Quantcast

Ron Paul Mega-Thread (Mergeness)

Discussion in 'Legal' started by brighamr, Jun 5, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. crashm1

    crashm1 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Messages:
    158
    Location:
    Western WI
    Here's a thought that just occured to me. I'm originally from MN which has in the recent past had two dark horse candidates elected when the MSM said they had no chance, one was Paul Wellstone. Wellstone handily beat an incumbent Senator and beat him again in a rematch six years later. In my opinion he won the rematch because he did what he said he would. The other was Ventura who was a running joke until election night and the Democrats and Republicans got blindsided by young independent voters who were dissatified with the status quo. Ventura turned out to be maybe a little too blunt for Minnesotans. He also had a tendency to stuff his foot in his mouth.
    As pcosmar said I heard about RP here and went searching for info and again he is the only candidate I have any real enthusiasm for hell he's the first candidate I was willing to send money too. I could bring myself to vote for Richardson or Huckabee but they ain't my first pick.
     
  2. D.S. Ambrose

    D.S. Ambrose Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    29
    The same tens of thousands of folks? How many people text voted for Paul in that poll?
     
  3. pcosmar

    pcosmar member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    UP Michigan
    Took a min. to find, here are the numbers.
    That would be about 10,000 on a spam proof poll.
     
  4. seansean

    seansean Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    209
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Recapturing the Spirit of Independence
    by Rep. Ron Paul

    This week Americans will gather around the grill, attend parades and watch fireworks displays, all in the celebration of the signing of our Declaration of Independence. At the same time, we will have thousands of bureaucrats, troops and agents stationed in countries across the globe being paid by American tax dollars.

    On the anniversary of our declaring our own independence from the British, it is certainly appropriate that we reflect on the nature and spirit of independent nationhood. While our founding fathers were individual men in a historically unique situation, they posited that the principles upon which they rested our national independence were timeless.

    If we truly honor the men who brought about Independence Day, we would do well to spend at least as much time reflecting on the Declaration of Independence, and the principles upon which it is based, as we spend time at the cookouts, parades, and fireworks displays. With the trend toward globalism that has been with us for the past century, we should be specifically thoughtful about how our celebration of independence can be made consistent with the policies that have been advocated by the American government – as well as many of the nation's elite – or what we used to call the Eastern Establishment.

    I believe there is no way to square our nation's traditions and reverence for independence with the globalist policies these elites are currently pursuing. The American concept of independent nationhood inscribed in our Declaration cannot be maintained if we are going to pursue a policy that undermines the independence of other nations. National independence is an idea, and the erosion of the independence of other nations only serves to erode that idea.

    At the same time, if we allow the erosion of that idea, by ignoring it in certain instances, we will be contributing to its erosion in all times and nations, even our own. In this way our nation's independence is linked with the independence of all nations. The sooner we realize this truth, and enact a foreign policy that is consistent with it, the sooner we will be able to recapture the spirit of independence.

    In addition, as our founding fathers understood, the idea of national independence is inseparable from that of constitutional republicanism. Only the safeguards and limitations that are enshrined in a constitutionally-limited republic can prohibit a nation from lurching toward empire. Recognizing these same protections is also the very best way to eliminate the need for civil wars and the violence of civil strife.

    Moreover, this constitutional republicanism is essential to protecting the individual rights and self-determination that is at the heart of our Declaration. As we celebrate the 231ist anniversary of our nation's birth, I hope every person who reads or hears this will take the time to go back and read the Declaration of Independence. Only by recapturing the spirit of independence can we ensure our government never resembles the one from which the American States declared their separation.




    http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=11231
     
  5. FeebMaster

    FeebMaster Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    275
    Because Ron Paul stands against everything they believe in?
     
