I'd like some input on this email I recieved from a friend...

[nexalacer]

Of course, I've already got a number of points floating around my head, but while I'm working on my response, I'd like to get some input from you guys about how to counter this ridiculous email:


O K, I stand corrected as far as to the 3rd party thing, however it still doesn't change anything.
He hasn't got a snowballs chance in hell of winning and all he'll do is be a spoiler to the "real' viable candidate. As of tonight he has had his and most of the Republican hopefuls hopes dashed because Fred Thomas just threw his hat in the ring on Jay Leno's show. Even if I grant you his congressional record, he's still a libertarian a heart. People just don't change their stripes. He's not the type that the "Dems" will work with either. I want another Ronnie Reagan. As a non main stream (or fringe) candidate he simply will be marginalized. I won't throw away my vote in that manner. He will take votes that might make a difference for THE candidate. Also, after he loses, often times what happens is those like yourself will become disinchanted and figure that why vote because it doesn't matter if you can't have him. It does matter. Life is a series of trade offs, picking the lesser of the two evils. You must keep your eye on the big picture at all times. Will our country be safer? Will our economy suffer? Will the rest of the the world still take us seriously? Not perfect, but better than the alternative. That's what I have to look at. Why does the rest of the world want to come here? There is nothing wrong with a little healthy fear. Just think back on your childhood. Same thing, just on another level. If the rest of the world doesn't like us, tough, then fear us. Unless we are ready to recognize the fact that we are a better country and vote to keep it that way we will surely all have to learn the Qur'an....

For some background, this person has been a Reaganite since I was a kid. She's die-hard Republican through and through, though she's not religious, so I'm pretty sure she's not a social conservative, as far as using gov't to control other people's lives. She listens to a lot of talk radio, may watch Fox News now and then, but mostly watches Dramas when she watches TV. I'm sure that's why she is for Thompson (whom she knows as Thomas, doh!). The first email she sent me talked about how foolish I was for "wasting my vote" on a 3rd party candidate. So I sent her links for ronpaul2008.com and Ron Paul Library on LRC, along with a very clear statement that Ron Paul is running as a Republican and has been a Republican for 20+ years.

Looking forward to your insights, thanks!

[DjLoTi]

Send her a picture of Ron and Ronald together, tell her Ron was 1 of 4 republicans who supported Ronald Regan in the beginning.

[Electrostatic]

"He's not the type that the "Dems" will work with either."
His support is equally high between dems, indies, and republicans
And he is the only rep. candidate against the war... Any other republican put forward WILL LOSE IN THE GREATEST LANDSLIDE IN 24 YEARS!!!! PERIOD!

70% of the American people want us the hell out of Iraq.

[catwoman]

First of all, unless you committed a typo I'd said say she's uninformed, because the guy on Leno last night wasn't Fred Thomas, but Fred Thompson. Secondly, I'd say she doesn't realize how she's being manipulated by the mainstream media. Getting people to acknowledge that is often, in my opinion, like getting some alcoholics to realize they need to stop drinking. They resist because of fear.

[apropos]

A few thoughts that you can use if you like:

I woud tell your friend the same thing that I tell my friends. That is, I am looking at the big picture. Voting your conscience is never a wasted vote. The things Ron Paul believes in are the fundamental principles of America - they are not tied to any specific party. Like our Founding Fathers, he has a blend of both republican and democratic values. He wants a smaller government - a platform Ronald Regan ran on and won. He wants us to stop printing U.S. dollars like it is monopoly money - which constantly devalues our money and your life savings in particular.

Picking the lesser of two evils time is truly a wasted vote because you are voting out of fear. I know because I have voted for the lesser of two evils. Not this time. There is nothing wrong with a little healthy fear until it starts guiding your actions and coopting your conscience. If George Washington had voted for the lesser of two evils - that is, some nebulous status quo - we'd still be saying 'God save the King'.

You can also tell her that Americans are now more heavily taxed than the taxation that set off the American revolution. What does that make the lesser of two evils now? The status quo with Hillary, Rudy, and McCain, or a man who is actually going to improve our quality of life?

[nexalacer]

A few thoughts that you can use if you like:

I woud tell your friend the same thing that I tell my friends. That is, I am looking at the big picture. Voting your conscience is never a wasted vote. The things Ron Paul believes in are the fundamental principles of America - they are not tied to any specific party. Like our Founding Fathers, he has a blend of both republican and democratic values. He wants a smaller government - a platform Ronald Regan ran on and won. He wants us to stop printing U.S. dollars like it is monopoly money - which will decrease the constant devaluation of our money and your life savings in particular.

