Ron Paul's, um, problem?

will — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:30:41 GMT

in china they murder christians and poor citizens for the organ trade, why are we selling them shares of our country?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

M, Saint Paul, Minn. — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:33:15 GMT

Stupid college kids who just read Ayn Rand and reactionaries jealous of the "gains" seen by Franco/Mussolini. Interesting coalition. I wonder where the college kids get their money from.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

jerry/corpus christi texas — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:33:57 GMT

Paul’s remarks this morning covered his core argument -- of returning to policies rooted in the principle of freedom. “If I had to summarize one word of what the campaign is all about, it’s champion the cause of freedom, and the Constitution that protects our freedom,” he said. The idea of freedom is still new in the history of the world, he said, and that it was why the U.S. was “the freest and the most prosperous.” “But something’s happening today, because everything has been undermined,” he continued. The result is a foreign policy that has America viewed as “a bully,” and a monetary policy that has led the money to borrow money “from the communists.”

Let's see......
The papers are still running....
Telephones are running.......
TV is still going......
Air America is still on (barely).......

No loss of freedom in this country.....
still trying to figure out what freedoms we have lost in this country....

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Brent, Schertz, Texas — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:36:27 GMT

Love the guy! So humble, and intelligent.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Mark, Muskego, Wisconsin — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:39:24 GMT

I marvel at how smaller government, national sovereignty, a humbler foreign policy, support for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (all ten of them) have become to be seen as "fringe" or "out of the mainstream" in this nation. I believe that the GOP has lost its way. Paul's message, provides a way back. I hope more primary voters can find their way back to the core values of the Republican Party and support him.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Jimmy CHICAGO IL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:43:33 GMT

in china they murder christians and poor citizens for the organ trade, why are we selling them shares of our country?
will (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 12:30 PM)
****************************************************
You're right we should sell them more christians.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Brady, Fruita, CO — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:44:36 GMT

Very nice article. Yet it still does not include his stances on the issues. Where is our article that takes all GOP candidates and shows their stance on each of America's important issues?

Ron Paul's support would grow even faster if that was published. Do we want that to happen? I do.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Daniel, NY — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:47:25 GMT

Ron Paul is actually getting somewhere -- the latest Iowa poll from the WaPo has him ahead of Rudy Giuliani: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/12/shuffle-it-up-one-more-time-edwards.html

Is there a Ron Paul viability line? Any candidate who comes in behind Paul in a major contest has to get out?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

JIMMY CHICAGO IL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:49:56 GMT

The papers are still running....
Telephones are running.......
TV is still going......
Air America is still on (barely).......

No loss of freedom in this country.....
still trying to figure out what freedoms we have lost in this country....
jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 12:33 PM)
****************************************************
The papers are still running.... as long as they complicit in outing a undercover CIA officer

Telephones are running....... as long as the NSA can still wiretap
TV is still going...... as long as Faux News has Bill O, Sean, and Greta
Air America is still on (barely)....... contrary ro Clearchannel's wishes

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Laura, Savannah, GA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:51:06 GMT

I like Paul's domestic policy, and most of his foreign policy, but I think we need to get Iraq into a situation where they can function on their own before abandoning them. I wish we could meld presidential candidates. Paul on how our money is spent, Huckabee on how the money is collected (fair tax), McCain to finish up in Iraq, Obama to deal with our foreign policy (not including Iraq) and to raise confidence in ourselves and abroad.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:51:56 GMT

jerry/corpus christi texas--Well, at least the trains are running on time.
Good observation Jer.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

wellstone revenge brigade — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:52:04 GMT

M in SP,

Impugning the motives and intelligence of Paul supporters will be a great way to get them to wise up and support the candidate that you support, don’t you think?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Benson, Stuart, FL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:55:36 GMT

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Laura, Savannah, GA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:55:44 GMT

I take that back, I don' want Paul in charge of how money is spent (he may be a little too thrifty for that) but I would love it if he was able to get his teeth into Ethics reform in the House and Senate. I have a feeling he would clean up the Pork Barrel spending crap.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:57:13 GMT

jerry/corpus christi texas--Well, at least the trains are running on time.
Good observation Jer.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Dickie Flatts, Charlotte, NC — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:58:33 GMT

Bankruptcies will surge as the Paul supporters max out their credit cards donating to Paul.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Kathy Fisher — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:58:36 GMT

Let's see......
The papers are still running....
Telephones are running.......
TV is still going......
Air America is still on (barely).......

Yes sir! All that is true but you missed on point..
Who is RUNNING them?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Eric, Edina, MN — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:00:42 GMT

What freedoms have we lost? Plenty! How about property rights for starters. Or freedom from oppressive and unecessary taxation? Freedom from foreign entaglements not authorized by congress? The writ of Habeaus Corpus. And looming on the legislative horizon a bill that will label American citizens homegrown terrorists for gathering on the internet to discuss 'radical' ideas.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

leon houston — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:01:35 GMT

Hey Jerry,
I'm back out of the hospital and man the last several of your posts were good and thoughtful not just a rant.was someone else using your name or have you calmed down some.

yea the tv, papers and radio as are still running and remember your phones are now bugged,because they are parroting republican and gwb talking points. they are scared to death of the guy!they might end up in gitmo.

okay paul supporters, it is your constitutional right to support any one you choose.I give you that, but do not let yourselves become disillusioned when he only gets about 3% of the vote.I fell into that trap one time and it can really destroy your soul if you're not careful. What is going to happen to all this money after the iowa and new hampshire primaries? he has already said he will not run as a third party candidate because he a republican through and through.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Ted, Birmingham, AL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:03:34 GMT

Ron Paul is the only genuine Christian I believe I have seen in the race.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

S.B. Stein E.B. NJ — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:06:30 GMT

I agree that there is something wrong. Ron Paul noted it once that there needs to be less money involved in running for office. He does have the point that it takes so much to get to the U.S. House or Senate to say nothing of running for President.

Ron Paul is also correct in some regards to the foreign policy. The Bush administration has failed constistantly to learn lessons of other presidents and respect the information that has come in from various sources. In regards to Iran, there Ron Paul is wrong. Because of their connections to various terrorist groups, I believe that Iran must stop any and all enrichment programs. If they were to have a third party enrich material outside of Iran and take the waste away for reprocessing, that would be more acceptable to me. We must protect our allies in the Middle East.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Leon, New York, NY — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:07:49 GMT

Jerry,

You have a limited definition of freedom if you limit it to freedom of the press. Freedom, properly defined, means freedom from government coercion and interference in your life. Now take a look at some part of your life, and then consider how the government influences it. Your job? Government take a healthy bite of your earnings. Your property? The government can confiscate it through eminent domain. Your private communications? No longer private, thanks to the Patriot Act. That is just the beginning. Take any other activity and notice the way the government makes decisions about how you should live your life for you.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

hatefalseweight, milwuakee WI — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:10:08 GMT

I suggest calling the sponsors of these neocon hack radio shows. I got hung up on today when the local jerk spent his occasional ron paul segment playing the setup piece that fox did on him about the huckabee cross instead of a full hour of substantive issue talk beck and scarborough did with him the other day. I can't wait for the day we don't have to deal with these jerks to have an intelligent political discourse.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

take a guess why — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:17:25 GMT

I'm a Nazi KKK Nation of Islam Communist Party member, and I support Ron Paul for one reason.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:18:54 GMT

Ted, Birmingham, AL-Ron Paul is the only genuine Christian I believe I have seen in the race.

Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian? All Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate. I'm pretty sure that is what Jesus preached, yet Republicans and the Christian right want nothing to do with the poor, they just want pro life laws and laws against Gays.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Scott, Citrus Heights, CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:19:52 GMT

"No loss of freedom in this country.....
still trying to figure out what freedoms we have lost in this country...."

Historically, when freedoms are taken away, they are taken away slowly in hopes that we will not notice. There was a very long period of time when this nation had zero debt, and did not tax personal incomes in order to pay interest on one. You may not have noticed, because debt and the taxes that fund it are all you've ever known. There was a time when Habeas Corpus was still in effect, and people imprisoned had a right to face their accusers. The Constition states clearly that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it." Bush has suspended Habeas Corpus, in violation of The Constitution. You may not have noticed that either. There was a time when a warrant and probable cause was necessary in order for the authorities to search our homes. Section 215 of The Patriot Act, with it's overly broad definition of "terrorists," allows unwarranted searches of our homes, and in fact, makes it a federal crime to discuss such a search with anyone, not even a lawyer or a judge. You may not have noticed, because much like the legistlators that signed the Patriot Act into law, you did not read it.

Hopefully it won't be too late by the time people do actually take notice and do something about it.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Tim, CT — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:19:59 GMT

Dr. Paul is right. It's the message, not the messenger. And much of America is simply fed up with the false choices of

"war in Iraq only"

vs

"war in Iraq and Iran"

and

"tax n spend"

vs

"borrow n spend"

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Leon, New York, NY — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:20:25 GMT

Laura,

I agree with you about wishing that we could leave Iraq more stable before we leave, but remember that the tribes there date back centuries and the Sunni/Shiite religious rift has existed almost as long. True peace will never come to Middle East until these problems are solved, and they are internal into that culture, and therefore must be solved internally. Our presence over there now, and our continued interference over the last few decades has only exacerbated the problem by allowing fanatics to focus on us rather than their own internal problems.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Mark, Pasadena, CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:21:41 GMT

Jerry from Corpus Cristi, you really are clueless. The fact that papers, telephones and TV work says nothing about our freedom.

This is just a short list of what's been happening:
1st Amendment - we are now being pushed into "Free Speech Zones" so are "right" is exercised in an ever diminishing space
2nd Amendment - so many gun control laws you can't even keep count
3rd Amendment - during Katrina, the national guard set up operations in civil buildings, such as a church, that were 'abandoned'
4th Amendment - decimated by the war on drugs
6th Amendment - no good if you are considered a 'terrorist' (no proof needed, of course)

And this is just off the top of my head. You just aren't paying attention.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

truthseeker, charleston,sc — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:26:34 GMT

Ron Paul was against the Iraq War for all the right reasons - that by itself should get him votes-

Why do all the other candidates want to stay in Iraq? to fight Bin Laden? no- he is in Pakistan with the nukes -right?

Why do the other candidates,excluding Paul, want to bomb Iran next?

Have we gone absolutely mad ?

Killing innocent Muslims breeds more and more terrorists-

I just do not understand why people buy the war propaganda .

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

M, Saint Paul, Minn. — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:26:50 GMT

Wellstone,

Works for everyone else. Besides, it is the truth. I would've adhered to "Ron Paul's message" when I was a freshman in college, right after reading "Atlas Shrugged."

At the time, I had not worked professionally, really lived on my own in a self-sufficient fashion, nor would I have seen what I have seen up to this point.

Consider this "reality," if you will: Ron Paul supports a return to the gold standard. What would that do to our currency as it stands right now? Instead of relatively stable market fluctuations (which take into effect the entire economy), instead the currency would be pegged to the price of gold.

A large rush on gold and a significant rising in it's price would create a deflationary currency. Who does a deflationary currency wound the most?

People in debt. Defaults and foreclosures would be the norm instead of the exception as it is now (despite what the media says). Rich get richer, poor get poorer.

I suggest Ron Paul supporters, if they are serious, take a basic macro-economics course and get their heads out of the sand. His economic policies are a disaster.

As for his views on the role of the Constitution, though I agree on a number of points, I believe Ron Paul would have a serious problem with reading into the Constitution a right to privacy. In fact, I believe that his view of the Constitution requires a strict reading, meaning that which isn't specifically prohibited to the federal/state governments is constitutional restriction.

In fact, his civil libertarian viewpoint may actually hurt civil liberties as whole as compared to the expansion of civil liberties seen from the Warren era onward.

So, in addition to a basic macro-economics course, I also suggest Paul supporters to take a basic Constitutional Law course, so they understand how the jurisprudence and judiciary actually read and apply the Constitution. Labelling them "activist judges" says nothing and merely exhibits the lack of intellectual understanding the person saying that statement actually has.

"Activist judges" similarly allowed the state and federal governments to segregate society based on race, through the idea and theory of the "separate but equal doctrine." SImilarly, activist judges on the Supreme Court also outlawed governmental regulation of the work week, minimum wage, unionization policies, and choice of law/work provisions due to an implied "liberty of contract" read into the 14th Amendment under "substantive due process."

Paul's position suggest a desire to return to a pre-Great Depression jurisprudence and federal government, one that would not be able to prevent the kind of disaster and excesses felt by the people in the 1930's.

Wellstone: Happy now?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Wilson, Seattle — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:27:00 GMT

Ron Paul is the only one who has a clue on foreign policy. All these candidates and pundits who claim they have so much experience in it should be held accountable for how crappy we've done in foreign relations. The only things that keeps us from being the most unpopular country in the world are MTV, McDonalds, Levis, and the fact we saved Europe a few generation ago. I invite anyone who has lived over-seas outside of western Europe and not in a gated community to argue against this!

Unfortunately his views on most over things are a little too much to swallow all at once. He should make his message more mainstream, but I guess that would compromise his political philosophy. Too bad.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Shane, Toledo, Ohio — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:28:34 GMT

"Young People" were NEVER really enthusiastic about Kerry. Look at the 2004 Dem Primary numbers to figure that out. Dean & Edwards took a much more significant share of the under 30 vote than did Kerry. The problem is, there's a lot more voters over 30 than under 30. And yes, those of us under 30 don't generally vote as reliably as older Americans.

No, Kerry got a much higher share of the under 30 vote than did Bush, but that was by default. They were against Bush. But not all that enthusiastic about Kerry.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Scott, Citrus Heights, CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:29:16 GMT

"I think we need to get Iraq into a situation where they can function on their own before abandoning them."

What many people don't understand is that it is our presence there that makes them unable to function on their own in the first place. The safest places in Iraq are the places where British troops have left and there is no foreign presence. It is resentment of our presence in their country that creates the chaos. The British have had the most positive effect on that country by leaving. We should take their lead... only then will things get better instead of worse.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

rob dee, tampa, florida — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:29:21 GMT

Jerry,
you are hilarious. obviously never heard of habeas corpus(trashed), patriot act, you have clearly never flown out or into the country and had to deal with federal airport officials.

leon,
ron paul probably wont win. his message however will live. we the people will vote more of his kind into congress, senate etc. in years to come many will wonder why we didnt vote for him now!

rob

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Richard Wicks — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:29:38 GMT

"okay paul supporters, it is your constitutional right to support any one you choose.I give you that, but do not let yourselves become disillusioned when he only gets about 3% of the vote."

