What is so crazy about ending the Fed. It is a great ideal. We need sound money "The FED"is just printing money when ever they feel like. Who says what a piece of paper is worth. I would rather have Gold in my pocket then paper. "END the FED". Now.

It's Keebler Time, TeaPaulers!

Once it's made publicly known what the Fed has done, you'll understand Paul's statement.

Why Ron Paul is correct about the FED

Think of it in terms of a stock split.

Take a dollar bill, tear it in half, that is what happens every time the FED doubles the money supply. Except, they give fifty cents of your money to special interest, cronies, finance wars, or foreign powers.

Tear your 50 cents in half again.

And again.

Now you have 12.5 cents. That is why a green pepper in 1980 cost 12.5 cents and now it is a dollar, and it has nothing to do with how much we pay the sun to shine. The dollar is backed up by the full force of America, which as it turns out is the US citizens. Backed up through taxation. And because our government can't tax us 100% because it would destroy the economy, it is added as debt.

What is the point of earning 7-10% on investments, while at the same time the FED is devaluing your money by 15%?

End the FED's stealing the "value" of my money right out of my bank account? Yeah, that's pretty darn crazy. Obama, Romney, Gingrich, Clinton, .... all think that bankers should be able to steal the value of money from everybody who saved for a rainy day. Steal the "value" of everybodies money who have saved for Retirement.

I'd say the mainstream who thinks the FED is a good idea are the crazy ones.

I won't argue with the need to perhaps CHANGE the way the Fed operates, but I really think any talk of disbanding the Fed altogether is totally insane and goes against any reasonable economic intelligence. We need the checks and balances of the Fed; and not just to control inflation!

I've heard the arguments people make saying that most of those checks and balances should be done by the free market but those ideas don't remove the bureaucratic levels, they just simply move them to another level where we may not have as much control. The government (the Fed in this case) having these authorities give the people much more control since we get to vote and replace it's leaders. I never understood this idea of privatizing all of these "checks & balances"... it's really adding more layers by removing it from a central command center that "We The People" get to have a lot of say in.

Disbanding the Fed won't help. If you want to fix our economic system, I think we need 2 basic things that are really easy and inexpensive, overall:

A. American kids are educated in High School on how to "pay as you go" and balance their check book / live within their means.. basically they need to learn Personal Finance.

B. Our Government quits patrolling the world and being the Super Hero... focusing on helping educate our own people and protecting our own people.

Change those things now and in 50 years you'll see a new , better America.

"The government (the Fed in this case) having these authorities give the people much more control since we get to vote and replace it's leaders."

We get to? It seems most are too afraid to replace anything.

nor2102

What is so crazy about ending the Fed. It is a great ideal. We need sound money "The FED"is just printing money when ever they feel like. Who says what a piece of paper is worth. I would rather have Gold in my pocket then paper. "END the FED". Now.

Thats ridiculous and not practical. Gold is much more volatile than the domestic dollar is even with inflation.

Most of what Ron Paul says sounds good at first blush, but any attempt to extrapolate his ideas reveal them to be incompatible with reality. "Getting rid of the Fed/Returning to the Gold Standard" is an example; there is not enough gold on the planet to cover the number of US dollars. Converting to a gold standard today would immediately result in the value of everything you own decreasing by at least 50%, and the value of everything you owe would at least double. The US economy would completely collapse, taking the rest of the world with it. Not only would big business and government not be able to spend, you wouldn't be able to buy a loaf of bread.

Unlike most of the fools who support Ron Paul, Ron Paul knows that going back to the gold standard can't be done, and has said so.

I've been pointing out for months that there's nothing new about Ron Paul. He simply represents the once-fringe John Birch Society, a group so crazy that it was publicly disowned by REAL Conservatives including Barry Goldwater and William F Buckley. Now they've become essential to the fortunes of the GOP as they've long pursued a strategy of constantly chasing an ever more radical base while doing everything within their power to dissuade everyone else from voting.

History will not look well upon this time when the Republican Party mainstreamed crazy.

The money would be better spent in helping families in need. Politicians need to understand that all the bad advertising is not going to do anything good for the people, other than just confusing everybody even more.

People would be a lot more moved if they would do something nice for a change. Example: Using the money of the Super Pac to help some homeless people. Just feed and shelter all the homeless people in a town for a few days. Make them feel human again, with dignity.

They would get a lot more votes, and they would really get in touch with the real people. I guess tha is a dream that probably will never happen.

Rick...There is more than enough Gold to cover the dollar, we just adjust wan an oz of gold is worth like maybe $3500.

I think the important thing is that they quit printing and devaluing the money we have. If they want to tie it to something, tie it to a basket price of all precious. It would be much less likely that it could be manipulated.

Anyone who thinks we should be gold-based: Look up the relationship Gold had on the Great Depression.... I'm sorry, but having a gold-based currency is, at best, stupid.

I'd say nearly all of Americans agree with at least one thing Ron Paul says... but then the next thing he says is totally crazy.... like: "do away with the Fed"... huh Ron?

Coastal Exchange

I agree with the first part of your statement. I do agree with much of Paul's foreign policy. I don't believe it is America's responsibility nor do I believe it should be our expense to police the whole world. I don't agree on much of his domestic principles.

But the FED I totally agree with. They are directly responsible with the Repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act which played a large roll in the economic crisis of 2008. The FED is nothing more that a banking cartel.

An item that cost $20.00 in 1913, when the Fed was formed, would cost $454.42 in 2011. In 1964, you could buy a gallon of gas or a pack of cigarettes for a quarter. You can still buy a gallon of gas or a pack of cigarettes for a 1964 quarter. Any questions?

Ron Paul has called for a full audit of the Fed. He's said multiple times that it's impractical to immediately put an end to it. Time will tell if he's making sense, but his record has been very good so far. He's successfully predicted events up to about 2011 way back in the 90's.

And Ron Paul isn't isolationist--he's simply against interventionism. You can't afford to run so many military bases abroad when you're broke.

The Federal Reserve is a Federal as Federal Express. Its a private bank headed by University of Chicago wingnut economists who seek to do nothing but indenture the whole world with debt. But I guess you're right Coastal because I don't see that happening anywhere. Do you? The only ones who make money off their policy of printing money and selling the worthless bonds they get in return are the bond salesmen and the Wall Street Houses they work for. The average guy gets saddled with the interest, the cutbacks that happen as a result of state and federal governments unable to service their debt and the hidden tax called inflation

denver bill 2,

I've explained this point to them almost a dozen times over the years, they just don't want to hear it. We are all crazy, the founding fathers are crazy, Dr Paul is crazy.

I also keep telling them whenever you point the finger you have three pointing back at yourself.

Ending the FED and the IRS might be the sanest things he suggests.

AP-1414066

The Fed caused the recession by printing and devaluing so many dollars that it caused the cost of houses to skyrocket.

most likely this will back fire on the press-a-tudes.looks like they are still scared of ron pauls message.

anyone that can think for themselves and have over room temp iq knows 9-11 was an inside job.get ready for the next false flag attack to if iran doesnt fire back.isreal and us are killing iran scienist and bombing iran bases.but when iran starts to defend it selves-watch the press-a-tudes will call them terrorist.

Bobl-1819708

Rick...There is more than enough Gold to cover the dollar, we just adjust wan an oz of gold is worth like maybe $3500

So who is going to do the adjusting? Did you think about what doubling the value of the basis for your economy would do to the economy? This is one area were the gold standard people show that they don't know what they are talking about. Another point they deride the fed and by extension the value of the dollar but still quote the value of gold in dollars. The value of gold is the same as anything else - it is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. If I'm willing to take 1 ounce of gold for doing some work or I'm willing to take a $100 bill it is the same. Gold can fluctuate; that is, inflate and deflate in value and very wildly too. I'm not enamored with the Fed but the idea that the gold standard is the answer is as they say just crazy talk.

The problem with the conspiracy theories is that the people who actually commit atrocities like 9/11 know what information to plant to make the doubters look ridiculous. The towers were not demolished, they weren't even supposed to fall. Terrorists flew the planes. What did happen is the CIA picked the targets and the weapons to create a spectacular television event. that would empower the Bush administration to make billions for the war mongers and severely erode our freedoms. Current engineering belief said the towers would not fall. Oops, when the metal frame got hot enough to bend the first millimeter, gravity did the rest. Once the mass of the upper portion of the towers got started downward, nothing could have stopped it. All the better though, the TV spectacular exceeded expectations by several orders of magnitude. Osama even believed he was responsible; all part of the plan. The CIA will never do the dirty work themselves when there are so many people that hate us, they don't need to. So, the events take their own path with the initial direction set by the puppeteers. A little sprinkling of misinformation and you have a real conspiracy that is hidden in subterfuge and makes any accuser look like a fool. These people are evil, not stupid.

Spot on Spartan! You are making Ron Paul look sensible and the media doesn't like that. They didn't even apply the vote button to your post. - oh wait - it's there now!

More empty rhetoric and accusations from uninformed people, buying what the false media and propaganda machine are selling you.

Anyone who has any issues with Ron Paul, please elaborate on your reasoning for these false and empty claims. "He's crazy !" or "ireelevant" just aren't good arguments. Yet that is the only argument that I seem to see against Paul. I didn't know much about the guy, but the more I learn, the more I like. His platform is simple, if it's in the Constitution vote yes, if it's not in The Constitution vote no. If you're anti Ron Paul, you're also anti-Constitution.

Ok all you pro Federal Reserve yaks...Does it make ant sense to you what Thomas Jefferson said when he said something like ...I fear anyone controlling our monetary system more than I fear any standing army...why would you think that he said that...WHY... look at the way things are...if you control the money you control the people...not hard to see that you can bring them to their knees, and people we are all but there. Take their homes, put them on food stamps, or just force them to low paying jobs like the rest of the world....control them, put them at the powers of the elite. There is a whole lot of people out there that don't even know that the federal reserve is not even owned by the United States but does control us with the way it causes the market to go up and down, the price you pay...if you can ...for your home, if you still have one, They control everything about you,so don't be a fool to think your some island untouched by what the fed has been doing. When we the USA put economic sanctions on Libya the fed loaned them money for very cheap, how in the hell does that make sense to you?! They have never had the interest of the people of the USA in mind, only the interest of bringing us to our knees, control the money...control the people! Fools to ever think the fed is on our side...they put a band-aid on...they don't want us to bleed out...they still need us!!

I blame the culture here in the South for this.

Here, we don't lock our crazy people in the basement or the attic, we bring them out, clean them up, let them sit in the parlor and sometimes we even elect them to public office.

That's how Ron Paul got to be a Congressman.

Ron Paul is America's crazy Grandpa. He's sweet, funny, and kind of wacky. But he's liable to say or do anything because his elevator doesn't go all the way to the top all the time. So why are we surprised that he has somebody's crazy nephew running his Super Pac?

Makes sense to me. If Franchi lived in Texas or Oklahoma, he'd probably be a Congressman too!

I am always amazed at the responses that show up in the comments section. Franchi is obviously out there, and I suspect his parents were right about his mental health. Yet, there are commenters who actually buy into this? Why Ron Paul would even be remotely associated with this guy is beyond me.

http:*****//www.thumbcharts.com/*****1335/the-dollar-gold-and-oil-last-five-years

Copy and paste this into your browser( Remove the *****'s of course...

Then get back to me on the one you think has been a more stable currency MSR... Just saying. And thats only a five year trend. Tell us now what one as been more unpredictable and has been tossed to and fro! Stop spreading the crap brother. Paper money is what it is.... Paper! If you think for one second that the powers that be use paper for their money.....You my friend are sadly mistaken!

All you pro Fed people, look up and view a video called The Money Masters...maybe then you will understand somewhat...because if you think the Fed is a good thing your the one out there, not Ron Paul or the many others that understand.

JustanotherVeteran

I actually believe there is an inverse correlation of sorts. The interesting charts are the US debt to Gold since like 1980. As the debt skyrockets, so does gold, on a parabolic curve headed to infinity. Sorry, don't have the charts at hand.

God forbid that a US president would make an effort to fully investigate the 9/11 events! Vote Ron Paul - annoy the military industrial complex!

Skip,

Good post!!

LOL

On to the un-Constitutional Federal Reserve. First of all it is not a federal institution, it is a private bank, owned and operated by the big bankers.

Secondly, the Fed operates free of Congressional oversight. They do need to report their operations to Congress, only after they have done it. They don't need Congressional approval before doing these things. For example, the Fed has the power to bail out an entire country without Congressional approval. As an American taxpayer, knowing they're using YOUR money, are you okay with that ?

Third, it states clearly in The COnstitution that Congress is responsible for coining money, regulate the value of said money, fix the standard of weights and measures. Congress has no power over any of these things anymore, it is now The Fed that does these things.

Finally, if we do abolish The Fed there will be struggle. There's a good chance the value of most things valuable will drop. But it's a necessary hardship we must accept. If we allow The Fed to continue unchecked, the bottom will fall out and the economy and this country will fall apart.

The main stockholders in the Federal Reserve are the big banks, some of which were bailed out by The Fed, and corporations.

In 1970 about 90% of international capital was used for trade and long term investment, productive things, and 10% for speculation. By 1990 those figures had reversed. - Noam Chomsky

john-737278

You are probably correct Sir...I'll be looking for those charts as well! But rest assured the concept sounds correct. If that statement were false the powers that be would end up in the same boat as the rest of us...A pocket full of a currency that isn't worth to s&%ts! The Powers that be are infact real people to, and do aquire debt just as the rest of us do. But it would be in their interest to have the value of their currency (GOLD) be on a steady rise closely corresponding with the debt ratio! You see that would ensure they never loose value.... the more debt they or we acquire.. the more their currency (Gold) is worth!

skip Nicholson, Oklahoma City

Those f'n crazy people that talk about stuff like not spending money you don't have, and things like how much money gets pissed away by the department of education, yes that is just crazy talk. We need more talk like, umm maybe lets continue to spend a trillion plus more dollars than we have a year, and pretend that somehow taxing the rich more money will solve that problem.

and those other crazy things he say like States Rights, and the Federal Government abusing power is was NEVER given.

Yes, wow those thoughts are crazy.

What we need is a president complaining that he doesn't have enough power and should be given more. (oh wait we have that right now)

You put in a comment that gets 30 likes and it gets collapsed. Interesting. Good thing I made a copy.

Why Ron Paul is correct about the FED

Think of it in terms of a stock split.

Take a dollar bill, tear it in half, that is what happens every time the FED doubles the money supply. Except, they give fifty cents of your money to special interest, cronies, finance wars, or foreign powers.

Tear your 50 cents in half again.

And again.

Now you have 12.5 cents. That is why a green pepper in 1980 cost 12.5 cents and now it is a dollar, and it has nothing to do with how much we pay the sun to shine. The dollar is backed up by the full force of America, which as it turns out is the US citizens. Backed up through taxation. And because our government can't tax us 100% because it would destroy the economy, it is added as debt.

What is the point of earning 7-10% on investments, while at the same time the FED is devaluing your money by 15%?

tap22man

"Why Ron Paul would even be remotely associated with this guy is beyond me"

I am sure you were saying the same thing about PBO and bill ayers? No?

It's Keebler Time, TeaPaulers!

I gotta laugh when I see these sad sad liberals. They don't have a leg to stand on. No facts to back them up. All they have are words attached to tea that they try to make sound derogatory. Word play can be humorous. But you guys suck at it.

coastal exchange- im sorry i usually dont get on here and post comments but after reading your response to the fed and the gold standard i had to interject my comments. you are without a doubt the product of our biased, government controlled education system. no. 1 the fed is not apart of the federal government, it is and always has been separate from the government. we the people do not elect any member of the federal reserve. it is a secret organization that does not control inflation but rather creates inflation. no. 2 the gold standard had absolutely nothing to do with the depression.

Is the author suggesting that to ask questions is kooky? Seems to me that is about as unintellectual and closed minded as you can get. Moreover, isn't it about time to stop using the logically fallacious argument of guilt by association? On all sides of the argument? Or are

all progressives murderers because they support some of Bill Ayers' positions?

Childish.

Victor-1573548

I think it is more about getting the FED to stop printing money because it is devaluing the money "YOU" have.

It was the folks with supposedly good understanding of how everything works that gave us the current economic crisis and then asked for hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in bailout money. And not one of those m-f..kers lost their job or ended up in jail. I vote for Ron Paul because HE IS NOT A CROOK like the rest of them. I may not agree with him all the time but he is a man I can trust.

John 737278... Your first comment was spot on man. Why did the community collapse it? Un-collapse it and ask yourself would I have collapsed this? If you say yes you either work for the fed res or you are a Rothchild. It reminds me of whenever there is a pot legalization thread I post the miracle aspects of the root of the cannabis plant and how you can make fuel and textiles and building materials etc, etc, etc... Seems whenever someone tries to inform people about real facts that threaten the greediest of our countrymen. They are silenced with great haste. Not a Ron Paul fan but not a fan of voter suppression and fraud either and I think we have never faced that problem more than we do in today's post patriot act/ 911 political environment. Instead of throwing tea in the harbor we should throw the politicians in and tell them to swim to the country they are loyal to. Swim-Party 2012... I smell a collapse... o_O

JustanotherVeteran

Here is one from 1994 on.

http://www.equitymaster.com/outsideview/detail.asp?date=08/03/2011&story=7&title=Kicking-the-Can-down-the-Road

@ Coastal Exchange, "I'd say nearly all of Americans agree with at least one thing Ron Paul says... but then the next thing he says is totally crazy.... like: "do away with the Fed"... huh Ron?"

Guess you didn't know that in 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank. They went against the US Constitution: Article 1 - The Legislative Branch, Section 8 - Powers of Congress - To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

They legally could not do that (Oath and Domestic enemy) which is why so many say that the Federal Reserve is a corrupt and illegal organization. It is not legally dealing with our money. It is actually a criminal organization with no real power but what domestic enemies and Oath Breakers within our government give it, which is, (unfortunately) a lot. So now you know when congress as a group was first "bought and sold".

Ron Paul used to say he was committed to doing away with the Federal Reserve, but since the TSA very public attack on Rand Paul, he changed that to audit the federal reserve. Go check his site if you do not believe me.

FYI: Things I bet you did not know about the US History of some major players and their deals with the rest of the world. Democide - the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder.

“In earlier times it was easier to control a million people than physically to kill a million people. Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people”- Zbigniew Brzezinski

Professor R.J. Rummel of the University of Hawaii; "Democide is the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder. Democide does not include soldiers killed in battle". During the 20th Century (1900s) alone, Rummel calculates that government power was used to murder approximately 262,000,000 people.

Soviet Union - Approximately 61,911,000 people, 54,769,000 of them citizens, were murdered by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1917 to 1987. Rummel writes:

Part of this mass killing was genocide, as in the wholesale murder of hundreds of thousands of Don Cossacks in 1919, the intentional starving of about 5,000,000 Ukrainian peasants to death in 1932-33,² or the deportation to mass death of 50,000 to 60,000 Estonians in 1949.³ Part was mass murder, as of the wholesale extermination of perhaps 6,500,000 "kulaks" (in effect, the better off peasants and those resisting collectivization) from 1930 to 1937, the execution of perhaps a million Party members in the Great Terror of 1937-38, and the massacre of all Trotskyites in the forced labor camps.

Most people are unaware that all that death resulting from the Bolshevik Revolution would not have been possible absent the support of wealthy financiers in London and New York. Lenin and Trotsky were on the closest of terms with these moneyed interests both before and after the Revolution. Additionally, it was President Woodrow Wilson that provided Trotsky with a passport to return to Russia to "carry forward" the revolution.

China -"Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution [40 million people murdered], it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history". David Rockefeller (CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg, Chase Bank).

Since 1949 the Chinese communists killed from 5,999,000 to 102,671,000 people; a prudent estimate is 35,236,000. When added to the number they murdered in previous years, the communists likely killed 38,702,000 Chinese, Tibetans, and other minorities.

No other people in the last century except Soviet citizens have suffered so much mass killing in cold blood as have the Chinese.

In 1972, then National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger and President Richard Nixon had no problem meeting with Mao, after Mao’s Great Leap Forward, which banned private property and resulted in the murder/starvation of millions of Chinese. This meeting improved U.S. Chinese relations so that U.S. economy could later be destroyed by outsourcing manufacturing to communist China.

Nazi Germany - Nazi Germany was a ruthlessly efficient killing machine from 1933 to 1945. By genocide, the murder of hostages, reprisal raids, forced labor, "euthanasia," starvation, exposure, medical experiments, and terror bombing, and in the concentration and death camps, the Nazis murdered from 15,003,000 to 31,595,000 people, most likely 20,946,000 men, women, handicapped, aged, sick, prisoners of war, forced laborers, camp inmates, critics, homosexuals, Jews, Slavs, Serbs, Germans, Czechs, Italians, Poles, French, Ukrainians, and many others. Among them 1,000,000 were children under eighteen years of age. And none of these monstrous figures even include civilian and military combat or war-deaths.

Of course, the Nazis did not lose the war, only the German people lost the war. The Nazis simply relocated to the United States under Operation Paperclip and South America (Grey Wolf).

It is important to realize that Hitler’s rise to power was made possible by Wall Street banksters and American industrialist. Anthony Sutton’s Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler demonstrates that the Nazi’s received support from Henry Ford, General Electric, ITT, Texaco, Wall Street houses — Dillon, Read; Harris, Forbes, Morgan and Chase banks, and banker Paul Warburg (co-founder of the private Federal Reserve), Standard Oil's [Rockefeller] role was technical aid to Nazi development of synthetic rubber and gasoline through a U.S. research company under the management control of Standard Oil. The Ethyl Gasoline Company, jointly owned by Standard Oil of New Jersey and General Motors, was instrumental in supplying vital ethyl lead to Nazi Germany — over the written protests of the U.S. War Department — with the clear knowledge that the ethyl lead was for Nazi military purposes.

Prescott Bush also h

The Fed (Federal Reserve) is a privateley owned bank created in 1913 which creates the countries money by lending it to the govt with a ledger entry (it doesn't have trillions of dollars). Same thing the Central Banks are doing with Greece. The govt does not run the Fed. The Fed runs the government, and in that sense the Fed IS the government.

Most wars start with orchestrated incidents. You keep "hitting" people until they strike back and you allow it and maybe clear the way.

The carriers at Pearl Harbor were intentionally sent out to sea out of the way of the Japanese fleet. If the Japanese fleet had detected the slightest hint of an american defense they would have turned around. If the carriers had been sent out as a defensive shield and the Japanese didn't run, they would have clobbered them, the way they did a few months later at Midway.

The assasination in Serbia occurred shortly after a series of diplomatic treaties were entered into assuring WW1 in the event of an "incident."

You didn't have to assasinate Lincoln yourself. Just look the other way, or secretly help, when inevitable enemies plan an attack. By the way, Lincoln opposed the creation of a "Federal Reserve," and Kennedy opposed the Fed.

Suppose you see someone about to attack someone else and you have the ability to easily stop the attack but don't. What is your culpability? And what if you forced the attack with intolerable provocations?

Wow and Paul is as nutty as the guy running his pac also and by the looks of the posts in here they are not alone. How does Paul hide his tinfoil hat in public. First place return us to a constitutional country would deppend on who interprets the Constitution. We all know the second amendment on guns relates to malitia's not personal use but we wink and say let them have their toys and move on. Should we now again permit slavery? Get rid of the fed? There is nothing in there that says you can or cannot have the fed. The fed and the sec and wall stree and banks and lending institutions all need a fix but guess who stops them before they start? And they quote the Constitution when they do. Paul is a breath of fresh air to some because he says things people like but telling us how good a slice of prime rib tastes does not make us less hungry. He has been in Congress for years and votes over 90% of the time with the establishment republicans. So now we have the worthless tparty who only wants tax relief for the wealthy the birthers and the conspirity nuts all backing Paul. The Supreme courts 5 yes men need to hang their heads in sham and submit their resignatinions forthwith

@ Coastal Exchange, "I'd say nearly all of Americans agree with at least one thing Ron Paul says... but then the next thing he says is totally crazy.... like: "do away with the Fed"... huh Ron?"

Guess you didn't know that in 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank. They went against the US Constitution: Article 1 - The Legislative Branch, Section 8 - Powers of Congress - To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

They legally could not do that (Oath and Domestic enemy) which is why so many say that the Federal Reserve is a corrupt and illegal organization. It is not legally dealing with our money. It is actually a criminal organization with no real power but what domestic enemies and Oath Breakers within our government give it, which is, (unfortunately) a lot. So now you know when congress as a group was first "bought and sold".

Ron Paul used to say he was committed to doing away with the Federal Reserve, but since the TSA very public attack on Rand Paul, he changed that to audit the federal reserve. Go check his site if you do not believe me.

FYI: Things I bet you did not know about the US History of some major players and their deals with the rest of the world. Democide - the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder.

“In earlier times it was easier to control a million people than physically to kill a million people. Today it is infinitely easier to kill a million people than to control a million people”- Zbigniew Brzezinski

Professor R.J. Rummel of the University of Hawaii; "Democide is the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder. Democide does not include soldiers killed in battle". During the 20th Century (1900s) alone, Rummel calculates that government power was used to murder approximately 262,000,000 people.

Soviet Union - Approximately 61,911,000 people, 54,769,000 of them citizens, were murdered by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1917 to 1987. Rummel writes:

Part of this mass killing was genocide, as in the wholesale murder of hundreds of thousands of Don Cossacks in 1919, the intentional starving of about 5,000,000 Ukrainian peasants to death in 1932-33,² or the deportation to mass death of 50,000 to 60,000 Estonians in 1949.³ Part was mass murder, as of the wholesale extermination of perhaps 6,500,000 "kulaks" (in effect, the better off peasants and those resisting collectivization) from 1930 to 1937, the execution of perhaps a million Party members in the Great Terror of 1937-38, and the massacre of all Trotskyites in the forced labor camps.

Most people are unaware that all that death resulting from the Bolshevik Revolution would not have been possible absent the support of wealthy financiers in London and New York. Lenin and Trotsky were on the closest of terms with these moneyed interests both before and after the Revolution. Additionally, it was President Woodrow Wilson that provided Trotsky with a passport to return to Russia to "carry forward" the revolution.

China -"Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution [40 million people murdered], it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history". David Rockefeller (CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg, Chase Bank).

Since 1949 the Chinese communists killed from 5,999,000 to 102,671,000 people; a prudent estimate is 35,236,000. When added to the number they murdered in previous years, the communists likely killed 38,702,000 Chinese, Tibetans, and other minorities.

No other people in the last century except Soviet citizens have suffered so much mass killing in cold blood as have the Chinese.

In 1972, then National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger and President Richard Nixon had no problem meeting with Mao, after Mao’s Great Leap Forward, which banned private property and resulted in the murder/starvation of millions of Chinese. This meeting improved U.S. Chinese relations so that U.S. economy could later be destroyed by outsourcing manufacturing to communist China.

Nazi Germany - Nazi Germany was a ruthlessly efficient killing machine from 1933 to 1945. By genocide, the murder of hostages, reprisal raids, forced labor, "euthanasia," starvation, exposure, medical experiments, and terror bombing, and in the concentration and death camps, the Nazis murdered from 15,003,000 to 31,595,000 people, most likely 20,946,000 men, women, handicapped, aged, sick, prisoners of war, forced laborers, camp inmates, critics, homosexuals, Jews, Slavs, Serbs, Germans, Czechs, Italians, Poles, French, Ukrainians, and many others. Among them 1,000,000 were children under eighteen years of age. And none of these monstrous figures even include civilian and military combat or war-deaths.

Of course, the Nazis did not lose the war, only the German people lost the war. The Nazis simply relocated to the United States under Operation Paperclip and South America (Grey Wolf).

It is important to realize that Hitler’s rise to power was made possible by Wall Street banksters and American industrialist. Anthony Sutton’s Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler demonstrates that the Nazi’s received support from Henry Ford, General Electric, ITT, Texaco, Wall Street houses — Dillon, Read; Harris, Forbes, Morgan and Chase banks, and banker Paul Warburg (co-founder of the private Federal Reserve), Standard Oil's [Rockefeller] role was technical aid to Nazi development of synthetic rubber and gasoline through a U.S. research company under the management control of Standard Oil. The Ethyl Gasoline Company, jointly owned by Standard Oil of New Jersey and General Motors, was instrumental in supplying vital ethyl lead to Nazi Germany — over the written protests of the U.S. War Department — with the clear knowledge that the ethyl lead was for Nazi military purposes.

Prescott Bush also h

@Bobl-1819708,

adjust the gold price to say $3500 - Isn't that like the Federal Reserve printing money?

Beside the world economy would collapse there is not enough gold to cover every dollar everyone has. Fortknox has the most gold in the world and I bet it would not cover 1.9 trillion dollars we owe China.

The type of conversion you are talking about is unattainable in the 21st Century.

Hey Monkey, couldn't the same be said about PBO and Ayers?

http://www.zombietime.com/prairie_fire/

Or how about PBO and our former Green Job Czar?

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-politics-in-national/van-jones-green-jobs-czar-a-self-described-communist-arrested-during-rodney-king-riots

Or how about PBO's communications director Anita Dunn and her worship of Mao?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi1zg2NOCn8

Or how about PBO being a progressive when one of it founders wanted to sterilize the undesirables (Eugenics?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

If you don't like the links please feel to google them yourself.

I'd like to see MSNBC spend more of its time talking about the NDAA and the treasonous action of President Obama and the treasonous action of almost the whole Congress in passing into law a bill allowing the President to send the MILITARY to kick in your door and toss you summarily into Guantanamo Bay or anywhere else without trial, a lawyer or a phone call. But that's not news in a country that tried to impeach President Clinton over an affair. Instead let's claim this and that about a SuperPac and hope it sticks.

I don't care about conspiracies. Though, conspiracy theorist can pick a candidate too. We're happy to let illegal aliens vote we should be happy to let American citizens vote.

What some voter thinks has nothing to do with the candidate. The fact is Ron Paul hasn't said ANYTHING CRAZY. Ron Paul is saying lets follow the constitution.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul 2nd in National Poll

@Coastal Exchange - The Fed was created by a few men with power, in secret, and rushed through Congress - but you don't see anything fishy about that? Wow. The fact IS that the Fed gives away as much of OUR money as it wants to whomever they want, in secret, and that process devalues OUR money - and you're ok with that? Wow. The so-called "good" things the Fed does is a smoke screen to hide the corruption. The establishment has taught you to believe the lies. Good luck with that.

Given what SuperPACs do, and how filthy they are, the fact that people sit on their asses and do nothing over it proves people really don't care at all who is running the country. I really call BS on all you left and right wing posters who express faux anger over the candidate you don't like. Because if you really wanted a voice in government, somebody would have rioted over SuperPACs and what they do by now, no matter what your favorite political party is.

@ breadex " First place return us to a constitutional country would deppend on who interprets the Constitution. We all know the second amendment on guns relates to malitia's not personal use but we wink and say let them have their toys and move on.

Actually, the US Constitution is very clear about what it says. Also the writings of the framers are easy to understand. Like this: ”The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government”. Thomas Jefferson

First, understanding that the Constitutional framers believed that our Rights listed in the US Constitution (and others) are our natural (and God given) Rights. Because our forefathers dealt with a lot of corrupt governments they created the US Constitution to define the way our government will operate (serves as a grant of power to, the blueprint for the structure of our federal government. It was also to Protect our natural and (God-given) Rights from those who might serve in our government who would take them away. The framers wanted to make sure everyone understood that the Constitution only grants the feds prescribed (complete list of, to be maintained as written), specific (having a special application, bearing, or reference; specifying, explicit, or definite: to state one's specific purpose. 2. specified, precise, or particular:), enumerated (to count off or name one by one; list. To determine the number of) powers; and that our federal government may NOTexercise any powers not specifically granted by the US Constitution.

(Though they have been doing just that. Taking power when they do not legally under our Constitution have it. They broke the Oath they were required to keep (impeachable and prosecutable, legal precedents; plus making them no longer meet the requirements of the office or position they are currently occupying). They made themselves domestic enemies of the USA while doing so.

