I have a few words about Mr. Paul

Originally posted by SouthernBelle82
So again I point to the national polls. If he's raising all this money why is Mike Huckabee number one? Not every single poll out there is from Fox. Duh. And you call it devout I call it spam.

Several people have received national polling calls, others even had it recorded. In many cases Ron Paul is not even a choice on the national poll, in others, it's simply a "For another candidate, press 6."

How are we to trust polls and pollsters when they do not provide all the options on the poll. Hell, even the pollster currently doing a lot of the polls was on Penn and Tellers BullSh!t testifying to how easy he "fakes" and skews polls, and its a regular part of his job.

Polls mean nothing.

reply to post by SouthernBelle82

Oh and with the whole "free market" bull I would love to hear how he's going to create new jobs with all these corporations sending them over seas. That's been George Bush's attitude for the past seven years and look how it's going now. Great huh?

What is so bull about a free market? It is not the federal governments role to create jobs, it is the markets. You don’t like outsourcing? Buy American. And George Bush is hindering job opportunities because he lets people come in here and work for almost nothing.

Originally posted by SouthernBelle82
You really think he would win? Look at the issues being talked about now. He's against any sort of national health care program, he's against public schools, he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when it was up for restoration and he thinks corporations should be able to do whatever the hell they want so say goodbye to telling them to not send jobs over seas. Try reading his "We the People" act as well. So here you are talking about election rigging with a candidate who's voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. How ironic. Oh and he claims to be a Constitional scholar while at the same time saying there's no such thing as the seperation of church and state. LOL! Oh and he also is for the original Constitution so those of you who are African-American or a woman or other minorities you can kiss your vote goodbye cause we didn't get to vote until the Civil Rights Act which Ron Paul voted against.

Originally posted by captainplanet
reply to post by SEEWHATUDO

 

I think he would just win in both scenarios. If the popular vote was a land slide, the electoral vote wouldn't be off, it's a flawed system but i don't think it's that flawed. If it is we would get shafted unless we did something.

[edit on 17-12-2007 by SouthernBelle82]

The founding fathers set up our government to have a federal government.....Brilliant!!!!! Lol that is why the founding fathers gave us a constitution aswell so we would have protection against a tyrannical government......

The We the People Act is a bill initially introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) on November 17, 2005. The bill, designated H.R. 4379, was immediately referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. The Judiciary committee referred H.R. 4379 to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property on February 6, 2006.[1]

It has to do with the internet rulings......You sure done your research.....





[edit on 17-12-2007 by Sentinel 1]

I live here in knoxville, Tn and a radio host took a straw poll today just for the fun of it and got surprised big time by the outcome. Fred Thompson is Tennessee's man and the radio host thought for sure he would have more votes. He just took phone calls from everybody from all around the listening area and by unanimous vote Ron Paul won. I think Fred got seven votes, Hillary got two, Obama got two, Romney got nine a few others got one or two votes, but Ron Paul got 35 votes. I know that's just a straw poll that doesn't really mean much but it sure surprised the talk show host Hallerin Hilton Hill. Just thought I'd throw that out there for you all.

reply to post by Solarskye


I think that is amazing!!! Hopefully more members will tell us about their communitys as well, we just might have our very own "straw" poll here in this thread.
Thank you for sharing, the more I hear about the massive support RP is getting the brighter the future looks.

SouthernBelle82
Oh and with the whole "free market" bull I would love to hear how he's going to create new jobs with all these corporations sending them over seas. That's been George Bush's attitude for the past seven years and look how it's going now. Great huh?

Be Careful, you are not telling the whole truth. You are attempting to pin the failure of NAFTA and the actions of businesses on one man. If that is your goal, then you should swing your crosshairs to the Clinton administration. He is, after all, the one who created it.

Also, Ron Paul is not high in national polls because he is not included in a majority of them. The reason I know this is because I am a republican "super voter" as they call it. I get polled all the time. And only once this year has any poll I've participated in included Ron Paul in it's selections. The question you should be asking is diametrically opposite of what you are asking : If Huckabee has the support the polls claim, then why doesn't he have the money to back it up?

