other reasons why i like RP? go look at his website (ronpaul2008.com i think) and look under the issues tab. I agree with EVERYTHING THERE except for his private property solution to pollution... tahts a little stupid imho.

I agree with everything you said, but some are misinformed, but i apologize as it gives me no right to insult others.

It just agitated me. and i heavily agree on the afraid of change.

But why not? Are we satisfied now with the way america is going?

I don't see why we don't take a chance, thats how america came to be right?

I say with another president i fear there may be an uproar, cause as far as i now there are americans not afraid of taking it to the street rather than a ballat poll.

Imo i would like to see a change and see how it would go
cause we could just impeach the guy.

Which comes to consider why didn't we do this with bush, and its obvious sum agree with his methods.

I just find that beyond belief....call me ignorant...but
theres a fine line.

[rastadub33]

Overall I think Ron Paul is all right. There are some parts of his views I strongly disagree with, like reverting back to the Gold Standard, and his views on health-care. Despite that he's got my vote if he makes it. He's consistent on his tax policy and pledge to cut spending, views on states-right issues, and personal liberty.

About the Gold Standard issue. He does believe in that but admits that it probably wouldn't ever happen again. Some people just need to understand that just because he has his own personal views on things that it does not necessarily mean he is going to implement them. For example, he is against marijuana and has never even tried it but he does want it to be legalized and also wants to give the states the right to do so. He just wants the Federal Govt. to stay out of our own personal business.. He believes that his own views shouldn't mold the govt. He feels we all have the right to personal freedom...

[Mr. Clandestine]

About the Gold Standard issue. He does believe in that but admits that it probably wouldn't ever happen again.

Well, he admits that the old procedure was flawed, and would admittedly like to see a 'New Gold Standard'. I don't know a whole lot about his fiscal policies and ideals, but I know he isn't a fan of either the IRS or the Federal Treasury. I can't blame him, because I also happen to agree that the Treasury isn't working for the American people, but rather a group of elite bankers...and many of whom are non-Americans.

The general consensus of this thread has been pretty consistent; vote Ron Paul if you want to elect a President who'll stand for change. A vote for many of the other candidates is just a vote to keep everything the same -- same archaic laws, same "obedience to Big Brother" mentality, same unrest among American citizens...

[Old Stoner]

bestbet -


Do you know than Osama Bin Laden said he is glad the US is in Iraq cause this way he can have both the Shiites and Sunnis unite and fight against America, and the longer the US is in Iraq the easier it is for him to do this


Yea, UBL said that. Fuynny thing is, it ISN'T working out that way for him. The surge is WORKING, and Iraqi's, both Shiite and Sunni, are turning in the Terrorists in record numbers. And it is catching all over the country. People are uniting in the fight against people who come into their country to kill by terror. Those people, incidentally, ARE the IRAQIS.

You don't read the papers? See the news? Hmmm...

[Old Stoner]

Mr. Purple -


If this guy does not become president, im out of this country within the next few
yrs.

Guess there's nothing left to say but enjoy your trip.


Wow dude were not fighting terroism, notice something everything everyone asks are totally opposite of what
he believes? Why......odd.

Nah, we're not fighting terrorists at all. We are fighting a peace loving bunch of radical muslims, who are just defending themselves, right? It''s ALL America's fault, right? ROFLMAO... You MUST be a youngster.... Geez...



9/11 wasn't a inside job, but we asked for it.

Man, it took me a few minutes to stop laughing at THAT one... Just like I said before, you and many others think it's all our fault. HILARIOUS. Do ANYONE of you remember a little ditty called Worl War II? WE - THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - kept Europe from speaking GERMAN. And defeated the Japanese, who were only after expanding their empire, same as Hitler. But yea, we asked for it alright.... Geez... America has done MORE GOOD in this world than ANY OTHER NATION. WHERE ELSE would you rather live? I suggest you go there, quickly...


Man this shit really fucking pisses me off, when alot of people are misinformed but thats okay though i can deal with that.


Yes, and you my friend are one of those people. People who lack doing the proper research is what pisses me off... And you'd fall under that area as well. Not intendeding to degrade or diss you, but I do believe you need to do a tad more research. And maybe you should TALK to some of the returning soldiers. The MAJORITY believe we are doing the RIGHT thing in Iraq.

[Old Stoner]

Mr. Purple Part II -

Whether or not there were WMDs matters not. Almost the ENTIRE FREE WORLD believed Saddam had them. Nevertheless, NO ONE from the administartion EVER said that Saddam was involved in 9/11. You and tons of others are taking too much out of context, and taking too much the major news ops say as gospel. Good grief...



If this guy doesn't become president, im leaving this country for the idiot's that ruined it.

Well, I guess this is goodbye then - have a safe trip!

[silkyblue]

Id vote old stoner gets 4 infractions .... for cyber attacks !


polictics, religion ,and sex, are not allowed on bb's,

they don far thee well

merry christmas ya'll crack this up !

[silkyblue]

ya really dont sound as if your preachin peace old stoner :mad:

[Old Stoner]

Easaron-


stoner, seeing as how youre entire family seems like its been military, i can hardly expect a different response.

Yep, the military made my entire family a bunch of automated, flag-waving, warmongers. It was a typical response, however, from someone who has obviously never been in the military. I just consider the source... nuff' said about that. Geez...


however, its different today than it was when you were there. you may think you get accurate info just because "your sons" are in it, but it appears you are not.

Gee, no shit? Different as in HOW? And show me where I even TRIED to imply or allude to me being privy to "secret" information, just because my sons serve their country? That is funny as hell.

Actually,I should have never responded to such an assinine statement, but I couldn't resist...


have you ever heard of blackwater? im sure you have, if you read the ny times. why dont you go ahead and explain to me why were using them. go ahead and try to give me a reasonable answer that doesnt point to a government spiraling towards oppression and corruption.

Who the fuck is Blackwater? ROFLMAO... We use them because we need to use them. Or any other private company that contracts to do jobs for the United States in ANY country. Do you relaize JUST HOW MANY private companies the U.S. hires to accomplish things for us? Apparently not. I don't care if we used the Keystone Kops. So long as we keep terror from reaching the streets of, say, even YOUR town. Mistakes are made, as in every war.

Ever watched, read, or did ANY research on the Second World War (just as an example). Privitization even existed THEN. And so did the MISTAKES.

Fact is, most couch-locked, uninformed Americans would rather throw up a peace sign, talk to those poor, persecuted terrorists, and correct this situation, stat! Right?

Just TRY doing that, and see if you come out of the meeting with your head still attached to your neck...


ok... so you call us very young, and imply we are unintelligent and have not done any research. You think saying "NO offense" is going to make that ok?


Many ARE very young, that is, the one's who support Paul. What's wrong with THAT fact? Additionally, I did not imply that anyone here was inintelligent. Maybe VERY UNEXPERIENCED, but I never said unintelligent. And yep, I meant NO OFFENSE when I said NO OFFENSE to anyone. Because of people like you who were bound to take my statements the way you did. Just thinking ahead, just thinking ahead...


wow... what weird logic... lets keep a war going for longer than ever before, accomplish nothing, and assume that in the end it will "save our children". refight this same war? they wont? oh i get it, thats cuz theyll still be fighting the same one. if you want your children to live in a peaceful world, dont send them to the military like dad, and dont continue to fight this war... its not our job to stabilize those countries... its their job. just like it wasnt our job to come in and "save" them.

Keeping your children from fighting a war on the same level as we are now is WEIRD LOGIC? Hmmm... Okie Dokie. Geez...

Yep, this war on terror may not EVER end. But I guess you'd rather sit back and wait until terrrorists decide to target YOU and YOUR TOWN, eh? I'd fight (if I were able, and the military would take me back, in my condition) until HELL FREEZES OVER to keep my family safe. You do not have enough cajones to fight for YOUR family?

So far, there has not been a terror attack INSIDE the United States in SIX YEARS. I'd say, even though I do agree on the fact, MORE could be done for Homeland Security. However, if we keep the pressure ON, Just like a well-oiled sports team, keep on doing what you're doing, we'll win. But then, the defeatest doth come out in you, for all to see... Thanks for the heads up...

Oh, and Dad didn't send ANYONE into the military, My sons and I had long discussions on the military before they joined. It was what THEY wanted to do. I gave them the pros and cons, and they also talked to tons of others who were serving, or who had served. They wanted to serve their country. And bubba, no matter what you say, my hat is OFF to ANYONE who wants to sincerely serve the country that gave them the freedom to be able to dissent, which is, incidentally, what you are doing. They even fight for YOU, believe it or not. Because it is the JOB they have chosen to do. God bless my sons, AND the military. For if it were not for our military, we'd be speaking with an English accent, and all saying God save the queen... Good grief, I am AMAZED at some of the statements some people make here.

Stabalize a country? Tell that to the Iraqis when Saddam was in control. They couldn't. They needed our help. Just as the United States needed France's help in the Revolutionary War. Just as many wars are fought - needing someone else's help.

The United States MUST keep it's interests safe, no matter WHERE it is threatened. The Middle East is THE HEADQUARTERS of terrorism in this day and age. Pretty damned good idea to jump right in the middle of it to me - keeps those bastards (errorists) occupied OVER THERE, and NOT over HERE.


There's plenty gettin done... its just either a change in the wrong direction or a slight change in other areas that we havent talked about much... like energy and fuel economy standards.

Give me a few examples of what A DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED CONGRESS has done so far in the last while. I'd LOVE to hear them. This Congress has wasted more time and tried so hard to send the Republicans to hell in a handbasket, NOTHING MUCH is getting done at all. LEGISLATE, and STOP INVESTIGATING! THAT is why nothing is getting done. Period.


if youre such a fan of change, then whats wrong with RP? dont like the changes he wants to make? I sure as hell do. and the only reason he WONT get the nomination is because people who could make a difference decide its not worth it because hes "not going to win"

Ron Paul thinks he can talk to the terrorists. He thinks he can fight the war on terror at home - you know - stop up the borders, become isolationists, etc. Read his website...but then, it wouldn't matter if he said he would wear a pink clowns costume, you would still agree with his foreign policy?

Nope, the reason Paul will NOT get the nomination is, simply put, he's an idiot, and on top of that,he hasn't a snowball's chance in hell in winning the presidency. You now, the rest of the folks here in this country greatly outnumbers us stoners. Paul wouldn't win if he DID get the nomination.


Im starting to stop caring about this... ive learned from experience that after youve gone through the military's shit you dont ever really think the same.

So you have served. I take the statement about you being non-military back, apologize, and I do sincerely thank you for serving your country. However, I went through 20 years of (the military's shit) and still think the same as I did when I was 18 and going into college. My son's think the same, and my father did as well. Some have bad experiences, other's have good experiences.

I tell anyone who asks if you are not ready to serve your country, it's people, and the powers that be, STAY OUT OF THE MILITARY. However ,if you have a very patriotic nature about you, and want to give back to the United States for giving us all the freedom to do and be anything we want to be, then go for it.

When someone joins the military, if they think they'll never be deployed or have to fight a war, and DON'T WANT TO, then PLEASE - STAY OUT OF THE MILITARY.


You can vote how you want, so can we. My point was... dont accuse us of being uninformed of the issues and dont imply that we arent intelligent.

Yep, sure can. And will. But I never said anyone was unintelligent. But I did say some people need to do a tad more research to find the truth. Some may search and never find it. Can't help that...


I agree with EVERYTHING THERE except for his private property solution to pollution... tahts a little stupid imho.

Good for you then. Vote for Paul, it is your right as an American. Myself, I agree with very little he says. Period.


just fucking wait until everyone hates us.

Where've YOU been? Hiding in a bong, LOL? The whole world ALREADY hates us, and has since this country began. They can't stand our freedom. Pffffft.....


people who think like you will lead to the fall of the American Empire.
I know were not an empire, but look at ROME see any PARALLELS??? cuz I sure as hell do. history repeats itself, and were right at the climax of a bad rerun.

American EMPIRE? ROFLMAO...okie dokie...I MAJORED in histroy. I see very little paralells between American and the Roman Empire. I think I'm gonna go throw up now....Good grief...

[Old Stoner]

Fencewalker -


Because he is a true Republican. For limited federal government and a return to following the constitution...You know, that quaint document that is supposed to be the backbone of this country.

You DO realize he ran as a Libertarian candidate for president awhile back, don't you?

Restoring our Constitution is going to take a WHOLE LOT MORE than Ron Paul. Supreme Court judges MUST change. Senators MUST change. Representatives MUST change. Without that, Paul ain't going nowhere, no matter WHAT he does.


Wow. Just wow. No, voting is not a "privilege". It's a right.

Show me a LAW, or where it is written in the Bill of Rights, OR the Constitution, where it says voting is a right. Nope, my friend, it is a privilege, which, I am afraid, not too many of us even use. Sad... But I'd dearly LOVE to see where ANY of our forefathers deemed it a "right."


Not at all isolationist in my opinion. Non-interventionist, yes. We cannot continue to wage "war" against ideals. War on "Terror". War on "Drugs". War on "Poverty".

Okay, then what do we do? Sit back and watch as the terrorists fly planes into our buildings - the ones AMERICANS, and others toiled over to get up? I agree with you on the poverty and drug issue, but cannot you understand that these radical islamist TERRORISTS want to kill YOU and your way of life? They don't care what kind of an American (or more precisely, WESTERNER), you are. Good grief, Charlie Brown...


Btw, since we are measuring internet penii...My dad was in Korea, my brother was stationed in Vietnam and I was a member of the 3rd Infantry stationed in Panama in the 80's.

Again, thank you for the service to country and the sacrifices that your family made by joining the military. We probably passed one another down Noriega country.


My brother and I support Ron Paul. My dad doesn't support anybody.

Good for you and your brother. Vote for Paul. You have the right to vote as you see fit. But the question was does anybody like Ron Paul, and I sure DO NOT.

Your dad is just waiting for a viable candidate to come through the mass of bullshit that presidential elections are. :thumbsup:

[Old Stoner]

To Ebel Eyes-


I'd honestly say the War on Drugs is the longest war we've been doing. This country has been demonizing and arresting drug users for quite sometime now.

I do so whole-heartedly agree. This "war on drugs" is bullshit. Might as well be fighting flies in Africa...

To Easaron -


true, but thats not a war per se. were not fighting with guns against people with guns, were not sending tanks up against dealers... the war on drugs is even more of a joke than the war on terror... but the war on terror is a WAR

Uh, hate to disagree, but we ARE fighting the "war on drugs" with guns AGAINST armed gunmen. All the time. Maybe no tanks, but plenty of small arms fire. Booby-traps, etc.

The war on drugs is the one I would like to see stopped. Keep killing the terrorists.

[Old Stoner]

Mr. Purple Part III -


I agree with everything you said, but some are misinformed, but i apologize as it gives me no right to insult others.

It just agitated me. and i heavily agree on the afraid of change.

But why not? Are we satisfied now with the way america is going?

I don't see why we don't take a chance, thats how america came to be right?

I say with another president i fear there may be an uproar, cause as far as i now there are americans not afraid of taking it to the street rather than a ballat poll.

Imo i would like to see a change and see how it would go
cause we could just impeach the guy.

Which comes to consider why didn't we do this with bush, and its obvious sum agree with his methods.

I just find that beyond belief....call me ignorant...but
theres a fine line.


Ever consider that YOU may be "misinformed?" ROFLMAO...

And no, not afraid of change at all - when it is the RIGHT change.

Go ahead, take a chance - take it to the streets. Didn't work in '68, won't work now. Ask me how I know.

Impeach Bush for WHAT? Hilarious, and I shouldn't have responded at all...Sorry...

I agree with Bush that we should fight 'em there, intead of fighting 'em here. Sounds like pretty good logic to me. If the terrorists were allowed to bring this fight to our soil (which happened in 2001, remember), HOW MANY INNOCENT AMERICAN LIVES WOULD BE LOST? And most importantly, WHY? Because us Americans didn't have the balls to stand and fight? Good grief, Americans of this day and time couldn't take another World War II. We have become a nation of - except for the few and the proud - a nation of pussies. Period.

[Old Stoner]

To silkyblue -

I'd LOVE to see an entire earth full of peaceful people, but as a quick study in history will reveal, that shit AIN'T gonna happen.

I'm preaching keeping my grandchildren and their children and their children ALIVE. By fighting this war NOW.

I am all for peace, but everyone isn't. Ask bin Laden...

Oh, and about the infractions. I do not believe I have broken any rules, and have only answered everyone's post. Infract if they will, that is the Mods perogative. It still won't keep me from saying what I believe, just as you have the same right.

You guys have fun flaming me on this thread - I'm through with it... It's getting REAL old...