In fact, the Bill of Rights sets limits on the federal government, making clear it has no power to infringe on rights we already naturally possess, or limit traditionally held privileges, such as trial by jury. The first 8 amendments making up the Bill of Rights specify rights and privileges our federal government may not in any way abridge (do away with). It puts into writing the protections of life liberty and property; plus the specific privileges in the judicial system already accepted in Anglo-American law.

"... the second amendment on guns relates to malitia's not personal use"

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. - 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

"No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms". Thomas Jefferson, proposal for Virginia's constitution of 1776.

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good. George Washington, in a speech to Congress, January 7,1790.

One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offence to keep arms, and by substituting a regular army in the stead of a resort to the militia. The friends of a free government cannot be too watchful, to overcome the dangerous tendency of the public mind to sacrifice, for the sake of mere private convenience, this powerful check upon the designs of ambitious men. Joseph Story, Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States (1840)

”In recent years it has been suggested that the Second Amendment protects the "collective" right of states to maintain militias, while it does not protect the right of "the people" to keep and bear arms. If anyone entertained this notion in the period during which the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were debated and ratified, it remains one of the most closely guarded secrets of the eighteenth century, for no known writing surviving from the period between 1787 and 1791 states such a thesis”. Stephen P. Halbrook, "That Every Man Be Armed", 1984

The prohibition is general. No clause in the constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both. William Rawle, "A View of the Constitution of the United States of America" (1829)

Strict gun laws are about as effective as strict drug laws...It pains me to say this, but the NRA seems to be right: The cities and states that have the toughest gun laws have the most murder and mayhem. Mike Royko, Chicago Tribune

According to the National Crime Survey administered by the Bureau of the Census and the National Institute of Justice, it was found that only 12 percent of those who use a gun to resist assault are injured, as are 17 percent of those who use a gun to resist robbery. These percentages are 27 and 25 percent, respectively, if they passively comply with the felon's demands. Three times as many were injured if they used other means of resistance. G. Kleck, "Policy Lessons from Recent Gun Control Research"

Our most conservative estimates show that by adopting shall-issue laws (concealed carry laws), states reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%... While support for strict gun-control laws usually has been strongest in large cities, where crime rates are highest, that's precisely where right-to-carry laws have produced the largest drops in violent crimes. - "More Guns, Less Violent Crime", Professor John R. Lott, Jr.,The Wall Street Journal, August 28, 1996

(Sorry, I put this in because I love wht he says about Clinton.) President Clinton boasts about 186,000 people denied firearms under the Brady Law rules. The Brady Law has been in force for three years. In that time, they have prosecuted seven people and put three of them in prison. You know, the President has entertained more felons than that at fundraising coffees in the White House, for Pete's sake. - Charlton Heston, FOX News Sunday, 18 May 1997

What I don't understand is why so many of the commenter's are being collapsed by the "community" especially when most of them are not "offensive" to anyone in a personal attack. Who does the collapsing and how and or why? Do you people FEAR difference of opinion of others and our constitutional RIGHT to free speech? Because that is what you are doing, who ever you are that does that. Whenever you collapse somebody you are in essence and fact breaking the law of the constitution and the Bill of Rights and our freedom of speech. That one of the most Absolute UnAmerican things you can do. I think that it borders on, if not actually is, treason to actually try to take away one or any of our constitutional RIGHTS.

Why do most countries, including the USA, still follow the same failed polices of the Roman Empire??? And the people still are foolish enough to continue to support and elect the candidates who wish to continue it. They even scoff at anyone wanting to get back to the very things that the country great to begin with. Very strange indeed.

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." - Cicero , 55 BC

To those that believe in the coincidence theories propagated by the "authorities"...
Remember the last words that Caesar uttered in the Roman Senate during that ''coincidence'':

Et tu, Brute'? -- [and then Caesar fell.]

Amazing the ease at which the media spins things and how the simpletons chug it down.

"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help." -- Ronald Reagan.

"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence the claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." -- David Rockefeller "Memoirs" (Page 405)

Straight from the horses mouth and they still think it's a myth.

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -- George Santayana

And we have the nerve to claim being the most intelligent animals on the planet... Children, indeed...

Ron Paul is the only candidate with a platform that has a chance of moving the country in the right direction. And then we get this moon-bat crazy stuff from out of left field. My concern is that Ron Paul can not separate the good ideas from the crazy stuff. For him to move forward, he needs to weed out the crazy, speak out against the crazy. His silence is taken as his acceptance of the crazy.

Dear Tom - Plymouth:

Someday when I get bored or need a good laugh, I'll read your links. None of the links you gave are creditable and it still doesn't address the point that most of what these moonbats spew out has been discredited. (Meaning proven false, fraudulent, fake, or uncreditable).

I am not going to argue with delusional people with fits of paranoia: The same people who think Ron Paul will win anything other than best joke of the year. They honestly will say the sky is pink with green clouds.

Also, I am not going to waste my precious idle time on your links or your moonbatery. I can smell the tinfoil hat moonbatery from a mile away.

For your efforts and general making me lol hard, you win a brand spanking new tinfoil hat. Guarenteed to protect you from the evil mind control rays from the Marcab Confederacy and won't rust, bust, collect dust, wither, bag, or sag at the knees! Please send me your shipping addy and you will get one in a USPS envelope! (Provided they don't go bankrupt and out of business first!)

Thank you for playing The Game.

@Rabid Cheese Monkey

I recall that Nixon's criminal actions in the re-election campaign were a conspiracy theory.....that is until they were proven and he was forced to resign.

The official explanation for JFK's assassination is NOT trusted by a majority of Americans.

I would wager about 75% of Americans believe at least one of those theories you listed to be true.

So there are moonbats in all the campaigns. One believes in UFOs, another believes in ghosts. Another follows their horoscope.

In fact, chances are better than not that there is a moonbat sitting next to you right now!!!!

1) I'd rather the next president be financed by a madman, than by Corporate America.

2) Regardless of the cause of 9/11, one can not deny that the Government used the situation to further their agenda of denying civil liberties and circumventing The Constitution.

3) The law establishing The Federal Reserve was written by the banking elite.

4) Conspiracy theories are a result of a lack of transparency in a government up to no good. Even if the method of deception is not exactly as described by the conspiracy theorists, they are a sign of an unhealthy democracy, whether they are true or not.

5) Ron Paul is the only candidate that wants to do anything different. Obviously, we can not keep doing the same thing and expect different results.

Monkey Man, I think I proved my point.

You are typical hypocrite that preaches do as I say not as I do.

Skip - "saying he'd eliminate 80% of the Federal Government. That's crazy Tom"

Please explain why taking back the power the federal government stole from the states is crazy?

Currently, most of what the Government does is "acceptable extortion"

They decide the speed by limiting state funding if they don't comply, they decide the drinking age by limiting state funding if they don't comply, they mandate health care issues by making other money dependent on it. and list goes on and on and on and on and on.

If you do some reading there is no way states would have ratified the constitution if they would have had give that much power away.

If you truly think we would still have slavery you are mistaken, if you truly believed the civil rights movement wouldn't have happen you are wrong. look at home state were already moving away from segregation.

I don't understand why people have so little faith in themselves that they are willing to give themselves to the Government.

Coastal Exchange: "I will admit, he's probably the only one who would actually make changes."

=============

..........I doubt it, he can't do a darn thing without support from the House and the Senate, it's Congress that really runs the the government, not the POTUS.

Yes, Ron Paul is a senile old coot. Yet, in desperation for anybody, some Repubs are supporting him.

We already know that he was fully aware of the racist and homophobic things written in his newsletter...and now this.

Yes, folks, these are the people who run with Ron Paul. UnAmerican, if you ask me.

JasonFinPhilly24All the Ron Paul supporters love to throw out how much a movie ticket cost in the 20s. Yeah, well how much did people get paid an hour in the 20s??? You get paid more and things start costing more.

Do you really understand what you are saying? Look at what the dollar bought in the 20's vs what it takes today. Look at the wages paid then and now and you will find most things cost the same percentage of your pay as it did in the past. After 100 years of the fed they have devalued the dollar down to nothing. They have little room left until it is worth nothing. So following your thinking if we all would go back to 20's pay things would cost what they did then? The fact is the FED has burdened each and every American with more debt than can be paid back. But what is the point in trying to tell you or any of you others on here who are so blind to think gold is bad. FDR took all the gold away and paid 20 an oz then he valued gold at 35 an oz. He devalued every dollar he gave by 60%, this was planned and it robbed the American people of 60% of their income. Educate yourself on how they have done this.

LynyrdSky

Don't blame them. They are simply spoiled little brats in denial who refuse to take their medicine and realize that we can change things now or drown in the bath water.

What's so crazy about a return to the gold standard?

You DO realize that we were on that until 1977 right? When Nixon took us away from that?

Ron Paul wants to tie money to an actual value... Not just gold, but platinum, silver, copper, and other precious metals. Instead of just making it up.

Which is more crazy, US dolars based on debt to it's citizens, or US dollars based on precious metal reserves that the government actually holds? I say the former.

Sure, the guy on the superpac might be a little different from you in his beliefs, but hey, he didn't embezzle billions like Corazine, or try to buy a pardon for his drug dealing brother with a big donation, like Obama's campaign money. The guys not a crook.

These mainstream media pieces are all the same.

Smear Ron Paul, followed by comments from people who either have educated themselves about him and like his ides, or people who say things like he's crazy without any substantive reasoning behind it.

Fox news is smearing Ron Paul. MSNDC is smearing Ron Paul.

Dems and Repubs alike fear him, and so does the Big Money.

That should tell you ALL you need to know. He WILL end thier gravy train at our expense.

He is electable. He has strong support among the youth, chipping away at Obama's base. He has strong support among Indys, further eroding Obama's base. He has strong support among buyers remorse democrats like myself. He will also get the Republican vote, or the "ABO" vote if he is nominated.

If following The Constitution is crazy

well I guess I'm crazy too.

Guess you didn't know that in 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank. They went against the US Constitution: Article 1 - The Legislative Branch, Section 8 - Powers of Congress - To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

They chartered the Federal Reserve as a "reserve bank" - a bank for banks, a function sorely needed in a major economy like the US. Other major economies also have a central reserve bank for much the same reason.

The Federal Reserve does not print bills or mint coins, it doesn't regulate the value of money or the exchange rate with "foreign coins", and it has absolutely nothing to do with "Standards of weights and measures". The US Mint, a division of the Treasury Department, prints the bills and mints the coins. and the National Institute of Standards, a Government agency, maintains the standards for weights and measures (and time keeping signals, too, BTW).

Admittedly, Congress no longer micromanages the exchange rate, that's controlled by the free market, with individual currency buyers and sellers determining how much they're willing to pay for various currencies. We could have Congress set official exchange rates, but the currency traders would just ignore that and buy and sell according to real supply and demand. Please note that the Federal Reserve doesn't control the exchange rate, either.

Brian...Sorry to say, but you are truly stuck on stupid. STILL talking about those old, old spins about Newt's "dying wife"? Romney "likes to fire people"? Time to come out of the basement, Still spinning things, you must be VERY dizzy. (Hmmm..that explains it). Still parrotting the same old spins, out of context quotes, and libspeak

It's crazy! Ron Paul stands for free speech, has no problem with You believing whatever You want and voicing your opinion. And a bunch of feign-Americans come out of the woodwork to bash him. Then turn around and join the ACLU bashing a school for telling a 8th grader he can't wear a bracelet that has I (heart) boobies. Just another double standard!

The Federal Reserve controls the money supply in three ways. First, it sets the "reserve requirement" for all banks. The reserve requirement is the amount of money a bank must hold in its reserve (typically its vault or on deposit at other banks) relative to all the money it has lent out. Thus, the Fed can shrink the money supply (known as "tightening") by requiring banks to hold more in reserve, which pulls money out of the system. Of course, Fed governors can also expand the supply (known as "loosening") by lowering reserve requirements.

The second way the Fed controls the money supply is through the buying and selling of Treasury bills and notes. When the Fed sells a T-Bill, it's taking money out of the system and replacing it with a security, which isn't counted in money supply — and vice versa when the Fed buys back bills and notes.

Finally, the Fed moderates the money supply through raising or lowering interest rates.

The Fed sets the federal funds rate, the rate that banks charge each other for overnight borrowing, and the discount rate, which is the rate the Fed charges banks to borrow from it.

Banks pass on the changes in these rates by adjusting their lending and borrow rates accordingly.

Rising rates tend to to tighten money supply by discouraging use of money for spending. The opposite is true for falling rates.

OK everyone, now that you've read everything on the thread to this point go research the John Birch Society, what they believe, and what they've said over time.

In the 1970s they said a communist conspiracy extending even into the supposedly safe Republican party (via the likes of Nelson Rockefeller) was trying to turn our sovereignty over to the UN, that a private citizen named Armand Hammer was actually only pretending to be a capitalist but in fact was attempting to destroy our freedom, that states rights had been destroyed by an evil federal government, and that very soon all of it would be brought to ruin by a world monetary collapse, with the only hope for salvation being a return to the gold standard.

Today much of Conservatism believes a socialist conspiracy extending even into the supposedly safe Republican party (via the likes of John McCain) is trying to turn our sovereignty over to the UN, that a private citizen named George Soros is actually only pretending to be a capitalist but in fact is attempting to destroy our freedom, that states rights have been destroyed by an evil federal government, and that very soon all of it would be brought to ruin by a world monetary collapse, with the only hope for salvation being a return to the gold standard.

If you don't think that's what Conservatives in the real world believe then read above.

History will not look well upon this time when the Republican Party mainstreamed crazy.

John B, Des Moines, IAI really wish you would dump the "John Birch Society" and "crazy" crap and logically look at what is happening in this country.Instead of being delusional about the problems we face just because you don't want to admit things must change to survive, honestly ask yourself "What if Ron Paul is right and nothing gets done with our debt?" We are broke! and instead of getting our debt under control it is adding up faster every day, and soon it will be unrecoverable.

Of course you wish I would dump it...the facts support my statements on the subject. In 50 years the narrative of the JBS hasn't changed. All they've done is tell the same fanciful tale of a conspiracy presenting imminent danger to America while changing the names of those involved...because they've been telling the SAME STORY so long that the original cast has all died.

Btw, everyone acknowledges that we're on an unsustainable debt trajectory. The only difference is that some of us realize it was the Reagan and Bush tax cuts that created that trajectory, and acknowledge the fact that the issue can't be resolved without some contribution from the revenue side. http://www.gallup.com/poll/148919/americans-new-debt-supercommittee-compromise.aspx

LOL at JohnB and his birchers stuff...

JohnB, The President is @%)&^%ing us, bigtime.

Don't listen to his words.... Look at his deeds.

Your mother tried to warn you, "actions speak louder then words"

Let it sink in, stay true to your Mom.

View Obama and the other candidates OBJECTIVELY.

Don't view the players in terms of "who is on my team"

That road leads to Madness brother.

And at this point, there are way too many people who are deep in the madness.

You're right, it's important to view the candidates objectively. Here's the truth about Ron Paul and the John Birch Society;

Reason Magazine’s Nick Gillespie attempted yesterday to confront the dirty little secret about Ron Paul. The libertarian hero may be leading in some Iowa polls, but as the story about the racist newsletters that were published under his name in the 1980s and 90s catches fire, his more respectable backers need to face up to their candidate’s past. To his credit, Gillespie admits that it’s not a “smear” to bring up the issue of the Texas congressman’s connections to hate literature as well as to 9/11 truthers, the John Birch Society and conspiracy mongers like Alex Jones. Gillespie even owns up to the fact that Paul has had as many different answers to the question of his connections to hate as Herman Cain did about allegations of sexual harassment.

But rather than fess up to the fact that their presidential standard-bearer has been a magnet for crackpot racists who regard the United States government as the enemy, Gillespie tried to argue that this ought not to “invalidate” his candidacy because a) Paul is a nice guy; and b) the hate he promoted and the lunatics in his camp are not as bad as the system he’s trying to destroy. Like a good Marxist, all Gillespie can do is to claim that the end justifies the means. But as anyone who listens to him discuss foreign policy, far from being tangential to Paul’s crusade, his hate connections are integral to his appeal on the margins of society.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/12/23/libertarians-ron-paul-hate/

What a crock of BS this article is!! So, the CFR Rockefeller owned MSNBC is implying that, if i have a gay brother whom i frequently help out, say by working on his house, or fixing his car etc. I must then share his views on homosexuality eh? Hell, i must be gay as well since i'm always doing stuff for him right? These crooks are professionals at mincing words to make you believe something which just isn't true! I don't believe for one second that Ron Paul shares those views. But i do believe that if he was elected POTUS, and he'd seen govt documents proving that 9/11/2011 was indeed an inside job, that he'd release those documents immediately, and without hesitation. I don't believe any other candidate would do the same if/when given the chance. ~Ron Paul 2012!~

John B., I'm actually impressed that you googled Ron Paul.

I wish you would go to google with a more objective approach though. Of course, I am assuming you have acted as I have previously known you to act. It is entirely possible, I admit, that you are still open minded enough to learn.

Still, the guy has been in politics for over 30 years. And the ONLY thing they can find on him

The only thing they can call dirt

Well....

It's a newsletter for which he was an "honorary editor".

A newsletter, that at it's PEAK, had less then 3,000 subscribers.

A newsletter that he had no editorial control over.

And it published three articles that Ron Paul did NOT write, and did NOT approve for publication, and did NOT EVEN SEE prior to them having been published.

Oh yeah, and it was in the wake of the Rodney King/Los Angeles race riots of 1992.

Remember the white guy being dragged from his truck and beaten in the face with a brick? Google Reginald Denny. Better yet, youtube it.

Those were some emotional days, Brother. The riots lasted six days. Officially. A little more, really.

And that's the worst thing they can come up with. After 30 years in politics.

Shoot, I can name three times Obama has violated The Constitution in the last three years right off the top of my head.

Ron Paul? NEVER.

Well said, Alil.

Now the excuses come out. Ron Paul has been closely associated with a racist, xenophobic organization for decades but that doesn't mean HE is a racist xenophobe. Or does it?

Did he or didn’t he?

That’s the question the public is asking about Ron Paul after a series of racist newsletters bearing his name have sparked controversy. The newsletters were published in the 1980s and ’90s and include disparaging remarks about African Americans. While Paul now says he didn’t personally write the newsletters, a Huffington Post investigation suggests that in 1996 the Texas congressman didn’t deny making the comments.

Old videos from that year, when Paul launched his first presidential campaign, reportedly show the libertarian plugging the newsletters. The only complaint he shares in the recordings are that his words have been taken out of context.

So what racially insensitive remarks has Paul supposedly made about blacks and civil rights in his newsletters and elsewhere?

Here’s a list:

• The Ron Paul Political Report newsletter stated the public should bear arms to protect themselves against carjackings by “urban youth who play whites like pianos.” Note that the terms “black” or “African American” aren’t used in this newsletter sample. However, the racially coded term “urban” and reference to “whites” makes it easy for the reader to ascertain what skin color the youth in question have. The newsletter, written in the first-person, continued on this topic with the following assertion: “I’ve urged everyone in my family to know how to use a gun in self-defense. For the animals are coming.” Now these animal wouldn’t be blacks, would they?

• In another newsletter, Paul described most black men in Washington, D.C., as “semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”

• Talking Points Memo reported that in December 1990, Paul suggested that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. sexually molested girls and boys, remarking: “And we are supposed to honor this ‘Christian minister’ and lying socialist with a holiday that puts him on par with George Washington?”

• In a 1993 Ron Paul Survival Report newsletter, alarm was raised about “The Disappearing White Majority.” The newsletter referenced the growing birth rate of people of color and expressed a pro-segregation stance with this comment: “It is human nature that like attracts likes. But whites are not allowed to express this same human impulse. Except in a de facto sense, there can be no white schools, white clubs, or white neighborhoods. The political system demands white integration, while allowing black segregation.”

• In May 2011, Paul told MSNBC that he would have voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended Jim Crow. He questioned the act because it took authority away from property owners. Evidently, Paul values the rights of racist property owners over those of African Americans whose housing, employment, schooling and leisure activities were all dictated by Jim Crow.

http://loop21.com/top-5-racist-ron-paul-quotes-newsletter

Oh look, there's more!

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

If either of these two are elected there woun't be much left to salvage in four years! That is unless we can elect overwhelming majoritys of common sense Conservatives to Congress, say about 65 in the Senate and 300 in the House. That would force either one to go along with compromise or govern, as Obama has already proven he will, by Executive Order. Should they chose the ladder, sooner or later, they will commit an impeachable act, and we will finally be rid of them!

Bill: those who insist Hawaii isn't a real state and that no "real" American can be named Obama or be half-black?? They are completely looney, but thankfully, no, they are not "very large in number".

There are a number of folks that are not sold on anything that they hear. Also, all of the media outlets are owned by large corporations that have only their own special interests at heart.

And as for the "New World Order". President George H. W. Bush gave the new world order speech twice. The first speech was in September 1990, and the second was in March 1991. The New World Order concept has been around since President Woodrow Wilson.

There is a very large number of folks out there that are still not completely sold on Mr. Obama's 'proof of citizenship'!

Well, "large number" is relative, isn't it? There certainly are too many for you to jam them all into your living room at once; however, if you're looking at them as a percentage of all Americans not currently confined to mental care facilities, the number is quite small, approaching minuscule.

tedcrawford - only a third of the senate is elected every two years

a very large number of folks...

Very large being millions?

Or the couple thousand that get their news from places like WND?

Dude, you gotta get over it.

There are many liberals out there that avoid the truth, if it doesn't suit their agenda! Case in point folks:

A Georgia judge has refused a demand from Barack Obama to quash a subpoena to appear at a series of administration hearings Jan. 26 at which residents of the state are challenging, as allowed under a state law, his name on the 2012 presidential ballot.

WSJ reported this week when Obama outlined a defense strategy for a number of state-level challenges to his candidacy in 2012 which argue that states have nothing to do with the eligibility of presidential candidates.

“Presidential electors and Congress, not the state of Georgia, hold the constitutional responsibility for determining the qualifications of presidential candidates,” Obama’s lawyer argued in a motion to quash a subpoena for him to appear at the hearings in Atlanta Jan. 26.

“The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant,” the lawyer said.

Judge Michael M. Malihi, however, took a different view.

“Defendant argues that ‘if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as president of the United States’ to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend,” he wrote in his order, released today.

“Defendant’s motion suggests that no president should be compelled to attend a court hearing. This may be correct. But defendant has failed to enlighten the court with any legal authority,” the judge continued.

“Specifically, defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority evidencing why his attendance is ‘unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony … [is] irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party’s preparation or presentation at the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced.’”

There is a very large number of folks out there that are still not completely sold on Mr. Obama's 'proof of citizenship'!

So we have birthers in the house! LOL! Totally off-topic and irrelevant, but --- carry on...

So we have birthers in the house! LOL! Totally off-topic and irrelevant, but --- carry on...

euterpe..... off topic? Did you read the article that is the subject of this conversation, lmao! You just proved Free Market's opening statement!

Mark, What euterpe is probably not aware of (and Free Mkt fan didn't mention) is that Gary Franchi is also being accused of being a birther as well. These liberal sites should get together and coordinate their half truths and unsubstantiated attacks!

Now that Ron Paul has a Super Pac i hope everyone who wants to restore the constitution and bill of rights will donate whatever they can to the only candidate who is actually genuine and always gives real answers to questions instead of pandering for votes like the others do. As far as 9/11 is concerned even a 10 year old kid can figure out it was an inside job, all anyone has to do is watch building 7 fall down and then look at the Pentagon footage to realize that 7 was imploded and that there was no plane that hit the Pentagon. Because of the PDB of 8/6/01 we know at the very least that Bush knew all about the attacks in advance and did nothing

Baah...Baah...Look at all the good little sheep.

Ron Paul and his band of anarchists are CRAAAAAAZY !!

.

These liberal sites should get together and coordinate their half truths and unsubstantiated attacks!

So what are you saying, Memphis? That birthers and truthers have it right? LMFAO!

Bill T from USA........there are also many who believe in the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. In comparison to the birthers and truthers, they are the more intelligent.

I think after this I am going to invest in aluminum foil companies... Then maybe make a company that makes tinfoil hats.

If anybody wants to sell the tinfoil hats next Ron Paul meeting, let me know! Imma going to get rich selling Tinfoil hats to the Ron Paul moonbats supporters!

euterpe why dont you explain yourself. "More crazys from ron pauls corner" im a crazy from RON PAULS corner. what are you? We defend liberty and the constitution. What do you defend ignorance obviously considering your awesome display of it. Ron Pauls position is this. just so a simpleton like youself can understand it better. Ending the wars, because we're BANKRUPT! do you know what that means ill exlain it a little further so you can understand. Bankruption for a country means printing money out of thin air to pay off the debts. This possibility of hyperinflationary can destroy a middle class. Ron Paul is a master of the Austrian school of free market economics. Im pretty sure thats the first time a person like you has even heard that phrase. We believe the war on drugs is a failed war that unfairly targets blacks and hispanics. We believe the NDAA section 1031 which Obama signed and for the first time in peace time for the US Military to arrest anyone they suspect as a terrorist and hold that person as long as they want and they dont even have to give the guy a phone call, yes this is America. We believe the federal reserve is a curropt corporation that obeys foreign banking cartels hence the trillions of dollars that were sent oversees to foreign banks using american tax payer money and were not even allowed to know they did it. We believe in ful Audit of the Federal reserve, Fort Knox, and the pentagon. Just to state a few

How horrible,the constitution? Most of what was said in the article sounded good to me. If anything Obama supporters seem to march without question to whatever is fed to them.

That radical Ron Paul asking for the military to get out of wars and close overseas bases.For the government to shut down unconstitutional agencys and get the dept under control.

Ron Paul is a truly honest man willing to do the right things that our country needs to keep from going bankrupt,support him!

Hey, if Newt Gingrich can get the support of the birther, Donald Trump; Mitt Romney can get the support of the mormon cult; and Rick Santorum can get the support of the anti-women and sweater vest cults, no reason Ron Paul can't get the support of this group. Since the Republican Party is full of right wing nut jobs, nothing wrong with adding a few more to the mix. Kind of like getting some walnuts mixed in with your peanuts, cashews, almonds and beer nuts; they just add some flavor to the mix.

Memphis, never underestimate the ability of a liberal to get confused!

If you think people that question the truth behind 9/11 are conspiracy nuts, then you probably haven't ever heard of Operation Northwoods.

Operation Northwoods was a series of false-flag proposals that originated in 1962 within the United States government, and which the Kennedy administration rejected. ^[2] The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or other operatives, to commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and elsewhere. These acts of terrorism were to be blamed on Cuba in order to create public support for a war against that nation, which had recently become communist under Fidel Castro.^[3] One part of Operation Northwoods was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington."

Operation Northwoods proposals included hijackings and bombings followed by the introduction of phony evidence that would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:

"The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere."

Several other proposals were included within Operation Northwoods, including real or simulated actions against various U.S. military and civilian targets. The plan was drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, signed by Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer and sent to the Secretary of Defense. Although part of the U.S. government's Cuban Project anti-communist initiative, Operation Northwoods was never officially accepted; it was authored by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but then rejected by President John F. Kennedy.

None of the Operations Northwoods proposals became operational.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Just the fact that anyone in the government actually even considered doing something like this in the first place is certainly enough to give any sane person just cause to question, even if only for a few moments, whether 9/11 might have been carried out by our own government or if it was Osama Bin Laden behind it.

I'm still pretty sure that OBL was the man behind the 9/11 attacks, but there is no way any sane person can be 100% sure of that, if you just consider that operation northwoods is a true story, and that it got off the ground enough that President Kennedy had to block it. Taking that into consideration, if you also consider that Bush1 went into Iraq, then withdrew, and Bush2 felt like it was "unfinished business", so he certainly had an agenda that would motivate him for an operation northwoods like scenario.

The only reason I am still mostly sure it was OBL and not our own government, was because I'm pretty certain that Bush would have just gone guns out and blamed Saddam Hussein for 9/11 if his administration had been behind it, but instead they put that blame where it rightfully belonged, on OBL.

I dont think 911 was planned. But if you wanted to create a whole new agency and lessen peoples freedoms

you couldnt have asked for a better excuse. Under obama we have just continued to lose more freedoms.

@FreeMarket -- suggest you look at this update. The judge has ruled that the President is a natural born citizen and will be on the presidential ballot in November. Now can all the birthers, please go away. Don't go away mad, just go away!

http://www.sonorannews.com/archives/2012/120208/frontpage-Georgia.html

Note that the judge "discredited the eight witnesses and said he found their testimony as well as exhibits tendered , "to be of little if any probative value and thus wholly insufficient to support the plaintiff's allegations . . . none of the testifying witnesses provided persuasive testimony." Translation -- all the birther arguments have been and always will be nothing but garbage!

Now, of course, the appeals begin, but that will get shot down as well. Wonder if Taitz ever paid her fines for wasting the court's time when she tried to pull this nonsense before.

Memphis, never underestimate the ability of a liberal to get confused! I know who is confused and it not the Liberal.

Truth is treason in the empire of lies.

TO: Bill T from USA who wrote:

"There is a very large number of folks out there that are still not completely sold on Mr. Obama's 'proof of citizenship'!..."

I don't think that they actually believe he's not a citizen as much as I think they like to pretend that he's not. In any event, this is America, we are a free country, and yes we have our share of nuts and kooks walking around. God Bless them all.

Obama / Biden 2012

Doc--I agree

...never underestimate the ability of a liberal to get confused!

It got Obama elected, didn't it?

dirp101

"Hey, if Newt Gingrich can get the support of the birther, Donald Trump..."

Trump endorsed Romney

DocHolliday-2979123

Man, this Teapubs sure do have mental issues....

Glad I am not part of this anymore. Brainwashing mentally challenged individuals is one of the worst thing you can do, just like Hitler did to the Germans....

The republican party is nothing but a criminal conspiracy to betray the interests of the American people
in favor of plutocratic and corporate interests, and absolutist religious groups...

Obama 2012

LMAO pot, meet kettle...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-23/ge-joins-intel-to-advise-obama-as-overseas-holdings-expand.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glenn-hurowitz/barack-obama-worlds-wor_b_67922.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/28/us/politics/obama-bundlers-have-ties-to-lobbying.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.workerscompass.org/mv/mv2011/mv10092011.html

What I don't understand is why so many of the commenter's are being collapsed by the "community" especially when most of them are not "offensive" to anyone in a personal attack. Who does the collapsing and how and or why? Do you people FEAR difference of opinion of others and our constitutional RIGHT to free speech? Because that is what you are doing, who ever you are that does that. Whenever you collapse somebody you are in essence and fact breaking the law of the constitution and the Bill of Rights and our freedom of speech. That is one of the most Absolute UnAmerican things you can do. I think that it borders on, if not actually is, treason to actually try to take away one or any of our constitutional RIGHTS.

@ James Brandon

just so a simpleton like youself can understand it better

Learn how to properly post on this site - as in read up and follow the COH - and then we can maybe have a conversation. Until then, all you'll get from me is a comment marked inflammatory and not one second more of my time.

Edifying info from link:

1. Adding a personal attack to an otherwise valuable comment or article serves only to render that contribution invalid in its entirety. Such content is subject to moderation.

Considering 1 in 7 Americans believe 9/11 was an inside job, there's bound to be 9/11 truthers in all the campaigns.

The news is....folks really distrusted Bush & Cheney.

MSNBC is really grasping on this one.

Lots of people like skip nicilson and docholiday saying he is crazy but don't mention why they think this. Sorry guys I don't think either of you know the first thing about the guy you are trashing. If you can post specifics with facts to back them up please do so. If not please stick to what you think you DO know and continue praising your savior Obama.

DocHolliday-2979123

Brainwashing mentally challenged individuals is one of the worst thing you can do, just like Hitler did to the Germans....

