• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

The One and Only Official CEP Ron Paul Thread

Y

yummy22

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
1,319
I know a lot of people are sick of hearing about Ron Paul so I think this should be the main Ron Paul thread. Any objections?

Anyways, there's big news today. If this many people showed up to this event, I think he could possibly win the Ames Straw Poll. If he does, it will get him tons of media coverage and place him in the "first tier".


Paul, uninvited to GOP forum, attracts a loyal flock for rally
His call for an immediate end to the Iraq war elicits his event's loudest reaction.


Outsider Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul headlined a raucous campaign rally Saturday after a multi-candidate GOP forum in Des Moines to which the Texas congressman was not invited.

An audience of more than 600 GOP activists turned out for the Paul event, held in Hy-Vee Hall next door to where six candidates addressed a subdued crowd of much the same size earlier.

"Today we want to celebrate and we want to be very positive," Paul said. "We're here to talk about life and liberty, and quite frankly they are inseparable."

Paul has built a loyal following of people attracted to the politician's libertarian stance on constitutional rights and opposition to the war in Iraq.

But organizers for the forum, held by Iowans for Tax Relief and the Iowa Christian Alliance, left Paul out of their lineup, citing his lack of campaign organization in Iowa.

The decision sparked loud protests from Paul supporters and prompted his campaign staff to plan its own rally.

During Paul's rally, he proposed getting rid of the Internal Revenue Service, Selective Service, income tax and the Federal Reserve, and withdrawing from the United Nations.

He received cheers from the audience of Iowans and supporters from other states after each point. The loudest reception came during his call for an immediate end to the war in Iraq.

"The policy of nonintervention is the policy of the founding fathers," said Paul, who was one of the few Republicans who voted against the 2002 resolution authorizing the invasion of Iraq. "Republicans would do well if they changed their position in this regard."

Donna Otoya and friend Warren Narron drove from Kansas City, Mo., to attend Paul's event. They were among about 25 people holding Paul campaign signs in the Iowa Events Center's parking lot before the event.

"I came because he's hope for America," Otoya said. "Ron Paul stands for true constitutional values, and he's our best hope to save America from what's happening."

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070701/NEWS09/707010342
Click to expand...


Why Ron Paul Can Win the Iowa Caucuses

Ron Paul's rally in DesMoines today was a huge success, drawing close to 1,000 supporters, several hundred more than the candidates forum that excluded him due to "credibility" factors. After today, someone has a credibility problem, but it's definitely not Ron Paul. Ed Failor of Iowans for Tax Relief will have some explaining to do to the members of his organization, for not inviting the candidate who wins "The Taxpayer's Best Friend" award every year, and who is apparently a bigger draw than all of the other second tier candidates, combined.

But there is much more hope for the continued rapid growth of Ron Paul's support in Iowa (and elsewhere) than his modest 2% showing in the latest Strategic Vision Iowa poll and the enthusiastic crowd at his rally. Here is the question the ten pro-war Republican candidates must come to terms with, from the same poll, asked of 600 likely Republican caucus goers June 22nd to 24th:

Do you favor a withdrawal of all United States military from Iraq within the next six months? (Republicans Only)

Yes -- 56%
No -- 38%
Undecided -- 6%
​


Let that sink in for a moment. A MAJORITY of Iowa REPUBLICAN voters want US troops withdrawn from Iraq, within the next six months. For all practical purposes, that amounts to an immediate withdrawal, an admission that the war was a colossal mistake, and a decision that leaving Iraq is preferable to staying there, no matter what happens after we leave.

Then realize that in an eleven-candidate field, Ron Paul is the only Republican who has opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, and is the only candidate calling for an immediate and total withdrawal -- exactly what the majority of Iowa Republican voters want. Ron Paul may be at 2% now, but he will rise much higher in Iowa (and elsewhere) when more voters learn of his stands on the issues, and grow even more weary of the war.

It doesn't hurt that Ron Paul is reliably conservative on the other issues that matter to Iowa Republicans, more so than the current front-runners, whether the issue is immigration, or taxes, or abortion, or privacy, or the Second Amendment. It doesn't hurt that Ron Paul has an incredibly consistent record and a well-deserved reputation for honesty and integrity, either.

It may seem a bit optimistic to be discussing the possibility of a Ron Paul victory in the Iowa caucuses, but today's rally is just the first in a series of momentum-building events in the next few weeks. People in Iowa will talk about the rally, whether or not the mainstream media covers it. YouTube videos of the event will be seen thousands of times. A New Hampshire straw poll is coming up next week, and Ron Paul could surprise people there. Ron Paul rallies in California and Las Vegas in the next two weeks will keep the momentum building. Second-quarter fundraising totals will shock the mainstream pundits.

Ron Paul is the Republican candidate with the most upside, and the one generating the most enthusiasm, not just online but in the real world as well. The debates may have sparked the first real interest in the Ron Paul presidential campaign, but June 30th, 2007, just might mark the beginning of the Ron Paul revolution.

Maybe there really is Hope for America.

http://paul4prez.blogspot.com/2007/06/why-ron-paul-can-win-iowa-caucuses.html
Click to expand...
 
^Thats awesome. I was hoping his rally would be a success I think a Ron Paul thread is a good idea, but I still think any major news about him deserves its own thread.

Here are some links that should definitely be included:
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ (his official site)
http://ronpaullibrary.org/ (an index of over 800 of his articles and speeches also with video)
http://www.dailypaul.com/


This recent graph is relevant to the RP thread.
280607Reps.jpg


Hitwise defines market share of visits within a site category as the percentage of traffic to a particular site based on its sample of 10 million U.S. Web users.
 
Last edited:
Ron Paul Should Win New Hampshire - Latest Poll Suggests


Washington D.C. 6/29/2007 2:43 PM GMT (TransWorldNews)

Late last year when the presidential campaigns started, George Bush had a 36% approval rating in the state of New Hampshire according to American Research Group. But the latest American Research Group poll shows the approval rating for the President dipping down to 14%.

USAElectionPolls.com suggests the reason for George Bush's low ratings to be because of the presidential campaign. "Approval ratings for George Bush have been dipping in New Hampshire because voters are being exposed to candidates from both political parties that have criticized the president."

All of the Democrats have come out staunchly against the president as they always have. On the Republican side, Ron Paul is the most vocal of all the candidates.

USAElectionPolls.com made the following statement:

"We know that Ron Paul is only getting at most 2% in any national or state poll but once Republican voters in New Hampshire realize Ron Paul is their only anti-war candidate, he will gain momentum. If you found 100 people that liked the color red and you offered them 10 shirts to choose from each of the color green, they will be forced to choose green. If you offered them an 11th option that is red, the majority of those 100 people would choose the red shirt. Ron Paul is the 11th option that resonates with the voters, they just don't realize it yet. Remember, Paul Buchanan won New Hampshire in 1996 with the same platform."

In a lot of election predicting, you also have to look at what issues voters want and with whom their feelings resonate well with. Because these polls are not stagnant, they are constantly changing. And the leader tomorrow will be different from today and different from yesterday. He should win according to the web site but they stress that Ron Paul's low poll numbers may keep voters from voting for him because of feelings that "he cannot win".

The web site also points out that this drop in approval ratings from 36% to 14% largely is from the Republican and Independent base because as they calmly asserted Democrats are just as against Bush now as they were 6 months ago. It is the Republicans and Independents now that are changing their opinions of Bush.

Visit http://www.usaelectionpolls.com for the latest polls.
http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?storyid=18225&ret=Default.aspx
 
Ron Paul on Immigration and Iowa

Ron Paul 2008 | June 28, 2007

From time to time, I'm going to send you my thoughts during this campaign. Your support is so important to me, and I want you to know what's happening.

Today, we had good news from the US Senate—not exactly a normal occurrence—when the president's immigration bill went down in flames.

Here we had a vastly expensive piece of legislation that would have made the immigration problem worse, and put more controls on the economy. So naturally, the entire establishment was behind it. It was a slam-dunk, or so they thought. Then the American people got riled up, and despite all the special interests, the pressure, the media, and the money, scared the politicians enough to vote the right way.

If our campaign succeeds, this will happen on a whole range of issues. The politicians will hear from the people on foreign wars, high taxes, Fed inflation, and all the other plagues visited on us by DC. And listen they will.

And speaking of our campaign, I am very excited by the Iowa rally this Saturday ( http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=16OCg4C1fq5W47gNJo_2bDHw_3d_3d ). This is an historic moment. Of course, the Iowa Christian Alliance and Iowans for Tax Relief had the right to exclude the most pro-life, anti-tax candidate in the race. But when they did so, people rose up. So we are holding a rally that will reverberate around this country. Our campaign goes from strength to strength, but I am convinced that this Saturday will be very important in the fight for a free, peaceful, and prosperous America.

Maybe you can come to the rally. In any event, I know you'll be there in spirit, and I'll write you all about it afterwards. Your support in this race means everything to my family and me.

Warmest regards,

Ron

PS: Because of people like you, I don't need the $100 million the establishment candidates will have. But I do need your help. $25, $50, $100, or even more--whatever you can send would do so much good, and be so much help. Thank you!

Donate Here
https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/
Click to expand...

http://blog.ronpaul2008.com/ron_paul_2008/2007/06/ron-paul-on-imm.html
 
I know a lot of people are sick of hearing about Ron Paul so I think this should be the main Ron Paul thread.
Click to expand...

lmao.. "i know you guys are sick of ron paul, so here's another ron paul thread" ;)
 
I'm going to officially designate this the Ron Paul thread and be done with it. Hell, I'll even sticky it. If someone wants one for another candidate, provide an article and let me know.
 
laugh your ass off?

"Big and Dandy" and "Mega-Threads" are very common on Bluelight.

Many people, especially forum regulars often "get sick" of numerous threads covering a similar topic, B&D threads are a good solution...
 
don't get your ron paul in a bunch.. i was just thinking that as I read the sentence :)
 
Last edited:
http://revolutioni.st


Ron Paul source of... stuff.

The Iowa speech videos are there;
http://revolutioni.st/iowa.html

The plan for the 4th of July is there.

Links to.... god only knows what all...
Are there.

Banners if you (gods forbid) want to put one on your webpage can be directly linked from there.

I can't get any users in the forums, but I'm still working hard at it =D
 
Infowars is crazy, xenophobic, homophobic and idiotic.
 
^ really? is that so?

I just checked it out and it seems most of the articles are from mainstream sources, like The London Guardian, The London Telegraph, Reuters, AP etc.

I dislike "spam" as much as anyone, but are the insults and name calling really much better?
 
He's the only one that has principles he has stood by even when they were unpopular, he doesn't seem to play politics as much. He was one of the few (only?) republiucans that didn't vote for war. He has a brain!
 
Recapturing the Spirit of Independence

Infowars.com | July 4, 2007
Ron Paul

This week Americans will gather around the grill, attend parades and watch fireworks displays, all in the celebration of the signing of our Declaration of Independence. At the same time, we will have thousands of bureaucrats, troops and agents stationed in countries across the globe being paid by American tax dollars.

On the anniversary of our declaring our own independence from the British, it is certainly appropriate that we reflect on the nature and spirit of independent nationhood. While our founding fathers were individual men in a historically unique situation, they posited that the principles upon which they rested our national independence were timeless.

If we truly honor the men who brought about Independence Day, we would do well to spend at least as much time reflecting on the Declaration of Independence, and the principles upon which it is based, as we spend at the cookouts, parades, and fireworks displays. With the trend toward globalism that has been with us for the past century, we should be specifically thoughtful about how our celebration of independence can be made consistent with the policies that have been advocated by the American government – as well as many of the nation's elite – or what we used to call the Eastern Establishment.

I believe there is no way to square our nation's traditions and reverence for independence with the globalist policies these elites are currently pursuing. The American concept of independent nationhood inscribed in our Declaration cannot be maintained if we are going to pursue a policy that undermines the independence of other nations. National independence is an idea, and the erosion of the independence of other nations only serves to erode that idea.

At the same time, if we allow the erosion of that idea, by ignoring it in certain instances, we will be contributing to its erosion in all times and nations, even our own. In this way our nation's independence is linked with the independence of all nations. The sooner we realize this truth, and enact a foreign policy that is consistent with it, the sooner we will be able to recapture the spirit of independence.

In addition, as our founding fathers understood, the idea of national independence is inseparable from that of constitutional republicanism. Only the safeguards and limitations that are enshrined in a constitutionally-limited republic can prohibit a nation from lurching toward empire. Recognizing these same protections is also the very best way to eliminate the need for civil wars and the violence of civil strife.

Moreover, this constitutional republicanism is essential to protecting the individual rights and self-determination that is at the heart of our Declaration. As we celebrate the 231ist anniversary of our nation's birth, I hope every person who reads or hears this will take the time to go back and read the Declaration of Independence. Only by recapturing the spirit of independence can we ensure our government never resembles the one from which the American States declared their separation.

paul_dees2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ron Paul Tops McCain in Cash on Hand

ABC News' George Stephanopoulos Reports: Though often regarded as a longshot candidate for president, Republican Ron Paul tells ABC News that he has an impressive $2.4 million in cash on hand after raising an equal amount during the second quarter, putting him ahead of one-time Republican frontrunner John McCain, who reported this week he has only $2 million in the bank.

