Some big reasons why YOU should support Ron Paul

[tman]

For those who don't already know much about Dr. Paul, this is a good place to start.

Besides the various government workers who are spying on us - we are all Second Amendment advocates. I can guarantee you there is NOBODY running in 2008 that will support our Second Amendment beliefs more than Ron Paul.

Also, understand that this is just the tip of the iceberg. Dr. Paul obviously has a deep understanding of our Constitution and is dedicated to upholding it along with our personal liberties. Dr. Paul knows that government's role, as our servant, should be to uphold liberty. He has proven this throughout his entire career.

He has been made popular by people who support him and believe in his message, not special interest groups or an acting career. People support him because they know he will do everything he can to protect our liberties. I don't know about you, but to me, freedom is what America should be all about. If you don't feel the same then maybe you have some reflecting to do. Or maybe you would be happier in England or China.



H.R. 1096: To restore the second amendment rights of all Americans (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.1096:)

Restoring the Second Amendment (http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr010903.htm)Thomas Jefferson said "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; ...that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." Jefferson, and all of the Founders, would be horrified by the proliferation of unconstitutional legislation that prevents law-abiding Americans form exercising their right and duty to keep and bear arms. I hope my colleagues will join me in upholding the Founders' vision for a free society by cosponsoring the Second Amendment Restoration Act.

Assault Weapons and Assaults on the Constitution (http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2003/tst042103.htm)
More importantly, however, the debate about certain types of weapons ignores the fundamental purpose of the Second amendment. The Second amendment is not about hunting deer or keeping a pistol in your nightstand. It is not about protecting oneself against common criminals. It is about preventing tyranny. The Founders knew that unarmed citizens would never be able to overthrow a tyrannical government as they did. They envisioned government as a servant, not a master, of the American people. The muskets they used against the British Army were the assault rifles of the time. It is practical, rather than alarmist, to understand that unarmed citizens cannot be secure in their freedoms. It’s convenient for gun banners to dismiss this argument by saying “That could never happen here, this is America”- but history shows that only vigilant people can keep government under control. By banning certain weapons today, we may plant the seeds for tyranny to flourish ten, thirty, or fifty years from now.

Snipers, Terror, and Gun Control (http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2002/tst102802.htm)
... the undeniable truth is that armed citizens are safer than disarmed citizens... it’s hard to imagine the sniper choosing Texas or another well-armed southern state to commit his crimes. The bottom line is that criminals seek defenseless, unarmed victims. Any criminal operating in the suburbs of Washington DC, southern Maryland, and northern Virginia- all bastions of anti-gun sentiment- can reasonably assume that his victims will not shoot back.

Tragedy begets tragedy - Violence in schools doesn't justify violence against liberty (http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst99/tst061499.htm)
We must recognize an important historical point. There are more restrictions on the sale, ownership and use of firearms today than at any time in history. Just fifty years ago, anyone could purchase weapons from most store catalogues for home delivery by US Mail. And yet fifty years ago we did not have school shootings. In fact, the number of incidents involving at-school violence with firearms has increased as the number of federal laws and regulations have increased.

Gun Control? Disarm The Bureaucrats! (http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst97/tst102097.htm)
... the Constitution's Second Amendment is the most important. Without the ability to protect themselves and their property, discussion of any other rights is only so much talk.

A gun in the hand of a law-abiding citizen serves as a very real, very important deterrent to an arrogant and aggressive government. Guns in the hands of the bureaucrats do the opposite. The founders of this country fully understood this fact, it's a shame our generation has ignored it.

The Failed DC Gun Ban (http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2004/cr100404.htm) (In support of HR 3193)
Restrictions HR 3193 will repeal include the requirement that all firearms be registered. Gun registration in other countries has created government lists of who owns what guns. Such lists facilitate the harassment of gun owners and the confiscation of their guns. Also repealed are blanket bans on the possession of handguns and handgun ammunition as well as of any semi-automatic guns. These bans exist despite the fact that handguns and semi-automatic guns are regularly used outside Washington, D.C. for self-defense. Also repealed is the prohibition on carrying a gun on one’s own property! It is hard to say a person is free if he is prohibited from using the means of protecting himself and his family even in his own home.


