Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
New Jersey legislator speaks out on why he endorsed Ron Paul
usadaily.com — NJ Assemblyman that was almost thrown in jail for refusing to raise taxes and increase spending tells why he endorsed Ron Paul for president.
yaba2007- 1781 diggs
- digg it
- buckybadger9876, on 11/19/2007, -10/+148http://teaparty07.com
- PATSCRU, on 11/19/2007, -35/+16good ol' fashioned spam in the comments...awesome!
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -16/+0THINK
** "over here we look at a mint and we can look forward to the day when the mint is minting real money gold and silver none of that paper" Ron Paul in Philadelphia Nov, 2007
** A return to the gold standard; called for an audit into how much gold really is in Fort Knox[11/05/07, On Face The Nation]
** "Paper" (for currency) does not make sense."[11/05/07, On Face The Nation]
** Central bankers and politicians don’t want a gold-backed currency system, because it denies them the power to create money out of thin air. http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2002/tst061002.ht ...
I do not have an economics degree and have some questions, so help me out and do NOT direct me to the Austrian School of economics.
How do we go back to a gold standard from where we are? Has anyone thought of the problems associated with this plan if we do literally as Ron Paul states and fully back the dollar in silver and gold?
#1 First if we go to a true gold standard the citizens of the United States of America will be forced to purchase at least one and possibly more than one TRILLION dollars of gold and silver. This will be held by the government to back the U.S. currency in circulation at this time. Citizens of the United States of America would accrue at least one trillion additional dollars of debt for the initial project. No new projects could be undertaken with the gold purchased for its purpose would be to sit in Fort Knox backing up the already circulating currency 1:1. We would most certainly have to either raise taxes or sell additional bonds to secure the funds to obtain the silver and gold necessary to carry out the plan.
In 2005 the United States of America had $760 billion in circulation, with an estimated half to two-thirds being held overseas, with an annual growth rate of about 7.6%. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_dollar
#2 We would introduce huge lag times at the federal level from planning through implementation to change economic policy. For every planned and UNPLANNED expansion of the economy or need for additional liquidity we would need to buy gold and silver. First the legislative bodies would need to determine the amount of additional silver and gold that needed to be purchased on a daily basis. Then the silver and gold need to be located, mined, transported, purified and secured. Only then could dollars and coins can be printed. This process would logically take months if not years bringing the goverment to a grinding halt.
#3 Then what of the scarcity of the materials of gold or silver now or in the future? Certainly the commodity price of gold and silver would go through the roof initially. Then any price changes in the commodities of gold and silver would force the U.S. Mint to either buy or sell gold and silver so as to back the dollar "full faith in gold and silver."
Governments that wanted to could contest the United States for gold and silver globally could drive the cost up for us to run an economy. Yes it would make the gold we had more valuable so it may be offset but we cannot tell at this time if people would want gold in the same amounts as today of it became a truly scarce commodity. Don't mention diamonds because that is a FALSE scarcity and cannot be compared to a true scarcity of a resource.
#4 We would have to protect the gold and silver purchased that was not in circulation, and if anything happend to the gold or silver the entire economy would take a hit.
The last time I raised the question some ANUS raised the fact that this scenario was in some movie but it is a fact. Any government that wanted to take out the U.S. economy would only have to hit the location where the gold and silver were stored.
Why would we do any of this with no percieved benefit?- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -10/+1Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle
www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=1996_1366357
AUSTIN - Democratic congressional candidate Charles ""Lefty" Morris on Wednesday criticized Republican opponent Ron Paul for endorsing a group that wants to end all government funding of education and repeal compulsory school attendance laws.
Morris said such an ""extreme" view would doom most children to a lifetime of digging ditches.
Paul defended his endorsement of the Separation of School & State Alliance, a nonprofit organization founded about two years ago by a former private school principal in California.
The Republican nominee said he supported the group because it sought more parental involvement in education to counter deteriorating public schools. He dismissed the organization's more far-reaching goals, including repeal of laws requiring children to attend school, as only ""theoretical" targets. - silveravnt, on 11/19/2007, -0/+3Well the state has done such a great job with schools. Why should the state force anyone to send their kids to school? It's called personal responsibility.
- darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1No perceived benefit? Are you smoking crack, or what? The single greatest problem with our current monetary system is that it's based on a promise issued by an entity that historically lies a lot. At least having money backed by something real and tangible would fix that problem. As for your point #2, you make the assumption that the government should be active and fast-moving, but I would argue that a slow government is much better - it gives We The People more time to act when it's being stupid. So that point goes out the window, nevermind the fact that the gold and silver would not actually need to be transported for trade to occur since the paper dollars would be representative of the gold (just as they are now representative of a liar's promise).
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -10/+1Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -16/+0I ask you, what would ANY Austrian KNOW about economics that the Unted States does not given Austria's nearly complete lack of an economy?
On the Tonight Show Mr. Paul said he likes Austrian Economics which is Free Market economics it also involves hard money, "you should not be able to print money out of thin air" he says. Ron Paul does NOT call it the the Austrian SCHOOL of Economics but that is what it is. So does Ron Paul know what he's talking about? Hard to tell. None of the posts on YouTube which Ron Paul has with Ben Bernanke are very full discussions so we really don't know what Ben Bernanke thinks of Ron Paul but he doesn't fear Ron Paul's ideas. Ron Paul is out of step.
OK so Ron Paul wants to base OUR system of banking on Austria's system. An Austrian system I have been told that does not exist in the current Austrian system...so the people of Austria REJECTED the Austrian School of Economics. They did NOT implement the Austrian School of Economics but Ron Paul wants us to implement it.
So lets look at this for a second. What is austrias GDP compared to the USA. I mean if Austria has a system that they even minutely implemented that he is fascinated by then it must be better than the USA otherwise he would be FASCINATED by the United States of Americas system of banking and economy!
So what do we have? Lets see where Austria is ranked in global GDP. At the time I looked at Wikipedia...and IT CHANGES, Austria is ranked 35th. And who is above Austria besides the United States of America? Countries like Mexico and Indonesia. Does the United States of America want an economy like or as POWERFUL as Austria? NO. Even if Austria did NOT follow the Austrian School of Economics Austrians have managed their economics poorly! So what is it that is so important that we are expected to follow it by Ron Paul? Ron Paul is full of hot air....OR *****. You choose.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ ...
OLD
In Millions of USD
#1 EU 14,527,140
#2 USA 13,244,550
#5 United Kingdom 2,373,685
#26 Austria 321,934
#30 Ireland 222,080
NEW
By Country...EU thrown in for presentation
European Union 13,881,051
#1 United States 13,020,861
#6 United Kingdom 2,121,766
#12 Mexico 1,171,506
#15 Indonesia 959,834
#35 Austria 297,727
#49 Ireland 186,705- Misesean, on 11/19/2007, -0/+12For the sake of other people reading this (I know it won't make any difference to the spamming idiot above), the only thing Austrian Economics has to do with Austria is the fact that its founder happened to be born there.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -7/+0What would you know about Austrian Economics in any case. One fact and you probably got it off of Wikipedia NOT some course at a major university. I've had two semesters of Econ for my business degree and I don't see why we need a gold standard.
- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -0/+4You had two semesters of Economics, and you don't even know that Austrian Economics is an economic theory? Are you brain damaged? I don't want to be rude if you have a serious mental condition. Please let me know. You should ask your university for a refund since they've obviously tricked you into thinking that prestige equates to substance.
- imacommi, on 11/19/2007, -0/+3I also have a business degree and have taken plenty of econ classes. Gold standard or some sort of a real asset backed currency standard would be a huge improvement to the currency we currently have now. Think about all the problems going on with our falling dollar value etc. This is the kind of thing that cannot and will not happen if we actually had some value attached to our currency. Not to mention the fact that we would stop being able to bring money out of thin air. The US government and our central banking system is basically running one big ponzy scheme with our currency, Think about it... We borrow money, pring money to pay it off, and borrow more money. At the current rate we are headed to financial disaster quickly
- darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2So, basically, you reject an economic theory because the country with which it shares its name is unable to generate the same GDP as some other country that is over 100 times larger?
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -16/+0THINK
- WTC7WasPulled, on 11/19/2007, -5/+34Tea Party 07 is going to be HUGE! I can't wait to see how much money is raised that day. Ron Paul will be President.
- DAaaMan64, on 11/19/2007, -1/+9I already gave $100 on the 5th of november. I can't give much more, so that day I am going to buy a couple of yard signs and a t-shirt. I think that maybe sufficient.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -15/+0http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2c5_1179338348&p=1
RON PAUL IS A 9/11 and KENNEDY TRUTHER!
According to Ron Paul "I never automatically trust anything the government does when they do an investigation because too often I think there's an area that the government covered up, whether its the Kennedy assassination or whatever."
Interviewer: "Would you provide support for a 9/11 investigation..."
Ron Paul: "Yes, I think we have to look at the details of it. The investigation was an investigation in which there were government cover-ups. There could be a better investigation because there is a split in government. So I would certainly consider that and it would be worth while. If you do the same thing over and over again you're just spinning your wheels. But I would definitely work with Dennis(Kucinich). So I'll talk to Dennis and he's in a position now with the party majority so he might have a better chance with it."
Interviewer: Yea, He has subpoena power and everything so..."
Ron Paul: "And we'd have a better chance of getting a new investigation. Too often investigation on almost any issue is usually a cover-up"
Interviewer: "Yeah,and I know that he is really serious about this because I know that his office is already investigating certain aspects of 9/11. He's having his guys look into it"
Ron Paul: "I'll talk to him about it."- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2Your behavior is strikingly resemblant to that of a truther.
- Fieri, on 11/19/2007, -0/+9Sign bomb on that day too. Let's make it so no one can drive anywhere without seeing Paul's name at least once. =D Name recognition is our major roadblock.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -15/+0http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2c5_1179338348&p=1
- DAaaMan64, on 11/19/2007, -1/+9I already gave $100 on the 5th of november. I can't give much more, so that day I am going to buy a couple of yard signs and a t-shirt. I think that maybe sufficient.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -20/+0Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle
www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=1996_1369494
""We must recognize that people have a right to get high, and legalize the use, possession and sale of all drugs which are now prohibited," Paul is quoted as saying in copies of the survey that Morris distributed to reporters. ""Further we must empty our prisons of all those who have been convicted of simple sale or possession, and make room for real criminals.
""People have used opiates, coca, and other drugs responsibly for thousands of years. Attempts to prohibit their use are not only immoral but doomed to failure," it said.
Ron Paul is NOT fit to be REPUBLICAN presidential material. He should be running as a democrat with the rest of the liberal drug addicts.- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -12/+0Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle
www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=1996_1366748
""The truth is if you want to help the children, you will help the children more if you get rid of the drug laws," Paul is shown saying to an unseen audience.
""If we want to get rid of the drug dealer, let's get rid of the drug dealer by getting rid of all the drug laws."
Morris' campaign manager, Billy Rogers, said the video was shot when Paul addressed a meeting of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws in June 1988.
Rogers wouldn't say how Morris' campaign obtained the video and said he believed the meeting was held in San Francisco or Washington.
""He says all drug laws. It's very clear in the full context that he's not talking about (only) federal laws," Rogers said.- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -0/+3COINTELPROAgent, is that you? If so, I hope you're having a nice vacation!
- darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+4You are absolutely retarded. I suppose you think the war on drugs is successful and morally right? Here's a question: do you know what "freedom" means?
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -12/+0Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle Houston Chronicle
- Herostratos, on 11/19/2007, -0/+4They even have a music video released:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=PTU2He2BIc0 - themoosejuice, on 11/19/2007, -2/+3Sounds like a great tea bagging party.
- pailsOfGrease, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1Too funny to bury.
- witebuddha, on 11/19/2007, -4/+1nothing like pushing an agenda!
- MaddieCakes, on 11/19/2007, -0/+0I literally don't have $100 to spend; I'm living off student loans. :(
- PATSCRU, on 11/19/2007, -35/+16good ol' fashioned spam in the comments...awesome!
- volksgardencom, on 11/19/2007, -11/+54go ron go
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -37/+2The following discussion is based on material within: The SAIS Center on Politics and Foreign Relations and the Financial Times hosted “A Traditional Non-Intervention Foreign Policy” featuring keynote speaker Congressman Ron Paul on Tuesday, September 11, 2007.
www.sais-jhu.edu/mp3_player/fall2007/ronpaul091107.htm
Asia; China and North Korea VS. Taiwan and South Korea
Ron Paul wants all the troops home from Japan and Korea as well as to vacate a treaty that we have with the democracy of Taiwan protecting it from communist China. China and Taiwan had a civil war more than 50 years ago and China lost. Since then Taiwan has grown into a major ally and trading partner of the United States of America. China wants Taiwan back in the fold now that China is a superpower. Taiwan refuses claiming that they are a soveriegn nation. China has decided to aim thousands of missiles at Taiwan and plans to attack Taiwan if they pursue becoming a full member of the United Nations or attempt to obtain soveriegnty.
Taiwan is the SECOND greatest producer of RAM for nearly ALL computers globally. South Korea IS NUMBER ONE.
The following link must be paste together.
www.electroniccomponents.globalsources.com/
gsol/I/Memory-chip/a/9000000089299.htm
/QUOTE/
Taiwan is the second-largest memory chip supplier in the world, with production focused on DRAM and Flash.
With 20 percent of the market, Taiwan is now the world's second largest producer of memory chips, tailing South Korea, which supplies 45 percent of the global requirement. Three industry giants from across three continents hold sway over the rest of the market: Qimonda of Germany, formerly Infineon, which accounts for 15 percent of the overall supply; and Micron of the United States and Elpida of Japan, with 10 percent each.
Taiwan is poised to capture 25 percent market share by 2009, according to the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI). The overall production value of Taiwan-made memory chips is forecast to grow from $6.76 billion in 2006 to $6.96 billion in 2007, according to ITRI.
/END QUOTE/
The following link must be paste together.
http://www.chinasourcingreports.com/csr/Computer-P ...
Computer-Boards-&-Cards/p/CSRCBC/Executive-Summary.htm
In 2005, makers of motherboards from Taiwan account for 86 percent of the global supply of motherboards.
The following link must be paste together.
http://www.chinasourcingreports.com/csr/Computer-P ...
Computer-Boards-&-Cards/p/CSRCBC/Industry-Overview.htm
/QUOTE/
As many as 60 Taiwan companies manufacture motherboards. Taiwan makers account for eight out of every 10 motherboards produced worldwide. A total of 108 million units were made in 2004. Output is forecast to reach 112 million units in 2005 and 115 million units in 2006.
/END QUOTE/
If you do not know what RAM or MOTHERBOARDS are let me state that you cannot manufacture a computer, iPod or many other devices without either. If China takes over Taiwan or North Korea takes over South Korea then they will control the global production of these components. Companies like Dell, HP, IBM, and Apple will virtually be out of business until we rebuild the lost infrastructure and that could take years. The U.S.A. will lose a major competitive advantage during that time as the U.S.A. may lose the ability to run businesses, the military, university research, etc.
Certainly we will have go to war to prevent the takeovers. Many hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of Americans will die to regain the losses. China and North Korea remain communist countries. North Korea and the North Vietnamese were supported by China against the United States of America in the Korean and Vietnam wars. We are in a delicate balance at this time and Ron Paul is stating that he wants us to withdraw our support for these countries.
RON PAUL IS DANGEROUS to the foreign policy of the United States of America. IT WOULD TAKE THE _WORLD_ YEARS TO SET UP FACTORIES TO BUILD RAM AND MOTHERBOARDS IN SUFFICIENT QUANTITIES TO REPLACE TAIWAN AND SOUTH KOREA.
The United States of America and all the trade that goes on does so at the PROTECTION of the United States of America. What do you think the satellites, submarines, Navy, Army and Marine Corps do? Along with protecting the people of the United States of America these units protect the trade of the United States of America supply routes for goods including oil. You must understand how the United States got to where it is and who it has alliances with globally and how dangerous RON PAUL is to those alliances. If we pull back all of our support the entire country will be very vulnerable within months.
Lets suppose that Ron Paul wins the election and the United States of America walks away from protecting Taiwan, South Korea and Japan among dozens of other countries. The takeovers of several of these countries would happen in a very short time period, perhaps a few months to a few years depending on the state. RON PAUL in this scenario would be president! What would this JACK ASS do! He claimed NON INTERVENTION to get the White House!!!! Americans will have to be SENT en masse to retake the countries. Hundreds odf thousands of Americans will die retaking what they had been protecting for decades! Do NOT support in any way shape of form or vote for this JACKASS. The more I know of Ron Paul the less I want to know. Ron Paul is a total JACK ASS on foreign policy and DANGEROUS TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
AND FINALLY, if you listened to the .ram file GOLD HAS NOT KEPT UP WITH INFLATION OVER THE DACADES and RON PAUL IMPLIES THAT IT HAS and that a gold based system is better for us than the system we have...WHAT AN *****! WHAT A SHAM. An ounce of gold would be worth several hundred thousand if it had kept up with inflation. Don't even be a turd and argue this point...go listen to what the MORON has to say and then THINK.- Arkavus, on 11/19/2007, -1/+20Your comment is insulting to both Taiwanese and South Koreans. You honestly think the ENTIRE FREAKIN WORLD would let China or North Korea jeopardize the RAM market? China is not run by morons, they have nothing to gain by destroying Taiwan or South Korea. And while North Korea is run by a moron he is not stupid enough try and invade South Korea. Especially with the millions of dollars worth of humanitarian aid his country gets from South Korea.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -10/+0The for what reason do the North Koreans NEED NUCLEAR WEAPONS? Don't try to shift the argument to me. Look at China and North Korea and how they have acted. China on Burma, China on Iran. North Korea trading nuclear secrets with Syria to set a facility to produce nuclear weapons! North Korea is a proliferator of nuclear weapons. No...YOU ARE THE INSULT! Everyone here is not as stupid as you and do not believe everything you have to say!
And I am going to rail against THIS JACKASS! RON PAUL IS A JACKASS! You want information warfare YOU'VE GOT IT. Cover your six because iI'm going to take you out. - EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -9/+0Look at the worm squirm with Sean Hannity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEZO7MPxJIs&feature ... - EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -8/+0Arkavus, I want you to know that an official of China said that if the United States of America got in their way when they decided to retake Taiwan that China would NUKE the West Coast of the United States. Also recently a Chinese official said that they would dump bonds that they hold to the tune of several trillion US dollars on the market if we did anything to slow the sale of their lead filled toys to the American market.
China will attack the US when it comes time for us to protect the chip and motherboard industry. They will act.
I also want you to know that I have datade for more than one year a Chinese woman, from Shanghai. And in spite of that fact that CHINA SUCKS. - darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+3@EditorResponse, today's king of Dumbassland:
So... wait, hold on. So basically... wait. Okay, let me double check this. First you ask why North Korea wants nuclear weapons? That's not obvious? Every enemy of the United States in the world wants nuclear weapons because we have shown clearly that we won't bother anyone with nukes. Generally speaking, when people get nukes, we start giving them foreign aid to keep them quiet. So why would North Korea *NOT* want nuclear weapons?