In an exclusive interview taped Friday and airing Sunday on "This Week," Paul said his campaign is on a better trajectory than McCain's.

"I think some of the candidates are on the down-slope, and we're on the up-slope," said Paul.

Paul's cash on hand puts him in third place in the Republican field in that important metric, although he is well behind leader Rudy Giuliani, who has $18 million in the bank, and Mitt Romney, with $12 million.

Paul, who polls show with support in the low single digits, said his surprisingly strong fundraising is the best measure of his support.

"I think people have underestimated the number of people in this country who are interested in a freedom message," says the Republican congressman from Texas, who has strong libertarian leanings.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/07/ron-paul-tops-m.html
 
if you think that's impressive, this is only the start. People are now starting to branch out from the internet into the street while still coordinating online.
 
Straws in the Wind in New Hampshire

Straws in the Wind in New Hampshire

by Jack Kenny

New Hampshire, which guards its first-in-the-nation presidential primaries against other, similar elections like a civic-minded junkyard dog, has somehow let the Iowa caucuses steal much of its thunder. And not just the caucuses, either. Have you noticed the Ames Straw Poll in the last few election cycles? Ames is big, man. It is news, and big news, for whoever wins there. It is even news when a candidate decides, months in advance, to skip the Ames Straw Poll, as Sen. John McCain has done. It is even momentarily news when a candidate admits to an interviewer on national television, as McCain did, that he was unaware that no one who skipped the Ames Straw Poll has ever won the Iowa caucuses. I mean, when you can parlay the first voting in the caucuses with the most prestigious straw poll, held some 15 months before the actual election, you have combined marketeering with electioneering in a way that suggests New Hampshire should look to its laurels.

And what of the Hopkinton Straw Poll in New Hampshire? What’s that? You never heard of the Hopkinton Straw Poll? You never heard of Hopkinton? (Yeah, sure, rub it in.) Well, I am a resident of Manchester, New Hampshire, where we have sidewalks, electricity, indoor plumbing and, yes, big-city dwellers, we even have a rather busy little airport where roughly 4 million individual trips, going and coming, take place every year.

But nobody cares about our straw poll in Hopkinton, just a half-hour drive from the Manchester-Boston Regional Airport. While Ames gets national coverage, George Stephanopoulos of ABC News doesn’t ask John McCain or any of the other candidates why they are skipping Hopkinton. And locally, the Amherst Fourth of July parade gets more news coverage in New Hampshire than the Hopkinton Straw Poll does.

So unless you were there, you probably missed it. On Saturday, July 7, 294 people cast ballots in the Straw Poll that was held by the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers as part of the organization’s annual picnic. Ron Paul received 182 of those votes. Rudolph the sawed-off RINO (Republican In Name Only) Giuliani was runner-up with 24 votes. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee cared enough to come, gave a rather good speech, shook a lot of hands, gave a lot of interviews and received half a dozen votes for his efforts. Mitt Romney, recently the governor of the neighboring state of Massachusetts and the occupant of a $10 million summer home in Wolfeboro, NH, picked up a few votes, though fewer than the ex-mayor of New York. The others were not there and it probably would not have mattered if they were.

Dr. Ron Paul was not there, either, but neither did that matter. He had made a previous commitment to address the Freedom Fest in Las Vegas, but that was okay. His hard-core followers were determined to vote for him if he had been anywhere other than China, Cuba, or Cambridge, Massachusetts. The candidate’s son, Dr. Rand Paul of Kentucky, made the trip, however, and made an impressive speech for his father.

The Manchester TV station, WMUR-TV, which owes much of its prosperity and its marvelous new facilities to revenues gained from the advertising paid for by candidates in the New Hampshire primaries, covered the event and interviewed Gov. Huckabee, Rand Paul and others. But there was no print media at all. The closest thing to print media coverage was a solitary blogger from Seacoast Online, which is owned by the Portsmouth Herald, a bland and predictably liberal daily on the New Hampshire seacoast. The statewide daily, The New Hampshire Union Leader/Sunday News missed the event altogether. Likewise the Concord "Monica" (one of Bill’s favorite newspapers), though Hopkinton abuts Concord and is well within the Monitor’s coverage area. Likewise all the other dailies and the Associated Press.

We are not surprised. New Hampshire has already hosted two pre-primary debates, one for the Republicans and one for the Democrats. Each "debate" lasted two hours without commercial interruption. Each was broadcast live from the campus of Saint Anselm College on our local ABC affiliate, WMUR-TV, and on the Cable News Network. Both were moderated by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. It was interesting that in four hours of questioning of 18 candidates (eight Democrats and 10 Republicans), very few questions were asked about issues that either libertarians or old-school conservatives would consider priority matters. No one asked Ron Paul, for example, how he would dismantle most of the federal government or how he would bring about the transformation of America’s foreign and military policies to reflect that "more humble" role for our nation that Texas Gov. George W. Bush talked about when campaigning for president in the year 2000.

Instead, we got questions about how the next president might utilize the talents of former President Bill Clinton or the current incumbent. Former Alaska Gov. Mike Gravel suggested he would send the Arkansas traveler traveling internationally. "He can take his wife with him," he suggested, much to the amusement of Sen. Hillary Clinton, who laughed heartily. "She’ll still be in the Senate." And Tom Tancredo, recalling that the president’s brain, Karl Rove, had instructed Tancredo never again to darken the door of the White House, said he would instruct George W. Bush to do the same.

The Republican candidates also were quizzed on Darwinism and whether they believed the evolutionists’ explanations of how we got here and why. As to the age of the earth and the days of creation, Gov. Huckabee, pastor of a church in Arkansas, confessed: "I don’t know. I wasn’t there." In other words, ask Bob Dole.

So they have conspired to exclude Ron Paul from the campaign in Ames, but Paul is no doubt making inroads there, anyway. There is a lot of old-style conservatism, as well as general anti-war sentiment in Iowa and Ron Paul is the only peace candidate on the Republican ballot. Other candidates say they are for peace, of course, even when proposing to nuke Iran for the temerity of wanting to have a nuke of its own. Ron Paul, appalled at the notion, wants peace the way President Eisenhower did.

"I think," Eisenhower said, "that the people want peace so much that one of these days, governments had better get out of the way and let them have it."

Well, there you have it – Dwight Eisenhower and Ron Paul as "peaceniks." All they’ve been saying is, "Give peace a chance." Who knows?

It might work.

July 12, 2007

http://www.lewrockwell.com/kenny/kenny57.html
 
Signing Statements Erode Constitutional Balance

by Ron Paul

July 9, 2007

Recently, the General Accounting Office studied nineteen instances where the President issued so-called “signing statements.” In such statements, the President essentially begins the process of interpreting legislation – up to and including declaring provisions unconstitutional—hence often refusing to enforce them.

The GAO study found that in nearly 1/3 of the cases studied, the administration failed to enforce the law as enacted. This approach is especially worrisome for several reasons.

First, these signing statements tend to move authority from the legislative branch to the executive, thus upsetting our delicate system of checks and balances. Next, these statements grant the President power not given by the Constitution, allowing him to usurp powers of the judicial branch. Finally, the idea of agencies refusing to enforce the law as enacted sets precedent for the type of run away administrative actions our constitution was expressly enacted in order to avoid.

Although these signing statements are at record high numbers, the problem is not with a single administration. Contrary to the claims of those who raise this issue for purely political purposes, the most significant challenge to liberty presented by these statements is that they can serve to further erode our constitutional republic.

I have long been skeptical of the line item veto on spending bills for the same reason I oppose these signing statements. The legislature should not yield its authority to the executive. Our constitutional republic demands that all branches of government understand and respect our system and jealously guard their own prerogatives.

In modern Washington nothing is more misunderstood, and less appreciated, than the genius of republicanism. Presidents issue signing statements that effectively “approve in part and reject in part,” laws of the land—even though there is no constitutional provision for such a process. In addition, Congress cedes its powers at the crucial moment when a decision on whether or not a war is to be fought will be made, only to then criticize the effort it could have used its powers to stop.

In his Notes on Virginia, Thomas Jefferson spoke clearly and directly about the idea of elected representatives delegating their responsibility to other branches of government, saying in no uncertain terms that since such representatives had received their authority by delegation from the people-- expressly for the use as representative-- the legislature had to choose to either use the authority granted or return it to the people. In other words, there is to be no delegation of authority from the representatives to the executive branch of government.

Concerns with signing statements ought to include a concern for the health of our constitutional republic, it ought not to be based upon the political battle of the day. Regardless of whether the President is named Bush or Clinton, and without respect to any particular political interest, we in Congress need to fulfill our oath of office and protect and defend the constitution and our republic. Our constituents deserve no less, and should demand it of all of us.

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst070907.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top