Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty"

Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

Message

PolarBear -> Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 10:51:21 AM)
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/ Finally, some sanity!

JimboFletch -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 11:03:43 AM)
At least Hillary accepted that she hadn't been selected by people with her political slant. Even Mr. Huckabee accepted that he wasn't the choice of conservatives. But Mr. Paul with the poorest showing of the major contenders is going to create the 21st century version of the Bull Moose Party because he's not man enough to accept defeat. I won't ever vote for Mr. Paul for being such a little man like that.

PolarBear -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 1:05:53 PM)
Paul isn't running anymore ... but the campaign for limited government must continue. This project aims to get true small-government conservatives elected at every level. Seems like the right way to do it to me! And he's doing it within the Republican Party, not as a third party. If this takes off, maybe there is hope for the GOP yet. If it doesn't, I'll be bolting to the Libertarians.

Solus -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 1:35:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JimboFletch At least Hillary accepted that she hadn't been selected by people with her political slant. Even Mr. Huckabee accepted that he wasn't the choice of conservatives. But Mr. Paul with the poorest showing of the major contenders is going to create the 21st century version of the Bull Moose Party because he's not man enough to accept defeat. I won't ever vote for Mr. Paul for being such a little man like that. What are you talking about? Ron Paul knew that he couldn't win and he has said so numerous times that his only goal was to educate people with what was going on, and to motivate them to do something about it. but I guess you are to "little of a man" to find that out for yourself.

JimboFletch -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 1:48:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Solus What are you talking about? Ron Paul knew that he couldn't win and he has said so numerous times that his only goal was to educate people with what was going on, and to motivate them to do something about it... I guess he failed to meet his goal then. Calling me names doesn't make me any more curious than before. You've never been in sales, right?

cow451 -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 1:52:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PolarBear Paul isn't running anymore ... but the campaign for limited government must continue. This project aims to get true small-government conservatives elected at every level. Seems like the right way to do it to me! And he's doing it within the Republican Party, not as a third party. If this takes off, maybe there is hope for the GOP yet. If it doesn't, I'll be bolting to the Libertarians. Maybe the GOP and the Libertarians could merge. That would increase the percentage of of people that identify themselves as Republicans from 31.6% to 31.61%.

stamper_ben -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 1:54:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PolarBear Paul isn't running anymore ... but the campaign for limited government must continue. This project aims to get true small-government conservatives elected at every level. Seems like the right way to do it to me! And he's doing it within the Republican Party, not as a third party. If this takes off, maybe there is hope for the GOP yet. If it doesn't, I'll be bolting to the Libertarians. I will agree that there HAS to be change in the GOP and it MUST begin at the local level. If Dr. Paul can help to bring about that change then my hat is off to him. [sm=catinhatsmile.gif][sm=chef.gif][sm=cowboy.gif][sm=farmersmile.gif]<---(Take your pick as to what hat it will be.)

Solus -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 2:00:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JimboFletch quote: ORIGINAL: Solus What are you talking about? Ron Paul knew that he couldn't win and he has said so numerous times that his only goal was to educate people with what was going on, and to motivate them to do something about it... I guess he failed to meet his goal then. Calling me names doesn't make me any more curious than before. You've never been in sales, right? Calling Ron Paul names doesn't strengthen your case. Bob Barr is predicted to get anywhere from 4% to 8% in the general election. But now that Ron Paul has withdrawn and started the Campaign for Liberty I expect the numbers will increase.

JimboFletch -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 2:12:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Solus Calling Ron Paul names doesn't strengthen your case... He's not the one you're supposedly trying to sell his movement to. I'll confess that I didn't dig deep enough on the home page to see that his intent is to work within the Republican party. My eye's glazed over before I saw that and the OP gave no info before going in. That's not very effective communication. But if he can moderate the party from within, then I congratulate rather than criticize him.

Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 2:20:55 PM)
Just out of curiosity, when did Ron Paul withdraw from the race? The last I heard (a couple of weeks back) he had not withdrawn in spite of the fact that McCain had clinched the nomination.

Solus -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 2:21:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky Just out of curiosity, when did Ron Paul withdraw from the race? The last I heard (a couple of weeks back) he had not withdrawn in spite of the fact that McCain had clinched the nomination. He suspended his campaign last night.

Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 2:23:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Solus quote: ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky Just out of curiosity, when did Ron Paul withdraw from the race? The last I heard (a couple of weeks back) he had not withdrawn in spite of the fact that McCain had clinched the nomination. He suspended his campaign last night. That's cool! I just hadn't heard about it yet. Thanks for the info!

Solus -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 2:29:44 PM)
Although I wish he had gotten the GOP nomination I am glad that he has started this and that he will endorse Bob Barr.

Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 2:35:07 PM)
I like Barr's stance on most issues but I cannot bring myself to support him simply because of the Libertarian Party's platform which supports abortion rights. I just can't get past that issue because abortion is murder, plain and simple. If he was running under a different party banner, then I could probably get behind him.

Solus -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/13/2008 2:39:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky I like Barr's stance on most issues but I cannot bring myself to support him simply because of the Libertarian Party's platform which supports abortion rights. I just can't get past that issue because abortion is murder, plain and simple. If he was running under a different party banner, then I could probably get behind him. I agree with you on the abortion issue. but that does not influence my voting for him at all. Bob Barr is against it. I don't care what party someone is, I vote for the what the person stands for, not what the party stands for.

