blog.t1production.com/presidential-candidate-us-in-danger-of-dictatorship

Read the article. It's definitely on point.

height=8

Congressman Ron Paul warns elite believe they own us and are “always prepared” to take our liberties Presidential candidate Ron Paul has warned that the US is now at a crisis point because the people have been so neglectful of protecting their liberties and big government has been so effective in eroding them. He warned that the elite are prepared to concoct events to scare the American people and asserted that the 2008 Presidential election is a contest between the people who care about their freedoms and those who are willing to succumb to the temptations of dictatorship. Congressman Ron Paul joined Alex Jones on air this week for a full hour to discuss his ongoing Presidential campaign and give his views on what he believes the fundamental issues are in America today. The Congressman gave a candid interview in which he discussed many topics in depth including the economy, foreign policy, the North American Union, the possibility of a draft and the situations in Iraq and Iran. Known for what many have described as his impeccable voting record, Ron Paul is a champion of individual liberty and a strong campaigner for restoration of a true Constitutionalist form of US government, a trait that has made him a rare and popular candidate amongst people from all across the political spectrum. When asked what he believes the overriding issue in America today is the Congressman pointed towards the erosion of personal freedoms: “Probably it’s the threat to individual liberty. because our government is growing endlessly by leaps and bounds and nobody seems to want to put a hold on it. every time government grows it is at the expense of personal liberty.” The Congressman explained that freedom is the underlying issue because the consequences of such erosion of individual liberty have a knock on effect in many different areas. Economically, for example, the country is becoming dependent, less productive and less self sustaining. “Economically the consequences will be that there’s going to be a wholesale rejection of the dollar, because the world has trusted the dollar, especially since the breakdown of the Bretton Woods in 1971, when the linkage of the dollar to gold was broken, they still trusted the dollar as if it were gold, and therefore we can print the money and we can spend the money and foreign countries take our money, then loan it back to us, so they’re getting a bum rap.” Paul stated. “They get a temporarily good deal but what it does is encourage us not to be productive, it encourages us not to have manufacturing any longer, we can let others do it cheaper, cheap labour, and then we buy it with cheap money. That is going to come to an end. That means later on there are going to be a lot of changes here. Domestically the interest rates are going to rise, the inflation rate, the price of all goods and services, that will rise, and the economy will weaken, so we have some very serious problems ahead.” Turning to foreign policy the Congressman asserted that his first action if he were to be elected as President would be to start to bring American troops home from all over the world. “As a Commander in chief you could certainly handle the troops around the world. I would start talking to all our allies and tell them what the plans were and start coming home. We are now spending close to a trillion dollars maintaining our foreign policy. It’s a lot bigger than most people realise if you add up the Dod, the supplementals, the interest on the money we spend and taking care of our veterans.” The Congressman made it clear that aggression abroad and America as a world police force has had a disastrous impact upon the very fabric of the country. “We have turned our own country into isolationists, diplomatically we don’t talk to anybody, we have more enemies than we’ve ever had before and fewer allies, and at the same time our ability to defend this country is being diminished on a daily basis. We worry about borders, all around he world, we worry about borders in Korea, about borders around Iraq, and what do we do with our own borders? Here we don’t do anything.” Paul then turned to the issue of the North American Union and made it clear that he believes the plans that have been secretly laid in Washington to merge the US, Mexican and Canadian economies are yet again the fallout from the souring of liberty in America. We have behind the scenes a plan for a North American Union, that’s the part that the American people are starting to wake up to, although we have a long way to go to wake up Washington. It’s amazing to me how many people outside of Washington are very much aware of the plans with this North American Union, at the same time they are in total denial in Washington, except for the few behind the scenes who are laying the plans and providing the finances.” Turning to discussion of his Presidential campaign, Ron Paul championed the alternative media and the internet as vital tools in allowing him to get his message across to a multitude of people that never could have been reached before without huge injections of money: “The internet already has been very helpful and I think it’s going to be more helpful as time goes on, and that’s something that is becoming more so everyday, ten fifteen years ago it wasn’t so significant. The other thing is radio talks shows like what you have are very important. Almost every place I go somebody will come up to me and I’ll say ‘how did you get involved’ and it’s through your show. So there are a lot of people who have joined our campaign and have already started to show up at our events because of your encouragement.” Paul emphasized that although the bigger candidates can raise millions of dollars through special interests, a lot of that money is wasted on private jets, huge salaries, advisors, advertising and the like. So there isn’t as big a gulf between he and the other candidates as people may think. The Republican Congressman, who has been dubbed “founding father material”, by his supporters has surprised some with his initial success, having gained widespread support from Libertarians, Liberals and Conservatives alike. He stressed that you have to be in the game to have any chance of winning it, and that this not only applies to his own campaign but more importantly applies also to everyone who wishes to remain free in America. “Time is running out and we may lose our liberties to the point where we won’t have these responses.” Paul stated. “You know there’s nothing that guarantees that they will allow you to air your radio show forever. They have already trampled on our rights, they talking about putting people in prison today without Habeas Corpus… If we don’t preserve our fundamental freedoms we can’t fight back. I’m convinced of one thing, we could all be very very poor tomorrow and have to start from scratch but if we have our freedoms and we have our sound currency and we have the government off our backs, this country would rebound so quickly.” Paul then outlined what he feels that the 2008 Presidential election is all about, and also warned that the elite are prepared to attempt to take the liberty of the people and change the course of history: “I think they are always prepared and everyday they have more powers than before because under these emergency powers acts, the President now has more authority than ever. And the contest that is really going on in this Presidential election is are there enough of us that care about our freedoms versus those who are willing to succumb to the temptations of dictatorship. Just think of the attitude, what it was like right after 9/11 when they passed the Patriot Act, I said ‘you know it’s not even available, you can’t even read it and we’re getting ready to vote’ they said ‘it doesn’t matter, the people want us to do something, this looks like we’re doing something, it sounds good, there’s no way I’m even gonna question this’, so they voted for it. They got their signals from the people. it is true that there are a lot of people who wanted something done, the big question is are there more of them or more of us?” Paul commented. in further reference to 9/11 the Congressman stated: “I think freedom’s been sliding for a long time and it got a lot worse after 9/11 and I’m always afraid of some concocted event that will scare the American people…. The people in this country need a little bit more reason to go along with the President, but unfortunately our leaders in this country too often have been able to provide the incident that unifies the country behind more militarism.” We implore our readers to listen to the entire interview here and support Ron Paul’s campaign. His voting record speaks for itself and he represents a genuine chance to attempt to put things right in America today. To support Ron Paul you can visit his website at www.RonPaul2008.com , where you can donate online or find out how to donate via other methods.