  6. GoSlash27

    GoSlash27 member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    168
    Marshall,
    No it's not die-hard RP supporters doing that. It's the people we're reaching. You're not going to see it on the TV until it becomes too big to hide, but we're participating in parades,
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG] fairs, festivals event_1599423.jpg and publicity events [​IMG] from coast to coast. This thing is no longer restricted to the internet.
    Of course, we're still getting the word out on the 'net as well.
     
  7. samtechlan

    samtechlan Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    270
    Location:
    USA
    GoSlash27,

    Keep up the good work!!!!

    _________________________________________________________________

    www.ronpaul2008.com

    Austrian Economics www.Mises.org
     
  8. samtechlan

    samtechlan Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    270
    Location:
    USA
    Interview with Ron Paul. http://www.goupstate.com/article/20070704/NEWS/707040337/-1/LIFE

    Check out this quote:

    SHJ: This is an issue close to Spartanburg: What can or should be done to combat youth violence, particularly when it comes to keeping guns out of the hands of children?

    PAUL: This is not a federal matter. You could just tell me a story of somebody having been killed by a knife. What are you going to do to keep a knife out of the hands of children because they might hurt each other? The weapon itself isn't the problem. It's the breakup of the family, the culture and the society that's so violent. But that's only going to be solved when you have a more moral society, and a more family-oriented society.


    Article published Jul 4, 2007

    Government can't create moral society, Paul says
    Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul shared his views this week on a variety of controversial issues. Here are his responses to questions posed by the Herald-Journal.

    SHJ: You're against abortion. How do you counter the view that's the government telling a woman what she can or can't do with her body, infringing on personal freedom?

    PAUL: There are two lives. You have a right to privacy in your home - I don't want any cameras or any invasion in the home. Your home is your castle in a free society. That doesn't give you the right to kill a baby in the bed. If there is another life involved, and that crib happens to be the uterus, the issue is not telling the woman what to do. The issue is whether there's another life. I tell my libertarian friends that if you have a live fetus, and it's 4, 5, 6, 7 pounds, and it has a heartbeat, and brainwaves, moves and sucks its thumb, and you kill him, you're committing an act of violence. So, it's a little more complicated than saying a woman can do what she wants with her body, and that's why it's been difficult for a lot of people to sort this out. The one thing I say is that we should repeal Roe v. Wade, and it should be a state issue.

    SHJ: You have a huge online presence. Should the government regulate the Internet? If so, how?

    PAUL: No. There are lines that can be crossed. If people are defrauding individuals, or telling lies, then the government would have a right to intervene. And that's only after the fact, and you say, 'Someone has done this to me' … I'm for no taxation and no regulation (of the Internet), and that's a pretty risky political position because there's some pretty nasty stuff out there. But the First Amendment is out there to protect controversial speech, not non-controversial speech. I certainly don't want the United Nations involved. One day, I'm sure they'll want to be.

    SHJ: This is an issue close to Spartanburg: What can or should be done to combat youth violence, particularly when it comes to keeping guns out of the hands of children?

    PAUL: This is not a federal matter. You could just tell me a story of somebody having been killed by a knife. What are you going to do to keep a knife out of the hands of children because they might hurt each other? The weapon itself isn't the problem. It's the breakup of the family, the culture and the society that's so violent. But that's only going to be solved when you have a more moral society, and a more family-oriented society.

    SHJ: Then, how do you do that? How do you fix society?

    PAUL: The government can't do that. Government's not a social worker. Government is to make sure that if there is injury to one person from another, that they punish that individual and stop it from happening. But to be responsible for a complete moral education for all of society … It might turn out that divorce is the single most important feature. What are we going to do? Force people to stay together? No. That's a reflection of the society. Freedom is not going to work unless you have a moral society. And that raises a serious question because certainly we can't force that type of morality on a society. It's like the same notion that we're going to force our values on the people of Iraq because they didn't have a good democracy, but we're going to go over there and start bombing them and killing them until they act good like Americans. The federal government can't force families to come together and treat their children better. That is a spiritual issue, and the government's responsibility is mainly to maintain order and punish violence. And almost all that responsibility falls on the local government.


