Forum Post: To the Ron Paul supporters
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 16, 2011, 4:40 a.m. EST by Benny14
(101)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I see alot of Ron Paul supporters trying to tell OWS that Ron Paul is a good guy.
The fact of the matter is Ron Paul is as corrupt as Obama as most of the other republicans and democrats they are all taking bribes from big corporations and special interest groups
Ron Paul has raised over 5mil dollars for his campaign in 2008. Here are the facts
legend PAC contributions $36,017 (1%) legend Individual contributions $1,445,869 (29%) legend Candidate self-financing $0 (0%) legend Other $3,532,397 (70%)
Notice "other" no one knows where those money are coming from.
List of bribes from corporations there is known:
Computers/Internet $818,835 Health Professionals $630,491 Real Estate $414,129 Misc Business $382,221 Education $345,256 Misc Finance $338,965 Republican/Conservative $320,132 Business Services $316,244 Securities & Investment $313,860 Other $301,316 Lawyers/Law Firms $279,539 Civil Servants/Public Officials $221,165 Construction Services $199,343 Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $152,568 General Contractors $135,276 TV/Movies/Music $134,616 Printing & Publishing $131,310 Oil & Gas $127,632 Special Trade Contractors $118,310
data from the 2008 campaign.
There is you proof Ron Paul is as corrupt as every other politicians. May they be democrats,republicans, socialist or conservative
Do you really think Ron Paul is going to do any legislation to help the little guy down the street working 2 jobs but can barely get by?
I have to agree with some posters, respectfully.
(A) his position on U.S. foreign policy makes him the best of all of the candidates running, including Pres. Obama;
(B) he is honest, I think, which is unique and can make him appear at times a bit unpolished; and
(C) just because he is receiving money, does not NECESSARILY make him "corrupt."
Of course it does stop deluding you self. They are taking bribes to legislate laws that will protect those interest groups. You as a person got nothing to say any more its total corruption
I don't think he has ever voted for a law that goes against the constitution - during his 30 year career. They call him Mr No because of that I believe. And bribes? he refuses to partake in the pension scheme, he calls it immoral. He gives back money out of his expenses every year.
Where is the source of this information on Ron Paul Benny?
According to open secrets...
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=2012&type=I&cid=N00005906&newMem=N
Individual Contributions $12,199,857 (95%)
PAC Contributions $0 (0%)
Candidate self-financing $0 (0%)
Other $604,735 (5%)
[Removed]
We don't need income redistribution when you have true Capitalism and an open and free market with regulations set up to protect the consumer and small business. We haven't had anything like what is stated in a long time but when we did, America was not perfect but was the most prosperous country on the planet. Wealth distribution would mean putting more power in to the state, the very creature that help propagate the problem we have.
[Removed]
You balance the scales by wiping all the illegitimate debt off the books and backs of the taxpayers, that was created by the printing presses at the Federal Reserve and return to some form of sound money system, not necessarily a gold backed but most certainly not debt based, like we have now. Once we start chiseling away at our debt, including the spending then we can talk about our social issues, until then all we'd be doing is burying ourselves under more debt.
You dont understand. No one needs to be rich. A person can get rich only by robbing the poor.
So you want to rob the rich, defy logic, due tell. And what constitutes being rich. Who sets that standard? Are you to tell me that I can not work hard and earn my way to a large bank account?
You can't say "Free-Market with regulations" lol. Contradiction
So you like toxic soup for drinking water, and lead paint on your children's toys, or the crushing fist of a monopoly?
Use your God given common sense.
No he doesn't want income redistribution done by force.
Why is everyone so quick to want to use guns on other people?
We don't need income redistribution, we need money out of politics. This will give us one person, one vote. Through those votes, a progressive taxation system would come about through the consensus of all the American people, not the 1% who is trying to game the tax system in their favor (and cutting every social program on the books).
I'll post my 2 cents about Ron Paul since I really admired him in 2008.
He's a kitten compared to the idealist he was just 3 years ago. I sincerely believe some higher up in the Republican't base silenced him. Even the few soundbites I hear from him these days are tame. Very disappointing.
