Maybe Jews are in such prominent positions because they work hard, their parents encourage them to work hard, and they have lots of family connections?
I don't think there's anything sinister about that.
What is sinister is how AIPAC his the government by the balls. Israel is so wrong when they terrorize Gaza and our media only gives us one side of the story. Fox News folks are all just useful idiots for Zionist interests. You cannot underestimate the power of an anti-Semitic or Nazi accusation (however unfounded)... this is how Israel's interests have us pissing Arabs off today.
McCain and Obama are the same. they're both for bigger government and want to move our country closer and closer to an oligarchy, neither of them address the MAIN problem of tackling the Federal Reserve so it's obvious they're either fucking stupid or are fucking part of the Fed's agenda.
the republican party has become a national socialist party... the democratic party has become kinda like the european democratic socialist party
all the ron paul supporters are nationalist capitalists... so most of them wernt happy with no president wanting a free market society (aka lawless market society)
Obama is a total fuck up! Isn't it obvious that this whole health care issue is Hillary's shit warmed over? The man would have done well to concentrating on the economy for most of his first term. But instead he deviates to satisfy that little whiny bitch Hillary? Grow a set of balls Mr. Pres!
Ughhhh I hate the conspiracy theorists that flock to support Ron Paul. They totally discredit the movement and should stop talking. Ron Paul does not agree with their views.
This is fucking bulshit. Go Fuck your self you piece of shit. Who the fuck are you to judge a brilliant and educated man such as Ron Paul. Some bozo who deiced to name his radio board cast station after Criminals. The Young Turks. Whose the raciest. Because of the young fucking turks over 1.5 million Armenians died. Who the fuck are you to judge other about racism when you have racism written all over you. You should just re-title you station The SS, or the Nazi/Hitler Sympathizers.
I bet you get called an anti-Semite or Nazi for speaking truth like that... the Israel lobby is the tail wagging the dog. Our foreign policy is for Israel... Americans are dying for Israel. It is so wrong.
I hate Zionists... Jews are fine. It is the rabid Zionist who have subverted our government foreign policy.
@shasha1873 dude, ron paul admitted to making some of those quotes and defended doing so and btw those quotes from rom paul was printed first in his own newsletter. give it up already. he is a racist who hates jews and blacks. period. just because something dissapoints you, doesnt mean its not true and you dont need to make up crazy conspiracies about what actually happened in order to blindly protect your man because you agree like myself with some of his stances on issues such as the wars etc
@TheInternetWanderer An American hero today is one who tries to do the right thing for his country against all odds and influences. The real meaning of the term hero is always relative to the times and struggles a nation is in.
no they're not. sure there's lunatic folks in every following of a candidate and ron paul supporters are particularly adamant about their opinions on policy issues but THATS the point.
whenever i -as a clinton supporter but not a US citizen btw- argued with republicans ron paul folks were the only ones that abstained from character assassination that's otherwise so predominant in republican talking points. even if i dont agree with RP's ideas, there's lot more decency involved in his campaigns
And Obama supporters are idiots that rely on hope and biblical miracles rather than believing in themselves and being the change they want to see. Don't make such preposterous generalizations about a group of people when you know hardly anything about them. And I am not being a hypocrite because if you really think Obama's fiscal policies will do anything for our country you are out of your minds.
Hear Hear! :) Lets see what happens methinks the looters will be begging us Ron Pauliens to accept their apologies when nobody owns anything and they cant get a doctor because they have to wait 6 months. I'd like to 702's ideas on how to fix our economy. It's easy to make broad, generalizing statements about a group of people. Hitler did it and it worked! Haha! It's alot harder to think and reason. But he who does not reason is not a man!
The system is setup so that there will always be 2 parties only. It appears what is now, will always be, because they designed it that way. Nobody has any choices here. Hitler hated the fact that there were so many political parties in Germany, so he eliminated most of them. Looks like the the republicans and the democrats did to America, just as Hitler did with Germany.
Im a Ron Paul supporter and I will be voting for Ron in november. But you are no friend of are's. You just want chaos. Youre a left wing koock partisan wack job who cares not for the country but for a political party as youve proven time and again. So do us all a favor and dont bother quoting Ron Paul because his words are tainted when they come out of your big fat mouth!
This guy should not be reporting. He carelessly mixes fact with his own opinion in a manner that tarnishes the intent and the reputation of Dr. Paul. He should have chosen his words more carefully. Dr. Paul doesn't want to cause trouble. He wants to wake people up.
I agree with you. this guy should have talked to some Ron paul supporters and we would have told him that Ron paul supporters really are no longer concerened with this election. The campain for liberty is about "LIBERTY" and nothing else.
Im voting Chuck Baldwin, he represents the views that Ron Paul supports hold. McCain has lost already, he cannot win, not that Chuck Baldwin has any better chance but voting for who you support is important no matter how much of a long shot they may be.
Eight of the protesters — Abbie Hoffman, Tom Hayden, David Dellinger, Rennie Davis, John Froines, Jerry Rubin, Lee Weiner, and Bobby Seale — were charged with conspiracy in connection with the violence at the convention.
They were known collectively as the "Chicago Eight"
yeah paul has more than a million votes not including caucus states, and they're not likely to vote for john "100 years" mccain. but you are wrong when you say ron paul wants to make trouble at the RNC. and no one plans on 'demanding' anything from the RNC. the plan is this: a peaceful rally to celebrate the traditional republican values that made our party great. i guarantee you that the world will take notice of us. our conservative movement is larger than anyone expects.
I want to see the Republican Party crumble to the ground so we, the Ron Paul Revolutionaries, can start the rebuilding process. I have been advising other Ron Paul supporters to vote for (but not to support) Obama and help create a landslide victory. Besides, if McFuck warmonger the war monster gets elected, the party loyal numb-numbs will just fall asleep. Then the U.S. will suffer. If Obama the socialist gets in, all conservatives, smart ones and dumb ones, will be watching him like a hawk.
I think you'll find that most liberals actually respect Ron Paul conservatives, even if they don't respect us. The neo-cons are sick and corrupt, at least libertarians have some principles.
Ever go into a store or restaurant not knowing what you might get? I think most people who usually vote do so to exercise their right, without feeling passionate about their choice. I made my choice to support Ron Paul last summer, and I'm sticking with it. The excitement has not gone away after all these months. I feel really good about his libertarian message and I'm sticking with it.
No way I can vote for McAmnesty. The Repubic party has decided they will out Dem the Dems. No self-respecting conservative can vote for this shill. I'm writing in Paul. Don't care if it is Quixotic. At least I'll have a clear conscience.
No Ron Paul supporter would ever vote for Mccain. In truth the majority of us would fight to the death before ever casting our vote for mccain. Can I get a second on that !
Ron Paul Doesn't hate anybody.He care about all of us.He want freedom,love,peace and harmony to all of us in the world an prosperity for everybody.He is the only one that really care American people and people all over the world.He want work together with a people.Ron Paul is very honest and we can trust him and every word what he say.Ron Paul for President 2008.
Hey! Maybe you could help us out by voicing your opinions on which Dems are for returning to the laws as stated in the Constitution? There is an awful lot of our (yes, yours & mine) liberties being trod upon for the benefit of a few. Are you guys interested in perhaps making this a Democratic concern and not just a Constitutionalists concern? Many of us who support Ron Paul are not Republicans. We would like your input on this.
The first ever political donation I sent was to Ron Paul. I know he doesn't have much of a chance winning the election, but I hope he will cause some havok at the GOP convention. Ron, go out with a blast instead of a spark.
I know this, it's just that I didn't call any the Ron Paul supporters' mothers sluts (metaphorically), and now it seems that any constructive criticism on the man is met with people getting riled up over comments.
He's anti-abortion, anti-seperation of church and state, and I find his Libertarianism stupid and simplistic when applied to todays populace. He relies too much on people to realize some want to make money rather than help others, especially aid and the job market. His Reaganomic-like policies will be a part of the problem, not the solution to the shitty economy.
By anti-separation of church and state I can assume you mean supporting allowing voluntary prayer in school. He has never supported forced prayer. His policies are not Reganomics. Reganomics was a way to cut taxes for the rich and screw the poor. He is talking about all around tax cuts for everyone. He is also talking about removing favoritism from government by removing subsidizes and tax breaks. That is not Reganomics.
I'm saying removing religious ceremonies from public schooling is what we need. We still don't need an amendment to put any religious practice in any public school. He'd still screw the poor over with the deregulation of big businesses and the stock market, not even tax cuts from ridding of the IRS could save us now with the hounds of big corporate interest loose.
The amendment protects ones right to pray in school it does not mandate prayer. I think the first amendment is clear enough about government making no law abridging religious practice. Kids can be punished for voluntarily praying in school. This is persecution not freedom. He wants an amendment but given how hard they are to pass the 1st amendment will ultimately have the say.
Seperation of Church and State will keep from putting religion in school, but protects the rights of the person's belief. I don't want the teacher making me pray or leave the class. Besides, I hate prayer, it's the feeling of doing something, while you sit on your ass doing nothing. I think humanity needs to realize that.
I agree the teacher should not force prayer but that has nothing to do with what Paul or I am talking about. It is about no punishing one for voluntarily praying for themselves. And if you do not like religion that is for you. Some people believe in religion and to punish them for practicing a voluntary belief protected by the first amendment is unconstitutional. You cannot force your beliefs on the religious any more than they should be able to force their religion on you.
When you say Libertarianism do you mean the concept of civic duty the founders wanted to instill in the population. The idea that the state is not the caretaker of the community, those in the community must take care of each other. The idea that the government is at best a necessary evil and that evil can not properly care for you. If that is stupid and simplistic then I am sorry you do not see the brilliance in what created this country and has inspired Libertarian thought since.
That won't work for todays varied and large populace; it worked for the past with smaller colonies to control seperately, but now there's just too many people. We need to move on from the past with it in mind, keep the Constitution and move forward with a base to build on. After all, it's like Barack Obama saying CHANGE, or McCain saying WAR, it's just people running around in a circle yelling NO MORE GOVERNMENT. It's optimistic in thought, but is not applicable to real life settings.
The problem is you are used to a United States. If government was ousted there would simply by small communities who govern themselves, trading with other. This idea of population being big does not matter it would just lead to more communities. When government disappears nations go with it. It is more than a word it is book upon book by people like Rothbard and Rand. The theory is already more than a phrase it is tomes of thought.
LOL. You watch Red Dawn too much. The only enemies the United States has is the ones we arm in the first place. If we gave food instead of guns, we'd be on the humanitarian list and loved again. Besides, Rand and Rothbard are fucktarded, I hate Objectivism.
Rothbard knew more about history and economics than most people in the 20th century. Objectivism, the idea that people can use their senses to create an objective reality, is the basis for science. You probably dislike the self-interest part though it can be in your self-interest to help people. Self-interest is not selfishness. Most people do not understand that. I never saw Red Dawn, what does that have to do with what I said and were did the enemies thing come from?
LOL. I played Bioshock, it's totally applicable to real-life settings, like Communism. Plus, it's a philosophy that makes selfishness like-able. It's all paranoia. It's a shitty pro-right movie against the Russians, I don't reccomend it for anything besides the lulz.
Now Bioshock I have played. That is a perfect example of a society doomed to fail. They did not adopt the most basic of things to establish a society, ethics. Beyond that it is simply a good game. I had the feeling a movie called Red Dawn may have been American Cold War propaganda.
As long as that control is not a coercive institution I am fine with it. In my opinion the problem arose from the rejection of ethics. Even animals have observable patterns of behavior in certain situations, ie natural ethics. If people cannot figure out something so simple less intelligent animals can understand it mankind is doomed, control or not.
I'm pretty sure that humans don't work like animals in the way of thinking like Ayn Rand or those Austrian economicists. A rejection of ethics comes when someone sees trouble and does nothing of it, when they see the poor starve and think welfare makes them lazy, try to privatize schools or social security and wonder why people have a distrust of the economy and corporations, it's the action of disaction I'm sick of, like FEMA, or any organization affected by cronyism of the Bush adm. I hate it.
John Locke, Calvin Hobbes and Thomas Paine thought one could observe natural rights, ie rights endowed by the creator. Natural Rights theory is a common idea adopted by our founders. People are inactive because they have abdicated responsibility to the government. People expect welfare to help so they do not give to charity or they do not help rebuild a destroyed city because the government is supposed to do it. The people are dependent on government to watch over the welfare of the society.
What does the first part of your post have to do with the second half? The charity vs. government argument seems to have less to do with morality than efficiency as long as in both cases you recognize that there is a moral imperative to help.
Why do people who are pro-choice act like the dilemma surrounding abortion is settled? As far back as Aristotle the belief was held that life began before birth, though that line has jumped around. To assume a rather far-reaching Supreme Court decision should silence dissent on the issue is not sound logic. I do not know how I feel on the issue but given the rest of his stances, all aimed at shrinking government, I can look the other way. The issue may matter more to you though.
If people thought like we do now, abortion would be no real issue. Sure the past shows that people had thought of the subject, but that can be said about almost anything. Unlike hte past, however, we can actually give the people the right with the help of the Courts and liberally minded individuals in government. It really does matter to me. Besides, babies are fucking annoying.
People now have very conflicting views on abortion. The argument life exists before birth is held by many people, including doctors. Also, the death of a pregnant woman is two counts of murder in some states but those states then will have to allow the mother to kill the fetus and must punish someone who killed both for the fetus's death. This is legally contradictory. Should all those double homicides laws be stricken by the Courts as well? This issue is far from settled.
You should read something about Austrian Economics. Deregulation allows for more competition, more innovation and lower prices. Regulation not only destroys about 100 jobs for every regulator it chokes out small business competition to those big corporations. The poor benefit with lower prices as well as a better job market. It is a progressive idea that regulation is good. In fact workers in Europe liked free markets because it freed them from the government backed guilds.
Tell that to the Reagan-era workers in the Rust Belt, near where I live. That's why they vote Democratic. Deregulation is for those with higher pay checks who benefit from the working base. It's unfair and that's why I want an even playing field.
Regan was a sham. He was the first corporatist neo-con. Do not confuse him for a real free market Libertarian. He is not a free market anything. His deregulation was paired with tax breaks and favoritism to corporations, hence a corporatist not free market. De-regulation is only part of it. One has to remove corporate favoritism as well. Regan increased corporate favoritism and sold it as a bullshit trickle-down theory. That is not a level playing field for all business nor is it a free market.
Like Bush and the GOP time and time again, Reagan ran on a very Libertarian platform and betrayed it, even praising Libertarianism as the heart of conservatism. Once he had power the old corporatist philosophies, that have been part of the Right since the Federalist, cropped up again. Paul has said in debates he thinks Reagan betrayed his own policies. It is because Classic Liberalism/American Libertarianism had no place on the Right.
Also corporate interest are not served by removing tax breaks and subsidizes from them. Nor are they benefited by a leveling of the playing field. Corporations flourish now because the regulation keeps small business competition down and government favoritism nets them subsidies and tax breaks. Not to mention the fact the government handed corporations the rights of people and limited liability. Free markets are the last thing CEOs and the Corporatist in the government want.
The eighties have nothing to do with free markets. That was the beginning of full-fledged corporatism. At the turn of the century the Courts granted corporations the rights of people and limited liability. This was an attempt at Corporatism but the Progressives stopped them. Since then it has been a fight between Corporatists and pseudo-socialists. In the eighties the Corporatists won. Free markets were abandoned and have not comeback. The eighties are irrelevant to a discussion of free markets.
It makes look greed look good. LOL. Ron Paul or Libertarianism won't help it either way. Free markets make Corporatism, unless you put fesable regulations on its power. So we could sit here all day and bitch about Ron Paul or Libertarianism, but neither will see the Oval Office anytime soon. LOL. ಠ_ಠ
Corporatism comes from the government interfering in free markets. By definition free markets do not exist when government is playing favorites on the economy. The government uses regulations as well as subsidies, etc to play favorites and that becomes Corporatism. Free markets exist separate from government. More government in the economy leads to Corporatism as the elites hijack the government system. Free markets inhibit Corporatism. The Oval Office is not the goal. Market anarchism is.
Why do Ron Paul supporters reject/erase/mark other opinions on the left or right and yet claim to be the bastions of free speech and giving the right there of? Is it because Ron Paul supporters talk of freedom, yet has been alienating other people for their personal opinions?
What are you talking about? A person has the right to agree or disagree with anothers opinion. If anything a Ron Paul supporter like myself are more annoyed with being ignored or passed off as if our opinions dont matter.
And as a reply to your 'prove my point' comment why dont you look at the other comments marked as spam and see what they say? Let me clue you in: they usualy say 'vote ron paul'.
I do realize that the VOTE RON PAUL stamps get spammed because they advertise for a presidential canidate. I for one would spam a VOTE OBAMA/MCCAIN/HILLARY comment anytime, it's just that Ron Paul supporters will go to extensive lengths to belittle those who have a certain opinion of Mr. Paul if it isn't blind praise. I have seen blogospheres attacked for bringing up his past for his somewhat controversial comments on his campaign paper written by his staff.
Well I understand that most supporters even myself get very defensive and argue or debate their positions & beliefs. I think the reasons are frustration, when most people ignore every valid point and just say 'He's a loon' without any merit. Most blogs that ive seen that bring up the controversial past like the racist articles are usualy in a tone of assumed guilt. Guilty untill proven innocent seems to be how people think these days. I don't blame anyone getting upset or attack such comments.
If someone is being disrespectful or belittle your opinions, I personal would ignore them and keep posting or tell them to chill out. I even tell fellow supporters to be more respectful since they represent all of us. An example of this would be the 'truthers' who most think all Paul supporters are. Its not a view I share and when I find a person who supports Paul and the 9/11 inside job thing I try explain to them Pauls true position on the subject, its frustrating when they disagree.
I understand the right-wing media snaps at Mr. Paul for some of his issues and blows some out of proportion. But the whole article being brought out into light gets attacked by the supporters, even if the article is being brought out into neutral settings. Afterall, it took a decade for Mr. Paul to finally apologize for the article that his staff had written. That's a long time for someone to finally talk about the 800 lb. gorilla in the room.
That could be true and I dont really know if he spoke about it before or he finaly got over with it now. I personaly believe he truely didnt know about and when he did notice he ignored it and moved on untill brought up again. After all there isnt much a person can do about those things except apologise and move on. Problem is even when he did finaly speak about it and tried to refute it most folks insist he is guilty. I think that frustrates supporters and therefore more arguements etc.
I dont blame anyone if they dont trust Paul or feel offended by the articles or by how he took action. They have the right to feel that way and not support him. For me I listen to his words that I know he's said (videos etc) and his opinions that I know he wrote (on his site). I trust Paul and believe his message and will support him. I will probably time to time argue with those who disagree but no matter what as long as we're respectful to one another I wouldnt block or reject your opinions.
The articles were honest. They talked about the extremely high rates of crime, including rape, committed by blacks. 40,000 white women are raped by blacks each year, and this continues because every one is afraid to write about it.
"Paul's staff reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."
"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," the paper said."
It's statistically impossible to say almost all black people commit crime in one city.
I have read those newsletters and all I can say about them is they are pure hilarity. I cannot believe they are meant to be racist because too many sound tongue-in-cheek sarcastic. I may be wrong because I do not take race seriously but I have heard racist rants from guys like William Pierce and they are much more serious in their claims than any in that newsletter. The writing sounds more like jokes my friends and I might tell for a good laugh rather than a real complaint against a race.
It really does not. Read an article from Vanguard News Network or listen to a Reason Radio broadcast. They don't just make jokes about blacks being fleet-footed, they refer to all ethnic groups by slurs. The newsletters from Paul that I read contained no mention of the N-word or any other slur. The language is much lighter than other racist journalists. It sounds more like an inappropriate joke than hate speak. It does not excuse the jokes but I do not think it is a symptom of a bigger problem.
I don't read biased news, it's all crap no matter which side you stand on. I mostly read the papers as anti-black and mostly attacked the minorities in the eighties that recieved a lot of attention. They weren't "sarcastic", they were even denounced by Mr. Paul, but even I know he justified them and knew what was in print, he's still a liar. Either way you slice it, he won't be put in office, and that's good enough for me.
I get the feeling Paul denounced them so he would not have to explain them. And like I said if you read real racism it is not as nice as the stuff in his newsletter. I would not urge you to listen to racist radio but if you tune into either of those outlets I named and compare that blatant racism to what was written in those newsletters there is a stark contrast in language and intent. The problem with print media is people will read them differently which leads to great misunderstanding.
True but it is not as serious. I do not know if you really are 74 but at 20 there is a difference between a joke that capitalizes on the ignorance of the statement for laughs and a statement of hatred that has nothing funny about it. Maybe it is a generational thing.
Did you just defend that? Wow, I can't really say anything to that. Yes, it is true that urban black communities in certain cities have high crime rates disproportionate to the populace; but claiming almost 100% of them are criminals? That's just ignorant beyond belief...
I think it's a testament to the cowardice of the white race that whites won't even discuss the fact, or get angry at the fact, that 40,000 white women are raped by blacks every year in the US.
Who is defending Paul here? Do you think it should matter who is raping who? The name is cute but you could spend some time working for change instead of staring red-herring accounts to make Paul look bad.
Message to all libertarians: Stop bumming Ron Paul. That is all.
bewilderedkettle 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Forget the party B.S. and just vote Ron Paul 2012!
lizardfirefighter110 4 months ago
ron paul and his stupid wankers should find a new tube just for themselves and stop posting on jewish youtube
allahisonlygod 8 months ago
@allahisonlygod Allah isn't real, Mohamed was a pedophile and Islam is an abomination.
Thanks
rLOVEutionFor2012 6 months ago
Maybe Jews are in such prominent positions because they work hard, their parents encourage them to work hard, and they have lots of family connections?
I don't think there's anything sinister about that.
jjmcreal 1 year ago
@jjmcreal
What is sinister is how AIPAC his the government by the balls. Israel is so wrong when they terrorize Gaza and our media only gives us one side of the story. Fox News folks are all just useful idiots for Zionist interests. You cannot underestimate the power of an anti-Semitic or Nazi accusation (however unfounded)... this is how Israel's interests have us pissing Arabs off today.
bobshenix 11 months ago
For the record I'm one of those million, i absolutely did not vote for John McCain.
Evil war monger neocon bastard.
Sorry Democrats, i will toss insults at McCain but i can't praise Obama.
s0beit 1 year ago
cant wait for the Ron Paul vs obama debate in 2012!
deshaebeasley 1 year ago
@deshaebeasley That'll never happen.
00D00 9 months ago
I lost all respect for the Young Turks and this joke of a host.
DivadFungi 1 year ago 4
@DivadFungi the host is a fuckboy and he sucked bush and Chaney's dick.
DOCSAFETUBE 1 year ago
McCain and Obama are the same. they're both for bigger government and want to move our country closer and closer to an oligarchy, neither of them address the MAIN problem of tackling the Federal Reserve so it's obvious they're either fucking stupid or are fucking part of the Fed's agenda.
baezalejandro 1 year ago
Go back to Turkey! Tell them all about your bs comment maybe they will listen to what you got to say.
zoran435 1 year ago
i cant stand this fuckin guy
Dlions81 1 year ago
the republican party has become a national socialist party... the democratic party has become kinda like the european democratic socialist party
all the ron paul supporters are nationalist capitalists... so most of them wernt happy with no president wanting a free market society (aka lawless market society)
wildboy789789 1 year ago
Obama is a total fuck up! Isn't it obvious that this whole health care issue is Hillary's shit warmed over? The man would have done well to concentrating on the economy for most of his first term. But instead he deviates to satisfy that little whiny bitch Hillary? Grow a set of balls Mr. Pres!
osensei2987 2 years ago 3
Ughhhh I hate the conspiracy theorists that flock to support Ron Paul. They totally discredit the movement and should stop talking. Ron Paul does not agree with their views.
TTTFenceTTTTTTTTTTT 2 years ago
I agree, when Paul threw "troofers" under bus at Faux News Debate his campaign funding dried up faster than that McCain Melenoma on his nasty face.
euro944t 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
most ron paul supporters are dumb but let's face it obama supporters are so much worse
juclyazzo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is fucking bulshit. Go Fuck your self you piece of shit. Who the fuck are you to judge a brilliant and educated man such as Ron Paul. Some bozo who deiced to name his radio board cast station after Criminals. The Young Turks. Whose the raciest. Because of the young fucking turks over 1.5 million Armenians died. Who the fuck are you to judge other about racism when you have racism written all over you. You should just re-title you station The SS, or the Nazi/Hitler Sympathizers.
BachGuitar3 2 years ago
Ron Paul is a true Republican. He wants to help the U.S and not Israel. Jewish media fucked him up.
shasha1873 2 years ago 36
Nixon & Reagan were anti-semite, does that = True Republican ?
"If you people are going to make Holocaust claims, it would help to bring evidence of the claims"(Reagan bolts off AIPAC stage giggling)
"Jews are born spies, unlike blacks"(Nixon Tapes)
Youtube has the clips, I enjoyed them, you will too.
euro944t 2 years ago
@shasha1873 Jews don't own the media you stupid racist cunt.
NewYorkFlavour 1 year ago
Comment removed
shasha1873 1 year ago
@shasha1873 You know this because you worked there I assume?
NewYorkFlavour 1 year ago
Comment removed
shasha1873 1 year ago
@NewYorkFlavour Sucking kike dick?
39483294jdw0 1 year ago
@39483294jdw0 No, your sister's tits
NewYorkFlavour 1 year ago
@NewYorkFlavour You might as well suck my dick too then, why you giving everybody free blow jobs but me? I can make ur neck fat.
39483294jdw0 1 year ago
@shasha1873 I congratulate you on your anti-Semitism, sir. Herr Himmler would be proud.
inconcordium 11 months ago
@inconcordium Himmler and the rest of the Nazi bastards are all dead.
shasha1873 11 months ago
@shasha1873
I bet you get called an anti-Semite or Nazi for speaking truth like that... the Israel lobby is the tail wagging the dog. Our foreign policy is for Israel... Americans are dying for Israel. It is so wrong.
I hate Zionists... Jews are fine. It is the rabid Zionist who have subverted our government foreign policy.
bobshenix 11 months ago
@shasha1873 dude, ron paul admitted to making some of those quotes and defended doing so and btw those quotes from rom paul was printed first in his own newsletter. give it up already. he is a racist who hates jews and blacks. period. just because something dissapoints you, doesnt mean its not true and you dont need to make up crazy conspiracies about what actually happened in order to blindly protect your man because you agree like myself with some of his stances on issues such as the wars etc
TheRockstar703 8 months ago
@TheRockstar703 Dude, everyone has a shortcoming. Dr. Paul is a human being and therefore not 100% perfect. But he is an American hero.
shasha1873 8 months ago
@shasha1873 - What constitutes an "American hero"? We hear this term bantered around often, but does it have any real meaning?
TheInternetWanderer 8 months ago
@TheInternetWanderer An American hero today is one who tries to do the right thing for his country against all odds and influences. The real meaning of the term hero is always relative to the times and struggles a nation is in.
shasha1873 8 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ron Paul supporters are fun to watch mostly conspiracy nuts looking for attention.
702decatur 2 years ago
no they're not. sure there's lunatic folks in every following of a candidate and ron paul supporters are particularly adamant about their opinions on policy issues but THATS the point.
whenever i -as a clinton supporter but not a US citizen btw- argued with republicans ron paul folks were the only ones that abstained from character assassination that's otherwise so predominant in republican talking points. even if i dont agree with RP's ideas, there's lot more decency involved in his campaigns
dontliethetruth 2 years ago 4
that was a response to 702decatur's statement 2 comments below btw.
dontliethetruth 2 years ago
And Obama supporters are idiots that rely on hope and biblical miracles rather than believing in themselves and being the change they want to see. Don't make such preposterous generalizations about a group of people when you know hardly anything about them. And I am not being a hypocrite because if you really think Obama's fiscal policies will do anything for our country you are out of your minds.
purplehazlenut 2 years ago 6
Hear Hear! :) Lets see what happens methinks the looters will be begging us Ron Pauliens to accept their apologies when nobody owns anything and they cant get a doctor because they have to wait 6 months. I'd like to 702's ideas on how to fix our economy. It's easy to make broad, generalizing statements about a group of people. Hitler did it and it worked! Haha! It's alot harder to think and reason. But he who does not reason is not a man!
renegade2142 2 years ago
The system is setup so that there will always be 2 parties only. It appears what is now, will always be, because they designed it that way. Nobody has any choices here. Hitler hated the fact that there were so many political parties in Germany, so he eliminated most of them. Looks like the the republicans and the democrats did to America, just as Hitler did with Germany.
L4k3rF4N 2 years ago 2
omg...obama=hitler...your right!!!
mattman1991 2 years ago
Nooooo HITLER DIDEN'T HAVE NUKES!!!
Also Barack has alot of less things.. For one I don't know if he's a mass murderer.. I MIGHT BE WRONG THOUGH lol
dardonZ 2 years ago
Manhatten Project was orig Hitler's, to be continued in USA.
Hitler's target was New Rome aka New York, hence the project name
Al Pike dream, shows banker and Masonic manipulation from western elite in all WW wars.
WW3 will be definately NWO scheme
euro944t 2 years ago
No, believe it or not, I KNOW it's totally ridiculous to think about it... but MAYBE people liked Ron Paul as a -person- rather than a party member.
Dradeeus 3 years ago 4
Im a Ron Paul supporter and I will be voting for Ron in november. But you are no friend of are's. You just want chaos. Youre a left wing koock partisan wack job who cares not for the country but for a political party as youve proven time and again. So do us all a favor and dont bother quoting Ron Paul because his words are tainted when they come out of your big fat mouth!
geekstreat 3 years ago
My response is NO. I am not voting for McCain.
coolmamac 3 years ago 3
Dr Paul?? When in the world did Ron Paul become a doctor? I am being serious. Sorry if I sound like I was being sarcastic.
deomartinez77 3 years ago
dude, He's an OB/GYN, He's touched so many women in so many wonderful ways! = )
rambojoe2323 3 years ago 8
lmfao!
dlacc187 3 years ago
When he graduated Duke medical school I suppose...
fps0chris 3 years ago 4
This guy should not be reporting. He carelessly mixes fact with his own opinion in a manner that tarnishes the intent and the reputation of Dr. Paul. He should have chosen his words more carefully. Dr. Paul doesn't want to cause trouble. He wants to wake people up.
fsujag54 3 years ago 23
I agree with you. this guy should have talked to some Ron paul supporters and we would have told him that Ron paul supporters really are no longer concerened with this election. The campain for liberty is about "LIBERTY" and nothing else.
farhadcoyote 3 years ago 3
I definitely do think Cenk is biased. He doesn't have to admit it, but it's sort of obvious. He looks at things at a more liberal way, so I dunno.
heero10 3 years ago 3
Did he try to hide it? He's not a Fox guy, you know. It's ok for him to be honest about what he is doing.
KungPisstank 2 years ago
I voted Ron Paul.
Im voting Chuck Baldwin, he represents the views that Ron Paul supports hold. McCain has lost already, he cannot win, not that Chuck Baldwin has any better chance but voting for who you support is important no matter how much of a long shot they may be.
t66wood 3 years ago
Uh...a little history;
Chicago Seven
Eight of the protesters — Abbie Hoffman, Tom Hayden, David Dellinger, Rennie Davis, John Froines, Jerry Rubin, Lee Weiner, and Bobby Seale — were charged with conspiracy in connection with the violence at the convention.
They were known collectively as the "Chicago Eight"
jibbi4one 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
we don't want a racist and a homophobe like cenk showing up there. how does that make you feel?
amagilly 3 years ago
yeah paul has more than a million votes not including caucus states, and they're not likely to vote for john "100 years" mccain. but you are wrong when you say ron paul wants to make trouble at the RNC. and no one plans on 'demanding' anything from the RNC. the plan is this: a peaceful rally to celebrate the traditional republican values that made our party great. i guarantee you that the world will take notice of us. our conservative movement is larger than anyone expects.
sanchosteve 3 years ago 2
I want to see the Republican Party crumble to the ground so we, the Ron Paul Revolutionaries, can start the rebuilding process. I have been advising other Ron Paul supporters to vote for (but not to support) Obama and help create a landslide victory. Besides, if McFuck warmonger the war monster gets elected, the party loyal numb-numbs will just fall asleep. Then the U.S. will suffer. If Obama the socialist gets in, all conservatives, smart ones and dumb ones, will be watching him like a hawk.
nododon 3 years ago 2
Go to the March in D.C. July 12th!!!!
roseagain2 3 years ago 2
You are so right. :D
Ron Paul 2012 if he runs again.
knighthawk2277 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
2012 will be too late!
ShootAAppleOffMyHead 3 years ago
If I can't vote for Ron Paul,...I'll vote for the Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr.
littlejeffmo 3 years ago
I'm a Ron Paul Republican who will never vote for a guy like McCain.
libertarian4322 3 years ago
I think you'll find that most liberals actually respect Ron Paul conservatives, even if they don't respect us. The neo-cons are sick and corrupt, at least libertarians have some principles.
mtf10 3 years ago 3
Ron Paul never said to leave immediatley.. Cause he's a realist!!
jimhunt81 3 years ago
When is the convention?
dshepherd15 3 years ago
Ever go into a store or restaurant not knowing what you might get? I think most people who usually vote do so to exercise their right, without feeling passionate about their choice. I made my choice to support Ron Paul last summer, and I'm sticking with it. The excitement has not gone away after all these months. I feel really good about his libertarian message and I'm sticking with it.
adpny 3 years ago
No way I can vote for McAmnesty. The Repubic party has decided they will out Dem the Dems. No self-respecting conservative can vote for this shill. I'm writing in Paul. Don't care if it is Quixotic. At least I'll have a clear conscience.
Stepper11 3 years ago
Bob Barr...vote for Bob Barr
comicus211 3 years ago
never forget you can still write in. It is your right !
wingnut4427 3 years ago 3
we will not vote for McCain, but we will stand and show how a majority of the Republican Party has been duped by neo-cons...
we are sick and tired of it... want proof of why McCain is hurting?
He is only winning around 65-70% of the votes in "unchallenged" elections... Bush won with 98% of the votes in similar fashions...
wake up, Republican Party, and go back to where you should be... the original founding fathers and Thomas Jefferson...
cowboycarl04 3 years ago 3
No Ron Paul supporter would ever vote for Mccain. In truth the majority of us would fight to the death before ever casting our vote for mccain. Can I get a second on that !
fullcolorone 3 years ago 3
Excellent commentary! The Convention is not to be missed, that's for sure.
allgunsblazing78 3 years ago
help our country make sure to visit breakthematrix com
justsyknow1 3 years ago
Ron Paul Doesn't hate anybody.He care about all of us.He want freedom,love,peace and harmony to all of us in the world an prosperity for everybody.He is the only one that really care American people and people all over the world.He want work together with a people.Ron Paul is very honest and we can trust him and every word what he say.Ron Paul for President 2008.
ciw97 3 years ago 4
revolutionmarch(dot)com.