My biggest concerns is that the power has significantly shifted since 9/11 into the hands of the select few....I'm not talking about just the government. But I'm also speaking of the corporations...And if you look at the forerunners from each of the parties its awfully disconcerting to see the results:

Clinton: Socialist
Obama: Anti-gun
Guliani: Fascist Dictator
Edwards: Feckless pretty boy that has been running since '04
Romney: Waffle
McCain: Disconnected waffle that lost all integrity.

This will help clarify further.

www.abum.com/54951/George-Carlin-on-Capatalism.html  

[Flame Suit On]

pretty sure i read this on here yesterday

"the big question is are there more of them or more of us?"

The big answer, there's more of them.

Paul is right on the vast majority of issues, but the people aren't ready. On both sides of the spectrum the majority is far too brainwashed to listen.

I hope I'm wrong, I hope my vote for Paul in the primary is more than a gesture, but despite the widespread dissatisfaction with the status quo people seem determined to maintain it.

That dude is a kook.
I can’t vote for anybody who wants to get rid of the CIA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xo6KIusCBoU


ARH

See?

People see what the likes of Bill Maher want them to see.

Fred's it in my opinion.

Quoted: See? People see what the likes of Bill Maher want them to see.

+1

People better wake the hell up. Ron Paul is the last, best hope for this country. He's definitely got my support.

Quoted: That dude is a kook. I can’t vote for anybody who wants to get rid of the CIA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xo6KIusCBoU ARH

He makes a point, and I wish he had the chance to expand on it...

Yay. An unrealistic absolutist isolationist without a chance in hell.

Ron Paul on the Fed

Quoted: Ron Paul on the Fed

Funny how the devaluation of the dollar is so seldom a topic on capitol hill.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ron Paul on the Fed Funny how the devaluation of the dollar is so seldom a topic on capitol hill. Tell me how the devaluation of the dollar to the point it is right now is a bad thing? I bet you will in the next sentence tell me how bad outsourcing is and how we don't manufacture anything in the US anymore.

Well if he doesn't, I certainly will. Screw the "global economy". Nationalism is the way to go... as in, WE care about OUR country and OUR people (and their jobs). Not the best interests of a few global elite multi-billionaires, a few of whom happen to be americans.

Thomas Jefferson said it pretty well several times. Here are a few quotes he made on economic matters:

--------

"Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains."
   * Letter to Horatio G. Spafford (March 17, 1814)

"I, however, place economy among the first and most important republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared."
   * Letter to William Plumer (July 21, 1816)

"I hope we shall take warning from the example [of England] and crush in it's birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws our country."
   * Letter to George Logan (November 12, 1816)

"Lay down true principles and adhere to them inflexibly. Do not be frightened into their surrender by the alarms of the timid, or the croakings of wealth against the ascendency of the people."
   * Letter to Samuel Kercheval (1816)

----------

People would do well to read and listen to the writings of our founding fathers. Technology changes, but the nature of mankind does not. Think about how illegal immigration is rampant and who it is that's employing these people. These corporations are giving many of the jobs of their countrymen to foreigners, while they take many of the _rest_ of the jobs and move them to places like pakistan or india or china, etc. - It's all about making the rich richer, and the well being of american workers be damned.

Ron Paul is a true american statesman. Just about the only one left who isn't in the pocket of international corporate bankers, etc.

That's a pretty damn sad situation too, when everything is so corrupt that a good person like him is left swinging in the breeze by so many people.

Quoted: Maybe you still want to live in a 19th Century economy.   I don't. And anytime someone uses the term "international corporate bankers" or something similar it shows their true colors. Red.  Or at the very least a useful idiot.

HAHAHAHAAA!!! Talk about a dumbass. Useful idiot describes YOU perfectly. Look in the mirror. Just keep on supporting your MASSUHS. You'll keep getting the same thing in return. USED.

If you'd read a bit of history, you'd know that over all, the hard working people of this country were much better off when they weren't being shafted by super high taxes that pay for unnecessary government "services" (we're getting "serviced" alright... as in FUCKED... on things like welfare, etc) and ridiculous regulations (EPA, etc) that simply run up the operating costs of business to the point that they feel the NEED to leave the country and break immigration laws.

