Ron Paul Revolution

[Commercial D]

Anyone feeling this guy? You'd think skateboarders would be constitutional libertarians....

[the ragamuffin]

Ron Paul is cool with me

[sebastian toombs]

hes sooo hot...  id give him a feel.  didnt know he was a librarian though

[Brandon]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul314.html

[Sony MDR V2 headphones]

Man it would be great to get a guy like him into office, but he doesn't stand a chance.

[Commercial D]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul314.html

Can't say I like his stance on immigration, but wouldn't it be great to get rid of the IRS?

[bumptobar]

Im going to vote for him.

[public transit]

hes fatty

[cold budweisers]

ron paul is a white supremacist

[bentmode]

hmmmmm, destroying globaliztion, racism for a couple of years.


ill weigh it out later.

[CUDDLEMONSTER]

besides his fiscal policy the dude is a total nutbag. i can't believe he has as much support as he does.

[the j]

Amnesty also insults legal immigrants, who face years of paperwork and long waits to earn precious American citizenship.

We’re often told that immigrants do the jobs Americans won’t do, and sometimes this is true. But in many instances illegal immigrants simply increase the supply of labor in a community, which lowers wages. And while cheap labor certainly benefits the economy as a whole, when calculating the true cost of illegal immigration we must include the cost of social services that many new immigrants consume – especially medical care.

i cannot say that that is racist, just true.

and in regards to Christmas that probably is the only thing i can ever say i'll agree with bill o. on

[jesus0nvi4gra]

besides his fiscal policy the dude is a total nutbag. i can't believe he has as much support as he does.

His views on things besides war, global affairs, and government control are pretty wack.  The media just doesn't focus on them.  He can be applauded for saying what he really thinks, but in a way he's not.  I've never heard him speak on topics besides the aforementioned 3. 

[the j]

Expand Quote

besides his fiscal policy the dude is a total nutbag. i can't believe he has as much support as he does.

[close]

His views on things besides war, global affairs, and government control are pretty wack.  The media just doesn't focus on them.  He can be applauded for saying what he really thinks, but in a way he's not.  I've never heard him speak on topics besides the aforementioned 3. 

i believe because those are the only ones that actually matter

[Knockout Ned]

he doesnt stand a chance, not really worth talking about. We'll probably end up getting stuck with rudy giulliani's lame ass or some other neocon twit.

[NickDagger]

Rudy or Hillary would both be awful, and beholdent to the same corporate interests and probably will both continue this foolish non-sense in Iraq into Iran.


Vote for Ron Paul, Kucinich, Gravel, or Nader.

I have libertarian tendencies, there are a couple of things I disagree with Paul on, but he is easily the most consistent person runnning and one of the most intelligent candidates i've ever seen.

Listen to him talk about economics.

[Prison Wallet]

Rudy or Hillary would both be awful, and beholdent to the same corporate interests and probably will both continue this foolish non-sense in Iraq into Iran.


Vote for Ron Paul, Kucinich, Gravel, or Nader.

I have libertarian tendencies, there are a couple of things I disagree with Paul on, but he is easily the most consistent person runnning and one of the most intelligent candidates i've ever seen.

Listen to him talk about economics.

What about Obama? Just curious 'cause you didn't even mention him.

I like Nader and Kucinich but I'm a realist and will vote the Democratic nominee. Voting a 3rd party candidate is a vote for whoever the conservative poster boy is this time around. 

Hillary takes a lot of heat but I actually kind of like her. Bill did some historic things during his presidency and I like him in her conrer. My two main beefs will Bill are NAFTA and Rowanda but he's got hindsight on his side and I'd like to think those are two mistakes he wouldn't make again. That said I like Obama alright too; at this point I don't know who I'll vote for in the primaries.

And is RP running on the Republican ticket or is he an independent? Either way I don't really care as long as he has a sizable conservative following, but not sizable enough to win. 

[max power]

if edwards is nominated over hillary and obama he has a chance. unfortunately i don't think this country isn't ready to vote in a black or female president.

[NickDagger]

Expand Quote

Rudy or Hillary would both be awful, and beholdent to the same corporate interests and probably will both continue this foolish non-sense in Iraq into Iran.


Vote for Ron Paul, Kucinich, Gravel, or Nader.

I have libertarian tendencies, there are a couple of things I disagree with Paul on, but he is easily the most consistent person runnning and one of the most intelligent candidates i've ever seen.

Listen to him talk about economics.

[close]

What about Obama? Just curious 'cause you didn't even mention him.

I like Nader and Kucinich but I'm a realist and will vote the Democratic nominee. Voting a 3rd party candidate is a vote for whoever the conservative poster boy is this time around. 

Hillary takes a lot of heat but I actually kind of like her. Bill did some historic things during his presidency and I like him in her conrer. My two main beefs will Bill are NAFTA and Rowanda but he's got hindsight on his side and I'd like to think those are two mistakes he wouldn't make again. That said I like Obama alright too; at this point I don't know who I'll vote for in the primaries.

And is RP running on the Republican ticket or is he an independent? Either way I don't really care as long as he has a sizable conservative following, but not sizable enough to win. 

Obama would be slightly better than Hillary. But the top candidates would all do close to the same things in terms of domestic and foreign policy.

These people are owned.

Read Chomsky.

[WonkaBar]

i turn on the tv and the first thing that pops up is a Ron Paul commercial. No war in Iraq, personal privacy, and less government agencys sounds pretty neat.

