Ron Paul, Libertarianism and the U.N.

[d-cat]

Reject Draft Slavery, Ron Paul Speech to Congress, October 5, 2004
https://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=587

Rethinking the Draft - November 27, 2006
https://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=488

Conscription-The Terrible Price of War, Ron Paul Speech to Congress, November 21, 2003
https://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=616

Conscription is Collectivism - January 13, 2003
https://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=287

Abolish Selective Service, Ron Paul Speech to Congress, January 30, 2003
https://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=659

Draft not needed for protection of liberty - August 23, 1999
https://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=111


for more info:
https://www.ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php?id=18

[d-cat]

Political positions of Ron Paul
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politi...ns_of_Ron_Paul


video:

Ron Paul - Then and Now (click link below)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcbfobiHTCE

[d-cat]

VIDEO: Ron Paul Speaks @ USC Sept 12 '07

this is a link to the 5 part playlist - you can watch them one after another automatically by clicking on "play all videos" on the right

https://www.youtube.com/view_play_li...80FC586712FC47

[d-cat]

VIDEO: Ron Paul in San Francisco (Sept 13)

https://vimeo.com/306606

["Mad" Miles]

https://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/...the-good-kind/

This article, and the subsequent "discussion" following, are a pretty good debate as to what Ron Paul represents, and doesn't. Plenty of Paul defenders in the responses.

I just read it, thought I'd share it with Waccoland.

"Mad" Miles




P.S. For the sake of full disclosure, I'm not sure, but I think the author of the article, Lance Selfa, is the same Lance I superficially knew in Chicago in the Left scene from 1985-1997. If it's the same guy, he was/is a partisan of the ISO, a Leninist-Trot organization with which I had/have fundamental disagreements, primarily because of their Leninism.

I don't care for authoritarian political philosphies that mask themselves as democratic and freedom enhancing. But that's a much longer, older, and tired-er debate that I long ago "Left Behind".

Speaking of which, check out the other recent articles published on DissidentVoice.org, I'm in the midst of doing the same. Overall it has some of the most articulate and interesting stuff around! And yes, I know it's founder, Sunil Sharma, but we don't hang out together or anything. Both too busy!

[Neshamah]

That is a good article, though I hardly think the UN is above criticism. I'll want to explore both websites when I have more time.

Ron Paul is the only anti-war candidate who is even remotely electable. At the very least, as a third party candidate he can prevent the election of Guiliani, perhaps the only current candidate who will be more abusive than Bush.

Ron Paul is a conservative, but there are a number of pragmatic reasons to support his candidacy, aside from draining support from Republicans in the general election. He will end the war and reduce our disastrous and aggressive foreign policy. He will likely be opposite a more empowered Democratic Congress which means his ability to roll back environmental protections or restrict abortion will be limited. Most importantly in my view, he will reduce the power of the executive branch to something resembling the job description in the Constitution. Rather than being yes-people for the President, the Legislative and Judicial Branches will be able to resume a real roll in government.

The government has taxed so heavily, and created so much debt which drives down the value of what all but the wealthiest can save, that most of us are dependent on the government for almost everything. This gives the government enormous power, and from time to time, people like Bush get into office and do as they please.

If we elect Paul and don't like him, we'll elect someone else in four years. Four years of Ron Paul will certainly reduce the scope of government, and his successor will have the opportunity to bring only the best parts back.

Four to eight years of Hillary Clinton might be better for many in the short term, but it will leave open the possibility of a future Bush III who just might take the final steps to dictatorship.


~ Neshamah

[OrchardDweller]

Some people seem to be concerned what a Paul presidency would mean for the environment. This interview will give you a great insight on his stances and ideas concerning the environment:
https://www.grist.org/feature/2007/10/16/paul/

[OrchardDweller]

I would like to point out that it was Barry, the moderator, not me, who started this thread. It's a continuation of this thread https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showthread.php?t=24928

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Ron Paul leads in Wacco Presidential poll!
This question led to many posts about Ron Paul, so I have them off into their own thread here:
Ron Paul, Libertarianism and the U.N.

Quote:
roble wrote:
US presidential hopeful, Ron Paul, is the leading favorite for the White House in the Wacco community!

I have just one question:

Who the hell is Ron Paul???
__________________
Founder & Moderator

[Zeno Swijtink]

Some people seem to be concerned what a Paul presidency would mean for the environment. This interview will give you a great insight on his stances and ideas concerning the environment:
https://www.grist.org/feature/2007/10/16/paul/

Paul sees no need for an EPA:

"What do you see as the role of the Environmental Protection Agency?"