Hehh... Red. That's funny. That's the farthest thing from the truth. Reds want MORE regulation... like YOU apparently do. I want LESS regulation. Specifically, I want this country to go back to following the constitution. I've never heard that described as Communist before, have you? You just can't stand the fact that the truth is what it is. Our government is largely owned by large corporations... specifically because they have the deepest pockets to pay people off. - Now, apparently, you're not smart enough to understand how that system works. Since I've been in the corporate world for a significant portion of my life, and have specifically dealt with environmental and hiring/firing regulations first hand, I can personally attest to the fact that the vast majority of the regulations on the books not only run up operating costs unnecessarily and are complete horse shit in a technical sense, but I can also say that in many cases, these very laws and regulations that are hated by most business people are actually secretly SUPPORTED by the heads of the largest corporations. YEP. You read that right. They'll publicly deny it to their graves, but the truth is that they not only support it, but they specifically pay for/use environmental groups as "useful idiots" to bring about MORE regulations upon themselves, and more specifically their _competitors_. The point of doing this is to cut out the vast majority of the competition by making it financially impossible for the "little guy" (small business) to play with the big boys. That leads to the little guys having no choice but to sell out to the large corporations, which leads to carefully crafted "non-monopolies" so to speak, where say, three or four international corporations own 99% of an industry between them. At the top, these companies are run by a handful of guys who all play golf (or whatever) together and decide the fate of the working guys in about the way it was done in that old Eddie Murphy movie called "Trading Places". - Now, if we took all these "wonderful" rules away, any old "joe-bob" could start his own local business in whatever field he chose... without having to have all the outrageously expensive permits, (useless) engineering studies, etc, etc, etc, done as a prerequisite to doing business. Lower startup and operating costs means more competitors in the marketplace, and more competitors means better deals for customers (price wars). Lower prices for consumers leads to more VOLUME of sales of any given item... meaning that the business will need more WORKERS to produce the additional volume... which leads to more JOBS. More jobs for the same number of available workers leads to higher wages for the workers (since the operator needs the best workers and uses higher pay to retain them).  Here ya go... to sum it up: Since the small to medium business owner wouldn't need to waste money on all the ridiculous fees and taxes for permits, etc, he could afford to: A) hire more workers, B) pay them more, C) sell his products for a reasonable price. - NOW... the guys who own the aforementioned large corporations don't like all this nice stuff, because it causes them to have to COMPETE for REAL instead of just quietly "fixing" everything illegally with their good buddies on the golf course. They can't STAND having to compete with some lowly "joe bob" redneck LOCAL from "fly-over country"... hell, Joe-Bob doesn't even play GOLF. And besides... in a situation where there were no unconstitutional rules (meaning 99.9 percent of all rules), there would be WAY too MANY competitors in the market place for the "big guys" to buy them all off even if they COULD get them to the golf course.

Now, since you're so smart, my 20 odd years of business experience will mean nothing to you and you'll keep saying I'm a dumbass. That's okay though. Guys like you don't really want to see the truth. You can't handle it.

Go stick your head back in the sand now, and vote for whoever the media tells you to vote for come election day.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ron Paul on the Fed Funny how the devaluation of the dollar is so seldom a topic on capitol hill. Tell me how the devaluation of the dollar to the point it is right now is a bad thing? I bet you will in the next sentence tell me how bad outsourcing is and how we don't manufacture anything in the US anymore.

Are you really asking whats wrong with losing purchasing power ?  

Quoted: I must have misunderstood. So do you believe that corporations should be able to invest where they want and how they want without interference from the .gov? Yes or no.

Basically yes. The only restrictions I think have some merit would be anti-trust regulations, and that only to stop things from becoming so dominated by a few companies that small to medium companies simply have no chance right from the get-go. Financially, I mean. - Which is happening in many industries lately. - The only problem with that though, is where to set limits. That's a pretty tough question, as I am generally pro-business and don't like regulations. The truth is, there is no simple answer, unfortunately. It's just damn sad to see things going the way they are.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ron Paul on the Fed Funny how the devaluation of the dollar is so seldom a topic on capitol hill. Tell me how the devaluation of the dollar to the point it is right now is a bad thing? I bet you will in the next sentence tell me how bad outsourcing is and how we don't manufacture anything in the US anymore. Are you really asking whats wrong with losing purchasing power ?   But what if you are an exporter?  What if your job is getting ready to get outsourced?

we're talking about two different things.

I'm talking about a devalued currency as a result of an increase in the money supply.  

You're talking about a weakened currency when compared with other currencies.

Inflation does not necessarily weaken the exchange rate of the dollar, in fact, the dollar can strengthen in regards to other currencies, even while being devalued by the fed.  The only thing that changes is how much in goods that dollar can purchase.  Without an increase in production and productivity, inflating the money supply only increases the amount of money going after the same, limited, amount of goods.  Resulting in an increase of price closely equal to the increase in the money supply.  If your wages don't increase at the same rate (the CPI is bunk, inflation is really around 10% or 11% as evidenced by the M3 numbers) you're getting screwed.

The problem with the arguement that monetary inflation and the subsequent devaluation is somehow good for our balance of trade is that monetary inflation in our system is accomplished by making credit available at whatever rate is necessary to create the inflation.