    _________________________________________________________________

    www.ronpaul2008.com
     
  9. MrRezister

    MrRezister Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2004
    Messages:
    144
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    Blasphemer! We all know it is the DUTY of the government to reach it's enormous, benevolent hand into my pocket, take my money, and give it to someone who needs it worse than I. It may be some poor family in an inner city in my state, or it may be some failing warlord in Iraq, but I know that someone, somewhere needs my money worse than I ever will. If we don't want the government to fix society(societies?), then who will?
     
  10. samtechlan

    samtechlan Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    270
    Location:
    USA
    Grant Cunningham who runs an extremely good blog which is a must read for revolver fanatics like myself (who else buys two J frames on the same day?) had a very poignant July 4th post. Now he does not mention which candidate he is talking about but read it for yourself and see what you think. It's going to keep me up at night trying to figure out who the mystery candidate is.


    http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog.html
    Wednesday, July 04, 2007 Filed in: Political Action, Current Events
    On this, the celebration of our country's birth, I wish for everyone a safe, happy, and inspiring holiday.

    I don't usually make political statements on this blog, as I generally find unsolicited discussions of politics and religion to be impolite. After all, if you wanted to read about such things you'd go to a blog dedicated to those topics! However, since our Second Amendment rights are inexorably tied to the political landscape, I think that it would not be out of line to make a comment on this occasion. I hope you'll indulge me for just a minute or so!

    Think ahead to the coming elections; at this point there is only one candidate for the highest office in the land, from the major parties, who espouses the principles espoused by our Founding Fathers. (I'll leave it to you to figure out who that person may be, as the individual personality isn't the point of this little diatribe - it's the concept I want to focus on.)

    Oddly, many in this country won't vote for such a candidate because they feel those principles are "too radical" or "anarchist." Sad, isn't it, that we have become so fearful of freedom in the last 231 years that we would actively avoid the kind of real personal liberties that our Constitution guarantees!

    So far, none of the gun bloggers - even the most rabid advocates of the Second Amendment - have come out in support of such a candidate, preferring instead to focus their endorsements on those who don't challenge the status quo, except in the shallowest manner.

    I fear that Patrick Henry is, at this very moment, rolling in his grave.

    Freedom - real freedom - is a messy, scary, imprecise thing. Back in 1776 they understood that it isn't always pretty or "fair" (by whatever definition of that word you care to use.) Any attempt to impose order or "fairness" will result in a reduction in freedom, and there is just no way around that. That is just what we've been doing for the last couple of centuries, and you can see the results. Can anyone out there honestly say that they're happy with this?

    Here's a little experiment: ponder, today and come November, where your personal intersection of freedom and comfort lies - then vote a little to the freedom side of that line. Push yourself. Encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same. In that way, little by little, we might be able to make some headway against the forces who stand for prohibition, limitation, and collectivism.

    End of sermon. That wasn't so bad, was it?
     
  11. DigitalWarrior

    DigitalWarrior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Messages:
    867
    Location:
    Nashua NH
    I took part in a parade in Merrimack NH. We had a dozen people or so. After it was over, I spoke with about 10 Obama marchers of the 40 or so they had. It tuns out that at least 7 of them were bussed in from out of state.

    Ron Paul is handicapped by his lack of money and his integrity. He doesn't transport boatloads of people to different places for free. His campaign mobilizes local people to do local work. We are working on getting supplies, and in many cases making our own because astonishingly people who benefit from Big Government don't give large contributions to Ron Paul.

    DigitalWarrior
     
  12. pcosmar

    pcosmar member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    UP Michigan
    Not bad at all.
     
  13. TrybalRage

    TrybalRage Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Messages:
    317
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Infiltrating websites? I've been here longer than I've heard of Paul, and all of his supporters I've seen have join dates that are older than his campaign. Whoops. There goes that theory.

