E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSRon Paul’s third campaign for president may not lead to the Texas Congressman being nominated at the Republican Convention in Tampa this August -- notwithstanding a lawsuit filed by supporters in attempt to make that happen -- but, from Maine to Alaska, the “Paul Revolution” has swept state Republican parties.
Out of the national spotlight, Paul activists have mastered obscure local party rules to win key positions of power at state conventions, infiltrating the Republican establishment across the country, including in the key swing states of Iowa and Nevada.
In Massachusetts, they even beat out many prominent pro-Mitt Romney supporters to win spots as Romney delegates. They are informally bound by party rules to vote for Romney still, but the open secret in both parties, is no one is really bound – one of the issues at the heart of the Paul supporters’ lawsuit against the national party.
Ben Margot / AP
Supporters of Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, cheer as Paul speaks at the University of California at Berkeley, Calif.
Paul’s strategy has always been to motivate “the remnant” to gain influence by getting involved in party politics, and described how that would happen to a small group of reporters in Columbia, S.C., in mid-January.
“We don't win over the insiders by becoming like an insider,” Paul said. “We win the inside over by making the outsiders become more appropriate.”
But what Paul activists have done in many places is learn the rules of the insiders and use them against them.
After being described as “an outlier for the Republican Party,” Paul Wednesday morning on MSNBC, explained how supporters will achieve his long-term goal of bringing the GOP around to accepting his political philosophy.
“I want to work on the platform,” Paul said, “but we know platforms don't change people's attitudes. That's what we want to do -- get attention to changing the attitude, so that we, who are perceived as outliers, become the insiders. And that's what's happening. … We're winning state delegations, state chairmen and small offices, anywhere from city councils to county commissioners.”
Paul supporters are winning elections and becoming party insiders: chairmen, national committeemen, executive board members, elected officials, candidates and delegates.
- In Iowa, four of Paul’s former aides hold leadership positions at the state party, including chairman A.J. Spiker – who was Paul’s state co-chair. At least six members of the Iowa State Central Committee are Paul supporters.
- In Alaska, Republicans voted Russ Millette as the party’s new chairman and Debra Holle Brown as co-chair, both Paul supporters. Local reports call this a sea change in state politics, after “at least 12 years of the Alaska GOP being run by what those party newcomers call ‘establishment Republicans.’”
- In Nevada, Paul supporters won 13 of 14 new elected executive board spots at the Clark County GOP. Four years after having the lights turned out on them at the state convention in 2008, Paul supporters now hold positions at local and county GOP offices across the Silver State.
- In Minnesota, the state Republican Party endorsed Paul supporter and economics teacher Kurt Bills for the GOP Senate nomination. He will face incumbent Democrat Amy Klobuchar in November.
- And in Maine, 21-year-old Paul supporter Ashley Ryan was elected as the state’s new Republican national committeewoman. The Paul campaign claims she is likely the youngest national committeewoman.
“Look at the next generation,” Paul said on MSNBC. “I mean, there is so much excitement out there. The big deal is that the next generation are sick and tired of what they're getting and they're looking for something. And what we're offering seems to appeal to the young people.”
Paul also explained that the goal of his movement “is to show that there's a political benefit toward accepting some of the views that we have.”
“I believe we're actually doing a favor for the Republican Party. If they would look to us for guidance and to realize that if they would accept some of these things, they might have an easier time winning.”
That said, not everyone's sold on just how lasting the impact of the "revolution" will be, considering Paul wasn't able to win a state in the GOP primary and didn't stop Romney, the most establishment of all the candidates, from becoming the nominee.
Asked which mattered more -- influence over party platform or being a state party chairman, Steve Schmidt, John McCain's 2008 campaign manager, dismissed either and said Paul supporters would be little more than a "hassle we'll have to deal with."
"I'm not sure that either have a particularly big influence on the direction of the party," Schmidt said on MSNBC. "When you have a state chairman who takes over a state party and the state party's dysfunctional, it's no longer relevant to the political goals of electing a majority, whether that's on the Democratic side or Republican side. Typically you see something that is taking place in California, for example, where you know the Republican parties become a small ideological clubhouse, totally faded to irrelevance where they-- factions gather twice every year to pass resolutions, denouncing the other faction, and it's a small clubhouse where people are relevant in the sphere of that small clubhouse, but no longer relevant in terms of being able to shape the outcome of an election -- to recruit candidates, to raise money, to register voters. And that's the direction these dysfunctional parties will go."
Jeff Johnson, a Republican National Committeeman from Minnesota, though, addressed the anxiety some in the establishment have over this increased participation by Paul’s followers.
“Ron Paul haters, get over it,” Johnson said. “If we don’t grow, we die as a party.”
Nearing the end of his career, Paul, 76, calls his movement an “ideological revolution,” one he says is “alive and well.”
And this year, as Paul disciples become more involved and win elections, it’s a movement the Republican Party is being forced to deal with.
Leave a Comment:
Tampa!
You have a problem! lol
Can't wait to see what shenanigan's they pull & how Team Willard deals with it!
Sure Red.
Charlotte is going to be a cake walk.
How come so many Dems don't want to go to the convention?
...as evidenced by...?
Just when you thought the old fart was blown away by the wind, here he comes, back in the limelight with with his 137 delegates....LOL...
BTW - Gary Johnson is running as a libertarian. I wonder how many Paulies he'll siphon out of the Repubican party? Could be more trouble for NitMitt....
Obama/Biden 2012
From the Daily:
At least half a dozen Democratic officials have said in recent days that they won't attend the Democratic National Convention this September in Charlotte, North Carolina, where the president will formally receive the party's nomination for a second term. The latest: New York Democratic Reps. Bill Owens and Kathy Hochul, both of whom won special elections in recent years – in 2009 and 2011, respectively – that were heralded by party leaders.
"I guarantee that my time will be better spent meeting the farmers, small business owners and other people who put me here," Hochul told The Daily today.
A spokesman for Owens gave a similar explanation.
"He just has a packed schedule back home," he said.
This comes on the heels of Pennsylvania Rep. Mark Critz saying he'd opt out, and a trio of West Virginia Democrats — Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin, Sen. Joe Manchin and Rep. Nick Rahall — all doing the same. Even though most of the convention-skippers have claimed they'd simply rather spend time back home, the political undertones are clear. After all, these Democrats share one thing in common: They answer to a conservative-leaning electorate that, at best, views Obama with a great deal of skepticism.
Egilman is behind this ... you go Egilman!
Tyler-
Ruken, you're suspended for a month for violating #1 of the Code of Honor. You know the rules.
You guys should have warned your latest favorite poster to stay on the safety of First Read....
Ah...so, WCA, your source is another part of Rupert's "Fair and Balanced" gang.
Isn't that nice.
Those are quotes Noid. Direct from the politicians.
Don't whine because MSNBC won't cover it.
It makes you look bad.
Red head- they've already pulled the shenanigans. Not many people follow the Ron paul campaign, but the Republicans and Fox news did a number on him big time. Bad things man.
Maybe you should of heeded your own advice and warned Snuffy!
Poor thing is back today fresh out of rehab and managed to earn herself a time out!
I tried to tell the old broad she was slipping but NOOOO she wouldn't listen!
Not real bright is she?
Then again, I wouldn't expect her to be, she is after all, a member of Team Red! lol
Really?
Gee...which politician said that?
Personally, I hope Ron & his supporters wreak holy havoc in Tampa!
Finally something we can agree on.
Sure Red. I wouldn't expect you to understand the difference between a day and a month.
You think the economy is coming back.
WCA - What article did Ruken get kicked out of?
A bit of Bloodshed over on the NBC article headlined "Is Romney to focused on the economy?"
Folks seem to forget to watch themselves when they wander off of First Read.
