knowbeforeyouvote.com— This website has a nice side by side comparison with links to sources. Someone did a great job of laying it all out. A must visit for everyone voting in the presidential primaries.
Jan 18, 2008View in Crawl 4
I like the way it was well referenced and clear. Anyone who has read the Constitution knows the phrase "use of force" cannot be found there. Anyone who is today working through mountains of paperwork trying to wade though ambiguous and ill written IRS codes knows what kind of a nightmare that is. Anyone who has been paying attention knows that 2007 dollars were worth less than 2006 and so on. In fact the American Eagle gold coins I purchased when "W" was sworn in will still get me the same amount of gasoline, so it is clear that Ron Paul knows a hell of a lot more about economics and the federal government than his opponents. I think the anti- freedom grouches are just angry because Ron Paul is so great and none of the others stack up and we Ron Paul supporters are among the smartest people in the land. They feel inferior because they are too weak to choose a candidate and too timid to stand up for their choice. Happily, myself and my fellow Ron Paul freedom supporters have no such problem. We are confident in our choice and we are strong enough to tell people about it. We realize why Ron Paul need to be the next president and why it is inportant to show others what a good and decent man he is and how much better a statesman he is than the also-rans. "In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." -Samuel Clemens, author who wrote under the nom de plume, Mark Twain
"Ron Paul has introduced legislation to...*Repeal the minimum wage"Minimum wage increases unemployment."*Amend the Constitution to ban flag burning (First Amendment?)*Amend the Constitution to define life as starting at conception (No abortions or even morning after pills)"What would it take to amend the constitution?Proposing amendment - 2/3 vote of the house and senateRatify - 3/4 of states"*Wants to Withdraw the US from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, UN, and UNESCO but says he is not an isolationist"An isolationist by definition can not advocate free trade.Non-interventionism + Protectionism = IsolationismNon-interventionism - Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.Protectionism - There should be legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states.*More federal pro-life legislation than I can countgood.*Lets not forget he believes in creation, and does not believe in evolution - <a class="user" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw</a>So? Both are just theories.*Lets look at what he wrote In this article - <a class="user" href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html">http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html</a>He says "The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America," that "The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers" and "the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both (of which are) replete with references to God""Of course the word God never appears in the Constitution, a massively important fact lost on Ron Paul. The sheer number of religiously motivated bills he has introduced, as well as his writings like this, are pretty scary."References to God.He did not say replete with the word God.
It's not propaganda if the facts are straight. I'm not arguing that it's not biased - clearly it is, but that doesn't make it propaganda. That facts aren't twisted. There's nothing wrong with probing the records of candidates - in fact, it would be a tremendous disservice to yourself and to your country if you voted WITHOUT being informed about not only the candidate's positions on the issue, but their record on the issues as well.This site is clearly biased, but it is also accurate.
Hortnon, I can only guess you are referring to terrorist attack on this country. If we weren't meddling with other countries, peopel won't meddle with us. there are plenty of countries out there who don't face the problems we are facing. As a matter of fact, it is the current foreign policy that will end up getting more nukes aimed at us. Remember, we are not the only country with nukes and Russia is very capable of flattening this entire continent.
Could someone please give us the source for this? I understand that there are sources listed for certain statements made within the document, but I need to know who constructed this and what their affiliation is with the election before I can take it as a truly neutral source. The use of simple phrases representing very complicated issues and the use of red and green on the chart (evoking an immediate, emotional positive/negative reaction on a candidate) would lead me to believe that this was put out by the Ron Paul camp and therefore not as neutral as it may appear. These documents can only be truly helpful to undecided voters if they are done by a completely neutral source, state entire issues, and give entire responses. It is hard to abbreviate things, like Tax plans or the war in Iraq, with a three or four word description and then slap a blunt YES or NO on it. That is something that makes me think this is from a bias source. As an undecided voter as of yet, I would love to know who created it, so that I can take it for what it is.
psalm1165 (above) writes: "I need to know who constructed this and what their affiliation is with the election before I can take it as a truly neutral source. "There it is folks, the product of a government education: "who cares whether the message is factual and well-sourced - I need to be able to smear the messenger's motives."
wish everyone would look at this before they vote. politicians have such a habit of double talk, it's no wonder people are voting for all the wrong candidates and reasons.
