Ron Paul has a lot on the ball.

If he did not hate government so much,
he would be a good president.

The market does not and will not fix everything, or seek justice, or do what is necessary for the welfare of the public. Government's role should be to ensure that such things happen; it is not clear that Ron Paul sees the need for government.

He is, however, honest. He is the best Republican candidate by far. The others are total losers.

But he DOES eat Freedom Fries, right???

I believe Obama is absolutely correct. To me, it is no different than those who slap a "Support the Troops" decal on their foreign car and somehow believes it qualifies them as a patriot ...

I prefer to wear my silver ring that's adorned with a row of Vietnam War-era peace signs. That weems more appropriate.

There was a Repub wore a flag pin
Jingo was his name-o
J I N G O
J I N G O
J I N G O
and Jingo was his name-o

Much ado about nothing. I applaud Obama for not goosestepping to the Repub tune.

If George Bush was wearing a 3 piece suit made out of the American Flag, he would still be lying to the American people every time he opened his mouth.
Does the suit make him patriotic?

Ron Paul is an anti-women's rights nutcase who introduced legislation defining that life begins at conception. Anyone who votes for Ron Paul is against a woman's right to choose. Period. Of course I've always had my suspicions about the roots of most of the virulant anti-Hillary rants on here.

Also, Paul opposes any form of universal government-backed healthcare plans, he opposes Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

The end.

FLAGS!

to colonpowpow,

When Ron Paul repeals the Income Tax and the IRS, you will be in a much better position to afford adequate healthcare insurance or other means of care.

When Ron Paul ends the federal war on drugs, the federal deficit will be greatly reduced, demanding less tax burden on future Americans, reducing prison numbers and greatly restoring our constitutional liberties

President Ron Paul will end the empire overseas and this will save $100 - $300 billion each year, a staggering amount that is unimaginable, and will reduce your taxes incredibly.

Ridding the USA of the Patriot Act and Homeland security will reduce the size and scope of the police state considerably.

Hilary will do none of this. A Ron Paul Presidency would allow the states to legalize or criminalize abortion but its a certainty that all west coast and northeast states would have legal abortions any America could go to get one, or you could go to Canada, Mexico or any other place in the world if you happen to live in Mississippi or Alabama.

Putting a federal law on abortion as a more vital priority than freeing hundreds of thousands of prisoners, ending the empire, ending the war in Iraq, and abolishing the income tax is irrational.

fred mertz:

He "hates" government? What? He thinks federal bureaucratic government, or centralized planning, is inefficient and costly. He would leave most things up to the states and free market, it would work better. Justice WOULD be served under Paul's presidency - but stealing from one group to give to another is far from "justice", it's just legal plunder.

colonpowwow:
And anti-black rights, and anti-gay rights. He's for individual rights, a term that used to mean something. Now-a-days every group has some type of "right", and they shouldn't - everyone should have the same rights.

And as far as abortion issue. You really think a doctor who has delivered 4000 babies is going to support Roe vs Wade? A person who saw an abortion, where they put the crying baby in a bucket in the side of the room, is gonna be pro choice? Surely you jest.

And he'd leave it up to the states to decide. The people would make the choices, not a federal judge.

And I really do love how you think it is a bad thing that he's against SS, MC, UHC, etc. Universal Health Care DOESN'T work, Social Security is going bankrupt (and I'll be screwed for the future), and you think these are worthy programs? People should be able to make CHOICES, I should be able to opt out if need be! But I can't, because I /MUST/ pay for SS, and when I reach that ripe age of 72 (theyll surely raise the age), I'll have 2 bucks.

Yay?

“I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag” – Molly Ivins

Marc Scott Emery writes: "A Ron Paul Presidency would allow the states to legalize or criminalize abortion but its a certainty that all west coast and northeast states would have legal abortions any America could go to get one, or you could go to Canada, Mexico or any other place in the world if you happen to live in Mississippi or Alabama."

What a stunningly clueless answer, coming, as all Ron Paul supporters seem to do, from a complete inability to see the big picture and imagine the circumstances of virtually anyone other than themselves. Spoken just like someone to whom it's never even occurred that many, many Americans don't have the financial, child-care and other resources to hop on a plane going across the country or "any other place in the world."

