Blogcritics Comments on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Comment by Clavos on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:21:29 EST

"Please write to them to voice your disapproval of Fox News' decision to exclude a legitimate presidential candidate." When they do, I'll be sure to.

Comment by Liberty Belle on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Sat, 29 Dec 2007 23:11:22 EST

As most of you may know, Fox News has decided to exclude Ron Paul from all future debates, including the January 6th presidential forum. Fox News' corporate sponsors would no doubt be interested to know that, due to their affiliation with a corrupt and biased network, we are boycotting their products. Here is a list of contact information for Fox News' sponsors. Please write to them to voice your disapproval of Fox News' decision to exclude a legitimate presidential candidate. www.debone.com/boycottFoxNewsSponsors.html

Comment by Jacob on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 13:31:00 EST

The message and the broadcast power behind it clearly favor Ron Paul's agenda. You must understand that a tin foil hat is intended to keep broadcast wave lengths of the electromagnetic spectrum from penetrating the skull -- those who don't get the Ron Paul message don't get it because their skulls are not being penetrated -- hence they are wearing the tin foil. Take off the tin foil and you will get Ron Paul's message.

Comment by Silver Surfer on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:25:23 EST

"It should be clear that Ron Paul's detractors already are wearing tin foil hats. So, who you think needs one?" You, clearly, although I suspect you already have one as it takes an awful lot to penetrate that thick skull.

Comment by Clavos on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:12:33 EST

Not to worry, Doc. It really doesn't matter. Being Aztecs, they'll be late to the game and will lose by default.

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:06:50 EST

STM on surfing: ...Hawaiians (who, believe it or not, compete as Hawaiians not Americans)... Probably because they invented the sport. Same reason the Iroquois Nation gets to field their own lacrosse team. Personally, I'm looking forward to the inaugural World Cup of that basketball-like Aztec sport where the winning captain got his head cut off. Now there's motivation for you. Although if the Aztecs get to have their own national team, what would their national anthem be?

Comment by Jacob on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Sun, 16 Dec 2007 01:12:56 EST

"I think I'm gonna start manufacturing tin foil hats" -- Clavos Why? Understand that a tin foil hat is intended to keep broadcast wave lengths of the electromagnetic spectrum from penetrating the skull -- and that the message here and the broadcast power behind it favor Ron Paul's agenda. It should be clear that Ron Paul's detractors already are wearing tin foil hats. So, who you think needs one?

Comment by Irene Wagner on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Sat, 15 Dec 2007 19:46:13 EST

STM in #24: On the UN issue alone, as the US has the right of veto as a permanent member of the security council, so to leave the UN would actually be far more dangerous to the US than staying. So did anyone think that one through? That's what worries me about Paul and his followers." STM, if the UN Security Council is so full of thugs that the US' permanent presence in it is required to avert something "far more dangerous to the US than staying", doesn't that say something about the nature of the UN itself? Why should the US participate in, and hold itself accountable to the edicts of, and provide real estate in NYC for the meetings of, a body comprised almost entirely of representatives whom Americans neither elected nor appointed, the interests of the most influential of which are, as you said, antithetical to the well-being of the United States? Maintaining national sovereignty and holding to a policy of noninterventionism don't preclude international cooperation.

Comment by Mick Russom on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Sat, 15 Dec 2007 06:11:56 EST

Drink LiberTEA at the Teaparty, Dec 16, 2007. Drink it for the first time. All other candidates DENY LIBERTY. Ron Paul is the greatest candidate I've ever seen. Consistent for 30 years. No flip flops. We are done with WAR, we want a real currency, we want peace, we want the welfare-state for the military industrial complex to END, we want to fix America and stop policing the world and to stop the authoritarian oppression here NOW. Here is what the US Government without Ron Paul in charge has done to us: - 9 trillion in debt - 850 billion trade deficit - War in Iraq - War in Afghanistan - Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda alive - Fomenting War with Iran - 12.25 trillion M3 money supply, and expanding (massive inflation) Ron Paul's record is crystal clean perfect and consistent. He takes no money from anyone but people and constituents. He is as pure as they come. One of my favorite quotes about Dr. Paul, "You're working for the most honest man in Congress." That was John McCain speaking to Kent Snyder in 1988.

Comment by Alex Merced on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 07:05:11 EST

Hello Fellow Freedom Fan, As you know a movement has ignited in this country behind presidential candidate Ron Paul, bringing the issues of Liberty to the forefront of politics today. This is a new momentum that all of us must take advantage of in helping get Libertarians, Republicans, Constitutionalists and other Liberty minded candidates into offices to change the course of this country. We must also inform the uninformed on the many issues surrounding Liberty, Individualism, Austrian Economics, and the US Constitution. So Please join the Liberty Independence Alliance. - Many videos on Libertarian topics to use to educate new people - a grassroots social network to mobilize voters, we encourage people to start groups for their congressional district - Media Contests, featured conversations in the forums, and blogging Join us, and if all of us can do our part to mobilize every Congressional District in this countrys change will be coming very very soon. - Alex Merced Founder of the Liberty Independence Alliance

Comment by Dave Nalle on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:46:02 EST

Paul we've been over this before. Robert Pastor does NOT speak for the CFR. The CFR is a diverse group and Pastor is just one member whose peculiar beliefs do not represent the organization as many other members have stated numerous times. As for your NAFTA super corridor link, it's a classic example of how conspiracy theories get generated from zero real evidence. So you found a site which points out the routes which will have additional traffic because of NAFTA. How exactly is wanting to be prepared for more traffic flow into the US as result of a trade treaty a conspiracy? How do better traffic flow and cheaper vegetables in my local market threaten my rights or take away our national sovereignty? The reason i belittle conspiracy promotors is simple. They're dangerous fools and to treat them like anything else is to lend them a legitimacy and respect which they certainly don't deserve. Dave

Comment by Theresa on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:39:08 EST

BTW, it doesn't end with the presidential race, not by a long shot! The movement is spilling over into everyday life. We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore! FU Frank Luntz.

Comment by Theresa on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:33:48 EST

Will they actually vote LOL, every supporter I know is. I might not wave signs, or pass out literature, I might not have the money to donate to the campaign, but I got all my family to register to vote in the primaries (8) who never vote plus myself. We'll all be there voting for Ron Paul Move outta the way, here us roar!

Comment by neil on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:56:12 EST

Ron Paul baby! woohoo.. "Silence is golden, untill it's about freedom then it is yellow". -Ben Franklin.... i love the article Kimberly.. much love N.G.

Comment by neil on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:56:11 EST

Ron Paul baby! woohoo.. "Silence is golden, untill it's about freedom then it is yellow". -Ben Franklin.... i love the article Kimberly.. much love N.G.

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:37:56 EST

Kimberly, This was a well written campaign ad. I hope the boys at the Paul for 2008 Committee paid you for it. You certainly earned the money. I have no dog in America's little greyhound race - except to note that the contenders are mostly just that - dogs. Paul looks better than the rest in some ways, but as far as foreign policy goes, the oil and banking establishment will stand in his way, should he get chosen.

Comment by Paul on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:36:30 EST

Leane: "They've started talking about the NAFTA corridor, and putting it on government websites." Dave Nalle: "Really? Hit us with a link, would you? I'm wondering how it's going to get to Canada with every state between Texas and the Canadian border refusing to participate." Me: NAFTA Trade Corridors & State Truck Standards. I also cannot help but notice how Mr. Nalle frequently belittles and chastises those that he disagrees with. As in the following quote: "Ooh look, Leane posted a whole bunch of delusional conspiracy claptrap." If anyone on here is delusional I suggest that it is you Mr. Nalle. The NAU was conceived in full by Mr. Robert Pastor on behalf of the CFR. Here is a short quote from some testimony he gave before the US senate. "The U.S. Congress should also merge the U.S.-Mexican and U.S.-Canadian interparliamentary groups into a single "North American Parliamentary Group." A third institution should be a "Permanent Tribunal on Trade and Investment." NAFTA established ad hoc dispute panels, but it has become difficult to find experts who do not have a conflict of interest to arbitrate conflicts. A permanent court would permit the accumulation of precedent and lay the groundwork for North American business law." Mr. Nalle also said in a related article recently and I quote, "Oh, and as for Robert Pastor, I do agree that he has some very dangerous ideas. However even people in the CFR don't take him seriously and certainly no one is interested in implementing his more radical suggestions." Um Dave, Robert Pastor is IN the CFR. Dave also said: "Your mistake is in thinking that knowing their origins would trouble me at all. I know exactly where the CFR came from, what it does and who's involved in it, and so long as it remains a fairly passive and diverse organization primarily focused on disseminating information and EDUCATING POLITICIANS who are mostly abysmally ignorant of foreign policy it's doing good work. Hmmm, are Fred Thompson, Guliani, Bill Clinton, and McCain educating politicians Dave?? Last time I checked they were POLITICIANS, and yes they are all in the CFR. As I have said in previous discussions, Dave Nalle is in fact a conspiracy theorist, and actually BELIEVES that 19 arabs from SAUDI ARABIA, actually fooled, and beat the defenses of the mightiest military machine in the history of the world!! Now that is what I call delusional!! If your going to be a conspiracy theorist Dave, and YOU are, I suggest you start doing your homework there bubba, cause your wayyyyyyyyyyy behind. :)

