Lance
Sam James
Josh Adams
fooser
jslef
Terry Woods
Ryan
davenate
Mike O
Brian McConnell
Brian LePort
halldg
Reading on Walden Bookstore
Tyler D.
Hugo
Jon
goesdownbitter
jack3566
ccscoachadams
killerbuffalo
Garnet SpyRon Paul and Duncan Hunter were among the names not invited to a FOX presidential forum in New Hampshire, just two days before the primaries that occur there. After a lot of concern, the NH Republican’s issued a press release regarding this issue, which was a slap in the face to FOX News:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Date: December 31, 2007
Contact: Fergus Cullen, Chairman, New Hampshire Republican Party
NH REPUBLICANS: DON’T LIMIT DEBATE PARTICIPANTS
CONCORD – New Hampshire Republican Party Chairman Fergus Cullen releases the following statement regarding primary weekend debates:
“Limiting the number of candidates who are invited to participate in debates is not consistent with the tradition of the first in the nation primary. The level playing field requires that all candidates be given an equal opportunity to participate – not just a select few determined by the media prior to any votes being cast.”
“Therefore, the New Hampshire Republican Party calls upon all media organizations planning pre-primary debates or forums for both parties to include all recognized major candidates in their events.”
“The New Hampshire Republican Party has notified FOX News of our position, and we are in ongoing discussions with FOX News about having as many candidates as possible participate in the forum scheduled for January 6.”
Filed under: Politics, Republicans, Ron Paul | Tagged: Duncan Hunter, Exluding, FOX News
[...] New Hampshire’s Republicans already have taken a stand against FOX News which threatened to limit participation by GOP candidates. [...]
Great! Now let’s see if the Dems can stand up to WMUR and ABC News. I am calling for Clinton, Obama, and Edwards to refuse to debate until ALL candidates are allowed to participate.
Outstanding. Go Ron Paul! He’s the only Republican worth voting for.
Ron Paul is a fundamentalist creationist. I can’t in good conscience vote for a guy who rejects hundreds of years of science in favor of a storybook assembled by church committee a little more than 300 years ago.
Pile
“Ron Paul is a fundamentalist creationist. I can’t in good conscience vote for a guy who rejects hundreds of years of science in favor of a storybook assembled by church committee a little more than 300 years ago.”
Ron Paul has stated that he is a christian and that the subject is up to debate but not in the political realm. He has also stated and his record reflects that it plays no role in his political quest.
You are using baseless attacks and repeating talking points and if that is the only reason you have to not vote for someone then you are shallow to boot.
Pile, you don’t know what Paul feels about Creationism - if you did, you’d know he simply believes there’s not enough evidence eitherway!
He doesn’t accept Evolution as the answer for EVERYTHING regarding life on earth.
Pile, Ron Paul simply stated that there wasn’t enough evidence or proof to support EITHER position. So it’s not like he’s a creationist. He’s actually looking at the issue more open minded than most people do. Do more research on Ron Paul before you come to these conclusions. Start here..
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/
Pile = PWNED !
At first I thought Dr. Paul was a little “out there”, and I definitely don’t agree with all of his ideas. He is however, IMO, the most intelligent, thoughtful, and consistent of the Rep. candidates.
I feel we need someone on the opposite end of the spectrum to pull this country at least back to center. He has my vote (and I haven’t voted in 24 years).
You can’t in good conscience support a creationist but you can in ignorance support the only scientific field (biology) that ignores the second law of thermodynamics?
You are a hypocrite!
I’m an evolutionist, but I don’t care if Ron Paul believes in creationism, flat earthism or flying spaghetti monsterism. As long as he believes in small government and wants to abolish the IRS, he gets my vote.
Excellent news… now let’s chase the Fox back to it’s den!
Bodie, evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics because the earth is not a closed system. This was never really a strong point because it is based on a misunderstanding of what the laws of thermodynamics actually mean. There are much more interesting points, such as explaining the aid to survival of the appreciation of music. You can start reading about this here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo/probability.html
Ron Paul is a creationist, and a fundamentalist Christian who believes that separation between church and state isn’t called for by the constitution. Check out his article, “The War On Religion”, where he tells us that he believes the founding fathers envisioned a “robustly Christian America”. He’s a states’ rights Huckabee.
