What is Digg?399 Comments
- Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -30/+267"Liberty once again must become more important to us than the desire for security and material comfort. Personal safety and economic prosperity can only come as the consequence of liberty. They cannot be provided by an authoritarian government... The foundation for a police state has been put in place, and it's urgent we mobilize resistance before it's too late... Central planning is intellectually bankrupt – and it has bankrupted our country and undermined our moral principles. Respect for individual liberty and dignity is the only answer to government force, force that serves the politically and economically powerful. Our planners and rulers are not geniuses, but rather demagogues and would-be dictators -- always performing their tasks with a cover of humanitarian rhetoric... The collapse of the Soviet system came swiftly and dramatically, without a bloody conflict... It came as no surprise, however, to the devotees of freedom who have understood for decades that socialism was doomed to fail... And so too will the welfare/warfare state fail... A free society is based on the key principle that the government, the president, the Congress, the courts, and the bureaucrats are incapable of knowing what is best for each and every one of us... A government as a referee is proper, but a government that uses arbitrary force to direct every aspect of society threatens freedom... The time has come for a modern approach to achieving those values that all civilized societies seek. Only in a free society do individuals have the best chance to seek virtue, strive for excellence, improve their economic well-being, and achieve personal happiness... The worthy goals of civilization can only be achieved by freedom loving individuals. When government uses force, liberty is sacrificed and the goals are lost. It is freedom that is the source of all creative energy. If I am to be your president, these are the goals I would seek. I reject the notion that we need a president to run our lives, plan the economy, or police the world... It is much more important to protect individual liberty and privacy than to make government even more secretive and powerful." - Ron Paul
- inactive, on 02/16/2008, -46/+273What a champion is Mr Paul!!!
- Kent4jmj, on 02/16/2008, -30/+213True leadership character.
- PAtravler57, on 02/16/2008, -12/+138A lot can happen between now and November but on election day I will write in Ron Paul for president of the united States of America!
- SeethisPass, on 02/16/2008, -27/+149 Ron Paul follows the Constitution. You disagree?
- JohnnyKinder, on 02/16/2008, -15/+118It is a shame that he wont win. It is nice to see a politician stand up for what he believes is best for America, and not best for his or her party. At the end of the day, aren't they all Americans?
- Jb611, on 02/16/2008, -13/+110I wish this man was our president... :(
- inactive, on 02/16/2008, -9/+103If for some reason the next candidate ***** things up even more, all the things Ron Paul has said are now in the public psyche, and they aren't willing to tolerate too much more. Even if he does not win this time around, something tells me it won't be the last we hear from him.
- jawnboy, on 02/16/2008, -10/+93Ron Paul is stoopid, he want me to have my civil liberties back, he wants to stop spending trillions of dollars messing with the rest of the world and pissing everyone else on the globe off. What an idiot, next thing you know he will want votes to actually mean something, or the government to be governed by the same laws as the rest of us. Why can't all you Rontards get it, he is a loser - the tv says so!
- toxicityj, on 02/16/2008, -4/+83Because, for me at least, it means more to me to donate, vote, campaign, etc. for someone i believe in that's going to lose than doing the same for some jackass I don't believe in just because he's part of my party or because he's going to win.
- theblueprint, on 02/16/2008, -94/+168This article mentions Ron Paul in one sentence, and makes none of the clams in the title or description.
- macinit1138, on 02/16/2008, -9/+76Dr. Ron Paul not being electable is tantamount to the canary in mineshaft of freedom dying. If our country's government truly were in the hands of it's people, he would undoubtedly be the dominant front runner, or better still, instead of him being the only one with integrity, the other candidates might also be standing for the rule of law as well and they might also have an outstanding voting record to backup their campaign rhetoric. Instead, we have what we have now, front running candidates with all rhetoric and no substance!
- TrevaLVF, on 02/16/2008, -11/+76Ron Paul supporters: No matter who the Republican nominee is, remember that voting your conscience in November is patriotic!
Write in, Ron Paul if you must. - Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -31/+93Actions carry with them implications. That you are blind to them is to your discredit.
- pedo, on 02/16/2008, -1/+62if they are charged with contempt of congress, shouldn't they be arrested?
