[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Ron Paul See other Ron Paul Articles Title: The Man Who Should Be President Today, I am going to do something that I have never done: I am going to devote virtually my entire column to posting another man’s words. That man is the man who should be President of the United States: Congressman Ron Paul of Texas. The following is a written transcript of a speech Dr. Paul gave on the floor of the US House of Representatives back in 2007. Had Congressman Paul been elected President in 2008, the country would be four years into the greatest economic, political, and, yes, spiritual recovery in the history of America. As it is, the US is on the brink of totalitarianism and economic ruin. And you can mark it down, four years from now it won’t matter to a tinker’s dam whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney was elected President this November. Neither man has the remotest understanding of America’s real problems nor the courage and backbone to do anything about it if they did understand. Read the following. This is a man who understands the Constitution. This is a man who understands sound economic principles. This is a man who understands liberty and freedom. This is a man who has the guts to tell the truth. This is a man who has put his life and career on the line for the principles of liberty for more than two decades. This is a man who has returned every dollar that he has been paid as a US congressman to the taxpayers. This is the man who should be President of the United States. [Ron Paul’s speech begins here] For some, patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. For others, it means dissent against a government’s abuse of the people’s rights. I have never met a politician in Washington or any American, for that matter, who chose to be called unpatriotic. Nor have I met anyone who did not believe he wholeheartedly supported our troops, wherever they may be. What I have heard all too frequently from various individuals are sharp accusations that, because their political opponents disagree with them on the need for foreign military entanglements, they were unpatriotic, un-American evildoers deserving contempt. The original American patriots were those individuals brave enough to resist with force the oppressive power of King George. I accept the definition of patriotism as that effort to resist oppressive state power. The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility and out of self-interest for himself, his family, and the future of his country to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state. Resistance need not be violent, but the civil disobedience that might be required involves confrontation with the state and invites possible imprisonment. Peaceful, nonviolent revolutions against tyranny have been every bit as successful as those involving military confrontation. Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., achieved great political successes by practicing nonviolence, and yet they suffered physically at the hands of the state. But whether the resistance against government tyrants is nonviolent or physically violent, the effort to overthrow state oppression qualifies as true patriotism. True patriotism today has gotten a bad name, at least from the government and the press. Those who now challenge the unconstitutional methods of imposing an income tax on us, or force us to use a monetary system designed to serve the rich at the expense of the poor are routinely condemned. These American patriots are sadly looked down upon by many. They are never praised as champions of liberty as Gandhi and Martin Luther King have been. Liberals, who withhold their taxes as a protest against war, are vilified as well, especially by conservatives. Unquestioned loyalty to the state is especially demanded in times of war. Lack of support for a war policy is said to be unpatriotic. Arguments against a particular policy that endorses a war, once it is started, are always said to be endangering the troops in the field. This, they blatantly claim, is unpatriotic, and all dissent must stop. Yet, it is dissent from government policies that defines the true patriot and champion of liberty. It is conveniently ignored that the only authentic way to best support the troops is to keep them out of dangerous undeclared no-win wars that are politically inspired. Sending troops off to war for reasons that are not truly related to national security and, for that matter, may even damage our security, is hardly a way to patriotically support the troops. Who are the true patriots, those who conform or those who protest against wars without purpose? How can it be said that blind support for a war, no matter how misdirected the policy, is the duty of a patriot? Randolph Bourne said that, “War is the health of the state.” With war, he argued, the state thrives. Those who believe in the powerful state see war as an opportunity. Those who mistrust the people and the market for solving problems have no trouble promoting a “war psychology” to justify the expansive role of the state. This includes the role the Federal Government plays in our lives, as well as in our economic transactions. Certainly, the neoconservative belief that we have a moral obligation to spread American values worldwide through force justifies the conditions of war in order to rally support at home for the heavy hand of government. It is through this policy, it should surprise no one, that our liberties are undermined. The economy becomes overextended, and our involvement worldwide becomes prohibited. Out of fear of being labeled unpatriotic, most of the citizens become compliant and accept the argument that some loss of liberty is required to fight the war in order to remain safe. This is a bad trade-off, in my estimation, especially when done in the name of patriotism. Loyalty to the state and to autocratic leaders is substituted for true patriotism; that is, a willingness to