Now... I'm not sure if I understood this part correctly or not, but are you saying that the nation of China might somehow have been improved by the fact that you dated (or datade) someone from that country? Do you really think so highly of yourself as that?
At any rate, I have this to say: Wow. Just wow. I knew humanity had some serious problems, but I was not prepared to see that it was in so bad a condition.- Arkavus, on 11/23/2007, -0/+1North Korea wanted nuclear weapons as a bargaining chip with the US. They got em and they got exactly what they wanted. They know using a nuclear weapon is not practical for their country.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -10/+0The for what reason do the North Koreans NEED NUCLEAR WEAPONS? Don't try to shift the argument to me. Look at China and North Korea and how they have acted. China on Burma, China on Iran. North Korea trading nuclear secrets with Syria to set a facility to produce nuclear weapons! North Korea is a proliferator of nuclear weapons. No...YOU ARE THE INSULT! Everyone here is not as stupid as you and do not believe everything you have to say!
- darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2I like how you basically say that we have a responsibility to protect South Korea and Taiwan because they make RAM. That's cool. And I'm sure both countries are happy to know that we're only interested in keeping them around as long as they keep making memory for our little gadgets.
"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson
So go suck on your alliances.
- Arkavus, on 11/19/2007, -1/+20Your comment is insulting to both Taiwanese and South Koreans. You honestly think the ENTIRE FREAKIN WORLD would let China or North Korea jeopardize the RAM market? China is not run by morons, they have nothing to gain by destroying Taiwan or South Korea. And while North Korea is run by a moron he is not stupid enough try and invade South Korea. Especially with the millions of dollars worth of humanitarian aid his country gets from South Korea.
- TopherT, on 11/19/2007, -0/+9Over the 'DACADES' the value of the dollar has plumeted, but what do your comment about gold's respective worth is nonsensical at best, what does it mean for a commodity to keep up with a floating point currency. Go take some economics classes.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -12/+0Ron paul stated it NOT ME. Go listen to the sound byte as directed.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -13/+0The following discussion is based on material within: The SAIS Center on Politics and Foreign Relations and the Financial Times hosted “A Traditional Non-Intervention Foreign Policy” featuring keynote speaker Congressman Ron Paul on Tuesday, September 11, 2007.
www.sais-jhu.edu/mp3_player/fall2007/ronpaul091107.htm
The Mideast; Ron Paul, an isolationist, rationalizes that Iran should be able to have its own nuclear weapon for defensive purposes because "everyone" else has one. "Why would Iran be a threat to Isreal." he asks? The problem is that Iran sponsors Syria, Hezbola in Lebanon, and Hamas in the Palestinian Territories so we KNOW what Iran's agenda is by its actions. The United States of America does NOT have to wait and see how Iran handles itself to discover whether or not it should be allowed to have nuclear weapons or the ability to develop nuclear fuel(plutonium) with a fuel cycle. If we do as Ron Pauul says we will withdraw NOW we will soon have to return to the Mideast and fight Iran in a nuclear driven war. Tens of millions will die in weeks.
We do not have to stipulate on what Iran may do with a nuclear weapon, we already know. We can look at the weapons trade that Iran has participated in with Syria, Hezbulla and Hamas. Iran gives BILLIONS in aid to Hezbulla and Hamas every year and in turn they use the weapons against Isreal. Hamas fires at least fifty missiles per month into Isreal without provocation. Hezbulla and Hamas are the "tip of the spear" for Iran in spreading Islamic fundamentalism. Iran is waging their fundamentalist religion against Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, and many oil producing Gulf countries. The three organizations, Iran, Hezbulla, and Hamas have one thing in mind and that is the destruction of Isreal, the United States of America and England. Watch the following material which has been obtained from Mideast television services.
Ron Paul non interventionism is dangerous. If we leave the Mideast or our allies the people of the United States of America loose important assets immediately.
THE FOLLOWING ARE PRODUCTS OF THE ARABIC MIDEAST.
NOT ALL Muslims DON'T GET IT. Paste the following two sections together for URL.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHHL7NxETvM&feature=
PlayList&p=EEDC1E1C07111326&index=1
Then watch the following and SEE REAL ARABIC TV and the INDOCTRINATION of HATE against us!
Indoctrination of Children. Paste the following two sections together for URL.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1yN171630Q&feature=
PlayList&p=EEDC1E1C07111326&index=2
Muslim Sesame Street I: do the "Death to America" thing
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw2EisVqKZ4&feature=related
Saudi Arabia 2002
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhbHVEGnYD8
November 2004
Iranian Kids: "Death to Israel, Death to America"
www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI-DiaBi7VE&feature=related
March 2005
www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OIUieD2KN4&feature=related
Anti-Western Incitment on TV. Paste the following two sections together for URL.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6PI5S83o6g&feature=
PlayList&p=EEDC1E1C07111326&index=0
Various MEMRI TV clips. Paste the following two sections together for URL.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZFXF97QzRQ&feature=
PlayList&p=EEDC1E1C07111326&index=3
08 2006
www.youtube.com/watch?v=FckLO8HcNyo&feature=related
February 2007
www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUezKsBCRbk&feature=related
April 2007
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWIFhKYiMqU&feature=related
December 2006
Iran supports Hezbolla..."Death to America"
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tXfIYxPGQs&feature=related
Al Qaeda. Paste the following two sections together for URL.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRc9UByJJsk&feature=
PlayList&p=EEDC1E1C07111326&index=4
-----------------
Paste the following two sections together for URL.
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380808635&pagename=
JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
After years of stonewalling, Iran has given the UN nuclear agency blueprints showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads, diplomats said Tuesday, in an apparent concession meant to head off the threat of new UN sanctions.
But the diplomats said Teheran has failed to meet other requests made by the International Atomic Energy Agency in its attempts to end nearly two decades of nuclear secrecy on the part of the Islamic Republic.
- Herostratos, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1Run Ron run!
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -37/+2The following discussion is based on material within: The SAIS Center on Politics and Foreign Relations and the Financial Times hosted “A Traditional Non-Intervention Foreign Policy” featuring keynote speaker Congressman Ron Paul on Tuesday, September 11, 2007.
- greves, on 11/19/2007, -16/+85This is about the only cool thing I've ever seen come out of New Jersey after almost 20 years of living there.
/NJ sucks.
//RP FTW!!!- AnarkeIncarnate, on 11/19/2007, -3/+15Seconded. Now we need to help curb corruption/property taxes as well as get some gun rights in this state and it might be livable.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -13/+0Ron Paul wants Iran to have the right to have a nuclear weapon. They need to have one like everyone else. And they will get as many as they can develop with Ron Paul in office.
Paste the following two sections together for URL.
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380808635&pagename=
JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
After years of stonewalling, Iran has given the UN nuclear agency blueprints showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads, diplomats said Tuesday, in an apparent concession meant to head off the threat of new UN sanctions.
But the diplomats said Teheran has failed to meet other requests made by the International Atomic Energy Agency in its attempts to end nearly two decades of nuclear secrecy on the part of the Islamic Republic.- Corrosionx, on 11/19/2007, -0/+6Thanks for tipping us on the new scare tactic...
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -9/+0Do your own research. Google it! You must be a Chinese Communist yourself. I'd love to have your IP address...they should be visible for everyone here who posts.
"Iran has given the UN nuclear agency blueprints" - darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1If Iran does not have a right to develop and possess nuclear weapons, then what right does the United States have to do the same? Hello double standard.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -13/+0Ron Paul wants Iran to have the right to have a nuclear weapon. They need to have one like everyone else. And they will get as many as they can develop with Ron Paul in office.
- luvs2spooge, on 11/19/2007, -11/+5Blow up New Jersey and give Pennsylvania a beach!
- CosmoLoss, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2Hah! And 'The City' refers to Philadelphia.
/Sarcasm
/TristateInsideHumor - ProKid, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2***** Pennsylvannia!!!!
- CosmoLoss, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2Hah! And 'The City' refers to Philadelphia.
- Corrosionx, on 11/19/2007, -2/+4This almost makes up for Bon Jovi!
- bizchris, on 11/19/2007, -1/+1This guy ought to be RP's choice for VP, he represented the nuances of his platform so well.
- Lancer383, on 11/19/2007, -1/+4I saw Bruce Springsteen live last night. He's way cooler.
- ronoxQ, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2Hey, don't diss all of New Jersey. The suburban areas aren't bad. It's just Jersey City and Newark that really ***** up the state's reputation for the rest of us.
- thefanmyj, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1I'll give you Newark, but Jersey City is a great place to live. It's a 10 minute train ride to Manhattan; rent is fairly affordable; property values are skyrocketing; many neighborhoods are safe; there is ethnic diversity and harmony to rival that of many "trendy" places in Brooklyn and Manhattan.
http://nymag.com/news/features/25014/
- thefanmyj, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1I'll give you Newark, but Jersey City is a great place to live. It's a 10 minute train ride to Manhattan; rent is fairly affordable; property values are skyrocketing; many neighborhoods are safe; there is ethnic diversity and harmony to rival that of many "trendy" places in Brooklyn and Manhattan.
- AnarkeIncarnate, on 11/19/2007, -3/+15Seconded. Now we need to help curb corruption/property taxes as well as get some gun rights in this state and it might be livable.
- patriotwarrior, on 11/19/2007, -9/+54Destroy the neocons before they destroy you. Wake up America.
- AnarkeIncarnate, on 11/19/2007, -4/+10I actually read some trash from some dimwit that said that when Ron Paul speaks out against "Neo-cons" he is really using it as a soft euphemism forJews... Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, George W. Bush.....all Jews.......got it.