Oh, and while we're at it, that's a perfect analogy for Obamas administration:

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/president-obama-signs-indefinite-detention-bill-law

In case you haven't figured out the fact that "indefinite detention without trial" allows for the exact same thing that Hitler used to fill his concentration camps...

http://patriotupdate.com/articles/the-holocaust-fema-camps-and-the-new-national-defense-authorization-act-ndaa

"In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."

Actually American Girl, the problem is that he does not meet the requirements to run for or to be the US President.

Specifically this one: “natural born citizen” in Article II of the Constitution, requires a Presidential candidate to have two parents that were U.S. citizens at the time the candidate was born. That requirement was so that it would make it more difficult to put a "traitor" or "domestic enemy" in the highest office. Of course they did not allow for American citizens to vote in corruption by voting for the "lesser of two 'evils'", putting "evil" in the White House no matter who they voted for. Or the infamous "follow the party line" or "don't waste a vote" making sure that people only voted for one of two parties candidate, not necessarily the best person for the position. Now that IS/WAS a WASTED vote.

Earlier many mentioned the Federal Reserve, and that Ron Paul called for the ending of it. Which used to be true.

But since the TSA, VERY PUBLICLY, went after his son, Rand Paul. TSA always (guess "usually" is the word now, like when the want to make a public "point" or threat?) forbids filming, pictures, etc of their wrong doing, unconstitutional actions.

Ron Paul backed off and is just calling for an full and continued audit of the Federal Reserve. (Privately owned, corrupt and criminal operation put in by a cowed domestic enemy and Oath breaking congress - 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank when the US Constitution clearly gives that duty to congress. Nor does it give them or any of the three branches the right to give away or re assign what is their acknowledged duty that they took an Oath to perform.)

That is kind of like the "rumored" threat Obama made to the Supreme Court about the illegal tracking devices - that they better find it his way or they would be tracked 24/7.

Or like the Georgia Court/Obama incident. "One of my earliest childhood memories is of my parents talking about Nixon and the Watergate scandal. I remember the newspaper headline: “Nixon Resigns!” President Nixon’s fight against court subpoenas made international news. Yesterday President Obama completely ignored a court subpoena, and the world shrugged.

Obama’s behavior yesterday is even more disturbing than Nixon’s. Nixon at least respected the judicial branch enough to have his attorney’s show up in court and follow procedure. Nixon’s fight in the courts followed existing law. Nixon acknowledged the authority of the judicial branch even while he fought it. Obama, on the other hand, essentially said yesterday that the judicial branch has no power over him. He ordered his attorneys to stay away from the hearing. He didn’t petition a higher court in a legitimate attempt to stay the hearing. Instead he showed complete contempt for the entire judicial branch and for the rule of law. Rather than respecting the legal process Obama went around the courts and tried to put political pressure directly on the Georgia Secretary of State. When that failed, he simply ignored the judicial branch completely.

The rule of law, and our three-branch system of government, now hang in the balance. If the Georgia court issues a ruling on the merits and an order finding Obama in contempt of court, and if that contempt order actually results in real punishment of some kind, then we will still have a Constitutional Republic. If this doesn’t happen, then Obama will have been rewarded for showing complete contempt for the judicial branch." Van Irion, Lead Counsel

Obama thinks he is the dictator here in the USA. Well, since no one has arrested him, he is the dictator here in the USA. Is this the Change you wanted?

I personally am willing to defend our US Constitution from the domestic enemies attacking us from within. Hard to tell who they are by listening to what they say. You have to look at the actions they do: like I will veto the NDAA because he was "against American illegal detainment". But it turned out HE is the one who fought to get that included in the bills.

I would rethink the people I hung out with if all of then are this fu@& up

american girl- god bless you too. your right were are a free country, but we have this thing called a constitution im sure you havent heard of it since nobody follows it anymore, but it states in order to become president you must be a natural born citizen

(Ron Paul supporter, Gary Franchi,)... said his parents, thinking he was mentally ill, had him heavily medicated for 10 years.

Who knows him better than his own parents?

Ron Paul 2012, the rest who don't agree need shovels to free their heads from the sand.

@ReduceGHGs

From what ever source you copy and pasted your blurb from, you accidentally copied the bottom of a web page. You should really try to compose your own posts. The anti-Paul trolls are really getting sloppy.

LOL at the global warming 'conspiracy'. As though the entire Republican establishment doesn't agree with Ron Paul on that one.

Hell, I'm an independent swing voter, and I ain't even sold on global warming.

He said his parents, thinking he was mentally ill, had him heavily medicated for 10 years.

Too bad he's off his meds.

These "Patriot" loons are lucky they live in the USA. In a whole lot of places they'd have been locked up long ago - which proves that their paranoid rants are baseless.

Knine

Specifically this one: “natural born citizen” in Article II of the Constitution, requires a Presidential candidate to have two parents that were U.S. citizens at the time the candidate was born. That requirement was so that it would make it more difficult to put a "traitor" or "domestic enemy" in the highest office.

The constitution never defines Natural Born Citizen, that is your own twisted interpretation. Put that together with the naturalization act of 1790, the Civil Rights act of 1866, and the 14th amendment and you'll see how that interpretation is completely wrong.

Move on already, stop grasping at straws.

So if this guy, Franchi, looks deep into controversial matters, he gets labeled? Does anyone ask if he finds anything, or is he castigated for investigating? I have no idea who he is, but the article makes it clear that the author has a problem with him and thus Ron Paul, even though the guy states that his ideas don't match Paul's. Do we condone policing thoughts and ideas now?

I have looked deep myself, into Ron Paul. I have seen nothing that is scary, except a policy of adhering to the Constitution. I really don't find that scary because I went to school before Jimmy Carter's Dept. of Ed was created. We actually studied the US Constitution and it left me with a deep respect for the principle's conveyed (rule of law) and the founders who created it. So I see nothing scary about someone who took an oath of office to abide by it, like all of the others do )who may or may not abide by it).

However, what I do find scary are those who take the oath then violate the Constitution. I find wars that are undeclared and not of benefit to We The People, where our soldiers are killed and maimed, as scary. I find laws that are passed that potentially target innocent Americans by our own government as scary. For all of those that think Ron Paul is scary, do these other concepts that he is against, not scare you? Are you ready to cross the ocean and die for someone else's profit base?

The Constitution = the new Bible... Totally infallible even though it was written a few hundred years ago by people with absolutely no concept of what the future would hold...

Don't get me wrong; there are a bunch of good ideas contained within, but it needs an update, big time, and people need to get over the idea that it's perfect. It's a great document written by imperfect humans; a good place to start, but not the last word...

I most definitely believe the JFK assassination was a conspiracy. So what?

These trolls are morons.

MikeMike; Who would know them better than his parents? I have to disagree with your comment big time. I know this for a fact. This is why I'm divorced. My ex would rather of had my son on pills than be a mother to him. She thought it calmed him down and so it was good for him. Well I disagreed with her and the doctors, he was a great kid and he didn't need drugs to calm him down, he needed a mother. Someone to do things with him that kept his interests peaking. She thought it was better to give him drugs and let him watch cartoons. She needed drugs, not him. So just because this guys parents had him at the doctors and on drugs, dosen't mean he needed them. Doctors don't give a good iota of a good squat as long as they make money. Giving anyone drugs means its a steady monthly visit to the doctors and money in that doctors pocket. Those parents were more interested in themselves than their son and so they went and cried to a doctor who told them, don't worry, no problems just give him this. The best part about it all, she ended up being the good parent. So a little dope and some brainwashing and you got your child eating out of the palm of your hand, in most cases. I have to salute this guy for sticking to his interests at his age and not falling into the mold his parents wanted for him. Good for him. His parents on the other hand, I'm not sure I can say much good about them. Maybe in your case concider yourself lucky, but would you even know if you wrte what you did in your post. Step outside of the box once in a while and look around and try to understand whats going on besides whats being said. I have to salute Ron Paul also in this post, as he just come out and said theres things in question about the govenrment, because the public never hears what really happened. He mentioned the Kennedy assignation in that sentence. Ok, toss this around in your head for a little. They can put a man on the moon but you still don't know what happened in the Kennedy assignation. Sure Oswald did it. Thats a lot easier for you to understand and if that satisfies you, then so be it. Oswald did it.

Ron Paul supporters see him as the only incorruptible candidate in an increasingly corrupt political class. Is it any wonder that the people who believe a corrupt government was behind 9/11 would support this man? It's inevitable, but that doesn't discount the basis of their support...ie, that he won't sell out the American Public for profit or power. Or murder them, for that matter.

As for the nutty birther comments...there is basis for that, as his father was undeniably not a US citizen, and the Supreme Court has defined a natural-born citizen as someone who was born on US soil to TWO U.S. CITIZENS. If we take that definition as valid, then there is absolutely no need for the birth certificate proving his location of birth...it's already been determined that he's not eligible by virtue of his daddy not being a citizen. But I doubt that'll play into this at this late date, and the whole Georgia thing was dismissed anyway. So it's a moot point. Besides, there's SO much more to go after him for.

But back to Ron Paul - sure, there are people who believe conspiracies that support him. They are part of our country too, though, and have their right to believe the evidence they find to support their theories. You can say they're nuts, but as for 9/11, there really is a lot of compelling evidence that the government at least knew that something might be happening, before it happened. A lot of well-connected people were warned not to fly, among other things. Maybe our gov't wasn't actively behind the attacks, but the evidence points to some responsibility for at the very least not defending us against a known threat, or warning us. And then they demean and discount the very rational questions brought up by people who are experts in their fields. Something's off here.

This whole piece reads like propaganda. 'Only truthers and birthers support Ron Paul, better get your tinfoil hats!'. But he's also supported by business owners, homesteaders, economists, welfare recipients, pot smokers, civil rights' activists, white supremacists, anti-war activists, occupiers, and people who just don't like having our elected officials and their buddies get away with crap that we would go to jail for forever if we tried. Pretty much everyone in America can fall into at least one of those categories, so to narrow us down to the label of 'conspiracy nuts' is...well, nuts. I don't like everyone that supports Ron Paul, but then again I don't have to...I just have to ask whether I like Ron Paul's message. And I do. I think that his plan is the only way to head off the economic disaster that we're racing full speed toward, with borrowing forty cents of every dollar our government spends, with our national debt taking off like a launching rocket (look at the graphs), and with our federal government not dealing with the issue in any kind of serious way. We WILL wind up unable to borrow more money, eventually. Soon. Much suffering and death will occur in that eventuality. Bring in Ron Paul, for pete's sake.

Who is Ron Paul? I mean Ive never seen the media mention him. I thought he didnt exist? But thanks to MSN we now all know who he is and now we all know we cannot possibly vote for this guy. Why does MSN not put an article on here about how all our soldiers, you know the ones we "support" mostly want Ron Paul as president and have paid more to his campaign then all the other candidates including obama combined. Ohhh because the media is ran by the same corporations who love war so they couldnt possibly publish that. Anyone who believes the anti Ron Paul propaganda is completely brainwashed.

Ron D: sorry, you are correct, Trump did endorse Romney, and then Romney lost the next 3 primary contests, go figure.

Ah, well, one more nut in mix.

countingbodieslikesheep

Who is Ron Paul? I mean Ive never seen the media mention him. I thought he didnt exist? But thanks to MSN we now all know who he is and now we all know we cannot possibly vote for this guy.

Need a shovel?

You have it the other way around! The media rarely mentions him but when they do, their main focus is on discounting him and giving us the impression that he's a weirdo. If you ever watch the debates, he's always positioned away from the center and the camera rarely goes on him and mainly focuses on the other three (as if he wasn't there). Also, Dr. Paul doesn't even get a chance to answer half the questions. On several occasions the "moderator" felt forced to include Dr. Paul because the audience complained he didn't get to answer a question about abortion. - Which was amazing because he delivered babies before entering politics!

If you don't know who he is - try something called GOOGLE. The more you know about him, the less likely you'll want to vote for the other status quo lying candidates - that is if you're a rational human being.

Squirming in my seat

The Constitution = the new Bible... Totally infallible even though it was written a few hundred years ago by people with absolutely no concept of what the future would hold...

I know, civil liberties is such a quaint philosophy

*sarcasm*

To Ron Paul fans,

Ron Paul is not going to be nominated or elected to anything. He's a hick who has shown he's a racist, a dull-witted anti-abortionist, a global warming flip-flopper and denier, and a rabid Christian who is completely ignorant of the Constitution, corrupting it to advance his personal beliefs. At the very least, Ron Paul allowed his name to be used by racists in his employ to publish racist rants like "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls ‘criminal justice system,’ I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

Paul has no problem banning abortions, even though such bans were outlawed by Rowe v. Wade, but just thinks it's a state's job to do so because of his warped view of the 10th Amendment. Paul has stated that because he delivered 4000 babies, he knows that life begins at conception (this is as stupid a statement as he's ever uttered--when life begins has been, is, and will always be a question for philosophers or politicians, and certainly not some quirky physician who delivered babies when he was in the Army).

Ron Paul is also a global warming flip-flopper and now a global warming denier. In 2008, he had this to say about global warming: "It is clear that the earth experiences natural cycles in temperature. However, science shows that human activity probably does play a role in stimulating the current fluctuations.” By 2009, Paul was singing a different tune: "The greatest hoax I think that has been around for many, many years if not hundreds of years, has been this hoax on [...] global warming." Even if Ron isn't being paid off by Big Oil, he's still doing their bidding. The concept that humans cause global warming is shared by the vast majority of legitimate climatologists in the world; only scientists hired by Big Oil promulgate the myth that global warming is a hoax or is not caused by human activities. Moreover, his claim that global warming has been a hoax for hundreds of years is so obviously wrong: concerns about global warming have not existed for "hundreds of years." I was around for the first "Earth Day" in 1970, and global warming or climate change wasn't an issue then. I'd say it became a topic of discussion about 15 years ago. Paul's statement about there being a global warming hoax for hundreds of years is patently ridiculous.

However, the most frightening aspect of this dogmatic old fart's belief system is his conviction that we are a Christian nation. According to Ron, "The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance." This is demonstrably wrong, according to no less an authority than the United States Supreme Court, which has consistently recognized that the purpose of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment was to build or erect a wall separating Church and State, according to Thomas Jefferson, whose group crafted the clause:

"[A]t the first session of the first Congress the amendment now under consideration was proposed with others by Mr. Madison. It met the views of the advocates of religious freedom, and was adopted. Mr. Jefferson afterwards, in reply to an address to him by a committee of the Danbury Baptist Association (8 id. 113), took occasion to say: 'Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions,-I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.' Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured." Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 164 (1878).
"Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. "In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.'" Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, 16, citing Reynolds v. United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164.

"This Court first reviewed a challenge to state law under the Establishment Clause in Everson v. Board of Ed. of Ewing, 330 U.S. 1, 67 S.Ct. 504, 91 L. Ed. 711 (1947).1 Relying on the history of the Clause, and the Court's prior analysis, Justice Black outlined the considerations that have become the touchstone of Establishment Clause jurisprudence: Neither a State nor the Federal Government can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither a State nor the Federal Government, openly or secretly, can participate in the affairs of any religious organization and vice versa.2 "In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State.' "Everson, 330 U.S., at 16, 67 S. Ct., at 511 (quoting Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 164, 25 L. Ed. 244 (1878)). The dissenters agreed: "The Amendment's purpose ... was to create a complete and permanent separation of the spheres of religious activity and civil authority by comprehensively forbidding every form of public aid or support for religion." 330 U.S., at 31–32, 67 S. Ct., at 519–520 (Rutledge, J., dissenting, joined by Frankfurter, Jackson, and Burton, JJ.); accord, Lee v. Weisman, 505 US 577, 599-600 (1992).

So what does Paul say about these court decisions: "Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few. The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity." So this arrogant twit, who is not educated in law, purports to be a higher legal authority on what the Founding Fathers intended by the religious clauses in the First Amendment than the Supreme Court, the final authority on what the Constitution means, has consistently ruled since 1878.

Just because Paul wants to dismantle the federal government and eliminate federal income taxes, as you may want, and will allow you to smoke pot (unless the states continue to outlaw it) doesn't make him a fit candidate for President of the United States. His brand of government may have worked in the 19th Century, but certainly not in the 21st. He keeps being rejected by the electorate because too many of his ideas are just plain kooky.

Michael L. Marowitz
J.D., J.S.M. (Master's Degree in Law with emphasis on constitutional law, Stanford Law School, 1981)

Ron Paul 2012, the rest who don't agree need shovels to free their heads from the sand.

Crazy as he sounds, Ron Paul is just another pork-loving Republican when you get right down to it, what-the-81. He likes some "civil liberties" for some people, and another set for others.

Michael L. Marowitz

If you think Ron Paul is a flip flopper I would like to know what you think about Romney, Gingrich, Santorum and Obama.

So we have birthers in the house! LOL! Totally off-topic and irrelevant, but --- carry on...

I have to verify who I am before I get a job but he did not willingly give this information up, oh the hell with it. Go back to your bread and circuses.

@ShipupMom 2.24

-The Judge allowed the expert witnesses. The defense did not challenge thier qualifications, and neither did the judge. Yet later the judge dissallowed them. In case you don't know, it is the job of the Defense to challenge a witnesses credentials, NOT the judge. The defense did not do this, so the judge did it for him.

- Obama and his lawyer defied a court ordered subpoena for his documents and then neither showed up for the hearing. You try that, see if YOU would win your case.

- Those same expert witnesses, one of whom wrote the code for photoshop, testified that the digital image released by The Whit House had been photoshopped.

-Those same experts testified that the typewriters in use in those years could not have produced the letters in the digital image.

- The birth certificates of others born in the same hospital on the same day DO NOT MATCH the digital image released by the White House. And it was stamped by a different Registrar. In addition the hand stamped seal was in exactly the same place on all three pages, to the micron. A humand hand with a rubber stamp is inccapable of that level of precision.

The judge relied for his ruling on "facts" not presented into evidence - That Obama is a citizen. That fact was not presented by the defense, and they did not comply with a subpoena for the records.

The judge used a Illinois court of appeals ruling to base his decision on, rather than consider the SCOTUS cases Wong v Ark and Minor v Happerstat that were presented by the plaintiffs.

Whatever happened to liberals, anyways. Remember, "Question Authority"?

I liked those liberals.

The President has STILL not been forced to produce his documents IN ANY OFFICIAL SETTING. In addition, he is spending millions to keep his records sealed.

I respectfully suggest that any OBJECTIVE person would want to know why.

Specifically this one: “natural born citizen” in Article II of the Constitution, requires a Presidential candidate to have two parents that were U.S. citizens at the time the candidate was born.

Please quote the relevant section of the Constitution that says that... Betcha can't.

Obviously, you've never actually read the Constitution, because it doesn't say that at all. Nothing at all about the "parents of the candidate", only that the Candidate be a natural born US citizen.

It's irrelevant anyway, as Obama's mother was a US citizen born in Kansas, and his father was a legal immigrant and naturalized citizen at the time Obama was born.

Jeez, you birthers really are resistant to evidence and reality, aren't you!

cm-6969, while 'natural-born citizen' isn't defined in the Constitution, it was defined in the SCOTUS case Minor v Happerstat as being born of two US citizens on American soil. So yes, there is precedent.

Though I agree it's irrelevant at this point. It would be nice to have an 'easy' way out of this dictatorial, tyrannical, treasonous president of ours, but I guess we'll just have to do it the hard way.

Now if you could just substantiate your claims, Kim. How is Obama treasonous? How is he tyrannical? How is he dictatorial. He's been labeled a lot of nasty things by a lot of air heads who are prone to accept pure fictions--he is born in Honolulu, he wasn't born in either Kenya or Indonesia, he is neither a Nazi nor a Muslim nor a Communist nor a socialist. His economic policies are to the right of Dwight Eisenhower's. He had hopes that were dashed by a phalanx of unrelenting warriors for the wealthy who took an oath not to raise taxes, thereby abandoning their obligation to govern.

How's it feel to be part of the sheeple?

Michael L. Marowitz <---- proof that extensive knowledge of Law won't guarantee an informed decision who the best candidate to lead the nation is

All that debt to finish school and nothing to show for it....who is among the sheeple now?

Kim--I'm going to have to assume you've done the usual and just blindly believed in someone else's lies here? Clearly you've never read the Supreme Court decision (MINOR v. HAPPERSETT, btw, one more thing you got wrong) you're quoting as proof of your position:

"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [88 U.S. 162, 168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts."

The decision comes straight out and says some people include birth on US soil by non-citizens are also natural-born citizens, but then says the case is going to completely ignore that question as irrelevant. The most you can say about that is that yes it does in fact state the children born to US citizens on US soil are natural born citizens. But arguing that proves your point is like claiming that the statement "Earth is a planet" clearly defines that only Earth qualifies as a planet. But anyway the decision continues:

"Under the power to adopt a uniform system of naturalization Congress, as early as 1790, provided 'that any alien, being a free white person,' might be admitted as a citizen of the United States, and that the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under twenty-one years of age at the time of such naturalization, should also be considered citizens of the United States, and that the children of citizens of the United States that might be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, should be considered as natural-born citizens."

Well there's a point that proves your belief is incorrect, right there.

Thanks, Stephen, I suspected that was the case. But the birthers will keep grasping at straws and refuse to concede to reality, due to their prejudice and bigotry.

Yup. Even Birthers acknowledge a critical point within their fantasy world -- that President Obama is the son of an American citizen -- then completely ignore the FACT that he is ergo a CITIZEN of the United States of America. EVEN IF EVERY OTHER FANTASY IN THEIR FLAWED BELIEF SYSTEM IS CORRECT, no one has even tried to prove that Ann Dunham (and her parents as well) weren't American citizens.

False from CM6969 - "It's irrelevant anyway, as Obama's mother was a US citizen born in Kansas, and his father was a legal immigrant and naturalized citizen at the time Obama was born."

Obama's father was never a US Citizen, EVER.

Michael L Morowitz -

How is Obama Treasonous? He signed into Law the NDAA, which explicitly repeals The Posse Comitatus, and explicitly bypasses The Bill Of Rights.

ALL PRESIDENTS take The Oath Of Office, which includes swearing to your God that you will uphold The Constitution. Betrayal of the Oath of Office is considered treason.

Obama extended the Patriot Act for four more years (violates your rights against unreasonable search and seizure, crazy telephone tapping, internet surveillance, etc) and signed into law the NDAA (which means the Government can grab you from your home in the middle of the night and make you disappear.... no phone call, no lawyer, your family doesn't even know what happened, and they have no way to find out.

Does that sound anything like "innocent until proven guilty"?????

No. It Doesn't.

Obama is like Bush on steroids.

And hey JohnB...

We had congressional hearings to see if McCain was eligible to be President.

A War Hero whose parents and grandparents were all well known citizens.

Why should Obama NOT have to answer the same questions?

If McCain was black, would the hearings be racist?

Are we talking about equality? Or are we talking about some other thing?

The President is spending millions of dollars to hide his past.

I respectfully suggest that any OBJECTIVE person would be a little curious about that.

That didn't even rise to the level of a good deflection. The fact that Barack Obama's father wasn't an American citizen has nothing to do with it. You didn't even address that.

Incidentally, I was right here on FR when the GW Bush Administration renewed the Patriot Act, arguing that it was an infringement on individual rights and repeatedly using the phrase "how will Conservatives feel if President Hillary ends up with these powers."

No one listened because Conservatives DIDN'T CARE ABOUT RIGHTS as long as a Republican was in the WH. Now it's a big deal to them...and to you. I disliked the Patriot Act then, pointing out that no head of state will EVER turn down that opportunity as long as the legislature continues to allow it. Will Congress have the backbone to stop this at the next renewal?

John, I am not deflecting. The lawyers at the Georgia hearing presented a very persuasive argument that Wong v Ark defined who is a citizen, and that Minor v Happersett defined "natural born" citizen. They also argued that the two decisions were not mutually exclusive. It was interesting when you look at both decisions in terms of wwhat is holding and what is dicta. For example, in the quote from Stephen###s above, he points out the decision in front of the court, which is holding, which means it sets the precedent going forward. However, by The SCOTUS's own rules on judicial restraint, the rest of the quote is dicta - that is because it is not relevant to the matter before the court, it is non binding moving forward.

I found thier argument very persuasive from a legal standpoint. As far as Obama's father having been a subject of the British Crown, not even Obama argues otherwise. (Kenya was under British control at that time.)

At issue in Georgia was if Obama qualified for the ballot as a "Natural Born" Citizen. If you watch the hearing, then read the judges decision, you will see that he considers in his decision facts that were not offered into evidence, ie that Obama is a citizen. Such a "fact" has still not been proven, and in fact Obama's lawyers defied a court ordered subpoena for the documents. So without presenting the documents he was ordered to provide, by breaking the law and commiting contempt of court, which he will never be charged for, it still was accepted into the record as a "fact" that he is a citizen.

I just want him to have to provide his bonafides, just like EVERY OTHER candidate has had to do. It's not crazy, it's not racist. It's equal treatment for ALL under the law.

And the patriot act, that was going to expire, but Obama beefed it up even more then extended it for four more years. The patriot act is Obama's baby now, John.

The extension of the "patriot" Act and the executive powers in the latest NDAA will come in handy indeed for Obama in his second term to deal with folks who like to question his "bonafides". Have you ever stopped to consider just how many extraordinarily powerful people would have to be involved in creating, and protecting, an unqualified candidate who then positions himself to win the Presidency? The leader of the Free world! The man with his finger on the Nuclear Button! He would be their TOOL. So who would these people be?

And still you ignore both the undisputed fact that President Barack Obama's mother (who raised him with an absentee father) is an American citizen and that the Patriot Act is a creation of the Conservative world.

Thanks for confirming just how out of touch with reality is the Conservative Movement.

I agree with the President's decision to ignore the subpoena! Think about this . . .

After being thoroughly vetted when he first threw his hat in the ring both officially and through the research of his opponents who checked into every aspect of his life (those who don't believe that are either naive or idiots -- Romney kept mentioning the vetting process when he was talking about his financial disclosure, you don't think the circumstances of President Obama's birth wasn't dissected seven ways to Sunday at the time!!), after having won the primaries and then the general election by majority, after having won the vote of the Electoral College by majority, after having been sworn in by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court (you know, the head "Constitution Guy"), taking into consideration there is plenty of precedence of former Presidents who had at least 1 parent not born in the US, after having served 3+ years in office, and after having already been on the ballot in Georgia during the last Presidential election, President Obama does not need to prove to anybody, especially the nutjobs that keep bringing these cases to court, that he is eligible to be President!

As has been stated a million times, it is up to the accuser to prove their case. The birther's "proof" has been shot down time and time and time again (a "photo-shop" expert who only had a scanned copy -- and they thought this was good enough for court!! The idiocy amazes me!!)

President Obama is already the president. He has nothing to prove.

John, neither I nor anyone else I know disputes the fact that Obamas mother was in fact an American Citizen. What is in dispute is where he was born, and wether or not he ever held dual citizenship. If he was not born on US soil as he claims, and/or if he ever for one single day held dual citizenship,

Then he is not legally qualified to hold the Office of President.

And like I said, Obama CHOSE to extend the patriot act.

The patriot act is now Obama's patriot act.

I know that's uncomfortable for you to think about, but it's true, nevertheless.

Paul - Are you suggesting The President should use the patriot act and the NDAA to round up people who disagree with him? You are sounding very Stalinesque there, buddy, I suggest you really need to re-examine your position there. Someday a republican will be in the White House again. Would you like Newt rounding up people for thier beliefs? Think about it.

Your point that many higher ups must be involved is a valid one. As a matter of fact, for the election papers submitted in Georgia in 2008, the democrats for the first time in 48 years ommitted the standard clause of eligibility. The republicans included it in thiers. A bit odd, that.

Shipup mom, you said this:

"I agree with the President's decision to ignore the subpoena! Think about this . . .

After being thoroughly vetted when he first threw his hat in the ring both officially and through the research of his opponents who checked into every aspect of his life (those who don't believe that are either naive or idiots -- Romney kept mentioning the vetting process when he was talking about his financial disclosure, you don't think the circumstances of President Obama's birth wasn't dissected seven ways to Sunday at the time!!),"

First of all, Obama was NEVER thouroughly vetted. There were questions swirling about his past, but it is just too fantastic sounding to have been taken seriously. Anyone who brought it up was called a racist and/or a nut, a dynamic that continues to this day. And everybody who did look into Obama's past was met with an impenetrable wall of lawyers and sealed records. Financial disclosure is a far cry from having your origins thouroughly examined. It's easy to say "prove it" when you know you have the proof locked up somewhere. If The President released his records, none of this would be an issue... or would it?

And the only reason all anybody can access is a scanned digital image is because THE ONLY THING OBAMA HAS RELEASED IS THAT DIGITAL IMAGE!

Take your liscence, scan it into a digital image, put the image on your phone or ipad.

Now go try to cash a check at the bank using that digital image. Or try to get a job using that digital image.

Does it work? No. No it doesn't. It is NOT ACCEPTABLE ID.

As far as the President ignoring a court ordered subpoena to show his bonafides, and your feelings that that is ok, well, that's a problem to me.

NOBODY is above the law. Nobody.

As far as this being "shot down again and again", The President has avoided having to produce his official documents 100% of all court cases. He has never yet shown them in any official setting. The closest he got to doing that was in Georgia, where the judge ordered his lawyer Jablonski to produce the documents, and The President and his lawyer simply refused.

Why ignore a Judges subpoena in an election year?

Why spend MILLIONS of dollars to keep your records sealed?

What's in there that's so important, that The President spends millions of dollars a year to keep hidden?

I respectfully suggest that The President is hiding a few things. If you can't see that, well, you must be using some standard that has no basis in objectivity.

Obama will use and abuse the powers of the Patriot Act and the NDAA, from day one of his second term, against his political enemies, like Cantor, McConnell, Liz Cheney etc. because they are enemies of the majority of the population of this country.

His doing so will of course bring forth a cacophany of cries of Stalinism and unconstitutionality. When Scalia, Alito, and Thomas ,Clarence and "Ginny", are "disappeared" he will let us know that he is serious and that he intends to make it clear that the powers he is using to end our EXTRA-Constitutional activities, should never have been provided to the Presidency in the first place. The only way he rids us of these abusive powers is to use them and demonstrate how unamerican they are. Good on him. Impeachment will be an impossibility. Obama will not relinquish the powers which no president before or after him should ever have been provided, until the last day of his second term. The swearing in ceremony of the 45th President should be rather unique.

God help us all if you're right, Paul.

Ron Paul can still save us, if he survives.

Sadly, I fear the sheeple will wait until the noose is too tight.

It's too late to struggle then.

The rope is in place, the noose is set. If Obama's intentions were dishonorable, he would already be making use and abuse of the powers which the NDAA provided to his office. He had to play along with the Military Industrial Complex to get to the point where they conferred upon him enough trust, and now power, to do what they think will be their bidding. Our only real hope is that he will betray them on our behalf, in 2013. At the earliest, maybe November 9, 2012.

History will not look well upon this time when the Republican Party mainstreamed crazy.

Enjoy your Birtherism, and look out for those black helicopters.

Who's a RE-peat-the-Lie-to-the-PUBLIC-an? John, are you just reading the first sentence of each paragraph?

Speaking to Alil, Paul...sorry for the confusion.

I was kinda half joking around. But really, why do you think the 9/11 commission wasn't granted the powers it needed to do the investigation properly? Start with the subpoena and security clearances.

John B, what do you think is in those records that he spends millions of dollars per year to keep sealed?

Why do you think he attended Occidental as Barry Soetoro, but Columbia and Harvard as Barck Hussien Obama?

How do you think he was able to fly directly to Pakistan despite people holding American passports being forbidden to travel there at that time?

By the way, your Republican crack is funny, since I only signed up as one yesterday . I'm only doing it so I can be a delgate for Ron Paul.

I wanted to put a smart woman in the White House, not this train wreck Obama. Unfortunately, the Big Money stopped us.

Seriously, I am curious why you think he spends so much money keeping his records sealed?

How much does your conspiracy-addled mind believe was paid to cause the state of Hawaii, to certify his birth certificate as valid and genuine?

We're done here.

Seriously John. Why do you think The President spends millions of dollars a year to keep his records sealed?

I know it's uncomfortable for you to think about, but give it a shot?

Why do you think he does it?

Where is your PROOF that Obama is spending millions of who's dollars every year to keep, which records sealed from whom?

Lols Paul. Poor thing. Too lazy to look for yourself?

Afraid that you might be confronted with something that is uncomfortable?

*sigh*

It's hard to find good sources, because most of the left leaning sites are covering it up. Here's a right wing source, just check the beginning of the article where they list fec records. These records can be verified independently by the FEC website but you would have to mine the data manually. Depends how motivated you are I guess. Interesting sidenote, I did not realize that factcheck.org was run by an Annenburg member, that's Bill Ayer's organization (The Weather Underground guy, Obama's supporter)

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2011/04/21/obama-law-tab-hits-2800000-00-contempt-of-court-contempt-of-congress-contempt-of-constitution-still-no-birth-certificate-all-to-foment-a-constitutional-crisis/

Want to hear something even crazier, about how a judicial search engine used by lawyers and judges appears to have been manipulated on this issue?

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/justiagate_natural_born_supreme_court_citations_disappear.html#ixzz1krDEWAGe

Just wallow in Fox for a day, and you'll feel and smell it all!

Henry from AZ - I think you have your political parties reversed. Who has Pelosis, Reid, Schummer, Boxer, Feinstein, Frank, Kucinich, and most of the folks that DO want to take peoples guns away, destroy american traditions such as marriage, religion, freedom of speech, individual responsibility, and capitalism in favor of socialist, communist, atheist, immoral, and tyranical policies. You need to get your head out of your posterior along with many on this blog who somehow think that the guy who has been on Amateur Hour for 3 years in the White House is in some way GOOD for this countries future. The only clown being followed around is the one that's paying the Chinese 400 billion a day in loan interest, spending money we don't have at a rate 4 times that of George Bush, thwarting energy production in our own nation while paying Brazilians to drill and then SELL to us, cutting our military to 1916 levels of readiness, bailing out organizations to keep union thugs in power, and creating class warfare and divisiveness to a degree not seen in this nation since 1860. Obama may not be the Antichrist; he could turn out to be worse! Lastly, Henry, only morons think that people with guns sit around in fear of anybody, and don't confuse revulsion with hatred. A bunch of you people really do need to get a life and leave internet la la land for a while. Mike-583206 - you're nuts!!! Enough said.

JP --- Time to adjust the aluminum cap on your head?

Sadly, as dudogger has pointed out, too much immersion in FOX news or Limbaugh/Beck is not healthy. The venom they spray on unsuspecting half-wits and disturbed individuals eventually leaves them cowering in a corner, waiting for the door to get kicked in. The unfortunate girl scout selling cookies at the door then becomes yet another victim. It's all so sad.

What about Obama's pastor for the last 20+ years have we all forgot about him, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Please look him up, then look at his relationship with Obama. They are very close!! He married him and his wife, baptised their kids, and was right there by his side until he was told to hide!! It is always a one way street when it comes to Obama!!

It so patheticly sad how blind folks are. The information is out there. Research! Not a Repub and sure as hell not a Liberal (Sorry i worked hard my whole life without asking for handouts).

JP- Whatever money America owes the Chinese was started by Bush (Fact)

Puba22- Its not Obama's Fault that you can't handle the TRUTH about America. Sorry the Rev Wright Card has already been played.

Its clear that president Obama dosent have the skills needed for his office.Why the blind following of people here is hard to figure out. We need a leader! also term limits to get rid of all the old corrupt dead wood in washington.

The dept is digusting.You think adding more dept to your household would help you out?

Sorry i worked hard my whole life without asking for handouts

I did too, but I'm still more liberal than conservative on most issues. Some conservatives need to get over the idea that all liberals/Democrats are on welfare and expect handouts.

The Social Security own most of this nation debit. Just how much do China own 8% and Japan own 6% then UK has the rest. The Republican can't handle the truth that is why they have to lie. Republican blame everything on the Dem when they are in control of everything. People who listen to Fox are clueless. Ron Paul is just another Republican, People need to start to look at his back ground your see he is crazy and evil.

TO: Puba22 who wrote:

"What about Obama's pastor for the last 20+ years have we all forgot about him, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Please look him up, then look at his relationship with Obama. They are very close!! He married him and his wife, baptised their kids, and was right there by his side until he was told to hide!! It is always a one way street when it comes to Obama!!"

Hold on now, you want us to look at President Obama's former pastor because he performed the POTUS's marriage ceremony and baptised their children, but Republicans turn a blind eye to the close, life long relationship George W. Bush had with Osama Bin Laden?

Republicans are giving themselves a bad reputation.

Obama / Biden 2012

Palmquist1

Why don't you clue the rest of us in on your insdight that Ron Paul is crazy and evil with some proof of your allegations. Right now all you are doing is repeating what the mainstream media has said.

This must be a really good article. I'm seeing post disappear quick today. They are the good posts that make people think. Yep, I never seen posts disappear as fast as they are today. The good ones are gone before people can comment on them and I can even finish reading them all. Real good article, I bet MSN is sorry they put this article on here today.

Talk about crazy.....

The Libs have George Cirrhosis as a primary backer.

Sigh, stable candidate huh? Sensible and workable policies? We have among us, a great many, of the most sophisticated, cosmopolitan, educated, and certifiable lunatics the world has ever produced. Londons old "Bedlam", nor the paying spectators to Its presentments of various and sundry displays of the inhabitants demented mental imaginings, bursting forth in groans of tormented agony and ecstasy, cannot exceed "that which many so proudly hail"; the pure insanity of American "right wing extremism". One doesn't know whether to laugh, weep, or just fart, and go look for something to eat again.

You served and must have seen the waste of money? the dept is like a cancer and it is slowly killing our country.every time the president speaks he talks about spending more.

Daniel - good point. My brother was there for 3 tours, and said the same thing, along with how much we take for granted in our own country here. No one and no thing -- not the Founding Fathers, not the Constitution, not the Bill of Rights -- promised us a perfect government. It's frequently ugly, often painful, subject to wild swings of the political pendulum, and has to be fought for and defended. But it's worth preserving.

And that, James, is what betrays your post. Lots of folks are heavily conflicted about our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan but Saddam was no altar boy, and although it took years and far more money and lives than we were promised, we found and took out Bin Laden. For you sit there and spew venom and hatred at those in the military, while you worry about your wallet, is too much. I understand you want everyone else to fight and defend us (while you condemn them for it), and no doubt you want everyone else to pay for that defense, pay for government services, make all the sacrifices and contributions that a free democracy requires -- so long as it doesn't inconvenience you.

All of which is your right, I guess. Just don't wrap yourself in the flag as you scorn and revile the hard work of others, especially those with their lives on the line.

TO: ron17571 who wrote:

"...every time the president speaks he talks about spending more."

Maybe so, but I'm darn glad he's NOT talking about spending any money overseas! As long as money is being spent in THIS country, on the AMERICAN People, I'm a happy camper.

We had 8 long agonizing years of spending millions of hardworking Americans' Taxpayer dollars each and every day, overseas, that in absolutely NO WAY benefitted the American People. Money was wasted and thrown around like it was nothing, not to mention Bush losing a Billion Dollars somewhere on the streets of Iraq. How does a person "lose" a billion dollars? You have to be dumb as a bag of hammers to "lose" a billion dollars, and then even dumber than that to never go looking for it and never finding it. Now THAT to me was frustrating.

Obama / Biden 2012

As a Black male Democrat who voted for Obama in the last election (HUGE MISTAKE), I do tend to agree with my friend Mr. Brandon. Whether Ron Paul is a racist or not, is beside the point. Ron Paul looks to restore our constitutionally given rights (Particularly, civil rights in my case). Just look at what's going on in these Family Courts (For both Blacks and Whites), in these costly endless wars that are taking away food to feed our families, discouraging "domestic" economic trade and development, violating our constitutionally given right to freedom of speech (You can't say sh$t anymore without some organization getting their panties in a bunch!!!), and strict gun laws that prevent you from protecting yourself and your loved ones in self-defense situations.

Not saying that he is, but if Ron Paul is a racist, I'd rather be successful and NOT have my civil rights violated under his government than be unsuccessful and have NO civil rights under this corrupt a$$ government. You better believe that a lot of these corrupt a$$ people in the government are going straight to Hell. The Devil already has their eternal luxury suites fully furnished.

American Girl-724855

TO: ron17571 who wrote:

"...every time the president speaks he talks about spending more."

Maybe so, but I'm darn glad he's NOT talking about spending any money overseas! As long as money is being spent in THIS country, on the AMERICAN People, I'm a happy camper.

I dont know where you get your information.....but he is spending plenty overseas. First of all, he never delivered on his promise of the "first thing i'm gonna do is pull the troop out...and you can take that to to the bank".....umm...no he didnt till 3 years later! The NDAA is reason enough to get this guy out!

It is obvious that you want to cut spending overseas......Got a surprise....ONLY Ron Paul is looking to cut overseas spending. Please do some....at least a little research...you will find it by opening your eyes!

Jason - just curious, what strict gun laws are you referring to? Understand, I'm a gun owner and hunter myself, but I keep hearing this screech from the far right that Obama is out to "take our guns." I went to a gun show in NC a few weeks ago (my first), and there is everything under the sun available for sale. So far as I know there's been no legislative or other initiatives of any kind since he took office to restrict gun rights. Am I missing something, or is this just red meat for the radical right -- a tempest in a Tea Pot??

TO: mqira who wrote:

I dont know where you get your information.....but he is spending plenty overseas. First of all, he never delivered on his promise of ... is pull[ing] the troops out...It is obvious that you want to cut spending overseas......Got a surprise....ONLY Ron Paul is looking to cut overseas spending.

I don't consider that a broken promise, especially since GWB "promised" that he would NEVER pull the troops out, but they're home now.

You're right about Ron Paul, and while I do like the idea of cutting overseas spending, I wouldn't say we should cut all of it off, completely. I like Ron Paul, but I'm voting for President Obama.

Obama / Biden 2012

but they're home now

Only if you consider Kuwait "home"

@LKNRaging - True, Saddam was no altar boy, but the weapons he used on his own people and in Kuwait were sold to him by the US. What did we think he was going to do with them? I am thankful that our troops are putting their lives on the line because they volunteered to do so, but they are fighting a war based on lies.

TO: 1SGFitzsWife4ID who wrote:

but they're home now

Only if you consider Kuwait "home"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Wifey, I am not privy, and I don't believe you are either, as to exactly where our American Soldiers are, exactly, at any point in time, unless of course you are trying to say that your husband is stationed in Kuwait right now, and you STILL don't know if that's fact or fiction. In fact, HE may have been told he's in one place, but is in fact somewhere else.

We as a country need to stop all the entiltement programs that are killing this counrty, its not the military that is breaking us its the 3.7 trillion (every year ) in entitlement programs. There are jobs out here get off your lazy ass and get one.

american girl.;... wow if you would ever bother to look up 1SGFitzsWife4ID I.D. you would see that she would know far better then you of the where abouts of her husband... Do you have anyone in the service? As a vetran i know you are told untruths in the service but today with the cell phones it would be hard for the government to lie to you about where you are since they have g.p.s. in them... you sir or lady not sure what to call you since you could be any gender on here..

American Girl????

I don't consider that a broken promise, especially since GWB "promised" that he would NEVER pull the troops out, but they're home now.

You're right about Ron Paul, and while I do like the idea of cutting overseas spending, I wouldn't say we should cut all of it off, completely. I like Ron Paul, but I'm voting for President Obama.

Ron Paul has nothing to do with GWB.....but the point is that Obama did lie....it was his first goal which he didnt do....he did break his promise, as he did with so many others! and it is because he has masters pulling his strings....he is a goldman sachs puppet. And Romney would be too.

Everyone has rights to like and vote for who they choose....and i do respect that....But i want to point out that one of the reasons you like Obama.....is something Obama is not going to do!

How do you feel about the NDAA? The Patriot Act? How about the new head of CFPB, RIchard Cordray????and the way he was appointed?

I love how both parties are so god damn hypocritical. Yes, even the self proclaimed saints of the world, the Democrats. For years the bitching and moaning about Iraq the patriot act, the bombing and killing the being owned by banks. The corporate greed and lies.

Hmmmm//Obama is bought by Goldman Sachs which is very public information. Where was the outrage from the Democrats when the banks went unpunished by the administration for giving themselves huge bonuses with our tax dollars, and still watching idly as people continued to foreclose on their homes?

Where is the outrage that our troops arent home? That our soldiers are still dying? Oh yes, suddenly every Obama supporter doesnt agree with Ron Pauls foreign policy which is to bring everyobe home. @!$%#ing hypocrites. Wheres the outrage of the invasion of our privacy at airports, or the NDAA act that allows American citicens to be detained and imprisoned indefinitely without trial?? No outrage I am hearing now. Just crickets.

People are starting to wake up. Some are a bit more slow than others, but everyone has their own personal threshold for how much bull@!$%# they want to believe. You'll come around. RON PAUL 2012

I know exactly where my husband is American Girl, it's been on almost every news media that our troops left Iraq and are finishing up their tours in Kuwait, sorry you missed it.

Thank you, Tyler.

@ Knine - Ron Pauls position on ending the Federal Reserve is the same as it has always been...

Initially he wants to have the Fed audited because he knows an honest audit will expose to the american sheeple that the Fed is a criminal organization and then the sheeple will better understand the situation and be open to an alternative. In order to make the transition flow with minimum disruption, he wants to make it legal to allow competing money in this country.

All I can say about 911 is that anyone with a brain has to wonder why building 7 dropped the way it did many hours later.

Go to Youtube and type this into Youtubes search box:

"9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Full-length, Pre-Release-v1.3; Low-Res."

So true well said sk-nitro

You're rite because there is no way our government would ever do us wrong! We need to ban smoking in ALL cities. Don't want someone starting a fire in their office trash can and collapsing the entire building.

Considering that the US doesn't have a hundred of that number your comment is a bit foolish. Once again we see that Ron Paul is backed by a loon as crazy as himself.

@R. Scalzo, your comment is foolish and you are the crazy. See, This article states that by 2030 there could be 30,000 drones flying all over the U.S.

Labeling people crazy does not cut it anymore.please backup what your are saying with fact. Otherwise you just spreading propaganda.people can call you crazy that doesn't make it true.

Well said. Take heart that others still in the military and government have decided enough is enough. These so-called white hats are on the offensive!

Pfffthahahahahaha!!!!

maniacal laughter doesnt make you look any saner.

Desert Rat-Am 74,always get a kick out people who dream about the good old days--Do You remember the depression,people sleeping under bridges,union people being shot down in the streets for picketing,seperate bathrooms for blacks,lynchings with impunity,children working 12 hour days,woman being beaten in front the white house while marching for the right to vote,concentration camps for japanese-american citizens-none for german or italian citizens,and on and on and on. Sorry desert rat compared to the past these are the good old days through enlightened legislation and hard work of the american populace. If you are being oppressed by the Government ,please give some specific examples and you will have millions of people on your side.

Charles, your post is the first that exposes the real truth as to what is really happening, the rest are just surface, knee jerk reactions!

Definition of OPPRESSION

1
a: unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power b: something that oppresses especially in being an unjust or excessive exercise of power

• Patriot act stripped me of my freedom of privacy

• NDAA robbed me of my right of due process

• My tax dollars are being used for wars I oppose and Libya war was started unconstitutionally.

• POTUS is now telling Catholic hospitals to issue birth control against their religious beliefs and against the guarantee of freedom of religion by the constitution

• American citizens have been assassinated

SO Charles, must we become slaves before you consider us oppressed? Doesn't look that far off to me brother.

It sounds Like the author of this article is a closet 9/11 truther,He seems to know all of the players websites,claims etc. If you simply take the time to look at Freedom to fascism, Infowars dot com, the (traitorous) 1913 federal reserve act, the tax laws then and now and what has changed. As Russo finds out there is not a law the IRS are just a bunch of criminals working for a private bank to collect a tax that is paid to them then dolled out to the states with strings attached.

The hour is late people, research the facts behind 9/11(What is building 7, architects and engineers for911 truth (over 1500 last I checked) Al Qaeda created funded and ran by Carters defence secretary, 23 trillion not 700billion to private banks in the tarp bailouts etc. just follow the trail laid out by the author, he gives you all the info to look into. Its much worse than any conspiracy theorist could have imagined.

Conspiracy theory is now anything that has to do with reality.

The New World Order is absolutely real as is the groups that run and operate it, the CFR Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group etc.

Only informed people should be allowed to vote. About 50% of the citizen can't even tell you who is running let alone what they stand for.

When will people realize that we are just throwing votes away? You can vote for candidate a) who will ruin this country by excluding 99 percent of the country, or candidate b) who will exclude the 1 percent of this country who controll all the wealth. Both will also destroy this country by their own particular methodology and both candidates will ultimately be part of the same evil beast. Only a peaceful spiritual and intellectual revolution can hope to change the hearts and minds of this country to realize that we are ONE people under GOD INDVISIBLE with liberty and justice for ALL. Everyone has a right to vote by the way informed or not. But they give us little choice between two ways of dividing and destroying ourselves.

IMO, people are very fearful, want serious change but don't know who to turn to. Dems and Repubs are basically two sides of the same coin with no real leadership. Americans have been fed so much bs for so long that we've become brainwashed and not able to "think outside the box" we've been put into.

Voters need to seriously think about fresh, new ideas. It's the only way things will change.

Thank You, somebody with some common sense. Everybody is afraid of Ron Paul because compared to other politicians he is thinking outside the big government box, if you want real change you have to have somebody willing to try to make it happen and Ron Paul is the one for the job. If you vote Romney, Santorum or Gingrich you might as well vote for Nobama, because they are one in the same. Big government and the feds printing money are the biggest concerns to our national security, not Iran, they can't even refine their own oil. Iran has to export their oil and import it back in as gas. Nuclear bomb my ass!!!!!!!! Are you people not sick of sending your sons, daughters, mothers and fathers to another country to die in an illegal war?? You people that slam Ron Paul do your homework and not listen to main stream news(which is owned by these same minions). Ron Paul is not crazy, if you think he is crazy what about our founding fathers?? Were they crazy??

james brandon--do you realize how funny your post is when you bring up Washington and slavery? He was the richest man in America but still felt the need to own and breed children for sale to other slave owners--Liberty is a two way street.

Two way street? o ya youll see.!! Slavery was an institution. Wealth was dependant on it as were most europeon countries. Your history is weak if thats your best argument because even free Negros in the 19th century had SLAVES. yes thats right so there goes your whole rediculous argument. Thomas jefferson actually drafted a declaration that detested slavery and it was revised by those who had to much invested in it, thomas also had slaves . So dont trash the constitution and the people who defend it. Trash the treasonous people who are destroying our liberties right in front of our eyes.

I see in America people are still defending slavery. How about the right to vote?

Roadkill---Dunno---whatever it is tho, should be investigated by the EPA. Tongue firmly in cheek.

OK and the one man funding newts PAC, Adelson or whatever his name is, is being investigated for ties with organized crime bosses in China where is the story on that?

If he is so far out there that even the Libertarians won't accept him, that indicates that he is simply a delusional little man in an ill fitting suit. He's clearly NOT a Republican!

Ron Paul actually ran for the Presidency on the Libertarian party ticket - twice - before becoming a Republican. The Republican party is better organized and much better funded than the Libertarian party, the reason why Ron Paul switched, but politically speaking the policy positions of Ron Paul are still more Libertarian than Republican.

CM-6969

A very simple and quick google search would have shown you what is Dr Paul's political history and affiliations.

from wikipedia..

Ronald Ernest "Ron" Paul (born August 20, 1935) is a United States Congressman (Republican Party) and repeat candidate for President of the United States, having run in 1988, 2008, and 2012. In the 1988 run, he was the nominee of the Libertarian Party during a 12-year hiatus between periods of service as a Republican congressman. In 2008 and 2012, he contended for the Republican Party presidential nomination. He has been an outspoken critic of American foreign and monetary policies, renowned for sharply opposing his own party on many issues. Since 1979, he has been elected to 10 terms in the House of Representatives, with an interruption of 12 years. In addition, he filled a vacated seat for most of 1976. Since 1997, Paul has represented Texas's 14th congressional district, which covers an area south and southwest of Houston that includes Galveston. Paul serves on the House Committees on Foreign Affairs and Financial Services, and on the Joint Economic Committee. He is the chairman of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology.

So he only ran as a Libertarian once in '88, he has always held his seat in congress as a republican, before his '88 libertarian run for president and after.

You might want to consider using google to make sure you do not make such foolish mistakes in the future.

Bill, Yeah you did, intentionally, written a manner to ridicule.

Quote:

As Libertarian Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul looks for a state he can win, some of his supporters have turned to a new theme: voting fraud.

First sentence of the article you have his name out there, tell this lie somewhere else!

I also believe that the headline is inflammatory in order to draw criticism. I would also like to know when there are many pictures of Dr Paul smiling, why the media always portrays him with "angry face".

So, Bill, why not report on the work RevPAC has done as an organization: analyze the collateral they have produced, and the fundraising campaigns they have promoted, and then see if you can find any hint of the "fringe" positions you are accusing Mr. Franchi (and by association, Mr. Paul) of holding and promoting. I think you will be disappointed.

Let's root through the other campaigns and their super PACs and report on the fringe beliefs held by their members, shall we? Meanwhile the insanity that is the U.S. federal government and its policies churns ahead, spending money faster than it can raise it, expanding further into our lives, and getting us involved in more costly foreign entanglements.

Watch closely. Marginalization is one of the classic tactics the status quo uses to maintains its power.

And Romney's biggest supporter is Goldman Sachs. End of story.

Im curious Bill why no mention has been made of the disgusting conflicts of interest that have taking place in IOWA, NEVADA and now Wyoming.... Gentry Collins and Jim Anderson oversaw the Iowa and Nevada Caucuses. Gentry Collins served as former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s Iowa State Director and advisor, Jim Anderson has just been appointed by Romney as state co-chairmen. Both these states are being lambasted for vote fraud.... Perhaps you ould look into it since your so Bi Partisan. Another thing to add is that Jim Anderson has been appointed to Wyoming so well keep an eye on that one now.

Goldman Sachs was Obama 2nd biggest contributor.

Interesting how the character assasination of Ron Paul by the media begins in earnest once it becomes obvious his campaign is not just going to fade away, and can be conveniently ignored, as it was during the earlier stages of the campaign.

I wanna know why Ron Paul gets almost no coverage from msnbc or any big network until he gets a second place or whatever and then he gets THIS kind of story with an obvious and in your face agenda. I'm a democrat and I can see through this. People need to start remembering this stuff. Just sayin...

Ciber You should join us, Obama is Bush he signed the NDAA hes expanded the wars in Iraq and he bailing out corporate america, His biggest contributor is Goldman Sachs as is Romenys. Ron Paul is the fight of his life and is only supported by the people. Why is it so hard for people like yourself to understand this and join us?

Ron Paul and his followers are drinking Kool Aid....

Ron Paul's image was tarnished when he began advocating for "legalized" drugs. Most Americans are smart enough to see that legalizing hallucinatory drugs that can create temporary insanity, even in a small minority, is a dangerous policy.

On the other hand, Ron Paul supports the Defense of Marriage Act, in which government attempts to prevent gay marriage, something that would harm absolutely no one. He is conveniently libertarian when it suits his ultra conservative and racist positions.

Shuo----thanks for supporting the effort to get Big money out political campaigns/

Ciberkahuna

Positive Ron Paul reports are kept out of the media because they don't want you to know he is the only true candidate for the people. Heck you might actually vote for him if you realized that our economy is trashed because of the endless wars we are fighting, if they stopped, that would put war profiteers out of business. If you actually knew what the FED was up to you would probably abolish it and cut off the banksters gravy train. If you were awake enough to realise all your liberties are being stripped from you at an alarming pace you may get upset and vote for someone who is NOT an Establishment candidate and that could screw up the whole corrupt system and lead to both the issues above which would destroy the status quo.

@ MkeMike: legalizing drugs=Personal Liberty! What's wrong w/ that? We're a country based on freedom, yet day by day it's being taken away from us. Example: Someone tries to give you an illegal drug, are you going to take it? No! I wouldn't either. Freedom of choice! Freedom to live the life you want to live. You want the gov't to tell you what you can and can't do w/ your daily life? Fine, your falling right into their hands.

the same should apply to gays then- dont you see pauls hypocrisy?- how his religous views satrt trumping on constitutional views- hes for the constitution when it fits his philosophy and against it when it doesnt

by the way i like Paul for the most part but i find some of his views hypocritical-!

You know I really am gonna start checking into Ron Paul I keep seeing fighting and stupid petty arguments between those campaigning at each and every debate(like that never happens anyways) I watch and everyone just ignores that fact. Ron paul always just stands there without getting involved in petty crap and seems to only answer the issues that matter WHEN he is ALLOWED a couple of minutes which is also obvious and in your face. I watch ALL the networks ignore this man. I see crappy story's like this with an agenda. So I have to ask myself why? It's almost as if networks are trying to sway the elections and it is obvious and it sometimes feels like they think folks are stupid that way and wont figure it out. But ya I'm starting to lean towards the DR. Paul as I'm sure a lot of folks are because they are seeing through this and it is quite offensive.

Ben Swann, a real journalist.

YouTube: Obama Refuses To Explain Why He 'Thinks" He Has The Right To Kill Americans?

Obama is another scum bag who was voted in because of the hatred for Bush and the "Hey Look! I'm Not a Racist" crowd.

Supporters of Obama, go look at his voting record.

The lack there of.

The YouTube video. al- Awlaki is a piece of @!$%# in my opion but he is an American citizen just the same. Where was his due process, his trial.

Obama who studied constitutional law yet ignores the constitution.

ReduceGHGs

This guy is a serious troll. I see his screen name everywhere like almost every newspaper or blog concerning ron ;paul. Google his screen name

ReduceGHGs

This guy is a serious troll. I see his screen name everywhere like almost every newspaper or blog concerning ron ;paul. Google his screen name

So why is whoever your talking about a "troll" because they go to other sites and defend someone you obviously disagree with? I said I would look into Ron Paul and what he's about. Does that make ME a troll? No it just means I want to see this from all sides and recognize obvious unfair practices. Are you saying it's not fair if other folks defend what they see as being right? Wouldn't it be a hoot if some folks that some people brand as "trolls" were actually just ordinary folks concerned at what they view as wrong things happening? Naw that would be impossible huh? You know those folks are still entitled to they'r opinions wherever and whenever they like. or did that change and when? Just making an observation because I keep seeing the term more and more with negativity almost always involved.

I don't think Ron Paul has actively courted liberals, but you might be interested in www[dot]bluerepublican[dot]org. Ron Paul outflanks liberals when it comes to matters of personal liberty, and he outflanks conservatives when it comes to limited government. It is reasonable to expect that Dr. Paul would garner votes from across the entire political spectrum.

Anyone who votes up and down Republican or Democrat is an idiot.

sounds like your the one whos not up for a discussion.. there are plenty of facts out there, if you refuse to look at them then we can never have a relative conversation.

Exactly, they live in an alternate universe. I feel sorry for them. They'll all tell you how smart they are and how we're stupid and have blinders on, when the truth is that they're a bunch of fools who will believe anything they read on those conspiracy websites. It's exciting for them to be "in the know", it provides them with a crusade and makes them feel special. I know a couple of guys just like them , right now they're focused on the danger of solar flares, supposedly we're all going to fry sometime this year. By next year when we don't they'll have been onto 10 different ETOW scenarios and will have forgotten all about this one. Ron Paul is a quack and so are his followers.

I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, but he is trying to alert you to things that the Mainstream media, which is owned by business conglomerates, won't tell you, or look into with any seriousness or persistence.

Knowing that we are being lied to, by the government, and the supposedly Free Press, and our willingness to point that out in public, does indeed make us special. The ridicule of the ignorant like you doesn't deter us from demanding the truth be restored to the American political and policy discussions.

Are you aware that the Flight Data Recorder from Flight 77 indicates that the plane was at too high an altitude to have ever hit the Pentagon?

Are you aware that bombs were going off in WTC#7 before either of the Twin Towers fell on 9/11?

Do you know that the 9/11 Commission didn't have the power to subpoena anyone and everyone who may have been a participant in the mass murder of 2979 Americans?

ETOW? Did you mean End of the World? EOTW.

Let's not lump all theories, and their believers, in with one another.

Do FEMA Camps exist? I think that there is mounting evidence that they exist and not for the reasons that cornered public officials will only allude to. Do I have any PROOF? Of course not, it's classified.

Here is proof of the New World order stuff right from the UN's site.

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/spec/aress19-2.htm

I especially like line 30 of the second one pushing fro population decline. Google Agenda 21 in any country and it is being implemented.

You skipped the part where your professor was relieved of his teaching duties due to the nonsense of his theory. You also ignore the fact that reputable engineers from around the world have explained in detail how and why the buildings collapsed, including building 7. I'm not an engineer, but I know that if you build a tower of playing cards, then remove a lower support, the entire thing with pancake.

There is also scientific evidence that liberals should be much more intelligent than they actually are. There's just no explaining some things.

Rick they relieved him (Stephen Jones) of his duties because they were scared of the effect on their image, not because there is no validity to his theory. BYU is more concerned about image sometimes then truth.

The fact that people who haven't a clue buy into this idiot's thories.

WTC7 burnt at a temperture of a few thousands degrees for HOURS. That's what brought it down. I'm amazed at the simple minds in this country that actually believe those ramblings. I doubt most never set foot in the towers nor were they there that day.

Maybe the airliners were simply a computer generated scene. Guess they set up the other two hijackings. The fact that Paul associates with that loon will make him a bigger joke.

It didn't burn at a "few thousand degrees". It had a few office fires, i.e. chairs, carpets, curtains. If a high rise is so at risk of collapsing due to office fires, why do millions of people work in them every day? Did you know that after the 1997 WTC bombing mayor Guilliani had a command bunker installed in WTC 7? It was super fortified against just about anything. Look it up. Why, when Larry Silverstein said to "pull building 7" were they able to do that when it takes months to wire a building for demolition? You have clearly not looked into this at all. That's the problem with the citizens in this country. They are afraid to look at anything outside their world view.

R Scalzo,

Dude you are the one with the closed mind. If you did, you would know that other buildings (older ones) have burn with hotter fires, for longer hours and didn't fall. There were people on the seen on the day the wouldn't have any reason to lie that supports the notion of something causing the buildings to fall other than a fire.

But you're right and everyone else is wrong? The 1,500 Engineers and Arictices that have publicly disagree with the offical stroy are wrong? Shut up dude!

Mclovins76

You are exactly right. Justice needs to be served.The bushes were involved in alot crooked stuff and they need to be brought to justice for it. I have been called deranged and crazy for saying the same thing you are.

Brian,

You got it backwards, the recently released study did not say Liberals are more intelligent. It said children with low IQ scores grow up to be Conservatives. The tendencies of those with both higher and average scores were not mentioned in the study. It's not that those who are intelligent, become Liberals. Rather that those who are unintelligent become conservatives.

I live in a Red state. I constantly find myself in conversation with people who have no clue about the issues and don't even remember who they voted for in the last election for state Legislature. They don't even bother to watch FOX. They just watch football and American Idol. They say they vote Republican because their parents did and for no other reason. On the other hand, I don't recall any Liberal ever telling me they vote a straight Democratic ticket, because their parents do.

Note: My personal and anecdotal observations are completely unscientific. Can anyone give a link to a study on the correlation of parental influence for Conservative versus Liberal voters?

If i'm gonna ask for a link, then.......

Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes

Sloppy phraseology doesn't help our cause. WTC#7 did NOT implode,"just like" the other two towers.

WTC#7 was a "classic" textbook implosion. The outer walls covered the pile. WTC1&2 were anything but classic demolition. Forces were being exerted in their demise which far exceded an attempt to make them merely fall down vertically. The concrete floors were converted entirely to dust in less than ten seconds. The pancake theory was debunked and abandoned within days of it being proffered by the "experts".