The exit polls stopped agreeing with the vote tally in 2000. After that, I became disillusioned, because exit polls are what the US has always used in foreign countries to determine if an election was actually free and fair.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Hcbrand — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:33:40 GMT

Who did die and annoint us King of the world? Imperialism was formerly Britian's job. And remember how happy we were about England's occupation of the colonies?
Protect our allies? Don't you really mean protect the oil interests? Not ot mention, Isreal has the toughest, nuclear-ready army in the region. Do they really need our protection? Plus, you can't play both sides of that fence and expect to make any of them happy.
Freedom is about making some tough decisions. As in, hey world, we're broke. Take care of your own.

And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

rob dee — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:34:02 GMT

all this internet stuff is preaching to the converted! (except for the odd ignorant thompson, guiliani, huckabee, mccain supporter) can someone please tell me where i can get RON PAUL flyers made to drop off in my neighborhood?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Scott, Citrus Heights, CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:35:06 GMT

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian?"

It is our extravagant monetary policy that creates poverty in the first place. Ron Paul is looking to the cause, instead of putting bandaids on what has become a gaping wound. The un-Christian thing to do is to continue to accumulate massive debt and destroy the dollar, and then turn around and encourage the poverty that has resulted by subsidizing it.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

--NSMSNBC — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:35:34 GMT

The great thing about this country is that so many people are free to completely waste their money. For more, go to RonPaul.org or something. I congratulate Paul on his haul, but his message is getting lost. Luckily, I disagree with a lot of his message, I don't think supporters quite understand what he is saying or are critical of his ridiculous points. I'm just thankful that months of Paul neglect by FR has driven the Paul bloggers from this site for them most part. I hope I've pissed somebody off with this.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Chris, Tampa, FL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:37:32 GMT

Jerry From Corpus Cristi...

Freedom in this USA has always been viewed as more than just "freedom from imprisonment."

Wake up!

Read how about the Federal Reserve.

Read about the think tanks that now create most of our foreign policy and make it a point to put their hand picked members in high political positions.

READ.

TV and Radio owned by large special interests does not equal freedom.

READ and WAKE UP.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Richard Wicks — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:40:02 GMT

I had to comment on this:

"I suggest Ron Paul supporters, if they are serious, take a basic macro-economics course and get their heads out of the sand. His economic policies are a disaster. "

As somebody that has spent his entire life being careful never to get into debt, I would like to suggest that forcing people like me to support people who recklessly spend beyond their means is an economic disaster.

As a case in point: What you are seeing in the current "credit crunch" is merely the tip of the iceburg. As a result of intentional and continual inflation, every asset that exists today is over-priced, especially fiat currencies.

Instead of just the poor that's going to be hurt, it's going to be everybody except the super rich.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Pam Bignardi, San Pedro, California — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:41:08 GMT

I so love to hear Ron Paul chastise his Republican running mates for their Constitutional, civil liberty, gays in the military and same sex marriage views!!

Who needs the democrats to insult the GOP Neanderthal Class of 2008? Ron Paul does a superb job!!

PEACE!!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Doug, San Diego — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:43:33 GMT

Lets examine Germany during WW2:
Trains ran on time, even the ones going to the camps. Papers still ran, all the propoganda fit to print. Radio likewise. Lights were on, or the electrician got herded onto one of those camp-bound trains. The homeland was praised, foriegners were cursed and blamed. Just a rosy, rosy picture, don't you think, Jerry?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:44:07 GMT

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

hcbrand — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:45:45 GMT

"Paul's position suggest a desire to return to a pre-Great Depression jurisprudence and federal government, one that would not be able to prevent the kind of disaster and excesses felt by the people in the 1930's. "

Have you watched Dr Paul lay Bernake to waste on the devaluation of the dollar? Greenspan has advocated a return to the Gold standard. But the point really seems to be, do you advocate a multi-trillion dollar debt? The dollar is weakening and the banks will soon call in the loans.

Macro-economics will not be an applicable theory at that point.

We are broke beyond any concept of how broke we really are.

All the spending has to stop. It's time to pull up the boot straps and stand on our own two feet.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Ron Holland — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:47:35 GMT

Ron Paul can win. Read: President Ron Paul – Could He Really Win?
http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-121407.html

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Chris, Tampa FL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:47:51 GMT

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian?"

Christianity and charity should not be LEGISLATED. How you wish to help someone should be a personal choice based on your beliefs Christian or not.

Many more charitable acts would occur if we did not have politicians and special interests telling us HOW and WHERE we should be charitable and then MANDATING that we pay for their idea of charity.

In addition, the "victim" mentality fostered by the socialist/commi/fascist viewpoint would vanish and people would become more personally responsible and not just looking for handouts from "MOM AND DAD" government.

It would be the most Christian and charitable thing that happened to the people in this country in nearly a hundred years to rid this country of the socialist programs that DON'T REALLY HELP ANYONE.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Scott, Citrus Heights, CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:49:13 GMT

"Rich get richer, poor get poorer."

This is much better description of what happens under the current system of fractional reserve banking and forced inflation. The "stability" you describe just means the consequences of poor economic policy are accumulating and diverted so that our generation won't have to pay for our own mistakes. When you absorb the natural ebb and flow of the economy into a massive national debt, the eventual price will be unfathomable when the time comes for it to be paid. The same thing happened leading up to The Great Depression, but the accumulation of debt this time around will eventually make the 30s look like a walk in the park. It is unfortunate that people are so willing to ensure the economic doom of their children and grandchildren in exchange for a little personal stability now.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Stephen, Temecula CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:49:38 GMT

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian? All Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate.

When I read through the Bible, I don't remember Jesus ever preaching or commanding the Roman republic and government to step in and help with the less fortunate. Sure Christians should be in the business of helping the less fortunate, but as Christians it is wrong to impose our beliefs on people by force. Just look at history, forcefully imposing Christianity on people has NEVER gone well.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

hcbrand — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:49:40 GMT

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian?"

If we didn't have an income tax, how much more money could you give to the United Way, Red Cross, Your Church, etc?

Stop thinking someone else should take care of the poor.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Freewheeler, Brick, NJ — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:50:01 GMT

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian? All Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate. I'm pretty sure that is what Jesus preached, yet Republicans and the Christian right want nothing to do with the poor, they just want pro life laws and laws against Gays."

I do not mean this in disrespect, but you do not understand economics. These programs actually hurt the very people they claim to help. I do not have time to go into all of it, but check out "John Stossel Goes to Washington" for a good introduction to this. The largest welfare states are the least prosperous, with the most poor. America became the greatest nation in the world because of an understanding of unintended consequences by our Founders. Even today, the largest welfare states have the highest unemployment, depsite programs intended to do just the opposite (see Western Europe). It does not take much examination to begin to see this.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:52:02 GMT

Mark, Pasadena, CA--You left out Habeas Corpus. A right so important that it appears in the main body of the constitution. The "President" can now determine who is entitled to Habeas based on if HE has designated them enemies of the State. If any person...any person...is denied their rights, then we have all been denied our rights. The Jerrys of this nation will tell you that We have not lost Habeas, only the Terrorists have. The trouble with this is that "King Geroge" has been granted the power to designate who is a terrorist and who is not. To trust that this will never be mis-used to attack political opposition is the act of the naive or the ignorant. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL men are created equal...

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Rick, WS, NC — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:52:04 GMT

What a joke...Paul has a real haul of bucks from the easily conned but he isn't spending any of it to spread his message of 17th century America...Whats he doing with that money suckers?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Kevin Houston, Bridgewater, SD — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:52:45 GMT

Jerry:

you have lost the right of "heabus corpus", the freedom from being imprisoned without timely access to courts and lawyers.

And don't even start with that "but only fer fur'iners." line of crap either. Jose Padilla was born and raised in south Chicago. He was thrown in jail and not even allowed to challenge his detention in court.

This also happened to a video store owner in the McMartin pre-school hysteria, so this is certainly nothing new with the Bush administration. The point is, we have lost that freedom.

We have lost the freedom of being secure from unreasonable searches. I'm not even talking about "sneak-n-peek" or unwarranted wiretaps, but about the simple loss of the ability to say "no." when the cops pull you over on the freeway for speeding.

Or how you now have to tell the police your name if they decide to ask you (not being suspected of any crime, just walking along, minding your own business.)

And how about that freedom of speech? Ever gone to a protest rally lately. We have "free speech zones" which are tucked out of the way, so the media and newspapers can have their "event" without any annoying protesters getting in the picture. Or how about the way ISPs are forbidden from talking about it if the Government has placed a tap on your internet connection (so-called "national security" letters.)

How about the freedom to tell your doctor something without having to worry about him being forced to testify against you? It's now gone too. Your doctor can be placed on the stand and made to testify as to what your personal habits are that you told him in expectation of total privacy.

How about the right to confer with your attorney in privacy? Gone! Now, as you are discussing your courtroom strategy, the prosecutor has the power to listen in.

Shall I go on? I could. The Federal Government is currently in violation of every one of the Bill of rights (and a majority of the sub-clauses too,) with the possible exception of the 3rd (quartering of troops) - I have not yet heard of the US Government stationing troops in anyone's home against their will, so I guess we're still "free" huh?

The US constitution isn't a list of things that Citizens *can* do. It is a list of things that the US Government is *prohibited* from doing. A violation of one is still a loss of freedom.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Richard Wicks — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:55:29 GMT

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian?"

Most programs that exist for the purpose of helping the poor, do very little to help the poor. The money sent to these programs are raided to do things, like, go to war in Iraq.

When it's said "the road to hell is paved with good intentions", this is what it means.

Although I'm open to funding programs to help the poor who genuinely need the money, I am not open to funding a charity program where 90% of the money is stolen and sent off to Haliburton and Blackwater. Face up to the facts, this government is more interested in killing people in Iraq than they are with helping people in, say, New Orleans.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Patrick, Tulsa, OK — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:00:00 GMT

I don't know if anyone saw John Stossel's show on charity. He focused on what parts of the country gives the highest percentage of their income and what parts gives the least. People from the Midwest states that are mainly Christian gave a far higher percentage of their income on average. The people who gave the least were in San Francisco and New York City. So, I think it is a fallacy that Republicans do not help the poor. Just thought I'd combat that fallacy...

I also think that if we repealed the income tax like Ron Paul wants; it would help the poor more than any other government program possible. We would be a more prosperous country by far. Welfare is a trap that keeps the poor where they are. Abuses also occur such as collecting welfare and then drug dealing on the side. At the minimum, I think if you are receiving welfare you should be forced to do some menial job like picking up trash for your welfare. Holding a job leads to self confidence which leads to bettering yourself.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

MarkD — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:00:40 GMT

Reuters put an article out on Huckabee and his front runner status 3hrs ago and not one person has so far left a comment. This article is under 2hrs old and has too many comments to count. Check them polls

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

M, Saint Paul, Minn. — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:04:05 GMT

Scott, I agree.

However, and this is a big however, a return to a gold standard would enflame and bring those fears mentioned by you into reality.

Interesting that I am saying this, but:
A fiscally responsible policy, as seen in the late '90's under Clinton, would have brought that debt a little more under control.

And then GWB happened.

And Democrats are the fiscally irresponsible ones???

Conflaguration of national debt fears with the gold standard is dealing with apples and oranges. And there, dear readers, you may note the fallacy in Ron Paul supporters' logic: there is none.

FEAR THE DEBT! GOLD STANDARD! The two issues are completely exclusive of one another. I would like to hear the argument that says that one is linked to the other. Hand wave explanations need not apply.

And your Bernanke/Greenspan v. Paul think is also lunacy. Never happened. Send me the link.

I also spend my time and life staying fiscally responsible. However, finding that fiscal responsibility in the Republican party is ridiculous. Look at their record the last seven years, for God's sake. And it certainly wasn't due to cozying up to the Democrats, now was it?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Kevin Houston, Bridgewater, SD — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:04:41 GMT

Stopwatchingfoxnews (love the name, BTW)

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian? All
Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate. I'm pretty sure that is what Jesus preached, yet Republicans and the Christian right want nothing to do with the poor"

Jesus said: "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, render unto G_d, that which is G_d's."

Charity belongs in religion, not in politics.

Ron Paul isn't about getting rid of programs that help the poor, he is against *taxing the money away from those who earned it in the first place* and giving to *whoever has the most political power at the moment.*

Ron Paul believes in private charity, that's why he didn't take Medicare, but instead worked for free when he was a doctor.

That's why Ron Paul supporters have on at least 3 occasions that I am aware of, held food drives and other charity events in conjunction with promoting Dr. Paul.

Later.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:09:02 GMT

To all of you who jumped on my help the poor comment.

Just because the media shows a story on how a few people cheat the system to get money, doesn't mean 95% of the people who get assistance don't need it. You are spewing the Republican, Conservative talking point. As a person who's mother was a social worker and who's wife is a social worker, I see the people she helps everyday and trust me they need it. You guys can all live in your middle class and rich neighborhoods and do your best not to go to areas where the less fortunate live and pretend it doesn't exist. But unfortunately it does.

Also, I wasn't the one who took out any reference of helping the less fortunate out of the Christian coalition's platform two years ago. Anyone who thinks that Jesus didn't help feed the poor, obviously hasn't read the bible.

But keep making excuses for your candidates. A country is only as good as it's poorest citizen.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Kevin Houston, Bridgewater, SD — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:13:42 GMT

First, a return to the gold standard is not the same as a currency pegged to a specific gold price. ron Paul has been very specific about not wanting to go back to the days of the gold peg.

And Ron Paul has said that he doesn't want to back the US Federal Reserve Note (FRN) with gold, he just wants to abolish the law that says you *have* to accept FRNs as valid payment of debt.

This would allow everyone to pay in the manner that they wish to. Some would pay with Gold, others would pay with FRNs, as they had agreed to. If a store can put up a sign that says "No Cash - Check or Credit Card only." Why can't another put up one that says "No Cash, Gold or Silver only."?

This would allow the legal formation of private currency (for those who agree to use it) backed by gold and silver or whatever - computer processing chips and aluminum, if you prefer. So long as everyone agrees, where's the problem?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Dave C. E.B NJ — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:15:13 GMT

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/071217/budget_de... This is the legacy of our current politicians...We are at a critical point in our history and we cannot have business as usual. Read RP's writings...We cannot subsidize defense for the world anymore and let our borders be a sieve!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Keith, Decatur, IL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:17:49 GMT

Stephen,
What do you think about forcing democracy on people?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

David Monk Tulsa, OK — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:19:51 GMT

Dr. Ron Paul stole my following, lol. I have been talking about some of his issues for years and I am still in college. In my classes they teach us that that it is freedom versus equality. In that you must give up one to get the other. This of course is incorrect and often is simply overlooked as fact. When in fact it is a theory based on little evidence.

