Michelle Bachman: HORRIBLE decision by RP

[Shii]

I've given Dr. Paul a fair amount of money and in result I am getting his "Committee to Re-Elect Ron Paul" newsletter, which is different from CFL.

This morning, he sent me this e-mail:


When it comes to fiscal issues, Congresswoman Michelle Bachman is a strong ally in Washington. She recently stood up with me and voted against the massive Wall Street Bailout, a politically difficult, principled stand for which she should be commended.

Michelle also serves with me on the House Financial Services Committee where she is a consistent ally in our efforts to shine light on the Federal Reserve. Her recent Op-Ed in the Washington Times demonstrates her leadership on the Monetary Issue.

As you may have heard, Congresswoman Bachman has recently come under attack by the liberal media. Her opponent has capitalized and raised some big money in a short period of time. There is even talk of a write-in candidate with no chance of winning that would only syphon votes away from Michelle.

At this time when big government forces are grabbing more and more power, we can not afford to lose a fiscally principled Representative like Michelle Bachman in the Congress. Please join me in supporting Michelle in any way you feel comfortable and, most importantly, please make sure you get the polls and vote for her on November 4th.

The fact is, I already gave money to her opponent Tinklenberg. Bachman did not "come under attack by the liberal media" for no reason. She basically called Obama a subversive anti-American agent, and called for a investigation into "librul" un-American activities in Congress. That sort of crap is exactly what we need less of. It has nothing to do with liberty, or fixing corruption. It's just one side of the mess sliming the other. I am from Minnesota and I know everyone in that state finds that sort of talk revolting.

Michelle Bachman is a neocon with none of Dr. Paul's humility and discretion. She does not deserve his support.

[phixion]

But he is an anti-American agent - he's CFR - he cares not about your country's sovereignty and can't wait to strip it away.

Get with the program.

Pete

[amy31416]

Jesus H. Christ.

[nobody's_hero]

Fairness doctrine in full effect already, I see.

The point is taken about the ad-hominem attacks not being a great strategy. It does waste time and effort. BUT, alone, does not automatically make one a neo-con.

[matratzac]

I've given Dr. Paul a fair amount of money and in result I am getting his "Committee to Re-Elect Ron Paul" newsletter, which is different from CFL.

This morning, he sent me this e-mail:



The fact is, I already gave money to her opponent Tinklenberg. Bachman did not "come under attack by the liberal media" for no reason. She basically called Obama a subversive anti-American agent, and called for a investigation into "librul" un-American activities in Congress. That sort of crap is exactly what we need less of. It has nothing to do with liberty, or fixing corruption. It's just one side of the mess sliming the other. I am from Minnesota and I know everyone in that state finds that sort of talk revolting.

Michelle Bachman is a neocon with none of Dr. Paul's humility and discretion. She does not deserve his support.

in ur opinion, bro

[Shii]

in ur opinion, bro

Well, yeah it's my opinion, and I know some people think any CFR member wants to destroy America, but I think we can't restore the Constitution if we tell the public that our political enemies are equivalent to terrorists.

[matratzac]

Well, yeah it's my opinion, and I know some people think any CFR member wants to destroy America, but I think we can't restore the Constitution if we tell the public that our political enemies are equivalent to terrorists.

maybe he doesn't care if she made a stupid remark and would rather look at her voting record/principles/issues. i agree she said an idiotic thing but still.

[phixion]

Shii,

Did you ever read Ron Paul's newsletter from back in the day?

He had very harsh words against the establishment and opponents, etc.

Just look at him in the video on Morton Downey Junior from back in the day when he was on fire, saying such things as "I say she invited it by the way she was dressed" in response to Lisa Sliwa stating one of her people (or whatever) were stabbed, I recall.

We need all kinds of people fighting for us.

Pete

[Chester Copperpot]

Well, yeah it's my opinion, and I know some people think any CFR member wants to destroy America, but I think we can't restore the Constitution if we tell the public that our political enemies are equivalent to terrorists.

But they are.. They are domestic enemies.. And theyre more dangerous to us than Alqaeda IMO.

[max]

I've given Dr. Paul a fair amount of money and in result I am getting his "Committee to Re-Elect Ron Paul" newsletter, which is different from CFL.

This morning, he sent me this e-mail:



The fact is, I already gave money to her opponent Tinklenberg. Bachman did not "come under attack by the liberal media" for no reason. She basically called Obama a subversive anti-American agent, and called for a investigation into "librul" un-American activities in Congress. That sort of crap is exactly what we need less of. It has nothing to do with liberty, or fixing corruption. It's just one side of the mess sliming the other. I am from Minnesota and I know everyone in that state finds that sort of talk revolting.

Michelle Bachman is a neocon with none of Dr. Paul's humility and discretion. She does not deserve his support.

obama IS a subversive marxist america hater...as is his nasty white hating wife.......if minnesotans find the truth offensive...blame urselves...not ms. bachman

[PatriotOne]

I've given Dr. Paul a fair amount of money and in result I am getting his "Committee to Re-Elect Ron Paul" newsletter, which is different from CFL.

This morning, he sent me this e-mail:



The fact is, I already gave money to her opponent Tinklenberg. Bachman did not "come under attack by the liberal media" for no reason. She basically called Obama a subversive anti-American agent, and called for a investigation into "librul" un-American activities in Congress. That sort of crap is exactly what we need less of. It has nothing to do with liberty, or fixing corruption. It's just one side of the mess sliming the other. I am from Minnesota and I know everyone in that state finds that sort of talk revolting.

Michelle Bachman is a neocon with none of Dr. Paul's humility and discretion. She does not deserve his support.

Gee....not politically correct enough for ya? Time to dispense with politeness when there ARE subversive anti-american agents working to destroy America. Only plain English will do sometimes.

[klamath]

So what was Tinklenburgs opinion of the bailout, the fed and all the issues?
It seems RP is mounting a campaign to try and help all the members of congress that voted against the bailout. I got one asking me to support McClintock who is running for congress and was deadly oposed the the bailout. I think the bailout meant a whole lot to RP and he believes it is a very important issue on who really believes in small government.

[Mini-Me]

Yeah, I'd have to agree this was a pretty bad call...but it might have positive consequences...

Bachman is starting to attack other politicians with the anti-American slur, and Obama's just the first. Frankly, before this, the odds were just as good that she'd go imperial and start ranting about Ron Paul's "anti-American" foreign policy. This didn't really work in the primary debates when other candidates took cheap swipes at Ron Paul (Ahmadinejad's newsletter comment, etc.), but if she's gearing up to do this full time as a new Joseph McCarthy and somehow succeeds at capturing public opinion (doubtful IMO though), the last thing Paul needs is to be mercilessly targeted by someone like that. By running to her defense, Paul might not only be able to insulate himself and us from the hysteria over "anti-Americanism" but even potentially affect her ideas about who the good guys and bad guys are.

Even if that's why he did it, I still don't agree with it, because it's a pretty Machiavellian political move and not his style...but I dunno. I'm just trying to come up with a better reason than, "Ron Paul screwed up royally."

[revolutionary8]

Yeah, I'd have to agree this was a pretty bad call...but it might have positive consequences...

Bachman is starting to attack other politicians with the anti-American slur, and Obama's just the first. Frankly, before this, the odds were just as good that she'd go imperial and start ranting about Ron Paul's "anti-American" foreign policy. This didn't really work in the primary debates when other candidates took cheap swipes at Ron Paul (Ahmadinejad's newsletter comment, etc.), but if she's gearing up to do this full time as a new Joseph McCarthy and somehow succeeds at capturing public opinion (doubtful IMO though), the last thing Paul needs is to be mercilessly targeted by someone like that. By running to her defense, Paul might not only be able to insulate himself and us from the hysteria over "anti-Americanism" but even potentially affect her ideas about who the good guys and bad guys are.

Even if that's why he did it, I still don't agree with it, because it's a pretty Machiavellian political move and not his style...but I dunno. I'm just trying to come up with a better reason than, "Ron Paul screwed up royally."

Interesting thoughts Mini-Me. I glanced over Tinklenberg's issues- he is anti-war, and he served under Gov. Jesse Ventura, I believe as head of transportation. He is all for the mass transit system. :rolleyes: He is anti-war and says that the is against higher taxes, but that is impossible if you are big mass-transit. He is also for Universal Healthcare.

Ron Paul did co-sponser about 6 of her bills, but I haven't gotten the chance to look them over. She is pro-war. Bleck. But if she is out to expose the Fed, then good on her for that.

Edit the more I read, the scarier he becomes:

We must put aside our political differences and begin the transition to universal healthcare by expanding SCHIP to cover every American child. It is our moral obligation to make sure our children have access to care
I will support the continued availability of private insurance options alongside a competitively priced public option, while insisting that no insurance company be allowed to deny coverage due to pre-existing health conditions.
I will support long-term care benefits for the elderly.
I will vote to allow direct price negotiations between the federal government and pharmaceutical manufacturers.



I will vote to preserve hunting and fishing habitat, including making incentives for the creation and preservation of open space.
I will advocate for clean air and water through better regulation of vehicular emissions and industrial waste, and supporting a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
I will support investing in energy independence through renewable energy alternatives.
I will support a farm bill that rewards responsible land management practices and benefits local family farms.


The evidence is in and speaks overwhelmingly – global climate change is real. To deny its potential impact would be to gamble with our children's and grandchildren's futures. America must reduce its dependence on the coal and petroleum products that contribute to global warming, and energy alternatives are becoming widely available in bio-derived, nuclear, solar, and wind energy.

I will work to see that the following measures are included in America’s energy policy:


Tax incentives to reward energy conservation and the use of alternative fuels in transportation, heating, lighting, and manufacturing, including implementation of a revenue-neutral carbon tax.
Sensible, progressive increases in CAFE fleet standards for fuel usage of automobiles and trucks.
Substantial increases in funding for mass transit and highway improvements to enhance transportation efficiency and reduce gridlock on our streets and highways.
http://www.tinklenberg08.com/issues.html

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

As much as I like Ron Paul, I also have to disagree with this endorsement. Sending out letters (likely ghost written) in support of people like Bachman and Don Young is just wrong. Yes, Bachman gets props for voting down the bailout. However, she has historically spoken up in favor of the war and empowering Patriot Act like garbage because of scary "Islamofascists." Ron Paul should only lend his name to endorsing liberty Republicans and others, not quasi-neo-cons who occasionally make a few good decisions.