GT-2021701
http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/21/12342128-is-romney-too-focused-on-the-economy?threadId=3447787&commentId=67283228#c67283228
Tyler beat me to him by but a post
Who would of guessed... ;o)
GT - the Romney economy thread!
Tyler also took out one of the nasty boobsie twins for a week! lol
This is worth a look whether you are for or against:
Are we allowed to say things here on FR, that can't be said other places?
... so "gang", I am willing to plead for a reprieve for JAS1 and Ruken to at least be able to post on FR.
Are we allowed to say things here on FR, that can't be said other places? big time
FR is not moderated like other Newsvine/MSNBC sites...
Wander off the ranch at your own risk! ;o)
Looks like they also got "JAS1" and one of the crazy "Bob's"
Thanks for the advice.....
Oh Tampa is gonna be fun to watch. I don't think anyone in the GOP has control of the Ron Paul group and they will cause havoc!
Popcorn and lots of it!
"This is crazy, there is no way houses are worth this kind of money. Alot of Banks may look solvent but they hold an awful lot of this debt and it will crash down hard"
Ron Paul in March 2006 on Neil Cavuto FOX NEWS
"The Economy is on a strong footing and our Housing Market is an example of the Wealth created in this economy. Pro growth Policies matter and the President deserves credit."
Karl Rove same show
Hey, Feisty,
Do you charge by the hour or the act?
logico - my guess is you're cheap enough that you could be had for the night for $25.00.
Feisty reminds me exactly of a guy I used to work with, when you wanted to bet the correct side of a football game all you had to do was ask this person which team was going to cover then go with the opposite team. I mean this guy couldn't pick a game for you know what, but if you asked him he was the greatest handicapper alive.
In a way it is just what Hitler did use the parlimentary rules to seize power you can't win at the ballot box or at the point of a gun. Just another example of how money affects the process. Unlike Hitler, Paul could not attract the big money of the true GOP power brokers like the Koch brothers, Adelson, and the other billionaires so he has to try other means.
That explains a lot. No wonder there's so much backbiting on these threads.
"You think the economy is coming back."
Reality time people. This economy is going to slog along for at least the next 6 years, probably longer. We will see very slow growth, flat wages, slow growth in employment and a so-so stock market. We are seeing a fundamental shift in the world economy and it doesn't matter who is elected in the fall. Presidents can tweak around the edges but they don't have all that much influence. Anyone believing that Obama, Romney, Paul or any other politician has some kind of magic bullet to kick start the economy is a fool.
Someone sounds WAAAAY too familiar with the working girls...
What's the matter little buddy?
You incapable of getting any for free? lol
Ron Paul doesn't really belong in the party of 'no.' He has a lot more in common with liberals than with Republicans, and even for issues where's there's differences of opinion, at least we can guarantee him that his opinion will be listened to with respect.
Byron, he doesn't belong in either party.
He is fiscally more conservative than the Republicans. Socially he is more liberal than the Democrats.
Newsflash. Mitt and Ron have been good friends since 2008. Ron Paul will get his 15 minutes of fame, but Romney will be the nominee.
Omg, Ron Paul supporters give up. Nobody wants him. He's cookoo!
Too true Fiesty. Good post.
Ron Paul supporters, please consider this! I was once a proud Republican but when I saw how my GOP Party mistreated and humiliated Dr. Paul, I could stand it no more.
That's why I'm encouraging as many of you Ron Paul supporters, all my Republican friends, Independents, and all other Freedom Loving Americans, to VOTE a straight DEMOCRATIC ticket come this November 2012.
Not only will it be FUN, but it's the RIGHT THING to do. By VOTING a straight DEMOCRATIC ticket this November 2012, you will STOP Mitt ROMNEY from DESTROYING the MIDDLE CLASS.
GOD BLESS YOU and GOD BLESS the U.S.A.
This was on FOX what a joke. If Ron took 13% the Republicans would be fu#ked.
Ron Paul as a independent would be awesome.
Ron Paul has been a thorn in the side of Mitt Romney's presidential run for years, but a new poll suggests that should the Texas congressman launch an independent candidacy it would actually help Mitt Romney.
The Rasmussen survey of a hypothetical three-way race for the White House shows Romney with 44%, President Obama with 39% and Ron Paul with 13%.
Ron Paul has not pulled out of the race for the GOP presidential nomination, although his chances of capturing the nomination are becoming increasingly remote.
The national survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on May 6-7, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
Charlotte not a good place for Democrats, Obama lost support of NC for the issue of the gay marriage ,and probably he won't have the courage to go to a NASCAR race like Bush did, for fear to make ridiculous, it didn't work for Michelle it won't work for Barry.
The current Democratic party contains a lot of Republicans who are so disgusted by the Republican party that they cannot vote for any Republican; I am such an ex-Republican. Beyond that, Democrats are now fiscally more Conservative that Republicans. Both are issues that have resonance with Libertarians. The friendships don't matter.
Go Ron Paul!! The republican party hasn't been the republican party for too long of time. Corruption abounds with the sell out of a whole political party that signs away their convictions to Norquest.
redvirginia,
I wouldn't count the president out in NC just yet, however, NC is not a state that Mr. Obama needs to win the election. Mitt Romney has no viable path to 270 electoral votes. President Obama is leading in our great commonwealth and is poised to win our 13 electoral votes a second time, he leads in PA, he leads in OH, he leads in Wisconsin, he's leading in Michigan and he's leading in a bunch of other swing states as well (most recent polls show Obama leading in FL too) but it's doesn't really matter because with the previously mentioned states, he's well over 270 electoral votes:
The Electoral college is the sole means by which we elect presidents, and if we go by current polling in the individual states, the electoral totals look something like this;
In the "Solid R, Likely R and Leans R" categories we have the following states; ID-4, UT-6, AZ-11, AK-3, MT-3, WY-3, ND-3, SD-3, NE-5, KS-6, OK-7, TX-38, MO-10, AR-6, LA-8, IN-11, KY-8, TN-11, MS-6, AL-9, GA-16, WV-5 & SC-9 =191 electoral votes
In the "Solid D, Likely D and Leans D" categories are; HI-4, WA-12, OR-7, CA-55, NV-6, CO-9, NM-5, MN-10, IA-6, IL-20, MI-16, ME-4, NH-4, RI-4, VT-3, MA-11, NY-29, CT-7, NJ-14, DE-3, PA-20, MD-10 & DC-3 = 262 electoral votes
That leaves 85 votes still up for grabs (VA-13, OH-18, FL-29, WI-10 & NC-15.) Romney must win 79 of the remaining 85, Obama needs 8. Most pollsters are on the verge of putting Virginia in the "Leans D" category since every poll, except the biased Evangelical "Christian" Roanoke College (who predicted McCain would win VA by 8% in 2008, actual result: Obama won by 7%), shows Obama winning the Commonwealth by a percentage outside of the margin for error.
So that brings Obama's total to 275 electoral votes, and thus earns him a second term.
It's awesome that Romney can win Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin and North Carolina and still lose the election having earned only 263 electoral votes. That's still very generous to Romney because President Obama is well ahead in both Wisconsin and Ohio. Florida looks to be going for Romney. North Carolina is still tied as well, so it really could be either man's state.
It's all right there, folks, you can't argue with the math. Mitt Romney has no viable path to 270, the best he can do is close, but no cigar. He'll do a lot better than McCain did, but that's not saying much.
Also, Obama is leading the national polls as well, even a Fox News poll. Not that national numbers actually have any bearing on the election, but it's fun to point out to Republicans exactly how woefully hopeless their candidate is. Oh, and the federal investigation against Romney for voter fraud isn't going to help him all that much either.