There has been little time in the history of the world that the people have been truely free. In those times those with the power have and do seek to undermine it. This is a common fact backed by a mountain of text books with clear examples of it. The point is to me, that it is not a surprise that a message of real freedom is resonating so. As opposed to the common rhetoric of freedom being say, tort reform, labor laws or whatever they are pushing at the time. Freedom is universal and it doesn't fit into your purse or wallet.

Most pundits do not like that fact, because they think it is there job to tell the people what that freedom is and where it is being uprooted. Or in other words, they got it wrong and thus looking back on their own reporting with this new light shows little mcuh. No one wants to be wrong and surely one who is on TV also most everyday does not want years of reporting and commentary struck down as out of date.

When they said the Revolution will not be televised, they meant it. So do not expect those on TV to understand before it happens. Only after the fact when evidence is so clear will change be accepted by them. Dead Prez says it best when they say,"I don't play hate, I just stay awake..." They people are awakening more and more. This election will be a good test of things in the US. And all the gallup polls in the world can't predict this one and much as they would like it too.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Elizabeth, Mountain View, CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:20:08 GMT

Ron Paul is the one clear voice of reason I'm hearing in the debates. He's honest, direct, and says it like it is. I've voted democrat in the past, but I re-registered republican to vote for him. He's got my vote and my support. Go Dr. Paul!!! Go! Go! Go!!!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Doug — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:20:09 GMT

"...still trying to figure out what freedoms we have lost in this country...."

With an attitude like that, don't worry. It will be much easier to figure out in a few years, when the answer is "all of them."

The time to fight the loss of your freedoms is before they are gone. Afterward, the government just arrests you in the middle of the night, sends you to some gulag somewhere, and leaves you there.

Now do you understand why people are worried about losing the writ of habeas corpus? Why giving the exalted leader the power to declare someone an enemy combatant and deny him a trial might not be such a good idea?

Ask residents of the the former East Germany or other former Soviet subjects whether giving the government unlimited power to spy in the citizens was a good idea, and whether that power was ever abused.

Remember the Declaration of Independence? One of the colonists' main complaints was that agents of the British government could write their own "writs of assistance" without judicial oversight, allowing them to conduct warrantless searches. Guess what? The Patriot Act does the same thing, and makes it a felony for those searched to even tell other people about it.

Forget the Iraq war. Forget the runaway spending, the national debt, and the crushing tax burden.

If we lose our Constitutional liberties, America is no longer a free country.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

G Bowman — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:20:26 GMT

Do any of you know about the National Caucus held on December 7th? Of course you didn't read about it --the paper forgot to pubish the results because Obama and Ron Paul won. That would blow their 'front runners' into the dust --make them look like fools. SO it's ignored. Main Stream Media only prints what it's ALLOWED to....

Check out the results. 19 states were involved. It took a good week to tally the results. I read NOTHING in the paper about this. Only the usual BS polls where they poll people who only have land lines who died since 2004.

Look at the endorsements. Look at the Professionalism and Organization put into it. Yet you heard nothing about it:
http://www.nationalcaucus.com/resultsarein

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Ron H. St. Pete, FL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:21:41 GMT

When Ron Paul does away with the IRS, I will take my additional $32,000 of income, buy more things from businesses in my area, donate 3 times as much to my church, and throw some money in the market, all along, Florida will receive 7% sales tax on that additional money, then those businesses will buy more stuff and pay another 7%, and so on and so on. I will live better, I will make my community and my state stronger. The only thing that will be gone is irresponsible Washington spending and political corruption. I'm taking my chances, and voting for Ron Paul

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Erik, Chicago IL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:22:26 GMT

On the gold standard:

If you do some research, rather than simply listen to what you hear in the media, you'll find that Ron Paul wants to get rid of inflationary monetary policy and reform the FED. Basically he wants to reform the entire monetary system. While he does talk about the gold standard in relation to the FED for comparative and argumenative reasons, that does not want to "Go Back" to the gold standard.

The fact that you don't know this is not your fault, the media needs to do its due diligence and look these sorts of facts up. It is their profession after all!

Ron Paul got into politics because he was concerned about economics, and he is more informed and well read on the matter than any other candidate for president.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

T Mac, Chicago, IL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:22:35 GMT

The thing that has always impressed me about Ron Paul supporters, is that they typically sound like the most informed and intelligent with regards to history, the economy, world events etc... The fact that most Americans are not well informed in these subjects may explain why Ron Paul doesn't poll well.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Ryan, Norman, OK — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:23:26 GMT

Hey Jerry. What freedoms have we lost? Are you joking? Freedom isnt about TV, telephone, and the papers! First, all of those technologies you mentioned are controled by a small group of people who have shaped our economic system into a greed filled bucket over flowing with money that is rapidly decreasing in value. Second, another thing you may be unaware of (as typical americans are) it is illegal for the government to monitor you i.e. banking, telephone, and internet. Do your self a favor, have a big shot a caffeine, AND WAKE UP!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:27:15 GMT

Forget Ron Paul.

All politicians are inherently and equally scumbags. If you really want change in the USA put a black female atheist independent candidate in office. Just say no to more old white Christian male scumbags.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

M, Saint Paul, Minn. — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:29:23 GMT

Chris,

Stripped your last sentence down to its fundamentals. You say:
"SOCIALIST programs . . . don't really help ANYONE."

Replace the last word, "anyone," with "me" and I think you would then be telling the truth.

Socialist programs, like the government guaranteeing a low student loan interest rate, helped get me through college, pay back the loan in four years, and serve in the United States Army.

Similar things can be said about people I know that have received unemployment compensation and the like, and are now successful in their new jobs and careers.

Be straight. Most Republicans and Republican voters don't like social welfare policies because they get no fiscal benefit out of them. Hence the fallacy of the right's argument.

personally, republican politics has always been the politics of emotion and the politics of the stomach: more money to spend on HD TVs, so they can get the heady patriotic feeling of watching a war live on TV. Pretty simplistic in the end.

Social engineering type arguments, like those posited by most of the crazies responding to this report by MSNBC simply because they hit it on a Google search, are completely ridiculous. As with most arguments such as this, alls I ask for is a little proof to back up your arguments.

The silence you hear from the lack of an answer to that is deafening. Go back to your Mein Kampf reading, will ya?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Dave A., Fort Walton Beach, FL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:32:26 GMT

For Rob Dee: You can download and print Ron Paul materials from his website:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/get-involved/downloads/

And Jerry, hope you don't try to build a new home on a damp piece of land the Army Corp of Engineers has deemed to be 'wetlands'. You'd find out just how 'free' you really are if such were the case.

OR, why not try to find a toilet that flushes more than 3 gallons of water...or a sizeable new car once the just-signed 35 mpg restrictions take effect...or to drive that new car without fastening your seatbelt...or put $10,000 into your bank account without having to prove where the money came from....or to smoke a cigarette anywhere indoors...or get a job without having to prove you are a US citizen (two government issued picture IDs)...or get on an airplane without having your every possession scrutinized.

Sure, no loss of freedom here. Everything is just like when your grandparents were young.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Freeman Female, Dallas, TX — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:33:12 GMT

I tell you what I am not voting for no Ron Paul and the way he describes black people.

According to Ron Paul we are fleet-footed black boys who love to steal. When asked were these his words he does not deny it.

Change? Yes, Change back to the Jim Crow ways is one of his ideals.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Josey2006, Tampa, Florida — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:34:47 GMT

It'll be refreshing when the dittoheads fade out of existence. Their general lack of either civility or education represents a black spot on the face of the Republican Party.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Ralph Z — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:37:20 GMT

HELP THE POOR! Here's a novel idea, lets give to the organizations of our choosing via the internet! Get government out of steeling from us and pilfering our money! NO to pilfering government! Yes to caring individuals with liberty!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

JC Kavanaugh — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:41:37 GMT

To Jerry from Corpus christi-
If theat is how you measure the freedom of a country, by the ability of global corporation to continue services in information technology (Phones, TV, paper, Radio) Then there is little wonder as to why our country is in dire need of change after electing a melon head from your state. Just some of the liberties we have given over to the current administration in the name of freedom include the right to privacy, The right to a swift trial, the right against unlawful search and seizure, the freedom of information act, the right against unlawful torture, and on and on the list goes. Your atitude is indicative of the people who elected a ( I have to believe) well meaning, not very bright front man to help hasten through a far right wing agenda.

Wake up-

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Erik, Chicago IL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:42:39 GMT

Dear poor Stopwatchingfoxnews, I have a question for you.... does Jesus suport FORCED help? When the government pays for a social program it has to tax everyone (including non-christians), and it makes me pay this tax under the threat of inpriosnment. That doesn't sound like something Jesus would support to me!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

wellstone revenge brigade — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:50:19 GMT

M in SP,

my happiness is not contingent on how well you articulate your points. I will say, your second post is a vast improvement over the first. Then you kind of lose it again later on.

Assuming you are a politically engaged individual who cares about results, you may wish to resist the temptation to make stereotyped judgments about other voters, if only because it does not help your electoral chances.

your friend in 55057

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

ddd — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:50:58 GMT

Freeman those were never his comments, please stop spreading false info.

Paul is for equality for all.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

scott alan — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:51:43 GMT

It is kinda sad that alot of people across america dont know much about Ron Paul but see Hillary on the t.v. every day. Alot of his ideas do sound a little crazy but that is because all the other candidates sound so much alike. His best point is that we need to get out of Iraq and the our president is running a war putting us and our kids and their kids to come in debt against the wishes of the majority of the american people. Just look at any poll and you can see the people do not want to be over there spending a billion a day and getting no results that help us domestically. The worst president in history, and he still believes the american people want their troops over there in the middle of a religious war. moron. Kerry didnt have the college vote he had the "anyone but Bush vote" after he stole the election from from Al Gore.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Erik, Chicago, IL — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:52:21 GMT

Freeman Female,

I don't know where you get your quotation regarding the man, but I have spent the last few months researching the man and have never found one inch of racial hatred. He believes in freedom for ALL people. There are Raps about him by white and black people on youtube and there are black men and women who have stood up to suport him in our meetup organizations and they all love the message he has. Where on earth did you get that quote? Or are you simply making it up.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Logan, Birmingham, Alabama — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:55:14 GMT

Stopwatchingfoxnews from Rochester, NY:

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian? All Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate. I'm pretty sure that is what Jesus preached, yet Republicans and the Christian right want nothing to do with the poor, they just want pro life laws and laws against Gays."

I am a Christian and I know Ron Paul is not the only Christian in the race. However, I feel that Ron Paul's approach to taking care of the poor matches more closely with what Jesus asked of his followers than the other candidates. Jesus said the Church should care for the homeless and the poor. Ron Paul wants to cut back the income tax and part of what happens in that process is that welfare goes back to private charity, one of which is the Church.

Logan

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Freeman Female, Dallas, TX — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:55:40 GMT

Secondly, Ron Paul, does this every time. Runs for President and transfer the money into his Congressional account which goes eventually in his pocket.

Lastly, what has he spent this great amount of money on????? Where is his fiscal responsibility?
Ron Paul supporter, if he has so much money, WHY does HE not do the RESPONSIBLE THING and put his on MESSAGE OUT????

YOU supporters go around blaming the media while Ron Paul has SUCKERED you out of your money and does not pay for his own message. Similar to the welfare state he wants to abolish but is doing personal welfare for himself with your hard earned money.

He could be the PERFECT CON MAN with the way you all are running around like chickens and he is sitting like a Fox in a henhouse counting up the profit.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

John Doe — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:56:47 GMT

Why do we sell our country to China?
Because we don't care about anything except American Idol, abortion, GOD, gays, guns and taxes, and allow our leaders to manipulate our fears.
Anything that is common sense around the planet does not seem to resonate when we have the ability to remain increasingly fat and less educated, lagging behind the rest of the first world.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

FREEMAN FEMALE, DALLAS, TX — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:59:49 GMT

ddd,

HE SUPPORTED AND BENEFITED FROM the RON PAUL REPORT.

SECONDLY, he never printed A RETRACTION.

Is that False too???
Taking responsibility for the comments is one thing and PRINTING A RETRACTION in that same report is a better execution.

STOP DRINKING THE RON PAUL WATER.

if i am lying, show me the RETRACTION, not the regret or the responsibility in words. and definetly NOT PROTECTING the AUTHOR WHO WROTE THE COMMENTS.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Donna Matrix — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:59:58 GMT

Charity is face to face. It's not governmental. Gee, you guys - did you go to pubic school or something? VOTE RON PAUL in November regardless of who is on the ballot!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Yankee Doodle — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:09:27 GMT

No loss of freedom in this country.....
still trying to figure out what freedoms we have lost in this country....
HMM how bout the right to get on a plane with your shoes on. or freedom from having the FBI break into your house to do a secret search or how 'bout some trials for those arabs we've kidnapped and put in cuba or how bout when they get their trial if they are found not guilty how bout we let them go instead of holding them untill the War on Terror is over. USA AOK

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Erik — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:19:56 GMT

"Be straight. Most Republicans and Republican voters don't like social welfare policies because they get no fiscal benefit out of them; hence the fallacy of the right's argument."

You're wrong... most Republicans don't like social welfare policies because they are morally wrong! I actually equate using government programs to stealing, which is why I don't use them.

Think about it, did you actually work for the benefit you received? If not, then why do YOU deserve it and not someone else? On the other hand, there are no moral objections to taking charity because that is provided by someone who is WILLINGLY giving.... which is why I donate. (Most republicans I know donate to charity) We are not selfish people we are people of conviction and principle.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Jesse — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:22:47 GMT

For those of you bickering about foreign policy....

Michael Scheuer, former HEAD of the CIA's Bin Laden unit, stating on radio that Ron Paul is the only candidate that appears to know jack squat about foreign policy and terrorism. He in fact, in so few of words, calls the other candidates (especially Giuliani) idiots on the matter. Oh and of special note Scheuer is a life time Republican voter.

http://dissentradio.com/radio/07_05_18_scheuer.mp3

This is pure ammunition when trying to spread Ron Paul's message especially to more hard lined pro-war Republicans. There is pretty much nothing they can respond with and it's been gold so far.

When you've got who many consider one if not THE world's leading expert on terrorism and Bin Laden, who also happens to be a Republican, stating that Ron Paul is right there isn't really much anyone can say about it...except maybe cover their ears and yell blasphemy

One of the things that I have noticed about Ron Paul during the debates, TV interviews, radio interviews, and commercials is his respect for all people. No matter whom it is or whether they are for him or against him, he always shows the utmost respect for their positions, status, back grounds, and beliefs. I have seen it written on several occasions about how “Grandfatherly” he seems….well you know, that is just fine with me. It’s time that we had someone to look up to…someone who is respectable, compassionate, sincere and willing to step into this mess (that has become the status quo) and start cleaning it up….I mean, really cleaning it up.

People should be real suspicious, especially if they are for any of the candidates that the media isn’t pushing, and here is why. Ron Paul’s campaign may unintentionally be proving a point that is becoming more and more obvious to the people of this nation as his popularity grows. The point being that this whole process of electing a person to office is really a war between the people and the corporations. The people want their person in office and the corporations want their person in office, so it becomes a battle. The corporations own the media and therefore restrict any viable candidate’s ability to become known and have their message heard.

On the other hand, the internet (not being owned or regulated by anyone) is becoming the real voice of the people. Ron Paul’s campaign is growing at an enormous rate both population wise and in its funding. The news media can’t deny this so they start down playing the surge of funds that Dr. Paul’s campaign is receiving by trying to coin the phrase “internet money” as though it is fake monopoly money and doesn’t really count.

First of all, it is real money, it does count, and this new loud voice from the people via the internet is scaring the hell out of the media corporations. Let’s not forget the fact that their candidates also have the same opportunity to raise money through the internet, but don’t seem to be as successful. Could it be that the people want someone other than who the media is picking for them? I wonder?

One other tactic that the media utilizes to degrade an opponent that appears to be gaining ground is simply “name calling” which stems from ancient Greek rhetoric. “Ridicule is the last refuge of a scoundrel in a debate.” (i.e., when one can not answer a question by logic or evidence or argumentation he will resort to “name calling” in an attempt to make others not pay attention to what the other is saying….thereby dodging the opponent’s original question.)

In following the debates, it strikes me as odd that none of the other candidates attack Ron Paul on his position of stopping the SPP the WTO or ridding us of the Federal Reserve System and their monetary system which has absolutely no value and the IRS (the Feds collection agency)…all of which are organizations that will extinguish American Sovereignty. (With the exception of Mike Huckabee, who also agrees with getting rid of the IRS; lending credence to Dr. Paul’s position) It seems only logical that if Ron Paul was as off base and “wacko” on these subjects as the media tries to label him, the other candidates would have a field day chastising him. Yet, they remain silent. Why? They know that Dr. Paul is correct on these matters, but it is not an area or topic that they have the guts to venture into. Ron Paul is standing up against an elite that the average person has no idea even exist.

People of this nation have finally tired of the “Elite Club” ruling their lives, making decisions for them and spending their money totally void of common sense. It will be real interesting to see the people’s reaction if at the end of all of this the corporations win again while the population is overwhelmingly for someone else.

It will prove two things; that the people really don’t have a chance or even a say in this GAME, and that the majority is truly ruled by the minority (totally opposite of the Republic our Forefathers set in place). That should really start a New Revolution! I’ve had the opportunity to meet Dr. Paul personally and I can tell you that he is a polite and genuine man.

There is nothing phony about his demeanor or his intelligence. He is reserved and very level headed and is sincerely interested in what you have to say. Not once have I seen him bash any of the other candidates…even while being ridiculed by them AND the press. His commercials as well as his answers to questions are never of an attacking nature. He just sticks to his message. He believes in a strong President leading an even stronger Republic and has been quoted as saying “We should have a strong President, strong enough to resist the temptation of taking power that a President shouldn’t have.”…

The closest he has been to taking aim at another candidate was when Sen. John McCain was spilling out babble about Hitler during the YouTube debate, and Dr. Paul just gave him that look… you know that look that we have all received at one point or another in our lives by someone who knows us well…that look, as if to say, “shut up while you can still save face, because YOU don’t even believe what you’re saying, you’re over reaching and you’re digging a big hole for yourself”.. We’ve all been there. Dr. Paul’s reaction was one that you would expect from a well mannered gentleman who will let you have your say, not attack your character and then will resume his targeted point.

I’m telling you, and you know it’s true, think back to all of the politicians that you have seen over the years; how many have had the real character that this man possesses? I’ve been following the political scene for a long time, like many of you have, and I personally can’t remember any. Here is a test for you. Try to find some dirt on this man. Go ahead, dig deep, you won’t find any! If there was anything the media would have uncovered it by now. None!

Here is a simple question I personally would like answered. “If following the Constitution is following the law and not following the Constitution is breaking the law…then why do most of the other candidates both Republican and Democrat (given their voting records) and the Current Administration find it acceptable to NOT follow the Constitution?”

I was once told by a very elderly lady that all politicians are as crooked as a barrel of snakes…..well people, I think we have finally found a straight one. Sure, he’s not slick, he’s not dashing and he will probably never make the cover of PEOPLE’S ten most sexy men, but you know what…who cares? I’m tired of always having to choose between celebrities and the “Lesser of Two Evils.” Is that what we have reduced ourselves to in this country; voting for a president as though we are using the same criteria for selecting the next “American Idol”? This is for real and we need to start taking our Country, our children’s future, our lives and our position in this world very seriously.

I don’t know about you, but I honor my grandfather as you probably do yours. He was one of the most respected and admired men that I and many others ever had the privilege of knowing….So given the choice between slick, celebrity and the same ole’ plastic grin canned BS…I’ll take wisdom, respect and character any day. So, whether you perceive Dr. Congressman Ron Paul as a Grandfather or a Modern Day Forefather, this man has earned and deserves respect.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:24:07 GMT

does Jesus suport FORCED help? When the government pays for a social program it has to tax everyone (including non-christians), and it makes me pay this tax under the threat of inpriosnment. That doesn't sound like something Jesus would support to me!

I just hope your grandparents can afford all of their medicines, because God forbid we would want any Medicaid or Medicare to help them.

Yeah, I know, all Ron Paul supporters want to do away with taxes. Well who's gonna pay the people who clean are cities, pay our fireman, policeman,the people who regulate what gets put in your food, the CDC etc? This small minded notion that we don't need government and taxes is rediculous.

So you want to privatize everything. So what happens when the private police force gets paid more to be in the rich neighborhood instead of yours? Or the private fireman only go to fires in the rich neighborhoods instead of yours. Just something to think about Ron Paul supporters.

All this stuff he says he's gonna do will never get through the congress anyway. I'm pretty sure there is a small percentage of people in Congress that are Libertarians. Not enough to change anything without the help of Democrats and Republicans.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Rich, Vidalia, GA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:24:28 GMT

Three questions, guys:

First, does anybody really believe libertarianism can work? I mean, doesn't it rely way too heavily on the "honor system" - trusting Iran not to divert uranium enriched for peaceful purposes into nuclear attacks against its ideological foes, for example? The mortgage meltdown putting the skids under the US economy right now arises out of a laissez-faire libertarian approach and the fundamental shysterism of human beings. Do we really need more of that?

Second, does anybody really believe Ron Paul, if elected, could push a libertarian agenda through Congress? They might struggle to scrape together votes to override a Bush veto now, but I'm sure they could manage to keep Medicaid, Social Security, their precious earmarks and so on in place over Dr. Paul's objections.

Third, and assuming nobody answers the first two in the affirmative, exactly what kind of people are financing Dr. Paul's campaign? Is it any more than a 'protest vote' against the realities of the world? Sure, everybody will tell you they deserve more freedom than they get. Everybody will tell you they pay too much to government, and receive too little in return. Everybody will tell you they're opposed to their sons and brothers and neighbors dying. Everybody will tell you they'd like to have everything they want and pay nothing for it, too, but then they'll shrug and admit things don't work that way...

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Paul Rogers — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:26:04 GMT

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Loren B, Vancouver, Wash. — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:28:57 GMT

If people would just take the time to learn Dr. Paul's stance on issues (and the media take the time to research, learn and present his true platform without all the untrue biased perspectives) then they would learn that Dr. Paul’s pulling out "immediately" from Iraq doesn't mean he would lose his brain's about Iraq. He has stated in more than one Youtube video (at private fund raising events at people’s homes) that he would listen to the Generals as to what was best on the exit time table. That's the real key here - Dr. Paul would actually listen to the Generals. Whereas President Bush and staff are hell bent on occupying as long as they can. Dr. Paul’s stance is let’s get out as soon as possible – immediately if we can but stay as long as we must. While our present administrations view is, we are staying until we are forced to leave - and whose is going to dare force us. Damn the people, damn the world – we’re here (in Iraq) to stay – and you better look out we’re heading to Iran next. Dr. Paul is not the brain dead person the MSM often make him out to be. He is the only one of the bunch, democrat or republican, that has what it takes to get American on a fiscally sound path again. If America doesn’t get that – it’s at our peril.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

mike.....Buffalo NY — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:29:29 GMT

Paul cult followers really scare me.....this guy should be on a space ship with Kuncinich....if he, or the other liberals get there way, pull out of Iraq, hide our heads in the sand, turn our heads to 9/11, we will be an arab speaking country before you know it....wonder what the brave men and women who sacrificed so much on foreign shores in the 40's would have to say about what pacificsts we are turning into...

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Donald coe Des Moines Iowa — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:30:20 GMT

Please stop with the christian stuf.
Soon our christians will be in iraq handing out food and medication while their real purpose is to reform them all from their current religion to christianity.
They do this all of the time, go to a war torn poverty stricken country and while helping they push jesus and christ and god their god.
Often times civil wars break out over religion, This is where the republicans get the support from the bible thumpers.
People have been slain in the name of god for thousands of years, I realy dont think they need this kind of help.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

erik - austin — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:30:23 GMT

The US does not need to bomb and bribe every part of the world and tell everyone what to do. It is not isolationism to say that we will let other coutries decide what is best for themselves and worry most about making our own country better - the simple fact is we cant afford to try and expand the empire and control the world. We really don't have any choice but to pull back from all of these foriegn engagments. We either manage that process, or that process is managed on us - the fact is we are going broke and can't afford it. There is not other long term option.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Spartacus — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:32:21 GMT

This post is in response to those wondering what freedoms we have lost:

Napolitano - Unconstitutional Patriot Act
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SU0zuUzrSg

Talk by Naomi Wolf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc

A Liberal re-thinks Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DueIGWpXjrU

Ron Paul Republican Bruce Fein supports impeachment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ymlViJ7DvI

H.R. 1955 - Thought Crimes Law in U.S.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGKbvGlaCZ4

Illegal Executive Orders
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFWIHbf50EI

Voting Fraud - Programmer Hired to Hack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pbvEt8NG2Q

How to End the Iraq War Now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLcUS9c9Kbo

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Freeman Female, Dallas, TX — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:33:41 GMT

Erik,

Check out the Ron Paul Report where these comments were originally taken from. Ron Paul apologized, stood by the comments, never revealed the author AND
NEVER PRINTED A RETRACTION. Where is the retraction?

He took the smear down from the original archived Report in 1992 but it can be found here:
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/g/ftp.py?people/g/gannon.dan/1992/gannon.0793

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Tyranny — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:33:59 GMT

Key donors being "young people". Ask John Kerry how reliable "young people" are when it comes time to vote. They easily sit behind a computer and donate, but getting them out to actually vote on election day is a different battle. Kerry had the "young people" vote all locked up, with such enthusiastic young supporters and donors.

Seriously? You actually believed that Kerry was a candidate? He bowed out and conceeded before he even lost. Ask Kerry. hhmmpp. Ask someone who actually understands politics.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Stephen, Temecula CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:35:51 GMT

"Stephen,
What do you think about forcing democracy on people?"

I don't think forcing democracy on people is very productive. It would seem much more prudent to 'lead by example'. Instead of bombing countries and telling them to be democratic, why don't we show the populations of these oppressed countries what true democracy is all about? No one wants to be something that they don't see as being superior.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Jesse, Texas — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:36:06 GMT

Wellstone, this is for you...enjoy :)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8teEHdCrFqE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7fRWsqLoGA

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

t, dallas — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:40:07 GMT

To understand Ron's low numbers in the polls, you must first understand that the only people getting polled are those that voted in the last republican PRIMARIES.

That excludes anyone who didn't vote in 2004/2006, anyone who has never voted, anyone who voted democrat and have switched to support Ron Paul (there's thousands and thousands of these people!).

Now, for the people that DO get polled and DO choose Ron...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whptaVhCtWc

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Henry — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:40:49 GMT

I'm voting for Ron Paul.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Tracker — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:42:46 GMT

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian? All Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate."

More money in our pockets would mean more money going to charities. The federal government wouldn't be taking its share for the service of distributing it, and the people who truly need it would get more of it.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Ray New Buffalo, Michigan — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:44:52 GMT

what a bunch of idiots. Freedoms are lost daily. The premise of an income tax is determental to freedom. Who owns your life/ labor? Lets go on. All licences, from drivers and fishing to marriage are not freedoms, but privileges regulated by beauraucrats. Wake up, you have no freedoms at all, you are only told you have them by your owner, the gov. God are some of you so freaking stupid it's pathetic. There was no income tax prior to 1913 and generally corporations paid a tax on their capital gains, but people paid no tax on their income. It is after 1913, that the federal government started spending more and more and then understandably raised taxes to pay for their shortfalls. NOw it is out of control and the central banks Fed ( private corp) create money from thin air , lend it to the gov and you and I pay interest on it. WTF? Wake up, its time to change the status quo. It's time for the revolution to hit home at the grass roots level and time to take our counrty back!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

t, dallas — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:45:52 GMT

Stephen, Temecula CA...

Here's how what he says is Christian:

If you will remember, FEMA (the program that is supposed to help in times of disaster) BLOCKED the National Guard from delivering fuel to Katrina victims, BLOCKED thousands of gallons of company-donated water, BLOCKED any worship in FEMA camps. If you look at Louisiana today, the only major help they are getting is from Brad Pitt, yet hundreds of thousands of people are about to be homeless in the next 6 months.

What Ron says is: if we will stop stealing money from the people to pay for these government programs that do absolutely nothing but create red-tape, then the people will have more money to be more charitable and help a neighbor out.

You wonder where "community" went? It went out the door when government programs promised to take care of all our needs. Why should we help our neighbor if that's the government's job...even though the government isn't doing it.

I'm all for cutting these programs because people are naturally good and want to help each other, but we're too broke after taxes to do anything other than get by.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Bernie, Kenosha, Wisconsin — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:47:44 GMT

Dont worry. The current media outlets and Washington elite will ensure Ron Paul does not have a chance. They have a firm hold on Washington. They will tell you who you are going to vote for (polls, political pundits, and analyst etc) They are already painting him as a nut case. Too bad, as you sheep of America go to vote.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Mike, Vancouver, WA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:53:31 GMT

All of you people talking about how Dr. Paul will cut all the social programs and taxes need to do some research. Every single dollar that the federal government takes in via the INCOME tax is spent PAYING DOWN INTEREST ON THE NATIONAL DEBT! Not ONE SINGLE PENNY of that money goes to ANY social program!

Think about that for a second!

And there will STILL be taxes! The roads will get paid for. The schools will get paid for. What will NOT get paid for is HUGE overarching federal programs where the money goes to the people running the system, and NOT where it's needed!