[AJ Antimony]

Ever heard of ignoring shit and not taking everything so personally?

[klamath]

I think RP is looking at this where this congresswomans value is and that is on the house Financial Services Committee. That is a very big gatekeeper to house spending. I believe he wants as many allies on this comittee as he can get.

[StateofTrance]

Although I do feel that Ron Paul needs allies at the moment, this lady is a NEO-CON HACK. I'm live in MN right now, and this hack needs to be booted out. '

Mark my words - Ron's name AND value will be in danger if he keeps "endorsing" and sending such letters to his followers i.e. us. This is beyond pathetic. Granted He knows what he's doing and I'm no one to judge his moves, but come on..

[StateofTrance]

But, yeah,

She's a hot, brunette MILF :D

[Ninja Homer]

Bachman did not "come under attack by the liberal media" for no reason. She basically called Obama a subversive anti-American agent, and called for a investigation into "librul" un-American activities in Congress. That sort of crap is exactly what we need less of. It has nothing to do with liberty, or fixing corruption. It's just one side of the mess sliming the other. I am from Minnesota and I know everyone in that state finds that sort of talk revolting.

Michelle Bachman is a neocon with none of Dr. Paul's humility and discretion. She does not deserve his support.

Bachmann said she suspects that Obama may be anti-American, because of the people he associates with. She went on to say that she'd like to see the media investigate and do an expose on congressman that are anti-American.

Here's the youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FocyKsnN4ng

Frankly, I agree with both of those things.

She made a big mistake... she called out for the liberal media to investigate liberal congressmen, and they are in bed together, so they can't have Bachmann talking about that kind of thing. That's why Bachmann was under attack by the liberal media.

I applaud Bachmann for standing up against the Fed. The Fed is the cornerstone of all that is wrong with our government, and when that goes down, all else will follow, so we need as many allies against the Fed as possible. In my eyes, it's the #1 issue and all other issues pale in comparison at this point in time.

Tinklenberg is pretty good, but I'd much rather see him up against somebody else. As a Ron Paul supporter, it's really a tough call between the 2 of them.

[klamath]

About half of Tinklenburgs issues.

I will support a comprehensive policy shift that focuses on creating good jobs at good wages through reforms in tax, trade, economic, and labor policy.

What are those reforms?

I will advocate for needed investments in education and infrastructure that will generate quality new jobs and improve long-term economic opportunities.

More spending

I will work to expand the research and development of new energy technologies to create local jobs, improve our environment, decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and limit consumer energy costs

More government involvement in the private sector and more spending

Freeze mortgage rates for responsible homeowners whose payments are about to skyrocket due to adjustable rate mortgages.

Reward those that tried to get a house beyond their means.

Pursue and prosecute the loan sharks who are taking advantage of homebuyers.

more nanny state. taking care of people that were to lazy to read the fine print in loans.

Ensure that loan practices are regulated effectively, and that Minnesotans have access to clear, honest information when purchasing a home.

More regulation of free enterprise.

Preserve the mortgage interest income tax deduction.

Good

We must put aside our political differences and begin the transition to universal healthcare by expanding SCHIP to cover every American child. It is our moral obligation to make sure our children have access to care

Socialism and more spending.

I will support the continued availability of private insurance options alongside a competitively priced public option, while insisting that no insurance company be allowed to deny coverage due to pre-existing health conditions.

More government regulation in the free market

I will support long-term care benefits for the elderly.

More socialism and spending

I will vote to allow direct price negotiations between the federal government and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

Pure socialism

I will support the immediate reform of No Child Left Behind to stop punishing public schools, and I will vote to deliver the federal funding it originally promised to help all public schools improve.

More federal spending

I will help ensure that special education teachers have access to the resources they need by voting to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

More federal spending

I will vote to make proven school-readiness programs like Head Start and Early Head Start available for all American children.

more federal spending

I will support expanding access to higher education through restoring the federal Pell Grant program, funding national service-for-tuition and other debt-forgiveness initiatives, and curbing college tuition increases.

More federal spending and debt.

I will support legislation to make post-secondary opportunities available to all students to prepare them for the job markets of the 21st Century.

More federal spending

I will strongly support a responsible timetable for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, This timetable, to be developed in consultation with our military leaders, must balance the safety of our troops with our moral commitment to Iraq’s stability.

Totally open ended but "moral commitment to Iraq's stability" doesn't sound like the troops are coming out

I will encourage the establishment of a regional peace-keeping force, composed chiefly of troops from the region, to ensure the security of the Middle East.

More interference in the middle east.

As part of a Democratic Congress, I will advocate for an increase in diplomatic efforts to work toward the long-term stability of the Middle East.

More US involvement in the middle east.
I will vote to end the Bush administration’s freeze on diplomatic postings by the State Department, and I will support shifting substantial resources from the Department of Defense to the State Department to expand long-term diplomatic efforts.

expanding the UN

Half way through his issues I agree with him on one and one of our people sent money to this guy??

[tonesforjonesbones]

Can't ya'll understand Ron Paul is a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN...not a liberal democrat. She should have called him KOMRADE Obama. She is righton, Ron Paul is righton..where do I donate to her campaign? Tones

[BarryDonegan]

is your tummy full from all Chris Matthews Kool Aide?

:)

[tonesforjonesbones]

Chris Matthews? The dude whose legs shiver when The Komrade speaks? That Chris Matthews? TONES the FM

[BarryDonegan]

the Matthews Kool Aide was what caused Bachmann to become the media's new McCarthy, when, really, she is just suddenly realizing the socialist overthrow of the USA that happened a few weeks back.

[tonesforjonesbones]

Well..she didn't vote for the Bail out..and now she's being called ugly words? There are very few who were brave enough to vote no! I don't get it. I just think some of the komrades are under the impression that Ron Paul is one of them. Tonesssss

[BarryDonegan]

i was complimenting bachmann

[tonesforjonesbones]

:) If Dr. Paul gives someone money...I guess he's pretty well vetted them. tonez

[M House]

After watching her anti america bs talking point, she totally deserves being grilled. She could've stood on many good points, but instead chose to fail. WTF is an anti-american. Heck she figured out a way to make me dislike her when she even proposed a bill to get those stupid government mandated compact fluorescents off the table. Saving the environment through hazardous waste, yeah... Maybe if she had some balls, she'd stick to issues involving our government's failures.

[RevolutionSD]

I've given Dr. Paul a fair amount of money and in result I am getting his "Committee to Re-Elect Ron Paul" newsletter, which is different from CFL.

This morning, he sent me this e-mail:



The fact is, I already gave money to her opponent Tinklenberg. Bachman did not "come under attack by the liberal media" for no reason. She basically called Obama a subversive anti-American agent, and called for a investigation into "librul" un-American activities in Congress. That sort of crap is exactly what we need less of. It has nothing to do with liberty, or fixing corruption. It's just one side of the mess sliming the other. I am from Minnesota and I know everyone in that state finds that sort of talk revolting.

Michelle Bachman is a neocon with none of Dr. Paul's humility and discretion. She does not deserve his support.

Agreed and this is exactly why we need to get rid of government and not just try to get the "good guys" and gals into office to replace the bad ones. That tactic will never work.

[MGreen]

Didn't she say that Obama may have anti-American views?

...Doesn't he? Don't both candidates? Such words wouldn't lose my vote, especially if the Congresswoman voted against the bailout. Not that she deserves an RP endorsement, but then again few incumbents do.

[Michael Landon]

I think we as Ron Paul supporters should try to get down and help her. Wouldn't it be great if it looked as if she were in a dog fight and a bunch of Ron Paul supporters showed up and stated "Ron Paul suggested we come and help you get re-elected. Where do we start?" It looks good for us and it looks bad for the Neo-Cons who were treating the Paul supporters like dirt. In Minnesota, we had to deal with it at all the various Conventions. We were treated like shit by the Neo-Cons and it's hard to get past it but I think this is an opportunity to show them that WE, too, are Republicans and that we are the better people.

- ML

[ChaosControl]

While I don't know if she is good or bad on policies, what actually counts. I do not think it a good idea to give money to an opponent just because she calls someone anti-American and asks for an investigation into liberal activities.

Obama doesn't support American ideals and freedoms. If you do not support such ideals then I feel you are anti-American because you are against what America is about. So she is right on that.

We DO need to investigate liberal un-American activities in congress. This includes everything from the patriot act to raising taxes to banning activities that no one is harmed from like marijuana use. Those are all big government "liberal" b.s. So I see nothing wrong with the actual things she said, although I admit what she meant by the words probably is not what I'd mean had I said such. Still, to make a contribution to an opponent who may be incredibly bad just on such a statement isn't a wise course of action. I could see, based on how you interpret her words, why you wouldn't vote for her or send her a contribution but unless you found something good in her opponent, I don't understand why you'd give them money either.

Do you want to eject a fiscal conservative and potentially end up replacing her with another big spending nutjob who would support the bailout and economic "stimulus" packages?

If you researched the opponent and found them to be good though, then obviously you can ignore what I have said.

[tonesforjonesbones]

Dr. Ron Paul is a moral Christian Conservative Constitutionalist Republican, not a libertarian or a liberal. He is giving money to REPUBLICANS who are in line with his way of thinking. tones

[angelatc]

Heck she figured out a way to make me dislike her when she even proposed a bill to get those stupid government mandated compact fluorescents off the table. Saving the environment through hazardous waste, yeah....

What does this even mean? You dislike her because she tried to tried to outlaw hazardous waste?

[angelatc]

I think we as Ron Paul supporters should try to get down and help her. Wouldn't it be great if it looked as if she were in a dog fight and a bunch of Ron Paul supporters showed up and stated "Ron Paul suggested we come and help you get re-elected. Where do we start?" It looks good for us and it looks bad for the Neo-Cons who were treating the Paul supporters like dirt. In Minnesota, we had to deal with it at all the various Conventions. We were treated like shit by the Neo-Cons and it's hard to get past it but I think this is an opportunity to show them that WE, too, are Republicans and that we are the better people.

- ML

That would indeed be a wonderful thing. Where's Chris in MN? He's a mover and shaker kinda guy.

[StateofTrance]

I think we as Ron Paul supporters should try to get down and help her. Wouldn't it be great if it looked as if she were in a dog fight and a bunch of Ron Paul supporters showed up and stated "Ron Paul suggested we come and help you get re-elected. Where do we start?" It looks good for us and it looks bad for the Neo-Cons who were treating the Paul supporters like dirt. In Minnesota, we had to deal with it at all the various Conventions. We were treated like shit by the Neo-Cons and it's hard to get past it but I think this is an opportunity to show them that WE, too, are Republicans and that we are the better people.

- ML

The ONLY problem I have is that these Neo-Cons will later on show their true colors and ditch us when expecting a favor from them. This has happened BEFORE.

Any neo-con who supports McShame doesn't deserve my support. Remember those days when they all used to make fun of "kooky, crazy" Dr. Paul? It's SO easy to forget those memories? FUCK NO.

FUCK YOU Michele Bachmann, you filthy, snakeoil saleswoman, neo-con. People like you have damaged what Republican Party used to stand for and you need to be booted out.

[angelatc]

The ONLY problem I have is that these Neo-Cons will later on show their true colors and ditch us when expecting a favor from them. This has happened BEFORE. .

Grow up - it will happen again too.

Money talks. If we start putting our money into the races we'll wield more influence.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Doesn't anyone care about her neo-con positions on foreign policy and domestic "security"? She won't get any support from me. Pretty hard to forget this editorial Bachman wrote back in the spring, where she vigorously defended government spying:

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/16690956.html

[itsthepathocrats]

nm

[revolutionary8]

Shii, Bachman is right in her accusations. Perhaps she did not go about he pronouncements in the most politically correct way, and thereby allowing herself to become a media target, but Backman's accusations are well founded in history.

I urge you to start your research into the matter by searching on "Norman Dodd," or "Rep Frank Church" or the "Reece Committee".....as all of these Congressional actions found hard evidence of anti-American activities by some of the nations largest organizations and richest individuals. Many of these same actors not only support Obama, they actually taught and cultivated him for this upcoming role.

I'm actually surprised to see RP take such a timid role in regard to these anti-american affairs. He was much more honest and aggressive in his first Presidential campaign.

I enjoy your posts itsthepathocrats. :) Here is one of my favorite Norman Dodd quotes:
"The careers of men are watched. The men who indicate they would be especially capable in terms of the aim of this group are approached queitly and invited in to the inner circles. They are watched as they carry out assignments and eventually they are drawn into it under circumstances which make it virtually impossible for them to ever get out of it. "

[Delivered4000]

Well, she DID vote AGAINST the BAILOUT

[itsthepathocrats]

nm

[Natalie]

Shii,

Did you ever read Ron Paul's newsletter from back in the day?

He had very harsh words against the establishment and opponents, etc.

Just look at him in the video on Morton Downey Junior from back in the day when he was on fire, saying such things as "I say she invited it by the way she was dressed" in response to Lisa Sliwa stating one of her people (or whatever) were stabbed, I recall.



I just found that video. ROFL! That guy got OWNED!

Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88REf0tjZHo

[free.alive]

Obama is a communist. The only thing he shouldn't be rhetorically attacked over is the one thing the media and his campaign will continue to suggests all criticism is about: race. That is a classic communist tactic.

Classic. Watch on YouTube Anarchy USA. It's common knowledge the leftist influence in the 60's civil rights movement, but few people talk about communist influences within the black community during and leading up to those years.

Exhibit A, Jeremiah Wright and his "Liberation Theology."

The sheer extremism of Obama is the only thing which could prompt me to even, in my darkest, weakest moments, consider voting for McCain. I can't do it, but the alternative is going to be hell to pay.

I think we should abandon the GOP on our ballots (only for president) to send the message that they can't win with candidates like McCain, but also because all the wars, assault on freedoms and fiscal violence that will be the war waged by an Obama Administration will unite Republicans against them. I am starting to wonder if the price will be worth it.

Nonetheless, Obama has this won. Be prepared and make the predictions publicly that the neocons will be trying to get Republicans to make amends with the socialism coming our way. We know why they will, but your typical Republican doesn't, will be confused and will otherwise be manipulated into supporting the coming New New Deal.

Go Ron Paul for backing up someone else with balls.

[TruthAtLast]

obama IS a subversive marxist america hater...as is his nasty white hating wife.......if minnesotans find the truth offensive...blame urselves...not ms. bachman

+1

I'm with you and her on this. To be fair, I think McCain is also part of the same system of corruption but I don't blame her for saying this. It is about time our Representatives in Congress had the balls to speak the truth rather than being so damn politically correct.

I'm donating to her right now.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Bachman strongly believes in telecommunications spying by the government and the war. I don't understand why she deserves monetary support just because she voted down the bailout.

[libertarian4321]

Can't ya'll understand Ron Paul is a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN...not a liberal democrat. She should have called him KOMRADE Obama. She is righton, Ron Paul is righton..where do I donate to her campaign? Tones

I knew nothing about her until a week or so ago.

She came off as a bat shit crazy neocon and a bit of a McCarthyite. When given a chance to correct her error, she just dug herself deeper into a hole.

I sure as HELL won't help this woman stay in congress- even if she is right on some issues, she's obviously wrong on others.

Tones, I know you're a bit of a neocon nut- so if you support her, I should probably support her opponent.

Let me know how much you send her, and I'll send her opponent 5 times that amount :)

[libertarian4321]

Bachman strongly believes in telecommunications spying by the government and the war. I don't understand why she deserves monetary support just because she voted down the bailout.

+1000

I love fiscal conservatives, but not warmongering, anti freedom, neocon McCarthyite fiscal conservatives.

Do we have to accept despicable persons like Bachman just because they are sometimes fiscally conservative?

I don't think so.

[StateofTrance]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOYR5Cem4dU

She said - "fighting the war is about preserving America's freedom."

What a fucking reptile. A total anti-thesis to what Ron Paul stood for years and years.

[Spider-Man]

The only way anyone will ever take CFL seriously is if they know they can count on their support when they vote like CFL wants them to, and if they don't then they get slammed. That's how you get things done. It's real simple.

[literatim]

obama IS a subversive marxist america hater...as is his nasty white hating wife.......if minnesotans find the truth offensive...blame urselves...not ms. bachman

+1

[Knightskye]

Seems to happen often:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=162822

[D.H.]

Thanks for posting Knightskye. I noticed Bachmann wasn't on the first list. Hmmm....He didn't think she was good enough to be part of the Liberty PAC.... but wants help for her now because she got herself in trouble. Heck, if he wants to base EVERYTHING on the bailout now, why doesn't he just throw out a few Dem names; plenty of them voted against it too.

There is no way he would have supported her pro war/neocon rhetoric in the past. This is dissapointing as I see this as just more of the same old, same old Washington partisanship.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

I have to wonder about some of these Ron Paul endorsements. I have a hard time believing the man himself really wants to publicly back up some of these people like Bachman and Don Young. Are some of his underlings just out of control and issuing support in Ron Paul's name?

Another possibility is that Ron Paul has been stripped of some Congressional seniority behind the scenes by the rotten GOP, and regrettably is trying to ingratiate himself with them again without pissing us off by endorsing some of their incumbents in close races. I don't know, but it is baffling.

[Knightskye]

Thanks for posting Knightskye.

Welcome.


I noticed Bachmann wasn't on the first list. Hmmm....He didn't think she was good enough to be part of the Liberty PAC.... but wants help for her now because she got herself in trouble. Heck, if he wants to base EVERYTHING on the bailout now, why doesn't he just throw out a few Dem names; plenty of them voted against it too.

If he was basing everything on the bailout, he'd retract his endorsement of Don Young, who voted for it.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2008-101

[NewEnd]

:confused:

WTF

That's the last time i ever donate to Ron Paul, and there goes my consideration for supporting CFL. Why the hell would he support someone like this? The woman is a bitch. I hardly like Bob Conley, but I could support him, and BJ Lawson is gravy..... but this bitch? WTF RON!!!???

[KenInMontiMN]

Response directly from her district coming here:

Bachmann is the superior choice in CD6 MN- that doesn't mean to imply that she's anywhere near a perfect choice.

Up until a month ago I would have gagged myself before ever stepping forward to support her. But we live in interesting times and things are evolving quickly- and as our congress goes she is now at the forefront in the 'coming around' category, and that is something we simply can't afford to lose in Washington under the upcoming Obama administration. There is going to be a whole army of Obamites in congress for the next session, and El Tinklenberg would be just one more such footsoldier. If there's anyone more difficult to bring around to the real problems facing this country than a formerly 100% neocon Republican, it is a big government Democrat- and we would lose an awful lot of recent positive development and be back to square one if we replace her with El. This support is tentative, of course, to future performance. But the reason Dr. Paul came forward with this entreaty towards our CD6 people is in large part because we asked him to do this.

It goes without saying that Ms. Bachmann is ditzy beyond belief at times and knows little in the way of a running gear in between 'the lights are out and no one is home here' and 'full forward gung ho.' It goes without saying that her remarks were incredibly intemperate in that she personalized them rather than sticking strictly to labeling the issues rather than the human being as Anti-American, which is the absolute truth. And of course she's still in the process of being brought up to speed on the fact that her party's leaders including McCain are also behind those Anti-American issues. But exactly like other MN politicians recently who are prone to exactly the same faults in the area of political self-induced suicide [insert Jesse here], with Michele you never have to wonder whether you're being 'handled' with deceptively intended rhetoric- love her or hate her you are getting the real Michele at all times. And to her credit she's caught on to her own stupidity in being led into her intemperate delivery of those remarks, and has admitted she was wrong to personalize them.

It was an interesting experience watching her evolve with grassroots influence this spring, from her first speaking gig at the local BPOU in Meeker County in late February- where she may as well have showed up dressed in a cheerleading outfit complete with pom-poms and a big 'W' on the blouse, she was selling Bush policy hard and was shocked I think to see her rhetoric nearly send the group into fistfights between the Liberty group and the Neocon supporters. For several minutes there she was interrupted while the group got about the business of tearing out one another's throats. From there to Wright Co, then on to HD16B Sherburne and the CD6 convention itself I listened as she amazingly had less and less to say about foreign policy and more and more to say about anything else- including light bulbs, LOL.