[Psycho4Bud]

You want to try that one again BlackHole?

Have a good one!:jointsmile:

[Mr. Purple]

Mr. Purple Part III -



Ever consider that YOU may be "misinformed?" ROFLMAO...

And no, not afraid of change at all - when it is the RIGHT change.

Go ahead, take a chance - take it to the streets. Didn't work in '68, won't work now. Ask me how I know.

Impeach Bush for WHAT? Hilarious, and I shouldn't have responded at all...Sorry...

I agree with Bush that we should fight 'em there, intead of fighting 'em here. Sounds like pretty good logic to me. If the terrorists were allowed to bring this fight to our soil (which happened in 2001, remember), HOW MANY INNOCENT AMERICAN LIVES WOULD BE LOST? And most importantly, WHY? Because us Americans didn't have the balls to stand and fight? Good grief, Americans of this day and time couldn't take another World War II. We have become a nation of - except for the few and the proud - a nation of pussies. Period.

You can't even define "right" (i mean that by its a concept).

My point is it would be a better change for the country then the way it is now.

Not only this but i have clearly have evidence that have proven you statements to be wrong.

Yeah back in 68 was the hippie movement, what if the whole country would go, are you telling me the government would stop a huge percentage of the population (pfft they don't even have enough soldiers to do so now as me how i now that:(), as the polls said 70% don't agree with war in iraq.

Your a minority and the one who is misinformed and stubborn with arrogance which contributes to why numerous countries don't like us.

How many innocent people will die overall? It isn't just about us,
with this "war" (note that keyword don't try to ignore it) many people are going to die.

We should have expected 9/11 to happen, we voted the wrong people in office and the politicians they voted for made the wrong decisions.

I agree with you on not fighting with in our soil, but you have to understand eye for eye is not going to get no where.

Myself im not afraid of conflict, and wanted to join the military but after finding newfound knowledge forget about it.

You have to look at americas faults, our economy booms with wars just look at ww2.

We go into other countries and tell them we'll help them out yadda, yadda, yadda, and we put our corporations, mcdonalds, and etc, in their to make money.

Capitalism is part of the problem, we should not impose our dominance on other countries it goes against want america stands for.

Why do we butt in other countries wars? For what will we benefit from this? We should just communicate with them and etc.

But not help them out in which dangerous things could come back on us.

I have clearly stated facts in my above posts, you wish not too recognize them, thats okay, but your methods of how things should work out will not benefit this country either.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Iraq death toll 'soared post-war' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3962969.stm)

[Zimzum]

This man likes Ron Paul :hippy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3SF48LbXQs
Check out his other You Tube videos!

[Nailhead]

true, but thats not a war per se. were not fighting with guns against people with guns, were not sending tanks up against dealers... the war on drugs is even more of a joke than the war on terror... but the war on terror is a WAR

Well, we aren't fighting with guns in the US, but visit countries like Columbia and Mexico that have major problems with large drug gangs killing people left and right, this is all part of the war on drugs. The war on drugs is indeed being fought with guns, it's just not being done on American soil so Americans dont care as much. It's a bit sad, but American's really don't care about the wars we wage as long as they aren't on our own soil. This is why so many people support the "war on terror" without actually looking into how effective this war is and if it can even be won.

As far as Ron Paul being an isolationist, Old Stoner, you seem certain that Ron Paul has called himself that, or supported that ideology but I am going to call you out and ask you to present some type of evidence. I am certain you are just mistaking non-interventionalist with isolationist, these are not at all the same so please don't confuse the two. I have done enough research into Ron Paul to be completely confident to believe that he never said such a thing, but if you want to prove me wrong I would love for you to do so.

The main reason I like Ron Paul is he is the only candidate that truly understands the situation our economy is in and has a solution to save it before it is too late. He also is a strong defender of our constitution, he is not anti-war as some say, he has said many times if it is necessary congress should declare war as allowed in the constitution. However, going to war because the UN wants us to, or without a declaration of war should be protested by all Americans, there is a reason why the constitution requires a declaration of war!

[Mr. Purple]

Well, we aren't fighting with guns in the US, but visit countries like Columbia and Mexico that have major problems with large drug gangs killing people left and right, this is all part of the war on drugs. The war on drugs is indeed being fought with guns, it's just not being done on American soil so Americans dont care as much. It's a bit sad, but American's really don't care about the wars we wage as long as they aren't on our own soil. This is why so many people support the "war on terror" without actually looking into how effective this war is and if it can even be won.

As far as Ron Paul being an isolationist, Old Stoner, you seem certain that Ron Paul has called himself that, or supported that ideology but I am going to call you out and ask you to present some type of evidence. I am certain you are just mistaking non-interventionalist with isolationist, these are not at all the same so please don't confuse the two. I have done enough research into Ron Paul to be completely confident to believe that he never said such a thing, but if you want to prove me wrong I would love for you to do so.

The main reason I like Ron Paul is he is the only candidate that truly understands the situation our economy is in and has a solution to save it before it is too late. He also is a strong defender of our constitution, he is not anti-war as some say, he has said many times if it is necessary congress should declare war as allowed in the constitution. However, going to war because the UN wants us to, or without a declaration of war should be protested by all Americans, there is a reason why the constitution requires a declaration of war!

I love you.

[Nailhead]

I love you too baby

[Jerry Garcia 2007]

After reading this thread I would like to point out a few things that seem to happen every primary.

You can only vote for a canidate in a primary if you are a registered voter for that party, if you are an independant you can not vote in a primary.

Inturn what happens is the Christian right has some of the most motivated groups so you end up with a cannidate on the far right (how do you think we got BUSH)

Then for the democrates you have the same thing and the far left liberals have the most activist voting block so you end up with a cannidate on the far left ( ie. Kerry and Gore )

So in the end we have cannidates that are on the extream end of either party. So in turn nothing in our goverment gets done!!!! because there is no middle ground!

[OriginalNlogax]

Ron Paul ftw

[Fencewalker]

You can only vote for a canidate in a primary if you are a registered voter for that party, if you are an independant you can not vote in a primary.
Depends on the state. In mine we have open primaries, which means Independents can vote either Democrat or Republican, our choice. ;)

[Jerry Garcia 2007]

Fencewalker,

I ment most states, thanks for the correction! Be nice if all states would adopt that law. In My state it is not that way.

[foodsy]

I like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.

[GoldenBoy812]

without a shadow of a doubt, Dr. Ron Paul is by far the most level headed, unbiased, logical and compassionated candidate since Barry Goldwater.

Those who doubt the value of true liberty need to vote for anyone else.... Or not vote at all!

[stinkyattic]

I like Dennis Kucinich over Ron Paul. I generally try to keep my personal politics off the boards, but in his case, I think he is an intelligent individual who is well qualified to be involved in policy making at the highest level. Whether he is electable is up for debate; sadly, I think he's not, but I would like to see him as VP.

[angry nomad]

I like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.

They are both constitutionalists. I was going to vote for Kucinich before I heard about Ron Paul.

[dragonrider]

I like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.

I wasn't sure if this statement was serious or a joke, but I see that others have taken it seriously, so I will too. About the only similarity I see between these two is that they honestly speak their minds and are more true to their own beliefs than they are to their official party platforms, so consequently they are labeled as kooks by their own parties. Other than that, there is nothing similar between these two, is there? They are polar opposites in their policies, aren't they? Ron Paul is for limited government (probably more limited than most people would actually want) and Dennis Kucinich is for more activist government (probably more activist than than most people would actually want).

[Sweeney]

Please America don't space on the day. Vote for Ron Paul!!!

[Nailhead]

After reading this thread I would like to point out a few things that seem to happen every primary.

You can only vote for a canidate in a primary if you are a registered voter for that party, if you are an independant you can not vote in a primary.

As Fencewalker pointed out, it depends on the state. For a detailed list of what state has an open or closed primary, as well as party change deadlines click the link below.

>>Primary and Caucus Information (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/primary-and-caucus-information)<<

I just want to also mention that I just received a letter confirming my voting registration as a REPUBLICAN so I will be able to vote for Ron Paul in California's closed primary on Feb 5th. I have never been this excited to vote, I can't wait! :D

And remember, if you have moved you need to register to vote again anyway, so why not register as a republican and show Ron Paul your love? Be sure to check that link above and find out the deadline to change your party in your state, don't be late!

[Iguana]

After reading this thread I would like to point out a few things that seem to happen every primary.

You can only vote for a canidate in a primary if you are a registered voter for that party, if you are an independant you can not vote in a primary.