An example, the Dept. of Education. I've heard a ton of people say "OMG He's gonna cut funding to schools!" This is simply not the case. When I first heard about this stance, I wanted to know more. So I talked to the 3 teachers that I knew, and asked them about the DOE. All three of them HATED it more than ANYTHING ELSE IN THEIR JOB! Can you believe that? Know any teachers? Ask em. Got a kid in school? Go talk to the principle about it. Ask what THEY need, don't listen to what somebody in Washington SAYS they need.

This election is too important not to be informed. I honestly don't care if you're going to vote for Ron Paul or not. I just would like to see an election based on IDEAS, rather than who can pander more to special interests, or Christians, or who's got the best hair.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Daniel, Roseville, CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:57:20 GMT

On Charity:

Why is it some people would never mug another person for $100.00 but would steal a $100.00 powertool from Home Depot?

People cannot relate to organizations like they do people. Receiving charity from an individual has the potential to change the lives of the giver and receiver. Receiving charity from an organization, especially government, is unlikely to either of their lives.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Marsh Ryan, Seattle Wash. — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:58:40 GMT

Americans want to shed the zionist influence that has infested our political system, we want CHANGE, we are fed up with politicians lying and betraying our people. We are fed up with waging trillion dollar wars in Iraq for Israel and we are fed up with zionist lobby wanting us to start a new trillion dollar war with Iran. THAT is the reason of the rise of Paul at the Rep side and Obama at the Dem side. The rest are more or less the same as Bush: zionist slaves who are suberting our interests to Israels.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

J, Mpls MN — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:59:26 GMT

Ron Paul is against SS. That's enough to stop him from being president.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

marc — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:03:51 GMT

Watch Meet the Press Sunday or set your TIVO to record it. He will be on there getting hammered from Tim Russert. If you have seen the previous ones, Tim goes for the jugular! It will be interesting how Ron handles himself. Ron Paul for President 2008!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

J707 — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:03:51 GMT

- "I suggest Ron Paul supporters, if they are serious, take a basic macro-economics course and get their heads out of the sand. His economic policies are a disaster."

Ok...so Walter Williams, Milton Friedman, Jim Cramer, and Lawrence Kudlow all "need to take a macroeconomics course and get their heads out of the sand?" Please. Name another candidate who can even keep up with Paul when talking economics.

Maybe Thomas Sowell should take an economics class too? Its a bit ironic that the candidate youre talking about is the one that has received praise and endorsements from the most respected and distinguished economists of today.

- "As for his views on the role of the Constitution, though I agree on a number of points, I believe Ron Paul would have a serious problem with reading into the Constitution a right to privacy."

Nonsense.
- The only candidate who voted against the PATRIOT act and wants it immediately repealed
- The one candidate running who wants to end the Drug War and its multitude of unconstitutional 4th amendment breaches
- The candidate recently denounced the handing over of phone records by corporations to the US government
- The candidate who is running on a philosophy of "thats your business, as long as you dont go out and hurt other people."
Lets assume youre right; youre actually prepared to advance the argument that there is another candidate who is more pro-personal privacy than Ron Paul? Man, they must be hiding themselves really well.

- "Paul's position suggest a desire to return to a pre-Great Depression jurisprudence and federal government, one that would not be able to prevent the kind of disaster and excesses felt by the people in the 1930's."

Youre progressing from the false assumption that the federal government was able to prevent that...or that it ever was and ever will be.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Mike, Spartanburg, SC — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:04:24 GMT

jerry/corpus christi texas - I usually don`t call people names because its just not nice, but in your case....you are a stupid ignorant sheep that really has no clue whats going on in America.

HR 1955 - look it up numnuts, because I have a feeling it will be used against you someday.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Nicole — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:08:00 GMT

To Jimmy/Corpus Christy 12:33pm.... just today
The New York Times has changed the subheadline in Wednesday’s front-page story on the CIA’s destruction of secret interrogation tapes, following a formal request by the White House. This is just one of many examples, we no longer have a free press. This is one of the freedoms lost, there are countless others.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Matt, TX — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:09:25 GMT

"What would that do to our currency as it stands right now?"
There's nothing that can be done about our currency. The backed currency would have to be bled into the economy just as fiat money was bled into backed money.

I have taken a macro-economics course. I am "in the real world" working like most Americans in the middle class. Dr. Paul does understand the weaknesses of a gold standard; he has expressed that knowledge before by criticizing the gold standard that was in place in the 1800s. Deflation can and did occur with that economic system at the end of that century, which is why (at least we are taught in school) the Federal Reserve was established. However, the dangers involved in fiat currency far outweigh those found within backed currency. I don't know what market/economy you have been keeping track of since the inception of the Federal Reserve and this country's introduction to fiat money, but it has hardly been "stable": Great Depression, several recessions, and consistent inflation (which taxes EVERYONE, not just the rich or poor). Not only that, but this monetary policy comes from a committee that has no overseeing control from our government or its people. We have a choice to continue under that rulership, and when someone controls your money supply, that's exactly what is, or we can vote to have monetary independence, free markets, and a balanced budget. I believe you are the one who needs to get their head out of the sand, because I know what I'm going to do if Dr. Paul loses: buy gold and silver to secure my wealth.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Mark, Seattle, Wa — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:14:15 GMT

Wake up Jerry from Corpus Christie-Educate yourself

"The Bill of Rights under George Bush-A timeline"
http://mondoglobo.ning.com/group/questionauthority/forum/topic/show?id=1509099%3ATopic%3A2937

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Brock — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:14:44 GMT

jerry,
That's right, the only rights that matter are the ones YOU use. Just throw all that other junk away, like habeus corpus, the 8th and 10th Amendments.
Once again, neocons, think before you speak. I know that is a difficult task for people who can only see three feet in front of them but we need to try and have a little foresight.
And M, what you say is running parallel to racist. Irrational generalizations, grouping everyone under some stereotype. I am 18, not in college, and I think Ayn Rand is a terrible author. Shut the Hell up and save some air (and text space) for the intelligent people who don't just troll the boards to bash Ron Paul.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

hard — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:14:45 GMT

ELECT RON PAUL - Americans needs 8 Paul years of Ron.

End the war in IRAQ, finish the job in Afghanistan to end Taliban. Choose between Musharaff & Karzai.

STOP McCAIN, RUDY, HUCKABEE, ROMNEY, & CLINTONS. Ask them to go hunting for WMD in IRAQ, not at tax payers money. Stop more Al Queda in IRAQI neighbourhood. No war on IRAN for next 8 years.

Let common sense prevail. ELECT RON PAUL

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Rick Phoenix — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:14:51 GMT

If you really desire to effect change, vote for an individual with a chance of winning..........

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

doug, redmond,or — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:15:10 GMT

Chris from Tampa, very well said regarding all the socialist programs. History has proven they dont work.
I'm not a big Paul supporter although some of his ideas have great merit, gold standard and getting rid of all these give away programs are two I like. I am leaning to huck primarily due to the Fairtax. The implementation of it would dramatically change the economy for the better. Imagine getting all the money you earn instead of alittle more than half and spending it on what you want and the charities you like instead of some washington bureaucrat deciding who or what it goes to.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

J, CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:16:54 GMT

I think there's a constituency that everyone has forgotten about here. Doctors. They always vote for their own and they have a lot of disposable income with which to keep donating to Dr. Paul. In addition to which, they are highly educated on issues of finance and Dr. Paul's are by far the most sound. So you college kids that don't have much money, don't worry, just make your homemade signs, gather up your fraternity brothers and go vote; that's your contribution.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

tracy, dallas — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:18:16 GMT

M in SP...

Your Gold Standard theory is SO WRONG. The people wouldn't rush to gold. The gold would just back the value of our currency and we would still use the paper bills we use today. As far as the global economy, maybe if we had done this a long time ago, Iran wouldn't have just refused to sale their oil in U.S. dollars (which was why we were going to inititate pre-emptive strikes against them. Iran hurried to switch to the Euro prior to any strikes, so a new NIE was released saying Iran had halted its nuclear program. We didn't strike fast enough to keep them from switching to the Euro. This is the same thing that happened with Saddam years and years ago). If we had done this a long time ago, then our current dollar wouldn't be worth the FOUR CENTS it's worth now!

Nevertheless, Ron Paul does not want to go back to the Gold Standard. That's something Fox News started and it's incorrect. Paul only wants to back our funds with assets: things of value.

And your money theory is incorrect.
INFLATION hurts the middle class.
DEFLATION makes money more valuable.

Banks would have to be more responsible for their lending habits if the government did not provide them with safety nets. Bankruptcies would not get worse...they would actually become less common as banks were forced to be more responsible.

I don't even have to comment about your Constitution remark, because you actually disproved yourself in your own comment, but I will...

You got it backwards. It's actually: powers that are not specifically granted to the federal/state government by the Constitution are prohibited to them. In other words, the Constitution does not say the government can conduct domestic spying, therefore domestic spying is prohibited and the people have a right to privacy.

How are your views so twisted?

You are either 11 years old, or you're being paid to twist information to sway voters.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Chris Some city PA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:19:51 GMT

China can sell organs? When are we going to be free enough to sell our organs. I have a kidney for sale.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Bob — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:20:56 GMT

Jerry gets his news from Hannity, O'Reily and Rush.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Stephen, Temecula CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:24:33 GMT

t, dallas

I completely agree with what you are saying.

I don't know about anyone else, but I get excited thinking about the amount of good that can be done when communities get back in the business of helping each other out. Just look at the donations 50k people gave to Ron Paul for something they believe in. Imagine that amount of support locally (without a max donation amount)for causes the community feel are worthwhile, but done all throughout our great country.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

chris some city, pa — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:24:44 GMT

Iran has always been able to hand off stuff to terrorists. Hisbollah and any other group. I do not understand how it is any different today then yesterday and why we would need to go there.

Iran signed the non proliferation treaty. This allows them to build nuclear plants for energy. So why are we saber rattling?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

FedUpWithReligion-Bashing — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:25:01 GMT

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian? All Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate."

Christians are not perfect. Neither are Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, etc, etc. Further, with dozens of sects and divisions in each and every religion there is no single definition of beliefs for any one of these religions, including Christianity.

So just because a politician, or anyone, is Christian, that does not require them to meet YOUR self-proclaimed definition of who a Christian is, what their beliefs and actions should entail, nor what they should say or believe. Your comment is hypocritical in the extreme!

However, Stephen of Temecula, CA is also incorrect. Within the US, as a republic (our representative tri-balanced democracy), the majority vote is primarily Christian because our population and our representatives are primarily Christian. It is the reality of who we are now, and who founded this country. It is built into our "corporate", democratic DNA, so to speak. Can we evolve? Certainly, but that takes time. In the meantime, other countries can either accept the strings attached to our monetary and democratic support, or they can go beg for help from somewhere else. We are not forcing these other countries to take our handouts.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Claire, Boise, ID — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:27:22 GMT

His aim is to return power to the local level, not abandond the poor and underpriveledged. I worked in healthcare for 20 years, and watched the government regulate the physicians into a corner until they can barely practice real medicine now. Let me assure you, allowing the insurance companies and government to have more and more power and the physician's to have less and less is not the way to improve the quality of healthcare. This example applies to every issue: Follow the Constitution, return power to the people, let individual issues be settled at the local level. (FYI: I'm a 45 year old middle-class housewife, not college kid with a bunch of money.)

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Brendan, seattle wash. — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:32:37 GMT

"Iran signed the non proliferation treaty. This allows them to build nuclear plants for energy. So why are we saber rattling?"

Good question. The answer is, zionist politicians want us to, zionist lobbyists want us to and zionist media want us to. All these zionist parties do not care about our future. It is all Israel they care about. If Israel goes down the drain, they want us to support it till the end, even if China will break our back in the process and we go bankrupt. Zionist fascists do not care. Good morning Chris and good morning america, it is time to wake up to this reality: we are not as free as we thought to be because of this zionist infestation of our politics. Remember the wmd-lie in Iraq, it was cooked in Israel!!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Ashcrest, Fort Worth, TX — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:38:37 GMT

will wrote;
in china they murder christians and poor citizens for the organ trade, why are we selling them shares of our country?
will (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 12:30 PM)
****************************************************
Jimmy CHICAGO IL wrote
You're right we should sell them more christians.

But if if there is a need for a "A-hole" transplant..Jimmy's a Doner

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Red 13, Seattle — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:39:27 GMT

>M, Saint Paul, Minn

Working, one would assume. Unless your trying to insinuate that every college student in america is there on someone elses dime.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

jason, grand rapids — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:42:50 GMT

What freedom's have we lost, Jerry from Corpus Cristi, you bonehead? Open your eyes...if you keep comparing America to the rest of the world, instead of comparing America to what it once was, you'd be so much more intelligent. Let's start with the corrupting powers of the Federal Gov't, all the gov't agencies, the Patriot Act, possible national ID card, practically strip searched at the airports, needing a passport to go to Canada, having military bases in almost every country in the world and trying to police the world, rather than take care of our pathetic economy and deteriorating middle class. Have you noticed the gap between the rich and poor...maybe not. Oh yeah, the republican party and democratic party is practically run by the same people...the fed. gov't has grown to it's largest EVER under Bushie.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

jason, grand rapids — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:42:51 GMT

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Bernie, Kenosha, Wisconsin — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:44:02 GMT

Bottom line is I personally like many of the constitutional ideas that Ron Paul stands for . My main point is, just dont follow the rest of the sheep. Read up on the candidates and there views. Study a little.
Then vote for whoever you wish to vote for. Like many, I have felt, used, manipulated and some sense of loss in hope to where our country is going on a variety of issues. (NAFTA,CAFTA 2nd amendment etc)
But I will try to remain optimistic. And I will exercise my right to vote, while I still have it.
(HR1955? okay, thankyou)

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Andrea — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:44:21 GMT

Christians not helping people is the silliest argument ever. Before Big BRother decided to step in, the churches ran hospitals, orphanages, homeless shelters, arranged transportation....the list goes on and on. Getting the government to foot the tab and create endless beaucracies drove the costs up so high that charity was forced out of the market. Corporate America loves liberal government spending.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Marc Andonian, Plymouth, Michigan — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:51:18 GMT

Bush is less Republican, more a war monger and corrupt slave of big business. He's tarnished the Republican Party as a whole, not just for Ron Paul.

Ron Paul 2008.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Kaylie, Tempe, AZ — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:53:14 GMT

Never thought that I would EVER vote for a Republican, but Ron Paul definitely gets my vote. He actually believes in CONSERVING, unlike Bush and his admin. He actually cares about the people in his own country and wants to resolve our issues instead of spending all of our money elsewhere and putting us even further in debt.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Akston — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:53:40 GMT

Jerry/Corpus Christi posted:
---
The papers are still running....
Telephones are running.......
TV is still going......
Air America is still on (barely).......

No loss of freedom in this country.....
still trying to figure out what freedoms we have lost in this country....
jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, December 19, 2007 12:33 PM)
---

Here's recent casualty in the list of American freedoms changing in the wake of war hysteria:

"ABC News: Intelligence Official Says People Need to Redefine Privacy, Adjust to Loss of Anonymity"
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3850235

When did we start allowing "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" to become "Government happy to take liberties with our lives"?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Jane Doe, Toronto, ON — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:54:33 GMT

stopreadingfoxnews,

If your mother is a social worker, you must understand then how bureaucracy interferes with charity. Two of my closest friends are social workers, and I hear all about this when they complain about their jobs.

One friend lives in WV and processes disability claims . She is a top case producer in her office. The rest of the staff are behind in their numbers; the reality is people who depend on this money often wait years to see their checks. The most incompetent employees won't lose their government jobs. The most diligent won't be rewarded for their efforts.

Also, my friend is a single mother with an eight year old son. His father owes well over the felony status in back child support; the courts have been useless. I think many women share these stories. The government obviously does not make the poor its priority.

My other friend lives in Brooklyn and works with LGBT youth. The funding for AIDS is progressively cut back, big pharm and the FDA often hinder community responses to AIDS, especially in poor countries. More on that. I think a repeal of drug laws, as Ron Paul suggests, and legalizing marijuana would benefit the gay community.

Both of my friends consider themselves Democrats, btw.

The services you wrote about, the police and the fire department, are primarily funded by local taxes. They should be, and the same should go for schools, etc. If Katrina taught us anything, it was that ineptness can be expected when a massive and clumsy government gets involved with immediate problems and emergencies. Let communities solve their problems instead of passing a literal buck to the feds.

Our federal income taxes at this point go to a foreign policy that threatens the safety of countless people throughout the world. It goes to debt for the next few generations of Americans and grows every day. The way of our current system, the decadent, bloated lifestyle of many Americans, means that 24,000 people starve to death every day. Think about that.

I think charity begins with the heart, and it is most effective when it is specific. It means more when it's direct and face-to-face. I believe in the goodness of many people, and I think if they were freer, they could accomplish more. I certainly believe Washington changes people for the worst... except for Ron Paul.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Joe Corrao, Brooklyn, NY — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 21:56:05 GMT

Read naomi Wolf peeps if u haven't already Ron paul 2008!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Aaron, Austin, TX — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:10:23 GMT

"[Ron Paul] would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian?"

Ron Paul gave free medical care to poor people in his practice. (Christian) Meanwhile, he refused to accept medicare or medicaid because he did not want to benefit from the harm created to others (Christian).

That harm of course is theft. Who would Christ have stolen from?

All Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate. I'm pretty sure that is what Jesus preached, yet Republicans and the Christian right want nothing to do with the poor, they just want pro life laws and laws against Gays.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

moshe kerr midland texas — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:11:50 GMT

To point of the game folks: getting into office. Once your their its a whole new ball game. Ron Paul sees economic hard times acomming, something like an Indian putting his ear to the rails. 9 trillion dollar debt and borrowing from communist nations to fight an unConstitutional war. Programs that the country can no longer afford, the baby boomers when they retire will be a significant population etc. Folks this aint so difficult. Ya'll just got to look a little past the tip of your collective noses. The Congressman's 72 don't you think that the Depression had an influence upon his take of reality? If the bubble pops and the markets crash its hard times for decades! Ron Paul thinks that its wise to step back from the brink. The economic stability of the dollar that's a strategic concern, Iraq that's tactical.
America needs to tighten its economic belt and go on a diet, cus this boy weighs more than several brass bands. The Congressman asks: where's the easiest place to save money and cut the budget? The war! Why spend hundreds of billions of dollars maintaining military bases oversea and close military bases at Home?! Military bases generate allot of income to a town, why generate income for europeans who don't like us and resent us, for Koreans who enjoy a trade surplus with or country, and with arabs who murder our people given a drop of the hat? When the soviets lost it their empired died overnight. All the million of lives lost to conquer that empire died in vain! We won the 2nd world war, we won the cold war, the Soviets and their dreams rot on the dung heaps of history. Ron Paul says folks, its time to step back and re-group. And what's wrong with that? Asia represents a long term economic power house. If we have to borrow from Communists can't they claim that communism lost a major battle with the fall of the USSR but should America fall Communism wins the war?!
The Congressman's "control" over his supporters - NOT. President Paul shall not cause corporate America to go broke. The opposite is the case! Corporate America has lost allot of control or dominance over world trade and markets. That's bad. We need to re-group and reestablish our economic dominance in world markets. But this aint going to happen when corporate america only wants to protect the remnants or scraps remaining on the plate. Something like a dog under the table. Where is Detroit and the automobile industry, American steel, IBM today compared to where they once stood post ww2? The Paul campaign has shown great initiative to overcome the msm alliance with the other Republican candidates. But the message that you folks need to understand, these headlines R yesterday's old news: we Americans have to forge a vision of where we see our future not just now or in 2 or 3 years but where we as a people are heading into the next generation! That's Ron Paul's message and i wholly support it. GO RON PAUL.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Chris Some city, PA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:14:53 GMT

When are people going to inform themselves and stop saying RP wants to return to the Gold standard.

He wants competing currencies. You know like Lincoln issuing the greenback - and his subsequent murder.

Oh, and JFK too. President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. Mr. Kennedy's order gave the Treasury the power "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This meant that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation. In all, Kennedy brought nearly $4.3 billion in U.S. notes into circulation. The ramifications of this bill are enormous.

Right before his murder.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Rich, Vidalia, GA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:15:20 GMT

I presume tracy, dallas is too young to remember the 1970s and the economic reasons Nixon abandoned the Gold standard.

And I presume Brendan, seattle has his tongue in his cheek. As far as it goes, yes, every nation has a right to do whatever it can get away with - every individual has that right as well. And there's no more reason to be alarmed at Iran enriching uranium than a hunter buying guns and ammo. Of course, if such a hunter takes his rifle down to the mall and starts shooting at Christmas shoppers, it's tragic - but it's a tragedy that we, as a nation, feel we can afford. Do we feel as sanguine about Iran producing and employing a nuclear weapon?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Matt, Las Vegas, NV — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:19:19 GMT

The GOP is becoming as irrelevant as the United Nations....interesting, and ironic.

Now if the GOP can emerge from the dark clound known as the "Christian Coalition", and move back towards true fiscal conservatisim, they might survive. But as long as they continue to let the hypocritical, minority, fringe elements control the entire party, the GOP is doomed.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

fishskicanoe, Wausau, WI — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:27:06 GMT

O.K.. A valid question to all the Paul supporters out there is when (not if) your candidate loses in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida and all the Super Tuesday primaries and it becomes mathematically impossible for him to take the nomination, where will you go then? Will you support the Republican nominee, as Dr. Paul says he wants you to do? Or will you support another candidate? The crazies who have latched on to Paul's campaign will try to draw the more normal supporters to their causes, be they White Supremacy, New World Order conspiracies or whatever. Where are you going to go after this all plays out?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

MissouriFarmer — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:32:06 GMT

What I find strange is that all of the Anti-Paul people's arguments are so easily dismissed. Is it because Ron Paul's Stance is correct or the the fact that the anti-paul people are just so un-informed because of federally mandated education requirements? My guess is BOTH!
The truth is that this is an EDUCATED revolution. When have you EVER heard the electorate discuss the role of the fed reserve, foreign policy, economics etc discussed in such a manner? The Anti-Paul crowd is using the tactics of the old guard, trying to slander without any real thought or meaning. A lack of substance will not win a debate. Whining because you are afraid of losing entitlements is not a substitute for hard work. It is NOT the job of the Federal govt. to make sure everyone has a safety net.
Yes, I do have a degree in economics. I have lived in my car due to economic hardship and now am worth 7 figures. I know the value of hard work, thriftiness and perseverance. Success is NOT called welfare, it is not called entitlements, it is called earning what you deserve. If you are waiting for the federal govt to make you rich, you will have a long time to wait, Ron Paul or not.
I do not feel it is my responsibility to pay for people's losses who live in high risk areas; New Orleans, Florida etc, just as I do not expect them to pay for my high risk business venture failures.
If you really understood the cause of the great depression, you will find that it was caused by A. greed B. the federal reserve and C. ignorant govt policies. Just like it is happening today.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Mary Kaisler, Warner Robins, GA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:32:23 GMT

Dear stopwatchingfoxnews,
Being a Christian means we help the people, not the federal government. The way our country is being run financially is creating hardships for the poor and weak. If we can turn that around through sound monetary practices and create prosperity for all instead of a few corporations, we will have far less poor people. Sounds to me like you don't want to help the needy yourself--- you want someone else to do it. Also, think about this---how much money would go straight to the cause if the government wasn't involved?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Clarissa C., Houston TX — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:33:17 GMT

Wow, what a way to detract attention from real issues

"OK, BUT WHAT IF HE DOESN'T WIN!? NEVERMIND THE REAL ISSUES FACING THIS COUNTRY!"

Real smooth

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Spartacus — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:41:12 GMT

Hi 'J' from Mpls,MN

Regarding Social Security...

Ron Paul has actually done more to save SS than most anyone in Washington. During the 90’s when politicians were raiding the SS fund for their own pet projects, Ron Paul was speaking out and insisting that the money be kept separate and safe.

And now when our Federal Government can’t afford to pay the bills yet still want to keep spending and expanding the war -- Ron Paul has a solution to balance the budget and save SS. The solution is to scale back our 1 trillion dollar/year overseas empire, by bringing most of our troops home from of the 700 bases in 100 countries around the world.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org

http://www.ronpaulaudio.com

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

tre annapolis, md — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:45:18 GMT

I only want to say one thing, because anyone who takes the time to actually LISTEN to what Dr. Paul has to day won't have the ignorant and negative questions/comments towards him.

You are kidding yourselves if you think that only "young people" are supporting Ron Paul...It's all of us.

And we are about to win this thing.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Brendan, seattle, wash. — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:51:43 GMT

If you have ever wondered why so many manipulation is around coming from the anti-Paul front, then give some thought to this fact: the more anti-Paul one will sound, the more zionist that person will be. That is no coincidence. Zionism want us to spend, spend, and spend for the sake of Israel and it does not care about OUR future. If a candidate shows who DOES care about OUR future, that candidate will be attacked by the zionist lobby with a vengeance. That is precisely what is happening now. Zionism does not like Ron Paul to say that Iran has a right to nuclear energy, because Israel does not want it to. Look America at the hijacking of our politics by the zionist system, look and wake up and free yourself from this slavery. Do not be afraid to be called antisemite, because you know you are not! www.nkusa.org

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:53:46 GMT

"Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian? All Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate. I'm pretty sure that is what Jesus preached, yet Republicans and the Christian right want nothing to do with the poor, they just want pro life laws and laws against Gays.

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY "

Sorry but social programs should not be the way of Christians (nor republicans.) Christians should believe in something called FREE WILL. They believe God gave us free will, do we then have the right to take that away from others via taxes? I would hope not. Rather Christians, and republicans, should believe in helping the poor from their own pockets. This isn't something that should be forced by the government, that takes away free will.

Please actually think before you speak.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

TRH — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:58:58 GMT

Hey, Chris in Tampa!! Really happy about what you stated!!

By the way, did you know that the Republicans as a group give more to charity that the Democrats? It's absolutely true . . . read up on it!! Stephen, in Temecula, Ca . . . Thanks for putting up your thoughts . . . I couldn't say it any better and probably couldn't say it as well!!!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

fishskicanoe, Wausau, WI — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:01:28 GMT

Clarissa, you're side stepping the question. The chances of him actually winning are close to zero. You are electing a candidate not anointing a savior. In Iowa the Democratic Party realizes this and gives people the option of choosing a person who ranks as their second choice. All I'm asking is what option is your "second choice"?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Tolli, Bothell, WA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:09:22 GMT

Sorry - not a college kid, but a strong Dr. Paul supporter. 36 year old male, married with 3 kids. I've held my job for 5 years. Very worried about my kids future, financially, security, and freedoms. Very worried about the federal government taking too many rights away from the common citizen. Illegal wiretapping, illegaly going to war, not being fiscally responsible, not having the world look up to us for our values, suspending citizens rights...

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Rich, Vidalia, GA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:21:52 GMT

Thanks, MissouriFarmer, for the deep belly laugh I got from seeing a self-proclaimed member of America's most subsidized industry deriding those who rely on the federal government for their wealth. If you believe American farmers get what their product is worth on the free market, your economic degree is worth about as much as Mike Huckabee's "Masters" in "Theology".

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Jen, Crescent City, CA — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:22:41 GMT

I donated to Dr. Paul's campaign and I'm in my thirties. At a rally near my hometown, there were more elderly people than young people. Many people of all ages and backgrounds support Dr. Paul's message.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Wendy, Independence, MO — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:40:00 GMT

Do you people really think that all 100,000 of those who have donated to Dr. Paul's campaign are college kids? Find the Ron Paul Meetup group in your area and you will realize your preconceived notions are false. In fact, in the Kansas City area, I haven't seen a single college student at any meetups.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Charlie — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:04:02 GMT

Hey M from Minn. I'm not a college kid. I'm in the military, and I got my money from you fighting over seas. Maybe you should read some reports and find out Dr. Paul has more money from the military than any other candidate before you start assuming

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Connelly Barnes — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:18:48 GMT

The government is torturing people. What part of torture don't people understand?

Of course, hundreds of thousands of people are also dying in a pointless war, and pretty much every civil liberty Americans used to have has evaporated. Politicians are currently voting on bills that authorize the government to spy on Americans without warrants.

All I can say is that if the vast majority of Americans don't want a free country, then they will have tyranny, just as they wanted. And it will take an awful lot of blood and death to restore any kind of freedom. Although I doubt Americans today have the backbone to restore freedom from a tyrannous state, because they honestly do not care.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Akston — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:33:35 GMT

fishskicanoe, Wausau, WI posted:
"O.K.. A valid question to all the Paul supporters out there is when (not if) your candidate loses…where will you go then?"

Name another fiscally conservative, non-interventionist, libertarian constitutionalist and I'll support him or her. Absent that choice, I refuse to vote the lesser of two evils ever again. I'll watch as the Republicans go down in inevitable defeat due to the Neo-Conservative fringe's refusal to accept that 70% of the American public rejects their "Democracy via invasion makes us safer" tenet.

Return question: When (not if) Ron Paul wins the nomination with the same groundswell of support that netted a record $6.02 million real dollars in a single day, will you support him?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Mitch, Wisconsin — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 01:47:47 GMT

rob dee,
go to ronpaul2008.com. You can order campaign materials there.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Tyler Paul, Fargo, ND — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 01:48:56 GMT

Somewhere up above the question was asked on how to plaster the town with fliers. I was discussing that last night. It's really hard to convince people to vote for someone that isn't on 'that there TV, he-uck'. Seriously. Ron Paul needs to do something sweep the offline crowd off their feet.

