Ron Paul Constitution Day Money Bomb

[evoorhees]

Just remembered this and donated... if you care about liberty, please support it here:

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/

Need some inspiration? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=LkuSo7Nys78#t=35s

[1713588877]

1713588877

[1713588877]

1713588877

[1713588877]

1713588877

[1713588877]

1713588877

[Minsc]

It says, "Payment Information
Credit Card PayPal "


Eww PayPal.

Why can't I send bitcoins?

[Christian Pezza]

Just remembered this and donated... if you care about liberty, please support it here:

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/

Need some inspiration? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=LkuSo7Nys78#t=35s

+1000

[JeffK]

Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy (a bill which he has repeatedly re-introduced), pull out of the UN, disband NATO, end birthright citizenship, deny federal funding to any organisation "which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style", and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan.

Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, believes that the Panama Canal should be the property of the United States, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories, not to mention his belief that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control.

[Rassah]

Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy (a bill which he has repeatedly re-introduced), pull out of the UN, disband NATO, end birthright citizenship, deny federal funding to any organisation "which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style", and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan.

Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he's against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, believes that the Panama Canal should be the property of the United States, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories, not to mention his belief that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control.

On the other hand, Bush believes(d) that... ah who am I kidding. We all know that, crazy or not, he's still not as bad as a lot of the other Republican presidents, or current contenders. He's at most a cooky grandpa with wild stories compared to them.

[Uhlbelk]

He has held office longer then most people on this board has been alive and one would think he is in the know about the world banks, its controllers and other shit we are not privy to know.
Most of that quote is BS and any kind of unbiased research will show you this.
I'm not going to waste any time tearing that quote apart instead ill just ask anyone who reads it see if for the propaganda slander it is and if you're not just a parrot for the status quo then actually look for the truth yourself.

[hugolp]

Ok, Ill bite:

Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception,

Yes, Ron Paul is a doctor with an anti-abortion history. Is no mistery to anyone even if I disagree with him. But he actually wants to get the federal government out of abortions and let the states decide.

build a fence along the US-Mexico border,

He has changed his mind in this one. Check the last republican debate.

This one and the death penalty are two of the big changes Ron Paul has had during his carreer.

prevent the Supreme Court from hearing Establishment Clause cases or the right to privacy (a bill which he has repeatedly re-introduced),

This is a law defending states rights, not what you are insinuating.

pull out of the UN,

+1

disband NATO,

+1

end birthright citizenship,

I did not know about this one and Im curious about what he has to say.

deny federal funding to any organisation "which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style",

Ron Paul always votes against any federal funding that is outside of the constitution. Whats extrange about this one?

and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard.

+1 to abolishing the Federal Reserve.

The link to the gold standard one does not work, but Ron Paul favours competing currencies and has introduced numerous legislation in this regard.

He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan.

+1 to peacefully trading with everybody and not favouring american imperialism around the world.

This vote has a lot of merit since all the democrats that get their mouths full of peace and goody feelings voted in favour and only a republican had the balls to vote against.

Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas,

Yes, he is religious and makes no intention of hiding it.

he's against gay marriage,

Wow, this is a lie and a big one.

He has stated publicy numerous times that he is in favour of allowing people to join together and call it however they like. The article is not against gay marriage and does not oppose gay marriage at any point. Again, the article is about states rights.

This lie says a lot about the person or organization that compiled this list (and anyone that reproduces it). A lot of republican representatives have spoken openly against gay marriage and its an issue that can take votes away from you if you are a republican, yet Ron Paul has splken in favour. In spite of this, someone tries to lie and make it look the contrary. This is the perfect example of how this list is not about issues or caring for the gays, but about attacking Ron Paul no matter if truth or lie.

is against the popular vote,

Very well written article that everybody should read about the dangers of pure democracy.

wants the estate tax repealed,

+1

is STILL making racist remarks,

False, read the article.

believes that the Panama Canal should be the property of the United States,

Id like to hear the rationale for this one.

and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories,

He is commenting on first Bush president own words about the "New World Order".

not to mention his belief that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control.

Mind control is not mentioned once. The link is about Ron Paul disagreeing with the political agenda of the UNESCO.


I wonder why the need to lie about Ron Paul positions. Everytime someone gets close to the Federal Reserve and teh banking system all this bullshit starts to come out.

[Rassah]

Thank you for the explanations. Half the links didn't work for me.

[speeder]

I wish today that I was American, only to vote in Ron Paul...

Or I wish we had a Ron Paul here.

When I first heard of him, I thought he was another of the idiotic republicans (not that I support democrats either, but I think republicans are usually idiotic warmongers).

Then, after seeing some interviews with Ron Paul and knowing what he actually supports, I wish I could vote in someone like him...

I mean...

Pull out of the UN? HELL YEAH!!!!

end birthright citizenship? HEEEEEEEEEELLL YAAAAAAAAAHHH!!!

End NATO? WHOOHOOOO!!!!

End the FED? HWOOOHOHWOHWOHWO!!!





Now explaining the birthright citizenship: Lots of the UN "human rights" are actually more like obligations, enforced by the state. The "birthright" citizenship, only means you are forced to be a part of particular state because you was born there, no matter what nation you really are. So, the 3 nations of Somalia are forced to be part of the state of Somalia.

And I am forced to be Brazillian (I am deeply ashamed of being Brazillian, and I hate being a Brazillian, and I hate the fact that I am a reservist in Brazil army... in fact if I am sent to war I am likely to kill my own side, Brazillians are rarely worth defending... and I wish some country was not part of the UN, so I could be citizen of whatever I wanted, or whoever accepted me, not Brazil...)

[JeffK]

How can you be against "pure democracy" and still think "letting the states decide" is a good idea? the exact reason we don't have the extent of state's rights that people want to is because it is where democracy often rears its ugly head: when voters use majority rule to screw over women, minorities, put in place religious doctrines into laws, and so forth.

It's like when people point out the Civil War was about "state's rights". Yeah, it was about state's rights: the 'right' to buy and sell human beings as slaves. It should be pretty clear from the past that when state's rights or the state's decision to do something is brought up, it is 9 times out of 10 a state using their voting populace to strongly fuck over some minority that can't defend themselves.

[hugolp]

How can you be against "pure democracy" and still think "letting the states decide" is a good idea? the exact reason we don't have the extent of state's rights that people want to is because it is where democracy often rears its ugly head: when voters use majority rule to screw over women, minorities, put in place religious doctrines into laws, and so forth.

It's like when people point out the Civil War was about "state's rights". Yeah, it was about state's rights: the 'right' to buy and sell human beings as slaves. It should be pretty clear from the past that when state's rights or the state's decision to do something is brought up, it is 9 times out of 10 a state using their voting populace to strongly fuck over some minority that can't defend themselves.

States right is not my ideal system. Im an anarchist. In the imaginary situation were I could decide the system I would not choose a system with states rights.

Now, given the present situation I think states rights is a good move in the right direction. The more local and close to the citizens the power is, the better. If I could I would support city rights.


[Slavery issue]

Ive left this apart because its always used not as a real argument, but just to emotionally influence the discussion.

First, Lincoln was a racist and had no intention of ending slavery during his presidency. It is true that Lincoln did not support slavery, but he was racist, considered the black people inferior and actually wanted to deport them back to Africa. Also, there are letters he sent to the south asking them not to secede and assuring them that they could keep their slaves, that it was not an issue. He did not go to war to stop slavery.

Actually, states rights were initially used to attack slavery and the anti-states right people tried to get ride of them to be able to enforce slavery all over the country.

People is not perfect and some groups might do some questionable stuff, but having local power and close to the people always stops more abuses and produces overall better results.

[Rassah]

The one major difference and benefit between states' rights issues now and then is that we now have means to communicate, anonymously if we with, with everyone around the country and the world, almost for free. When people learn about each other, they can accept minorities easier. Gay rights compared to black rights is a perfect example. Protections for race had to be literally forced on the states and the people for people to interract with black people, learn about them, and accept them as equals. Gays aren't as visible in the public, but thanks to interactions over the internet and some media, the only people who are still stuck in homophobe mode are the old people and the crazy-religious homeschooled kids. Unlike historical black rights legislation, in the case of gay rights government and states are actually lagging quite a bit behind public opinion on passing legislation to force equality.

I also wish people would keep the question of what the civil war was really about to themselves. Neither group can convince the other, and the arguments just end up sounding like trolling between racist bigots and pious assholes.

[speeder]

lol @ majority voting against women, when women ARE majority.

Brazil for example, vote is mandatory, 51% of the population is women, and 80% of the households according to official government research company, have the money and vote controlled by the wives. (usually, the poorer, the more likely women control the house... with the "C" level people, or lower "medium class" having the biggest amount of money in hands of women... interestingly, that research was hired, so that companies could do better marketing, and had nothing to do with sociology).

[Uhlbelk]

Ok, Ill bite:

Thank you for biting. That was marvelous. Bravo.