Ron Paul 2012!!! Your thoughts on who we should pick for our "Cause"?

[GP73LPC]

expanded... ? that's funny...

O needs to start killing more... Bush had 7 years to kill and has the lead.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

... I've been told not to talk, but these stooges don't scare me. Threats or no threats, I've laid bare the coming race war in our big cities. The federal-homosexual cover-up on AIDS (my training as a physician helps me see through this one.) The Bohemian Grove-- perverted pagan playground of the powerful. Skull & Bones, the demonic fraternity that includes George Bush and Leftist Senator John Kerry, Congress's Mr. New Money. The Israeli Lobby which plays Congress like a cheap harmonica. And the Soviet-style "smartcard" the Justice Department has in mind for you... Sincerely, Congressman Ron Paul

(pdf)

eric dondero - "the nuttier the newsletters, the more the money poured in."

the "new money" is now about 23 years old. not unlike fears of rampant inflation, these things aren't happening. are all the worldnet/prisonplanet conspiracy theories coming from Ron's ghostwriter?

 

[dagnabit]

expanded... ? that's funny...

O needs to start killing more... Bush had 7 years to kill and has the lead.

Not to worry...
the mongers are beating their chests for Iran and n Korea

 

[GP73LPC]

the mongers, yes... the far right wing crazies... the ones that insist we spend more than the rest of the world combined on defense, while children in this country are hungry. that's some seriously fucked up priorities.

i see cheney has already called for an invasion of iran and already failed to prevent n korea from getting nukes (no oil)...

<sarcasm> of course war is the only answer </sarcasm>

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Why Ron Paul's Controversial Newsletters Are Back In The News

First Posted: 12/23/11 01:19 PM ET Updated: 12/23/11 01:19 PM ET

NEW YORK -- On Thursday night Reuters reported on a solicitation for Ron Paul's political and investment newsletters from the 1980's and 90's; the direct-mail ad warned of a "coming race war" and included incendiary rants about blacks, gays and Israel similar to those previously surfacing in newsletters bearing his name.

Reuters noted that the letter was provided to the news organization by James Kirchick, a New Republic contributing editor who happened to be cited two days earlier in a New York Times piece that's helped revive questions about the decades-old publications. Paul has long denounced the newsletters and in the past claimed to have not even seen them until years after their publication. But the story's taken on a second life in the media, with Kirchick getting name-dropped by the likes of Slate, New York and the Daily Beast (twice).

Now a Prague-based foreign correspondent, Kirchick says he's surprised to wind up in the middle of a political controversy, considering that his New Republic piece on Paul's newsletters wasn't published this primary season but the last one.

"When I wrote the story four years ago, I never thought that I would have to do this all over again," Kirchick told The Huffington Post by phone Friday, shortly after attending the funeral for the late Czech leader Vaclav Havel.

The fact that Kirchick is doing this all again has less to do with any new revelations concerning Paul's newsletters and more to do with the candidate's frontrunner standing in Iowa polls less than two weeks before the caucus. The political press, which has often dismissed Paul as a non-entity, is now taking him seriously. And with the frontrunner position -- as Rick Perry or Herman Cain can attest -- comes increased media attention and scrutiny.

For those engaged in the blogosphere debate about Paul's newsletters following publication of Kirchick's Jan. 2008 article, this all may seem like old news. Although some publications, like the libertarian Reason magazine, followed up four years ago, the newspaper of record didn't. So to many, it's a revelation.

Kirchick, however, acknowledges that the material isn't new, even if the national press attention to it is.

"It's the same stuff," Kirchick said. "It's the same exact stuff. I haven't uncovered anything new in four years."

In fall 2007, Kirchick began looking into Paul's background after seeing a report that his campaign accepted a $500 donation from Don Black, publisher of the white supremacist site Stormfront. He began digging and spoke with experts on far right-wing organizations. Through research, he obtained copies of Paul's letters that were held in the archives at the University of Kansas and Wisconsin Historical Society.