Lastly it goes without saying that if she'd simply stayed in the Foxhole, kept her head down and not stuck her neck out in the media she'd have won here with at least a 10% margin, here in MN's most conservative district. Now that's in doubt and a troubling development is exacerbating the problem- a certain college prof at St. John's/St. Bens has thrown his hat back in the ring as a write-in choice. I spent a good deal of the day helping one of his colleagues move into her new home yesterday near St. Joe, and on the moving crew were a few other faculty members. Its an open secret up there that Mr. Aubrey Immelman, the Political Psych prof and St. Could Times political columnist, and write-in candidate who filed last weekend to have his votes counted, is a longtime Democrat supporter with the sole intent of siphoning off as much Bachmann support as possible in the hopes of helping Tinklenberg get elected. The vast majority of us Liberty people voted for him in the primary- as a protest anti-Bachmann vote at a time when it didn't matter as to the outcome, and as a result we helped Immelman out to the tune of over 14% in that primary against Bachmann. But now there are real stakes on the table in the general election, and its absolutely crucial that each and every one of our CD6 people fully understand that Immelman is all about absolute deception and they must decide accordingly. And they must be informed as to Michele's progress in the area of coming around to Liberty viewpoints, which is very real and not insubstantial. We will never know for sure if we deposed a budding Ron Paul in the making if we let Tinklenberg win. MN has no such Ron Paul in National office on the GOP side, the closest thing we have is conservative Dem Collin Peterson up in the NW, and he's a damn good rep as Dems go. I strongly urge all MN CD6'ers, despite past record on Bachmann, to give some thought to her apparent epiphany with regard to economics and the importance of limited Federal gov't living within its means, and vote to find out how she will evolve from here. A Tinklenberg win sets us back to square one.

I strongly urge all outside the district whether inside or outside of the state borders to keep an open mind on this- and the idiots who want to denigrate Dr. Paul for supporting movement in the right directions from his colleagues in Congress and more specifically on his committee- well to put it bluntly you can stick that garbage where the sun don't shine and keep it there.

[Michael Landon]

Response directly from her district coming here:

Bachmann is the superior choice in CD6 MN- that doesn't mean to imply that she's anywhere near a perfect choice.

Up until a month ago I would have gagged myself before ever stepping forward to support her. But we live in interesting times and things are evolving quickly- and as our congress goes she is now at the forefront in the 'coming around' category, and that is something we simply can't afford to lose in Washington under the upcoming Obama administration. There is going to be a whole army of Obamites in congress for the next session, and El Tinklenberg would be just one more such footsoldier. If there's anyone more difficult to bring around to the real problems facing this country than a formerly 100% neocon Republican, it is a big government Democrat- and we would lose an awful lot of recent positive development and be back to square one if we replace her with El. This support is tentative, of course, to future performance. But the reason Dr. Paul came forward with this entreaty towards our CD6 people is in large part because we asked him to do this.

It goes without saying that Ms. Bachmann is ditzy beyond belief at times and knows little in the way of a running gear in between 'the lights are out and no one is home here' and 'full forward gung ho.' It goes without saying that her remarks were incredibly intemperate in that she personalized them rather than sticking strictly to labeling the issues rather than the human being as Anti-American, which is the absolute truth. And of course she's still in the process of being brought up to speed on the fact that her party's leaders including McCain are also behind those Anti-American issues. But exactly like other MN politicians recently who are prone to exactly the same faults in the area of political self-induced suicide [insert Jesse here], with Michele you never have to wonder whether you're being 'handled' with deceptively intended rhetoric- love her or hate her you are getting the real Michele at all times. And to her credit she's caught on to her own stupidity in being led into her intemperate delivery of those remarks, and has admitted she was wrong to personalize them.

It was an interesting experience watching her evolve with grassroots influence this spring, from her first speaking gig at the local BPOU in Meeker County in late February- where she may as well have showed up dressed in a cheerleading outfit complete with pom-poms and a big 'W' on the blouse, she was selling Bush policy hard and was shocked I think to see her rhetoric nearly send the group into fistfights between the Liberty group and the Neocon supporters. For several minutes there she was interrupted while the group got about the business of tearing out one another's throats. From there to Wright Co, then on to HD16B Sherburne and the CD6 convention itself I listened as she amazingly had less and less to say about foreign policy and more and more to say about anything else- including light bulbs, LOL.

Lastly it goes without saying that if she'd simply stayed in the Foxhole, kept her head down and not stuck her neck out in the media she'd have won here with at least a 10% margin, here in MN's most conservative district. Now that's in doubt and a troubling development is exacerbating the problem- a certain college prof at St. John's/St. Bens has thrown his hat back in the ring as a write-in choice. I spent a good deal of the day helping one of his colleagues move into her new home yesterday near St. Joe, and on the moving crew were a few other faculty members. Its an open secret up there that Mr. Aubrey Immelman, the Political Psych prof and St. Could Times political columnist, and write-in candidate who filed last weekend to have his votes counted, is a longtime Democrat supporter with the sole intent of siphoning off as much Bachmann support as possible in the hopes of helping Tinklenberg get elected. The vast majority of us Liberty people voted for him in the primary- as a protest anti-Bachmann vote at a time when it didn't matter as to the outcome, and as a result we helped Immelman out to the tune of over 14% in that primary against Bachmann. But now there are real stakes on the table in the general election, and its absolutely crucial that each and every one of our CD6 people fully understand that Immelman is all about absolute deception and they must decide accordingly. And they must be informed as to Michele's progress in the area of coming around to Liberty viewpoints, which is very real and not insubstantial. We will never know for sure if we deposed a budding Ron Paul in the making if we let Tinklenberg win. MN has no such Ron Paul in National office on the GOP side, the closest thing we have is conservative Dem Collin Peterson up in the NW, and he's a damn good rep as Dems go. I strongly urge all MN CD6'ers, despite past record on Bachmann, to give some thought to her apparent epiphany with regard to economics and the importance of limited Federal gov't living within its means, and vote to find out how she will evolve from here. A Tinklenberg win sets us back to square one.

I strongly urge all outside the district whether inside or outside of the state borders to keep an open mind on this- and the idiots who want to denigrate Dr. Paul for supporting movement in the right directions from his colleagues in Congress and more specifically on his committee- well to put it bluntly you can stick that garbage where the sun don't shine and keep it there.


Agreed.

- ML

[NewEnd]

I strongly urge all outside the district whether inside or outside of the state borders to keep an open mind on this- and the idiots who want to denigrate Dr. Paul for supporting movement in the right directions from his colleagues in Congress and more specifically on his committee- well to put it bluntly you can stick that garbage where the sun don't shine and keep it there.

Those FRN's are garbage, but I'll spend them on a worthy candidate, not this piece of neocon trash. Yeah, they are all "coming around" all of the sudden... NOT. Suddenly Johhny Mac is all about smaller government and against Bush.... NOT.

Its ass kicking time, I will watch with glee when she loses.

[KenInMontiMN]

Those FRN's are garbage, but I'll spend them on a worthy candidate, not this piece of neocon trash. Yeah, they are all "coming around" all of the sudden... NOT. Suddenly Johhny Mac is all about smaller government and against Bush.... NOT.

Its ass kicking time, I will watch with glee when she loses.

She may lose, she may win, but it will not be an ass-kicking either way, this one is going to be close. No one asked you to spend a cent, just stay out of my district if you'd enjoy seeing her lose (she earned that negative sentiment and its very understandable based on her past record), her campaign has plenty of money to offset her opponent's new wealth.

But labeling people as presumably irredeemable trash is about a thousand times more intemperate than anything she ever put forward, in comparison. Michele has always been 100% genuine and forthright about her stances, however hopelessly lost in space some of those stances were. Michele now begins to display the makings of a sound Liberty candidacy in its infancy, a lot of work has been expended bringing her to this point by a lot of very dedicated people in this Ron Paul district, and MNCD6 C4L wants to see where it leads from here. That's why Dr. Paul is supporting her re-election here as well, and lacking a long-term Liberty candidate on the ballot, Ms. Bachmann, again, is the superior choice in this election cycle, especially considering the stacked deck that will be on display in Washington after this election.

[D.H.]

Another possibility is that Ron Paul has been stripped of some Congressional seniority behind the scenes by the rotten GOP, and regrettably is trying to ingratiate himself with them again without pissing us off by endorsing some of their incumbents in close races. I don't know, but it is baffling.

I wondered too but I looked into it and that is not the case. Even the National GOP is offended by her comments and pulled funding for Bachmann. See AP article below.

She's getting support from the what is considered the ulta right wing side like Tony Perkins President of the Family Research Council. It started out as a division of James Dobson's group Focus on the Family. I can't understand Ron Paul even involving himself with her and her supporters at all, bailout vote or not because the FRC wants Federal control of everything.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jCycSG2hdMyWkELgsHHbI_YCjq2wD9414SPG1

[NewEnd]

She may lose, she may win, but it will not be an ass-kicking either way, this one is going to be close. No one asked you to spend a cent, just stay out of my district if you'd enjoy seeing her lose (she earned that negative sentiment and its very understandable based on her past record), her campaign has plenty of money to offset her opponent's new wealth.

But labeling people as presumably irredeemable trash is about a thousand times more intemperate than anything she ever put forward, in comparison. Michele has always been 100% genuine and forthright about her stances, however hopelessly lost in space some of those stances were. Michele now begins to display the makings of a sound Liberty candidacy in its infancy, a lot of work has been expended bringing her to this point by a lot of very dedicated people in this Ron Paul district, and MNCD6 C4L wants to see where it leads from here. That's why Dr. Paul is supporting her re-election here as well, and lacking a long-term Liberty candidate on the ballot, Ms. Bachmann, again, is the superior choice in this election cycle, especially considering the stacked deck that will be on display in Washington after this election.

What has she said about foreign policy, that leads you to believe this? What about civil liberties? Is the freedom message about labeling other Americans as "unamerican". Is that the face the C4L wants on their flyers? Hell no. She could only be a detriment.

Anybody, that thinks they can call anyone else "unamerican" because of their political beliefs is the same fucking trash that tried to silence those who opposed the Iraq war 5 years ago. I will not forget the darts and slings, and if someone is still going to insult me like that, they can go to hell.

Attacking a persons patriotism, is off limits, in my opinion. It is not helpful, it is not unifying, it is simply the Bushy politics of fear and division.

[KenInMontiMN]

There are Anti-American stances on issues, and many presumably well-intentioned Americans, President Bush not the least among them, have made the mistake of lining up behind such stances. Obama has as well. So has McCain, and so has Bachmann.

Any stance that leads directly to America's insolvency as a nation stands first and foremost among them.

She had every right and duty, as my representative in Washington, to bring that fact to light. I would be disappointed if she didn't do that, and I have for a long time been disappointed in that regard. She was led to personalizing the statement towards one particular candidate which was a huge and glaring omission. She's been informed that when pointing out such problematic support there is no better place to begin pointing the finger than at the mirror.

Again, we want to see where all this leads, and that is our intent- to re-elect her if we can. Not to present her as a Liberty candidate unless and until the ongoing record reflects that worthiness. Nobody here is printing up any Bachmann C4L fliers, simply supporting her re-election as suddenly an intriguing new option we in no way would have supported prior to the bailout. We've nothing to lose at this point with that support, and there appears to be potential for gain that will needless to say never get a measurement unless she is re-elected. Sorry to hear you can't wish us well and support us in that endeavor.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Just voting down the bailout is not good enough reason to support Bachmann. She still shows all signs of being neo-con lite, given her support for that other immoral drain on our economy:

http://minnesotaindependent.com/11590/five-things-michele-bachmann-and-the-surge-evangelists-arent-telling-you


This week at the 6th District congressional debate in Stillwater, Michele Bachmann hailed last year’s “surge” of troops to Iraq as an unmitigated success, saying it has done “what no one thought was possible.” Iraq has peace and calm, she said. And al-Qaeda has “essentially been vanquished.”

And just for the yuck factor:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michele_Bachman#State_of_the_Union_Address


During the 2007 State of the Union Address, Bachmann was on the aisle in a very visible position in the Chamber and frequently greeted members going into the Chamber. During President Bush's exit from the Chamber, Bachmann clasped his shoulder for about 30 seconds while waiting for a photograph to be taken.[48] Bush signed two autographs for Bachmann and, finally, leaned into Bachmann for a kiss.[49] The encounter received immense press coverage the next day.

Endorsing these pro-war incumbents because of a handful of fiscally conservative acts could really come back to hit the CFL in the face if it continues. There are still fights going on across the internet because of Barr's positions and CIA past, but we expect a unified liberty movement by endorsing these toxic incumbents like Bachmann who are pro-war and pro-domestic spying? I really don't get it. This is going to do more harm than good in the long run if Ron Paul issues more endorsements like this.

[KenInMontiMN]

You worry about McCollum over there, Lovecraftian, and we'll worry about Bachmann up here. I know who's made more progress so far since the actual state of the union has become apparent to even the most hopelessly fogbound. I never pretended that Bachmann may not still be problematic. It's a work in progress.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

There are Anti-American stances on issues, and many presumably well-intentioned Americans, President Bush not the least among them, have made the mistake of lining up behind such stances. Obama has as well. So has McCain, and so has Bachmann.

Any stance that leads directly to America's insolvency as a nation stands first and foremost among them.

She had every right and duty, as my representative in Washington, to bring that fact to light. I would be disappointed if she didn't do that, and I have for a long time been disappointed in that regard. She was led to personalizing the statement towards one particular candidate which was a huge and glaring omission. She's been informed that when pointing out such problematic support there is no better place to begin pointing the finger than at the mirror.

Again, we want to see where all this leads, and that is our intent- to re-elect her if we can. Not to present her as a Liberty candidate unless and until the ongoing record reflects that worthiness. Nobody here is printing up any Bachmann C4L fliers, simply supporting her re-election as suddenly an intriguing new option we in no way would have supported prior to the bailout. We've nothing to lose at this point with that support, and there appears to be potential for gain that will needless to say never get a measurement unless she is re-elected. Sorry to hear you can't wish us well and support us in that endeavor.

I don't really have anything against individuals working for her re-election, since I'm not sold on the idea that Tinklenberg is much better. What bothers me is Ron Paul, our public face for the CFL and wider "liberty movement," endorsing people like her and calling for support. I believe it's going to do much more harm than good in the long run, especially if we give anti-war Democrats a bitter taste who might turn against Obama as he screws up over the next few years.

Ron Paul should not be openly supporting these incumbents who have terrible baggage on many issues that are important to us. How can we expect to be taken seriously if our current leader (and he is, at least in a de facto sense) expresses support for police state hawks who get it right on a few economic issues, or conversely, anti-war politicians who fail on economics (I don't think this has happened yet, but I'm using the opposite as an example)?

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

You worry about McCollum over there, Lovecraftian, and we'll worry about Bachmann up here. I know who's made more progress so far since the actual state of the union has become apparent to even the most hopelessly fogbound. I never pretended that Bachmann may not still be problematic. It's a work in progress.

Well, you guys do at least have a close race to look forward to. I wish McCollum were under that kind of pressure, but it probably isn't happening this year.

[specsaregood]

Bump for relevance. Judging by today's performance by Michelle Bachman, I can see why he wanted to keep her around.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9DgMG-_6Ls

[Bruno]

I think RP is looking at this where this congresswomans value is and that is on the house Financial Services Committee. That is a very big gatekeeper to house spending. I believe he wants as many allies on this comittee as he can get.

This 10/2008 comment rang true at today's hearing. She nailed it!

[PatriotOne]

Um yeah.....supporting a politician who is telling the truth to the public is bad!

Good call on Tinklenberg :rolleyes:.

Believes in global Warming and support the Carbon Tax
Wants Universal Health Care
Wants to give MORE $ to Homeland Security to fight Domestic Terrorism

Etc., etc., etc.

http://www.tinklenberg08.com/conservation.html

Errr....did you bother to read his issues before you sent him $ :eek:

[diggronpaul]

Bachman did not "come under attack by the liberal media" for no reason. She basically called Obama a subversive anti-American agent, and called for a investigation into "librul" un-American activities in Congress. That sort of crap is exactly what we need less of. It has nothing to do with liberty, or fixing corruption. It's just one side of the mess sliming the other. I am from Minnesota and I know everyone in that state finds that sort of talk revolting.
I heard the Bachman statements when they came out, and her message is/was accurate. Of course she'll be attacked by the establishment for this.

This thread discusses the 1934 document, 5year study funded by Carnegie, that lays out the goals and the educational portion of the plan.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2008572

And this thread discusses how Norman Dodd, as chief researcher for the Reece Commission, found evidence that all major foundations were subverting the US educational system
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=132213

[Stary Hickory]

She stands against the FED and the bailouts. This is enough for me to seriously support her. Any Democrat that gets put in WILL vote yes for all bailouts and will go along with Obama for socialist programs.

This must be stopped, we have to survive four years of intense socialist attacks. We need people who oppose this in DC.

[literatim]

From what I have seen of her, I am glad she won the election.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE3Q77MlzCc

[He Who Pawns]

She made a fool of herself on Hardball. Hopefully she will not embarrass Dr Paul.

[revolutionary8]

She made a fool of herself on Hardball. Hopefully she will not embarrass Dr Paul.

Oh please. She will only embarrass herself, if she embarrasses anyone. Do you think she and Ron Paul are conjoined twins? I am SO sick of the embarraphobists. ;)

[risk_reward]

I was just watching the nightly news and they played part of her questioning of Geithner and Bernanke. Specifically, they played "show me in the constitution" "sir, in the constitution" "where in the consititution". I was shocked to see the media concerned that our financial overlords were ignoring the constitution.

[pcosmar]

OP, Fail.
This is Text Book Fail.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

Oh please. She will only embarrass herself, if she embarrasses anyone. Do you think she and Ron Paul are conjoined twins? I am SO sick of the embarraphobists. ;)
* PLEASE READ, SPENT LONG TIME READING POSTS TO RESPOND TO ALL


I have been on here for 20 mintues now reading all of your posts and i have to say i am a little worried. I personally beleive you all know much more about Ron Paul than i do, and his ideals. most of you are also much greater supporters of his ideals, and i think that is great. BUT, What i notice is that many of you do not understand how politics works very well with the general public. Now i agree with you all on almost all issues, especially foreign policy. What i think a lot of you dont grasp is that you will NEVER win an election or make a large enough movement to change anything if you always stick to far to one side of the politcal spectrum. It is called lineland chaos and i will explain it to anyone who does not wish to look it up. Essentially it is very simple. What i am trying to say is that people who say outlandish things as Michelle Bachman has DOES hurt the movement, and if she is associated with Ron Paul and the CFL it will have a negative impact on our movement. One of the main reasons Ron got so little attention from the media is because he mentioned some things that were a little to far out there for the general nonpolitcally educated public to understand and or believe in. Especially in regards to the Fed and 9/11. Now Ron is a very smart man, and i commend him for speaking his thoughts outloud like that during the debates, and that won respect points for me. The simple truth though is that the american public has to be lied to to get certain things done. Look at any president and almost all of there agenda was presented post election, and sometimes in complete oppostion of what they ran on. Because by the time the election is over most Americans could care less from then on. What Ron really needs to do is surround himself with people who know how to bite there lip sometimes and be smart about what they say. The changing of the Fed and other huge legislation can come once they are in office. They need to run on the ideas of liberty, good foreign policy, and then work there way from there. Otherwise the majority of americans will not go for it until it is to late, and it may already be too late. I Just hope people on here and other forums recognize that although they may be right (and i think they mostly are) it is not about being right, it is about getting everyone else to think your right, and you must be very careful in how you do this. And yes everything you say in politics matters, and it will come back to bite you in the ass if you are not careful. END RANT

*so for that reason, i must agree with the OP. I however would not have supported the other candidate after reading his stances on certain issues.

[Anti Federalist]

The simple truth though is that the american public has to be lied to to get certain things done

I'm not willing to "win" that way.

I'd rather lose with honor.

Failure.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

I'm not willing to "win" that way.

I'd rather lose with honor.

Failure.

Then sadly you will always lose, and nothing will ever be accomplished. I do not like it either, but it is simply the way things have to be done until the general public decides it is important for them to understand there politics and there government.

[specsaregood]

I was just watching the nightly news and they played part of her questioning of Geithner and Bernanke. Specifically, they played "show me in the constitution" "sir, in the constitution" "where in the consititution". I was shocked to see the media concerned that our financial overlords were ignoring the constitution.

I was impressed by her actions today, hopefully she can come around and vote more like Dr. Paul in the future. With that said, I sent her a friendly email, an encouraging word.



Congresswoman Michele Bachmann,

I would like to applaud you on your questioning during the House Financial Services Committee today (3.24.2009). There are too few representatives willing to take such a stand. I don’t know if you are aware of it, but today you went from a name without a face, to a large blip on the radar of many constitution supporting activists today. I now see why Congressman Paul sent out a letter of support for your candidacy to his supporters last October.

I am not a constituent of yours but I am a campaign donator and activist. There are thousands more like me that have been awakened by Dr. Paul’s recent Presidential campaign. We are organized, freedom-driven and willing to donate our time, money and support to any candidate that stands up for sound money, civil liberties, and most importantly a constitutionally-limited government; as evidenced by their voting record.

You will no doubt be facing many tough decisions and legislation over the remainder of your current term in office. I urge you to follow Congressman Paul’s lead and err on the side of the constitution and liberty on all proposed legislation; for it is tough to fault a representative that does so. If your voting record over the next 2 years falls between these suggestions you may just find yourself with a nation-wide base of support upon which to draw from.

Sincerely,


I for one am willing to look past previous belimishes on her record if she starts to vote more inline with Dr. Paul. If she can do that, remains to be seen.

[Anti Federalist]

Then sadly you will always lose, and nothing will ever be accomplished. I do not like it either, but it is simply the way things have to be done until the general public decides it is important for them to understand there politics and there government.

Nothing will be accomplished, if you start off by lying.

You will have already corrupted yourself, and then, what's one more lie, what's one more contribution, what's one more night of drunken hookers and coke and payola from foreign lobbyists?

Ron Paul has the credibility he has by being unfailingly honest for thirty years in politics.

Google "Pyhrric Victory".

[Roxi]

About half of Tinklenburgs issues.

I will support a comprehensive policy shift that focuses on creating good jobs at good wages through reforms in tax, trade, economic, and labor policy.

What are those reforms?

I will advocate for needed investments in education and infrastructure that will generate quality new jobs and improve long-term economic opportunities.

More spending

I will work to expand the research and development of new energy technologies to create local jobs, improve our environment, decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and limit consumer energy costs

More government involvement in the private sector and more spending

Freeze mortgage rates for responsible homeowners whose payments are about to skyrocket due to adjustable rate mortgages.

Reward those that tried to get a house beyond their means.

Pursue and prosecute the loan sharks who are taking advantage of homebuyers.

more nanny state. taking care of people that were to lazy to read the fine print in loans.

Ensure that loan practices are regulated effectively, and that Minnesotans have access to clear, honest information when purchasing a home.

More regulation of free enterprise.

Preserve the mortgage interest income tax deduction.

Good

We must put aside our political differences and begin the transition to universal healthcare by expanding SCHIP to cover every American child. It is our moral obligation to make sure our children have access to care

Socialism and more spending.

I will support the continued availability of private insurance options alongside a competitively priced public option, while insisting that no insurance company be allowed to deny coverage due to pre-existing health conditions.

More government regulation in the free market

I will support long-term care benefits for the elderly.

More socialism and spending

I will vote to allow direct price negotiations between the federal government and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

Pure socialism

I will support the immediate reform of No Child Left Behind to stop punishing public schools, and I will vote to deliver the federal funding it originally promised to help all public schools improve.

More federal spending

I will help ensure that special education teachers have access to the resources they need by voting to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

More federal spending

I will vote to make proven school-readiness programs like Head Start and Early Head Start available for all American children.

more federal spending

I will support expanding access to higher education through restoring the federal Pell Grant program, funding national service-for-tuition and other debt-forgiveness initiatives, and curbing college tuition increases.

More federal spending and debt.

I will support legislation to make post-secondary opportunities available to all students to prepare them for the job markets of the 21st Century.

More federal spending

I will strongly support a responsible timetable for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, This timetable, to be developed in consultation with our military leaders, must balance the safety of our troops with our moral commitment to Iraq’s stability.

Totally open ended but "moral commitment to Iraq's stability" doesn't sound like the troops are coming out

I will encourage the establishment of a regional peace-keeping force, composed chiefly of troops from the region, to ensure the security of the Middle East.

More interference in the middle east.

As part of a Democratic Congress, I will advocate for an increase in diplomatic efforts to work toward the long-term stability of the Middle East.

More US involvement in the middle east.
I will vote to end the Bush administration’s freeze on diplomatic postings by the State Department, and I will support shifting substantial resources from the Department of Defense to the State Department to expand long-term diplomatic efforts.

expanding the UN

Half way through his issues I agree with him on one and one of our people sent money to this guy??

okay thats way awesome... you should do a blog and do all the neocon platforms in this way

[revolutionary8]

* PLEASE READ, SPENT LONG TIME READING POSTS TO RESPOND TO ALL


I have been on here for 20 mintues now reading all of your posts and i have to say i am a little worried. I personally beleive you all know much more about Ron Paul than i do, and his ideals. most of you are also much greater supporters of his ideals, and i think that is great. BUT, What i notice is that many of you do not understand how politics works very well with the general public. Now i agree with you all on almost all issues, especially foreign policy. What i think a lot of you dont grasp is that you will NEVER win an election or make a large enough movement to change anything if you always stick to far to one side of the politcal spectrum. It is called lineland chaos and i will explain it to anyone who does not wish to look it up. Essentially it is very simple. What i am trying to say is that people who say outlandish things as Michelle Bachman has DOES hurt the movement, and if she is associated with Ron Paul and the CFL it will have a negative impact on our movement. One of the main reasons Ron got so little attention from the media is because he mentioned some things that were a little to far out there for the general nonpolitcally educated public to understand and or believe in. Especially in regards to the Fed and 9/11. Now Ron is a very smart man, and i commend him for speaking his thoughts outloud like that during the debates, and that won respect points for me. The simple truth though is that the american public has to be lied to to get certain things done. Look at any president and almost all of there agenda was presented post election, and sometimes in complete oppostion of what they ran on. Because by the time the election is over most Americans could care less from then on. What Ron really needs to do is surround himself with people who know how to bite there lip sometimes and be smart about what they say. The changing of the Fed and other huge legislation can come once they are in office. They need to run on the ideas of liberty, good foreign policy, and then work there way from there. Otherwise the majority of americans will not go for it until it is to late, and it may already be too late. I Just hope people on here and other forums recognize that although they may be right (and i think they mostly are) it is not about being right, it is about getting everyone else to think your right, and you must be very careful in how you do this. And yes everything you say in politics matters, and it will come back to bite you in the ass if you are not careful. END RANT

*so for that reason, i must agree with the OP. I however would not have supported the other candidate after reading his stances on certain issues.
:rolleyes: OFCOL
It is TOO DAMNED LATE TO KEEP DOING THE SAME THINGS WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST OVER AND OVER!
For YEARS, Ron Paul has "blended in", and for YEARS he has been ignored! How about drawing attention to oneself by *speaking out* on certain issues, no matter how *taboo* it might seem to the sleeping masses at that particular point in the time/space continum. Maybe some day, they will all wake up!!!!
Cheesus H.
Please Pass the ducci, NOT Gucci. Thanks.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

Nothing will be accomplished, if you start off by lying.

You will have already corrupted yourself, and then, what's one more lie, what's one more contribution, what's one more night of drunken hookers and coke and payola from foreign lobbyists?

Ron Paul has the credibility he has by being unfailingly honest for thirty years in politics.

Google "Pyhrric Victory".

Maybe i should have chosen my words more carefully. Instead of lie i should have probably said not say the whole truth. If he does not share everything he stands for such as abolishing the Fed or uncovering 9/11 inconsistencies, it will not be necesarrily lying, just not expressing things that are SURE to hinder your chances of winning the presidency. If you think the movement will get anywhere without major events that make most of the general public wake up and smell the shit, then you are wasting your time and money imo. What we need to do is wake up and realize that we will not get anywhere if we stick to far to oneside of the political spectrum. It is exactly why JcPenny and Sears had there stores next eachother all through the early 1900's, so they could share the customer and get nearly equal amounts of revenue. Move to far to one side of the town and you lose part of your customer base. move to the center and share the profits. Exactly why the republican and democratic parties are so similar. LINELAND CHAOS THEORY

[revolutionary8]

Maybe i should have chosen my words more carefully. Instead of lie i should have probably said not say the whole truth. If he does not share everything he stands for such as abolishing the Fed or uncovering 9/11 inconsistencies, it will not be necesarrily lying, just not expressing things that are SURE to hinder your chances of winning the presidency. If you think the movement will get anywhere without major events that make most of the general public wake up and smell the shit, then you are wasting your time and money imo. What we need to do is wake up and realize that we will not get anywhere if we stick to far to oneside of the political spectrum. It is exactly why JcPenny and Sears had there stores next eachother all through the early 1900's, so they could share the customer and get nearly equal amounts of revenue. Move to far to one side of the town and you lose part of your customer base. move to the center and share the profits. Exactly why the republican and democratic parties are so similar. LINELAND CHAOS THEORY
It took YEARS for RP to be heard on some of the issues that we face today, and by the same token, it will take those who heard him from the very beginning YEARS to hear about some of the more "conspiratorial" issues, and most importantly- VICE VERSA- those that were more attached to the future, learned from those more attatched to the past. At some point in their research, those who fear internment camps and prison camps (FEMA) in their future, learned from those who had experienced/studied internment camps and prison camps in the past.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

:rolleyes: OFCOL
It is TOO DAMNED LATE TO KEEP DOING THE SAME THINGS WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST OVER AND OVER!
For YEARS, Ron Paul has "blended in", and for YEARS he has been ignored! How about drawing attention to oneself by *speaking out* on certain issues, no matter how *taboo* it might seem to the sleeping masses at that particular point in the time/space continum. Maybe some day, they will all wake up!!!!
Cheesus H.
Please Pass the ducci, NOT Gucci. Thanks.

Historically incorrect. Ron has actually been advocating the same ideals since his first congressional win (special election) in 1976. Even when he was only there for a few months before the general election that he lost. He just didn't get the spotlight he did until he ran for POTUS in 1988 (third party, also why he got no real media attention). Most people on here have to admitt they knew nothing about him until then. It is not because he was trying to "blend in". It is because he didn't get any media attention and most people were not interested in what he stood for until they heard him talking about it. I will say there probably are some on here who have supported him for much longer, but i would be wiling to guess less than half.

[purplechoe]

Then sadly you will always lose, and nothing will ever be accomplished. I do not like it either, but it is simply the way things have to be done until the general public decides it is important for them to understand there politics and there government.

I'd rather loose with honor than win with dishonor. I have this thing called conscience, which doesn't mean that I won't ever do something "wrong", but knowing what you're doing is wrong and keep doing it? You're not much of a friend to this movement if that's your attitude. What attracted me the most to Ron Paul is his honesty. This movement would have never gotten as big as it had, had it not been for Ron Pauls record in congress and that he has been talking about the same things for over 30 years.

Even though I was somewhat active in politics, I never gave one money before Ron. Had he been in the form as you suggest in your post I would have never became a Ron Paul supporter. I wholeheartedly reject the bullshit you posted.

[revolutionary8]

Historically incorrect. Ron has actually been advocating the same ideals since his first congressional win (special election) in 1976. Even when he was only there for a few months before the general election that he lost. He just didn't get the spotlight he did until he ran for POTUS in 1988 (third party, also why he got no real media attention). Most people on here have to admitt they knew nothing about him until then. It is not because he was trying to "blend in". It is because he didn't get any media attention and most people were not interested in what he stood for until they heard him talking about it. I will say there probably are some on here who have supported him for much longer, but i would be wiling to guess less than half.

No, I think you misunderstood me. Ron Paul never blended in, many of us have seen the Morton Downey Junior Years, and feel a special connection to him, even though we did not even know he was alive. :) I think that some people believe that he should "Blend In". Not cause a rift, don't cause a wave. People get upset around here when RP goes on the radio with MILLIONS OF LISTENERS b/c he is speaking to Alex Jones. Thenn, he goes on TV with Glenn Beck after Beck calls RP supporters "terrorists" bitching about a "terror memo" and he gets catapulted in to hero status. Its infuriating.

I guess what I am trying to say, is that there is a point where the future and the past will meet, and certain lessons will be carried on. I DO believe in what some call a "critical mass". I am thankful that Ron Paul has HIMSELF found the happy medium, cause I fear if he hadn't, they'd have already gotten rid of him. I see it as a sneak attack in the final stretch.
ENDURANCE in other words.
I think we are at the final straight.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

It took YEARS for RP to be heard on some of the issues that we face today, and by the same token, it will take those who heard him from the very beginning YEARS to hear about some of the more "conspiratorial" issues, and most importantly- VICE VERSA- those that were more attached to the future, learned from those more attatched to the past. At some point in their research, those who fear internment camps and prison camps (FEMA) in their future, learned from those who had experienced/studied internment camps and prison camps in the past.

i can't argue with you on that point. The point i am making is that we are living here RIGHT NOW and the majority of americans don't even want to think about things like that. In the future i think Ron Paul will be looked at and remembered greatly for the things he did, but sadly it will be after those kinds of things happen or almost happend. had he done what i said, or some of his followers still do, then there is a great possibility of those things (like internment camps) never having a purpose or being used. So basically you are saying we are the followers of a man who's ideals will never be listened to until the future when people realize he was right? then i ask you, what is the point ? So you can say you were "right" to everyone in the "afterlife" ? It almost seems pointless to me if you can't except the fact that on the current path there is no chance of winning the POTUS or causing a large enough movement to change anything. Im sorry, thats just the way i see it as of right now.

[PeacePlan]

There are very few people that speak out against the Fed and she is one of the few. If we get rid of the Fed we then break the money supply that feeds the war complex.

We need to get rid of the Fed IMO so I am for her and I wish all the others that are our Reps would be like minded. We get rid of that and all the other issues would get worked out because they could not fund them.

[FrankRep]

Bump for relevance. Judging by today's performance by Michelle Bachman, I can see why he wanted to keep her around.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9DgMG-_6Ls

Grilling the Federal Reserve. beautiful!

[Anti Federalist]

Maybe i should have chosen my words more carefully. Instead of lie i should have probably said not say the whole truth. If he does not share everything he stands for such as abolishing the Fed or uncovering 9/11 inconsistencies, it will not be necesarrily lying, just not expressing things that are SURE to hinder your chances of winning the presidency. If you think the movement will get anywhere without major events that make most of the general public wake up and smell the shit, then you are wasting your time and money imo. What we need to do is wake up and realize that we will not get anywhere if we stick to far to oneside of the political spectrum. It is exactly why JcPenny and Sears had there stores next eachother all through the early 1900's, so they could share the customer and get nearly equal amounts of revenue. Move to far to one side of the town and you lose part of your customer base. move to the center and share the profits. Exactly why the republican and democratic parties are so similar. LINELAND CHAOS THEORY

Nope.

Been there, done that.

Freedom is an "all or nothing" endeavor.

As an older man, coming from a long journey of "mainstream" conservatism, I have come to realize that freedom is not a Chinese menu that can be compromised or picked at random. Thus, I am not the most "comfortable" when that has to include things like complete drug re-legalization or homosexual marriage, as a couple of examples.

But the fact is, liberty is not a consumer good, you will debase and destroy it by trying to "doll it up" with slick marketing and political comprising to appeal to the vast muddled middle.

There is no choice but to put it out there, uncompromising and pure, and let things develop from there.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

I'd rather loose with honor than win with dishonor. I have this thing called conscience, which doesn't mean that I won't ever do something "wrong", but knowing what you're doing is wrong and keep doing it? You're not much of a friend to this movement if that's your attitude. What attracted me the most to Ron Paul is his honesty. This movement would have never gotten as big as it had, had it not been for Ron Pauls record in congress and that he has been talking about the same things for over 30 years.

Even though I was somewhat active in politics, I never gave one money before Ron. Had he been in the form as you suggest in your post I would have never became a Ron Paul supporter. I wholeheartedly reject the bullshit you posted.

I understand you position on this subject. And i have to admitt that Rons honesty is one of the things that attracted me the most to him. It is hard to find someone like that today. BUT... had he never mentioned things such as destroying the Fed, or inconsistancies in the 9/11 commission, and still talked about sound money, smart foreign policy, states rights, etc....would'nt you stilll have supported him ? i think you would have. See the simple thing is that he would not have shared his views on those issues, then he would still have your support, you would still feel that he is trustworthy, and he would have gotten possibly millions more of followers. he would have gotten better media coverage, etc. All the while he would know to himself and his closest advisors that if they win the POTUS then they can introduce things later such as ending the Fed, and redoing the 9/11 commission. Then he is seen as being legit because he is the POTUS and no one will really question it as much as if he is a candidate , except maybe the Fed issue. Then not only has he kept you feeling he is truthful, but he also did the things that we deeply want him to do, but if publically addressed, would have killed his chances of winning.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

Nope.

Been there, done that.

Freedom is an "all or nothing" endeavor.

As an older man, coming from a long journey of "mainstream" conservatism, I have come to realize that freedom is not a Chinese menu that can be compromised or picked at random. Thus, I am not the most "comfortable" when that has to include things like complete drug re-legalization or homosexual marriage, as a couple of examples.

But the fact is, liberty is not a consumer good, you will debase and destroy it by trying to "doll it up" with slick marketing and political comprising to appeal to the vast muddled middle.

There is no choice but to put it out there, uncompromising and pure, and let things develop from there.


IF you want an example simply look at how the "founders" compromised to create our country/constitution. they had to meet near the MIDDLE. That is the way it has always worked and will continue to work, otherwise nothing will be accomplished. I commend you for your outright love of the ideals of liberty and openmindedness to accept gay marriage and legalization, but that kind of thinking (such as abolish the fed, states rights, legalization, etc.) out loud to the general public will never get you anywhere into a position that is able to make a change. The majority of Americans will need to be eased back into those ideals, and we must first hold the seats of power to do so. And use them correctly without abuse.

If we simply do it the way you suggest, it may be hundreds of years before life will be like that even in just our country. And what it will take is people to achieve postitions of power within the gov. to make those changes. And unless by then the majority of americans view things the way we do, then he/she will also have to "doll things up" to get elected. Its just the way it works man, i hate it too, but its the way it works.

[trey4sports]

Nope.

Been there, done that.

Freedom is an "all or nothing" endeavor.

As an older man, coming from a long journey of "mainstream" conservatism, I have come to realize that freedom is not a Chinese menu that can be compromised or picked at random. Thus, I am not the most "comfortable" when that has to include things like complete drug re-legalization or homosexual marriage, as a couple of examples.

But the fact is, liberty is not a consumer good, you will debase and destroy it by trying to "doll it up" with slick marketing and political comprising to appeal to the vast muddled middle.

There is no choice but to put it out there, uncompromising and pure, and let things develop from there.


+1
great post

[vegaspilot03]

IF the people of Minnesota ever found out that the Federal Reserve was stealing all their money and not telling them where it was even going, i think they would perhaps drop all issues and dethrone king obama and may even place Bachman in office.

[Anti Federalist]

IF you want an example simply look at how the "founders" compromised to create our country/constitution. they had to meet near the MIDDLE. That is the way it has always worked and will continue to work, otherwise nothing will be accomplished. I commend you for your outright love of the ideals of liberty and openmindedness to accept gay marriage and legalization, but that kind of thinking (such as abolish the fed, states rights, legalization, etc.) out loud to the general public will never get you anywhere into a position that is able to make a change. The majority of Americans will need to be eased back into those ideals, and we must first hold the seats of power to do so. And use them correctly without abuse.

The Founders compromised after they had fought a bloody war.

A war that was started when radicals outside of Boston refused to compromise.

And, I forgot to add, that action taken by the radicals in Boston, was looked at in horror by the majority of those in the colonies at the time.

Thus is the eternal debate between the "pragmatists" and the "rip, shit or bust" radicals.

It should be clear where I stand.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

The Founders compromised after they had fought a bloody war.

A war that was started when radicals outside of Boston refused to compromise.

I must suggest you brush up on history of the founders a tad. our first president even preferred that we settle things diplomatically up until lexington and concord. he despised the notion of a war with England. And he too knew that we must find a middle ground with england, and thats what we tried, but the king would except no compromises. thankfully we do not have a King to deal with, and we can work withiin our own government diplomatically to achieve our goals. Unless you are suggesting it will take a war with our own country to make those changes? a war that could very well be avoided IF WE MEET IN THE MIDDLE AND THEN WORK FROM THERE. You are only helping prove my point.

some such as madison did prefer war over compromise, i will grant you that, but the majority would rather have had diplomatically solved there conflicts with England, and avoided the war completely. This is also a bad example because you are comparing England and there tyranny to our government, but that is simply not parallel, seeing as we can all achieve postitions in the legislature if we try, but american born citizens were not able to achieve nobility. Making it impossible to work within the system itself, inevitably leading to a war.

[Anti Federalist]

I must suggest you brush up on history of the founders a tad. our first president even preferred that we settle things diplomatically up until lexington and concord. he despised the notion of a war with England. And he too knew that we must find a middle ground with england, and thats what we tried, but the king would except no compromises. thankfully we do not have a King to deal with, and we can work withiin our own government diplomatically to achieve our goals. Unless you are suggesting it will take a war with our own country to make those changes? a war that could very well be avoided IF WE MEET IN THE MIDDLE AND THEN WORK FROM THERE. You are only helping prove my point.

some such as madison did prefer war over compromise, i will grant you that, but the majority would rather have had diplomatically solved there conflicts with England, and avoided the war completely. This is also a bad example because you are comparing England and there tyranny to our government, but that is simply not parallel, seeing as we can all achieve postitions in the legislature if we try, but american born citizens were not able to achieve nobility. Making it impossible to work within the system itself, inevitably leading to a war.

I added to the post after you answered it.

And yes, the example of tyranny of the Crown as compared to now is not accurate.

We are living under much worse tyranny now, than then.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

I added to the post after you answered it.

And yes, the example of tyranny of the Crown as compared to now is not accurate.

We are living under much worse tyranny now, than then.

i Have to respectfully disagree with you on that. I do believe that we have some serious problems, but we still have our basic rights, taxation with representation (which could be argued some what), and the right to vote. not only that but we can still become elected officials and change things diplomatically. My whole point exactly.

although now thinking about it you could see how the virgin islands and other "terratories" could see the USA as a modern day England since we impose taxes yet they have no representation.... i may have to bring that up in my leg. processes class tomorrow.

** also, at least you have kept responding and voicing your opinion, unlike some other posters who have seemed to given up on arguing against my point. Although i assume mostly because they got offline, etc. Haha, it would be nice to think i may have changed there views a little bit, but doubtful.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

in reply to you edit in your other post:

The pragmatists had the right idea though, and they tried everything they could until they were forced with no other option than war with England. WE have a choice to work with our own legislature to make the changes within, which i believe is the point of the CFL. But like i said, we have to be willing to compromise near the middle to achieve positions of power, and then begin to enact our agenda. The way it must work, and will continue to work in our legislature until a better kind is invented and implemented.

[Anti Federalist]

i Have to respectfully disagree with you on that. I do believe that we have some serious problems, but we still have our basic rights, taxation with representation (which could be argued some what), and the right to vote. not only that but we can still become elected officials and change things diplomatically. My whole point exactly.

although now thinking about it you could see how the virgin islands and other "terratories" could see the USA as a modern day England since we impose taxes yet they have no representation.... i may have to bring that up in my leg. processes class tomorrow.

** also, at least you have kept responding and voicing your opinion, unlike some other posters who have seemed to given up on arguing against my point. Although i assume mostly because they got offline, etc. Haha, it would be nice to think i may have changed there views a little bit, but doubtful.

Well, let's look at that a bit.

First, the tax rate that we struggle under now is ten times that of what the colonial tax rates were.

Second, in the line of work I am in, merchant mariner, I am subject to a whole slew of laws, taxes and regulations that are imposed on me by the IMO (International Maritime Organization) in London (oh the irony). Now, the vessel that I command works wholly within US waters, with a US crew, under US flag, but I am still beholden to the regulations, taxes and fees, on me, personally.

Tell me, where do I vote for my IMO representation? The answer is: I don't. I, and hundreds of thousands of fellow mariners have no representation there whatsoever, but yet we are saddled with rules and taxes.

And as the sickness of "globalization" continues to spread, more and more people will come under this form of tyranny.

When you have to pay your "carbon taxes", who will be your representative in Brussels, or Davos or Hong Kong?

Third, we have a standing army within out country now that would make the founders blanche, we are tracked, traced, monitored, watched and surveilled 24/7, in such a way as to make a mockery of the 4th Amendment, and these same forces gun us down to the tune of roughly one "Boston Massacre" per month.

I look at it and see we have very few of our "basic rights" left, and what ones we do have left, the exercising of them will get you branded as a possible "terrorist".

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

Well, let's look at that a bit.

First, the tax rate that we struggle under now is ten times that of what the colonial tax rates were.

Second, in the line of work I am in, merchant mariner, I am subject to a whole slew of laws, taxes and regulations that are imposed on me by the IMO (International Maritime Organization) in London (oh the irony). Now, the vessel that I command works wholly within US waters, with a US crew, under US flag, but I am still beholden to the regulations, taxes and fees, on me, personally.

Tell me, where do I vote for my IMO representation? The answer is: I don't. I, and hundreds of thousands of fellow mariners have no representation there whatsoever, but yet we are saddled with rules and taxes.

And as the sickness of "globalization" continues to spread, more and more people will come under this form of tyranny.

When you have to pay your "carbon taxes", who will be your representative in Brussels, or Davos or Hong Kong?

Third, we have a standing army within out country now that would make the founders blanche, we are tracked, traced, monitored, watched and surveilled 24/7, in such a way as to make a mockery of the 4th Amendment, and these same forces gun us down to the tune of roughly one "Boston Massacre" per month.

I look at it and see we have very few of our "basic rights" left, and what ones we do have left, the exercising of them will get you branded as a possible "terrorist".

TO THE BOLDED STATEMENT:
Does that account for inflation, etc. ?

To the rest:

Yes the patriot act and other legislatioin does infringe upon our rights. And speaking out about them thusfar has labeled some people as unpatriotic and possible terrorist lovers or terrorist themselves (ex: MIAC report). But the difference between now and then is that we ARE ABLE to make the changes within our own government. It is hard to do but the founders made it that why on purpose. The problem is most americans like to be handfed bullshit in elections and they eat the shit right up. What we/you need to do is work within the system to change it, and it is possible. it is better than doing nothing other than support a person who's sometimes "radical" speeches dont connect with mainstream america today. We need to rethink our approach in how we can make these changes, because it is currently not working. Ron paul and his supporter (us) are still written off as conspiracy theorists, etc. We need to find a middle ground in our speeches, and pamphleterring and gather more support to win the elections. Then we can enact the more libertarian/conservative policiies that we stand for that are not far from the policies we ran on in the elections if not the same in most cases. It is how all the political parties have done it. From the jacksonians and the whigs to the republicans and the democrats. Its AMERICAN POLITICS.

* and the prediciment you are in is def. unfortunate. Have you tried to gather other fisherman such as your self to talk to your representative to promote change. Are there groups out there that work to change this type of taxing, etc. Also the rules of the sea are much different than the rules of the land when it comes to politics. I don't know much about sea laws though i must admitt. And globalization in the economy is not a bad thing but it depends on how it is handled and makes sure to keep soverignty of the countries. i believe Ron Paul is a supporter of world wide free market economy. It has great promise in helping to pull poorer countries our of low standards of living (not by wealth sharing). It just needs to be done in the right way, and being the humans we are, we probably won't get it right the first time.

[revolutionary8]

Yes the patriot act and other legislatioin does infringe upon our rights. And speaking out about them thusfar has labeled some people as unpatriotic and possible terrorist lovers or terrorist themselves (ex: MIAC report). But the difference between now and then is that we ARE ABLE to make the changes within our own government. It is hard to do but the founders made it that why on purpose. The problem is most americans like to be handfed bullshit in elections and they eat the shit right up.

:eek:
RUN FORREST RUNNNNNNN

"Like"? They have been BRAINWASHED, AND TAXED FOR IT!

[Anti Federalist]

TO THE BOLDED STATEMENT:
Does that account for inflation, etc. ?



Yes, that's why I made it a point to say "rate".

The "Intolerable Acts" raised the effective tax rate on the colonists to roughly 5 percent.

The average family of four pays about 50 percent today in taxes.

[Smoke the Liberty Tree]

:eek:
RUN FORREST RUNNNNNNN

"Like"? They have been BRAINWASHED, AND TAXED FOR IT!

So unbrainwash them with your ideals. But for them to first catch on you must meet them in the middle or near it. Then work them back to liberty/sanity lol. You have to understand, thats what they had to do to get us where most americans are today. So do the same thing but in reverse if you can look at it that way.

In regard to you taxes. i agree, i am not for high taxes, and think the income tax should be done away with. But i have to say that i think soley due to the fact that we have our freedoms (speech, religion, protest [which have been challenged we know, but we still have them]) and we are able to be elected to our government to make the changes we want, i believe that it is not as bad as it was back then, but not far from it i will addmitt. But i hope you don't think that just because of that we should have another civil war or an uprising ?! We must do what our elders did, work on a compromise and meet near the middle, then work from there. IF that fails and somehow we are no longer able to do so, and we have lost almost all our rights and there is an attack on our freedoms, then yes, i think a revolution must occur. BUT THAT MUST BE THE LAST OPTION. we were lucky with the revolution and the civil war. Not always do they end well and it would be a shame for our union to dissolve if we could have fixed it diplomatically.


* i also must say that your arguments have been very "matter of fact" and without much substance. I dont expect to change your point of views being you are an older man, but i do hope you consider what i have said. American politics is my one passion and it is what i constantly am thinking about (other than fine woman and the occasional drink), and i sometimes find it difficult when people who don't fully understand the way the system works try and make it work another way, especially when i agree with them on so many issues, but they don't know how to work with the system that they "love." It has always been the same system, just different ideals and legislation. Please read into lineland and flatland chaos and you will understand why this movement is having such a hardtime getting off its feet, and why people aren't "waking up."