Ron Paul Will Win The Republican Nomination & The Presidency

Thoughts create our reality. Observation effects the state of matter.

After thorough observation of our situation, all of my thoughts are screaming RON PAUL WILL WIN!!!

Originally posted by THEDUDE86
Ron Paul needs to win

It may take something out of nowhere such as a complete collapse of other candidates but he needs to win.

If he doesn't win nothing will change. I guarantee nothing will change

Exactly, and that's why Ron Paul must and will win IF people mobilise their energy behind him.. Keep putting massive positive energy into it. Keep visualising it. Remember the words of Goethe:

"Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back-- Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth that ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamed would have come his way. Whatever you can do, or dream you can do, begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. Begin it now."

This man will win with the support of the people. Be bold, stay committed.

Ron Paul has already won the hearts of the people who can see through the corruption.
Better times are ahead for sure! Ron Paul is supported by people all around the world.

May he live long and win the 2012 presidential elections

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
Because I don't join lost causes with racist baggage that are doomed from the start.
He has had four years to find out who wrote that garbage and publicly castrate him for doing so in his name, he never did it.

Okay, you keep pushing some strange notion that Paul has to publicly denounce each and every person that misinterprets his views. So far, you've demanded he come out in public and renounce 9/11 truthers, when he made his stance clear that he does not believe 9/11 was an inside job, but that's not good enough for you. Now, you're demanding he hunt down some idiot who mistook his stance on civil rights laws as racism, when it's quite the opposite of being racist. QUITE the OPPOSITE. Here, since you obviously didn't read it...I'll post it again for you. Written by Dr. Paul himself.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business's workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge's defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.

Of course, America has made great strides in race relations over the past forty years. However, this progress is due to changes in public attitudes and private efforts. Relations between the races have improved despite, not because of, the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
www.lewrockwell.com...

And we'll add this for good measure...

Repeal most federal drug laws; blacks are treated unfairly
Q: If you are elected president in 2008, what positive and significant legacy, if any, will you leave for Black Americans?

A: I would like to believe that if we had a freer society, it would take care of Blacks and whites and everybody equally because we’re all individuals. To me, that is so important. But if we had equal justice under the law, I think it would be a big improvement. If we had probably a repeal of most of the federal laws on drugs and the unfairness on how Blacks are treated with these drugs laws, it would be a tremendous improvement. And also, I think that if you’re going to have prosperity, it serves everybody. And if this is done by emphasizing property rights and freedom of the individuals, making sure that the powerful special interests don’t control Washington, that the military industrial complex doesn’t suck away all the wealth of the country, and then we would have prosperity.

Inner-city minorities are punished unfairly in war on drugs
Q: What policy would you support to guarantee young Black and Latino men a fairer equal justice system?

A: A system designed to protect individual liberty will have no punishments for any group and no privileges. Today, I think inner-city folks and minorities are punished unfairly in the war on drugs. For instance, Blacks make up 14% of those who use drugs, yet 36 percent of those arrested are Blacks and it ends up that 63% of those who finally end up in prison are Blacks. This has to change. We don’t have to have more courts and more prisons. We need to repeal the whole war on drugs. It isn’t working. We have already spent over $400 billion since the early 1970s, and it is wasted money. Prohibition didn’t work. Prohibition on drugs doesn’t work. So we need to come to our senses. And, absolutely, it’s a disease. We don’t treat alcoholics like this. This is a disease, and we should orient ourselves to this. That is one way you could have equal justice under the law.
www.ontheissues.org...

So, how is Dr. Paul racist again? Seems to me, he's the anti-racist.

I think Tupac is right, you have an agenda. Because every rock you've thrown, has been deflected, and you just pick up another and throw it, hoping it will hit. But it won't.

I don't care if it is negative I will not vote for a Libiterian He may not be corrupt but his views are way to extreme

reply to post by 27jd


The newsletters were not some random guy who misinterpretted him. It was his publication.

Here's a sample of the dirt to dig up.

