PDA

View Full Version : Paul supporters likely to splinter




RonPaulFanInGA
06-22-2008, 03:22 PM
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/22/Paul_supporters_likely_to_splinter/UPI-10521214167464/


WASHINGTON, June 22 (UPI) -- With former Republican U.S. presidential hopeful Ron Paul unlikely to endorse his party's presumptive nominee, analysts say his supporters will likely splinter.

The Politico reported Libertarian candidate Bob Barr and Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin will pick up some of the longtime Texas congressman's supporters.

"I would be very surprised to see many people going for (Democrat) Barack Obama," said Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign spokesman. "Barr will pick up some, but the majority will go Republican or stay home."

This, in my personal opinion, is a big problem. Even on this forum, there is a palpable split among members. A seeming plurality of Ron Paul supporters say they'll vote Barr, then you got another group that says Barr sucks and they're voting for Chuck Baldwan, another smaller group supporting Obama or McCain and then yet another group saying they'll write in Ron Paul and others saying they'll stay home. It's a mess.

MsDoodahs
06-22-2008, 03:25 PM
This, in my personal opinion, is a big problem. Even on this forum, there is a palpable split among members. A seeming plurality of Ron Paul supporters say they'll vote Barr, then you got another group that says Barr sucks and they're voting for Chuck Baldwan, another smaller group supporting Obama or McCain and then yet another group saying they'll write in Ron Paul and others saying they'll stay home. It's a mess.

I'm not following why you think individuals choosing who they want to support is a problem?

eta: you surely don't think we should all do a lock step vote for someone...or do you?

RonPaulRkfd
06-22-2008, 03:26 PM
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/22/Paul_supporters_likely_to_splinter/UPI-10521214167464/



This, in my personal opinion, is a big problem. Even on this forum, there is a palpable split among members. A seeming plurality of Ron Paul supporters say they'll vote Barr, then you got another group that says Barr sucks and they're voting for Chuck Baldwan, another smaller group supporting Obama or McCain and then yet another group saying they'll write in Ron Paul and others saying they'll stay home. It's a mess.

I'm going to write in Dr. Paul no matter what.
May as well, because Baldwin or Barr will not win, and I
certainly will not vote McCain or Obama. I have vowed to
stick with my FIRST choice, and that is Dr. Ron Paul.

Dayna

RonPaulFanInGA
06-22-2008, 03:27 PM
I'm not following why you think individuals choosing who they want to support is a problem?

There is of course nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying it'd be better if we were all united behind a candidate rather than split up into about five or six different splinter groups.

rancher89
06-22-2008, 03:30 PM
"I would be very surprised to see many people going for (Democrat) Barack Obama," said Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign spokesman. "Barr will pick up some, but the majority will go Republican or stay home."

That's the problem, as usual, why say these things to the press?????? STAY HOME??????

Kalifornia
06-22-2008, 03:30 PM
The majority of RP supporters ARE Republican. They wont stay home. But they wont be voting Republican either. The Blue Bloods guaranteed their loss when they picked the most liberal guy on the stage.

OptionsTrader
06-22-2008, 03:31 PM
I fail to see a problem. An election in which a very large % of voters shun the 2 prepackaged false choices and vote third party - that is encouraging not discouraging. It gives me hope people are actually thinking for themselves.

tonesforjonesbones
06-22-2008, 03:32 PM
Well...it appears that isn't going to happen. Everyone has to vote for who / what they think is right and let the chips fall where they may. I read in the paper our electric company is raising the rates. When will the American People unite and take to the streets? Not until the wealthy feel the pinch. Remember...it wasn't the poor who were jumping out of windows when the Great Depression hit. Maybe the crashing of the economy will be a uniter and remind us that we are supposed to be one people. TONES

The Good Doctor
06-22-2008, 03:35 PM
I am writing in Ron Paul period end of story.


The majority of RP supporters ARE Republican. They wont stay home. But they wont be voting Republican either. The Blue Bloods guaranteed their loss when they picked the most liberal guy on the stage.

RonPaulFanInGA
06-22-2008, 03:36 PM
I fail to see a problem. An election in which a very large % of voters shun the 2 prepackaged false choices and vote third party - that is encouraging not discouraging. It gives me hope people are actually thinking for themselves.

Not to be argumentative, but what "large percentage" of Americans will vote third party this year? Two percent? Maybe it's a little higher now, but after a few more months of the media shoving nothing but McCain and Obama down everyones' throats, talking about how this is the most important election in the history of the United States (like they do every presidential election) and completely ignoring all third party candidates, that's probably about where it will end up.

Plus we have Paul supporters on this very forum talking about how they're voting for Obama. I haven't seen anyone saying they'll vote McCain, but I imagine they have to exist somewhere.

Sigh. If only Ross Perot didn't drop out for a couple of weeks in 1992 when he was leading Bush Sr. and Clinton in all the polls. Maybe the damn two-party system would have ended then.

Truth Warrior
06-22-2008, 03:37 PM
I just keep working to get 95+% to wake up, grow up, get real, lose the "governmentality" and stay home. :D

Choose the "red pill"!

tonesforjonesbones
06-22-2008, 03:38 PM
Good Dr. Doens't seem to matter at this point..id' say go for it if it makes you feel good. We don't have much of a movement left. TONES

JosephTheLibertarian
06-22-2008, 03:39 PM
Ask Baldwin supporters the following:

Do you support protectionism?

Do you support outlawing pornography?

Do you support a ban on gay mariage?

If they answer "no" to any of these question, say "Baldwin does!"

mwahaha

pcosmar
06-22-2008, 03:39 PM
There is of course nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying it'd be better if we were all united behind a candidate rather than split up into about five or six different splinter groups.

What difference does it make?
There are not enough third party voters to affect any real difference in this election. Though there may be enough to register our dissatisfaction with the two parties.

Cowlesy
06-22-2008, 03:43 PM
Freedom, Liberty and our American Heritage transcends any presidential candidate whether it was Paul, or is now Barr/Baldwin/McCain/Obama.

Let them think we'll all go cry in the sandbox. The less those people are thinking about us, the better.

Truth Warrior
06-22-2008, 03:46 PM
How many of those ELIGIBLE to vote, routinely DO NOT vote? Perhaps they just know something that the VOTERS do not know. ;)

"The system is corrupt, beyond redemption, and is not worthy of my support!"

Spirit of '76
06-22-2008, 03:49 PM
Let them think we'll all go cry in the sandbox. The less those people are thinking about us, the better.

Exactly. Personally, while I certainly won't vote for either McCain or Obama, I'm starting to be less and less interested in the politics of the 2008 presidential election and more and more focused on state/local efforts. I feel that's where I have the best chance to make a real difference.

asgardshill
06-22-2008, 03:52 PM
Remember...it wasn't the poor who were jumping out of windows when the Great Depression hit.

Actually, it was. The national suicide rate in 1929 soared from 14 to 17 per 100,000 people. The vast majority of those new suicides weren't international megabankers or the JP Morgans - the ones jumping out of skyscraper windows were low-level speculators who got assraped by the skyrocketing call money rates at the time.

Truth Warrior
06-22-2008, 03:56 PM
Great Depression, courtesy of the Fed, per Bernanke! ;)

Madison
06-22-2008, 03:56 PM
Benton is wrong. Many Paul supporters will vote for Obama when November rolls around and it looks like McCain has a chance.

Akus
06-22-2008, 04:33 PM
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/22/Paul_supporters_likely_to_splinter/UPI-10521214167464/



This, in my personal opinion, is a big problem. Even on this forum, there is a palpable split among members. A seeming plurality of Ron Paul supporters say they'll vote Barr, then you got another group that says Barr sucks and they're voting for Chuck Baldwan, another smaller group supporting Obama or McCain and then yet another group saying they'll write in Ron Paul and others saying they'll stay home. It's a mess.
I'm sorry this isn't news.

I've been telling this almost immediately upon learning of RP dropping out. We will split and vote A or B or C or D candidate and in the end we will all get Obama.

There is still time. We need to unite behind whatever candidate has 50 or most states ballot. Either Constitution or Libertarian part will do for me, but we all need to decide which one.

rprprs
06-22-2008, 04:37 PM
Benton is wrong. Many Paul supporters will vote for Obama when November rolls around and it looks like McCain has a chance.

Correct. But the reverse is also true. Make no mistake about it, there will be Paul supporters voting for both major party candidates solely to stop the opposition. There will be those who dislike McCain, but will vote for him anyway just to halt Obama and what they perceive to be his leftist/socialist agenda. Other Paul supporters, particularly the many who were drawn by his anti-war stance, will vote for Obama because he has paid lip service to bringing the troops home from Iraq.

Couple this split with the additional divide between third-party candidates, and the Paul vote is totally diluted. This plays right into the hands of the Republicrats and TPTB. They couldn't have asked for a better scenario. No one is a threat to the status quo and no one shows enough power or support to ever be a threat in the foreseeable future. It's what they wanted, and that's why it's problematic.

I'm with the OP on this one.

OptionsTrader
06-22-2008, 04:37 PM
Benton is wrong. Many Paul supporters will vote for Obama when November rolls around and it looks like McCain has a chance.

If they vote for Obama they never understood Paul's message in the first place and were not "Ron Paul supporters" by my definition.

dude58677
06-22-2008, 04:39 PM
SO I GUESS THIS REALLY ISN'T A REVOLUTION AFTER ALL???:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

Leroy_Jenkems
06-22-2008, 04:43 PM
I know that, in a forum amongst many independent thinkers who are passionate about rallying people to stay active in politics, what I'm about to state is blasphemy...but here goes:

It doesn't matter.

The establishment would NEVER let us upstage McCain and Obama by overtaking every state delegate convention. It's going to be McWar versus Commie Obamie (yeah, I just made that one up, clever isn't it? :o) and Obama will win. The sheep have grown tired of the right wing of the hill, so they think that the left wing has greener pastures.


I did plenty of campaigning for Dr. Paul myself, but at this point the aspirations of making a dent outside the two-party system Presidential bid is futile. Better focus more on the Campaign for Liberty's bottom-up approach to getting local congressmen & women into office. As far as the White House goes though, all I can say is...batten down your hatches, economic misery is coming.

Leroy_Jenkems
06-22-2008, 04:44 PM
I'm sorry this isn't news.

I've been telling this almost immediately upon learning of RP dropping out. We will split and vote A or B or C or D candidate and in the end we will all get Obama.

There is still time. We need to unite behind whatever candidate has 50 or most states ballot. Either Constitution or Libertarian part will do for me, but we all need to decide which one.

What he said.

brooklyn
06-22-2008, 04:46 PM
I just don't see Mcwar even being able to compete against Hussein. I read somewhere Hussein is leading by about 15% currently.
Here in Nevada we don't have a write-in policy so there goes that option.
Not voting for me in not an option so I will have to decide on either Barr or Baldwin. Leaning heavily toward Barr at this point. It all sucks right now. Sigh.

Truth Warrior
06-22-2008, 04:51 PM
It Always Sucks! :p

newbitech
06-22-2008, 05:02 PM
If they vote for Obama they never understood Paul's message in the first place and were not "Ron Paul supporters" by my definition.


why not just take it one step further and replace "Obama" with "anyone else besides Ron Paul"?

The only thing that really bothers me about following through with this is that Dr. Paul won't be a valid write in candidate. So now I am basically forced to go against the message.

Vote for Barr means that I vote for a candidate that voted yes on the Patriot Act.

Vote for Baldwin means that I vote for someone who is not 100% behind individual liberty and states rights, also blurs the line on the separation of church and state.

Vote for Obama and I risk being labeled "not Ron Paul supporter" :rolleyes:

Vote for McCain and die.

So there is no obvious choice, hence the correct prediction that the movement is going to split on the presidential vote. No surprise really.

Some will still write in Dr. Paul because thats the only principled action. You can do that and still fight for greater election transparency, to expose voter fraud, and ballot access. But you will have to know that your vote/voice will be trashed/not heard and the good Doctor himself has said this is not productive.

So no matter what you/we do, its status quo until the next election in 2010.

LibertyEagle
06-22-2008, 05:05 PM
....said Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign spokesman. "Barr will pick up some, but the majority will go Republican or stay home."

What's he smoking? I haven't met a RP supporter YET, who plans to vote for McCain.

LibertyEagle
06-22-2008, 05:07 PM
Better focus more on the Campaign for Liberty's bottom-up approach to getting local congressmen & women into office. As far as the White House goes though, all I can say is...batten down your hatches, economic misery is coming.