Red Virginia - NASCAR? Are you out of your mind? Who the hell cares about NASCAR? Why not go to Bush's fake ranch
Remember how all of the news people were stationed in front of of a falling down shed and a rusty what?
Get a grip little boy Obama doesn't need fake movie site - he has attracted more people than the Mittens
2,500 people at his speeches versus Willards 250 at his
Willard is a total fake - He! He! HE! I believe he has learned Bush's laugh- and Bush's total cross-eyed lies
"At least half a dozen Democratic officials have said in recent days that they won't attend the Democratic National Convention"
Wow!! At least half a dozes -- you mena more like 10 or maybe even 11?? Sounds like a major revolution to me!!! Sorry -- it's not the Democratic party that ripping itself apart -- it's the Republican Party.
No one said the Democrats are ripping themselves apart, but this does show that a significant number of Democrats up for election don't want to be associated with the President at all. I feel that bodes poorly for Obama. I do like that Ron Paul is attempting to change the Republican party. Human nature being what it is his people won't get all they want, but its probable that as a counterweight to the religious right we could end up with a fiscally conservative, socially moderate, self-defense oriented Republican Party. They would then be representative of mainstream America, leaving the Democrats to represent only special interest groups.
Even though I think Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are even worse than Mitt (I'd rather have a guy with no ideological commitments than one that will destroy the country to serve his utopian ideology), I think it's great that the libertarians are becoming an option for GOP voters. A strong second right-wing party may just be what Obama needs to secure his re-election.
I think being forced to discuss alternative views is good for both parties, so I'm glad to hear Ron Paul supporters are taking these steps.
On fiscal issues I disagree with much of Paul's platform. But I wish him the best of luck, and not for "sabotaging the convention" purposes. I think that we need to see the parties broken up. If he get the process started then good for him.
It's funny to see how all the libtards support Republicans voting for Paul. They realize they need some way to take votes away from Romney, because otherwise, in the electoral college Romney will end up killing Hussein. It is the same way that Perot got Clinton elected in 1992.
Santorum and Gingrich also won quite a few delegates. If their delegates played along in a similar manner and also voted for their candidates for nomination, Romney would still cinch the nomination but would be wounded by doing so without a large majority and those candidates would be able to pressure Romney and the party to cater to their constituencies to win their needed support for November. If the win was by a small majority, then that could signal an open door to a realistic third party challenge in the general, so the field could get crowded.
The Obama ship is sinking, his buddy AG Holder is going down with it. What a transparent administration! Executive privilege my A$$!!! Fast and Furious will help bring this president down and they are trying to blame Bush for this one as well! The Obamacare law will most likely be struck down. So let's face it, it doesn't look good for the Democratic party.
You Libs are completely missing the point. Both the Paul folks and the Tea Party folks are going to be in Tampa to make sure that it's not "business as usual" in the GOP. They're there to ensure that fiscal responsibility, Constitutionality, and reigning in an out of control govt are integral in the platform. Notice has been served. RINOs are getting swept out, and progressives and their confiscate and redistribute/borrow and squander strategy will be toast come Nov. Bev Perdue (liberal gov here in NC) isn't even running for re-election. She can see the writing on the wall. MSDNC has NC as a tossup... now there's some wishful thinking.... the DNC is working with Charlotte City Council to see how far away from the Convention Center they can keep protestors while Oblamo is in town.... I'm sure they're hoping for something like a ten mile radius...
No one said the Democrats are ripping themselves apart, but this does show that a significant number of Democrats up for election don't want to be associated with the President at all.
A half a dozen is not a significant number. Spin this all you want but it is NOT the Democrats who are ripping themselves apart.
"in the electoral college Romney will end up killing Hussein. It is the same way that Perot got Clinton elected in 1992."
Colorado Mam -- you live in a dream world. Turn off Fox and listen to some real news. It's Romney who is more likely to win the popular vote and lose in the electoral college-- not President Obama. And the Perot in 92 vote was just about 50/50 -- Dem and Rep.
The Republican convention will be contentious, to say the least. The Republicans don't want any protestors to get close to the site. They want the convention to appear to be a big right wing conservative cumbaya party. There is already controversy between convention security/police and protestors as to where they will be allowed to assemble.
The media struggles to define Ron Paul. It's no surprise since they worked so hard to black him out for the greater part of the campaign season. Whether CNN or Fox, they have to do that. It's orders from high above. Yes, higher than Barack.
No one ever seems to wonder how someone can go from "community organizer (wth is that?) to President of USA in such short hops. Did his awesome leadership abilities come from a winning smile and ability to use several teleprompters? Certainly singing a few lines of Al Green is a talent a world leader simply can't do without.
Mitt spent a term as a governor (a good one?, why didn't he last longer?). Why isn't he still there? Bored rich kid looking for bigger kicks? Both are empty suits serving as conduits for global financial entities. It's sort of like Goldman Sachs vs Goldman Sachs. Heads they win, tales you lose.
While mired in global debt crisis and the possibility of a USD currency collapse, the topic of gay marriage takes precedence. Gay marriage isn't even the government's business. It's nice to add to the talking points to avoid telling the people what they would do if there was a financial collapse in America and zero value dollars, locked bank doors and dark ATM machines. What about the "reset". how will that go down? It appears as though inquiring minds Don't want to know. But I digress on a subject people aren't really interested in.
Defining Ron Paul. Where does he belong in the all-important issue of media labeling? How about Constitutional Republican, as opposed to Neocon Republicans. Instead of Paulites, Paulbots, Paultards, or even "Paul Supporters", how about Constitutional Republicans? That's what it's all about. Simply a return to the US Constitution.
I would dearly love to see Constitutional Democrats as well. Why not? The Constitution was specifically created to be an umbrella of protection for all Americans' individual rights. It's worth saving or suffer the alternatives. I realize few people (or none) will read this, or scoff with their finely honed "commenting rhetoric" but time is running out. Not Obama's time. Not Mitt's time.
Time is running out for our nation and the Constitution. Just stand up for the Constitution while some of it still exists, or go back to sleep and hope your dreams are more pleasant than the reality we soon face.
If we keep voting for more of the same that we have always been getting, we will always keep getting more of the same.
Kevinoffsite, #1.26, great justaposition references from the Neil Cavuto FOX NEWS segment. Actually, when you think about it, Rove actually said, without really meaning it, that it is Bush's fault.
I don't think people "vote for mitt" they vote for the other guy who isn't Obama.
I think Rom Paul needs to be heard, as I said before I don't think he has the solutions but he knows the problems. I think he should be looking into the complexity of Centralized government and how to kiss (keep it simple stupid) there lies the waste.
(R) or (D) how about R&D!
If it shoud come down between Ron Paul and obama, I plan to stay home, I have nothing against RP but for one thing he is too old and many of his policies I don't agree with, as for obama I agree with none of his policies!
These Ron Paul supporters are simply whistling in the wind. All I see is a little old Libertarian touting views that simply are not in line with realities of today's world. He doesn't like everything going on today and that is what his supporters also believe, but Ron Paul is not an answer. If he was then a majority of voters would be backing him.....but he has a very poor showing in the overall scheme of things.
...but Ron Paul is not an answer. If he was then a majority of voters would be backing him.....but he has a very poor showing in the overall scheme of things.
Jack - Americans are backing Romney and Obama. Idiots. Paul is too genuine for the Right and too honest for the Left.
To go backwards into prosperity is better than continuing forward into poverty!!! How far back would we have to go, I do not know but thousands of thing have led us to this point and it will take a million things to fix it. I would rather just get rid of the thousand bad things!!! Simplify the system so we are not being taken advantage of anymore and to any who do not feel taken advantage of, I have one word for you,,,,,,, " Bush."
It is sad that Ron Paul seems to be the ONLY honest politician out there who isn't controlled by the "Fed" and banking interests.
(Why do I get the feeling that if he was a viable threat of taking office, they would have to get rid of him?)
We need a real leader so bad.
It is sad the American public has been dumbed down to the degree that we have only the option of choosing between interchangeable losers like obama and Romney.
Might as well write in Gilbert Goddfried/Carrot Top !!
The road to anarchy that Ron Paul would pave is still much safer than the Romney rape.
I hate the republican party that I used to be a member of a YR back in the 60's. I don't even recognize it anymore it has become so Nazi like!
In the 60's we thought that Barry's stand on the issues was extreme, but it is nothing like the right wing of the new republican Nazi Party now taking shape!
1) Just want to say it gladdens my heart whenever the Fascist Party, AKA GOP, tears itself apart! May they go the way of the Whig Party and be lost to the dung heap of history. This goes for the Pseudo-Libertarians too, like the Paul's (Father and Son).
2) @ White Collar Auto - while I have no affiliation with either Party (my State allows for voter registration w/o picking any Party), I and my wife would never want to go to SC under any reason, so if the Dems don't want to go there and spend money in a State that shows itself to be as callous and hate-filled as SC does, that is their right to do so. If/when SC stops living in the mid-nineteenth Century and actually evolves to live in the twenty-first century, I will change my views. Until then I will shun the State and any companies with HQ's there.
Seriously, you folks who think the RP bandwagoneers are damaging the GOP are ignoring the fact that most of these loonbats were Obama supporters last election. EVERY Ron Paul fan I know were previous Obama voters...too funny that you idiots are trying to spin this the other direction!!!!
I owuld vote for a road kill squirrel before I would vote for a republican
KC Ted, I think you are right! I also believe that we are up to our necks in debt to China, et al, and China is probably now in a position to dictate global economics. I believe that Bernanke et al are trying to INFLATE our way out of international debt (no matter who is in office). The time for the Titanic to hit the iceberg head on and not sink is gone (i.e. no bailouts should have been done for AIG/et al) , the ship has already made the turn too late and is currently ripping a long gash in the side which will ultimately sink the US Dollar. Its best to fix ourselves the best life boats (prepare) we can, and start planning for how we will rebuild with the US Constitution intact. To much power in the hands of too few people/entities--whether those people/entities are governments or big corporations or dictators, are not good for the rest of us!
As Scooby-Doo would Say:
RUH-ROH !
Occupy SoggyBottom!
It's going to take more than Scooby-snacks to help Romney bound over this little pile of Paul doo-doo. Perhaps he could tie Ron to top of the station wagon and parade him around the states in question. That ought to put those uppity Paul supporters in their place.
Shucks, if only the GOP/TP could stomach their icky candidate. Unlike Paul and Obama followers, who really like their respective candidates
Lets see here,...........
The Southern U.S. won't vote for Romney because he's Mormon. The Midwest won't vote for him because he wanted to bankrupt Detroit, the Unions won't vote for him cause,.....well,....you know, Cali. and Massachusetts won't vote for him cause they know him too well. The remaining votes will be siphoned off by Tea Baggers and Ron Paul supporters.........
Sorry kids. Just don't add up to a Romney Romp. Can't see it hap-nin'.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012
Seems to me when 42% of the voters support a felon behind bars, the progressive have a big problem getting their guy elected in November...and all this without debates, all based on the record of the incumbent and his nasty, closed door policies.
Like vultures fighting over a carcass. The republican party is dead, trashed. All you had to do was watch the republican primary debates to realize that they are the party of NOWHERE. Sarah Palin? Rick Perry? Michelle Bachmann? Newt? A field of creeps and losers. They will soon change their name to NFP the National Fascist Party. If they get their way it'll be America, Inc. and we'll all be up @!$%#'s creek without a paddle.
We heard this after Obama was elected and yet the Democrats ended up losing control of the House and getting little of what they planned to do done. No matter how many times Progressives say this it doesn't come true and we've been hearing this since Watergate. The Republicans always survive because at the end of the day, no matter how awful they might be, the Democrats are always viewed as spineless, do nothings who's only solution to every single problem ever is to raise taxes and give away taxpayer's money.
GOPisextinct
And 60% won't vote for Obama because he's an incompetent.... not to mention a pathological liar.
We heard this after Obama was elected and yet the Democrats ended up losing control of the House
And today the Republicans in the House have a 7% approval rating.
As a YR from the 60's we thought that Barry had extreme views on the issues, but they are moderate compared to the newly developing right wing Nazi republican party now taking shape.
This is exactley what Paul stated was his goal at the beginning of the whole primary fiasco. Paul keeps stealing up to half the delegates at every party convention. Why Romney hasn't been able to fend Paul off is a true indication of how much party support he really has. ( and how truly incompetent he is about managing )
When elites are held in check, typically by effective legal mechanisms, everyone else in society does much better and sustained economic growth becomes possible. But powerful people - kings, barons, industrialists, bankers - work long and hard to relax the constraints on their actions. And when they succeed, the effects are not just redistribution toward themselves but also an undermining of economic growth and often a tearing at the fabric of society.
Please sign the petition to the U.S. Senate Banking and House Financial Services Committee asking for improved oversight of federal banking and market regulators.
To read more about what we’re trying to do and to sign the petition, click here:
http://www.change.org/petitions/u-s-senate-banking-and-u-s-house-financial-services-committees-use-technology-to-provide-oversight-of-u-s-banking-and-market-regulators?share_id=HTpDoOQNJgpe=d2e
It'll just take a minute!
I personally like Ron Paul. I am wondering what the other Ron Paul supporters will say if and when he endorses Mitt Romney?
As a member of the class you speak of I would lose some respect for ron paul if he were to endorse mitt romney. However, I would still be drawn to much of the ideology that ron paul endorses.
Like legalizing all illegal drugs?
Because the war on drugs is not effective and just costs us taxpayer money,crowds our jails and forces users to do sketchy things resulting in higher crime rates and more deaths. The war on drugs is actually one of the biggest failures our gov has ever weathered
Thank you, Get_a_Life-- I did go sign that petition. I might not always agree with you on all your posts but that is a good petition to sign.
Speaking of disgruntled Republicans, has anyone heard from Rick Santorum lately?
he's spending time with his sick child you stupid fuk
Thank you, Jason. Have a nice day!!!
Guess he told you, eh noid?
From ABC News a couple weeks ago:
"On Tuesday, sources close to Santorum told ABC News that the former presidential candidate will be announcing the formation of a 501 c(4) organization that he will use to pursue a set of issues he has fought for during much of his political career.
Last month the pro-Santorum super PAC, the Red, White, and Blue Fund, became a hybrid political action committee that will also work as a traditional leadership PAC to push Santorum’s message, support his
political travel, cover administrative costs and donate money to candidates he supports with similar views. This new issues-oriented push from Santorum could easily operate out of this leadership PAC.
The announcement could come during Santorum’s morning speech at the Conservative Political Action
Conference in Chicago. Friday will be a busy day for the former Pennsylvania senator. He is also headlining a fundraiser in Dallas for the Tea Party candidate in the Texas Senate race, Ted Cruz.
But it hasn’t been all work and no play for Santorum. Monday night he and his old presidential campaign staff met for a reunion of sorts — a trip to a Northern Virginia bowling alley."
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/the-mystery-of-rick-santorums-big-friday-announcement-solved/
he's spending time with his sick child you stupid fuk
Noid - That was quite brief...LMAO....
Like I said, the Republicans don't love Romney. They just put up with him.
Romney won the primaries with support of 3 overlapping groups - big business, the 1%, and the Mormons. But the major factor in most Romney wins was that the opposition was split, allowing him to squeak out narrow victories at first, then once the juggernaut got rolling and the opposition fell away, the Teapublicans fell in line behind their front runner Romney.