Inturn what happens is the Christian right has some of the most motivated groups so you end up with a cannidate on the far right (how do you think we got BUSH)

Then for the democrates you have the same thing and the far left liberals have the most activist voting block so you end up with a cannidate on the far left ( ie. Kerry and Gore )

So in the end we have cannidates that are on the extream end of either party. So in turn nothing in our goverment gets done!!!! because there is no middle ground!


HWether or not you have to be registered with a particular party to vote in their primary is regulated by state law, so there is no blanket answer on this one. My state (MI) is set up so that you can only vote in one party's primary, but you can make that decision when you cast your vote.

[dragonrider]

After reading this thread I would like to point out a few things that seem to happen every primary.

You can only vote for a canidate in a primary if you are a registered voter for that party, if you are an independant you can not vote in a primary.

Inturn what happens is the Christian right has some of the most motivated groups so you end up with a cannidate on the far right (how do you think we got BUSH)

Then for the democrates you have the same thing and the far left liberals have the most activist voting block so you end up with a cannidate on the far left ( ie. Kerry and Gore )

So in the end we have cannidates that are on the extream end of either party. So in turn nothing in our goverment gets done!!!! because there is no middle ground!

It's definitely true that the candidates that win the primaries are not always the best ones for the general election. But I think it has more to do with the fact that the highly motivated true belivers are the ones that get out to vote in the primaries, while most of the moderates stay home. Then when the moderates turn out for the general election, they don't like the candidates that the more radical primary voters picked for them to choose from. So the problem is mostly voter turnout in the primaries, not the fact that people who are not registered with a party can't vote for that party's candidates during the primaries.

I think you should be registered with a party before being allowed to vote in that party's primary. If anyone can vote in a party's primary without being registered with that party, it leads to "gaming" the primary, where outsiders try to get unelectable opponents on the other party's ticket in order to give their own party a better chance of wining in the general election.

[angry nomad]

I wasn't sure if this statement was serious or a joke, but I see that others have taken it seriously, so I will too. About the only similarity I see between these two is that they honestly speak their minds and are more true to their own beliefs than they are to their official party platforms, so consequently they are labeled as kooks by their own parties. Other than that, there is nothing similar between these two, is there? They are polar opposites in their policies, aren't they? Ron Paul is for limited government (probably more limited than most people would actually want) and Dennis Kucinich is for more activist government (probably more activist than than most people would actually want).

Well, they both voted against the Patriot Act, and call for an immediate end to the war in Iraq.

[foodsy]

I wasn't sure if this statement was serious or a joke, but I see that others have taken it seriously, so I will too. About the only similarity I see between these two is that they honestly speak their minds and are more true to their own beliefs than they are to their official party platforms, so consequently they are labeled as kooks by their own parties. Other than that, there is nothing similar between these two, is there? They are polar opposites in their policies, aren't they? Ron Paul is for limited government (probably more limited than most people would actually want) and Dennis Kucinich is for more activist government (probably more activist than than most people would actually want).

Well I like both...Its odd. I like both of their ideas. Both are smart individuals, definitely the best in their parties. Dennis Kucinich is like the hippie politician, he's for outright legalization of marijuana, and setting up a "cigarette" system that makes sure all of it is of good quality, and for it to be taxed and sold at 7/11's around the nation. He's almost a constitutionalist, but right after the VT shooting, he tried to pass a bill that would ban guns in some weird circumstance (A direct violation of the 2nd Amendment).

[MasterKief]

I like and support Ron Paul because of where he stands on the subject of marijuana.

[sk8markysk8]

RONPAUL2008

[ANAVRIN RX]

oh i do sorta

[TheSmokingMonkey]

I will be voting for him in my state's caucus.

I am advertising for him with stickers and buttons.

Although I do not agree with every position he has taken, I think the country sorely needs a true libertarian at this juncture.

I hope he wins!!!

[MagicBlunt]

I met Ron Paul in Las Vegas at Freedomfest '07. This man could potentially save this once great nation of ours. Can you imagine actually having the freedoms originally intended by our forefathers. (Please do not take any offense to this post please, i am sharing my opinion from what I have heard him say and read about.) As far as returning to the gold standard. We currently have a FICA (i believe this is the term) where a group of bankers who are NOT part of the federal government yet call themselves the Federal Reserve, hold America's gold as collateral (sp?) for money they print at their own whims, thus the giant inflation and wonderful economic situation we are in. How they convinced congress this was a good idea is beyond me. Healthcare for everyone, how could this be a bad thing, healthier citizens means a less stresses healthcare system. He also emphasizes bringing all troops home and to cease occupying other countries (which has been proven to be a major reason for terrorism, just read Blowback) The main thing that makes Ron Paul the right candidate is that he wants to put the freedom of choice where it belongs, in the people's hands, not an overpowered government. I am sure I have left out all kinds of valid points, I am just passionate about this man and his ideals. Please visit Ron Paul 2008 &mdash; Hope for America (http://www.ronpaul2008.com) and thank you for sticking with me through this rant...lol

[rockcopper]

RON PAUL FOR CHANGE

[foodsy]

I got at least two people to hopefully vote for Ron Paul. My gramma thinks he's too radical though.

[420izzle]

I got at least two people to hopefully vote for Ron Paul. My gramma thinks he's too radical though.

My grandma is totally behind him now... And my mom, three brothers, one sister, wife, two children, two workmates, my neighbors have their yard signs up now too...it's catching on!!!

It started with me this last summer...and the brushfire has grown to over 15 people I know and love supporting Dr. Paul and counting! And from what I understand, this is pretty typical storyline. The message of freedom, peace and prosperity is popular!

RP08 (www.ronpaul2008.com)

[O. G. ganja smoker]

man was up with all the Dennis Kucinich supporters. That guy to me is to easy to control meaning he seems like he could be taken advantage of. He just dont seem very streetsmart or smart at all. Hes running for Pres. and said hes seen a UFO come on I belive there are aliens but i dont think that hes seen one that kinda thing is very rare and it just happends that a guy running for office seen one. Lets be honest RON PAUL takes a HUGE shit on Dennis Kucinich's campaign.

[foodsy]

My grandma is totally behind him now... And my mom, three brothers, one sister, wife, two children, two workmates, my neighbors have their yard signs up now too...it's catching on!!!

It started with me this last summer...and the brushfire has grown to over 15 people I know and love supporting Dr. Paul and counting! And from what I understand, this is pretty typical storyline. The message of freedom, peace and prosperity is popular!

RP08 (www.ronpaul2008.com)

When wouldn't it be? lol

[smokerofweed420]

Ron Paul is the man. I've already got some friends voting for him.

[Delta9 UK]

If I could fly to the US and vote for Ron Paul then I would ;)

[xlz916]

I'm a newb here, and mostly a lurker, but I am also a social scientist.

Ron Paul should not be taken seriously by anyone. Sorry. He knows nothing about economics, and his tax plans and ideas on the Federal Reserve are dangerously naive. There is not enough gold in the world for the US to adopt a gold standard! There is simply not enough gold wealth to cover the US's material wealth. His ideas regarding our economy are simply stupid. Very VERY stupid.

I do have some respect for his ideas regarding foreign policy. It's moot anyway. He has no shot at winning the Republican nomination, much less a general election.

EDIT to add:

I posted this on another forum -- thought I would acopy and paste it here:

Respectfully, I'm not sure why you guys take RP seriously. Bring back the gold standard? That shows me he knows nothing about economics. (There is not enough gold in the world to back up all the US's wealth!)

Abolish the IRS? Replace it with what -- a flat tax? This will disproportionately affect poor people. Our current tax system is not perfect, but there is a reason every civilized western country uses a progressive tax system. Why? Because people with more disposable income will not have their needs taxed, whereas those who have little to no disposable income will have much less financial "breathing room."

A national sales tax would be even worse!

The reason RP is not taken seriously: a) Because he represents a true threat to the establishment and will bring power "back" to the people, or b) because his ideas are silly and likely dangerous. Occam's razor.

I don't want to denigrate anyone in this thread. Yeah, I'm a newb, but I actually know something about this (it's kind of my career). A lot of intelligent people are supporting RP, but just look at how untenable his positions are!

I will say is is close to right on regarding Iraq and the whole imperialism thing. His foreign policy outlook is good. But domestically his ideas are rather silly and dangerous.

