It really doesn't matter who the republicans put forth as their candidate. The
republicans in the house (T Party) and the senate. Are making such a name for
themselves and the republican party as the party of NO that the public will
reelect President Obama again. So far this yea the republicans have brought the
country to the brink of default THREE times. I expect they will do the same in
November (the 13th) when the appropriations bill comes up for a vote. It is
also clear they republicans do not even intend to work with the president on his
job bill. Obviously it need some tweeks but they are doing nothing to help -
just stall. These tactics will do nothing the help the eventual republican
candidate win the white house in 2012. My opinion!
MormoncowboyAre you saying that the value of gold would be less than
the value of the paper That our money is currently printed on?You realize your statement does not make sense right?
bricha, you seriously think that anything Ron Paul would do would lead to more
stress on the stock market than what the Big 2 political machines have
accomplished? What exactly do you picture in your vision of "absolute
havoc." Are sure you aren't just using the same empty
rhetoric/political scare tactics that have been used against those outside of
the political machines for many decades?
Even just a "cursory glance" reveals that the current two
"parties" are just flip sides of the same statist coin. No matter
which side "wins" we get more government and less freedom. Study the
"Hegelian Dialectic" to see why. RP is NOT in this loop and advocates
actual liberty, and always has. More and more Americans are waking up to this
fact. The media is part of the dialectic and will try to discredit RP at every
opportunity, even calling him "unelectable". Think for yourself. Ron
I am a little bit offended when so many of the Ron Paul supporters think that
all people that don't like him only think that way because of the media, that no
one in their right mind who really researches the man could disagree. Well I
have and i still disagree with a lot of his stuff. Like I have said in other
posts in a Government philosophy class I would love most of his ideas (though
not all), but the implimintation of a these ideas could bring more problems than
good. Think of the stress on the stock market if he was able to make sweeping
changes, that alone could cause absolute havoc.
Don't give me any garbage about his foreign policy either. Active and retired
military seem to think his foreign policy is pretty good considering that he has
gotten more military contributions than Obama and the other GOP candidates
combined. 71% of all military contributions. I think we should pay attention to
these contributions he's getting because the military knows whats really going
on overseas. Paul is Ronald Regan and Obama is Jimmy Carter. It will
be that much of a landslide.So tell me naysayers, would you vote for
Obama over Ron Paul? Really?
Kouger."Let's support the only candidate who has the chance of
defeating Obama, shall we? Let's be rational and see REALITY!"No Thank You. I will stick to supporting the constitution. I'm will not be a
contributor to continuing the corruption in this country.
Before you dismiss this man and buy into the so-called mainstream thinking
pushed by much of our media in collaboration with the two accepted political
parties. Consider that if we had elected him in previous elections we would have
avoided (1) the current near-catastrophic debt and (2) the Iraq war and
subsequent nation-building effort.
Ron Paul is dead on when it comes to the Federal Reserve. This nation will never
be financially free as long as the Fed is a private corporation with the
monopoly right to print money.Ron Paul is far off the mark on most
non-financial policies.That is why he will continue to be a farce in
the presidential race rather than a force.
The only thing we should be worried about is defending the constitution. By
standing by the constitution all other problems we face will be corrected.
Every major problem we have was caused by not following the constitution as laid
out by our Fore Fathers. In D&C 101:77 According to the laws
and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and
should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to
just and holy principles;80 And for this purpose have I established
the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto
this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood.There is only one candidate that even upholds the constitution and has since
he was elected. Ron Paul is the only one. Mitt is maybe 50% in support of the
constitution. Perry maybe 20%. This is based off their records while in office.
If we are to defend the constitution and uphold it there is only one candidate,
GreatStateofUtah:I'll answer that. He goes off the deep end with
Iran, and the Gold Standard. 1) Iran: Paul is correct in noting that
a lot of the military turmoil faced by the U.S. is a result of our military
meddling in foreign affairs. We do police the world way too much. We probably
should begin withdrawing troops from most regions over the next 2 to 5 years -
though as a caveat to that notion, I am not closed to the idea that perhaps our
military intelligence people have very good reasons for disagreeing with that
notion, so I could change my mind. Still Iran, is not going to start behaving
peacefully when we get out of the Middle East. Even if they pose less of a
direct threat to the U.S., they will still be a threat to Israel - and
U.S./Israel politics aside, that's still not a good thing. Prevention is the
wisest course.2) Gold Standard: Gold is hardly the stable commodity
and basis for economic trade that it once was. It has very little universal
utility, and is just a speculative index like cash money these days. It would
also stifle economic growth.