He is a dangerous theocrat, just look at the “We The People Act”. It would allow state governments to establish official religions and even bar people from holding office if they are the “wrong” religion.
Plus, there is evidence that DOCTOR PAUL is a racist, his newsletter the RON PAUL SURVIVAL REPORT had such wonderful articles like “Los Angeles Racial Terrorism”, and another which said that 95% of blacks in D.C. are “semi-criminal or entirely criminal”.
With his racist and theocratic leanings, he should be right at home on Fox News.
One thing that you should consider: Dr. Ron Paul is a MEDICAL doctor, not a doctor in basket weaving. He was a commisioned officer in the United States Air Force that was a Flight Surgeon. He may be many things, but he is NOT stupid.
Wouldn’t that be a nice change of pace for a politician?
Abolish the Federal Reserve, a collection of private bankers who control Americans’ livelihoods.
Stop the imperial empire-building BS, especially the wars being fought for Israel.
Stop the fear-mongering, baseless “war on terror” BS used to take away individual rights and liberties.
Restore Habeus Corpus and repeal the Patriot Act.
Shall I go on?
I implore ANYONE who has 2 hours of their life to spare to watch the documentary “America: Freedom to Fascism” …I swear on my mothers grave, sweet sweet baby jesus, allah, and all things, that it is the most eye opening experience since 2girls1cup (I have jokes…Happy NYs)
I was ready to vote for Ron Paul until I learned about his wishy-washy “there isn’t enough evidence to decide” crap about evolution. Look people, it’s the 21st century — evolution is rock-solid science and only hillbillies, religious kooks and idiots still cling to the anti-evolution camp. This means Paul is either:
A) Ignorant (which I doubt)
B) A deluded kook
C) Pandering to his base (the Religious Right)
Who cares if Ron Paul is a creationist? The point is that he realizes his isn’t the only opinion and won’t force his religious beliefs into law.
@Koowan,
Only people ignorant of the real issues in politics would make such an uninformed and irrelevant statement. Please, do the rest of us a favor and don’t vote.
Real issues? You mean like the fact that China is cranking out engineers and scientists while we waste endless tax dollars fighting off creationists from the public schools?
Frankly, it isn’t going to matter who the Republicans nominate. Bush and company have left such a stain on the GOP that even us diehards are mostly consigned to the inevitability of Hillarystein
I read the Paul piece that 4000BABIES mentioned, entitled ” The War on Religion.” It really isn’t that bad, although the last two paragraphs clearly show that Paul is ignorant of the Founding Fathers’ intentions, at least as far as religion is concerned. That does not bode well for someone who claims to be a strict constitutionalist. But the idea that Paul is trying to appeal to the extreme religious right is ridiculous. Further, these things are not part of any agenda. If you were to ask Paul what he would do about his feeling that religion should have a larger role in public life (if that is in fact what he feels, which, judging from his essay, it may well be), he would simply tell you that he would have no say in the matter - it’s a decision that should be left to congress and the courts, not the executive. I’ve listened to enough Ron Paul to know that much.
We’re not going to find the perfect candidate. But we’re at the point where we need to do something, or this country is ruined. A status quo vote by progressives for one of the corporate/Israeli shills like Clinton, Obama, or even Edwards, will lead us down the same path to destruction we’re already on. Kucinich has no shot to win. Paul does. And Paul will bring the troops home and cut the military budget enormously. He hates imperialism and empire-building.
Oh, and eliminating the Fed isn’t such a bad thing either, now is it? :)
Here’s the Paul essay on religion, for those who are interested: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html
Atheist fundamentalists want to wipe out every other ideology or viewpoint. They hate freedom. I’m pretty sure anyone who hates freedom so much that they can’t tolerate someone having a belief different from their own isn’t going to be voting for Ron Paul. I suggest Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney or Hillary Clinton might be more appropriate to such a personality.