[xlz916]

Do you know than Osama Bin Laden said he is glad the US is in Iraq cause this way he can have both the Shiites and Sunnis unite and fight against America, and the longer the US is in Iraq the easier it is for him to do this

This is totally incorrect. Sorry.

Bin Laden hates the Shia quite possibly more than the US. Many extremist (Wahhabi) Sunnis believe that the US, Israel, and Iran (yes, Iran) are allies fighting against "true" (Sunni Wahhibism).

I will happily take back my statements should you provide a link. I think I probably agree with your overall position regarding foreign policy, but it's important to have your facts straight. :)

[xlz916]

You can only vote for a canidate in a primary if you are a registered voter for that party, if you are an independant you can not vote in a primary.

This is wrong.

Many states (eg New Hamphire, Missouri) are open primary states.


Then for the democrates you have the same thing and the far left liberals have the most activist voting block so you end up with a cannidate on the far left ( ie. Kerry and Gore )

So in the end we have cannidates that are on the extream end of either party. So in turn nothing in our goverment gets done!!!! because there is no middle ground!

Wow you really don't know what you are talking about at all do you?

[melodious fellow]

I posted here the other day and my post is GONE! :wtf:

[iniganja]

Ron Paul will not legalize marijuana or any other drug. Im not sure if anyone has cleared this up but I have seen numerous comments (and the above signature) on how he will do so. He will simply remove the federal governments authority on the matter and leave it to the states--the constitutional way. If your state wants marijuana to be legal then it will be.

Respectfully, I'm not sure why you guys take RP seriously. Bring back the gold standard? That shows me he knows nothing about economics. (There is not enough gold in the world to back up all the US's wealth!)
Well, he never actually said he would bring it back. But, the gold standard makes a lot more since than money being back by thin air.

Abolish the IRS? Replace it with what -- a flat tax? This will disproportionately affect poor people. Our current tax system is not perfect, but there is a reason every civilized western country uses a progressive tax system. Why? Because people with more disposable income will not have their needs taxed, whereas those who have little to no disposable income will have much less financial "breathing room."
Yes, abolish the IRS. The only reason it is there is to pay the debt to the Fed. And, who is to say income is disposable? Bill Gates and Donald Trump have disposable income? Their money--a product of their mind--is disposable? Their mind and contributions to mankind are disposable? Flat tax? Over my dead body.


The reason RP is not taken seriously: a) Because he represents a true threat to the establishment and will bring power "back" to the people, or b) because his ideas are silly and likely dangerous. Occam's razor.
What is the establishment? And power to the people is stated in the constitution and correlates directly with logic...so help me out with your A. As for B: His ideas give power to the people and take away from a house of fascists. You're damn right WE are dangerous.

I don't want to denigrate anyone in this thread. Yeah, I'm a newb, but I actually know something about this (it's kind of my career). A lot of intelligent people are supporting RP, but just look at how untenable his positions are!
Intelligent people know logic; so they side with logical positions. Untenable? I think we can take care of ourselves just fine

[angry nomad]

I just want to let everyone know that Fox News has announced that Ron Paul will be excluded from the Fox News debate in New Hampshire on January sixth.

[xlz916]

...the gold standard makes a lot more since than money being back by thin air.

No, it doesn't. Honestly.

The value of money is decided by a process of floating: which basically allows the value of currency to fluctuate against other currency.

There is no such thing as real value. The only reason gold has value is that we give it value. As I explain to my classes: God does not cram wealth inside of gold. If we want to say shiny pieces of golden metal have value, then it has value. The same exact principle applies to little green pieces of paper.

Yes, economics is weird.

[angry nomad]

No, it doesn't. Honestly.

The value of money is decided by a process of floating: which basically allows the value of currency to fluctuate against other currency.

There is no such thing as real value. The only reason gold has value is that we give it value. As I explain to my classes: God does not cram wealth inside of gold. If we want to say shiny pieces of golden metal have value, then it has value. The same exact principle applies to little green pieces of paper.

Yes, economics is weird.

Gold and silver cannot be printed.

[xlz916]

Gold and silver cannot be printed.
No, but they are subject to the same forces of supply and demand.

New sources of gold and silver can, and have been found. When this happens their value goes down.

Smart governments do not print more money when they are in financial trouble. Because it is insane.

We do alter the value of our money through a system of altering interest rates that banks can change each other int he short term. This does give us some flexibility in increasing or decreasing the value of our own currency. (And yes, having a weak currency is a good idea sometimes!)

EDIT: The main advantage of having a system where a government can print money at will is that they can expand their economy when needed. Gold, as you mentioned, can't be printed. The US economy has outgrown the gold standard. There simply is not enough gold to cover all its wealth.

[Cyclonite]

The "gold standard" doesn't mean gold necessarily, you seem pretty stuck on that. RP has stated this. " We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros."

The current system sucks and needs to be revamped big time...I remember when I was in Germany and the euro was first introduced, how great was that $1-1.5 euro or so. Now look at it, pretty much reversed....we get loans from foreign countries for ridiculous amounts.

Our wealth needs to be backed by something real otherwise the way its going the all mighty dollar is in trouble. We need to pull in to the US and pay off China and get the dollar back where it should be.

[xlz916]

Dude, I am not trying to debate, but inform.

The idea that "money" needs to be "backed" by something "real" is wrong because 1) money is a commodity (like anything else of value), 2) wealth is a social construction, and the only things that have value are those thing we GIVE value, so 3) there is not such thing as REAL wealth.

Go back and read my posts above. I have tried to explain this -- if I am not clear I apologize.

Again, this is not really debatable. I mean, if you want to argue that 2+2 equals 5, knock yourself out.

EDIT:

We need to pull in to the US and pay off China and get the dollar back where it should be.

I agree 100%.

The problem is that Bush's policies have really left us with no real answers. Doing both of these things at the same time is very difficult, and will lead to recession (which is likely inevitable anyway).

[Nailhead]

I'm a newb here, and mostly a lurker, but I am also a social scientist.
Having 5000+ friends on myspace does not make you a social scientist


Ron Paul should not be taken seriously by anyone. Sorry. He knows nothing about economics
You obviously know NOTHING about Ron Paul


He has no shot at winning the Republican nomination, much less a general election.

You also know nothing about how the primaries work, but I'm sure you watch a lot of Fox News


Abolish the IRS? Replace it with what -- a flat tax?

Ron Paul does not support replacing the IRS with anything other than less spending, and if you knew what you were talking about you wouldn't have gone on about a flat tax as if it is something he supports


I don't want to denigrate anyone in this thread. Yeah, I'm a newb, but I actually know something about this (it's kind of my career).
I hope your boss doesn't read what you post on the internet :P

[xlz916]

Nailhead:

Nice ad hominem attack there.

I have like 30 something Myspace friends. However, I do have a Ph.D. I don't know if that addresses any of your concerns or not.

Fox News is chock-full of right wing propaganda, on top of being really poor journalism. I mean bottom of the barrel, make-up-your-own-facts journalism.

If I say something inaccurate then please correct me. Provide a link or something. I will correct myself. (Example -- "You also know nothing about how the primaries work" -- ???)

I'm sorry if we don't agree on Ron Paul. But that does not make me an idiot.

[NorCal Grown]

EDIT: I posted while still editing/typing. Other post can be deleted, sorry!!

Are you possibly a professor?? But I'm pretty sure your a Socialist.

Originally Posted by xlz916:
"Abolish the IRS? Replace it with what -- a flat tax? This will disproportionately affect poor people. Our current tax system is not perfect, but there is a reason every civilized western country uses a progressive tax system. Why? Because people with more disposable income will not have their needs taxed, whereas those who have little to no disposable income will have much less financial "breathing room.""

"disproportionately affect poor people"?? how with it disproportionately do anything?? It's flat, and if your under a certain income, you don't pay at all. Learn about the flat tax. The current system puts the burden of all these social handout programs on the backs of the innovative and ambitious.

"there is a reason every civilized western country uses a progressive tax system" and most are in VERY bad shape, with stagnant economies.

I have never had or will ever have "disposable income". Could I have some of your "disposable income"?? It does not exist, "disposable income" was made up by people like you. All MY money is mine and I have a plan for it. You did not work for it, I did. You will not decide for ME where it is best spent.

[cosmas]

I've donated to Ron Paul's campaign and truly hope he wins. I'm not as socialist in my viewpoints as Kucinich but I think he has integrity. I dream of a Paul victory but if he's out, i would rather have Kucinich than any of the other corporate shills running in both parties - despite the fact that he's a near polar opposite philosophically to Paul.

[xlz916]

NorCal: thanks for a reasonable, non-hostile, intellectually honest, and non-trollish response. :pimp:


EDIT: I posted while still editing/typing. Other post can be deleted, sorry!!

Are you possibly a professor?? But I'm pretty sure your a Socialist.
Yes. And have have socialist leanings, though I (like most leftists) concede that capitalism as an economic system works better at creating wealth.

The issue with capitalism is that it also creates wealth inequality, which I personally have a problem with. I believe in wealth redistribution in the form of taxation + redistributive government programs (MUCH more than the bottom of the barrel social redistribution we have in America).



I have never had or will ever have "disposable income". Could I have some of your "disposable income"?? It does not exist, "disposable income" was made up by people like you. All MY money is mine and I have a plan for it. You did not work for it, I did. You will not decide for ME where it is best spent.


What is disposable income? A fair question! This is economics academic jargon for income that comes after meeting one's necessities. Food, rent, bills, etc, is non-disposable. Money that goes toward weed, pussy, plasma screen TVs, and that WoW subscription is disposable income.

You can claim you don't have it if you want, and that is cool. I do understand your position. I even respect it. I just don't agree with it. My opinion: if you make a certain amount of money, you should pay more taxes.

This is likely an issue we will have to agree to disagree on.

:)

[angry nomad]

No, but they are subject to the same forces of supply and demand.

New sources of gold and silver can, and have been found. When this happens their value goes down.

Smart governments do not print more money when they are in financial trouble. Because it is insane.

We do alter the value of our money through a system of altering interest rates that banks can change each other int he short term. This does give us some flexibility in increasing or decreasing the value of our own currency. (And yes, having a weak currency is a good idea sometimes!)

EDIT: The main advantage of having a system where a government can print money at will is that they can expand their economy when needed. Gold, as you mentioned, can't be printed. The US economy has outgrown the gold standard. There simply is not enough gold to cover all its wealth.

The problem is the Fed just makes money whenever they want. Only alchemists can make gold.

[xlz916]

Also:

"there is a reason every civilized western country uses a progressive tax system" and most are in VERY bad shape, with stagnant economies.
Is simply factually inaccurate.

Since 1998 Sweden's rate of growth has been better than the OECD average (basically, other advanced capitalist democracies) EVERY year except one. Sweden, as I'm sure you know, has many more social programs than most other capitalist countries.

Here is where we can agree (I hope): capitalism works. Different systems of capitalism all work relatively well. Which flavor of capitalism you prefer largely depends on your personal values.

Arguing which works better is somewhat pointless imo.

[xlz916]

The problem is the Fed just makes money whenever they want.
You are totally correct.

However, this might not be a bad thing. If you have a government that is run by people that know what the fuck they are doing, it can actually be a good thing.

Given the recent incompetence and stupidity of the Bitch administration I completely understand your lack of trust in government doing this well. Luckily, we have ceded power to a group that can effectively act independently of politicians. (Whether or not this is actually constitutional is another matter entirely.)

Here is a hierarchy most economists would agree on:

Currency supply completely controlled by a bureaucracy of expert economists >>> an inflexible currency system (eg, the gold standard) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currency supply completely controlled by a bunch of idiots



Only alchemists can make gold.

Word! I tell my classes the same thing! :rastasmoke:

[Nailhead]

Nailhead:

Nice ad hominem attack there.

I have like 30 something Myspace friends. However, I do have a Ph.D. I don't know if that addresses any of your concerns or not.

Fox News is chock-full of right wing propaganda, on top of being really poor journalism. I mean bottom of the barrel, make-up-your-own-facts journalism.

If I say something inaccurate then please correct me. Provide a link or something. I will correct myself. (Example -- "You also know nothing about how the primaries work" -- ???)

I'm sorry if we don't agree on Ron Paul. But that does not make me an idiot.

Ron Paul has broken all records for donations within 24 hours of any candidate in history, his supporters have launched a blimp without any help from the Ron Paul campaign, his supporters have more meet up groups than any other candidate, republican or democrat, he has won over half of the straw polls, and what he didn't win he usually came in 3rd or 2nd, and you are still naive enough to think this guy doesn't have a chance at winning? Might I also remind you that very few people vote in the primaries, and phone polls given only represent what people want, but not what people are willing to get off their ass and vote for, hence they are not very accurate in determining how well Ron Paul will do when voting day comes. I don't need a link to back up simple common sense.

You also conveniently avoided how I pointed out you don't know much about what Ron Paul supports when you stated he supports a flat tax to replace the IRS, something he has repeatedly said he does not support. Maybe you were thinking of Mike Huckabee because he supports that, but not Ron Paul. If you need a link google it yourself, this isn't hard information to dig up on the net and if you were half as smart as you try to portray yourself you would already know more about Ron Paul than myself. I'm not doing your political homework, you're the social scientist, so simple research should come naturally to you, right?

[xlz916]

Hey Nailhead.

Please show me where I said RP supports a flat tax. I can save you time: I never said he did. I did say he supports getting rid of the IRS. I am pretty sure I am correct about that.

I am not trying to claim to be smart. I never meant to do that, and I'm sorry if I appeared that way to you or anyone else. I'm not trying to be an ass, or belittle anyone. You are the one that said I was not a social scientist (some idiocy about MySpace), so I was really just defending myself. (FYI: personal attacks are neither polite nor a strong argument make.)

When I say that if I make an incorrect statement you should provide a link to correct me, I am not asking you to do my research for me. I am asking you to prove me incorrect. If I have said anything incorrect, I will take it back. Simple as that.

As for Ron Paul not standing a chance, we will see about that won't we. I don't deny he has raised a lot of money. However, I don't know a SINGLE political scientist that would claim he has a snowflake's chance in hell (including myself). Sorry. But this is really a silly argument. If I am wrong, I will concede I don't know a damn thing about politics. I will be shocked if he gets higher than 4th in Iowa, and 3rd in NH. That is being generous.

I will be either proven right or wrong very soon.

[Nailhead]

Hey Nailhead.

Please show me where I said RP supports a flat tax. I can save you time: I never said he did. I did say he supports getting rid of the IRS. I am pretty sure I am correct about that.

Here you go:

Abolish the IRS? Replace it with what -- a flat tax? This will disproportionately affect poor people. Our current tax system is not perfect, but there is a reason every civilized western country uses a progressive tax system. Why? Because people with more disposable income will not have their needs taxed, whereas those who have little to no disposable income will have much less financial "breathing room."





I am not trying to claim to be smart. I never meant to do that, and I'm sorry if I appeared that way to you or anyone else. I'm not trying to be an ass, or belittle anyone.

Then why did you say...

I'm a newb here, and mostly a lurker, but I am also a social scientist.

I do have a Ph.D.
Whether intentional or not, you have a condescending attitude in your posts. You didn't even say what your Ph.D is in or how that relates to the topic we are discussing, thus it is completely irrelevant. George W. Bush attended Harvard University, one of the most respected schools in America, but what good did that really do? If you want to impress me, do it with words of wisdom, not your personal history of education.



As for Ron Paul not standing a chance, we will see about that won't we. I don't deny he has raised a lot of money. However, I don't know a SINGLE political scientist that would claim he has a snowflake's chance in hell (including myself). Sorry. But this is really a silly argument. If I am wrong, I will concede I don't know a damn thing about politics. I will be shocked if he gets higher than 4th in Iowa, and 3rd in NH. That is being generous.
lol, I know I didn't post it but I was thinking to myself how your most likely response would be something along the lines of "we will see what happens". If we are talking about chance then surely you are basing your assumption of Ron Paul having 0% chance on some sort of evidence, right? I gave you specific reasons why he does indeed have a chance at winning, I didn't say it was a sure shot, but I did provide good reasons to back up my opinions and you have not done the same for your own. Why should I hold your opinions over anyone else's?

[xlz916]

You still did not show me where I said RP supported a flat tax.

EDIT:

Whether intentional or not, you have a condescending attitude in your posts.
You have a hard time accepting apologies?

This is what I wrote:

I am not trying to claim to be smart. I never meant to do that, and I'm sorry if I appeared that way to you or anyone else. I'm not trying to be an ass, or belittle anyone.

WTF is your problem dude? Seriously. I'm just trying to chill and discuss politics. If occurs to me that maybe I have been and ass, so I man up and say I'm sorry. If that is not good enough for you, then whatever!

[xlz916]

lol, I know I didn't post it but I was thinking to myself how your most likely response would be something along the lines of "we will see what happens". If we are talking about chance then surely you are basing your assumption of Ron Paul having 0% chance on some sort of evidence, right? I gave you specific reasons why he does indeed have a chance at winning, I didn't say it was a sure shot, but I did provide good reasons to back up my opinions and you have not done the same for your own. Why should I hold your opinions over anyone else's?

Fair question. My evidence is that polls have consistently shown Paul having low support consistently. You say those polls are not accurate. Correct? I think they are not perfect, and tend to underestimate his support, but Paul will not do better than 4th place in Iowa.

Any yes, will will see soon won't we?

EDIT: grammar.

[Nailhead]

If by your own post you did not mean to insinuate Ron Paul supports a flat tax, why did you even bring it up? Was it just another irrelevant post just like you mentioning your Ph.D or your job title? What other irrelevant information would you like to post that has nothing to do with what we are talking about?

[Fencewalker]

I tend to side with the folks that say the polls are pretty inaccurate. For instance, traditional phone polling only call those that are (let's take the republicans) "likely republican voters" and their definition seems to be those that were registered republican and voted in the last election.

I have seen folks say that amounts to about 4-6% of republicans in 2006, most of whom voted for Bush, which is a pretty small pool to be choosing out of and would not be Paul fans anyway.

Paul's demographics seem to draw from young voters (never voted before and use cell phones more than land lines), disenfranchised voters (didn't vote in the last election) and Independents and Democrats that registered as Republicans solely to be able to vote for Dr. Paul this time around. The polls would not reflect those demographics.

As you say though, we will know shortly, won't we? :)

See, I didn't even need to insult anybody or be belligerent to get my point across. Amazing how that works Nailhead, huh?

[xlz916]

If by your own post you did not mean to insinuate Ron Paul supports a flat tax, why did you even bring it up? Was it just another irrelevant post just like you mentioning your Ph.D or your job title? What other irrelevant information would you like to post that has nothing to do with what we are talking about?

Dude, you are the one that brought up that the only thing that made me qualified was having 5000+ MySpace friends. You attacked me remember? Point out where I have insulted you.

So, after you insulted me, I decided to try and defend myself. In doing so, I likely made as ass of myself. So I apologized to you. You chose not to accept my apology and basically say "fuck you." If that's how you wanna be, then fine I guess. I was trying to be cool with you. I really was. But I guess that is not happening. Hopefully there are other people more chill than you on this board. Thankfully, it seems most people here are much nicer.

My "qualifications" don't mean shit. I have a piece of paper that supposedly means I know something, and a LOT of fucking student loan debt. You are 100% that a degree, in and of itself, means nothing.

I would like to be cool with people here, including you. If you can't be cool with me, then seriously just leave me the fuck alone. If you can, then fine.

[xlz916]

I tend to side with the folks that say the polls are pretty inaccurate. For instance, traditional phone polling only call those that are (let's take the republicans) "likely republican voters" and their definition seems to be those that were registered republican and voted in the last election.

I have seen folks say that amounts to about 4-6% of republicans in 2006, most of whom voted for Bush, which is a pretty small pool to be choosing out of and would not be Paul fans anyway.

Paul's demographics seem to draw from young voters (never voted before and use cell phones more than land lines), disenfranchised voters (didn't vote in the last election) and Independents and Democrats that registered as Republicans solely to be able to vote for Dr. Paul this time around. The polls would not reflect those demographics.

As you say though, we will know shortly, won't we? :)

Good points. You have just outlined why I think that the phone polls underestimate RP's support in Iowa (not as much in NH).

Check out what I bolded above. That is a lot of shit to do just to vote for RP! Did some people do it? Yes, certainly. Did enough do it to make him likely to contend for a Republican nomination? I don't think so. Voting tends to be habitual -- people that have never voted are notoriously unreliable as far as turnout goes.

The big question: is RP's young, inexperienced based MOTIVATED enough to overcome all expectations? If so, if RP manages to even get 2nd, or even 3rd in Iowa, then we might actually have a RP revolution!



See, I didn't even need to insult anybody or be belligerent to get my point across. Amazing how that works Nailhead, huh?

I'm not going there anymore. But thanks for talking to me in a civil way. I like to think that people that disagree can have a civil discussion. :D

[Nailhead]

Sorry if you took this all so personally because I wasn't trying to attack you, but rather attack your political statements. I only criticized your education after you presented it as part of your support for your statements, I only considered this as part of the political debate we were having, nothing personal. If you took it that way, then I am sorry.

But back on topic...
As for phone polling, another reason it's not very accurate for showing Ron Paul's support is that it is one thing to have somebody call you and ask you about your political opinions. I know a lot of people that while they can give a definite answer to who they support, the question of if they will actually vote is another issue. Many will not, but I would say most Ron Paul supporters understand how important the primaries are and know the dates of when and where they need to be. Most people, that vote at least, only vote in the general elections. The primaries are usually for people that are more involved in politics than others, and while people in early states might be more excited to be involved with the countries future, I'm not convinced other states have people just as interested.

I don't think Ron Paul is a majority, I'm guessing it's probably more like 12%, but while Giuliani might have 21.5%, maybe only 20% of those supporters will actually go and vote in the primaries, whereas Ron Paul might have a mere 12%, but 99.9% of his supporters will be bright and early at their states polling location.

It's just a theory of course, but I do think it is something to consider because many republicans are not really thrilled with any of the candidates and may not vote at all because of that.

[Stoney Toney]

I like ron paul and yes he supports the end of war on drugs but yall all know he really isn't going to win. if yall are willing to admit that like me then vote for obama i don't care what he says he gonna do but i know he won't take us to war.

Hillary is going to win and we don't need clinton's or bush's in the white house so just think about waste your vote on the right canidate or sacrifice your vote for the second best.


Hillary is going to win! fight back:(

oh well doesn't matter anyway:smokin:


:smokebong:

[carfreek5]

I hear he wants to legalize Mary J, if so, hes got my vote:stoned:

[Fencewalker]

As to motivation to get out and vote....These are the same people that have contributed donations, enough donations to break records. They show up not only at their own candidates appearances, but at other candidates appearances. They wave signs at street corners...

I don't think it will be a problem motivating them to get out and vote. ;)

[angry nomad]

I like ron paul and yes he supports the end of war on drugs but yall all know he really isn't going to win. if yall are willing to admit that like me then vote for obama i don't care what he says he gonna do but i know he won't take us to war.

Hillary is going to win and we don't need clinton's or bush's in the white house so just think about waste your vote on the right canidate or sacrifice your vote for the second best.


Hillary is going to win! fight back:(

oh well doesn't matter anyway:smokin:


:smokebong:

Barack Obama, asked on 60 Minutes about using military force to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, began a discussion of his preference for diplomacy by responding, "I think we should keep all options on the table."

The Words None Dare Say: Nuclear War (http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0228-28.htm)

[xlz916]

As to motivation to get out and vote....These are the same people that have contributed donations, enough donations to break records. They show up not only at their own candidates appearances, but at other candidates appearances. They wave signs at street corners...

I don't think it will be a problem motivating them to get out and vote. ;)
I agree 100% that RP has a group of highly motivated supporters. I am just skeptical that there are very many of them.

[angry nomad]

I agree 100% that RP has a group of highly motivated supporters. I am just skeptical that there are very many of them.

YouTube - Ron Paul March in San Francisco 9/13/07 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbkwdT6Erm8)

YouTube - Ron Paul Grand Central Station NYC (10-13-07) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPldT3zeiYs)

YouTube - News Report on Guiliani SWAMPED by Happy Ron Paul Supporters (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXz7Po8YPHo)

YouTube - Austin Tea Party / Ron Paul rally 12-16-2007 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvGS12EoZUE)

[Nailhead]

I like ron paul and yes he supports the end of war on drugs but yall all know he really isn't going to win. if yall are willing to admit that like me then vote for obama i don't care what he says he gonna do but i know he won't take us to war.

Hillary is going to win and we don't need clinton's or bush's in the white house so just think about waste your vote on the right canidate or sacrifice your vote for the second best.


Hillary is going to win! fight back:(

oh well doesn't matter anyway:smokin:


:smokebong:
What makes you think Obama is going to do anything different than Hillary? He is a carbon copy only darker toned. Neither of Clinton or Obama have any real government experience, they are only front runners because one of them is black and the other has a vagina. Aside from those differences, they are completely identical.