- chaosium, on 11/19/2007, -0/+7No, that's "International Bankers".
- n8glenn, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2What? Are you serious? What exactly makes you think Ron Paul is talking about Jews? By the way, I am not asking for assertion, I would like to see proof.
- AnarkeIncarnate, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2The point was that he is not. However, some woman/blogger/reporter said that when he says Neocons, he means Jews, because he has backers from the KKK, etc. Just because somebody supports you, does not make you one of them. If Lesbian Soccer Players for the Antichrist supported Ghouliani, would that make him a lesbian soccer player? No, it would make him the Antichrist
- n8glenn, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2Oh! oops, I misread you there. But people make such ridiculous assertions about Ron Paul these days it's hard to tell anymore! I apologize.
- AnarkeIncarnate, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2The point was that he is not. However, some woman/blogger/reporter said that when he says Neocons, he means Jews, because he has backers from the KKK, etc. Just because somebody supports you, does not make you one of them. If Lesbian Soccer Players for the Antichrist supported Ghouliani, would that make him a lesbian soccer player? No, it would make him the Antichrist
- AnarkeIncarnate, on 11/19/2007, -4/+10I actually read some trash from some dimwit that said that when Ron Paul speaks out against "Neo-cons" he is really using it as a soft euphemism forJews... Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, George W. Bush.....all Jews.......got it.
- befranklin1776, on 11/19/2007, -5/+94He risked jail to do the right thing. Can you imagine a judge even trying that?
- SiNN4R, on 11/19/2007, -2/+13Thats the craziest thing I've read in a long time.
- Frnnkdlxx, on 11/19/2007, -0/+16And what a well spoken man. He knew and knows all these little tricks that the criminal and backward element of our government endorses and HE didn't try to run for government. People must simply be amazed by the seeming size of Ron Paul's balls, yet they're the same size as ours (:) metaphores are a killer today) But anyway, we all have the power to affect change much the same way Dr. Paul is. All you have to do is become educated in the most simplest feild of the constititution and jump in to help us working class people. Ron Pauls campaign draws so many from across the spectrum because he pumps blood back into our patriotic hearts.
Awaken Sleeping Giant.We have work to do.- silveravnt, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2It's evidence of our failed education system that kids don't learn the constitution. Nor are they taught to comprehend the terminology of the document. I guess it's part of the dumbing down.
- eagle0468, on 04/27/2008, -0/+0Actually part of the indoctrination of our children into simply being sheeple as my generation was mostly taught. I remember having a U.S. History teacher that spent an entire month on the constitution, most of my peers tell me they don't remember ever even reading it in their U.S. History or Political Science classes. Dreadful!!
- silveravnt, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2It's evidence of our failed education system that kids don't learn the constitution. Nor are they taught to comprehend the terminology of the document. I guess it's part of the dumbing down.
- yaba2007, on 11/19/2007, -5/+66Imagine if every Republican would rather go to jail than raise taxes.
- strOphe, on 11/19/2007, -2/+16Holy win-win situation, Batman!
- Phyltre, on 11/19/2007, -1/+16Not really. If all the Republicans are in jail, who will the neocon democrats blame?
- Fieri, on 11/19/2007, -0/+8Good point. It wouldn't do to give away that the parties need each other to blame so that they can trade power and surpress real political opposition.
- Phyltre, on 11/19/2007, -1/+16Not really. If all the Republicans are in jail, who will the neocon democrats blame?
- silveravnt, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2Just substitute "Every politician" for "Every Republican" and we have a winner.
- starcrunchfx, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2When's the last time Democrats cut taxes? JFK?
- eagle0468, on 04/27/2008, -0/+0Imagine if we made it a law that if they did raise taxes they would go to Jail. Hmmmm, there's an idea. I like that one!!
- strOphe, on 11/19/2007, -2/+16Holy win-win situation, Batman!
- kylelynch, on 11/19/2007, -6/+60Its good to see there are some Republicans that have enough backbone to endorse Ron Paul for president.
- readthis, on 11/19/2007, -3/+50That's an excellent article. I particularly enjoyed this statement, "Constitutional rights have been threatened since the words were first written on the document. Our forefathers warned that they were giving us a republic, and that it would be our task to see if we could keep it. Opportunists who want to go around constitutional protections are nothing new, but the voices challenging the tyrants had become quite muted until Ron Paul stepped into the picture."
- wetmetalthong, on 11/19/2007, -3/+32EditorResponse has got to be a shill. And who gives a ***** about gold. Use silver. Use ***** pubic hairs. Just not debt.
- Dokument, on 11/19/2007, -0/+8" the total for your car is 15,000,000 pubic hairs"
- ChaosMotor, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2People will be regretting those Brazilians!
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -7/+0He probanbly cant read or he would have rebutted my comments... Did you see me say that I was for additional debt anywhere?
- pailsOfGrease, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1Hillary is the hair-apparent.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -10/+0I'm a republcan and have ever voted democratic. If Paul wins the primary election I'll vote for him. But I have a problem with at least 30% of what he stands for. I do not want to pull our troops out of every location across the globe. It will open our country and all of our allies up to attack. We also do not need a gold standard. I didn't see you respond to anything I wrote so you must be one of the ones that are stupid enough to vote for any F*King thing that crosses your desk. I don't. I think a debate is healthy...get your thinking caps on if you think I'm tough. The democrats will be comming at you with both barrels.
- darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1If our "allies" can't take care of themselves, that's their problem, isn't it?
But really, heres' the funny part. You: "I'm a republican and have ever (sic) voted democratic" and "get your thinking caps on" Yes, because you are a beacon of intellectualism, with your party steadfastness. All hail EditorResponse for his loyal obedience to the Grand Old Party!
Oh, and no worries, I don't think you're tough. I think you're a moron, and morons are necessarily weak.
- darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1If our "allies" can't take care of themselves, that's their problem, isn't it?
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2Hey guys instead of admitting I don't know that much about finance, DEBT = BAD
- Dokument, on 11/19/2007, -0/+8" the total for your car is 15,000,000 pubic hairs"
- RollFizzlebeef, on 11/19/2007, -48/+11Once again, "USA Daily" = completely fake Ron Paul spam site.
Please, if you're reading this, bury this "story".- stillasleep00, on 11/19/2007, -7/+12I just looked at their Politics section- none of the headlining stories mention Ron Paul...
- Anliz, on 11/19/2007, -4/+6Do a search for Ron Paul on their site. Do a search for another candidate on their site.
- RollFizzlebeef, on 11/19/2007, -9/+6That's because those are all AP wire stories to give the illusion that it's an actual newspaper.
Go to the columnists section - there are your 4 or 5 New Jersey Libertarians responsible for the whole site, and their "stories" (Libertarian Party propaganda) constantly get spammed to Digg.
- scubasteve377, on 11/19/2007, -2/+9So how does that makes the article not legit? It was obviously slanted questioning, but the writers opinions are not important here since it was an ***interview*** not an editorial. The interviewee had some interesting things to say and some good points to make, and he wasn't really led by the writer, so I don't see a problem with it. It's no different than any other amateur journalist's blog you see posted up on digg and it's certainly no more biased than what you will see from FOX or NBC.
- Xondar, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1I read you comment, and then I buried... YOU!
- stillasleep00, on 11/19/2007, -7/+12I just looked at their Politics section- none of the headlining stories mention Ron Paul...
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -53/+11I dunno, maybe it's because Ron Paul's racism, support for genocide, and economically suicidal policies just make sense.
- hinchb, on 11/19/2007, -6/+32"racism" Not filtering his donations for white supremacists = racism
"support for genocide" Just because he doesn't want to force the taxpayers of the US to throw money at Darfur doesn't mean he supports genocide. You can always start a private monetary help fund if you are so inclined
"economically suicidal policies" Right because they are different from current policies, and he actually has viable facts and references to back up his economic policies = suicide
I know there is a schism in digg between RP supports and RP haters, but really could you try to make your attacks at least factually based and logical? Thanks.- wakananda, on 11/19/2007, -2/+20How much value has the dollar lost recently? People don't realize what a corner we've turned in that the dollar is no longer the world's leading reserve currency. The repercussions of this will be felt for decades. Ron Paul will bring our military home from over 700 bases in 130 countries. This will pay for his repeal of the income tax many times over, and stimulate our economy. He will put our dollar on the gold/silver standard, and abolish the private, profit-taking Federal Reserve, thus preventing debasement of the currency, which is called "inflation." Inflation has ONE cause: the corrupt and corrupting Fed creating more dollars for circulation. Ron Paul's policies remove this parasite from the body of our nation, and will help control the damage it's clearly done.
- gemmakicn, on 11/19/2007, -16/+5I hate to admit limits to my own intelligence and knowledge, but i have the barest understanding that economists are mathematical geniuses who calculate economic performance and change through 300 variable partial differential equations, this is why they are typically highly paid (and very boring) individuals, i can make guesses about the economy and how to tweak it, but i'd probably be wrong, and nothing to me suggests that Ron Paul has any clue beyond following the dogma of "If i offer to eliminate taxes, people will vote for me".
This man would bring back the work houses, child labour and all the other fun features of governments with no social programs that existed in the 19th century...- hinchb, on 11/19/2007, -2/+10I know this almost sounds like a false dilemma fallacy, but there are really two choices. Big governments, not just ours since this is a history property of them, are horrible with money. We make tons and tons of social programs that fail to meet expectations, and in general waste a ton of money. If you had a choice between letting people spend their own money back in the economy, or let the government take the money and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars doing research into make creationism sound scientific so they could put it in textbooks (yeah they gave our money to do this), which would you choose? You could say that there is a middle ground and that you need sound programs to use, but while this sounds great it doesn't really work in practice. He recognizes that people are dependent on government, and he wouldn't throw anyone out on the streets by getting rid of everything. This would be a gradual process to let people take over their own lives if they wanted to. Truly free economies don't exist in the world for good reason, and I'm sure he knows this and isn't going to dump department of * all out the instant he gets into office.
- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -2/+3We don't necessarily need 'economic hardship' to learn to stand on our feet, but at this rate, I welcome any stimuli that will open people's eyes to the lunacy of this government that claims to create prosperity while destroying wealth.
- Misesean, on 11/19/2007, -2/+6There is almost no mathematics involved in economics, gemmakicn. Read http://www.mises.org/rothbard/mes.asp and you'll know more economics than 99% of so-called "economists" - and you won't find a single PDE, let alone one with 300 variables :)
- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2Exactly. Economics is an easy subject. Financing is a more complex subject. The 'experts' are trying to make it sound complex, but most of them don't know ***** about economics and tend to interject their 'feelings' about what the government should do to make things work. The best thing the government can do is close shop.
- hinchb, on 11/19/2007, -2/+10I know this almost sounds like a false dilemma fallacy, but there are really two choices. Big governments, not just ours since this is a history property of them, are horrible with money. We make tons and tons of social programs that fail to meet expectations, and in general waste a ton of money. If you had a choice between letting people spend their own money back in the economy, or let the government take the money and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars doing research into make creationism sound scientific so they could put it in textbooks (yeah they gave our money to do this), which would you choose? You could say that there is a middle ground and that you need sound programs to use, but while this sounds great it doesn't really work in practice. He recognizes that people are dependent on government, and he wouldn't throw anyone out on the streets by getting rid of everything. This would be a gradual process to let people take over their own lives if they wanted to. Truly free economies don't exist in the world for good reason, and I'm sure he knows this and isn't going to dump department of * all out the instant he gets into office.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -9/+4Actually I say that he is racist because an extremely racist article was published by Ron Paul under the name of Ron Paul in the Ron Paul Survival Report. Ron Paul and his supporters claim it was ghostwritten, but if you read the last sentence I just wrote, you'll see why I think it was not.
As for his economic policies, we tried laissez-faire economics in the 1800s and early 1900s and a lot of people died.
And you misread the thing about genocide. The act he voted against was intended to prevent the US government from giving money to the genocidal government in Darfur. Ron Paul was the only person to vote against this free-market disincentive to genocide. Here is the text of the bill if you care to read it: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h180_ih.xml
Now apologize.- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -4/+4I'm sorry you believe liberty is dead, but you've been deceived. Why you place so much faith in the government to do the right thing I do not know. If you believe I must be forced to further your interests, then you will never understand why I defy you. You cannot achieve a moral good by justifying immoral acts.
- chaosium, on 11/19/2007, -4/+3"Why you place so much faith in the government to do the right thing I do not know"
We rightfully trust corporations to do certain functions even less, doubly so in the absence of all Government regulation. - Egoist, on 11/19/2007, -3/+7The great difference between a government and a corporation is that a corporation can be shut down and replaced without bloodshed. A government, not so much.
- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -3/+2Corporations are government recognized entities, granted certain privileges which allow them to shy away from their accountability when they harm individuals. In turn, corporations may also enable the Government to skirt its own laws, such as utilizing third party data collection on citizens.
- chaosium, on 11/19/2007, -4/+3"Why you place so much faith in the government to do the right thing I do not know"
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -6/+3what the ***** are you even talking about peppermintpig
I'm sorry if it is necessary to infringe on your rights to do business with a genocidal nation, label your prescription drugs as you please for resale in order to prevent the free market from killing everyone. - Egoist, on 11/19/2007, -3/+8So in a single newsletter from 20 years ago, there was a single sentence that could be believed to be somewhat racist. You're really stretching on calling the man a full-on racist.
We've tried laissez-faire economics up to present day, and they've worked a hell of a lot better than communist societies have in the same amount of time -- and many fewer have died than at the hands of the likes of Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, et al.
As soon as I read the pretext of that bill, I knew exactly why he voted against it -- he's a Libertarian. He's against any government control of the market, no matter the reason.
You're the one who should be apologizing for wasting our bandwidth with your mindless, knee-jerk dribble.- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -4/+2"We've tried laissez-faire economics up to present day, and they've worked a hell of a lot better than communist societies have in the same amount of time -- and many fewer have died than at the hands of the likes of Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, et al."
If only there were some sort of middle ground, one that didn't make piles of corpses.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -4/+2"We've tried laissez-faire economics up to present day, and they've worked a hell of a lot better than communist societies have in the same amount of time -- and many fewer have died than at the hands of the likes of Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, et al."
- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -4/+5Attacking people and calling them nazi's and genocide supporters is doing nothing to stop the REAL genocide going on. But go ahead, keep on fantasizing that you're some kind of a hero. You enjoy telling other people what to do, but lack the courage to actually stand up for the liberty of others.
I suppose if a government agency lies about the risks of drugs and people die as a result, its acceptable to you, but heaven forbid a private company handles the testing of drugs because they could be feeding our children poison?!!!
***** the 'greater good'. Only individuals can make choices and no majority has the right to take that away.- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -5/+4You live in a ***** society.
Holy ***** you're stupid. - ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -5/+4" suppose if a government agency lies about the risks of drugs and people die as a result, its acceptable to you, but heaven forbid a private company handles the testing of drugs because they could be feeding our children poison?!!! "
No, if a government agency does that it's horrible. But a government agency does a better job than nothing at all.
The system you advocate has been shown to kill a lot more people for no reason, and this makes you insane.
You're a sick *****. - PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -3/+5"No, if a government agency does that it's horrible. But a government agency does a better job than nothing at all."
That's likely not the case. If there are no other agencies to verify the quality of a drug, then all you have is 1 organization to handle it. That alone is why competing organizations are superior. It's also the reason you should not give one organization the authority to ban and endorse substances.
"The system you advocate has been shown to kill a lot more people for no reason, and this makes you insane."
You seem to think I favor a system with little to no drug testing. I think that actually describes what you're living in now. When Big Pharma wants to rail a drug through the FDA quickly, they'll throw a bunch of money at them to do so. It's no surprise that people are dying DESPITE all the innovations we've seen.
You're too angry and irrational to have a reasonable debate with. Grow up, please. - ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -5/+2"That's likely not the case. If there are no other agencies to verify the quality of a drug, then all you have is 1 organization to handle it. That alone is why competing organizations are superior. It's also the reason you should not give one organization the authority to ban and endorse substances."
This does not happen. You made it up. It works in magical libertopia land, but in real life, it's been tried, and magical free market drug regulatory bodies don't arise.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -5/+4You live in a ***** society.
- n8glenn, on 11/19/2007, -2/+3I don't even give a f**k if Ron Paul said something that could be considered racist 11 years ago. Everyone has said something stupid at one time or another, it is their general beliefs and actions that you should judge, and Ron Paul has made very clear that he doesn't think anyone should be discriminated based on their race or religion or any other factor, he has made very clear that he believes all people are equal and that we are not members of groups, but that we are all fundamentally the same. Perhaps you are perfect and have never said anything that could possibly offend anyone, but the rest of us are human and we make mistakes. Just because Ron Paul may have made a mistake is no reason to condemn him as a person and ignore his message of freedom, prosperity and peace, which would save the lives of American soldiers and innocent people all over the world. If you want to support war mongers because you deem them to be less "racist" then you go right ahead.
- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -4/+4I'm sorry you believe liberty is dead, but you've been deceived. Why you place so much faith in the government to do the right thing I do not know. If you believe I must be forced to further your interests, then you will never understand why I defy you. You cannot achieve a moral good by justifying immoral acts.
- hinchb, on 11/19/2007, -6/+32"racism" Not filtering his donations for white supremacists = racism
- victrola, on 11/19/2007, -58/+12I am sick of reading about Ron Paul. I did not read this article, I wll never read any article about ron Paul, because Ron Paul's internet street teamers have made the internet an annoying place.
- Mast3rDigg3r, on 11/19/2007, -8/+16you're a cry baby
- wakananda, on 11/19/2007, -1/+12And a willfully ignorant person.
- crodragn, on 11/19/2007, -2/+14And yet, you took the time to access this digg article and tell us this...
- Murdats, on 11/19/2007, -2/+11you are making the internet an annoying place, feel free to leave at any time.
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -3/+4You should read every article that you can find for and against the person who you are going to support. Then debate the issues you come across.
- falseleftright, on 11/19/2007, -0/+4OMG you poor poor thing. How dare all these people get it and you be left by the wayside. I am sorry for your horrible horrible situation.
- n8glenn, on 11/19/2007, -0/+4Oh no! You were forced to NOT read a Ron Paul article! Would it help you any to know that no one else can possibly read the things that you don't want to read? Would that make baby feel any better???
- Mast3rDigg3r, on 11/19/2007, -8/+16you're a cry baby
- Richandler, on 11/19/2007, -23/+9I think most Democrats and socialists would have people thrown in jail for not raising taxes.
- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1They will tell you that is absurd, but I think they would do so as well. Ultimately, the threat will give way to violence and the guns will reveal themselves.
- bingobongony, on 11/19/2007, -37/+8more usadaily crap.
Gotta love the new Digg! Anyone can get to hte front page regularly...as long as you pay well.- CanIGetAWitness, on 11/19/2007, -2/+12So just what makes the article crap? It's an interview with an elected NJ politician about a political candidate. It's not a blogged opinion from a John or Jane Blog.
- skipdog172, on 11/19/2007, -1/+5This is just an interview...how is it biased? LOL. It is one elected man explaining why he endorsed Ron Paul. Is it biased because every question was not an attack on Ron Paul, like almost every other interview? What a joke.
- falseleftright, on 11/19/2007, -1/+4A serious reply to this guy might fall on deaf ears. He is a troll.
- Dawnrazor, on 11/19/2007, -29/+9Even if Ron Paul were elected, you really think congress will pass legislation to eliminate the income tax? Or any of his other radical ideas?
- Mast3rDigg3r, on 11/19/2007, -2/+17yeah, congress controls everything, just look at the decline in war funding
- gemmakicn, on 11/19/2007, -4/+2Well its a tricky situation, congress has power of equal to that of the president, the president is using his power (what remains of it) to hold up changes to his regime, the president can direct congress to pass a bill, but its just a request on headed note paper and as binding, he cannot make congress vote or even discuss his hair-brained schemes without some cronies in congress.
- Fieri, on 11/19/2007, -2/+21That's a reason not to elect him?
Seriously, start somewhere. You'd be surprised what could happen if Paul had the bully pulpit. Maybe not during his Presidency, but he could seriously throw a rock into the well-oiled gears of our staged political scene. - Phyltre, on 11/19/2007, -1/+20It's about the only way we have to send a message, isn't it? Are you saying we should do nothing, since doing something would be ineffective?
- wstrucke, on 11/19/2007, -1/+13this is the problem exactly. the mass media has us all convinced that we don't matter.
it's a lie.
- wstrucke, on 11/19/2007, -1/+13this is the problem exactly. the mass media has us all convinced that we don't matter.
- SeekerDarksteel, on 11/19/2007, -0/+21No, but that's precisely why people who like his general ideas of non-interventionism, limited government, and restored civil rights but who are put off by his more radical ideas (gold standard, eliminate the fed, leave the UN) should still vote for him.
You have to look at what he wants to do and what he's capable of doing. What he will be able to do is reverse the downward course of American foreign policy and economics. Whether or not any of his more radical ideas are implemented is completely dependent on if he can convince congress to back him. That seems like a pretty good check seeing as how they're not willing to do much of anything to rock the boat.
Now look at what other candidates want to do and what they're capable of. And almost all of them both want to and are capable of enacting policies that will keep America on its downward decline. - CanIGetAWitness, on 11/19/2007, -1/+14This is my favorite argument for not electing RP. Don't you realize that Congress represents the people (at least supposed to) and if RP can win the presidency that his "radical ideas" would send a strong message to congress. No, RP can't single handed whip congress into shape, but with the help of the people talking to their congressional representatives and insisting that they work with RP to either accomplish the goals or find some middle ground, that WE and RP could actually change the great ol' USA.
I hope all RP supporters realize that just getting the man in office is the equivalent of getting your foot in the door. There will be much more work on our part to get the country turned around. I know I will be working hard. - Scheissen, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2Yes. Every Republican candidate supports the Fair Tax, which will get rid of the capital gains tax and incomes tax in exchange for a 23% sales tax (I think we can cut government programs and spending and make that a cool 10%). When a certain party has their candidate elected president, they tend to take control of Congress. Bush is the only president in a long time to defy this logic.
- Dawnrazor, on 11/19/2007, -8/+2Say what you want, (and Digg me down all you want too), but it doesn't change the facts.
He'll submit legislation to do something radical, and it will go against not only what the Democrats want, but what the majority of his own party wants, so it'll get voted down if it even gets out of comittee. So no matter what party has congress he'll get nothing accomplished. Welcome to 4 years of gridlock.- darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2Every time I see someone complain that "situation X" would result in a Congressional deadlock, I ask the same question: Would that be so bad? Go read the Constitution and see if you can show me why it is that Congress needs to be so busy all the time. It really has a VERY LIMITED scope of work.
- Mast3rDigg3r, on 11/19/2007, -2/+17yeah, congress controls everything, just look at the decline in war funding
- ReturnToFreedom, on 11/19/2007, -9/+43Just wait until after teaparty07, I have a feeling Ron Paul will suddenly find a lot of endorsements. What we really need is to sway the zombies who actually want Rudy or Hillary to win. Freedom to choose what's best for our own lives is the very essence of liberty and much more important than issues where I disagree with Ron Paul. I'm an atheist but damn, the guy really cares about civil liberties.
- gemmakicn, on 11/19/2007, -19/+3Personally i want Barack Obama to win, definatly not Hilary, although Guliani or even Huckabee would probably be a saner choice than Ron Paul..
- Fieri, on 11/19/2007, -2/+10Haha! Nice one
- Corrosionx, on 11/19/2007, -2/+9Sure, the neocons are doing a heckavujob right now aren't they!
- ChaosMotor, on 11/19/2007, -3/+6Hillary = Giuliani
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -7/+2Barak is so WET it isn't even funny. He knows less about running the seat than Hillary Clinton and I wouldn't vote for her because all she has done for thirty years is sit in the offices held by her husband. She knows NOT a damm thing about ruinning anything. Neither does Barak.
- skipdog172, on 11/19/2007, -2/+3Yeah, our country is doing just great with the neo-cons! ROFL
- x0epyon0x, on 11/19/2007, -9/+2What does you being an atheist have to do with civil liberties? That's like saying, "Well, I may be blind, but I know a thing or two about cellular mitosis."
- chaosium, on 11/19/2007, -1/+3It means your interests are not being protected by Paul.
- omegaant, on 11/19/2007, -2/+14What is "teaparty 07"? And I also do not agree with everything RP says (I'm registered Democrat), but he's the closest thing to a visionary leader we have seen in a long time. I even have a bumper sticker on my car!
- CanIGetAWitness, on 11/19/2007, -2/+12Teaparty 07 is a second online pledge drive for RP like the one on Nov. 5th. This will be on Dec. 16th when the Boston Tea Party happened in 1773.
If you are interested in voting for RP, you may need to change your party affiliation to vote for him in the primary of your state. - Misesean, on 11/19/2007, -2/+7http://teaparty07.com - the next big Ron Paul "money bomb"
- EditorResponse, on 11/19/2007, -6/+4You have to register as a republican to vote for Ron Paul.
- CountryBoyRI, on 11/19/2007, -1/+3Only in the primaries. Come D-Day, you can vote for whomever you like.
Personally, I'm a registered democrat and have always voted democrat across the board. Nonetheless, as unlikely a team-up as it sounds, due to their differences, I'd vote big-time for a Paul/Kucinich ticket. We *seriously* need a whole new way of thinking in the White House. - MaddieCakes, on 11/19/2007, -0/+2Not in all states. In some states, you don't have to change your party. In Nebraska you do though. I turn 21 the day before teaparty07, so when I go get my new license, I'm going to change my party to Republican.
- CountryBoyRI, on 11/19/2007, -1/+3Only in the primaries. Come D-Day, you can vote for whomever you like.
- CanIGetAWitness, on 11/19/2007, -2/+12Teaparty 07 is a second online pledge drive for RP like the one on Nov. 5th. This will be on Dec. 16th when the Boston Tea Party happened in 1773.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -10/+3uh, Ron Paul would make freedom of religion a state issue bro. Not sure if he has your civil liberties in mind.
- Derferman, on 11/19/2007, -2/+10Sorry ncurses, but freedom of religion resides in the first amendment, and therefore would be protected by a strict champion of the constitution such as Paul.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -7/+3Oh hey what's this here, oh it's the text of Ron Paul's "We the People" bill that makes freedom of religion a state issue in complete violation of at least article III and the first amendment of the constition:
From the We The People bill:
"The Supreme Court of the United States and each Federal court—
(1) shall not adjudicate—
(A) any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion;
(B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or
(C) any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation; and
(2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in paragraph (1)."
Sorry bro, he's just not all that pro-constitution.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -7/+3Oh hey what's this here, oh it's the text of Ron Paul's "We the People" bill that makes freedom of religion a state issue in complete violation of at least article III and the first amendment of the constition:
- Derferman, on 11/19/2007, -2/+10Sorry ncurses, but freedom of religion resides in the first amendment, and therefore would be protected by a strict champion of the constitution such as Paul.
- gemmakicn, on 11/19/2007, -19/+3Personally i want Barack Obama to win, definatly not Hilary, although Guliani or even Huckabee would probably be a saner choice than Ron Paul..
- Rsardinia, on 11/19/2007, -7/+30Doherty sounds like a very rational intelligent person. I hope he can win the governorship of his state. I'm very glad to see that he supports RP as well.
- brianewart, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1I will vote for him.
- gemmakicn, on 11/19/2007, -28/+6This reads like a poorly disguised political advertisement supporting Ron Paul, if he gets elected, quite literally may the goddess(or other representative divine presence(s)) have pity on the United States, for it will suffer crises of untold proportions under the control of that ignorant woman hating, homophobic, racist nubjob masquerading as an intellectual!
- Fieri, on 11/19/2007, -2/+13This "racist" allegation cracks me up. Ron Paul had nothing to do with that newsletter. How about I start a newsletter with your name on it and write pro-KKK articles? Does that disqualify you for President?
- gemmakicn, on 11/19/2007, -10/+3My feelings about his racism stem from his isolationist, anti-imigration policy, both of which i find abhorrent and smacking of a feeling of superiority of ones own citizens over those on the outside (racism in my book).
- K3ITHK, on 11/19/2007, -2/+13In that case all my friends and I are going to live in your house, because it's residents aren't superior to those on the outside.
- gemmakicn, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1You think americans are superior? Thats just sad.
- 89992, on 11/19/2007, -2/+5So you believe that everyone around the world has the right to enter the US without obeying any of the laws? That, my friend, is ludicrous.