This abundant credit is what makes persistent trade imbalances possible, other countries send us goods exceeding our exports and we send them debt instruments, whether bonds or dollars it's all debt, as all dollars are loaned into existence at interest.

An $800B a year current account deficit means there's roughly $10K in debt and equity leaving the country per household, or $2500 per capita, every year. The goods and services that money pays for would be provided by Americans if our monetary policy didn't facilitate the imbalance.

Cheap dollars have made the situation worse not better, as is clear if you look at the charts since the strong dollar policy (which is another subject which merits attention in itself, as it actually meant something specific and quite damaging) came to an end in '99 or so. Free trade isn't the problem, but what we have isn't free trade.

The tradeoff of cheaper goods vs. jobs, wages, and manufacturing capacity we argue now isn't even the biggest issue, it's what happens when the process reverses itself and those debt instruments start coming due, the power that grants our crediters and the long term economic and security ramifications.

Protectionism is another issue, and has no place in a thread about Ron Paul. What the liberals propose to "do something" about the problems the mainstream GOP ignores isn't relevent.

He supports an isolationistic perspective on economic issues. That = bad.

Quoted: He supports an isolationistic perspective on economic issues. That = bad.

WTF ?????

100% incorrect

Quoted: He supports an isolationistic perspective on economic issues. That = bad.

Please expound, provide references, and explain what you mean by "isolationistic"

Beyond the 'sending American jobs overseas is really the best thing for us' argument.

The Consitution Party sent out an email asking for guidence in picking potential candidates.

I went with

1. Ron Paul
2. Tom Tancredo
3. Duncan Hunter

For obvious reasons.

http://www.constitutionparty.com/surveys/index.php?sid=2

Quoted: Beyond the 'sending American jobs overseas is really the best thing for us' argument. The Consitution Party sent out an email asking for guidence in picking potential candidates. I went with 1. Ron Paul 2. Tom Tancredo 3. Duncan Hunter For obvious reasons. www.constitutionparty.com/surveys/index.php?sid=2

Thanks for the link. If the republicans don't run a decent candidate, I'll definitely vote 3rd party. Weather they have a chance of winning or not isn't entirely the issue (in a long term sense). Forcing the republican party to come to it's senses _is_ the issue. I'm just not gonna vote for any of the "lesser evils" anymore. I've done that over and over and the result has been to get to see the republicans taking the road to hell at 45 mph instead of the 60 mph the dems would go. Either way, our country is turning into a socialist/globalist shithole. In the long run unless and until the republicans realize that they have to support the constitution to get back the loyalty of their supporters, things will not change. They have to stop trying to be "centrist" in other words. - I'm only gonna vote for someone who's gonna turn this place around and start the country back in the right direction. If enough people would be adamant about forcing the republicans to either run good candidates or lose votes, then good candidates WOULD have a chance. - So saying good candidates don't have a chance is a self fulfilling prophecy in that by saying that, you are undermining potential support for them. People who want good leaders need to set an example for the followers of the world. Vote for and support the good guys even if you don't think the chances are good. To do otherwise is to help our enemies by not standing your ground and by setting a bad example for others who might have had courage enough to do the right thing if they had seen a few more people making a good example. Compromise is the slow road to hell. People need to stand by their convictions.

Quoted: Thanks for the link. If the republicans don't run a decent candidate, I'll definitely vote 3rd party. Weather they have a chance of winning or not isn't entirely the issue (in a long term sense). Forcing the republican party to come to it's senses _is_ the issue. I'm just not gonna vote for any of the "lesser evils" anymore. I've done that over and over and the result has been to get to see the republicans taking the road to hell at 45 mph instead of the 60 mph the dems would go. Either way, our country is turning into a socialist/globalist shithole. In the long run unless and until the republicans realize that they have to support the constitution to get back the loyalty of their supporters, things will not change. They have to stop trying to be "centrist" in other words. - I'm only gonna vote for someone who's gonna turn this place around and start the country back in the right direction. If enough people would be adamant about forcing the republicans to either run good candidates or lose votes, then good candidates WOULD have a chance. - So saying good candidates don't have a chance is a self fulfilling prophecy in that by saying that, you are undermining potential support for them. People who want good leaders need to set an example for the followers of the world. Vote for and support the good guys even if you don't think the chances are good. To do otherwise is to help our enemies by not standing your ground and by setting a bad example for others who might have had courage enough to do the right thing if they had seen a few more people making a good example. Compromise is the slow road to hell. People need to stand by their convictions.

Hope you like 4 - 8 years of Hillary!

Quoted: Hope you like 4 - 8 years of Hillary!

If that's what it takes to get the republicans to wake the hell up, then so be it.

Quoted: Quoted: Hope you like 4 - 8 years of Hillary! If that's what it takes to get the republicans to wake the hell up, then so be it.

Think that'll happen?

Yeah, right.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Hope you like 4 - 8 years of Hillary! If that's what it takes to get the republicans to wake the hell up, then so be it. Think that'll happen? Yeah, right.

With your attitude nothing will get done _for_sure_ to change them. I guess you want to just give up and support them even when they don't represent us? That's what got us in this position to start with. The only thing that will get their attention is massive loss of votes due to their lack of performance.

Quoted: With your attitude nothing will get done _for_sure_ to change them. I guess you want to just give up and support them even when they don't represent us? That's what got us in this position to start with, there oh brilliant one. The only thing that will get their attention is massive loss of votes due to their lack of performance.

