What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Much Are You Over-Paying For Your Auto Insurance view!
howlifeworks.com - Car insurance rates have dropped leaving many people paying far more than they need to...
428 Comments
- KramerDSP, on 07/18/2009, -28/+172If Ron Paul decides to run in 2012, millions and millions of people are going to do everything they possibly can to see him get into the White House and try to reverse course on this country going down the cliff. There will also be a concerted effort to discredit anything he says and slander his name by some very powerful people who do not want the status quo to change. I hate to use a slogan from the Obama campaign, but Ron Paul 2012 would be REAL change. I know MANY people who agree with Ron Paull 100% on half the issues, and flat out disagree with him on the other half.
How is it possible that Ron Paul is to the left of Obama on foreign policy and the current war on terrorism, but is to the right of all the psuedo-republicans when it comes to fiscal issues and reducing the bloatedness and inefficiency of our current federal government? Ron Paul is far from perfect, but he's the closest thing this country has had to a citizen-stateman in decades. Lobbyists don't even bother going to his office!! Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs of the current bailout mess fame was the second highest contributor to President Obama's campaign. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycl ...
Ron Paul's top contributors during his campaign were US Army, US Navy, and US Air Force. Google and Microsoft are also in the mix. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycl ...
The problem with this country today is too many people treat it like a sports event, like Ron Paul said. This is my favorite article ever on the Republicrats, and how both major political parties are just two sides of the same coin. "Ghosts Inside The Machine" - http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_anthony__0 ... - ctiger2, on 07/18/2009, -18/+92Ron Paul must run in 2012. Especially if the USD collapses in that timeframe. The US will be nutso by then.
- BROWNS004, on 07/19/2009, -20/+91If you want freedom...vote for Ron Paul.
If you want nothing more than the staus quo..vote for Obama, Palin, or Romney.
...as for me...
"Give me liberty of give me death!" -Patrick Henry - speciallyblend, on 07/19/2009, -4/+45the only option i see in the gop to get my vote in 2012 is Ron Paul 2012, until the gop figures out that Ron Paul is the leader of the gop. the gop might become a 3RD PARTY and you can count my republican vote and money on that!
- NorthMass, on 07/19/2009, -13/+49End these ridiculous wars that like Ron Paul said Obama is continuing, end the Federal Reserve that doesn't have to tell anyone where they lent out $2 trillion, end the absurd War on Drugs, end the anti 4th amendment Patriot Act, and restore sound money back to America so a dollar saved is truly a dollar earned!
Ron Paul 2012! - mcsenget, on 07/19/2009, -6/+37If you want to continue the drug war, invasions of privacy, government eavesdropping on private conversations, Big Brother, inflation of currency, government intrusion into all markets, wars, lies, assassinations, trade restrictions, and the bubble economy, then by all means -
DO NOT VOTE FOR RON PAUL.
Otherwise, vote for him or anybody he endorses and you have checked out on your own! - inactive, on 07/19/2009, -11/+35RON PAUL 2012!!!
- KramerDSP, on 07/18/2009, -8/+31I'm hopeful things won't be THAT bad. I just wish that more of the Obama supporters would realize that not all that much has changed.
On one hand, transparency of government is trumped over all other goals during the campaign, and on the other, 1,000 page bills with 300 page amendments added in the wee hours of the morning are voted on by congressmen that haven't even read the bills, and the public has not had time to see the bill and digest what is really being added into the tiny corners of the 300-page amendment. When the republicans did this with the Patriot Acts, the democratic base and civil libertarians were very, very upset, but then the democrats do the same thing and Boehner pitches a hissy fit (rightfully so, even though he's a hypocrite for doing the Patriot Act vote the same way he complained the Democrats were doing with the Cap and Trade vote).
On one hand, Obama says torture is not allowed. On the other hand, we haven't prosecuted Bush or Cheney for war crimes, and we're not releasing the pictures of torture. Rendition is still going on, and there's talk of Preventive Dentention, which has the ACLU of all organizations roiling.
I want to like Obama. He seems like a nice guy, someone I could hang out with and share a beer. Wasn't that how the last guy got elected back in 2000? Obama may mean well, but all of the presidential powers he acquires and all of the expanasion he does in office goes to the next guy, who could end up making 43 look like Stephen friggin Hawkins. - JJDiggle, on 07/19/2009, -7/+28He was just on Free Talk Live.
http://freetalklive.com/ - jgubbe, on 07/19/2009, -4/+25Link to first page of article.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25109.ht ... - Thinbev, on 07/19/2009, -5/+24Millions of Ron Paul supporters are:
-Anti War (Pro-peace)
-Anti corporate or government monopolies of our money supply (Pro sound money and pro personal monetary choices)
-Anti government spending/ Inflation/ Taxation (Pro- personal prosperity)
-Anti government involvement in people's personal lives (Pro-personal freedoms)
-Anti government involvement in the economy (Pro-economic freedom... Pro equal opportunity to fail and succeed. No corporate favoritism or protection and pro government punishing of fraud.)
