Ron Paul Calls it Quits

That's quite enough...

Please remember that this is still a "News Forum" and is held to a higher standard... Civility and decorum will rule the day and pervade this thread. The staff realizes that political topics can lead to heated discussions, but personal attacks are against the Terms & conditions and will not be tolerated.

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.

I thought I read a news article today saying how Ron Paul wasn't -actually- quitting, and that this was some scheme by the neo-cons invading his website or something. The article stated he was still on schedule for many rallies and whatnot...

I'll try to find it =\

Originally posted by mybigunit
Nope that isnt how I play. You can have a good national defense without spending 1 trillion dollars a year for army bases and nation building over seas.

On that I agree. Pentagon spending is where about seventy cents goes, out of every dollar you pay in taxes. It's bloated, corrupt, and needs to be hit with a lawnmower.

if only hte American concept of "small government" involved trimming military spending at all, huh? News flash... it doesn't. Even St. Paul himself carefully tiptoed around that issue.

I already told you above you cant get rid of ALL taxes but you can get rid of income tax to start and when we get somehow fix the social security and medicaid we can drop that too.

And again - you would pay the same amount of money in taxes without an income tax. Other taxes would go up to compensate.

Its good to have police but we dont need anywhere near the amount of police we have on the street. BTW that is covered by property taxes not the national government.

Never made any claim for the police. However., most police departments do get government funding to some degree. Part of the whole "War on drugs / terror" thing, you know?

Roads you can have a small gas tax like what we have now to fix roads and bridges. But instead of that money going to fix the roads it goes to the dept of transportation and just disappears in the big government bureaucracy.

And is that a problem of taxes or obfuscated government systems?

I can go on and on. The governments job is to provide national defense, coin and set the value of money, do infrastructure, that is really about it. It doesnt cost 3 trillion dollars a year to do these things. Really the tariffs, gas taxes, and the other small means of income can cover all this you do not need an income tax and inflation tax and all the other big government taxes to do this.

Read Article 1, Section 8. Congress has a lot of stuff it does. "General welfare" coversa LOT of ground.

All the problems you have are traceable back to the military problem, ultimately - the need for military secrecy has transformed into a need for government secrecy, which lends itself to massive amounts of corruption and graft, which means YOU pay more, for the same services. The solution isn't to complain for lower taxes (which will net you less service ultimately) but instead for transparent government. The key is, as citizens, we are entitled to see what our elected officials and their appointees aree up to, AT ALL TIMES.

The Ron Paul thing was fun to watch. The media drooling all over Obama is as much fun. But my basic question is this. WHY IS NOBODY LOOKING INTO THE CONSPIRACY OF THE DNC DOING EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER TO LOOSE THE LAST 3 ELECTIONS. First they run a idiot. Gore. Next a retard with a head the size of a VW. Swift boat Kerry. Now they are running a black guy and or a woman against a WAR HERO. While the nation is at war. The DNC is either 1 INSANE. Or 2 run by blind tree monkeys that flick poop at pictures to decide who runs.

[edit on 13-6-2008 by TXMACHINEGUNDLR]

reply to post by TXMACHINEGUNDLR


The DNC is a pretty vile thing, from the viewpoint of THIS democrat. The moment a state elects a republican governor or gets a small GOP lead in state legislature, or even has someone say "Republican" on a local news channel, the DNC writes that state off as "Republican territory - unwinnable" and refuses to campaign there, support the Democrats in that state, or anything.

They are pretty much one and all, GOP-aligned corporatists who's main function was providing the illusion of a two-party system. Here's hoping that the DLC manages to actually return democrats to the Democratic party. Off to a good start with Dean's fifty-state strategy (sunnuvabitch wasn't lying about "We're gonna go to Iowa! We're gonna go to Nevada! We're going to go to the U.S. Marshall Islands! YEEEARGH!" was he?)

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


War on drugs eliminated and save that 45 billion a year. Who am I to tell a person they cant screw up their life. Its there life. Prostitution legalize it if 2 consenting adults want to have sex who am I to stop them it happens all the time the only difference is you exchange money and that is when it becomes illegal. Well let me ask you something have you been married trust me you pay the woman one way or another.

Sure you can cut the military. You dont need bases in 130 countries. Bring them all home. End the war in Iraq and focus on Afghanistan and get that war finished. Then come home and save that 1 trillion a year.

I dont know why you keep saying your going to pay the same amount in taxes. You not by fixing our foreign policy to the above and kill this police state we have and lets work on social security and medicaid to phase it out and eliminate it. That would leave us with about an $950 billion budget and that is still PLENTY of money and we would not have to pay a dime in income taxes. Im very well aware of the constitution also and general welfare means in my eyes the protecting of my freedoms from both the government and other people. Not to pay for my kids education. I can do that with all the money I would be keeping.

The only socialistic view I have is for the kids. If a mother and father are addicts the kids should be taken care of. We as a country should invest in our children. Im a product of that investment but that will still fall in my above budget.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


The DNC is just as pathetic as the RNC and that is because they are all the same they both want big government and big taxes. The Dems really let me down when they didnt impeach Bush and Cheney not once but two times. They pandered and it just proves my point that they are all the same and thats why a real change needs to happen and it will just not this election.

This country is too inanely corrupt and the oversight responsible for quashing that corruption is even worse. It would never allow a Ron Paul type to become commander and chief, even if he had an overwhelming electoral victory.


That being said, I can't imagine Obama not being taken out leading up to this election. Hillary will be "re-placed". This oligarchy has too many moral and ethical wrongdoings to achieve.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Being a Ron Paul supporter, which as you implied, also means I am too lazy to look-up information, I decided to get off my a#s and peruse the information in the obviously authoritative link you posted.

It is, indeed, a very impressive chart of how the Gov't purports to spend the budget approved by congress. However, this is merely a compilation of Official expenditures presented in a graphic chart form. The chart does have a small "Who Pays" section where it states:

"For every $1 Billion of total federal spending...
Every tax payer has to pay $4 on average
550 Million in total"

...this is just parroting information the Government provides.
Here is a little background on the charts' creator:

"Jess Bachman is a freelance graphic designer residing in Burlington, Vermont.
Aside from combing the informational depths, Jess can be found collecting music, designing custom game boards to play RIsk on, engineering popsicle stick birdhouses, experimenting with tea, making art for people who play music, fumbling over a harmonica, and other peculiarities."

www.wallstats.com...








[edit on 13-6-2008 by FewWorldOrder]

reply to post by mybigunit


Ya know, I think most of us are actually on the same page here! The WOD (war on drugs) is a scam, perpetrated on us, to hide Black Ops.

I don't condone drug use, of course. BUT, it (the 'WOD') is a cover, used 'covertly', to hide money from prying eyes, and divert it. AND, the stolen 'drug' money is then pumped into the Black Ops....see the wheel go round and round???

Shoot....if I scratch too close to the surface, I'm gonna cause an itch, and the next thing I know, I'm gone!!!!

OK, outta here!!

reply to post by weedwhacker


There is a war on drugs because the government does not like competition. Plain and simple as that. Legalize marijuana and tax it.

My grandfather is a lifelong Republican. About six years ago he got into some financial trouble becasue he kept giving his money to a Republican congressman in need. He would get letters saying how this congressman was fighting the neo-communists and the threat of foriegners taking over America. My grandfather at this point was in the beginning stages of Alzheimer’s. So two years ago we move him and my grandmother to a home where they can be cared for. After the move my family starts going through his mail that he has saved up from this congressman in need. The mail from the congressman who needed my grandfather's money so desperatley. It was Ron Paul. I like when Ron Paul says things he isn't supposed to say during debates. I think it keeps everyone on their toes. But I have nothing but ill will for congressman Paul. I sure hope he won his fight agianst the foreign neo-communist alien invaders.

reply to post by Becker44


Either 3rd Party or write in ballot. I could write in Ron Paul's name though I am considering writing, "No confidence in the government"

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Read Article 1, Section 8. Congress has a lot of stuff it does. "General welfare" coversa LOT of ground.

And this is quite likely the single most-abused clause in the Constitution. The vast majority of the welfare system is to provide for individual welfare...But the Constitution Framers knew quite well that no government can do this, thus they specified general welfare to mean "the Citizen body as a whole," not for each & every individual citizen. The money that goes into such wasteful individual welfare programs would take a big chunk out of taxation.

For each & every Right enumerated in the Constitution, Bill of Rights & other Natural Rights as interpreted by the Supreme Court, there also exists a corresponding personal responsibility inherent with the exercise of those Rights...Individual welfare does not correspond with personal responsibility.

Most of these welfare systems rob those dependent upon them of taking the responsibilities to exercise their Rights...In other words, when the government forces a majority to "contribute" to the welfare of innumerable individuals, then people who are responsibly-minded are being forced to tend to the irresponsible people around them.

reply to post by MidnightDStroyer


Touche! Is it overkill to give you two stars?

Very good explanation.

reply to post by MidnightDStroyer


I agree. Star for you. I interpret general welfare as things like infrastructure and maybe national parks and crap like that. Stuff for the general population. Then again maybe I am wrong. I do know for sure it doesnt mean a monthly welfare check to people.

Originally posted by RRconservative
Although is was over when it started....I can officially say.....

THE RON PAUL FANTASY IS OVER!!!!

Man that felt good!!!

Man, you have to admit though, you though this day would have come about 5 months ago...

Ron Paul was a slap in the face to conventional Rupublicrat v Demicain values, but realisticly, he was dead on arivial.

But the effects the Ron Paul had on the people of this nation. People that had no intrest in polotics, have taken intrest, and trying to find meaning.

I like him but it is too bad he was too stubborn to run independent.

and being non CFR an not sponsored by foreign lobbies and corporate foxy media stations didn't get him far enough on the republican ticket.

he was too good to become president, so I wonder what's it gonna be now, more global war and Control of Foreign Resources or the first black US president and the same CFR?