You voting for Ron Paul will mean jack.  As the Dems win more and more.. the Repubs feel that in order for them to win, they must become more liberal.. moving more to the center (and to the left of where they are).

You may support whoever you wish, but Ron Paul has no chance in hell of becoming President.

Quoted: You voting for Ron Paul will mean jack.  As the Dems win more and more.. the Repubs feel that in order for them to win, they must become more liberal.. moving more to the center (and to the left of where they are). You may support whoever you wish, but Ron Paul has no chance in hell of becoming President.

Well, you're obviously welcome to your opinion. I think that's a load though. They've been moving further and further left for a while now, and sooner or later they're gonna figure out that they'd be better off moving back to their original position. If they can't or don't do it, well, that's not my fault. I will absolutely NOT support them unless they start getting their minds right. They _certainly_ aren't gonna change what they're doing based on people continuing to support them regardless of what they do. Same stuff in, same stuff out. Something has to change, and sometimes things have to get worse before they can get better.

He also supports:

Legalised Drugs

Gay Mariage

Gay Adoption

Abortion

Cutting and running from Iraq (He also is takeing those tired communist lines of "Bush lied, people died", and "no blood for oil" lines lately, or the same bent at least judging by an Interview on FOX just the other day.)

Cutting and running from Afghanistan to if I'm not mistaken (and I may be)

End the War on Terror

Disband the Millitary (no "standing army")

Isolationism in Foreign Policy I.E. do not intervene anywere even when doing so would be in our best interests, crazy dictator in another country says he is going to attack us, and has the means to do it?, he would do nothing.  We tried this once before in the interwar period between World War 1, and World War 2, the result?  We were unprepared, and before World War 2 our millitary was on the same level as Portugal, which I believe at the time was something like only the 19th most powerful in the World.  Ever see those videos of US soldiers training with wooden machineguns, and Deuce, and a Halfs with the word Tank painted on the side to represent tanks?  Thats what Isolationism bought us, because since we just "mind our own bussiness" what did we need an army for?  With global terrorism, China, and the gradual re-emurgence of Russia, do you really want that?

Isolationism in the economy, he wants no free trade, and punishing terrifs among other things, basicly he wants no international bussiness at all, that doesn't work to well eighther remember early 19'th Century Japan, or Pre Nixon trip China, and other communist shit holes? worked real well didn't it? (not)  There is money to be made over seas, we can make all we want but whos going to buy it? Capitalism? Never Heard of it.

I'm also pretty sure he wants Open Borders

Now I may be wrong on a few of those points, and I probably am, and I'm sure the Ron Paul koolaid drinking apologists will be arounnd shortly to tell me exactly which ones, but most are right, but I'm sure they will be makeing excuses for those as well.

Except for being Pro-Gun, Great on Domestic Economic Policy, and being for small Government he sounds just like hillery clinton, or some other communist bastard.  If it weren't for those few things all the dope smokeing, Tofu, and Granola eating, Berkenstock wearing, tree hugging unwashed dirty hippies would love him.

Now don't get me wrong he's a GREAT Senator, but thats where he should stay.

Now if we were forced to choose between him, Guliani, and Mc Cain , then he may well be the better choice, though mainly just because he wouldn't screw us on the RKBA, wouldn't try to Tax us to death, and might cut some entitlement programs, but for everything else he SUCKS, Especially in Foreign Policy, to the point where Guliani might actualy be the better choice, even though he's a RINO at best.

He has no chance to win though in the primarys, or especially the General Election, so instead of wasting money, time, and effort on him, we should support a real candidate that WON'T screw us over as bad as the communists, like Thompson should he ever decide to run (and he will).

Fred Thompson in '08!!!!!

Quoted: i13.photobucket.com/albums/a300/tescosuicide/Alicia/Fred_Thompson.jpg

Ron Paul is a deluded nut job.

Anybody who would throw their vote away on Ron Paul, is not living, even remotely in the real world.

Quoted: He also supports: Legalised Drugs  Prohibition sure as fuck isn't working, all the while the feds grow more invasive, Gay Mariage  Couldn't give two shits, they can be miserable too. Gay Adoption  How many minorities are you personally adopting? Abortion  How many more welfare leaches do you want? Cutting and running from Iraq  Not possible, world oil prices will sky rocket Cutting and running from Afghanistan to if I'm not mistaken (and I may be) End the War on Terror  What war on terror? Disband the Millitary (no "standing army")  You mean National Guard, right? Isolationism in Foreign Policy I.E. do not intervene anywere even when doing so would be in our best interests, crazy dictator in another country says he is going to attack us, and has the means to do it?, he would do nothing.  We tried this once before in the interwar period between World War 1, and World War 2, the result?  We were unprepared, and before World War 2 our millitary was on the same level as Portugal, which I believe at the time was something like only the 19th most powerful in the World.  Ever see those videos of US soldiers training with wooden machineguns, and Deuce, and a Halfs with the word Tank painted on the side to represent tanks?  Thats what Isolationism bought us, because since we just "mind our own bussiness" what did we need an army for?  With global terrorism, China, and the gradual re-emurgence of Russia, do you really want that? Isolationism in the economy, he wants no free trade, and punishing terrifs among other things, basicly he wants no international bussiness at all, that doesn't work to well eighther remember early 19'th Century Japan, or Pre Nixon trip China, and other communist shit holes? worked real well didn't it? (not)  There is money to be made over seas, we can make all we want but whos going to buy it? Capitalism? Never Heard of it. I'm also pretty sure he wants Open Borders  He also wants to end thier getting handouts from our government too. Now I may be wrong on a few of those points, and I probably am, and I'm sure the Ron Paul koolaid drinking apologists will be arounnd shortly to tell me exactly which ones, but most are right, but I'm sure they will be makeing excuses for those as well. Except for being Pro-Gun, Great on Domestic Economic Policy, and being for small Government he sounds just like hillery clinton, or some other communist bastard.  If it weren't for those few things all the dope smokeing, Tofu, and Granola eating, Berkenstock wearing, tree hugging unwashed dirty hippies would love him. Now don't get me wrong he's a GREAT Senator, but thats where he should stay. Now if we were forced to choose between him, Guliani, and Mc Cain , then he may well be the better choice, though mainly just because he wouldn't screw us on the RKBA, wouldn't try to Tax us to death, and might cut some entitlement programs, but for everything else he SUCKS, Especially in Foreign Policy, to the point where Guliani might actualy be the better choice, even though he's a RINO at best. He has no chance to win though in the primarys, or especially the General Election, so instead of wasting money, time, and effort on him, we should support a real candidate that WON'T screw us over as bad as the communists, like Thompson should he ever decide to run (and he will). Fred Thompson in '08!!!!! rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyGZ64ipGZRwBzV6jzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=122fkpn6e/EXP=1177302010/**http%3A//www.utk.edu/new_images/FredThompson.jpg

Quoted: Quoted: You voting for Ron Paul will mean jack.  As the Dems win more and more.. the Repubs feel that in order for them to win, they must become more liberal.. moving more to the center (and to the left of where they are). You may support whoever you wish, but Ron Paul has no chance in hell of becoming President. Well, you're obviously welcome to your opinion. I think that's a load though. They've been moving further and further left for a while now, and sooner or later they're gonna figure out that they'd be better off moving back to their original position. If they can't or don't do it, well, that's not my fault. I will absolutely NOT support them unless they start getting their minds right. They _certainly_ aren't gonna change what they're doing based on people continuing to support them regardless of what they do. Same stuff in, same stuff out. Something has to change, and sometimes things have to get worse before they can get better.

Yeah, the "protest voters" have certainly taught everyone a lesson by making Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the House.  What VooDoo says it absolutely correct, they lesson they are learning is that they need to be more liberal.

Eight years of a demonrat President got us in this mess to start with due to their lack of response to terrorists acts against Americans.  Eight more years like that, or worse, and this country may very well not survive.

That much "worse" we can't afford, but if you think the dissolution of this country due to the demonrats giving up everything to the rest of the world.  If you think some kind of revolution is the answer, think again.  This country would become another third world shithole in the event of such a thing and it may well do it anyway with the demonrats running the show.

Idealism is great, but it is trumped by reality every time, period.

Quoted: Ron Paul is a deluded nut job. Anybody who would throw their vote away on Ron Paul, is not living, even remotely in the real world.

Yep...  

He is a whacko who couldn't live under the very system he would like to set up.  Anyone that thinks isolationsim works needs to look at N. Korea...a totally isolated country.  Works so well for them.  

When I hear Ron Paul's name, the words "snowball's chance" comes to mind.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: He also supports: Legalised Drugs  Prohibition sure as fuck isn't working, all the while the feds grow more invasive, Gay Mariage  Couldn't give two shits, they can be miserable too. Gay Adoption  How many minorities are you personally adopting? Abortion  How many more welfare leaches do you want? Cutting and running from Iraq  Not possible, world oil prices will sky rocket Cutting and running from Afghanistan to if I'm not mistaken (and I may be) End the War on Terror  What war on terror? Disband the Millitary (no "standing army")  You mean National Guard, right? Isolationism in Foreign Policy I.E. do not intervene anywere even when doing so would be in our best interests, crazy dictator in another country says he is going to attack us, and has the means to do it?, he would do nothing.  We tried this once before in the interwar period between World War 1, and World War 2, the result?  We were unprepared, and before World War 2 our millitary was on the same level as Portugal, which I believe at the time was something like only the 19th most powerful in the World.  Ever see those videos of US soldiers training with wooden machineguns, and Deuce, and a Halfs with the word Tank painted on the side to represent tanks?  Thats what Isolationism bought us, because since we just "mind our own bussiness" what did we need an army for?  With global terrorism, China, and the gradual re-emurgence of Russia, do you really want that? Isolationism in the economy, he wants no free trade, and punishing terrifs among other things, basicly he wants no international bussiness at all, that doesn't work to well eighther remember early 19'th Century Japan, or Pre Nixon trip China, and other communist shit holes? worked real well didn't it? (not)  There is money to be made over seas, we can make all we want but whos going to buy it? Capitalism? Never Heard of it. I'm also pretty sure he wants Open Borders  He also wants to end thier getting handouts from our government too. Now I may be wrong on a few of those points, and I probably am, and I'm sure the Ron Paul koolaid drinking apologists will be arounnd shortly to tell me exactly which ones, but most are right, but I'm sure they will be makeing excuses for those as well. Except for being Pro-Gun, Great on Domestic Economic Policy, and being for small Government he sounds just like hillery clinton, or some other communist bastard.  If it weren't for those few things all the dope smokeing, Tofu, and Granola eating, Berkenstock wearing, tree hugging unwashed dirty hippies would love him. Now don't get me wrong he's a GREAT Senator, but thats where he should stay. Now if we were forced to choose between him, Guliani, and Mc Cain , then he may well be the better choice, though mainly just because he wouldn't screw us on the RKBA, wouldn't try to Tax us to death, and might cut some entitlement programs, but for everything else he SUCKS, Especially in Foreign Policy, to the point where Guliani might actualy be the better choice, even though he's a RINO at best. He has no chance to win though in the primarys, or especially the General Election, so instead of wasting money, time, and effort on him, we should support a real candidate that WON'T screw us over as bad as the communists, like Thompson should he ever decide to run (and he will). Fred Thompson in '08!!!!! rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyGZ64ipGZRwBzV6jzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=122fkpn6e/EXP=1177302010/**http%3A//www.utk.edu/new_images/FredThompson.jpg He would not be elected dictator, but President.  Which means working with Congress. Who do you think would be able to work with Congress to get more of what we want done?