This is all good for Ron Paul in the primaries, BUT, please understand that with
the exception of Romney, Obama will bury all these other GOP candidates with
landslides come November 2012. They make Obama look like a great president
deserving of a second term. Let's support the only candidate who has the chance
of defeating Obama, shall we? Let's be rational and see REALITY!
Three cheers for the last statesman, Ron Paul!
Paul's stand on gold reminds me of Andy Jackson's specie circular that destroyed
the US economy in 1837. All we need is another "KnowNothing" president
to really wreck things.
Ron Paul is electable as long as the American citizens understand what the scope
of the debate is or should be. Recent media-promoted debates have shifted the
debate to focus on policy making issues. For example, the focus of most debates
is on what policies will strengthen the economy. What Ron Paul understands and
has consistently promoted during his years in Congress is a free market system
where the competition of market ideas among the various participants (all of us)
is healthier for the economy than any group of policy makers can provide.
Unfortunately, the media-backed debates ask questions that focus on
pro-business, corporatist policies that may do something to bring about a change
in the economy but suffocate the vital competition of a free-market system. His
policies on the Fed, gold standard and regulations are rooted in his commitment
to free-market principles. Ultimately, the debate should focus on
the principles of liberty versus tyranny; self-governance versus statism. Ron
Paul has consistently won those debates through his consistent voting record.
Now, the question that remains is, will the American people focus on the debate
that matters most.
I wonder if those that are so certain they don't agree with certain of Paul's
"radical" policy suggestions really know what those suggestions
are.For instance, despite many inaccurate reports on the matter,
anybody who actually watched the GOP debate with the question about the
uninsured man would have seen Paul state unequivocally that he should not be
"left to die" despite the real world consequences of his choices.
Paul has deep experience in the matter. He was a practicing doctor for decades
- with most of those decades being before the inefficient Federal insurance
programs. None were turned away. Likewise, when it comes to the dependency of
so many on those programs, Paul has said again and again you can't just
"pull the rug out from under people". Paul has suggested many other
places where Federal largesse could be reined in as the inefficiencies and
problems in Medicare and Social Security are reformed over time. Yet, you may
not know this from the Saturday Night Live skits or even FoxNews.On
every issue, Paul has clear, compassionate, thoughtful leadership that he has
thoroughly documented in entire books over the last four years. :)
Cats"Ron Paul CANNOT win, doesn't expect to win and will go
back to Congress after he doesn't win. On top of that, he is too old. He's a
good and sincere man, but he's a little off the deep end on foreign policy. Please, let's not waste any more votes or treasure on someone who can't
win. We really have a chance to defeat Obama. We need to unite around a strong
candidate who actually can win. Please everyone, let's get out of denial and not
waste our time on a spoiler who CAN'T WIN. "What does being too
old have to do with running for president? That is the most idiotic thing I ever
heard. A vote for any other phony GOP candidate IS a vote for Obama. There is no
difference between Him and Romney. I will not compromise at all and I won't
throw away my sacred vote for a guy like Romney or Obama.
He has my vote and I'm not voting for the party i'm voting for the man.
Ron Paul is exactly what we need. Hes the only guy that would actually change
something. Romney, Obama, and Perry will all continue the big spending and wars
and then blame their lousy performance on the previous president. Ron Paul votes
consistently and doesn't change like the others. He is 100% right about the 9/11
causes, it was pathetic to see Guiliani call him out and get him booed in the
2008 debate. He didn't shy away from it when Guiliani asked him to, he stuck
with it like he always does. The war propaganda is rediculous and I want the
government to admit the real reasons we are in the middle east. If it were for
WMDs then why aren't we in North Korea,Pakistan, and Iran. Its not our job to
police the world, and even if it were the cost to do so is ruining our economy
and destroying our currency.Mitt is electable, but he is much more
moderate than most mormons want to admit. I don't think he'll dramatically
change policies like he should. Every politician is bought by corporate donors
that fund campaigns. Might as well call it legal bribery.
@cats"he's a little off the deep end on foreign policy"Why do we have to spend over 6x more a year in defense spending than 2nd place
china? What was the purpose of spending a trillion and losing thousands of
soldiers to fight the iraq war? Why does the man who is explaining why Al Qaida
attacked us on 9-11 get booed while listing the reasons bin Laden himself
explicitly stated were the cause of it? Bin Laden listed our relationship with
Saudi Arabia, our Israeli policy, and our military presence in the middle east
as the reasons for 9-11. Guess what? "Hating us for our freedoms"
wasn't one of them and Paul was correct to state that but he gets booed for the
truth by the audience full of jingoists.
I like his foreign policy when it comes to the military, and some of his streaks
of libertarianism, but with everything else I very strongly disagree with him so
he can't possibly earn my vote.
Maybe they need a little spoiling." I have to disagree with Ron Paul on
this; you cant spoil what is already rotten. The media (especially
the arrogant Associated Press) helps perpetuate the fiction that there is
actually a fundamental difference between the two parties; they are both
pro-war, pro-bail-out, pro-big government. Paul is the freshest
thing either party has had in years, and it scares the heck out of the status
After studying Ron Paul's platform, I think that Ron Paul CAN beat President
Obama in a head to head election.Many people are rethinking this
being the World's policeman policy that is draining our once rich economy. We need to be nation building right here in our own country, not in the
oil-laden countries as the oil companies and the military machine corporations
wish. THEY are the ones prospering from this policy as we go more and more into
debt to a communist nation.Ron Paul has consistantly said this
policy would bankrupt our nation and he wants to do the nation building right
here at home, for the American people.Ron Paul has my vote.Sign me "An ex-Obama supporter"
@ CatsFor someone who gets more donations from the military than all
the others candidates combined, I don't think his foreign policy is too far off.
I personally want the troops to come home. If you refer to Mitt
Romney as the person we can all rally around, you are mistaken. I will bet you
50 cents if Mitt Romney gets elected, the debt will keep increasing, the wars
will keep going and things will not change. I will not support him. His tune
changes as he changes what he is running for.
@CatsI have to disagree with you on several points:"he is
too old"Ron Paul is a doctor who has taken good care of himself, runs
and walks everyday. His health is just as good as most if not all the
candidates."he's a little off the deep end on foreign
policy"You say that, but what do the troops say? You know, the ones
actually fighting these wars and risking their lives? Ron Paul receives more
money from active duty military than all of the other Republican candidates
COMBINED. It seems that those who know the situation firsthand and are most
affected by it agree with Ron Paul's ideas of non-intervention and bringing the
troops home."let's not waste any more votes or treasure on
someone who can't win"the only wasted vote in a primary is one for a
candidate who you don't believe in and won't hold to your principles. As for
money, Mitt Romney doesn't need any of mine. I'll use my treasure on the man who
doesn't have the advantage of corporate buddies to finance his campaign. I'm
proud that my small contribution keeps a discussion of liberty moving forward.
Ron Paul is the candidate that impresses me most with his sincerity,
preparation, understanding of the issues, and commitment to time-tested
principles that our nation was founded upon.I'm continually
fascinated by how little the general GOP electorate knows about the man that is
accurate. The Washington Post ombudsman recently did a study of their own
reporting and concluded that -- while they didn't completely shut Paul out of
reporting -- the few mentions Paul got in general articles tended to be short,
shallow, and often inaccurate. That seems to be a common trend. I honestly
think most political pundits and reporters have no idea what to do with the man
or his ideas.He's not the most polished on the stage, his voice is
quite as mellifluous, and his body language seems the most un-coached. Yet,
what he has spent his time doing is studying, learning, voting with principles,
and inspiring grassroots interest in many ignored or misunderstood issues of
liberty.The man spent his first career delivering thousands of
babies. He has a genuine commitment to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness. Look him up and read his actual views. They're refreshing. :)
For what it's worth, Paul has said that he will not campaign again for his seat
in the House.
Ron Paul CANNOT win, doesn't expect to win and will go back to Congress after he
doesn't win. On top of that, he is too old. He's a good and sincere man, but
he's a little off the deep end on foreign policy. Please, let's not
waste any more votes or treasure on someone who can't win. We really have a
chance to defeat Obama. We need to unite around a strong candidate who actually
can win. Please everyone, let's get out of denial and not waste our time on a
spoiler who CAN'T WIN.
Ron Paul is the only person running our that run in the last presidential
elections that 1) understands the constitution, 2) votes like he understands the
Constitution, 3) understands why we are really in the mess we are in, and 4) has
voiced the correct ways for us to get out of this mess. Both the democrats and
the republicans eat at the same table, they are the same. We need to elect a
president that truly understands the constitution, and doesn't give it just
lip-service. That's what both Mitt and Huntsman do as well as everyone else
running. As whether he can be elected I think he can be if people
really understand what he is for. I am tired of voting for the lesser of two
evils. Ron Paul for President!
Wonderful comments, David King! Ron Paul is the only candidate who has upheld
and will uphold the U.S. Constitution. This is even more significant than his
principled opposition to the Federal Reserve (important though that is). From a
Latter-Day Saint perspective, the Lord his clearly put his seal of approval on
the U.S. Constitution; why then do so many of us permit ourselves to be led
hither and thither by pied pipers who prioritize jobs, war, and other, lesser
policy objectives? Would that we all loved liberty more than jobs, the stock
market, our military forces, our government handouts, and the like. This nation
will stand or fall on the Constitution -- not changing political fashions -- now
@Grammy3If you're saying we need someone who understands the economy, Ron
Paul is that man. Mitt Romney did not predict the housing crisis, Herman Cain
did not anticipate the recession. It's one thing to understand how to turn a
profit, it's another to understand how the economy works as a whole, where booms
and busts come from, and the damage that the Federal Reserve has done,
especially to the savings and purchasing power of the poor and middle class.
Maybe Mitt Romney knows how to make a buck, but does he understand those who are
suffering because the dollar is falling? Does someone who receives most of his
money from hedge-fund managers and Wall Street millionaires represent the common
man? Ron Paul receives mostly small donations from thousands of grassroots
supporters. He is the ONLY candidate in the race who has made strict obedience
to the Constitution a major facet of his campaign. Samuel Adams once made a
statement about those who love "wealth more than liberty" and I fear
that is what America has become. We have forgotten that liberty, not wealth,
has made America great and allowed it to prosper.
Ron Paul might be a good man but to me he is way to old and a little bit off on
a few things. He is not what this Country needs at this time. We need to get
back to where we are the greatest nation on earth again. We need jobs, jobs and
more jobs. We need someone who can turn things around and make this Country
again like we use to be. We need either Mitt Romney or Herman Cain to get in
there and do what they do best and that is improve our economy. I might just be
more for this than others as this economy has taken a great big toll on me and
my family over the last three years. We are not better off than we were in 2007
and with our age it will be hard to ever have what we once had. It can be very
depressing but I have faith in Mitt Romney or in Herman Cain that they can get
us back on track to become the great Nation we call America.
Thank you DN for publishing this. I'm convinced if more people can hear Dr.
Paul's message straight from his mouth, they will see the wisdom in his
words.Ron Paul receives more donations from active duty military
than all of the other Republican candidates combined.Ron Paul
predicted the housing crisis and subsequent recession. No other candidate can
say that.He's the one candidate who understands the economy as a
whole, not just business and making money. He's the one candidate who has
dedicated his life to defending the principles of our Constitution.Don't believe what you hear. Look up Ron Paul for yourself and believe in
@ CJB: Ron paul knows that if congress passes an appropriations bill, HIS
constituants will have their money taken from them. This is not good and this is
why he votes against the bil. Now, the reason he asks for something for his
distric in the bill, is because it will probably pass, so why not try to get
some of HIS constituants at lease SOME of their money back?If you
were being mugged, but the mugger asked if you wanted to be mugged, you would
vote NO. Now, if the mugger offered to give some of your stuff back if you
asked, would you ask? I think so.This is the reason Paul does as he
does. It is perfectly logical.
Who are you to say that Ron Paul 'probably won't win'? Please don't pretend to
know who will and who will not win. Please stop trying to convince the public
that it is no use supporting Paul, as if he doesn't have a chance. We The People
can judge for ourselves.
Why a "spoiler"? The very purpose of the current vetting and
subsequent primaries is to give people a real choice between the candidates and
their programs. The time for compromises will only come after the primaries are
over, and the party will need unity (based on compromises) for winning the
general election. Now, we choose WHO and WITH WHAT will represent the Republican
Party, and I hope it will be Ron Paul.
Ron Paul could very win the nomination. Perry is on the outs now. Paul and Cain
are battling for the top 3 spots alongside Romney.
Where does he go off the deep end? Please state facts.
What I have heard about Ron Paul.He attaches riders to spending
bills that benefit his district, but then votes against the bill when it has
enough votes to pass anyway.This way he helps his district and gets
to claim that he doesn't support any "unconstitutional" spending.Those people who are Ron Paul groupies, ought to be aware of this.