• 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

Ron Paul Wins Washington Straw Poll

NH Pols
Thursday, August 23, 2007

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – Representative Ron Paul won the South Sound Ronald Reagan Republican Club's straw poll last night in Snohomish County, Washington. Dr. Paul received 30 percent of the vote, beating out Fred Thompson who garnered 27 percent.

The victory continues a string of straw poll successes for Dr. Paul. In the past week, the Republican congressman and OB doctor won contests in North Carolina, New Hampshire and Alabama.

"Our campaign is growing by the day and continues to build momentum," said campaign manager Lew Moore. "This victory demonstrates strong grassroots support in the important state of Washington."

http://campaignsandelections.com/nh/releases/index.cfm?ID=3238
 
Ron Paul Debates the War
With Doug Casey, against Dinesh D'Souza and Larry Abraham

YouTube
Tuesday Aug 28, 2007

The BIG Debate: U.S. Foreign Policy and the War in Iraq

Libertarians Ron Paul & Doug Casey vs. Conservatives Larry Abraham & Dinesh D'Souza


FreedomFest is an annual festival where "free minds meet" to celebrate "great books, great ideas, and great thinkers" in a liberal, open-minded society. It is independent, non-partisan, and not affiliated with any organization or think tank.

Founded and produced by Mark Skousen since 2002, FreedomFest invites the "best and the brightest" from around the world to talk, strategize, socialize, and celebrate liberty. FreedomFest is open to all and is purely egalitarian, where speakers, attendees, and exhibitors are treated as equals.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_eA1NWiwMQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ze98wCHJII
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaXOTpk7BCw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC-ZxzYneOQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IOZgXhgF5A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BqTrhrF86o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2rKQ6vyzYA
 
Last edited:
The Cat Is Out Of the Bag: Ron Paul Is a Top Tier Candidate

USA Daily Staff
08/31/2007

The media monopolies seem to be only fooling themselves; the cat is out of the bag, Ron Paul is a top tier candidate. Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul is a force to be reckoned with within the GOP.

According to the last quarter filings he has more money in the bank than John McCain and sources tell USA Daily that Paul’s next quarter numbers will surpass expectations. Fund raising ability is as much an indicator of a campaign’s popularity as are poll numbers. Whether you agree with Paul or not on the issues, his campaign is serious and has national support despite media censorship.

Paul’s campaign is a coalition of Libertarians, Traditional Conservatives, Constitutionalists, Independents, Anti-war voters, and those opposed to establishing what they perceive as a global tyranny via an unelected world government or precursors like the North American Union. It is even attracting some traditional Liberals opposed to the Iraq war that like his support for the Constitution.

Whether this translates into a majority of voters or not remains to be seen but Paul has demonstrated fund raising ability, organization, and the ability to build a coalition. His volunteers go beyond just the internet. Home made signs and other forms of promotion are popping up all across America in support of Ron Paul. Often with a creativity that reflects the wide range of the type of supporters he attracts.

Paul has bold positions including opposition to income taxes, the Patriot Act, the Iraq war, and the Federal Reserve. His call to abolish the Federal Reserve may play well with voters as the mortgage crises deepens if he can frame the issue to point to the soft money policies of the Federal Reserve as the contributing factor to the crises.

While FCC laws exempt debates from the equal time requirement, the modern notion of fairness in a free society would suggest that broadcast networks provide candidates with equal time during the debates.

The 2008 campaign is different from previous elections. In the past third party candidates have been censored from debates but candidates involved in the actual major party debates were usually given a fairer distribution of time. Major media attempts at manipulating this election are more blatant than in the past

It remains to be seen whether the upcoming Fox News Republican debate will break that trend. With many states moving their primaries up there are likely to be many more debates in various states that are now more involved with the election process which may help media non preferred candidates get the message out.

Paul’s campaign will likely win his home state, delegate rich Texas, one of the many states up for grabs on February 5th. That prospect will likely keep his campaign viable until the Texas primary even if he doesn’t win any of the early primary elections.

Chances are the February 5th election will not have a decisive winner in all 23 states up for grabs.

Tancredo’s campaign is also likely to remain viable until February 5th when his home state of Colorado and other western states are up for grabs where his signature issue of immigration reform will play well as will Paul’s message.

Giuliani’s home state of New York and other states in the north east will also be decided that day. As will Fred Thompson’s home state of Tennessee and Mike Huckabee’s home state of Arkansas.

The unpredictability of having so many states that in the past voted in the primary only when the nominee was already a forgone conclusion, now having a real input and influence over the election, may make this presidential contest a free for all.

There are demographics and regional influences that never really had a chance to participate in the presidential primary election that may turn out to be the king makers.

A look at the primary calendar, competing ideologies, and regional factors, point to a slight chance that the GOP nominee will be decided at the convention.

http://usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=72775
 
Ron Paul raises $102,000 in one night

Successful Fundraiser
The single most-successful fundraiser of the Ron Paul 2008 campaign took place last night in Highland Park, Texas (Dallas). The event was held at the home of Mr. and Mrs. Donald Huffines.

The Huffines family opened their beautiful home and graciously hosted many supporters of Dr. Paul's. The evening ended with $102,000 donated to Dr. Paul's presidential campaign!

Kent Snyder
Chairman, Ron Paul 2008


http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2007/09/successful-fund.html
 
Ron Paul wins Maryland State Fair straw poll

tack on another one

Ron Paul 263 votes - 27.3%
Giuliani 220 votes -22.8%

Thompson 188 votes -19.5%
Mitt Romney - 89 (10%
John McCain - 54 (6%
Mike Huckabee - 35 (4%
Tom Tancredo - 16 (2%
Sam Brownback - 12 (1%
Duncan Hunter - 3 (0%
Write Ins:
New Gingrich - 17 (2%
Bob Ehrilich - 3 (0% (Ehrlich is former Republican Governor of MD)
Other - 11 (1%
Spoiled ballots - 15 (2% (e.g. voted for more than one candidate)
Total votes cast - 926

http://ronpauldaily.blogspot.com/2007/09/ron-paul-wins-maryland-state-fair-straw.html
 
I'm not really sure, and to be honest was a little bit distressed when hearing about the IA straw poll showing Romney on top, followed by Mike Huckabee (?) What's up with the Ron Paul campaign? IMO, he's probably the best choice out there, but people aren't talking about him as much lately.
 
Straw polls are semi-formal polls usually orchestrated by a local party organization. The NH straw poll was put on by the Strafford County Republicans and cost $20 to attend. The point of the straw polls is basically to see who has the most local support way before the primaries, many times with visits and speeches from some of the candidates preceding the poll taking.
 
I would LOVE to see Ron Paul get the nomination. The problem is that he is running on the republican name. I "really" don't see the republican party putting him on the ticket, he's a republican by name, but he doesn't follow any of the republican talking points. IMO, there is NO way that the republican party will put him on the ballot. He's a libertarian, not a current republican. The republican party will never place him on the ballot.
 
mulberryman said:
I'm not really sure, and to be honest was a little bit distressed when hearing about the IA straw poll showing Romney on top, followed by Mike Huckabee (?) What's up with the Ron Paul campaign? IMO, he's probably the best choice out there, but people aren't talking about him as much lately.

Look at who spent the most money in these polls. In Iowa, Romney paid for about 7000 votes and he only got around 4000. Huckabee was probably the real winner for the amount of money he spent in Iowa. Ron Paul is spending little money and still turning out huge support.
 
^^ Well then he needs to spend more $$

I know, I know, we all need to send him some... :|
 
Zagenth, the Republican Party will nominate whomever has the best chance of winning the election in the end. They don't care at all what the candidate stands for or what he says, all they care about is money and victory for their party's name. The Democrats are the same. As soon as Ron Paul becomes the nominee, the Republican Party will start looking and sounding a lot more like the Libertarian Party than it ever has before...
 
In an ideal world he'd get the nomination and whilst he has positioned well in polls, even mainstream news channel polls, I think we are all dreaming, he says all the right things and has integrity in his values and isn't playing politics.
 
What does Ron Paul think about anti-trust laws, the minimum wage and labor unions? Anyone know?
 
He state's that it's not the Federal government's job to mandate corporate regulation. However he's also against lobbyist's, and corporate manipulation of government resources. Lowering the tax initiative, and kickback's for corporation's that hire on whole army's of lobbyist's. One would also be willing to bet he's against the corporate identity concept, being that that's also something that is in the traditional Republican, and Libertarian doctrine.
 