Racist Newsletter
Since 1985, Ron Paul has published a newsletter, first called the Ron Paul Political Report (and since renamed the Ron Paul Survival Report.)

In 1992, the newsletter published a bunch of inflammatory comments on racial subjects, listed in the Quotes section of this page. Pretty raw stuff.

In 2001, as Paul moved to the mainstream and rejoined the Republican party, he disavowed these comments and blamed them on an unnamed ghostwriter. But when Paul ran for Congress in 1996, as a Libertarian, his opponent brought these up to show that Paul had fringe ideas. At that time, Paul told the Houston Chronicle that he opposed racism and his commentaries about blacks came in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time." In other words, he didn't deny writing the Ron Paul column in the Ron Paul newsletter, profits of which go to Ron Paul, until many years later. Then he claimed that his campaign aides thought it would be "too confusing" to tell the truth, so he had to lie and accept responsibility.

Whichever story is true, he's clearly responsible for the contents of that newsletter and pretty squirrelly about the whole thing.

Source


Even Ron Paul has failed to explain it away so don't give yourself any chance to.

Do you think the Obama team is so nice they won't use it?
This is reallity

I agree with you that negative vibrations set loose are a bad thing. One never know where they will go or get tracked into.==I also agree thet Ron Paul is our best hope for change that we never saw from the present gov't staff in DC right now.
I am just new to log in member but have read for a long time. I just had to get going with this thread.

You know I'm all for Ron Paul, hell i voted for him 4 years ago. However, I'm not going to vote for someone that will be 76 when he takes oath of office. Personally i think the maximum age should be 70 to run for president. Because essentially when someone is that age your not voting for him, but rather the VP.

reply to post by TheHorseChestnut

You know I'm all for Ron Paul, hell i voted for him 4 years ago. However, I'm not going to vote for someone that will be 76 when he takes oath of office. Personally i think the maximum age should be 70 to run for president. Because essentially when someone is that age your not voting for him, but rather the VP.

Another terrible reason why somebody won't vote for quite possibly one of the most Constitutionally patriotic presidential candidates to run for office.

His voice isn't powerful enough, he's too old, the voters in the ATS poll didn't choose his "electability" as the reason to vote for him...

Is there nobody that has a legitimate reason why they won't vote for him, as in a disagreement with his stance on an issue/issues?

reply to post by TinfoilTP


So, you present a statement he gave, saying he did not write the newsletter in question, and opposes racism...and somehow want to use that as proof he's racist? Um, okay.

The Obama administration can trot out a newsletter he didn't write all they want. I've provided you with plenty of his actual writings, and opinions showing he very clearly is not racist, and very clearly stands for LIBERTY FOR ALL. So, tell them to bring it on. Check out RP's facebook page, you'd be surprised how many black folks, and other minorities support him. I know you won't, but anybody not here solely to attack Ron Paul, (but supposedly doesn't actually support a candidate) can clearly see for themselves he is not racist.

I'll give you credit, you're persistent and trying your hardest to dig up actual dirt, instead of all the hit and run posts that don't address the issues in any way. Keep digging.

Originally posted by dron020
I don't care if it is negative I will not vote for a Libiterian He may not be corrupt but his views are way to extreme

Could you maybe expound on this a little? I've been seeing alot of these hit and runs. Please, when you get some time, tell us which of his views are too extreme and why you feel that way...

His domestic policy is perfect. His foreign policy is short sighted. He won't win.

Not even close.

Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by WhiteDevil013

 

Consider this. WAR is very very expensive. THE only real reason for fighting a war is to take resources (land & minerals) from someone else. The value of that land must be more than the cost of the war. Politicians will give you lots of pretty words to hide that fact but theft of resources is ALWAYS the reason

Have to disagree, modern wars are sometimes fought to prove a point, advance a particular foreign policy, to absolve a perceived grievance or as a distraction. I'm a little cynical but this is the way I see it. Korean & Vietnam to try and stop the spread of communism and to show the Russians and Chinese we can kill our own people for a cause. Iraq 1 & 2 because our boy went off the reservation. Afghanistan for the perceived grievance of 9/11 and the fact we needed a distraction. Our kinetic adventure in Libya because Gaddafi has been parading the Pan Am Flight 103 bomber around. And all our latest secret kinetic adventures in Yemen, Somalia and coming soon to a sand box near you Syria, Iran and Pakistan for a preelection buildup of Obama as a get tough on terrorism great leader and beacon of freedom.

The world is a complex place and leadership is not for the fainthearted. Obama is almost if not overwhelmed by current events and has defiantly risen to his level of incompetence. We don't need a "nice guy" as a President that tries to appease the world, we need a real butt hole. Ron Paul is a "nice guy" that would let the world step on him, push him around and usurp our place.

The whole drug thing is just what we need, NOT, a bunch of pot heads running around. Cheech & Chong do America. We have enough problems now with everyone laying around.

reply to post by zarp3333

When I choose my avatar I wasn't thinking of the stories where faeries are the Disney sweetness and light. My favorites have always been where beautiful faeries are mean, vindictive little bitches pranking mortals. I would say an attitude sort of like Robin Goodfellow.

And while I'm on it, I don't really want to see Rick Perry as President either. The mind boggles at all the Aggie jokes that should be unleashed soon. My experience with Aggies has been they are clannish and have their own form of nepotism in hiring, promotions and downsizing. The idea of Aggies running the government causes cold chills to run down my spine. If Rick Perry had an affinity for burnt orange instead of maroon, he'd be an OK guy.

I see Ron Paul as a pastel kind of guy sort of like Mister Rogers. Maybe he should get a sweater.

reply to post by Bramble Iceshimmer

The whole drug thing is just what we need, NOT, a bunch of pot heads running around. Cheech & Chong do America. We have enough problems now with everyone laying around.

That's an extremely ignorant thing to say. I could take the time to dig up the studies that say it doesn't ruin productivity, and show you just how beneficial it is and how it has no negative health consequences other than short term memory loss, but that's all been done in this thread.

Keep in mind that it's never killed a single person in history, while the two legal and acceptable drugs tobacco and alcohol kill over half a million people annually.

"Deny ignorance"

Originally posted by TheHorseChestnut
You know I'm all for Ron Paul, hell i voted for him 4 years ago. However, I'm not going to vote for someone that will be 76 when he takes oath of office. Personally i think the maximum age should be 70 to run for president. Because essentially when someone is that age your not voting for him, but rather the VP.

Ron Paul works 18 hours a day and works out daily. He's probably in better shape than a lot of folks way younger.

Ron Paul’s Home Run – Literally! A First and Only for the annual Congressional Baseball game

While we were there, we also heard that Ron Paul is the only congressman to ever hit a home run over the fence in the 50 years that the game has been running.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8a6b02069bfc.jpg[/atsimg]

Looks good to me.

His mind is sharp and he has integrity - that's what matters to me. Hell, any one of us could drop dead at any moment!!!

Fox news is conducting another online poll about who will be the next GOP presidential nominee right now. Ron Paul is leading with 4417 votes...the next closest is perry with 1423. Go and vote now.

www.foxnews.com...

scroll down a little on the right hand side

sorry...bad link
www.foxnews.com...

reply to post by Bramble Iceshimmer

"The whole drug thing is just what we need, NOT, a bunch of pot heads running around. Cheech & Chong do America. We have enough problems now with everyone laying around."

Everyone laying around, lol. If you only knew how much pot was smoked by those construction workers you see building houses and buildings everywhere you wouldn't have said this. The ones that are running and moving the fastest usually have smoked the most. I'm not saying it's from first hand experience but... it's from first hand experience. One guy really springs to mind, he smokes more pot than I've ever witnessed a human being smoke and five minutes later is moving faster than everyone around him. I guess it works different on different people.

Originally posted by Bramble Iceshimmer
Ron Paul is a "nice guy" that would let the world step on him, push him around and usurp our place.

Are you a war veteran? Ron Paul is. He served as a flight surgeon in Vietnam. Which one of the other "badasses" running for office has seen the horrors of war first hand? But, at least you've brought actual issues to the table that we can clarify, which is more than others seem to do.

A PRO-AMERICA FOREIGN POLICY

As an Air Force veteran, Ron Paul believes national defense is the single most important responsibility the Constitution entrusts to the federal government.

In Congress, Ron Paul voted to authorize military force to hunt down Osama bin Laden and authored legislation to specifically target terrorist leaders and bring them to justice.

Today, however, hundreds of thousands of our fighting men and women have been stretched thin all across the globe in over 135 countries – often without a clear mission, any sense of what defines victory, or the knowledge of when they’ll be permanently reunited with their families.

Acting as the world’s policeman and nation-building weakens our country, puts our troops in harm’s way, and sends precious resources to other nations in the midst of an historic economic crisis.

Taxpayers are forced to spend billions of dollars each year to protect the borders of other countries, while Washington refuses to deal with our own border security needs.

Congress has been rendered virtually irrelevant in foreign policy decisions and regularly cedes authority to an executive branch that refuses to be held accountable for its actions.

Far from defeating the enemy, our current policies provide incentive for more to take up arms against us.

That’s why, as Commander-in-Chief, Dr. Paul will lead the fight to:

* Make securing our borders the top national security priority.

* Avoid long and expensive land wars that bankrupt our country by using constitutional means to capture or kill terrorist leaders who helped attack the U.S. and continue to plot further attacks.

* Guarantee our intelligence community’s efforts are directed toward legitimate threats and not spying on innocent Americans through unconstitutional power grabs like the Patriot Act.

* End the nation-building that is draining troop morale, increasing our debt, and sacrificing lives with no end in sight.

* Follow the Constitution by asking Congress to declare war before one is waged.

* Only send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.

* Ensure our veterans receive the care, benefits, and honors they have earned when they return.

* Revitalize the military for the 21st century by eliminating waste in a trillion-dollar military budget.

* Prevent the TSA from forcing Americans to either be groped or ogled just to travel on an airplane and ultimately abolish the unconstitutional agency.

* Stop taking money from the middle class and the poor to give to rich dictators through foreign aid.

As President, Ron Paul’s national defense policy will ensure that the greatest nation in human history is strong, secure, and respected.
www.ronpaul2012.com...

The whole drug thing is just what we need, NOT, a bunch of pot heads running around. Cheech & Chong do America. We have enough problems now with everyone laying around.

This is a joke, and I can't believe people like you still exist...

reply to post by Strictsum


Just goes to show you what a dismal failure the "Drug War" has been. You disproved your own point.

Similarly today, the best way to fight violent drug cartels would be to pull the rug out from under their profits by bringing these transactions out into the sunlight. People who, unwisely, buy drugs would hardly opt for the back alley criminal dealer as a source, if a coffeehouse-style dispensary was an option. Moreover, a law-abiding dispensary is likely to check IDs and refuse sale to minors, as bars and ABC stores tend to do very diligently. Think of all the time and resources law enforcement could save if they could instead focus on violent crimes, instead of this impossible nanny-state mandate of saving people from themselves!

If these reasons don’t convince the drug warriors, I would urge them to go back to the Constitution and consider where there is any authority to prohibit private personal choices like this. All of our freedoms – the freedom of religion and assembly, the freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, the right to be free from unnecessary government searches and seizures – stem from the precept that you own yourself and are responsible for your own choices. Prohibition laws negate self-ownership and are an absolute affront to the principles of freedom. I disagree vehemently with the recreational use of drugs, but at the same time, if people are only free to make good decisions, they are not truly free. In any case, states should decide for themselves how to handle these issues and the federal government should respect their choices.

www.ronpaul.com...

Ron Paul's position makes good, logical sense.

I'ts easy, make him win is the best chance - if not the only - to save your country. You like challenges, just do it, or you're lost poor american people!