Koowan:
If you think Ron Paul is capable of pandering, you just aren’t paying attention.
Evolution and intelligent design are not mutually exclusive (go see the NY museum of natural history’s great exhibit- it explains that evolution is a theory, not fact, and is about recognizing patterns in the fossil record, as opposed to direct “begats” as Popularly portrayed). Evolution does not attempt to explain why (religon), just how (science).
God created a true world, not a magic world.
And, back to the original post, hats off to the NH GOP for at least giving FOX a little lip. Of course, if they really had balls they would pull their sponsorship of the event. Bottom line: Ron needs to win or place in Iowa; then they will have to include him.
Its amazing what happens when you quote full sentences.
Some commenter above said, “where he tells us that he believes the founding fathers envisioned a “robustly Christian America.”
When it goes, “The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America”
Wow, distortion much?
bt,
You are correct of course in pointing out that full sentences should always be quoted, lest the intended message be skewed. And in this case, it certainly makes a difference, as a “robustly Christian America” is different from a “robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America.” However, it is incorrect of Paul to assert that the founders envisioned a robustly Christian America at all, with or without religious tolerance. They were by and large products of the enlightenment, and the religious values they held were more often deist, as opposed to Christian. I am unhappy that Paul has made this mistake, but it won’t change my vote for him.
Thompson isn’t even on the ballot there.
Thompson couldn’t get 500 signatures from real registered voters.
Thompson’s only there to frame the corperate puppets, I mean Mainstream Candidates.
@ally kendall
1. I’m an atheist, and I’d vote for Ron Paul in a heartbeat.
2. “They hate freedom”…snore…you’re boring and not very smart.
Dan, when you said “However, it is incorrect of Paul to assert that the founders envisioned a robustly Christian America at all, with or without religious tolerance.” I think you forgot the pledge of allegiance, the declaration of independence, all our currency & all the artwork on our early government buildings. You’ll find no references to god there. /s
Just because the founders wanted a tolerant and secular society, that does not mean as Ron points out, that they did not admire Christian values. The problem is that the church has long stop advocating wholesome traits such as discipline, charity, sobriety, and tolerance; instead the church of today is just another means of power and control for a select few. So, to confuse the fact that while the founders definitely did not believe in the core doctorines of Christianity, it is patently wrong to believe that they did not hope that all Americans would strive to conduct their lives in the manner that Christianity at the time advocated.
As to the objections over the bill that would give state’s the rights to govern religion: I hate to break it to you, but the Constitution and the First Amendment only apply to the FEDERAL government, unless otherwise specifically stated in the Constitution (Read the 10th Amendment). So, all Ron is really doing is trying to reinterate the rights that the states already have under the Constitution.
Lastly, as with the point above about religion bill, believing that Ron is a Tax Hike Mike St. HuckHillbie on one answer to a yes or no question on evolution is absured, it is knee jerk stupidity like that that elects the current morons we have today in office. Evolution is a big subject, and is composed of a lot more than the theory of Darwin. For example, a current central holding of evolution is that life began spontaniously from a “protein soup” that was cooked justed right. This idea is so central, because without answering how life got here evolution could never claim to have all the answers, that a ton of research is being done right now to try and recreate this beginning of life. Of course, we have no proof this is how life began on earth (it could have just as easily come on a comet like some hold) or even have the faintest idea what the composition of the “protein soup” was or of the other conditions that made this beginning of life possible. So no, evolution is not all rock hard science, and no, there are even many sane evolutionist that do not believe in all of the currently accepted theory of evolution. The most honest answer to the question of do you believe in something, even if you agree with 95% of it, is still no, unless you believe in it 100%. But to assume that just because someone does not buy the whole sales pitch hook, line, and sinker, does not make them ignorant, diluted, or anything else that Ron is accused of being. Wise up, and do your research before you go raving over yes and no answers and out of context one liners.
Oh, and to the guy that said Ron was a racist, bottoms up on the coolaid buddy!