The New Republic published Kirchick's lengthy piece in early January 2008, along with sample newsletter pages and several selections -- including quotes from the solicitation letter published by Reuters -- on the magazine's site. Last cycle, Paul never moved to the top of the Republican field, finishing the race with 35 delegates.

And this time around, the national media spent little time covering Paul for most of the 2012 Republican primary -- despite Paul coming in a close second in the Ames Straw Poll last August. As of a couple weeks ago, Rick Santorum was the only candidate to get less coverage, according to Pew's Project for Excellence in Journalism. During over a dozen primetime debates, moderators -- often preoccupied with Romney and the not-Romney Republican flavor-of-the-moment -- never asked Paul about the newsletters. The newsletter issue didn't seem an issue in the 2012 election.

But as Iowa approaches, editors and cable news producers are now starving for Paul material.

Recently, an editor for the Weekly Standard, an influential neoconservative magazine, asked Kirchick to revisit the 2008 story and take a look at whether anything's changed since then. The publication published a piece by Kirchick on Dec. 16 looking into Paul's ongoing relationship with conspiracy-spouting talk show host Alex Jones and the "hateful and conspiratorial nonsense that Paul promoted for decades under his own name."

The Times followed up a few days later; then Kirchick got a call from Reuters reporter Mark Hosenball asking about the cache of newsletters. Kirchick doesn't have the newsletters in Prague, but he happened to have the solicitation letter on his computer, which he passed along to the reporter. Reuters published the letter in full for the first time on Thursday.

Since the racists rants in the newsletters is well known, now journalists are looking into whether Paul's previous statements in relation to the newsletters matches his current claims about not having read them at the time. BuzzFeed's Andrew Kaczynski unearthed a 1995 C-SPAN interview where Paul mentions the newsletters and USA Today reported that Paul vouched for their accuracy in a 1996 Dallas Morning News interview.

On Wednesday, CNN's Gloria Borger pressed Paul on the newsletters during a contentious exchange. "I've never read that stuff. I've never read -- I came -- I was probably aware of it 10 years after it was written, and it's been going on 20 years that people have pestered me about this. And CNN does it every single time," Paul said.

As Borger persisted, Paul again said, "I didn't write them, didn't read them at the time, and I disavow them. This is the answer." Paul soon removed his microphone and abruptly ended the interview.

It can be expected that Paul will face more questions about the newsletters in coming days, especially when past comments recognizing them surface. On Friday The Huffington Post's Sam Stein uncovered a previously unreported video of Paul commenting on the investment newsletter in a May 1987 interview while the then-Libertarian was running for president.

A Paul campaign spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/23/ron-paul-newsletter-media_n_1167689.html

.

 

[dagnabit]

And obusha has called the death of kim jong il as "a chance to help bring freedom and stability"

i think we all know we bring "freedom and stability" with blood and bombs.....

Sadly

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

The Company Ron Paul Keeps

Meet Alex Jones.

Dec 26, 2011, Vol. 17, No. 15 • By JAMES KIRCHICK

The Republican Jewish Coalition announced this month that congressman Ron Paul would not be among the six guests invited to participate in its Republican Presidential Candidates Forum. “He’s just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican party and this organization,” said Matt Brooks, executive director of the RJC, adding that the group “rejects his misguided and extreme views.”

Paul’s exclusion caused an uproar, with critics alleging that his stand on Israel had earned the RJC’s ire; an absolutist libertarian, Paul opposes foreign aid to all countries, including the Jewish state. “This seems to me more of an attempt to draw boundaries around acceptable policy discourse than any active concern that President Dr. Ron Paul would be actively anti-Israel or anti-Semitic,” wrote Reason editor Matt Welch. Chris McGreal of the Guardian reported that Paul “was barred because of his views on Israel.” Even Seth Lipsky, editor ofthe New York Sun and a valiant defender of Israel (and friend and mentor of this writer), opined, “The whole idea of an organization of Jewish Republicans worrying about the mainstream strikes me as a bit contradictory.”

While Paul’s views on Israel certainly place him outside the American, never mind Republican, mainstream, there is an even more elementary reason the RJC was right to exclude him from its event. It is Paul’s lucrative and decades-long promotion of bigotry and conspiracy theories, for which he has yet to account fully, and his continuing espousal of extremist views, that should make him unwelcome at any respectable forum, not only those hosted by Jewish organizations.

In January 2008, the New Republic ran my story reporting the contents of monthly newsletters that Paul published throughout the 1980s and 1990s. While a handful of controversial passages from these bulletins had been quoted previously, I was able to track down nearly the entire archive, scattered between the University of Kansas and the Wisconsin Historical Society (both of which housed the newsletters in collections of extreme right-wing American political literature). Though particular articles rarely carried a byline, the vast majority were written in the first person, while the title of the newsletter, in its various iterations, always featured Paul’s name: Ron Paul’s Freedom Report,the Ron Paul Political Report,the Ron Paul Survival Report,and the Ron Paul Investment Letter. What I found was unpleasant.

“Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks,” read a typical article from the June 1992 “Special Issue on Racial Terrorism,” a supplement to the Ron Paul Political Report. Racial apocalypse was the most persistent theme of the newsletters; a 1990 issue warned of “The Coming Race War,” and an article the following year about disturbances in the Adams Morgan neighborhood of Washington, D.C., was entitled “Animals Take Over the D.C. Zoo.” Paul alleged that Martin Luther King Jr., “the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours,” had also “seduced underage girls and boys.” The man who would later proclaim King a “hero” attacked Ronald Reagan for signing legislation creating the federal holiday in his name, complaining, “We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day.”

No conspiracy theory was too outlandish for Paul’s endorsement. One newsletter reported on the heretofore unknown phenomenon of “Needlin’,” in which “gangs of black girls between the ages of 12 and 14” roamed the streets of New York and injected white women with possibly HIV-infected syringes. Another newsletter warned that “the AIDS patient” should not be allowed to eat in restaurants because “AIDS can be transmitted by saliva,” a strange claim for a physician to make.

Paul gave credence to the theory, later shown to have been the product of a Soviet disinformation effort, that AIDS had been created in a U.S. government laboratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland. Three months before far-right extremists killed 168 Americans in Oklahoma City, Paul’s newsletter praised the “1,500 local militias now training to defend liberty” as “one of the most encouraging developments in America.” And he offered specific advice to antigovernment militia members, such as, “Keep the group size down,” “Keep quiet and you’re harder to find,” “Leave no clues,” “Avoid the phone as much as possible,” and “Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.”

If the above were not enough to place Paul beyond the pale for the RJC, what the congressman had to say about Jews and Israel would probably be a deal-breaker. No foreign country was mentioned in the newsletters more often than Israel. A 1987 newsletter termed it “an aggressive, national socialist state,” and another missive, on the subject of the 1993 World Trade Center attack, concluded, “Whether it was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.” In 1990, the newsletter cast aspersions on the “tens of thousands of well-placed friends of Israel in all countries who are willing to wok [sic] for the Mossad in their area of expertise.”

This is just a sample of the hateful and conspiratorial nonsense that Paul promoted for decades under his own name. His response to the revelations was nothing short of unbelievable. “The quotations in the New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed,” he said. “When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.” In an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer two days after the article appeared, Paul waved away accusations of racism by saying that he was “gaining ground with the blacks” and “getting more votes right now and more support from the blacks.”

Yet a subsequent report by Reason found that Ron Paul & Associates, the defunct company that published the newsletters and which counted Paul and his wife as officers, reported an income of nearly $1 million in 1993 alone. If this figure is reliable, Paul must have earned multiple millions of dollars over the two decades plus of the newsletters’ existence. It is incredible that he had less than an active interest in what was being printed as part of a subscription newsletter enterprise that earned him and his family millions of dollars. Ed Crane, the president of the Cato Institute, said Paul told him that “his best source of congressional campaign donations was the mailing list for the Spotlight, the conspiracy-mongering, anti-Semitic tabloid run by the Holocaust denier Willis Carto.”

This sordid history would not bear repeating but for the fact that the media love to portray Paul as a truth-telling, antiwar Republican standing up to the “hawkish” conservative establishment. Otherwise, the newsletters, and Paul’s continued failure to name their author, would be mentioned in every story about him, and he would be relegated to the fringe where he belongs. But Paul has escaped the sort of media scrutiny that would bury other political figures. A December 15 profile of Paul in the Washington Post, for instance, affectionately described his love of gardening and The Sound of Music and judged that “world events have conspired to make him look increasingly on point”—all without any mention of the newsletter controversy. Though present at nearly every Republican debate, he has yet to be asked about the newsletters. Had Paul’s persona and views changed significantly since 2008, this oversight might be understandable. But he continues to say and do things suggesting that, far from disowning the statements he has claimed “do not represent what I believe or have ever believed,” he still believes them.

In the four years since my article appeared, Paul has gone right on appearing regularly on the radio program of Alex Jones, the most popular conspiracy theorist in America (unless that distinction belongs to Paul himself). To understand Jones’s paranoid worldview, it helps to watch a recent documentary he produced, Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement, which reveals the secret plot of George Pataki, David Rockefeller, and Queen Beatrix, among other luminaries, to exterminate humanity and transform themselves into “superhuman” computer hybrids able to “travel throughout the cosmos.” There is nothing Jones believes the American government isn’t capable of, from “[encouraging] homosexuality with chemicals so that people don’t have children” to blowing up the Space Shuttle Columbia, a “textbook psychological warfare operation.”

In a March 2009 interview, Paul entertained Jones’s claim that NORTHCOM, the U.S. military’s combatant command for North America, is “taking over” the country. “The average member of Congress probably isn’t a participant in the grand conspiracy,” Paul reassured the fevered host, essentially acknowledging that such a conspiracy exists. “We need to take out the CIA.” On Paul’s latest appearance on the Jones show, just last week, he called allegations that Iran had attempted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States a “propaganda stunt” of the Obama administration. In a January 2010 speech, Paul announced, “There’s been a coup, have you heard? It’s the CIA coup” against the American government. “They’re in businesses, in drug businesses,” the congressman added.

Likewise, Paul’s insistence that America should be a “friend” of Israel is belied by public statements like one from a November 22 GOP debate: “Why do we have this automatic commitment that we’re going to send our kids and send our money endlessly to Israel?” This is an echo of Pat Buchanan’s 1990 claim that if the United States went to war against Saddam Hussein it would be on behalf of Israel, and that “kids with names like McAllister, Murphy, Gonzales, and Leroy Brown” would be the ones doing the fighting and dying. The assertion that American soldiers are risking their lives to protect Israel and not the United States is as false today as it was two decades ago.

Last, Paul continues to be the favorite candidate of those who believe that the United States either orchestrated the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, or allowed them to happen in order to create the pretext for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s not hard to understand why. In a December 9 speech to supporters in Iowa, Paul had this to say: “Just think of what happened after 9/11. Immediately before there was any assessment there was glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq.”

Paul’s more mainstream supporters have always explained away his popularity with 9/11 “Truthers” as an unfortunate consequence of his altruistic, if at times naïve, libertarian ethos: The man just loves freedom so much that he’s loath to turn away backers who may think differently from him. To anyone who bothers to look into Ron Paul’s record, that claim is simply not credible.

James Kirchick is a fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a contributing editor to the New Republic.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/company-ron-paul-keeps_613474.html?page=3

remember... don't fire unless fired upon.

save your money folks, this is cottage industry.

I will say this, at least Ron cordially admits a known quantity. When asked how he expects to manage such radical changes in federal government, Dr. Ron Paul responded, "Oh, of course I'll have to work with the House and Senate."

 

[dagnabit]

Hmmmmm

Shall we judge presidential by the tenuous connections to the company they keep?

naaaa we dont wanna do that....

 

[stonedstoner]

if you wanna be an african american why don't you go back to fuckin africa eh? nothing like a good ol racist black person. you would rather support someone who's pretty much wiped his ass with our constitution because he's black than wake up and smell the coffee. why the fuck can't we all just be americans and stand together and realize color doesn't fuckin matter. really wtf people like you are whats wrong with the world. you and the people that think a vote for ron paul is a wasted vote. fuckin jackasses

i never said i was african american. there are more races than just white and black, homie. and even if i was african american, why would i go to africa? there are several generations of african americans in this country. why? because the white man brought africans over and enslaved them. you would seriously tell an african american to go back to africa? that just shows you how ignorant you are. i'm sure a lot of ron paul supporters are that ignorant as well. i'm not saying all of them are. i happen to have sooo many friends that are ron paul fans. i just disagree with them. but none of my ron paul supporting friends would say that kind of racist shit you just said.

 

[GP73LPC]

just to be fair, the black man in Africa sold the black man to the white man.

so some blacks and some whites were equally guilty of enslavement...

 

[HUGE]

remember... don't fire unless fired upon.

save your money folks, this is cottage industry.

I will say this, at least Ron cordially admits a known quantity. When asked how he expects to manage such radical changes in federal government, Dr. Ron Paul responded, "Oh, of course I'll have to work with the House and Senate."

What in that article is so bad? If you had actually heard the interviews you would recognize the attempt to miss quote and sensationalize whenever possible. I guess it comes down to weather or not you really believe our country is involved in drug dealing and evil things all in the name of some bankers money or you think the gov is generally good and has your best interests at heart. If you think the things mentioned in the article aren't real then I guess I can see how you could find it shocking.

 

[monkey5]

What a true statement A-loc..great minds think alike!

What a true statement A-loc..great minds think alike!

if you wanna be an african american why don't you go back to fuckin africa eh? nothing like a good ol racist black person. you would rather support someone who's pretty much wiped his ass with our constitution because he's black than wake up and smell the coffee. why the fuck can't we all just be americans and stand together and realize color doesn't fuckin matter. really wtf people like you are whats wrong with the world. you and the people that think a vote for ron paul is a wasted vote. fuckin jackasses

~~~ You are correct! Thank you for being a thinking person! monkey5

 

[dagnabit]

Nasty rep messages from the status quo crowd....
Seems their fear and loathing is getting the best of them.

 

[GP73LPC]

politics and religion bring out the BEST and the WORST in people...

 

[BigTex]

"Think not what your country can do for you, but what YOU can do for your country"

It's time for the american people to band together and stop letting washington and big busines flush this country down the drain. Instead of looking for someone like Ron Paul to save us we should focus on punishing all the bad apples in washington. How or who you give your presidential vote to amounts to nothing...unless your're a member of the electorial college! If every politician that did wrong or worked for his or her own interests was severly caned in public the rest would either straighten up or get the hell outa washington. It just amazes me that 95% of the people allow the other 5%(or less) to basically get away with murder, because they are murdering your freedom, your way of life, and this country. The american people are nothing but sheep doing what their sheppard says. Only when it gets bad enough that mass amounts of americans are starving and the economy is so bad it's pointless to go to work will people band together and say enough of this shit, but by then it'll be too late. If we are not willing to stand up to them for us then we should at least do it for our children and future generations. The Roman empire rose and fell and the USA will too.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

What in that article is so bad? If you had actually heard the interviews you would recognize the attempt to miss quote and sensationalize whenever possible. I guess it comes down to weather or not you really believe our country is involved in drug dealing and evil things all in the name of some bankers money or you think the gov is generally good and has your best interests at heart. If you think the things mentioned in the article aren't real then I guess I can see how you could find it shocking.

IMO, verbatim citations aren't misquotes. The very nature of running for president has a way of sensationalizing one's history. Dr. Paul has a point when he repudiates what was written. However, there's the appearance that Dr. Paul is looking at all this in the rear-view mirror when it's closer to riding on his front bumper.

One may seek truth without necessarily finding it. The best we have are the verbatim sources. Yet, the old saying, "don't believe everything you read" has to apply. We only know some of what's been presented.

I'm not as largely focused on the so called minority-influenced rhetoric. One of the previous articles states that Dr. Paul praised the militia movement 3 months prior to the Oklahoma City bombing. I'm not suggesting that Dr. Paul was complicit. Yet McVeigh expressed he expected to ignite the 'revolution' to take back government. Around the time that Eric Rudolph was blowing up women's health clinics, Dr. Paul's newsletters expressed opposition to abortion and that life begins at conception. In and around this time is when Dr. Paul's newsletters ceased circulation.

I draw no association with Rudolph and Dr. Paul. I draw association with disparaging, irresponsible rhetoric that influences psychopaths. I draw comfort that by-and-large, the militia movement's actions are largely rhetoric. Waco, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City and Rudolph's multiple crimes were in one way or another tied to the idea that the neo revolution would ignite. I'm relieved (and) more informed that the so-called militia movement is more comfortable spectating than acting atm.

All this aside, what really gets me is the degree of hatred that exploded after Clinton's election. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center have documented the exponential increase in militia organizations, rhetoric and in some cases actions. These activities have been compared to neo KKK organizations who practiced loose affiliation after a grand dragon went to prison for hate crimes. Rhetoric from folks like David Duke became less public and more underground. Their publications instruct their subscribers to draw no associations and the implications are obvious.

Not only did the militia movement substantially grow during the late-eighties and early 90s, focus of hate moved directly toward government as (not Reagan's problem but) the enemy. Government was no longer seen as something to manage but something to fight.

Come to find out, one of our senior members in the House of Representatives is linked to the militia movement, with all the plausible deniability and compelling incuriosity. The absence of $millions in proceeds might suggest that Dr. Paul actually believed what was published. The money only amplifies the surreptitiousness. He believes all that baloney or he's laughing all the way to the bank or both.

There's a great argument that the Patriot Act limits our rights. But 15 years before the cataclysmic event that changed our lives, the militia movement was exploding and hate rhetoric became a way to make the big bucks. Only in America.

So what's all the 90s era hate stuff and it's massive growth? It ain't taxes because rates haven't changed enough to make a spit in the bucket. We haven't had any of the gun regulations like the NRA howls every time a democrat wins the presidency. So if it's not guns and taxes, what is it?

We did happen to pass major hate-crimes legislation and subsequently arose the argument our freedom of expression was being trampled. But this argument met the general public and was disparaged enough that the argument became guns and taxes. So-much was hating peeps removed equation, some folks actually pretend that ethnic hatred no longer exists. Pointing the finger at gub dodges the stank, only until you read the disparaging rhetoric.

I'm actually glad that Dr. Paul is running for president. Never before have we had the opportunity to see what's happening beneath the radar so clearly from a man so arguably influential. Might bring a contrast to Michelle Bachmann's brand of wholesale hatred.

We get the occasional nut job like the Arizona shooter after a congresswoman's picture was depicted behind cross hairs. As the militia movement watches all the hate crimes take place, we have a guy running for president and he's waist-deep in cash from rhetoric substantial enough to archive two independent university studies of hate speech and any potential actions that may arise, based on full volumes of Dr. Paul's newsletters.

I'm not here to suggest that Dr. Paul will be investigated, much less prosecuted. But Dr. Paul might want to take this a little more head-on then he's doing atm. Otherwise the general electorate will say the same thing to Dr. Paul as they did to Pat Buchanan and the unpopular argument.

 

[GP73LPC]

"Think not what your country can do for you, but what YOU can do for your country"

It's time for the american people to band together and stop letting washington and big busines flush this country down the drain. Instead of looking for someone like Ron Paul to save us we should focus on punishing all the bad apples in washington. If every politician that did wrong or worked for his or her own interests was severly caned in public the rest would either straighten up or get the hell outa washington. It just amazes me that 95% of the people allow the other 5%(or less) to basically get away with murder, because they are murdering your freedom, your way of life, and this country. The american people are nothing but sheep doing what the sheppard says. Only when it gets bad enough that mass amounts of americans are starving and the economy is so bad it's pointless to go to work will people band together and say enough of this shit, but by then it'll be too late. If we are not willing to stand up to them for us then we should at least do it for our children and future generations.

i am not at all pleased with my fellow countrymen.... i speak with friends and family and half of them are like 'it's okay, we will be okay, let's not rock the boat..."

i'm like "fuck that, would our founding fathers be so complacent..."

bad shit is gonna have to happen for Americans to wake up. i live in the greatest society ever known to mankind and we have so many problems it's not even funny...

sick shit... i need a cat hug

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Barring further natural and or terrorist acts, the only bad shit that's going to happen is further contraction and the suffering it brings. Lawmakers aren't going to sit around with their thumbs in their ears while America tries to fight itself out of a jam. Lawmakers aren't stupid. They know that money doesn't pull the lever.

As soon as we get enough lawmakers in Washington willing to get big money out, we'll begin to see improvement. By and large these folks care about what they're doing.

They'll never satisfy natural rights individualists. Neither will Dr. Paul. No president resembles their campaigns when so little of the job is known to mere candidates. The more radical the change, the more considerable the resistance, at least in theory.

 

[HUGE]

Here is where the disconnect is happening you think this country is mostly good and they aren't deliberately going to harm Americans. Well they have and they will again. You keep defending the very people who have been rapingbyou and the rest of the world for a Lon time.
If you can't see the truth now either you havnt been exposed to it or you are in willfull denial like alot o folks I know. Either way until you recognize that our gov has been fully Currupted and taken over we will never see eye to eye. For my enemy is your friend. You are the perfect corporate whore American. may the chains of bondage rest lightly upon you. And let me forget you were my countrymen.


Go check the tats on terror related deaths and tell me we should have 2 wars/ and the parrot act and the ndaa.

Economic collapse is coming. It has been for awhile. Pyramid schemes have a tendency to fall apart. When it does remember dr Paul tried to help.

All this Paul's a racist tuff is meaningless in the general picture of life. There is a Mongolian beast raping your wife and all your worried about is making sure his balls don't get dusty.

Barring further natural and or terrorist acts, the only bad shit that's going to happen is further contraction and the suffering it brings. Lawmakers aren't going to sit around with their thumbs in their ears while America tries to fight itself out of a jam. Lawmakers aren't stupid. They know that money doesn't pull the lever.

As soon as we get enough lawmakers in Washington willing to get big money out, we'll begin to see improvement. By and large these folks care about what they're doing.

They'll never satisfy natural rights individualists. Neither will Dr. Paul. No president resembles their campaigns when so little of the job is known to mere candidates. The more radical the change, the more considerable the resistance, at least in theory.

 

[bentom187]

politicians are always ready to play off of our fear and make promisies they cant keep at our expense.
you cant foam pad the world its best to be on good terms with all people.
so far the people are the only ones who are suffering this brings about resentment reguardless of party affiliation.
so lets all take a step back and look at THE SYSTEM they originally used to produce the outcomes that got us here.
then think about who would help us get out then i think youll see the only one who wants to do anything different is Dr.Ron Paul.