Ron Paul for President

[ls1z4me]

When someone asks me why I support Dr. Paul, I tell them my reasons, but in the same breath tell them to go look up the facts for themselves. Go see what he really said about this or that, because if your are expecting the main stream media (MSM) to get right, they wont!

Most, if not all, have came back and told me that they did their research and are going to support Paul, not because they agree with him 100%, but they realized that the MSM was reporting falsely on Paul's positions, if in when, they reported on him at all.

Ron Paul destroys the left/right paradigm. He exposes it for the "WWF wrestling match" it is, and the MSM hates him for it. Just take a minute and watch how, 4 years ago in Iowa, the MSM grovelled to their chosen candidates victories and how important an Iowa win means. Now that Paul has a good shot of winning it, Iowa does not matter.

Watch this video.

http://youtu.be/9c_YvAfWN2w

here is the extended version

http://youtu.be/soHAOVZzXtA

MSM is being exposed for what it is, just a bunch puppets reading off a script. The real questions is who is pulling stings.

 

[abajaj11]

If there was somebody who lined up better with my views I suppose I would vote for him instead... but Ron Paul is the closest any presidential candidate has ever come to my own beliefs.

He is the only one with sane and realistic views on foreign policy. It amazes me how scared some people are of Iran... a country with a pathetic air force and navy, which doesn't even have the capability to land a missle, much less a single soldier, on our soil. I can only imagine how terrified you guys must have been during the Cold War, when we were at odds with a country that actually WAS capable of posing a threat to us. The idea that a country like Iran would actually WANT to start a war with us is ridiculous. They know that we would utterly destroy them if we turned our full military might on them.

FYI Pakistan already has nukes, and has for some time. They are an Islamic country with a lot more of a radical population than Iran... and yet they don't attack us. The hostility between Iran and us doesn't have near as much to do with Islam as it does with our history of intervention in that country. Do any of you happen to know how Iran went from being a constitutional republic and one of the most secular, westernized countries in the middle east to a dictatorship during the 1950s?

Ron Paul is also the only one who makes any sense when it comes to economic and monetary policy... he has been trying to warn us for years about the dangers of a bubble economy and of printing too much money, while everybody else was cheering about how great it is how so many Americans are buying homes and how great the stock market is doing. None of the other jokers running for the nomination predicted the crisis. Most of them were supporting the policies that led to it.

He is also definitely the most pro-gun candidate.

How many more reasons do you need?

I agree.+1000

 

[mons meg]

Interesting questionnaire, even if it was from the New Yawk Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/12/29/us/election-news/candidates-on-executive-power.html

(and a summary from Reason)
http://reason.com/blog/2011/12/30/r...on/HitandRun+(Reason+Online+-+Hit+&+Run+Blog)

Look at the responses from the "top tier" candidates. Some of them are downright scary. I'll hand it to Paul, he gets all of them "right". Gary Johnson was not on the list, but I would assume many of his answers would be similar to Paul's. ALL the others listed have misguided notions of Executive Power.

For me, warts and all, I prefer Paul to the other Republican candidates. But in the general election, if I see Gary Johnson: Libertarian on the ballot, my "protest" vote is headed his way.

 

[RickN]

So why punish a libertarian for what liberals do? The only connection between the two is the letter "L".

Because legalizing drugs will just give us more basket cases to support, and before someone says Paul will wave his magic wand and make all that go away, I live in the real world and know better. Plus I have several family members with drug or booze problems and have seen for myself what happens.

 

[vvvvvvv]

Because legalizing drugs will just give us more basket cases to support, and before someone says Paul will wave his magic wand and make all that go away, I live in the real world and know better. Plus I have several family members with drug or booze problems and have seen for myself what happens.

So the crime factor was a deterrent?

 

[redmax51]

So the crime factor was a deterrent?

Ask the Swedish government,specifically Stockholm,how legalizing drugs worked for them.

Ask the USA government how legalizing alcohol worked for us.

 

[abajaj11]

illegalizing drugs and the WAR on drugs costs us a LOT of money as a society. Legalizing booze makes it a lot cheaper as a society. both are addictive substances that can harm us greatly.
Many things are addictive. Some are illegal and others are not. Coffee can be addictive. Fast food can be addictive (DAs often routinely supply happy meals to informers). any addictive substance can cause hurt to the person and their near and dear ones.
I am sorry that happened to you.
The question being discussed is, should we make some addictive things illegal or should we legalize them all and let people assume responsibility.
drugs are illegal but FREELy available. so what's the point of illegalizing them? Since they are freely available anyway, I disagree with your assumption that the number of "basket cases" will go up.

Because legalizing drugs will just give us more basket cases to support, and before someone says Paul will wave his magic wand and make all that go away, I live in the real world and know better. Plus I have several family members with drug or booze problems and have seen for myself what happens.

 

[henschman]

BTW right now I'm at the Ron Paul campaign headquarters in Norman, helping out with some phone banking... if you're close by, you should come check the HQ out -- it is pretty cool. It is on Main Street across from the Sooner Theatre. We are having a big g2g on Jan. 3, watching the Iowa results come in. There will be food and drinks (alcoholic and non), so you should swing by. It will be a good time. Also we are cranking up for the Oklahoma GOP county, district, and state conventions, and getting delegates elected to the RNC, so you should come get signed up on our list so you are in the loop on all the happenings on that front.

Oh and of course your guns are welcome at the HQ too!

 

[RickN]

So the crime factor was a deterrent?

It helps.

 

[vvvvvvv]

It helps.

Non-anecdotal evidence?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/oct/26/drugsandalcohol.homeaffairs
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=portugal-drug-decriminalization

Those who support the government choosing what natural substances aren't and aren't legal for a human to consume in private, as well as government choosing what an adult may or may not do in their own bedroom with (an)other consenting adult(s), obviously believe that government should be the ultimate decision maker for the individual. That describes a large amount of the platform of the Republican Party.