    You keep ignoring the fact that most of his supporters are not gun people. They don't really care about our cause. So they wouldn't think to join this site.
     
  14. Silver Bullet

    Silver Bullet Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,335
    Location:
    Arizona
    Silver Bullet:

    candidate of choice: Ron Paul

    THR join date: 12-24-02
     
  15. FeebMaster

    FeebMaster Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    275
    That doesn't prove anything. You might just be a forward thinking infiltrator.

    lol
     
  16. GoSlash27

    GoSlash27 member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    168
    :D
     
  17. pdowg881

    pdowg881 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,103
    Location:
    Southern NH
    Yea I didn't know who the hell Paul was until a thread I read about a month ago. You would think since the people here value the constitution and the beliefs of the founding father's that they would at least give Paul some credit but It's like so many people here just refuse to believe he has anything going for him. His voting record speaks for itself.

    I really am baflled that half the people here think he's a good for nothing nobody. Just every positive comment has some rebuttal. He can't win, he's no good, it's just internet hype, it's the same small group that supports him, blah blah blah. If he truly holds your beleifs and values why don't you support him?
     
  18. Matt King

    Matt King Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,151
    Location:
    USA
    Marshall,

    Can you point to any evidence that suggests this? Or are you just making broad assumptions based on your own opinion?

    For the record, I consider myself a Ron Paul supporter and have been a member of THR for well over a year. Most RP supporters here on THR aren't fair weather fans.
     
  19. Matt King

    Matt King Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,151
    Location:
    USA
    Besides, if rabid Ron Paul supporters have infiltrated this forum, how come Fred Thompson is winning this THR poll?
     
  20. budney

    budney member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    741
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    Texas,

    I'm not sure there's much point arguing with Marshall. He has advanced several completely unsubstantiated conspiracy theories already; it seems pretty clear that he's going to believe what he believes, regardless of the facts. For example, he even cited a pause in one of RP's answers as proof that he believes 9/11 truthers' conspiracy theories.

    --Len.
     
  21. Matt King

    Matt King Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,151
    Location:
    USA
    I see. Thanks, budney.
     
  22. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,054
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    I agree with Budney. I don't think Marshall is going to change is mind. In fact I don't know why he continues to participate in Ron Paul threads. He supports statist neo-conservative candidates, which, while marginally better than supporting a statist Democrat, is not the solution to our nation's problems. Maybe the reason he has all the conspiracy theories about Ron Paul supporters infiltrating websites is because he is in fact an infiltrator for Giuliani or McCain or Romney?
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2007
  23. samtechlan

    samtechlan Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    270
    Location:
    USA
    It's funny the anti Paul folks are always yelling about the wacko, tin foil hat wearing Ron Paul supporters and then they are the ones pushing the conspiracy theories.

    _________________________________________________________

    www.ronpaul2008.com

    Two fantastic Austrian weapons:

    One is mechanical: http://www.glock.com/

    The other is intellectual: Austrian Economics www.mises.org
     
  24. samtechlan

    samtechlan Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    270
    Location:
    USA
    Ron Paul, bringing different folks together. Freedom IS POPULAR. Article from Seattle newspaper:
    http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=258048


    The Iconoclast
    GOP Candidate Catches on in Washington State
    By Eli Sanders


    How did a Republican Texas Congressman named Ron Paul become a darling of the Washington State Meetup scene?

    It all began, oddly enough, with Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell and a stand she took against the international sex trade.

    In 2004, Cantwell became a prominent voice behind the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act, which was intended to fight "human trafficking"—mail-order brides and the like. This highly displeased Adam Berman, 40, of Gig Harbor, who runs LatinLoveSearch.com, which he calls "the largest free Latin-themed dating website on the internet." His site is about love connections, not human exploitation, Berman says, and it wasn't forced to go free until after Cantwell's bill passed.

    The bill actually wasn't Cantwell's alone: It was introduced in the House by another Washington Democrat, Rick Larsen, and it had strong bipartisan support. But Cantwell is a big name here in Washington State, and she stuck in Berman's mind. Her anti-human-trafficking agenda involved describing people like Berman—people running pay sites that connect Americans with foreign lovers—as "international marriage brokers," and when the bill became law it imposed strict requirements on these brokers, mandating that they conduct criminal background checks on their American customers and then translate the results into the native languages of all foreign users.

    The only way Berman could get around the new rules was to stop charging people to use his site, which he did, losing a huge amount of money in the process.

    As Berman was fuming about what Cantwell had done to his business, he noticed that Ron Paul, a Republican Congressman from Texas, had voted against the bill. Paul, a physician, has earned the nickname "Dr. No" because of his refusal to support any bill that he feels isn't constitutional, and apparently Paul felt Cantwell's "human trafficking" law fell short. When Dr. No jumped into the presidential race this year, Berman, who has never been active in politics before, decided to do all he could to support the guy.

    "He's just against the federal government having so much control," Berman told me. "He's hitting home with people who are frustrated with what's going on."

    For a web-savvy character like Berman, getting behind Paul meant starting a group on Meetup.com for Paul supporters in Washington. He now heads three groups—in Seattle, Tacoma, and Bellevue—with more than 300 members between them. That's almost as many Meetup supporters as Barack Obama has in this state, and more Washington Meetup members than Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and John McCain combined.

    The online traction Paul is getting here mirrors a national phenomenon. Thanks to his iconoclastic showing in the Republican debates—where he's been the only candidate to speak forcefully against the Iraq war and to come out clearly in favor of fiscal conservatism, limited government, and hands-off social policy—Paul's candidacy is exploding online, bringing him more total Meetup groups nationwide than any other presidential candidate.

    Does Meetup membership really matter? If you ask Howard Dean, the answer is yes. It was through Meetup that Dean's surprise internet support began to take off in Washington and around the country in 2003, the year that the internet first emerged as a platform for launching nonmainstream candidates into mainstream viability. And as a gauge of potential online donors, Paul's Meetup numbers are huge; there are rumors that he may have pulled in $4 million online during the most recent fund-raising quarter.

    Paul's actual fundraising numbers for the quarter won't be released until July 15, but if the rumors prove true he will vault from being an entertaining Republican asterisk to... well, being an entertaining Republican asterisk with a good chunk of cash and a lot of online supporters.

    As Dean showed, that doesn't necessarily transform a person into a winning candidate. But here in Washington, the Paul Meetup contingent is optimistic. Berman, the local Meetup leader, was at a Round Table Pizza in Tacoma on July 2 communing with Paul supporters. The next day another Meetup group gathered in the food court of the Crossroads Mall in Bellevue. And Berman is planning a huge Ron Paul presence at Hempfest. (Paul has opposed federal raids on medical-marijuana operations in states that allow medical marijuana, based on states' rights principles.)

    Paul's candidacy, Berman says, "is growing like wildfire" because of "a crossover message that's able to escape the party line." Paul himself likes to put it this way: "Freedom is popular." In independent-minded Washington State, it's no surprise that this message would be appealing to antiwar lefties, libertarians, and frustrated conservatives alike—people who applaud Paul's votes against the Iraq war, against the PATRIOT Act, against gun control, and against raising taxes.

    "The guy's definitely a phenomenon that most people haven't seen," Berman says.



    _________________________________________________________

    www.ronpaul2008.com

    Two fantastic Austrian weapons:

    One is mechanical: http://www.glock.com/

    The other is intellectual: Austrian Economics www.mises.org
     
  25. Silver Bullet

    Silver Bullet Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,335
    Location:
    Arizona
    Forward thinking ? Oh ... yeah ... yeah, that's right ! I'm forward thinking ! So forward thinking, in fact, that you probably give a little more weight to my opinions ! ;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice