21

11/29/2007 4:12:21 PM

I <3 Ron Paul

11/29/2007 4:40:20 PM

Page 21 wants MOAR Ron Paul.

11/29/2007 4:49:55 PM

Quote :

"say it isn't so!!! "

I do say it's so!

To be honest...Most of Clinton's fiscal responsibility came after his party was swept from power in '94. Then we had a pretty good set-up. Democrat prez and a GOP congress...that slowed the spending back down to just a spree.

But you're right Hur...the republicans have done a horrible job of controlling spending. It's obscene what they've done. They've assaulted our liberty and privacy, run up a huge debt, and invaded a country for dubious reasons. They are truly embarassing. I just hope this last election slapped some sense back into them.

11/29/2007 7:29:38 PM

I really liked how the host last night on the "debate" would let people rip into Ron Paul, not let Paul respond, saying "We'll get to that in a moment," and then never "got to that in a moment."

Seriously. Can we at least pretend to be impartial, CNN? Nevermind the fact that Rudy and Romney together had more time to speak than all the others combined. The only thing that made the "debate" worth it was watching Rudy get owned on the first fucking question

11/29/2007 9:17:57 PM

he just broke 10million for the 4th quarer

12/1/2007 6:09:07 AM

I am in

12/1/2007 6:41:41 AM

Interview with our man Paul in business week. Great stuff on the Federal Reserve.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_50/b4062021769214.htm

12/4/2007 11:06:58 AM

For those who care, Ron Paul is on the View - the one that is on right now. He'll be on before the end of the hour.

As much as I love Ron Paul, I just can't bear to watch.

12/4/2007 11:14:26 AM

Quote :

"The nanny state doesn't work, the police state doesn't work, and neither does the warfare. And they know it."

Quote :

"I'd get the government out of managing education and medicine. "

Quote :

"Why do we tax them, make it hard for them, then give them grants? It doesn't make any sense. "

my man.

Quote :

"But to deal with terrorism, we can't solve the problem if we don't understand why they [attack us]. And they don't come because we're free and prosperous. They don't go after Switzerland and Sweden and Canada."

lol.

12/4/2007 11:24:51 AM

Quote :

"But to deal with terrorism, we can't solve the problem if we don't understand why they [attack us]. And they don't come because we're free and prosperous. They don't go after Switzerland and Sweden and Canada. They come after us because we've occupied their land, and instead of reversing our foreign policy after 9/11, we made it worse by invading two more countries and then threatening a third. Why wouldn't they be angry at us? It would be absolutely bizarre if they weren't. We've been meddling over there for more than 50 years. We overthrew a democratically elected government in Iran in 1953; we were Saddam Hussein's ally and encouraged him to invade Iran. If I was an Iranian, I'd be annoyed myself, you know. So we need to change our policy, and I think we would reduce the danger."

know fucking shit. people for the most part here in the US are completly ignorant on world politics; foreign policy history; and global issues. OMG lets bomb iran before they get nukes. the turrists hate our freedom and hate democracy.

For example the original UN mandate to force Saddam out of Kuwait in 1991 needed to be done. Most people though probably sincerely believe it was about helping out our friends in Kuwait . The Emir of Kuwait actually had stronger ties w/ the collapsing USSR at the time of the invasion then they did with the US.

I saw a CNN interview two weeks ago with W. One of the questions asked was concerning "white house policy toward the democratically elected past prime minister in Palestine who was a member of Hamas." Hamas is definitely a destabilizing factor in the region and its a move in the positive direction when Ismail Haniyeh stepped down. However, instead of addressing the issue as to why Palestinians elected this radical figure who belonged to a known terrorist group into power and the situation in Gaza. Bush's first phrase was the Palestinians just don't like democracy blahh blah blah; completely ignoring the fact that the towel head was ELECTED into office.



[Edited on December 4, 2007 at 12:17 PM. Reason : aa]

12/4/2007 12:10:16 PM

Quote :

"people for the most part as complete ignorant on world politics"

You said it.

Americans just have too short an attention span and lack of patience for too much world intervention. We want everything fixed in a half hour...20 minutes after commercials.

That's why we should stick to a non-interventionist policy.

12/4/2007 12:15:36 PM

But I am sure as hell 50% population knows who won American Idol last week

12/4/2007 12:23:39 PM

maybe we should reformat the elections into an American Idol style competition and have people vote via text message.

12/4/2007 12:43:19 PM

Ron Paul this saturday in downtown Greenville, SC. Im planning on heading to it 8pm at the Peace arts complex.

12/5/2007 10:23:16 AM

anyone know if he is ever coming to the raleigh area?

12/5/2007 10:50:14 AM

Quote :

"Americans just have too short an attention span and lack of patience for too much world intervention. We want everything fixed in a half hour...20 minutes after commercials. That's why we should stick to a non-interventionist policy. "

12/5/2007 12:24:17 PM

Quote :

"know fucking shit."

you are really struggling with these homonyms lately. this is like the third of fourth post of yours in the last couple of days. want me to proofread for you?