The Paulites won't fall in line, they're fanatically devoted to their leader. Being few in number, they're trying a different tactic of working behind the scenes to get their members in as delegates, hoping to seize the nomination for Paul at the convention. That strategy might work, but it will backfire badly if they manage to pull it off, as they will be perceived as having "stolen" the nomination. For that reason, I hope the Paulites succeed in their nomination quest.
(Yes, I know it's technically legal and within the Republican party rules, I'm talking about the perception by the general population).
Job1, they might not like Romney but their hatred for President Obama rules their lives. They will be out in droves to see that the president is not re-elected. This is very frightening to me because so many dems and indys are so self-centered and childish that they truly believed that President Obama could have cured all our ills in a couple years. Not thinking that it took decades to get us here. Not to mention the goal of the GOP was to destroy President Obama and not help our nation. Don't forget a statement from Norquist that (paraphrase) stated all the republican party needed in a president was a person who had enough digits turn hold a pen to sign what is put in front of him.
I hate to tell you but paulites are not few in number and not many people actually like Romney look at rally attendance. There has been massive voter fraud and that is why there is a major lawsuit currently I dont see how more people dont see this. Also youre wrong about this being bad for him or the repub party because the majority of Romneys support if you can call it that is from people who simply dont want Obama and will back whoever the nominee is not to mention RP has a huge backing from independants and a large portion of democrats.
Also, while people may not have expected obama to fix everything immediately we definately expected him to not make things worse and Ive had enough of my rights taken away by NDAA and its family. Ive also had enough of the fed, and Obamas wreckless shopping spree spending
i love the idea that paul infiltrated the GOP. no story of how paul has finally, after years of wondering how by the msm, finally charged out the youth vote.
nope, just something about obsure rule folllowing; rules obviously designed to keep the people away and out of the loop. just that fact alone should make it obvious that this Liberty movement is the next phase of the GOP.
i would suspect that the GOP warmongers are upset and confused as to how it is that democracy is showing signs of life.
I never understand the media's portrayal of these "obscure party rules." It's different from state to state, but the number 1 rule is to SHOW UP AND BE COUNTED. All kinds of jokers will show up for 5 minutes on primary day to vote Mitt Romney, but they certainly won't be active in the party for him (unless they are insiders already who do what they're told).
Kind of speaks to an enthusiasm gap, don't you think?
Da Noid, I think you are right. People, for the most part, are ignorant, uninformed and frankly stupid when it comes to positions of the candidates. More people could probably tell you who won American Idol, the Superbowl or Dancing with the Stars than could tell you who is the Vice President or the Speaker of the House or Senate Majority Leader.
The Liberty movement inspired by Ron Paul is the future of the GOP. Mitt Romney is a remanat of the past. If there is one thing we know for sure about Mitt though, it is that he has no firm convictions or ideas of his own. With two months to go before the convention, I think we'll see him flopping over to the views of the liberty faction just in time to get elected.
"The liberty movement." I love that. Yup, that's what we need - deregulation, government shrunk to almost nothing, everything governed by private contracts. Welcome to Mogadishu.
EarlyOut, you've got it right except for one thing. Without a government, it is almost impossible to enforce private contracts.
We really have to wonder about the ethics of those who want no government, presumably because a Government would interfere with their scams.
Yes, the libertarians tend to gloss over that. In a society without regulation, but with private contracts as the primary means of organizing society, roughly half the population ends up either being lawyers, or working for the massive court system. And then who enforces those court orders?
The entire libertarian philosophy can be summed up in one phrase: "Let the big dogs eat." It never occurs to the non-stinking-rich among the Paul supporters that the "liberty" they crave also means that those more powerful than they are will then have the liberty to take their lunch money.
A true paradise.
Early out that is a very narrow minded view of what Ron Paul and for that matter libertarians believe in. Most libertarians actually hold current liberal beliefs we just have a different solution to the same problem. Libertarians believe individuals can be repsonsible for their own actions while the current liberal ideology is individuals are not responsible for their own actions and their government needs to handle their decisions for them.
Most libertarians understand the need for government regualation over variuos enterprises we just believe it can be done better and with less iterferance with individual rights.
"Regulation with less interference with individual rights" is what we refer to as a Magic Pony. It's the solution that doesn't exist in the real world.
Environmental regulation means that you have to give up your individual right to pump noxious gases into the atmosphere. Labor regulation means that you have to give up your individual right to hire 9-year-olds for $2 a day. Economic regulation means that you have to give up your individual right to create a monopoly and promptly price-gouge your way to riches. The list goes on and on.
You can't have it both ways. Anyone who thinks you can is simply a fantasist.
Earlyout i'd suggest you do a bit more research before spouting off. Libertarians want to see LESS government not NO government. We want the government to perform only the functions it was designed for. what we have now is a bloated government structure that is not working. Contrary to what you seem to think we understand that there must be some regulation in place, but what is there now is just ridiculous and overreaching. Most of the regulation in effect now is the CAUSE of the problems that the Democratic party fights against...it creates an environment where some are allowed to prosper while others are forced to fail based solely on the Federal governments whim. It CREATES monopolies controlled by the government - the very thing that regulation was supposed to eliminate. Having less regulation does not mean that it will be a marketplace free for all, but will level the playing field and allow more competition in the marketplace. Nobody is going to allow a business to pump noxious gasses into the atmosphere because THAT would be a violation of others' liberty. Please educate yourself on what we want to accomplish before spouting off your extremist views about Libertarians
Johnson/Gray 2012
NJRichie, I suggest you read your own party's platform. It's the work of a group of truly delusional people.
I'm very familiar with my party's platform and I believe it is what this country needs. Sticking with the same tired ideals of the 2 party system is killing this country. I see not one ounce of difference in either party...they talk a different talk but the end result is exactly the same and the people who can't envision a different viewpoint are the very same people who are benefiting from the 2 party system. There is nothing delusional about a group of people who want what was promised to us more than 200 years ago. It's people that are afraid of change that are the problem. When you're afraid of those of us who speak the truth you call us crazy, racists, pacifists, anything and everything to try and discredit us to keep things from changing....so what are YOU so afraid of? What if we're right and the government envisioned by the Libertarian party works? That would not be so delusional right? At this moment in time none of our individual rights are being honored...we have given them all away in favor of government control. We don't want anarchy...we want ORDER and personal responsibility
The only reason Ron Paul has forged ahead is to put his half-wit son into the limelight - ain't going to happen - Rand Paul is crazier than his kooky dad
His half-wit son released his academic records. The idiot we pretend is a genius in the White House refuses to release his. End of story.
Earlyout, you are sadly misinformed about what libertarians and specifically conservative libertarians stand for. Instead of just listening to what you have been told we stand for try actually talking to libertarians, as mentioned before many of us see eye to eye with liberals on key social issues, we just have a different way of accomplishing the same intended goal. No one is saying any one party has all the answers and we certainly don't do not want anarchy, as NJrichie correctly stated we want personal responsibilty to be a key factor in governing, something you have to agree is currently missing form our political world.
Corporations especially are incapable of taking individual responsibility. It's a sad fact that you need a strong central government to oversea the large corporations otherwise the corporations will run roughshod over everyone we need more regulation not less dergulation is never the right answer to any problem
Tiffany--what I believe is that we need a BALANCE of power--no one entity should have too much, whether corporations OR government....
What if Romney choose Ron Paul for VP? Now that would be interesting. I do not think he would accept but hypothetically - very interesting concept.
Could Romney be considering Rand Paul for vp? Ron Paul is holding on for one reason or another.
Romney may be a lot of things (just check out the broad array of positions he's taken on any given issue), but "suicidal" isn't one of them. The notion of Rand Paul being next in line for the Presidency would scare the bejeesus out of anyone to the left of Joseph Goebbels.