COM2, the words “under God” were added to the pledge on April 22, 1951. the Declaration does make reference to a ‘Creator,’ but no God or christian-specific deity. “In God We Trust” first appeared on the 1864 two-cent coin after our founders were all dead. What artwork are you referring to on early government buildings?
“pledge of allegiance”
Actually they added the god part to that in the 1950s.
Last I checked, the Constitution did not grant the President any powers to make decisions about the origins of the universe.
It did, however, place strong limits on the federal government with respect to privacy, habeas corpus, declaration of war, intellectual property, treaties, and numerous other concerns that are being COMPLETELY IGNORED by both parties.
For the record, Paul isn’t a short-day creationist, he has made the statement (and recently) that he isn’t a cosmologist and doesn’t take a position on the timetable or methods God used in creation.
Compare this to Huckabee and Romney, who IIRC believe in a literal 4004 BC creation.
But in the end, a President’s views on evolution won’t result in us fighting losing wars, borrowing ourselves into a collapsed economy, or destroying the liberties that made this nation great.
Also at issue are serious concerns over state’s rights. Take, for example, California being overridden recently on two issues that should be a state’s right to decide: CO2 emissions and medical use of marijuana.
I’m in Texas. It’s none of my damned business how that state wants to deal with medicine or climate change. Therefore, it’s none of the business of the people I sent to Congress and to the White House.
Given two candidates:
(a) one I disagree with on a few points, but who understands and works within the limits of his office, and;
(b) one I agree with entirely, but who believes the Presidency is a dictatorship and the federal government as a tool to override the will of the states;
I’ll pick (a) every time.
Last I checked the constitution DOES apply to the states. Last I checked the states had to RETIFY the constitution. New states had to ACCEPT the constitution in order to be accepted into the union.
A State law can NOT legally violate your rights. If the constitution ONLY held true for the feds we would have ZERO police protection etc.. anyone who thinks the constitution is limited to the feds is simply uneducated on the matter.
The constitution does NOT grant you rights. Rights can not be GRANTED only privileges can be granted.
Rights are intrinsic. The constitution simply spells out few of these rights (NOT all of them) in such a way to set RESTRICTIONS on the government. IE its written to say NO you government can not do this NOT you people “can” do this. The difference seems simple and small but is staggeringly huge once you fully realize the implications.
if you ELIMINATED the bill of rights those rights are STILL YOURS and would still be INVIOLATE - it would just be a lot harder to maintain them.
Never let it be said that truth and honesty stood in the way of becoming President.
They should let Ron Paul in for fairness….at least I feel as if the people who stood up and made those phone calls, wrote those letters, and sent those emails, were somewhat successful.
Theres evidence that many of the Founders thought the BORs( and the general philosophy of liberty the country was founded on) should be enforced on the whole country. But we had the civil war and passed “the 4th Amend” anyhow. So for over a hundred years weve been “incorporating” the Bill of Rights in all the states. And I think we’re a much better, freer country because of it. This is relevant to Paul too, because he doesnt believe in evolution, doesnt believe in the sep of church and state, but does believe it’d be ok for public schools to teach creationism in science class and ban evolution. Thats because he doesnt believe in incorporation of the BORs.
I have a real problem with his “states rights philosophy”. As Chris Taylor mentioned (above), your rights are inalienable, it shouldnt matter which state you live in, no govt, federal or state, should be able to infringe your basic rights. I dont want to go backwards a 100 years. Thats not one ot the things we need to do to take back our government and re-assert our freedoms. In fact, if we did that we’d be doing the exact opposite.
That should be “…But we had the civil war and passed “the 14th Amend” anyhow…”, not the 4th.
@Pile
Quite frankly, you are not the one sounding rational here. There has not been “hundreds of years” of evelotionary theory, and the Christian faith has been around much longer than 300 years, namely 2000. (I assume that’s the ’storybook’ you are referring to).
So instead of relying upon your good (actually bigoted) conscience, brush up on your history before you spew forth. You would be more persuasive.
Also, do not forget, that Ronald Regean and Jimmy Carter (before you were born), were people of the Christian faith. People of faith continue to exist in this world, some of which are your neighbors and who you will need to get along with. They also vote.