PolarBear -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/14/2008 10:19:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Solus I agree with you on the abortion issue. but that does not influence my voting for him at all. Bob Barr is against it. I don't care what party someone is, I vote for the what the person stands for, not what the party stands for. Absolutely! I think I could personally even vote for a "normal" Libertarian because the approach they take to the issue is much different than, say, a liberal Democrat. The Democrats just want it to be legal for reasons probably involving power, or possibly just because it goes against God's will and leftists tend to flock to those sorts of things. Libertarians don't support it for those reasons, but simply because they believe the government shouldn't be telling people what to do as long as it doesn't hurt another individual. They are of course mistaken that abortion doesn't hurt another individual, and there is a good sized "Libertarians for Life" group for that reason. When Libertarians realize that pro-life is consistent with their positions, they'll admit it.

JimboFletch -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/16/2008 9:38:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PolarBear quote: ORIGINAL: Solus I agree with you on the abortion issue. but that does not influence my voting for him at all. Bob Barr is against it. I don't care what party someone is, I vote for the what the person stands for, not what the party stands for. Absolutely! I think I could personally even vote for a "normal" Libertarian because the approach they take to the issue is much different than, say, a liberal Democrat. The Democrats just want it to be legal for reasons probably involving power, or possibly just because it goes against God's will and leftists tend to flock to those sorts of things. Libertarians don't support it for those reasons, but simply because they believe the government shouldn't be telling people what to do as long as it doesn't hurt another individual. They are of course mistaken that abortion doesn't hurt another individual, and there is a good sized "Libertarians for Life" group for that reason. When Libertarians realize that pro-life is consistent with their positions, they'll admit it. Why is this slippery-slope of settling for a party that goes against your princilples superior to those voting for the major parties? If you post enough, you will simply prove my premise again and again that every single voter settles in one way or another.

PolarBear -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/16/2008 1:24:57 PM)
Did you even read the post? There is another major difference between Libertarians and Democrats on the issue of abortion. Democrats want to take your money and use it to fund programs that promote (or do!) abortions both in the States and overseas. Needless to say, that is despicable, rotten to the core. Libertarians will have none of that. I am completely convinced that true Libertarianism MUST be pro-life. The fact that most of them don't recognize that now is unfortunate.

Solus -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/16/2008 1:51:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JimboFletch quote: ORIGINAL: PolarBear quote: ORIGINAL: Solus I agree with you on the abortion issue. but that does not influence my voting for him at all. Bob Barr is against it. I don't care what party someone is, I vote for the what the person stands for, not what the party stands for. Absolutely! I think I could personally even vote for a "normal" Libertarian because the approach they take to the issue is much different than, say, a liberal Democrat. The Democrats just want it to be legal for reasons probably involving power, or possibly just because it goes against God's will and leftists tend to flock to those sorts of things. Libertarians don't support it for those reasons, but simply because they believe the government shouldn't be telling people what to do as long as it doesn't hurt another individual. They are of course mistaken that abortion doesn't hurt another individual, and there is a good sized "Libertarians for Life" group for that reason. When Libertarians realize that pro-life is consistent with their positions, they'll admit it. Why is this slippery-slope of settling for a party that goes against your princilples superior to those voting for the major parties? If you post enough, you will simply prove my premise again and again that every single voter settles in one way or another. I am not "settling for a party". I am voting for Bob Barr because of his views. I couldn't care less about someones political party, I care about their views.

JimboFletch -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/16/2008 2:24:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Solus I am not "settling for a party". I am voting for Bob Barr because of his views. I couldn't care less about someones political party, I care about their views. I'm tickled pink for you Solus, but I was addressing PolarBear. I'll have to remember to remove all but the obvious poster's comments when quoting. Sorry for bothering you...

JimboFletch -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/16/2008 2:25:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PolarBear Did you even read the post? Yes. Did you spill oatmeal on your shirt this morning?

thomas2008 -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/18/2008 12:40:10 PM)
I just don't understand why all the bickering about Paul because he refuses to endorse John McCain. Why should Dr. Paul compromise his views and endorse someone who has different views? Then someone says that Ron Paul is... "not man enough to accept defeat." Why misjudge Ron Paul? Why should he support any of the contenders? None of them were fair enough to him during the debates. Why? John McCain doesn't deserve a single red cent of endorsement from Ron Paul or myself. You say Ron Paul isn't man enough to accept defeat? Ron Paul was the only person running for President that actually cared about this country those who support him. John McCain don't care, if he did he wouldn't support the failed Bush foreign policy that is killing our men and women. How many times have we heard McCain or Obama even say the word LIBERTY, FREEDOM, CONSTITUTION? They haven't said the much or at all, probably because the big one in those three is something that no President listens to anymore. The Constitution.

JimboFletch -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/18/2008 3:55:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thomas2008 ...How many times have we heard McCain or Obama even say the word LIBERTY, FREEDOM, CONSTITUTION?... But Obama wears a Flag pin. [8D] Sometimes.

its_GO_time -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/27/2008 12:18:37 PM)
His new book is very good. Sadly for some, it dosen't come in the 7 second sound-bite version, and there's no pop-ups, or pictures.

cog41 -> RE: Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" (6/28/2008 8:48:50 AM)
I agree with voting for their beliefs and not their party affliation. I only wish we had more representatives and senators who believed in limited government. As voters we must vote our beliefs and quit supporting parties. Those who are unelectable would then become electable. Pray hard and keep your powder dry. We are in for bumpy role.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI