This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Ron Paul: A New Beginning
From Ron Paul
Ron Paul: A New Beginning
America is over $16 trillion in debt. The “official” unemployment rate still hovers around 8%.
Our federal government claims the right to spy on American citizens, indefinitely detain them, and even assassinate them without trial.
Domestic drones fly over the country for civilian surveillance.
Twelve million fewer Americans voted in 2012 than in 2008, yet political pundits scratch their heads.
It’s not hard to see why, though.
To go along with endorsing a never-ending policy of bailouts, “stimulus packages,” and foreign military adventurism, the establishment of neither major party questions the assaults on Americans’ liberties I’ve named above.
As my campaign showed, the American people are fed up. Many realized heading into Tuesday that regardless of who won the presidential election, the status quo would be the real victor.
GOP leadership is now questioning why they didn’t perform better.
They’re looking at demographic changes in the United States and implying minorities can only be brought into the party by loudly advocating for abandoning what little remains of their limited government platform and endorsing more statist policies.
My presidential campaign proved that standing for freedom brings people together.
Liberty is popular – regardless of race, religion, or creed.
As long as the GOP establishment continues to not only reject the liberty message, but actively drive away the young, diverse coalition that supports those principles, it will see results similar to Tuesday’s outcome.
A renewed respect for liberty is the only way forward for the Republican Party and for our country.
I urge all my Republican colleagues to join the liberty movement in fighting for a brighter future.
»
- 62552 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I'm in
Me too
Me three.
Looks more like the end to me.
At least the People's House of Congress isn't going to commit suicide anytime soon. I'll remind you the newly elected el Presidente's budget got zero votes last time......so their's really no hope coming from there.
Staying informed, paying off debt, saving cash, buying physical gold & silver, eating a healthy diet and getting fit is the best way to maintain freedom and liberty.
The masses of clueless, obese debt slaves are already lost.
<- LIBERTY = RESPONSIBLE FOR SELF
<- LIBERTY = FREE TO SMOKE POT
Can't it be both?
Bobola said it right. His list of liberty doesn't include forms of self-destruction. Self-destructive practices eventually lead to servitude.
The question is therefore, when does smoking pot become self-destructive?
Another way to think about it might be, why would anyone prefer anything less than perfect clarity and resolution.
Karl Rove hates Ron Paul for his freedom.
http://howstupidare.blogspot.com/2012/11/how-stupid-are-karl-rove-and-friends.html
im well into my own liberty movement = pms , weapons, debt free modest lifestyle
"Twelve million fewer Americans voted in 2012 than in 2008."
I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT.
Mr Paul.. Call Cozine before your committee.. And arrest him on the spot.
Until then.. Go fuck yourself.
+ 100
If you guys are feeling especially militant then why not go the vigilante route? No balls?
The world isn't changed by one-off, futile acts of violence. Those who win, win minds.
So your fantasy in which Ron Paul singlehandedly wrestles Corzine to the floor of the House (and he could do it) is not really such a good idea after all?
There is nothing vigilante about Congress arresting Corzine. Do you know the definition of vigilante? Do you understand Federal congressional powers?
So now it's not Paul's fault alone as implied above. It's the fault of Congress which would never support him in such an action. You're thinking a little more clearly now.
<- Lame
<- Pathetic
Can you refute the argument with an argument or can you only deploy derogatory adjectives?
"Burp." Does that answer your question, you disingenuous, fallacious, dipshit.
Yes, it does.
It's a bit late to be arguing don't ya think?...I'd be digging seret holes for your metal by now, if I were you....certainly not discussing who's right and who's wrong, that's a game for the ignorant.
I say F*CK the Republican Party.
RON PAUL!
Look at all the distraction in this thread even after the election is over.
<- Zero Hedge
<- Ron Paul
<-- Melt the Precious
<-- Bury the Precious
Alex Jones Caller Ron Paul Revenge Voters For Obama 10/09/2012
http://www.myspace.com/video/michaelwiseguy/alex-jones-caller-ron-paul-revenge-vote-for-obama/109079927
Anyone can re-upload this video on Youtube, my account was terminated.