The Tea Party is a horrific joke and that really soured my feelings towards him.
My conclusion: OWS is what Ron Paul should have been. I can vote in the Repuke primaries, so he'll get my vote there.
Money corrupts
His stance on wars alone makes him better than the other losers.
What about his stance on a states right to discriminate based on sexual orientation or color ? How about his stance on health insurance / healthcare ? How about his stance on even more deregulation of the banks and Wall Street ? Maybe his stance on repealing the Civil Rights Act ?
Libertarians have some great ideas but they are based in a fantasy land. If people were not greedy, immoral, corrupt, racist and selfish... Maybe then Ron Paul would be a good choice. For now, he is probably the most unelectable presidential candidate in U.S history.
Stop listening to everything that fox news says. Nothing you just said is close to right. In a free market you wouldn't get bail outs. you wouldn't have corporations with the power to make laws and get to big to fail. You would have sound money. You fear change and want to keep things the same and hope more bail outs will work you can't have it both ways.
Well i don't watch Fox News and i understand basic economics, thanks for the advise though. =)
I was just going to say... :)
And why do regulations consistently get equated with "bailouts?"
Hell if i know... If a gnat farted some where in Africa I'm sure i could find 10 people that would tell me it was because of De-regulation and another 10 telling me it was because of to much regulation.
Ron Paul isn't going to just de-regulate everything. What has any regulation done to help the mess we are in now. Nothing. What would happen if Ron Paul is wrong about everything? Nothing. What would happen if he is right? Nothing Good> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V36MT5lAMrc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc0T1kMc1d4&feature=share Watch this and see if you still agree.
Yes. They depend on human beings being rational and unselfish. Not practical
Why shouldn't a PRIVATE business be able to discriminate on ANY thing they wanted to? If I want to open a bar that only allowed in blonde haired, blue eyed women with size 36C and above breasts, why shouldn't I be able to? If I am brown haired brown eyed girl, then I will find a bar that caters to me and so on.
Civil rights were ONLY needed because of government schools and "public" resources that is why most libertarians want Civil rights repealed. The basic rights we are born with: the right to own our own bodies and the right to keep the fruit of our labor, applies to ALL people no matter what color. All Civil rights has done has given government basic control of our lives based on race and creed, exactly the opposite of its stated intent.
Obama is Brzezinski's protege and, as you must know, carries water for the banksters. I don't automatically identify Paul with the so-called Tea Party. Mainstream media tries to black out his campaign for a reason.
I recently received heresy from a progressive. You might peruse it:
Why Progressives Should Gladly Vote For Ron Paul (A Republican) Over Any Democrat Including Obama
By Steve Brown
Watch this startling (mind-changing) recent TV interview with Ron Paul.
http://dailybail.com/home/videos-ron-paul-bring-the-troops-home-now-maxine-waters-the.html
Let me say right out that I oppose many of Ron Paul’s positions -- such as criminalizing abortion; denying that climate change is a global threat (or that it is man-made); withdrawing Government funding from social programs; refusal to tax the rich; support of unlimited corporate donations to election campaigns; and promoting prayer in the public schools.
So why would I vote for him over any Democratic candidate including Obama? Because my objections to many of his positions pale into insignificance when weighed against his clear and unequivocal promise not only to IMMEDIATELY stop our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and bring home all American troops -- but also to close every single one of our hugely expensive (and provocative) foreign military bases in Germany, Japan, Korea, and nearly 800 other locations around the world.
Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate – Republican or Democrat – who has even addressed this issue, let alone made such a clear statement of intent. Aside from the profound moral insanity of our government’s murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan, these wars -- and our 800 foreign military bases -- and the bloated military-industrial complex that instigates our wars and sucks up over 60% of the federal budget -- are primary causes of our economic crisis, and of the increasing violence and international terrorism that may lead to nuclear war and the destruction of our planet.