Well aware Sherrick thanks.  But if the current dumbass is any indicator the president can still steer the ship aground.  In the long odds Paul were to get elected he would be attempting to steer quite a bit.  I'm fairly certain Paul knows what a veto is too.

Quoted: Quoted: He also supports: Legalised Drugs  Prohibition sure as fuck isn't working, all the while the feds grow more invasive, So since we can't stop every criminal, we should just drop the law? Yay!!!! Meth for everyone!!!! You think it's bad now?  I guess by your logic we shouldn't punish thieves eighther, because the law against shoplifting didn't stop them, or any other criminals from breaking any other law for that matter, so lets just repeal all laws, Anarchy rocks!!!! Gay Mariage  Couldn't give two shits, they can be miserable too. It undermines real mariage, it sends the message that a real marriage is no more special than a couple of butt buddies who want to play house, and if we recognise one "alternative lifestyle", mustn't we then by extension recognise all the others?, how about the hippies that want to marrie Ducks?, equal protection under the law, and all.  So now marriage is no more sacred then some freak who wants to marry a duck.  Think I'm exagerateing?, look at the countries who have already allowed gay marriage. Gay Adoption  How many minorities are you personally adopting? Ever hear of child abuse? I guess you think someone with no family, or moral values at all raising a child (who will eventualy be old enough to vote) is fine, and dandy huh?, or indocrinateing them to be gay, or that little fact that most child molesters we seem to hear about have been surprise....gay. Abortion  How many more welfare leaches do you want? So the murder of what is it 3 million? (In the US Alone) people each year is hunky dory with you?, hell why stop at the womb then?, why not do as that other poster suggested the other way, and just go into the ghetto, and start gunning down random people?, or do you just not have a problem killing babies?  There is a place for it like in the case of rape, insest, and LEGITIMATE health reasons, but abortion on demand is just wrong. Cutting and running from Iraq  Not possible, world oil prices will sky rocket I saw him in an interview just the other day where he said he wanted to cut, and run. Cutting and running from Afghanistan to if I'm not mistaken (and I may be) End the War on Terror  What war on terror? You know fighting those crazy bastards with dirty laundry on there heads who are trying to kill us, you know the evil bastards who crashed planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and that field in Pennsylania on September 11, 2001.  Or are you one of those not jobs that thinks it's a conspiracy, and blame Bush for it?, or were you sleeping that day, and just crawled out of that cave you've been liveing in for the fast 5+ years? Disband the Millitary (no "standing army")  You mean National Guard, right? So you think we can keep China, Russia, Venezuala, and North Korea, at bay, plus defend ourselfs against the Terrorists, and all the other countries, and wackjobs that want to attack us, plus fight the war on terror (Oh thats right you don't think there is one.) with just the National Gaurd?  What have you been smokeing/injecting/inhaleing/snorting/ingesting (maybe all 5)? (since you advocate legalized drugs to) Isolationism in Foreign Policy I.E. do not intervene anywere even when doing so would be in our best interests, crazy dictator in another country says he is going to attack us, and has the means to do it?, he would do nothing.  We tried this once before in the interwar period between World War 1, and World War 2, the result?  We were unprepared, and before World War 2 our millitary was on the same level as Portugal, which I believe at the time was something like only the 19th most powerful in the World.  Ever see those videos of US soldiers training with wooden machineguns, and Deuce, and a Halfs with the word Tank painted on the side to represent tanks?  Thats what Isolationism bought us, because since we just "mind our own bussiness" what did we need an army for?  With global terrorism, China, and the gradual re-emurgence of Russia, do you really want that? Isolationism in the economy, he wants no free trade, and punishing terrifs among other things, basicly he wants no international bussiness at all, that doesn't work to well eighther remember early 19'th Century Japan, or Pre Nixon trip China, and other communist shit holes? worked real well didn't it? (not)  There is money to be made over seas, we can make all we want but whos going to buy it? Capitalism? Never Heard of it. I'm also pretty sure he wants Open Borders  He also wants to end thier getting handouts from our government too. So he, and presumably you have no problem with the disregard to our laws, the dissrespect of our sovreinty, and the waves of crime then? Now I may be wrong on a few of those points, and I probably am, and I'm sure the Ron Paul koolaid drinking apologists will be arounnd shortly to tell me exactly which ones, but most are right, but I'm sure they will be makeing excuses for those as well. Except for being Pro-Gun, Great on Domestic Economic Policy, and being for small Government he sounds just like hillery clinton, or some other communist bastard.  If it weren't for those few things all the dope smokeing, Tofu, and Granola eating, Berkenstock wearing, tree hugging unwashed dirty hippies would love him. Now don't get me wrong he's a GREAT Senator, but thats where he should stay. Now if we were forced to choose between him, Guliani, and Mc Cain , then he may well be the better choice, though mainly just because he wouldn't screw us on the RKBA, wouldn't try to Tax us to death, and might cut some entitlement programs, but for everything else he SUCKS, Especially in Foreign Policy, to the point where Guliani might actualy be the better choice, even though he's a RINO at best. He has no chance to win though in the primarys, or especially the General Election, so instead of wasting money, time, and effort on him, we should support a real candidate that WON'T screw us over as bad as the communists, like Thompson should he ever decide to run (and he will). Fred Thompson in '08!!!!! rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyGZ64ipGZRwBzV6jzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=122fkpn6e/EXP=1177302010/**http%3A//www.utk.edu/new_images/FredThompson.jpg