Brent Burk:

You need to quit listening to Rush and Fox and try a little rational independent thought ...

Why is it a centralized authority is inefficient when it comes to government, but somehow becomes efficient when it is applied to the private sector or the military? What would be the reaction of our largest corporations if they were told they had to decentralize and open separate management facilities in each state? We are a single nation and that requires national laws and a national authority. The fact is "the free market and leaving it up to the states" does NOT always work better. The fact is you wouldn't want to live in a completely free market without consumer protections and we would still have slavery in some states if if was left to the states. If you think the poor in this country have the best deal, why don't you quit working and go on welfare. The fact is our tax system currently favors the well-to-do and corporations more than it has in a century. In the words of Warren Buffet, "There is class warfare in this country and my class is winning." Take a look a the tax rates prior to Reagan which resulted in the growth of our middle class and compare them to what they are today. There is plunder going on today, but it is not going to the poor. Also, "bureacrats" are not some evil, alien race ... they are what is known as "staff" or "employees" in the private sector and preform the exact same functions.

I can see you are a member of the poor, oppressed white majority. Quit being a sniveling little wimp! Why is it that you are so afraid of competing with the poor, minorities and gays on an equal basis? (Which of course it still is not!)

As the saying goes, abortion would not be an issue if men were the ones who got pregnant. The fact is you don't have a dog in this fight so please spare us the rightous indignation.

Actually, universal health care DOES work ... in every industrialized country in the world except the U.S.! Furthermore, you don't see them scrambling to adopt our system, do you? Not only that, be even though we pay more for health care, we have worse outcomes than these other countries! The problem with SS is that the trust fund has been robbed (primarily by Reagan, Bush I and Bush II). Ask your parents how they feel about it. Also, as insurance agent, I can tell you that the federal government is more efficient in managing Medicare than are insurance companies in the private sector. As an example, administrative costs for Medicare are about 20%, but private insurance companies pay more than this just for commissions on Medicare Supplements, before you even get to their real administrative costs!

You're right if you think SS won't be there when you retire ... if we continue to elect republicans. The fact is that the philosphy of most of them now is to "starve the beast" or run up such debt that the government can't afford to provide any services.

What you fail to understand is that it isn't the poor, minorities and gays that are the problem ... it is the republican legislators you have elected over the last quarter of a century. They are very pleased with themselves over creating a "second gilded age," but go take a look at what happened after our first. As they say, those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

At the risk of using maybe this medium to support claims (of mine) on this medium, take a peek at the latest:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/055259.php

Ya see? See? This guy is the only consistent politician of our time. He's actually trustworthy. Were he and LaRouche college roommates or something? But it gave me a chance to inject foreign policy. It's his fault.

I don't want to see the UN strong enough to level anything about international politics; we all enjoy some stuff we'd have to give up to make everything really 'fair' and redistribute wealth among 'Earth Neighbor' nations (some of which really would like to see our undoing). But it's anther tool. We should run that place, but we don't because the world mistrusts this administration. At the UN we see the real-world effects of our generations of success and swagger as we empower other, smaller countries and burgs: some band together to nip at our heels.

Today we're in a resources face-off with China, which has access to the upper hand. Russia isn't really paying attention to us, they're more interested in access to resources in other markets to strengthen their position relative to Europe. And Iranian and South American despots are bellied up to the UN bar together, probably chatting about David and Goliath (or Lilliput) scenarios in NYC. Paranoia is only one way to deal with deal that.

I'd like to hear Ron Paul address Obama's internationalist approach specifically, to see how he'd tie our international influence to isolationism and contrast his own position with cooperation and allegience. Anybody know him? Could you ask?

Ron Paul on abortion, etc:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul100.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul240.html

"The notion that an all-powerful, centralized state should provide monolithic solutions to the ethical dilemmas of our times is not only misguided, but also contrary to our Constitution. Remember, federalism was established to allow decentralized, local decision-making by states. Yet modern America seeks a federal solution for every perceived societal ill, ignoring constitutional limits on government. The result is a federal state that increasingly makes all-or-nothing decisions that alienate large segments of the population.

This federalization of social issues, often championed by conservatives, has not created a pro-life culture, however. It simply has prevented the 50 states from enacting laws that more closely reflect the views of their citizens. Once we accepted the federalization of abortion law under the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, we lost the ability to apply local community standards to ethical issues. It is much more difficult for pro-life advocates to win politically at the federal level. Those who seek a pro-life culture must accept that we will never persuade 300 million Americans to agree with us. Our focus should be on overturning Roe and getting the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters. A pro-life culture can be built only from the ground up, person by person. For too long we have viewed the battle as purely political, but no political victory can change a degraded culture. A pro-life culture must arise from each of us as individuals, not by the edict of an amoral federal government."

The supposed pro-life agenda is going to face some real problems going forward:
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpopinfo.html

World Population Growth:
1960 - 3 billion
1974 - 4 billion
1988 - 5 billion
2000 - 6 billion
Projections:
2012 - 7 billion
2026 - 8 billion
2042 - 9 billion

These figures are actually very conservative. I have seen other projections that predict 12 billion people by 2040. This is unsustainable, folks.

Of course, nature has a way of dealing with overpopulation ... plagues. All it will take is a virus like AIDS (or worse) to evolve into an airborne strain and we will see a rapid adjustment.

A consumption tax sounds good, but it would have a disproportionate impact on middle and lower income familes. Anyone who says he doesn't see that is either lying in order to promote it or just plain stupid. It's a ruse to get even more money into the pockets of those who already have it.

Besides, if we adopted a consumption tax and did away with the income tax tomorrow, how long do you think it would be before Congress would start granting reductions or exemptions on certain items, especially those favored by corporations and big donors? How about the next day?

Right now, as flawed as it is, the income tax serves a purpose besides raising revenue. It is also an instrument of implementing social policy. If you want people to take care of their children, give them a credit for child care. If you want people to be more energy efficient, give them credit for buying more efficient heating and cooling systems. If you want to stimulate the economy, give people a deduction of interest payments. Etc, etc, etc. How do you do that with a consumption tax?

oooohhhh, SLAVE TAX. I guess this will be the replacement for the DEATH TAX. Nevermind that ESTATE TAX never affected more than 3% of the population ... or that it is favored by such people as Warren Buffet and Bill Gates as a means for preventing the creation of a permanent wealthy class.

I really get a kick out of all these wingnut republicans/libertarians who claim to be such proud patriots ... just as long as it doesn't involve any sacrifice on their part. The problem is that as a member of a society, you aren't entitled to a free ride. You can't just benefit from society, you also have to contribute.

And before you tell me how independent and self-sufficient you are and how you don't need any of the services of government, think about where you would be without them.

I wish we could put a group of these guys on a deserted island for a couple of years and then go back and not only see if they survived, but what sort of society they created.

Okay Tom, thanks for Mr. Paul's take on the national sales tax. I think, however that in America you can get really rich, and that's good. But you can't get rich without lit highways and bridges you can drive goods across, and the whole get-rich opportunity wouldn't exist here without the protection of property afforded by a central government and the laws under whose authority crimes against you can be enforced.

The government doesn't own your labor. We live in a society. We all eat, get sick, prosper or fail, etc. Since we all eat, it makes pretty damn good sense we fiddle with food production. It makes sense to buy bulk for drugs. It makes sense to have someone watching to be sure those drugs don't cause us to commit suicide. You want to be personally vigilant? You want access to that six-pack? Chip in.

The fact that this gov't hasn't been keeping track of which drugs are poisonous is especially irritating. I fear my tax dollars are going disproportionately to private school bills of unproductive rich people who live in DC part of the year, and to other rich people getting fat off the fraud war.

But I want paved highways, air traffic coordination, one currency, lots of those things we all have because there's a government. No funds means no government but the will of the stronger. Would Mr. Paul join that club? He's joined and gets a salary from government.

Wait- hey thanks Tom. You just helped me realize he's another No-Government hypocrite in government. I withdraw my previous non-endorsement of the candidate and enter my indictment of his character.

Wheee,

Sorry to hog so much space, but there is a movement afoot committed to demonstrating the failure of government. "The politics of failure have failed, we must make them work again!"
Apropos, a Fox reference.

This post started with lapel pins, and Obama's patriotism being at least entertained instead of outright dismissed by Ron Paul. I haven't heard anyone say Mr. Paul is incompetent yet. Is he in the habit of recruiting the least qualified for jobs?