July 12th!
grit123 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
i think Ron Paul is a pretty cool guy
eh hates niggers and jews
and doesn't afraid of anything
ronpaul4tehwinnar 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i think Ron Paul is a pretty cool guy
eh hates niggers and jews
and doesn't afraid of anything
d4v1dduk3lulz 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i think Ron Paul is a pretty cool guy
eh hates niggers and jews
and doesn't afraid of anything
t3hbr1dg3tro11 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i think Ron Paul is a pretty cool guy
eh hates niggers and jews
and doesn't afraid of anything
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i think Ron Paul is a pretty cool guy
eh hates niggers and jews
and doesn't afraid of anything
D43D51D0G 3 years ago
Further fueling me to take more outgoing action of educating others on RP and Freedom...see you all in DC on JULY 12th!
marchbomb . com
revolutionmarch . com
See you all in WASHINGTON on JULY 12th!
jasrid04 3 years ago
this guy is a fool
Ron Paul Rocks
but this felow wants to cause problems for republicans
not to support Ron
there will be some degree of protest at BOTH conventions
the Clinton people will be louder and more out of hand than the respectfull Ron Paul supporters
ron paul needs to have a voice in the republican party
but the Democrats are evil pieces of garbage
at least McCain is a decent guy
hillary is crooked and Obama is f***ing evil
yesman90125 3 years ago
@bavarianbeast2000
lol yeah thats like saying 100% of the white population go muddin and tippin cows.
rollen01 3 years ago
Come on and vote!!!
news(.)aol(.)com/political-machine/straw-poll
swalker711 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice Video lolz, my names Jessica, im feelin n0rty and h0rn3y if any guyz wana chat im usually on
___ FriendlyFlirts..dot..COM ___ my username there is Jessica-mmkrvcxobuy chat soon ;)
quantum1487 3 years ago
If Paul supporters don't straighten them out, WHO WILL??? YES!!!!!
daniellewalker78 3 years ago 8
Hey! Maybe you could help us out by voicing your opinions on which Dems are for returning to the laws as stated in the Constitution? There is an awful lot of our (yes, yours & mine) liberties being trod upon for the benefit of a few. Are you guys interested in perhaps making this a Democratic concern and not just a Constitutionalists concern? Many of us who support Ron Paul are not Republicans. We would like your input on this.
mikwid 3 years ago 4
the young turks are awesome... gonna start watching these guys more often.
Claytrainor 3 years ago
Wow!
Brilliant!
No , Mr. Turk Guy,- I will NEVER vote for John McCain - I don't care how many times Jon Stewart has him on his show - he still is not cool!
6782485 3 years ago 4
dude,for REAL!...seems like every time i look up McSame is on the Daily Show again
eenkmouse2311 3 years ago
The only choice for me this election, is to support Bob Barr and guarantee we do not get that sucker McCain in the White House.
mikebellman 3 years ago
The first ever political donation I sent was to Ron Paul. I know he doesn't have much of a chance winning the election, but I hope he will cause some havok at the GOP convention. Ron, go out with a blast instead of a spark.
justhefactsmac 3 years ago 12
McCain sends me donation letters cuz i sent Ron Paul $2300, i throw them in the trash.
user134342 3 years ago 6
I just put a couple of slim-jim in the self addressed stamped envelope;-)
lv2ndamendment 3 years ago
LOL!!!
daniellewalker78 3 years ago
i'd wipe my ass with them, but i don't want to get my ass dirty.
normlsparky 3 years ago
I know this, it's just that I didn't call any the Ron Paul supporters' mothers sluts (metaphorically), and now it seems that any constructive criticism on the man is met with people getting riled up over comments.
bavarianbeast2000 3 years ago
If you have some constructive criticism I would love to hear it. Everybody else just throws out cries of racism.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
He's anti-abortion, anti-seperation of church and state, and I find his Libertarianism stupid and simplistic when applied to todays populace. He relies too much on people to realize some want to make money rather than help others, especially aid and the job market. His Reaganomic-like policies will be a part of the problem, not the solution to the shitty economy.
RonPaulinista 3 years ago
By anti-separation of church and state I can assume you mean supporting allowing voluntary prayer in school. He has never supported forced prayer. His policies are not Reganomics. Reganomics was a way to cut taxes for the rich and screw the poor. He is talking about all around tax cuts for everyone. He is also talking about removing favoritism from government by removing subsidizes and tax breaks. That is not Reganomics.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
I'm saying removing religious ceremonies from public schooling is what we need. We still don't need an amendment to put any religious practice in any public school. He'd still screw the poor over with the deregulation of big businesses and the stock market, not even tax cuts from ridding of the IRS could save us now with the hounds of big corporate interest loose.
RonPaulinista 3 years ago
The amendment protects ones right to pray in school it does not mandate prayer. I think the first amendment is clear enough about government making no law abridging religious practice. Kids can be punished for voluntarily praying in school. This is persecution not freedom. He wants an amendment but given how hard they are to pass the 1st amendment will ultimately have the say.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
Seperation of Church and State will keep from putting religion in school, but protects the rights of the person's belief. I don't want the teacher making me pray or leave the class. Besides, I hate prayer, it's the feeling of doing something, while you sit on your ass doing nothing. I think humanity needs to realize that.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
I agree the teacher should not force prayer but that has nothing to do with what Paul or I am talking about. It is about no punishing one for voluntarily praying for themselves. And if you do not like religion that is for you. Some people believe in religion and to punish them for practicing a voluntary belief protected by the first amendment is unconstitutional. You cannot force your beliefs on the religious any more than they should be able to force their religion on you.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
LOL. It's still stupid to put up a amendment; either way, he's not going in the White House anytime soon, so, yeah.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
I agree an amendment is useless. It take over 9000 years to pass an amendment anyway.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
When you say Libertarianism do you mean the concept of civic duty the founders wanted to instill in the population. The idea that the state is not the caretaker of the community, those in the community must take care of each other. The idea that the government is at best a necessary evil and that evil can not properly care for you. If that is stupid and simplistic then I am sorry you do not see the brilliance in what created this country and has inspired Libertarian thought since.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
That won't work for todays varied and large populace; it worked for the past with smaller colonies to control seperately, but now there's just too many people. We need to move on from the past with it in mind, keep the Constitution and move forward with a base to build on. After all, it's like Barack Obama saying CHANGE, or McCain saying WAR, it's just people running around in a circle yelling NO MORE GOVERNMENT. It's optimistic in thought, but is not applicable to real life settings.