Some in the loser Romney camp are calling us "Paulqaeda". I like that. It's a combination English/Aribic word.
Paul Qaeda = Paul Base
In the 2008 campaign, we were 'Paulistas".
The man certainly has a way of drawing attention to the issues, unlike a candidate who will remain as nameless. Imagine how engaging this election might have been with Ron on the stage. Oh, well....
As far as I am concerned you should STFU about Ron Paul. You blew the horn all over the place for the man but didn't have the balls to go to the booth and write his name down. You don't stand for Liberty, you stand for the convenient, and as soon as it wasn't convenient for you you bailed. On this topic I think you should fuck off.
+ .1
Did Ron Paul write in Ron Paul?
Did Ron Paul go vote for things other than himself even though he wasn't on the ballot? Did he vote for amendments, state races, etc? You didn't. You stayed home, and told other people to stay home.
Provide a citation in which I told people to stay home. If you can't do it you're a liar.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-30/how-vote-well#comment-2932560
"I could walk half a block and be the only one in line. No muss, no fuss, no waiting. But I won't. What would be the point?"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-12/ron-paul-one-party-system#comme...
"Everybody knows that the "none of the above button" is rebranded from time to time with names such as "Nader," "Buchanan," "Baldwin" or "Johnson." If I bothered to vote (which I won't) I would look for that button."
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guest-post-should-obama-and-congress-be-ar...
"The Ron Paul people who have infiltrated the complacency of everyday life are the ones who can make a difference. Rule yourself wisely and lead by example."
In none of those quotes did I tell others not to vote. Looks like you get to wear the liar tag.
Wormtongue, have you been caught bullshiting again?
Of course not. It's just the DTs. You should be used to it by now.
fuu does not lie.
fuu is clearly showing that the ways of Mordor are filled with lies and deceit.
or is the majority of our political agenda not based on stating a meaningless "fact" that in truth disguises the actual meaning?
your statements would only lead to not voting if followed by the masses.
therefore while possibly you did not state so "directly" your verbage was equal to such.
therefore, fuu did not lie.
But I never told others not to vote and he said I did. That is by definition a lie, even in Hobbiton.
And do you think that is all just a coincidence? I don't.
Many agendas are threatened by the message of liberty.
Exactly.
"Liberty" is such a fine word, truly.
me? I'm not content to use the word without accurate, complete descriptions of who is included.
and I'd like anyone ELSE who liberally uses the word to describe who gets "liberty" and who is exempt, and why.
if that's an "agenda" - then you can apply your label. or your anonymous downVOTE.
not directed at anyONE in particular, just a statement reply.
Who said anything about the Liberty written there? Liberty doesn't need to be defined to mean what it means, hence it being in the dictionary.
Your argument seems more focused on fairness and "equality" than anything. You would prefer everyone be a slave over everyone being free.
nice try voter.
it was deep sarcasm, but it grabbed a downvote, so I'm workin' the room *nods*
example A: You would prefer everyone be a slave over everyone being free.
Birds of a feather flock together.
-1 disingenuous attempt to lead the witness
Describe the scene in which Ron Paul arrests Corzine. Flesh out the role of each player on the stage. If you think it through you'll find that yours is the disingenuous argument.
Alfred Hitchcock. Please just STFU now.
Yeah, you're all about the liberty.
Narcissistic spam junkie.
.
.
Really? I've read your comments for quite some time now. I think you should probably go drink some booze and go to bed early.
I had no idea until now that ZH is predominantly a forum for stoners parading behind the mask of liberty.
Mama told me not to come
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKaQzQAlNn4
+1 ultimately correct
I withheld my vote because I thought both candidates were terrible.
You are correct, it wasn't 12 million. It was 8,860,176 fewer voters in 2012 than 2008
Did you include the padding?
I can assure you, when my "better half" has pms, its anything but liberty. At least not for me.
You can't draw some artificial line and state that liberty ends at "self destructive practices" because then you get bracket creep of what constitutes self destructive practices, with free speech and disagreement with government listed as a self destructive practice. Liberty means the freedom to do anything stupid to yourself that you want to, along with the responsibility of dealing with the consequences. That's just life.
I didn't draw any line. Don't give me that line-drawing shit. We each draw our own lines. That's obvious. It's also obvious that a point is eventually reached where a person becomes servile to someone else or government because they carelessly surrendered their liberty.
Liberty is doomed if all it has is fools like you to count on. Thanks for proving it. That is all.
The brain doesn't surrender its addictions without a good, long fight. Most of you really need to wake the hell up. I've told you the truth. Deal with it for once instead of fucking copping out all the time like a bunch of infantile, mind-altered junkies. Can't you think of at least one person who trusts and depends on you? Fucking fake liberatian narcissists. Stop using libertarianism to fucking stick pencils up your ass in the name of freedom.
Pot is a performance enhancing drug, dumbass. Look at Michael Phelps. Winners don't smoke pot, champions do.
Charlie STD. Performance enhancing maybe --- if you're are a competitive eater or a porn star.
BTW. Nobody gives a shit if you smoke pot. Toke away. I wouldn't stop you. Think whatever you want. And don't be surprised when you wake up, if someone took your coin, guns, girlfriend and the rest of your shit.
Agreed
Everything in moderation. If you want to smoke pot , rock on. But the minute you stop giving a shit and start losing everything, can't get the buzz you once did and then have to move on to meth, or smack be careful where you start looking for new drug revenue sources. The minute a head pops into my home I'm not going to ask questions. If my 2 german shepherds don't get you first my 00 will. Toke away smokey, but just think about where it might lead you
Have you actually ever gotten high off MJ?
It's the Reefer Madness excuse again. I honestly think some of you are doing yourself a disservice with not educating yourselves. Not my problem though, unless you start telling me what I can and can not do with my body, wait...
'Performance enhancing maybe --- if you're are a competitive eater or a porn star.'
No.
And here's one example: If you had ever been on an elite swim team, you would know that five-to-eight hours in the pool per day of controlled breathing = much like Zen moving meditation practices. Five hours of controlled breathing, you are high as a fucking kite and can't feel your feet when you walk home, nor do you care.
The pot high yeilds similar effects outside the pool, and can help with mental focus.
Check the times for your age group on U.S. Masters Swimmers website; and please ponder how fast those times really are, and the effort required to move through water that fast. If you have any grasp on reality, you will most likely feel humbled. Lots of swimmers smoke pot.
Pot is a tool for the obsessive. Ask Phelps. He was just tyring to get normal during downtime from practice.
LOL Charlie, Precious acts like he knows all of the points, but the war on drugs army will eventually turn on us.
In a world of way too many laws, the rise of criminals is inevitable.
Clearly not a Ron Paul guy.
Fool. I'm for legalization of pot. That doesn't mean I recommend using it. What is so fucking hard about that concept?
Fool, LOL.
I know alcohol heads and pot heads.They are the same. They use.
Where I live, bunch of leftie potheads and fine winos vote left.
Did they just vote for more liberty and freedom? No way. More debt, regulations and a shifting SCOTUS.
The point is that the entire weed and gay marriage issue and all of the other red herrings are a bunch of irrelevant shit in a liberty discussion and in light of the performance of Washington.
Dickweed. In case you didn't notice, your fellow Americans voted for POT, HIGHER TAXES and OBAMA. That's apparently THEIR IDEA OF LIBERTY. At liberty to take your shit and smoke it.
Perhaps it's time to point out that in Fight Club, "Fuck you, you fucking fucktard" is the same as "I lost. Please stop beating the snot out of me."
Socrates. Thank you for your attempt at sagacious insight (snobby, velvety put-down [FAIL] probably works on Huffpost). But everything serves a purpose now and then, including profanity.
Why do you have such a low opinion of yourself?
Why do ass clowns like you get off on inappropriate cliches?
Please present documentation supporting your assertion that I am an "ass clown." Oh, nevermind...
Maybe you're only 3/4 ass clown.
WHO THINKS RON PAUL HAS BEEN FIGHTING FOR YOUR RIGHT TO SMOKE A DOOB?! HOW FAR WILL PEOPLE WILLINGLY STUFF THEIR HEADS UP THEIR BACKSIDES?
It is shocking that voters actually embraced this as an electoral issue AT ALL, but particularly and most pathetically in light of all that's happening. Legalization of pot is about as tangential as anything else trotted out these days for a distraction. It's infuriating. GET A GOD DAMN PRIORITY.
Tangential? Do you know how many people are in jail over pot?
You are reminding me of all of the ways the drug laws create jobs, revenues and votes.
Huge businiess. Corporate prisons growing earnings.
Imagine this for every one person you remove from the economy, you put .005% people into employment. That is essentially what you are doing.
.
..
In case it missed your attention, restoring actual freedom and personal responsibility - legalizing the popular recreational drugs people are using anyway - would eliminate the justification for the most wasteful, inefficient bureaucracy that Nixon started, Bush corrupted, Klinton refined, that awed Boris and that we are paying for... at gunpoint. As an added benefit, legalization will devastate organized crime. Release the Moral Hazard! Holland is your case study. You don't want to shoot them because they use drugs, you want to shoot them because they are coming through your window. Thats good enough for me.
It's so easy to get the people foaming at the mouth about a politically expedient end. Druggies were dealt with negative social pressure before.That is free.
I doubt the cost benefit will be worth it in the end.
We now have 900 hp state police gun boats with multi 50's on board. Vietnam style.
heh, it begins to unravel, the story of why,
it was a pot thing all along, eh youth vote?
we all have to pee in a cup whenever nanny wants to inspect our bladders. Its The Lieu.
I know, it sucks.
maybe some women are against having to pee on a stick for Daddy's law enForcers, maybe you can understand why?
As if that wouldn't be enogh. Tyranny is tyranny. If more folks could look at a single issue which effects them personally and say, "I'm not going to take any more of this bullshit!" the world would be a better place.
I agree.
Tyranny is Tyranny.
of course, your whole post ignores your arguments for Sanctity of Life promoters.
The Sanctity of Life bill returns decisions on abortion to the states. This is true to Ron Paul's promotion of federalism which brings government closer to the people by recognizing the jurisdiction of states as oppose to the federal government. I would prefer to see an end to all government but I fail to see the benefit in mischaracterizing the efforts of Ron Paul.
Cathartes, I don't know what has gotten up your butt lately, but it seems increasingly impossible for you to think with your brain instead of with your uterus.
Really, enough with the single-issue off-topic feminist tangents already. Life, and liberty, is about FAR more than your immediate and narrowly-focused concerns. Your obsession with your womb borders on a very unbecoming if not outright ugly narcissism. But go ahead and tell me once again that I can't possibly understand, because I am a man. Is that your version of "original sin"?
akak, again, we've been through this before, and you'll most likely get less upvotes than last weekend's heady exchange - and have I ever said "you can't possibly understand, because you're a man" to you? I may have pointed out that being a man, you have no ball in this game *cough* but plenty of "men" understand that this "liberty" you keep referring to needs to include everyone, and that policing women's reproductive capacity falls outside the "liberty" definition for them, even if it bores you.
and once again, I am not a feminist, nor am I a woman, nor am I a voter - but you keep labeling me if it helps your thinking. . .
True or False?
Because the birth of child results from the choice of the mother exclusively -- with no input from the father whatsoever -- no father should be required to pay support for a child except with the presence of a pre-existing contract to that effect.
"Because the birth of child results from the choice of the mother exclusively -- with no input from the father whatsoever -- no father should be required to pay support for a child except with the presence of a pre-existing contract to that effect."
I'm starting to like this whole independent uterine liberty thingy.
indeed, it would be a game changer, over time.
if Repubs were to ever get their way - doubtful, IMO - and gain control over women's bodies, I'm guessing the result would be less fucking all round (Religious Right wet dream, ha), and only certain women would be letting any sperm near them without some heavy negotiation, compensation, etc. economics suggest that a premium would be put on access to the womb, as it would be a State regulated thing. I reckon more dudes would begin to find each other attractive, since that's the way it's already headed, and if women wanted a "baby" they'd negotiate that too, like many already are.
would be a fascinating thing to watch, but most likely the shit will hit the fan financially before anyone's imaginings happen.