What is this corporate identity concept, exactly, why are Repulicand and Libertarians against it?
 
^ Watch The Corporation

THE CORPORATION explores the nature and spectacular rise of the dominant institution of our time. Footage from pop culture, advertising, TV news, and corporate propaganda, illuminates the corporation's grip on our lives. Taking its legal status as a "person" to its logical conclusion, the film puts the corporation on the psychiatrist's couch to ask "What kind of person is it?" Provoking, witty, sweepingly informative, The Corporation includes forty interviews with corporate insiders and critics - including Milton Friedman, Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, and Michael Moore - plus true confessions, case studies and strategies for change.

Winner of 24 INTERNATIONAL AWARDS, 10 of them AUDIENCE CHOICE AWARDS including the AUDIENCE AWARD for DOCUMENTARY in WORLD CINEMA at the 2004 SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL. The long-awaited DVD, available now in Australia and coming in March to North America, contains over 8 hour of additional footage.

The film is based on the book The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power by Joel Bakan.
 
Surrender Should Not Be an Option

by Ron Paul


September 2, 2007

Faced with dwindling support of the Iraq War, the warhawks are redoubling their efforts. They imply we are in Iraq attacking those who attacked us, and yet this is not the case. As we know, Saddam Hussein, though not a particularly savory character, had nothing to do with 9/11. The neo-cons claim surrender should not be an option. In the same breath they claim we were attacked because of our freedoms. Why then, are they so anxious to surrender our freedoms with legislation like the Patriot Act, a repeal of our 4th amendment rights, executive orders, and presidential signing statements? With politicians like these, who needs terrorists? Do they think if we destroy our freedoms for the terrorists they will no longer have a reason to attack us? This seems the epitome of cowardice coming from those who claim a monopoly on patriotic courage.

In any case, we have achieved the goals specified in the initial authorization. Saddam Hussein has been removed. An elected government is now in place in Iraq that meets with US approval. The only weapon of mass destruction in Iraq is our military presence. Why are we still over there? Conventional wisdom would dictate that when the "mission is accomplished", the victor goes home, and that is not considered a retreat.

They claim progress is being made and we are fighting a winnable war, but this is not a view connected with reality. We can't be sure when we kill someone over there if they were truly an insurgent or an innocent Iraqi civilian. There are as many as 650,000 deaths since the war began. The anger we incite by killing innocents creates more new insurgents than our bullets can keep up with. There are no measurable goals to be achieved at this point.

The best congressional leadership can come up with is the concept of strategic redeployment, or moving our troops around, possibly into Saudi Arabia or even, alarmingly enough, into Iran. Rather than ending this war, we could be starting another one.

The American people voted for a humble foreign policy in 2000. They voted for an end to the war in 2006. Instead of recognizing the wisdom and desire of the voters, they are chided as cowards, unwilling to defend themselves. Americans are fiercely willing to defend themselves. However, we have no stomach for indiscriminate bombing in foreign lands when our actual attackers either killed themselves on 9/11 or are still at large somewhere in a country that is neither Iraq nor Iran. Defense of our homeland is one thing. Offensive tactics overseas are quite another. Worse yet, when our newly minted enemies find their way over here, where will our troops be to defend us?

The American people have NOT gotten the government they deserve. They asked for a stronger America and peace through nonintervention, yet we have a government of deceit, inaction and one that puts us in grave danger on the international front. The American People deserve much better than this. They deserve foreign and domestic policy that doesn't require they surrender their liberties.

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst090207.htm
 
The Corporation was simply jawdropping, thanks.

On that note, I think the above article by Ron Paul is while most certainly true, exactly the wrong thing to say if he hopes to get elected. It is the truth, and yes it is true and we need to get our noses out of these other countries, but lets be honest, we have this war for one reason. One BIG reason. OIL. It would seem that we as a people, we Americans, ineed perhaps we humans, are all guilty of all of the most heinous, evil acts ever committed, either directly, or through our indifference. I'm not sure that a majority of Americans will support an end to this military capitalism. Lets face it, $3.00 a gallon is a pain, but we can afford it, and we can afford it because we are profiting from evil, just as we always have, and most likely always will until we render ourselves extinct.
 
Republicans, Paul clash over Iraq war
By LIBBY QUAID, Associated Press Writer

DURHAM, N.H. - Republican presidential contenders voiced support for the Iraq war Wednesday night despite a warning from anti-war candidate Ron Paul that they risk dragging the party down to defeat in 2008.

"Even if we lose elections, we should not lose our honor," shot back former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, "and that is more important to the Republican Party."

Huckabee was in the majority, Paul very much in the minority on a University of New Hampshire debate stage when it came to the war. The politically unpopular conflict has emerged as the dominant issue of the 2008 race for the White House.

The issue flared near the end of a 90-minute encounter in which all eight men on stage welcomed former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson to the race with barbed humor and pointed advice.

"This is a nomination you have to earn," said former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. "Nobody's going to give it to you. Nobody's going to grant it to you."

The debate unfolded several days before Gen. David Petraeus is scheduled to deliver an assessment of President Bush's wintertime decision to commit 30,000 additional combat troops to the war.

Sen. John McCain, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Giuliani all stressed support for the war, at times even competing to show their commitment.

"The surge is apparently working," said Romney, referring to the increase in troops.

That brought an instant rebuke from McCain, who said, "The surge is working, sir, no, not apparently. It's working."

Alone among the contenders, Paul, a veteran Texas congressman with a libertarian streak, made the case for withdrawing troops. That drew a sharp challenge from Chris Wallace, one of the debate questioners, who asked whether the United States should take its marching orders from al-Qaida.

"No! We should take our marching orders from our Constitution," Paul shouted back, pointing his pen at Wallace for emphasis. "We should not go to war without a declaration" by Congress.

Occasionally interrupted by applause, Paul doggedly stuck to his point. "We have lost over 5,000 Americans over there in Afghanistan, in Iraq and plus the civilians killed," he said during his exchange with Huckabee.

"How long — what do we have to pay to save face? That's all we're doing, is saving face. It's time we came home," Paul said.

There was no debating whether it was important to cut taxes and spending, although McCain and Giuliani defended their refusal to sign a pledge not to raise taxes.

"I stand on my record and my record is 24 years of opposing tax increases," said McCain.

Giuliani said he had a strong record of cutting New York City taxes. "I only think a man or woman running for president ought to take one pledge and that is a pledge to uphold the United States Constitution.

The debate ranged over familiar issues, and each of the men on stage looked for moments to appeal to their target constituents.

Huckabee, eager to win the support of social conservatives, said he supports a "human life amendment" to outlaw abortion.

By contrast, Giuliani supports abortion rights and Romney favors allowing states to decide on their own whether to permit or ban them.

Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas and Rep. Duncan Hunter of California called for the resignation of Sen. Larry Craig, the Idaho Republican who pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct in an airport men's room in an undercover police operation.

"It's important that the party stand for family values," said Brownback, although as recently as last week, he pointedly avoided recommending that Craig step down.

Brownback also drew boos from the audience when he called for passage of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. "I understand there is a divided audience," he said.

Giuliani responded to questions about his personal life by confessing to imperfections.

"I'm running as a human being who has been very successful as a leader," he said.

Giuliani's son has said he didn't speak to his father for some time. Giuliani and their mother, Donna Hanover, had a nasty and public divorce while Giuliani was New York's mayor, and he has since remarried.

The debate occurred roughly four months before New Hampshire holds the first primary of the 2008 race.

Thompson clearly hoped to upstage the event — airing the first advertisement of the campaign on Fox TV during a commercial break, and formally announcing his candidacy on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" after the debate.

He was not disappointed. Brit Hume, the debate moderator, opened up by asking each of the eight candidates to respond to the newcomer's presence.

"I was scheduled to be on Jay Leno tonight, but I gave up my spot to somebody else because I'd rather be here in New Hampshire," joked Huckabee.

"Why the hurry? Why not take some more time off?" Romney said humorously.

The war was a recurrent theme for the debate, in which New Hampshire voters outside the hall were allowed to pose questions to the candidates.

One man, Mark Riss, chastised Romney for comparing the service of men who have fought in Iraq with his own sons' support for his campaign.

"I know you apologized a couple of days later ... but it was wrong sir, and you never should have said it," Riss said.

"Well, there is no comparison, of course," Romney agreed.
 
Top