Two reasons : Either the support is an apparition, or his enormous amount of supporters will not open their wallets for him. In either case, his voter turnout will be low. If Huckabee supporters will not donate, the odds are good they will not stand in the rain at the voter's booth. Ron Paul supporters will standing the freezing rain for hours just to vote in a meaningless straw poll.

Furthermore, you obviously do not know what a free market is. The statements you make seem to indicate that the ills of this country are befallen to us because of actions in free market capitalism. But what you are espousing is impossible to achieve when economic planning is centralized. In short, we do not have a free market, and we haven't had a free market since 1913. The central banking concept is 100% in line with soviet style economic planning.

Your statement

SouthernBelle82 Oh and with the whole "free market" bull I would love to hear how he's going to create new jobs with all these corporations sending them over seas.

Makes me cringe. Presidents do not make Jobs. The corporations you despise so much do that. The president does not run the economy, the Central Bank, the thing that makes your beloved, bankruptcy inducing, social programs possible does that. But if you must know. Abolishing NAFTA would go a long way toward encouraging business to come back. Unless you want force a business owner to stay here through by the barrel of a gun, or the audit of the IRS. I suppose if I had to put up with the looters running rampant in this country, trying to steal my creations, demanding more of my money, demanding that I provide jobs at my expense. Forcing me to hire people that are incompetent because I have to fill a quota, I would leave too. It is after all, granting your wish. Getting rid of the greedy, corrupted corporations that are the source of everyones pain, right? Be careful what you wish for. What is happening in this country today, is the result of your every wish being fulfilled.

You wanted to spread our way of life to the far reaches of the globe and help those in need? Granted, it's what we are doing.

You wanted a nanny state, someone to take care of your retirement and medical needs? Granted, it's yours.

You wanted to punish the thinking rich for producing the things we need and "taking advantage" of the American worker? Done, don't be surprised they left.

You wanted more funding for public education? Done, 2nd in the world for most money per student, Dead last for performance.

For all your bantering you don't know a thing. If you were dropped in the middle of a wilderness tomorrow, I wonder how long it would be until you figured out how to gather, hunt, or build your own shelter, how long would it take you to build the computer your using now, from scratch. You couldn't. The industrialist you hate so much could. What a wonderful series of contradictions you are.

[edit on 17-12-2007 by aravoth]

reply to post by Xtrozero


Sorry if a reposnse to this has already been given, but it's late and I'm heading to bed and won't have time to read the rest of this.

Paul is ignored by Fox for one reason only....the WAR. You see, FOX News popularity surged during its coverage of 9/11 and the following buildup to the war. The way I see it, FOX is who it is because of the WAR. And, despite their neutral bias, no-spin talk, they lean right.

When Cheney wouldn't go on CNN or MSNBC, which network did he choose for his interviews....FOX. So, its quite apparent that FOX totes the hawkish Republican think tank. Dr. Paul is in direct opposition to what this network has achived because of the WAR.

For FOX to entertain Dr. Paul as a viable candidate would, in effect, be like Jane Fonda jawing with the north vietnamese. They'd be seen as a traitor to the cause. And, of course, if you are against the WAR then you must be against our brave men and women fighting for YOUR freedom overseas. If you've eer listened to Hannity, that's what you'll hear. I hate to admit it, but I bought all of the 9/11 rhetoric hook, line and sinker. I listened to Hannity every day. I thouht the guy had it right on the money. Then came along a man who introduced me to the Constitution, a politician who made sense when he spoke. A man whose values and integrity have been part of every decision made while in office. That man was Dr. Ron Paul.

Does Dr. Paul think ill of our men and women fighting overseas. No. He knows that we put most of these people in power; that lovely little rogue alphabet agency called the CIA. He knows that these orginizations have been running outside of their limits for many years. As such, the boundaries of our nation's most cherished document have been stretched to the breaking point. America is at the brink of national disaster.

What's even more upsetting than listening to Hannity day after day now is the knowing that ordinary citizens are crying out for a leader to give them more of the same. If you listen to the MSM that's what they'll tell you. They'll tell you that you need someone like Obama or Huckabee or Clinton in office.

Let me ask you...why do you people want these candidates? Don't you realize there will be no change! These guys are pawns....they're owned, puppets for the global elite. Heck, its even been stated that Paul could be assasinated because his popularty is getting in the way of THEIR plans.

Folks, we need change in this country. And it can't be with just one person. If you think one of the chosen candidates will bring real change, then you're sorely misguided.

We rose up against tyranny and oppresive English rule once before. It's time that we do it again.

reply to post by SouthernBelle82

Racist ,Nazi Wannabee's Supporting The Honorable Mr. Ron Paul ? ? I beg your pardon,but I think you have your distorted facts wrong ! People from *ALL* walks of life support this Great Man ! And as far as the main stream media is concerned , we all know that they are nothing more than propaganda mouthpieces for the elite N.W.O. puppets ! Wake Up!! The Revolution Has Begun !

Good old fashioned anti Ron Paul smears. The poster attacks Ron Paul, but her only reasoning for Richardson being a better candidate is that he is higher in the polls. Classic, although I do give her credit for at least mentioning whom she supports. Most of the people who attack Ron Paul don't bother to provide their own candidate because of how dirty thier own candidate is.

On another note, we had an AM radio station 1190kex.com here in Portland have a straw poll. I checked in to see who would win, not thinking Paul had a chance, but as it turned out he won. I was pretty surprised.

I can't believe that the fact Ron Paul broke the single day record for fundraising isn't even on the front page of CNN anywhwere. It is freaking repulsive and shameful. They won't mention that, but the fact that Billary "tears up at campaign stop" And "Lieberman: McCain can reunite our country" do make the front page.... my god.

I think the most difficult thing about this is that Ron Paul actually gives me a small glimmer of hope for the country. As a pessimist, that is only going to make it that much harder when he gets robbed.

Polls apparently do mean something. For example in the Iowa cacuses they're done by people. I think it's pretty funny how one minute you guys are bitching about the Fox poll and now you claim they don't mean anything. If polls really didn't mean anything than why the bitching? If Paul supporters really believed that than they wouldn't care.

Originally posted by WolfofWar

Originally posted by SouthernBelle82
So again I point to the national polls. If he's raising all this money why is Mike Huckabee number one? Not every single poll out there is from Fox. Duh. And you call it devout I call it spam.

Several people have received national polling calls, others even had it recorded. In many cases Ron Paul is not even a choice on the national poll, in others, it's simply a "For another candidate, press 6."

How are we to trust polls and pollsters when they do not provide all the options on the poll. Hell, even the pollster currently doing a lot of the polls was on Penn and Tellers BullSh!t testifying to how easy he "fakes" and skews polls, and its a regular part of his job.

Polls mean nothing.

Nope. I've only seen at most two Paul bumper stickers and I live in a city that goes either way.

Originally posted by SEEWHATUDO

Originally posted by Sentinel 1
reply to post by SEEWHATUDO

 

Thank you for the post...I to live in a small town (Missouri though) And it is the same way here...I have relatives in a small town in Texas same way there aswell...Only much bigger though..He has a bunch of support in Texas....But I realise mostly in Missouri I dont see any other politicians signs or bumper stickers other than Ron Paul...I did however see one Obama sticker like 3 months ago I keep seeing more and more RP stickers showing up though....

WOW!Thay is incredible!!!
Anyone else noticing signifigant Ron Paul support in their communitys?
Curiouser and curiouser...

Hmm personal attacks I see. I thought people were allowed to have their own opinions here. I guess not. Paul people surely are a bunch of hypocrites for a bunch of people who preach about so-called "freedom" and "liberty." Thanks for showing me your true colors.

Originally posted by SEEWHATUDO

Originally posted by SouthernBelle82
Want to borrow my glasses?

Are they rose colored?

[edit on 17-12-2007 by SouthernBelle82]

reply to post by SouthernBelle82


I think it is funnier that you put more weight on these polls that have already been shown on how they are biased against Paul, than you do in the fact that he has raised more money in one day than any other candidate in history.

I also think it is funny that you are alone in this thread, leading the charge to smear Ron Paul.

So I guess people can't change their minds huh?

Originally posted by stfspam
Well, its been stated that the way that the majority of polls are conducted is from a known base. The interesting thing with Paul is that his supporters are more than likely not in this polled base (I know its been said alot have not voted before, etc). I think it all will come down to the primarys though to see if he can get people out to vote which was the main problem I think with the Howard Dean internet deal. On this I think Paul has alot more hope and likelyhood as I think if people actually go to meetups, put up signs, and pay money, they are probably going to vote in the end.

I have looked at Ron Paul's voting record hun. As a socialist it scares the # out of me. He will undue so much progress this country has made. I guess you'd like to go back to the Colonial period huh?

Originally posted by Sentinel 1

Originally posted by SouthernBelle82
Yeah because that's why the stromfront group supports him right? LOL! I guess they aren't Nazi wannabe's are they? Nah. Just good ol "keep it white" people eh? Richardson is fourth in the democratic primary. Where is Ron Paul? Oh Clinton News Network how clever...not. Please grow up. You can't even get the name of a network right good grief. And Richardson has done way more than Ron Paul ever has. There's a reason he's fourth place in the democratic primary.

Originally posted by Sentinel 1
reply to post by SouthernBelle82

 

Ah ok I see what is happening with you its the race card and you know RP isnt gonna give illegals drivers liscences and give them free citizenship....Lol this is a lost cause ...But I will reply to your stromfront comment...Hmm I wonder if "LA RAZA" The race is supporting your boy or Mike....Also as for the comment on RP being low in the polls and why well did you even read the heading on this blog or did you just see RPs name and decide to come in here and start chirping about how much you despice him>>??? Obviously you are a Main stream meadia worshipper and think they are gospell....Look into who owns all the MM you may or may not be surprised they are all controlled by the same person wonder why RP isnt getting attention on there....Also the internet is way bigger than TV "google" RP and see who has the most hits....Explain that one....

Gotta be a Richardson supporter.....And if you think RP supporters are Nazis you couldnt be farther from the truth....And our so-called revolution raised over 6 mil. in one day check the books....Did Richardson do that???

The reason Richardson isnt getting any where is so obvious...He worked for Bill Clinton as an ambasador for the UN.Also his record as being governor isnt to good either... Go back and look at his record...And as we have been saying the media isnt being completely honest...Especially The Clinton News Network....

Just some friendly advice...Look at RPs voting record aswell....

So I ask you again: look at NAFTA, CAFTA etc. Those are creations of the so-called "free market." And look at jobs going over seas. Without jobs people don't work and without work people can't get paid and without pay people can't survive and without people surviving and living a decent life and paying into the government system than the government can't survive. Who's going to pay the huge debt we have? We don't even know the real price of our debt because the Bush administration doesn't add what all it spends on Iraq and/or Afghainstan on it. My governor where I live either last year or the previous year made a law that states any jobs that are created in my state has to stay here. You can't send the jobs to another state or another country and because of that there have been more jobs created. So since you say it isn't the governments job to create jobs doesn't that go for the salary as well? So why are you bitching about that to the federal government? I thought you were for the so-called "free market." For the record I'm for a fair market.

Originally posted by captainplanet
reply to post by SouthernBelle82

 

Oh and with the whole "free market" bull I would love to hear how he's going to create new jobs with all these corporations sending them over seas. That's been George Bush's attitude for the past seven years and look how it's going now. Great huh?

What is so bull about a free market? It is not the federal governments role to create jobs, it is the markets. You don’t like outsourcing? Buy American. And George Bush is hindering job opportunities because he lets people come in here and work for almost nothing.

Originally posted by SouthernBelle82
Oh so he doesn't want the fed government telling people what to do? So why is it that he put up a federal amendment in the House wanting to ban abortion? Gee here I thought he wanted the people to decide. Oh and read his "We the People Act" as well. More bull. The founding fathers set up our government to have a federal government. Once again Ron Paul fails at basic American government history lesson.

Actually, I think this is where you do not understand the way that the system is supposed to work. This goes back to the days of the Civil War, which considering your screen name, I am shocked you don’t know more about.

The Civil War was not really about Slavery for most of the Southerners of the time, because the majority of them did not have the money to own slaves to begin with. The war from the Southern perspective was about “States Rights” vs. “Federal Rights”. Though there was a federal government, it was only supposed to oversee the states, and to deal with foreign governments and national issues. The individual states had the right to make and enforce their own laws, and even have their own militias. This is the way that it is laid down in the original Constitution, and it works better that way for the common man, because he has more say in his government. When the North won the war, we went more toward a Federalist System, with the Federal Government assuming many rights that it was never supposed to hold. You must remember that the original writers of the Constitution came from the suppressive Monarchies of Europe, and did not want to give that type of centralized power to the federal government for fear of them becoming the same way. With that in mind, it should be obvious to you, that a strong Federal Government is not the way that our government is intended to be set up, and it has become that way because it helps keep the elite both rich and powerful.

Now, Ron Paul is all about starting to put things back the way they were originally intended to be. To give much of the law making power back to the individual states, and to stop the elite few from making the decisions for the majority. This is why, even though he has as much popular support as he does, he is meeting heavy resistance from groups such as the elite controlled media. They fear his making it into office, because it will change the structure that they have carefully crafted over a long period of time that has allowed them to quietly run this country from the shadows of their offices in high towers of large financial districts. Now we will see exactly how controlled the system has become.

As for Ron, I’ll certainly vote for him, if he is not nominated I’ll write him in, but I don’t think that those who really run things will allow him to succeed because they stand to lose too much.

Hun try reading the Constitution actually k? The founding fathers set up checks and balances. If you're as intelligent as you like to be cocky I'm sure you already know what the checks and balances are. Or do you need to take a basic American government class in college?

Originally posted by Sentinel 1

Originally posted by SouthernBelle82
You really think he would win? Look at the issues being talked about now. He's against any sort of national health care program, he's against public schools, he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when it was up for restoration and he thinks corporations should be able to do whatever the hell they want so say goodbye to telling them to not send jobs over seas. Try reading his "We the People" act as well. So here you are talking about election rigging with a candidate who's voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. How ironic. Oh and he claims to be a Constitional scholar while at the same time saying there's no such thing as the seperation of church and state. LOL! Oh and he also is for the original Constitution so those of you who are African-American or a woman or other minorities you can kiss your vote goodbye cause we didn't get to vote until the Civil Rights Act which Ron Paul voted against.

Originally posted by captainplanet
reply to post by SEEWHATUDO

 

I think he would just win in both scenarios. If the popular vote was a land slide, the electoral vote wouldn't be off, it's a flawed system but i don't think it's that flawed. If it is we would get shafted unless we did something.

[edit on 17-12-2007 by SouthernBelle82]

The founding fathers set up our government to have a federal government.....Brilliant!!!!! Lol that is why the founding fathers gave us a constitution aswell so we would have protection against a tyrannical government......

The We the People Act is a bill initially introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) on November 17, 2005. The bill, designated H.R. 4379, was immediately referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. The Judiciary committee referred H.R. 4379 to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property on February 6, 2006.[1]

It has to do with the internet rulings......You sure done your research.....

[edit on 17-12-2007 by Sentinel 1]

Here I thought polls meant nothing. So it seems polls only matter when your person wins. Boy you Paul supporters are truly showing me your hypocritical colors just like your guy does! Good job.

Originally posted by Solarskye
I live here in knoxville, Tn and a radio host took a straw poll today just for the fun of it and got surprised big time by the outcome. Fred Thompson is Tennessee's man and the radio host thought for sure he would have more votes. He just took phone calls from everybody from all around the listening area and by unanimous vote Ron Paul won. I think Fred got seven votes, Hillary got two, Obama got two, Romney got nine a few others got one or two votes, but Ron Paul got 35 votes. I know that's just a straw poll that doesn't really mean much but it sure surprised the talk show host Hallerin Hilton Hill. Just thought I'd throw that out there for you all.

i just went to cnn to vote on larry kings poll to vote. paul has 65% of the vote as of 12;30 midnite tuesday and huckabee in second with 25%
any way if they even tell the results u already know they will begin with a negative statement as to why paul is winning. larry needs some gonads

well surfing cnn i went to this page----look at the photos--most are smiling and a good headshot---now look at paul's---he looks crazy in it and looking down---so is gravel who i think is also looked down on.---go figure---cnn has a huge budget---you mean they couldn't get a good headshot----
maybe i'm splitting hairs here--but come on everyoner has good pics but paul

www.cnn.com...

[edit on 17-12-2007 by shortywarn]

[edit on 17-12-2007 by shortywarn]