Closed AccountJan 18, 2008
I like the way it was well referenced and clear. Anyone who has read the Constitution knows the phrase "use of force" cannot be found there. Anyone who is today working through mountains of paperwork trying to wade though ambiguous and ill written IRS codes knows what kind of a nightmare that is. Anyone who has been paying attention knows that 2007 dollars were worth less than 2006 and so on. In fact the American Eagle gold coins I purchased when "W" was sworn in will still get me the same amount of gasoline, so it is clear that Ron Paul knows a hell of a lot more about economics and the federal government than his opponents. I think the anti- freedom grouches are just angry because Ron Paul is so great and none of the others stack up and we Ron Paul supporters are among the smartest people in the land. They feel inferior because they are too weak to choose a candidate and too timid to stand up for their choice. Happily, myself and my fellow Ron Paul freedom supporters have no such problem. We are confident in our choice and we are strong enough to tell people about it. We realize why Ron Paul need to be the next president and why it is inportant to show others what a good and decent man he is and how much better a statesman he is than the also-rans. "In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." -Samuel Clemens, author who wrote under the nom de plume, Mark Twain
726f6e7061756cJan 24, 2008
"Ron Paul has introduced legislation to...*Repeal the minimum wage"Minimum wage increases unemployment."*Amend the Constitution to ban flag burning (First Amendment?)*Amend the Constitution to define life as starting at conception (No abortions or even morning after pills)"What would it take to amend the constitution?Proposing amendment - 2/3 vote of the house and senateRatify - 3/4 of states"*Wants to Withdraw the US from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, UN, and UNESCO but says he is not an isolationist"An isolationist by definition can not advocate free trade.Non-interventionism + Protectionism = IsolationismNon-interventionism - Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.Protectionism - There should be legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states.*More federal pro-life legislation than I can countgood.*Lets not forget he believes in creation, and does not believe in evolution - <a class="user" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw</a>So? Both are just theories.*Lets look at what he wrote In this article - <a class="user" href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html">http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html</a>He says "The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America," that "The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers" and "the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both (of which are) replete with references to God""Of course the word God never appears in the Constitution, a massively important fact lost on Ron Paul. The sheer number of religiously motivated bills he has introduced, as well as his writings like this, are pretty scary."References to God.He did not say replete with the word God.
mokkan88Jan 24, 2008
It's not propaganda if the facts are straight. I'm not arguing that it's not biased - clearly it is, but that doesn't make it propaganda. That facts aren't twisted. There's nothing wrong with probing the records of candidates - in fact, it would be a tremendous disservice to yourself and to your country if you voted WITHOUT being informed about not only the candidate's positions on the issue, but their record on the issues as well.This site is clearly biased, but it is also accurate.
ladalangJan 27, 2008
Wow, fantastic!
phatmannerJan 28, 2008
Very Interesting...
benjameetup151Jan 30, 2008
Hortnon, I can only guess you are referring to terrorist attack on this country. If we weren't meddling with other countries, peopel won't meddle with us. there are plenty of countries out there who don't face the problems we are facing. As a matter of fact, it is the current foreign policy that will end up getting more nukes aimed at us. Remember, we are not the only country with nukes and Russia is very capable of flattening this entire continent.
psalm1167Jan 30, 2008
Could someone please give us the source for this? I understand that there are sources listed for certain statements made within the document, but I need to know who constructed this and what their affiliation is with the election before I can take it as a truly neutral source. The use of simple phrases representing very complicated issues and the use of red and green on the chart (evoking an immediate, emotional positive/negative reaction on a candidate) would lead me to believe that this was put out by the Ron Paul camp and therefore not as neutral as it may appear. These documents can only be truly helpful to undecided voters if they are done by a completely neutral source, state entire issues, and give entire responses. It is hard to abbreviate things, like Tax plans or the war in Iraq, with a three or four word description and then slap a blunt YES or NO on it. That is something that makes me think this is from a bias source. As an undecided voter as of yet, I would love to know who created it, so that I can take it for what it is.
zardiwFeb 1, 2008
Amazing site. A LOT of research went into that. Kudos!!............z
clamumFeb 1, 2008
Obligatory idiotic comment of "PAULBOTS".
lowrider49Feb 3, 2008
You must be one of those Socialist Democrats.
howardofskiFeb 8, 2008
psalm1165 (above) writes: "I need to know who constructed this and what their affiliation is with the election before I can take it as a truly neutral source. "There it is folks, the product of a government education: "who cares whether the message is factual and well-sourced - I need to be able to smear the messenger's motives."
dunciadFeb 13, 2008
wish everyone would look at this before they vote. politicians have such a habit of double talk, it's no wonder people are voting for all the wrong candidates and reasons.
bmjfbFeb 14, 2008
Please enlighten us
kanardFeb 22, 2008
LOVE IT!