THE DAILY PAUL ...

Rather than start anymore new threads about Ron Paul , I've decided to start one last thread , this one , on Ron Paul for those of you in here that ARE interested in him or that are on the fence.

It's not for discussion , it's simply to get to know the man and see the people across America ... no matter how few you think they are , that support him.

This thread is closed for posts as it's not for discussion. It's for knowledge.

If you feel strongly about an opposing candidate , I encourage you to start a thread on them and do the same.

For this thread I'm going to step back a few months and post his appearance on Leno. But more importantly is his interaction with the people and what an effect he's having on the hopes and dreams of those people. Drawing crowds that Leno's show has never seen for a candidate ever before.

This is a genuine good soul we're being offered as a candidate. See if you don't agree.

This will give you a chance also to see all "the kooks" he attracts from diverse culture, race and religion (Or not) .

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9LZyHoAPL3M&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9LZyHoAPL3M&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

As a lifelong Democrat up to this point....I must say that Ron Paul is the best Presidential candidate by far.

But the moral majority cannot see because of their heads being in their asses.

Just chalk Paul up right there alongside Ross Perot and Ralph Nader as another of the few "Hopes of this Country", that the masses are too stupid to recognize.:notallthere:

 

Very true Perot in particular would have gotten our financial mess in order and we'd be the richest country on earth instead of the biggest debtor. :doh:


AND NOW ...

Thread closed for Daily Paul updates only ... (Unless we get a lot of crying about it) Then again , complainers can always start a thread bashing him or anything posted her if they want.

This thread I'd like to remain UN convoluted.

 

And now for something completely new

This is the 1/2 hour special that will be broadcast throughout IOWA this weekend .

opcorn:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uQNWHmiGj-k&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uQNWHmiGj-k&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wekzQrQfacg&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wekzQrQfacg&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

EXPERIMENT FAILED - One thread is too much to ask.

The NAYS have it , the playground is open and the well will run dry.

Have at it kiddies ...

The mob RULES ! :clap:

There can be no Daily Paul

Have a Merry Christmas!

 

Sure there can be a "Daily Paul" but do it with the knowledge that there will be opposing views and open, forum-like discussion about what you post.

 

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QNLpC3wD0cE&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QNLpC3wD0cE&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

It strikes me that the biggest gaps between Paul and the other Republicans is the stances on getting out of Iraq and intervention being a big part of our foreign policy.

While I like much of Paul's game, I am not real sure about how we leave Iraq. I don't think we can cut and run as Paul advocates, but I'm also not sure there will ever be a sense of stability in Iraq that opens a window for removing troops.

On foreign policy, I'll admit I haven't made up my mind yet. I hear the term isolationism bounced around and I think it's a created "scare phrase" by other Republicans. In this day and age I think it is impossible to be completely isolated as in the McCain example of the US during NAZI Germany. The world is different and information is too free flowing to ever be that isolated again.

However, the real meat of the issue is troops stationed around the world. That's where I have the biggest grey area in my support. At times I am on the side of the fence that thinks the presence of US troops on foreign soil does more to damage the world image of the US than it does to help our strategic military positioning around the globe.

The single line that Paul continually uses that makes you feel he is on the right track is "With or without troops abroad, no one will ever do anything militarily against the US". There is much truth to that statement especially if factor in the notion that fewer groups would care to harm the US without troops or missiles in their region.

 

Paul needs to move more around the nation and visit poor places, walk around and go to where he needs to for the votes. Be more agressive, he's too passive to have any impact on people. Seems like his PR office is doing more work than him. He just sits back and hope.

 

Rest assured , Dr No would take action ! :blobbox:

 

The real truth of the matter GF is Ron Paul is the only guy that actually would fight for the people and DO SHIT.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/trAiCwzSVho&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/trAiCwzSVho&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NHilf4xibUY&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NHilf4xibUY&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

Like hell he doesn't.

You know why guys like Hunckleberry will find ways to raise taxes ... because they HAVE TO to pay for the bloated government they refuse to fix. Tell me it won't be as much or more tax when you're paying 20-30% extra on everything you buy.

Paul plan cuts off all the fat and thus doesn't need to raise tax and can actually eliminate taxes.

One thing not a single politician has on Paul is anything to do with econimics. Non bring as much knowledge to the table.

 

October 29, 2007

Ron Paul's Record on Economic Issues

Club for Growth Releases Seventh Presidential White Paper
Ron Paul: The Perfect as the Enemy of the Good

​

Washington - Today, the Club for Growth released its presidential white paper on Republican presidential candidate Representative Ron Paul (see PDF). The seventh in a series of white papers on the pro-growth records of presidential candidates, the attached report provides an extensive summary of Ron Paul's economic policies during his years in the U.S. House of Representatives.


"Ron Paul's record contains some very laudable components," said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. "On taxes, regulation, and political speech, his record is superb. His spending record is impressive ...................

Taxes
The Club for Growth is committed to lower taxes-especially lower tax rates- across the board. Lower taxes on work, savings, and investments lead to greater levels of these activities, thus encouraging greater economic growth.

Ron Paul's record on taxes is excellent, epitomized by his rallying cry for phasing out the IRS^[1]. A strong believer in the economic benefits of tax cuts, he declared in a 2006 article, "I reject the notion that tax cuts harm the economy. The economy suffers when government takes money from your paycheck that you otherwise spend, save, or invest. Taxes never create prosperity."^[2] Over his career, he has backed up his speeches and articles with many pro-growth votes. These include:

• Voted for a resolution proposing a constitutional amendment requiring a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers to raise taxes^[3]
• Voted for a capital gains tax cut^[4]
• Voted for a bill to require Congress to replace the tax code with a simple and fair tax system^[5]
• Voted to cut taxes by $80 billion over five years^[6]
• Voted to override Clinton's veto and repeal the Death Tax^[7]
• Voted to override Clinton's veto and alleviate the marriage penalty^[8]
• Voted to repeal the tax on Social Security benefits^[9]
• Voted for the Bush tax cuts in 2001^[10] and 2003^[11]
• Voted to permanently repeal the Death Tax^[12]
• Voted to extend the Bush tax cuts^[13]

Spending
The Club for Growth is committed to reducing government spending. Less spending enhances economic growth by enabling lower taxes and diminishing the economically inefficient political allocation of resources.
Rep. Paul's strong belief in limited government translated into an impressive list of votes against increased federal spending. These include:

• Voted against the Medicare Prescription Drug Act^[14]
• Voted for a substitute amendment to balance the budget by 2002 by cutting non-defense discretionary spending and applying the savings to increased tax cuts^[15]
• Voted for an amendment to prohibit the use of appropriated funds for the development of national reading and math tests^[16]
• Voted nine out of nine times against raising his own pay^[17]
• Voted against increased funding for the Legal Services Corporation^[18]
• Voted for the Republican Study Committee budget multiple times^[19]
• Was 1 of 41 congressmen to vote against No Child Left Behind^[20]
• Voted to cut mohair,^[21] sugar,^[22] and Viagra subsidies^[23]
• Voted against the subsidy-laden 2002 Farm Bill^[24]
• Voted against the 1998 and 2005 Highway bill, only 1 of 9 to vote against the pork-filled 2005 bill^[25]

 

Interesting Article from AP
=====================

Paul Shaping Up As Spoiler in GOP Race


By DAVID ESPO – 1 day ago


CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — It wasn't long ago that Rep. Ron Paul was an anti-war asterisk in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. Then his campaign raised a record $6 million in a single day.


Now the libertarian-leaning Texas congressman is looking like a possible spoiler, with an eclectic, tech-savvy following and an astounding $18 million in donations raised in less than three months.


"It's sort of gotten out of control. I don't know what to do about it," he told one audience recently in mock frustration.


At the current rate, it is some of his better known rivals who might have cause for concern. Polls give no indication that Paul can win any primaries or caucuses. But his appeal to independents, in particular, could make a difference in contests in New Hampshire, which votes on Jan. 8, or in Michigan, where a primary is scheduled one week later.


Sen. John McCain of Arizona, for one, hopes to appeal to independents in those states, both of which he won when he first sought the White House eight years ago. Paul's literature says he never voted to raise taxes, a point that could get him a look from backers of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.


Other contenders who have been losing ground slowly in statewide New Hampshire surveys — former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani or former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, for example — would be hard-pressed to explain it if they wind up trailing a man who says the United States needs a more humble foreign policy in an age of terrorism.


The attention is going to an 72-year-old physician who pursued an interest in free-market economics and a career in politics.


Addressing a breakfast audience recently, he was as scathing in his denunciation of President Bush's stewardship of international relations as he was of Bush's economic policy.
"I want the foreign policy of our Founding Fathers. No entangling relationships," he said. That means trade with Cuba, ending penalties against Iran and — above all — getting U.S. troops out of Iraq.


"All this death and destruction. We blow up their bridges, we're taxed for that. Then we're taxed to rebuild their bridges and our own bridges are falling down," he said, drawing a connection between the war and unmet needs in this country.