Outside of a third party witnessing the document signed (in duplicate, one for her, one for him) attesting that both entered into a contractual agreement voluntarily that holds the male unresponsible for any, ahem, third parties involved at a later date...I don't see a problem.
Besides the immediate buzz kill (to both primary parties passions) at the bar of course ;-)
the "problem" might well be a lack of women willing to participate in said act.
kids these days, they're hella creative, heh.
once the possibility is removed for any financial gain, be it gov't or otherwise, I reckon, over time, "sex" might find its natural equilibrium again.
careful what you wish for.
And that my friends, when all things are said and done, is what they call morality. Am I the only one who is turned off by the glorification of casual sex?
Sex is a little more than just an act...but I've gotta say...I'm not the least bit interested in the "heady days" of Greece...lol.
Nor am I under any illusion that males & females can't be bought for "sex"...but we were talking about "voluntary free sex acts" leaving both parties indemnified.
Why do I always feel like I've been voluntarily sucked into a dark hole with no bottom when we do this? ;-)
Maybe your old lady needs a vaginoplasty.
Sorry, buddy. All in fun. ;-)
lol...believe me, I've tried to knock the lining out of it...she just says more more more. When it gets up to an hour & half OSHA & the EEOC will have to get involved here ;-)
You're a better man than I.
Geez, I hate pronouns. You never know what to do with them
sex without mutual respect might be considered an act by some. the "voluntary free sex acts" you refer to might be seen as more dangerous, hence unappealing, should the gov't. enter into enForcing outcomes, can you understand this? that if a chance of an unwanted pregnancy in exchange for "voluntary free sex" would put a woman's womb contents in the hands of the State Law Enforcement, that over time there might evolve a certain hesitation to engage so freely on the part of the only person the laws pertain to - the woman?
all one need do is a bit of research into cultural norms over time, and realise that the centuries have their "flavour" - including the heavy clothing norms both sexes were held to, though women more than men, in order to be seen as culturally chaste, etc.
remember the folks who are behind these types of control dramas - the Conservative Christian types who preach abstention until sealed by their god's approval, and then unto no one else ever again, lol - and despite the propensity to hang with prostitutes in cheap motels, they don't make any allowances for the flock.
"voluntary free sex acts" are fine - but they won't be so much fun when the gov. gets in bed with folks.
and, for the record, I reckon the Christian Conservatives are the dinosaur here, and the bell curve is detumescent of late. . .
"voluntary free sex acts" are fine - but they won't be so much fun when the gov. gets in bed with folks."
But that is whats happening now. Which is where we will always "separate".
"Free pills" and other variant concepts places government squarely in the bed with them...whispering in each ear between it...there will be no consequence for either of you for doing this.
Doesn't that creep you out at all?
I don't give a damn what consenting adults do...but I don't want to pay for their drinks at the bar, their food afterwards, their "free pills" and rubbers after that or taking care of a rug rat of consequence because all of the above was provided for them frrrreeeee! and they just said no.
Its really quite simple to me.
But enough of this...I'm sure I've got LTER on the other line about now ;-)
LTER sends his apologies. He just washed his hair and he can't do a thing with it.
despite your attempts to box me in with the "free rubbers" gal, I am in not that person, and I don't advocate for "free" anything from the .gov - bar the FREEdom from Laws criminalising a woman's inherent right to make a decision regarding her own body. end of. no other "woman's issue voting" shit shall be attached to me, k? unless I choose to argue it. remember, I don't vote, never have, and never will. I'm just here pointing to shallow, generic thinking, and maybe interrupt the bro-fest occasionally.
really guys, the stereotyping is intense right now, as is the desire to box folks into separate corners. particularly when it comes to what should be private, and that includes sexuality, however it's expressed.
"despite your attempts to box me in with the "free rubbers" gal"
Why did you just say gal? You just said you were a male.
Some believe you are starting with a false statement to begin with, therefore cannot answer your question.
Yeah, stop being so anal.
Precious, perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying. Based on this comment I would conclude that you feel that people are free to do stupid things, but that sometimes these stupid things end up with them surrendering liberty to someone else? Fair statement, although I believe we would both agree that pre-emptively handing liberty to government in order to prevent us from doing stupid things that hand our liberty to government is a non-starter as far as logic goes. However, I am still baffled by your previous comment, could you clear it up? You said "Bobola said it right. His list of liberty doesn't include forms of self-destruction. Self-destructive practices eventually lead to servitude." What did you mean by that, specifically with reference to the "list of liberty" part?