+1

james1844
06-22-2008, 05:09 PM
No split here. I'm supporting BJ Lawson. A vote is just part of it. Where the real support comes in is $ and time spent on activist work.

By the way, we are having a money bomb on the 29th. BJ is the real deal so sign up and pledge. There will be no commissions taken and your email address will not be reused.

http://www.lawsonlibertyfund.com

MsDoodahs
06-22-2008, 05:27 PM
When will the American People unite and take to the streets? Not until the wealthy feel the pinch.

First, define wealthy. We don't all have the same definition of that term.

I consider it a liberal ploy to attempt to categorize and then divide individuals along income/economic lines. It is just as vile as attempts to divide individuals by race, by sex, by religion, by age....

STOP FALLING FOR THAT CRAP.

Divide and ..... WHAT?


Remember...it wasn't the poor who were jumping out of windows when the Great Depression hit. Maybe the crashing of the economy will be a uniter and remind us that we are supposed to be one people. TONES

So do you want only the poor united with you as one people? What about the wealthy folks who support the idea of freedom?

What about the middle income people?

See what I mean about dividing us? And it's insidious - people say things like "filthy rich" all the time. A rich individual may, or may not, be filthy.

But saying "filthy rich" lumps all those individuals into the same category, and WORSE - it indicates that you despise capitalism.

Do you?

Akus
06-22-2008, 05:28 PM
I just don't see Mcwar even being able to compete against Hussein. despite the odds, McCain has still a chance, if only a small one. He can do what Bush did in '04, scare people into voting for him. But to do that in 2008, when the war support and the President's support is all time low, he will have to work really really hard.

It will take more then saying Barak's middle name is Hussein, thus, Osama bin Laden is one of his myspace friends. It will take some serious documents, real or manufactured of terrorists' grandiose plan to rule the world, or, God help us, another 9/11.

McCain can still win, but only if he uses the few cards he has in his deck right.

And I hope he wins, too. If Obama wins, the GOP and the punditry will not be interested in anything other then bashing liberals and we don't need that. We need to concentrate on Republican Party's own short comings.

pcosmar
06-22-2008, 05:30 PM
A rich individual may, or may not, be filthy.

True.
I am one of the filthy poor.:D
One might even say "dirt poor".

V-rod
06-22-2008, 05:38 PM
In 2004 I held my nose and voted for Kerry. I'll probably be doing same this year for McCain. But only if he stops pandering to the enviromental leftists.

Alex Libman
06-22-2008, 05:39 PM
I am writing in Ron Paul period end of story.

You might just be throwing your vote away. Depending on what state you live in, it's possible that no one will even know how many people in your state wrote in Ron Paul, and the MSM certainly won't report those numbers. By not voting for a valid third party candidate, you're not using your opportunity to take percentages away from Obama & McCain, thus by writing in Ron Paul (or by not voting) you are, in effect, supporting the socialist status quo.

Bob Barr FTW!


---

Baldwin reminds me of Hitler before he came to power, and this forum needs to get rid of the theocratic nut-jobs by ostracizing them before they completely ruin Ron Paul's legacy! Sure, he's saying all the right things now, but imagine what his Prohibition, errr, I mean """Constitution""" party would do if they came to power on state level! They won't just stop at outlawing gambling and pornography as their platform is calling for, no sir! We're talking about Christian Taliban here! :eek:

LibertyEagle
06-22-2008, 05:53 PM
In 2004 I held my nose and voted for Kerry. I'll probably be doing same this year for McCain. But only if he stops pandering to the enviromental leftists.

McCain IS a leftist.

newbitech
06-22-2008, 06:16 PM
You might just be throwing your vote away. Depending on what state you live in, it's possible that no one will even know how many people in your state wrote in Ron Paul, and the MSM certainly won't report those numbers. By not voting for a valid third party candidate, you're not using your opportunity to take percentages away from Obama & McCain, thus by writing in Ron Paul (or by not voting) you are, in effect, supporting the socialist status quo.

Bob Barr FTW!

regarding taking away percentages: I think the only percentage that will get reported on is the margin of victory.

The MSM is already trying to paint this like the 3rd party / independent vote is going to cause McCain to lose. The way I see it, McCain's media induced perception has been that he will bring in independent votes and take away some of the moderate vote from Obama.

So lets say the election is close, the best possible scenario for the media spin machine.

Dems 49%
Reps 45%
Other 6%

This is the likely scenario that the media will want to conjure. Sure they will talk about other parties by saying that this is what cost McCain the win. I have no doubt that the party and media will put the guilt trip on Ron Paul.

I seriously doubt the above scenario will play out however. Even though its what the media would love.

I am thinking its going to be more like

Dems 58%
Reps 38%
Other 4%

They won't even mention 3rd party when talking about the margin. I expect record turnout. So they MSM might mention 3rd party in terms of total turn out.

I think best case scenario for America is for Obama to win in a landslide. Something along the lines of

Dems 66%
Reps 29%
Other 5%

I think what will hurt this country more than a splintered Ron Paul vote would be another dead heat between Reps and Dems. This country, full of sheep or not, really needs to coalesce around something like it did on Sept 12, 2001. Obama represents the best chance of that happening. America needs to speak with one voice, right or wrong.

We on the other hand, need to prepare for 2010, because the revolution needs more time to gel, obviously.

OptionsTrader
06-22-2008, 06:45 PM
In 2004 I held my nose and voted for Kerry. I'll probably be doing same this year for McCain.


A vote for McCain says you support him. Tell us why you support Mccain.

RCA
06-22-2008, 06:47 PM
"I would be very surprised to see many people going for (Democrat) Barack Obama," said Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign spokesman. "Barr will pick up some, but the majority will go Republican or stay home."

That's the problem, as usual, why say these things to the press?????? STAY HOME??????

My thoughts exactly. What a tool. This is the same guy that was more concerned with getting hitched with Ron's daughter than doing what he was paid to do: Getting Ron Paul Elected as President!!!

rockandrollsouls
06-22-2008, 06:49 PM
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/22/Paul_supporters_likely_to_splinter/UPI-10521214167464/



This, in my personal opinion, is a big problem. Even on this forum, there is a palpable split among members. A seeming plurality of Ron Paul supporters say they'll vote Barr, then you got another group that says Barr sucks and they're voting for Chuck Baldwan, another smaller group supporting Obama or McCain and then yet another group saying they'll write in Ron Paul and others saying they'll stay home. It's a mess.

I don't think it's that bad. We have a clear divide here....freedom loving people and traitors. People here will either be voting for paul, baldwin, or barr, and the other group sold out and will be voting for obama and mccain. Within the freedom group, there are some extremists who think barr is a conspiracy, but I don't really count that :p

FrankRep
06-22-2008, 06:52 PM
No matter who you vote for in this election, we must stick together no matter what. Our goals are Freedom, Liberty, and the Constitution. It does matter what political party we are apart of.

armstrong
06-22-2008, 06:53 PM
Barr / Baldwin / Nadar / Obama / Mcain with of these only Obama or Mcain with a little Luck on his side wow such times we live in

armstrong
06-22-2008, 07:01 PM
I myself will write in Ron Paul, but off the two who can win --Obama or Mcain --if you ask me of the two who do I choose as my commandor and chief well as Jesse Ventura said -----None of the above

Joseph Hart
06-22-2008, 07:17 PM
I will only vote for Baldwin if Ron Paul endorses him.

Ninja Homer
06-22-2008, 07:45 PM
Even if we Ron Paul supporters vote for a couple different people, I don't see that as "splintering" or splitting ourselves up. No matter what, I think we all see Ron Paul as our leader; even if Ron Paul doesn't see himself as our leader, even if we decide to support somebody else for president, and even if some people decide to vote for the lesser of 2 evils or just abstain from voting.

The Ron Paul Revolution is sooo much bigger than trying to get somebody we like as president. People in the media, or for that matter all people outside of this movement, do not understand that we are much bigger than a presidential campaign.

We will remain united by the message, we will remain united by the Campaign For Liberty, and we will remain united in growing and spreading the message. At this point, there is no stopping it! Ron Paul himself couldn't stop this movement.

We have been so successful in what we've done so far, that all political parties have taken notice, and they are all pandering for our support. Personally, I'd like to see them all pander to us as much as possible, because it helps to spread the message. I'll let them know who I support after I'm done voting.

Leroy_Jenkems
06-22-2008, 07:53 PM
A vote for McCain says you support him. Tell us why you support Mccain.

Exactly. The lesser of two evils (if that's the "rationale" in voting for McCain) IS STILL EVIL.

RideTheDirt
06-22-2008, 07:55 PM
We will all know who will vote for in November.Those who cannot come to a conclusion may stay home. I believe a lot is going to happen from now until November.

rockandrollsouls
06-22-2008, 08:02 PM
Exactly. The lesser of two evils (if that's the "rationale" in voting for McCain) IS STILL EVIL.

I could not agree more. Same goes for Obama. At least I don't have to lie through my teeth when I say Baldwin and Barr are reformed and support liberty now.

alaric
06-22-2008, 08:15 PM
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/22/Paul_supporters_likely_to_splinter/UPI-10521214167464/



This, in my personal opinion, is a big problem. Even on this forum, there is a palpable split among members. A seeming plurality of Ron Paul supporters say they'll vote Barr, then you got another group that says Barr sucks and they're voting for Chuck Baldwan, another smaller group supporting Obama or McCain and then yet another group saying they'll write in Ron Paul and others saying they'll stay home. It's a mess.

I'll keep repeating this: WE MUST UNITE ON ONE: BARR OR BALDWIN. If Ron will not pursue the write-in, sometime before nov, we must unite. Maybe have a 3rd party debate among all the 3rd and independent candidates. Whatever differences between Barr & Baldwin, aren't they much smaller than between either of them and mcobama?

alaric
06-22-2008, 08:22 PM
A vote for McCain says you support him. Tell us why you support Mccain.

There is no more room for holding your nose and voting lesser of 2 evils. We no longer have that 'luxury' if we ever did. I voted bush to avoid gore. NO MORE! We have not had a real choice since Goldwater. Yeah, Reagan was sure better than Carter, but ronnie was no Goldwater, no Taft. And none other since Barry was any good. When will we learn?

alaric
06-22-2008, 08:25 PM
No matter who you vote for in this election, we must stick together no matter what. Our goals are Freedom, Liberty, and the Constitution. It does matter what political party we are apart of.

Yes! +2008:D

hypnagogue
06-22-2008, 08:32 PM
WE MUST UNITE ON ONE: BARR OR BALDWIN. I fail to see the impetus. Neither one would be pushed into the white house by our collective votes. A sizable chunk of 3rd party votes, for any party, will still send the message that the American people are growing increasingly dissatisfied with the two entrenched parties.

I strongly believe one of the fastest ways to fracture this movement is to attempt to coerce us to vote as one. The presidential election is largely over for us. I see no compelling or competitive candidates left. It is enough for us to lodge as large a 3rd party vote as we can and to keep working to expand our base through education and activism.

alaric
06-22-2008, 08:37 PM
I fail to see the impetus. Neither one would be pushed into the white house by our collective votes. A sizable chunk of 3rd party votes, for any party, will still send the message that the American people are growing increasingly dissatisfied with the two entrenched parties.

I strongly believe one of the fastest ways to fracture this movement is to attempt to coerce us to vote as one. The presidential election is largely over for us. I see no compelling or competitive candidates left. It is enough for us to lodge as large a 3rd party vote as we can and to keep working to expand our base through education and activism.

no compelling, just common sense. And as Yogi says: it ain't over till it's over.

armstrong
06-22-2008, 08:40 PM
Baldwin/Barr/ Nadar/ or write in Ron Paul is the same,,,2 or 20% of people voteing for other than the 2 party system will not win.....so we need a ? For me it is Jesse Ventura and a Ron Paul ticket...would win in a landslide...----wishfull thinking

ForLiberty-RonPaul
06-22-2008, 08:46 PM
I'll keep repeating this: WE MUST UNITE ON ONE: BARR OR BALDWIN. If Ron will not pursue the write-in, sometime before nov, we must unite. Maybe have a 3rd party debate among all the 3rd and independent candidates. Whatever differences between Barr & Baldwin, aren't they much smaller than between either of them and mcobama?

let's call them Obamacain or Obamccain

sounds like foot powder.

Truth Warrior
06-22-2008, 08:52 PM
In ALL elections the ONLY votes that REALLY count are half the difference between the top two candidates + 1. The others merely cancel each other out or are irrelevant.

Majority rule is but a dream and an illusion. :rolleyes:

brooklyn
06-22-2008, 09:12 PM
let's call them Obamacain or Obamccain

sounds like foot powder.

Sounds more like ass cream to me. And our asses will need something by the time either one gets through with us!
Never McCain!

asgardshill
06-22-2008, 09:21 PM
let's call them Obamacain or Obamccain

sounds like foot powder.

Jock itch cream.

amy31416
06-22-2008, 09:27 PM
I don't give a rat's ass who people vote for this time around (though I can't help but cringe at any of us voting McCain or Obama), as long as we stay united via the CFL, the forums and other efforts. It doesn't matter.

Let 'em think we splintered. Keep 'em guessing.

Akus
06-22-2008, 09:28 PM
No matter who you vote for in this election, we must stick together no matter what. Our goals are Freedom, Liberty, and the Constitution. It does matter what political party we are apart of.

how is this possible?:confused:

tonesforjonesbones
06-22-2008, 09:28 PM
Obama is not the messiah. Doodah, you seem defensive...you must be upper middle class or wealthy and spend your weekends filling up your boat lol. I don't care. I was talking to a man the other day who told me he had a successful business which his son now runs. He told me that their company had decided to reduce the pay for their employees from 28.00 per hour to 14.00 per hour, and it was a good thing for their company. He told me the county approached his son about tearing down a low in come neighborhood by the river to build condos to clean up the neighborhood and the businesses who invested in the project would get kick backs. ... Jesus said "It is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven." When that man was telling me these things...I was very sad...and I though of that bible verse. TONES

ninepointfive
06-22-2008, 09:34 PM
Benton is wrong. Many Paul supporters will vote for Obama when November rolls around and it looks like McCain has a chance.

no f'in way will true supporters of Paul's Ideals vote for Obama

tonesforjonesbones
06-22-2008, 09:36 PM
I don't know any Ron Paul supporters who are voting for obama . I know one who is voting for McCain. Our meet up went to heck after the primary and the organizer made it a republican meet up. Only 5 or so out of 100 people stayed. He mucked up big time. TONES

ninepointfive
06-22-2008, 09:52 PM
I don't know any Ron Paul supporters who are voting for obama . I know one who is voting for McCain. Our meet up went to heck after the primary and the organizer made it a republican meet up. Only 5 or so out of 100 people stayed. He mucked up big time. TONES

Our meetup has restructured under the CFL

tonesforjonesbones
06-22-2008, 09:59 PM
I have a Bob Barr meet up and the LP locally. TONES

rockandrollsouls
06-22-2008, 10:11 PM
Baldwin/Barr/ Nadar/ or write in Ron Paul is the same,,,2 or 20% of people voteing for other than the 2 party system will not win.....so we need a ? For me it is Jesse Ventura and a Ron Paul ticket...would win in a landslide...----wishfull thinking

Nadar shares nothing close to our views...


And tones, I've taken the liberty of putting the usernames of individuals in my signature who have stated they would vote for Obama and have gone as far to defend him. I'm sure there are more...so if anyone else here has a closet-boner for Obama, speak up. Take a place on the wall of shame.

tonesforjonesbones
06-22-2008, 10:26 PM
Yes that is absolutely shameful and I dont know why they are on this forum other than to antagonize the LIBERTY minded folk. TONES

Roxi
06-22-2008, 10:31 PM
In 2004 I held my nose and voted for Kerry. I'll probably be doing same this year for McCain. But only if he stops pandering to the enviromental leftists.



NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooOOOOOOOO OOOOoooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOO:eek:

LibertyEagle
06-22-2008, 10:50 PM
Obama is not the messiah. Doodah, you seem defensive...you must be upper middle class or wealthy and spend your weekends filling up your boat lol. I don't care. I was talking to a man the other day who told me he had a successful business which his son now runs. He told me that their company had decided to reduce the pay for their employees from 28.00 per hour to 14.00 per hour, and it was a good thing for their company. He told me the county approached his son about tearing down a low in come neighborhood by the river to build condos to clean up the neighborhood and the businesses who invested in the project would get kick backs. ... Jesus said "It is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven." When that man was telling me these things...I was very sad...and I though of that bible verse. TONES

So, do you believe anyone who has worked hard and been successful is some kind of evil person? The opportunity to work hard and make something of yourself, is what made this country great. It's not the people who are successful that are the problem. It's the ones who make their money unfairly off of government largesse.

Now, how about what you said about the small business reducing the salary of their employees. That sure sounds like a drastic cut. Do you know whether they are having financial problems, because that is the case with a lot of smaller companies today. If that is in fact what is going on, I would well imagine the employees would rather take a pay cut, than to be laid off. What do you think? They always have an option anyway, which is to quit and seek employment elsewhere and if enough of them did that, the company would be forced to raise their pay, or go under. If the employees want, they can always start their OWN company and pay their employees $100/hour, if they can afford it and that's what they want to do.

It's simple supply and demand and it's why the free market works best. It's only when government sticks their big foot in the way, that everything gets screwed up.

Knightskye
06-22-2008, 11:01 PM
Sorry, Benton's job as a spokesman isn't to state his opinion. You wait until you resign and write a tell-all book.

We're not voting for McCain. Nor are we - even though I'd like it - uniting behind one of our choices.

Obama
McCain
Barr
Baldwin
Nader
Green Party nominee
Socialist party nominee - or did I already cover that?

I don't think writing Ron Paul in is a good idea.

amy31416
06-23-2008, 02:15 AM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooOOOOOOOO OOOOoooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOO:eek:

qft.

sophocles07
06-23-2008, 02:35 AM
There is no more room for holding your nose and voting lesser of 2 evils.

Yes, a line has to be drawn at some point; otherwise you merely continue on the same, unchanging path.

newyearsrevolution08
06-23-2008, 02:38 AM
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/22/Paul_supporters_likely_to_splinter/UPI-10521214167464/



This, in my personal opinion, is a big problem. Even on this forum, there is a palpable split among members. A seeming plurality of Ron Paul supporters say they'll vote Barr, then you got another group that says Barr sucks and they're voting for Chuck Baldwan, another smaller group supporting Obama or McCain and then yet another group saying they'll write in Ron Paul and others saying they'll stay home. It's a mess.

I find this funny, thats about all I have to say... wake the fuck up people COME ON DAMN IT!

newbitech
06-23-2008, 02:55 AM
Nadar shares nothing close to our views...


And tones, I've taken the liberty of putting the usernames of individuals in my signature who have stated they would vote for Obama and have gone as far to defend him. I'm sure there are more...so if anyone else here has a closet-boner for Obama, speak up. Take a place on the wall of shame.

I think this post is rather divisive and inflammatory. I am going to request that you go ahead and take it down. I can't speak for others, but I voted for Ron Paul gave some of my money over 1000 to the campaign, helped 8 people change from Dem to Rep to vote for Ron Paul, active in meetups, etc.. etc..

I think your problem is that there is not an easy answer to the question of who we should vote for. So rather than have a civil discussion about the merits of voting for each candidate, you act like a twerp with you sig line "wall of shame". Please take my name off your little list and stop spreading rumors and lies about me. I'd also appreciate it if you kept your obscene comments to yourself.

Please direct your attention to the forum guidelines, particularly:

#5 + Insulting or personally attacking other users is not allowed by any member. There is very little tolerance for violations, particular for new members. Reason: Insults lead to relational which often result in disruption, which dilute the resources of members and the intent of the forum. Putting my user name in your sig line is a personal attack.

#9 + If you are to be critical of another users ideas or message please do so in a respectful manner. It is possible to discuss your points as to why you feel the way you do, ideally you should include alternate suggestions or acknowledge you have none. You have done nothing but show me complete disrespect, especially with your most recent comments.

I don't mind if you disagree with the way I think things through or if you don't like the fact that I consider ALL options. What I do mind is when you attempt to discourage others by trying to put a stigma on me and associate me with ideas that I don't agree with. You are misrepresenting my character and beliefs by using me as a target for your bellicose rhetoric in order to show your hate for what Obama stands for. This is unacceptable and I will not tolerate that kind of attitude from someone who claims to represent individual liberty and freedom. You will cease and desist, sir.

revolutionary8
06-23-2008, 03:25 AM
This is only further explanation (to me) as to why neocon Barr would enter the race, other than for him and WAR to take over the Libertarian Party of course. (Little fish in big pond move to big fish in little pond);)
Create a divide. then conquer. Too bad for them, I am a fucking REPUBLICAN.
I am so god damned SICK of these fucking "VOTE BARR OR DIE" articles I could fucking puke on my own sandals.

SeanEdwards
06-23-2008, 07:04 AM
Benton is wrong. Many Paul supporters will vote for Obama when November rolls around and it looks like McCain has a chance.

That's where I'm coming from. I'm in the anyone or thing but McLame faction.

It is unfortunate in a way that Ron Paul is abdicating his ability to lead his supporters. This is probably an inevitable consequence of his individualistic philosophy. But in the game of politics, power comes from organization. I think Paul and his message would be a lot more influential if he at least let the grassroots know which way he was leaning. If we all scatter or stay home on election day, we will dissipate our political power.

Personally, I like the idea of Paul betraying the GOP and calling on his supporters to vote for anyone but McCain. Then when the GOP inevitably crashes and burns, Paul and the libertarian wing can claim credit for the destruction. That's power.

Somebody get ahold of Paul and convince him to make an anti-endoresment of McCain! That would so pwn.

SeanEdwards
06-23-2008, 07:12 AM
no f'in way will true supporters of Paul's Ideals vote for Obama

Sure we will. It's our only way of affecting blowback on the GOP.

Inevitably some doof is going to respond that the dims and repugs are two wings of the same party. Fine, fine. But the voters who support these fictions are not in on the joke, and they can be made to suffer for not supporting Paul when they had the chance. And I for one am going to celebrate when they get to eat a big plate of dark-skinned socialism.

armstrong
06-23-2008, 07:18 AM
its not splintering, just who do we throw are vote too,,,,,as for pres. we will support new members running for congress and senate and local but for pres...it really does not matter unless we have someone who can win that position...unless we can muster 50% or so it will not matter in the big picture,,,but will show growing strength...for the future --hope we have that long before the economy collapses and then we start over...or we just start over afterwards......

acptulsa
06-23-2008, 07:23 AM
I consider it a liberal ploy to attempt to categorize and then divide individuals along income/economic lines. It is just as vile as attempts to divide individuals by race, by sex, by religion, by age....

STOP FALLING FOR THAT CRAP.

Divide and ..... WHAT?

First you were arguing against voting in lockstep and here you are arguing for voting in lockstep. Well, at least this is the argument in favor of it. We have strength so long as we can work together and agree on a path to the common good. We can form a formidable voting bloc as long as we're willing to be a bloc. This is why herds are more powerful than the most powerful cat! Division of voters is their forte'. And we're actually too smart to fall for it. Aren't we?

tonesforjonesbones
06-23-2008, 07:35 AM
I am for keeping the Wall of Shame. For the Obama shills, YES we are going to discourage your politiking for Obama on the RON PAUL forum because OBAMA has NOTHING in common with Ron Paul other than he is a human being. Ron Paul said NO to Mccain and Obama, although you have your own mind. You can bet that very few on here consider it ok for Obama trolls to come here and try to convince Liberty minded folk to switch to a communist like that. As for Baldwin and Barr....those two are close to Ron Paul and fit in here, Ron Paul said nice things about them. I wish the best of luck to both of those patriots! New Bioach...i understand...I'd be embarrassed if my name were on that Wall of Shame too! TONES

tonesforjonesbones
06-23-2008, 07:39 AM
Liberty...I consider people to be more important than things. If someone has been at your company for 15 years and works hard and reaches a salary of 28.00 an hour....it's ok to reduce it to 14.00 an hour and say "oh well if they don' t like it they can go find another job." Corporations don't care about their employees or their families...they care about their bottom line. I find it disgusting that a county would offer kick backs to companies who invest in development. TONES

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 07:56 AM
Liberty...I consider people to be more important than things. If someone has been at your company for 15 years and works hard and reaches a salary of 28.00 an hour....it's ok to reduce it to 14.00 an hour and say "oh well if they don' t like it they can go find another job." Corporations don't care about their employees or their families...they care about their bottom line. I find it disgusting that a county would offer kick backs to companies who invest in development. TONES
They care about the bottom line because that's the LAW!!!

phree
06-23-2008, 08:10 AM
I'm staying home.

Thomas_Paine
06-23-2008, 08:50 AM
There is of course nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying it'd be better if we were all united behind a candidate rather than split up into about five or six different splinter groups.

As far as the Presidential vote goes it doesn't matter all that much, although I would like to see Barr get over 5%, what is important is that we remain united in our PRINCIPLES and elect more Constitutionally oriented candidates to office via CFL.

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 08:54 AM
As far as the Presidential vote goes it doesn't matter all that much, although I would like to see Barr get over 5%, what is important is that we remain united in our PRINCIPLES and elect more Constitutionally oriented candidates to office via CFL.

< ????? >

acptulsa
06-23-2008, 08:55 AM
what is important is that we remain united in our PRINCIPLES and elect more Constitutionally oriented candidates to office via CFL.

Yes, this is most important. I would really love to see us show our total strength in the presidential numbers, which is the race that most people pay the most attention to. I think it's important from an educational perspective. That said, stuffing Congress is exceptionally important--whether Dubya tried to make that august body irrelevant or not! And working up the ranks is vital, too. Short term, long term--I guess I just want it all!

samsmom
06-23-2008, 08:58 AM
This is crazy. I hate it when people say that because X number of people voted for a 3rd candidate it ruins the election. This is MSM crap. A vote is NEVER wasted. EVER!

By saying "I won't vote for such and such because he won't win", you're following many other people that said RP won't win, so I'm not "WASTING" my vote.

Vote for the candidate that you believe in. I won't vote for either of the major ones, never again. Remember, your vote is counted and taken notice of.

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 08:59 AM
Yes, this is most important. I would really love to see us show our total strength in the presidential numbers, which is the race that most people pay the most attention to. I think it's important from an educational perspective. That said, stuffing Congress is exceptionally important--whether Dubya tried to make that august body irrelevant or not! And working up the ranks is vital, too. Short term, long term--I guess I just want it all!
Congress ranks even LOWER in public opinion than GWB! :D ;)

armstrong
06-23-2008, 09:08 AM
yea I am going to write Ron Paul in ,,,its still my vote!!!! I dont feel it is a waste! Because I will not vote for Obama or McNcheese---a write in or vote for any other than Obama or McNcheese will only give the 3rd party more clout

LibertyEagle
06-23-2008, 09:15 AM
Liberty...I consider people to be more important than things.

I do too, but it's not my right to dictate to other people what they do with their OWN money.


If someone has been at your company for 15 years and works hard and reaches a salary of 28.00 an hour....it's ok to reduce it to 14.00 an hour and say "oh well if they don' t like it they can go find another job."

Yes. As I said before, if enough employees quit over this, the company would be forced to raise their salary, or they would just have to close their doors. But, keep in mind that we don't know the whole story here. For example, we don't know if the company was about to go broke and if they didn't reduce expenses, they would go under. Regardless, the owners of the company have the right to pay what they want. Surely, you aren't saying that you want the government to step in and mandate what the company has to pay, are you? :confused:

Keep in mind that the way capitalism works is that the employees remain free agents. They have the liberty to work at that company who just reduced their salary, they can find new jobs that pay better, or they can even start their own companies. It's only when government controls wages and places so many restrictions on starting new companies, that We the People's options, dry up. Government regulation is rarely the answer to most any problem you can think of. The answer is usually, more liberty.



Corporations don't care about their employees or their families...they care about their bottom line.

They have to worry about the bottom line, or they would not be in business and no one would be employed, at any wage.

It's true that companies used to act like they cared more about employees and their families. The ones that are competing with other companies for talented employees, still do. They HAVE to, or the employees will go elsewhere. Again, government regulation is what is causing most of the problems we're seeing today. For example, the practice of outsourcing, keeping people at part-time employment to get around paying benefits, relocating their offices to places like India and Red China, etc. All of it is a response to government intervention.


I find it disgusting that a county would offer kick backs to companies who invest in development.

So do I, but this is a different matter than what you raised about employee salary.

MsDoodahs
06-23-2008, 09:21 AM
First you were arguing against voting in lockstep and here you are arguing for voting in lockstep.

I was not arguing for voting as a group, Tulsa. (As an anarchist, it's rare to find me arguing for voting at all, lol...)

We're all INDIVIDUALS. I find efforts to categorize us along economic lines, race, sex, religion, age....or who we support for president...to be anti-individual.


We have strength so long as we can work together and agree on a path to the common good.

ACK. There is no such thing as the COMMON GOOD. How about....

"Inside the current system of government, individuals have greater strength when they come together to elect specific pro-liberty candidates at all levels."

:)

acptulsa
06-23-2008, 09:24 AM
I was not arguing for voting as a group, Tulsa.

No, you weren't. As I show in the next sentence, you were using an argument that makes my case. And your excellent quote does it even better:

"Inside the current system of government, individuals have greater strength when they come together to elect specific pro-liberty candidates at all levels."

That yours? Or to whom may we attribute it? I like it.

P.S. Sorry. Didn't mean to ruffle your anarchistic sensibilities with that C__ G__ cussing...

MsDoodahs
06-23-2008, 09:24 AM
I do too, but it's not my right to dictate to other people what they do with their OWN money.

Yes. As I said before, if enough employees quit over this, the company would be forced to raise their salary, or they would just have to close their doors. But, keep in mind that we don't know the whole story here. For example, we don't know if the company was about to go broke and if they didn't reduce expenses, they would go under. Regardless, the owners of the company have the right to pay what they want. Surely, you aren't saying that you want the government to step in and mandate what the company has to pay, are you? :confused:

Keep in mind that the way capitalism works is that the employees remain free agents. They have the liberty to work at that company who just reduced their salary, they can find new jobs that pay better, or they can even start their own companies. It's only when government controls wages and places so many restrictions on starting new companies, that We the People's options, dry up. Government regulation is rarely the answer to most any problem you can think of. The answer is usually, more liberty.

They have to worry about the bottom line, or they would not be in business and no one would be employed, at any wage.

It's true that companies used to act like they cared more about employees and their families. The ones that are competing with other companies for talented employees, still do. They HAVE to, or the employees will go elsewhere. Again, government regulation is what is causing most of the problems we're seeing today. For example, the practice of outsourcing, keeping people at part-time employment to get around paying benefits, relocating their offices to places like India and Red China, etc. All of it is a response to government intervention.


WOOO!!!

PREACH IT, GIRL!

:D

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 09:26 AM
I was not arguing for voting as a group, Tulsa. (As an anarchist, it's rare to find me arguing for voting at all, lol...)

We're all INDIVIDUALS. I find efforts to categorize us along economic lines, race, sex, religion, age....or who we support for president...to be anti-individual.



ACK. There is no such thing as the COMMON GOOD. How about....

"Inside the current system of government, individuals have greater strength when they come together to elect specific pro-liberty candidates at all levels."

:)
How about individuals have greater strength by withdrawing their consent and reclaiming their individual POWER.

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i304/Truth_Warrior/vote-for-nobody.jpg

;)

tonesforjonesbones
06-23-2008, 09:27 AM
No I am not advocating government regulation. I am advocating moral compass. Do you throw people under the bus so your ceo's and stockholders can keep their high standard of living? No moral compass in the USA these days. TONES

MsDoodahs
06-23-2008, 09:30 AM
No, you weren't. As I show in the next sentence, you were using an argument that makes my case.

<sigh> Maybe I have not had enough coffee this morning. lol...



And your excellent quote does it even better:

"Inside the current system of government, individuals have greater strength when they come together to elect specific pro-liberty candidates at all levels."

That yours? Or to whom may we attribute it? I like it.

Mine.

MsDoodahs
06-23-2008, 09:31 AM
No I am not advocating government regulation. I am advocating moral compass. Do you throw people under the bus so your ceo's and stockholders can keep their high standard of living? No moral compass in the USA these days. TONES

Sounds like you are advocating gov't regulation and that everyone be equal.

LibertyEagle
06-23-2008, 09:33 AM
How about individuals have greater strength by withdrawing their consent and reclaiming their individual POWER.

The powers-that-be don't care if we don't vote. In fact they would love it.

I plan to use my individual power to vote for the most liberty-minded candidates I can find.

acptulsa
06-23-2008, 09:35 AM
Mine.

Then you seem to have had the right amount of coffee! Any circumstance that produces a quote that quotable must be right.

tonesforjonesbones
06-23-2008, 09:36 AM
I like the way my grandfather ran his business as a small grocery store owner, when there was still such a thing. When he died as we were going through his papers...we found some old bills from local customers. During the depression, my grandfather extended credit to many people who would not have been able to eat otherwise. He never collected on those debts. There was one outstanding bill we found ..evidently the debtor had died and my grandfather wrote on the bottom of it.."Taken Care of by God". This is the way things used to be before the big money corporations took over. Mom and pop businesses ...you could develop personal relationships with. There were no government regulations. People cared about people. Communities took care of each other. Charity was extended because people cared, not because they got a tax write off. Maybe a depression is in order so that we can come together as caring human beings again. TONES

LibertyEagle
06-23-2008, 09:37 AM
No I am not advocating government regulation. I am advocating moral compass.

Well, one way for you to actually do something about that, is to start your own company and run it the way that YOU believe that other companies should. If you are successful, you will attract most of the talent in that area and other companies will be forced to add perks, or all they will have as employees are the bottom of the barrel.

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 09:37 AM
No I am not advocating government regulation. I am advocating moral compass. Do you throw people under the bus so your ceo's and stockholders can keep their high standard of living? No moral compass in the USA these days. TONES
Corporations are the CREATIONS of the governments. ;)

Abolish corporate personhood!

tonesforjonesbones
06-23-2008, 09:40 AM
I recollect Ron Paul saying something like this when he was practicing medicine. He said he had personal relationships with his patients. He also said if they coudln't pay he would treat them for free. Remember that? He spoke about charity hospitals. TONES

MsDoodahs
06-23-2008, 09:42 AM
How about individuals have greater strength by withdrawing their consent and reclaiming their individual POWER.



"Don't vote, it only encourages them!"

:D

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 09:44 AM
The powers-that-be don't care if we don't vote. In fact they would love it.

I plan to use my individual power to vote for the most liberty-minded candidates I can find.
SURE THEY CARE!

They freak out when the total voters fall below 50% of those eligible. :D

"OMG, they may just be waking up to our "DIVIDE and CONQUER, POWER and CONTROL" DEMOBCRAZY scam!" :eek:

tonesforjonesbones
06-23-2008, 09:44 AM
As I said...there is no moral compass in the USA these days. TONES

MsDoodahs
06-23-2008, 09:44 AM
Corporations are the CREATIONS of the governments. ;)

Abolish corporate personhood!

PREACH IT!!!

:D:D:D

tonesforjonesbones
06-23-2008, 09:45 AM
Corporations are under the illusion they are "people" per the 14th amendment. TONES

Badger Paul
06-23-2008, 09:47 AM
It would be nice if we could unite around one candidate. But considering that we're a pretty diverse group ourselves, it's not suprising.

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 09:51 AM
PREACH IT!!!

:D:D:D
Can I get an AMEN, sister? ;)

:D

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 09:53 AM
It would be nice if we could unite around one candidate. But considering that we're a pretty diverse group ourselves, it's not suprising.

I support and strongly recommend "NOBODY". ;)

tonesforjonesbones
06-23-2008, 09:54 AM
I like the way my grandfather ran his business as a small grocery store owner, when there was still such a thing. When he died as we were going through his papers...we found some old bills from local customers. During the depression, my grandfather extended credit to many people who would not have been able to eat otherwise. He never collected on those debts. There was one outstanding bill we found ..evidently the debtor had died and my grandfather wrote on the bottom of it.."Taken Care of by God". This is the way things used to be before the big money corporations took over. Mom and pop businesses ...you could develop personal relationships with. There were no government regulations. People cared about people. Communities took care of each other. Charity was extended because people cared, not because they got a tax write off. Maybe a depression is in order so that we can come together as caring human beings again. TONES

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 09:57 AM
Corporations are under the illusion they are "people" per the 14th amendment. TONES
They fought and worked hard, for years, for personhood.

The government finally bought it, or vice versa! :rolleyes: :D

newbitech
06-23-2008, 10:33 AM
I am for keeping the Wall of Shame. For the Obama shills, YES we are going to discourage your politiking for Obama on the RON PAUL forum because OBAMA has NOTHING in common with Ron Paul other than he is a human being. Ron Paul said NO to Mccain and Obama, although you have your own mind. You can bet that very few on here consider it ok for Obama trolls to come here and try to convince Liberty minded folk to switch to a communist like that. As for Baldwin and Barr....those two are close to Ron Paul and fit in here, Ron Paul said nice things about them. I wish the best of luck to both of those patriots! New Bioach...i understand...I'd be embarrassed if my name were on that Wall of Shame too! TONES

How about Obama will also be running against McCain? You let your emotions cloud your judgment of others. This is a sign of weakness. So is name calling. This could be a big reason that this movement failed to get more recognition from regular folks who don't know what shills and trolls are. It was our job to educate, and based on your inflammatory comments directed at me and others who are following the same logic, you have failed to provide any incentive to want to know more about where you stand.

I am sure most people who worked to get Dr. Paul elected with donations, door knocking, phone calls, blood sweat, and tears understand that this is a movement designed around people who DON'T fit in (with the status quo). "Close" to Ron Paul was never an option for us. It was all or nothing.

And if you want to talk about being embarrassed, you ought to broaden your scope a little to the bigger picture. I am more embarrassed that my countrymen are splintered because of an inept congress, lame duck president, and complicit media.

I encourage you to read the rules of the forum as well. Single people out for attack is a violation of the rules. And doing so with disrespect is also a violation of the rules. I hope that you will change your mind about me, but somehow I think you have locked on to your target and will refuse to have an open mind about ALL possibilities. Therefor I appeal to the basic rules of communication. If you don't have anything constructive to offer, then turn your attention elsewhere.

P.S. Ron Paul also said NO to the two folks you are suggesting as well. And in a way, he said NO to himself by discouraging people from writing his name in. Sure Dr. Paul has acknowledged that he would like to see votes go towards either Barr or Baldwin, but he didn't endorse either. Dr. Paul said that his goal was to take back the repub party. He hasn't changed that goal. Also, Dr. Paul has acknowledged that the youth vote is going to Obama. There is a reason for that.

The likeliness of me voting for Obama is the same percentage as me voting for any of the other candidates besides McCain. For the record here is where I stand as of the day that Dr. Paul said writing in his name was not productive.

Barr - 19%
Baldwin - 21%
Obama - 21%
Write in Dr. Paul - 20%
Stay Home - 19%
McCain - 0%

The bias towards Baldwin reflects that he campaigned and endorsed Dr. Paul and is in Florida. The bias towards Obama is that the larger the margin of victory, the more painful the defeat for regular folk McCain voters. ESPECIALLY since, as I have mentioned, I live in a battle ground state that has traditionally leaned Republican. I do not want to go an do something that I feel would give McCain a chance to keep the margin slim here. So I MAY go ahead and vote Obama to give the repubs a better chance of losing and losing big.

Oh, and not that I should have to defend myself, but I will be on the ballot in August to become a committeeman for my precinct in the Repub party. We will be voting for Ron Paul supporters for state committeeman and committeewoman. These are the folks responsible for picking our delegates to Nation Repub convention.

G-Wohl
06-23-2008, 10:49 AM
I am writing in Ron Paul period end of story.

Why?

Your state won't even count it. When they count ballots with written-in names, they count them as defective and throw them away.

Might as well vote for another candidate who sees eye-to-eye with Ron Paul.

thomaseusin
06-23-2008, 10:57 AM
Quotes from random strangers like, "I've heard of RP, but won't vote for him because he can't win" don't realise what they're VOTING for. It's not the American Idol, it's not the Kentucky derby. It's your vote to who you think should run the country!

After the last 6 months of eye-opening lessons from the good doctor, no longer will I ever vote for a party - I'm voting for the candidate!

Gonna write in Ron Paul!

armstrong
06-23-2008, 11:37 AM
yo bro

LibertyEagle
06-23-2008, 01:50 PM
SURE THEY CARE!

They freak out when the total voters fall below 50% of those eligible. :D

"OMG, they may just be waking up to our "DIVIDE and CONQUER, POWER and CONTROL" DEMOBCRAZY scam!" :eek:

Instead of my inaction possibly causing them to guess that I might be waking up, I'd much rather remove all doubt from their minds by communicatung it actively and directly by voting and working hard to get people elected who will topple their apple cart.

But, that's just me. ;)

BTW, the numbers of those participating in voting has gone down drastically over the years, as people stop voting altogether, because of apathy and other reasons. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't see it worrying the powers-that-be a damn bit, nor slowing down their agenda.

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 02:19 PM
Instead of my inaction possibly causing them to guess that I might be waking up, I'd much rather remove all doubt from their minds by communicatung it actively and directly by voting and working hard to get people elected who will topple their apple cart.

But, that's just me. ;)

BTW, the numbers of those participating in voting has gone down drastically over the years, as people stop voting altogether, because of apathy and other reasons. Perhaps I missed it, but I don't see it worrying the powers-that-be a damn bit, nor slowing down their agenda.
Voting just confirms that they still have you. :) Who are the apple cart topplers? The NAU and NWO will come THROUGH governments, left, middle and right.

TPTB has done it's homework very well, over very long periods of time. They are not stupid nor careless. ;)

The agenda has achieved critical mass long before either you or I were born. We are now well past the point of no return.<IMHO> It pretty much now just runs on momentum, autopilot, and continued political involvement.

After all, WE voted ( consented ) FOR it didn't WE? :rolleyes:

ALL of the people get the governments that only MOST of the people deserve.

Choose the "red pill"! :)

JosephTheLibertarian
06-23-2008, 02:24 PM
Show me some evidence of that, sir.

Maltheus
06-23-2008, 02:28 PM
What's he smoking? I haven't met a RP supporter YET, who plans to vote for McCain.

Jesse Benton has been a consistent problem throughout the campaign. If he wasn't dating Ron Paul's granddaughter, then I'd like to assume he'd be out on his ass already. The guy just needs to shut up and stay the hell away from the Campaign for Liberty. He's the one who convinced the media that Ron Paul dropped out in March and we've been dealing with that fallout ever since. Pretty much every time he opens his mouth, you know something will need cleaning up.

rodo1776
06-23-2008, 02:33 PM
IMO who cares about president at this point?

The revolution needs now LOCAL candidates (like not US congress or senate but city council, mayor, dogcatcher, sheriff, state house of reps, state senate, county boards etc.)

Get behind your local candidates but be sure to "target" races that can be won.

We need to sneak up behind the neo cons.

Meanwhile vote however you want for Prez. But make sure you support LOCAL candidates.

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 02:34 PM
Show me some evidence of that, sir.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennisA.htm :)

JosephTheLibertarian
06-23-2008, 02:37 PM
http://www.newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennisA.htm :)

oh yea? I'll read that and get back to you. wink

MsDoodahs
06-23-2008, 02:37 PM
Voting just confirms that they still have you. :) Who are the apple cart topplers? The NAU and NWO will come THROUGH governments, left, middle and right.

Exactly correct.



The agenda has achieved critical mass long before either you or I were born. We are now well past the point of no return.<IMHO>

As sad as I am to have to say that you're right about this, TW...you're right about this.



ALL of the people get the governments that only MOST of the people deserve.

Depressing...and true.

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 02:41 PM
oh yea? I'll read that and get back to you. wink

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i304/Truth_Warrior/lewrock0305a.gif
;)

MMolloy
06-23-2008, 02:46 PM
I like the way my grandfather ran his business as a small grocery store owner, when there was still such a thing. When he died as we were going through his papers...we found some old bills from local customers. During the depression, my grandfather extended credit to many people who would not have been able to eat otherwise. He never collected on those debts. There was one outstanding bill we found ..evidently the debtor had died and my grandfather wrote on the bottom of it.."Taken Care of by God". This is the way things used to be before the big money corporations took over. Mom and pop businesses ...you could develop personal relationships with. There were no government regulations. People cared about people. Communities took care of each other. Charity was extended because people cared, not because they got a tax write off. Maybe a depression is in order so that we can come together as caring human beings again. TONES

Now you made me regret my last post... I feel at a loss but I agree totaly with you... except maybe the last line.

As the Government gets bigger it vies for your loyalty with many other institutions... primary among these are your family and your God/religion

As the State increases it will tend to break you from these other loyalties... leaving you sitting alone in a bar staring at big brother and telling him you love him... just put a bullet through my head :D

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 02:50 PM
Exactly correct.



As sad as I am to have to say that you're right about this, TW...you're right about this.



Depressing...and true.
Your help, if possible, in persuading LibertyEagle would be greatly appreciated. ;)

Thanks! :)

JosephTheLibertarian
06-23-2008, 02:56 PM
LibertyEagle is a powerfreak.

MsDoodahs
06-23-2008, 03:04 PM
Your help, if possible, in persuading LibertyEagle would be greatly appreciated. ;)

Thanks! :)

Persuading LE to join the anarchist side?

You're shitting me, right?

lol...

LibertyEagle
06-23-2008, 03:07 PM
Your help, if possible, in persuading LibertyEagle would be greatly appreciated. ;)

Thanks! :)

I'll tell ya what. First convince Ron to be an anarchist and then I'll consider it. :p

LibertyEagle
06-23-2008, 03:08 PM
LibertyEagle is a powerfreak.

Yeah right. I believe in limited government and that makes me a "powerfreak". :rolleyes:

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 03:09 PM
Persuading LE to join the anarchist side?

You're shitting me, right?

lol...
Actually, I was just thinking of his leaving or even questioning the statist's side. ;)

:D

Truth Warrior
06-23-2008, 03:14 PM
I'll tell ya what. First convince Ron to be an anarchist and then I'll consider it. :p
"Visit LewRockwell.com, an outstanding and crucially important Web site I visit every day." -- Ron Paul.
"THE REVOLUTION, A MANIFESTO" ( page # 158 ), http://www.lewrockwell.com/ ;)

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i304/Truth_Warrior/lewrock0305a.gif

:)

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_RedWhiteBlue/misc/progress.gif

JosephTheLibertarian
06-23-2008, 03:15 PM
I'm on both sides. I'm good at reaching across the aisle, like McCain lol.

Mattsa
06-23-2008, 04:10 PM
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/06/22/Paul_supporters_likely_to_splinter/UPI-10521214167464/



This, in my personal opinion, is a big problem. Even on this forum, there is a palpable split among members. A seeming plurality of Ron Paul supporters say they'll vote Barr, then you got another group that says Barr sucks and they're voting for Chuck Baldwan, another smaller group supporting Obama or McCain and then yet another group saying they'll write in Ron Paul and others saying they'll stay home. It's a mess.

That's the whole idea ain't it????

Divide and conquer

They (The elite) know how to deal with people like Ron paul. They put their own guy in the frame to split support.

But I don't think it's gonna work this time

Ron Paul is JUST TOO BLOODY GOOD for them

AMEN!

constituent
06-23-2008, 04:52 PM
What's he smoking? I haven't met a RP supporter YET, who plans to vote for McCain.

When was he not clueless?

Leroy_Jenkems
06-23-2008, 06:13 PM
There is no more room for holding your nose and voting lesser of 2 evils. We no longer have that 'luxury' if we ever did. I voted bush to avoid gore. NO MORE! We have not had a real choice since Goldwater. Yeah, Reagan was sure better than Carter, but ronnie was no Goldwater, no Taft. And none other since Barry was any good. When will we learn?

Exactly. And if there really is a "lesser" of two evils present between Obama and McCain, it's a trickle of piss in the ocean's difference. They're both globalist commie weasels.

Leroy_Jenkems
06-23-2008, 06:14 PM
IMO who cares about president at this point?

The revolution needs now LOCAL candidates (like not US congress or senate but city council, mayor, dogcatcher, sheriff, state house of reps, state senate, county boards etc.)

Get behind your local candidates but be sure to "target" races that can be won.

We need to sneak up behind the neo cons.

Meanwhile vote however you want for Prez. But make sure you support LOCAL candidates.

YES.

SeanEdwards
06-23-2008, 06:30 PM
We need to sneak up behind the neo cons.


Surprise buttseks?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHB4h0dqeD8&feature=related

MMolloy
06-23-2008, 07:02 PM
Surprise buttseks?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHB4h0dqeD8&feature=related

Yah... Just like that! :D

phree
06-23-2008, 07:24 PM
The powers-that-be don't care if we don't vote. In fact they would love it.

I plan to use my individual power to vote for the most liberty-minded candidates I can find.

The problem I have with your comment is that it still fits within the "lesser of evils" mold. I'm done with that crap, let my non vote be counted.

zeke105
06-23-2008, 07:58 PM
I wish there was "none of the above" option to show our distaste for the current political arena.

V-rod
06-23-2008, 08:28 PM
I can't be the only conservative on this forum who would consider the possibility of voting for McLame. Just compare the voting records between Obamination and McLame.

Over fifty percent of McLame's votes were un-conservative, but nearly 100% of Obama's was. I know this whole WAR issue is big for most of you, but I am more worried about a democrat-controlled Congress with a socialist like Obama who will pass more big government legislation, and if you think a un-conservative Republican controlled Congress with a weak President is bad, you can imagine what the democratic one will do. Some of you seem to forget how the Republican Congress and Clinton butted heads and kept each other from ruining the country with their gridlock.

Face it, lesser of two evils isn't ALWAYS wrong if it means survival. I haven't decided if I will vote for McCain, but I am still keeping my options open.

constituent
06-23-2008, 09:09 PM
The problem I have with your comment is that it still fits within the "lesser of evils" mold. I'm done with that crap, let my non vote be counted.
sheriff... d.a.


those are the only votes that matter anyway.

don't be distracted by the circus.

MMolloy
06-24-2008, 05:10 AM
I can't be the only conservative on this forum who would consider the possibility of voting for McLame. Just compare the voting records between Obamination and McLame.

Over fifty percent of McLame's votes were un-conservative, but nearly 100% of Obama's was. I know this whole WAR issue is big for most of you, but I am more worried about a democrat-controlled Congress with a socialist like Obama who will pass more big government legislation, and if you think a un-conservative Republican controlled Congress with a weak President is bad, you can imagine what the democratic one will do. Some of you seem to forget how the Republican Congress and Clinton butted heads and kept each other from ruining the country with their gridlock.

Face it, lesser of two evils isn't ALWAYS wrong if it means survival. I haven't decided if I will vote for McCain, but I am still keeping my options open.

Work on getting Ron some help in congress... Don't vote for McCain, he'll pull the rug out from underneath any Republican lead opposition to unconstitutional legislation.

Never ending wars is one of THE main problems... we will never be free with their continuation!

War on Terror = Never Ending War = 1984

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 05:22 AM
The problem I have with your comment is that it still fits within the "lesser of evils" mold. I'm done with that crap, let my non vote be counted.
;)

V-rod
06-24-2008, 06:11 AM
Work on getting Ron some help in congress... Don't vote for McCain, he'll pull the rug out from underneath any Republican lead opposition to unconstitutional legislation.

Never ending wars is one of THE main problems... we will never be free with their continuation!

War on Terror = Never Ending War = 1984

Obama made public statements that he will probably expand the war along the Pakistan borders, or at least throw more of our tax money to them, while McCain talks about airstrikes on Iran. How in god's name is Obama drastically different than McCain when it comes to foreign policy?

I'm not supporting McCain with time or donations, I just said there is a slight possibility I might vote for him.
I support like minded "Ron Paul Republicans" already. How will allowing a hard left socialist like Obama going to help Ron Paul in Congress? With a democrat majority in congress, Obama will sign more big spending/social programs into effect and make George W. Bush look fiscal conservative as Barry Goldwater compared to Obama.

COMPARE THEIR DAMN VOTING RECORDS! One is clearly worse than the other.

ronpaulhawaii
06-24-2008, 06:27 AM
As another poster stated in another thread



McCain vs. Obama = lesser of two evils
Baldwin vs Barr = lesser of two goods


Has anyone considered that certain PTB would very much like to see us splinter, and that articles such as in the OP are perfect vehicles to get that ball rolling?

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 06:29 AM
For me personally, I can't think of one thing positive that McCain would do. Once upon a time, he had a much more conservative voting record, but for quite some time, he has not voted much differently than a liberal. In my opinion, a vote for McCain is like saying we want 4 more years of Bush.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 06:35 AM
Who can we ALL agree on? Nobody!

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i304/Truth_Warrior/V-vote-for-nobody.gif

:D

tpreitzel
06-24-2008, 06:36 AM
As another poster stated in another thread



Has anyone considered that certain PTB would very much like to see us splinter, and that articles such as in the OP are perfect vehicles to get that ball rolling?


I don't doubt it. However, I don't see any serious split occurring as too much is at stake and most of us realize it. On specific issues, most of us can simply agree to disagree and support adhering STRICTLY to the US Constitution as originally written and explained in the Federalist papers. Trouble makers will ALWAYS be ready to manipulate some willing dupe for their own agenda. Although we have to be careful so we don't fall prey, most of us realize our own liberty is at risk.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 06:56 AM
Index to the Antifederalist Papers
http://www.wepin.com/articles/afp/index.htm

acptulsa
06-24-2008, 07:02 AM
As another poster stated in another thread

McCain vs. Obama = lesser of two evils
Baldwin vs Barr = lesser of two goods

I think you're talking about me, but I didn't put it that clearly or concisely. Good job!

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 07:15 AM
Voting just confirms that they still have you. :) Who are the apple cart topplers? The NAU and NWO will come THROUGH governments, left, middle and right.

TPTB has done it's homework very well, over very long periods of time. They are not stupid nor careless. ;)

The agenda has achieved critical mass long before either you or I were born. We are now well past the point of no return.<IMHO> It pretty much now just runs on momentum, autopilot, and continued political involvement.

After all, WE voted ( consented ) FOR it didn't WE? :rolleyes:

ALL of the people get the governments that only MOST of the people deserve.

Choose the "red pill"! :)

I will not vote for anyone who supports the NAU, world government, the UN, or any of its associated parts. Nor will I vote for someone who wants to expand the size of the federal government, or snubs his/her nose at the Constitution.

I just don't see how sitting home and not getting involved, is going to do anything to turn this thing around. If you don't see someone running who you can support, then run, yourself.

Yes, it may be too late in the game to stop this, but I darned sure am going to try. "Not trying" is conceding and that just isn't something I plan on doing.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 07:27 AM
I will not vote for anyone who supports the NAU, world government, the UN, or any of its associated parts. Nor will I vote for someone who wants to expand the size of the federal government, or snubs his/her nose at the Constitution.

I just don't see how sitting home and not getting involved, is going to do anything to turn this thing around. If you don't see someone running who you can support, then run, yourself.

Yes, it may be too late in the game to stop this, but I darned sure am going to try.

So, I honestly don't see how sitting on the sidelines does anything to stop the bad guys.

I know you don't, that's a HUGE part of the problem.<IMHO> :(

"Statement of Purpose: Voluntaryists are advocates of non-political, non-violent strategies to achieve a free society. We reject electoral politics, in theory and in practice, as incompatible with libertarian principles. Governments must cloak their actions in an aura of moral legitimacy in order to sustain their power, and political methods invariably strengthen that legitimacy. Voluntaryists seek instead to delegitimize the State through education, and we advocate withdrawal of the cooperation and tacit consent on which State power ultimately depends."
http://www.voluntaryist.com/

"Freedom is the right to BE wrong and NOT the right to DO wrong."

"If voting ever really changed anything, it would be illegal."

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 07:36 AM
Well, I agree with you that it's going to take a lot more than just sitting back and choosing from the candidates who are doled out to us. A whole lot of us are going to have to get involved educating people and taking back our government. That means we're going to have to do our own homework and beat them at their own game. Then, we can change the game back to what was originally intended by our Founders. They told us that we would not be able to keep our Republic if we remained ignorant and non-involved. They were right.

I agree that the system has been corrupted beyond belief and doesn't even resemble what our Founders left us.

I will read some of the articles on the website you provided, but at this point, I choose to be active in reclaiming my country, rather than passive.

acptulsa
06-24-2008, 07:44 AM
More calls not to vote? We're asking the herd of cats to volunteer to be declawed? Seems like the gist of it...

The only thing worse than a republic is any alternative.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 07:46 AM
Well, I agree with you that it's going to take a lot more than just sitting back and choosing from the candidates who are doled out to us. A whole lot of us are going to have to get involved educating people and taking back our government. That means we're going to have to do our own homework and beat them at their own game. Then, we can change the game back to what was originally intended by our Founders. They told us that we would not be able to keep our Republic if we remained ignorant and non-involved. They were right.

I agree that it is corrupt as all hell and doesn't even resemble what our Founders left us.

I will read some of the articles on the website you provided, but at this point, I choose to be active in reclaiming my country, rather than passive.

Thanks! I really appreciate that. :)

As will I, BTW! ;)

“A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against it's government.”

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 07:50 AM
“A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against it's government.”

Here's a man who understands why the 2nd Amendment was written. :)

rprprs
06-24-2008, 07:58 AM
Has anyone considered that certain PTB would very much like to see us splinter, and that articles such as in the OP are perfect vehicles to get that ball rolling?

Yes and no. As I posted earlier in this thread, it's exactly what TPTB wanted. But I think it's somewhat unfair to suggest that the OP is somehow responsible for inciting or contributing to that splinter. I believe the OP was merely lamenting something that had already occurred. I, too, am dismayed that we have no ONE candidate around whom we can coalesce. With all due respect to MsDoodahs' suggestion that we wouldn't want to be guilty of voting in some"lock-step", collectivist block, I'd be willing to bet she would be singing a somewhat different tune if the name of Ron Paul were on the ballot come November.

And yes, I fully realize there are other avenues for the revolution to pursue and the presidential election isn't the be-all and end-all. But wouldn't most of us like to have an option in that arena on whom we could agree without reservation or equivocation? I'm not going to fall into the trap here of pimping one candidate over the other, that's not what this thread was about. I will only, once again, reiterate that not having a clear alternative to Dr. Paul is, indeed, problematic for this movement and the revolution. People should, of course, vote their conscience (or not vote, if they believe that somehow sends a message.:confused:) But, IMHO, it would be far more advantageous to this movement if we weren't so divided on this issue. Lacking a candidate around whom we can all rally, as we would have with Dr. Paul, diminishes our voice. I think that's all the OP was trying to say, and the disparate comments in this thread only serve to confirm his point. It's a mess.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 08:05 AM
Here's a man who understands why the 2nd Amendment was written. :)

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

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- Thomas Jefferson

ronpaulhawaii
06-24-2008, 08:07 AM
Yes and no. As I posted earlier in this thread, it's exactly what TPTB wanted. But I think it's somewhat unfair to suggest that the OP is somehow responsible for inciting or contributing to that splinter. I believe the OP was merely lamenting something that had already occurred. I, too, am dismayed that we have no ONE candidate around whom we can coalesce. With all due respect to MsDoodahs' suggestion that we wouldn't want to be guilty of voting in some"lock-step", collectivist block, I'd be willing to bet she would be singing a somewhat different tune if the name of Ron Paul were on the ballot come November.

And yes, I fully realize there are other avenues for the revolution to pursue and the presidential election isn't the be-all and end-all. But wouldn't most of us like to have an option in that arena on whom we could agree without reservation or equivocation? I'm not going to fall into the trap here of pimping one candidate over the other, that's not what this thread was about. I will only, once again, reiterate that not having a clear alternative to Dr. Paul is, indeed, problematic for this movement and the revolution. People should, of course, vote their conscience (or not vote, if they believe that somehow sends a message.:confused:) But, IMHO, it would be far more advantageous to this movement if we weren't so divided on this issue. Lacking a candidate around whom we can all rally, as we would have with Dr. Paul, diminishes our voice. I think that's all the OP was trying to say, and the disparate comments in this thread only serve to confirm his point. It's a mess.

Yes, I tried to word it to to avoid this connection between the article and the topic starter, and obviously failed...

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 08:08 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoting_out_of_context

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- Thomas Jefferson

Huh? I was paying you a compliment. Also, I was not taking anything out of context, I included the entirety of what you said on that issue.

rprprs
06-24-2008, 08:25 AM
Yes, I tried to word it to to avoid this connection between the article and the topic starter, and obviously failed...

Ahh, yes, I see the distinction. The failure was mine. In any event, I never intended to disparage you, as I know you have worked hard to further the cause, and I applaud your efforts.
After all, you and I are largely responsible for keeping that "$20.08" thread alive.:)

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 08:33 AM
More calls not to vote? We're asking the herd of cats to volunteer to be declawed? Seems like the gist of it...

The only thing worse than a republic is any alternative.
A happy "blue pill". :D

acptulsa
06-24-2008, 08:41 AM
A happy "blue pill". :D

I'm not happy I'm blue and you're the pill!

Damned Oklahomans...

Paul Revered
06-24-2008, 08:44 AM
I'm sorry this isn't news.

I've been telling this almost immediately upon learning of RP dropping out. We will split and vote A or B or C or D candidate and in the end we will all get Obama.

There is still time. We need to unite behind whatever candidate has 50 or most states ballot. Either Constitution or Libertarian part will do for me, but we all need to decide which one.I'm with you. If we get Obama, we get Obama; but we can't support a corrupt GOP.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 08:45 AM
Huh? I was paying you a compliment. Also, I was not taking anything out of context, I included the entirety of what you said on that issue.
Use of the "Quote" button INCLUDES context. ;)

Thanks for the compliment. :)

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 08:48 AM
Use of the "Quote" button INCLUDES context. ;)

Thanks for the compliment. :)

This is the "CONTEXT" I left off.


Thanks! I really appreciate that.

As will I, BTW!


I fail to see how that adds anything to what I quoted and replied to. But, obviously you do. :rolleyes:

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 08:50 AM
I'm not happy I'm blue and you're the pill!

Damned Oklahomans...
I'm NOT an Oklahoman, I just live here! :D

Look at the bright side, I won't cancel out YOUR vote! ;)

acptulsa
06-24-2008, 08:54 AM
I'm NOT an Oklahoman, I just live here!

I call bs, Okie! You just might as well load the mattresses on your Hudson Super Six and head down the mother road, 'cause you're now an Okie through and through. Hope your mama makes it to California!

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 08:57 AM
This is the "CONTEXT" I left off.



I fail to see how that adds anything to what I quoted and replied to. But, obviously you do. :rolleyes:
It's just ANOTHER priinciple thingy for me, and a pet peeve. :D

Then why leave it out. Your way is more work and harder. ;)

revolutionman
06-24-2008, 08:58 AM
If Ron Paul isn't going to endorse anyone, then people will have to do what they should be doing anyway! Making up their own minds based on their own opinions and the positions of the candidates. Just because you have to vote for some one else on election day doesn't mean your gonna walk away from the Campaign For Liberty. I was indoctrinated as a youth that voting is a civic duty even if you vote for some obscure third party out of protest. Go out there speak your mind, even if its just to tell the bi partisan system to go fk itself. Sure i wish i was voting for Paul this november, but its off the table so I'd vote for Barr, or pretty much anyone else but Obama or McCain. Dont just sit home and appear statistically with the ignorant and apapthetic masses that dont bother to vote.

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 08:59 AM
Why are we acting like the presidential election is the only thing? If we're going to take back our country, we have to take it back from the ground floor on up.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 09:00 AM
I call bs, Okie! You just might as well load the mattresses on your Hudson Super Six and head down the mother road, 'cause you're now an Okie through and through. Hope your mama makes it to California!
I just became multi-lingual, so I kin tawk t' ma famly. :D

JosephTheLibertarian
06-24-2008, 09:03 AM
Why are we acting like the presidential election is the only thing? If we're going to take back our country, we have to take it back from the ground floor on up.

I guess you care more about country than state. What is your machination with the GOP? There are opportunities in every party, not just the pro-war party. Who cares what it used to be, let's look at what the GOP is now.

ProBlue33
06-24-2008, 09:03 AM
When you look at the GOP letter, it's clear that yes Ron Paul supporters are splintering, but most, are not, maybe 90% voting McCain. And any Ron Paul supporters that are thinking about doing that, just go watch a youtube of McCain an Ron Paul in the primary debates.

acptulsa
06-24-2008, 09:04 AM
Dont just sit home and appear statistically with the ignorant and apapthetic masses that dont bother to vote.

QFT

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 09:05 AM
Why are we acting like the presidential election is the only thing? If we're going to take back our country, we have to take it back from the ground floor on up.
Country = geography! :)
Nation = Country + government ( Politics ). :p

Paul Revered
06-24-2008, 09:07 AM
I doubt that Ron Paul will be endorsing anyone; as he in good conscience may find it difficult to endorse McCain. He can't endorse anyone outside the GOP, and be perceived as loyal. We cannot count on Paul to lead us at this time. We also cannot afford to squander all of the time and money that Paul and his supporters have invested. The fact that Paul cannot lead us at this time is no great obstacle. We have been a highly organized grassroots movement from the beginning. We have made this effort a success, and I can't see any reason why that needs to change. As Ron Paul will not be on the ballot, a write in vote for Paul will accomplish little. However a strong 3rd party run will send a loud message to both parties. They are very protective of their power; and a 3rd party president would seriously upset their little partnership. If you think that I an right; will you stand with me to form a consensus? If I am wrong; will you demonstrate how, and gain the support to build a consensus? The key point is that we remain united, and effective in our cause.

revolutionman
06-24-2008, 09:08 AM
QFT

I dont know what that means.

JosephTheLibertarian
06-24-2008, 09:10 AM
I dont know what that means.

Quoted For the Truth

It's an elitist thing.

ronpaulhawaii
06-24-2008, 09:10 AM
Ahh, yes, I see the distinction. The failure was mine. In any event, I never intended to disparage you, as I know you have worked hard to further the cause, and I applaud your efforts.
After all, you and I are largely responsible for keeping that "$20.08" thread alive.:)

No worries, you made a valid point in that I need to be very careful writing on this topic, so as not to further any potential division...

And I certainly appreciate your contributions in the $20.08 thread, I only wish more people would use it :)

acptulsa
06-24-2008, 09:10 AM
I dont know what that means.

I quoted you for the truth of what you said, my friend. What's elite about that, I don't know.

Paul Revered
06-24-2008, 09:10 AM
I dont know what that means.

Quoted For Truth

rancher89
06-24-2008, 09:12 AM
No worries, you made a valid point in that I need to be very careful writing on this topic, so as not to further any potential division...

And I certainly appreciate your contributions in the $20.08 thread, I only wish more people would use it :)

It's been updated recently.......big evil grin!!!!

revolutionman
06-24-2008, 09:14 AM
thanks, i tried looking it up in the urban dictionary and it has a whole bunch of different meanings, most of which are negative and rude, but because i couldn't imagine why anyone would be rude I desided to ask to be sure.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 09:23 AM
If Ron Paul isn't going to endorse anyone, then people will have to do what they should be doing anyway! Making up their own minds based on their own opinions and the positions of the candidates. Just because you have to vote for some one else on election day doesn't mean your gonna walk away from the Campaign For Liberty. I was indoctrinated as a youth that voting is a civic duty even if you vote for some obscure third party out of protest. Go out there speak your mind, even if its just to tell the bi partisan system to go fk itself. Sure i wish i was voting for Paul this november, but its off the table so I'd vote for Barr, or pretty much anyone else but Obama or McCain. Dont just sit home and appear statistically with the ignorant and apapthetic masses that dont bother to vote.

So voting is the separation action between the "ignorance and apathy" folks and the STATIST group-think, herd mentality truly "enlightened" ( so called )?

< ROFLMAO! >

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 09:30 AM
Quoted For the Truth

It's an elitist thing.

Bullshit. All it means is that the person agrees with the poster.

JosephTheLibertarian
06-24-2008, 09:32 AM
Bullshit. All it means is that the person agrees with the poster.

Elitists don't like being exposed. My bad. ;) You're awfully snappy.

acptulsa
06-24-2008, 09:50 AM
So voting is the separation action between the "ignorance and apathy" folks and the STATIST group-think, herd mentality truly "enlightened" ( so called )?

There are only two groups? You accuse people of group think yet you think there are only two groups? And how did your button get stuck?


[B]< ROFLMAO! >

I wish I was so easily amused...

revolutionman
06-24-2008, 10:11 AM
So voting is the separation action between the "ignorance and apathy" folks and the STATIST group-think, herd mentality truly "enlightened" ( so called )?


I only understand the first half of this post. You seem like some kinda anrchist or something. This ain't no comic book kiddo, go watch Water World or Mad Max, or The Postman or whatever postapocolyptic fantasy film you get your political ideals from, and leave the thinking to the grown folk.

The battle ground in politics is public perception. Thats the bottom line, your opinions on statist whatever the hell, don't mean a damn thing. What does mean a damn thing is when MSNBC or Faux News shows statistics this winter that showed record numbers of citizens voting for third parties.

It will read as a big ol' fuck you to the democratic and republican parties, and increase the likelihood that Joe Schmoe might take a third party serious in coming political contests, be they local, state or national.

Some times anti establishment sentiment can become just as much of a mental cage as the establishment itself.

if we're gonna do this without guns, we will have to work within the system, and extremist nonsense and conspiracy theory talk will derail the whole damn movement.

JosephTheLibertarian
06-24-2008, 10:22 AM
I only understand the first half of this post. You seem like some kinda anrchist or something. This ain't no comic book kiddo, go watch Water World or Mad Max, or The Postman or whatever postapocolyptic fantasy film you get your political ideals from, and leave the thinking to the grown folk.

The battle ground in politics is public perception. Thats the bottom line, your opinions on statist whatever the hell, don't mean a damn thing. What does mean a damn thing is when MSNBC or Faux News shows statistics this winter that showed record numbers of citizens voting for third parties.

It will read as a big ol' fuck you to the democratic and republican parties, and increase the likelihood that Joe Schmoe might take a third party serious in coming political contests, be they local, state or national.

Some times anti establishment sentiment can become just as much of a mental cage as the establishment itself.

if we're gonna do this without guns, we will have to work within the system, and extremist nonsense and conspiracy theory talk will derail the whole damn movement.

um yeah. That's why I like to supplement my anti-state rhetoric with political remedies. You can't tear down the state without either:

1. war

or

2. a government majority of anti-statists

the most we can do is fight for lower taxes, cuts in spending, and just a political revolution in order to help the little guy without imposes false morals based on religious cults and shoving it all down people's throats. Can we have fiscal responsibility without this morality bullshit? I hope.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 10:43 AM
I only understand the first half of this post. You seem like some kinda anrchist or something. This ain't no comic book kiddo, go watch Water World or Mad Max, or The Postman or whatever postapocolyptic fantasy film you get your political ideals from, and leave the thinking to the grown folk.

The battle ground in politics is public perception. Thats the bottom line, your opinions on statist whatever the hell, don't mean a damn thing. What does mean a damn thing is when MSNBC or Faux News shows statistics this winter that showed record numbers of citizens voting for third parties.

It will read as a big ol' fuck you to the democratic and republican parties, and increase the likelihood that Joe Schmoe might take a third party serious in coming political contests, be they local, state or national.

Some times anti establishment sentiment can become just as much of a mental cage as the establishment itself.

if we're gonna do this without guns, we will have to work within the system, and extremist nonsense and conspiracy theory talk will derail the whole damn movement.
So you're just NOT apathetic. :D

I'll bet I'm older than you, junior. How many grandkids ya got?

Perception, that's good. At least it's NOT REALITY. ;)

Screw the "SYSTEM"!!!

Ron's NOT anti-establishment, conspiracy theory friendly and extreme?

What planet are you on? :rolleyes:

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 10:49 AM
It's just ANOTHER priinciple thingy for me, and a pet peeve. :D

Then why leave it out. Your way is more work and harder. ;)

Because of my respect for the other readers here. Why force them to wade through a bunch of other stuff in a post that has nothing whatsoever to do with what you are responding to?

Clearly, you like to argue for the sake of argument. Feel free, but please do it with someone else. I'm not into games.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 11:02 AM
acptulsa --

FYI, your post # 194 is whacked, for reply! :confused:

There are only two groups? You accuse people of group think yet you think there are only two groups? And how did your button get stuck?

Take it up with the poster I was replying to. Sometimes ya just gotta go to where the folks are. Reading for comprehension often helps too. ;) Bold IS intentional! :p

I wish I was so easily amused...

Me too! You'd possibly be a lot more fun! Actually, it's a choice.<IMHO>

Choose the "red pill". ;)

Carole
06-24-2008, 11:04 AM
Well, having read most of these comments, it does seem likely RP supporters will splinter their votes.

In one way, it matters not--so long as none of us vote for McInSane or Obama who are both in favor of globalism, CFR,World,IMF, NAU, etc.

So I do not care how the votes splinter in the sense that a vote for any other candidate is a protest vote.


"The world is in a constant conspiracy against the brave. It's the age-old struggle: the roar of the crowd on the one side, and the voice of your conscience on the other." - Douglas MacArthur


So true:)

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” — John Quincy Adams

I can not ever again vote against my principle.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 11:09 AM
Because of my respect for the other readers here. Why force them to wade through a bunch of other stuff in a post that has nothing whatsoever to do with what you are responding to?

Clearly, you like to argue for the sake of argument. Feel free, but please do it with someone else. I'm not into games.
Well, aside from the logical fallacy reasons, it's often dishonest, deceptive and misleading.

Of course you are! POWER GAMES!

And especially "the NOT answering questions game". ;)

pacelli
06-24-2008, 11:13 AM
This thread wins at splintering Ron Paul supporters.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 11:15 AM
This thread wins at splintering Ron Paul supporters.
INDIVIDUALS are often INDIVIDUAL. ;)

revolutionman
06-24-2008, 11:24 AM
I'll bet I'm older than you, junior. How many grandkids ya got?

you could be 60 years old and it really doesn't matter, if your off daydreaming about Lord of The Flies like your in a freshman English class. Ya know how people say "your only old if you act old." well that idea works both ways. But age isn't particularly important. It was just my special way of telling you to get serious. I'm sorry for being a little over agressive.

Ron Paul is whatever the people percieve him to be, and we all know too well that the main stream perception is a simple matter of spin and propaganda. With that said, Ron Paul is not anti-establishment, conspiracy theory friendly, and extreme. He is however a mover and shaker, who thinks outside the box, is always open to new ideas, and is willing to consider the opinions of others.

Don't use the terms that the enemy uses to slander us to describe Ron Paul. If his own supports don't bother to put a positive spin on his campaign then wtf will??

I'm not saying we should go out and lie, but we shouldn't just stand there with our hands in our pockets while people try to railroad us, our platform, and our main political proponent.

Voting is important, maybe not as important as it is said to be, but its important enough that no one should abstain. Even if its just an outlet for us to flex our muscles, its worth putting your shoes on for.

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 11:26 AM
This thread wins at splintering Ron Paul supporters.

Yup, it sure does.

IRO-bot
06-24-2008, 11:26 AM
Wining the Presidency is not Important. Baldwin and Barr won't win, we know that. They can have some effect. Fine, thats good.

Our real focus, is Education. Changing the public opinion, and getting Ron some damn friends in Congress!!!!!

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 11:27 AM
Well, aside from the logical fallacy reasons, it's often dishonest, deceptive and misleading.
True, it can be. But, usually that is not the case from what I have seen. It is always something everyone should watch out for and do one's best not to mislead.

Of course you are! POWER GAMES!
Yeah, right. :rolleyes:


And especially "the NOT answering questions game". ;)

What question did you ask me that I did not answer?

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 11:31 AM
you could be 60 years old and it really doesn't matter, if your off daydreaming about Lord of The Flies like your in a freshman English class. Ya know how people say "your only old if you act old." well that idea works both ways. But age isn't particularly important. It was just my special way of telling you to get serious. I'm sorry for being a little over agressive.

Ron Paul is whatever the people percieve him to be, and we all know too well that the main stream perception is a simple matter of spin and propaganda. With that said, Ron Paul is not anti-establishment, conspiracy theory friendly, and extreme. He is however a mover and shaker, who thinks outside the box, is always open to new ideas, and is willing to consider the opinions of others.

Don't use the terms that the enemy uses to slander us to describe Ron Paul. If his own supports don't bother to put a positive spin on his campaign then wtf will??

I'm not saying we should go out and lie, but we shouldn't just stand there with our hands in our pockets while people try to railroad us, our platform, and our main political proponent.

Voting is important, maybe not as important as it is said to be, but its important enough that no one should abstain. Even if its just an outlet for us to flex our muscles, its worth putting your shoes on for.

"Visit LewRockwell.com, an outstanding and crucially important Web site I visit every day." -- Ron Paul.
"THE REVOLUTION, A MANIFESTO" ( page # 158 ), http://www.lewrockwell.com/ ;)

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i304/Truth_Warrior/lewrock0305a.gif


:rolleyes:

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 11:32 AM
Ron's NOT anti-establishment, conspiracy theory friendly and extreme?

Ron VOTES.


What planet are you on? :rolleyes:

Indeed.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 11:33 AM
True, it can be. But, usually that is not the case from what I have seen. It is always something everyone should watch out for and do one's best not to mislead.

Yeah, right. :rolleyes:

What question did you ask me that I did not answer?
Where do I even begin? :rolleyes:

Thanks! :)

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 11:41 AM
Ron VOTES.



Indeed.
Yes, and a GOP US congressman and POTUS candidate. As such, he too is a statist. :( I understand. He also ENDORSES LRC. :D

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

revolutionman
06-24-2008, 11:48 AM
LewRockwell.com,

I will certainly take the time to visit this site, but that does not mean that i will allow it to become my political doctrine. I've got a mind and will of my own, that not even my respect and admiration for Dr. Paul will subdue.

Indy4Chng
06-24-2008, 11:50 AM
For me personally, I can't think of one thing positive that McCain would do. Once upon a time, he had a much more conservative voting record, but for quite some time, he has not voted much differently than a liberal. In my opinion, a vote for McCain is like saying we want 4 more years of Bush.

I think you are wrong... Bush is much more fiscally conservative than McCain. At least Bush managed to kill the Cap & Trade and Windfall Profit Taxes... McCain supported both. Of course that is where GWB positives end. But I can't think of any positives of McCain. IMHO the only difference between McCain and Obama is McCain policies will be linked to conservative principles such as was the case in Bush. At least with Obama as president they will institute the same policies just it won't be attached to the conservative name.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 11:51 AM
I will certainly take the time to visit this site, but that does not mean that i will allow it to become my political doctrine. I've got a mind and will of my own, that not even my respect and admiration for Dr. Paul will subdue.
As do I. LRC and I just very often agree. I've been libertarian for going on 4 DECADES now!

Carole
06-24-2008, 11:55 AM
The thing I most hope for is that the current Republican party goes down in flames of non-glory in November. They so deserve it. :D

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 12:15 PM
The thing I most hope for is that the current Republican party goes down in flames of non-glory in November. They so deserve it. :D
I'd say the odds for that outcome, are very very good. :)

tonesforjonesbones
06-24-2008, 12:19 PM
I also pray the GOP goes down in flames in November. That is the ONLY way to cull out the neo cons..who are dirty rats ...then the Ron Paul Republicans can move in for the kill. Here's the ironic thing about it...I bet Ron Paul will be one of the FEW republicans that will keep his seat in November while the rest of them slink under their rocks. TONES

tonesforjonesbones
06-24-2008, 12:22 PM
My prayer is also that Chuck Baldwin will join the GOP and run for representative ...Ron Paul says he only needs 10 thinkers like himself to really make an impact...Chuck Baldwin is PERFECT. we need 9 more TONES

SLSteven
06-24-2008, 12:25 PM
I also pray the GOP goes down in flames in November. That is the ONLY way to cull out the neo cons..who are dirty rats ...then the Ron Paul Republicans can move in for the kill. Here's the ironic thing about it...I bet Ron Paul will be one of the FEW republicans that will keep his seat in November while the rest of them slink under their rocks. TONES

Even if the GOP goes down in flames it doesn't mean it won't be replaced by something worse. We need to continue to grow the movement.

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 01:32 PM
Where do I even begin? :rolleyes:


So basically, you have no answer. Just what I thought. :rolleyes:

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 01:38 PM
So basically, you have no answer. Just what I thought. :rolleyes: Not what I said. There's another one, BTW. ;)

Here's a favorite: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1460263&postcount=146

Count the unanswered questions TO YOU! :D

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 02:19 PM
Those were questions? Ha. It looked more to me like you were enjoying talking to yourself.

By the way, if you want people to listen to you, you might try stopping the condescending attitude.

tonesforjonesbones
06-24-2008, 02:21 PM
Continuous sniping. whatevah. The Baldwin people should be hitting the church parking lots on sundays with Baldwin / CP brochures. If we could get the christian block...that would be great. The libertarians can work on those conservatives that resonate with Bob Barr. TONES (James Dobson says he might not even vote for the president at all...why won't he endorse baldwin??? Baldwin people should be emailing Focus on the Family like crazy)

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 02:32 PM
Those were questions? Ha. It looked more to me like you were enjoying talking to yourself.

By the way, if you want people to listen to you, you might try stopping the condescending attitude.
Question, "duck and dodge", as usual. :( YOU wanted an example!

It's very hard NOT to be interpreted as condescending to most OSU grads, I've found. :D

Is condescending mentioned in the RPF Guidelines?

Do we really need to play 6 posts to a maybe answer, AGAIN? :rolleyes:

LibertyEagle
06-24-2008, 02:42 PM
Keep it up, TW. :rolleyes:

anaconda
06-24-2008, 02:44 PM
I am for the Revolution uniting behind an RP endorsement. I think that will make the most powerful pro Liberty statement. Having said that, I don't think the "splintering" is as detrimental as one might think because I think that the vast majority of Paul supporters will vote for Barr, Baldwin, or RP write-in. Campaign experts and pollsters are smart enough to figure out where the votes went, even if they choose not to admit it publicly. The result is that it will be clear that we all voted against big government, the war, the IRS, income taxes, and for far more civil liberties than either party was offering. As long as the Paul supporters end up in one of these three camps it still is a powerful message from us.

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 02:47 PM
Keep it up, TW. :rolleyes:
Noted!

acptulsa
06-24-2008, 02:52 PM
Noted!

Anyone care to chip in to a money bomb to get these two a room?

Truth Warrior
06-24-2008, 02:55 PM
Anyone care to chip in to a money bomb to get these two a room?
;) :D

ProBlue33
06-26-2008, 10:28 PM
http://www.lettertogop.com/

Yes splinter they will, and most will not vote McCain

lisajames96
06-27-2008, 09:01 AM
why not just take it one step further and replace "Obama" with "anyone else besides Ron Paul"?

The only thing that really bothers me about following through with this is that Dr. Paul won't be a valid write in candidate. So now I am basically forced to go against the message.
Vote for Barr means that I vote for a candidate that voted yes on the Patriot Act.

Vote for Baldwin means that I vote for someone who is not 100% behind individual liberty and states rights, also blurs the line on the separation of church and state.

Vote for Obama and I risk being labeled "not Ron Paul supporter" :rolleyes:

Vote for McCain and die.

So there is no obvious choice, hence the correct prediction that the movement is going to split on the presidential vote. No surprise really.

Some will still write in Dr. Paul because thats the only principled action. You can do that and still fight for greater election transparency, to expose voter fraud, and ballot access. But you will have to know that your vote/voice will be trashed/not heard and the good Doctor himself has said this is not productive.

So no matter what you/we do, its status quo until the next election in 2010.

I didn't know that about Barr. I have never really looked into his voting record.
Did he ever give an explanation of why he voted for the Patriot Act, and if he still supports his decision? I wont vote for McCain or Obama, they are both big government to me, just different in their choices of what they would spend our prosperity on.

acptulsa
06-27-2008, 09:03 AM
I didn't know that about Barr. I have never really looked into his voting record.
Did he ever give an explanation of why he voted for the Patriot Act, and if he still supports his decision? I wont vote for McCain or Obama, they are both big government to me, just different in their choices of what they would spend our prosperity on.

It has been said by people who presumably would know that he bought the "sunset clause" with his support (got an expiration date added to it).

newbitech
06-27-2008, 10:24 AM
I didn't know that about Barr. I have never really looked into his voting record.
Did he ever give an explanation of why he voted for the Patriot Act, and if he still supports his decision? I wont vote for McCain or Obama, they are both big government to me, just different in their choices of what they would spend our prosperity on.

Yes he has. There are several Youtube's of him recently discussing his decision making process. Here is one from June 6th. It is an excerpt from the Glenn Beck program.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaCtj8qzU5I&feature=related


go to this link to see how Barr voted while he was in congress. It is broken down by issue. http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=22028

tpreitzel
06-27-2008, 02:29 PM
Barr is simply another duplicitous candidate running for the POTUS. Can anyone really trust him? I don't think so and his record indicates that I'm right. It's truly ironic to me that Baldwin is likely the ONLY candidate running who would even attempt to obey his words. He's the very same candidate which is constantly blasted inappropriately for desiring some sort of "theocratic" state. I really can't believe some people. Let's see. We still have a laughable Congress and mockingly spirited Supreme Court with which to contend. ;) Personally, I find it laughable that the only candidate who would likely follow through with his desire to return our country to its constitutional roots by actually working with the other branches of government is the same candidate who lacks support from many lovers of freedom. Maybe, some so-called lovers of freedom don't like the responsibility that comes with it, eh? Well, then, maybe we, the people, should just trash the federal apparatus and return ALL power to the people and their respective states. I can digg it. Let secession ring throughout the land! :)

Truth Warrior
06-27-2008, 02:34 PM
Oh, I'd say he can be trusted about as much as almost ALL of the other candidates. :rolleyes:

:D