Posted on Monday, 1/07/2008 - 10:11 p.m. PST — by RealAmerica
I don't know how many of you out there are Goldwater fans, but your might be interested in this. The FOX debate last night composed of Republicans was dropped from endorsement by the GOP because Dr. Ron Paul was excluded. So Dr. Ron Paul held a town hall meeting instead. (I would provide a link but the sound on the YouTube coverage was atrocious.) Barry Goldwater came out of the audience, congratulated Dr. Paul on being the 'bad boy' of the election, and announced that Dr. Paul's positions made him the closest of the current crop of GOP candidates to the 'Goldwater conservatism' sometimes touted by his pretenders-in-arms.
So if you watched the FOX (FAUX) debate last night, you were probably grossly mislead by the questions of the 'moderator'. More importantly, you missed the real excitement of the upcoming election such as Dr. Paul's explanation of why he would eliminate foreign aid to Israel. (He would also eliminate aid to Israel's Arab enemies, which is 3 times as much aid as we give to Israel. Now that's gonna piss off the arms industry, who sell weapons to both sides.)
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
How many more weeks before Paul ... throws in the towel?
Hard to say. He just set a record for funds raised in a single day. When people find out about him, and that he has the most consistent record as a candidate, and what he stands for, they just want to give him $$$.
For example, did you know that he has, for the past 3 years at least, sponsored bills to end birthright citizenship for children born here of foreign parents? Any other candidates do that?
Do any other candidates want to abolish the IRS? Address the Federal Reserve Board policies? Address the FEDERAL DEBT? ...
you get the picture.
Republicans. Democrats.
Selling America One Piece At A Time
B Careful How U Vote
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
Barry Goldwater, Sr. died in the late 90's, so I assume you are referring to Barry Goldwater, Jr. Jr. served in the congress for awhile then ran for the Senate and lost and has been out of politics since the early 80's. So why would anyone give much weight to his opinions about Ron Paul or any of the other candidates?
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
... why would anyone give much weight to his opinions about Ron Paul or any of the other candidates?
Well, the American public was swayed to elect Nixon over Goldwater, Sr., and look at what a mistake THAT turned out to be. I am assuming that as his son he would have more insight into what his father was about and therefore more qualified to proffer a credible opinion.
There are quite a few of us remaining that were around back then (Baby Boomers), who may realize they have 1 more shot at getting it right this time.
Election 2008
Personal Freedom or Corporate Slave
Be Careful How You Vote
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
I was around then and I don't think the Ron Paul is anything close to a Barry Goldwater.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
... I don't think the Ron Paul is anything close to a Barry Goldwater
How about foreign relations? I did a Google search on Goldwater and CFR and came up with this -
http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/multi/goldwatr.html
When you read what is there and your suspicion is raised, check the other candidates. Then check them against this list -
Trilateral Commission
World Bank
Bilderberg Group
United Nations
NAFTA
CAFTA
NAU
You won't find Paul, Gravel, or Dennis Kucinich as members of these elitist organizations that have dictated our foreign policy for decades.
But I may have figured out why the MSM is so afraid of Dr. Ron Paul. Whoever is elected President will be able to seat 2 - 3 Supreme Court Justices in their term. Can you imagine the 'hit' the globalist, corporate interests will take if all 3 new justices are strict Constitutionists? Can you smell the return of sovereignty to the American people?
Personal Freedom or Corporate Slave
Choose Wisely
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
The egotistical Edwards shill, DemoTaker, mis-posted the following article in Nation-World -
Looking at the debate from the Repubs, it seems ol' Paul would wake up and realize he sounds like a Democrat rather than a richy-boy. The only difference in him and the Democratic Party is we are not trying to destroy all agencies of the government...
That is Dr. Ron Paul's strength. Coming from a Libertarian point of view, he passes through the Democratic spectrum to arrive at his place in the Republican party. In other words, his message appeals to a broader spectrum of persons than either major party, alone, can muster.
But what does Paul mean by Revolution? Let's read a story done in 2007, no less, about those ill-fated newsletters that have now come to light... again.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/124912/740
--- After his 1979-85 service in Congress as a Republican and his 1988 campaign for the presidency as the nominee of the Libertarian Party, Ron Paul returned home to Surfside, Texas and devoted himself to a variety of pursuits, one of which was his self-published newsletter, The Ron Paul Political Report. Founded in 1985, the eight-page newsletter featured Paul's extreme libertarian perspective on a number of different issues, notably crackpot theories about the Federal Reserve and the money system and a tireless advocacy of a return to the gold standard—a longtime Ron Paul hobby horse. The Ron Paul Political Report would come to feature in the stable of "underground" publications and photocopied "zines" that fed the nascent "patriot movement" that arose in the early 1990s, spurred by anger over federal government actions in Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and by fear of a supposed "New World Order." Indeed, Paul changed the name of the newsletter to the Ron Paul Survival Report around 1993 in what we may presume to be an effort to tap into the survivalist sentiments then peaking among the radical right wing. ---
His explanantion tonight really didn't answer anything and was quite evasive.
A real reporter took up the gauntlet and contacted Dr. Ron Paul personally about the issue and chronicled his response in this article -
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/124281.html
I wasn't too impressed with the text presented by DT - it was a typical smear piece, with most of the common tactics employed - name calling, guilt by association, innuendo, quoted hot-button words, lack of context, vague sources, etc.
And as for his "crackpot" financial view, is it any more bizarre to bind a country's treasury to a fixed asset, such as gold, than to let a mysterious group of men, unfettered by government office or oversight, print as much money and thereby incur as much debt as the whim of politicians demand? We've already ransomed our grandchildren following these fiscal policies DT thinks are 'normal'.
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Now it's getting interesting. The GOP chair in one of Nevada's counties is predicting Dr. Ron Paul to take the caucus. Paul's campaign is taking the state very seriously and has gone so far as to point out registration irregularities that could skew the results.
http://reason.com/blog/show/124503.html
I liked the summary of the GOP candidates by tomdog:
tomdawg | January 18, 2008, 10:32pm
McCain = "I was a POW, so I get to shove Amnesty down your throat."
Huckleberry = "God told me to run for Pres., and Jesus too. I love Jesus and therefore should be Pres. and stop everyone from smoking and drinking....and [bleep]ing."
Romney = "I'm a Mormon but my magic underwear don't matter much, I was effectively pro-death, ahh, pro-choice but in my heart always a pro-life Mormon. I worked harder than Teddy Kennedy for qweer marriage but I changed my mind."
PAUL = "Just get the government the hell outta my life, and our soldiers the hell outta Iraq."
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Jan Oski asked a couple of weeks ago -
How many more weeks before Paul is no longer a credible candidate
FOX (Faux) commentators asked the same question two weeks later after Dr. Ron Paul came in second in Nevada, and this was Dr. Ron Paul's reply -
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=2rbjXHdTK5A&feature=related
Check it out quickly, because it was censored by FOX when the debate was re-shown. When you look at the link, note the comments about Japan asking how to sue el Presidente Bush for the deaths of Japanese citizens in 9/11. As for why the reply from Paul was censored, check out this link regarding the people's text-messaging poll of who won the S.C. debate
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=sICXSaiQExE
Republicans. Democrats.
Selling America One Piece At A Time
RealAmerica
copyrighted picture courtesy of the artist, James and Leah Tiscione.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Jan Oski wrote =
Where did he come in 2nd?
Then later states -
I find it hilarious that you a conservative would complain that Fox News is censoring. Afterall, they are a private enterprise, and they have the right to conduct their business as they see fit.
In the past week there were 2 primaries and 1 caucus. This is the AP report on the Nevada caucus -
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hUPSXLSf9BMjfyPSCc2sdK8RtV8QD8U9C3EO1
Note the absence of Dr. Ron Paul in the 'article'. When you go back another day to the AP, you see these results -
http://www.onenewsnow.com/2008/01/nevada_caucus_results.php
As you can see, Dr. Ron Paul, who actively campaigned in Nevada, edged out McCain, who did not actively campaign. But I can see if you only use the MSM as a source of infotainment how you would have missed it.
As for FOX (Faux) News, I find it hilarious that you condone a corporation that has been leased space on our public frequencies with a condition of public 'trust' that was censured by the New Hampshire GOP because of its unfair treatment of excluding Dr. Ron Paul from the debates. Then they were caught again in their denial that Dr. Paul won their S.C. debate according to the public text message vote. Here's a little infotainment for you about that -
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=Do3ZtMJEwLw&feature=related
As you may be aware, payback is a b***h. When Paul takes Clinton in the race in November, can you guess where the AP reporters will be sitting in the White House press room? Do you suppose Dr. Paul might turn his attention to the abuses of the FCC in terms of public trust when he gets to name up to 3 Supreme Court justices?
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Jan Oski wrote -
... For a balanced look at Dr. Paul, here's an example of his ignorance about foreign issues. He obviously forgot about the USS Cole incident. I love how McCann just shakes his head in utter disbelief. ...
Ya gotta remember that the oil-producing nations are no longer exclusively accepting American dollars in exchange for oil. Our economy is tanking as a result of printing more money and borrowing from overseas investors to cover our debt. (see It's the Economy, Stupid thread) So el Presidente Bush is motivated to start a war with these countries in retaliation. All they need is an incident. I remember reading somewhere that the ship's captain was admonished for his aggressive response to the speedboats in light of the intelligence received at the time. THAT is the concern of Dr. Ron Paul - was this an incident contrived by Bush to start another 'war'? Of course the war-mongering McCain made a face. He practices making those faces for 2 hours a day as one of his campaign tactics. ref:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4e5_1199991640&c=1
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Here is an almost-endorsement from Tom McClintock for Dr. Ron Paul -
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/01/with-fred-thomp.html
Now that the Schwartz has thrown in with the Clintons in selling out Mexifornia, McClintock stands a good chance of being the leader who can reverse the direction this state has been heading and return sanity to this 'promised land'.
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Here's some encouraging news from Denver - the response to a Ron Paul appearance caused overflowing crowds -
http://origin.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_8141602
And the bad news - McClintock is hedging his bets and will not come out with an endorsement for Dr. Paul -
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1963808/posts
But then again, in a heavy turnout in Maine, Romney took 52%, McAmnesty 21%, and Ron Paul 19%, and the shuckster 6%.
RealAmerica
Edited 2/2/2008 6:58 pm by RealAmerica
Edited 2/3/2008 9:10 am by RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Jan K Oski wrote - he's another crazy Pro-lifer!
Well, life is a compromise at best. Dr. Ron Paul is also weak on illegal aliens in that doesn't view it as an attack on our sovereignty so much as a result of the disparity of our economies. I guess the statistics on child abuse crimes by illegal aliens that suggests a cultural norm escapes him.
As for the pro-lifers, I wish we could exercise this scenario. Have every who professes to be pro-life put their name on a list. Then start at the top of the list and assign a child from our many orphanages to the names of the list for adoption. When the orphanages are empty, we turn to African orphanages. I'm sure there are enough unwanted children to go around to every person on that list. Then start at the top of the list again. When the African orphanages are empty, go to the South American orphanages.
In short, let the pro-lifers put their money behind their beliefs in order to learn their lessons, but don't make financial commitments on my part.
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
When Ron Paul exits after Super Tuesday ...
Well, here it is, post- Super Tuesday, and Dr. Ron Paul is still hanging tough. This is an article about his recent appearance at CPAC, the conservative caucus of the GOP held recently -
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/ron_paul_mccain_friends_with_f.html
As for me, I plan to use a part of the 'stimulus plan' money to make a contribution to Ron Paul and the continuation of personal freedom and reduced government.
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
... with 14 delegates ...
You are 1/2 right, Ron Paul was hoping to do better and just left a note that he is re-prioritizing his efforts from Presidential to Representative re-election -
http://people.ronpaul2008.com/campaign-updates/2008/02/08/message-from-dr-paul-onward-to-the-convention-and-beyond/
But for the record, your totals do not take account of back room deals and potential caucus - convention counts that may bring it as high as 41 delegates.
... Some people just don't know when they've on the canvas and KO'd...
That's why you're such a credible poster in this forum. It's not about ideas with you, it's "... I'm better than you are ... " which I outgrew shortly after kindergarten.
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Washington State - A Preview 4 the GOP?
With 87% of the vote in, Washington State shows a 3% difference between the front runner Shuckster, McAmnesty, and Dr. Ron Paul.
http://wsrp.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=7042
Now in Louisiana, no GOP candidate got 51%, and there was 2% difference between the top 2 candidates, and the 20 delegates will be assigned at the state GOP convention next week. So beware the main stream media proclaiming someone a 'winner' and expect the incredible news to assign the delegates to their 'winner' in their manipulation of election 'results'.
In Kansas, the shuckster got 60%, McAmnesty 24%, and Ron Paul 11%.
RealAmerica
Edited 2/10/2008 11:30 am by RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
I have a friend who despises the main stream media's 'choices' for President, yet won't look at Ron Paul because he doesn't come off as a strong leader. The following summary from the Burlington Free Press somewhat addresses his concern - ref: http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080303/O...
To see how badly he spanked the Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke in a debate this week check out the It's the Economy, Stupid forum
Rep. Ron Paul Cured My Apathy Published: Monday, March 3, 2008, By Marc Pavlick
There's one presidential candidate who has a long consistent record of voting for the interest of Americans and not special interests.
He's known as the most honest and ethical member of Congress.
He's the only one shedding light on the implications of this fiat currency and the absence of gold/silver backing. As Congressman Paul, member of the House Committee on Financial Services and former member of the House Banking Committee, has said, "A perfect storm (is) facing America, caused by a federal government that spends, borrows and prints so much money that our dollars are eroding in value at an alarming rate."
These are a couple reasons that former Treasury Secretary William Simon commented, Dr. Paul is the "one exception to the Gang of 535" on Capitol Hill. He's the only candidate who does not take money from lobbyists, PACs or special interests. Lobbyists do not bother visiting him because he never supports any bill that gives handouts to their bosses, no matter who they are.
He's repeatedly voted against raiding Social Security funds and introduced a bill to stop Congress from borrowing from Social Security to pay for unbalanced budgets. He's opposed to the taxation of Social Security benefits as well. It is said that Congressman Paul introduces more substantive legislation each year than any other member of Congress. Of all the candidates, only Ron Paul has an extensive legislative record opposing the monetary policy that led to the current sub-prime mortgage crisis.
He has never voted to raise taxes, for an unbalanced budget, to raise congressional pay, or to increase the power of the executive branch. He has never taken a government-paid junket, does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program, and he returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. Treasury every year!
He voted against the unconstitutional Iraq war and the Patriot Act, and is opposed to the national ID card, being a strong advocate for protecting our privacy and civil liberties. Thanks to Dr. Paul's campaign accomplishments, we're hearing unfiltered news for once, where millions of Americans are hearing the truth about taboo subjects that the establishment doesn't want us to know about.
You probably haven't heard about his success, since he's been intentionally marginalized by the mainstream "news," so let me fill you in. Impressive is the fact that Ron Paul has received more campaign contributions from veterans and active military personnel than McCain, Clinton, Huckabee, Obama -- combined! In the fourth quarter he raised more money than all Republican candidates with $20 million. This was reached with an average donation size of $95 from ordinary Americans, and not PACs, which largely fund the other candidates, looking for a contract, subsidy or deal.
On Dec. 16 he broke the single-day fundraising record with $6 million-plus. He's done well in primaries/caucuses where he finished third in Maine, second in Nevada and fourth in Louisiana. He won about 25 percent of the vote in Montana and 8 percent in Washington, 21 percent in North Dakota, 17 percent-plus in Alaska and Minnesota, and 10 percent-plus in Kansas and Iowa, and in some contests he beat McCain.
Don't be fooled by the empty rhetoric of "change" from the status quo candidates. Do your homework at www.RonPaul 2008.com.
Marc Pavlick lives in West Burke.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Ron Paul retained his Congressional seat yesterday. ___________________________________________________________________________ The British have their own sense of fair play as shown in this humorous piece -
ref: http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i31410&rating=4#rating
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
The spirit of Ron Paul created a spark in Southern California recently - a possible resurgence of the California Republican Party, without the failed policies of McClintock & company?
http://www.therightperspective.org/?p=740
RealAmerica
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
From the nolanchart.com website -
Read the below transcript or listen from Ron Paul's Third Party Speech from September 10. Many Paul supporters seem to have missed the closing note about Quigley during all the hubbub about Barr not attending and the novel idea of voting for a third party. If you have already listened to this speech, you can just fast forward to the bold text; I posted other parts of the speech for context for those who may have missed the speech.
_______________________________________________________________
In Liberty!
Jake, the Champion of the Constitution
RealAmerica
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
I don't think Dr. Paul is too far off in his thinking ... and we can add to it that a significant percentage of the professional members of both parties are bought and sold by corporate and special interest groups. That said, there are a couple of fundamental differences between the two political parties, and there are basic and fundamental choices that we make when we either join one of the parties or support its candidates. I will provide but one example ... I am sure you can find others. I do not think there is any reason to believe that had Al Gore been elected president in 2000 that we would have unilaterally invaded Iraq or that we would have voided the Kyoto Protocols OR done such a huge disservice to science in the policy-making process.
Joined: Jul 2006
Current Posts: 769
Ross Perot showed that alternative candidates for president can be viable. So did Ralph Nader, at least the first time he ran. All they need is the $$ to organize in all (or at least the largest) states so they can compete in enough races to make a difference. Ron Paul was reported to have raised a lot of money during his run for the republican nomination, but he faded into oblivion. Wonder where all that money went?
Joined: Jul 2005
Current Posts: 1715
Maybe the self-destructive policies derived from the Reagan Revolution will be abandoned, and Republicans will abandon neo-conservative thinking. This would be a good thing. Nothing wrong with a little integrity and adherence to goals of limited constitutional government, fiscal responsibility, sound monetary policy, Second Amendment rights, strong national defense, a non-interventionist foreign policy, personal freedom, and opposition to illegal immigration. While I do not agree with or subscribe to some of the policy details arising from this set of principles, they are honorable and worthy of consideration.
Joined: May 2008
Current Posts: 182
America clearly prefers it's reality tv to reality in real life. And we seem to have elected folks who actually believe the lie that perception is reality. Perhaps we need a proposition that makes it illegal for anyone with a J.D. degree and anyone who has ever worked in a law office from holding public office. Fill the slots with nurses, teachers and housewives, maybe a few retired soldiers and private businessmen and we'll be all set.
Joined: Sep 2006
Current Posts: 1158
Least We Forget
(cut & paste:) youtube.com/watch?v=8Ur9Pe42jCM&feature=player_embedded
Democrats. Republicans.
Selling America One Piece At A Time
RealAmerica