Quoted: Well aware Sherrick thanks.  But if the current dumbass is any indicator the president can still steer the ship aground.  In the long odds Paul were to get elected he would be attempting to steer quite a bit.  I'm fairly certain Paul knows what a veto is too.

And you say you are not a demonrat troll.  Shit, I guess you would have been happier with either Gore or Kerry.

That "dumbass" shit is straight from the DNC.

Quoted: Quoted: Well aware Sherrick thanks.  But if the current dumbass is any indicator the president can still steer the ship aground.  In the long odds Paul were to get elected he would be attempting to steer quite a bit.  I'm fairly certain Paul knows what a veto is too. And you say you are not a demonrat troll.  Shit, I guess you would have been happier with either Gore or Kerry. That "dumbass" shit is straight from the DNC.

Ron Pual himself was reciteing that commie favorite "Bush lied!!!!" crap on FOX just the other day in an interview.

Quoted: Quoted: Well aware Sherrick thanks.  But if the current dumbass is any indicator the president can still steer the ship aground.  In the long odds Paul were to get elected he would be attempting to steer quite a bit.  I'm fairly certain Paul knows what a veto is too. And you say you are not a demonrat troll.  Shit, I guess you would have been happier with either Gore or Kerry. That "dumbass" shit is straight from the DNC.

No I actually voted for the sitting president, should clue you into what I think of of the Dims.  Face up to the fact the sitting idiot is killing the Republican party.  Most of America knows exactly what the Dims are they also know they are not the answer to any problem yet they stayed home or held thier nose and voted tard.  How much more of a failure can the current president be?   I'd bet things only get worse.

Quoted: Idealism is great, but it is trumped by reality every time, period.

Haha... that's the kind of thinking that got us to where we are right now. You have no ideals if you won't stand up for anything. It's thinking like yours that really _will_ eventually lead to the end of this country.

If people had stood for what they believed in all this time instead of believing horse shit like a lot of you guys spout, we wouldn't be in the position we're in. But, then again, since some of you guys obviously think that going back to having a constitutional government and _true_ freedom (instead of massive government and oodles of unconstitutional laws, all of which runs our taxes through the roof and our economy into the ground) is equal to being a third world country, I guess you guys really support the fucked up direction we're going in, so I guess we're just never gonna agree. It's a damn good thing not _everyone_  thinks the way you do. Unfortunately, it looks like lots of folks do though. Blind cheerleaders for one of two teams, neither of which represents the best interests of the average person.

On the subject of where this country is headed... All you have to do is read some history to see where things will end up going. Both ancient and more recent history is filled with countries that were great for a while, but eventually fell apart. There has never ever been one that lasted forever. Not ever. To think that this one will do so is foolish. All I can hope for is that when this one does fall apart it will be replaced by something as good as this one once was, and not by something more akin to Hitler's version of Germany or Julius Caesars version of Rome. Unfortunately, I figure that's about a 50/50 chance. I hope I don't live to see it if it goes in that direction. Actually, I figure none of us will live to see whatever it is that will end up happening. I think it'll take longer than that for things to fall completely apart. Could be wrong though. Either way, giving up on what you believe because of someones version of "reality" is just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. What if our founding fathers had felt the way you do? We'd all still be speaking with a british accent so to speak... and what if guys like Martin Luther King had felt the way you do? Black folks would still be riding on the back of the bus, etc. - Etc, etc, etc... Wake the hell up, man. SOMEBODY had better stop compromising and start standing up for what they believe in. Otherwise, we're _really_ gonna be fucked.

The republicans will either start standing for the right thing, or I won't support them. If that means the libs win the next election, that's THEIR fault, not mine. As Barry Goldwater said, "I Didn't Leave the Republican Party. The Republican Party Left Me".

- All of that being said - While I ultimately support Ron Paul because he is the only candidate who really agrees with the vision of the founding fathers (which is obviously WAY too free for the likes of some of you), if the republicans run Thompson, I will vote for him, because from what I've read, I do agree with enough of what he says to feel that I wouldn't be doing the wrong thing in doing it. - If, on the other hand, they run McCain or Giuliani (sp?) or someone along those lines, I will absolutely positively vote 3rd party, because in my opinion, they would be just as bad as Hitlery Klinton and Nazi Pelosi. Choosing between that group is really no choice at all.

By the way... I voted straight republican ticket in this past election. Just so you'll know.

- edited to correct spelling