"You wouldn't need it. Environmental protection in the U.S. should function according to the same premise as "prior restraint" in a newspaper. Newspapers can't print anything that's a lie. There has to be recourse. But you don't invite the government in to review every single thing that the print media does with the assumption they might do something wrong. The EPA assumes you might do something wrong; it's a bureaucratic, intrusive approach and it favors those who have political connections."

But is it that simple? Does the analogy with libel law hold? [Note that Paul misuses the expression "prior restraint" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_restraint but his intention is clear]

Don't we need an agency that sets the rules: how much arsenic is allowed in drinking water? As Robert Morris, author of "The Blue Death: Disease, Disaster and the Water We Drink" wrote in the NYT of Oct 3:

"From herbicides to arsenic, the Environmental Protection Agency has set standards for 80 different chemicals, specifying how much of each should be allowed in our drinking water."

https://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.h.../03morris.html

Morris's complaint is that there are many contaminants that remain unregulated. Paul seems to want to do away with all standards and have a private individual go to a judge and argue that he has been "harmed."

But how can the judge decide what level of contamination amounts to harm?

Moreover in many cases it is impossible to causally trace a particular harm to a particular cause. Evidence is often statistical, having to do with groups of people, not individual cases. Maybe an area where Paul's libertarianism, which only recognizes individuals, breaks down?

[Paradox]

...and then explain to this progressive community why they should waste ten seconds thinking about supporting him. Good luck.

For one, their efforts have inadvertently supported the creation of a fascist state (not a socialist utopia as you might have hoped). Corporations are closely aligned with politicians and the squeeze on our liberties is now in full effect (Fascism not Socialism/Communism). If Bush and Cheney were not so incompetent we may not be having this discussion.

Are you a warmonger? That is the question of the hour. If you are not then who else (other than Ron Paul) is there to vote for? And let's keep it real...someone that actually has a chance to win. There is little difference between Democrat and Republican these days. Take a look at your political options, you can vote for bad, worse or Ron Paul. We are on the verge of bankruptcy, your ideals have brought us to this point. Write another hot check if you must but I will fight to undo the damage done by the misguided babyboomer generation. What a bunch of ingrates.

Let me guess. You are one of them.

[Neshamah]

If Bush and Cheney were not so incompetent we may not be having this discussion....

Bush and Cheney are deliberate, not incompetent. They are deliberately grabbing power. Guiliani will do the same. Clinton has better intentions domestically, but will still be grabbing power to see them realized. Unless we elect Clinton dictator for life, we may very well see her expanded power in the hands of another President in the mold of Bush or Guiliani.

(I do not by the way advocate electing anyone dictator for life.)

Clinton and Guiliani are both campaigning on fear. Guiliani basically says that if we do not sacrifice our freedoms and trust the government, terrorists will kill us. Clinton says if the government does not take care of us and make all our decisions, people will starve and die prematurely. There is certainly some truth to Clinton's claims, and I won't call anyone names for supporting her. However, if we depend only on the government and not on each other to solve these problems, the potential for deliberate abuse as we've seen with Bush and Cheney only gets worse.


~ Neshamah

[radio4progressives]

Paradox,

You were essentially on the right track until you finalized your post with your mis-placed (and/or misdirected) anger with adhominem attack.

The state of fascism which we are collectively coming to terms with (and struggling against) was not created by the "babyboomer" generation..
Although I will grant you that the "baby boomer" generation were/are unwitting enablers (just as our parents were, and parents before them and so on) but I will assert that it is essentially because we were all born INTO a well developed and institutionalized FASCIST STATE which had begun nearly a century before boomers were born.


It's going to take a great deal of "de-programming" (if you will) to bring folks up on this fundemental struggle. But in order to accomplish this we will need to do this together.. Conservative Libertarians need to work with Progressive Libertarians on this dear and fragile common ground which we share absolutely. That is to say we hold a deep and abiding respect, love and passion for all that is contained (and enshrined) within the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Pointing fingers and placing blame at the "babyboomer" generation and calling us "ingrates" is not going to work. This should be stating the obvious to someone who is essentially asserting a sense of superiority over those of us who see Ron Paul in a very different light than you do. And for all that, babyboomers have a lot of valid creds in pointing fingers and viscious name calling in the other direction. But that's what the Fascists want us to do, isn't it? Keep us distracted and divided instead of working together - keep in mind the old axiom, United We Stand - Divided We Fall - there is much more wisdom and truth in what may appear to be an old and tired cliche.

There seems to have been several junctures in our nation's early history, during the beginnings of our "democracy" where a bit of fascism creeped into our governance for instance.. But I believe it wasn't as brazen and/or rampant until the period following the Civil War.

Here's a quote from President Rutherford Hayes (1876) during the Reconstruction period when he made this statement :

"This is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people no longer. It is a government of corporations, by corporations, and for corporations (Wasserman 1984, 291)."

But I think it wasn't until 1886, thanks to a collosol mistake in a court reporter's notes which inadvertantly set precident when Corporations were reported to have been granted "Personhood" rights in the case of Southern Pacific Railroad vs Santa Clara County..

You can read about this case in length in various places, but I recommend these two very good reads here, and here, as a staring point, if you haven't read about it already...

Whichever the case, I would like to encourage you to consider directing some of that passion and energy towards the effort towards reclaiming our democracy vis a vis the Abolish Corporate Personhood Movement and all efforts on this front.


Here's an excerpt from William H. Boyer's Myth America - Democracy vs. Capitalism discussing the Southern Pacific Railroad vs Santa Clara County case:

(Source: Third World Traveler )

[QUOTE]

THE SANTA CLARA CASE

This slackening of legal restraints on corporations culminated in a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1886 known as Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific Railroad. It opened the floodgates for the accumulation and consolidation of corporate power. Without even any allowance for discussion or debate, the Supreme Court accepted the Santa Clara decision that corporations are "persons." Even though they are artificial entities, they were granted the same legal status as real human beings and were entitled to all the same Bill of Rights protections including freedom of speech.

In one fell swoop, essentially all pretense of meaningful control over corporations was abandoned for the corporations since they can use the First Amendment provision for "freedom of speech" as the basis for making contributions to political candidates. The result, as we know too well, has been to transfer the economic power of the corporation into control of the political system.

From 1886 onward, corporations have used their court-conferred wealth to overwhelm the democratic process. Having now the same rights as real people, they were allowed to participate in the political process. Their unlimited spending in elections permitted them to gain majorities in legislatures and eliminate all remaining troublesome language in state constitutions. Any attempts at control were defeated as "unconstitutional" infringements on their right to "free speech."

The Supreme Court used the Fourteenth Amendment to rationalize its decision by saying that it "forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of laws." (Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 U.S. 394 (1886), available at www.tourolaw.edu/patch/santa.) The logic was inescapable once the corporation was deemed a "person."

[/quote]

One final note:

Although the state of affairs in which we collectively find ourselves (wrt to the Fascist State in America) began long before fourty or sixty years ago, I'm of the opinion that so much was codified under Truman's administration when he established the National Security Act of 1947.

Eisenhower sh/could have repealed or abolished it altogether given all that he had become aware during his administration to which he spoke of in his farewell address to the nation leaving us with the (then surreal) warning of the dangers of the Military Industrial Complex. Kennedy himself gave an extrordinary warning as to the dangers of Secret Societies and their institutions, which can be heard in an audio clip on this week's broadcast of Guns and Butter. ..

(Note: this week's edition of Guns and Butter is essentially audio excerpts from the film Zeitgeist: The Myth of Religion, The Myth of 9/11, The Myth of War - and Kennedy's audio clip can be heard 34 minutes and 22 seconds into the program.)

I do not see anyone in the race thus far, who I can cast my vote for except maybe Kucinich, or Edwards. But I'm not looking to anyone of these people for leadership or to save us and our nation from Fascism... Only we, the people can accomplish that. and it won't be through the "election system".

For one, their efforts have inadvertently supported the creation of a fascist state (not a socialist utopia as you might have hoped). Corporations are closely aligned with politicians and the squeeze on our liberties is now in full effect (Fascism not Socialism/Communism). If Bush and Cheney were not so incompetent we may not be having this discussion.

Are you a warmonger? That is the question of the hour. If you are not then who else (other than Ron Paul) is there to vote for? And let's keep it real...someone that actually has a chance to win. There is little difference between Democrat and Republican these days. Take a look at your political options, you can vote for bad, worse or Ron Paul. We are on the verge of bankruptcy, your ideals have brought us to this point. Write another hot check if you must but I will fight to undo the damage done by the misguided babyboomer generation. What a bunch of ingrates.

Let me guess. You are one of them.

[purplepig]

[Anyone who still believes that their vote will be counted as anything more than an acknowledgement of ignorance will continue to get the government they deserve. America died some time ago. It's not coming back. I like Ron Paul. I also like Ward Cleaver. In a different world, that might count for something. Not this one. The power structure which brought us to this state has no intention of changing it back. To continue to look to it for solutions is only to perpetuate it. Go ahead. The bleeting of sheep makes their day.

[amalia]

I am stunned by the wave of support on Wacco and elsewere for Ron Paul.
Please delve further than just his anti-war views. He has voted against every social program including the recent SCHIP since being in office. Because of his staunch anti-choice views, imagine who he might put on the Supreme Court! I, too feel in a position of desperation with the current mess in Iraq and a potential one in Iran... but I WILL NOT vote for someone who does not share these equally core values!

For one, their efforts have inadvertently supported the creation of a fascist state (not a socialist utopia as you might have hoped). Corporations are closely aligned with politicians and the squeeze on our liberties is now in full effect (Fascism not Socialism/Communism). If Bush and Cheney were not so incompetent we may not be having this discussion.

Are you a warmonger? That is the question of the hour. If you are not then who else (other than Ron Paul) is there to vote for? And let's keep it real...someone that actually has a chance to win. There is little difference between Democrat and Republican these days. Take a look at your political options, you can vote for bad, worse or Ron Paul. We are on the verge of bankruptcy, your ideals have brought us to this point. Write another hot check if you must but I will fight to undo the damage done by the misguided babyboomer generation. What a bunch of ingrates.

Let me guess. You are one of them.

[Neshamah]

I am stunned by the wave of support on Wacco and elsewere for Ron Paul.
Please delve further than just his anti-war views. He has voted against every social program including the recent SCHIP since being in office. Because of his staunch anti-choice views, imagine who he might put on the Supreme Court! I, too feel in a position of desperation with the current mess in Iraq and a potential one in Iran... but I WILL NOT vote for someone who does not share these equally core values!

(1) Please do not confuse opposition to government programs opposition to the programs themselves.
Ron Paul votes against the government providing these programs because it makes the government too powerful. Governments that become too powerful become unaccountable and make Presidencies like the present one inevitable. If the government stops providing services, other organizations, and if necessary, the states will step up to provide the services that are needed. They will be more local and better attuned to local conditions, and therefore more efficient.

(2) Concerning abortion, Ron Paul will leave it up to the states. Most states, including California will remain pro-choice. I personally believe even local governments are too clumsy to restrict abortion, but I cannot see all ends and do not think my values should be enforced on everyone in every other state. If you are convinced that free access to abortion should be a universal value, consider that the deaths and unhappiness resulting even from radical restrictions on abortion would still be far less than the lives that will be lost if our 'nation-building' efforts turn nucleur, something that neither Guiliani or Clinton has ruled out with respect to Iran.

A Ron Paul presidency will shake up the country, dramatically reduce the scope of the Federal government, and require people to do their own part to make this a better country for everyone. We need to do something big, and a Ron Paul presidency, or even a Ron Paul campaign that merely splits the Republican party, is the best possibility we have in the near term.


~ Neshamah

[d-cat]

Paradox,
I do not see anyone in the race thus far, who I can cast my vote for except maybe Kucinich, or Edwards.

WARNING: Edwards is CFR
https://www.cfr.org/bios/9641/john_edwards.html

[d-cat]

Ron Paul at PBS Debate 9-27-07
https://video.google.com/videoplay?d...25114672831244

excellent! answers on the subjects of racism, war on drugs, war in Iraq, prosperity, taxes, illegal immigration, national ID card...



Ron Paul at Fox News Debate - Florida 10-21-07
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjylvNNo7zc

Ron Paul in front of a selected FOX audience - booed but he wins the Fox post debate poll!


Ron Paul On Hannity & Colmes Fox Post Debate 10-21-07
https://video.google.com/videoplay?d...25114672831244

Ron Paul finally shuts Hannity up!

[Paradox]

Liberty Alliance 2008

That's rather selfish. You are an American after all. We must get our priorities straight. Your goals will not be realized under a fascist corporatist police state. I simply see no other way out at the moment (shy of uniting behind Ron Paul)... if we cannot set our petty differences aside to save our freedom and liberty than we deserve the destruction that lies ahead. Set idealism aside for a moment and get real. We are under attack and the gloves are now off, if we lose you lose. Make no qualms about it.

Ron Paul will leave most things to the states and individuals, you live in California (Nor Cal at that), lighten up...if you support Ron Paul you are one of the good guys. Anyone else (I'm afraid) will drive the final nails into our coffin OR they have a snowballs chance in hell of winning. We need a winner, and we need one this time around.

I am stunned by the wave of support on Wacco and elsewere for Ron Paul.
Please delve further than just his anti-war views. He has voted against every social program including the recent SCHIP since being in office. Because of his staunch anti-choice views, imagine who he might put on the Supreme Court! I, too feel in a position of desperation with the current mess in Iraq and a potential one in Iran... but I WILL NOT vote for someone who does not share these equally core values!

[Paradox]

Hi Purplepig,

You're wrong. The fog is lifting my friend. You are powerless no more. America, like the Pheonix is rising from the ashes and a new age is dawning. Do not give up hope, for in times like this hope is fuel for change. You are powerful, you are a mighty force who has been conned into thinking you cannot make a difference. I am here to say that you can and YOU ARE. We common folk are winning, the wind is at our back and the establishment is crumbling under the weight of our will.

Radio4progressives has made some very valid points which I will respond to when time permits. Edwards has a great personality and presence for a CFR henchman and Kucinich has no hope of winning . We cannot afford to waste votes here. Laws are now in place to imprison at will for no other reason other than thinking differently than our leaders...the stage is set. We are screwed without decisive and collective action. Our only hope at the moment is the Ron Paul revolution. It's that bad. After that, we can lick our wounds and press our state (which to date has been rather accommodating) for the reforms (beyond personal liberty and freedom) that are important to us.

We have slowed our free-fall into a military-industrial complex instituted fascist world order. We must seize the day.

I switched parties for this man because we are currently looking up from the depths of a seemingly insurmountable hole (which we have dug for ourselves). I honestly believe that Dr. Ron Paul can bring us home.

~Paradox

[Anyone who still believes that their vote will be counted as anything more than an acknowledgement of ignorance will continue to get the government they deserve. America died some time ago. It's not coming back. I like Ron Paul. I also like Ward Cleaver. In a different world, that might count for something. Not this one. The power structure which brought us to this state has no intention of changing it back. To continue to look to it for solutions is only to perpetuate it. Go ahead. The bleeting of sheep makes their day.

[d-cat]

I am stunned by the wave of support on Wacco and elsewere for Ron Paul.
Please delve further than just his anti-war views. He has voted against every social program including the recent SCHIP since being in office. Because of his staunch anti-choice views, imagine who he might put on the Supreme Court! I, too feel in a position of desperation with the current mess in Iraq and a potential one in Iran... but I WILL NOT vote for someone who does not share these equally core values!

Ron Paul, as mentioned, is not against the programs themselves, but rather against an overbloated and inefficient entity such as the federal government to handle such things.

Regarding the abortion issue, he speaks on it in part 2 of this PBS interview:

RON PAUL NEWS HOUR INTERVIEW OCT 12, 2007
part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtNmGjzVsBg
part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCGk1bosqOM

[purplepig]

We already live in a fascist corporatist police state. Right now they let us feel as if we have a say because they still need us. Not for long. We cannot set our petty differences aside to save our freedom and liberty because we are a petty people. They depend on that. We passively stood by and watched our freedom go down the toilet. They know that. They tested us all along, each time a little more and we always looked to them for answers. They know that. They also know that voting makes us feel good. Important. That one has to really make them chuckle. How can they have any respect for us? Who's they? They is us. We deserve the destruction that lies ahead. We allowed the worst in us to take control. We stood by and watched this happen. We will pay the price. We brought it upon ourselves. Ron Paul dosn't stand a chance in Hell. The next puppet has already been picked. Enjoy what illusions of freedom you have left. In time, with the new definition of freedom given us, we will forget the old ideas. Our memories will die with us and only pass on as myth if not forbiden entirely as unpatriotic, which is very likely. You may even come to love the new world awaiting us. Might as well. It's almost here.

[radio4progressives]

I understand your sentiments purple pig. I'm under no illusion about what all this is about. I do not think we can change the course we've been on vis a vis "elections", a system rigged to the nines and then some. The annointed ones are already chosen, and the "campaigns" is nothing but a multi-billion dollar stage production. However, there is value in "participating" in this theatrical production, if for no other reason than for the history books and the record that won't be in the public schools and classrooms in this country, but will be in Libraries and classrooms somewhere else in the world. The point is that even given most of what you and others have expressed is true, there has to be a record preserved somewhere to demonstrate that some of us at least tried to fight back in some way. We're not ALL sheep going off to slaughter.

[Anyone who still believes that their vote will be counted as anything more than an acknowledgement of ignorance will continue to get the government they deserve. America died some time ago. It's not coming back. I like Ron Paul. I also like Ward Cleaver. In a different world, that might count for something. Not this one. The power structure which brought us to this state has no intention of changing it back. To continue to look to it for solutions is only to perpetuate it. Go ahead. The bleeting of sheep makes their day.

[radio4progressives]

btw... votes are counted accurately when we show up to monitor the vote counting process.

I understand your sentiments purple pig. I'm under no illusion about what all this is about. I do not think we can change the course we've been on vis a vis "elections", a system rigged to the nines and then some. The annointed ones are already chosen, and the "campaigns" is nothing but a multi-billion dollar stage production. However, there is value in "participating" in this theatrical production, if for no other reason than for the history books and the record that won't be in the public schools and classrooms in this country, but will be in Libraries and classrooms somewhere else in the world. The point is that even given most of what you and others have expressed is true, there has to be a record preserved somewhere to demonstrate that some of us at least tried to fight back in some way. We're not ALL sheep going off to slaughter.

[OrchardDweller]

Ron Paul on Jay Leno 10/30/07:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1EFHgUXZaU

[OrchardDweller]

I found this posted on another forum:

Small farmers should support Ron Paul
There are so few of us small farmers left in the country, that most of y'all probably have no idea how hard he works to protect our freedoms.

Dr. Paul has been a vocal opponent of NAIS--a federal program that would require registration of all farm animals with the federal government (big agribusiness loves this, but it is an expensive invasion of our rights and privacy), and a strong supporter of homeschooling (which is very popular among rural families).

As I'm sure y'all know he fights Big Pharma's control over health care, and supports homeopathy.

Yesterday he introduced a bill to legalize the interstate transportation of raw (unpasturized) milk. This is a big deal to those of us who favor the ability to sell and consume raw milk.

Just another reason to cheer Ron Paul.

[Zeno Swijtink]

I found this posted on another forum:

Small farmers should support Ron Paul
There are so few of us small farmers left in the country, that most of y'all probably have no idea how hard he works to protect our freedoms.

/snip/

Just another reason to cheer Ron Paul.

Glenn Greenwald has an interesting discussion of the Ron Paul surge in Salon.com today.

https://www.salon.com/opinion/greenw...aul/index.html

[OrchardDweller]

Glenn Greenwald has an interesting discussion of the Ron Paul surge in Salon.com today.

https://www.salon.com/opinion/greenw...aul/index.html

Good article, thanks, I'd missed that one. It fails to mention though that Ron Paul raised $4.3 million in a single day yesterday (there's a link in the article, but it doesn't work). This 'money bomb' was organized by grassroots and is indeed not getting much mainstream press.
This support proves that Ron Paul is for real and here to stay. The people have spoken.
https://gytimes.blogspot.com/2007/11...-24-hours.html

[OrchardDweller]

Ron Paul on Abortion and Stem Cell Research (video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66jpPCIzza8



complete interview (audio only - great interview):

Stream: https://69.65.26.137/~ronpaula/RonPa...BoardNHQ&A.mp3

Mp3: https://69.65.26.137/~ronpaula/RonPa...BoardNHQ&A.m3u

[Valley Oak]

I watched the video and Ron Paul clearly states at the very beginning that he considers "...abortion to be an act of violence..."

I find Paul's position on abortion abhorrent and I very strongly oppose his candidacy for President of the United States! Paul would clearly be one of the worst possible choices for the White House.

The good news is that this extremist jerk, Paul, will never occupy the Oval Office. That's a fact.

All women have the right to have access to an abortion and must be able to legally keep that right forever.

Edward

Ron Paul on Abortion and Stem Cell Research (video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66jpPCIzza8



complete interview (audio only - great interview):

Stream: https://69.65.26.137/~ronpaula/RonPaulNashuaTelegraphEditorialBoardNHQ&A.mp3

Mp3: https://69.65.26.137/~ronpaula/RonPaulNashuaTelegraphEditorialBoardNHQ&A.m3u

[OrchardDweller]

Ron Paul on Marijuana (video)

https://youtube.com/watch?v=2p_G9BPouCo