But it would be delicious, wouldn't it? It would make McCain look like a genius for tapping Palin.
That might work out for the Democrats. Just like looney Sara Palin worked out for the Republicans in '08 A Rand Paul or Ron Paul would be as goofy or maybe even worse and would be a cakewalk for Obama. The Paulites maybe are trying to deal a Veep position for their demigod or his son I hope they succeed.
I find your description of Ron Paul as goofy offensive.
I think the problem that Romney would have with Paul would be personality. Paul is a bigger personality than Romney. He's energetic, he's charismatic, and he comes across as genuine. Romney on the other hand is kind the poster child for "empty suit". He doesn't seem to stand for anything, he's detail poor, and honestly I think even his "supporters" don't truly believe he believes anything he's saying.
Paul would over shadow him. He'd be the one standing out and drawing attention. And typically that is not a quality that candidates look for in a running mate.
How have the Paul people taken positions of power in the Republican Party? The answer is simple: they cared enough to show up. That's all it takes in this environment of apathy and cynicism. A sign of a rotten system ready for reform.
Not only do they show up, but they are knowledgeable about the important issues facing the nation. They believe in something. They are passionate and they are serious.
More people are coming around to the positions of the liberty movement every day from all political backgrounds and all walks of life. With its blatant corruption, greed, and disregard for the citizenry, the establishment is ensuring that this trend will continue.
They are also very much a minority within the Republican party, which explains why they never won a single primary or caucus in spite of their enthusiasm and the lack of enthusiasm for the other candidates. the Paulites might take control of several state parties, maybe even the Republican National Committee, but they'll find little support or enthusiasm from the rank and file Republican party members.
(Channeling a Paulista...) But, but, but, the VIRGIN ISLANDS!!! As St. Croix goes, so goes the nation.
"80 % of success is showing up..."
I agree 100% to that statement. In the long run, the GOP will shift back to where it was for decades (Ron Paul's platform is that of a traditional conservative).
Neo-cons can't hold the GOP hostage forever.
CM, Ron Paul won Maine.
And Nevada.
And Iowa.
He was cheated out of these wins by election fraud.
You would never know this if you get all your news from the mainstream media.
WRITE IT IN -November-
RON PAUL 2012 -pass it on-
Paul Ryan V. P.
Good idea Mitch. Lead the march to write-in Ron Paul. Wouldn't that be special. Maybe Willard's Superpacs need to start spending some of their money trashing Paul.
Tom , Why waste your money trashing Ron Paul? he was the only chance the republicians had IF they had supported him over this plastic corney piece of corp yuck!!
The only problem with that would be that ron paul has the most integrity and clean record of any politician and theres virtually nothing to trash him on so good luck!
GOP vs. Tea Party vs. Paul Party... couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of guys... ;-)
Ron Paul was the only Republician that had anywhere near a chance to beat Obama, there are people on the left
that support Ron Paul there are people in the center,,,BUT mr Creepozoid Romney gets his party support, republicians you gonna lose, at least with Ron Paul you could have died with honor now the republicians a real laughing stock...
I don't know why you guys keep calling Paul a Republican. He is not a Republican he is a Libertarian. The only reason he runs as a Republican is because Libertarians don't get voted in. He is no more a Republican than Obama is.
I'malwayswrite - no one on the left supports Ron Paul. He is out of touch with reality and people know he cannot garner enough support to win anything.
He's a thorn in the GOP's side and nothing more.
verno, Paul is not a Libertarian either, he's a Constitutionalist who believes the country should be governed in strict accordance to the laws and guide lines set forth in the US Constitution. And as a veteran, he is not against war, just undeclared, unfunded political wars and playing the role of the world's policeman. And as a doctor, he does not believe in sacrificing lives for oil or political gain......Quite a nut job wouldn't you say ???
Ellis, Paul is not a Constitutionalist but an Anarchist. He is opposed to anything and everything to do with government. While our government may be broken there will be one heck of a mess if he is elected to anything other than obscure Congressman from Texas. If he's grooming Junior to be just like him we'll see their BS lasting another generation. Pie-in-the-sky looks good to some dreamers but realists know Paul and his boy are full of (UY&*(UY) and should be ignored.
Your never right - In your dreams - Ron Paul sucked the tit of his time in Congress had one bill passed in what his 26 years - waste of my money as a taxpayer
Also you're hero - got the biggest payout for Galveston - great no Fed Money - how about $18 Million
Hypocrite!
Obama's crowning achivement in Congress was to get a bill passed congratulating the Chicago White Sox on winning the 2005 World Series. What a star roflmao.
Want to know why he didnt get anything passed? because not everything needs to be changed all the damn time. Also because he doesnt play ball and do the whole corrupt vote trading shenanigan his vote is in line with the constitution and nothing more. Even on bills that fell in line with his beliefs he voted no because they were unconstitutional. There will not be a politician as transparent and full of integrity as Ron Paul for many years to come.
Alder, since when does following the Constitution make one an anarchist?
Wanting a FEDERAL gov't limited by its Constitutional bounds, with more power going to the states and to the people does NOT make one an anarchist...
Ron Paul is one of the few candidates that actually lives his ethics...that alone is worthy of my vote. It's suspicious that the media hardly gave him any coverage. Maybe cause he doesn't play their game...
Ron Paul is a generalizing, rabble-rousing trouble-maker with a huge ego oozing out of a dwarf's body. He is a spoiler just like Ross Perot was. He's the Ralph Nader of the right-all talk, no specifics, no action. They all belong in a rubber room.
ROMNEY ALL THE WAY! O MUST GO BEFORE WE ALL GO DOWN.
"All talk, no specifics, no action?" Ron Paul has plenty of practical ideas, but no one ever hears about them because the media never gave him adequate coverage. Most people don't even know what he stands for. Many of the predictions that Ron Paul has made over the past decade in regards to our economy have come to pass... Stop believing everything that you hear in the news and learn to think for yourselves people!
Happy twelfth birthday.
logico- "Ron Paul is a generalizing, rabble-rousing trouble-maker with a huge ego oozing out of a dwarf's body. He is a spoiler just like Ross Perot was. He's the Ralph Nader of the right-all talk, no specifics, no action. They all belong in a rubber room."
Hey logico- happy twelfth birthday.
Ron Paul or not at all!
Ron Paul is not the trauble-maker.You are all in trouble already. He try's to show the American people that. The people who control's your country doing a good job.They have the media propaganda machine to do big part of the job. The Federal Reserve doing the rest. If you think that there is are difference between Romney and Obama you are making a big mistake. They are both puppets of the same master, Lake Hitler was a creation of this masters.Iam sure the American people will understand this vary soon, but it will be too late.Ron Paul is only the politician who is telling the truth. Everybody else is too corrupt to admit that to the American people. Wake up before is too late, if it's not already.
What in gods name are you talking about no specifics? Ron Paul is the most specific of any of the candidates he has detailed plans for each sector while Romney says nothing more than " yea our economy is bad and im gonna make it good again yay" NO ACTION? Ill tell you one thing he served his country unlike mittens who dodged the draft and another thing his action is singlehandedly standing up to the establishment and big banks for 30 years what has flip flomney done?!
What a jackass. He is just handing the election to Obama, by fracturing THE REPUBLICAN BASE.
If you follow that logic then nothing ever changes. "Why would i vote for him, no one else ever does, he'll just lose anyways..." At some point someone has to break ranks and be the first to follow a new idea or no one else will. If you think he's the best candidate, vote for him, if not then don't. It might not be strategic, but it's an ideal principle.
That is a good point, one I intend to make myself this fall. Several people have tried to convince me that a vote for Paul is a vote for obama, and while i see their logic, i will not be convinced to sacrifice my principles and be persuaded to vote for someone I would rather not see in office.
