Korean Job Discussion Forums

[atomic42]

I'm in. Ron it is.

[mithridates]

Turns out a Ron Paul supporter has just up and paid for a full-page ad in USA Today (apparently costs about $120,000 to do so) for the 21st:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=37965

[ChciPivo]

Liberty is brewing. Sign me up.

[keane]

[ontheway]

That USA Today Ad is great. Paid for by one supporter.

Ron Paul has more than 67,000 active volunteers in more than 1100 meetup groups and over 240 college support groups. The independent activities and expenditures of this army of freedom loving individuals mean that Ron Paul probably has the biggest campaign of all the candidates at this point.

Ron Paul's people donate their time and money. They run independent ads, videos, signs, create events and rallies. This is truly a revolution by the people against an evil, corrupt, fascist, socialist, welfare, warfare state. It is time to dismantle the federal government of the United States and restore our liberty. That is why millions of people are supporting Dr. Ron Paul.


In contrast, at one Hillary Clinton rally, there was one large Clinton banner being carried by two men. Only one banner. The men kept trying to move infront of the largest of the many Ron Paul signs and banners being carried by Ron Paul volunteers at the Clinton rally.

When interviewed on YouTube as to why they kept trying to block out the Ron Paul sign, they replied that it was on orders from the campaign staffer that "hired" them.

Only one large banner, and Hillary has to not only pay for the banner, she has to pay people to carry it for her.


When the Soviet empire fell, it was because the people rose up against it, and the government couldn't buy enough support to keep itself in power. The same kind of revolution has begun in the United States. It's about time.

[huffdaddy]

For being a "libertarian" he sure does introduce a lot of bills.

Go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and enter Ron Paul. 59 bills introduced this term!! My favs:

[thepeel]

Why do you put libertarian in quotes? Do you even have the slightest idea?

Ron Paul, as a libertarian, wants to decrease the extent to which government meddles in the lives of citizens.

So, of those 10 bills:

2. wanted more time to be given to read bills. (a damn good idea, given that most bills simply aren't read)

13. limiting federal courts

22. defining when life is legally determined to begin

23. limiting government spending

27. 2nd ammendment

30. banking/information freedom

51. Trying to expose citizens to the extent of their tax bill.

54 Free trade

55 Free Trade

57 Freeing up interstate trade


So, huff, why in the world did you put libertarian in quotes? The majority of those bills are clearly libertarian. Unless you think that his being a libertarian means he should not participate in the legislative process.

Maybe just go back to being a True Believing Democrat. Old dogs, new tricks. etc.

[ontheway]

I agree with Ron Paul on those bills.

10 for 10


Go Ron Paul 2008!

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

Why won't this hero for liberty call for a convention?

Ron Paul Reality Check


When critics of government won't honor a demand by all 50 states, it's disappointing. The author is a co-founder of Friends of the Article V Convention at www.foavc.org and can be reached through www.delusionaldemocracy.com.


by Joel S. Hirschhorn

As self-professed champion of the Constitution, presidential candidate Ron Paul has missed a monumental opportunity to educate Americans about Congress violating their oath of office. Nor has he taken advantage of his 15 minutes of fame to promote the nation뭩 first-time use of what the Founders gave us -- the Article V convention option, an alternative to Congress proposing amendments (the only procedure used for 220 years). Support for using the Article V convention option should be a litmus test for any presidential candidate, which is reasonable considering that Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt supported it.
Paul has no problem in seeing the need for constitutional amendments. He has been a proponent of an amendment that would not allow children born in the USA from illegal parents to become citizens. How can a champion of the Constitution remain so silent on Congress?refusal to honor over 500 applications from all 50 states for a convention that more than satisfies the one and only requirement in Article V?

Paul clearly recognizes the many failures of the federal government. Maybe as a member of Congress he too has been part of a long-standing refusal by Congress to obey Article V of the Constitution. Why don뭪 passionate Paul supporters see this inconsistency?

If passionate supporters of Paul would spend more time investigating all his congressional activities, they would find more to question. For example, he has routinely inserted earmarks for pork spending to make constituents in his district happy. Then he hides behind his votes against the spending bills containing his earmark spending items. But those earmarks remain in those spending bills passed by Congress.

Many have been for projects by the Army Corps of Engineers, many to funnel money to the Texas Department of Transportation (including one for repairs to the Galveston Trolley system), and one for Texas A&M University/Galveston Campus to convert the Texas Clipper for educational purposes; maybe this was the $30 million for the Texas Maritime Academy to refurbish a ship. And then there was the $8 million for the marketing of wild American shrimp and $2.3 million to pay for research into shrimp fishing. This year Paul has requested about $400 million worth of federal spending for his district -- not exactly consistent with Paul뭩 rhetoric on reducing federal spending and taxing.

Here is some irony: With our thoroughly corrupt and rigged political system, Ron Paul has absolutely zero chance of becoming the Republican presidential nominee, regardless of his high level of grassroots support. Odd then that Paul has not supported the one and only route to profoundly changing this awful political system. It is the method our Founders gave us with the Article V convention option. Indeed, his lack of support for using the Article V convention option seems to makes him a part of the political establishment, which is consistent with his recent announcement that if he does not get the Republican nomination he will not run as a third party candidate.

Anyone who studies the history of attempts to get the first Article V convention will learn that it has consistently been opposed by people and groups on the political left and right that are part of the nation뭩 elitist political status quo establishment. So here is Ron Paul, supposedly an honest non-elitist political maverick that does not fit into the political establishment, declining to back the use of the Article V convention option. Paul has had virtually no real impact on what evil Congress has done; what does he have to lose?

http://www.progress.org/2007/hirsch31.htm

[ontheway]

This is a redherring and bogus, Joo:

Of all the calls for a constitutional convention issued by the states, there were none that called for a general convention to propose amemdments as the group supports. Rather, the states have voted and sent their applications to Congress for a convention to propse a specific amendment to the consititution.

Ron Paul has supported using this method in the past, for example the Liberty Amendment to eliminate the income tax and the IRS.

It is reasonable to support the individual amendment requests of the states for a convention to propse an individual amendment and at the same time oppose an undefined grab bag request for a general convention.

The backers of a general convention generally have as their goal the complete gutting of all individual rights guaranteed under the Constitution. They should make their proposals and submit them individually.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

How about this part.

[ontheway]

Ron Paul uses earmarks to show how evil the pork system is. He submits them to demonstrate just what the others do and then votes against them to show what the others should do. Ron Paul's earmarks do not increase Federal spending.


Earmarks are not legislation. They do not constitute a vote for spending. They are really just indicatons of preference that if you're going to spend the money anyway, here is what you should spend it on. It's like a poll. Earmarks don't count.


It's like if someone asked if Hillary was better than Hitler. Of course I think Hillary is better than Hitler. That is an indication of preference among two bad choices.

Still, in a real election, I'll vote for Ron Paul. The real vote is where you show what you really believe.

[atomic42]

[Pluto]

[Kuros]