- d03boy, on 02/16/2008, -5/+64I'm a Ronpublican
- ndnspongebob, on 02/16/2008, -7/+64Ron Paul, a politician that you can trust.
- inactive, on 02/16/2008, -1/+56Since I disagree with the direction this country is headed, a vote for any other candidate for me would be wasted. Ron Paul 2008
- inactive, on 02/16/2008, -2/+51The media will not allow his anti-corporate message to enter into the national debate, the only way to get the average American thinking that perhaps he is truly being screwed is by bringing these ideas to his attention.
The only way to do that is by running for President. The idea is to start a movement that will eventually put a Constitutional, freedom oriented man in the White House - NightVortez, on 02/16/2008, -2/+48Win or not what he did was noble and respectful and for some turned out to be even more powerful then the walkout itself.
To be fair they should have mentioned the other two Republicans who didn't walk out, I'm glad at least one part of my party, small as it is, still represents my views. - airwalkery2k, on 02/16/2008, -5/+50He's not running for king, as many other presidential hopefuls seem to be.
- hypertension, on 02/16/2008, -0/+40You've probably heard of this "world citizen" stuff being thrown around nowadays. The elite and wealthy politicians can simply bankrupt the country at the rate they're filling their own pockets, then up and leave at any time, probably enjoying a higher standard of living in another country once the US is ruined.
At the end of the day, it's all about them, not anyone else. - reaganluver, on 02/16/2008, -6/+44Because he's from a country dumb enough to elect people like good ole W.
- Tommyhawk, on 02/16/2008, -1/+36That's some twisted logic you got there.
- theskyisblue, on 02/16/2008, -1/+35Why do idiots like you care about "who will win" or "electability?" vote for whose opinions you side most with, you slave. You have seen the many examples of this man's ability to truly lead and abide by principles, not made up viewpoints that shift with every minute to please one interest or group of voters to another.
- JohnBoyer, on 02/16/2008, -1/+35i donated to the message of freedom and personal liberty.
it just so happened that ron paul was the voice for it. - reaganluver, on 02/16/2008, -2/+36He was a flight surgeon in the Air Force. Loads of vagina there during the sixties i'll tell ya. Thanks for advertising your idiocracy.
- larfus, on 02/16/2008, -1/+33Our government has turned its back on the Constitution. The media has turned its back on Ron Paul . All I know is I will not turn my back . As stated above I will write his name in as well if I have to.
- Rahodeb, on 02/16/2008, -0/+31If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you always got. If you want any real change in government, you have to vote accordingly.
- rexblade, on 02/16/2008, -1/+32LOl i almost thought you were a pro troller the "stoopid" was very convincing.
- hypertension, on 02/16/2008, -3/+33I doubt your ideas of "separation of church and state" are along the lines of what the founders intended. Further, the fact that Ron Paul, a committed Christian, is put off of the idea of Washington prayer breakfasts and doesn't go to them, demonstrates that he understands both the "separation" *and* his faith.
- Peko, on 02/16/2008, -14/+43I see where you are coming from and I can agree with some of your sentiment. But I do applaud politicians who actually act in accordance with their purported beliefs. Kudos to RP for that. (BTW, I think RP is a twit in many ways, but you gotta give the guy cred when he walks the walk)
- tidu, on 02/16/2008, -2/+31I don't know... Ron Paul is definitely getting old. Add 4 more years and he's almost 80. And considering he's had over a year of nationwide campaigning... that's gotta be exhausting as hell. Hopefully he'll continue to spread his ideology though...
- DogBotherer, on 02/16/2008, -1/+30You wouldn't say that if you had a pussy instead of just being one!
- TheTaoOfBill, on 02/16/2008, -5/+34Anyone who claims separation of church and state is in the constitution is ignorant of what the constitution says. There is a great amount of difference between freedom of religion and separation of church and state. The constitution says flat out that congress can make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion nor can it make a law respecting a religion.
That doesn't mean religion cannot be in government. It doesn't mean a school cannot have a Christmas play. It doesn't mean a court hall can't have a Christmas tree. It doesn't mean a school can't have prayer (as long as it's not required).
