Poll: Who is the Piggs president?

[Sandi Egan]

We are bound to start this at some point, so why not now?

In your opinion, which presidential candidate has a policy most in line with the philosophy of this blog?
Would you vote for that candidate?

[JWM in SD]

Ron Paul

[ybbor]

Ron Paul all the way

-Robby

[ybbor]

Ron Paul all the way

-Robby

[ybbor]

Ron Paul all the way

-Robby

[ybbor]

Ron Paul all the way

-Robby

[ybbor]

Ron Paul all the way

-Robby

[JWM in SD]

Ron Paul

[JWM in SD]

Ron Paul

[JWM in SD]

Ron Paul

[JWM in SD]

Ron Paul

[NateK]

That was easy…Next Poll!!!!

[NateK]

That was easy…Next Poll!!!!

[NateK]

That was easy…Next Poll!!!!

[NateK]

That was easy…Next Poll!!!!

[NateK]

That was easy…Next Poll!!!!

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc
Ron Paul and that’s all!

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc
Ron Paul and that’s all!

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc
Ron Paul and that’s all!

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc
Ron Paul and that’s all!

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc
Ron Paul and that’s all!

[The OC Scam]

RON PAUL! It is time to shake it up!

[The OC Scam]

RON PAUL! It is time to shake it up!

[The OC Scam]

RON PAUL! It is time to shake it up!

[The OC Scam]

RON PAUL! It is time to shake it up!

[The OC Scam]

RON PAUL! It is time to shake it up!

[Jumby]

Ron Paul for me also

[Portlock]

Sorry, I’m not as diligent in researching my candidates at this point in time as I should be, but the message is clear…

I will do my work to find out why, but more data points are always welcome… Can we hear the top three (or more) reasons why Ron Paul should be the local Piggtonian choice? Mahalo.

[Sandi Egan]

Portlock,

Personally for me, above and beyond everything else, he represents a miracle: an honest, authentic person, a man of principle, a champion for the US Constitution. His support comes from people, he does not deal with special interest groups.

Dr. Paul is serving his 10th term in Congress, and has a perfect voting record (from my point of view). As in “NO” to war in Iraq (a Republican!), and many other important issues.

Unfortunately I don’t consider myself articulate enough to introduce people to Dr. Paul’s candidacy and position. The Internet, however, is full of information on that topic.

The official campaign website is http://www.ronpaul2008.com. Check out the Issues section for his position most issues.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org – a very good place to find answers.

If you can sare an hour of your time, I highly recommend watching Ron [email protected] video. There in a very nice format Dr. Paul covers most topics and answers many questions:

Dr. Paul has tremendous grass-roots support, particularly among intelligent, thinking audience. I am yet to see an online poll that he has not won hands down (this thread is but one example).

[greekfire]

Ron Paul

[greekfire]

Ron Paul:

Champion of the Constitution

Never voted to raise taxes

Never voted for an unbalanced budget

Never voted to raise congressional pay

Has never taken a government-paid junket

Never voted to increase the power of the executive branch

Voted against regulating the internet

Has not participated in the congressional pension program

Repeatedly named the “Taxpayers’ Best Friend” in Congress

Nicknamed “Dr. No” for voting no so much against frivolous bills.

Delivered over 4000 babies as a doctor

Served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force and Air National Guard

Wants to get rid of the FED and IRS, and return to sound money backed by hard, tangible assets

Will uphold the Second Amendment

Believes that human life is sacred and begins at conception

Does not flip-flop on the issues, like Romney

Is still on his first wife, unlike Giuliani

[drunkle]

http://www.house.gov/paul/legis_tst.htm

read some of his essays.

i dont agree with some of his stances, like his stance on slashing social services, elimination of the estate tax and such. but, i think he’s even handed… elimination of social services balanced with elimination of corporate favoritism. elimination of the estate tax with protection of middle class american jobs.

he’s really the only one tackling the issues of the economy, the wage gap and the government’s failure to provide for all of it’s people.

and fox news is deathly scared of him. that fact alone should be good enough for anyone.

[drunkle]

http://www.house.gov/paul/legis_tst.htm

read some of his essays.

i dont agree with some of his stances, like his stance on slashing social services, elimination of the estate tax and such. but, i think he’s even handed… elimination of social services balanced with elimination of corporate favoritism. elimination of the estate tax with protection of middle class american jobs.

he’s really the only one tackling the issues of the economy, the wage gap and the government’s failure to provide for all of it’s people.

and fox news is deathly scared of him. that fact alone should be good enough for anyone.

[drunkle]

http://www.house.gov/paul/legis_tst.htm

read some of his essays.

i dont agree with some of his stances, like his stance on slashing social services, elimination of the estate tax and such. but, i think he’s even handed… elimination of social services balanced with elimination of corporate favoritism. elimination of the estate tax with protection of middle class american jobs.

he’s really the only one tackling the issues of the economy, the wage gap and the government’s failure to provide for all of it’s people.

and fox news is deathly scared of him. that fact alone should be good enough for anyone.

[drunkle]

http://www.house.gov/paul/legis_tst.htm

read some of his essays.

i dont agree with some of his stances, like his stance on slashing social services, elimination of the estate tax and such. but, i think he’s even handed… elimination of social services balanced with elimination of corporate favoritism. elimination of the estate tax with protection of middle class american jobs.

he’s really the only one tackling the issues of the economy, the wage gap and the government’s failure to provide for all of it’s people.

and fox news is deathly scared of him. that fact alone should be good enough for anyone.

[drunkle]

http://www.house.gov/paul/legis_tst.htm

read some of his essays.

i dont agree with some of his stances, like his stance on slashing social services, elimination of the estate tax and such. but, i think he’s even handed… elimination of social services balanced with elimination of corporate favoritism. elimination of the estate tax with protection of middle class american jobs.

he’s really the only one tackling the issues of the economy, the wage gap and the government’s failure to provide for all of it’s people.

and fox news is deathly scared of him. that fact alone should be good enough for anyone.

[greekfire]

Ron Paul:

Champion of the Constitution

Never voted to raise taxes

Never voted for an unbalanced budget

Never voted to raise congressional pay

Has never taken a government-paid junket

Never voted to increase the power of the executive branch

Voted against regulating the internet

Has not participated in the congressional pension program

Repeatedly named the “Taxpayers’ Best Friend” in Congress

Nicknamed “Dr. No” for voting no so much against frivolous bills.

Delivered over 4000 babies as a doctor

Served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force and Air National Guard

Wants to get rid of the FED and IRS, and return to sound money backed by hard, tangible assets

Will uphold the Second Amendment

Believes that human life is sacred and begins at conception

Does not flip-flop on the issues, like Romney

Is still on his first wife, unlike Giuliani

[greekfire]

Ron Paul:

Champion of the Constitution

Never voted to raise taxes

Never voted for an unbalanced budget

Never voted to raise congressional pay

Has never taken a government-paid junket

Never voted to increase the power of the executive branch

Voted against regulating the internet

Has not participated in the congressional pension program

Repeatedly named the “Taxpayers’ Best Friend” in Congress

Nicknamed “Dr. No” for voting no so much against frivolous bills.

Delivered over 4000 babies as a doctor

Served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force and Air National Guard

Wants to get rid of the FED and IRS, and return to sound money backed by hard, tangible assets

Will uphold the Second Amendment

Believes that human life is sacred and begins at conception

Does not flip-flop on the issues, like Romney

Is still on his first wife, unlike Giuliani

[greekfire]

Ron Paul:

Champion of the Constitution

Never voted to raise taxes

Never voted for an unbalanced budget

Never voted to raise congressional pay

Has never taken a government-paid junket

Never voted to increase the power of the executive branch

Voted against regulating the internet

Has not participated in the congressional pension program

Repeatedly named the “Taxpayers’ Best Friend” in Congress

Nicknamed “Dr. No” for voting no so much against frivolous bills.

Delivered over 4000 babies as a doctor

Served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force and Air National Guard

Wants to get rid of the FED and IRS, and return to sound money backed by hard, tangible assets

Will uphold the Second Amendment

Believes that human life is sacred and begins at conception

Does not flip-flop on the issues, like Romney

Is still on his first wife, unlike Giuliani

[greekfire]

Ron Paul:

Champion of the Constitution

Never voted to raise taxes

Never voted for an unbalanced budget

Never voted to raise congressional pay

Has never taken a government-paid junket

Never voted to increase the power of the executive branch

Voted against regulating the internet

Has not participated in the congressional pension program

Repeatedly named the “Taxpayers’ Best Friend” in Congress

Nicknamed “Dr. No” for voting no so much against frivolous bills.

Delivered over 4000 babies as a doctor

Served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force and Air National Guard

Wants to get rid of the FED and IRS, and return to sound money backed by hard, tangible assets

Will uphold the Second Amendment

Believes that human life is sacred and begins at conception

Does not flip-flop on the issues, like Romney

Is still on his first wife, unlike Giuliani

[greekfire]

Ron Paul

[greekfire]

Ron Paul

[greekfire]

Ron Paul

[greekfire]

Ron Paul

[Sandi Egan]

Portlock,

Personally for me, above and beyond everything else, he represents a miracle: an honest, authentic person, a man of principle, a champion for the US Constitution. His support comes from people, he does not deal with special interest groups.

Dr. Paul is serving his 10th term in Congress, and has a perfect voting record (from my point of view). As in “NO” to war in Iraq (a Republican!), and many other important issues.

Unfortunately I don’t consider myself articulate enough to introduce people to Dr. Paul’s candidacy and position. The Internet, however, is full of information on that topic.

The official campaign website is http://www.ronpaul2008.com. Check out the Issues section for his position most issues.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org – a very good place to find answers.

If you can sare an hour of your time, I highly recommend watching Ron [email protected] video. There in a very nice format Dr. Paul covers most topics and answers many questions:

Dr. Paul has tremendous grass-roots support, particularly among intelligent, thinking audience. I am yet to see an online poll that he has not won hands down (this thread is but one example).

[Sandi Egan]

Portlock,

Personally for me, above and beyond everything else, he represents a miracle: an honest, authentic person, a man of principle, a champion for the US Constitution. His support comes from people, he does not deal with special interest groups.

Dr. Paul is serving his 10th term in Congress, and has a perfect voting record (from my point of view). As in “NO” to war in Iraq (a Republican!), and many other important issues.

Unfortunately I don’t consider myself articulate enough to introduce people to Dr. Paul’s candidacy and position. The Internet, however, is full of information on that topic.

The official campaign website is http://www.ronpaul2008.com. Check out the Issues section for his position most issues.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org – a very good place to find answers.

If you can sare an hour of your time, I highly recommend watching Ron [email protected] video. There in a very nice format Dr. Paul covers most topics and answers many questions:

Dr. Paul has tremendous grass-roots support, particularly among intelligent, thinking audience. I am yet to see an online poll that he has not won hands down (this thread is but one example).

[Sandi Egan]

Portlock,

Personally for me, above and beyond everything else, he represents a miracle: an honest, authentic person, a man of principle, a champion for the US Constitution. His support comes from people, he does not deal with special interest groups.

Dr. Paul is serving his 10th term in Congress, and has a perfect voting record (from my point of view). As in “NO” to war in Iraq (a Republican!), and many other important issues.

Unfortunately I don’t consider myself articulate enough to introduce people to Dr. Paul’s candidacy and position. The Internet, however, is full of information on that topic.

The official campaign website is http://www.ronpaul2008.com. Check out the Issues section for his position most issues.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org – a very good place to find answers.

If you can sare an hour of your time, I highly recommend watching Ron [email protected] video. There in a very nice format Dr. Paul covers most topics and answers many questions:

Dr. Paul has tremendous grass-roots support, particularly among intelligent, thinking audience. I am yet to see an online poll that he has not won hands down (this thread is but one example).

[Sandi Egan]

Portlock,

Personally for me, above and beyond everything else, he represents a miracle: an honest, authentic person, a man of principle, a champion for the US Constitution. His support comes from people, he does not deal with special interest groups.

Dr. Paul is serving his 10th term in Congress, and has a perfect voting record (from my point of view). As in “NO” to war in Iraq (a Republican!), and many other important issues.

Unfortunately I don’t consider myself articulate enough to introduce people to Dr. Paul’s candidacy and position. The Internet, however, is full of information on that topic.

The official campaign website is http://www.ronpaul2008.com. Check out the Issues section for his position most issues.

http://www.ronpaullibrary.org – a very good place to find answers.

If you can sare an hour of your time, I highly recommend watching Ron [email protected] video. There in a very nice format Dr. Paul covers most topics and answers many questions:

Dr. Paul has tremendous grass-roots support, particularly among intelligent, thinking audience. I am yet to see an online poll that he has not won hands down (this thread is but one example).

[Portlock]

Sorry, I’m not as diligent in researching my candidates at this point in time as I should be, but the message is clear…

I will do my work to find out why, but more data points are always welcome… Can we hear the top three (or more) reasons why Ron Paul should be the local Piggtonian choice? Mahalo.

[Portlock]

Sorry, I’m not as diligent in researching my candidates at this point in time as I should be, but the message is clear…

I will do my work to find out why, but more data points are always welcome… Can we hear the top three (or more) reasons why Ron Paul should be the local Piggtonian choice? Mahalo.

[Portlock]

Sorry, I’m not as diligent in researching my candidates at this point in time as I should be, but the message is clear…

I will do my work to find out why, but more data points are always welcome… Can we hear the top three (or more) reasons why Ron Paul should be the local Piggtonian choice? Mahalo.

[Portlock]

Sorry, I’m not as diligent in researching my candidates at this point in time as I should be, but the message is clear…

I will do my work to find out why, but more data points are always welcome… Can we hear the top three (or more) reasons why Ron Paul should be the local Piggtonian choice? Mahalo.

[Jumby]

Ron Paul for me also

[Jumby]

Ron Paul for me also

[Jumby]

Ron Paul for me also

[Jumby]

Ron Paul for me also

[sogon]

I have had a bad taste in mouth about national elections and I still do, unless the general election is Ron Paul vs Joseph Biden, I do not intend to even vote because it will be another beauty competition where the most ruthless bitch will always win. With those two in the race I would genuinely be undecided, which is really where we all ought to be, weighing the pros and cons of each position with those of each candidate. Not just buying some random propaganda, sadly I don’t think that day will ever come, American politics has been degenerating for years, a little economic turmoil may be just what the doctor ordered.

[sogon]

I have had a bad taste in mouth about national elections and I still do, unless the general election is Ron Paul vs Joseph Biden, I do not intend to even vote because it will be another beauty competition where the most ruthless bitch will always win. With those two in the race I would genuinely be undecided, which is really where we all ought to be, weighing the pros and cons of each position with those of each candidate. Not just buying some random propaganda, sadly I don’t think that day will ever come, American politics has been degenerating for years, a little economic turmoil may be just what the doctor ordered.

[sogon]

I have had a bad taste in mouth about national elections and I still do, unless the general election is Ron Paul vs Joseph Biden, I do not intend to even vote because it will be another beauty competition where the most ruthless bitch will always win. With those two in the race I would genuinely be undecided, which is really where we all ought to be, weighing the pros and cons of each position with those of each candidate. Not just buying some random propaganda, sadly I don’t think that day will ever come, American politics has been degenerating for years, a little economic turmoil may be just what the doctor ordered.

[sogon]

I have had a bad taste in mouth about national elections and I still do, unless the general election is Ron Paul vs Joseph Biden, I do not intend to even vote because it will be another beauty competition where the most ruthless bitch will always win. With those two in the race I would genuinely be undecided, which is really where we all ought to be, weighing the pros and cons of each position with those of each candidate. Not just buying some random propaganda, sadly I don’t think that day will ever come, American politics has been degenerating for years, a little economic turmoil may be just what the doctor ordered.

[sogon]

I have had a bad taste in mouth about national elections and I still do, unless the general election is Ron Paul vs Joseph Biden, I do not intend to even vote because it will be another beauty competition where the most ruthless bitch will always win. With those two in the race I would genuinely be undecided, which is really where we all ought to be, weighing the pros and cons of each position with those of each candidate. Not just buying some random propaganda, sadly I don’t think that day will ever come, American politics has been degenerating for years, a little economic turmoil may be just what the doctor ordered.

[NateK]

Come on!!! Take a look at how Ron Paul makes Bernanke stutter and you tell me he isn’t tackling the issues head on.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yAwvlDJgJbM

[Eugene]

Ron Paul is the way to go.

Abolish income tax, so that rich people (such as myself) can keep all of their hard-earned money. Oops, there’s a big hole in the budget? We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work. Alternatively, consider selling a kidney to some rich man. There’s always demand for kidneys. It does not say anywhere in the Constitution that selling your own organs should be illegal.

If you don’t want to work at the conveyor belt 10 hours a day, 6 days a week – consider becoming a butler (or a gardener, or a maid). Those 5-10% of Americans who make it through the Second Great Depression without going bankrupt will be filthy rich compared to middle-class workers making $100/month. They will be able to afford mansions and servants. Exurbs will be plowed over and turned into ranches.

Whether you end up being a butler or a manufacturing worker, you should feel fortunate. You could have ended up like those poor 20% of folks who defaulted on their upside-down morgages and were sold into slavery. (Oh yeah – the 13th amendment was abolished by President Paul soon after the 16th as contrary to the spirit of founding fathers. Many of whom were slaveowners, as you know. Besides. Mr. Paul felt that it was a good way to prevent moral hazard among homebuyers.)

Man, life will be fun.

[Sandi Egan]

OK, esmith, you made me stay up until 5AM to answer your post 🙂

Disclamer: I am not claiming to know all the answers, and my thoughts below are just that – my thoughts. They are based of my limited understanding of how things work and what Dr. Paul’s position is. I might be completely wrong.

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.
I work in a science-related field myself, and it’s my opinion, that government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs. It is OK to waste enormous amounts of money in hope to produce SOMETHING at the end, but I don’t think a country on a verge of bankruptcy can afford that. And who said NASA is the only right way for space exploration? It is as a wasteful and irresponsible way of spending our taxes as they come.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.
For better or worse, changes in social programs can’t come overnight. People who are 75 now will still get all their benefits.
If you are 45 today, and you have a good income, but you spend it all in hopes that I will pay for your retirement – well, think again. With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could. If you decide not to, how come it is the responsibility of my son, who is 2 now, to pay your medical bills in 30 years?
Of course, in some cases the society is responsible to protect its weakest, but the federal programs that handle it right now are not the best way of dealing with the problem. Imho.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work.
This is outside my area of expertise, and my views can be overly simplistic. But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct. If the reasonable cost for the job is $100/month, artificially raising it to $200 will not make the company pay $200. It will make the company pay $100 to somebody who will take it, namely move it overseas. The company does not really have a choice here, other than going out of business. So, the small companies that cannot afford to build plants in China will be driven to bankruptcy, while the big corporations will outsource. How exactly is that helping the worker, who cannot earn even that $100 now? I know how – by paying his unemployment benefits from my taxes. No, thanks.

Anyway, it is nice to have a constructive discussion here, without name-calling and emotional statements. It’ll be great to hear everyones thoughts on the topic.

Happy Thanksgivig, everyone.

[Eugene]

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

I don’t think there is much difference between using federal and state money and I don’t think Ron Paul does either. He uses federal vs. state card to avoid addressing hot issues like gay rights, abortion, etc.

government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs.

Some branches of science require presence of government to advance. Private investors aren’t going to pay for research unless it is likely to lead to profits in reasonable timeframe. Theoretical physics is a good example. Then, there are things that can’t come into existence unless backed by government(s). Some time next year we will probably see the launch of the largest particle accelerator in the world (LHC). It was built in Switzerland at the cost of around $3 billion. It is going to keep a good portion of world’s high energy physicists busy for the next 10 years. No private investor or a group of investors is going to pay for a project like this. For a government like the one we have in the U.S., it’s peanuts ($15 from every taxpayer). (Incidentally, an even bigger accelerator could have been finished and launched in Texas 10 years ago, but, in the end, the government decided that the project was too expensive and killed it.)

Same thing with space exploration. It’s been 50 years since the launch of Sputnik and still no private company has been able to even come close to putting a man-made object into orbit. It’s just too expensive.

With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could.

The problem is, people who need Social Security / Medicare most don’t pay much (if any) income tax. Abolishing income tax will greatly benefit lawyers and engineers and programmers (especially single ones), but it won’t do much for a burger flipper or a janitor who makes $30,000 a year.

But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct.

Ron Paul’s views on economics (and the Austrian school in general) are the economic equivalent of the intelligent design. It’s okay to study the intelligent design as long as it stays theory, but you’re going to get in trouble if you try to solve real-world problems and to make policy decisions based on it. Conventional economics tells us that attempting to keep a tight lid on money supply in times like the present has a good chance of turning a potentially mild economic slowdown into a full-scale depression. Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The thing about free market, it tends to adhere to a 80/20 rule: 20% of people make 80% of the money. Basic cost of living is nearly the same for everyone, so people who make more money can save more and invest more. Rich get richer and poor stay poor. In the United States, inequality is not so pronounced, for a number of reasons, all of them anti-libertarian (income tax, minimum wage laws, partially socialized medicine and education). Minimum wage laws make it uneconomical to manufacture stuff in America. Instead of assembling iPods and painting toys, unskilled Americans join the service industry. American burger flipper is far better off than Chinese manufacturing worker, because minumum wage laws make sure that he’s paid at least $5.15 an hour (more than most Chinese workers make in a day), and his clients can afford to pay $3 for a Big Mac.

[Sandi Egan]

esmith,

Your previous post made me think, and after posting my answer, I spent a couple of days researching the subject. Someone on this thread accused me of being a white rich straight male, (which I have to admit I am), and as such am looking at the issues differently. I accept that my views on some social issues might be biased by my personal situation, and I might not give some issues the importance I would, if my life and well-being depended on them.

Perhaps, I am no good at describing his positions on all issues. This video might shed light on some of them.

http://www.ronpaulnation.com/tv.html#nashua_telegraph

I tried to investigate the Dr. Paul’s stance on social security, medicare, and other related issues, which I admittedly didn’t pay enough attention to. Here’s what I found out:

As you can see in the video, there are two critical positions, that define Dr. Paul’s stance: non-interventionalist foreign policy and protection of personal liberty. Everything else is kind of following from these two. He is not going to disband SSA and Medicare when he gets to the White House. He will try resolve the financial issues that the US is facing, mainly by cutting the foreign military involvement, and then slowly steer the country to a less-bureaucratic route. He promises that everybody who needs help will receive it. That approach will allow to actually fund social programs by better distributing the funding, instead of just raising taxes.

Ron Paul of course has personal position regarding all topics, which may or may not correlate with mine or yours. His approach, however, is that it is not the place of executive branch of the government to force their beliefs on people. Regardless of his personal beliefs, the president should not aspire to replace the law with his own vision. The laws are the Constitution and the will of people expressed through their representatives in Congress. The executive branch is charged with optimal implementation of the laws.

I don’t agree with Ron Paul on some issues. Personally I would benefit from increased funding for science. It hurts my feelings, that he is opposes participating in Darfur crysis resolution and is against branding massacre of Armenians by Turkey in 1915 a genocide. But I understand that his position is not dictated by populist reasons. He claims that the US should not meddle in internal affairs of other nations, which I support, and I fully understand that his principles will not allow him to make exceptions and apply double standards.

I disagree with you that Dr. Paul is trying to sidestep hard questions by saying the States will deal with them. On the contrary, he openly describes how he feels about them, and by doing so repels some of his potential supporters. But the point is, he does not think he as a president will have a right to push his opinion on the country. For example, as an obstetrician he feels very strongly about abortions. He said many times, that in his personal view any abortion is a murder. But he will be opposed to a federal abortion ban, simply because it is not the place of federal government to dictate that. Like with other questionable issues, States decide what constitutes a crime and what should be the punishment. For this reason anti-abortion groups, that fight for a constitutional amendment to ban abortions wouldn’t endorse Ron Paul.

And that brings us to the main and overwhelmingly crucial argument, that defines Ron Paul for me. It looks like an obvious move for a candidate: proclame support for something he personally truly believes in and gain the endorsement of an influential political fraction. But he wouldn’t do that, because he puts the Law and Constitution above his personal beliefs, even if it might cost him a dearly. I challenge anybody to name another candidate that would dare to do so.

What I am trying to say is, Ron Paul is not an ordinary presidential candidate. The society grew convinced that there is no such thing as an honest politician. We don’t follow the politics, don’t vote. And even when we do, we vote for someone who promises something that would benefit us personally, as opposed to what is good for the country.

Ron Paul is a once-in-a-century opportunity for this country. Opportunity that came exactly when we needed it the most. Let’s not blow our chance.

[NotCranky]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

Sandi,
His view on power and use of American Authority will end his presidential hopes. When he talks about a hands off stance against Iran and the economic stances he is famous for, the terrorist propagandist(Republicans) and prosperity conscious ideologues(all candidates) that are going to be the real core of the election campaigns will be brought out to do away with him. I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.

Dr. Paul’s response to the religion issue is just a shame as far as I am concerned.The religion issue is a shame for me throughout the political process, especially at the national level. It is just as much what he says as what he doesn’t say. When we have a candidate similar to Dr. Paul, who also seems contemporary and intellectually honest, on church and state/religion and politics, I will get really excited. His poor rhetoric on religion is a bigger strike against him than it is to other candidates because he gives me the hope that he would be more progressive. He is totally unexceptional on this front and is in fact a disappointment.

[4plexowner]

Sandi Eagan – to summarize your description of Ron Paul: he is a statesman

a statesman puts his country and people first and moves into politics because of his passionate beliefs

a politician chooses politics as a profession that will allow them to achieve their personal ambitions (power, fame, wealth, all of the above) – the people are secondary to their personal agenda

Ron Paul is the first statesman the world has seen in a long, long time – perhaps the world has forgotten what honesty and passion look like (or is scared witless by the sight)

[4plexowner]

Sandi Eagan – to summarize your description of Ron Paul: he is a statesman

a statesman puts his country and people first and moves into politics because of his passionate beliefs

a politician chooses politics as a profession that will allow them to achieve their personal ambitions (power, fame, wealth, all of the above) – the people are secondary to their personal agenda

Ron Paul is the first statesman the world has seen in a long, long time – perhaps the world has forgotten what honesty and passion look like (or is scared witless by the sight)

[4plexowner]

Sandi Eagan – to summarize your description of Ron Paul: he is a statesman

a statesman puts his country and people first and moves into politics because of his passionate beliefs

a politician chooses politics as a profession that will allow them to achieve their personal ambitions (power, fame, wealth, all of the above) – the people are secondary to their personal agenda

Ron Paul is the first statesman the world has seen in a long, long time – perhaps the world has forgotten what honesty and passion look like (or is scared witless by the sight)

[4plexowner]

Sandi Eagan – to summarize your description of Ron Paul: he is a statesman

a statesman puts his country and people first and moves into politics because of his passionate beliefs

a politician chooses politics as a profession that will allow them to achieve their personal ambitions (power, fame, wealth, all of the above) – the people are secondary to their personal agenda

Ron Paul is the first statesman the world has seen in a long, long time – perhaps the world has forgotten what honesty and passion look like (or is scared witless by the sight)

[4plexowner]

Sandi Eagan – to summarize your description of Ron Paul: he is a statesman

a statesman puts his country and people first and moves into politics because of his passionate beliefs

a politician chooses politics as a profession that will allow them to achieve their personal ambitions (power, fame, wealth, all of the above) – the people are secondary to their personal agenda

Ron Paul is the first statesman the world has seen in a long, long time – perhaps the world has forgotten what honesty and passion look like (or is scared witless by the sight)

[Sandi Egan]

I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.
One who doesn’t support what he truly believes in because “it has no chance of winning”, but instead supports “the lesser of evils” deserves the government he elects. If you believe in something, it is your duty as a citizen to act on it and try to convince everybody else. Even if you are the only one who believes it.

Regarding the link, I agree with every word. I’ll research Ron Paul’s position on the issue, and put links here.
In any case, I prefer to end the wars today, even if it means foregoing corporate Christmas parties for a couple more years.

[NotCranky]

You agree with every word of Ron Paul’s in the link? I think that is what you are saying? Rich white male ,check, religious establishment check.

4-Plex is sure this guy is some kind of grand Statesman. Why does he wait to run for president of the U.S to show it. Not some voting record but to get out in national public eye and show some “passion”.

People who show passion to a degree that means a possibility of real change get killed, not go around on the evening talk show circuit pitching themselves. Good chance he backs out when he realizes he is a threat to the Republicans already slim chance of winning anything.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.

Rustico out.

[Sandi Egan]

religious establishment check

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.
Do you consider celebrating Christmas and Mt. Soledad cross a human rights abuse? Even if you do, which is more important to you: sound foreign and domestic policy or politically correct landscape?

I think it’s a matter of priorities. There are several quizzes on the Internet, that let you specify your position on issues, and recommend the candidate that you are most aligned with. For example
http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

[NotCranky]

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

My bad, I should have asked why you were so excited to agree on his support of Religion in Politics and Church and State status quo. I forgot the importance of Santa for so many. It is not a a very large political issue but it will alienate some people from him. To me it is one of the the most important things. The issue wasn’t on the questionaire.Too bad for me. As far as the questionaire goes, I gave up when I couldn’t find “None of the above” or fill in the blank as a choice.

The human rights religion issue has nothing to do with Christmas, crosses or Mt.. Soledad. Thanks for matching my blunder with a blunder.

Good luck to you. I do believe you mean well. I am fine with your candidate going all the way , if it works out that way. I might even vote for him. I just express my doubts and observations when in fact I should stay off this thread. Bye.

[Sandi Egan]

Rustico,

I apologize. I generally don’t consider religion in my decision to support or not support a particular political stance, but I shouldn’t have assumed it to be the only way to look at things. Please forgive me for hurting your feelings.

[NotCranky]

Sandi,
Really no need to apologize. I was grumpy and should have just stayed off the topic. My comments directed to you regarding the checklist was my mistake. Not just because I was wrong in fact, but also wrong to let it out that way. Thanks for your consideration.
Rustico

[NotCranky]

Sandi,
Really no need to apologize. I was grumpy and should have just stayed off the topic. My comments directed to you regarding the checklist was my mistake. Not just because I was wrong in fact, but also wrong to let it out that way. Thanks for your consideration.
Rustico

[NotCranky]

Sandi,
Really no need to apologize. I was grumpy and should have just stayed off the topic. My comments directed to you regarding the checklist was my mistake. Not just because I was wrong in fact, but also wrong to let it out that way. Thanks for your consideration.
Rustico

[NotCranky]

Sandi,
Really no need to apologize. I was grumpy and should have just stayed off the topic. My comments directed to you regarding the checklist was my mistake. Not just because I was wrong in fact, but also wrong to let it out that way. Thanks for your consideration.
Rustico

[NotCranky]

Sandi,
Really no need to apologize. I was grumpy and should have just stayed off the topic. My comments directed to you regarding the checklist was my mistake. Not just because I was wrong in fact, but also wrong to let it out that way. Thanks for your consideration.
Rustico

[Sandi Egan]

Rustico,

I apologize. I generally don’t consider religion in my decision to support or not support a particular political stance, but I shouldn’t have assumed it to be the only way to look at things. Please forgive me for hurting your feelings.

[Sandi Egan]

Rustico,

I apologize. I generally don’t consider religion in my decision to support or not support a particular political stance, but I shouldn’t have assumed it to be the only way to look at things. Please forgive me for hurting your feelings.

[Sandi Egan]

Rustico,

I apologize. I generally don’t consider religion in my decision to support or not support a particular political stance, but I shouldn’t have assumed it to be the only way to look at things. Please forgive me for hurting your feelings.

[Sandi Egan]

Rustico,

I apologize. I generally don’t consider religion in my decision to support or not support a particular political stance, but I shouldn’t have assumed it to be the only way to look at things. Please forgive me for hurting your feelings.

[NotCranky]

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

My bad, I should have asked why you were so excited to agree on his support of Religion in Politics and Church and State status quo. I forgot the importance of Santa for so many. It is not a a very large political issue but it will alienate some people from him. To me it is one of the the most important things. The issue wasn’t on the questionaire.Too bad for me. As far as the questionaire goes, I gave up when I couldn’t find “None of the above” or fill in the blank as a choice.

The human rights religion issue has nothing to do with Christmas, crosses or Mt.. Soledad. Thanks for matching my blunder with a blunder.

Good luck to you. I do believe you mean well. I am fine with your candidate going all the way , if it works out that way. I might even vote for him. I just express my doubts and observations when in fact I should stay off this thread. Bye.

[NotCranky]

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

My bad, I should have asked why you were so excited to agree on his support of Religion in Politics and Church and State status quo. I forgot the importance of Santa for so many. It is not a a very large political issue but it will alienate some people from him. To me it is one of the the most important things. The issue wasn’t on the questionaire.Too bad for me. As far as the questionaire goes, I gave up when I couldn’t find “None of the above” or fill in the blank as a choice.

The human rights religion issue has nothing to do with Christmas, crosses or Mt.. Soledad. Thanks for matching my blunder with a blunder.

Good luck to you. I do believe you mean well. I am fine with your candidate going all the way , if it works out that way. I might even vote for him. I just express my doubts and observations when in fact I should stay off this thread. Bye.

[NotCranky]

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

My bad, I should have asked why you were so excited to agree on his support of Religion in Politics and Church and State status quo. I forgot the importance of Santa for so many. It is not a a very large political issue but it will alienate some people from him. To me it is one of the the most important things. The issue wasn’t on the questionaire.Too bad for me. As far as the questionaire goes, I gave up when I couldn’t find “None of the above” or fill in the blank as a choice.

The human rights religion issue has nothing to do with Christmas, crosses or Mt.. Soledad. Thanks for matching my blunder with a blunder.

Good luck to you. I do believe you mean well. I am fine with your candidate going all the way , if it works out that way. I might even vote for him. I just express my doubts and observations when in fact I should stay off this thread. Bye.

[NotCranky]

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

My bad, I should have asked why you were so excited to agree on his support of Religion in Politics and Church and State status quo. I forgot the importance of Santa for so many. It is not a a very large political issue but it will alienate some people from him. To me it is one of the the most important things. The issue wasn’t on the questionaire.Too bad for me. As far as the questionaire goes, I gave up when I couldn’t find “None of the above” or fill in the blank as a choice.

The human rights religion issue has nothing to do with Christmas, crosses or Mt.. Soledad. Thanks for matching my blunder with a blunder.

Good luck to you. I do believe you mean well. I am fine with your candidate going all the way , if it works out that way. I might even vote for him. I just express my doubts and observations when in fact I should stay off this thread. Bye.

[Sandi Egan]

religious establishment check

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.
Do you consider celebrating Christmas and Mt. Soledad cross a human rights abuse? Even if you do, which is more important to you: sound foreign and domestic policy or politically correct landscape?

I think it’s a matter of priorities. There are several quizzes on the Internet, that let you specify your position on issues, and recommend the candidate that you are most aligned with. For example
http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

[Sandi Egan]

religious establishment check

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.
Do you consider celebrating Christmas and Mt. Soledad cross a human rights abuse? Even if you do, which is more important to you: sound foreign and domestic policy or politically correct landscape?

I think it’s a matter of priorities. There are several quizzes on the Internet, that let you specify your position on issues, and recommend the candidate that you are most aligned with. For example
http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

[Sandi Egan]

religious establishment check

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.
Do you consider celebrating Christmas and Mt. Soledad cross a human rights abuse? Even if you do, which is more important to you: sound foreign and domestic policy or politically correct landscape?

I think it’s a matter of priorities. There are several quizzes on the Internet, that let you specify your position on issues, and recommend the candidate that you are most aligned with. For example
http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

[Sandi Egan]

religious establishment check

Hm. Didn’t see that coming 🙂
I am not religious at all, I am just a big fan of Santa.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.
Do you consider celebrating Christmas and Mt. Soledad cross a human rights abuse? Even if you do, which is more important to you: sound foreign and domestic policy or politically correct landscape?

I think it’s a matter of priorities. There are several quizzes on the Internet, that let you specify your position on issues, and recommend the candidate that you are most aligned with. For example
http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

[NotCranky]

You agree with every word of Ron Paul’s in the link? I think that is what you are saying? Rich white male ,check, religious establishment check.

4-Plex is sure this guy is some kind of grand Statesman. Why does he wait to run for president of the U.S to show it. Not some voting record but to get out in national public eye and show some “passion”.

People who show passion to a degree that means a possibility of real change get killed, not go around on the evening talk show circuit pitching themselves. Good chance he backs out when he realizes he is a threat to the Republicans already slim chance of winning anything.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.

Rustico out.

[NotCranky]

You agree with every word of Ron Paul’s in the link? I think that is what you are saying? Rich white male ,check, religious establishment check.

4-Plex is sure this guy is some kind of grand Statesman. Why does he wait to run for president of the U.S to show it. Not some voting record but to get out in national public eye and show some “passion”.

People who show passion to a degree that means a possibility of real change get killed, not go around on the evening talk show circuit pitching themselves. Good chance he backs out when he realizes he is a threat to the Republicans already slim chance of winning anything.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.

Rustico out.

[NotCranky]

You agree with every word of Ron Paul’s in the link? I think that is what you are saying? Rich white male ,check, religious establishment check.

4-Plex is sure this guy is some kind of grand Statesman. Why does he wait to run for president of the U.S to show it. Not some voting record but to get out in national public eye and show some “passion”.

People who show passion to a degree that means a possibility of real change get killed, not go around on the evening talk show circuit pitching themselves. Good chance he backs out when he realizes he is a threat to the Republicans already slim chance of winning anything.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.

Rustico out.

[NotCranky]

You agree with every word of Ron Paul’s in the link? I think that is what you are saying? Rich white male ,check, religious establishment check.

4-Plex is sure this guy is some kind of grand Statesman. Why does he wait to run for president of the U.S to show it. Not some voting record but to get out in national public eye and show some “passion”.

People who show passion to a degree that means a possibility of real change get killed, not go around on the evening talk show circuit pitching themselves. Good chance he backs out when he realizes he is a threat to the Republicans already slim chance of winning anything.

I have always been in favor of being poor,even personally, over prosperity driven wars. I have also been for making sure that the religion and politics connection have no negative link to human rights abuses domestically and by our hand abroad. Show me someone like that.

Rustico out.

[Sandi Egan]

I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.
One who doesn’t support what he truly believes in because “it has no chance of winning”, but instead supports “the lesser of evils” deserves the government he elects. If you believe in something, it is your duty as a citizen to act on it and try to convince everybody else. Even if you are the only one who believes it.

Regarding the link, I agree with every word. I’ll research Ron Paul’s position on the issue, and put links here.
In any case, I prefer to end the wars today, even if it means foregoing corporate Christmas parties for a couple more years.

[Sandi Egan]

I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.
One who doesn’t support what he truly believes in because “it has no chance of winning”, but instead supports “the lesser of evils” deserves the government he elects. If you believe in something, it is your duty as a citizen to act on it and try to convince everybody else. Even if you are the only one who believes it.

Regarding the link, I agree with every word. I’ll research Ron Paul’s position on the issue, and put links here.
In any case, I prefer to end the wars today, even if it means foregoing corporate Christmas parties for a couple more years.

[Sandi Egan]

I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.
One who doesn’t support what he truly believes in because “it has no chance of winning”, but instead supports “the lesser of evils” deserves the government he elects. If you believe in something, it is your duty as a citizen to act on it and try to convince everybody else. Even if you are the only one who believes it.

Regarding the link, I agree with every word. I’ll research Ron Paul’s position on the issue, and put links here.
In any case, I prefer to end the wars today, even if it means foregoing corporate Christmas parties for a couple more years.

[Sandi Egan]

I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.
One who doesn’t support what he truly believes in because “it has no chance of winning”, but instead supports “the lesser of evils” deserves the government he elects. If you believe in something, it is your duty as a citizen to act on it and try to convince everybody else. Even if you are the only one who believes it.

Regarding the link, I agree with every word. I’ll research Ron Paul’s position on the issue, and put links here.
In any case, I prefer to end the wars today, even if it means foregoing corporate Christmas parties for a couple more years.

[NotCranky]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

Sandi,
His view on power and use of American Authority will end his presidential hopes. When he talks about a hands off stance against Iran and the economic stances he is famous for, the terrorist propagandist(Republicans) and prosperity conscious ideologues(all candidates) that are going to be the real core of the election campaigns will be brought out to do away with him. I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.

Dr. Paul’s response to the religion issue is just a shame as far as I am concerned.The religion issue is a shame for me throughout the political process, especially at the national level. It is just as much what he says as what he doesn’t say. When we have a candidate similar to Dr. Paul, who also seems contemporary and intellectually honest, on church and state/religion and politics, I will get really excited. His poor rhetoric on religion is a bigger strike against him than it is to other candidates because he gives me the hope that he would be more progressive. He is totally unexceptional on this front and is in fact a disappointment.

[NotCranky]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

Sandi,
His view on power and use of American Authority will end his presidential hopes. When he talks about a hands off stance against Iran and the economic stances he is famous for, the terrorist propagandist(Republicans) and prosperity conscious ideologues(all candidates) that are going to be the real core of the election campaigns will be brought out to do away with him. I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.

Dr. Paul’s response to the religion issue is just a shame as far as I am concerned.The religion issue is a shame for me throughout the political process, especially at the national level. It is just as much what he says as what he doesn’t say. When we have a candidate similar to Dr. Paul, who also seems contemporary and intellectually honest, on church and state/religion and politics, I will get really excited. His poor rhetoric on religion is a bigger strike against him than it is to other candidates because he gives me the hope that he would be more progressive. He is totally unexceptional on this front and is in fact a disappointment.

[NotCranky]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

Sandi,
His view on power and use of American Authority will end his presidential hopes. When he talks about a hands off stance against Iran and the economic stances he is famous for, the terrorist propagandist(Republicans) and prosperity conscious ideologues(all candidates) that are going to be the real core of the election campaigns will be brought out to do away with him. I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.

Dr. Paul’s response to the religion issue is just a shame as far as I am concerned.The religion issue is a shame for me throughout the political process, especially at the national level. It is just as much what he says as what he doesn’t say. When we have a candidate similar to Dr. Paul, who also seems contemporary and intellectually honest, on church and state/religion and politics, I will get really excited. His poor rhetoric on religion is a bigger strike against him than it is to other candidates because he gives me the hope that he would be more progressive. He is totally unexceptional on this front and is in fact a disappointment.

[NotCranky]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

Sandi,
His view on power and use of American Authority will end his presidential hopes. When he talks about a hands off stance against Iran and the economic stances he is famous for, the terrorist propagandist(Republicans) and prosperity conscious ideologues(all candidates) that are going to be the real core of the election campaigns will be brought out to do away with him. I like his view on these two issues but they will be a threat to “our freedom” “our standard” of living” and U.S. voters will not have the will to see past this.

Dr. Paul’s response to the religion issue is just a shame as far as I am concerned.The religion issue is a shame for me throughout the political process, especially at the national level. It is just as much what he says as what he doesn’t say. When we have a candidate similar to Dr. Paul, who also seems contemporary and intellectually honest, on church and state/religion and politics, I will get really excited. His poor rhetoric on religion is a bigger strike against him than it is to other candidates because he gives me the hope that he would be more progressive. He is totally unexceptional on this front and is in fact a disappointment.

[Sandi Egan]

esmith,

Your previous post made me think, and after posting my answer, I spent a couple of days researching the subject. Someone on this thread accused me of being a white rich straight male, (which I have to admit I am), and as such am looking at the issues differently. I accept that my views on some social issues might be biased by my personal situation, and I might not give some issues the importance I would, if my life and well-being depended on them.

Perhaps, I am no good at describing his positions on all issues. This video might shed light on some of them.

http://www.ronpaulnation.com/tv.html#nashua_telegraph

I tried to investigate the Dr. Paul’s stance on social security, medicare, and other related issues, which I admittedly didn’t pay enough attention to. Here’s what I found out:

As you can see in the video, there are two critical positions, that define Dr. Paul’s stance: non-interventionalist foreign policy and protection of personal liberty. Everything else is kind of following from these two. He is not going to disband SSA and Medicare when he gets to the White House. He will try resolve the financial issues that the US is facing, mainly by cutting the foreign military involvement, and then slowly steer the country to a less-bureaucratic route. He promises that everybody who needs help will receive it. That approach will allow to actually fund social programs by better distributing the funding, instead of just raising taxes.

Ron Paul of course has personal position regarding all topics, which may or may not correlate with mine or yours. His approach, however, is that it is not the place of executive branch of the government to force their beliefs on people. Regardless of his personal beliefs, the president should not aspire to replace the law with his own vision. The laws are the Constitution and the will of people expressed through their representatives in Congress. The executive branch is charged with optimal implementation of the laws.

I don’t agree with Ron Paul on some issues. Personally I would benefit from increased funding for science. It hurts my feelings, that he is opposes participating in Darfur crysis resolution and is against branding massacre of Armenians by Turkey in 1915 a genocide. But I understand that his position is not dictated by populist reasons. He claims that the US should not meddle in internal affairs of other nations, which I support, and I fully understand that his principles will not allow him to make exceptions and apply double standards.

I disagree with you that Dr. Paul is trying to sidestep hard questions by saying the States will deal with them. On the contrary, he openly describes how he feels about them, and by doing so repels some of his potential supporters. But the point is, he does not think he as a president will have a right to push his opinion on the country. For example, as an obstetrician he feels very strongly about abortions. He said many times, that in his personal view any abortion is a murder. But he will be opposed to a federal abortion ban, simply because it is not the place of federal government to dictate that. Like with other questionable issues, States decide what constitutes a crime and what should be the punishment. For this reason anti-abortion groups, that fight for a constitutional amendment to ban abortions wouldn’t endorse Ron Paul.

And that brings us to the main and overwhelmingly crucial argument, that defines Ron Paul for me. It looks like an obvious move for a candidate: proclame support for something he personally truly believes in and gain the endorsement of an influential political fraction. But he wouldn’t do that, because he puts the Law and Constitution above his personal beliefs, even if it might cost him a dearly. I challenge anybody to name another candidate that would dare to do so.

What I am trying to say is, Ron Paul is not an ordinary presidential candidate. The society grew convinced that there is no such thing as an honest politician. We don’t follow the politics, don’t vote. And even when we do, we vote for someone who promises something that would benefit us personally, as opposed to what is good for the country.

Ron Paul is a once-in-a-century opportunity for this country. Opportunity that came exactly when we needed it the most. Let’s not blow our chance.

[Sandi Egan]

esmith,

Your previous post made me think, and after posting my answer, I spent a couple of days researching the subject. Someone on this thread accused me of being a white rich straight male, (which I have to admit I am), and as such am looking at the issues differently. I accept that my views on some social issues might be biased by my personal situation, and I might not give some issues the importance I would, if my life and well-being depended on them.

Perhaps, I am no good at describing his positions on all issues. This video might shed light on some of them.

http://www.ronpaulnation.com/tv.html#nashua_telegraph

I tried to investigate the Dr. Paul’s stance on social security, medicare, and other related issues, which I admittedly didn’t pay enough attention to. Here’s what I found out:

As you can see in the video, there are two critical positions, that define Dr. Paul’s stance: non-interventionalist foreign policy and protection of personal liberty. Everything else is kind of following from these two. He is not going to disband SSA and Medicare when he gets to the White House. He will try resolve the financial issues that the US is facing, mainly by cutting the foreign military involvement, and then slowly steer the country to a less-bureaucratic route. He promises that everybody who needs help will receive it. That approach will allow to actually fund social programs by better distributing the funding, instead of just raising taxes.

Ron Paul of course has personal position regarding all topics, which may or may not correlate with mine or yours. His approach, however, is that it is not the place of executive branch of the government to force their beliefs on people. Regardless of his personal beliefs, the president should not aspire to replace the law with his own vision. The laws are the Constitution and the will of people expressed through their representatives in Congress. The executive branch is charged with optimal implementation of the laws.

I don’t agree with Ron Paul on some issues. Personally I would benefit from increased funding for science. It hurts my feelings, that he is opposes participating in Darfur crysis resolution and is against branding massacre of Armenians by Turkey in 1915 a genocide. But I understand that his position is not dictated by populist reasons. He claims that the US should not meddle in internal affairs of other nations, which I support, and I fully understand that his principles will not allow him to make exceptions and apply double standards.

I disagree with you that Dr. Paul is trying to sidestep hard questions by saying the States will deal with them. On the contrary, he openly describes how he feels about them, and by doing so repels some of his potential supporters. But the point is, he does not think he as a president will have a right to push his opinion on the country. For example, as an obstetrician he feels very strongly about abortions. He said many times, that in his personal view any abortion is a murder. But he will be opposed to a federal abortion ban, simply because it is not the place of federal government to dictate that. Like with other questionable issues, States decide what constitutes a crime and what should be the punishment. For this reason anti-abortion groups, that fight for a constitutional amendment to ban abortions wouldn’t endorse Ron Paul.

And that brings us to the main and overwhelmingly crucial argument, that defines Ron Paul for me. It looks like an obvious move for a candidate: proclame support for something he personally truly believes in and gain the endorsement of an influential political fraction. But he wouldn’t do that, because he puts the Law and Constitution above his personal beliefs, even if it might cost him a dearly. I challenge anybody to name another candidate that would dare to do so.

What I am trying to say is, Ron Paul is not an ordinary presidential candidate. The society grew convinced that there is no such thing as an honest politician. We don’t follow the politics, don’t vote. And even when we do, we vote for someone who promises something that would benefit us personally, as opposed to what is good for the country.

Ron Paul is a once-in-a-century opportunity for this country. Opportunity that came exactly when we needed it the most. Let’s not blow our chance.

[Sandi Egan]

esmith,

Your previous post made me think, and after posting my answer, I spent a couple of days researching the subject. Someone on this thread accused me of being a white rich straight male, (which I have to admit I am), and as such am looking at the issues differently. I accept that my views on some social issues might be biased by my personal situation, and I might not give some issues the importance I would, if my life and well-being depended on them.

Perhaps, I am no good at describing his positions on all issues. This video might shed light on some of them.

http://www.ronpaulnation.com/tv.html#nashua_telegraph

I tried to investigate the Dr. Paul’s stance on social security, medicare, and other related issues, which I admittedly didn’t pay enough attention to. Here’s what I found out:

As you can see in the video, there are two critical positions, that define Dr. Paul’s stance: non-interventionalist foreign policy and protection of personal liberty. Everything else is kind of following from these two. He is not going to disband SSA and Medicare when he gets to the White House. He will try resolve the financial issues that the US is facing, mainly by cutting the foreign military involvement, and then slowly steer the country to a less-bureaucratic route. He promises that everybody who needs help will receive it. That approach will allow to actually fund social programs by better distributing the funding, instead of just raising taxes.

Ron Paul of course has personal position regarding all topics, which may or may not correlate with mine or yours. His approach, however, is that it is not the place of executive branch of the government to force their beliefs on people. Regardless of his personal beliefs, the president should not aspire to replace the law with his own vision. The laws are the Constitution and the will of people expressed through their representatives in Congress. The executive branch is charged with optimal implementation of the laws.

I don’t agree with Ron Paul on some issues. Personally I would benefit from increased funding for science. It hurts my feelings, that he is opposes participating in Darfur crysis resolution and is against branding massacre of Armenians by Turkey in 1915 a genocide. But I understand that his position is not dictated by populist reasons. He claims that the US should not meddle in internal affairs of other nations, which I support, and I fully understand that his principles will not allow him to make exceptions and apply double standards.

I disagree with you that Dr. Paul is trying to sidestep hard questions by saying the States will deal with them. On the contrary, he openly describes how he feels about them, and by doing so repels some of his potential supporters. But the point is, he does not think he as a president will have a right to push his opinion on the country. For example, as an obstetrician he feels very strongly about abortions. He said many times, that in his personal view any abortion is a murder. But he will be opposed to a federal abortion ban, simply because it is not the place of federal government to dictate that. Like with other questionable issues, States decide what constitutes a crime and what should be the punishment. For this reason anti-abortion groups, that fight for a constitutional amendment to ban abortions wouldn’t endorse Ron Paul.

And that brings us to the main and overwhelmingly crucial argument, that defines Ron Paul for me. It looks like an obvious move for a candidate: proclame support for something he personally truly believes in and gain the endorsement of an influential political fraction. But he wouldn’t do that, because he puts the Law and Constitution above his personal beliefs, even if it might cost him a dearly. I challenge anybody to name another candidate that would dare to do so.

What I am trying to say is, Ron Paul is not an ordinary presidential candidate. The society grew convinced that there is no such thing as an honest politician. We don’t follow the politics, don’t vote. And even when we do, we vote for someone who promises something that would benefit us personally, as opposed to what is good for the country.

Ron Paul is a once-in-a-century opportunity for this country. Opportunity that came exactly when we needed it the most. Let’s not blow our chance.

[Sandi Egan]

esmith,

Your previous post made me think, and after posting my answer, I spent a couple of days researching the subject. Someone on this thread accused me of being a white rich straight male, (which I have to admit I am), and as such am looking at the issues differently. I accept that my views on some social issues might be biased by my personal situation, and I might not give some issues the importance I would, if my life and well-being depended on them.

Perhaps, I am no good at describing his positions on all issues. This video might shed light on some of them.

http://www.ronpaulnation.com/tv.html#nashua_telegraph

I tried to investigate the Dr. Paul’s stance on social security, medicare, and other related issues, which I admittedly didn’t pay enough attention to. Here’s what I found out:

As you can see in the video, there are two critical positions, that define Dr. Paul’s stance: non-interventionalist foreign policy and protection of personal liberty. Everything else is kind of following from these two. He is not going to disband SSA and Medicare when he gets to the White House. He will try resolve the financial issues that the US is facing, mainly by cutting the foreign military involvement, and then slowly steer the country to a less-bureaucratic route. He promises that everybody who needs help will receive it. That approach will allow to actually fund social programs by better distributing the funding, instead of just raising taxes.

Ron Paul of course has personal position regarding all topics, which may or may not correlate with mine or yours. His approach, however, is that it is not the place of executive branch of the government to force their beliefs on people. Regardless of his personal beliefs, the president should not aspire to replace the law with his own vision. The laws are the Constitution and the will of people expressed through their representatives in Congress. The executive branch is charged with optimal implementation of the laws.

I don’t agree with Ron Paul on some issues. Personally I would benefit from increased funding for science. It hurts my feelings, that he is opposes participating in Darfur crysis resolution and is against branding massacre of Armenians by Turkey in 1915 a genocide. But I understand that his position is not dictated by populist reasons. He claims that the US should not meddle in internal affairs of other nations, which I support, and I fully understand that his principles will not allow him to make exceptions and apply double standards.

I disagree with you that Dr. Paul is trying to sidestep hard questions by saying the States will deal with them. On the contrary, he openly describes how he feels about them, and by doing so repels some of his potential supporters. But the point is, he does not think he as a president will have a right to push his opinion on the country. For example, as an obstetrician he feels very strongly about abortions. He said many times, that in his personal view any abortion is a murder. But he will be opposed to a federal abortion ban, simply because it is not the place of federal government to dictate that. Like with other questionable issues, States decide what constitutes a crime and what should be the punishment. For this reason anti-abortion groups, that fight for a constitutional amendment to ban abortions wouldn’t endorse Ron Paul.

And that brings us to the main and overwhelmingly crucial argument, that defines Ron Paul for me. It looks like an obvious move for a candidate: proclame support for something he personally truly believes in and gain the endorsement of an influential political fraction. But he wouldn’t do that, because he puts the Law and Constitution above his personal beliefs, even if it might cost him a dearly. I challenge anybody to name another candidate that would dare to do so.

What I am trying to say is, Ron Paul is not an ordinary presidential candidate. The society grew convinced that there is no such thing as an honest politician. We don’t follow the politics, don’t vote. And even when we do, we vote for someone who promises something that would benefit us personally, as opposed to what is good for the country.

Ron Paul is a once-in-a-century opportunity for this country. Opportunity that came exactly when we needed it the most. Let’s not blow our chance.

[lurkor]

Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The guy who called the housing bubble for what it was (Ron Paul) or the guy who denied there was ever a housing bubble at all (Ben Bernanke)? You’re basically waving Bernanke’s PhD around while ignoring the fact that his forecasting and analysis record is horrendously bad. I don’t really care about what his degree is in, I’ll pick the guy who didn’t deny one of the most obvious bubbles in history and who has proven that he has the better grasp of what’s actually going on.

The rest of your post is teeming with economic fallacies but it’s getting late. From what you typed you are clearly ignorant of the Austrian theory of the business cycle so I recommend that you actually try to understand it before bashing it on a public forum.

[4plexowner]

what is it with the democratic mindset?

democrats seem to feel a need for someone to make the world a fair place via social programs – “even the playing field”, so to speak so everyone has a chance to grab the brass ring

I can understand having this desire for altruistic reasons – ie, “I’m so gifted it isn’t fair to everyone else – let’s put some regulations and taxes in place so the less fortunate of the world can benefit from my brilliance.”

I can also understand the more base (and likely more common) desire for a level playing field which springs from an inferiority complex – ie, “The world isn’t fair and I’m not good enough to compete. We need some regulations and taxes to make everyone equal.”

one of my basic tenets is that there is no free lunch anywhere in the universe – IMO the democratic mindset is all about free lunch for somebody (the less fortunate) and it is therefore a flawed concept

also, as a productive member of society it is typically my taxes that are paying for the ‘free’ lunch so I get really pissed talking to democrats that want to give even more of my money to the less fortunate of the world

perhaps we could spend my taxes on some self-esteem classes for the democrats of the world so they would realize that they are capable of competing on their own merits

[NotCranky]

To me it is much more complex than that 4-plex. At our level ,yours and mine,I could see what you are saying, but we are voting on the national level where handouts to the rich or poor are just one aspect of a huge collection of agendas, and on which issue the main parties have seemingly decided to be as close to polar opposites as possible,each keeping being electable in mind of course. It is likely democrats fail on all other items and agendas with you. However, it would be fair to say the issues are much more nuanced than what happens to your paycheck and the self esteem issues of nearly half our country’s populace.

Good Morning BTW

[NotCranky]

To me it is much more complex than that 4-plex. At our level ,yours and mine,I could see what you are saying, but we are voting on the national level where handouts to the rich or poor are just one aspect of a huge collection of agendas, and on which issue the main parties have seemingly decided to be as close to polar opposites as possible,each keeping being electable in mind of course. It is likely democrats fail on all other items and agendas with you. However, it would be fair to say the issues are much more nuanced than what happens to your paycheck and the self esteem issues of nearly half our country’s populace.

Good Morning BTW

[NotCranky]

To me it is much more complex than that 4-plex. At our level ,yours and mine,I could see what you are saying, but we are voting on the national level where handouts to the rich or poor are just one aspect of a huge collection of agendas, and on which issue the main parties have seemingly decided to be as close to polar opposites as possible,each keeping being electable in mind of course. It is likely democrats fail on all other items and agendas with you. However, it would be fair to say the issues are much more nuanced than what happens to your paycheck and the self esteem issues of nearly half our country’s populace.

Good Morning BTW

[NotCranky]

To me it is much more complex than that 4-plex. At our level ,yours and mine,I could see what you are saying, but we are voting on the national level where handouts to the rich or poor are just one aspect of a huge collection of agendas, and on which issue the main parties have seemingly decided to be as close to polar opposites as possible,each keeping being electable in mind of course. It is likely democrats fail on all other items and agendas with you. However, it would be fair to say the issues are much more nuanced than what happens to your paycheck and the self esteem issues of nearly half our country’s populace.

Good Morning BTW

[NotCranky]

To me it is much more complex than that 4-plex. At our level ,yours and mine,I could see what you are saying, but we are voting on the national level where handouts to the rich or poor are just one aspect of a huge collection of agendas, and on which issue the main parties have seemingly decided to be as close to polar opposites as possible,each keeping being electable in mind of course. It is likely democrats fail on all other items and agendas with you. However, it would be fair to say the issues are much more nuanced than what happens to your paycheck and the self esteem issues of nearly half our country’s populace.

Good Morning BTW

[4plexowner]

what is it with the democratic mindset?

democrats seem to feel a need for someone to make the world a fair place via social programs – “even the playing field”, so to speak so everyone has a chance to grab the brass ring

I can understand having this desire for altruistic reasons – ie, “I’m so gifted it isn’t fair to everyone else – let’s put some regulations and taxes in place so the less fortunate of the world can benefit from my brilliance.”

I can also understand the more base (and likely more common) desire for a level playing field which springs from an inferiority complex – ie, “The world isn’t fair and I’m not good enough to compete. We need some regulations and taxes to make everyone equal.”

one of my basic tenets is that there is no free lunch anywhere in the universe – IMO the democratic mindset is all about free lunch for somebody (the less fortunate) and it is therefore a flawed concept

also, as a productive member of society it is typically my taxes that are paying for the ‘free’ lunch so I get really pissed talking to democrats that want to give even more of my money to the less fortunate of the world

perhaps we could spend my taxes on some self-esteem classes for the democrats of the world so they would realize that they are capable of competing on their own merits

[4plexowner]

what is it with the democratic mindset?

democrats seem to feel a need for someone to make the world a fair place via social programs – “even the playing field”, so to speak so everyone has a chance to grab the brass ring

I can understand having this desire for altruistic reasons – ie, “I’m so gifted it isn’t fair to everyone else – let’s put some regulations and taxes in place so the less fortunate of the world can benefit from my brilliance.”

I can also understand the more base (and likely more common) desire for a level playing field which springs from an inferiority complex – ie, “The world isn’t fair and I’m not good enough to compete. We need some regulations and taxes to make everyone equal.”

one of my basic tenets is that there is no free lunch anywhere in the universe – IMO the democratic mindset is all about free lunch for somebody (the less fortunate) and it is therefore a flawed concept

also, as a productive member of society it is typically my taxes that are paying for the ‘free’ lunch so I get really pissed talking to democrats that want to give even more of my money to the less fortunate of the world

perhaps we could spend my taxes on some self-esteem classes for the democrats of the world so they would realize that they are capable of competing on their own merits

[4plexowner]

what is it with the democratic mindset?

democrats seem to feel a need for someone to make the world a fair place via social programs – “even the playing field”, so to speak so everyone has a chance to grab the brass ring

I can understand having this desire for altruistic reasons – ie, “I’m so gifted it isn’t fair to everyone else – let’s put some regulations and taxes in place so the less fortunate of the world can benefit from my brilliance.”

I can also understand the more base (and likely more common) desire for a level playing field which springs from an inferiority complex – ie, “The world isn’t fair and I’m not good enough to compete. We need some regulations and taxes to make everyone equal.”

one of my basic tenets is that there is no free lunch anywhere in the universe – IMO the democratic mindset is all about free lunch for somebody (the less fortunate) and it is therefore a flawed concept

also, as a productive member of society it is typically my taxes that are paying for the ‘free’ lunch so I get really pissed talking to democrats that want to give even more of my money to the less fortunate of the world

perhaps we could spend my taxes on some self-esteem classes for the democrats of the world so they would realize that they are capable of competing on their own merits

[4plexowner]

what is it with the democratic mindset?

democrats seem to feel a need for someone to make the world a fair place via social programs – “even the playing field”, so to speak so everyone has a chance to grab the brass ring

I can understand having this desire for altruistic reasons – ie, “I’m so gifted it isn’t fair to everyone else – let’s put some regulations and taxes in place so the less fortunate of the world can benefit from my brilliance.”

I can also understand the more base (and likely more common) desire for a level playing field which springs from an inferiority complex – ie, “The world isn’t fair and I’m not good enough to compete. We need some regulations and taxes to make everyone equal.”

one of my basic tenets is that there is no free lunch anywhere in the universe – IMO the democratic mindset is all about free lunch for somebody (the less fortunate) and it is therefore a flawed concept

also, as a productive member of society it is typically my taxes that are paying for the ‘free’ lunch so I get really pissed talking to democrats that want to give even more of my money to the less fortunate of the world

perhaps we could spend my taxes on some self-esteem classes for the democrats of the world so they would realize that they are capable of competing on their own merits

[lurkor]

Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The guy who called the housing bubble for what it was (Ron Paul) or the guy who denied there was ever a housing bubble at all (Ben Bernanke)? You’re basically waving Bernanke’s PhD around while ignoring the fact that his forecasting and analysis record is horrendously bad. I don’t really care about what his degree is in, I’ll pick the guy who didn’t deny one of the most obvious bubbles in history and who has proven that he has the better grasp of what’s actually going on.

The rest of your post is teeming with economic fallacies but it’s getting late. From what you typed you are clearly ignorant of the Austrian theory of the business cycle so I recommend that you actually try to understand it before bashing it on a public forum.

[lurkor]

Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The guy who called the housing bubble for what it was (Ron Paul) or the guy who denied there was ever a housing bubble at all (Ben Bernanke)? You’re basically waving Bernanke’s PhD around while ignoring the fact that his forecasting and analysis record is horrendously bad. I don’t really care about what his degree is in, I’ll pick the guy who didn’t deny one of the most obvious bubbles in history and who has proven that he has the better grasp of what’s actually going on.

The rest of your post is teeming with economic fallacies but it’s getting late. From what you typed you are clearly ignorant of the Austrian theory of the business cycle so I recommend that you actually try to understand it before bashing it on a public forum.

[lurkor]

Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The guy who called the housing bubble for what it was (Ron Paul) or the guy who denied there was ever a housing bubble at all (Ben Bernanke)? You’re basically waving Bernanke’s PhD around while ignoring the fact that his forecasting and analysis record is horrendously bad. I don’t really care about what his degree is in, I’ll pick the guy who didn’t deny one of the most obvious bubbles in history and who has proven that he has the better grasp of what’s actually going on.

The rest of your post is teeming with economic fallacies but it’s getting late. From what you typed you are clearly ignorant of the Austrian theory of the business cycle so I recommend that you actually try to understand it before bashing it on a public forum.

[lurkor]

Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The guy who called the housing bubble for what it was (Ron Paul) or the guy who denied there was ever a housing bubble at all (Ben Bernanke)? You’re basically waving Bernanke’s PhD around while ignoring the fact that his forecasting and analysis record is horrendously bad. I don’t really care about what his degree is in, I’ll pick the guy who didn’t deny one of the most obvious bubbles in history and who has proven that he has the better grasp of what’s actually going on.

The rest of your post is teeming with economic fallacies but it’s getting late. From what you typed you are clearly ignorant of the Austrian theory of the business cycle so I recommend that you actually try to understand it before bashing it on a public forum.

[kev374]

Ron Paul for President!!!!

[kev374]

Ron Paul for President!!!!

[kev374]

Ron Paul for President!!!!

[kev374]

Ron Paul for President!!!!

[kev374]

Ron Paul for President!!!!

[afx114]

Wayne Gretzky.

[afx114]

Wayne Gretzky.

[afx114]

Wayne Gretzky.

[afx114]

Wayne Gretzky.

[afx114]

Wayne Gretzky.

[Eugene]

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

I don’t think there is much difference between using federal and state money and I don’t think Ron Paul does either. He uses federal vs. state card to avoid addressing hot issues like gay rights, abortion, etc.

government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs.

Some branches of science require presence of government to advance. Private investors aren’t going to pay for research unless it is likely to lead to profits in reasonable timeframe. Theoretical physics is a good example. Then, there are things that can’t come into existence unless backed by government(s). Some time next year we will probably see the launch of the largest particle accelerator in the world (LHC). It was built in Switzerland at the cost of around $3 billion. It is going to keep a good portion of world’s high energy physicists busy for the next 10 years. No private investor or a group of investors is going to pay for a project like this. For a government like the one we have in the U.S., it’s peanuts ($15 from every taxpayer). (Incidentally, an even bigger accelerator could have been finished and launched in Texas 10 years ago, but, in the end, the government decided that the project was too expensive and killed it.)

Same thing with space exploration. It’s been 50 years since the launch of Sputnik and still no private company has been able to even come close to putting a man-made object into orbit. It’s just too expensive.

With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could.

The problem is, people who need Social Security / Medicare most don’t pay much (if any) income tax. Abolishing income tax will greatly benefit lawyers and engineers and programmers (especially single ones), but it won’t do much for a burger flipper or a janitor who makes $30,000 a year.

But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct.

Ron Paul’s views on economics (and the Austrian school in general) are the economic equivalent of the intelligent design. It’s okay to study the intelligent design as long as it stays theory, but you’re going to get in trouble if you try to solve real-world problems and to make policy decisions based on it. Conventional economics tells us that attempting to keep a tight lid on money supply in times like the present has a good chance of turning a potentially mild economic slowdown into a full-scale depression. Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The thing about free market, it tends to adhere to a 80/20 rule: 20% of people make 80% of the money. Basic cost of living is nearly the same for everyone, so people who make more money can save more and invest more. Rich get richer and poor stay poor. In the United States, inequality is not so pronounced, for a number of reasons, all of them anti-libertarian (income tax, minimum wage laws, partially socialized medicine and education). Minimum wage laws make it uneconomical to manufacture stuff in America. Instead of assembling iPods and painting toys, unskilled Americans join the service industry. American burger flipper is far better off than Chinese manufacturing worker, because minumum wage laws make sure that he’s paid at least $5.15 an hour (more than most Chinese workers make in a day), and his clients can afford to pay $3 for a Big Mac.

[Eugene]

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

I don’t think there is much difference between using federal and state money and I don’t think Ron Paul does either. He uses federal vs. state card to avoid addressing hot issues like gay rights, abortion, etc.

government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs.

Some branches of science require presence of government to advance. Private investors aren’t going to pay for research unless it is likely to lead to profits in reasonable timeframe. Theoretical physics is a good example. Then, there are things that can’t come into existence unless backed by government(s). Some time next year we will probably see the launch of the largest particle accelerator in the world (LHC). It was built in Switzerland at the cost of around $3 billion. It is going to keep a good portion of world’s high energy physicists busy for the next 10 years. No private investor or a group of investors is going to pay for a project like this. For a government like the one we have in the U.S., it’s peanuts ($15 from every taxpayer). (Incidentally, an even bigger accelerator could have been finished and launched in Texas 10 years ago, but, in the end, the government decided that the project was too expensive and killed it.)

Same thing with space exploration. It’s been 50 years since the launch of Sputnik and still no private company has been able to even come close to putting a man-made object into orbit. It’s just too expensive.

With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could.

The problem is, people who need Social Security / Medicare most don’t pay much (if any) income tax. Abolishing income tax will greatly benefit lawyers and engineers and programmers (especially single ones), but it won’t do much for a burger flipper or a janitor who makes $30,000 a year.

But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct.

Ron Paul’s views on economics (and the Austrian school in general) are the economic equivalent of the intelligent design. It’s okay to study the intelligent design as long as it stays theory, but you’re going to get in trouble if you try to solve real-world problems and to make policy decisions based on it. Conventional economics tells us that attempting to keep a tight lid on money supply in times like the present has a good chance of turning a potentially mild economic slowdown into a full-scale depression. Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The thing about free market, it tends to adhere to a 80/20 rule: 20% of people make 80% of the money. Basic cost of living is nearly the same for everyone, so people who make more money can save more and invest more. Rich get richer and poor stay poor. In the United States, inequality is not so pronounced, for a number of reasons, all of them anti-libertarian (income tax, minimum wage laws, partially socialized medicine and education). Minimum wage laws make it uneconomical to manufacture stuff in America. Instead of assembling iPods and painting toys, unskilled Americans join the service industry. American burger flipper is far better off than Chinese manufacturing worker, because minumum wage laws make sure that he’s paid at least $5.15 an hour (more than most Chinese workers make in a day), and his clients can afford to pay $3 for a Big Mac.

[Eugene]

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

I don’t think there is much difference between using federal and state money and I don’t think Ron Paul does either. He uses federal vs. state card to avoid addressing hot issues like gay rights, abortion, etc.

government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs.

Some branches of science require presence of government to advance. Private investors aren’t going to pay for research unless it is likely to lead to profits in reasonable timeframe. Theoretical physics is a good example. Then, there are things that can’t come into existence unless backed by government(s). Some time next year we will probably see the launch of the largest particle accelerator in the world (LHC). It was built in Switzerland at the cost of around $3 billion. It is going to keep a good portion of world’s high energy physicists busy for the next 10 years. No private investor or a group of investors is going to pay for a project like this. For a government like the one we have in the U.S., it’s peanuts ($15 from every taxpayer). (Incidentally, an even bigger accelerator could have been finished and launched in Texas 10 years ago, but, in the end, the government decided that the project was too expensive and killed it.)

Same thing with space exploration. It’s been 50 years since the launch of Sputnik and still no private company has been able to even come close to putting a man-made object into orbit. It’s just too expensive.

With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could.

The problem is, people who need Social Security / Medicare most don’t pay much (if any) income tax. Abolishing income tax will greatly benefit lawyers and engineers and programmers (especially single ones), but it won’t do much for a burger flipper or a janitor who makes $30,000 a year.

But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct.

Ron Paul’s views on economics (and the Austrian school in general) are the economic equivalent of the intelligent design. It’s okay to study the intelligent design as long as it stays theory, but you’re going to get in trouble if you try to solve real-world problems and to make policy decisions based on it. Conventional economics tells us that attempting to keep a tight lid on money supply in times like the present has a good chance of turning a potentially mild economic slowdown into a full-scale depression. Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The thing about free market, it tends to adhere to a 80/20 rule: 20% of people make 80% of the money. Basic cost of living is nearly the same for everyone, so people who make more money can save more and invest more. Rich get richer and poor stay poor. In the United States, inequality is not so pronounced, for a number of reasons, all of them anti-libertarian (income tax, minimum wage laws, partially socialized medicine and education). Minimum wage laws make it uneconomical to manufacture stuff in America. Instead of assembling iPods and painting toys, unskilled Americans join the service industry. American burger flipper is far better off than Chinese manufacturing worker, because minumum wage laws make sure that he’s paid at least $5.15 an hour (more than most Chinese workers make in a day), and his clients can afford to pay $3 for a Big Mac.

[Eugene]

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

I don’t think there is much difference between using federal and state money and I don’t think Ron Paul does either. He uses federal vs. state card to avoid addressing hot issues like gay rights, abortion, etc.

government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs.

Some branches of science require presence of government to advance. Private investors aren’t going to pay for research unless it is likely to lead to profits in reasonable timeframe. Theoretical physics is a good example. Then, there are things that can’t come into existence unless backed by government(s). Some time next year we will probably see the launch of the largest particle accelerator in the world (LHC). It was built in Switzerland at the cost of around $3 billion. It is going to keep a good portion of world’s high energy physicists busy for the next 10 years. No private investor or a group of investors is going to pay for a project like this. For a government like the one we have in the U.S., it’s peanuts ($15 from every taxpayer). (Incidentally, an even bigger accelerator could have been finished and launched in Texas 10 years ago, but, in the end, the government decided that the project was too expensive and killed it.)

Same thing with space exploration. It’s been 50 years since the launch of Sputnik and still no private company has been able to even come close to putting a man-made object into orbit. It’s just too expensive.

With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could.

The problem is, people who need Social Security / Medicare most don’t pay much (if any) income tax. Abolishing income tax will greatly benefit lawyers and engineers and programmers (especially single ones), but it won’t do much for a burger flipper or a janitor who makes $30,000 a year.

But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct.

Ron Paul’s views on economics (and the Austrian school in general) are the economic equivalent of the intelligent design. It’s okay to study the intelligent design as long as it stays theory, but you’re going to get in trouble if you try to solve real-world problems and to make policy decisions based on it. Conventional economics tells us that attempting to keep a tight lid on money supply in times like the present has a good chance of turning a potentially mild economic slowdown into a full-scale depression. Who would you rather trust to make decisions on this subject? An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?

The thing about free market, it tends to adhere to a 80/20 rule: 20% of people make 80% of the money. Basic cost of living is nearly the same for everyone, so people who make more money can save more and invest more. Rich get richer and poor stay poor. In the United States, inequality is not so pronounced, for a number of reasons, all of them anti-libertarian (income tax, minimum wage laws, partially socialized medicine and education). Minimum wage laws make it uneconomical to manufacture stuff in America. Instead of assembling iPods and painting toys, unskilled Americans join the service industry. American burger flipper is far better off than Chinese manufacturing worker, because minumum wage laws make sure that he’s paid at least $5.15 an hour (more than most Chinese workers make in a day), and his clients can afford to pay $3 for a Big Mac.

[Sandi Egan]

OK, esmith, you made me stay up until 5AM to answer your post 🙂

Disclamer: I am not claiming to know all the answers, and my thoughts below are just that – my thoughts. They are based of my limited understanding of how things work and what Dr. Paul’s position is. I might be completely wrong.

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.
I work in a science-related field myself, and it’s my opinion, that government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs. It is OK to waste enormous amounts of money in hope to produce SOMETHING at the end, but I don’t think a country on a verge of bankruptcy can afford that. And who said NASA is the only right way for space exploration? It is as a wasteful and irresponsible way of spending our taxes as they come.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.
For better or worse, changes in social programs can’t come overnight. People who are 75 now will still get all their benefits.
If you are 45 today, and you have a good income, but you spend it all in hopes that I will pay for your retirement – well, think again. With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could. If you decide not to, how come it is the responsibility of my son, who is 2 now, to pay your medical bills in 30 years?
Of course, in some cases the society is responsible to protect its weakest, but the federal programs that handle it right now are not the best way of dealing with the problem. Imho.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work.
This is outside my area of expertise, and my views can be overly simplistic. But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct. If the reasonable cost for the job is $100/month, artificially raising it to $200 will not make the company pay $200. It will make the company pay $100 to somebody who will take it, namely move it overseas. The company does not really have a choice here, other than going out of business. So, the small companies that cannot afford to build plants in China will be driven to bankruptcy, while the big corporations will outsource. How exactly is that helping the worker, who cannot earn even that $100 now? I know how – by paying his unemployment benefits from my taxes. No, thanks.

Anyway, it is nice to have a constructive discussion here, without name-calling and emotional statements. It’ll be great to hear everyones thoughts on the topic.

Happy Thanksgivig, everyone.

[Sandi Egan]

OK, esmith, you made me stay up until 5AM to answer your post 🙂

Disclamer: I am not claiming to know all the answers, and my thoughts below are just that – my thoughts. They are based of my limited understanding of how things work and what Dr. Paul’s position is. I might be completely wrong.

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.
I work in a science-related field myself, and it’s my opinion, that government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs. It is OK to waste enormous amounts of money in hope to produce SOMETHING at the end, but I don’t think a country on a verge of bankruptcy can afford that. And who said NASA is the only right way for space exploration? It is as a wasteful and irresponsible way of spending our taxes as they come.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.
For better or worse, changes in social programs can’t come overnight. People who are 75 now will still get all their benefits.
If you are 45 today, and you have a good income, but you spend it all in hopes that I will pay for your retirement – well, think again. With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could. If you decide not to, how come it is the responsibility of my son, who is 2 now, to pay your medical bills in 30 years?
Of course, in some cases the society is responsible to protect its weakest, but the federal programs that handle it right now are not the best way of dealing with the problem. Imho.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work.
This is outside my area of expertise, and my views can be overly simplistic. But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct. If the reasonable cost for the job is $100/month, artificially raising it to $200 will not make the company pay $200. It will make the company pay $100 to somebody who will take it, namely move it overseas. The company does not really have a choice here, other than going out of business. So, the small companies that cannot afford to build plants in China will be driven to bankruptcy, while the big corporations will outsource. How exactly is that helping the worker, who cannot earn even that $100 now? I know how – by paying his unemployment benefits from my taxes. No, thanks.

Anyway, it is nice to have a constructive discussion here, without name-calling and emotional statements. It’ll be great to hear everyones thoughts on the topic.

Happy Thanksgivig, everyone.

[Sandi Egan]

OK, esmith, you made me stay up until 5AM to answer your post 🙂

Disclamer: I am not claiming to know all the answers, and my thoughts below are just that – my thoughts. They are based of my limited understanding of how things work and what Dr. Paul’s position is. I might be completely wrong.

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.
I work in a science-related field myself, and it’s my opinion, that government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs. It is OK to waste enormous amounts of money in hope to produce SOMETHING at the end, but I don’t think a country on a verge of bankruptcy can afford that. And who said NASA is the only right way for space exploration? It is as a wasteful and irresponsible way of spending our taxes as they come.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.
For better or worse, changes in social programs can’t come overnight. People who are 75 now will still get all their benefits.
If you are 45 today, and you have a good income, but you spend it all in hopes that I will pay for your retirement – well, think again. With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could. If you decide not to, how come it is the responsibility of my son, who is 2 now, to pay your medical bills in 30 years?
Of course, in some cases the society is responsible to protect its weakest, but the federal programs that handle it right now are not the best way of dealing with the problem. Imho.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work.
This is outside my area of expertise, and my views can be overly simplistic. But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct. If the reasonable cost for the job is $100/month, artificially raising it to $200 will not make the company pay $200. It will make the company pay $100 to somebody who will take it, namely move it overseas. The company does not really have a choice here, other than going out of business. So, the small companies that cannot afford to build plants in China will be driven to bankruptcy, while the big corporations will outsource. How exactly is that helping the worker, who cannot earn even that $100 now? I know how – by paying his unemployment benefits from my taxes. No, thanks.

Anyway, it is nice to have a constructive discussion here, without name-calling and emotional statements. It’ll be great to hear everyones thoughts on the topic.

Happy Thanksgivig, everyone.

[Sandi Egan]

OK, esmith, you made me stay up until 5AM to answer your post 🙂

Disclamer: I am not claiming to know all the answers, and my thoughts below are just that – my thoughts. They are based of my limited understanding of how things work and what Dr. Paul’s position is. I might be completely wrong.

The main premise of Ron Paul’s position on federal spending (as I understand it) is, using FEDERAL money and FEDERAL solutions is always less effective and more abuse-prone, than using State local programs to achieve the same goal. Using private money is more effective yet.

We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.
I work in a science-related field myself, and it’s my opinion, that government-funded science is by far less productive than privately funded labs. It is OK to waste enormous amounts of money in hope to produce SOMETHING at the end, but I don’t think a country on a verge of bankruptcy can afford that. And who said NASA is the only right way for space exploration? It is as a wasteful and irresponsible way of spending our taxes as they come.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.
For better or worse, changes in social programs can’t come overnight. People who are 75 now will still get all their benefits.
If you are 45 today, and you have a good income, but you spend it all in hopes that I will pay for your retirement – well, think again. With the income tax abolished, you will be able save by far more money than you ever could. If you decide not to, how come it is the responsibility of my son, who is 2 now, to pay your medical bills in 30 years?
Of course, in some cases the society is responsible to protect its weakest, but the federal programs that handle it right now are not the best way of dealing with the problem. Imho.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work.
This is outside my area of expertise, and my views can be overly simplistic. But my understanding is, Ron Paul does not want the government to dictate the rates. Free market tends to self-correct. If the reasonable cost for the job is $100/month, artificially raising it to $200 will not make the company pay $200. It will make the company pay $100 to somebody who will take it, namely move it overseas. The company does not really have a choice here, other than going out of business. So, the small companies that cannot afford to build plants in China will be driven to bankruptcy, while the big corporations will outsource. How exactly is that helping the worker, who cannot earn even that $100 now? I know how – by paying his unemployment benefits from my taxes. No, thanks.

Anyway, it is nice to have a constructive discussion here, without name-calling and emotional statements. It’ll be great to hear everyones thoughts on the topic.

Happy Thanksgivig, everyone.

[Eugene]

Ron Paul is the way to go.

Abolish income tax, so that rich people (such as myself) can keep all of their hard-earned money. Oops, there’s a big hole in the budget? We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work. Alternatively, consider selling a kidney to some rich man. There’s always demand for kidneys. It does not say anywhere in the Constitution that selling your own organs should be illegal.

If you don’t want to work at the conveyor belt 10 hours a day, 6 days a week – consider becoming a butler (or a gardener, or a maid). Those 5-10% of Americans who make it through the Second Great Depression without going bankrupt will be filthy rich compared to middle-class workers making $100/month. They will be able to afford mansions and servants. Exurbs will be plowed over and turned into ranches.

Whether you end up being a butler or a manufacturing worker, you should feel fortunate. You could have ended up like those poor 20% of folks who defaulted on their upside-down morgages and were sold into slavery. (Oh yeah – the 13th amendment was abolished by President Paul soon after the 16th as contrary to the spirit of founding fathers. Many of whom were slaveowners, as you know. Besides. Mr. Paul felt that it was a good way to prevent moral hazard among homebuyers.)

Man, life will be fun.

[Eugene]

Ron Paul is the way to go.

Abolish income tax, so that rich people (such as myself) can keep all of their hard-earned money. Oops, there’s a big hole in the budget? We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work. Alternatively, consider selling a kidney to some rich man. There’s always demand for kidneys. It does not say anywhere in the Constitution that selling your own organs should be illegal.

If you don’t want to work at the conveyor belt 10 hours a day, 6 days a week – consider becoming a butler (or a gardener, or a maid). Those 5-10% of Americans who make it through the Second Great Depression without going bankrupt will be filthy rich compared to middle-class workers making $100/month. They will be able to afford mansions and servants. Exurbs will be plowed over and turned into ranches.

Whether you end up being a butler or a manufacturing worker, you should feel fortunate. You could have ended up like those poor 20% of folks who defaulted on their upside-down morgages and were sold into slavery. (Oh yeah – the 13th amendment was abolished by President Paul soon after the 16th as contrary to the spirit of founding fathers. Many of whom were slaveowners, as you know. Besides. Mr. Paul felt that it was a good way to prevent moral hazard among homebuyers.)

Man, life will be fun.

[Eugene]

Ron Paul is the way to go.

Abolish income tax, so that rich people (such as myself) can keep all of their hard-earned money. Oops, there’s a big hole in the budget? We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work. Alternatively, consider selling a kidney to some rich man. There’s always demand for kidneys. It does not say anywhere in the Constitution that selling your own organs should be illegal.

If you don’t want to work at the conveyor belt 10 hours a day, 6 days a week – consider becoming a butler (or a gardener, or a maid). Those 5-10% of Americans who make it through the Second Great Depression without going bankrupt will be filthy rich compared to middle-class workers making $100/month. They will be able to afford mansions and servants. Exurbs will be plowed over and turned into ranches.

Whether you end up being a butler or a manufacturing worker, you should feel fortunate. You could have ended up like those poor 20% of folks who defaulted on their upside-down morgages and were sold into slavery. (Oh yeah – the 13th amendment was abolished by President Paul soon after the 16th as contrary to the spirit of founding fathers. Many of whom were slaveowners, as you know. Besides. Mr. Paul felt that it was a good way to prevent moral hazard among homebuyers.)

Man, life will be fun.

[Eugene]

Ron Paul is the way to go.

Abolish income tax, so that rich people (such as myself) can keep all of their hard-earned money. Oops, there’s a big hole in the budget? We’ll scale down our defense spending. There’s still a big hole? No problem, we’ll just cut some unnecessary programs. Here’s an idea: why don’t we shut down NASA.

Cut social programs such as unemployment benefits and Medicare. You want to eat? Go find a job you lazy bum. You want to go to a doctor, but you can’t afford health insurance? Tough luck. You’re 75 and you have no savings (or, rather, not enough to pay $1000/month for health insurance in the absence of Medicare)? Tough luck.

Start raising rates. What deflationary spiral? What 25% unemployment? We’ll just repeal minimum wage laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to America. If you can’t afford to own a car and a house on a $100/month manufacturing salary – you’ll have to live in a factory dorm and walk to work. Alternatively, consider selling a kidney to some rich man. There’s always demand for kidneys. It does not say anywhere in the Constitution that selling your own organs should be illegal.

If you don’t want to work at the conveyor belt 10 hours a day, 6 days a week – consider becoming a butler (or a gardener, or a maid). Those 5-10% of Americans who make it through the Second Great Depression without going bankrupt will be filthy rich compared to middle-class workers making $100/month. They will be able to afford mansions and servants. Exurbs will be plowed over and turned into ranches.

Whether you end up being a butler or a manufacturing worker, you should feel fortunate. You could have ended up like those poor 20% of folks who defaulted on their upside-down morgages and were sold into slavery. (Oh yeah – the 13th amendment was abolished by President Paul soon after the 16th as contrary to the spirit of founding fathers. Many of whom were slaveowners, as you know. Besides. Mr. Paul felt that it was a good way to prevent moral hazard among homebuyers.)

Man, life will be fun.

[NateK]

Come on!!! Take a look at how Ron Paul makes Bernanke stutter and you tell me he isn’t tackling the issues head on.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yAwvlDJgJbM

[NateK]

Come on!!! Take a look at how Ron Paul makes Bernanke stutter and you tell me he isn’t tackling the issues head on.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yAwvlDJgJbM

[NateK]

Come on!!! Take a look at how Ron Paul makes Bernanke stutter and you tell me he isn’t tackling the issues head on.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yAwvlDJgJbM

[NateK]

Come on!!! Take a look at how Ron Paul makes Bernanke stutter and you tell me he isn’t tackling the issues head on.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yAwvlDJgJbM

[condogrrl]

On social issues, Ron Paul is just another right-wing fundamentalist. I guess if you’re a rich white straight male he might be the candidate of choice, but if you’re not, then the choice for president is still a puzzle. All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.

[Raybyrnes]

condogrrl
“All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.”

This statement is as ignorant as me stating that I will not vote for a black president, or a woman. You are categorizing with little of not foundation as this poit behind that position. It demonstrates what the majority of americans do; follow the herd.

To me I can see how you can disagree with the Platforms of all of the candidates but if you don’t listen to what people have to say how do you know you are making an informed decison.

I always pay attention to candidates like Nader and Paul becasue they help you better understand the way the politiacal process works and the introduce choices that many people may have never considered.

[Sandi Egan]

My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end.

I always supported democrats, but after learning about Paul’s platform I realized how close it is to what I believe in. The rest of Republican field is just scary to me. If Dr. Paul does not get the Republican nomination, his followers will most likely persuade him to run as independent. I don’t particularly like that outcome, since progressive voters will be split between Dems and Paul, while neocons will vote Republican.

I think all liberals here will agree, that Ron Paul is at the very least the best choice among Republicans. So, I urge everyone, especially independents, to register and vote in Republican primaries for Ron Paul.

[Sandi Egan]

My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end.

I always supported democrats, but after learning about Paul’s platform I realized how close it is to what I believe in. The rest of Republican field is just scary to me. If Dr. Paul does not get the Republican nomination, his followers will most likely persuade him to run as independent. I don’t particularly like that outcome, since progressive voters will be split between Dems and Paul, while neocons will vote Republican.

I think all liberals here will agree, that Ron Paul is at the very least the best choice among Republicans. So, I urge everyone, especially independents, to register and vote in Republican primaries for Ron Paul.

[Sandi Egan]

My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end.

I always supported democrats, but after learning about Paul’s platform I realized how close it is to what I believe in. The rest of Republican field is just scary to me. If Dr. Paul does not get the Republican nomination, his followers will most likely persuade him to run as independent. I don’t particularly like that outcome, since progressive voters will be split between Dems and Paul, while neocons will vote Republican.

I think all liberals here will agree, that Ron Paul is at the very least the best choice among Republicans. So, I urge everyone, especially independents, to register and vote in Republican primaries for Ron Paul.

[Sandi Egan]

My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end.

I always supported democrats, but after learning about Paul’s platform I realized how close it is to what I believe in. The rest of Republican field is just scary to me. If Dr. Paul does not get the Republican nomination, his followers will most likely persuade him to run as independent. I don’t particularly like that outcome, since progressive voters will be split between Dems and Paul, while neocons will vote Republican.

I think all liberals here will agree, that Ron Paul is at the very least the best choice among Republicans. So, I urge everyone, especially independents, to register and vote in Republican primaries for Ron Paul.

[Sandi Egan]

My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end.

I always supported democrats, but after learning about Paul’s platform I realized how close it is to what I believe in. The rest of Republican field is just scary to me. If Dr. Paul does not get the Republican nomination, his followers will most likely persuade him to run as independent. I don’t particularly like that outcome, since progressive voters will be split between Dems and Paul, while neocons will vote Republican.

I think all liberals here will agree, that Ron Paul is at the very least the best choice among Republicans. So, I urge everyone, especially independents, to register and vote in Republican primaries for Ron Paul.

[Raybyrnes]

condogrrl
“All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.”

This statement is as ignorant as me stating that I will not vote for a black president, or a woman. You are categorizing with little of not foundation as this poit behind that position. It demonstrates what the majority of americans do; follow the herd.

To me I can see how you can disagree with the Platforms of all of the candidates but if you don’t listen to what people have to say how do you know you are making an informed decison.

I always pay attention to candidates like Nader and Paul becasue they help you better understand the way the politiacal process works and the introduce choices that many people may have never considered.

[Raybyrnes]

condogrrl
“All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.”

This statement is as ignorant as me stating that I will not vote for a black president, or a woman. You are categorizing with little of not foundation as this poit behind that position. It demonstrates what the majority of americans do; follow the herd.

To me I can see how you can disagree with the Platforms of all of the candidates but if you don’t listen to what people have to say how do you know you are making an informed decison.

I always pay attention to candidates like Nader and Paul becasue they help you better understand the way the politiacal process works and the introduce choices that many people may have never considered.

[Raybyrnes]

condogrrl
“All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.”

This statement is as ignorant as me stating that I will not vote for a black president, or a woman. You are categorizing with little of not foundation as this poit behind that position. It demonstrates what the majority of americans do; follow the herd.

To me I can see how you can disagree with the Platforms of all of the candidates but if you don’t listen to what people have to say how do you know you are making an informed decison.

I always pay attention to candidates like Nader and Paul becasue they help you better understand the way the politiacal process works and the introduce choices that many people may have never considered.

[Raybyrnes]

condogrrl
“All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.”

This statement is as ignorant as me stating that I will not vote for a black president, or a woman. You are categorizing with little of not foundation as this poit behind that position. It demonstrates what the majority of americans do; follow the herd.

To me I can see how you can disagree with the Platforms of all of the candidates but if you don’t listen to what people have to say how do you know you are making an informed decison.

I always pay attention to candidates like Nader and Paul becasue they help you better understand the way the politiacal process works and the introduce choices that many people may have never considered.

[condogrrl]

On social issues, Ron Paul is just another right-wing fundamentalist. I guess if you’re a rich white straight male he might be the candidate of choice, but if you’re not, then the choice for president is still a puzzle. All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.

[condogrrl]

On social issues, Ron Paul is just another right-wing fundamentalist. I guess if you’re a rich white straight male he might be the candidate of choice, but if you’re not, then the choice for president is still a puzzle. All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.

[condogrrl]

On social issues, Ron Paul is just another right-wing fundamentalist. I guess if you’re a rich white straight male he might be the candidate of choice, but if you’re not, then the choice for president is still a puzzle. All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.

[condogrrl]

On social issues, Ron Paul is just another right-wing fundamentalist. I guess if you’re a rich white straight male he might be the candidate of choice, but if you’re not, then the choice for president is still a puzzle. All I know at this point is that I will not vote Republican.

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc

Actually voting is just a farce. The candidate has already been chosen by “them”. I will vote for Ron Paul just for drill.

“If you only knew the horrible truth” RDD

[partypup]

I’m just happy that people on this board have stopping yapping about Obama and his “feel good” platform that will do virtually nothing to address what truly ails this country. Aside from Paul (and MAYBE Edwards), there’s no horse in this race that will make one whit of difference in our lives come January 2009. At its core, American politics today is essentially an argument over two flavors of vanilla, regardless of whether the candidate is a white man, a white woman or a black man. By the time any candidate has amassed enough money to appear on the national stage, they have been bought, sold and locked to the Establishment. Deluded Americans are being given the illusion of choice in order to anesthetize them to the real pain around them, much as we root for our favorite team in professional sports. It’s a distraction of enoromous proportions. Unless Paul or Edwards is on the ticket in Nov 2008, I’m not wasting my time voting. It will strictly be a calorie-burning exercise.

[Arraya]

Well put partypup, my sentiments exactly. The problem is stupidity rules with an iron fist. America sleeps as we slowly slip into a facist state. In the mean time, oil depletion is going to hit the already teetering american economy like the hammer of god.

We have become a country incapable of thinking and we deserve the incapable leaders that we elect.

The Amercian civilization is not unlike the housing bubble in that it is unsustainable. A few tweaks of the dials will not help.

The empire wears no clothes…

Everyone is in denial about something; just try denying it and watch friends make a list. For Freud, denial was a defense against external realities that threaten the ego, and many psychologists today would argue that it can be a protective defense in the face of unbearable news, like a cancer diagnosis.

[Arraya]

Well put partypup, my sentiments exactly. The problem is stupidity rules with an iron fist. America sleeps as we slowly slip into a facist state. In the mean time, oil depletion is going to hit the already teetering american economy like the hammer of god.

We have become a country incapable of thinking and we deserve the incapable leaders that we elect.

The Amercian civilization is not unlike the housing bubble in that it is unsustainable. A few tweaks of the dials will not help.

The empire wears no clothes…

Everyone is in denial about something; just try denying it and watch friends make a list. For Freud, denial was a defense against external realities that threaten the ego, and many psychologists today would argue that it can be a protective defense in the face of unbearable news, like a cancer diagnosis.

[Arraya]

Well put partypup, my sentiments exactly. The problem is stupidity rules with an iron fist. America sleeps as we slowly slip into a facist state. In the mean time, oil depletion is going to hit the already teetering american economy like the hammer of god.

We have become a country incapable of thinking and we deserve the incapable leaders that we elect.

The Amercian civilization is not unlike the housing bubble in that it is unsustainable. A few tweaks of the dials will not help.

The empire wears no clothes…

Everyone is in denial about something; just try denying it and watch friends make a list. For Freud, denial was a defense against external realities that threaten the ego, and many psychologists today would argue that it can be a protective defense in the face of unbearable news, like a cancer diagnosis.

[Arraya]

Well put partypup, my sentiments exactly. The problem is stupidity rules with an iron fist. America sleeps as we slowly slip into a facist state. In the mean time, oil depletion is going to hit the already teetering american economy like the hammer of god.

We have become a country incapable of thinking and we deserve the incapable leaders that we elect.

The Amercian civilization is not unlike the housing bubble in that it is unsustainable. A few tweaks of the dials will not help.

The empire wears no clothes…

Everyone is in denial about something; just try denying it and watch friends make a list. For Freud, denial was a defense against external realities that threaten the ego, and many psychologists today would argue that it can be a protective defense in the face of unbearable news, like a cancer diagnosis.

[Arraya]

Well put partypup, my sentiments exactly. The problem is stupidity rules with an iron fist. America sleeps as we slowly slip into a facist state. In the mean time, oil depletion is going to hit the already teetering american economy like the hammer of god.

We have become a country incapable of thinking and we deserve the incapable leaders that we elect.

The Amercian civilization is not unlike the housing bubble in that it is unsustainable. A few tweaks of the dials will not help.

The empire wears no clothes…

Everyone is in denial about something; just try denying it and watch friends make a list. For Freud, denial was a defense against external realities that threaten the ego, and many psychologists today would argue that it can be a protective defense in the face of unbearable news, like a cancer diagnosis.

[Arraya]

[Ricechex]

Partypup, Arraya, I am with you–what a sad state of affairs.

The train has left the station, and the world is on the brink of chaos, despair and death. Anyone remember the movie “Soylent Green” with Charlton Heston?

Many people don’t seem to pay attention and don’t seem to care. Many people are just too busy trying to meet basic needs, so that there is not much left over to worry about the greater good. Many others have been dumbed down by the media and have lost any critical thinking abilities. They just don’t know any better or prefer to wear the rose colored glasses, because otherwise, they might have to do something.

Aaaah….well…that was a bit off task. Ron Paul seems okay, but it could be that folks are just grasping at straws. Not crazy for Hilary or Obama either. The next election is going to be a tough one.

[partypup]

Ricechex, I wasn’t going to go there in my previous post, but you are spot-on: the world (especially America) is in for one helluva ride in the coming years. Only a fool would be blind to the fact that our economy is being held together at present with paper clips, gum and hope. The dollar is breaking new, historic lows EVERY week now, the stock market is on life support (even with billions being pumped into it weekly by the Fed), and you can’t even give away a condo in Florida these days. Rappers and supermodels are rejecting the dollar in favor of Euros. Starving African nations in search of food and aid are doing the same thing! And yet the average American doesn’t have a clue or care to have a clue about what this will soon mean for them. Why? Because they still have another $900 of available credit on their cards, fajitas are still being served up at Chili’s and the “Dancing with the Stars” finale is coming up next week (I think).

And Arraya is 150% correct about the insidious effects of denial on our populace. People literally will not wake up to the fact that the train is hurtling off the cliff as we speak — because they happen to be in the caboose and don’t realize the first 5 cars have already tumbled over the edge.

People, the next few months are going to be very strange, very sad and very scary, indeed. We may limp through the holidays with gas less than $4/gallon, and Wal Mart and JC Penney may squeeze the last few bucks out of the consumer. But this will be the last “happy” holidays for a long, long, LONG time, my friends. Come January 2008, people are going to bitch-slapped in a major way, suddenly and unexpectedly, and the real effects of a falling dollar are going to make themselves known.

And of course, Americans will turn to their leaders and ask, “Why didn’t anyone tell us this was happening???”

We are so deep in crap at this point, I don’t know what kind of rope we could possibly find to pull us out. The Dem candidates know this; the GOP candidates know this. At the end of the day, they are all fighting to become the next leader of a banana republic. Let’s be clear: Ron Paul can never possibly get elected. But it is just cathartic to hear him raising the only issues that matter now. And when the SHTF, he can honestly look into the eyes of Americans and say, “I warned you.”

No one else can say that.

[sdrealtor]

Dan Millman

We are all here and it is now.

[patientlywaiting]

I voting for Ron Paul in the primary. And I’ll vote for him if he gets the nomination.

Otherwise, I’ll be voting for Hillary in the general election. Having the Clintons back in the White House will be fun!!

[patientlywaiting]

I voting for Ron Paul in the primary. And I’ll vote for him if he gets the nomination.

Otherwise, I’ll be voting for Hillary in the general election. Having the Clintons back in the White House will be fun!!

[patientlywaiting]

I voting for Ron Paul in the primary. And I’ll vote for him if he gets the nomination.

Otherwise, I’ll be voting for Hillary in the general election. Having the Clintons back in the White House will be fun!!

[patientlywaiting]

I voting for Ron Paul in the primary. And I’ll vote for him if he gets the nomination.

Otherwise, I’ll be voting for Hillary in the general election. Having the Clintons back in the White House will be fun!!

[patientlywaiting]

I voting for Ron Paul in the primary. And I’ll vote for him if he gets the nomination.

Otherwise, I’ll be voting for Hillary in the general election. Having the Clintons back in the White House will be fun!!

[sdrealtor]

Dan Millman

We are all here and it is now.

[sdrealtor]

Dan Millman

We are all here and it is now.

[sdrealtor]

Dan Millman

We are all here and it is now.

[sdrealtor]

Dan Millman

We are all here and it is now.

[partypup]

Ricechex, I wasn’t going to go there in my previous post, but you are spot-on: the world (especially America) is in for one helluva ride in the coming years. Only a fool would be blind to the fact that our economy is being held together at present with paper clips, gum and hope. The dollar is breaking new, historic lows EVERY week now, the stock market is on life support (even with billions being pumped into it weekly by the Fed), and you can’t even give away a condo in Florida these days. Rappers and supermodels are rejecting the dollar in favor of Euros. Starving African nations in search of food and aid are doing the same thing! And yet the average American doesn’t have a clue or care to have a clue about what this will soon mean for them. Why? Because they still have another $900 of available credit on their cards, fajitas are still being served up at Chili’s and the “Dancing with the Stars” finale is coming up next week (I think).

And Arraya is 150% correct about the insidious effects of denial on our populace. People literally will not wake up to the fact that the train is hurtling off the cliff as we speak — because they happen to be in the caboose and don’t realize the first 5 cars have already tumbled over the edge.

People, the next few months are going to be very strange, very sad and very scary, indeed. We may limp through the holidays with gas less than $4/gallon, and Wal Mart and JC Penney may squeeze the last few bucks out of the consumer. But this will be the last “happy” holidays for a long, long, LONG time, my friends. Come January 2008, people are going to bitch-slapped in a major way, suddenly and unexpectedly, and the real effects of a falling dollar are going to make themselves known.

And of course, Americans will turn to their leaders and ask, “Why didn’t anyone tell us this was happening???”

We are so deep in crap at this point, I don’t know what kind of rope we could possibly find to pull us out. The Dem candidates know this; the GOP candidates know this. At the end of the day, they are all fighting to become the next leader of a banana republic. Let’s be clear: Ron Paul can never possibly get elected. But it is just cathartic to hear him raising the only issues that matter now. And when the SHTF, he can honestly look into the eyes of Americans and say, “I warned you.”

No one else can say that.

[partypup]

Ricechex, I wasn’t going to go there in my previous post, but you are spot-on: the world (especially America) is in for one helluva ride in the coming years. Only a fool would be blind to the fact that our economy is being held together at present with paper clips, gum and hope. The dollar is breaking new, historic lows EVERY week now, the stock market is on life support (even with billions being pumped into it weekly by the Fed), and you can’t even give away a condo in Florida these days. Rappers and supermodels are rejecting the dollar in favor of Euros. Starving African nations in search of food and aid are doing the same thing! And yet the average American doesn’t have a clue or care to have a clue about what this will soon mean for them. Why? Because they still have another $900 of available credit on their cards, fajitas are still being served up at Chili’s and the “Dancing with the Stars” finale is coming up next week (I think).

And Arraya is 150% correct about the insidious effects of denial on our populace. People literally will not wake up to the fact that the train is hurtling off the cliff as we speak — because they happen to be in the caboose and don’t realize the first 5 cars have already tumbled over the edge.

People, the next few months are going to be very strange, very sad and very scary, indeed. We may limp through the holidays with gas less than $4/gallon, and Wal Mart and JC Penney may squeeze the last few bucks out of the consumer. But this will be the last “happy” holidays for a long, long, LONG time, my friends. Come January 2008, people are going to bitch-slapped in a major way, suddenly and unexpectedly, and the real effects of a falling dollar are going to make themselves known.

And of course, Americans will turn to their leaders and ask, “Why didn’t anyone tell us this was happening???”

We are so deep in crap at this point, I don’t know what kind of rope we could possibly find to pull us out. The Dem candidates know this; the GOP candidates know this. At the end of the day, they are all fighting to become the next leader of a banana republic. Let’s be clear: Ron Paul can never possibly get elected. But it is just cathartic to hear him raising the only issues that matter now. And when the SHTF, he can honestly look into the eyes of Americans and say, “I warned you.”

No one else can say that.

[partypup]

Ricechex, I wasn’t going to go there in my previous post, but you are spot-on: the world (especially America) is in for one helluva ride in the coming years. Only a fool would be blind to the fact that our economy is being held together at present with paper clips, gum and hope. The dollar is breaking new, historic lows EVERY week now, the stock market is on life support (even with billions being pumped into it weekly by the Fed), and you can’t even give away a condo in Florida these days. Rappers and supermodels are rejecting the dollar in favor of Euros. Starving African nations in search of food and aid are doing the same thing! And yet the average American doesn’t have a clue or care to have a clue about what this will soon mean for them. Why? Because they still have another $900 of available credit on their cards, fajitas are still being served up at Chili’s and the “Dancing with the Stars” finale is coming up next week (I think).

And Arraya is 150% correct about the insidious effects of denial on our populace. People literally will not wake up to the fact that the train is hurtling off the cliff as we speak — because they happen to be in the caboose and don’t realize the first 5 cars have already tumbled over the edge.

People, the next few months are going to be very strange, very sad and very scary, indeed. We may limp through the holidays with gas less than $4/gallon, and Wal Mart and JC Penney may squeeze the last few bucks out of the consumer. But this will be the last “happy” holidays for a long, long, LONG time, my friends. Come January 2008, people are going to bitch-slapped in a major way, suddenly and unexpectedly, and the real effects of a falling dollar are going to make themselves known.

And of course, Americans will turn to their leaders and ask, “Why didn’t anyone tell us this was happening???”

We are so deep in crap at this point, I don’t know what kind of rope we could possibly find to pull us out. The Dem candidates know this; the GOP candidates know this. At the end of the day, they are all fighting to become the next leader of a banana republic. Let’s be clear: Ron Paul can never possibly get elected. But it is just cathartic to hear him raising the only issues that matter now. And when the SHTF, he can honestly look into the eyes of Americans and say, “I warned you.”

No one else can say that.

[partypup]

Ricechex, I wasn’t going to go there in my previous post, but you are spot-on: the world (especially America) is in for one helluva ride in the coming years. Only a fool would be blind to the fact that our economy is being held together at present with paper clips, gum and hope. The dollar is breaking new, historic lows EVERY week now, the stock market is on life support (even with billions being pumped into it weekly by the Fed), and you can’t even give away a condo in Florida these days. Rappers and supermodels are rejecting the dollar in favor of Euros. Starving African nations in search of food and aid are doing the same thing! And yet the average American doesn’t have a clue or care to have a clue about what this will soon mean for them. Why? Because they still have another $900 of available credit on their cards, fajitas are still being served up at Chili’s and the “Dancing with the Stars” finale is coming up next week (I think).

And Arraya is 150% correct about the insidious effects of denial on our populace. People literally will not wake up to the fact that the train is hurtling off the cliff as we speak — because they happen to be in the caboose and don’t realize the first 5 cars have already tumbled over the edge.

People, the next few months are going to be very strange, very sad and very scary, indeed. We may limp through the holidays with gas less than $4/gallon, and Wal Mart and JC Penney may squeeze the last few bucks out of the consumer. But this will be the last “happy” holidays for a long, long, LONG time, my friends. Come January 2008, people are going to bitch-slapped in a major way, suddenly and unexpectedly, and the real effects of a falling dollar are going to make themselves known.

And of course, Americans will turn to their leaders and ask, “Why didn’t anyone tell us this was happening???”

We are so deep in crap at this point, I don’t know what kind of rope we could possibly find to pull us out. The Dem candidates know this; the GOP candidates know this. At the end of the day, they are all fighting to become the next leader of a banana republic. Let’s be clear: Ron Paul can never possibly get elected. But it is just cathartic to hear him raising the only issues that matter now. And when the SHTF, he can honestly look into the eyes of Americans and say, “I warned you.”

No one else can say that.

[Ricechex]

Partypup, Arraya, I am with you–what a sad state of affairs.

The train has left the station, and the world is on the brink of chaos, despair and death. Anyone remember the movie “Soylent Green” with Charlton Heston?

Many people don’t seem to pay attention and don’t seem to care. Many people are just too busy trying to meet basic needs, so that there is not much left over to worry about the greater good. Many others have been dumbed down by the media and have lost any critical thinking abilities. They just don’t know any better or prefer to wear the rose colored glasses, because otherwise, they might have to do something.

Aaaah….well…that was a bit off task. Ron Paul seems okay, but it could be that folks are just grasping at straws. Not crazy for Hilary or Obama either. The next election is going to be a tough one.

[Ricechex]

Partypup, Arraya, I am with you–what a sad state of affairs.

The train has left the station, and the world is on the brink of chaos, despair and death. Anyone remember the movie “Soylent Green” with Charlton Heston?

Many people don’t seem to pay attention and don’t seem to care. Many people are just too busy trying to meet basic needs, so that there is not much left over to worry about the greater good. Many others have been dumbed down by the media and have lost any critical thinking abilities. They just don’t know any better or prefer to wear the rose colored glasses, because otherwise, they might have to do something.

Aaaah….well…that was a bit off task. Ron Paul seems okay, but it could be that folks are just grasping at straws. Not crazy for Hilary or Obama either. The next election is going to be a tough one.

[Ricechex]

Partypup, Arraya, I am with you–what a sad state of affairs.

The train has left the station, and the world is on the brink of chaos, despair and death. Anyone remember the movie “Soylent Green” with Charlton Heston?

Many people don’t seem to pay attention and don’t seem to care. Many people are just too busy trying to meet basic needs, so that there is not much left over to worry about the greater good. Many others have been dumbed down by the media and have lost any critical thinking abilities. They just don’t know any better or prefer to wear the rose colored glasses, because otherwise, they might have to do something.

Aaaah….well…that was a bit off task. Ron Paul seems okay, but it could be that folks are just grasping at straws. Not crazy for Hilary or Obama either. The next election is going to be a tough one.

[Ricechex]

Partypup, Arraya, I am with you–what a sad state of affairs.

The train has left the station, and the world is on the brink of chaos, despair and death. Anyone remember the movie “Soylent Green” with Charlton Heston?

Many people don’t seem to pay attention and don’t seem to care. Many people are just too busy trying to meet basic needs, so that there is not much left over to worry about the greater good. Many others have been dumbed down by the media and have lost any critical thinking abilities. They just don’t know any better or prefer to wear the rose colored glasses, because otherwise, they might have to do something.

Aaaah….well…that was a bit off task. Ron Paul seems okay, but it could be that folks are just grasping at straws. Not crazy for Hilary or Obama either. The next election is going to be a tough one.

[Arraya]

[Arraya]

[Arraya]

[Arraya]

[partypup]

I’m just happy that people on this board have stopping yapping about Obama and his “feel good” platform that will do virtually nothing to address what truly ails this country. Aside from Paul (and MAYBE Edwards), there’s no horse in this race that will make one whit of difference in our lives come January 2009. At its core, American politics today is essentially an argument over two flavors of vanilla, regardless of whether the candidate is a white man, a white woman or a black man. By the time any candidate has amassed enough money to appear on the national stage, they have been bought, sold and locked to the Establishment. Deluded Americans are being given the illusion of choice in order to anesthetize them to the real pain around them, much as we root for our favorite team in professional sports. It’s a distraction of enoromous proportions. Unless Paul or Edwards is on the ticket in Nov 2008, I’m not wasting my time voting. It will strictly be a calorie-burning exercise.

[partypup]

I’m just happy that people on this board have stopping yapping about Obama and his “feel good” platform that will do virtually nothing to address what truly ails this country. Aside from Paul (and MAYBE Edwards), there’s no horse in this race that will make one whit of difference in our lives come January 2009. At its core, American politics today is essentially an argument over two flavors of vanilla, regardless of whether the candidate is a white man, a white woman or a black man. By the time any candidate has amassed enough money to appear on the national stage, they have been bought, sold and locked to the Establishment. Deluded Americans are being given the illusion of choice in order to anesthetize them to the real pain around them, much as we root for our favorite team in professional sports. It’s a distraction of enoromous proportions. Unless Paul or Edwards is on the ticket in Nov 2008, I’m not wasting my time voting. It will strictly be a calorie-burning exercise.

[partypup]

I’m just happy that people on this board have stopping yapping about Obama and his “feel good” platform that will do virtually nothing to address what truly ails this country. Aside from Paul (and MAYBE Edwards), there’s no horse in this race that will make one whit of difference in our lives come January 2009. At its core, American politics today is essentially an argument over two flavors of vanilla, regardless of whether the candidate is a white man, a white woman or a black man. By the time any candidate has amassed enough money to appear on the national stage, they have been bought, sold and locked to the Establishment. Deluded Americans are being given the illusion of choice in order to anesthetize them to the real pain around them, much as we root for our favorite team in professional sports. It’s a distraction of enoromous proportions. Unless Paul or Edwards is on the ticket in Nov 2008, I’m not wasting my time voting. It will strictly be a calorie-burning exercise.

[partypup]

I’m just happy that people on this board have stopping yapping about Obama and his “feel good” platform that will do virtually nothing to address what truly ails this country. Aside from Paul (and MAYBE Edwards), there’s no horse in this race that will make one whit of difference in our lives come January 2009. At its core, American politics today is essentially an argument over two flavors of vanilla, regardless of whether the candidate is a white man, a white woman or a black man. By the time any candidate has amassed enough money to appear on the national stage, they have been bought, sold and locked to the Establishment. Deluded Americans are being given the illusion of choice in order to anesthetize them to the real pain around them, much as we root for our favorite team in professional sports. It’s a distraction of enoromous proportions. Unless Paul or Edwards is on the ticket in Nov 2008, I’m not wasting my time voting. It will strictly be a calorie-burning exercise.

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc

Actually voting is just a farce. The candidate has already been chosen by “them”. I will vote for Ron Paul just for drill.

“If you only knew the horrible truth” RDD

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc

Actually voting is just a farce. The candidate has already been chosen by “them”. I will vote for Ron Paul just for drill.

“If you only knew the horrible truth” RDD

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc

Actually voting is just a farce. The candidate has already been chosen by “them”. I will vote for Ron Paul just for drill.

“If you only knew the horrible truth” RDD

[eccen in esc]

eccen in esc

Actually voting is just a farce. The candidate has already been chosen by “them”. I will vote for Ron Paul just for drill.

“If you only knew the horrible truth” RDD

[34f3f3f]

I had never heard of this guy, but then he doesn’t know who the Swiss President is. I’m new to American politics and my first impressions from the YouTube clip is that he comes across as a nice principled guy. He seems trustworthy and a lot of what he say about government vis-a-vis commerce, war and diplomacy makes sense. However, I was left wondering how much of his emphasis on social and legal contracts, which seemed to be pivotal to his idealogical thrust, are workable. I was a little unclear how you do away with the IRS and Medicare, and what replaces it. He also seemed to side-step the issue of global warming. Whether you believe it is man made or not, it can’t be ignored. It seems that contracts will govern everything and business will fund everything. What role is left for government?

Allowing guns on planes, which he says could have prevented 9/11 is a very shaky supposition. He appeared equally ambiguous on gay rights as on environmental issues.

Judging the man himself; his demeanor and ethos, I was left wondering whether he has presidential charisma. Arms flap about and he rambles, I found myself drifting off. I just can’t see him strutting the world stage, and being taken very seriously.

Just my outsider’s impressions.

[NotCranky]

I must admit I agree with qwerty depite having some amiration for Dr. Paul. My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end. My preference would be a walkout of mass proportions,which I think would suit Piggs fine, as we seem to like the sidelines for now. Unfortunately we will probably have normal low voter turnout. A protest of mass proportions… that is what I would like to see. Vote for Ghandi, Malcolm X or Kennedy.

[NotCranky]

I must admit I agree with qwerty depite having some amiration for Dr. Paul. My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end. My preference would be a walkout of mass proportions,which I think would suit Piggs fine, as we seem to like the sidelines for now. Unfortunately we will probably have normal low voter turnout. A protest of mass proportions… that is what I would like to see. Vote for Ghandi, Malcolm X or Kennedy.

[NotCranky]

I must admit I agree with qwerty depite having some amiration for Dr. Paul. My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end. My preference would be a walkout of mass proportions,which I think would suit Piggs fine, as we seem to like the sidelines for now. Unfortunately we will probably have normal low voter turnout. A protest of mass proportions… that is what I would like to see. Vote for Ghandi, Malcolm X or Kennedy.

[NotCranky]

I must admit I agree with qwerty depite having some amiration for Dr. Paul. My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end. My preference would be a walkout of mass proportions,which I think would suit Piggs fine, as we seem to like the sidelines for now. Unfortunately we will probably have normal low voter turnout. A protest of mass proportions… that is what I would like to see. Vote for Ghandi, Malcolm X or Kennedy.

[NotCranky]

I must admit I agree with qwerty depite having some amiration for Dr. Paul. My guess is that 80% or so of Ron Paul supporters will vote republican in the end. My preference would be a walkout of mass proportions,which I think would suit Piggs fine, as we seem to like the sidelines for now. Unfortunately we will probably have normal low voter turnout. A protest of mass proportions… that is what I would like to see. Vote for Ghandi, Malcolm X or Kennedy.

[34f3f3f]

I had never heard of this guy, but then he doesn’t know who the Swiss President is. I’m new to American politics and my first impressions from the YouTube clip is that he comes across as a nice principled guy. He seems trustworthy and a lot of what he say about government vis-a-vis commerce, war and diplomacy makes sense. However, I was left wondering how much of his emphasis on social and legal contracts, which seemed to be pivotal to his idealogical thrust, are workable. I was a little unclear how you do away with the IRS and Medicare, and what replaces it. He also seemed to side-step the issue of global warming. Whether you believe it is man made or not, it can’t be ignored. It seems that contracts will govern everything and business will fund everything. What role is left for government?

Allowing guns on planes, which he says could have prevented 9/11 is a very shaky supposition. He appeared equally ambiguous on gay rights as on environmental issues.

Judging the man himself; his demeanor and ethos, I was left wondering whether he has presidential charisma. Arms flap about and he rambles, I found myself drifting off. I just can’t see him strutting the world stage, and being taken very seriously.

Just my outsider’s impressions.

[34f3f3f]

I had never heard of this guy, but then he doesn’t know who the Swiss President is. I’m new to American politics and my first impressions from the YouTube clip is that he comes across as a nice principled guy. He seems trustworthy and a lot of what he say about government vis-a-vis commerce, war and diplomacy makes sense. However, I was left wondering how much of his emphasis on social and legal contracts, which seemed to be pivotal to his idealogical thrust, are workable. I was a little unclear how you do away with the IRS and Medicare, and what replaces it. He also seemed to side-step the issue of global warming. Whether you believe it is man made or not, it can’t be ignored. It seems that contracts will govern everything and business will fund everything. What role is left for government?

Allowing guns on planes, which he says could have prevented 9/11 is a very shaky supposition. He appeared equally ambiguous on gay rights as on environmental issues.

Judging the man himself; his demeanor and ethos, I was left wondering whether he has presidential charisma. Arms flap about and he rambles, I found myself drifting off. I just can’t see him strutting the world stage, and being taken very seriously.

Just my outsider’s impressions.

[34f3f3f]

I had never heard of this guy, but then he doesn’t know who the Swiss President is. I’m new to American politics and my first impressions from the YouTube clip is that he comes across as a nice principled guy. He seems trustworthy and a lot of what he say about government vis-a-vis commerce, war and diplomacy makes sense. However, I was left wondering how much of his emphasis on social and legal contracts, which seemed to be pivotal to his idealogical thrust, are workable. I was a little unclear how you do away with the IRS and Medicare, and what replaces it. He also seemed to side-step the issue of global warming. Whether you believe it is man made or not, it can’t be ignored. It seems that contracts will govern everything and business will fund everything. What role is left for government?

Allowing guns on planes, which he says could have prevented 9/11 is a very shaky supposition. He appeared equally ambiguous on gay rights as on environmental issues.

Judging the man himself; his demeanor and ethos, I was left wondering whether he has presidential charisma. Arms flap about and he rambles, I found myself drifting off. I just can’t see him strutting the world stage, and being taken very seriously.

Just my outsider’s impressions.

[34f3f3f]

I had never heard of this guy, but then he doesn’t know who the Swiss President is. I’m new to American politics and my first impressions from the YouTube clip is that he comes across as a nice principled guy. He seems trustworthy and a lot of what he say about government vis-a-vis commerce, war and diplomacy makes sense. However, I was left wondering how much of his emphasis on social and legal contracts, which seemed to be pivotal to his idealogical thrust, are workable. I was a little unclear how you do away with the IRS and Medicare, and what replaces it. He also seemed to side-step the issue of global warming. Whether you believe it is man made or not, it can’t be ignored. It seems that contracts will govern everything and business will fund everything. What role is left for government?

Allowing guns on planes, which he says could have prevented 9/11 is a very shaky supposition. He appeared equally ambiguous on gay rights as on environmental issues.

Judging the man himself; his demeanor and ethos, I was left wondering whether he has presidential charisma. Arms flap about and he rambles, I found myself drifting off. I just can’t see him strutting the world stage, and being taken very seriously.

Just my outsider’s impressions.

[Coronita]

Any Republican that will balance the government moving forward, and burden a Democrat dominated House and Senate such that the government returns back to the good old days…burdened with so much bureaucracy, nothing gets done. I'm just as fearful of an all Democrat government passing any policies as an all Republican government we've had in the past. It will be interesting to see what kind of gov bailout happens if we have an all Democrat house. No checks and balances, party agendas,etc.

Isn't Hilary supporting bailouts left and right? I'm really not sure I understand her positions on anything.

[Sandi Egan]

A must read for everyone:
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2007/11/20/85535/649

[Sandi Egan]

A must read for everyone:
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2007/11/20/85535/649

[Sandi Egan]

A must read for everyone:
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2007/11/20/85535/649

[Sandi Egan]

A must read for everyone:
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2007/11/20/85535/649

[Sandi Egan]

A must read for everyone:
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2007/11/20/85535/649

[Coronita]

Any Republican that will balance the government moving forward, and burden a Democrat dominated House and Senate such that the government returns back to the good old days…burdened with so much bureaucracy, nothing gets done. I'm just as fearful of an all Democrat government passing any policies as an all Republican government we've had in the past. It will be interesting to see what kind of gov bailout happens if we have an all Democrat house. No checks and balances, party agendas,etc.

Isn't Hilary supporting bailouts left and right? I'm really not sure I understand her positions on anything.

[Coronita]

Any Republican that will balance the government moving forward, and burden a Democrat dominated House and Senate such that the government returns back to the good old days…burdened with so much bureaucracy, nothing gets done. I'm just as fearful of an all Democrat government passing any policies as an all Republican government we've had in the past. It will be interesting to see what kind of gov bailout happens if we have an all Democrat house. No checks and balances, party agendas,etc.

Isn't Hilary supporting bailouts left and right? I'm really not sure I understand her positions on anything.

[Coronita]

Any Republican that will balance the government moving forward, and burden a Democrat dominated House and Senate such that the government returns back to the good old days…burdened with so much bureaucracy, nothing gets done. I'm just as fearful of an all Democrat government passing any policies as an all Republican government we've had in the past. It will be interesting to see what kind of gov bailout happens if we have an all Democrat house. No checks and balances, party agendas,etc.

Isn't Hilary supporting bailouts left and right? I'm really not sure I understand her positions on anything.

[Coronita]

Any Republican that will balance the government moving forward, and burden a Democrat dominated House and Senate such that the government returns back to the good old days…burdened with so much bureaucracy, nothing gets done. I'm just as fearful of an all Democrat government passing any policies as an all Republican government we've had in the past. It will be interesting to see what kind of gov bailout happens if we have an all Democrat house. No checks and balances, party agendas,etc.

Isn't Hilary supporting bailouts left and right? I'm really not sure I understand her positions on anything.

[condogrrl]

I have to confess I will put my blinders on when I vote and look for any candidate who does not have a penis. How many more men do we need to elect to prove that they just screw things up. Maybe a woman would too, but as a believer in equal opportunity, let’s give a woman a chance to be just as disappointing as all the male presidents who preceded her.

[4plexowner]

I agree with your sentiment condogrrl

women might be better world leaders than men – testosterone and international politics don’t mix well

“Bring it on!” (and they did)

women have superior brain power to men – they have a 30% larger connection between the left and right brain hemispheres – this larger connection allows them to transition between right and left-brain thinking more readily (some men would argue that women spend very little time in the analytical left brain hemisphere but we won’t touch that subject today) – I believe this larger connection explains why women are better multi-taskers than men

so, in general, I support the idea of a woman president but I don’t believe Hillary is the right woman – personally, she scares the hell out of me – IMO she is evil personified – she is even smarter than her husband and I don’t trust her motivations one bit – I would never turn my back on Hillary for fear of feeling a cold steel blade entering my ribcage (although the Clinton’s MO appears to be having inconvenient people commit ‘suicide’ or crash in an airplane)

[Anonymous]

Cool! A penis or luck thereof being discussed as a merit on which to elect the President of the United States!

Grow up!

http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/2075990/

[blahblahblah]

The American people like to hear simple stories and the media are always willing to oblige them, especially at election time. The stories we heard in the last two presidential elections were:

2000 – The Good Old Boy versus Mister Smartypants
2004 – The Good Old Boy versus Swift Boat Liar Man From Tax-achusetts

In 2008, the media will give us one of the two following story lines:

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus Scary Woman-Man

– OR –

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”

No other stories are going to be allowed. No matter how much sense any of the other candidates make, no matter how valid their points or how logical they are, presidential elections aren’t about logic or sense. They are about giving the American people the illusion that they have some input into the actions of the federal government. This has not been true in a very long time, so to keep us happy the media gives us story-time. Presidential election story-time serves the same purpose as preschool story-time; it makes our eyelids grow heavy and we inevitably drift off to sleep for another four years while they ship our jobs off to God-knows-where, debase our currency, and allow illegal immigrants to run riot in our streets.

As for myself, I haven’t decided who to vote for. Will it be Mister Nine-Eleven Man or Scary Woman-Man? Certainly not The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”. I really like Mister Gold Standard Man, but I suspect if he gains much more momentum, he will be pushed towards an independent run ala Ross Perot in 1992; this will split the Republican vote and tilt the election to Scary Woman-Man in 2008. Mister Gold Standard Man will simply never be allowed to win the Republican nomination.

Back to sleep everyone. Blue pills all around…

[JWM in SD]

“An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?”

So you want to trust a person whose primary allegiance is to a group of private, ultra-wealthy bankers? So far, in this crisis, BB’s track record is not so good unless you like to watch the value of your savings go down the toilet.

You really need to re-think your comments here, because they are idiotic at best.

[Raybyrnes]

So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.

You don’t have to like Ben Benanke. You don’t have to agree with Bernanke, but last I looked he was a Professor for Princeton. They make good money but definitely not the type of loot a hedge fund manger would make and I am certain he has had multiple offers.

Ron paul is another Ralph Nadar. I am glad to see divergent opinions and issues being raised but he is not going anywhere. Living in California gives you the luxury if you are Republican to vote for him because your vote is fairly meaningless. The state is going Democrat

[JWM in SD]

“So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.”

Although their motives are not purely altruistic, I’m pretty sure they don’t conspire to kill the people their drugs are prescribed for. The motives of those who Ben really reports, are a different matter altogether.

Stop being so nieve…it’s tiresome.

[Raybyrnes]

Last time I looked pharma companies were among the most profitable. Additionally they worked to changed patent expiration to keep generic drugs off the market that could save people. Seems to me that there are equal amounts of special interests involved. I guess it naive to see the truth

[Raybyrnes]

Last time I looked pharma companies were among the most profitable. Additionally they worked to changed patent expiration to keep generic drugs off the market that could save people. Seems to me that there are equal amounts of special interests involved. I guess it naive to see the truth

[Raybyrnes]

Last time I looked pharma companies were among the most profitable. Additionally they worked to changed patent expiration to keep generic drugs off the market that could save people. Seems to me that there are equal amounts of special interests involved. I guess it naive to see the truth

[Raybyrnes]

Last time I looked pharma companies were among the most profitable. Additionally they worked to changed patent expiration to keep generic drugs off the market that could save people. Seems to me that there are equal amounts of special interests involved. I guess it naive to see the truth

[Raybyrnes]

Last time I looked pharma companies were among the most profitable. Additionally they worked to changed patent expiration to keep generic drugs off the market that could save people. Seems to me that there are equal amounts of special interests involved. I guess it naive to see the truth

[JWM in SD]

“So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.”

Although their motives are not purely altruistic, I’m pretty sure they don’t conspire to kill the people their drugs are prescribed for. The motives of those who Ben really reports, are a different matter altogether.

Stop being so nieve…it’s tiresome.

[JWM in SD]

“So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.”

Although their motives are not purely altruistic, I’m pretty sure they don’t conspire to kill the people their drugs are prescribed for. The motives of those who Ben really reports, are a different matter altogether.

Stop being so nieve…it’s tiresome.

[JWM in SD]

“So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.”

Although their motives are not purely altruistic, I’m pretty sure they don’t conspire to kill the people their drugs are prescribed for. The motives of those who Ben really reports, are a different matter altogether.

Stop being so nieve…it’s tiresome.

[JWM in SD]

“So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.”

Although their motives are not purely altruistic, I’m pretty sure they don’t conspire to kill the people their drugs are prescribed for. The motives of those who Ben really reports, are a different matter altogether.

Stop being so nieve…it’s tiresome.

[Raybyrnes]

So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.

You don’t have to like Ben Benanke. You don’t have to agree with Bernanke, but last I looked he was a Professor for Princeton. They make good money but definitely not the type of loot a hedge fund manger would make and I am certain he has had multiple offers.

Ron paul is another Ralph Nadar. I am glad to see divergent opinions and issues being raised but he is not going anywhere. Living in California gives you the luxury if you are Republican to vote for him because your vote is fairly meaningless. The state is going Democrat

[Raybyrnes]

So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.

You don’t have to like Ben Benanke. You don’t have to agree with Bernanke, but last I looked he was a Professor for Princeton. They make good money but definitely not the type of loot a hedge fund manger would make and I am certain he has had multiple offers.

Ron paul is another Ralph Nadar. I am glad to see divergent opinions and issues being raised but he is not going anywhere. Living in California gives you the luxury if you are Republican to vote for him because your vote is fairly meaningless. The state is going Democrat

[Raybyrnes]

So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.

You don’t have to like Ben Benanke. You don’t have to agree with Bernanke, but last I looked he was a Professor for Princeton. They make good money but definitely not the type of loot a hedge fund manger would make and I am certain he has had multiple offers.

Ron paul is another Ralph Nadar. I am glad to see divergent opinions and issues being raised but he is not going anywhere. Living in California gives you the luxury if you are Republican to vote for him because your vote is fairly meaningless. The state is going Democrat

[Raybyrnes]

So I guess by the same rational if I need a doctor I probably would want to stay clear of Ron Paul because of his allegiance to the Medical and Pharma companies.

You don’t have to like Ben Benanke. You don’t have to agree with Bernanke, but last I looked he was a Professor for Princeton. They make good money but definitely not the type of loot a hedge fund manger would make and I am certain he has had multiple offers.

Ron paul is another Ralph Nadar. I am glad to see divergent opinions and issues being raised but he is not going anywhere. Living in California gives you the luxury if you are Republican to vote for him because your vote is fairly meaningless. The state is going Democrat

[JWM in SD]

“An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?”

So you want to trust a person whose primary allegiance is to a group of private, ultra-wealthy bankers? So far, in this crisis, BB’s track record is not so good unless you like to watch the value of your savings go down the toilet.

You really need to re-think your comments here, because they are idiotic at best.

[JWM in SD]

“An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?”

So you want to trust a person whose primary allegiance is to a group of private, ultra-wealthy bankers? So far, in this crisis, BB’s track record is not so good unless you like to watch the value of your savings go down the toilet.

You really need to re-think your comments here, because they are idiotic at best.

[JWM in SD]

“An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?”

So you want to trust a person whose primary allegiance is to a group of private, ultra-wealthy bankers? So far, in this crisis, BB’s track record is not so good unless you like to watch the value of your savings go down the toilet.

You really need to re-think your comments here, because they are idiotic at best.

[JWM in SD]

“An obstetrician (Ron Paul) or a professor with three published textbooks on macroeconomics (Ben Bernanke)?”

So you want to trust a person whose primary allegiance is to a group of private, ultra-wealthy bankers? So far, in this crisis, BB’s track record is not so good unless you like to watch the value of your savings go down the toilet.

You really need to re-think your comments here, because they are idiotic at best.

[blahblahblah]

The American people like to hear simple stories and the media are always willing to oblige them, especially at election time. The stories we heard in the last two presidential elections were:

2000 – The Good Old Boy versus Mister Smartypants
2004 – The Good Old Boy versus Swift Boat Liar Man From Tax-achusetts

In 2008, the media will give us one of the two following story lines:

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus Scary Woman-Man

– OR –

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”

No other stories are going to be allowed. No matter how much sense any of the other candidates make, no matter how valid their points or how logical they are, presidential elections aren’t about logic or sense. They are about giving the American people the illusion that they have some input into the actions of the federal government. This has not been true in a very long time, so to keep us happy the media gives us story-time. Presidential election story-time serves the same purpose as preschool story-time; it makes our eyelids grow heavy and we inevitably drift off to sleep for another four years while they ship our jobs off to God-knows-where, debase our currency, and allow illegal immigrants to run riot in our streets.

As for myself, I haven’t decided who to vote for. Will it be Mister Nine-Eleven Man or Scary Woman-Man? Certainly not The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”. I really like Mister Gold Standard Man, but I suspect if he gains much more momentum, he will be pushed towards an independent run ala Ross Perot in 1992; this will split the Republican vote and tilt the election to Scary Woman-Man in 2008. Mister Gold Standard Man will simply never be allowed to win the Republican nomination.

Back to sleep everyone. Blue pills all around…

[blahblahblah]

The American people like to hear simple stories and the media are always willing to oblige them, especially at election time. The stories we heard in the last two presidential elections were:

2000 – The Good Old Boy versus Mister Smartypants
2004 – The Good Old Boy versus Swift Boat Liar Man From Tax-achusetts

In 2008, the media will give us one of the two following story lines:

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus Scary Woman-Man

– OR –

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”

No other stories are going to be allowed. No matter how much sense any of the other candidates make, no matter how valid their points or how logical they are, presidential elections aren’t about logic or sense. They are about giving the American people the illusion that they have some input into the actions of the federal government. This has not been true in a very long time, so to keep us happy the media gives us story-time. Presidential election story-time serves the same purpose as preschool story-time; it makes our eyelids grow heavy and we inevitably drift off to sleep for another four years while they ship our jobs off to God-knows-where, debase our currency, and allow illegal immigrants to run riot in our streets.

As for myself, I haven’t decided who to vote for. Will it be Mister Nine-Eleven Man or Scary Woman-Man? Certainly not The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”. I really like Mister Gold Standard Man, but I suspect if he gains much more momentum, he will be pushed towards an independent run ala Ross Perot in 1992; this will split the Republican vote and tilt the election to Scary Woman-Man in 2008. Mister Gold Standard Man will simply never be allowed to win the Republican nomination.

Back to sleep everyone. Blue pills all around…

[blahblahblah]

The American people like to hear simple stories and the media are always willing to oblige them, especially at election time. The stories we heard in the last two presidential elections were:

2000 – The Good Old Boy versus Mister Smartypants
2004 – The Good Old Boy versus Swift Boat Liar Man From Tax-achusetts

In 2008, the media will give us one of the two following story lines:

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus Scary Woman-Man

– OR –

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”

No other stories are going to be allowed. No matter how much sense any of the other candidates make, no matter how valid their points or how logical they are, presidential elections aren’t about logic or sense. They are about giving the American people the illusion that they have some input into the actions of the federal government. This has not been true in a very long time, so to keep us happy the media gives us story-time. Presidential election story-time serves the same purpose as preschool story-time; it makes our eyelids grow heavy and we inevitably drift off to sleep for another four years while they ship our jobs off to God-knows-where, debase our currency, and allow illegal immigrants to run riot in our streets.

As for myself, I haven’t decided who to vote for. Will it be Mister Nine-Eleven Man or Scary Woman-Man? Certainly not The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”. I really like Mister Gold Standard Man, but I suspect if he gains much more momentum, he will be pushed towards an independent run ala Ross Perot in 1992; this will split the Republican vote and tilt the election to Scary Woman-Man in 2008. Mister Gold Standard Man will simply never be allowed to win the Republican nomination.

Back to sleep everyone. Blue pills all around…

[blahblahblah]

The American people like to hear simple stories and the media are always willing to oblige them, especially at election time. The stories we heard in the last two presidential elections were:

2000 – The Good Old Boy versus Mister Smartypants
2004 – The Good Old Boy versus Swift Boat Liar Man From Tax-achusetts

In 2008, the media will give us one of the two following story lines:

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus Scary Woman-Man

– OR –

2008 – Mister Nine-Eleven Man versus The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”

No other stories are going to be allowed. No matter how much sense any of the other candidates make, no matter how valid their points or how logical they are, presidential elections aren’t about logic or sense. They are about giving the American people the illusion that they have some input into the actions of the federal government. This has not been true in a very long time, so to keep us happy the media gives us story-time. Presidential election story-time serves the same purpose as preschool story-time; it makes our eyelids grow heavy and we inevitably drift off to sleep for another four years while they ship our jobs off to God-knows-where, debase our currency, and allow illegal immigrants to run riot in our streets.

As for myself, I haven’t decided who to vote for. Will it be Mister Nine-Eleven Man or Scary Woman-Man? Certainly not The Guy Whose Name Sounds Like “Osama”. I really like Mister Gold Standard Man, but I suspect if he gains much more momentum, he will be pushed towards an independent run ala Ross Perot in 1992; this will split the Republican vote and tilt the election to Scary Woman-Man in 2008. Mister Gold Standard Man will simply never be allowed to win the Republican nomination.

Back to sleep everyone. Blue pills all around…

[condogrrl]

Methinks (aka Mr. Tiny) I got your message. In revealing your preference for penises, I guess you just “came out” to us.

[condogrrl]

Methinks (aka Mr. Tiny) I got your message. In revealing your preference for penises, I guess you just “came out” to us.

[condogrrl]

Methinks (aka Mr. Tiny) I got your message. In revealing your preference for penises, I guess you just “came out” to us.

[condogrrl]

Methinks (aka Mr. Tiny) I got your message. In revealing your preference for penises, I guess you just “came out” to us.

[condogrrl]

Methinks (aka Mr. Tiny) I got your message. In revealing your preference for penises, I guess you just “came out” to us.

[Anonymous]

Cool! A penis or luck thereof being discussed as a merit on which to elect the President of the United States!

Grow up!

http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/2075990/

[Anonymous]

Cool! A penis or luck thereof being discussed as a merit on which to elect the President of the United States!

Grow up!

http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/2075990/

[Anonymous]

Cool! A penis or luck thereof being discussed as a merit on which to elect the President of the United States!

Grow up!

http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/2075990/

[Anonymous]

Cool! A penis or luck thereof being discussed as a merit on which to elect the President of the United States!

Grow up!

http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/2075990/

[4plexowner]

I agree with your sentiment condogrrl

women might be better world leaders than men – testosterone and international politics don’t mix well

“Bring it on!” (and they did)

women have superior brain power to men – they have a 30% larger connection between the left and right brain hemispheres – this larger connection allows them to transition between right and left-brain thinking more readily (some men would argue that women spend very little time in the analytical left brain hemisphere but we won’t touch that subject today) – I believe this larger connection explains why women are better multi-taskers than men

so, in general, I support the idea of a woman president but I don’t believe Hillary is the right woman – personally, she scares the hell out of me – IMO she is evil personified – she is even smarter than her husband and I don’t trust her motivations one bit – I would never turn my back on Hillary for fear of feeling a cold steel blade entering my ribcage (although the Clinton’s MO appears to be having inconvenient people commit ‘suicide’ or crash in an airplane)

[4plexowner]

I agree with your sentiment condogrrl

women might be better world leaders than men – testosterone and international politics don’t mix well

“Bring it on!” (and they did)

women have superior brain power to men – they have a 30% larger connection between the left and right brain hemispheres – this larger connection allows them to transition between right and left-brain thinking more readily (some men would argue that women spend very little time in the analytical left brain hemisphere but we won’t touch that subject today) – I believe this larger connection explains why women are better multi-taskers than men

so, in general, I support the idea of a woman president but I don’t believe Hillary is the right woman – personally, she scares the hell out of me – IMO she is evil personified – she is even smarter than her husband and I don’t trust her motivations one bit – I would never turn my back on Hillary for fear of feeling a cold steel blade entering my ribcage (although the Clinton’s MO appears to be having inconvenient people commit ‘suicide’ or crash in an airplane)

[4plexowner]

I agree with your sentiment condogrrl

women might be better world leaders than men – testosterone and international politics don’t mix well

“Bring it on!” (and they did)

women have superior brain power to men – they have a 30% larger connection between the left and right brain hemispheres – this larger connection allows them to transition between right and left-brain thinking more readily (some men would argue that women spend very little time in the analytical left brain hemisphere but we won’t touch that subject today) – I believe this larger connection explains why women are better multi-taskers than men

so, in general, I support the idea of a woman president but I don’t believe Hillary is the right woman – personally, she scares the hell out of me – IMO she is evil personified – she is even smarter than her husband and I don’t trust her motivations one bit – I would never turn my back on Hillary for fear of feeling a cold steel blade entering my ribcage (although the Clinton’s MO appears to be having inconvenient people commit ‘suicide’ or crash in an airplane)

[4plexowner]

I agree with your sentiment condogrrl

women might be better world leaders than men – testosterone and international politics don’t mix well

“Bring it on!” (and they did)

women have superior brain power to men – they have a 30% larger connection between the left and right brain hemispheres – this larger connection allows them to transition between right and left-brain thinking more readily (some men would argue that women spend very little time in the analytical left brain hemisphere but we won’t touch that subject today) – I believe this larger connection explains why women are better multi-taskers than men

so, in general, I support the idea of a woman president but I don’t believe Hillary is the right woman – personally, she scares the hell out of me – IMO she is evil personified – she is even smarter than her husband and I don’t trust her motivations one bit – I would never turn my back on Hillary for fear of feeling a cold steel blade entering my ribcage (although the Clinton’s MO appears to be having inconvenient people commit ‘suicide’ or crash in an airplane)

[condogrrl]

I have to confess I will put my blinders on when I vote and look for any candidate who does not have a penis. How many more men do we need to elect to prove that they just screw things up. Maybe a woman would too, but as a believer in equal opportunity, let’s give a woman a chance to be just as disappointing as all the male presidents who preceded her.

[condogrrl]

I have to confess I will put my blinders on when I vote and look for any candidate who does not have a penis. How many more men do we need to elect to prove that they just screw things up. Maybe a woman would too, but as a believer in equal opportunity, let’s give a woman a chance to be just as disappointing as all the male presidents who preceded her.

[condogrrl]

I have to confess I will put my blinders on when I vote and look for any candidate who does not have a penis. How many more men do we need to elect to prove that they just screw things up. Maybe a woman would too, but as a believer in equal opportunity, let’s give a woman a chance to be just as disappointing as all the male presidents who preceded her.

[condogrrl]

I have to confess I will put my blinders on when I vote and look for any candidate who does not have a penis. How many more men do we need to elect to prove that they just screw things up. Maybe a woman would too, but as a believer in equal opportunity, let’s give a woman a chance to be just as disappointing as all the male presidents who preceded her.

[snail]

RON PAUL!!!
sorry for the late response…too much wine

[greekfire]

Snail,

Too much wine is an OK excuse on this blog. It means you are speaking the truth. Just curious…was it a red or a white?

[snail]

Actually Red-White-Red
Port with the appetizer of assorted nuts
Then white with the salmon and rice
the red(bordeaux) with the roast standing rib and potatoes….mmmmmhhhh
We decided not to cook turkey on this past Thanksgiving.
Got those wines cheap at Trader Joe…probably spent no more than $25.00 for a very decent wines. Sorry for the rant, Just got hungry again here.

[rseiser]

Since Ron Paul is the only person who keeps Congress and the Federal Reserve somewhat in check, I am happy to give this man a big reward for his service of the last 30 years. One single guy who has proven not to work just for himself but remind Congress constantly of serving the people’s interest.

Also, what I have learned from him about the Federal Reserve, inflation, gold, and macroeconomics has made me more profit than believing any other government propaganda.

Today is actually the day which can make Ron Paul the frontrunner (at least in fundraising).

http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=201346
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com

[Sandi Egan]

Today is the day to make a difference. We need to help Dr. Paul’s campaign get his message out. He needs money for that because mainstream media is sure as hell not going to help us.

Today is the day when we protest against the inflation tax. Today is 234th anniversary of Boston Tea Party that started the Revolution, and we celebrate it like this: http://www.teaparty07.com

Please consider helping the Revolution today at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate ! Even a $25 donation is important and very helpful.

More than 100,000 people have already donated and almost $4 million is raised today already with 7 hours to go. Join us today!

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

[drunkle]

what does this mean:

4. I am not a federal government contractor.

does this mean that if i work for a company with federal contracts, i’m not eligible to contribute? and what defines federal? just about every local government agency gets federal funds…

edit: nevermind, called the office for clarification.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[rseiser]

Stopping the Fed printing money will certainly unleash the deflationary forces of credit contraction. Hence, some prices will fall. But since he will cut tons of wasted overseas spending, there will be more money available at home. All of his policies will lead to a stronger dollar. Again, this might not keep asset bubbles alive, but it will also be easier to keep interest rates lower, so at least we won’t have a 1970s experience.

[Sandi Egan]

Ron Paul is an expert when it comes to economy and particularly monetary policy. Be assured that he is going to implement the changes in the smoothest possible way.

[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[Sandi Egan]

If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. That’s a process, it will take time. Sure, there will be market shocks. But that has nothing to do with who the next president is going to be. We are deep in debt, and continuing the same way is only going to make things worse. If you are an individual who overspends, you can hope for a government bailout or in the worst case file a bankruptcy. If you’re a government, bankruptcy is not really an option, so soon or late you will HAVE TO pay back. And the later you start that, the worse it’s going to be.

[drunkle]

“If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. ”

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…

[Sandi Egan]

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…
Ron Paul is just a man. One man can only do that much. But his Message is getting attention, people’s thinking paradigm is shifting. There will be those who pick up the message and run with it.
Many of us on this board understand the economic situation that we are facing. There are hundreds of boards like this throughout the country. Once you identify the problem, it’s only natural to try and do something about it. Once you’ve seen the light, there’s no turning back. People are waking up. It’s not too late.

[drunkle]

i dont share your faith in joe 12 pack… the hippie boomers back in their day didn’t change the world. most people in 2001 supported the knee jerk invasion. an entire state elected to insert intelligent design as a “competing theory” to evolution. people believed that democrats could save the day.

it will take one man to change the world. he has to do it and he’ll be villanized for it.

[Arraya]

I agree with drunkle on most points

1: I support RP
2: If he gets close to being elected, he will be “removed” by the “establishment”
3: If he does get in there will be economic chaos due to his changes and the short sighted, instant gratification programed populace will not elect him again.

The only way there will be “real” change is when we run our current system into the ground and half the population is starving. Bad thing for us they have put in place very handy laws to quell dissent by eroding the bill of rights. See Patriot Act I & II, john warner defense act, bush spy bill etc… And lets not forget the 1/2 billion dollar detention center KBR is building which will come in handy for unruley citizens. Blackwater can round them up while the national gaurd is securing more oil wells….

[drunkle]

and there was ross perot…

[Irish]

What a surprise to see such interest in the Prezidential race at such an early stage !
To many of us it seems that whatever way we vote, it will make little difference in the way this country is run. However I personally feel that when we vote we should vote against the incumbent. For example, in our beloved state of California, let’s dump Boxer and especially Feinstein from their thrones in the Senate as well as Pelosi from the House. They have been so disappointing to me, as a liberal democrat that I would rather see almost any Republican in their place. They should pay the price for continually ignoring their electorate during these 7 ugly Boosh years.
In terms of the Prezidential election, I hope people are able to see how phony all the Republican candidates are on the issues, with the exception of Ron Paul and perhaps Mike Huckabee. Endless fear and war on terror and the knee-jerk invasion and occupation of Arab countries gets so wearisome (not to mention, costly). The Democrats don’t inspire much more confidence, especially Hillary, but there does seem to be more sane and reasonable talk on their side. So, I tend to want to vote for Ron Paul in the Primary and switch to Democratic in the November election so I can vote for whichever one of them floats to the top.
Just my 2 cents

Irish

[equalizer]

Hi Irish,

Welcome. You should be prepared for the “insults”, such as “Go back to watching the Fighting Irish and listening to the UN loving Bono while we stop the black helicopters.”

[equalizer]

Hi Irish,

Welcome. You should be prepared for the “insults”, such as “Go back to watching the Fighting Irish and listening to the UN loving Bono while we stop the black helicopters.”

[equalizer]

Hi Irish,

Welcome. You should be prepared for the “insults”, such as “Go back to watching the Fighting Irish and listening to the UN loving Bono while we stop the black helicopters.”

[equalizer]

Hi Irish,

Welcome. You should be prepared for the “insults”, such as “Go back to watching the Fighting Irish and listening to the UN loving Bono while we stop the black helicopters.”

[equalizer]

Hi Irish,

Welcome. You should be prepared for the “insults”, such as “Go back to watching the Fighting Irish and listening to the UN loving Bono while we stop the black helicopters.”

[Irish]

What a surprise to see such interest in the Prezidential race at such an early stage !
To many of us it seems that whatever way we vote, it will make little difference in the way this country is run. However I personally feel that when we vote we should vote against the incumbent. For example, in our beloved state of California, let’s dump Boxer and especially Feinstein from their thrones in the Senate as well as Pelosi from the House. They have been so disappointing to me, as a liberal democrat that I would rather see almost any Republican in their place. They should pay the price for continually ignoring their electorate during these 7 ugly Boosh years.
In terms of the Prezidential election, I hope people are able to see how phony all the Republican candidates are on the issues, with the exception of Ron Paul and perhaps Mike Huckabee. Endless fear and war on terror and the knee-jerk invasion and occupation of Arab countries gets so wearisome (not to mention, costly). The Democrats don’t inspire much more confidence, especially Hillary, but there does seem to be more sane and reasonable talk on their side. So, I tend to want to vote for Ron Paul in the Primary and switch to Democratic in the November election so I can vote for whichever one of them floats to the top.
Just my 2 cents

Irish

[Irish]

What a surprise to see such interest in the Prezidential race at such an early stage !
To many of us it seems that whatever way we vote, it will make little difference in the way this country is run. However I personally feel that when we vote we should vote against the incumbent. For example, in our beloved state of California, let’s dump Boxer and especially Feinstein from their thrones in the Senate as well as Pelosi from the House. They have been so disappointing to me, as a liberal democrat that I would rather see almost any Republican in their place. They should pay the price for continually ignoring their electorate during these 7 ugly Boosh years.
In terms of the Prezidential election, I hope people are able to see how phony all the Republican candidates are on the issues, with the exception of Ron Paul and perhaps Mike Huckabee. Endless fear and war on terror and the knee-jerk invasion and occupation of Arab countries gets so wearisome (not to mention, costly). The Democrats don’t inspire much more confidence, especially Hillary, but there does seem to be more sane and reasonable talk on their side. So, I tend to want to vote for Ron Paul in the Primary and switch to Democratic in the November election so I can vote for whichever one of them floats to the top.
Just my 2 cents

Irish

[Irish]

What a surprise to see such interest in the Prezidential race at such an early stage !
To many of us it seems that whatever way we vote, it will make little difference in the way this country is run. However I personally feel that when we vote we should vote against the incumbent. For example, in our beloved state of California, let’s dump Boxer and especially Feinstein from their thrones in the Senate as well as Pelosi from the House. They have been so disappointing to me, as a liberal democrat that I would rather see almost any Republican in their place. They should pay the price for continually ignoring their electorate during these 7 ugly Boosh years.
In terms of the Prezidential election, I hope people are able to see how phony all the Republican candidates are on the issues, with the exception of Ron Paul and perhaps Mike Huckabee. Endless fear and war on terror and the knee-jerk invasion and occupation of Arab countries gets so wearisome (not to mention, costly). The Democrats don’t inspire much more confidence, especially Hillary, but there does seem to be more sane and reasonable talk on their side. So, I tend to want to vote for Ron Paul in the Primary and switch to Democratic in the November election so I can vote for whichever one of them floats to the top.
Just my 2 cents

Irish

[Irish]

What a surprise to see such interest in the Prezidential race at such an early stage !
To many of us it seems that whatever way we vote, it will make little difference in the way this country is run. However I personally feel that when we vote we should vote against the incumbent. For example, in our beloved state of California, let’s dump Boxer and especially Feinstein from their thrones in the Senate as well as Pelosi from the House. They have been so disappointing to me, as a liberal democrat that I would rather see almost any Republican in their place. They should pay the price for continually ignoring their electorate during these 7 ugly Boosh years.
In terms of the Prezidential election, I hope people are able to see how phony all the Republican candidates are on the issues, with the exception of Ron Paul and perhaps Mike Huckabee. Endless fear and war on terror and the knee-jerk invasion and occupation of Arab countries gets so wearisome (not to mention, costly). The Democrats don’t inspire much more confidence, especially Hillary, but there does seem to be more sane and reasonable talk on their side. So, I tend to want to vote for Ron Paul in the Primary and switch to Democratic in the November election so I can vote for whichever one of them floats to the top.
Just my 2 cents

Irish

[drunkle]

and there was ross perot…

[drunkle]

and there was ross perot…

[drunkle]

and there was ross perot…

[drunkle]

and there was ross perot…

[Arraya]

I agree with drunkle on most points

1: I support RP
2: If he gets close to being elected, he will be “removed” by the “establishment”
3: If he does get in there will be economic chaos due to his changes and the short sighted, instant gratification programed populace will not elect him again.

The only way there will be “real” change is when we run our current system into the ground and half the population is starving. Bad thing for us they have put in place very handy laws to quell dissent by eroding the bill of rights. See Patriot Act I & II, john warner defense act, bush spy bill etc… And lets not forget the 1/2 billion dollar detention center KBR is building which will come in handy for unruley citizens. Blackwater can round them up while the national gaurd is securing more oil wells….

[Arraya]

I agree with drunkle on most points

1: I support RP
2: If he gets close to being elected, he will be “removed” by the “establishment”
3: If he does get in there will be economic chaos due to his changes and the short sighted, instant gratification programed populace will not elect him again.

The only way there will be “real” change is when we run our current system into the ground and half the population is starving. Bad thing for us they have put in place very handy laws to quell dissent by eroding the bill of rights. See Patriot Act I & II, john warner defense act, bush spy bill etc… And lets not forget the 1/2 billion dollar detention center KBR is building which will come in handy for unruley citizens. Blackwater can round them up while the national gaurd is securing more oil wells….

[Arraya]

I agree with drunkle on most points

1: I support RP
2: If he gets close to being elected, he will be “removed” by the “establishment”
3: If he does get in there will be economic chaos due to his changes and the short sighted, instant gratification programed populace will not elect him again.

The only way there will be “real” change is when we run our current system into the ground and half the population is starving. Bad thing for us they have put in place very handy laws to quell dissent by eroding the bill of rights. See Patriot Act I & II, john warner defense act, bush spy bill etc… And lets not forget the 1/2 billion dollar detention center KBR is building which will come in handy for unruley citizens. Blackwater can round them up while the national gaurd is securing more oil wells….

[Arraya]

I agree with drunkle on most points

1: I support RP
2: If he gets close to being elected, he will be “removed” by the “establishment”
3: If he does get in there will be economic chaos due to his changes and the short sighted, instant gratification programed populace will not elect him again.

The only way there will be “real” change is when we run our current system into the ground and half the population is starving. Bad thing for us they have put in place very handy laws to quell dissent by eroding the bill of rights. See Patriot Act I & II, john warner defense act, bush spy bill etc… And lets not forget the 1/2 billion dollar detention center KBR is building which will come in handy for unruley citizens. Blackwater can round them up while the national gaurd is securing more oil wells….

[drunkle]

i dont share your faith in joe 12 pack… the hippie boomers back in their day didn’t change the world. most people in 2001 supported the knee jerk invasion. an entire state elected to insert intelligent design as a “competing theory” to evolution. people believed that democrats could save the day.

it will take one man to change the world. he has to do it and he’ll be villanized for it.

[drunkle]

i dont share your faith in joe 12 pack… the hippie boomers back in their day didn’t change the world. most people in 2001 supported the knee jerk invasion. an entire state elected to insert intelligent design as a “competing theory” to evolution. people believed that democrats could save the day.

it will take one man to change the world. he has to do it and he’ll be villanized for it.

[drunkle]

i dont share your faith in joe 12 pack… the hippie boomers back in their day didn’t change the world. most people in 2001 supported the knee jerk invasion. an entire state elected to insert intelligent design as a “competing theory” to evolution. people believed that democrats could save the day.

it will take one man to change the world. he has to do it and he’ll be villanized for it.

[drunkle]

i dont share your faith in joe 12 pack… the hippie boomers back in their day didn’t change the world. most people in 2001 supported the knee jerk invasion. an entire state elected to insert intelligent design as a “competing theory” to evolution. people believed that democrats could save the day.

it will take one man to change the world. he has to do it and he’ll be villanized for it.

[Sandi Egan]

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…
Ron Paul is just a man. One man can only do that much. But his Message is getting attention, people’s thinking paradigm is shifting. There will be those who pick up the message and run with it.
Many of us on this board understand the economic situation that we are facing. There are hundreds of boards like this throughout the country. Once you identify the problem, it’s only natural to try and do something about it. Once you’ve seen the light, there’s no turning back. People are waking up. It’s not too late.

[Sandi Egan]

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…
Ron Paul is just a man. One man can only do that much. But his Message is getting attention, people’s thinking paradigm is shifting. There will be those who pick up the message and run with it.
Many of us on this board understand the economic situation that we are facing. There are hundreds of boards like this throughout the country. Once you identify the problem, it’s only natural to try and do something about it. Once you’ve seen the light, there’s no turning back. People are waking up. It’s not too late.

[Sandi Egan]

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…
Ron Paul is just a man. One man can only do that much. But his Message is getting attention, people’s thinking paradigm is shifting. There will be those who pick up the message and run with it.
Many of us on this board understand the economic situation that we are facing. There are hundreds of boards like this throughout the country. Once you identify the problem, it’s only natural to try and do something about it. Once you’ve seen the light, there’s no turning back. People are waking up. It’s not too late.

[Sandi Egan]

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…
Ron Paul is just a man. One man can only do that much. But his Message is getting attention, people’s thinking paradigm is shifting. There will be those who pick up the message and run with it.
Many of us on this board understand the economic situation that we are facing. There are hundreds of boards like this throughout the country. Once you identify the problem, it’s only natural to try and do something about it. Once you’ve seen the light, there’s no turning back. People are waking up. It’s not too late.

[drunkle]

“If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. ”

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…

[drunkle]

“If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. ”

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…

[drunkle]

“If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. ”

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…

[drunkle]

“If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. ”

he’ll only have 4 years to act. that’s not a lot of time…

[Sandi Egan]

If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. That’s a process, it will take time. Sure, there will be market shocks. But that has nothing to do with who the next president is going to be. We are deep in debt, and continuing the same way is only going to make things worse. If you are an individual who overspends, you can hope for a government bailout or in the worst case file a bankruptcy. If you’re a government, bankruptcy is not really an option, so soon or late you will HAVE TO pay back. And the later you start that, the worse it’s going to be.

[Sandi Egan]

If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. That’s a process, it will take time. Sure, there will be market shocks. But that has nothing to do with who the next president is going to be. We are deep in debt, and continuing the same way is only going to make things worse. If you are an individual who overspends, you can hope for a government bailout or in the worst case file a bankruptcy. If you’re a government, bankruptcy is not really an option, so soon or late you will HAVE TO pay back. And the later you start that, the worse it’s going to be.

[Sandi Egan]

If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. That’s a process, it will take time. Sure, there will be market shocks. But that has nothing to do with who the next president is going to be. We are deep in debt, and continuing the same way is only going to make things worse. If you are an individual who overspends, you can hope for a government bailout or in the worst case file a bankruptcy. If you’re a government, bankruptcy is not really an option, so soon or late you will HAVE TO pay back. And the later you start that, the worse it’s going to be.

[Sandi Egan]

If all the agencies that RP says should be disbanded are disbanded withing a day, the country will descend into chaos. But they will not be. The president cannot do that by himself, even if he wanted to. What he CAN do is, gradually scale down unnecessary spending, stimulate slow shifts in psychology, start bringing troops home. He can veto porked-up bills and prevent additional debt. That’s a process, it will take time. Sure, there will be market shocks. But that has nothing to do with who the next president is going to be. We are deep in debt, and continuing the same way is only going to make things worse. If you are an individual who overspends, you can hope for a government bailout or in the worst case file a bankruptcy. If you’re a government, bankruptcy is not really an option, so soon or late you will HAVE TO pay back. And the later you start that, the worse it’s going to be.

[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[drunkle]

sandi:

i don’t see how that’s possible. of course, i’m dense and unimaginative, but it seems to me that fixing the system requires breaking it. breaking deficit spending, breaking the fed’s loose monetary policy, breaking the addiction to cheap credit, breaking addiction to the government teat.

growth requires spending. stopping government spending and encourage citizens to save will stop growth. the economy is dependant on growth to drive dividends and share prices. profits. the wealthiest americans, despite elimination of the “death tax” will suffer loss of absolute wealth. compensation of ceo’s will crater as investors come to realize that ceo’s have nothing to do with corporate profits.

btw, i donated to his campaign and support him for president. i’m just saying, these are reasons i think people, the media, corporations are afraid of him. reasons why his presidency may be misconstrued. reasons to be cautious with your own financial situation.

i’ma digress for a second cuz it’s been at the back of my mind and say that the “issues” of abortion and gay marriage as part of the list of “issues” of the presidential campaign are retardly laughable. immigration as well, but to less of a retarded degree. it’s only been some 40 years since blacks and women were allowed to even vote, in the evolution of social attitudes in this country, abortion and gay marriage (aka, religious freedom) are still way off on the horizon of social acceptance. we can’t even get the country to commit to separation of church and state (aka, pledge of alligance) let alone to abortion and gays. to discount paul as your candidate based on an “issue” that no other candidate could possibly affirmatively affect is absurd, particularly in light of the real issues (edit: more pressing issues) at hand.

edit: reduced spending will also cost jobs.

[Sandi Egan]

Ron Paul is an expert when it comes to economy and particularly monetary policy. Be assured that he is going to implement the changes in the smoothest possible way.

[Sandi Egan]

Ron Paul is an expert when it comes to economy and particularly monetary policy. Be assured that he is going to implement the changes in the smoothest possible way.

[Sandi Egan]

Ron Paul is an expert when it comes to economy and particularly monetary policy. Be assured that he is going to implement the changes in the smoothest possible way.

[Sandi Egan]

Ron Paul is an expert when it comes to economy and particularly monetary policy. Be assured that he is going to implement the changes in the smoothest possible way.

[rseiser]

Stopping the Fed printing money will certainly unleash the deflationary forces of credit contraction. Hence, some prices will fall. But since he will cut tons of wasted overseas spending, there will be more money available at home. All of his policies will lead to a stronger dollar. Again, this might not keep asset bubbles alive, but it will also be easier to keep interest rates lower, so at least we won’t have a 1970s experience.

[rseiser]

Stopping the Fed printing money will certainly unleash the deflationary forces of credit contraction. Hence, some prices will fall. But since he will cut tons of wasted overseas spending, there will be more money available at home. All of his policies will lead to a stronger dollar. Again, this might not keep asset bubbles alive, but it will also be easier to keep interest rates lower, so at least we won’t have a 1970s experience.

[rseiser]

Stopping the Fed printing money will certainly unleash the deflationary forces of credit contraction. Hence, some prices will fall. But since he will cut tons of wasted overseas spending, there will be more money available at home. All of his policies will lead to a stronger dollar. Again, this might not keep asset bubbles alive, but it will also be easier to keep interest rates lower, so at least we won’t have a 1970s experience.

[rseiser]

Stopping the Fed printing money will certainly unleash the deflationary forces of credit contraction. Hence, some prices will fall. But since he will cut tons of wasted overseas spending, there will be more money available at home. All of his policies will lead to a stronger dollar. Again, this might not keep asset bubbles alive, but it will also be easier to keep interest rates lower, so at least we won’t have a 1970s experience.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[drunkle]

i’m pretty sure if ron paul wins, the stock market will implode.

if he wins and enacts his policies, oversight or elimination of the fed, elimination of subsidies, “fair” taxes and leveling of the playing field (via elimination of governmental favoritism), he’ll be targeted for termination.

the economy will probably suffer as his policies transition the country away from debt spending and big government. people will blame him for ruining the country and drop him like a used carter.

he’ll lay the foundation for prosperity under his successor who will be venerated like a doddering reagan.

[drunkle]

what does this mean:

4. I am not a federal government contractor.

does this mean that if i work for a company with federal contracts, i’m not eligible to contribute? and what defines federal? just about every local government agency gets federal funds…

edit: nevermind, called the office for clarification.

[drunkle]

what does this mean:

4. I am not a federal government contractor.

does this mean that if i work for a company with federal contracts, i’m not eligible to contribute? and what defines federal? just about every local government agency gets federal funds…

edit: nevermind, called the office for clarification.

[drunkle]

what does this mean:

4. I am not a federal government contractor.

does this mean that if i work for a company with federal contracts, i’m not eligible to contribute? and what defines federal? just about every local government agency gets federal funds…

edit: nevermind, called the office for clarification.

[drunkle]

what does this mean:

4. I am not a federal government contractor.

does this mean that if i work for a company with federal contracts, i’m not eligible to contribute? and what defines federal? just about every local government agency gets federal funds…

edit: nevermind, called the office for clarification.

[Sandi Egan]

Today is the day to make a difference. We need to help Dr. Paul’s campaign get his message out. He needs money for that because mainstream media is sure as hell not going to help us.

Today is the day when we protest against the inflation tax. Today is 234th anniversary of Boston Tea Party that started the Revolution, and we celebrate it like this: http://www.teaparty07.com

Please consider helping the Revolution today at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate ! Even a $25 donation is important and very helpful.

More than 100,000 people have already donated and almost $4 million is raised today already with 7 hours to go. Join us today!

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

[Sandi Egan]

Today is the day to make a difference. We need to help Dr. Paul’s campaign get his message out. He needs money for that because mainstream media is sure as hell not going to help us.

Today is the day when we protest against the inflation tax. Today is 234th anniversary of Boston Tea Party that started the Revolution, and we celebrate it like this: http://www.teaparty07.com

Please consider helping the Revolution today at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate ! Even a $25 donation is important and very helpful.

More than 100,000 people have already donated and almost $4 million is raised today already with 7 hours to go. Join us today!

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

[Sandi Egan]

Today is the day to make a difference. We need to help Dr. Paul’s campaign get his message out. He needs money for that because mainstream media is sure as hell not going to help us.

Today is the day when we protest against the inflation tax. Today is 234th anniversary of Boston Tea Party that started the Revolution, and we celebrate it like this: http://www.teaparty07.com

Please consider helping the Revolution today at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate ! Even a $25 donation is important and very helpful.

More than 100,000 people have already donated and almost $4 million is raised today already with 7 hours to go. Join us today!

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

[Sandi Egan]

Today is the day to make a difference. We need to help Dr. Paul’s campaign get his message out. He needs money for that because mainstream media is sure as hell not going to help us.

Today is the day when we protest against the inflation tax. Today is 234th anniversary of Boston Tea Party that started the Revolution, and we celebrate it like this: http://www.teaparty07.com

Please consider helping the Revolution today at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate ! Even a $25 donation is important and very helpful.

More than 100,000 people have already donated and almost $4 million is raised today already with 7 hours to go. Join us today!

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

[rseiser]

Since Ron Paul is the only person who keeps Congress and the Federal Reserve somewhat in check, I am happy to give this man a big reward for his service of the last 30 years. One single guy who has proven not to work just for himself but remind Congress constantly of serving the people’s interest.

Also, what I have learned from him about the Federal Reserve, inflation, gold, and macroeconomics has made me more profit than believing any other government propaganda.

Today is actually the day which can make Ron Paul the frontrunner (at least in fundraising).

http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=201346
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com

[rseiser]

Since Ron Paul is the only person who keeps Congress and the Federal Reserve somewhat in check, I am happy to give this man a big reward for his service of the last 30 years. One single guy who has proven not to work just for himself but remind Congress constantly of serving the people’s interest.

Also, what I have learned from him about the Federal Reserve, inflation, gold, and macroeconomics has made me more profit than believing any other government propaganda.

Today is actually the day which can make Ron Paul the frontrunner (at least in fundraising).

http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=201346
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com

[rseiser]

Since Ron Paul is the only person who keeps Congress and the Federal Reserve somewhat in check, I am happy to give this man a big reward for his service of the last 30 years. One single guy who has proven not to work just for himself but remind Congress constantly of serving the people’s interest.

Also, what I have learned from him about the Federal Reserve, inflation, gold, and macroeconomics has made me more profit than believing any other government propaganda.

Today is actually the day which can make Ron Paul the frontrunner (at least in fundraising).

http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=201346
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com

[rseiser]

Since Ron Paul is the only person who keeps Congress and the Federal Reserve somewhat in check, I am happy to give this man a big reward for his service of the last 30 years. One single guy who has proven not to work just for himself but remind Congress constantly of serving the people’s interest.

Also, what I have learned from him about the Federal Reserve, inflation, gold, and macroeconomics has made me more profit than believing any other government propaganda.

Today is actually the day which can make Ron Paul the frontrunner (at least in fundraising).

http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=201346
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com

[snail]

Actually Red-White-Red
Port with the appetizer of assorted nuts
Then white with the salmon and rice
the red(bordeaux) with the roast standing rib and potatoes….mmmmmhhhh
We decided not to cook turkey on this past Thanksgiving.
Got those wines cheap at Trader Joe…probably spent no more than $25.00 for a very decent wines. Sorry for the rant, Just got hungry again here.

[snail]

Actually Red-White-Red
Port with the appetizer of assorted nuts
Then white with the salmon and rice
the red(bordeaux) with the roast standing rib and potatoes….mmmmmhhhh
We decided not to cook turkey on this past Thanksgiving.
Got those wines cheap at Trader Joe…probably spent no more than $25.00 for a very decent wines. Sorry for the rant, Just got hungry again here.

[snail]

Actually Red-White-Red
Port with the appetizer of assorted nuts
Then white with the salmon and rice
the red(bordeaux) with the roast standing rib and potatoes….mmmmmhhhh
We decided not to cook turkey on this past Thanksgiving.
Got those wines cheap at Trader Joe…probably spent no more than $25.00 for a very decent wines. Sorry for the rant, Just got hungry again here.

[snail]

Actually Red-White-Red
Port with the appetizer of assorted nuts
Then white with the salmon and rice
the red(bordeaux) with the roast standing rib and potatoes….mmmmmhhhh
We decided not to cook turkey on this past Thanksgiving.
Got those wines cheap at Trader Joe…probably spent no more than $25.00 for a very decent wines. Sorry for the rant, Just got hungry again here.

[greekfire]

Snail,

Too much wine is an OK excuse on this blog. It means you are speaking the truth. Just curious…was it a red or a white?

[greekfire]

Snail,

Too much wine is an OK excuse on this blog. It means you are speaking the truth. Just curious…was it a red or a white?

[greekfire]

Snail,

Too much wine is an OK excuse on this blog. It means you are speaking the truth. Just curious…was it a red or a white?

[greekfire]

Snail,

Too much wine is an OK excuse on this blog. It means you are speaking the truth. Just curious…was it a red or a white?

[snail]

RON PAUL!!!
sorry for the late response…too much wine