Nothing at this moment in history is more important than stopping our wars and dismantling our military-industrial complex. If Ron Paul could start doing this now, I will gladly put off the fight over his less palatable policies to another day. That is, if Ron Paul even lives to see another day – instead of meeting the same fate from an assassin’s bullet as John F Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Robert F Kennedy and Malcolm X, or anyone else who is perceived (rightly or wrongly) to be a threat to the power establishment.
At election time, the Democratic Party routinely thumbs its nose at the progressive movement because it thinks we have nowhere else to go. The mantra has always been, “Any Democrat is better than a Republican.” But except on minor issues of lifestyle and culture, is that really true? Has Obama really been – not smarter, of which there is no doubt – but better than Bush? Or has he been able to get away with things that Bush could only dream of, because the left has not dared to challenge him as it challenged Bush and his predecessors?
In addition to his firm stand on ending our wars and cutting military spending, Ron Paul is very strong on civil liberties. Whereas Obama has been rapidly shredding our civil liberties and snipping every thread of the social safety net so painstakingly constructed during the past 65 years since the New Deal.
Obama is owned by the financial sector (his largest campaign contributor was Goldman Sachs). And Michele Bachman, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and every other Republican is also deeply in debt -- morally, spiritually, and financially -- to the same corporate interests that finance the Democrats (although the specific donors may differ). But Ron Paul does not seem to be in debt to anyone except his own conscience and his own principles – which may admittedly be a mixed blessing, but is far better than we can expect from any other candidate on the horizon.
So I will vote No to Obama and Yes to Ron Paul, in the not unlikely event that he becomes the Republican nominee. Any other candidate – Republican or Democrat – will be a disaster. If we can’t have Ralph Nader (sigh), then the next best thing really is Ron Paul. Even if Ron Paul is not on the ballot, I will give him a write-in vote, and if enough voters do so, we might, for the first time in U.S. history, actually elect an anti-war president who really is.
Friend of mine sent me this and ask to pass the word around. I hope people read and take actions:
Time for our legislators to live by their rulings..
Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best quotes about the debt ceiling: "I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election
The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in1971...before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc.
Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.
Warren Buffet is asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security. All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.
Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12. The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.
If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.
THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!
If you agree with the above, pass it on. If not, just delete. You are one of my 20+. Please keep it going.
I have done just as you said people should. I looked it up:
Contributions
Individual $12,122,816
PAC $0
Party $0
Candidate $0
Federal Funds $0
Transfers-In $500,500
Disbursements $8,948,654
Cash On Hand $3,674,768
Size Donations
$200 and Under $7,353,759
$200.01 - $499 $1,671,708
$500 - $999 $1,043,616
$1000 - $1999 $912,254
$2000 and Over $1,217,399
Source: http://www.fec.gov/disclosurep/pnational.do
This list is of his donor's occupations, NOT corporations themselves. He received 95% from individuals. Ron Paul has twice the integrity than the fool who wrote this post. He hasn't sold out for anybody in his 30 years on the hill. He has never taken a donation for a political favor. You nust be drinking the Venus Project kool-aid if you don't realize that Ron Paul represents a solution to the unifying beef that OWS has: Government / Corporate collusion.
What you need to do is ask a lobbyist what happens when they go to Ron Paul. I can tell you what happens is Ron Paul looks at what they want and if it is not allowed in the Constitution he says no. He fights against the corporate cronyism that sets up things like tarp and Wall street bail outs. You would not see anyone working under his presidency from Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan. Ron Paul is a friend to this cause. He has nothing to do with the tea party people as it was hijacked by neocons. To make Ron Paul the enemy would make me an enemy of OWS
Okay...I don't see any sources. You have to post where you got this information if you're making claims like these. All of his donation data is on the FEC and it shows where money is coming from.
Data from Quarter 2: http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2011/Q2/C00495820.html
Data from Quarter 3: http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2011/Q3/C00495820.html
I mean, everything is there for all of the candidates. Where did you get your info?
there you go http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?id=TX14&cycle=2008
Where's the info on the confirmed bribes? And you should say that the data is from a congressional 2008 campaign, not the current presidential campaign, you're confusing a lot of people.