Scientific knowledge is important and can be pursued by people of faith. Do not let your intolerance be blind to that fact.
Listen, we are the people that the government and the media is supposed to serve. The government and the media is powerless without the support of the people, and most notably, without financial backers.
There has been talk about boycotting Fox’s supporters, which works great when you send the company copies of your receipts and make it known that they lost a customer, however there is a better way of doing this. A much more powerful way. Most of the companies that advertise on Fox have shaky business practices, why not give everyone talking points for why their friends, and associates should not use those company’s services, and give some better alternatives (especially if that alternative supports Ron Paul) Give these shaky bastards a little public relations nightmare, and I’m sure we are going to catch their attention better than any self imposed boycott.
If Ron Paul is not part of the Republican Debate on January 6th, lets show fox WHO is in CONTROL. We The People are NOT going to look the other way while the few elite laugh all the way to the bank.
“Who cares if Ron Paul is a creationist?”
People who want to ensure the future of science in the United States.
There has never been a time that religion prevailed over science. Inevitably, religion changes to accommodate the new results of science.
So the sooner we get there, the sooner our leadership in science will be reattained.
JP the “Ron Paul is a creationist” is a talking point, and nothing more.
Its there to distract attention that the other other candidates are stealing your hard earned money and giving it to the special interests that put them into office, and I challenge you to refute this statement.
Enough said,
Dan, maybe when Ron said
“The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America”
he meant they recognized that America WOULD BE robustly Christian because of the simple fact that Christianity was (and is) the dominant religion. They believed it would be religiously tolerant because of the system of government they set up with it’s checks and balances and respect for individual rights. Just splittin’ hairs.
i think god created man but gave him the ability to evolve and adapt to new environments.
aside that that pointless debate Ron Paul is a hell of a lot better than the other ‘choices’.
“We’re not going to find the perfect candidate. But we’re at the point where we need to do something, or this country is ruined. A status quo vote by progressives for one of the corporate/Israeli shills like Clinton, Obama, or even Edwards, will lead us down the same path to destruction we’re already on, LIKE BUSH. Kucinich has no shot to win. Paul does. And Paul will bring the troops home and cut the military budget enormously. He hates imperialism and empire-building.”
amen~
but first things first…
Vote for someone who can fix America first… Then worry about science and religion topics…
Vote Ron Paul.
@ally kendall: Atheism is not a belief system. Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby. Saying “atheist fundamentalist” is the same as saying “aphilatelist purist” to describe someone who is very keen on keeping the guidelines for “not collecting stamps” as they were originally.
Evolution has nothing to do with atheism either. Look up Ken Miller on YouTube (such as http://youtube.com/watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg) to see someone brilliant who is very Christian and ardent defender of evolution (as a top cell biologist).
@bunch of other people: Whether Ron Paul believes in creation or an evolution is irrelevant to the job as president. The question is whether or not he can keep his personal religious beliefs out of his duties as president. If he cannot, then don’t vote for him. That may very well be the case here based on his comments relating to government-endorsed religion. But don’t use his being unconvinced on evolution as an excuse.
I can no longer support Ron Paul. He ignores established science on both evolution and global warming. We’ve had 8 years of ignoring facts. We don’t need another fundamentalist christian who doesn’t respect science.
Global warming *is* a fact. What is NOT a fact is that it’s man-made. Mars, for instance, is experiencing global warming–and there are no factories there. In reality, the sun gets hotter on roughly thirty-year intervals. So ALL the planets in the solar system experience temperature shifts. Earth’s thirty-year cycle has been proven by taking core ice samples from Antarctica.
Con-men are hijacking REAL science to start a global tax, and basing it on a fraud: namely, that global warming is due to man.
Read up on an issue. Don’t take it on “faith”. And don’t claim that the UN and other globalists are men-of-science and their opinions are unassailable. You just look like an ignoramus.
Always question! Always research! And when people are proposing taxes (to scam and steal from you) check out who “funds” the “scientific” studies being cited to rob and manipulate you.
@David. Please, please, please. Even an evolutionist will tell you that there is still a lot to learn within the Theory. Dr. Paul doesn’t believe there is enough proof for either assertion ( evolution v creationism ), oh and there is just as much debate on global warming. Do you that volcanoes put out more carbon than we do?
I would gather from your uninformed statement that you do not. I can remember in the 80’s these same scientist were saying we were going to be in an Ice Age by this time. The Environmentalism movement is just a money and land grab scam. Dr. Paul has never said that he’d do away with science…I mean never mind the fact that he IS A DOCTOR. So keep making irrational and uninformed decisions and enjoy your Idiocracy.
know
David i would be hard pressed to say that you were ever a real supporter of Ron Paul.
Why? because you are unfamiliar with the issues…
Ron Paul has a clean voting record, he walks his talk, to support anyone else (Democrat or Republican) means more of the same flip-flop (i want to hear you say something against this)
Ron Paul guide is the constitution, Everyone else’s guide - the special interests that got them and their friends into office, and political jocking for position (again, we are right here)
Ron Paul is the only candidate who has fought to keep the government out of your private life. Everyone else wants the government to dictate how you can run your life. (again, even your other favorite candidate is guilty of this)
So the question is this, who can you support, someone who hasn’t changed under pressure and incentives, or more of the same
Than again Ron Paul is not for everyone, if you are afraid to make your own choices and take responsibility them. If you need a big brother to babysit you and hold your hand, than Ron Paul is not for you. If your living depends on how much your special interest groups can milk out of the government, than you better start saying your prayers, and exploring other career options, because this revolution is only getting started
The question ultimately boils down to this, do we want the government to run our lives, or do we want to run our lives.
Only 1 candidate consistently supports the latter
@JP:
It’s irrelevant, really, because the Feds have no authority to fund research or teach science (or anything else, really).
He’s going to get rid of the Dept. of Education, NASA, and all (or as much as is reasonable for a four-year term, though I’d anticipate a second) other unconstitutional departments.
Samwise, please be careful when making statements that without research sound absurd.
The reason why Ron Paul wants to get rid of those departments is because most of the money that is supposed to go there, goes to special interests, and because the federal government always spends more, and achieves less. This is especially evident that the private schools outperform the public school system, yet the private schools spend much less per student.
Basically to sum it up, if I help you into office, you own me a favor and you are going to help me win bloated, one sided contracts with the feds. aka: Special Interests
Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter are not “recognized major candidates.” They needn’t be included in the any events.
who said they can’t vote for ron paul because he’s a creationist? you do realize that there are people in this country (a lot actually) that don’t believe what you do right? if you’re going to sack your vote for one of the only honest candidates with a voting record to back it up then at least recognize that that sort of ‘logic’ is what got us in the mess we’re in right now.
ask any one of those voting officials that were convicted of cheating the vote count because they though dubya was just a swell guy.
you want someone whos gonna tell you they’ll give you what they want and not or someone who doesn’t necessarily believe what you do but will do whats best for the country regardless?
Fox news has been losing support from Republicans left right and center since this primary started. They pimped Giuliani so hard, but I don’t know any conservatives who can support a gun-grabbing big-government liberal - even if he did cut taxes.
Its backfiring big time and to cap it off, there will (hopefully) be a major sell-off of FoxNews stock tomorrow.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/512551/ron_paul_supporters_organizing_news.html
[...] New Hampshire’s Republicans already have taken a stand against FOX News which threatened to limit participation by GOP candidates.Let’s see who the real American heroes are in this field of Democrats.Hillary? [...]
[...] Fox site 12/30. It disappeared 12/31. Someone indeed is/was playing games. NH GOP publishes this Press Release late 12/31 where we learn Paul and Duncan Hunter are both excluded. IMHO, it seems obvious that [...]
Besides all that - you cannot dismiss a candidate on one or even two issues alone. Otherwise, you vote for no one. They ALL have certain issues that we do not agree with 100% of the time. The ones that should be paid attention to are the basics.
So who would you vote for? the same old, same old Big Oil or Big Pharm or any other BIG - or one with fresh old ideas that work?
I know who that would be for me.
Oh for Chrissake. (no pun intended!)
We’re on the edge of FASCISM and you’re squabbling about the separation of church and state? PERSPECTIVE, PEOPLE!!!! CHEEZUZ!!!!!
Only 3 people running for President this time around are not “owned” by the corporate elite and the CFR:
Dennis Kucinich
Mike Gravel
Ron Paul.
Those are your choices if you want to remain a part of AMERICA instead of the North American Union. Obama is a member of the CFR, so who cares if his speeches are “inspiring.” Let him continue to be inspiring as a Senator.
AUGH. People make me NUTS sometimes. AGAIN, some perspective please. This is do-or-die-time.
People, when you talk about fascism, talk about active interference in our personal lives and not passive things like wiretapping. Think IMBRA law…which forces Americans to undergo background checks in order to say hello to foreigners (see http://www.onlinedatingrights.com) or VAWA which makes husbands and boyfriends second class citizens if a woman falsely claims abuse in a relationship. The courts and lawyers are declaring our personal lives completely regulatable.
A Republican judge declared that IMBRA was OK because “The Supreme Court has never held that there is a fundamental liberty interest in an American contacting a foreigner” (Judge Thomas Rose on May 26th, 2006).
A Clintonite judge Clarence Cooper declared on March 26th, 2007: “Meeting someone online is like buying a gun. Both should require background checks.”
Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo voted No to all of the above which was the brainchild of John McCain and Sam Brownback and their friend Hillary Clinton and Maria Cantwell. Julie Annie has indicated that he would do Clinton and Brownback one step “better”: Julie Annie would make it illegal for an American to use a prostitute in another country (his plan to eliminate “sex tourism”). Romney just said “That’s tough” when asked what he thought about the Duke lacrosse players being falsely accused of rape.
The United States is now run by the NOW. Last heterosexual male out, please turn out the lights.
What the people who criticize Dr. Paul for his lame answer on “Evolution vs. Creationism” fail to realize is that NO US president has ever won without the moron vote.
As I also commented in the evolution article written by Lance, the Bible states that God created man from the dust of the earth. Sounds quite similar to life evolving from a single celled organism if you ask me.
As far as Ron Paul on global warming, one thing he has stated that is pro-environment is that property rights should not allow for another person to pollute your land, air, water. I think he believes that private citizens will be able to coerce corporations to make the necessary changes to the environment better than the government can if it is necessary. I think it will take both.
Some interesting things going on with PowerPlant C02 output being used to grow algae to create biofuels and biomass.
I just read the Fox news debate was cancelled three weeks ago because it is so close to an ABC debate. Not sure if it is true or not.
[...] Slapped in the Face by NH Republicans For Exclusion article from The Political [...]
RON PAUL FEAR AND LOATHING EXPOSES NEO-CON AND NEO-LIB HATE-BAITERS
In the American Cultural War, the antagonists can be conveniently divided into two broad categories: citizens who are the American People, and citizens who are consumed with fear and loathing of the American People.
As the Ron Paul Rebellion relentlessly advances across America like wildfire, the screams of the damned, Neo-Cons and Neo-Libs, grow louder; especially those of the hate-baiters swarming out of their closets, exposing themselves to the scrutiny of the World: the racist-baiters, anti-Semite baiters, Nazi-baiters, homophobe-baiters, xenophobe-baiters, theocracy-baiters, fascist-baiters, and insane-baiters; those growing cancerous elements that have done so much to give the American People their Ugly American reputation; and to manifest America’s long overdue need for a healthy rebellion, to preserve her sacred Constitution against increasingly dangerous social and economic governmental tyranny; and subversive control over American foreign policies by the bloody China, Mexico, and Israel lobbies.
Amazingly, the entire World knows exactly what is going on; and is cheering for Ron Paul and his rebel army.
Google: Who Would the World Elect; Mearsheimer Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy; Stricherz Why the Democrats are Blue