digg

Join DiggAbout

***HOT TOPIC*** New Plot against Ron Paul has been Uncovered watch!

video.google.com — Jim Tucker exposes new information from a mole attending the recent trilateral commission meeting, about the plot to pressure Ron Paul to drop out and stop his fiscal and foreign policy wake up tour

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • dgarry7, on 05/09/2008, -7/+27If Tom Foley starts pressuring RP..then we know this is true!
    • brainon4u, on 05/09/2008, -3/+11I don't believe that will now be the litmus test, since this info has gone public. They always have a plan B - let's wait and identify that plan.
      • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -15/+6Soooo...you can never prove if you're correct? Convenient.
        • Jimmyb207, on 05/09/2008, -2/+9And that's the boat you've been sailing in all along.
    • SuperWinner, on 05/09/2008, -14/+2RON PAUL FOR vice prez?
      • xbenx, on 05/09/2008, -1/+10no.
      • aliengoods, on 05/09/2008, -4/+10Ron Paul is far too honest for the VP spot.
        • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -11/+8Ron Paul is a crook.
          • Jimmyb207, on 05/09/2008, -5/+10Back it up, troll.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -7/+8http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Ron_Paul_to_Use_ ...

            Here you go, liar.
          • Jimmyb207, on 05/09/2008, -5/+10It doesn't prove anything! That article is 100% speculation!
            My comment in that thread about the "speculative" nature of the article:

            Another thing the Anti-Paul trolls are doing here is behaving as if Ron Paul is actually in the process of setting up the publishing Co. BUT...if the trolls stayed within the context of the article they would have comprehended this: "he MAY use his unspent campaign donations for a unique venture.","his campaign is EXPLORING a novel way." So it's all speculation. See how they trash Ron Paul for something that he hasn't even done? Ron Paul is a good man. I whole heartedly trust him that he will not do anything unethical or outside of the law. I think the goodness of this man is what repulses some of these people.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -9/+7So to you a person who thinks about robbing a bank but decides not to do it because he can't get away with it isn't a crook. That's the difference between you and I, Dimmy.
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -5/+8"So to you a person who thinks about robbing a bank but decides not to do it because he can't get away with it isn't a crook. That's the difference between you and I, Dimmy."

            Thanks for clearing this up... basically, the difference is that jcm267 believes that thought crimes should be punishable, "Dimmy".
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -7/+6I didn't say that, Cow.
          • Look4Truth, on 05/09/2008, -4/+7"Ron Paul is a crook."

            The only fools who believe that are your RLC buddies Jocko. RP is the only honest person in the bunch but you go on drinking the Kool-Aid, maybe one day you'll figure out that you were taken by your government and lamestream media.
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -6/+7Well, us and...95%+ of America.
          • Look4Truth, on 05/09/2008, -4/+5Actually, I'd put that number around 90% which is the percent of people who are brain washed or don't care, you fit right in there nicely Shorty. You should be proud of how you're helping to further the destruction of this nation.
  • Todash19, on 05/09/2008, -9/+45His message scares people.
    I just her Dennis miller call him crazy on his show, and hang up on a RP supporter who called in asking why he has not had him on his show.
    Dennis Miller lost a listener today
    • cyndezu, on 05/09/2008, -5/+28Make that 2.
    • dmjarrington, on 05/09/2008, -4/+173
    • unravelled, on 05/09/2008, -5/+1369
    • BigManOnCampus, on 05/09/2008, -4/+11Dennis always impresses me with his sense of history. Odd that he should be so opposed to learning lessons from it.
    • spaceman84, on 05/09/2008, -3/+10You guys are all retards for listening to Dennis Miller in the first place.
    • metric7, on 05/09/2008, -2/+9Dennis Miller has a show?
    • boonesfarm, on 05/09/2008, -10/+4i would hang up on a lot of RP supporters.
    • ncurses, on 05/10/2008, -1/+2dennis miller is an unbelievably huge ***** and always has been, this is pretty cool of him though
  • cyndezu, on 05/09/2008, -31/+60Two kinds of people that don't like Ron,
    1. The one's who don't know any better and are oblivious
    2. The one's that do know and are scared
    • reed311, on 05/09/2008, -27/+23Thanks, I didn't know things were that simple.
      • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -14/+29When it comes to opponents of Ron Paul that pretty much says it all.
        I would recommend you buy his latest book. Perhaps you will finally come around to the option of supporting freedom and liberty and the future of Our Nation.
        • reed311, on 05/09/2008, -31/+151. I was being sarcastic because of his (predictable) attempt to put complex issues into black and white terms that Ron Paul (and George W. Bush/neocons) love to do.

          2. No way in hell I'm giving that shyster any of my money. If he is so concerned about spreading the message, then he can donate all his profits to starting his own PAC. Of course, he won't do that, he's going to use your non-profit donations to start his own for-profit company. Just like we had been predicting for months.
          • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -5/+16I've seen your same comment before. It is just as stupid and ridiculous now.
        • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/09/2008, -20/+8So if I don't support Ron Paul, I don't support liberty and freedom? Shut the ***** up, stupid jingo.
          • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -5/+16well, who would you support, as far as a leader of this country, if you DID support liberty and freedom?
          • DroogInPhoenix, on 05/09/2008, -5/+18Clinton, Obama and McCain certainly do not support liberty and freedom... So you decide.
    • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -41/+21You forgot:

      3.People who have researched his policies rather than buying his rhetoric, and realize he would destroy America.
      • digitalhair, on 05/09/2008, -14/+30funny that you use the word "research" in the same frivolous way I've seen you use it in so many other threads defending government before liberty.
        • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -34/+16LOL, can you see, with ***** floating that high up in your eyes? Funny you would group 200 million people into two simpleton categories. That is your version of in depth research? Complexity in people.s views just too much for you, huh?

          I defend the government, while calling Bush the worst president of my lifetime? Or saying the Patriot Act needs to be overturned? Saying that this war has been horribly botched? Which of those are you referring to with your claims that I support the government? Or are you just saying "everything government is automatically bad", in another desperate attempt to keep things supremely simple for your overworked brain?

          Is it just that I think for myself? Is that what bothers you? Ron Paul hive-think or nothing? I strongly believe EVERYONE should have the same basic rights, unlike Ron "let's single out gays, women, and non-Christians, and make up claims about God in the Constitution to get idiots to buy into my *****" Paul.

          See, YOU are the one who lacks critical thinking. Your post proves that. Trying to belittle everyone who disagrees with you, by putting them into two convenient categories (which means you don't have to actually THINK and converse) shows you are just a follower, nothing more.

          Grow up. People dislike Ron Paul for many reasons, including his willingness to ignore the Constitution when it doesn't fit his agenda. All you do is reinforce the months long belief that Ron Paul supporters would rather yell "Freedom is Popular" than actually discuss issues, because they don't understand the actual issues.

          Congratulations on adding another nail to Ron Paul's coffin...
          • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -7/+19Where are you getting your information about what Ron Paul supports? When, exactly, has he ignored the constitution when it didn't fit his agenda. Educate me please. What issues do you think Ron Paul supporters don't understand?
            (last time I asked these questions, as a reply to a very similar post, I got no answers)
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -17/+10You can start with this one: When attempting to assert that the "secular liberal agenda" was destroying America, he claimed the Constitution was "replete with references to God". In truth, God is only mentioned once (in setting the date), and the "Creator is mentioned once. It is not full of references to God, but he tried to claim that, in furthering his agenda of a Christian nation.

            He wants to overturn the 16th amendment, because he doesn't like it. Same with the 14th amendment. Now, keep in mind, when he was running as a Libertarian, he was ALL FOR open borders. Then, when that wasn't popular with his latest constituents, he flip-flopped his stance (like what? A typical politician).

            Whenever anything doesn't fit his agenda, he acts as if the only thing that exists in the Constitution is the 10th amendment. HE has stated bluntly he would try to convince the courts the 10th amendment could be used to overturn Roe v Wade. He didn't actually think it would work, but he wanted to try to use it to force through his anti-abortion beliefs.

            He proposed the "We the People Act" as a way to circumvent personal liberty. In it, he specifically singled out gays, women, and non-christians as groups that States could discriminate against, making part of the Act that those groups had zero recourse to challenge unconstitutional laws. For example (real world): Texas wanted to make it a law that no one could run for office if they didn't swear allegiance to the bible. Ron Paul's We the People Act would have made that legal, and made it impossible for anyone to challenge that law.

            He has said, publicly, on more than one occasion, "God's law" supercedes "man's law" (The Constitution). His allegiance to the Constitution is secondary.

            Those are just a few examples where Ron Paul drives his agenda, over the Constitution.
          • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -6/+17Wow... I can't help but wonder if you are getting paid. First of all the TEXAS CONSTITUTION ALREADY states "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, PROVIDED HE ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF A SUPREME BEING". Texas Constitution: Article ONE section 4. Look it up for yourself. The "We the People Act" would, in fact, keep the FEDERAL COURTS from over ruling that law. But they might want to make it that you have to believe in the Christian god, in order to be elected to public office. Or anything. Ron Paul wants to decrease the power of the Federal Government. For good reason, I would say. I mean they make a debacle of everything they touch. I would love to know where you get that he singled out "gays, women and non-christians"? The 16th Amendment. He doesn't like it, huh, do you know WHY???? Because it is unconstitutional AND was never legally ratified. This non law is NOT in your best interest, and is essentially the reason for the Revolutionary War - taxation without representation.

            The American Right to Life People call Ron Paul "Pro-choice, state by state" http://artlaction.com/ The tenth amendment could be used, if actually followed, to turn over A LOT of laws, including some of the drug laws - it states that: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." TO THE PEOPLE!!!! You don't get it. And you are wrong, and you are spouting rhetoric. Why don't you do yourself and any offspring you may have a BIG favor, and stop listening to other people and do the research yourself. Ron Paul has a right to believe that there is a difference between Man's Law and God's Law if he wants to. If there IS a supreme being, I sure as hell don't think that he would want to see things the way they are today. Ron Paul has no desire to make everyone believe what he believes, spiritually. His desire is that we are all allowed to believe what we want to.
          • floatingorb, on 05/09/2008, -5/+14Asking to amend the Constitution is constitutional.
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -14/+9Yes, the Texas law says that NOW. They wanted to change it, and Ron Paul BACKED that change. You are clearly delusional, unwillingly to research, and promoting a failed candidate.

            I have wasted more than enough time on you in other threads. Ron Paul is dead as a candidate. Enjoy jumping in 9 months late.

            Meanwhile, I am going to go ***** my blond haired, blue eyed, big titted girlfriend of 5 years, 20 years younger than me. I hope that scares you. She likes it, a LOT. You know, despite my being black and all....
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -14/+6@mystcnurse

            So you didn't REALLY want to know, and you hadn't REALLY been ignored. You just wanted another chance to ignore the facts. How disingenuous. Ron Paul lost. Accept it. Move on. Do something worthwhile in your local government, rather than being a whiny bitch here.
          • floatingorb, on 05/09/2008, -3/+5@ssn697 RE:"MEANWHILE"
            I'm going to trust that you were as 'well into your cups when you wrote that as much as I'm into mine now; But as YOU have pulled out the "race card" to anger:

            I'm glad to see that you are not against inter-racial relationships; A friend of mine (white) married a very prominent black woman (our redneck circles call the offspring "golden children"). I see that you and I also align on torture and the drug war so I'm going to miss our 'cat-fights' on Digg (some of which have even been *educational* for me). I think I'm done with Digg so here is something that I trust will be just as offensive as your jib: I've adopted a saying "You're not a man until you've made it with the tan..." but greasy black women--especially the ones deemed 'nappy headed hoes' are not to my particular tastes {ha! we agree there also, it seems}...but bring on the polynesians and palestinians -- Yea baby!! Well, take care.
            Tim
        • cyndezu, on 05/09/2008, -9/+25Gee , all that angry rambling and inaccurate information about Ron .
          Sounds like a 1 to me.
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -22/+12Since you are replying to digitalhair's comment, I agree with your assessment. He/she didn't really ramble though. I guess more than one sentence is rambling to you? Simple minds, simple thoughts, simply hilarious.
          • JanYpe, on 05/09/2008, -16/+6Aww you get to call him Ron? Are you his BFF?
          • digitalhair, on 05/10/2008, -0/+5man, i must have really hurt your feelings pal... That was not my intention. I just made a simple observation about how misguided you are -- because what true American insists on defending government before liberty? and what true American insists on undermining a man who does precisely the opposite of that?
        • Herkimer56, on 05/09/2008, -27/+15Which part of it is inaccurate? Have you even bothered to read Ron Paul's voting record? The man has been a total waste of time in Congress and would have made a horrible President.
          • 0nslaught, on 05/09/2008, -7/+16Yeah, if they had been more like Ron Paul, we wouldn't have been able to amass our beloved 53 trillion dollars of debt.

            Oh, wait...
          • Herkimer56, on 05/09/2008, -10/+5Since when has Ron Paul ever shied away from pissing away the taxpayer's money? He's just more hypocritical about it than nearly all of the other career politicians.
          • digitalhair, on 05/10/2008, -0/+4everybody, please take a look at Herkimer56's profile history, especially the number of comments vs. diggs as well as his dork-inspired avatar (which was previously a CIA emblem - not kidding) so you can get a good look at how neo-brownshirts hijack democracy using exploitation, lies, fraud, and deception. No need to respond to him, 'nuff said.
        • Todash19, on 05/09/2008, -7/+16...defending government before liberty.

          comment is spot on.
          +100
        • KMye, on 05/09/2008, -13/+6oops
      • V3n0M, on 05/09/2008, -6/+21No, she covered that:

        2. The one's that do know and are scared
        • cyndezu, on 05/09/2008, -6/+19spreading dis-info .. I see your point!
      • rexblade, on 05/09/2008, -5/+17Yup because right now everythings going sooooo great. I think its wonderful that it costs 50$ to fill my tank when 8 years ago it took 20$. And I think its pretty cool that my friends who make it back from Iraq are committing suicide, must be because they did such great stuff over there. What we really need is endless war the NAU and fiat money controlled by a private group. As long as we keep all that inplace America cant lose...... Screw our children if they don't like the fact they will inherit a financially and morally bankrupt country then they should have not been born. Besides they won't know any better anyway because we will just twist history and filter the news for them like we already do. the DUH-partment of education keeps all of the sheep inline early on.
    • Herkimer56, on 05/09/2008, -36/+29You also forgot:

      4. People who believe that equal rights and equal opportunity should exist for everyone and not just for white, heterosexual, Christian, ultra-rightist males.
      5. People who understand basic economics.
      6. People who believe in and support all of the US Constitution, not just the parts that support their racist, oppressive political agenda.
      7. People who believe that women have the same civil rights as men.
      8. People who believe that our government shouldn't be controlled by the clergy.
      9. People who understand that 150 year old foreign policies will not work in the modern world.
      • rexblade, on 05/09/2008, -12/+21LOL wow Herk havent heard you use the "racist" attack in a while. Did you happen to see the talk Ron was giving about black people being treated unfairly by law enforcements and the courts? Here ya go pay attention .. 4 minutes http://youtube.com/watch?v=vkqkzHfWuSM
        Boy what a racist...
      • Risingashes, on 05/09/2008, -13/+1It actually scares me how readily people will praise such horrible economic policies when they have no idea what they actually mean.
        I'd personally never comment on the effectiveness of a football play stratagem or a the best way to preform a tribal dance- I don't get how people can be so supportive of something that they don't even understand.
        • floatingorb, on 05/09/2008, -0/+7Enjoy your steel pennies...can't even make bullets out of them.
      • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -9/+20I am a female, I am pro-choice, I am NOT a Christian, and I 100% support Ron Paul. Know why? Because my right to be a non-Christian female who is pro-choice would be protected by Ron Paul. As would my right to free speech, my right to protect myself, my right to marry or sleep with whomever I want, to do whatever I want to my body, to talk to whomever I want to talk to without being evesdropped upon, and to KEEP the money that I earn without having it stolen by global bankers to spend on endless wars that they ultimately profit from. AND - if people are at all good, and I believe they are, they will take care of each other. I really don't think we need the government doing EVERYTHING for us. Ever heard of "learned helplessness".

        AND if you really knew anything about Ron Paul you would know that he is not racist. All of the black people I know (which are A LOT) LOVE him and would vote for him in a second. My black friends have chosen to educate themselves on the issues, instead of listening to O'Reily and other MSM liars. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSh6kVT4UL0
        • xbenx, on 05/09/2008, -13/+11so your legions of black friends like Ron Paul so he CANT be racist. makes total sense.
          • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -10/+13No, but he IS NOT a racist. Any more than you are.
          • ncairns, on 05/09/2008, -16/+10I don't have two decades of racist propaganda named after me.
        • Herkimer56, on 05/09/2008, -17/+13"We the People" Act. Read it and if you are who you say you are then there is no way that you could continue to support the old fool. If you're okay with the "We the People" Act then you're lying about who you say you are.
        • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -16/+12I am black. I don't support him. No one in my family supports him. If you watch the videos of his rallies, it is almost exclusively whites. It is easy to pick out blacks, asians, etc. because there are so few involved in his campaign. He doesn't have a single African American on either his congressional staff, or his (former) campaign staff. But of course, your anecdotal evidence of your "black friends" trumps all that, right?

          We educated ourselves, and found him severely lacking, just as the rest of America did.
          • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -8/+14well, I'm just waiting for you guys to start asking YOUR candidate what HE is going to do about the racial disparities, like, particularly the one having to do with PRISONS, where a whole lot of your brothers are hanging out while their white counterparts walked, just because of the differences in the FORM of a drug. OR anything, when are you all going to ask him about ANYTHING that matters? Something with some substance. I continually ask, what is OBAMA going to do for you? And no, I'm not assuming you are voting for Obama because he is half black. I'm assuming you are voting for him because I'm really hoping you are smart enough not to want to vote for Hitlary or McInsane.
          • conceptkid, on 05/09/2008, -7/+14http://www.ronpaul2008.com/press-releases/15/ron-p ...
            http://www.nolanchart.com/article936.html
            http://digg.com/politics/NAACP_President_Ron_Paul_ ...
            Yea, you can STFU now, scrub. That took 2 minutes to find, go to youtube and also find many videos of Black people supporting Paul.
          • LadyKofNYC, on 05/09/2008, -8/+14"I'm black, therefore I speak for all black people......"

            Tool.
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -13/+9"well, I'm just waiting for you guys to start asking YOUR candidate what HE is going to do about the racial disparities"

            Who the ***** are you talking about? Can you be more specific, or does your racism preclude that?

            "Something with some substance. I continually ask, what is OBAMA going to do for you? "

            Again I say, compare Obama's issues page on his website to Ron Paul's, then crawl back into your bigoted hole....

            When did I say I was voting for Obama? Shove racism down people's throats much?
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -12/+9"I'm black, therefore I speak for all black people......"

            Interesting. When a Ron Paul supporter said her "black friends" supported Ron Paul, not a PEEP from MrNYC. No callouts for a white woman claiming to speak for blacks.

            I say something about none of my black relatives supporting Ron Paul, and his videos showing almost exclusively white people, and his complete lack of blacks on his staff, (you know, more than anecdotal evidence) and he calls ME out. Now, why would that be? Some sort of bias? Some inability to think rationally? Some sort of "I cannot admit anyone would be wrong on the Ron Paul side" problems?

            Thanks for showing your clear bias dude....
          • rexblade, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3What do you mean? The Video I showed interviewed a black woman from his staff. And who do you support ssn697 anyway?
        • ncairns, on 05/09/2008, -17/+13Yeah, you might want to look into the 'We the People Act'. Under it, the federal court (including the Supreme Court) would be barred from hearing any and all cases regarding religious rights, gay rights, and abortion rights. For that matter, you might want to take a look at Paul's attempt to federally define life as beginning at conception.
          • conceptkid, on 05/09/2008, -7/+11Why do you care so much? You do not even live in the US nor are you a US citizen, so just stfu already.
          • ncairns, on 05/09/2008, -14/+111. Non-US citizens have no reason to care about US affairs? *****.
            2. I was born in New Hampshire. I am a US citizen. *****.
            3. Trying to find a reason to avoid addressing your prophet's disturbing lack of a wardrobe is quite telling. *****.
          • BrapAllgood, on 05/09/2008, -6/+11Yes, you certainly do sound educated. *****.
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -14/+8Excellent point, Brap. Any other brilliant statements?
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -13/+8So Brap is still out there? I did some script mods, and see nothing at ALL from my blocked list of users or blocked sites. (I sent the code into greasemonkey). A little bug on the blocked sites, if I tail a friends comment, but well worth it.

            In just a week, I had forgotten about brap. Programming is a good thing!
          • BrapAllgood, on 05/09/2008, -5/+8"Excellent point, Brap. Any other brilliant statements?"

            Just yours, sunshine.
        • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -6/+12Would have expected NOTHING OTHER than to get dugg down on that one :)
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -14/+9you got dugg down, because you made it obvious you haven't researched Ron Paul, AT ALL...
        • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -12/+11LOL. Wait a sec, let me get done laughing. Your right to be a non-Christian would be defended by Ron Paul? Have you NOT read his We the People Act? You know, the one that says it should be just fine to discriminate against non-Christians? Real world, if you are a non-Christian we want to stop you from being able to enjoy the American Dream, legislation.

          You didn't put a lot of thought into your post, did you?
          • digitalhair, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3hey ssn, get a job, and stop drinking so much. or stop drinking, then get a job. If commenting on digg was your M.O. or civilian job and if I was your C.O. or supervisor, I would fire you for somehow driving people TOWARD Ron Paul. your numerous and ineffective comments result in NEGATIVE productivity. by any measure of economics, your failure rate is astounding!
            In fact, I'm torn between wasting my time making this comment to you or spending my time actually contributing to the greater good of society by doing something productive, but it just feels so damn UNAMERICAN to let your authoritarian stupidity sit on this page unanswered and unconfirmed.
    • ncairns, on 05/09/2008, -27/+16I hold four advanced degrees from two of the best universities in the world. I've studied under Noam Chomsky and Eric Maskin, and have lived in nine countries and three continents - four if you count Australia. Among those countries are Denmark (one of the most 'socialistic' countries in the world) and Hong Kong (which is THE most libertarian country in the world). I not only oppose Ron Paul, I think his policies are some of the most dangerously ignorant, misguided, reckless nonsense you could possibly espouse.
      • phenry, on 05/09/2008, -12/+25What a pity! Educated beyond your intelligence....
        • cyndezu, on 05/09/2008, -8/+18lol phenry ;)
        • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/09/2008, -20/+8Can I circle jerk like you morons too?
        • ncairns, on 05/09/2008, -21/+13Dude, I graduated high school at 15 and finished my first BS from Caltech at 18. I really, *really* don't need your approval to instill in myself a sense of security in my own intelligence. That you need to convince yourself that anyone who disagrees with your political ideology is either stupid or ignorant is, though, rather telling of how unsure you are of your own 'convictions'.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -17/+10I see your comments and I believe you, but people lie about ***** online all the time. You don't need to prove anything to these jackoffs as you have obviously already accomplished more in your life than phenry, cyndezu, and BrapAllgood will ever accomplish collectively. Hell.. you probably accomplished more by the time that you were 15 than Brappie will accomplish in his entire life.
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -5/+15jcm267 I like how you use that little pet name "Brappie" all the time.

            Do you sleep with a stuffed animal, perchance?
          • Jimmyb207, on 05/09/2008, -5/+14I must learn to use that new mouse better....dugg down!
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -15/+9Well Cattle has just admitted to either trolling back several pages of my comments or having had a previous digg account banned. I haven't said anything to Brappie in quite a while, Cow.
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -5/+12jcm267 52 minutes ago: "Hell.. you probably accomplished more by the time that you were 15 than Brappie will accomplish in his entire life."

            Will you now retract your statement? If not, my friends and I shall report you for libel.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -12/+9Stop lying, Cattle. Everyone here knows that you have no friends. Well, other than the voices in your head.

            Now please leave me alone before I report you for stalking and harassment.
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -5/+10Yet another insult. You never stop abusing and insulting people, jcm267.

            What part of the Digg Terms of Service do you not understand?

            1. to abuse, harass, threaten, impersonate or intimidate other Digg users;
            2. to post or transmit, or cause to be posted or transmitted, any Content that is infringing, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, abusive, offensive, profane, or otherwise violates any law or right of any third party;

            Reported for abuse, harassment and intimidation.

            Oh, and for discrimination against me just because I have no friends :(
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -12/+8http://digg.com/world_news/HOT_TOPIC_New_Plot_agai ...

            You are an idiot, Cattle.
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -4/+11Yet another insult, jcm267. Please, I beg of you to re-read the Digg Terms of Service before you have your access suspended!

            Friends, you know the drill. Bury and report this Digg abuser. Hopefully he will learn to post constructive comments rather than a constant barrage of abuse, libel and personal attacks, before it's too late.
        • BrapAllgood, on 05/09/2008, -8/+16"Dude, I graduated high school at 15 and finished my first BS from Caltech at 18. I really, *really* don't need your approval to instill in myself a sense of security in my own intelligence."

          @ncairns: This explains your poor social skills wonderfully.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -16/+10How do you explain your lack of social skills, Brappie? Your failure to earn a single college degree (community college doesn't count, Brappie) should make you super cool based on that logic of yours.
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -6/+12Reported for personal insults, abuse and harassment.

            Please re-read the Digg.com Terms of Service. If you don't agree with items 1 and 2, might I suggest you find another news forum with less stringent conditions. Perhaps Usenet would more suitable?

            Thank you.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -12/+9Cattle, I disagree with Brappie almost every time he says something and find him to be a disgusting human being but I do think that you are going over board here.
          • BrapAllgood, on 05/09/2008, -5/+11I'm a Virgo. Shows how much you know.
          • ncairns, on 05/09/2008, -11/+10I wasn't aware social skills for a prerequisite for intelligence. I'm going to have to tell my curmudgeonly friends at NASA they have to stop being so damn smart.
        • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -17/+13So phenry, no rebuttal, just childish attacks. Very nice job showing, once again, what the average Ron Paul supporter is made of.
      • Todash19, on 05/09/2008, -10/+13All by the age of 12? Impressive!
      • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -20/+16^
        Behold, the intelligence of the average Paulbot, unable to actually respond to ncairns.
        • ncairns, on 05/09/2008, -19/+17It's a pattern in cults - anyone who doesn't conform to the narrow scope of their experience is marked as stupid or ignorant. It's a kind of self-defense mechanism to prop up the echo chambers that birth their beliefs in the first place.
      • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -8/+17Please explain. All I saw was a random, unbacked assertion.
        • ncairns, on 05/09/2008, -17/+11What I wrote here is a good start:

          http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Ron_Paul_Campain ...

          His domestic policies are even less substantial - or, in the rare instances where they're somewhat fleshed out, deeply wrong.
          • digitalhair, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4"His domestic policies are even less substantial" because you said so??? Thanks for posting your self-deprecating resume...for the good laugh. Reminds me of Steve Martin's latest movie caricature...

            *I bet Noam Chomsky could whip your ass in a bar fight, you walking brain, you.
        • Herkimer56, on 05/09/2008, -18/+11Since when do you have trouble with random, unbacked assertions? Everything you post is a random, unbacked assertion. Now go do your homework.
      • Daniel591992, on 05/09/2008, -6/+10Boy you're cool...

        but not as cool as me, because I have 3 ps3's
      • xbenx, on 05/09/2008, -14/+11hahaha. this is what happens when you oppose Ron Paul. you get a wide gamut of 'ur 12 lol' to 'educated beyond your intelligence' which doesn't make an ounce of sense.
        • phenry, on 05/09/2008, -5/+16Sorry you didn't understand the reference, but I'm too busy to instruct you
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -18/+9Busy with what?
          • Herkimer56, on 05/09/2008, -19/+10Rolling his ***** into tiny balls and flinging the balls at his cat.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -18/+8By looking at this picture I'd guess he'd be ending another long day by cleaning a Henny Penny right about now.

            http://digg.com/users/phenry/gallery/4722910
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -4/+17" jcm267 11 minutes ago
            By looking at this picture I'd guess he'd be ending another long day by cleaning a Henny Penny right about now.

            http://digg.com/users/phenry/gallery/4722910"

            Outrageous personal attack.

            Reported.
          • LadyKofNYC, on 05/09/2008, -6/+16You're such a superficial little girl, JCM. Lets see a picture of you all dolled up in that pretty pink tutu you're wearing right now.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -14/+8Go ahead and report me over such a trivial "attack". Well, before you do that please tell me how I violated Digg's Terms of Use.
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -5/+16By way of example, and not as a limitation, you agree not to use the Services:

            1. to abuse, harass, threaten, impersonate or intimidate other Digg users;
            2. to post or transmit, or cause to be posted or transmitted, any Content that is infringing, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, abusive, offensive, profane, or otherwise violates any law or right of any third party;

            Abuse, harassment and libel.

            You're a winner three times over, jcm267.

            I would encourage all Digg users to bury any jcm267 comment that contains a personal attack, insult or obscenity (in other words, all of them) and then click "Report It" so that Digg Abuse team can be made aware of his/her repeated and contemptuous violations of the Digg Terms of Service.

            Thank you.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -16/+8If you're going to be a literalist about things, Cow, I'm going to have to ask you to report yourself for this personal attack against me:

            http://digg.com/world_news/HOT_TOPIC_New_Plot_agai ...

            Now in addition to this personal attack one just has to look at your posting history for tonight. You have been following me around and harassing me all night. Again I implore you to contact abuse@digg.com and report yourself for the same Terms of Use violations that you are anally holding me to.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -16/+8Oh, and I'll remind you that excessive and inappropriate use of the report button is a violation of Digg's Terms of Use. Be sure to report yourself for that, too.
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -5/+16That was a legitimate question, as I happen to have a stuffed animal myself, which I have named Brappie. I apologize if you have taken it as a personal attack.

            I will email digg abuse right now to clear up any confusion.

            Thank you.
          • HumanCattle, on 05/09/2008, -4/+15Thanks for the tip, jcm267.

            However I cannot find any mention of "report button" on the Digg Terms of Use page, found here: http://digg.com/tos

            I respectfully request that you re-familiarize yourself with the stated Terms of Use of this website, and adhere to your end of the agreement in good faith from this point forwards, by desisting your recent flood of personal attacks, abuse, obscenity and libel.

            Thank you.
          • Look4Truth, on 05/09/2008, -5/+16"Rolling his ***** into tiny balls and flinging the balls at his cat."

            How old are you again Jerky? 50 something? It's a no brainer how the globalists use fools like you and your RLC buddies.
      • conceptkid, on 05/09/2008, -7/+16ROFL!
        I studied under Superman, Batman, Albert Einstein, The Wright Brothers, Elvis, and The Green Lantern!
        Dude, seriously, I think that online school you went to tricked you out of your money .....hahahahha
        • LadyKofNYC, on 05/09/2008, -5/+17LOL!!
        • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -17/+8Where did you go to school, cluelesskid?
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -16/+8I recall cluelesskid listing his college association as the American Dodgeball Association of America...
          • digitalhair, on 05/11/2008, -0/+6conceptkid doesn't have to respond because he didn't needlessly and embarassingly post his unofficial resume before anyone asked for it. why would he want to join a bunch of moths in their endless quest for artificial light?
    • PolishLogic, on 05/09/2008, -13/+213. The ones that know the feasibility of isolationism died in the 1800's.
      • Rikushix, on 05/09/2008, -16/+4Probably around the time Poland started getting it's ass handed to it.
    • metroidragon, on 05/09/2008, -28/+21Alright, to the mass of Digg users that will digg this up because it's Ron Paul and no other reason: ***** you.

      Do some research and stop just following what the majority of Digg users do. Ron Paul is an old bigot who made numerous rants against Gays, Jews, Blacks, AIDS victims and people like Martin Luther King Jr.

      http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsle ...
      FTA:
      The controversial newsletters include rants against the Israeli lobby, gays, AIDS victims and Martin Luther King Jr. -- described as a "pro-Communist philanderer." One newsletter, from June 1992, right after the LA riots, says "order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."
      Another says, "The criminals who terrorize our cities -- in riots and on every non-riot day -- are not exclusively young black males, but they largely are. As children, they are trained to hate whites, to believe that white oppression is responsible for all black ills, to 'fight the power,' to steal and loot as much money from the white enemy as possible."
      • metroidragon, on 05/09/2008, -19/+14Sorry, link was cut off:
        http://tinyurl.com/26dmpv
      • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -11/+18Response to above smear:
        http://www.takimag.com/site/article/why_the_beltwa ...
        • xbenx, on 05/09/2008, -14/+15what an amazing answer from the Paul camp. "we dont know who even wrote those things."

          hes got my vote and donations!
        • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -18/+14So, he doesn't know who, among the dozen people he hired for his newsletter, in his name, distributed by his company, wrote the newsletters, and that is good enough for you?

          You don't see a problem with that logic? We are talking about a staff of 12, TOPS. That included Ron Paul and his family. They were distributed by Ron Paul Publishing. Are you saying he bears no responsibility, just by saying "I don't know who wrote them"? You would say the same thing if it was Obama publishing distributing "kill whitey" newsletters for decades?

          Doesn't that make you even wonder about his ability to organize, if he can't even keep track of 10-12 people, or a newsletter put out in his name? That cuts it as President material for you?
          • JDenigma, on 05/09/2008, -7/+11Boo!
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -13/+11And, in true Ron Paul supporter fashion, a nothing answer gets Dugg up, over serious questions. And you guys wonder why your guy was trounced, and isn't taken seriously...

            Congratulations...
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -12/+10SSN's latest comment was 6 minutes old and was already dugg down at least once. Meanwhile, JDenigma's idiotic comment was at +4.

            Again, you Ron Paul supporters are morons.
          • JDenigma, on 05/09/2008, -4/+10lol

            You guys are fun. I'll give you that. I'm not looking to take you guys seriously on this subject and engage in serious discussion on this subject matter, particularly with the combative tone in ssn's posts.

            My idiotic answer sure enough was illustrative of just how relevant I think you guys and this subject matter are. That was the whole point in my one word response. lol I don't even care anymore. I just think it's funny watching you guys get worked up over us and Ron Paul so I'm just enjoying the show.