Comment by Dave Nalle on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:01:06 EST

I've read the S.P.P. And I've also read the freedom of information act request from the meeting that they kept silent about in Banff Alberta. Oooh, secret meetings. They're always secret conspiracies when you're not invited, right? You might want to take the time to research that yourself. No offence, but the S.P.P. myths and facts page claims that the NAFTA corridor is a myth. Thing is, they cant hide it anymore, and as I've mentioned, it's on our gov. web sites. Do some research, the world is a lot bigger than your borders. (but perhaps not for long) I have done the research, Leane. The fact that a proposal for a central continental highway has been made doesn't mean that it exists or will ever exist. People propose all sorts of things all the time. It doesn't mean that they ever went beyond proposals or vague ideas. There have been proposals for a highway from Texas to Canada going back to the 1970s. However, there has never been any passed federal legislation to build such a highway, nor has any state except for Texas passed anything to build even a part of such a highway, that being the Trans Texas Corridor, a project which is in a great deal of trouble and will likely never be built. Some states neighboring Texas have actually gone so far as to consider legislation refusing to participate in any such program and have blocked a variety of related highway programs because of fear of an expansion of the TTC into their territory. The 'NAFTA Superhighway', such as it is, is a proposal to use existing roads and improve infrastructure from Texas to other parts of the country. It's a proposal from a NGO called NASCO which is basically a business lobbying group and has no governmental power or authority. You ought to read up on it and find out some of the facts before promoting the ridiculous theories spread by people like Jerome Corsi and Lou Dobbs. Dave

Comment by STM on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 03:24:42 EST

Leanne: "Our laws are getting harmonized, and thanks to the Northcom Agreement, our militaries are tied." Your militaries have been tied since 1917, when the US entered WWI - the same as they've been tied with the militaries of Australia, Britain, New Zealand and a few others to boot. My father in-law was a flyer in the RAF and trained in the United States - before the US entered the war. Other mates of his went to Canada instead. But the co-operation actually goes all the way back to the treaty of Ghent (1815), which set the stage for these enduring alliances after the War of 1812. And the reason you laws are becoming harmonised is because they've been harmonised since, oh, about 1700. You might as well say the laws of Britain, Australia, New Zealand (and a few other countries) are harmonised with those of the US and Canada too if you are going to mount that silly argument. The reason: although slightly different in function rather than form, the laws essentially come from the same place: English law, especially in the criminal jurisdictions (and many civil ones too, including slander, libel and defamation). Even today, US judges on occasion (rarely, though, and against some prevailing legal thought in the US) will refer back to the English law that held sway prior to independence. Lo and behold, so do Canadian judges. And Australian ones. And New Zealand ones. And British ones. You have a shared history when it comes to this stuff. That shoots down two of your main arguments. The US and Canada are two totally separate nations, and always will be (while the people of Canada and the US choose it that way). What, do you think America is going to invade?? Please ... do me a fu.king favour Leane. The fact that they hold common values and value each other's friendship and the trade opportunities that arise because of that is just a bonus for both. You should know by now that Canada doesn't do anything the Canadian people don't want to do. Iraq might be the classic example there. You are being really silly Leane ... at the very least, go back and have a look at the history books.

Comment by STM on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 02:59:45 EST

Clav: "I think I'm gonna start manufacturing tin foil hats". I knew a mad guy once at the beach who used to wear a wetsuit hood nicely accessorised with a full-face motorcycle helmet - for extra double protection from radio waves. You can imagine how that went down on a 40C day. Seemed to work well, though. The only person he ever spoke to was himself, as everyone else just pissed off in the opposite direction whenever he came within coo-ee (Strine for: close).