As for all that crud about the devastation his policies would cause. It's not any worse that what can and most likely will happen anyways. We, America, aren't going to cease to exist over any sorta political disaster, economic or otherwise. We just gotta buckle down and get ourselves on the right path again. I remember learning about what our government was based on and I remember when I actually took a look and realized it really didn't exist anymore. Currently it's "We, the government, are going to control everything. How should we go about doing so?" not "We, the government, are here to do the best for the people and protect everyone to our ability. At what point should we step in?"

I would never consider electing Ron Paul to govern the state. I disagree with his opinions on issues such as... well most all of the powers that he'd keep up to the states. But he's fighting for my right to NOT to have my day to day life controlled by the federal government (be it positive or nevegative), he's against legislating choices that should be left up the individual. You can't win if try to control everything and make everyone happy. He always looks at the biggest picture possible and he's the wisest politician I've ever come across. He's the only good choice for president. The rest would do less damage to an already warped government than the other candidates. That's all.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Flo — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 01:59:41 GMT

People who have watch Paul for 15 years or so like myself have prayed one day we would have a person with this much integrity to win the Whitehouse. Many of us middle class raising our grandchildren and helping to support our parents understand the reasons we support Paul. Young and Old alike. The economy will do us all in. Your other issues will not matter one red cent.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Single Dad, Orlando, FL — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 02:11:21 GMT

“The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.” – Thomas Jefferson

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Bob C — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 02:29:38 GMT

Jerry ask any Japanese American who was imprisoned
here 60 odd years ago during World War II for the
"crime" of being 2nd, 3rd or 4th generation Japanese immigrants if they feel any Americans have lost any freedoms? Ask anyone who lives in Massachusetts that went to jail for a "mandatory" one year sentence if they didn't register their guns if they feel we've lost any freedom.
Ask anyone at an airport if they like standing in line being felt up by a dufus and having their mouth wash confiscated if we've lost any freedom.
Ask yourself why our forefathers warned us about enemies foreign and DOMESTIC...Ah never mind go watch Fox "News" and have a donut.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

mnjrupp,South Carolina — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:16:21 GMT

Now that the MSM has crowned Huckabee as the "King for a day" candidate you will be hearing about the so called "Fair Tax".
Just Google Huckabee and Fair tax. You will see that Huckabee is neither conservative nor is the Fair Tax fair.
How about a flat tax? Like zero!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

jfrchitect, San Angelo, Texas — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:41:22 GMT

M,St, Paul Minn.
You, sir, are obviously from the Keynesian school of economics. Let me suggest you study von Mises. Your analysis of the gold standard is sophomoric. The Federal Government, the Fed, and its system of banks literally robs the citizens of this country via the mechanism of inflation. The return to commodity backed currency will throw a very large wrench into workings of this machine of larceny.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Marleny, Tucson, AZ — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:54:50 GMT

Yay!!!!!!!!!! We LOVE YOU RON PAUL!!!! YOU ARE OUR HERO!!! YOU ARE A WORTHY HUMAN BEING WITH TRUE VALUES, MORALS, & ETHICS!!!!! DID I MENTION WE LOVE YOU?

REVOLUTION!!!!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Rick P — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 04:45:38 GMT

I think he would have overwhelming majority supporting him - only if MSM doesn't try to censure him!! They would give more coverage to some pregnancy - rather than covering in big front page about 6 million dollars coming in for a candidate from 55,000 individuals without candidate doing anything!! MSM -Wake up!! And do not play in the hands of Corporates, Big money, defence establishment..Ro

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Connie, SW Florida — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 05:25:16 GMT

Jerry,

Are we free?

Let's see...

I did a google search on "Ron Paul" early 12/17, and it said there were 104 AP related stories. When I clicked on that link, it said no stories were available. Several hours later I repeated that google search. Again, 104 AP related stories were supposedly listed. I again clicked on that link, and only stories about Huckabee came up. Tonight I again googled Ron Paul and what comes up? Three stories about Ron Paul taking money from White Supremacist - OLD NEWS back in October, being repeated again in the past three hours, and one story about his raising cash from the money bomb on 12/16, of course, at the bottom of the three White Supremacist stories, which are being dragged out again to hurt Dr. Paul.

Oh yes, we live in a free and fair country. Or perhaps I should say fair and balanced, just like Fox news?

Hey, all Ron Paul supporters - please change your party affiliation to Republican if you have not already done so in order to vote for Ron Paul in the Primary. I'm a Democrat, and I just switched to Republican so I could help him get counted.

DEMOCRATS FOR RON PAUL!!!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

m. ketcher — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 05:37:08 GMT

People are flocking to Ron Paul because they're sick-and-tired of the same old song-and-dance from all the other politicians. See this hilarious YouTube music video from the international award-winning feature film, "Song of the Dead," a zombie-musical and political satire. The video stars horror movie icon Reggie Bannister and is a great satire on the president, the MSM, and the war on terror. The filmmaker, Chip Gubera, is donating a share of his profits from the film to the Ron Paul campaign. Go to:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qQmkkoxSKYw

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Tom Fitzsimmons — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 06:08:23 GMT

Freeman Female, Dallas, TX, I sympathize with your concerns. I find myself supporting Dr. Paul, but some of the libertarians scare me. I have my radar set to fascist and I watch this campaign and it's rhetoric closely. I have seen no statement by Dr. Paul that even remotely espouses these sentiments.
Now, the anger over the atrocities in LA all of those years ago is no surprise. I grew up in these neighborhoods, a ghetto white boy I, and was subjected to violence and the threat of violence every day. It was very hard for me to temper my own anger with reason. In this regard you yourself are not really very liberal. Let people have their tirades after the violence and let them calm down. Then, we might be able to talk.
We need to overthrow the insidiously corrupt power structure in this country. I think we are on the brink of world catastrophe and if we don't wrest control from these lying, self serving, heartless idiots, we are destined for hell, right here on earth. But, and this is a big 'but', if we do not do this with love in our heart, compassion in our words and actions, we are no better than they are and we will deservedly lose, even if we appear to win. So please, join us. This is not a 'white' revolution, but a revolution for all people, and finally it must be a revolution of the heart!
I wish you and yours a peaceful holiday season and a happy new year-t

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Peter,Baton Rouge,La. — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 06:42:55 GMT

jerry/corpus christi texas

Have you ever watched what happens to Ron Paul whenever he tries to answer a question. He usually gets cut off. And you don't notice any loss of anything? Hmmm.

Ted in Birmingham

Since when does having someone or something(Federal Taxes) forcing me to donate to the poor have anything to do with Jesus Christ ASKING me to care for the poor? I'll give you the shirt off of my back if you ASK for it. But try and force me and you're going to get a knuckle sandwich.Christianity doesn't work like that. Jesus himself would not approve of his teachings being shoved onto anyone.

Ron Paul is for freedom to decide these kind of things on your own. Using free will. Not goverment intervention.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

dddienst, lincoln Park, nj — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 06:55:00 GMT

>>Bankruptcies will surge as the Paul supporters max out >>their credit cards donating to Paul.
----------------
Thats ok. If he wins they can use the money that would have gone to the IRS to pay it and if he looses the FED will bail out the banks like they always do.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Justin, San Fran, CA — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 06:58:52 GMT

A great article on Ron Paul and the coming generational war...

http://wisdomknowledgehappiness.blogspot.com/2007/12/is-ron-paul-in-generational-war.html

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Greg, Burbank, CA — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:11:58 GMT

No loss of Freedoms?? Most Americans don't have a clue what is happening. Read the article: Treason - The Attack On Our Bill Of Rights, link below. This outlines the Congressional laws and Presidential Executive Orders since 2001 that takes away your rights.

http://mondoglobo.ning.com/group/questionauthority/forum/topic/show?id=1509099%3ATopic%3A2937

There has been acontinuous process of taking away our rights. Here are some, but not all, of the most recent ones:

2004-January-The FBI begins keeping a database of US citizens based on information obtained via NSLs.

June-Supreme Court upholds Nevada state law allowing police to arrest suspects who refuse to provide identification based on police discretion of “reasonable suspicion.”

2005-January-Supreme court rules that police do not need to have probable cause to have drug sniffing dogs examine cars stopped for routine traffic violations.

June-Supreme Court rules that the federal government can prosecute medical marijuana users even in states which have laws permitting medical marijuana.

2006-March-Senate passes amended version of Patriot Act, reauthorization, with three basic changes from the original including: recipients of secret court orders to turn over sensitive information on individuals linked to terrorism investigations are not allowed to disclose those orders but can challenge the gag order after a year, libraries would not be required to turn over information without the approval of a judge, recipients of an FBI "national security letter" -- an investigator's demand for access to personal or business information -- would not have to tell the FBI if they consult a lawyer. New bill also said to extend Congressional oversight over executive department usage guidelines. Shortly after bill is signed George Bush declares oversight rules are not binding.

June-Supreme court rules that evidence obtained in violation of the “knock and announce” rules can still be permitted in court.

(In other words, they can search your home, your office, without a warrent.)

September-US Congress and Senate approve the Military Commissions Act, which authorizes torture and strips non- US citizen detainees suspected of terrorist ties of the right of habeas corpus (which includes formal charges, counsel and hearings). It also empowers US presidents at their discretion to declare US citizens as enemy combatants and subject to detention without charge or due process.

(Here the president can arrest the leaders of war protesters or any other American and put them in detention for as long as he wants.)

October-John Warner Defense Authorization Act is passed. The act allows a president to declare a public emergency and station US military troops anywhere in America as well as take control of state based national guard units without consent of the governor or other local authorities. The law authorizes presidential deployment of US troops to round-up and detain “potential terrorists”, “illegal aliens” and “disorderly” citizenry.

(Now we have the military able to round up and detain American citizens. Are you getting the picture yet? Remember how the Japanese in Califoria were rounded up and put into conscentration camps, but not the Germans or Italians)

2007-May-National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51) establishes a new post-disaster plan (with disaster defined as any incident, natural or man-made, resulting in extraordinary mass casualties, damage or disruption) which places the president in charge of all three branches of government. The directive overrides the National Emergencies Act which gives Congress power to determine the duration of a national emergency.

(This allows the President to be a dictator for as long as he wants)

June-In “Bong Hits for Jesus” case Supreme court rules that student free speech rights do not extend to promotion of drug use.

(First drugs, what is next. There goes you free speech rights)

July-Executive Order 13438: "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq, issued. The order asserts the government’s power to confiscate the property “of persons determined to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq or undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people."

(Ah, yes, protest the war and they take your assets. Can't do much when you have no money, right)

And there is more pending in Congress.

Only Ron Paul will restore our rights.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Tim, Swisher, Iowa — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:29:22 GMT

leon houston - I've seen countless interviews...Ron has been careful to never say he'd NEVER run for third party...his wording is "I have no intention..."

Stopwatchingfoxnews' -- Jesus was not a politician. The government stealing money from its citizens and using it to help the less fortunate is Christianity?!?!?! How 'bout, don't steal money from your citizens, put more in their pocket, allowing the Christians to help more? This is Dr. Paul's vision.

FYI...Dr. Paul will be running a 30-min TV Ad this weekend in Iowa...you can see it here...

http://www.apatheticsanonymous.com/2007/12/ron-paul-tv-special-2-parts.html

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Jarrett, Orlando, FL — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:35:24 GMT

I'm not worried about the ignorant people who have Ron Paul all wrong. I will still Vote for the good Dr. Paul and I will be a better person for it. He will win the nomination and then we will get to see him destroy the democrat nominee in some of the greatest debates of our time. I can't wait.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Mike — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 10:54:39 GMT

Jesus would NEVER advocate using government FORCE to collect resources from people to help poor. That is what taxation and government social programs are: violently enforced wealth redistribution, and it is completely unjustifiable.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

JOHN B — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:18:58 GMT

If we remove the federal income tax, workers will have about 1/3 more spendable money to use in their communities for things like private charity.
Local people know how to provide charity locally. Federal government can only siphon money.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

freedom's dead in Social Circle, GA — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:05:59 GMT

jerry/ corpus christi.......if your tv is on then you don't have comcast

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Brett — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:08:21 GMT

jerry/corpus christi texas:

So, you're left wondering what freedoms we've lost. Maybe your too tuned into the boob tube of Mainstream Media perhaps to recognize that big government is taking close to half of your paycheck.

Wake up America!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Col, Tampa Fl — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:28:20 GMT

Stopwatchingfoxnews UHM you say how is RON PAUL a christian for ending all the government programs to help the poor.. are you ready for a big bombshell... THAT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENTS JOB. Now I ask you... what have YOU done to help the poor, because that aspect of our society and responsibility lies solely on US and our COMMUNITIES.. we do not need the government to take care of us. Be like millions who go out and do charity and volunteer work.. go help feed the homeless and jobless.. we have freedom of choice and free will. If we want to help those around us WE can.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

fishskicanoe, Wausau, WI — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:28:49 GMT

"Return question: When (not if) Ron Paul wins the nomination with the same groundswell of support that netted a record $6.02 million real dollars in a single day, will you support him?"

Absolutely not.

I believe in the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts. Paul does not. The river a few blocks from my house used to be an open industrial sewer 40 years ago. Due to pressure fronm the Feds and the State that was corrected and its now well on the way to recovery.

I believe in public financing of campaigns. Paul does not. The only way to get control of our government back from the corporations is to put all individuals on an equal playing field as far as financing elections. Not to mention the amount of resources it would free up for our elected representatives. No more fundraising tours. No more implied threats from disaffected lobbyists.

I believe in Universal Health Care. Paul does not. It is disgusting to go into one of the local supermarkets and see the signs posted for benefits to help pay for some poor kids leukemia treatment. Holding bake sales for health care is a poor substitute for having a system that recognizes the worth of every citizen, not only those lucky enough to have good health care. Plus Dr. Paul's refusal to accept Medicare payments strikes me as an example of arrogant paternalism. I've been paying into this system for decades and now Dr. Paul says that he will only see me if he deems me acceptable to receive his "charity". Screw him.

I believe in people having equal rights in every State of the United States. Paul does not.
His take on the Constitution is basically that each State should have the ability to define what properly constitutes church/state, race and marital/sexual relationships. If you thought that Jim Crow laws were a good way to run the country, then Pauls your man. This, BTW, is what makes him so attractive to the White Supremacist movement.

I support good, well financed public education. Paul does not.

I support the idea that we are the ones that screwed up the lives of Iraqis and we therefore have an obligation to try to fix what we have broken. Paul does not. Recently women who are considered too secular in southern Iraq have been murdered and tortured. What about those people who would not survive in the Shiia or Sunni religious fanatic's brave new Iraqs. Would we be willing to have them relocate here in order to protect them? Abandoning the secular populace to the tender mercies of the gangs and militias would be akin to Bush the First abandoning the Kurds and Marsh Arabs after encouraging them to rebel against Saddam. Like it or not we are now enmeshed in the future of Iraq. Paul's Lindberghesque isolationism is immoral.

I could go on and on. Paul's support for far right groups like the John Birch Society and the Neo-Confederate movement and his writings that seem to indicate he is a member of the anti-NWO, black helicopter crowd would make him ineligible in my eyes to be elected to any post. They make him totally unacceptable for the position of POTUS.

BTW, I see Paul's poll numbers have dropped drastically in South Carolina.

http://www.pollster.com/08-SC-Rep-Pres-Primary.php

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Marty, Bastrop, Tx. — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:39:18 GMT

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY, Really, because he would get rid of all programs that help the poor. How is that in any way Christian? All Republicans claim they are the most Christian, but none of them ever want to help the less fortunate. I'm pretty sure that is what Jesus preached, yet Republicans and the Christian right want nothing to do with the poor, they just want pro life laws and laws against Gays.

If we had less government involved in the charity and more charity doing there part, we would not have so large a government = less taxes = more giving to those charity's that do the right thing. Open books are needed.
If you have more in your check after taxes, then you would have a choice, not the governments choice of how it is spent.
Dr. Paul is on to something here. WE need to stop the banks from having the ability to print on demand. It is not healthy. Our economy is going to hell in a hand basket. Our jobs are easily lost to overseas cheap labor, they are imported to do it for less. The CEO of ye or made 10x the lowest paid employee just a short 20 years ago, now they bring make on average 400x's the lowest paid. It's broke folks. Stocks are owned by the share holder who is rightfully due that vary large figure as dividends, yet we allow the board members to hand it over to the CEO who claims S/He made the largest profit for the company... By sending the jobs overseas?
Now don't get me started on emigration. Our government is not going to change much in the near future. Here is how that is playing out.
The I.R.S. collects taxes from employers of illegals who use SSN they bought. So you have like 3-5 illegals paying tax on one number. No one one can collect the taxes at the end of the year, why you ask? Well there happens to be 5 different address' so no one collects anything but a letter from the I.R.S. saying prove your are entitled. They can't. 2002 had a windfall of 2.5 Billion, Yes with a "B" that went back to the coffers of the government. Easy money scam. No change you see. Dr. Paul is needed in a major way. Good luck to him.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

leon houston — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:56:28 GMT

Tim,

I do not know if you will return to this post but if so, you would be better off not using that no intention arguement... it sounds too much like depends on what the definition of is is.

to say i have no intention of is"no" in any language i have come across.

regardless, i wish he and you the best. i'm more concerned with republicans for bush having created the greatest suicide rate for soldiers in the history of the nation.latest news says it is now a record.342

how do people still support this clown??

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Sam Adams, NY, NY — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:56:59 GMT

Mitt cries, Huck insults religion by using it as a campaign slogan, Rudy remains sick, Tancredo quits, Fred sleeps and Ron Paul raises $6 million dollars in one day. Except for Dr. Paul, "there's not a dime's worth of difference between" Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas, banning books like "America Deceived' from Amazon, warrant-less wiretapping and the PATRIOT ACT. They are both guilty of treason.
Time to take sides, fellow patriots, you're either for liberty and Support Dr. Ron Paul or you're against liberty and damn us all.
Final link (before Stark County DIstrict Library bends to pressure and drops the book):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

SEA — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:12:25 GMT

I am amazed at how many people desire turning this country into a Communist state by continuing to allow the FEDERAL GOVT to take the hard-earned $ from Americans ... so THE GOVT decides who should get what, and where and when and why! Have Americans already forgotten the decades we spent fighting Communism in favor of private enterprise?!

Ron Paul wants to give *individuals* the choice of how & where & when to give to those in need ... no more taxes for GOVT to control!

As to Ron Paul's *AMAZING* fundraising success, two points:
1. The average donation is somewhere around $100-200 per person... not exactly "college kids putting themselves into credit card debt" !

2. If it's such a meaningless & easy thing to do, and the public really, really is more in favor of Rudy, or Huckabee, or Romney --
THEN -- why are those other candidates not having the same *AMAZING* results in fundraising? not just in total $ amount, but in NUMBER OF DONORS!

If the American public really felt strongly about the "message" of those other candidates, they would be out there fighting hard for them as Ron Paul supporters do! Instead, those other candidates have to PAY people to do the work that RP supporters do for FREE... and they still can't compete!!

www.ronpaul2008.com
to Learn More about the issues. Once people truly understand what Ron Paul stands for, it is easy to see why his support is increasing exponentially!!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Dale L — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:45:35 GMT

If we don't get Ron PAul in the whitehouse America will be a country of "serfs" working for the chinese at 3rd world labor prices.

He is the only one who understands the economy and base of our economic problems.

If the Republicans don't nominate Ron Paul they will lose so bad that the party may go the way of the wigs and be a historical curiosity. There is certainly no way they can win the whitehouse. This republican of 24 years won't vote for any of the neo-con war mongers.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Ginger — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:11:40 GMT

All the people that are against Ron Paul because they think he will be bad for the economy are very wrong. At present you are 10 Trillon in debt thanks to the moron in office surely Dr Paul can do better then that. He is a very wise and itellegent man and I have absolute faith in him. Also he is the only one who is not a member of the CFR or the other groups that are for a one world government and that alone makes him the only one to vote for if you have a brain in your head.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Phil Durgin, Austin Texas — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:22:24 GMT

People keep saying that we will return to the days of yore when everything was BAD. The Great Depression happened after the creation of the Federal Reserve, whose job it was to minimize swings in the money markets.

The same thing was supposed to happen under the watch of the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) yet we still have the Enron's, Global Crossings, et al of the World still happening.

The FDA was supposed to ensure that drugs and drug interaction problems were supposed to be a thing of the past, yet even now we find drugs taken off the market that passed the FDA's stringent test because the drugs kill people. The FDA's biggest blunder was keeping an easy remedy for ulcers off the market for 12 years giving the Pharmaceutical billions in profit.

I won't touch the war or the laws that Congress have passed, other have done a much better job explaining Ron Paul's position than I could.

Ron Paul brings common sense to the table. He shines a light on the problems that our government creates by interfering in the free market.

No wonder so many people upon hearing his message give money to the man. He speaks truth, something we haven't gotten from a politician in a long time.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

TJF, Suffolk, VA — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:35:30 GMT

Thanks for the article. So what other candidate has a similar problem? Romney is the only one I can think of with a big difference in that he is his own supporter where Ron Paul is getting support from all across the country. I thought is was funny last week that John McCain got a single vote (Lierberman) and Ron Paul got 58,000 votes - which one got more press coverage?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Glendon Cook, Auburn, ME — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 00:30:48 GMT

The world will always have its poor. Poverty grows when the value of money is manipulated by and for the banking masters. Ideal. Social programs feed on the impoverished masses who dutifully vote in those who arrange for their poverty. A big money self sustaining system.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Akston — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 00:53:15 GMT

fishskicano,

You posted that you would absolutely not support Paul in the event that wins the GOP nomination. I can accept that, mostly because I feel as strongly as you do against voting for a candidate *other* than Paul and can understand how unacceptable that alternative would be. I'll assume you'd vote for a non-GOP candidate or abstain.

As to your reasons, I can't argue with the items you present accurately. They're just a matter of opinion. I do have some comments and questions though.

We disagree on the effects of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts, not the intent. Paul has stated that private property rights should be enforced when citizens pollute the air and water which enter the property of other citizens. I see the Clean Air and Clean Water Act as having become tools of special interests (both public and private). But your right to stop other citizens from polluting a river that runs through your property should indeed be protected.

Your position on federal government-financed campaigning doesn't invoke any immediate disagreement from me. Don't know how you'd work it into the constitution so it would be legal. Maybe you could get enough support for an amendment.

But, I'd be interested in where "Universal Healthcare" is written into Article 1, Section 8. Unless it's explicitly permitted there, the federal government has no authorization to do that. Again, we disagree on the presumed effect, not the intent. I just happen to think poor people can better afford healthcare when they have more of their own money still in their pockets and the only parties involved are the patient and the doctor (like any other service in our lives). Added layers of bureaucracy won't make healthcare cheaper for anyone. But then, we simply disagree on that effect.

Your assertion: "I believe in people having equal rights in every State of the United States. Paul does not." is not correct. There is a difference between rights, as protected by government, and the voluntary interactions between private citizens. In the case of rights, the 14th amendment states that "No State shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." So no state could constitutionally discriminate in state functions. In the case of voluntary interaction between private citizens, he would not support federal interference. If I want to buy something or live somewhere, and the seller does not want to voluntarily sell or rent to me, Paul's federal government would not force a State government to make him sell or rent against his will. I'm okay with that.

"I support good, well financed public education. Paul does not." Again, false. Paul simply does not favor a federal Department of Education with its commensurate centralized bureaucracy. Schools are funded primarily by local property taxes, not the federal government. And a "good" education is a subjective thing. Ask most teachers what they think is the value added by a federal Department of Education. But again, we simply disagree about the effects of controlling education federally, not the intention: "better" education. I also can't find anything about education in the constitution.

As far as the Pottery Barn description of Iraq, I stipulate that invasion has left the Iraqi people in far worse condition than when the U.S. arrived. However, I've heard no concrete definitions for what would constitute a "fixed" Iraq. Without a specifically defined end-condition, the occupation can last indefinitely, due to not being "fixed" yet. I also remain convinced that if there is going to be a bloodbath when we leave, that will be the case next year, or in 10 years. There can also be an argument made that our mere presence extends the conflict on its own account.

But I do like your idea of opening immigration for any Iraqis who feel they would be safer in America (providing they are offered only the opportunity of residence and eventual citizenship, not immediate entitlements). Legal immigrants and American citizens who work for their own futures are the engine that drives American production.

Paul's poll numbers and people with unpopular views who might also support or oppose him hold no interest to me at all. Paul's own character and positions on the issues are all that matter. I support nearly every position he has taken, and disagree with a few. You prefer a different road. I can live with that. Though I'd be lying if I said I hope your views prevail. :-)

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Brandon, Denton, Texas — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 05:44:17 GMT

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY,

Christ never relied on the government to help the poor. He expected the people and churches to run hospitals and charities. Last time I checked, that is also the last time they were the most efficient and effective. Read your history and remember the facts. Welfare=Control.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Ralph — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:48:14 GMT

I just want to scram at the Mass Media! Our government is fat and bloated. We've been bamboozled by both parties and I'm sick and tired of the same thing! Inflation, I can't afford a house! It's the same old thing with the battle of the candidate clones. They say," I have a plan A for this, or, I have a plan B", It just doesn't cut it anymore! I just want to scream in your faces. Our dollar is becoming worthless. The Arabs are using Euros and Yens. Giselle Bundchen, the Victoria Secret Super model, refuses to be paid in dollars she demands Euros! I think other Americans are screaming too!

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Dr. Kibble — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 17:22:06 GMT

I can't believe that I am the only one who sees that Ron Paul is the BEST chance for Republicans to win in 2008. There are a lot of people who are sick and tired of the status quo in Washington. Ron Paul not only talks about changing that, he has consistently VOTED for that change. He is the most consistent, principled politician, Don't take my word for it, check out his voting record sometime...it speaks for itself.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Comic Strip Blogger, Germany, EU — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 17:25:22 GMT

Being viewed as a bully is one thing, but what about being viewed as country that is unthankful to its hardest allies like Poland?

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Mike Scoglietti, Strongsville, Ohio — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 02:09:08 GMT

Jerry from Corpus Christi must pretty young to not know! I don't think I'll tell him though, because if he only knew, it would turn his stomach.

Mike Scoglietti
Editor, DynamicTrends.com

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Jim in Wisc — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 20:44:46 GMT

I used to be a college kid, back in the 80s, I didn't get my money from my parents, I worked through college like so many others have to do. I believed in many of the positions Ron Paul takes, before I ever heard of him. I guess I'm one of the "kooks", then. I care about the economy, about my earnings and investments, my freedom of speech and habeas corpus. I follow the laws and speak out when I feel there is injustice towards others. I don't believe in the welfare state.
And I am opposed to preemptive war and occupation of foreign countries. I believe the government is a joke.

And I not only give Ron Paul my hard earned dollars, I do it not as a protest against the establishment, I follow my personal ideals. Now, why wouldn't I vote for Ron Paul? Because someone else tells me not to?

When or lose, at least I felt represented and got involved in the process. Better get used to it...

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

John, Perris, California — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:59:33 GMT

Our countries biggest problems are with our government. It has grown to big, been given to much power and continues to take whatever power it wants as we all have to sit and watch. We need to find and elect people that are not career politicians that have been getting fed by big corporations so they can continue to buy whatever they want from our President. We need to go back to a time when the three checks and balances of our countries government really worked and were not just words on a piece of paper as they are treated now. We need to make it so that every time a new bill is voted on that 400 other attachments are not stuck to it so that nothing gets done to actually help the people. I love our country but it is starting to feel like it is no longer “By the People and For the People”.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Edward ,Colorado Springs, Colorado — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:55:30 GMT

This is in response to Jerry/Corpis Christy Texas's comment below:
******************************************************
Let's see......
The papers are still running....
Telephones are running.......
TV is still going......
Air America is still on (barely).......

No loss of freedom in this country.....
still trying to figure out what freedoms we have lost in this country....
******************************************************

The freedoms you have lost are as follows:
Right to privacy
Right to own and develop your own property
Right to keep and bear arms
Right to Free Speach
Right to Protest
Miranda Rights
Right to redress of grievance from the Government
Right to a fair trial and be judged by a jury of your peers.

All these rights and more have been taken from you by the Patriot Act. All of these violations of an American Citizens rights, granted to us by the Constitution of the United States of America, has occurred indivudually or in various combinations within the past 5 years in American courts across the country.

Ron Paul's, um, problem?

Donna in Cambridge, New York — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:59:48 GMT

"Go RON PAUL!"
As he is the only candidate concerned about our civil rights, the constitution and the sovereignty of our country...Why is it that he doesn't get more coverage on MSNBC or any other news media outlet. For instance tonights broadcast(02-28-2008)reported about Obama, Hillary, McCain, a blip about Huckabee,and no mention about Ron Paul. WHAT A SHAME! My husband travels all over our great country and sees RON PAUL signs everywhere...overwhelmingly more than any of the other candidates, so why do the news/media outlets ignore his story? I wonder! He is our only hope to correct our governments travesties, and change the course of this nation for the better. On election day I intend to make my voice heard. My vote for RON PAUL will count!