            I had no interest in giving a serious response because frankly at this point it's not deserving of a serious response. It doesn't matter to me anymore what you think of Ron Paul and it sure as hell doesn't matter to me what you think of me so I wasn't seeking your approval in my response and I sure as hell was not trying to bother debating you on this issue or persuade anyone. I don't even care because you guys obsess so much about Ron Paul and his alleged racism that it has gotten so old on here and it's really not that relevant now. I'm amazed at seeing how much I've seen some of you characters spend time in some of these threads. I don't even frequent these threads much but whenever I check in them, it's always the same motley crew that I see. You guys are as bad as the "truthers" who spend all their time in conspiracy related threads. So maybe you have more in common with these "truthers" you like to bash, than you realize.

            Yes, it would be an issue if some politician is a racist, but you guys are going on some obscure, tenuous links of supposed evidence to make your case much like the fuzzy evidence for WMD and al-qaeda in Iraq before the war. However, you're just beating a dead horse now. Ron Paul is obviously out so why do you guys even still continue to insist on this claim and waste time arguing about this non-issue? I would not condone and support someone who was a proven racist, but I didn't see anything to convince me that Ron Paul is a definite racist.

            Give it up guys. This is an old issue that you're wearing out and there's no point to it anymore. You guys seem to have a one track mind with this ***** that you obsess about. Is Ron Paul a racist or not? Who knows. We have nothing to go on other than what some unrelated person wrote in some newsletter and it wasn't like it was the words of Ron himself. We don't know Ron Paul personally and we can't read his mind. As far as I'm concerned, actions speak louder than words and Ron Paul has never demonstrated any signs of racism to me in his actions. As far as I know, he hasn't attempted to use his position in government to try to hurt minorities and that speaks volumes much more than some skeletons in the closet about some dumb newsletter. Man are you reaching with that crap.

            Anyway, who gives a *****. Even if Ron Paul is a racist, I'd be disappointed with him personally, but I'd move on and it wouldn't change a thing about how I view my political beliefs because Ron Paul is just one man who is a vehicle for a larger movement, for a philosophical message and that ladies and gentlemen is what is truly relevant here. Capice?!

            Ah well, go ahead and lambast me. I was just cracking up seeing your spinchters get tightened up over my response :-)

            So go ahead and wine about the evils of Ron Paul. I won't even take it seriously and won't listen to it. You two keep yapping about Ron Paul like mentally disturbed poodles. I'll just move on to ideas and real issues. Leave the nonsense to the kiddies.

            Yap! Yap! Yap! Yap! :-P

          • digitalhair, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3I think you're getting buried in less than 6 minutes because nobody's reading your jackass comments anymore after you spammed this thread with your droning dogma about how unfair it is that nobody agrees with you. Somehow you miss the fact that people know what you're up to just by looking at your authoritarian comments every time there's a Ron Paul article submitted. Is that a valid explanation?
        • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -12/+7kemp: I don't really care about all the sycophants. I am curious about your answer. As a side note, please tell me you aren't Bill Kemp....
          • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -1/+9Do I think Ron Paul made a mistake in allowing this stuff to come out under his name? Of course! It was definitely the number one thing that allowed his candidacy to be torpedoed amongst the moderately literate. In this day and age of extreme political correctness, one thing that could be looked at as racism, and you're done, especially with the media and so many looking to pounce on ANYTHING to make Ron Paul look bad. You have to admit, the power establishment does not like Ron Paul's message. In fact, they HATE it. It goes to the heart of their power over the people. That's why I support him and why, at the same time, he is relatively blackballed by the major power brokers (big media, party establishment, etc.) At this point, I support Ron Paul, not in terms of being president in 2008, but in terms of getting a quality message of liberty out to the masses. I do care very much about passing on a free society to my progeny and I'll fight for that. As far as the "We the People Act" that you guys ride HARD, hey, I may not agree with it, but I believe it is issue number 100-something on the overall list of what's really critical to getting us out of our hole (war, empire, Fed System, over-taxation, war on drugs, PATRIOT Act, Real ID, NAU, faulty voting machines, civil liberties, social insecurity system, national debt, constitutional limits, wealth redistribution in general, big lobbying, anti-tyranny, individualism over collectivism, etc., etc.) these are my BIG issues and they are what the Federal government is doing that is killing the soul of the country. Do I agree with Ron Paul 100% always? No. And I doubt there is anyone out there who I agree with 100% (I'd like to meet that cool person if they exist!) but I do agree with him on the fundamentals to a much larger degree than the 3 "chosen" candidates, in spite of whatever flaws he may have. In terms of my thoughts as to whether Paul is actually racist, I think he is absolutely not and I try to be as 100% objective as possible in my analysis. The Dallas NAACP leader had a long interview right after the release of the New Republic smear letting everyone know that he had known Ron Paul for years and knew him not to be racist. I trust this man on this subject much more than I trust the smear-happy-kid Jamie Kirchick who wrote the out-of-context bash job on Paul. In terms of planning and being on top of the ball, I think Obama is great (you pointed out his "plan" on the website and I have seen it) but I disagree with Obama on some key issues relating to taxation and gun control. I believe in freedom and much of Obama's stance is quite antithetical to freedom and limited government, so I have a hard time supporting the guy in spite of the fact that I agree with a decent amount of his program and many people I know and love REALLY like the guy. So, yeah, that's just my two cents, hopefully you see it, and, no, I'm not Bill Kemp, my first name is actually Kemp and that's a real picture of me on my page.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -8/+2No one is going to bother reading your rants until you stop with the run-on paragraphs.
          • JDenigma, on 05/10/2008, -0/+4Real nice jcm. I understand that it's not easy to read posts like that which aren't broken up into paragraphs. It's not easy on the eyes. I used to do that myself online. So he made a little mistake and forgot to break it up. I can see how a person could do that not consciously thinking of it. It's easy to be typing away on here and forget to leave some spaces to separate it into paragraphs. You could politely point it out and provide constructive criticism, but no, instead you had to be a jerk about it.

            Whether you agree with what he said or not, he gave a decent, well thought out response and you chose to be a jerk instead of politely discussing these issues. I guess this is just your cop out so you don't have to address what he actually said. It's easier to do that after all. You guys wonder why we don't be civil with you?
        • mystcnurse, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2What a smart guy. I agree with you 100%. However, I don't think that any of these guys that are riding the "We the People Act" so hard have actually read it, or else they do not understand it, and it is very likely that they are getting their information about the act from third party political action committees - because one of them claimed that it singled out "gays, women, etc, etc" and it does none of that. Actually, it would keep the Federal Courts from interfering in a state's decision... and currently, there are states who have decided to recognize same sex marriages, for example. This act would prevent any one except the people of that state to change it. When ever these guys don't understand something, they resort to insults. It's a shame. BTW - here is a link to the actual bill. If anyone sees where it singles out ANY group of people, please, educate me, because I am not seeing it. Now, I realize that there are those of you who chose to receive ALL of your info from NEWS MEDIA - which, I can sort of understand, since these bills CAN be difficult to interpret and understand. But I don't think people should make CLAIMS about things that they actually know nothing about. Especially emotional claims. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.437 ... Peace Out. And @SSN - I'm really proud of you for attaining your trophy. I hope you treat her better than you speak of her.
        • metroidragon, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1JDenigma, thank you for an actual intelligent post from the Ron Paul Camp. I dugg that up.

          Now, I'm not sure if any of the other responders frequent the Ron Paul threads and complain about him there, but I can say that this was my first anti-Paul post.

          As for your point that the anti-Paul supporters are beating a dead horse; that same logic could be applied to this new wave of pro-Paul stories making it to the front page. Paul is a dead and done candidate, and just like the supporters still promote him, the detractors will still rail on him.

          The thing with "skeletons in the closet" when it comes to politics, is that the public generally doesn't care that it happened 10-15 years ago. They learned that information today, and it is affecting how they think now. I agree that it's stupid, but it's how the general population thinks. If turned out to be true, those racism claims from Pauls closet will be fresh in the minds of the voters, and that is all that matters.

          (incase your wondering why my response is so far away, the new comment system wouldn't allow me to post in the same thread)
    • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/09/2008, -24/+93. People who aren't prepubescent 12 year olds
    • Zap2, on 05/09/2008, -6/+5Please...you can't sum people up like that
    • NightVortez, on 05/09/2008, -2/+23As a Ron Paul fan, I've got to say..

      3. People who disagree with his political positions.
    • Beatmiser, on 05/09/2008, -10/+10The ones who don't believe God created the world in 7 days.
    • jer2eydevil88, on 05/09/2008, -16/+1How the ***** did so many people Digg you up? Did I miss something or do we have a Ron Paul activists group organized and striking?
    • KMye, on 05/09/2008, -15/+10My god, I just read through this entire thread, and I may not quite be dumber for it, but it caused me some real physical pain at points. Has anyone else noticed the level of "discourse" coming from the Paul supporters seems to have, somehow, unimaginably, dropped even lower than before?
      • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -15/+6It is a sign of a cult in it's last throes. Even "you hate liberty!" is too deep for them now...
      • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -14/+7They don't even bother pretending they know what they're talking about anymore. They just ramble incoherently at this point, hoping someone will vote for their Messiah, but deep down knowing it's over and they each wasted more than $2k
      • NightVortez, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7To be fair you see the same thing from Obama supporters in their threads, in fact, I'm starting to wonder if it's just the average digger.
      • Kent4jmj, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1anyone else noticed the level of "discourse" coming from the Paul HATERS seems to have, somehow, unimaginably, dropped even lower than before?
  • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -46/+22This is so funny, I am tempted to Digg it up for the entertainment factor. How deluded by false self importance can one failed group be? Ron "4%" Paul, the man who just barely beat "no preference" in the latest primaries, is somehow Public Enemy #1.

    Well, he is public enemy #1 against rational thought.
    • dmjarrington, on 05/09/2008, -10/+23You just keep thinking that.
      • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -25/+14Thank you for allowing me to have my own thoughts. Very rare in the Ron Paul supporter world...
        • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -10/+21Think whatever the hell you want, just DON'T TREAD ON ME.
          Get it?
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -9/+13So, no "your are a treasonous bastard, you hate liberty, and you are a neo-con socialist commie NOW loving CFR sheeple shill" from The Ron Paul supporters, when I assert my right to an opinion then?

            Wow. THAT will be a change of pace! I can't WAIT to get my next "you're opinion is just as valid as anyone else's" comment...
          • hansk, on 05/09/2008, -5/+2your = possessive
            you're = you are
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -4/+5orly
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -5/+5ah, resorting to grammar bitches, rather than answering the point.

            Your perspicacity regarding the inane is impressive. My ability to not give a ***** when on my laptop is an even greater talent. Heaven forbid you should answer to the issue. Are you pretending you didn't understand me? Nope. You are just using the pretense to avoid personal interaction/admittance that I am correct.

            I accept that. Thanks for validating my premise.
      • hansk, on 05/09/2008, -9/+6Digg him down everybody, fact is he has a lesser chance of making president than I do with having sex with my wife and her sister at the same time.
        • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -2/+5Wow, your wife must be a real prude.
          • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -8/+5Yes, she is a prude because she doesn't want to have sex with her sister. Is that the Ron Paul Libertarian stance these days? Or is that your Christian position.
          • hansk, on 05/09/2008, -5/+4i think ill manage, like the states will manage without ron paul
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -5/+5Well, that seals the deal on your intelligence...
    • mystcnurse, on 05/09/2008, -3/+7It does appear to me that Hansk is the one who wants to have sex with his wife and her sister. Just the fact that he is thinking such a thing makes me think that his wife must be a prude which is maybe what is causing him to have such sinister thoughts. I wonder, is that the "liberal stance" or his _______________ position. You poor guy. Too bad you can't wake up and see that Ron Paul is not about a person, but about a movement, and that the rest are all the same. CFR, media/weapons company owned/ make sure you watch American Idol tonight, and don't forget your anti-depressants, and your yearly health screening, and how will you spend YOUR tax refund check??? I've already said, I'm neither a libertarian NOR a Christian, nor a democrat, nor a Republican, nor a liberal, nor a conservative. Makes it much easier to see, when you don't have something to hold on to so tightly - what is really going on.
      • hansk, on 05/09/2008, -6/+6It seems you are not a lot of things to be spouting dribble like that. Your opinions are as valid as the next person's, but please do not push your own agenda and sell them as "facts". I can make opinions about people too, here are what comes to mind when I read your 7 lines: Nothing about you is mainstream, you hate everything that is status quo. This gives you a feeling of superiority. You are probably anti-war, anti-big business, new age, and loath prescription medications.
        Are you suggesting that one who does not take a side has a more correct view on politics? What exactly is a _______ position?
  • AlwaysAwake, on 05/09/2008, -8/+35Popularity is no measure of honesty. In fact, usually the opposite, because few of us "like" the Truth. If the lackeys of The Bankers can silence him, then they can avoid the messy business of assassination, which always leaves troublesome doubts in peoples minds, as it does yet for JFK, RFK, MLK, and many others too numerous to mention. They will kill him, if they have to, to shut him up. Too many people are starting to wake up to their treacherous beezness.
    • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/09/2008, -18/+7blah blah blah vague conspiracy statement blah blah blah
      • bohemianowl, on 05/09/2008, -3/+10blah blah blah bury brigade troll trash blah blah blah
  • silentboom, on 05/09/2008, -4/+31People want to be told "the war is going well", "saying the word change makes it happen", or "vote for the candidate with the same genitalia or skin color" ....it makes things so much easier than thinking and fixing things.
  • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -7/+51Attention Trolls - Believe whatever you want, support whoever you want, do whatever you want with your self and your time, just DON'T TREAD ON ME. Leave me free to be me. Don't ensnare me in the web of an ever-growing state. Is it that hard to understand? This basic essential concept leads to 99% of Ron Paul's support.
    Before you smear answer these questions:
    1. Bases in 130 countries at taxpayer expense?
    2. Illegal to do business in gold or silver? (I'll even leave the whole Fed thing out of it)
    3. Social security system you cannot opt out of and continue to be allowed to feed your family?
    4. Growing surveillance state?
    5. Federal government central control of how we educate our children?
    The list could grow, the tread marks are legit and not right. Defend these realities of the mainstream candidates before going on attack, please, thanks!
    • jbalantekin, on 05/09/2008, -14/+6What were the questions? Were you asking why? It seems like you just listed things you don't like then put question marks after it.
      • QuantumBios, on 05/09/2008, -5/+11Typical ignorant comment. Go read a history book and try to wrap your mind around "Don't Tread On Me" statement. There may be hope for you yet, the answers are out there.
        • jbalantekin, on 05/09/2008, -7/+8What answers are out there? I was simply asking what questions kemp34 was asking me to answer, since "Growing surveillance state?" Isn't really a question. I mean, "Why do we have a growing surveillance state?" would be a question. "Should we have a growing surveillance state?" would be a question. I was simply asking for clarification and you went on the defensive, labeling my comment and pitying me for something you seemed to misinterpret.
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -9/+9Don't bother, they're Paulbots, simple concepts like what is a question and what isn't is beyond some of them.
          • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4In relation to the growing surveillance state, I have yet to see Obama, Hillary or McCain soundly denounce it, so, given their shirking of said responsibility to take a position, I want to know how their supporters feel about the issue. Is it justified? Is the status quo fine to you? Please elaborate. The rest of the questions are similar, where do you see your candidate going with these issues? They don't address them really at all, so I have no clue. What do you think?
          • jbalantekin, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1I'm just curious why you refer to them as my candidates. I don't really support any of the candidates. Not to say I'm against all of them, I just don't have an Obama pin or anything like that. I think that elections are a much more delicate than most people believe. In order to get elected, to get to a position of power, you need to please the majority of people. Someone who says everything they think would most likely ostracize an extremely large portion of the populace, and sometimes staying away from certain topics may be best. I find it best not to guess what other people think, especially people that you don't personally know at all and only see on the tele or in the newspaper or online in the news. I think that all candidates have something to hide about what they may or may not do. As far as the surveillance state, I have nothing against the idea of people watching me, it's just information. It's what they do with that information that matters. Whether or not it's possible to have people running the surveillance who would handle the information correctly is another story, and a very complicated one. Again, these issues aren't as black and white as most politicians and their believes would like to think, the real world isn't that simple.
        • floatingorb, on 05/09/2008, -6/+4syntax nazi ^
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -9/+7That's the way to get more support for Paul, orb, being a superior *****. Keep up the good work!
        • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -4/+2Typical Paultard comment. Someone obviously slept through English class.
      • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -2/+10I would like to hear a justification for the status quo policies that are mentioned above.
        • jbalantekin, on 05/09/2008, -6/+7Was that the question to be answered? justifying all of these things? In that case, it would be pretty much impossible to do, at least in this setting. And not for the reasons you may think. They are all very complicated issues involving much background, theory, history, etc. More importantly, they all involve very large philosophical questions, the answering of which is not an easy process. The reason I think this would be hardest to do would be that, at least right now, in this setting, Digg's comment system is not set up to be a discussion forum, the setup just does not support it. If you actually care about the discussion, I would be glad to carry on to another, more supportive medium.
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -8/+6No no, everything in the world is black and white, right or wrong. That is the Ron Paul way!
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -11/+6Yeah the bases, let's close some of those down, only problem is they are huge for the local economies they are in, then we will get to hear how much the locals in those countries don't want us too leave.... for once, when it comes down to the dollar, which is ironic since Americans are the only people who care about money as learned from my digg education.
      • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -4/+15I am sorry, but when planning our military expenditure, I do not see "supporting foreign local economies" as one of the factors that even comes near entering into the equation.
        • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -1/+10I didn't say that, I'm saying when they talk about closing bases in foreign countries, usually there is a lot more backlash over the base related revenue loss than expected for how much we are demonized.
    • ncurses, on 05/09/2008, -11/+1uh no you owe a debt to society and are obligated to pay it fag

      also you are overblowing ***** that no one cares about. It's not illegal to do business in gold, it's just retarded to do it.
      • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -3/+8I don't owe ***** to society, the "society" has raped my paychecks for far more than is provided.
        • ncurses, on 05/09/2008, -8/+3lol I guess you're right, we don't need law enforcement or anything
          • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -1/+7I guess you're right, we should just fork over as much money as the public sector claims it costs.
      • Robjayne, on 05/09/2008, -7/+4I can't believe how truly stupid you are. It's actually disgusting.
  • krond, on 05/09/2008, -3/+29If Ron Paul is indeed dismissible, and doesn't matter...then why are they so concerned? Me thinks they doth protest too much when they say "RP doesn't have a chance."
    • BrapAllgood, on 05/09/2008, -4/+14They've been saying it since at least last June. You'd think they would get tired of beating those heads against the Paul Wall.

      Stupid is as stupid does.... Have a truffle, fellas.
      • Todash19, on 05/09/2008, -2/+10The Paul wall? Brilliant! ***** Brilliant!
      • JohnReb, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2"the Paul Wall"? As in "just another brick in..."?
    • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -13/+6So, you're one of the Paulbots that thinks Paul can still win?

      How many delegates does he have, again?
      • jer2eydevil88, on 05/09/2008, -10/+4Delegates don't matter to the people stupid enough to think that Paul has a chance still. I mean the guy has proven himself to have a good heart, a sound mind and a very clear idea on where he wants to take the country... trouble is that I (and many other people) think he's a bit too extreme for our tastes.
        • floatingorb, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5I think there is a chance/hope. McInsane's general pallor and malaise lead me to believe he has syphilis and is not long for this world.
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -6/+4Romney or Huckabee still have more delegates than Paul.
          • BrapAllgood, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3That's what she said.
    • malcolmlo, on 05/09/2008, -1/+9The guy said it in the interview. They are not concerned about him winning the presidency, thats obviously not going to happen. They are concerned about the movement he has started, what he is saying, and the response it is getting from young voters.
  • nymphetamine, on 05/09/2008, -24/+7You got Ron Paul in my politics-filtered digg. Damn you guys are sneaky.

    /Vote Quimby!
    http://i16.tinypic.com/71fqrex.jpg
  • dirka, on 05/09/2008, -0/+18Why do I always think of those 2 old guys from the movie Trading Places every time someone mentions the Trilateral Commission???
    • armedangel, on 05/09/2008, -1/+7Randolph and Mortimer Duke! Totally!
    • LadyKofNYC, on 05/09/2008, -1/+9Ironically, Aaron Russo directed that movie!!!
  • nomorepaul, on 05/09/2008, -24/+10It's pretty funny if you actually listen to the video. They say he has no chance to win, and they both diss on Ron Paul supporters for their wasting time.
    • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -5/+17Are you able to think further out than a handful of months?
      • nomorepaul, on 05/09/2008, -15/+8Considering back in January I said Ron Paul would get demolished in the primaries and turn his campaign into a book tour to benefit himself, I would say yes, and I do it much better than RonPaulTards
        • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -5/+13You do realize the future of liberty and this country is more important to the VAST MAJORITY of Ron Paul supporters than simply one presidential race, right? Or are you just going to continue spouting "Paultards" like a broken troll machine?
          • nomorepaul, on 05/09/2008, -13/+12Then they should shut up about Ron Paul winning the 2008 race, stop acting like cult followers, and stop spamming everywhere. Until then, yes, I will call people like you RonPaulTards who unable to critically think about anything, and just repeat what the Grand Wizard Paul tells you to say.
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -11/+7shhhhh, nomorepaul, they're busy building a private Paulbot-only compound.
          • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/09/2008, -12/+6This is how the Paultards keep recruiting new people. They automatically associate Ron Paul with liberty and freedom like dumb *****.
  • lolmeout40, on 05/09/2008, -20/+3A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Oprah.
  • cheese06, on 05/09/2008, -21/+15anyone who delves into Alex Jones' crap is doofus. He makes his living off paranoia.
    • Mangoose, on 05/09/2008, -10/+1He also believes that Noam Chomsky is a CIA asset.
    • Frankenface, on 05/09/2008, -9/+2I used to listen for amusment. The day he called Noam a "NWO shill" was the day I turned off for good.
  • sockpuppets, on 05/09/2008, -22/+12Buried for this **hot topic** *****. LQQK this isn't eBay...
    • Enron, on 05/09/2008, -2/+9I thought Hot Topic was a clothing store for emos.
  • plimpton777, on 05/09/2008, -7/+26Ron Paul was a surprise deviation in the script to rule the world. The seeds of revolution have been planted.
  • kinghajj, on 05/09/2008, -20/+13Buried for Alex Jones.
  • Rikushix, on 05/09/2008, -9/+5*looks at submission title*
    *looks at where submission is under Hot in All Topics*
    My god, the man is a prophet.
  • MattNF, on 05/09/2008, -18/+9Buried for "**HOT TOPIC**".
  • Dumbledorito, on 05/09/2008, -14/+7Hot pocket? Where?
  • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/09/2008, -24/+2Ron Paul sucks *****, Alex Jones is a pedophile, and Hot Topic is a terrible place to shop.
  • madfrogurt, on 05/09/2008, -18/+8I love how the Paulastinians still think there is a conspiracy to help Ron Paul fail any faster.
  • OffPiste, on 05/09/2008, -17/+8What's the plot, make him actually talk to a black people?
  • flogistan, on 05/09/2008, -1/+11Jim Tucker seems like a truly kind hearted old guy. I hope I'm as active and have his kinda balls when I'm that old.
  • twertyto, on 05/09/2008, -14/+9Why would anyone pressure Ron Paul to drop out? How would take make any difference?
    • xbenx, on 05/09/2008, -9/+6it wouldn't. hes so far removed from the current White House race anyhow. he can stay in and keep raking in the money from "supporters," but he won't be president.
  • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -2/+15The trolls have matriculated but fail to mention my questions on standing policy noted above. Thanks folks!
    • flogistan, on 05/09/2008, -9/+2They enrolled in a university? Lucky they didn't pontificate.
    • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -7/+4You didn't ask actual questions, nor did you phrase them in a neutral manner. Therefore, they are a waste of time to even address, at least until you can get an education.
      • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4Are you still trying to assert that I am not intelligent? This attack doesn't work once one has proven some degree of intelligence over a period of time. Right now, your posts are looking more and more like ill-willed trollish smears. Is that who/what you desire to be?
  • cyndezu, on 05/09/2008, -1/+19So the the trilateral commission is worried about Ron Paul educating thousands on the political
    process ? We should be doing this by the millions!
    Wake - up!
  • merripen, on 05/09/2008, -10/+2Is this about tacky goth clothing?
  • Dumbledorito, on 05/09/2008, -14/+10The Trilateral Commission? What happened to running in circles screaming about the Council on Foreign Relations or the Bilderberg Conference? Or even the good ol' Illuminati?

    I need to found a group that meets somewhere and get the attention of conspiracy theorists; I could retire on t-shirt sales alone.
    • Doitdifferently, on 05/09/2008, -1/+9Wasn't part of the conspiracy of Bilderberg that Hillary Clinton would be the next president? Which makes me wonder if McCain has been seen at any of Conferences. I've always had a passing interest in conspiracy theories since my used to watch shows on them all the time. I've found it fascinating how many shows are done by the mainstream media "exposing" conspiracies. I mean if the media is controlled by the *insert evil group here* you'd think they wouldn't do that.

      • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 05/09/2008, -2/+3It doesn't matter who wins to conspiracy theorists. They will say the results supports their theory no matter who wins.

        Ron Paul could win the Presidency and they will turn around and say he is a CFR, Bilderberg, Rothschild, TriLateral Commission clone grown by Halliburton to replace the REAL Ron Paul.
  • mentallyinhell, on 05/09/2008, -10/+1You throw hot topic in the title and no one will pay attention to the article itself. Stupid douche, this should have been taken seriously.
  • Trixrox, on 05/09/2008, -7/+1You have to wonder how true this stuff is. I mean, I don't want to dismiss it at all, but I can't go around believing everything...
    Henry Kissinger said he would raise gas prices artificially... I mean come on.
  • cheeseysynapse, on 05/09/2008, -12/+6i think Wesley Snipes listened to too much Alex Jones too........................
  • Risingashes, on 05/09/2008, -14/+9Ron Paul is a 'by the book' neoclassical economist. If you want to know why his policies are dangerous just go on a bit of a search.
    The market is not always right.
    • Trixrox, on 05/09/2008, -5/+10Dangers bad for everyone or just the people in the bilderberg group.
    • Look4Truth, on 05/09/2008, -4/+7"Ron Paul is a 'by the book' neoclassical economist. If you want to know why his policies are dangerous just go on a bit of a search."

      Eh...what? Are you kidding? Ron Paul is the ONLY one with solutions but whatever, just quietly stick your money in the faltering banks and rigged stock market, I'm sure everything will be fine. Best of luck.
      • Dumbledorito, on 05/09/2008, -6/+4Psst. A lack of regulation and oversight caused the current financial crisis. Ron "No Regulation" Paul wouldn't help in the slightest.
        • silentboom, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4Wow are you lost. The fed's irresponsibly low rates caused the malinvestment which led to the boom and encouraged the credit expansion. It also inflated the money at the same time stealing from the value of the dollar.....not to mention the debt that we are in which is credit owed to foreign nations at interest. All engineered. When you have free markets you don't have massive failures at the same time, you have problems being solved at the local levels as intended. We have had anything but free markets for a long long time now, you need to get educated, and not from a public school.
      • Look4Truth, on 05/09/2008, -4/+3Lol, yeah and I'll bet your candidate has ALL the answers to fix everything. Put down the lamestream Kool-Aid guy, it's all full of cyanide.
  • gravitywins, on 05/09/2008, -5/+12No, the market is not always right, but the government is NEVER right. (and never the answer)
    The unrestrained free market is what catapulted this country to its glorious and (almost) unprecedented success in a short 150 years before they tampered with it.
  • ncurses, on 05/09/2008, -4/+7dugg because this is what libertarians actually believe
  • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -5/+11I see we have the usual cast of lamers and haters and political cowards.
    I see some are trying to assert that gold is not useful, yet the gold coins I bought when "W" was sworn in will buy more gasoline than when I bought them, but the bury bunch doesn't think that's a sound investment.
    For the first 140 years the wholesale prices remained constant. You could but the same amount of goods and services with gold and silver coins.
    The gold American Eagle has a face value of $20 but it is worth over $800.
    I see the haters have once again tried to fool people with some newsletter crap.
    http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_is_Not_A_Bigot_R ...
    That newsletter had a circulation of about fifty. So far nobody has been able to answer the complete and total refutation of the newsletters and even the editor of TNR admits Ron Paul didn't write them.
    Ron Paul is the only candidate with a plan for peace and prosperity through trade, not bombs.
    All three Senators see nothing wrong with deficit spending, undeclared wars, and all three refuse to sponsor or cosponsor the Enumerated Powers act.

    http://digg.com/political_opinion/The_Constitution ...
    Quite simply, Ron Paul is the most educated candidate, the only candidate with macroeconomic expertise and the only candidate whose domestic and foreign policies make sense. He is the only candidate with a record of adherance to the Constitution and the only candidate who has not violated his oath of office.Ron Paul is the voice of reason in an insane process and the only one who is fit to lead.
    Ron Paul has done more for health care for poor and minorities than the three Senators put together.
    So, I look forward to the nonresponses from the lamers and haters and political cowards. They drone on and on with stuff that has been completely refuted in the vain hope someone will be stupid enough to believe them.
    They predicted that Peden would beat Paul in the primary, remember?
    Given that fact anyone who believes the lamers and haters and political cowards is a fool.
    • reed311, on 05/09/2008, -6/+5"They predicted that Peden would beat Paul in the primary, remember?"

      I never predicted that and the one or two people who were saying that were just screwing with you guys. Obviously Peden had no chance in hell against a guy that brings home the pork like Ron does.

      On the other hand, you guys predicted that Ron would win in a landslide and that the straw and Internet polls would be accurate and that the scientific polls were rigged. These things are very basic and you guys were waaaaayy off. We told you for months and months (after being called trolls for stating the fact that scientific polls are more accurate then Internet polls) all the while being dugg down or getting some chant about how "freedom is popular" and therefore the scientific polls must be rigged.

      It has nothing to do with hating, but trying to stop people like Ron Paul supporters from spreading false information and propaganda like they have been doing for the past year on digg. Not one of their little conspiracy theories have come true, but they have suckered a few impressionable people to give money to this shyster and it is dragging down this site.
      • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6He does not bring home the pork, we have already covered this and you were proven wrong yet again. I have been through each and every item he requested and didn't find any pork anywhere in it. That you would still trot out that disproven crap still shows you lack of ability to understand the process and reality. Why you want to look like a fool is anyone's guess. I got my money's worth the first time he opened his mouth in the debate and have never been sorry for any money I donated to his campaigns.
        • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -7/+5Just because you say it's disproven, does not make it so...
      • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7shy·ster [ shstər ] (plural shy·sters)


        noun

        Definition:

        unethical person: an unscrupulous person, especially a lawyer ( slang insult )

        Ron Paul is both ethical and worthy of trust. I find it interesting that you would use that word. Perhaps you were looking in the mirror?

        • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -7/+4Weak, even for you.
        • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -7/+4Ron Paul is certainly not an ethical man. Look at his racist newsletters, his constant hypocrisy regarding his support of the Constitution (We The People Act), and his idea to take YOUR campaign contributions and use them to start up a for-profit publishing company.
        • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7The "racist" newsletters has been shown for what it was. Completely debunked http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_is_Not_A_Bigot_R ...
        • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -7/+4Denied does not mean debunked. And FYI when you edit a post you have to repost the entire URL. Digg's commenting system sucks like that, so all I get from you is a dead link.
        • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6They were completely debunked. Only someone who failed to read the article could come up with your statement. http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_is_Not_A_Bigot_R ...
          Completely and utterly refuted.As in they have no basis in fact and there's ample proof of it.
        • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -7/+4Paste that link all you want, it doesn't change the fact that Ron Paul managed and published under his name some pretty racist newsletters. That happened. Get over it.
        • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6It was completely disproved. You can only pretend otherwise by ignoring reality.
          http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_is_Not_A_Bigot_R ... Completely and utterly refuted. I know you will never read the story because you want to keep makinbg baseless accusations against Ron Paul. If ignorance is bliss you must be the happiest digger ever.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -7/+3Stop trying to "completely disprove" the newsletters by posting the same dead link.
          • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5The link is not dead, I just went there. Looks like you have a problem on your end again.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -6/+3The link is dead. I just clicked on it again. Try clicking on the link that you posted in that comment, retard.
          • Hortnon, on 05/09/2008, -6/+4So, That link shows proof that Ron Paul never paid for the newsletter, and they illegally used his name, right? Where's the lawsuit?
      • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7I see Hortnon shows up. Isn't that nice? I wonder Hortnon, do you follow all of the Ron Paul threads all day every day or do you take some time off?
        I completely disproved the pork accusation by showing the basis for every dollar that he requested.
        Now perhaps funding nurse education and expanding hospital facilities to accomodate a certain condition and requesting money to maintain government facilities is somehow pork in your mind.
        To a reasonable person who does not wake up every morning hating Ron Paul and anyone who agrees with him those requests seem proper and justified.Not pork.
        • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -7/+3disproved the pork accusation? You're an idiot.

          Look at how much his district receives in federal programs and the amount of pork that Ronnie requests in relation to the amount of tax dollars paid. His district is a drain on federal coffers.
        • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6jcm267 if you can find me one dollar of pork I will disprove it because I have been through each and every request.
          Now if you are just going to spout statistics or some other measure you can call it whatever you like.
          I read the request, apparently you did not because you are calling it pork.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -7/+4I'm not taking the time to find the .pdf of all the requests because you're just going to deny that they're pork. Here's a list.

            http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/07/ron-pauls ...

            If none of this stuff is pork, then the bridge to nowhere isn't pork either.
          • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7I have already been through each and every request and found nothing that even comes close to pork.
            You have never even read the requests. That is obvious to the casual observer.
            You have made yet another baseless and disproved accusation of wrongdoing by Ron Paul.
            I guess you don't mind looking foolish.
          • jcm267, on 05/09/2008, -7/+5Retard, I've read the requests. There is a .pdf of all of the $400 million in earmarks that made the news several months ago floating around somewhere. I didn't bother taking too much time looking for them because, as per usual, you are denying reality.
          • cashman57, on 05/09/2008, -3/+6"Retard"?
            I guess we see your extent of ability to argue and thus rely on pers