Many people can't seem to wrap their finger around these simple ideas because they're not found as a party platform choice in the bogus two-party system.
Amazingly enough, if our politicians followed their rule book (the Constitution), we'd have a government that would behave exactly as stated above... - Waiting2awake, on 07/19/2009, -4/+23But 77 is the new awesome. ;-)
- Willtheway, on 07/19/2009, -2/+19Ron Paul should try to run again in 2012. If he fails then, he should then give up any chance of winning the presidency. The fact that he was spot on with predicting the collapse of the housing bubble along with the People's economic concerns make him quite a force to be reckoned with. Go Ron Paul 2012!
- inactive, on 07/19/2009, -5/+21Why wasn't this man made president? Bush was a crazy douchebag, Obama is a crazy douchebag. The country needs a break from crazy douchebags.
- inactive, on 07/19/2009, -4/+20What the *****?
Paul advocates the destruction of the Department of Education. How does that qualify as maintaining the status quo? - henri3, on 07/19/2009, -6/+21I agree KramerDSP! and thanks for the opedenews site.
- AlwaysTurning, on 07/19/2009, -3/+18I'm not even going to bother commenting how much I like Ron Paul because I'll just get a bunch of drones telling me how I'm racist and don't want minorities or women to have rights, when really that's the exact opposite of anything Ron Paul says. In 3 and a half years we'll see how it turns out. by then hopefully people will be able to see a little clearer.
- henri3, on 07/19/2009, -16/+31Digg for Doctor Love ;o)
- Mankind121, on 07/19/2009, -0/+15why the hell is this on the second page?
- Super6, on 07/19/2009, -3/+17As a doctor Ron Paul wouldn't accept Medicare/Medicaid, any patients that were in these systems he cared for free of charge. I think he's in favor of a more compassionate systems which does not equal government takeover.
- ctiger2, on 07/19/2009, -5/+19These are just outright lies. Ron has never said anything is "just fine". Ron has stated many times that the Govt. needs to get OUT of Health Care & Education. Only then will improve. Phase out Medicaire, Medicaid & The Fed Dept. of Education and things would improve drastically. THAT'S what Ron says to do.
- elonkytroot, on 07/19/2009, -5/+19Several very obvious reasons.
1.) The election of Ron Paul as president is so unlikely and incredibly out there, it would be a massive statement. It would mean the country is demanding his principles. It would mean other politicians would have to adopt Paul's principles to satisfy the electorate. The country wouldn't just elect Ron Paul while being satisfied with everyone else in congress.
2.) Foreign policy. Ron Paul would have the authority to order the gradual reduction in troops across the world, effectively ending the American empire the world so despises us for. This would also save the country upwards of $1 trillion a year, since we would no longer have to pay for our troops in German, Japan, South Korea, the Middle East, etc, plus we'd stop giving billions of dollars in foreign aid away to countries that don't need it, such as Israel.
3.) Budget power. President Paul can threaten to veto any budget that is not balanced, requiring 2/3rds majority in Congress if they wish to overturn him. And again, they'd look back for overturning him if he was actually elected.
4.) The President has taken a semi-legislative role. For instance, the bailout bill was crafted by Obama and the Treasury. The President does have plenty of influence here and can attempt to push his agenda. Ron Paul might not even do this, but that's an improvement over having liberals pushing theirs. - KramerDSP, on 07/19/2009, -9/+22I don't disagree that age won't be an issue should he run in 2012. However, he is very fit for his age, exercises and eats well. His father lived to see his 100th birthday, and Paul is much healtheir than John McCain who was being pushed as the GOP's candidate in 2008.
As for your claim that Paul is "pushing the constant lie that the dollar is on the brink of collapse", how do you explain that the Dollar's purchasing power has declined 96% since 1913 ? $1 dollar in 1913 is worth 4 cents now. You are entitled to your opinion, but every single time I see Ron Paul speak, I see a man who has said the same thing for decades and has not bent to the political winds like 99.9% of the politicans out there. - KramerDSP, on 07/19/2009, -5/+18You're welcome. Love that article. It's outdated now, but in some ways, it'll never be outdated. Just gotta switch the names come 2011. I show this article to all my friends, and almost never get a reply. I guess they're just being stubborn. When the left is in power, the right grumbles and the left says "love it or leave it". When the right is in power, they scream "love it or leave it" to the grumbling left. And the basic premise is that in a country with all these supposed choices available to us consumer-wise, we only get two avenues of mainstream political thinking. It's ridiculous is what it is.
- emazur, on 07/19/2009, -5/+18The headline didn't mislead me.