Comment by STM on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 02:22:49 EST

Clav: "No surf worthy of the name, though" Sebastian Inlet up north a bit. Gets all time, on occasions. A couple of other Florida spots aren't too bad ... and the place has produced two world champs: Kelly Slater, far and above the best ever, no sh.t, and Lisa Anderson, who ran away from home because her mum wouldn't let her surf - and she becomes the women's world champ a few years back. Still goes pretty good too, the last time I saw her. Slater, though, he's on a different planet. He changed competitive surfing forever because he was so far ahead of the pack. An Aussie won the world title this year, Mick Fanning from Queensland, after years of domination by the Americans and Hawaiians (who, believe it or not, compete as Hawaiians not Americans, showing excellent taste by using the State flag - which of course, has a very nice Union Jack in the corner :)

Comment by leanne on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 02:00:13 EST

I've read the S.P.P. And I've also read the freedom of information act request from the meeting that they kept silent about in Banff Alberta. You might want to take the time to research that yourself. No offence, but the S.P.P. myths and facts page claims that the NAFTA corridor is a myth. Thing is, they cant hide it anymore, and as I've mentioned, it's on our gov. web sites. Do some research, the world is a lot bigger than your borders. (but perhaps not for long)

Comment by Clavos on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:44:19 EST

Re #32: I think I'm gonna start manufacturing tin foil hats. Looks like a growth industry.

Comment by Dave Nalle on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:42:00 EST

Ooh look, Leane posted a whole bunch of delusional conspiracy claptrap. People who have done more with their time than watch the msm talk about Britney Spears underwear If you were paying proper attention you'd know it was her lack of underwear which was the issue. know that the corruption involved is downright scary. Please, this isn't a slam against anyone. Take the time to research these things, and then come to your own conclusions. Who did your research for you? Alex Jones? Ron Paul isn't about isolationisim of the 30's. He's about sovereignty of the United States. By the way I'm not an American citizen, but I can tell you, that he's right on the money about the CFR's plan for a North American Union.. Except that the CFR doesn't HAVE plans and there is no North American Union. The S.P.P was hotly criticized in Canada, with huge protests across the country. Nice to know Canadians can be gullible fools too. Have you read the SPP? They've started talking about the NAFTA corridor, and putting it on government websites. Really? Hit us with a link, would you? I'm wondering how it's going to get to Canada with every state between Texas and the Canadian border refusing to participate. Our laws are getting harmonized, and thanks to the Northcom Agreement, our militaries are tied. NORTHCOM is the same as SOUTHCOM and CENTCOM and EUCOM, designed to coordinate US Military operations in North America if need arises. It's a response to the perceived failure of the military to respond effectively to crises like 9/11 and Katrina. It doesn't really involve the Canadians in any substantive way. The Fed is destroying the value of your dollar, Which is a deliberate strategy designed to improve our balance of trade and it's been highly effective. and in a few years, when they bring up the Amero, there will be citizens who will beg for it. Really? Can you find a single legitimate source of information that documents any actual governmental plan for a regional currency? OR... you can vote for Ron Paul, and keep your country, constitution, and your dollar, which if backed, will make you the envy of the world. Voting for Ron Paul is fine, but why not do it for real reasons rather than based on paranoid fantasies? Living in the modern world doesn't mean giving up your country . It doesn't mean protecting the outer boundries of north America only, as the S.P.P. pushes forth.(why do you think Bush isn't protecting the borders?) Because immigration is good for the economy, duh. As for protecting the 'outer borders', the continental ports of entry are far better points of interdiction for terrorists than the thousands of miles of land border. Living in a modern world means looking back on the past century, and realizing that you've been boondoggled, and doing something about it.Please look up the many reports from lou Dobbs of cnn on the S.P.P, on youtube And then laugh along with the rest of the sane people as Lou trots out lie after lie. Instead of listening to Dobbs, go read the SPP yourself and make up your mind based on actual facts. Dave

Comment by mketcher on Why Has Ron Paul Lit the World On Fire?

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:39:22 EST

Tired of the same-old song-and-dance from your president and news media? See this YouTube excerpt from the award-winning rock musical, Song of the Dead. It's a great satire on the president, the MSM, and the war on terror. The filmmaker is giving a share of his profits from the feature film to the Ron Paul campaign