I took the date from the last election of course
The last election date for his congress seat was 2010 though...
I would be happy to go over every election Ron Paul has ever attended if it would be you happy but you know as I do that of course he has taken large sums from special interest groups just like every other politicians there lives today well except Buddy Roemer
Well, that's really the only problem I have at the moment. If I was a cashier at wal-mart and I donated to his 2008 congressional campaign, it seems you would call that a bribe simply because I work for a corporation.
You can call if what you wish if you it makes you feel better. All I know if i go down the street and bribe the cops to look away when I rob you house its illegal but when you do in congress its called donations.
ahh i see the categories you got it from now, though how can we tell they're bribes though? They're just the category of the employer of individuals donating to the campaign.
Not its not he got massive sums from special interest groups. Nothing I wrote here is a lie its all a fact.
The fact of the matter is you can be a democrat or republican it really doesn't matter since they all working for the same boss aka wall street
I think you are misunderstanding the data. When you donate, you write down what your employer is and your occupation. Just because I happen to be, lets say a doctor, and I donate, that doesn't mean he's serving the special interest of the medical community. It just means I like him and I'm donating to him. The only way for that list to be zero is if nobody donates period. I'm not sure what you would consider a non-special interest donation.
It is a lie when you are taking facts and twisting them. Let's have a look at http://www.opensecrets.org/races/indus.php?cycle=2008&id=TX14
Retired is the top 'industry'. Are you going to claim that 'Retired' is a corporation that was bribing Ron Paul? These lists are the employers that individual donators put when they donated.
Silliness? You are the one claiming things that are not true. Retired= special interest group? No. It is people who are retired who individually donated to him.
Proof has already been posted that disproves you. The other (3.5 million) was transferred from his 2008 presidential campaign, as harikaried posted. This list that you claim are corporations are in fact the employers of individual contributors. Please face the facts.
"The majority of "Other" is transferred from his 2008 Presidential campaign: RON PAUL 2008 PCC CLUTE TX 77531 06/24/2008 $3,500,000
You can see the transfer for that exact $3.5m: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/expend.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00005906
And here's where the money came from: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00005906
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00005906 Individual contributions $34,336,169 99% "
Retired is just 1 of many special interest groups. stop with the silliness plz. I agree Ron Paul is not one of the worst but he isn't free of charge either he has taken sums from special interest groups no matter if you like it or not.
The author of this post does not have the facts right. You need to fact check before you smear someone. You'll need to do it yourself. I'm not doing it for you.
http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?id=TX14&cycle=2008
The majority of "Other" is transferred from his 2008 Presidential campaign: RON PAUL 2008 PCC CLUTE TX 77531 06/24/2008 $3,500,000
You can see the transfer for that exact $3.5m: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/expend.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00005906
And here's where the money came from: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00005906
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00005906 Individual contributions $34,336,169 99%
http://www.fec.gov/disclosurep/pnational.do
Wut?
He raised over $8M, and the donations are listed by employer, he isn't being paid off by a specific corporation.
You cite absolutely no real source for that information. It's $3M off the real total for starters. He raised $8M from 100,000 small donors, Perry is the one that raised $17M from 20,000 donors. Only one of them is corrupt.
I'll post a link to the real information for anyone that is interested: http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2011/Q3/C00495820.html
A doctor who is so opposed to taxes he won't accept them as payment from his patients, instead he did the humanitarian deed and provided the medical care for free. A representative of the people who won't steal their money to pay for his retirement. Earned the nickname Dr. NO because lobbyists know he won't trade his principles for their corporate contributions. If that's corruption, the definition must be changed.
As a Canadian I can only cheer Ron Paul on from the sidelines. Where else but in America could a guy with political views like he has be elected? If Ron Paul ran in Canada the elites here would commit defenestration from their ivory towers. He's the most consistent man in politics hands down. How can you not admire him for that?
As a whole, Americans don't live their lives based on any principle. They're unable to understand even what it means to be principled. Love the guy or hate the guy but he's done the same thing the entire time he's been in public office.
I figure Ron Paul is the best thing that could ever happen to our foreign policy. I mean, that's what he has direct control over, right?
For the other stuff he wants to do...eh, he'd just be the president, not like he could push any of the stuff he wants to do through congress. He'd be lucky to end the Fed by 4 years in, let alone do anything else other than bring the troops home. And by then, someone prettier would come along, or he'd die of old age.
You are an idiot. You might want to look into Ron Lawl a little more seriously and stop the player hating fool
Obama has taken 10x from the same people so why jump on poor old Ron? He's been a rebel for a long time.
I agree with you on that one Obama is even worse but my point is both parties are corrupt doesn't matter who you think is a good guy or not.
Take the money out of politics stop the bribery
Agreed!!!
Ron Paul is a member of the Republican Party. Whether RP supporters like it or not, their support for Ron Paul ultimately becomes support for the Republican Party - and support for either 'Pubs or 'Dems ultimately means that you support Wall Street.
Ron Paul is just telling the disaffected what they want to hear. Ron Paul will not End the Fed ... just like Obama did not end the wars.
It's time to let go of our two-party political system. Both parties are controlled by Wall Street.
Ron Paul corrupt?
Take a look at his FEC report. See where he gets no donations from PAC's and big business? Compare that with Obama's or anyone else in the race.
Jeez get some information - shouting your ignorance to the world is not a great way to have your future comments listened to.
Of course the OP of this thread is lying and that's why he didn't provide his link. I see he's been called out on his bullshit, though.
The Ron Paul attacks are coming like crazy because the neocons and the neolibs both not only hate him and his anti war positions but they FEAR him for the same reason.
OK Benny, I found where you got your information from, his 2008 campaign for Congress, in District 14.
http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?id=TX14&cycle=2008
And then you go on to state,
"Notice "other" no one knows where those money are coming from."
"List of bribes from corporations there is known:"
So which is it, do you know or don't you know.
How about it isn't bribes from corporations but rather contributors who are individuals who are employed by those corporations and have claimed as such?
His campaign financial reports have 90% discloser rate according to open secrets.
Benny watch this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nF30eMuWFHI#!
A good portion of Dr. Paul's donations are from Main Street!!
Listen to his message. Look at his voting record. Decide for yourself.
I've done (and continue to do) the above. I've also looked up his 2008 campaign stats (on opensecrets.org, nonetheless). He made over 30 million (mainly from "moneybombs"), not 5 million. 99% came from individual donations; 1% (~$180k) came from "Other".
There is another field at the very bottom (which is probably what you're referring to) that lists the amount of his donations that are undisclosed. That number is 14% (~$2 million). I imagine that is mostly donors that contributed less than 200 dollars. The campaign is not required to disclose those people (and I imagine there are a lot of them, if they came up with 2 million bucks).
Unless you are getting your numbers from another source, you are giving some misinformation. That's why we're in this situation in the first place. Too many people don't research bullshit like this and find out for themselves.
Benny14,
You need to have your facts in order before trying to call someone out. I think we can all agree (Maybe not you) that you have been thoroughly owned and made to look foolish here by all those that posted the actual facts and links to back it up.
If you listen to one of Buddy Roemers speaches he can tell you exactly down to the lines of tax code on changes that he will make to promote fair trade.
I agree Buddy Roemer might be the only decent and none corrupted politicians that's left today
Baby steps people. Every single one of us took baby steps to get where we are, and so will our democracy have to take baby steps to get where we want it to go.
There is no perfect candidate. But some are definitely better than others. And if we vote for the better ones, we'll eventually get even better ones because the people's wishes will start to gain traction. BABY STEPS!
I propose to you that Ron Paul is a way better option than the other GOP jokes, and if he wins the nomination, he's even better than Obama.
Even better than all of them is Buddy Roemer. He is, actually, the perfect candidate. I take back what I said earlier, he's the real deal, a perfect candidate... running on a campaign financed by donations of $100 or less. No corporate influence. Just people power fueling his campaign. Check him out > http://www.buddyroemer.com/
BABY STEPS!!!!!
I agree with you and I also agree that Buddy Roemer is the perfect candidate he is a good statesman and refuse to take those bribes. But he cant even be allowed in the debates
Ron Paul is for; ending income tax, opting out of social security and ending wars...if people could hold on to more of their money, then they wouldn't have to have 2 jobs to get by!! Downsizing Government is the only way to do it. No other candidate is willing to do that!
Have you seen Ron Paul's agenda if he becomes our next President?
He is willing to cut a trillion dollars right off the bat his first 100 days as President.
http://blogs.cbn.com/thebrodyfile/archive/2011/10/14/exclusive-ron-pauls-agenda-to-include-eliminating-cabinet-secretaries-and.aspx
You say all President Campaigners make promises then once in office renege...go look at Ron Paul's record, he is true to his word. How many Presidents would say they would take a salary of $39,336? Quick answer: NONE!
NO ONE BUT PAUL!!
Benny your an idiot.
I'm an idiot because I provide public information that Ron Paul and Obama are all taking bribes from interest groups and financial institutions?
Well if that's being an idiot well then Ill be an idiot
Good. We agree you're an idiot.
I don't think that is proof that he is more corrupt. His voting record supports the fact that he votes in a way which is consistent with his spoken viewpoint. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXCbakWnA4Q There is unfair opposition to Ron Paul in this movement. His policies on election reform, the banks, the drug war, the real wars are all in line with people in this forum. And we are in need of a specific course of action. Now, his environmental policies suck...however, his fiscal policies and policies on reform are right in line.
@Anonymoose, His environmental policies are for sustainability of our resources. He would support people in their ability to sue companies for polluting their land. He has strong stances on property rights.
~ Eliminate the ineffective EPA. Polluters should answer directly to property owners in court for the damages they create – not to Washington. Source: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/energy/
@Benny Taking a generalized list of names of industries and pasting it as proof of corruption is not enough. WHO made those donations, the FEC has regulations on what the candidates have to report.
If you want facts then Research, read the news and come to a rational decision, But realize that facts are subjective to those who do not wish to believe them. That is part of what the whole "Freedom" thing is about.
Political parties are irrelevant. To this point, here is a great speach at Occupy LA that everyone should see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkinHuvLEaU
Please post links to this
Its public record look it up
Wait, so your argument is that he should campaign for public office without any money to prove he is not corrupt?
Ron Paul is an extremist candidate. He could never possibly win.
Start with him abolishing our Social Security entitlement, and he ends right there. He's not viable.
We will never leave our grandparents on the streets dying.
Ron Paul only appeals to white middle class youth who hate homosexuals, black people and pretty much every minority and believe that the poor cause their own poverty, and think that these controversial opinions plus a reading of Ayn Rand makes them smart. And they think that these qualities will make them the next libertarian entrepreneur (note:there are no libertarian entrepreneurs and there never will be) even though they will spend the rest of their lives stuck in their parent's basement, writing angry, stupid crap on the internet. Oh wait, they will bring their political ads to rallies and riots, even though the riot doesn't have anything to do with Ron Paul and his stupidity. This is the only moment they get any sunlight.
Ron Paul supporters posting are mostly paid political propagandists.
Posting on public forums is the new political advertising.
Ron Paul would make an awesome Grandpa.. But as a President, he would suck.
Thanks for posting! I'm not sure you'll overcome the brainwashing though... :-\
How is this brainwashing? I'm just providing facts you can find this information yourself its public record
Trying to pass off the occupations of Ron Paul's individual donors as corporate contributions could qualify as such.
What are you talking about? At least link to the REAL information that is in public record here:http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2011/Q3/C00495820.html
A long shot from the crap you posted.
I meant the brainwashing of the Ron Paul machine... they don't take to facts very well
ahh lol:D You cant argue against facts
You're right. You can't argue against the facts. That's why you didn't use any. Read my post above if you don't understand.
Right now you reek of troll. Go back to trade chat.