Agree or not, he appears to be a better sort of person than the Appointer, the Decider and the AWOL Reservist- just wrong, not necessarily psychopathic.

Yes Dave. But every effort toward expanding the possibilities is American, not regional.

It's the ideal expressed in the Constitution. The good thing about Roe is that it curtails prohibitions from sea to shining sea. All Marriage is local though- just look down south or on the Utah border for a set of standards in which the northeast couldn't abide. Is the age of consent still 14 in Kentucky?

I favor keeping the amendments we have and not adding amendments that attract another cohort of legions of lawyers to complicate our lives more by intruding in our decisions in the name of the state. You can't force an American woman to reproduce. That's a good thing.

"He may be very, very sincere in what he is saying,"

The pin, made in China, was recalled due to excessive amounts of lead.

As they've experienced a toxic lead dementia, no wonder the behavior of our federal politicians has been so bizarre since 2001.

.

Proof that the End Times are here: The flag lapel pin has become the Mark of the Beast. Revelations says the Mark of the Beast appears on the AntiChrist's adherents. Without the mark, people can't engage in commerce, such as buying food. I guess you've also gotta have a flag lapel pin to run for elective office.

Gonna get me a lapel flag pin, so I can be raptured up with all the Bush-worshipping yahoos and fundamentalist Christians!

Flag pins, car truck ribbons, American Flags amassed behind every speaker....but no kid serving in Iraq. Enameled xenophobia?

Very+nice+work%2C+admin+%3A%29+Good+luck%21p

Excellent+web+site+I+will+be+visiting+often.0

Nice+looking+site.+

Hello%21%85

that%5C%27s+neat%21o

Big+thanx+to+webmaster%21%3E

excellent%21w

Yes%21+so+hold.o

Good+job%2C+here+and+there%21%21

Awesome%21%21%21a

Excellent+resource+you%5C%27ve+got+here%21%21%21+Will+definately+be+back%21%21%21c

Thanks+a+bunch%21+

Thanks+a+bunch%21r

Nice+looking+site.a

Nice+site%21d

Thank+you%21f

Good+Site%21+Keep+Doing+That%21d

Thanks+bro%21+Real+good+work%21b

thank+you%21s

Thank+you+very+much.n

Big+thanx+to+webmaster%211

It%5C%27s+a+very+good+site%21+

Really+perfect%21s

Good+Site%21+Keep+Doing+That%21g

Great+Site+%2D+really+useful+information%21%2C

Thank+you+sooooo+much%21w

wow+nice%21o

excellent+texture.e

Great+Site+%2D+really+useful+information%21e

Excellent+web+site+I+will+be+visiting+often.n

Good+site%2C+thanks%21a

Thank+for+making+this+valuable+information+available+to+the+public.%5C

Nice+site%21h

I+just+wanted+to+say+WOW%21s

Really+good+site%2C+and+a+pleasant+suprise...+Good+Luck%21+

I+just+wanted+to+say+WOW%21D

Wow%21%21%21%11

Pretty+nice+site%2C+wants+to+see+much+more+on+it%21

Looking+for+information+and+found+it+at+this+great+site%85%C9

Thank+you+for+you+work%21+Good+Luck.0

I+like+that%21c

Very+nice+work%2C+admin+%3A%29+Good+luck%21c

Hello+people%21+

Thank+you+for+you+work%21+Good+Luck.

I+like+that%21%2B

This+is+a+great+tutorial+thanks%21s

Good+job%2C+here+and+there%21n

Excellent+web+site+I+will+be+visiting+often.

It%5C%27s+a+very+good+site%21%0D%0A+

Thank+you%21%2D

Thanks+bro%21+Real+good+work%219

I+just+wanted+to+say+WOW%21

Nice+effect.s

I+just+wanted+to+say+WOW%21

Very+good+site%21+I+like+it%21+Thanks%21o

Excellent+resource+you%5C%27ve+got+here%21%21%21+Will+definately+be+back%21%21%21b

Nice+looking+site.n

Good+site%2C+thanks%21i

Thanks+bro%21+Real+good+work%21e

Very+nice+work%2C+admin+%3A%29+Good+luck%21r

It%5C%27s+a+very+good+site%21+

excellent%21u

Excellent+web+site+I+will+be+visiting+often.d