Picking the lesser of two evils time is truly a wasted vote because you are voting out of fear. There is nothing wrong with a little healthy fear until it starts guiding your actions and coopting your conscience. If George Washington had voted for the lesser of two evils - that is, some nebulous status quo - we'd still be saying 'God save the King'.

You can also tell her that Americans are now more heavily taxed than the taxation that set off the American revolution. What does that make the lesser of two evils now? The status quo with Hillary, Rudy, and McCain, or a man who is actually going to improve our quality of life?

Thanks! This has some good stuff, things I was thinking but couldn't quite get into a coherent statement. Nice way to start on ronpaulforums! Welcome!!

[catwoman]

A few thoughts that you can use if you like:

I woud tell your friend the same thing that I tell my friends. That is, I am looking at the big picture. Voting your conscience is never a wasted vote. The things Ron Paul believes in are the fundamental principles of America - they are not tied to any specific party. Like our Founding Fathers, he has a blend of both republican and democratic values. He wants a smaller government - a platform Ronald Regan ran on and won. He wants us to stop printing U.S. dollars like it is monopoly money - which will decrease the constant devaluation of our money and your life savings in particular.

Picking the lesser of two evils time is truly a wasted vote because you are voting out of fear. There is nothing wrong with a little healthy fear until it starts guiding your actions and coopting your conscience. If George Washington had voted for the lesser of two evils - that is, some nebulous status quo - we'd still be saying 'God save the King'.

You can also tell her that Americans are now more heavily taxed than the taxation that set off the American revolution. What does that make the lesser of two evils now? The status quo with Hillary, Rudy, and McCain, or a man who is actually going to improve our quality of life?

That was good. Wish I had thought of it. Alas it is too early in the morning for me yet.

[LibertyEagle]

Reagan and Goldwater BOTH referred to themselves as libertarian-conservatives. This stance IS traditional conservatism and Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who holds these principles dear. The ONLY one.

- limited constitutional government
- personal privacy
- personal responsibility
- strong national defense
- fiscally responsible government
- individual liberty

The other Repulican candidates are either Rockefeller Republicans or neoconservatives. BOTH, big government types that differ very little from their big government brethren on the other side of the aisle. The only difference is, what they want their big government to force down the throats of the American people. There is nothing about this that is conservative. Nothing.

Only Ron Paul stands apart. He is the true successor to Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagans's conservatism. Which is why the Goldwater family supports Ron Paul.

[EvilEngineer]

I hate the idea that we have to pick the "lesser of two evils" its because people are lazy and scared of doing the right thing that we always end up in this situation. A vote for ANY republican other than Ron Paul is throwing your vote away, because they are all pro-war. With the majority of the country anti-war now, all it does is give a LANDSLIDE victory to Hillary. The only chance we have of turning this country around is with Ron Paul.

I'm sorry to say but this is the LAST election we as a free people will ever get. If Hilliary or any other CFR pundits is put in office, our sovereignty will be gone by the 2012 election.

[njandrewg]

Snowballs chance: the republican party is decimated. And even within it 30% of republicans are against the war. Thats 30% that RP gains, add to that all the independants, liberterians, constitutionalists, democrats and apathetic voters who are becoming republican and he has plenty of chance. Especially when only a minor group votes in the primaries.

You don't even know the name of your candidate...yet somehow he is better? Do you realize how ignorant that makes you sound? I bet you haven't even looked at Thompsons(thats how his name is spelled) record. Look past his hollywood character and see just what kind of a person the man is.

As far as him having liberterian roots...he was a republican all his life...he was a republican on a liberterian ticket. Read up liberterian positions...they are not that different from Reagan republicans.

And democrats not willing to work with him? How do you explain that? He is the ONLY candidate who is able to convert die hard democrats into Republicans. As far as capitol hill goes, he is the only republican who democrats are actually willing to work with.

If you want Ronald Reagan the politician, you should vote for Ron Paul then. But if you want Ronald Reagan the actor...then go ahead and throw your vote away on Thompson(thats how his name is spelled, wouldn't want you to get confused when you vote). Did you know Ronald Reagan was Ron Paul's close friend? Did you know what Ron Paul was one of a few republicans who actually backed Reagan to get him nominated? Its easy to call yourself Ronald Reagan, but you need to have the record to back it up, which Thompson does not.