RonPaulinista 3 years ago
The problem is you are used to a United States. If government was ousted there would simply by small communities who govern themselves, trading with other. This idea of population being big does not matter it would just lead to more communities. When government disappears nations go with it. It is more than a word it is book upon book by people like Rothbard and Rand. The theory is already more than a phrase it is tomes of thought.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
LOL. You watch Red Dawn too much. The only enemies the United States has is the ones we arm in the first place. If we gave food instead of guns, we'd be on the humanitarian list and loved again. Besides, Rand and Rothbard are fucktarded, I hate Objectivism.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
Rothbard knew more about history and economics than most people in the 20th century. Objectivism, the idea that people can use their senses to create an objective reality, is the basis for science. You probably dislike the self-interest part though it can be in your self-interest to help people. Self-interest is not selfishness. Most people do not understand that. I never saw Red Dawn, what does that have to do with what I said and were did the enemies thing come from?
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
LOL. I played Bioshock, it's totally applicable to real-life settings, like Communism. Plus, it's a philosophy that makes selfishness like-able. It's all paranoia. It's a shitty pro-right movie against the Russians, I don't reccomend it for anything besides the lulz.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
Now Bioshock I have played. That is a perfect example of a society doomed to fail. They did not adopt the most basic of things to establish a society, ethics. Beyond that it is simply a good game. I had the feeling a movie called Red Dawn may have been American Cold War propaganda.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
A good game with a message of how Objectivism's follies would apply to a modern setting if there's no control. Yes, Red Dawn was bullshit propaganda.
t3hbr1dg3tro11 3 years ago
As long as that control is not a coercive institution I am fine with it. In my opinion the problem arose from the rejection of ethics. Even animals have observable patterns of behavior in certain situations, ie natural ethics. If people cannot figure out something so simple less intelligent animals can understand it mankind is doomed, control or not.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
I'm pretty sure that humans don't work like animals in the way of thinking like Ayn Rand or those Austrian economicists. A rejection of ethics comes when someone sees trouble and does nothing of it, when they see the poor starve and think welfare makes them lazy, try to privatize schools or social security and wonder why people have a distrust of the economy and corporations, it's the action of disaction I'm sick of, like FEMA, or any organization affected by cronyism of the Bush adm. I hate it.
t3hbr1dg3tro11 3 years ago
John Locke, Calvin Hobbes and Thomas Paine thought one could observe natural rights, ie rights endowed by the creator. Natural Rights theory is a common idea adopted by our founders. People are inactive because they have abdicated responsibility to the government. People expect welfare to help so they do not give to charity or they do not help rebuild a destroyed city because the government is supposed to do it. The people are dependent on government to watch over the welfare of the society.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
What does the first part of your post have to do with the second half? The charity vs. government argument seems to have less to do with morality than efficiency as long as in both cases you recognize that there is a moral imperative to help.
GrownupPhan 3 years ago
P.S. That was TL;DR material. I don't trust it, that's all.
t3hbr1dg3tro11 3 years ago
Why do people who are pro-choice act like the dilemma surrounding abortion is settled? As far back as Aristotle the belief was held that life began before birth, though that line has jumped around. To assume a rather far-reaching Supreme Court decision should silence dissent on the issue is not sound logic. I do not know how I feel on the issue but given the rest of his stances, all aimed at shrinking government, I can look the other way. The issue may matter more to you though.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
If people thought like we do now, abortion would be no real issue. Sure the past shows that people had thought of the subject, but that can be said about almost anything. Unlike hte past, however, we can actually give the people the right with the help of the Courts and liberally minded individuals in government. It really does matter to me. Besides, babies are fucking annoying.
RonPaulinista 3 years ago
People now have very conflicting views on abortion. The argument life exists before birth is held by many people, including doctors. Also, the death of a pregnant woman is two counts of murder in some states but those states then will have to allow the mother to kill the fetus and must punish someone who killed both for the fetus's death. This is legally contradictory. Should all those double homicides laws be stricken by the Courts as well? This issue is far from settled.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
Yes, and I still hate babies.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
You should read something about Austrian Economics. Deregulation allows for more competition, more innovation and lower prices. Regulation not only destroys about 100 jobs for every regulator it chokes out small business competition to those big corporations. The poor benefit with lower prices as well as a better job market. It is a progressive idea that regulation is good. In fact workers in Europe liked free markets because it freed them from the government backed guilds.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
Tell that to the Reagan-era workers in the Rust Belt, near where I live. That's why they vote Democratic. Deregulation is for those with higher pay checks who benefit from the working base. It's unfair and that's why I want an even playing field.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
Regan was a sham. He was the first corporatist neo-con. Do not confuse him for a real free market Libertarian. He is not a free market anything. His deregulation was paired with tax breaks and favoritism to corporations, hence a corporatist not free market. De-regulation is only part of it. One has to remove corporate favoritism as well. Regan increased corporate favoritism and sold it as a bullshit trickle-down theory. That is not a level playing field for all business nor is it a free market.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
LOL. Irony. Ron Paul loves Reagan, so why would he be one of Reagan's favorite politicians, if his policies supposedly don't match up to the Gipper?
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
Like Bush and the GOP time and time again, Reagan ran on a very Libertarian platform and betrayed it, even praising Libertarianism as the heart of conservatism. Once he had power the old corporatist philosophies, that have been part of the Right since the Federalist, cropped up again. Paul has said in debates he thinks Reagan betrayed his own policies. It is because Classic Liberalism/American Libertarianism had no place on the Right.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
Also corporate interest are not served by removing tax breaks and subsidizes from them. Nor are they benefited by a leveling of the playing field. Corporations flourish now because the regulation keeps small business competition down and government favoritism nets them subsidies and tax breaks. Not to mention the fact the government handed corporations the rights of people and limited liability. Free markets are the last thing CEOs and the Corporatist in the government want.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
LOL. That's funny. It's like you don't remember the eighties at all.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
The eighties have nothing to do with free markets. That was the beginning of full-fledged corporatism. At the turn of the century the Courts granted corporations the rights of people and limited liability. This was an attempt at Corporatism but the Progressives stopped them. Since then it has been a fight between Corporatists and pseudo-socialists. In the eighties the Corporatists won. Free markets were abandoned and have not comeback. The eighties are irrelevant to a discussion of free markets.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
It makes look greed look good. LOL. Ron Paul or Libertarianism won't help it either way. Free markets make Corporatism, unless you put fesable regulations on its power. So we could sit here all day and bitch about Ron Paul or Libertarianism, but neither will see the Oval Office anytime soon. LOL. ಠ_ಠ
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
Corporatism comes from the government interfering in free markets. By definition free markets do not exist when government is playing favorites on the economy. The government uses regulations as well as subsidies, etc to play favorites and that becomes Corporatism. Free markets exist separate from government. More government in the economy leads to Corporatism as the elites hijack the government system. Free markets inhibit Corporatism. The Oval Office is not the goal. Market anarchism is.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
I'll see your happy ass at the convention. McCain deserves to be bitchslapped up and down by Dr. Paul and his "legion"
ElCapitan1985 3 years ago
Mr. Young Turk or should I say Young Jurk.
I remember you saying insulting things about
Ron Paul. Now you're saying positive things.
YOU ARE SLOW TO CATCH ON.