Ron Paul on 2012/Obama/Palin = Ron Paul's Opinion on running in 2012, his opinion on Obama, and his opinion on Palin - mc88, on 07/19/2009, -4/+17The last time he ran was in 1988 as a Libertarian. How is that perennial? I'm waiting.
- KramerDSP, on 07/19/2009, -5/+18He might lose the election, but imagine RP in the debates with Obama and the GOP candidate. He would run roughshod over the both of them. To me, the ideal election would be Paul vs. Kucinich. The debates would be a lot more substantial.
- KramerDSP, on 07/19/2009, -5/+18Never suggested he was... "Ron Paul on 2012/Obama/Palin" followed by "In this interview with Politico, Ron Paul criticizes both Obama on the left AND Palin to the right. He also talks about whether he will run for President again in 2012."
- Waiting2awake, on 07/19/2009, -5/+17TaoofBill - Of course they don't come with a gold standard. Neither does inflation. This increase in growth is like the increase in home values over the last few years. It is an illusion. Sooner or later the ponze scheme reaches its' end and then, not now, is when the bill comes due.
Right now the only thing that gives the American dollar any value is the right of taxation. That the government can and will take the American peoples wealth and give it to foreigners so the upper echelon of society can continue to live high on the hog, while the bill continues to accumulate.
That bill will not be paid by those that have benefited, just as it wasn't the Elites at the financial institutions that paid for the housing crash. It was the average American, and that is exactly who will be paying for this illusion. - Waiting2awake, on 07/19/2009, -14/+26this thread is an example of the blind leading the blind.
Why are you two so fearful of liberty? So averse to freedom? So incapable of seeing your chains?
Rhetorical question of course, you can't answer any of it, because you don't see any of it, just as fish don't know they are wet. - bizzywho, on 07/19/2009, -5/+17Gah! He's gonna be 76 by the time 2012 comes around.
And since the Mayans and John Cusack told me that the world is gonna end on December 21, 2012, I don't think it really matters. /s - Waiting2awake, on 07/19/2009, -6/+18Then it would seem to make sense to bring back the real USD, and get rid of the pointless Federal Reserve Note.
- cmcagle, on 07/19/2009, -5/+17Which of Ron Paul's positions are anti-woman? He's pro-life, but that is far from being anti-woman; hell, I know more pro-life women than I do pro-life men! Even on the issue of abortion, he doesn't want to use the federal government to enforce his views on the entire country; he wants to return the issue to the States. (For the record, I'm pro-choice, but abortion isn't a "vote-moving" issue for me)
Which of his policies are anti-gay? He has said that he doesn't think the federal government has any role in marriage whatsoever, and doesn't think that sexual orientation should confer any special rights or privileges. He also thinks gays should be allowed to serve openly in the armed forces, and that we should punish sexual misconduct, not sexual orientation.
You have half a point about immigration, but I see no reason to put it into racist language. I do wish he would forcefully advocate that American immigration policy should allow for much easier LEGAL immigration to cut down on the number of illegal immigrants.
Your idea that we just need to play identity politics (e.g. the choice of Palin as VP) is a losing battle. Rather than try to "cater to" every possible special interest group based on gender, sexual orientation, religion or ethnicity, we need to stress that everyone ought to be treated the same under the law regardless of these things. - mcsenget, on 07/19/2009, -1/+12I tend to think that Ron Paul refers to the Constitution because it's a quick guide for most people but his real allegiance is with pure liberty - no matter what the Constitution should say. For example, Ron Paul cites the Constitution all the time, as we know, but he disagrees with the income tax which is in the Constitution.
His whole argument surrounding the Constitution is that nobody else in government obeys it. And if there is a 'social contract' and if they do take an oath to it, then that is the LEAST that they could do. - AlwaysTurning, on 07/19/2009, -4/+15He is for equal liberty and freedom for all...He has said many times you need to stop thinking in terms of men, women, black, white or hispanic, and think based on each individual. no matter what gender or race everyone has their individual rights. stop making up ***** about ron paul
- govsucks, on 07/19/2009, -11/+22The situation we are in now is OWNED by Republicans and Democrats....anyone want to deny that?
It is 90% or better Republican and Democrat in control of this nation and look where we are.
SOOOOO I say ***** you republican and democrat *****. We keep letting you drive and you keep wrecking the ***** car. So now its our turn. Try things our way for a little while.
Freedom for America, collectivist ***** in the back seat and shut up. You guys have had control of the nation for a hundred years and we're just about bankrupt. Anyone want to deny that?
I really don't think after this many decades you people and all your social programs have anything to add but more debt. So move the hell over and let liberty drive for a while. - KramerDSP, on 07/19/2009, -1/+12udjet, Ron Paul is far from perfect, and you are absolutly correct when you say history shows that people change when they take office. However, if you looked at the voting record of every politician over the last 100 years, you'd probably come to the conclusion that Ron Paul is the most consistent politican of the last few decades. His voting record pretty much says it all.