Yes he is being marginalized...but his message is so strong its NOT WORKING! He is raising tons of cash, has the biggest grass roots network of ALL candidates combined and has actual passion from his supporters.

Voting someone because they are a viable candidate...IS throwing your vote away. We have the right to vote, in order to make sure the best man wins. Voting for someone and sacrificing your principles is exactly what throwing your vote away means. And frankly if you don't even know your candidate's last name...you should be ashamed of yourself. How can you mock others for "wasting votes" when you yourself are wasting your vote on a windbag you know nothing about?

Fred Thompson is NOT the candidate. He talks the talk...but he NEVER walks the walk. The man was a lobbyist and an actor for Christ sake...he knows how to spin people into believing him. Thats why you look at Thompson's record, and see that the things he is talking about he picked up from Ron Paul...and you'll see that based on his record this is the first time he is talking about it.

Yes you are right...Ron Paul people will never vote for the lesser of two evils again. You can only do that for so long, before you are stuck with complete garbage...and thats whats happening now. Can you imagine going back 10 years...and telling people "I'll be voting for a lobbyist!" You would get hanged by the republicans on the spot.

Well if you follow that then vote for Ron Paul, he is OBVIOSLY the lesser of two evils compared to any other republican. And hey wtih him at least we'll have a fighting chance beating Clinton. 70% of the country will not vote for a pro-war republican...so voting for one in the primaries is equivelent to throwing your vote away...even worse...its a vote FOR Clinton.

Will our country be safer? YES, Iraq war did nothing but breed more terrorists. Before going in Al Qaeda was on the verge of collapse...and now they are the most powerful terror group on the planet. And believe me, it won't take long for them to smuggle their people in through Mexico and attack us on our soil w/o repurcussions.

Economy? Once again Ron Paul is the winner, he is the only candidate running who actually knows economics. He is the only candidate even remotedely capable of fixing the economy.

World taking us seriously? You bet. Do you know that Ron Paul actually has a major following overseas? I can show you pictures of people in France with Ron Paul banners, in germany, in Canada etc. Electing Ron Paul will restore the international respect for the United States that Bush squandered by invading Iraq, a country that has not attacked us, and which was invaded under false pretenses.

But here is the thing...with Ron Paul the world will actually like us. As far as it being good that they fear us? Do you really want to push that? It doesn't take much effort to get terrorists on the US soil...with bombs going off in supermarkets who will you attack with our weakened military? Noone because terrorists don't have bases...and if you attack civilians you'll cause even more death on the US soil. And here is another hint...the world is slowly catching up the USA. Did you see the news lately? Russians and China are working together in a coalition. We also have a coalition in Europe(EU), and there is another coalition in the middle east that we are building by staying in Iraq. Look in the future 10-20 years.

People hate USA with a passion. They will come over here to blow us up. The EU, Arab countries and Russia/China will all be able to match us militarily at that point. Turning the whole world against us...may seem like the lesser of two evils now...but in 10-20 years we will pay for our transgressions. The term blowback is exactly what this means, things done 50 years ago, were used as motivation to carry out the 9/11 attacks. So will your hate for the world...that hate will be used to destroy the United States later in history. No civilization survived by making everyone else fear them: Persians, Romans, Greeks, Egyptians...they all fell when the small guys they bullied rallied together to fight and destroy them.

You want to avoid learning the Koran? Then I suggest you vote for Ron Paul, and not a candidate who will fold under pressure at a moments notice. Not for a candidate who is going to keep building the hate against us all over the world. Wake up and smell the flowers

[nexalacer]

njandrewg, thanks, that has a lot of great points. It's a little angry to send to a friend who is my elder, but I will definitely use many of the points.

By the way, anyone got any really good Quotes from Founders or Reagan that could be used to sway someone in Ron Paul's direction?

Or any great links for totally discrediting Thompson as a Reagan Republican?

[njandrewg]

njandrewg, thanks, that has a lot of great points. It's a little angry to send to a friend who is my elder, but I will definitely use many of the points.

By the way, anyone got any really good Quotes from Founders or Reagan that could be used to sway someone in Ron Paul's direction?

Or any great links for totally discrediting Thompson as a Reagan Republican?
well I tend to argue a lot with those hannity type retards...so yeah its a little mean spirited :P

[catwoman]

njandrewg, thanks, that has a lot of great points. It's a little angry to send to a friend who is my elder, but I will definitely use many of the points.

By the way, anyone got any really good Quotes from Founders or Reagan that could be used to sway someone in Ron Paul's direction?

Or any great links for totally discrediting Thompson as a Reagan Republican?


There are some great quotes by Thomas Jefferson. Almost anyone of those would apply.

Here's a great site for TJ quotes.

http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeffcont.htm

[LibertyEagle]

njandrewg, thanks, that has a lot of great points. It's a little angry to send to a friend who is my elder, but I will definitely use many of the points.

By the way, anyone got any really good Quotes from Founders or Reagan that could be used to sway someone in Ron Paul's direction?

Or any great links for totally discrediting Thompson as a Reagan Republican?

Read this and ask yourself who it reminds you of.

http://www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan/speeches/rendezvous.asp

[nexalacer]

Wow, if Reagan was able to speak like that.... what the fuck happened? The 80s were horrible for increased government! Is it really true that the assasination attempt scared him into doing as GHWB said? Man, what a shame.... I spent most of my teenage years being taught that Reagan was the devil.... little did I know he could speak truth to power so much. So again, what happened?!

[dwdollar]

I had a friend who liked Freddo. Then I hammered on about him being in the Council on Foreign Relations. Seemed to get him off Thompson but now he likes Huckabee...(I think he is coming around though).

[Severius]

Well first of all, a vote for Thompson is wasted vote. He's voted multiple times in the past for gun control, and will lose the vote from gun owners that make up a large part of the Republican party. If you actually look and all the candidates you'll see that the Republicans and Democrats are running on almost an identical platform. Only Ron Paul stands for the constitution and our liberties.

As for quotes, here a few good ones:

I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That "all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people." To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition. - Thomas Jefferson

If it be asked, What is the most sacred duty and the greatest source of our security in a Republic? The answer would be, An inviolable respect for the Constitution and Laws — the first growing out of the last... A sacred respect for the constitutional law is the vital principle, the sustaining energy of a free government. - Alexander Hamilton

Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness. - George Washington

[blazin_it_alwyz]

voting the lesser of 2 evils is still voting for evil.

Why would you vote for the lesser, when we can have THE BETTER? As we have seen, Ron Paul isn't a fringe candidate, he actually has HUGE SUPPORT!

How can you consciously vote for a candidate you know is going to do harm to this country, might as well not vote at all? Why would you be complicit in that?

You should either vote for someone you think would be good for office, or don't vote at all. No more of this voting for a lesser evil nonsense, because if everyone decided not to vote for a lesser evil, we would get a better candidate, it is that very way of thinking that leaves us with only with the choice of lesser of 2 evils....

[DJ RP]

If you can get your friend to watch these three videos in this order maybe it'll change their mind...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyXW1hb-JQg Reagan on paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXRnM55o6Ew inspiring story about the gold medal congress wanted to award Reagan out of tax payers money. If they don't believe he's true conservative surely this will change their mind.

Then if they're swaying throw this avaroth number their way

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFfdB5OzlyQ

If they're still resisting might be best to just drop the subject and let them think about it for some time.

[FluffyUnbound]

The current Republican party has no grounds for asserting that their candidate will be the lesser of two evils.

From the perspective of small-government conservativism, the W Presidency has been about 1000x worse than the Clinton Administration.

When Clinton was President, we didn't get huge new Medicare entitlements becoming law. W did that.

When Clinton was President, we didn't get McCain-Feingold being signed into law. W did that.

When Clinton was President, we didn't get huge new federal intrusions into the state prerogative of education. W did that.

When Clinton was President, he didn't piss on the 4th Amendment every day. No one was rendited or tortured. Habeus corpus was in force.

I hated Clinton when he was in office. I considered W the lesser of two evils when he ran in 2000. I didn't vote for W, but I was pleased when he won all the same. Time has shown me the error of my ways.

I don't see how Hillary Clinton could possibly be worse for the country from the perspective of a conservative than any of the Bush clones are likely to be. As long as there are 40 votes in the Senate against socialized medicine, she's contained and limited in the damage she can do.

[Slugg]

That letter just broke my heart. Here's what I read:

"Yeah, he's great. But I wont vote for him because the news hasn't told me to. You should really listen to the news. Even though they are usually wrong, they are right sometimes...and that's important. Remember, people who live in oppressed countries want to come here, so be happy with you mild tyranny; it's easier than fighting for a real republic. My neighbor flipped me off today, but he's still carrying that black eye from yesterday...so I don't care. Gotta make this short, have a tax audit this afternoon."

I am NOT (I repeat NOT) making fun of this lady; this is just what I hear when I hear these arguments. I've heard this before from many people (including my father, who it took three months to turn around). Every time I hear those things, it really just makes me wonder how in the world we can get this man elected. :(

But, a few minutes of surfing the forums and I'm back on track! :D

One avaroth video and I'm donating money again!!! haha :eek: :cool:

[michaelwise]

I didn't want to throw my republican vote away in 2004, so I voted for John Kerry.

[apropos]

Paul lends himself well to quotations by the founders, because he uses them frequently. I remember hearing the Ben Frankiln one - "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety deserve neither liberty, nor safety" - last night, I believe.

George Washington:

"It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world."

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master!"

There are many Paul quotes and founding father quotes in the following video, set to music by Don Maclean's American Pie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWfIhFhelm8

[nexalacer]

Well, it may be too long, but I couldn't stop writing once I started. We'll see how it is received.


He hasn't got a snowballs chance in hell of winning what? The election in November 2008 or the primary in January/February? Either way, I disagree, but the important part right now is the primary. Not many people vote in primaries, and many of the people I've talked to didn't even know they COULD vote in primaries. So, usually the people left voting are only the people who are really into politics... the die-hards. Well, Ron Paul supporters are that: There are 40,000 people registered for Ron Paul groups on meetup.com, a website where grass-roots organizers can set up meetings in order to plan political action. I've read articles that estimate that spending by meetup groups could possibly out spend the Ron Paul campaign itself, especially since many people have already maxed out their legal campaign contributions so have begun donating to meetup groups that are getting Dr. Paul's name out. Also, among Ron Paul supporters, it's been reported that over 70% are die-hard, already committed to their candidate. The numbers for other Republicans aren't anything close to that. He consistently wins online polls, often by huge margins, and has won a number of live straw polls as well. Then there is the matter of the war. Among Republicans, approximately 30% are anti-war... these would be the so called Paleo-Conservatives and libertarians... those guys who supported Goldwater and Reagan. And considering the war has severely shrunken the Republican base, the amount of newcomers who have joined specifically to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries will have a significant impact. You likely hear that he has no chance from the nationwide polls, who have recently been rating him from 1-3%. The problem with those polls is they only do landlines-young people, who are mobilizing in a huge way for Ron Paul, often have only a cell phone-they only contact previous Republican voters-people newly registered Republican or people who have never voted or not voted in a long time are out-and the way they ask the questions is a self-fulfilling prophecy-they say the names relatively quickly and sometimes in order of the main-stream media's predictions of the "top-tier" candidates, leaving it only up to name recognition. So far, that's Dr. Paul's biggest hurdle.... many people love his message once they do the research, but far too often they don't know his name because of the intentional ignoring being done by the MSM. One other big point is money. You can talk all you want about how much support a candidate has, but it really comes down to the campaign contributions doesn't it? Of the cash on hand numbers reported in June, Ron Paul was number 3, ahead of McCain and behind Romney and Guiliani. Well, Guiliani is mostly supported by corporate sponsors, and honestly, he has no chance among most of Republicans with his New York-centric point of view and his liberal views. And of Romney's cash on hand, a huge portion of it is his own. I read one article that said if you subtract his self-contributions, he actually has only about 3% more than Ron Paul. That was in June, and since then his Internet traffic has skyrocketed, and I expect after his powerful performance on Wednesday, it'll do so again in September. Watch for his donation numbers in October, I think you'll be surprised.

And I knew you wanted a Ronald Reagan type, that's why I begged you to look at Ron Paul. If you read the previous Ron Paul Library link I sent you and http://www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan/speeches/rendezvous.asp this speech by Reagan during Goldwater's presidential campaign, you'll see they talk the same talk. And Dr. Paul has walked the walk too during his 20 years in congress. He's become fringe in the House only because the whole system has been bought out by corporations looking for a little bit more of that government dole. They are worse than the welfare recipients because they spend millions if not billions a year buying out more congressmen. Dr. Paul has never taken ANY of their money and votes simply on the principles that Reagan talked about in the speech I linked above. Furthermore, Reagan and Goldwater both referred to themselves as libertarian-conservatives... I'm not sure what's wrong with Dr. Paul being a libertarian at heart. I wouldn't vote for him if he had changed his stripes... I'm looking at him as a man who was one of only 4 house Republicans to support Reagan for his presidential run in 1976 against Ford. I'm looking at him as a man who has consistently voted for small government, less taxes, strong national defense, and more personal liberty. If these aren't Reagan-esque policies, what are? Reagan took down the Evil Empire, the Soviets, without ever invading any countries and pulled troops out of Lebanon because he said, like Ron Paul has said, middle-east politics are too "irrational" for us to try to make a difference over there. They've been fighting each other for 800 years and trying to force Democracy by the barrel of the gun is not going to make them stop.

For more Reagan supporting videos, I recommend these (they're real short, about a minute or two each):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyXW1hb-JQg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXRnM55o6Ew

And the only things Fred Thompson and Ronald Reagan have in common are they were both actors and they both had a big R next to their name. But Fred Thompson is not a Ronald Reagan brand Republican, he's a Neo-Con Republican. I heard during his announcement on Leno he talked about extending the war in Iraq indefinitely and even expanding into Iran. Talk about a candidate that has NO CHANCE against the Democrats in November. In fact, any of the pro-war candidates has a chance in November 08. 70% of Americans want out of Iraq. They will not vote for someone who wants to keep us there, especially if they wanna do it indefinitely. Not only the factors of the war, but now that Thompson is in the race, his record in the Senate (he was a notorious flip-flopper as well as well-known for not showing up to votes, i.e. he was lazy), as well has his career as a lobbyist will ruin him in the eyes of many Republicans. He talks big about federalism in his current ads, but his record in congress showed just the opposite... he consistently voted to increase state power. Plus he's a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, whose aim is the removal and complete destruction of American sovereignty.

While Ron Paul's chances were really slim when he threw his hat in, he's had a stellar rise on the Internet that has lead to real world gains in the last two or three months. We've still got work to do to get him on the ballot in November, but it's not going to be as hard as the media likes to make it seem. And honestly, most of the disenchanted, myself included, wouldn't have voted anyway if not for Ron Paul. But now, even if he doesn't get on the ballot as a Republican or Democrat, a huge number of his supporters will likely write him in, or vote for him if gets on another party's ballot. The support for his message of freedom is huge!

Lastly, I refuse to pick the lesser of two evils again. From a lot of the research I've been doing, it looks like this may be our last actual chance to have a presidential election, considering the executive orders that Bush has signed that give him dictatorial powers in any sort of National Emergency, whether natural, terrorist, or economic. There are also plans in the works, (see http://www.spp.gov/ ) of creating a EU type entity between Canada, America, and Mexico. If you look at the history of the EU, you'll see the SPP is very similar in every way to the forerunner of the EU, the EEC. I will not give up my freedom as an American just because the media wants to try to shove two shitty candidates, most of whom are on the same CFR that supports the SPP and the NAU, down my throat so I can pick the lesser of the two.

I AM looking at the big picture. Our country will be safer when we stop having a military presence in 130 countries around the world and we bring our troops home to protect AMERICA. If we were REALLY attacked right now by the Chinese or whatever, we'd be crushed! Our troops are spread so wide, there is no way we could react without a huge loss of life, in the case of a real invasion. Our economy will be stronger when we stop paying for an Imperial military and reduce the taxes needed to run our welfare state. Also, Ron Paul is the only candidate talking about monetary policy, and that is actually more important to me than the war! Every day, millions of dollars are printed out of thin air, and every time that happens, the spending power of YOUR money goes down. That's what Ron Paul refers to as the hidden inflation tax. You don't hear anyone else talking about this. A dollar today is worth about 4 cents when compared to the buying power of a pre-1913 (the year the federal reserve began printing worthless money) dollar. And finally, will the rest of the world STILL take us seriously? I don't think they take us seriously now. We talk about being the most free nation in the world, yet we just gave up habeas corpus, our president uses illegal wiretaps against the citizens of this nation (Clinton did it as well, they're both CFR members), and we began the first preemptive war since Hitler. I think Ron Paul's foreign policy will both reduce anger at us in the middle east by removing our so-called "infidel" troops from their holy land as well as raise the level of respect with other nations for actually following the ideas and the Constitution that MAKES the rest of the world want to come here.

Also, I think voting for the lesser of two evils is truly a wasted vote because you are voting out of fear. There is nothing wrong with a little healthy fear until it starts guiding your actions and co-opting your conscience. If George Washington had voted for the lesser of two evils - that is, some nebulous status quo - we'd still be saying 'God save the King'.

I'll leave you with a couple of quotes from our founders and a video that is one of the most impressive I've seen. Please take a look when you have some time... It's about 8 minutes long.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety deserve neither liberty, nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin

"I sincerely join... in abjuring all political connection with every foreign power; and though I cordially wish well to the progress of liberty in all nations, and would forever give it the weight of our countenance, yet they are not to be touched without contamination from their other bad principles. Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto." --Thomas Jefferson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFfdB5OzlyQ

And about having to learn the Koran.... there are many war-mongers in this country that like to sell the idea that Islamo-fascism is a real threat, but I have a real problem with this chicken-hawk way of thinking. Here is an excellent post I read by someone on http://www.ronpaulforums.com/ . It's a bit harsh, but this fear needs a harsh wake up call:

"So, you're so afraid of Muslims that you're willing to change and reduce our freedoms here at home? Talk about letting the terrorists win, damn. Instead, why don't you focus on protecting our 2nd amendment rights so we can actually protect ourselves from people who would attack us instead of concentrating on letting the government do it? Are the terr'ists all going to get in boats and said across the ocean and take us over? Do you really think thats possible? If so, Id say you need to get yourself a tinfoil hat and glue it to your head permanently.Wanting Big daddy government protecting us sounds like something I would hear from the most socialist liberal democrat, not a supposedly brave American. Geez, what a crybaby. Ill tell ya what, if it ever gets to the point where terrorists land on our shores in large numbers, you chickenhawks can go hide behind the government beg for protection and let the rest of us 100 million armed Americans defend ourselves. Don't worry little buddy, we wont let them getcha."

Again, harsh, but the idea is sound. The countries of the Middle-east are third-world backwaters. Do you think they really can amass the power to invade America to instill Sharia Law? Talk about a snow-ball's chance in hell. And as far as the terrorists, they may get a few more attacks in, especially with our military flung to all corners of the world, but 9/11 led to 3000 Americans dead. Up until now, 5000 American service-men have died in Iraq and Afghanistan, yet Bin Laden IS STILL LOOSE! This current war is not about fighting an enemy, because terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy. And by fighting a tactic, all it leads to is more innocent deaths in Muslim countries. For every innocent death, we give them 10 more Al-Queda recruits. But no matter how large the terrorist organizations groups get, they will never be able to defeat well-armed Americans who are fighting for their homes. It's not gonna happen, and the snake-oil salesmen that sell that tripe on Talk-Radio and Fox News are doing it for the sake of their Big-Oil and Military-Industrial Complex buddies. Please don't believe it.

[Corydoras]

Here is why to support Paul if one is convinced he can't win.
He is INFLUENCING other candidates.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/015141.html

[klamath]

Ron Paul being one of only four congressmen to endorse Reagan led the Texas delegation to the republican convention in 1976 and delivered all 100 for Ronald Reagan.

[redpillguy]

The mentality of "I'll vote for the lesser of 2 evils" or "I'll vote for someone whom the vote won't be wasted on", is EXACTLY how the establishment gets the public to vote for one of the media anointed.

THEY ARE TWO FACES OF THE SAME EVIL.

In reality if people simply voted for whom they liked, Ron Paul CAN win.

Here's a nice article about the media's manipulations:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_anthony__070903_the_ghosts_inside_th.htm
" the two-party system is the true cancer eating away at the heart of this republic. The notion that both sides have a grasp on absolute truth, politically and morally is one of the greatest lies perpetrated against the American people."

Read my blog entry:
"Democrat/Republican: Good Cop/Bad Cop."
http://rabbit-hole-journey.blogspot.com/2007/08/democrat-republican-good-cop-bad-cop.html

And
"The Mass Media: DoublePlusUnTruth"
http://rabbit-hole-journey.blogspot.com/2007/08/mass-media-doubleplusuntruth.html