Comments on: Ron Paul for President

By: Joseph

Joseph — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:23:28 +0000

Ae least with Ron Paul,I do not have to vote for the lesser of two evils. It will not be a sin to vote for him, so till he says something againsed Gods law, I’m going to get regestered and vote and get others to vote likewise! Everything is starting to happen so fast,(one more”terrorist attack” were done) he may be our last hope for awhile. Get involved this time get three guys to get three guys to commit, I remember in high school, we voted in the biggiest doofis for president, HE DIDEN”T EVEN RUN!!

By: Ben

Ben — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 01:02:37 +0000

I’d love to see Paul/Hagel but I don’t think that’s going to happen. Although if Paul manages to drum up a bit of support during the primaries we may well see Hagel/Paul. That would be pretty amazing despite Hagel’s many flaws. And let’s face it, it’s a lot better than the Bush/Cheney Hegemaniacs or, god forbid, McCain.

By: peterd

peterd — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 00:43:50 +0000

Of all the crap we see on TV, all the fake news fake people and misinformed idiots, finally someone comes along that believes in the will of the people, and he’s highly intelligent and educated .. in my 30years on this earth, i’ve only had two heros, one is Jim Garrison, the other is Ron Paul. Both willing to stand up for truth and go against the heard despite what the cost to themselves might be.

By: Jimunro

Jimunro — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 06:55:47 +0000

Thank you Nicholas.

By: nicholas gray

nicholas gray — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 01:58:45 +0000

Some more good news- Ron Paul co-wrote a book in favour of the Gold Standard!!!!!! Read all about it at Mises Economic Blog.
Jimunro, being moderated means that someone cares enough about what you write that they will actually read it! Someone, somewhere, is actually reading your writing! If you only reach one person, it’s still been worthwhile! Hasn’t it?

By: Jimunro

Jimunro — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 12:34:32 +0000

Ps I have not been moderated before. If it is a new proceedure i can accept that, if on the other hand, you feel that I have done something to warrant it, please contact me and let me know what it was.

By: Jimunro

Jimunro — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:50:37 +0000

In America the Republican Party has within it a considerable Libertarian element, many of whom self identify as Libertarian, so the situation is different there. Whereas here Liberals and Libertarians are totaly seperate entities, and likely to remain so, there seems to be a fair amount of cross polination between Libertarians and Republicans, except for the more fundamentalist types among the two groups.

The USA was founded on libertarian principles, and the Republicans tend to echo this, while the Democrats tend to be a fairly standard leftist, nanny-state party.

The group that I involve myself in is Mainstream Libertarian, http://www.mainstreamlibertarian.com/ with a blog at
http://www.libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/

This site tends to support Guiliani, who himself seems to have good libertarian credentials, however other candidates, both Libertarian and Libertarian orientated Republican, get coverage.

Another site which may be of interest, is the Republican Liberty Caucus,
http://www.republicanliberty.org/libdex/li_look.asp
which scores federal politicians on personal and economic liberty, and rates them from libertarian through to authoritarian. I think the cutoff point for “Libertarian” should be higher but the people do lean that way.

If the Republicans wish to win the presidency, and retrieve the senate and house they will have to stand candidates who are fiscally conservative, and against big government, which is as much to blame for their current situation as the war.

By: nicholas gray

nicholas gray — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 07:24:44 +0000

Americans are so slow! While Aussie libers have been drooling over Ron for some time, they’ve only just noticed him at The Blog, in Mises.org! How far behind the times is that? There’s an item extolling his good points at that site. What took them so long?

By: Daniel

Daniel — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 07:31:55 +0000

If Ron gets any reasonable tv time, he will win the presidency, there is no question about it, its simply impossible to not want a man like him to be president. All he wants is to restore and reinforce the laws which increase individual prosperity and safety from big government. That is a winning proposition for the population from every angle.

The big struggle is simply to get him tv time. The second big struggle is for Ron to maintain effective security around himself, because he will be pitted against the establishment during his government reform.

He is a founding father of the 21st century, that much is clear.

Will America, wake up for once and choose the right candidate. How many more decades of total crap will the nation put up with? Having been sedated by the welfare state and the mind numbing media, I dont blame them. At the end of the day, it simply comes down to this, do you want the real definition of liberty and prosperity in your life or not? If you want maximum chance to achieve so called American Dream, then that can only be achieved with minimum government intrusion in your personal and financial affairs. I am not advocating anarchy, simply the correct balance between population and government.

By: terje (say tay-a)

terje (say tay-a) — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 04:50:41 +0000

David,

It is not what he thinks of homosexuals that makes him a libertarian or not. It is what he thinks the government should do about it. Mostly he seems to think the Federal government in the US should stay out of it and let the states decide. Which is about as Libertarian as you will get from any US President.

Regards,
Terje.