TimEngle 3 years ago
I have a stamp for it. :)
Insidious1 3 years ago
P.S. If you mark the previous comment as spam, you've definately proved my point.
bavarianbeast2000 3 years ago
Why do Ron Paul supporters reject/erase/mark other opinions on the left or right and yet claim to be the bastions of free speech and giving the right there of? Is it because Ron Paul supporters talk of freedom, yet has been alienating other people for their personal opinions?
bavarianbeast2000 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you're full of shit
devknob 3 years ago
What are you talking about? A person has the right to agree or disagree with anothers opinion. If anything a Ron Paul supporter like myself are more annoyed with being ignored or passed off as if our opinions dont matter.
And as a reply to your 'prove my point' comment why dont you look at the other comments marked as spam and see what they say? Let me clue you in: they usualy say 'vote ron paul'.
Seiku 3 years ago
I do realize that the VOTE RON PAUL stamps get spammed because they advertise for a presidential canidate. I for one would spam a VOTE OBAMA/MCCAIN/HILLARY comment anytime, it's just that Ron Paul supporters will go to extensive lengths to belittle those who have a certain opinion of Mr. Paul if it isn't blind praise. I have seen blogospheres attacked for bringing up his past for his somewhat controversial comments on his campaign paper written by his staff.
bavarianbeast2000 3 years ago
Well I understand that most supporters even myself get very defensive and argue or debate their positions & beliefs. I think the reasons are frustration, when most people ignore every valid point and just say 'He's a loon' without any merit. Most blogs that ive seen that bring up the controversial past like the racist articles are usualy in a tone of assumed guilt. Guilty untill proven innocent seems to be how people think these days. I don't blame anyone getting upset or attack such comments.
Seiku 3 years ago
If someone is being disrespectful or belittle your opinions, I personal would ignore them and keep posting or tell them to chill out. I even tell fellow supporters to be more respectful since they represent all of us. An example of this would be the 'truthers' who most think all Paul supporters are. Its not a view I share and when I find a person who supports Paul and the 9/11 inside job thing I try explain to them Pauls true position on the subject, its frustrating when they disagree.
Seiku 3 years ago
And of course its human nature to try to ignore or block out anyone if they feel they arent on 'their side'. Who hasnt done that?
Hopefully those you've met that have done or said disrespectful things will mature more.
Seiku 3 years ago
I understand the right-wing media snaps at Mr. Paul for some of his issues and blows some out of proportion. But the whole article being brought out into light gets attacked by the supporters, even if the article is being brought out into neutral settings. Afterall, it took a decade for Mr. Paul to finally apologize for the article that his staff had written. That's a long time for someone to finally talk about the 800 lb. gorilla in the room.
bavarianbeast2000 3 years ago
That could be true and I dont really know if he spoke about it before or he finaly got over with it now. I personaly believe he truely didnt know about and when he did notice he ignored it and moved on untill brought up again. After all there isnt much a person can do about those things except apologise and move on. Problem is even when he did finaly speak about it and tried to refute it most folks insist he is guilty. I think that frustrates supporters and therefore more arguements etc.
Seiku 3 years ago
True. It's not like everyone knows everything about any politician's decisions and what he/she does behind doors.
bavarianbeast2000 3 years ago
I dont blame anyone if they dont trust Paul or feel offended by the articles or by how he took action. They have the right to feel that way and not support him. For me I listen to his words that I know he's said (videos etc) and his opinions that I know he wrote (on his site). I trust Paul and believe his message and will support him. I will probably time to time argue with those who disagree but no matter what as long as we're respectful to one another I wouldnt block or reject your opinions.
Seiku 3 years ago
Of course I can't say the same for everyone else, everyone handles things their own way.
Hopefuly we will all learn to get along, we need to in order to get our country back on track.
Seiku 3 years ago
The articles were honest. They talked about the extremely high rates of crime, including rape, committed by blacks. 40,000 white women are raped by blacks each year, and this continues because every one is afraid to write about it.
RonPauladvocate 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Paul's staff reported on gang crime in Los Angeles and commented, "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."
"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," the paper said."
It's statistically impossible to say almost all black people commit crime in one city.
bavarianbeast2000 3 years ago
The bit on D.C.'s "criminal justice system" seems like sarcasm, I belive the point of it is showing how discriminatory the system is.
Seiku 3 years ago
This is misleading. One guy slipped some stuff like this into a newsletter many years ago.
XenuTravolta 3 years ago
I have read those newsletters and all I can say about them is they are pure hilarity. I cannot believe they are meant to be racist because too many sound tongue-in-cheek sarcastic. I may be wrong because I do not take race seriously but I have heard racist rants from guys like William Pierce and they are much more serious in their claims than any in that newsletter. The writing sounds more like jokes my friends and I might tell for a good laugh rather than a real complaint against a race.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
His sarcasm reminds me of Tom Metzger, just without the white sheets.
RonPaulinista 3 years ago
It really does not. Read an article from Vanguard News Network or listen to a Reason Radio broadcast. They don't just make jokes about blacks being fleet-footed, they refer to all ethnic groups by slurs. The newsletters from Paul that I read contained no mention of the N-word or any other slur. The language is much lighter than other racist journalists. It sounds more like an inappropriate joke than hate speak. It does not excuse the jokes but I do not think it is a symptom of a bigger problem.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
I don't read biased news, it's all crap no matter which side you stand on. I mostly read the papers as anti-black and mostly attacked the minorities in the eighties that recieved a lot of attention. They weren't "sarcastic", they were even denounced by Mr. Paul, but even I know he justified them and knew what was in print, he's still a liar. Either way you slice it, he won't be put in office, and that's good enough for me.
RonPaulinista 3 years ago
I get the feeling Paul denounced them so he would not have to explain them. And like I said if you read real racism it is not as nice as the stuff in his newsletter. I would not urge you to listen to racist radio but if you tune into either of those outlets I named and compare that blatant racism to what was written in those newsletters there is a stark contrast in language and intent. The problem with print media is people will read them differently which leads to great misunderstanding.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
He wants to wipe the blackface off and try to trick the blacks into voting for him. LOL.
Plus, it's still racist without nigger, fag, or kike in the sentence.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
True but it is not as serious. I do not know if you really are 74 but at 20 there is a difference between a joke that capitalizes on the ignorance of the statement for laughs and a statement of hatred that has nothing funny about it. Maybe it is a generational thing.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LOL. The Internet is Serious Business.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Shutup you faggot liberal cunt.
RonPauladvocate 3 years ago
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
I win.
t3hbr1dg3tro11 3 years ago
Did you just defend that? Wow, I can't really say anything to that. Yes, it is true that urban black communities in certain cities have high crime rates disproportionate to the populace; but claiming almost 100% of them are criminals? That's just ignorant beyond belief...
bavarianbeast2000 3 years ago 6
I think it's a testament to the cowardice of the white race that whites won't even discuss the fact, or get angry at the fact, that 40,000 white women are raped by blacks every year in the US.
RonPauladvocate 3 years ago
Ron Paul supporters think it a crime that any body get raped by any body .
CoSyBob 3 years ago 3
LOL RAPE
You'd defend the guy if he reinstated slavery.
naziforronpaul 3 years ago
Who is defending Paul here? Do you think it should matter who is raping who? The name is cute but you could spend some time working for change instead of staring red-herring accounts to make Paul look bad.
SSSLLLAAYYEEERRRR 3 years ago