[grimcity]

I have loads of respect for this guy...but it's bizarre that someone who dislikes federal government so much is running to be the head of it.

Not speaking of Ron Paul here, but that's been the neocon-Republican strategy since Reagan:
"Oh, government is evil!"
People elect said neocon...
Neocon breaks government...
"See how inefficient government is? Do you see?!?!!?"
Then they go and privatize everything rather than fix the problems that the system has in-house.

As far as Ron Paul, he's probably my favorite Republican running for President, if only because he brings up some good debates that put his fellow campaigners on the hot seat, but I do disagree with him on a number of issues, and I agree that he's a tad kooky.

I love Kucinich's politics and his senate history, but he'll never get elected because he's an idealist and because he's funny looking (I wish I was joking, but US voters are pretty fucking petty sometimes).

I'd rather give my vote to Edwards, Obama, Dodd or Richardson, but I'll give Hillary a vote over any Republican any day, if only so that Bill can be the first-husband.

[loophole]

I love Kucinich's politics and his senate history, but he'll never get elected because he's an idealist and because he's funny looking (I wish I was joking, but US voters are pretty fucking petty sometimes).

and he believes in UFOs

but yeah i agree. I'm ready for a FLILF!

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

Healthcare reform is a big issue in my head. Ron Paul fails in that department. Atleast he believes in evolution though
I like Edwards. He seems to be on the right track with a lot of issues.
But he has the luxury of talking without voting.
Hillary is no good. She talks about her Iraq vote like it was a mistake that she would never make again, then she virtually repeats it with her Iran vote. She's out. I want to vote to get rid of a hawk in the presidency, not put a hawk from a different party in.
Obama is slightly better, but he is pretty political too. On all the votes I hope he'll take a stand on he doesn't even show up for the vote. When the senate is that close- 50/50 on war issues, every vote counts.
And Grim is on point about the neocon government doesn't work idea. Throughout history anti-government leaders fuck up. The greatest presidential failures have been that way- Harding, Reagan, Bush jr. They all hate government and fuck up the institutions they are in charge of.

[sebastian toombs]

...  and yet they loooove big military.

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

...  and yet they loooove big military.

The budget equation in fiscal conservatism doesn't include military budget. Thats why they cut the hell out of almost every program and still manage to increase the deficit more than a democrat could ever dream.

[Prison Wallet]

Obama would be slightly better than Hillary. But the top candidates would all do close to the same things in terms of domestic and foreign policy.

These people are owned.

Read Chomsky.

I've never read Chomsky but the "these people are owned" bit sounds like rhetoric to me. Are you saying the Bush Jr and Clinton administrations were pretty much the same? BC created a budget surplus out of the cold war deficit. Global relationships between the US and other countries were on the up and up. Now look what we've got. The top Democratic candidates are far from perfect and sure they bow to special interests, but not big oil, defence contractors, or drug companies. That counts for a lot in my book. And realistically I cast my vote for change. Voting Kucinich (although I love his stance on education and foreign policy) or RP is not a vote for change. It's one less vote the right wing has to worry about.

What I really wish would happen is an indepent from the far religous right would step up and run. Someone who would steal all the anti-abortion/anti-gay votes from whoever the republican front runner is.

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

Jesco, you have a good point. When people give me that "their all the same" garbage I feel like its a total cop out. I could see somebody who had recently read Chomsky believing that though, Chomsky fucks with people's head, in a good way, but sometimes people get overzealous about it.

I think a vote for Paul or Kucinich in a primary is ok, because a big part of a primary is establishing a party's stance. These guys may not win, but they can affect the party's platform if enough people support them. Nader or any other third party candidates in the general election on the other hand are a different story.

[Commercial D]

Chomsky's a tool. "Who cares?" if 9/11 was an inside job, he says. He also defends the Warren Commission. Classic disinfo agent. He gets dough from Rockefeller. "Controlled opposition" it's called. Total schmuck who produces hackwork disguised as "radical critique."

Ron Paul's a trillion times more dangerous to the "power class" than Chomsky ever was or will be.

[Commercial D]

Healthcare reform is a big issue in my head. Ron Paul fails in that department.

It sounds as though you're unfamiliar with that aspect of Dr. Paul's platform. He talks about making private care affordable again, by taking the power away from the HMOs and giving consumers more choices in a truly free-market healthcare economy.



You don't want communist medicine, trust me.

[Prison Wallet]

Chomsky's a tool. "Who cares?" if 9/11 was an inside job, he says. He also defends the Warren Commission. Classic disinfo agent. He gets dough from Rockefeller. "Controlled opposition" it's called. Total schmuck who produces hackwork disguised as "radical critique."

Ron Paul's a trillion times more dangerous to the "power class" than Chomsky ever was or will be.

If Chomsky thinks 9/11 was an inside job he's a tug job. If you're gonna pull off an inside job to promote war there's cleaner, more logical ways to do so. The CIA could have set up a chemical weapons lab in Iraq and a munitions dump. They could have set up some Iraqis to get caught sneaking a dirty bomb into the country. They could have set up an Al Qeada training camp inside Iraq with all kinds of plans to attack the western world. All those plans would have been easier than staging 9/11 and would have been more of a clear cut reason to go to war. And wouldn't have hurt the US economy or caused so much collatoral damage. 9/11 wasn't thought out enough to be an inside job.

Hell we tried to fabricate a reason for war after 9/11 and failed; what makes you think the same people could pull off 9/11.  Stupid.