- gemmakicn, on 11/19/2007, -4/+3The US is a country built on immigration. The law is just a method of control from those on top.
- darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1That was very nice of you, calling him friend. Not the name I would have chosen. :)
- Xondar, on 11/19/2007, -1/+1You are aware that Ron Paul is very much FOR legal immigration right? The United States currently has the lowest numbers of legal immigration in the Western World, but the highest number for illegal immigration. Just to put that in perspective: Canada currently has the lowest numbers of illegal immigration in the Western World, and the highest numbers for legal immigration.
From what I've read and seen, Ron Paul is FOR legal immigration, and AGAINST illegal immigration. I don't really see a problem with that. It sure works well for Canada.
- K3ITHK, on 11/19/2007, -2/+13In that case all my friends and I are going to live in your house, because it's residents aren't superior to those on the outside.
- gemmakicn, on 11/19/2007, -10/+3My feelings about his racism stem from his isolationist, anti-imigration policy, both of which i find abhorrent and smacking of a feeling of superiority of ones own citizens over those on the outside (racism in my book).
- falseleftright, on 11/19/2007, -1/+1You mean, as opposed to the crisis we are in now?
- powerclicks, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1How can he get the support of woman haters, Do you know he is an OBGYN? And he delivered some 4000 babies. Just becasue he doesnt advocate groups based on race doesnt mean he is a racist. Many a times he mentioned that he values the person as an individual and not based on his race, religion or other divisive attributes of the society. The thing is his positions are very idealistic and seem unrealistic to be true. But he is known for being a man of his word. Read more about him. He is known for his honesty and stubborn integrity. I personally do not agree with his positions in all issues. But im with him because he is not for sale like the rest of the bunch.
- Fieri, on 11/19/2007, -2/+13This "racist" allegation cracks me up. Ron Paul had nothing to do with that newsletter. How about I start a newsletter with your name on it and write pro-KKK articles? Does that disqualify you for President?
- Fieri, on 11/19/2007, -7/+39MASS comment down-digging by anti-Paulers.
What's your motivation, people? Maybe one story per 2-3 days about Ron Paul on your precious website? DON'T CLICK ON IT.- Sogui, on 11/19/2007, -16/+3One story every 2-3 days? You're kidding right?
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -15/+3what the ***** are you talking about, there isn't a single comment in opposition to Ron Paul that is above -4 diggs
also ***** you- falseleftright, on 11/19/2007, -2/+3You should watch your mouth in polite company..
- witebuddha, on 11/19/2007, -8/+1blind fool
- falseleftright, on 11/19/2007, -1/+8Their motivation is fear. They aren't actually casual diggers, they have an agenda. I'll give you a hint, it is an anti-american one.
- stephbangm, on 11/19/2007, -5/+27This is exactly why I support Ron Paul and I'm also going to run as a delegate to get him the GOP nomination. We have to become delegates to get Ron Paul the GOP nomination; As delegates, we'll be picking the GOP nominee just like the electors in the electoral college pick the President; Delegates vote to determine and decide who the GOP nominee is---it's that important! Become a Delegate or Ron Paul will NOT be President - http://delegate.notlong.com < Approved by the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee: Jeff Greenspan, Regional Coordinator
- Araxen, on 11/19/2007, -18/+5Why isn't Ron Paul in favor of impeaching George Bush? Kind of ironic the guy "for protecting the constitution" actually has no interest at all in protecting it against the high crimes and misdemeanors the Bush and Cheney have done to this country and the constitution.
- stephbangm, on 11/19/2007, -3/+16Think about it: If Ron Paul voted to impeach Cheney, people will say that he's going against his own party and that doesn't support the GOP---so they'll use this against him!
Also, don't you think that it's a coincidence that Kucinich introduces an impeachment bill when he just so happens to be running for President? He had over 5 years to do it but he does it now?! Give me a break. He's obviously pandering and intentionally raising money and coverage for his campaign. Wake up! - omegaant, on 11/19/2007, -4/+10RP is not the least bit frivilous with taxpayer dollars, time, or impeachments based on assumptions difficult to prove. For example, maybe Cheney is just crazy. How would that be provable? If he really believes in WMD's, etc., what psychiatrist will vouch against the VP or P? Who can prove what the neocons' motives really are? Maybe they're all hypnotized or something. If RP voted against impeachment, as much as I'd like to see the assholes impeached, I can honestly say I TRUST his judgment. How many political people can you say that about? RP has foresight - something sadly lacking across the spectrum.
- Corrosionx, on 11/19/2007, -3/+11As president, he would have much more power to do anything against Cheney than supporting impeachment efforts that will likely fail.. Think about it, if anyone in Congress had the balls to impeach Cheney, they could have done that years ago... Cheney and Rove must have some pretty bad blackmail material on every single elected representative... except maybe for Ron Paul...
- peteweird, on 11/19/2007, -2/+2They couldn't impeach Clinton over sexual misconduct and harrassment (in the private sector he'd be doing 30 years), what makes anyone think that anybody has a chance of impeaching Bush for doing exactly what Congress allowed him to do?
To try to help out the RP campaign I've decided to create a pledge at PledgeBank.com to encourage new people to get involved in the campaign. I want to try to get some micro-donations going for Ron and help run up his number of new donors on the 16th. There are a lot of people that like RP but that don't have $100 to donate, especially given the state we are in right now. I think these small donations and an extra 1000+ new donors would be a great addition to the tea party. So if there are any supporters out there that haven't been able to justify a larger donation please check out my pledge.
Here's the direct link; www.pledgebank.com/microdonordrive - hiphoc, on 11/19/2007, -4/+10Ron Paul wants the impeachment to be done constitutionally. There was some issue with how Kucinich intorduced to article. I think it has to go to committee or something like that. If you do a google search you will see a clear explanation as to why he voted against it. Its more a constitutional procedure was not followed thats all. There is supposed to be an investigation and hearings and such in the Judiciary committee, there wasnt thats why he voted against it. He wants the american people to see all the evidence laid out in hearings as the constitution requires.
- darkcooger, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1Strictly speaking, there is no procedure for impeachment defined in the Constitution, except that the House gets it started and the Senate tries the case with the Chief Justice presiding. Any other formalities are left to the Congress to decide.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -2/+3***** this comment system
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -7/+2Dude, when he says he wants to protect the constitution he means the preamble and amendments 2, 4, and 10.
- falseleftright, on 11/19/2007, -2/+3If Ron Paul were to vote to impeach Bush, then that would leave Cheney next in line. Dr. Paul is not stupid.
- stephbangm, on 11/19/2007, -3/+16Think about it: If Ron Paul voted to impeach Cheney, people will say that he's going against his own party and that doesn't support the GOP---so they'll use this against him!
- jamesmudgett, on 11/19/2007, -16/+1MItt Romney
- vinwal, on 11/19/2007, -2/+4SUCKS
- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2You're good at this game. :)
Seriously though, I can't trust a candidate who walks away from someone who asks an honest question concerning a life-threatening condition.
- PeppermintPig, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2You're good at this game. :)
- jamesmudgett, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1Don't get me wrong I do like Ron Paul. I just think he's stuck in the past; kind of reminds me of someone that got laid off and all they do is complain about the way things have been. His debating has yet to address anything he plans to really do; instead, all I hear is trash talking about the way things are and no plan of attack. I think his intentions are there, he just seems like a bit of a pussy. In my own opinion.
- vinwal, on 11/19/2007, -2/+4SUCKS
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -21/+8I don't get why you guys support Ron Paul. Isn't freedom of religion popular on Digg? Well Ron Paul has introduced multiple bills that would abolish the Supreme Court's authority to rule on first amendment cases in his We The People act. I.e., if congress passed a law that violated the first amendment, this bill would make it so that it cannot be overturned. Here is the text of the bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h300_ih.xml
Isn't Digg for the most part pro-choice? Ron Paul has introduced three constitutional amendments that would outright ban abortion federally. No abortion in all 50 states.
Moreover, Ron Paul would eliminate the DOE, FBI, DEA, IRS, FDA, and CIA (and probably some other stuff, too). I dislike the CIA and IRS as much as the next guy, but how can a government be run without some agency enforcing the tax code?
In addition to this, his position on the FDA is insane. Here is an ad for Radium suppositories from before the FDA existed that I think illustrates why we need an FDA in place: http://sabretooth.mirror.waffleimages.com/files/bc ...
I don't know how aware of the genocide in Darfur you guys are, but surely you would agree that an act that made it illegal for the US government to give money to the people committing the genocide would be a good bill, right? Well here's the text of the bill, it's HR 180, the Darfur Divestment act of 2007: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h180_ih.xml Ron Paul was the only person to vote nay. Yes, Ron Paul was the only person who believes in protecting your right to do business with genocidal states. Don't get me wrong, I love having a free market, but there are limits to any ideal, and surely this is one of them.
I think the reason Ron Paul gets so much attention here is because he is antiwar and anti-war on drugs. Vote for Gravel or someone whose policies have not been shown to result in piles of corpses.- M4tt3r, on 11/19/2007, -4/+15First of all, you completely read the bill incorrectly; the bill basically states that the Supreme Court and Federal Courts can't make "roe vs. wade" type decisions, thus basically making it law, with out the typical process of checks and balances. It's a loop hole in a way from all the man handling of the constitution and SCOTUS power abuses. The listed departments you stated, for example, the DOE is sooo bloated that the more money they take in, the larger they get, the more money they need, in the end the teachers and children end up getting screwed. It's a cache 22, that can't be fixed by the government. Let the parents keep their money and buy private education.... Private schools against Public schools? I wonder which would win, the people would actually have the money to purchase tuition and the schools would have to fight for the kids/parents/money, instead of it being handed to them like it is now in which they still provide a ***** education.
IRS = Federal Reserve = Inflation = Income Tax = Dollar devaules = stealing money from you, and you don't even know about it. Which is the real reason gas prices are going up so high, but no one talks about it. More dollars are need to buy oil/barrel, because the dollar is worth less. ($0.05 McDonalds Hamburgers) The dollar has lost 85%+ of its value over the last 50 years, (look it up if you don't believe me). Just the last 5 years, IIRC it has lost around 35% of it's value. The fed just prints the money for the war as needed.
FDA.... Vioxx?
http://www.adrugrecall.com/vioxx/death.html
Killed around 28,000 people, yes, you read that correctly. That was FDA approved, not to mention the 100's of mistakes they've made in the past. Have you heard of ETC or UL? Look under a toaster, they are the private companies that make sure your toaster and all the other electrical appliances don't blow up or spark on fire, it's not a Government organization. Their is no accountability with the government what so ever. 28,000 human beings. Twenty-eight thousand. Half a baseball stadium.
DEA,.. prohibition never works, and they should have learned that from alcohol prohibition. Black markets only create crime and rich "bad guys".
The Genocide thing...I don't know why... but I would have to say, spending money that the country doesn't have.
If someone is stupid enough to believe that stapling their stomach will make them lose weight, (radium suppositories of our day) well my friend, I have a bridge I'd like to sell them.
Ron Paul stands for small, small government which is the true American position. The Founding Fathers (who, you and I wouldn't be here if it wasn't for) specially set up rules for the government to follow. He is going off those rules and I stand right next to him.
In other words... Google Ron Paul and listen for yourself, instead of making wild accusations / assumptions.- silveravnt, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2Thank you for your whole post except for this, "If someone is stupid enough to believe that stapling their stomach...". Why is it stupid if it works. I've seen it work firsthand on a friend. He had to change his habits in conjunction with it but he has lost over 100lb so far.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -11/+4@m4tt3r
From the We The People bill:
"The Supreme Court of the United States and each Federal court—
(1) shall not adjudicate—
(A) any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion;
(B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or
(C) any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation; and
(2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in paragraph (1)."
Were you reading the same bill as I was? This bill makes it so that state and local governments can establish a religion or persecute gay people and is clearly in violation of Article III and Amendment 16 of the constitution.
"IRS = Federal Reserve = Inflation = Income Tax = Dollar devaules = stealing money from you, and you don't even know about it. Which is the real reason gas prices are going up so high, but no one talks about it. More dollars are need to buy oil/barrel, because the dollar is worth less. ($0.05 McDonalds Hamburgers) The dollar has lost 85%+ of its value over the last 50 years, (look it up if you don't believe me). Just the last 5 years, IIRC it has lost around 35% of it's value. The fed just prints the money for the war as needed. "
A government needs to have a tax in order to function. A graduated income tax is the fairest tax possible. An agency needs to exist to enforce this task.
And about the FDA: oh so the FDA let vioxx through and it killed 28,000 people, so you want to remove the FDA? That's just stupid.
"If someone is stupid enough to believe that stapling their stomach will make them lose weight, (radium suppositories of our day) well my friend, I have a bridge I'd like to sell them."
So these people just get to die in your Paulean libertopia? You're a real piece of *****, you know.
"wild accusations"
*****.- falseleftright, on 11/19/2007, -2/+4We did just fine without income tax until 1913. You speak about what the government NEEDS like you are the government...are you? Also, "that's just stupid" and "If someone is stupid enough" really isn't going too far in backing up your assertions. You should try actual data.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -2/+2READ A ***** BOOK
- falseleftright, on 11/19/2007, -2/+4We did just fine without income tax until 1913. You speak about what the government NEEDS like you are the government...are you? Also, "that's just stupid" and "If someone is stupid enough" really isn't going too far in backing up your assertions. You should try actual data.
- n8glenn, on 11/19/2007, -2/+1How much are they paying you? I hope it's alot, and seriously, we will support the one guy who has a chance to change things, thank you very much. Your arguments are nonsensical assertions, nothing more.
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -4/+2"nonsensical assertions"
what? His voting record is now a nonsensical assertion?
You guys are ***** nuts.- n8glenn, on 11/19/2007, -1/+2You want to talk voting record, please, let's do that! He has the best voting record in the house, or the senate!
- ncurses, on 11/19/2007, -4/+2"nonsensical assertions"
- M4tt3r, on 11/19/2007, -4/+15First of all, you completely read the bill incorrectly; the bill basically states that the Supreme Court and Federal Courts can't make "roe vs. wade" type decisions, thus basically making it law, with out the typical process of checks and balances. It's a loop hole in a way from all the man handling of the constitution and SCOTUS power abuses. The listed departments you stated, for example, the DOE is sooo bloated that the more money they take in, the larger they get, the more money they need, in the end the teachers and children end up getting screwed. It's a cache 22, that can't be fixed by the government. Let the parents keep their money and buy private education.... Private schools against Public schools? I wonder which would win, the people would actually have the money to purchase tuition and the schools would have to fight for the kids/parents/money, instead of it being handed to them like it is now in which they still provide a ***** education.
- HippyInASuit, on 11/19/2007, -4/+21Dugg, just to piss off you freaking anti-Ron Paul spammers. If you don't like reading about him, then don't click the link, fool!
- chaosium, on 11/19/2007, -6/+3You're not a hippy, you're a Right-Wing Conservative.
- witebuddha, on 11/19/2007, -5/+2oh yes.... because spamming teaparty ***** is fine... but we give our opinion and we are suddenly 'spammers'
- n8glenn, on 11/19/2007, -2/+5No, but if you whine about people discussing Ron Paul, then you are whining about freedom of speech, not spam.
- BellicoseGandhi, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1But is whinging about people whinging about people any different? jesus christ you're dumb.
- n8glenn, on 11/22/2007, -0/+1Well, let's see now, you think I'm dumb, and you cannot spell the word "whine". How about this, maybe I'll just whine about you whining about me whining about people whining?
- BellicoseGandhi, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1But is whinging about people whinging about people any different? jesus christ you're dumb.
- n8glenn, on 11/19/2007, -2/+5No, but if you whine about people discussing Ron Paul, then you are whining about freedom of speech, not spam.
- witebuddha, on 11/19/2007, -13/+1i can't take this ***** anymore... i don't normally comment these days because i'm immediately buried by people who put their fingers in their ears and yell 'lalalalalalalala'... RP is a joke who is going to lose the republican ticket... maybe he should take that teaparty money and run as an independent so he can throw off a few votes for the republicans...
- madmonkey300, on 11/19/2007, -2/+2Dugg, bro.
- witebuddha, on 11/19/2007, -4/+3Who is Ron Paul?
- Nismobeach, on 11/19/2007, -2/+2Check out http://www.ronpaul2008.com
- dkern, on 11/19/2007, -2/+3Ron Paul is about the only politician worth listening to since JFK. Sadly he will be buried under the elitist rubble- not unlike JFK either!
- brianewart, on 11/19/2007, -1/+1Doherty for Governor.
- BabyWookie, on 11/19/2007, -2/+1It’s interesting to note how much support Ron Paul has garnered from the younger generation, conveying a lot of youthful passion and enthusiasm. Considering the rampant display of Ron Paul fanboism seen here, Digg is a perfect example of this phenomenon. I think that it’s good that the youth can still get enthused about the political process and be driven to act, but it’s rather unfortunate that it has to be someone as backwards, inflexible, right-wing and WASPy as Ron Paul.
The fact that they support Ron Paul, clearly shows the kind of values many in this young generation have embraced and it’s not a pretty picture. These spoiled children of the information age, who grew up with their minds deluded by the Internet, have embraced the amoral values of isolationism, individualism, greed, self-interest, mistrust, lack of compassion, lack of empathy, lack of communal spirit, thinly-veiled racism and the whole “screw the world” attitude common among the so-called “Internet tough guys” and sociopathic rich assholes. It’s rather disturbing and does not speak highly for the future of this country.
It saddens me to see Ron Paul and his regressive, right-wing, anti-humanitarian ideologies getting so much exposure on Digg. Of course, I realize that his Digg “popularity” is greatly inflated, due to the gaming campaigns organized on various Ron Paul supporter message boards and an inflow of people who couldn’t give a ***** about Digg otherwise, but it still bothers me. - FMWatkins, on 11/19/2007, -0/+5I'm from the UK, and I know that what Babywookie describes as Rn Paul's 'ideals' is disinfo nonsense. He's a constitutionalist I believe. His opinion is that you worry about fixing your own back yard after decades of looting by robber barrons and corporations, then you look to help others.
There is nothing backwards about the Constitution.
And your rhetoric attacking the entire group of people who support Ron Paul's beliefs is laughable. The young (internet) generation are the real group who have a chance of changing things for the better. Unlike previous generations who sat on their arses waffling about how great feminism (breaking up families), communism (destroying competition and centralizing all power within the government) and other 'isms were.
People see Bush is not acting in their interests. They agree with Ron Paul's views, or at least most of them. Isolationist? No. He embraces communication with other countries with dialog, not bombs. Wants the monetary system based on something that actually has value. Wants people to have their freedom and privacy back. Wants the wealth of the country owned by people, not the bankers.
If it wasn't for the 'attitude' of these young people being active now, millions wouldn't have a damn clue about what's going on.
Don't be so patronising and show people more respect. Being able to have an opinion and speak out is a right, not a privilege. - anaswasi, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1Wow, Mike Doherty is a great speaker, so eloquent, concise, and veracious.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