No laws would ever change if everybody had the same pessimistic attitude you have towards politics, remember, change begins with yourself.

[Nailhead]

I agree 100% that RP has a group of highly motivated supporters. I am just skeptical that there are very many of them.

There aren't that many of them, certainly more than what the polls suggest, but I don't believe for one instant there are more Ron Paul supporters than supporters of other candidates. But Ron Paul supporters are all going to vote when the time comes, the other candidates supporters aren't that interested and will most likely forget to go vote....this is why I believe he has a very good chance at winning.

I do think it is possible that he does represent a larger percent of supporters than most of the other candidates in some of the other smaller states, but nationally of course he is not the majority...probably closer to 14-16% I'm guessing. I think I posted something like that earlier, but im too stoned right now to go look for that post lol

Just donated tonight to Ron Paul by the way....I've been sitting staring at his website waiting for my name to come across but there must be a glitch because it's not showing, it did for nov 5th :(

oh well, anyway just 15 minutes left to donate for this quarter (ends midnight eastern time, 9pm pacific time) SO GO DONATE RIGHT NOW :)

[Zimzum]

I hear he wants to legalize Mary J, if so, hes got my vote:stoned:

He will only remove the federal restrictions on it becoming legal. Under a Ron Paul presidency it will ultimately be at the decisions and laws of the states.

[norkali]

Ron Paul will win by a landslide (http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=207908)

[angry nomad]

He will only remove the federal restrictions on it becoming legal. Under a Ron Paul presidency it will ultimately be at the decisions and laws of the states.

True. But repealing federal marijuana laws is the greatest and first step to take on ending the War on Drugs, and legalizing cannabis.

[Nailhead]

He will only remove the federal restrictions on it becoming legal. Under a Ron Paul presidency it will ultimately be at the decisions and laws of the states.

You say only as if the federal involvement of prohibition is not as great, or equal to the involvement states have towards prohibition. Many states would legalize marijuana and as time progresses and people realize marijuana legalization does not have any connection with increased criminal activity, (and they also will learn it actually will reduce the profits drug dealers can make), other states should soon follow.

Right now Jack Herer (http://www.jackherer.com/) is co-sponsoring a bill in California that would legalize marijuana. If the bill passes only the federal government would be in the way of legalization in California.

The federal government is behind much of the lies surrounding marijuana, end the lies and people will see there is nothing to fear about this harmless and natural weed.

[altoids]

Well, as much as I want him, do any of you think he may have even a chance of being president?

To me, it doesn't look like he has much of a chance....

[GotWake88]

I am voting, publicly endorsing, and donating for Dr Paul.

In fact, in response to Faux News' exclusion of Dr Paul from the upcoming forum, I sold what shares I owned of NewsCorp. I also cancelled my service with Nextel due to it's affiliation with Faux News. My New Years resolution is to be 100% Murdoch-free. Why doesn't he go back and fuck up his own country, anyway? NWS is going south for the winter.

[GotWake88]

And to those that say he doesn't have a chance....

My prediction is that Dr Paul will SWEEP THE MAP. ALL of the polls that show Dr Paul in the single digits are very flawed. For one, if you look into who is polled, you will find out that it is only people who a) have landline, and b) voted republican in 2004. Less that seven percent of registered republicans voted in 2004. Aside from that, those who voted republican in 2004 are the subgroup of the population that are most likely to be Bush loyalists.

As the saying goes: There are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics.

The ONLY reliable election predictor is fundraising, taking into account the actual dollar amount, as well as the number of donors. I repeat: Ron Paul will sweep the map.

[Nailhead]

Well, as much as I want him, do any of you think he may have even a chance of being president?

To me, it doesn't look like he has much of a chance....

based on what? As previously explained the way polls are conducted, support of Ron Paul cannot be accurately collected. Most of the people that think he doesn't have a chance are basing that assumption on the national polls, which are not even a reliable predictor to who will win a primary, let alone an accurate base to say who has how much of a chance at winning. The reality is that with so many undecided voters anybody has a chance....except Allen Keys, :P lol

[Zimzum]

Taken from last night in Boston. We met many RP supporters and answered many "who is Ron Paul" questions. Someone had a 10 stack DVD burner and we handed out plenty of RP DVDs and America: Freedom to Fascism DVDs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdfCyP-XgDI

[phx123]

Ron Paul all the way!
He's got my vote for sure January 15th.

[xblackdogx]

That 72 year old has got my vote!

[eL.migz]

i like him. he seems consistent with many good points to his agenda, some i dont like, but so far, he is my favorite republican candidate

[420izzle]

Well, as much as I want him, do any of you think he may have even a chance of being president?

To me, it doesn't look like he has much of a chance....

He has a good chance. I agree with GotWake88 ... he could sweep the map. He wins the most straw polls, debate polls and raises the most money in the 4th quarter. His growth is exponential and I love it! Let Freedom Ring!
It's clear that we the people support Ron Paul. (http://truthseeds.org/2007/12/26/proof-we-the-people-support-ron-paul/)

[Kokujin X]

The question is, what do you people expect from the government? Do you expect a socialist, or even a fascist tone to our government? Most of us align with capitalism / democracy (im not talking to thoes of you who despise capitalism, you radical bastards) yet when you look at whats popular, people want lower taxes, medicare benefits, basically asking for increased government activity, but less funding. You people apparently WANT our government WAY outspending its worth, throwing our country into debt and continuing to ruin the dollar. This is our own fucking government spending, funding for the war, all sorts of things. I personally think its time Americas government goes back to its roots and stops babying its citizens (at a price I might add) Imagin a father who loves his son, and the kid says "daddy, I want "this", I want "that", I want!!!" and, so the father buys the toys or whatever. Problem is hes been living off credit cards, borrowing the money to buy his kid all sorts of awesome things but also for food and things they need. Everything seems fine but the father knows otherwise, because one of his cards wasn't accepted and knows he cant afford the min payment. The last thing he wants to do is inform his child of the impending doom. But then the shit hits the fan and he declares bankruptcy, his credit scores ruined, house revoked, I think all of us can agree the father overspent himself and now he suffers.

Have any of you heard of the Amero? Well, look it up. You will probably be seeing a lot of it soon. Ron Paul is the only candidate that even acknowelages the Amero, NAFTA's highways, the unionization of Canada, US, and Mexico to the NAU (North American Union) and no, this is not fake. Now think, what are some possible ways to actually integrate this currency into america? Hmmm...... well, if the dollar collapses, the amero would seem like a pretty good idea. What makes me sick is the idea that most these candidates would wait for economic crisis, then spring in the Amero, or maybe even Bush if it happend sooner. The ugly fact is the dollar is going down. It can only decrease in value with the way things are going now. Ron Paul is the only candidate that can save the $, give people back there liberties and freedom, cut the useless, parenting government programs (Public schooling is not being cut BTW) stop this bullshit war, cut our empire to size and return attention to important matters here at home.

Truely, Ron Paul is such a good candidate I can't believe people are even considering cheese dicks like romny, guliani, or hilary. I guess the outcome of November 2008 will just show how much of us have successfully been hypnotized.

Hello National ID, NAU and the Amero, Iran, patriot act III, police state America, bye bye freedom....

[GotWake88]

Fuck the Amero. Fuck the NAU. And fuck the Nasco Corridor(which is already under construction). These three things are the biggest potential infringements to our national sovereignty that we have ever experienced. We need a true libertarian to return this nation to its Jeffersonian roots. We need to return to commodity-backed currency, before the dollar crashes, and its too late. We need to repeal the Patriot Act, and we certainly need to repeal the Military Commissions Act of 2006(literally the most frightening peice of legislation that has ever passed Congress).

I fear that the 2008 may be America's last chance to return itself to its roots.

Restore the Republic.
Ron Paul 2008

[Mr. Clandestine]

Hello National ID, NAU and the Amero, Iran, patriot act III, police state America, bye bye freedom....

Great post, very passionate and motivating. While we're nitpicking through unnoticed changes happening daily in our government, "Totalitarian" feels like an appropriate addition to the 'Hello' list.

George W. Bush: If Only I Were A Dictator (http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/2002/10/29_Dictator.html)

By the way, isn't it rumored that the NID will take affect sometime in 2008?

[silkyblue]

Fuck the Amero. Fuck the NAU. And fuck the Nasco Corridor



yeah fuck em!!!


roflmbo!

[Psycho4Bud]

This thread has clearly outlived its usefullness regarding the subject matter.

Have a good one!:jointsmile: