Power Independence Home 
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register
Power Independence > Good News > Good News > Ron Paul

 Moderated by: Joe Kelley Page:    1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  Next Page Last Page  
New Topic Reply Printer Friendly
Ron Paul  Rating:  Rating
AuthorPost
 Posted: Sat Jan 13th, 2007 02:45 pm
  PM Quote Reply
1st Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.petitiononline.com/Paul2004/petition.html
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Sat Jan 13th, 2007 03:16 pm
  PM Quote Reply
2nd Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/11/AR2007011101424.html

He was one of a handful of Republicans to vote in 2002 against giving President Bush the authority to use military force in Iraq, contending that only Congress had the power to declare war. At times, he has voted against funds for the military.

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 15th, 2007 02:42 pm
  PM Quote Reply
3rd Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul361.html

In coming weeks I plan to introduce legislation that urges the administration to heed the advice of the Iraq Study Group. Dialogue and discussion should replace inflammatory rhetoric and confrontation in our Middle East policy, if we truly seek to defeat violent extremism and terrorism.




January 15, 2007


 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Tue Feb 6th, 2007 03:50 pm
  PM Quote Reply
4th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://wonkette.com/politics/ron-paul/save-america-ron-paul-for-president-228158.php
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Feb 12th, 2007 03:05 pm
  PM Quote Reply
5th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.sobran.com/columns/2007/070125.shtml

 



 President Paul? 




January 25, 2007 


Paul isn’t flamboyant or defiant about it; his style is quiet and reasonable, not combative. Being a maverick isn’t a pose for him. It’s a matter of conscience and logic.

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Wed Feb 21st, 2007 11:24 am
  PM Quote Reply
6th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/phillips1.html

 

Since the big three candidates, McCain, Romney, and Giuliani, are getting all the coverage, Will’s decision to cover a dark horse candidate like Rep. Paul is interesting.






Will vs. Paul on the Constitutional Limits of Government





by Dan Phillips


Will barely musters a constitutional defense for big government. It's as if he doesn’t feel he needs to. He writes, "Even before the Founders’ generation passed from the scene, the government was slipping off the leash that Madison said – and Paul says – the Constitution puts on it." This is unfortunately an unequivocally true statement. So it was. But isn’t that really evidence for the anti-Federalist’s case that the Constitution’s safeguards were insufficient, instead of proof that the Founders didn’t really mean it. Will seems to suggest that all the Founders had their fingers crossed. "Ha, Ha. Fooled you." (An anti-Federalist case can and has been made that the Founders really were up to no good – Patrick Henry’s "I smell a rat!" – but that is not the case Will is making. Will is making the hyper-Federalist case.)


 This is very important:

Will likely finds frequent conservative appeals to the Constitution and limited government insincere and hypocritical, which they no doubt are. Perhaps in that sense Will’s candor is refreshing. I think Will would be happy if Rep. Paul, who actually means what he says, sufficiently embarrasses his "conservative" colleagues out of their frequent invocations of the Constitution when they recognize the true implications of strictly following that document. Let us hope and pray that Rep. Paul’s candidacy has the opposite effect. That instead it embarrasses some "conservatives" into re-adopting the limits contained in a document their stated guiding philosophy used to consider more than a rhetorical flourish.


Last edited on Wed Feb 21st, 2007 11:44 am by Joe Kelley
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Thu Feb 22nd, 2007 10:07 am
  PM Quote Reply
7th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/gutzman1.html

If Berger’s argument from the history of the language the Philadelphia Convention was using were not enough, we have corroboration of this definition from the monarchist-nationalists themselves.

Ahhh...how can you tell if a politician is lying?

Answer: Their mouths are open.

Now - the idea in the article is to support the truth, I think, and that is my point.

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Wed Mar 14th, 2007 01:03 pm
  PM Quote Reply
8th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul374.html

"Group rights" is an oxymoron.

 

Ron Paul is precious.

 

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed Mar 14th, 2007 01:45 pm
  PM Quote Reply
9th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/sabrin5.html

Ron and I first met at a 1982 monetary conference in Washington, DC. Two years later he invited me with other newsletter writers to tour the Federal Reserve, the U.S. Treasury and the Securities and Exchange Commission. In a Paul presidency, the downsizing of government would begin in earnest, two of the three institutions we toured nearly a quarter of century ago would be abolished, and the U.S. Treasury would probably be responsible for maintaining the integrity of a gold-backed dollar. In short, in a Paul presidency, Washington, DC would be less populated, the budget would shrink substantially, taxes would decline markedly, the dollar would be stronger and no American troops would be policing the world.

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Sun Mar 25th, 2007 10:39 am
  PM Quote Reply
10th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://thelibertarian.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/happy-friday/

Don't Steal.

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Mar 26th, 2007 06:34 am
  PM Quote Reply
11th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods63.html

The link is there for anyone to read.

I want to state here and now that my current viewpoint appraises Ron Paul as the least evil in this race to the throne.

I’m running myself as a write in candidate so my vote won’t be wasted on anyone else. For those who feel the need to vote and for those who are searching for accurate data to help them make the least injurious choice, for those individuals, I can offer my current thoughts.

Ron Paul will shackle government down to basics and that is a huge leap forward no matter how severe that road may appear to harm some people. If you must feel sorrow, then, look at your loved ones first. Liberty is not cheap.


 

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Tue Apr 10th, 2007 10:58 am
  PM Quote Reply
12th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul380.html

Certainly it’s true that Mr. Bernanke can drastically affect the economy at the drop of a hat, simply by making decisions about the money supply and interest rates. But why do members of Congress assume this is good? Why do we accept without objection that a small group of people on the Federal Reserve Board wields so much power over our economic well-being? Is centralized, monopoly control over our money even compatible with a supposedly free-market economy?

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Tue Apr 24th, 2007 10:21 am
  PM Quote Reply
13th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul382.html

Congress bears the greater blame for this fiasco. It reneged on its responsibility to declare or not declare war. It transferred this decision-making power to the executive branch, and gave open sanction to anything the president did. In fact the founders diligently tried to prevent the executive from possessing this power, granting it to Congress alone in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution.

 

Certainly we are doing better with her than when we tried to impose our will by force.

 

Do I hear lady Liberty screaming in agony?

 

 

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Tue May 1st, 2007 10:55 am
  PM Quote Reply
14th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul384.html

Fighting over there has nothing to do with preserving freedoms here at home.

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Thu May 3rd, 2007 10:09 am
  PM Quote Reply
15th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.raidersnewsnetwork.com/full.php?news=5134

A candidate such as Paul would bring a different perspective to the debate, he added.

 

Accurate?
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Sat May 5th, 2007 05:49 pm
  PM Quote Reply
16th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/comments?type=story&id=3133938#commentBox

Ron Paul did not just tap dance around invoking Ronald Reagan's name and touching briefly and diplomatically upon Republican talking points in responses carefully scripted by spin doctors. Ron Paul stopped the superficial lip service to Republican "issues" and openly addressed the bare truth in brazen and honest language. Why did ABC not give him even a nod for finally going off-script, as we wish a politician would do, to address what we are all thinking? Is ABC so out of touch with what the people want to see addressed as issues? Is ABC bowing to political pressure to blandly showcase a choreographed play to imagined voters' concerns as determined by some poll? Is ABC just clueless as to what real political and philosophical debate actually entails? ABC needs to do some soul-searching to determine what their basic principles and bottom line are. ABC has failed to even rise to the level of marginalizing truth by excluding mention of Ron Paul's stunning and disquieting evocation of bare and stark reality, something the other politicians carefully avoided for fear of making voters uncomfortable, and potentially losing votes. Give us truth, Ron Paul, and tell us about it, ABC; otherwise, what are you there for?

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Sat May 5th, 2007 05:50 pm
  PM Quote Reply
17th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://news.google.com/news?q=Ron+Paul+debate&hl=en&um=1&sa=X&oi=news_group&resnum=1&ct=title








Ron Paul Wins MSNBC Debate Poll
 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Sat May 5th, 2007 06:06 pm
  PM Quote Reply
18th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18421356/

The above link may be your only chance to have an accurate accounting of your vote.

When I added my vote Ron Paul was winning by 10%.

This type of voting reform is transparent. Think people; what is the opposite of transparent?

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Wed May 9th, 2007 03:36 pm
  PM Quote Reply
19th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=3147940

 
Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who barely registers in public opinion polls of the Republican presidential field, won last Thursday night's debate.
 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Wed May 9th, 2007 03:56 pm
  PM Quote Reply
20th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6399
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
 http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/05/08/jon-stewart-analyzes-the-republican-presidential-debate/

On the light side?

Who expressed a need to end the mass murder (war)?

 

 
Back To Top PM Quote Reply

Current time is 10:34 am Page:    1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  Next Page Last Page    
Power Independence > Good News > Good News > Ron Paul Top


UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems