The GOP can't shut me out! »

Posted by: ecotourusa 2 months, 3 weeks ago

69 Comments Reflect Report this Story

5.0

Scale of 1 to 10

Read: 0

Propped: 69

Comments: 69

Click Prop It to Raise Score

Prop it

This man is still on fire. See this latest video from CNN.

Read Full Story at dailypaul.com

Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment

Comments So Far: 69

Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

ecotourusa
April 29, 2008, 11:36 a.m.
You can vote for one of the other 3 special interest, more of the same, stooges.
Or, You can vote for Dr. Ron Paul!

53 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  Bkumm
  April 29, 2008, 12:15 p.m.
  No chance. Some of what he says makes sense, but some of it really, really doesn't.
  He's essentially a libertarian and I just don't think anybody really understands what that means.
  
  47 RepliesReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    blablabla
    April 29, 2008, 12:23 p.m.
    name some that doesn't
    
    44 RepliesReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      Bkumm
      April 29, 2008, 12:55 p.m.
      In general, I agree with the libertarian social politics of individual freedom.
      I disagree with them that everything should be free from regulation.
      
      43 RepliesReply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 1:26 p.m.
        I disagree Bkumm. Everything Ron Paul says makes absolute logical sense.
        Many of the average can't handle that, I suppose.
        
        33 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 2:18 p.m.
        Well, I disagree with you and I don't see myself as average at all.
        There are various forms of libertarianism. Ron Paul seems to be a market libertarian, suggesting that the market solve all problems. It simply won't work any more than communism. Libertarianism and communism work on opposite ends of the political and economic spectrum.
        Libertarians tend to believe that if the free market (laissez-faire capitalism) is allowed to work it will solve all problems economic and social. Under this dictum people will act in rational ways to protect and promote their own self interest.
        
        Communism, on the other hand, suggests taking market forces out of the picture all together. Assuming that people will work together as a group (the proletariat) to solve all problems economic and social. Under this system people will work together in rational ways to protect the interests of the group.
        CONT
        
        15 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 2:24 p.m.
        Ron Paul is a Republican. And, letting the market take care of our problems is an excellent idea. especially when it comes to health care. I do not want socialized medicine, rather I want affordable health care.
        
        14 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 2:45 p.m.
        And affordable health care is exactly what you will not get in a free market economy.
        He's a Republican who identifies strongly as a libertarian.
        
        12 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 2:52 p.m.
        "And affordable health care is exactly what you will not get in a free market economy."
        How did you come to that?
        Do you ever read what you write? Geeez Bkumm you just compared communism to libertarianism... Have you lived under communism?
        Very typical to liberals is that you always believe that you are right, no doubt about it, none... and therefore you want others to live like you do, and you need a huge government to force it on others, and guess what you are winning...
        
        11 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 2:58 p.m.
        The sole purpose of a corporation in an unregulated free market economy is to create a monopoly. That is, they have all of resources and all of the customers which keeps out competition. At the point when one company becomes a monopoly and it will happen FAST, what keeps them from charging whatever they want?
        Do YOU read what I write? I did compare the two by saying that they were on OPPOSITE ends of the economic and political spectrum. Have YOU ever lived under communism? I haven't, but I have studied both and my conclusion is accurate.
        I am a liberal, if by liberal you mean progressive. I don't look to government to solve all of the problems, but I do recognize that government must be involved in certain issues to protect its citizens.
        Do you want a fire department run by the lowest bidder?
        
        10 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 3:31 p.m.
        "I did compare the two by saying that they were on OPPOSITE ends of the economic and political spectrum"
        yes as in both don't work for the same reason...
        Well Bkumm i have lived under communism and i must tell you it is nothing like what you piled up here... I have lived under socialism also and i must tell you we are marching towards both and when we are there you will wish you kept your pie hole shut...
        "I haven't, but I have studied both and my conclusion is accurate." you just made my point on liberals...
        I suggest you go back and study it a bit more...
        Do you want a fire department run by the lowest bidder? NO! I want competition on it. On Long island we have the highest bidders running the fire departments (government). They have ladders that reach 300 feet. The highest building is 3 story here.
        
        7 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 3:38 p.m.
        Read it again, please, that's not what I said. I said they both don't work, but not at all for the same reason.
        Libertarianism: "Under this dictum people will act in rational ways to protect and promote their own self interest."
        Communism: "Under this system people will work together in rational ways to protect the interests of the group."
        Not at all the same thing. You have most certainly NOT lived under communism. You may have lived in a system that called itself communist, but there has never been a true communist system on the planet excepting some small instances of tribal communism.
        Competition will exist under laissez-faire economics only until one entity establishes a monopoly and then competition ceases to exist.
        Pure socialism is also crap by the way. But, obviously you don't think I have any idea what I'm talking about so I won't go into that.
        
        6 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 3:54 p.m.
        You have most certainly NOT lived under communism.
        again, you know better...
        Competition will exist under laissez-faire economics only until one entity establishes a monopoly and then competition ceases to exist.
        and then the world stops and no one will will be able to figure out how to slice bread again right?
        Pure socialism is also crap by the way. But, obviously you don't think I have any idea what I'm talking about so I won't go into that.
        I really don't i am sorry...
        
        5 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 4:11 p.m.
        Really? Will it violate your privacy if I may ask in which communist country you lived? You may send it to me privately if you wish. I have studied the economies of Yugoslavia, East Germany, Poland, the Soviet Union, China, Romania, Czechoslovakia,Hungry and Cube. I have a passing knowledge of the so called "lesser" communist economies of Vietnam, North Korea and Laos. Of course that was some time ago. Not one of them qualifies as communist the way that it was formulated by Marx and Engels.
        The world doesn't stop, but nobody else can get in. Let me use an example. Let's say that you go to your local coffee shop to get a cup of coffee. They serve you some colored water and call it coffee. You say, that you want a different cup and they tell you to get bent. You say that you'll take your business elsewhere. You cross the street to another coffee store and get the same thing. You realize that it's the same store just on the other side of the street.
        CONT
        
        2 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 4:35 p.m.
        I
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 4:50 p.m.
        my answer is below somewhere...
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 4:15 p.m.
        Above:
        You, being a budding capitalist, decide to start your own coffee business to provide good coffee to the masses. You look around to find the freshest beans, but you find that the local suppliers won't sell to you because they are owned by the first coffee shop. Then you go to other suppliers farther away and they too will not sell to you, because THEY are owned by the first coffee shop. Finally, you find some beans, but they are five times the price when you count shipping. But, you have faith that your coffee will be five times better. So, you set out to find a grinder. Can't find one locally, they are all owned by the first coffee shop. Finally you find one further away, but it adds another two times to your coffee. But, you are confident in your cup. You get everything ready and set out to find a location for your business. Of course all of the premium locations are already owned by shop one.
        CONT
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 4:17 p.m.
        Above:
        So, you have to settle for a sub-standard location, which means your traffic in customers will be less. The rent is higher and you're already having to charge seven times what coffee shop one is for coffee.
        Is your coffee seven times better? Even if you force coffee shop one to improve its coffee and your coffee only costs three times as much they still win and will eventually force you to close your doors.
        I'm sorry this is so dry, but this is basic economics. It doesn't make sense at first, but if you walk through it it really does.
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 3:41 p.m.
        If you studied it long enough you will realize that communism is the absolute capitalism where one and only one holds monopoly... They are the winners they tell you what how and when to do and how much it will cost you. Good luck on your progressivism, you are building communism.. You are halfway there, our two party system is a joke they all want one thing, bigger government and to be able to tell you what to do how and when to do it, and how much it is going to cost you...
        