It simply means that the government cannot do anything about religion. It cannot make a state religion and most importantly it cannot ban religious practices ANYWHERE. Ron Paul simply votes against those who believe America is a secular nation. It's not. There is a difference between a secular nation and a nation that practices freedom of religion.
In a secular nation the government tells you when and where you can practice religion. Sometimes the government doesn't even allow religion in a secular nation. That's not what the constitution was meant to do. It's quite clear in the 1st amendment that you are allowed to practice religion anytime and anywhere without the government giving you ***** about it.
Ron Paul has never voted outside of the constitution on this issue or any issue for that matter. - BEloftyIRONS, on 02/16/2008, -5/+33"The White House argues that the contempt-of-Congress laws do not apply to the president or any officials who invoke executive privilege, and that forcing the aides to testify would violate the Constitution's separation of powers."
I guess it only applies to them. I wish Ron Paul would be our next president I know it won't happen. I just wish it would though. All I can do is vote for him. That is what I did during the primary. I just wish there were more men like him in our government. - Yaanu, on 02/16/2008, -2/+30He said that all in one breath?
Damn. - Arkavus, on 02/16/2008, -1/+27Except the walk out already happened and he did not walk out. RTFA.
- byrdgang, on 02/16/2008, -0/+26The White House spokesperson says that the Justice Department won't enforce it. Let's hope she's wrong.
- rolf, on 02/16/2008, -12/+38Only one sentence, true, but what part of "Three Republicans who did not take part in the walkout -- including current presidential hopeful Ron Paul of Texas -- supported the resolution, while one Democrat, Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar, opposed it" did you not understand?
- BAFrayd, on 02/16/2008, -3/+29Very simple: His ideas are a threat to the powers that be. Namely, the Federal Reserve, the U.S. military industrial complex, and the globalists.
- wetard57, on 02/16/2008, -0/+25He is writing a book of his ideas btw
http://www.ronpaulbookbomb.com/ - TrevaLVF, on 02/16/2008, -0/+25I was hoping that Ron Paul would get the Republican nomination, especially after my candidate (Kucinich) announced that he was transitioning out of the Democratic presidential primary race. That way, when I vote my conscience in November and if the Dem nominee lost to a Republican, if the Republican is Ron Paul, I can say, "Great! At least, somebody in the White House will restore our lost civil liberties and get our industries and troop returned to US soil."
- sobebelushi, on 02/16/2008, -0/+25"White House spokeswoman Dana Perino called the move "a partisan, futile act" that would not be enforced by the Justice Department."
Not enforced by the justice department? Because they are your lackeys? This corruption at the highest levels needs to stop... - TheTaoOfBill, on 02/16/2008, -0/+24Donating, even now has positive effects for Ron Paul's platform because whatever money is left over from his campaign will go toward his congressional run as well as possibly being split with other congressmen who share his platform. That's well worth the money to me.
- hypertension, on 02/16/2008, -1/+25It's not necessarily the Ron Paul revolution -- Ron Paul simply happens to be involved.
He's the only one taking on the INSANE military empire of the US head on for what it's doing -- pissing people off around the world and bankrupting the US.
The hope comes from the fact that people are starting to wake up to this. The hope lies in the message. - beernutz, on 02/16/2008, -1/+24I wish i could double digg your comment.
- TheTaoOfBill, on 02/16/2008, -4/+26Tell that to Einstein. Tell that to Gandhi. Tell that to Martin Luther King Jr.
You don't change the world by following the herd. - GravitySpec, on 02/16/2008, -2/+23That is precisely the point that Ron Paul is trying to make with this election. During the last election, I never even knew who McCain was. This time around he is being shoved to the top. Now if whoever leads this country for the next 4 years manages to keep us intact until the next election, we could see Ron Paul come to the top as well after everyone sees what the result of a twisted election this will bring.
- rksprst, on 02/16/2008, -0/+20What are you talking about?
Practicing doctors are not in charge of the health care system... congress and corporations are.
Practicing doctors don't "fight for the anti-cancer", researchers with either phDs or MDs conduct research to find a cure/medicine for cancer.
How can you trust a doctor? Isn't that the person people are most likely to trust? Haven't you seen the shirts that say "Trust me. I'm a Doctor." -
Show 51 - 100 of 395 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is