- smacksaw, on 07/19/2009, -2/+12@homercles337
Hi, it's me again.
Ever hear of the word "corporatism?"
The reason that word is even in the lexicon of political debate today is because Ron Paul dared talk about it.
Honestly, I think you know very little about Ron Paul and even less about libertarianism and the founding of the USA. Jefferson himself warned us to be wary of speculators and bankers as well.
Libertarians believe in a strong CONSTITUTIONAL government that defines and enshrines our rights. The rule of law is important to us. Anarchists do not believe that. Anarchists are not libertarians. It's like saying Democrats are libertarians because they believe in civil rights as libertarians do. You're being ignorant.
Libertarians would be far more aggressive in regulating corporations than the Democrats or Republicans. Libertarians are against collusion, cartels and monopolies. They would remove personhood from corporations. Do research and find out what that means, to remove personhood from corporations. - AlwaysTurning, on 07/19/2009, -1/+11he does not ever say they are "just fine" so I don't know where you are quoting that from. he said too many times that there is too much intervention in both of those systems causing most of the problems people complain about. why doesn't anyone bother to learn about the guy before they bash him
- AlwaysTurning, on 07/19/2009, -3/+13NoLibertarians, wanting to withdraw our army from other peoples countries is not being an isolationist. He wants free trade, free travel and free communication. He want's to handle our problems with other countries diplomatically rather than using threats or embargos. He is not an isolationist you heard that question asked in one debate and can't get off of it. stop spouting *****
- Waiting2awake, on 07/19/2009, -8/+18"If you want economic disaster, for those elites that have benefited from the increased productivity of the workers, and have not given any of it back, and economic freedom for those same workers... vote for Ron Paul."
TFTFY - bearsandbulls, on 07/19/2009, -12/+221.5 million voted for him in primaries and unlike other politicians his followers and message gains steam regardless of it's election time or not.
- ironhide, on 07/19/2009, -6/+15Put me down as Sec. of Agriculture.
- Izult, on 07/20/2009, -2/+11quite possibly the most misinformed statement i've read on digg. amazing.
- regeya, on 07/19/2009, -5/+14For the millionth time, and someone PLEASE do me the honor of ANSWERING me instead of just rating me down because you don't like the question...
If Ron Paul is a man of Constitutional principles and you want him to be President because of that, how does this help anything? Traditionally the President just has the final say, the power to sign or veto--however, he's already in one of the jobs where people are actually supposed to call the shots.
How would removing him from the legislative process improve anything? - mcsenget, on 07/19/2009, -3/+12Ron Paul's running mate is Freedom
- ironhide, on 07/19/2009, -5/+14Not a chance, but I've got my own ideas about changing the damned corporate farms and subsidizing corn.
- Infekshun, on 07/19/2009, -3/+12This is why the dollar will collapse:
1) The government has spent us into an unfathomable amount of debt.
2) This money comes from a few different sources: foreign investors, domestic investors, Government IOUs to itself (social security), and the Federal Reserve
3) Fortunately, only one of these methods causes inflation: the purchase of US debt by the Fed
4) Unfortunately, foreign investors, who hold nearly half of our debt, are getting tired of what we are doing to our currency and are becoming hesitant to acquire any more of our debt
5) Just because they don't like us doesn't mean we don't have to pay them back - so, how will we pay them back (almost 50% of our debt) if they won't continue to purchase our future debt?
6) Answer: the Fed will the create money
This is how the dollar will die. And no, all this extra money doesn't magically make us all richer or more productive - it just diminishes the value of the money we already have.
Please let me know if you see any flaws in this argument. Maybe you have more faith in those foreign investors to prop up the dollar, but many nations, including China and Russia, have spoken out about the devaluation of the dollar and would like a new world currency. The Japanese, our #2 debt holder, say they still have faith, but shortly after an announcement of this nature was made, some Japanese men were found crossing the Italian border with (I don't remember the exact value, but it was about) $150 BILLION dollars in US Treasury Bonds.
Again, please tell me where your faith in the dollar is coming from. - Ramenboy005, on 07/19/2009, -1/+9Hes got a chance
- govtdoesnotwork, on 07/19/2009, -1/+9The ratification of the 16th amendment which allowed an income tax without apportioning it among the states has been called into question a number of times. But even if it's valid, he and I want it repealed. Also, many people seem to suffer under an illusion that the individual income tax is the government's sole source of revenue. Far from it... But once again, the problem is SPENDING. If we went back to the level of spending of the last year of Clinton, the USA could entirely eliminate the individual income tax. Corporate taxes, gas taxes, and various other federal excise etc. taxes would remain, but my early Aprils would be SO happy...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 438 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is