12/5/2007 2:01:01 PM

http://tinyurl.com/2sxu5k

Paul supporters gearing up for a big New Hampshire campaign. This is a pretty good, unbiased article.

12/6/2007 2:37:04 PM

Good news Ron Paul fans. Click on the December 4th video. http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/webcast_archives.aspx

And read this article: http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_126_66.aspx

(InsiderAdvantage is the publisher of the Southern Political Report and is a professional pollster.)

Lets hope it's a very, very cold day in Iowa and that the Orange Bowl is an intriguing matchup.

12/6/2007 11:56:26 PM

Ron Paul = Ralph Nader

12/6/2007 11:57:56 PM

More an anti-Nader.

12/7/2007 12:20:27 AM

you know there are quite a few issues that i disagree with ron paul on. however, on those issues, his views are supported by the constitution, which i'm all for. i think that if there is something i believe which isn't necessarily supported by the constitution, then it's our job as citizens to lobby our representatives to support an amendment, thus making them constitutional. this is the reason i can still support ron paul even while disagreeing with some of his views

12/7/2007 3:14:03 PM

^that was my initial reason for supporting him, then I was further entrenched after seeing how he answers any question in a straight-forward manner, unlike pretty much any other candidate out there.

It made me realize that he could answer these questions bluntly b/c he was answering based on his principles and belief in the constitution, whereas other candidates are answering based on what position they think will get them the most votes.

when I heard his stance on abortion, I was totally sold.

12/7/2007 3:35:08 PM

yeah we need to get everyone to register Republican and get out to the primaries. Unfortunately he does not fit in the mainstream tool bag neo-con category so he gets no love from the GOP leadership.

12/7/2007 4:05:44 PM

i like a lot of the stuff he is for, but i don't like how he is against abortion... i would think a true conservative wouldn't want to interfere with people's choices.

12/7/2007 6:31:30 PM

i dont see how you dont understand that. if he feels abortion is murder, which he does, then the answer to your question is extremely clear. Murder is illegal, and he doesnt want to interfere with people's choices...except when their choice is to do something like take someone's life.

personal preferences aside (even tho i am not a fan of abortion), i dont see how his stance confuses anyone.

[Edited on December 7, 2007 at 7:02 PM. Reason : ]

12/7/2007 7:01:49 PM

except for the fact that a 3 week old embryo is not a person, it has no SSN, no name, and Social Services can not take it into care of the state when the women decides to no longer take care of it.

12/7/2007 7:03:29 PM

Quote :

"i like a lot of the stuff he is for, but i don't like how he is against abortion... i would think a true conservative wouldn't want to interfere with people's choices."

Which is fair enough, although I'd argue at least he takes the defensible position of advocating returning the matter to the states, rather than trying to use Congress as a winner-takes-all federal cage match on the issue, which frankly seems unhelpful as far as policy goes.

12/7/2007 7:07:00 PM

Quote :

"but i don't like how he is against abortion"

^
Yes I applaud his goal to get the issue out of the federal gov't. At some point along the birth process, we would all agree that abortion is murder. Murder is handled at the state level. Let each state decide that point.

If you have to travel to a liberal state to abort your third trimester child...so be it. (ok..cheap shot)

12/7/2007 10:38:06 PM

Honestly I applaud him for his stance against abortion. Even so, I'm glad he wants to make a state issue. So if several states want it legal, great, all the sluts can go live there.

12/8/2007 12:26:07 AM

Quote :

"So if several states want it legal, great, all the sluts can go live there."

Way to go. You may have seriously landed in the top 5 most ignorant things ever said on TWW. That's quite the feat. I know it's a sentiment that's echoed all over this board, but that doesn't make it any less ignorant with each new repetition.

By the way kids, Ron Paul if nucking futs....

http://www.newsweek.com/id/73372

Quote :

"Ron Paul wants you to be scared. There's a conspiracy in the land—what he calls a "conspiracy of ideas"—to give up America's sovereignty. It's a shadowy scheme that begins with the NAFTA "superhighway," a road as wide as several football fields that will link Mexico, the United States and Canada. "They don't talk about it and they might not admit it," Paul said at the CNN-YouTube presidential debate last week. He didn't say exactly who "they" are, but perhaps one can guess. "They're planning on [taking] millions of acres … by eminent domain," warned the prickly libertarian. But elected government officials aren't acting alone. There's "an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments" pushing the idea, Paul wrote in October 2006. "The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union—complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union." Only it's not true. The main purveyor of this broad conspiracy theory is Jerome Corsi, coauthor of "Unfit for Command," the book that helped Swift Boat John Kerry's presidential ambitions. His latest offering is "The Late Great U.S.A.: The Coming Merger With Mexico and Canada," which became a best seller on The New York Times's business list this summer. Corsi plays on growing nationalist fears. He sees a scenario in which a North American Union is born and shares a currency, the "amero." Even some right-wing standard-bearers regard the fears as over-blown. Jed Babbin, editor of the conservative newspaper Human Events, says: "I guess there are people who believe in [the plan for a North American Union]. But there are people who believe in Bigfoot." "The evidence is out there," says Corsi."