Should Anabaptists have the liberty to live in communist collectives?
Damn straight, they should.
Oh, I can tell your just a heartless neo-nazi conservative (sarc/off)!
Something that can be self-desructive isn't always self-destructive. Along with freedom comes personal responsibility and moderation, and if those fail, accountability for one's actions. Otherwise, we're right back to the Volstead act and banning large sodas.
Most things have dual uses --- both good and bad, including government.
I'm for government trying to protect people from the malice of others.
I'm against government trying to protect people from themselves.
I'm for government trying to protect people from the malice of others.
I'm against government trying to protect people from themselves.
So having a drink or smoking some weed would be alright, although supplying said drink or weed would be unlawful under your form of government?
In your quest for perfect government, you will end up with the worst form of government.
Sovereignty rests with the individual alone. The individual is tangible and real. The state is an artificial construct. It can't have rights.
Good luck explaining that to the artificial D.A. the next time the state gives you an artificial D.U.I. or lands your ass in jail for failure to reply to the artificial I.R.S. notice.
I knew you were a fucking clown the whole time.
Tyranny does not supplant individual rights it merely defrauds the purchase holder.
Well then lets leave it at that Davy. Pffft.
By the way eMan. Where is the malice in offering something to someone? Malice? Really?
Unless the offer is intended to deceive someone, where is there any malice in offering smoke or drink?
Combining replies in one post is lazy and confusing to your readers. I was like, "Who the hell is E-man?"
Are you high?
You topped out early Davy. The facts today prove, you are 100% ass clown.
Actually, I'm heading downstairs to top off again.
Blame it on the vodka.
Just because so many are convinced that their delusions are real doesn't make it more real that they will create fictions to abuse, murder and steal from others.
If you had a real argument, you would not need to use derogatives.
Another way to think about it might be, why would anyone prefer anything less than a different perspective for a few hours?
There, fixed it for ya!
How can you be responsible for yourself if your not high?
Everyone knows the only thing keeping people from killing eachother like wild beasts is an unlimited supply of Prozac and Pot, without those two things people would be at eachothers throats.
Thank you for illustrating my point.
Dre4dwolf:
" How can you be responsible for yourself if your not high? ..."
SWP (Stoned While Posting); learn the correct use of contractions while YOU'RE (not 'your') at it.
Give him a break already! He's just really high.
Waste of time trying to work inside the system, as he wishes to do.
I met with him and told him the only real change comes from outside of the system.
We must walk away from elections, Wall St, corporations, psychopaths in general, NOT enable them with our thoughts, action and capital.
Stop the Revolution and Start the Evolutionand
My Awakening Part 1 + 2Dual Power
Ron Paul's real goal has been to advise and support the moral character of individual people. For example, although Ron respects all human life he says that the Federal government has no role in determining a woman's right to chose abortion. He says that laws can not change human behavior for the better, only the strong moral character of the individual can do that.
" Ron Paul: A New Beginning "
Oh gawd ... HWGO (here we go again)
Some of us have a firm grasp on reality and others do not. What happened to the Romney landslide?
And then there was my call:
<- No Spam
<- Logout
Why not let the Tylers make the call? This is their house.
No self-respecting Tyler would censor anything but his own stupidity.
Stop fighting, you guys are on the same side I thought. It's clear RP could have done more as chairman of domestic monetary policy committee. He did plenty running for President, but then ran scared imo and shut down his campaign. It also didn't help his message that he shuts the campaign (with many counting on him) with one hand and asks for money with the other. If liberty is 'able to take advantage' many D's who turned to RPs message were turned off.
very interesting that you have brought this up, given how strongly you championed Paul.
and for the record, I agree it's a point worth exploring, thoroughly.
Then proceed.
have.
Foul balls don't count.
agreed, perhaps a shower will help?
Do you have a solution to chronic jock itch?
WTF. You mean HWGA, FFS.