Paul's vision of the nation's economic future is not pretty. "When empires go too far their currencies are ruined because all wars are fought through inflation," he said. "That means the trillion-dollar operation that we have (overseas) is coming to an end. I want to bring it to an end gracefully, not wait for a dollar collapse."


While Paul says his critics sometimes accuse him of being a good candidate for the 19th century, his campaign appears to be aided to an unusual degree by the energy and enthusiasm of supporters skilled at using the Internet to their own advantage.


He is the only candidate whose name is emblazoned on a blimp. It was last reported over Maryland en route to New Hampshire, and has its own Web site, which in turn contains a daily tracker, flight plan, live video feed and blimp blog.


Because the effort says it is independent of the campaign, donations to keep the blimp aloft are not limited by federal election law. But the publicity it produces draws attention to Paul.


The campaign is employing more traditional tactics, as well.


Fergus Cullen, the New Hampshire Republican party chairman who is neutral in the race, said Paul's campaign has sent more campaign mail to households than any other organization has. Radio advertising is heavy, although paid television advertising has been relatively modest so far.


Current polls in New Hampshire show Paul in single digits. But Cullen said, "I believe there is more support than public opinion polls are picking up. I believe that he is appealing to anti-establishment Republicans and independents, and there are a lot of them."


Independents account for about 42 percent of the electorate in the state, and outnumber both Republicans and Democrats.


Cullen predicted the Texan would poll more than 10 percent — a significant threshold because it would guarantee him at least one delegate to the GOP nominating convention next summer.


He said he doubts Paul will hurt any candidate more than another. "I believe most of Ron Paul's supporters would probably not participate in the primary" without him in the race, he said.


Officials in other campaigns are not so sure.

Paul's campaign has been active in Iowa, too, although his relative lack of an organization in that state makes it harder to have an impact in the caucuses on Jan. 3 that mark the campaign's first test.


In recent days, the campaign has purchased 30-minute blocks of time for Sunday for a statewide appeal. Campaign mail has begun in Michigan, whose primary is Jan. 15.


Paul was noncommittal when asked how he intended to spend his surprisingly large treasury, answering only that he was getting ready to compete in primaries in 20 states on Feb. 5.


Beyond the campaign's official moves, a second independent effort involves supporters sending letters to independent voters in Iowa as well as elsewhere. A Web site devoted to the effort claims more than 500,000 letters sent to potential Iowa caucus-goers alone.


E-mails sent to two organizers drew no immediate response.


Jesse Benton, a campaign spokesman, said the blimp and the letter-writing campaign were examples of spontaneous support. "We couldn't control it if we wanted to, and we don't want to control it," he said.

 

Ron Paul wants a ban on abortion because he's invested money in clinics in Mexico.

 

The Associate Press? Did they NOT get the memo about MSM not covering Ron Paul??????

 

Post of the week.

TFK

 

Another interesting take on Ron Paul from USA DAILY

----------------------
USA
Dailytm

Ron Paul will win by a landslide

Larry Fester
Published 12/23/2007 - 8:35 p.m. EST

Analysis/Opinion-Republican presidential candidate and Texas Congressman, Ron Paul, can win the presidency. Contrary to the pundits and media propaganda, Ron Paul is best positioned to win the GOP nomination.

Ron Paul has more money than his opponents and is just starting to gain momentum. As a result of massive popular support Paul’s donor base is huge and donors are not close to reaching contribution limits. Paul’s opponents are going broke and their donors are maxed out. Ron Paul may raise 20 million this quarter and chances are he’ll raise more the next quarter.

To get an idea of how strong Paul’s support is consider this. Ron Paul received donations from over 123,000 people this quarter. If one out of 100 voters donate to a presidential candidate that means Paul has the support of over 12 million primary voters. My guess is that less than 1 out of 100 voters donate in a primary.

Of Paul’s opponents, John McCain and Mike Huckabee are broke and don’t have the funds to compete on Super Tuesday. Both candidates appear to be media creations in this election and don’t have that much popular support. If it weren’t for undeserved free media they wouldn’t be on the radar screens.

Giuliani was forced to go with his big state strategy because he ran the risk of getting creamed in early primaries. He appears to be a lead balloon and runs the risk of losing some of those big states to Paul. Thompson just hasn’t taken off. There is a chance he could get revived in South Carolina but he may not make it that far.

Romney is self financing his campaign and can go the distance, but how much of his personal wealth is he willing to squander?

Recent commentaries and political talk have mentioned the possibility of a brokered convention. This is an early admission by pundits that Ron Paul can’t be stopped, and a hope that he won’t have 50% of the delegates allowing his opponents to broker a deal to deny him the nomination.

Paul is unique among GOP candidates because his support is national. He can compete in every state.

The primary calendar has been frontloaded which was deliberate to keep second tier candidates (candidates not bought and paid for) from having a shot at winning the nomination. It is doubtful that when planning the schedules anybody had a clue that Ron Paul would be one of the only candidate that could be competitive on February 5th

Iowa, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Michigan, Nevada, South Carolina, Florida, Maine are all up for grabs prior to Super Tuesday which is on February 5th. Given the low expectations Paul only needs to win one of these to show that he can win prior to Super Tuesday.

The Iowa caucus on January 3rd will be a tough start for Paul. He hasn’t spent that much time in Iowa and may not have the organization that Romney does to win the caucus. Placing in the top five is all that is needed there. A third place would be huge.

Two days later on January 5th is the Wyoming Caucus. This state is a neighbor of Utah and Romney may have a strong organization here as well. Paul may do well here though.

January 8th in New Hampshire is where the campaign really starts for Ron Paul. He doesn’t need to win it but he probably will. Buchanan won this state in 1996 running on similar campaign themes with 27% of the vote. Paul’s support is much broader.

Paul’s odds look good for Michigan on January 15th. The state is a foreclosure war zone and Paul’s blaming of the Federal Reserve for creating a housing crash may resonate well.

January 19th Nevada and South Carolina are up for elections. Paul should win Nevada and has an outside shot at South Carolina.

On January 29th Florida is up. This is the state where Giuliani has circled his wagons. If he’s still in the race it will be an uphill battle for him especially if Paul has momentum generated by a couple victories. There is evidence of Paul support in Florida on the ground just by observing bumper stickers and yard signs on residences but Giuliani also has some visible support.

Of course, if Paul wins New Hampshire the momentum generated from that victory is likely to steam roll his campaign through all of the above mentioned states setting him up for the knock out punch on Super Tuesday.

If Ron Paul doesn’t have the nomination sewed up on Super Tuesday, Paul’s delegate rich home state of Texas will be the final nail in the coffin come March.

The point is it is already too late to stop Paul. He’s going to win the Republican nomination.

As a general election candidate Ron Paul will win a 50 state landslide against any Democratic nominee.

Ron Paul’s opposition to the war in Iraq, and defense of the Bill of Rights, and Civil Liberties, may actually dig deeply into the Democratic vote and overwhelmingly attract independents to his campaign.

His support for secure borders as an integral part of national defense is also a very popular issue that transcends parties.

If Ron Paul is the GOP nominee it won’t matter if Bloomberg or anybody else runs as a third party candidate. Once people go to Paul’s website and review his issues and record they either reject Paul’s ideas or they are sold. Paul will not lose any supporters to another candidate once they are in his camp.

Unlike media propaganda, the ideals of peace, freedom, and prosperity, are very mainstream. To the aging baby boomer population now on fixed incomes, Ron Paul’s challenging of the Federal Reserve’s ‘Inflation Tax’ is most welcomed. To the rest of America feeling the double whammy of an ‘Inflation Tax’ and progressive federal income taxes, Paul’s calls to end the income tax are a cause for celebration.

In fact, Paul’s calls for reforming the monetary system, the income tax, foreign policy, and protecting the Constitution, are a lot more mainstream than pre-emptive nuclear war, no borders, and a police state are.

Those media generated polls are as valuable as the media propaganda that pushed the nation to war in Iraq. People should have as much faith in polls as they do the Easter Bunny and computerized voting. Ron Paul is going to win by a landslide <table align="left" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td height="10"></td></tr><tr><td align="left"></td></tr></tbody></table>

 

Yes I know ... another meaningless poll :doh:

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2007/12/21/straw-poll-dec-21-jan-4/

The Poll claims to be SPAM PROOF ... but I'm sure where there's a will there's a way.

Ron Paul gets 22,000 votes and 29% of the republican votes total so far ... next closest is God Help us Giuliani with 13,246 votes.

over 76,200 votes on the republican side and 71,800 on the Democratic side ....

So far the winner of the overall poll ???


HILLARY CLINTON with nearly 32,700 votes so far ! :doh:

Clinton = 32,694
Paul = 21,997
Obama = 19,483
Giuliani = 13,246
Huckabee = 12,636

Here's a question for some here ... which Republican stands any chance of beating Hillary ?

 

Then how come he won't explain how America will adjust to a non-military-based economy in a time of economic downturn? He talks about grand schemes that might work, given 20 years of commitment, but in the short run, we're talking about four years of economic crisis, followed by him being replaced with an ultra-conservative or a neo-FDR.