[Edited on December 8, 2007 at 3:12 AM. Reason : fucking nuts]

12/8/2007 3:08:20 AM

But he's still saner than any other candidate out there.

12/8/2007 8:44:43 AM

^

12/8/2007 9:09:55 AM

^^^He's pointed out many times now that it's not a current reality, but the combination of current proposed legislation and people involved show that it not only could happen, but that there is a considerable amount of backing to make it happen.

You want to compare the knowledge of a news magazine to that of a 10 term congressman, I wonder who has a bit more insider knowledge of what's going on there. And of COURSE anyone actually involved is going to deny it completely, because its a fucking ridiculous thing to try and do.

I'd be glad to point you to hundreds of other federal programs that people thought were crazytalk to even think about, and yet they still came into being and we keep on funding them today. Missle Defense Initiative anyone?

[Edited on December 8, 2007 at 3:23 PM. Reason : .]

12/8/2007 3:23:13 PM

I am not trying to be xenophobic but I don't see how all countries will not combine into a giant global union. It seems to be heading that way whether some illuminati salisburyboy fantasy people are behind this or not.

Every country is trying to push immigration, diversity, multiculturalism, etc. If every countries populations turns into 10% Chinese, 10% White, 10% African, 10% Hispanic, 10% Muslim, 10% Indian, etc then what is the point of having different countries if they all are the exact same?

I am not saying it will happen within the next 10 years but maybe in 100 or so.

12/8/2007 8:11:04 PM

Quote :

"Every country is trying to push immigration, diversity, multiculturalism, etc. If every countries populations turns into 10% Chinese, 10% White, 10% African, 10% Hispanic, 10% Muslim, 10% Indian, etc then what is the point of having different countries if they all are the exact same?"

lol...so by your definition, if the US had the same ethnicity breakdown as south korea we would be the exact same? are you 10?

place or origin/ethnicity does NOT = same political/religious ideas etc. There is immigration BECAUSE these people do not like the country they are in as much as the country they are moving too! The fact that you think countries will be the same simply because they are a mix of national identities is completely absurd.





Anywho, I went to see Ron Paul speak tonight. was ftw.

12/8/2007 9:49:18 PM

Quote :

"I am not trying to be xenophobic but I don't see how all countries will not combine into a giant global union. It seems to be heading that way whether some illuminati salisburyboy fantasy people are behind this or not."

Relatively the world is pretty fractured compared to the way it was during other points of human civilization.

12/8/2007 10:01:15 PM

wow i really shouldnt post on here at all after getting hardly any sleep apparently. my grammar in nearly all of my posts yesterday was atrocious hahaha. sticks out like a sore thumb to me today when im not even looking for it.

anyways, bttt for Dr. Paul

(found this from last night)


[Edited on December 9, 2007 at 3:17 PM. Reason : ]

12/9/2007 3:10:53 PM

He's an imperfect candidate for sure...but as it stands, he's got the Gamecat seal of approval. I just wish he weren't a xenophobic pro-lifer.

12/9/2007 8:55:24 PM

^^ wait, where

12/9/2007 9:33:42 PM

what the hell makes you think he's xenophobic?

Quote :

"when I heard his stance on abortion, I was totally sold."

me too

12/9/2007 9:59:58 PM

^^ greenville, sc

12/9/2007 10:43:14 PM

so close!

Imma vote for him in the primaries down here, though

12/9/2007 11:07:17 PM

i do you change your party affiliation in order to vote in the primary.

12/10/2007 10:32:36 AM

depends upon the state

12/10/2007 11:08:03 AM

RP's site has a list of primary election info by state:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/states/

If your primary is listed as "closed," this means you must register as Republican by the deadline. If it's "open," you don't have to switch affiliation - however, some states now require you to declare an affiliation. So, basically - just make sure to check your affiliation well before the deadline.

12/10/2007 11:19:22 AM

so if its open, you can vote in the republican primary regardless of your affiliation? because im registered republican but have friends that are not registered republican that are going to/want to vote for RP and SC is election type: open.

nvm did some research for myself. obviously my voting experience before was in NC which was closed so i wasnt sure.

[Edited on December 10, 2007 at 11:46 AM. Reason : ]

12/10/2007 11:41:47 AM

I don't think this has been posted, but Ron Paul says he's in favor of legalized drugs, prostitution, and gay marriage. Haven't been a fan up to this point, but he's really making sense here.



[Edited on December 10, 2007 at 10:58 PM. Reason : ,]

12/10/2007 10:58:03 PM

he's not "in favor" of any of those things. He just thinks the federal government doesn't have any power to regulate any of them and they should be decisions left to the states.

12/11/2007 3:26:53 AM