        1 ReplyReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 4:21 p.m.
        That's called despotism and has no relationship to communism as formulated by Marx.
        I don't agree with the current system at all, but I completely disagree with the basic tenants of libertarianism.
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 7:43 p.m.
        RON PAUL ON THE PA PRIMARY
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtZKZXSmEPQ&feat...
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 2:23 p.m.
        From Above:
        In a perfect world, where human behavior could be predicted by whether or not a person would always act in a certain way, either system would be fine. Also, both systems assume we are starting from a dead stop.
        That is simply not the case. Laissez-faire capitalism was destroyed in the United States by the Progressive movement on the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Under that system, the system advocated my libertarians like Ron Paul, businesses will only operate in ways that further their own self interest. So, business A pollutes the water, kills the fish, clear cuts trees, makes the air unbreathable and dumps toxic waste in the back yards of houses full of children because it's cheaper. The consumers of business A's products don't care and the government doesn't have the power to regulate the business. So, there is nothing to stop the business from continuing these practices.
        CONT
        
        6 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 2:27 p.m.
        "So, business A pollutes the water, kills the fish, clear cuts trees, makes the air unbreathable and dumps toxic waste in the back yards of houses full of children because it's cheaper. The consumers of business A's products don't care and the government doesn't have the power to regulate the business. So, there is nothing to stop the business from continuing these practices."
        seems to me this is happening now...
        which system will you call this?
        
        5 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 2:42 p.m.
        It's NOTHING like it was. Prior to the creation of the EPA by Richard Nixon in 1970 there were few laws in place and no enforcement of those few laws to force companies to regulate there own pollutants.
        An example is necessary.
        In 1936 the Cuyahoga River in Ohio caught on fire and burned for days because of surface pollutants. This process of burning continued until the mid 1980's. So, not only was the water toxic, when it burned it polluted the air.
        It is still polluted, but nothing like it was before.
        Acid rain became a significant problem in the United States in the late 1950's and by the 60's was catastrophic to some areas. Laws were enacted forcing electrical power plants that burned high sulfur coal to put in sulfur "scrubbers". Now, acid rain is almost a non-issue in the United States.
        It's working, but it's slow because soooo many people think laissez-faire is in their self interest. It isn't.
        
        4 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 2:58 p.m.
        Bkumm-
        why don't you post your own story. you have much to say about nothing.
        I cannot believe I read your entire thread, which is borderline extremely boring.
        (with all due respect, I was waiting for something profound...and, it never happened. what is your point?)
        
        3 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 3:05 p.m.
        Because I'm having such fun on yours!
        So, what you're saying is that my point that the clean up of the air and water that began over 40 years ago (before the EPA) is still continuing after almost 200 years of libertarian (laissez-faire) capitalism doesn't make a point?
        Come on, you're smarter than that. Of course it's boring. It's real life about real people, not some pie in the sky fantasy.
        Ron Paul has advocated for the elimination of the EPA and deregulation of protection for water and air quality.
        Don't read it if you don't want to. I'm merely responding to the idea that Ron Paul and his libertarian agenda are ridiculous from an economic perspective.
        Like his social stuff, can't live with the economics.
        
        2 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 3:47 p.m.
        I doubt if Ron Paul wants to pollute what's left.
        Bkumm-
        did you hear him say he wanted to do away with the EPA?
        does that mean he wants businesses to pollute? The EPA is just another BS govt. agency. they can be bought and paid for by big business. just like the FDA is bought and paid for by Pharmaceutical lobbyists.
        come on...
        he does say:
        "we must remind our family and friends of the ideals
        this country was founded on if we wish for the real issues our country faces to ever to be addressed in a serious way."
        
        1 ReplyReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 4:04 p.m.
        I didn't say that he did want to pollute what's left. In his mind, to his way of thinking what he's doing is the best way to actually protect what's there. I just think he's not looking at it the right way.
        No, I misspoke. I should have said that he was for allowing private land ownership and the courts to take the place of the EPA in regulating pollution.
        What he is advocating will have unintended consequences. We know this, because we've seen it before.
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 2:29 p.m.
        From Above
        And it isn't just in the realm of environmental regulation where libertarianism falls down. Let us take another example. Let's say that in 1985 when Microsoft really took off, that everything had proceeded just as it has, EXCEPT there is no ability by the government to stop a company from achieving the ultimate goal of any true free market capitalist which is a total monopoly. It is possible that, in time, especially given Microsoft's unique advantages, every computer and computer related system on Earth, including Propeller would be controlled by Microsoft. And if the playing field is not level (and it can't be in a laissez-faire system) no-one would be able to enter the market. Think there are massive internationals now? If the laissez-faire system was allowed to continue there would only be three companies (maybe four) on Earth right now. Standard Oil, AT&T and GE.
        CONT
        
        2 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 4:41 p.m.
        i had to post it here it was getting waaaay too thin up there:
        I lived in Hungary under one of the more humanized form of communism there was, and believe me i couldn't wait to get the he** out of there. You have to forgive me to desire true free markets, because the way i see, this country is going down the same path as mine did. About your coffee theory, once a corporation gets to the point where they can charge whatever they want they will charge the maximum until someone figures out a way to beat them and that is how free markets should work. In other words monopoly will never happen because someone will always be there to make a buck. unless big business and government work together to keep the pile very limited like in the health insurance industry.
        
        1 ReplyReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 30, 2008, 11:30 a.m.
        Hungry, as with all the nation states mentioned, did not practice communism. They practiced a form of oligarchy the masqueraded as communism, but it wasn't at all. I'm sure that it was not pleasant, I don't see how it could have been. Oligarchal communism makes everyone poor, it just makes some people less poor than others. But, it isn't communism as put forth by Marx.
        A monopoly will use market forces to keep out competition. As I illustrated, there is no way to beat them without intervention by an outside body.
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 2:33 p.m.
        From above:
        The idea that the market, without regulation, can solve all of the problems of society and the economy is pie in the sky idealism of the same stripe as communism. Neither take the absolutes of human nature (that there ARE no absolutes) into consideration.
        Now, having said all of that. I think the idea of social libertarianism (you mind your business and I'll mind mine) are mostly correct. In that arena the government does not have the right to interfere with me, until and unless it has an effect on another person. That view is healthy and mature.
        
        6 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 2:35 p.m.
        "In that arena the government does not have the right to interfere with me, until and unless it has an effect on another person. That view is healthy and mature."
        so, you'll be voting for Ron Paul?
        
        5 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 2:43 p.m.
        Absolutely not. His economic policies are catastrophic to the nation. We can all work together to change the social structure without destroying the work we've already put in.
        
        4 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 3:51 p.m.
        "In that arena the government does not have the right to interfere with me, until and unless it has an effect on another person. That view is healthy and mature."
        precisely the reason big business would not be able to lobby the EPA, the FDA, etc.
        Healthy business is: Good for Me, Good for You!
        
        3 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 4 p.m.
        How does that idea keep a business from lobbying the government for policies that are helpful to them?
        I fully agree. Healthy business is good for everyone. Show me a healthy business. Business thrives by taking and using an advantage that may or may not be helpful to the consumer. This is a good thing because it drives innovation. It is a bad thing if not regulated because it leads to a monopoly.
        
        2 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 4:01 p.m.
        Ha has said this many times that the environmental agency is one of the few he would keep.
        
        1 ReplyReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 4:05 p.m.
        I misspoke about that, I apologize. I read my information wrong. You and ecotour are keeping me hopping!!
        
        Reply | Report!
      - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 1:30 p.m.
        the reason why they don't like regulations is because regulations tend to help big business, in exchange big business gets regulations to keep out competition. they promote free markets that will eventually happen when the dollar collapses (not because we have a totalitarian government, that doesn't like competition either, just like communists did)...
        free markets clean the dirty out, while regulations keep the undesired, like fat health insurance companies and such...
        
        8 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 2:53 p.m.
        Sure, if humans weren't humans. The purpose of unregulated free market capitalism is to create monopolies. Monopolies do NOT encourage competition which is the basis of the flawed argument behind unregulated free market capitalism.
        
        7 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 4:13 p.m.
        In your head maybe... I am beginning to think that you are a government employee and would lose your job if there were free markets... I believe you totally got this backwards.
        Then again do you believe once a company gain monopoly the rest of the world will stop and cannot figure out how to make sliced bread again. You mean to tell me if MSFT charged thousands of dollars for their vista the rest of the world would stop breathing and wouldn't be able to figure out a better cheaper product?
        
        6 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 29, 2008, 4:27 p.m.
        I'm not. I'm a stay at home dad, believe it or not.
        Microsoft is not a monopoly. In fact they have been charged and convicted in Federal court of trying to become one.
        You don't understand the economic term monopoly. In a monopoly there is only one producer of the product or service in question and there are no viable alternative. The key word is viable. Market barriers, caused by the monopoly, can keep the next super bread slicer from reaching the consumer in large enough quantities to break the monopoly.
        
        5 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 4:59 p.m.
        "I'm not. I'm a stay at home dad, believe it or not."
        I thought My dad was the only Stay at home dad out there. Hats off to you Bkumm!!
        
        1 ReplyReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 30, 2008, 11:30 a.m.
        Thanks!
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        blablabla
        April 29, 2008, 5:36 p.m.
        conrats Bkumm
        You don't understand the economic term monopoly. In a monopoly there is only one producer of the product or service in question and there are no viable alternative
        like government and health industry...
        
        2 RepliesReply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        ecotourusa
        April 29, 2008, 7:42 p.m.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtZKZXSmEPQ&feat...
        RON PAUL ON THE PA PRIMARIES
        
        Reply | Report!
        
        Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
        
        Bkumm
        April 30, 2008, 11:35 a.m.
        Thanks!
        Government is, by definition, a monopoly. It must be or we would have anarchy.
        The health insurance industry is not a monopoly. There are various competing companies in the market. The problem is that health insurance premiums are driven by many factors that are not competing but reinforcing the rise in premiums. Some of these are:
        1. Doctor specialization
        2. Lack of payment for services
        3. Legal fees
        4. Regulation
        5. Too few workers in the industry
        6. An aging population
        7. Demand for services
        There are others, but I believe these are the most important. You'll notice that regulation is only one of many.
        
        Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    rimbaud
    April 29, 2008, 1:32 p.m.
    Libertarianism was SOP (standard ooperating procedure) in the Industrial Revolution (Scrooge was a libertarian) and in America's Wild Wild West. Socialism was a new (modern) idea in reaction to it. Socialism was adopted in a big way in Europe, following World War 2 (when Britain's National Health Service was set up).
    
    Reply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    ecotourusa
    April 29, 2008, 7:41 p.m.
    good point
    
    Reply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  ecotourusa
  April 29, 2008, 3:01 p.m.
  Here's another great article written by Dr. Ron Paul!!
  http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2008/04/28/p...
  
  1 ReplyReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    bruhaha
    April 30, 2008, 7:25 a.m.
    Ron Paul has also written that the constitution is replete with references to God (there is only 1 reference to god in the constitution). Paul, who many claim is such a great supporter of the constitution, likely has never read the constitution, or has a different version.
    
    Reply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  bruhaha
  April 29, 2008, 8:01 p.m.
  Yes, vote for Ron Paul. Let the corporations decide everything. Get rid of all regulation.....yes, that's the way to go. It's worked well in the past....just look at Enron, the mortgage industry, the S&Ls...etc, etc.
  And while we're at it, how is putting for profit corporations in charge of everything going to make things cheaper? You like paying tolls on all your major roads. You like having crappy, beat up local roads because of all the additional traffic of people avoiding the toll roads that have been turned over to corporations who are required to make a profit.
  You want clean air, water, etc.....don't expect the corporations to do it without government regulation.....
  
  2 RepliesReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    blablabla
    April 30, 2008, 7:48 a.m.
    I do not know what country you live in but in the USA corporations already do make the decisions. And if i was wrong and you were right we wouldn't have this discussion...
    
    1 ReplyReply | Report!
    - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
      
      bruhaha
      April 30, 2008, 10:02 p.m.
      ??????????????????????? So since the corporations already make the decisions, you're saying that we should just go ahead and make it official.......
      
      Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

blablabla
April 29, 2008, 12:22 p.m.
Hard to believe but this was shown on CNN... This same guy was bashing Ron Paul a while back. He still doesn't seem to get it though. Some people are sooooo slow to understand why we need the good Dr...

1 ReplyReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  ecotourusa
  April 29, 2008, 1:25 p.m.
  I would like to think people have more sense. but, lately I'm seeing the "masses are _sses!"
  
  Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

rdy2rck
April 29, 2008, 2:06 p.m.
'The market has more sense than the government."That's one statement I can agree with and makes logical sense.

2 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  blablabla
  April 29, 2008, 2:10 p.m.
  As Ron Paul put it, politicians and bureaucrats are not smart enough to decide what is good for the masses... They solve one problem by creating a bunch of others.
  
  1 ReplyReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    rdy2rck
    April 29, 2008, 3:59 p.m.
    Pick a problem where the gov't has stuck it's nose in and I'll agree:) Oh boy, let's take over the health care industry, we've already seen what the billions of "no child left behind" has done.
    
    Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

TheRealizer
April 29, 2008, 2:10 p.m.
I will continue to support Dr. Paul unil the bitter end, the others are cheer leaders for the status quo.....

1 ReplyReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  ecotourusa
  April 29, 2008, 2:22 p.m.
  exactly my point,
  TheRealizer!
  thanks.
  
  Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

ecotourusa
April 29, 2008, 4:56 p.m.
Midleft-
That is sooo cool! THANK YOU!

Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

ecotourusa
April 29, 2008, 4:55 p.m.
Friday, April 30, is the official release
date of "The Revolution: A Manifesto,"
by Ron Paul.

Thanks to you, the manifesto of our movement is currently one of the top ten best selling books on Amazon.com!
order the book here:
http://www.ronpaulbookbomb.com/buy/amazon/

Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

bruhaha
April 29, 2008, 10:56 p.m.
Ron Paul is no different from any other far right republican other than being opposed to the war in Iraq, opposed to the patriot act, and in favor of legalized drugs.

2 RepliesReply | Report!
- Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
  
  blablabla
  April 30, 2008, 7:45 a.m.
  Bruhaha you need to learn a lot about Ron Paul.
  
  1 ReplyReply | Report!
  - Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)
    
    bruhaha
    April 30, 2008, 9:55 p.m.
    WHat....I'll magically change my views on him....suddenly be ok with his support of the Marriage Protection Act (he is opposed to gay marriage unlike what some claim). Suddenly be ok with his willingness to lie about the content of our constitution...... Suddenly be ok that his beliefs, if enacted would lead us back to segregated schools (He may not be a racist, but there is a reason he is a favored candidate of white supremacist groups)
    
    Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

ETproductions
April 30, 2008, 1:34 a.m.
Run ROn Run. Whatever it takes to give him a bid at the presidency.

Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

onlyonesecret
April 30, 2008, 5:13 p.m.
How the media has manipulated public opinion through distorted political campaign reporting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iW5kOB1pmg

Reply | Report!
Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

bruhaha
April 30, 2008, 9:59 p.m.
Can't handle that your golden boy isn't as golden as you think he is. Like I said, other than opposition to the war, the patriot act, and in favor of legalized drugs, and a few other things, he is no different than any other far right republican.
Paul claims to strictly follow the constitution, however, his support of the Marriage Protection Act makes him a hypocrite and no different than other politicians on the right.

Reply | Report!