A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama and a vote for Obama is a vote for Romney (because they are fundamentally the same). Both of them support the status quo (federal reserve based boom and bust economies, massive spending and trade deficits, circus and bread for the people).
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for a very clear, practical, platform. Sound money, disciplined foreign policy, rule of law.
If you look at the logjam in Congress right now, where would Ron Paul get ANY Support for ANYTHING that he tried to move through Congress? Won't happen.
You make a good point, Judy, but we have to start somewhere--and if we do what we always did, we will get what we always got-- we have to start somewhere - we have to start somewhere! And I'm seriously thinking of voting for Ron Paul!! The only thing is, I think the fall of the US Dollar as the World Currency is now inevitable, the Fed Reserve Bank and our government is taking us there to get us out of international debt, all the while Wall Street and some really huge non-ethical corporations are playing 'Grab the wealth and to hell with everybody and everything else' and that is what Ron Paul will inherit if he wins. I would definitely want him at the helm though for the rebuilding we will all need to do after this whole mess is done. I just don't want to see him get blamed for what happens when/if he gets elected Capt. of the Titanic 3 seconds after it hits the ice burg.
Even exlax ETCH-A-SKETCH'S own Republican Party are divided on him! They know he's nothing but a phony! They know the 99% American People know it too! That's the REAL REASON they're divided! They know this JERK can't win the election NO MATTER HOW MUCH SUPER PAC BULL$HIT is slung! He's even hard to look at he's so phony! Throw him out and get somebody in the Republican party who realizes it is the 99% American People that has made them successful and STOP THE MONARCHY that has MADE SLAVES of the American People! Ron Paul, get this jerk thrown out!
Do you actually know his background or what he stands for? Or are you just parroting what you've heard in the news or from other people? The guy has different ideas from the rest of the candidates, so I guess that makes him looney right? Ironically, everybody complains about how all of our politicians are just the same man in a different suit, and when someone like Ron Paul comes along with different ideas they call him a nut. If you know what he believes and understand the background of his ideas then fine, I applaud your opinion. But if you're just repeating what you've heard, (not to be mean), it's simple ignorance.
I have listened to him at length, until I ran out of patience with his platitudes and generalizations. I'm sure he means well, but pie in the sky intentions do not trump practicality. He's just another peace-nik who wouldn't fight if his life depended on it.
Well if you know what he stands for, then no worries. Most people have no idea. In regards to the issue of wars overseas, I don't really agree with his stringent idealism either. Realistically though, if he was elected then most of that idealism would be balanced out with the reality of politics. His extreme ideas on peace would never be realized, but it would put America in a much healthier balance. Right now we're a little like the Roman empire before its collapse- overextended militarily and broke.
You must have been born yesterday logico, Ron Paul left his wife and children behind and enlisted in the military to serve his country. What have you done to show your patriotism, invested in Haliburton ?
Actually, he was never "enlisted"; as a doctor he served in the Army Medical Corps as an officer (captain, the lowest rank at which medical doctors serve).
I voted O last time but support Ron Paul completely. So, if you think he hasn't divided the demon party you're wrong.
You called it the demon party. Pretty much undid your own point from one sentence to the next. That must be some kind of record.
Ron Paul's foreing policy would destroy the world. The US cannot be isolationists also anyone who thinks we need to get rid of the EPA is a moron whose not getting my vote we need more enviornmental regulations not less. I'm sorry but the market is not capable of regulating it's self also there is not enough gold in the world to support the current population size going back to the gold standard that's crazy, and the one time we did without a federal reserve bank lead to massive economic problems. Andrew Jackson in theory got rid of the central bank but used several state banks to basically do the same job we can't do without a federal reserve his positions ignore reality of human nature.
god tiffany you are so uninformed it was painful to read your post. Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is like calling your neighbor an isolationist because he doesnt come over to your house and break your windows. He believes in a strong defense and declared wars not isolationism. Second off youre description of failures of returning to the gold standard made NO sense. All it implies is equating our dollar to be worth a certain amount in precious metals which are globally valued and we could return to that standard right now without ever buying any more gold. The Federal Reserve is the biggest problem in this country right now and biggest threat to our economy and the house of all banker corruption. Tell me how printing off money at an alarming rate with no backing to loan out to other banks to loan back to us with interest is beneficial whatsoever. All it does is lead to hyperinflation which is why since the fed was created in 1913 our current dollar is worth 2 cents of a dollar back then. PLEASE educate yourself
logico;;
yah, Ross Perot lied when he told us about that giant sucking sound you'll hear will be American jobs..what he didn't say was one that was sucking the jobs away was Romney!! Ralph nadar had a lot of specifics too bad the people with intelligence understood him and still do..and the brainless masses elected Bush , yah how that worrk out?
No wonder Ron Paul's been so quiet. He's been planning to depth charge the Republican Convention. Perfect.
Once upon a time he was the Tea Party's main guy. Remember?
The Republicans appropriated the Tea Party for what they thought would be their own gain. Little did they realize that they did so at their own peril.
To quote the old adage: "You knew I was a snake when you picked me up."
Now the snake begins to eat its own tail.
Should be fun to watch.
We have innocent people murdered at the hands of Obama and Holder and msnbc has a lead story about Ron Paul
they certainly have their priorities straight
Bin Laden?
We had innocent people murdered at the hands of Bush & Cheney's immoral war in Iraq
and FOX has a lead story about buying DUCT TAPE to survive the terrorists gas attack that BUSH said they could NOT STOP !
No doubt Bush murdered thousands with his false intell and waterboarding.....Fox Noize called it necessary..how their morals change upon agendas
Oh, great, now we have some nutter that thinks terrorists are "innocent people". Look, just because some terrorist was once a US citizen doesn't make them "innocent".
Obama derangement syndrome strikes again!
This is pure BS but if you find it a source of amusement, forge ahead. The intentions of Issa and his lackeys is abundantly apparent, although some illiterates believe it to be in the pursuit of "justice." Outside a cadre of fanatical activists, no one gives a fiddler's f**k about Fast and Furious and the death of a border guard is not going to sway this election, no matter how hard Issa and Republicans beat the drums of discontent with his lifeless body. And for the record, very few Americans view Mexican nationals as "innocent." Most are viewed as potential illegal aliens and to a large extent, that is the correct view.
This is still America, and you are supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law! there can be no exceptions, or the whole thing will fall around us.
No doubt Bush murdered thousands with his false intell and waterboarding.....Fox Noize called it necessary..how their morals change upon agendas
-------------------------------------------
Thank goodness that doesn't happen with Democrats or the left leaning portion of the MSM. True and blue and consistent right down the line. Now about that prime real estate in south central Florida...
After Carter gutted the CIA and other intelligence organizations, we had no real intell on the ground. All we knew was he was gassing the Kurds (yes those are considered weapons of mass destruction) several times, and even used them with the Iranians. So he had the weapons. They probably went to syria when the US telegraphed our intent to invade. He has plent of time to get rid of them. As for the waterboarding insiders say it gave them some valueible intell that led them to Bin Laden. Like with Watergate, the crime is usually small and the Coverup usually leads to more crimes. That seems to be the case for F&F too. Holder wanted to take Bush to trial for his so called crimes but didn't because the evidence was lacking. No he is in the frying pan, and the President commes to his aid by covering up anything that could show him or higher officials that were involved. (something Obama compained about when he ran for President). Now it is ok to do. He didn't close Gitmo, because it is now ok to have. (notice no more news stories). There is no longer a daily body bag account in the middle east, even though solders are still dying. (notice no news stories). What a change a president can make. Unemployment has dissapeared, no more war, No debt problem. Life is great.
I would rather see Ron Paul running as the GOP Candidate than that loser Romney. Just wait, the Democrats are holding the cards that will flush Romney in October.
You must mean 'the race cards', right, moron?
Using your metaphor, if Obama is re-elected, the whole country will go down the drain.
And if Romney is elected, only the working poor and the remains of the middle class will go down the drain.
Paul is not cuckoo. That is just how the bought and paid for media portrays him and the Democrat and Republican sheeple eat it up. I do not agree with all of his Ideas, but he is the only candidate that is for the PEOPLE of this country.
I will not vote for Romney or Obama. I may just write in Ron Paul.
With hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign advertising money to be gleaned, what media outlet is going to jeapordize those funds by cozying up to Paul? Fox expects very little Democratic money so it will lay chase after Paul (who essentially has no money) in support of the establishment GOP camp. Still, Paul becomes as foil which can deny Romney a few million votes he could otherwise count on. And his crusade can be used against Romney by left leaning media outlets ~ ~ and according to Republicans, that would be all of them. Ron Paul cannot be elected but he could have a significant hand in who is.
Ron can only win with Rommey, as if some deal is made, (already some, because he has joined the Republican side) to get some of is ideas, I would like him to head some cabinets, to control the cost of government. he would be a great asset, along with Romney's business skills, could help get spending under control. If they can do that Trillions would be freed up to the local sectors, and the people would have more to spend buying things instead of paying taxes.
300 - yeah, that's just what Americans need - to be able to buy more "things." We've got so many "things" our dumps are overflowing. At least taxes provide (or should provide) services - education, roads, safety nets in health and old-age and disabilities, retirement, etc., etc. But, I realize that Ron supporters aren't real big on the social agendas.
Ron Paul's revolution is Picket's charge. Romney is just revolting as himself.
A funny thing about facts.
Ross Perot warned us about NAFTA, "free" trade and joblessness. We were too smart to listen. Now the U6 unemployment rate (no jobs, part-timers who want full-time and those who've given up) is 14.8% (that's almost 1 in 6) with no jobs to be seen on the horizon.
Ron Paul warned us about debt, unfunded wars and irresponsible spending. We're too smart to listen. Now the debt is $16T (fully 105% of our GDP), the deficit $1.3T, interest on the debt $225B and we have $120T of future liabilities to SS, M'Care and M'Caid but no money to pay them.
So, where are we? We have no jobs. We can never repay our debt. We've saddled kids and grandkids with a horror they can't escape. Luckily we're deeply divided or the facts might force us to act together and intelligently.
Perot was totally correct and that is largely what cost him an election ~ ~ speaking truth to known facts. Yet Romney's solution (if you can find one) is more free trade agreements with international coalitions. How's that worked out for us so far? Make no mistake ~ Obama is not deserving of a second term, however the United States is not deserving of Romney and his "secret" plans. We already know enough to get a sense of what the hidden agenda is ~ ~ and that's enough to disqualify him.
The problem is the public doen't want to hear the truth, they want to hear people telling them lies, like I will fix the problem and you will still get your stuff. We will just get someone else to pay for it, but not you. So lets see we gave Obama almost 4 years and he spent more, unemplyment has not gone down, (still a million more unemployeed from when he took office, not counting the four years of new job seekers joining the market since then). The Debt has gone up by almost $6,000,000,000,000.00 dollars, and continues to go up. Mitt who will not commit to anything for fear of it hurting his chances with the media. Ron Paul, who has not real chance to win, even Santorem has more deligates. So yes we have no good aternitives, but I figure the unknown is better then the known this time. A ultra liberal Democrat, vs a Liberal Republican, not the choice I would have wished for, but still a choice.
I'll write him in, and by the time November gets here,
It'll be obvious to do so. He'll be the first person who will not be representing
a party, elected by the people, and not the electoral collage.
He will lead because the people asked him to so, and he will
OWE no one. He'll audit the FED, probably repeal about 200 executive orders,
and after he fires a whole lot of people, he'll remind the ones still standing
about the importance of the Constitution. The Write-In System is supposed
to work, I say: lets try it out.. Write It In, November, -PASS IT ON-
As many online sites as you can find,.. The Media Blacked Him Out,
( He Didn't lose, he never had a fair chance, a level playing field )
see if they can black out an online Write-In campaign, -pass it on-
Let's SEE,, what happens
Mitch - a throw away vote for Ron Paul is dangerous this election. That could let Mitt win. We can't afford that.
Hey, Slagghorn, If you knew anything about the Constitution you would know that there is no way for anyone to win the Presidency strictly with the popular vote. The Constitution requires the Electoral College. But you and your Constitutional expert Ron Paul know that don't you and just slipped your mind when you decided that a write in vote would do it alone didn't you?
And don't blame the media because there isn't 24/7 drooling over the guy. They cover what is important and what is real news not some two bit also-ran.
Hmm, maybe the Paulites are planning on taking over the Electoral College in the same way they've been getting their delegates in. Won't work, the Electoral College works differently than the Republican party does.
Paul will never win the popular vote, certainly not by write-in, he couldn't even win any party primaries.
And don't blame the media because there isn't 24/7 drooling over the guy. They cover what is important and what is real news not some two bit also-ran.
@Adler, are you kidding? I see completely pointless articles posted on here all the time, while other major issues are under-reported.
"The main stream media covers what is important...."
Too funny....
So that segment I watched the other day about a new pair of adidas shoes coming out was "important."
16 trillion in debt, 104% debt to GDP, 20% real unemployment, the US, our top banks and European banks having their credit ratings cut (some to just above junk levels), a financial industry that sells insane destructive credit default products, the Euro approaching a demise, the US constantly having to restructure our debt to the Federal Reserve (a private bank)...................
I don't see a whole lot of in depth coverage of these problems. They must not be important. The day I see a thirty minute piece on the nightly news explaining that operation twist is nothing more than refinancing existing debt out to a longer repayment period (kind of like refinancing your mortgage daily because you can't ever afford the payments), I'll take main stream media seriously.
Until I see the MSM talk about our REAL problems, I will remain a little suspicious of them.
I thought Ron Paul running as an independent may shake up the political system and force republicans and democrats to work together for the greater cause. But if that is not going to happen, it really does not matter who is president because Wall street still holds title to all the corporate puppets in Washington, including most republicans and democrats..........It will remain a pay to play system at the people's expense
Ellis, you are indeed correct. Even if Ron Paul, by some strange miracle, were elected he wouldn't be a dictator, at least I hope not, as there would be Congress that would have to approve of what he is doing. I doubt they would approve of much. He's only had one bill make it to the President's desk and it was on some minor issue. He's been in Congress a long time and only one bill. I don't think the people of his district are getting their money's worth. Certainly Wall Street isn't geting it's money's worth. They hold the purse strings because we've allowed it. Now it is time to take the purse back from Wall Street and give it back to the people. Where is Robin Hood when we need him?
He got the Federal Reserve audited and uncovered trillions in off the book loans....that one thing is more than any other politican has managed to do in a hundred years.
If you estimate the value of a legislator by the number of laws they pass, then expect to live in a police state (we're beginning to).
Value a legislator by the number of unconstitutional laws they manage to vote no on and you'll live in a free society.
Any third party canidate takes votes away from the two main parties. Just look at all the major elections of the past century, the third canidate either gave the election to the Democrats, or the Republicans. All you need to do is look at the elections of Teddy Rosevelt, Ross Perot, and Ralph Nader. If Ron Paul runs it takes more votes from the Republicans and Obama will win. Just like if Hillary would run it would take away from Obama and Mitt would win. I like most of Ron's domestic agenda's but his Drug, and foreign policy sucks as far as I am concerned. Just like McCain, I liked his cuts on spending and earmarks, but other then that he was to liberal, for a Republican.