Let liberty ring loudly - All of Constitution, not just sections, must be defended (http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst99/tst062199.htm)
For the sake of the future of our Republic, it is important that we are not just consistent, but correctly consistent. We must defend not just the sections of the Constitution we find popular, we must defend the entire Constitution. Most importantly, we must jealously guard the philosophy of freedom upon which it is based. If we do, the sound we will hear is that of liberty once again loudly ringing across our land.

[schizrade2]

*snip*

But, But, Guiliani was at 9/11 and he supports the troops!!!
Fred Thompson speaks like a down home good old boy and reminds me of Reagan!!!!
OMG teh GOP!11!!!!!11!!!111!

[Kestryll]

Sorry, not my candidate.

[erblo]

+1 for Ron Paul!

[tman]

Sorry, not my candidate.
Here you go:
http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/7250/bradyshtn4.jpg

[Kestryll]

Here you go:
http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/7250/bradyshtn4.jpg

Well now that's about the lamest argument I've seen, and an example of why I won't be voting for Paul.
That kind of fanatisism and the tendancy to insult if you don't agree with them make him a very questionable candidate.
You are known by the people who support you and his supported look more like Heaven's Gate members than voters, based on this example at least.

[leelaw]

Could you post his thoughts on the global warming disaster and desire to open the southern border, too? Thanks.

[tman]

Could you post his thoughts on the global warming disaster and desire to open the southern border, too? Thanks.
Open the border? He wants to build a fence.

Well now that's about the lamest argument I've seen, and an example of why I won't be voting for Paul.
That kind of fanatisism and the tendancy to insult if you don't agree with them make him a very questionable candidate.
You are known by the people who support you and his supported look more like Heaven's Gate members than voters, based on this example at least.
It wasn't an argument. Just poking fun at you.

The fact still remains that Ron Paul is the strongest Second Amendment advocate. Period.

Also, the reason why his supporters are so "fanatical" is because we know that Ron Paul is of a very rare breed. It is exciting to actually have the hope that our republic may be restored.

[Liberty1]

Could you post his thoughts on the global warming disaster and desire to open the southern border, too? Thanks.

note: I'm still looking for a global warming position.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul

Political positions
Main article: Political positions of Ron Paul
In his 2008 presidential campaign, Paul has stated that he would like to "reinstate the Constitution and restore the Republic." His voting record is consistent in rejection of a welfare state role for the federal government and advocacy of hard currency and a non-interventionist foreign policy.

Paul voted for the attack on Afghanistan in 2001 and believes in a strong national defense.[12] He is the only 2008 Republican presidential candidate to have voted against the Iraq War Resolution in 2002[13][14] and suggested alternatives after the September 11 attacks, including giving the President authority to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, which would allow war to be carried out against individuals rather than foreign countries and allow local bounty hunters familiar with the Afghanistani terrain to be hired to capture Osama bin Laden and his co-conspirators. Paul released a statement about the bill: "Paul's bill would allow Congress to authorize the President to specifically target Bin Laden and his associates using non-government armed forces. Since it is nearly impossible for U.S. intelligence teams to get close to Bin Laden, the marque and reprisal approach creates an incentive for people in Afghanistan or elsewhere to turn him over to the U.S."[15] Paul would also allow armed commercial airline pilots.

Paul's desire to secure U.S. borders remains a key topic in his 2008 presidential campaign. He opposes the North American Union proposition and its proposed integration of Mexico, the United States of America, and Canada. Paul voted "yes" on the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorizes the construction of an additional 700 miles of double-layered fencing between the U.S and Mexico. Paul opposes illegal immigration as well as amnesty for illegal immigrants. He also introduced legislation that would amend the Constitution to stop giving automatic citizenship to babies who are born in the United States to non-citizen parents, which has been in effect since the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868.[16]

In the May 3, 2007, GOP Debate, Paul stated that as President, he would seek the immediate abolition of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the abolition of the income tax. As Congressman, he has long fought for the prohibition of direct taxes by repeal of the 16th Amendment which created the income tax.

Moreover, Ron Paul links his pro-life position closely to his libertarian views.[17] Paul supports allowing individual states to decide on the legality of abortion citing that it is not an enumerated power of the federal government.[18] Accordingly, he has challenged Roe v. Wade for its unconstitutionality.[19]


Principles
Texas Monthly, calling Paul "both deeply principled and wholly uncompromised", wrote in 2001 that he does not take money from political action committees (PACs), is not swayed by Congressional lobbyists, only votes on his "deeply held beliefs" and does not cut "backroom deals." They write, "The phrase 'honest politician' is an oxymoron; yet in the sense that Paul never, ever votes against his stated principles... the phrase describes him." Along with not signing up for a Congressional pension, Paul's Congressional office returns money to the government each year; in 2000, the sum returned was $50,000.[7]

[LECTRIKHED]

+1 Ron Paul. I have just discovered him. I truly believe that he is the only candidate that can save this country. There's a reason that everyone, everywhere is talking about him.

[Liberty1]

+1 Ron Paul. I have just discovered him. I truly believe that he is the only candidate that can save this country. There's a reason that everyone, everywhere is talking about him.

Well, from hearing him speak, he is realistic as to what one man, even a POTUS, can do in the short term. He'll work with the congress on freedom issues, and if they won't work with him they'll get the veto.

[mow]

Also, the reason why his supporters are so "fanatical" is because we know that Ron Paul is of a very rare breed. It is exciting to actually have the hope that our republic may be restored.

Roger that!

[SemiAutoSam]

I doubt that Ron Paul would use that Signing statement tool either. Bush uses it like a weapon to not follow laws that he does not care for or so it seems.

[Liberty1]

Could you post his thoughts on the global warming disaster..., too? Thanks.

The Ron Paul Library
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/



http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=24

30. Kyoto treaty disregards science for a radical anti-American agenda Congressional Web site, December 15, 1997

Kyoto treaty disregards science for a radical anti-American agenda

Environmentalism has become refuge for those opposing liberty and American goals By US Representative Ron Paul

In blatant disregard for the sovereignty of the United States, the well-being of American families, and even reasonable science, the Clinton administration last week sounded the trumpet blast of victory in signing on with an international treaty dealing with environmental issues.
In Kyoto, Japan, delegates from more than 150 nations gathered to set new, international guidelines for reducing the so-called "greenhouse" gases. As one might imagine, the villain in the eyes of the participants were the "greedy Americans," and as such we will bear the brunt of the treaty's wrath, while communist China and the world's other oppressive regimes can pollute all they want. Those on the radical environmental fringe, who organized this conference, have been using questionable "science" to raise the fear that some environmental collapse is just around the corner unless immediate, radical action is taken.

We've only been able to accurately study the levels of atmospheric gases for some 25 years. To definitively claim today's weather patterns are the result of naturally-occurring cycles, or part of a long chain of natural events, or something man alone is creating, is unsound simply because more data is needed. In the respectable scientific community, there is considerable debate over how to interpret the global climate data. Therefore, urgings for radical action based on claims that the earth is about to boil are wrong-headed. In fact, all available evidence points to the contrary, that the temperatures are getting cooler, on average.

To be fair, many in the environmental movement are honestly concerned about man's impact on our land, air and water, and are sincere in wanting only to do what is right. At a basic level, we all should be concerned about those things. But sadly many in the movement are more guided by a complete, unabashed hatred of free-markets, capitalism and the American way of life, as well as a complete disregard for the well-being of their fellow man....



http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=154

24. EPA Regulations Threaten Texas Congressional Web site, June 26, 2000

..."The EPA, with typical bureaucratic arrogance, has acted without congressional authorization in creating its own standards for air quality....The D.C. District Court of Appeals found that the EPA acted without congressional authorization when it created and applied its air standards.... This sound decision by the Court supported constitutional principles, as all legislative powers are assigned to Congress only....The threat to the local economy is obvious, as the costs of complying with onerous regulations will send business and jobs elsewhere. While air and water quality standards are a legitimate concern, the state of Texas should make its own decisions without oversight from Washington.

I previously have stated in this column that there is no constitutional authority for the creation of the EPA. I view Wednesday's vote as a victory in our fight against unconstitutional, unaccountable federal agencies. We must continue to work against EPA overreaching in the 14th District of Texas and across the nation...."



http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=151

25. CARA: Environmental Protection or Destruction? Congressional Web site, June 5, 2000

...When the House of Representatives recently passed the "Conservation and Reinvestment Act", better known as CARA, it took a big step in the wrong direction. This legislation allows the federal government to get further involved in the real estate business by owning more property.

I believe the federal government should be selling off many of its real property holdings. Efficient land use, as well as constitutional government, would suggest the federal government already owns far too much real property.

Still, some of the most radical environmentalists remain convinced that the only way to protect green space is for government, particularly the federal government, to own more and more land. This is an ironic point of view, because countries that have had the most government regulation of property, such as the former Soviet bloc nations, have had the absolute worst records of environmental quality....


Any more question:)?

[tman]

Well, from hearing him speak, he is realistic as to what one man, even a POTUS, can do in the short term. He'll work with the congress on freedom issues, and if they won't work with him they'll get the veto.
Very true. You also have to take into account the ripple effect having someone like Ron Paul in the Whitehouse would have. It would be an earth-rumbling step in the right direction.

People would once again be reminded of what freedom, liberty and the role of government are. It would be a lot harder for more establishment shills to take the Whitehouse after him. It will be very clear to Americans, as it already is to his current supporters, what lying, scumbag, brainwashing, crooks most politicians are.

There is a reason why after each debate, his campaign receives an onslaught of donations all throughout the night. Light bulbs are coming on in people's heads all throughout America.

Why do you think the MSM is so terrified of him? First, they tried bashing him. That worked against them so now they are just trying to give him as little attention as possible. During the debates, he was shoved ALL the way to the side, barely visible while Giuliani and McCain were right in the center. Also, Giuliani spoke for around 18 minutes, and Ron Paul only got to speak for about 6.

[ghettoshecky]

Ron Paul would put the country in a way better direction than it currently is in now, but my question is why would he get rid of the IRS when it would be the best tool to catch illegal immigrants? I mean if they can catch Al Capone I'm pretty sure they can catch illegal immigrants who evade taxes.

[tman]

Ron Paul would put the country in a way better direction than it currently is in now, but my question is why would he get rid of the IRS when it would be the best tool to catch illegal immigrants? I mean if they can catch Al Capone I'm pretty sure they can catch illegal immigrants who evade taxes.
If you think the only reason to keep the IRS around is to catch illegal immigrants, then I am here to tell you that there are a billion better ways to catch illegal immigrants.

The immigration problem is not one of inability. It is a problem of neglect, no matter what angle you look at it.

[SemiAutoSam]

Its about time and it would be a dream come true this man could fix a lot of problems that have been plaguing our country since the mid 1800's.

There is a reason why after each debate, his campaign receives an onslaught of donations all throughout the night. Light bulbs are coming on in people's heads all throughout America.



The MSM is terrified of him because he does not stand for what they and their corporate owners want to happen in our country.

They also most likely are scared because this is one man that cannot be bought and will not cater to the special interests and PAC's



Why do you think the MSM is so terrified of him? First, they tried bashing him. That worked against them so now they are just trying to give him as little attention as possible. During the debates, he was shoved ALL the way to the side, barely visible while Giuliani and McCain were right in the center. Also, Giuliani spoke for around 18 minutes, and Ron Paul only got to speak for about 6.

[Liberty1]

If you think the only reason to keep the IRS around is to catch illegal immigrants, then I am here to tell you that there are a billion better ways to catch illegal immigrants.

The immigration problem is not one of inability. It is a problem of neglect, no matter what angle you look at it.

The IRS catches them? I thought they just issue them Individual Taxpayer Identification numbers and let them keep working.

[Pont]

I think Ron Paul would be the perfect candidate to go up against Clinton.

Clinton, like Kerry, is a professional fence sitter. She's way better at it than Kerry. She anticipates where the fence will be and sits on it ahead of time, so as not to be seen as a flip flopper. She's only says what she thinks people want to hear. Her goal is to get elected. And to ban guns, naturally.

Giulliani, McCain, Romney, et al will not stand a chance against Clinton. McCain "betrayed" his liberal supporters and is a flip-flopper. Giulliani is a one-trick pony, and we've seen the trick before. Romney's religion and religious conservatism will doom him. Being Mormon won't win the Southern Baptists and Kentucky Kristians, but his religious conservatism sure as hell will lose him 100% of the Bush haters who feel like the religious conservatives keeping Bush in power are at fault for the Iraq war.

Clinton has nothing over Ron Paul. She's fence-sat on the Iraq war, whereas Ron Paul has been consistent and against it (and is aligned with the majority of citizens who are pro-Afghanistan war and now anti-Iraq war). She couldn't beat Ron Paul on foreign policy because she has no good ideas of her own. She couldn't beat Ron Paul on character. She couldn't beat Ron Paul on taxes. She'd have to resort to making gun rights the main issue of the campaign, and that would work out in our favor.

[tman]

I think Ron Paul would be the perfect candidate to go up against Clinton.

Clinton, like Kerry, is a professional fence sitter. She's way better at it than Kerry. She anticipates where the fence will be and sits on it ahead of time, so as not to be seen as a flip flopper. She's only says what she thinks people want to hear. Her goal is to get elected. And to ban guns, naturally.

Giulliani, McCain, Romney, et al will not stand a chance against Clinton. McCain "betrayed" his liberal supporters and is a flip-flopper. Giulliani is a one-trick pony, and we've seen the trick before. Romney's religion and religious conservatism will doom him. Being Mormon won't win the Southern Baptists and Kentucky Kristians, but his religious conservatism sure as hell will lose him 100% of the Bush haters who feel like the religious conservatives keeping Bush in power are at fault for the Iraq war.

Clinton has nothing over Ron Paul. She's fence-sat on the Iraq war, whereas Ron Paul has been consistent and against it (and is aligned with the majority of citizens who are pro-Afghanistan war and now anti-Iraq war). She couldn't beat Ron Paul on foreign policy because she has no good ideas of her own. She couldn't beat Ron Paul on character. She couldn't beat Ron Paul on taxes. She'd have to resort to making gun rights the main issue of the campaign, and that would work out in our favor.
You make great points. Republicans need to realize that the American people will NOT elect another president who wants to continue the "war" in Iraq. Ron Paul really is their best chance. Also, Ron Paul is the type of candidate that will motivate large portions of people who normally wouldn't vote to go out and register. His popularity spreads like a a wild fire, and will only continue to grow.

Dissent towards the current administration is very high. People will jump at the chance for something new, even if it's Hilary. Giuliani's "9/11 Hero" status just won't be enough.

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

Seems like a modern day Roosevelt.


















The good one. :D

[Archenemy550]

+1 for Ron Paul in 2008!

[SemiAutoSam]

Interesting videos of Ron Paul.
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/ronpaul.htm


You mean Teddy right, When you say "The good one."



Seems like a modern day Roosevelt.



The good one. :D

[SemiAutoSam]

Here is one major reason why you all should support Ron Paul.

I seriously doubt that any other elected offical would attempt to go after the fed.

Here are a few interesting quotes from the website but read the whole article it will open your eyes.

ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 OF THE CONSTITUTION STATES THAT CONGRESS SHALL HAVE THE POWER TO COIN (CREATE) MONEY AND REGULATE THE VALUE THEREOF.

IN 1935 THE SUPREME COURT RULED THAT CONGRESS CANNOT CONSTITUTIONALLY DELEGATE ITS POWER TO ANOTHER GROUP.


http://www.apfn.org/APFN/fed_reserve.htm

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j184/mag-lock/chooser.gif

[stag1500]

A lot people don't realize that it was the Federal Reserve that caused the Great Depression. That surge of money they pumped into the economy during the 1920's led to the stock marked bubble which burst in 1929 when debts starting being called in. Ever since then, they kept printing more and more money effectively weaking the purchasing power of the dollar, which is another form of wealth confiscation by the government. The Federal Reserve is one of the most evil institutions in this county next to the BATFE.

[Matt777]

Ron Paul is the man. I've never been more inspired by a political figure.

[SemiAutoSam]

Guys spread this link in your e mails far and wide Let this information cross the country like the Zumbo incident and we can let the American public know the Fraud of the Federal Reserve System. If 10% of the American public knew how the Federal Reserve System works we could make it crash and burn.

http://www.apfn.org/APFN/fed_reserve.htm
http://www.apfn.org/APFN/taxman.gif

http://www.apfn.org/money/money.htm
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve2.htm

A lot people don't realize that it was the Federal Reserve that caused the Great Depression. That surge of money they pumped into the economy during the 1920's led to the stock marked bubble which burst in 1929 when debts starting being called in. Ever since then, they kept printing more and more money effectively weaking the purchasing power of the dollar, which is another form of wealth confiscation by the government. The Federal Reserve is one of the most evil institutions in this county next to the BATFE.

[stag1500]

A lot of people have complained about Ron Paul saying that he wants to open up our southern border. That couldn't be farther from the truth. Check out this link:

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst052507.htm


Immigration ‘Compromise’ Sells
Out Our Sovereignty
May 28, 2007
The much-vaunted Senate “compromise” on immigration is a compromise alright: a compromise of our laws, a compromise of our sovereignty, and a compromise of the Second Amendment. That anyone in Washington believes this is a credible approach to solving our immigration crisis suggests just how out of touch our political elites really are.
The reality is that this bill will grant amnesty to virtually all of the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens in the country today. Supporters use very creative language to try and convince us that amnesty is not really amnesty, but when individuals who have entered the United States illegally are granted citizenship – regardless of the fees they are charged – what you have is amnesty.
What is seldom discussed in the immigration debate, unfortunately, is the incentives the US government provides for people to enter the United States illegally. As we know well, when the government subsidizes something we get more of it. The government provides a myriad of federal welfare benefits to those who come to the US illegally, including food stamps and free medical care. Is this a way to discourage people from coming to the US illegally?
Additionally, one of the most absurd incentives for people to come to the US illegally is the promise of instant US citizenship to anyone born on our soil. That is why when Congress returns next week I will be re-introducing my Constitutional amendment to deny automatic citizenship to individuals born on US soil to parents who are not US citizens or who do not owe permanent allegiance to the United States .
There are many other very troubling items buried deep in the Senate’s immigration compromise. The bill explicitly calls for an “acceleration” of the March 2005 agreement between the US president, the president of Mexico , and the prime minister of Canada , known as the “Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America .” This somewhat secretive agreement – a treaty in all but name – aims to erase the borders between the United States , Canada , and Mexico and threatens our sovereignty and national security. The SPP was agreed by the president without the participation of Congress. It should be eliminated, not accelerated!
According to the pro-Second Amendment Gun Owners of America, the legislation also makes it easier to target gun dealers for prosecution. Even gun clubs could find themselves targeted under this immigration reform legislation.
Immigration reform should start with improving our border protection, yet it was reported last week that the federal government has approved the recruitment of 120 of our best trained Border Patrol agents to go to Iraq to train Iraqis how to better defend their borders! This comes at a time when the National Guard troops participating in Operation Jump Start are being removed from border protection duties in Arizona , New Mexico , and Texas and preparing to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan ! It is an outrage and it will result in our borders being more vulnerable to illegal entry, including by terrorists.
I will continue to oppose any immigration bill that grants amnesty to illegals or undermines our liberty and sovereignty.

[MrTuffPaws]

Paul gives me warm fuzzies in my tummy. The other GOP candidates make me vomit.

[Bizcuits]

I'd be fine with either fred or ron, they both look promising. It's just nice to see more pro-gun possibles this time around.

[Moby]

I registered as a Republican so I could vote for Ron in the primaries (previous Libertarian). He is our last chance for honest government.

[RJ Dunn]

;I'd be fine with either fred or ron, they both look promising. It's just nice to see more pro-gun possibles this time around.

He's only been unleashed by the elite to take away any support and momentum Paul has. The flamming may begin.;)

[chevy_dude]

All I can say is Check out his web site, listen to the man speak. And not to give in to the neocons that dominate the media. He will be pushed aside if we cannot speak out for our selfs. I know for a fact he is a true believer, look at his track record... Besides that the man is a genious and he could only create good for the future of this country... Join the Ron Paul Revolution!

[radioactivelego]

I like Ron Paul and everything, but the more voraciously rampant digg links of him are considered "news" and RON PAUL WILL FATHER MY CHILD myspace spam profiles keep messaging, the more I'm willing to vote for Hillary.

I put the words "Ron" and "Paul" in a caption on my Myspace and I instantly get spammed by 4 profiles for friend requests and RON PAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL messages in my inbox.