challenge the state and defend the country, the people and the culture. The more difficult the times, the stronger the admonition comes that the leaders be not criticized. Because the crisis atmosphere of war supports the growth of the state, any problem invites an answer by declaring war, even on social and economic issues. This elicits patriotism in support of various government solutions, while enhancing the power of the state. Faith in government coercion and a lack of understanding of how free societies operate encourages big-government liberals and big-government conservatives to manufacture a war psychology to demand political loyalty for domestic policy just as is required in foreign affairs. The long-term cost in dollars spent and liberties lost is neglected as immediate needs are emphasized. It is for this reason that we have multiple perpetual wars going on simultaneously. Thus, the war on drugs, the war against gun ownership, the war against poverty, the war against illiteracy, the war against terrorism, as well as our foreign military entanglements are endless. All this effort promotes the growth of statism at the expense of liberty. A government designed for a free society should do the opposite, prevent the growth of statism and preserve liberty. Once a war of any sort is declared, the message is sent out not to object or you will be declared unpatriotic. Yet, we must not forget that the true patriot is the one who protests in spite of the consequences. Condemnation or ostracism or even imprisonment may result. Nonviolent protesters of the Tax Code are frequently imprisoned, whether they are protesting the code’s unconstitutionality or the war that the tax revenues are funding. Resisters to the military draft or even to Selective Service registration are threatened and imprisoned for challenging this threat to liberty. Statism depends on the idea that the government owns us and citizens must obey. Confiscating the fruits of our labor through the income tax is crucial to the health of the state. The draft, or even the mere existence of the Selective Service, emphasizes that we will march off to war at the state’s pleasure. A free society rejects all notions of involuntary servitude, whether by draft or the confiscation of the fruits of our labor through the personal income tax. A more sophisticated and less well-known technique for enhancing the state is the manipulation and transfer of wealth through the fiat monetary system operated by the secretive Federal Reserve. Protesters against this unconstitutional system of paper money are considered unpatriotic criminals and at times are imprisoned for their beliefs. The fact that, according to the Constitution, only gold and silver are legal tender and paper money outlawed matters little. The principle of patriotism is turned on its head. Whether it’s with regard to the defense of welfare spending at home, confiscatory income tax, or an immoral monetary system or support for a war fought under false pretense without a legal declaration, the defenders of liberty and the Constitution are portrayed as unpatriotic, while those who support these programs are seen as the patriots. If there is a war going on, supporting the state’s effort to win the war is expected at all costs, no dissent. The real problem is that those who love the state too often advocate policies that lead to military action. At home, they are quite willing to produce a crisis atmosphere and claim a war is needed to solve the problem. Under these conditions, the people are more willing to bear the burden of paying for the war and to carelessly sacrifice liberties, which they are told is necessary. The last 6 years have been quite beneficial to the health of the state, which comes at the expense of personal liberty. Every enhanced unconstitutional power of the state can only be achieved at the expense of individual liberty. Even though in every war in which we have been engaged civil liberties have suffered, some have been restored after the war ended, but never completely. That has resulted in a steady erosion of our liberties over the past 200 years. Our government was originally designed to protect our liberties, but it has now, instead, become the usurper of those liberties. We currently live in the most difficult of times for guarding against an expanding central government with a steady erosion of our freedoms. We are continually being reminded that 9/11 has changed everything. Unfortunately, the policy that needed most to be changed, that is, our policy of foreign interventionism, has only been expanded. There is no pretense any longer that a policy of humility in foreign affairs, without being the world’s policemen and engaging in nation building, is worthy of consideration. We now live in a post-9/11 America where our government is going to make us safe no matter what it takes. We are expected to grin and bear it and adjust to every loss of our liberties in the name of patriotism and security. Though the majority of Americans initially welcomed the declared effort to make us safe, and we are willing to sacrifice for the cause, more and more Americans are now becoming concerned about civil liberties being needlessly and dangerously sacrificed. The problem is that the Iraq war continues to drag on, and a real danger of it spreading exists. There is no evidence that a truce will soon be signed in Iraq or in the war on terror or the war on drugs. Victory is not even definable. If Congress is incapable of declaring an official war, it is impossible to know when it will end. We have been fully forewarned that the world conflict in which we are now engaged will last a long, long time. The war mentality and the pervasive fear of an unidentified enemy allows for a steady erosion of our liberties, and, with this, our respect for self-reliance and confidence is lost. Just think of the self-sacrifice and the humiliation we go through at the airport screening process on a routine basis. Though there is no scientific evidence of any likelihood of liquids and gels being mixed on an airplane to make a bomb, billions of dollars are wasted throwing away toothpaste and hair spray, and searching old women in wheelchairs. Our enemies say boo, and we jump, we panic, and then we punish ourselves. We are worse than a child being afraid of the dark. But in a way, the fear of indefinable terrorism is based on our inability to admit the truth about why there is a desire by a small number of angry radical Islamists to kill Americans. It is certainly not because they are jealous of our wealth and freedoms. We fail to realize that the extremists, willing to sacrifice their own lives to kill their enemies, do so out of a sense of weakness and desperation over real and perceived attacks on their way of life, their religion, their country, and their natural resources. Without the conventional diplomatic or military means to retaliate against these attacks, and an unwillingness of their own government to address the issue, they resort to the desperation tactic of suicide terrorism. Their anger toward their own governments, which they believe are coconspirators with the American Government, is equal to or greater than that directed toward us. These errors in judgment in understanding the motive of the enemy and the constant fear that is generated have brought us to this crisis where our civil liberties and privacy are being steadily eroded in the name of preserving national security. We may be the economic and the military giant of the world, but the effort to stop this war on our liberties here at home in the name of patriotism is being lost. The erosion of our personal liberties started long before 9/11, but 9/11 accelerated the process. There are many things that motivate those who pursue this course, both well-intentioned and malevolent, but it would not happen if the people remained vigilant, understood the importance of individual rights, and were unpersuaded that a need for security justifies the sacrifice for liberty, even if it is just now and then. The true patriot challenges the state when the state embarks on enhancing its power at the expense of the individual. Without a better understanding and a greater determination to rein in the state, the rights of Americans that resulted from the revolutionary break from the British and the writing of the Constitution will disappear. The record since September 11th is dismal. Respect for liberty has rapidly deteriorated. Many of the new laws passed after 9/11 had, in fact, been proposed long before that attack. The political atmosphere after that attack simply made it more possible to pass such legislation. The fear generated by 9/11 became an opportunity for those seeking to promote the power of the state domestically, just as it served to falsely justify the long-planned invasion of Iraq. The war mentality was generated by the Iraq war in combination with the constant drumbeat of fear at home. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, who is now likely residing in Pakistan, our supposed ally, are ignored, as our troops fight and die in Iraq and are made easier targets for the terrorists in their backyard. While our leaders constantly use the mess we created to further justify the erosion of our constitutional rights here at home, we forget about our own borders and support the inexorable move toward global government, hardly a good plan for America. The accelerated attacks on liberty started quickly after 9/11. Within weeks, the PATRIOT Act was overwhelmingly passed by Congress. Though the final version was unavailable up to a few hours before the vote, no Member had sufficient time to study it. Political fear of not doing something, even something harmful, drove the Members of Congress to not question the contents, and just voted for it. A little less freedom for a little more perceived safety was considered a fair trade-off, and the majority of Americans applauded. The PATRIOT Act, though, severely eroded the system of checks and balances by giving the government the power to spy on law-abiding citizens without judicial supervision. The several provisions that undermine the liberties of all Americans include sneak-and-peek searches, a broadened and more vague definition of domestic terrorism, allowing the FBI access to library and bookstore records without search warrants or probable cause, easier FBI initiation of wiretaps and searches, as well as roving wiretaps, easier access to information on American citizens’ use of the Internet, and easier access to e-mail and financial records of all American citizens. The attack on privacy has not relented over the past 6 years. The Military Commissions Act is a particularly egregious piece of legislation and, if not repealed, will change America for the worse as the powers unconstitutionally granted to the executive branch are used and abused. This act grants excessive authority to use secretive military commissions outside of places where active hostilities are going on. The Military Commissions Act permits torture, arbitrary detention of American citizens as unlawful enemy combatants at the full discretion of the President and without the right of habeas corpus, and warrantless searches by the NSA. It also gives to the President the power to imprison individuals based on secret testimony. Since 9/11, Presidential signing statements designating portions of legislation that the President does not intend to follow, though not legal under the Constitution, have enormously multiplied. Unconstitutional Executive Orders are numerous and mischievous and need to be curtailed. Extraordinary rendition to secret prisons around the world have been widely engaged in, though obviously extralegal. A growing concern in the post-9/11 environment is the Federal Government’s list of potential terrorists based on secret evidence. Mistakes are made, and sometimes it is virtually impossible to get one’s name removed even though the accused is totally innocent of any wrongdoing. A national ID card is now in the process of being implemented. It is called the REAL ID card, and it is tied to our Social Security numbers and our State driver’s license. If REAL ID is not stopped, it will become a national driver’s license ID for all Americans. We will be required to carry our papers. Some of the least-noticed and least-discussed changes in the law were the changes made to the Insurrection Act of 1807 and to posse comitatus by the Defense Authorization Act of 2007. These changes pose a threat to the survival of our Republic by giving the President the power to declare martial law for as little reason as to restore public order. The 1807 act severely restricted the President in his use of the military within the United States borders, and the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 strengthened these restrictions with strict oversight by Congress. The new law allows the President to circumvent the restrictions of both laws. The Insurrection Act has now become the “Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.” This is hardly a title that suggests that the authors cared about or understood the nature of a constitutional Republic. Now, martial law can be declared not just for insurrection, but also for natural disasters, public health reasons, terrorist attacks or incidents, or for the vague reason called “other conditions.” The President can call up the National Guard without congressional approval or the Governors’ approval, and even send these State Guard troops into other States. The American Republic is in remnant status. The stage is set for our country eventually devolving into a military dictatorship, and few seem to care. These precedent-setting changes in the law are extremely dangerous and will change American jurisprudence forever if not revised. The beneficial results of our revolt against the King’s abuses are about to be eliminated, and few Members of Congress and few Americans are aware of the seriousness of the situation. Complacency and fear drive our legislation without any serious objection by our elected leaders. Sadly, though, those few who do object to this self-evident trend away from personal liberty and empire-building overseas are portrayed as unpatriotic and uncaring. Though welfare and socialism always fails, opponents of them are said to lack compassion. Though opposition to totally unnecessary war should be the only moral position, the rhetoric is twisted to claim that patriots who oppose the war are not supporting the troops. The cliché “Support the Troops” is incessantly used as a substitute for the unacceptable notion of supporting the policy, no matter how flawed it may be. Unsound policy can never help the troops. Keeping the troops out of harm’s way and out of wars unrelated to our national security is the only real way of protecting the troops. With this understanding, just who can claim the title of “patriot”? Before the war in the Middle East spreads and becomes a world conflict for which we will be held responsible, or the liberties of all Americans become so suppressed we can no longer resist, much has to be done. Time is short, but our course of action should be clear. Resistance to illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of our rights is required. Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty. [Ron Paul’s speech ends here] There it is. The speech Dr. Paul gave in 2007 seems even more relevant today than it did then. Don’t you think? You want to elect a real American statesman? You want to elect a man who would preserve liberty and freedom in America? You want to elect a man who would resist the devilish New World Order? You want to elect a man who would reestablish sound economic principles? If so, you will vote to elect Ron Paul as President of the United States. (And, no, no one has paid me a penny to post his speech or make this endorsement.) Forget all the smoke and mirrors and the dog and pony shows that you see and hear from the other Presidential candidates. The issues that Dr. Paul addressed in this speech are the issues that are going to determine our country’s future. Again, this is the man who should be President of the United States. *If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link: http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19 Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: christine (#0)
Firstly, Ron Paul made this speech at a time of republican control, the very PARTY to which he pledges his fidelity for life. A third party effort is unwanted. Secondly, Ghandi and King, BOTH TOOK action, put themselves in danger, got out front and led the civil disobedience Paul speaks of. Once again, Ron Paul has the message but he is a total failure as the messenger or leader.
I disagree. For the worse, television and JFK changed forever the way weak-minded citizens vote. We have become so brain-dead that the prettiest face and the best hair can determine the leader of this country. Sadly our election process is being decided in the beauty parlor and not the arena of ideas, policies, and principles. This article makes me glad that I donated my little $201.20 to RP's money bomb earlier today. Break the Conventions - Keep the Commandments - G.K.Chesterson I understand and respect that. Paul is near my age and as such, time is short and action is needed, words will no longer suffice. At the very least, if Paul insists on being a party loyalist, he could stand up in the House and NAME THE WARMONGERS, CALL THEM OUT. Most of his speeches are delivered to an empty House and few Americans ever hear them. Ghandi and King both got out front, LED THE CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, it took six tries before Ghandi was finally assassinated. I cannot recall if King had more than the one. We the sheep need a leader, every revolution has a leader, we have no one. The ballot box route has been a proven failure for many years and it will do so once again this year.
I wouldn't waste my time responding to this douche bag Lod. The guy spends his day pathetically trying to demoralize Ron Paul voters. Don't fall for his schtick. Dr. Paul may not be perfect but he's all we have. This asshole is trying to get people to stay home and not vote. What his agenda is is anyone's guess. He spent his entire adult life sponging off of the American people as a federal employee and is receiving a governmental retirement check. He is pro-union, especially government union. Maybe he feels threatened by Dr. Paul's stance on smaller government. There's really no telling what his agenda is. He bitches and moans all day long about Ron Paul but never presents anyone with an alternative. The fact of the matter is, when a guy spends as much time trying to demoralize the voters of the ONLY person in the race who is actually discussing real change, he has an agenda. Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is like calling your neighbor a hermit because he doesn't come over and break your window - unknown Jesus said, "Forgive them Father for they know not what they do. Evangelical Fundinuts say, "kill them all who will not bow down to the Zionist Jew." - F.A. Hayek Fan
Name calling and personal attacks are beneath you, F.A. Like many here, myself included, Paul's actions in '08 were at best inexplicable and at worst a betrayal of his loyal supporters and donors. Since, as you said, he's our ONLY real voice/hope for change; I'll continue to support his efforts this year. Break the Conventions - Keep the Commandments - G.K.Chesterson Maybe you're right Lod. I have little patience with shills for the two party fraud, especially when they won't be upfront with their shilling. I put him on my bozo list. Now he can clandestinely shill for Obama or Romney until his heart's content without me having to read it. Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is like calling your neighbor a hermit because he doesn't come over and break your window - unknown Jesus said, "Forgive them Father for they know not what they do. Evangelical Fundinuts say, "kill them all who will not bow down to the Zionist Jew." - F.A. Hayek Fan
Sir Lod... Here is what Louis McFadden said on the House floor during regular session in 1934, he was killed soon after. He named names. "Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of constitutional privilege. "Whereas, I charge. . .Eugene Meyer, Roy A. Young, Edmund Platt, Eugene B. Black, Adolph Casper Miller, Charles S. Hamlin, George R. James, Andrew W. Mellon, Ogden L. Mills, William H. Woo W. Poole, J.F.T. O'Connor, members of the Federal Reserve Board; F. H. Curtis, J.H. Chane, R.L. Austin, George De Camp, L.B. Williams, W.W. Hoxton, Oscar Newton, E.M. Stevens, J.S. Wood, J.N. Payton, M.L. McClure, C.C. Walsh, Isaac B. Newton, Federal Reserve Agents, jointly and severally, with violations of the Constitution and laws of the United States, and whereas I charge them with having taken funds from the U.S Treasury which were not appropriated by the Congress of the United States, and I charge them with having unlawfully taken over $80,000,000,000 from the U.S. Government in the year 1928, the said unlawful taking consisting of the unlawful creation of claims against the U.S. Treasury to the extent of over $80,000,000,000 in the year 1928; and I charge them with similar thefts committed in 1929, 1930, 1931, 1932 and 1933, and in years previous to 1928, amounting to billions of dollars; "
Actually I thought this was going to be about me. Although, really, I should be King!
“Teach a child their rights and it breeds rebellion, teach a child their responsibility an it breeds righteousness.”
I pick Chrissy. I'd follow her to hell & back. But she's got to get that little South Dakota problem squared away first. Snicker
lol, if he's all we have then we are royally screwed. The words of Patrick Henry apply here- face the painful truth. Paul is a good teacher but we have to keep fighting for liberty, even after the charade of the diebold selection of the latest Jew puppet "Even to the death fight for truth, and the LORD your God will battle for you". Sirach 4:28
I meant in terms of the present presidential election cycle. Calling Ron Paul an isolationist is like calling your neighbor a hermit because he doesn't come over and break your window - unknown Jesus said, "Forgive them Father for they know not what they do. Evangelical Fundinuts say, "kill them all who will not bow down to the Zionist Jew." - F.A. Hayek Fan
One of the founders said, "The tree of Liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants". ;)
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
That is where Audey Murphy's unit went when they invaded Italy. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
Words rarely do! I can't figure out who is our worst enemy. Is it the warmongering chickenhawks, or is it the cowardly people? How many lines in the sand have been crossed and we do nothing. You verbal elitest cowards only embolden those who are tearing this country apart with your cowardly words. Remember, sticks and stones break bones and words won't hurt anybody.
Having been a non partisan political agitator in county and state politics for many years, I learned one very important lesson about the average citizen/voter. When we organized meetings to unseat politicians or protest some new tax or whatever, we always had good turn outs of ticked off citizens. Most always nearly everyone was with us, on to Moscow, hang the politicians, etc etc. To weed out the talkers we used a very simple tried and true method. The loud talkers were asked to join us, in some capacity, OUT FRONT, or too contribute money or both. They always vanished, too busy, broke or whatever. Another item learned was that if you need work done in any campaign, find a female to do it and it would get done. Men talk and talk and talk.
You make some very valid points. I spose those doing the majority of spewing verbal garbage on here, fall into the talkers category. Funny how the self appointed elite on 4um seem to have no shortage of words until they are asked to step up to the front and put their neck on the line. A true American gift!
Are you ready to haul ass South of Mexico?
"Paid with blood" sucks but then this life is temporal to begin with.
Four years ago, Christine and I laid out two thousand bucks for a 4um ad for Ron Paul. Amazing how many posters were destitute and could not help.
I used to think that sounded wise, but of late that one leaves me scratching my head. I mean, what would General Patton have said? An old lonely slave comes back from the grave I know you had asked my brother Lacumo for a donation towards a Ron Paul billboard. I know he didn't donate because he tried to borrow the money. He gave a donation to Paul's campaign and then had to go without some of his medication like insulin for a couple of weeks. He partially left 4um over the bigmouths who talk(write) and do nothing. He says they are cowards and rightfully so.
I used to think that sounded wise, but of late that one leaves me scratching my head. This is the only recipe for keeping our liberty. Too bad there are so many like yourself who have never grasped the true cost of freedom and liberty.
Paul decided not to go third party, so there was little reason to keep supplying support and money. This time around he has nearly dropped off the MSM radar screen, be interesting to see what route he takes, support Romney or no.
I don't believe he will support Romney. What I would like to see happen, is for the Paul supporters, simply not vote. Obama will get a second term and that is all the people deserve. It was the lousy GOP that had the biggest hand of marginalizing Paul. Paybacks can be a bitch!
Once again, Ron Paul has the message but he is a total failure as the messenger or leader. This is the sort of leader which is needed . I'd wager his name has made at least a few government watch lists. no reason to leave because i dont believe armagedden is coming.Ive heard that since i was a kid & it is nonsense. We will be on 4um,living our lives, going to work,etc next year, 5 years the same as always.1 year from now ill ping this thread to prove it.
"Even to the death fight for truth, and the LORD your God will battle for you". Sirach 4:28
Don't go that direction. The Drug War is being heated up to go that direction. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
George Patton was killed for his views that ex-Nazis could run the government better than the occupation forces. He was a great General nonetheless. "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
I don't think it is either. But I sure wish I could get back to driving a truck. Next time I go to Wal-Mart I will work on the application. It will be intra-state, so no log required. "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
The main problem with Romney is that he is sucking Netanyahu's schwantz. Anyone who stoops to that is a worthless POS. "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
Good for you. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
I recall working the gun ban referendum back in Arlington Height, Illinois. We won 66% to 32%. A member of the town council said, "This is a mandate." A couple of guys got drunk and put a For Sale sign in front of the woman's house (the main anti-gunner) who was in charge of the gun ban being put on the ballot. Too funny. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
The man that should be president, will never be president. Vote and one becomes a part of the system.
Don't vote and you've got no right to squawk about the way things are. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
There are eighty million Americans that could vote but for some reason chose not to. The surprising statistic in this voting charade is the number of voters that vote but do not vote for federal office. The number NOT voting for president is most significant. They vote but understand they have no choice in reality, so they do not vote. At the opposite end are the huge numbers of straight party line voters.
In Illinois, if you vote, you must vote for President at the minimum. You have to do at least that much. "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
Very true. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
"...make the other bastard die for his!"
An old lonely slave comes back from the grave *sigh*
An old lonely slave comes back from the grave An old lonely slave comes back from the grave Searching... searching... searching For his master who's long gone on What does your tag line have to do with anything relevant on this forum. I can understand why you used to think it was necessary to water the tree of liberty with the blood of both patriots and tyrants ,but why is it not revelant today? What made you change your mind? Be honest!
Too many stupid people quote it.
An old lonely slave comes back from the grave Was not aware of any State requiring a vote. Most of our state is rural and we still use paper ballots. No requirements, free election, vote at your own risk.
Illinois does not require you to vote for President, but, if you vote, you must vote for President at the minimum. I understand what you say about paper ballots. Here in Missouri for the primary, they put a Democrat and a Republican ballot in front of you, and you pick one. Unlike Illinois, where you MUST declare which party you are voting for. "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
I do remember him saying that. "Don't die for your country, make the other bastard die for his." "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||