A New Hope for our country

Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
248
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Valdosta GA
#1
Been doing lots of candidate research lately. I'm shocked that integrity such as this can be a contender for the White House in this day and age. He's got my support, and I'm not usually politically involved because I've been so disgusted over the last 15 years. Watch this video, make your own decision. If you agree please please repost. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG2PUZoukfA
 

Zoom

Twin 2.0
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
40,739
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
41
Location
Denver, CO
#2
I've got a few questions about him before I start talking about support for anyone. If the election was held tomorrow, I would be abstaining from voting because I either don't like or don't know enough about the candidates to vote and I refuse to vote along party lines "just because". We've seen the mess that's made.
 

GlassOnion

Thanks, and Gig 'em.
Joined
Oct 29, 2005
Messages
9,065
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Tejas
#3
I'd vote for him I think. I don't know about his education platform. Abolish the federal government control over education. Revert control of schools to parents and students? Give the students the option to go to school?

Well I guess the world does need more hamburger flippers. At least the people going to school will want to be there, or will have decent parents who make them. The rest can just run wild through the streets or whatever.
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
248
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Valdosta GA
#4
LOL @ run wild through the streets. :) If they want to bad enough that's exactly what they do anyway I suppose. I do agree with you though- and the question I have for him would be this: How does he plan on implementing a national standard for education? Will he? What's the perks for the best state scores since he wants to put education control into states? I'd like to hear more about it.
 

Boemy

New Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
2,481
Likes
0
Points
0
#5
Ron Paul? He's the one who, a few years ago, said that crime in America has a color, and it's black.

So, yeah, the bigot won't get my vote.
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
248
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Valdosta GA
#9
Ron Paul on racism: From www.RonPaul2008.com

A nation that once prided itself on a sense of rugged individualism has become uncomfortably obsessed with racial group identities.

The collectivist mindset is at the heart of racism.

Government as an institution is particularly ill-suited to combat bigotry. Bigotry at its essence is a problem of the heart, and we cannot change people's hearts by passing more laws and regulations.

It is the federal government that most divides us by race, class, religion, and gender. Through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, government plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails. Government "benevolence" crowds out genuine goodwill by institutionalizing group thinking, thus making each group suspicious that others are receiving more of the government loot. This leads to resentment and hostility among us.

Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism.

The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence - not skin color, gender, or ethnicity.

In a free society, every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty.
 

Boemy

New Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
2,481
Likes
0
Points
0
#10
Ron Paul said:
Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely crimina
Ron Paul said:
We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such.
These quotes are from his 1992 newsletter. He also voted against the Civil Rights Act. He also has several notable Neo-Nazis supporting his campaign, including Will Williams (southern regional leader for the National Alliance Party, the largest Neo-Nazi group in the US.) Ron Paul's getting donations from these people . . . Why isn't he throwing the money back in their ugly faces and kicking them in the politcal nads?

LuvinBullies said:
Government as an institution is particularly ill-suited to combat bigotry. Bigotry at its essence is a problem of the heart, and we cannot change people's hearts by passing more laws and regulations.
Government as an institution is ideally suited to combat bigotry. Here's an example that touches on sexism, rather than racism.

Yesterday at work a retiree printed up a picture of herself with a little story about how she had come to work there, at the large utility company.

In 1965 she got a job with the company. At the time, WWP only hired women if they were unmarried or if their husbands were in the armed services. Well, fortunately her husband was in the air force so she got the job at $1.50 an hour. She drove 80 miles to work round trip every day.

The company also fired pregnant women, when they were in their fifth month. This woman had five children and every time she was fired, but she was one of the lucky ones because they rehired her each time. But each time she had to start from the bottom again, with the minimum pay, no health benefits, and no vacation. After her last child was born, in 1977, the laws changed with the Anti-Discrimination Act. Companies could no longer refuse to hire women because they might start families or get pregnant.

And today the Billing Department and Accounting Department of that company are easily 80% female.

Nothing was preventing that company from hiring women. They were free to "see women as individuals" and "reward individual achievements" by women. But they didn't. They never changed until the government said, "Hey--you can't do that. Stop."
 

GlassOnion

Thanks, and Gig 'em.
Joined
Oct 29, 2005
Messages
9,065
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Tejas
#11
Nothing was preventing that company from hiring women. They were free to "see women as individuals" and "reward individual achievements" by women. But they didn't. They never changed until the government said, "Hey--you can't do that. Stop."
Yah let's completely disregard the change in times that was going on too. It was the 70s, a lot of social changes were being made. The company would have had to change with or without the law.

All we managed to do was let the government step in and tell us who is an acceptable employee that we are or aren't allowed to hire.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
94,266
Likes
3
Points
36
Location
Where the selas blooms
#14
I can't support Ron Paul.

He talks a good game about upholding the Constitution and keeping government out of the private lives of citizens, but it seems he only believes that if it doesn't conflict with his own views.

He's adamantly anti-abortion. Well, fine. Good for him; he's a physician and this is against his professional and personal beliefs and it's admirable that he is willing to take a stand for his beliefs.

However - making this an issue for the government to decide - as he has stated he wishes to do - is in direct contradiction to his professed stance FOR the Constitution and AGAINST the interference of government in the private lives of citizens.

He's just another political hypocrite with his own agenda, talking out of both sides of his mouth.
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
50
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
#15
If Ron Paul would fight terror outside the country, I would support him. He is not perfect, but he is clearly the best choice for those who believe the individual is responsible for their own destiny.

Oh and Boemy... I am going to do something I hate doing, but you inspired me....


:rolleyes:


As long as there are laws that are based on color, there will be racism. The only true antidote is individual liberty, not special programs. Think about it... How many TRILLIONS of dollars has the government spent on the "war on poverty" and other such programs?? Where has it gotten us? Has not every administration since the 60's promised equality? You REALLY think the government is a "perfect" entity to combat racism?

I think you are smarter than that. Don't drink the kool-aid.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top