Ron Paul in 2008!
- Thread starter freedom1
- Start date
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
Menelik said:
Politically, there is no reason to vote for McCain. Socially, there is. I'm voting for him because of the social repercussions that will be felt in this country with an Obama presidency. Honestly, I expect this site and others like it will be shut down under an Obama presidency, especially with a Democrat-controlled Congress. We'll see.
Menelik said:
I agree. I don't expect the First Amendment to be bannedanytime soon.
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
Don Wassall said:
I'm glad there are some optimists here.
They won't 'ban' the First Amendment. They'll just ignore it like they do everything else. Didn't McCain-Feingold violate the First Amendment, too?
How many of you thought McCain-Feingold would even pass? Or that Bush would sign it into law? Or that the Supreme Court would rule that reforming campaign finance laws was more important than our First Amendment rights? How about the changes in eminent domain? The Patriot Act? How about the use of American soldiers on American soil? The rescinding of posse comitatus?
McCain-Feingold has already limited our freedom of speech in an election. We already have some 'hate speech' laws. Do you really think it so far fetched that the United Socialists of America will not or cannot pass legislation similar to Canadian and European hate crimes laws?
I hope you are right.
Edited by: White Shogun
White Shogun said:
That's all part of having a two-party system that excels at marginalizing opposition. Freedom of speech will continue to be chipped away at by Dems and Repubs. It's all about maintaining their monopoly of institutional power. I'm not optimistic or pessimistic about that, just realistic. It's possible there'll be such relief at finally having the criminal Bush cabal out of Washington that we may have a little more "dissent" under an Obama administration than under a McCain continuation of the Bush nightmare. As long as there's no real threat to the PTB, freedom of speech is good for pseudo-"democracy." Edited by: Don Wassall
I think they'll let us vent here as long as we like. It's a great way to blow off steam that, without another outlet, would find other ways to express itself. Each and every one of us sitting at a keyboard is another guy not going out and trying to actually change things. If we were shutdown from this we might go out and try to meet with like minded peopleand do things in the real world.
And I'm surea lot of you guys are doing other things but there are a great many people that don't and use cyber space (not just this site) as an outlet for frustration and anger.
And I'm surea lot of you guys are doing other things but there are a great many people that don't and use cyber space (not just this site) as an outlet for frustration and anger.
Freethinker
Hall of Famer
Let's be realistic for a second. Unless you live in one of the "swing states", your vote for McCain or Obama won't mean squat. I will be voting for one of the third party candidates (probably Baldwin) because I'd rather have my vote go towards a "meaningful" statistic. My vote will represent one many Americans who is sick of the 2 party system and will not support their hand-picked puppets. My hope is that more and more people will wake-up every election year and vote 3rd party. Maybe in 15 or 20 years we can finally get some real change or reform.
Just something to consider.
Just something to consider.
InfamousOne
Guru
White Shogun said:
This is EXACTLY what i want. This type of behavior will FORCE white people to deal with blacks crying wolf about every silly little thing. Whites simply want to leave it alone because it is a very uncomfortable topic for them. Obama will support this rediculous behavior in blacks, enraging white people and forcing them to act. How will whites respond to more taxes and handouts for poor blacks when they have no money themselves?
And how will black behaviour be any different with Obama in office, when they are already crying racism about everything now?
InfamousOne
Guru
guest301 said:
The US is doomed either way. Neither candidate can stop the financial storm coming that will be the end of us. Our representative form of government has been coopted by oligarchs once again and nothing short of revolution will change it.
Bart said:
Tell the haters I said don't let the door hit you on the backside on your way out!
(But we'll take your vote!!)
Yes I saw a lot of this in my many years of involvement in the Libertarian Party. A more confused group of white guys on racial matters would be hard to find. Here is a politically active segment of the popultion that is 99% white male, usually educated, and they are hopelessly clueless about race. In fact they pride themselves on their race neutrality even though blacks will have nothing to do with them. The party would try to figure out ways of getting black people to get involved with the party like they were some kind of exotic species.
The official party line on race realists black and white is that if someone wants to self segregate and discriminate based on race then that's OK as long as no type of violence or fraud is involved. In reality though if you profess to be a white racialist you are essentially caste-out (haha); black racialists are fine though. It's exactly what you would expect from liberals which is what many libertarians are except they understand that government sucks.
What Barr should have said is that donations and support are welcome from everyone that agrees with the Party philosphy; what they do on their own time as long as it doesn't involve force or fraud is not the concern of politics. At least Ron Paul understood that by refusing to return donations fromBlack and Stormfront etal.
The comment: "We do not want and will not accept the support of haters. Anyone with love in their heart for our country and for every resident of our country regardless of race, religion, nationality or sexual orientation is welcome with open arms." would make a true libertarian barf.
Who cares if someone has "love in their heart" for an abstract idea like "our country". Even the phrase "our county" is so collectivist it should cause libertarians to shiver. And you also have to love every resident? regardless of race, religion, nationality and sexual orientation(!!!!!)? Really? I'll have to check the party platform to find that plank. That kind of cumbaya love everybody stuff is not in vogue with the cold hearted capitialist Ayn Rand secularists I used to know who made up the Party.
And they don't want the support of "haters"? Why not? Haters are people too, and soverign citizens as I understand it.
What's going on with the Constitution Party?
DixieDestroyer
Hall of Famer
Besides Barr's past Neocon leanings, this is another reason I'll be voting for Dr.Baldwin. Typical deceived White with no racial identity, only gets "tough" against White "extremists".
Yogi Berra supposedly said, " Include me out."That will be my responseto anyone asking me to supportRon Paul's next bid for thepresidency.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=4212
Dr. Paul's latest Texas Straight Talk:
With the election behind us, our country turns hopeful eyes to the future. I have a few hopes of my own.
I congratulate our first African-American president-elect. Martin Luther King, Jr. certainly would be proud to see this day. We are stronger for embracing diversity, and I am hopeful that we can continue working through the tensions and wrongs of the past and become a more just and colorblind society. I hope this new administration will help bring us together, and not further divide us. I have always found that freedom is the best way to break down barriers. A free society emphasizes the importance of individuals, and not because they are part of a certain group. That's the only way equal justice can be achieved. (snip)
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=4212
Dr. Paul's latest Texas Straight Talk:
With the election behind us, our country turns hopeful eyes to the future. I have a few hopes of my own.
I congratulate our first African-American president-elect. Martin Luther King, Jr. certainly would be proud to see this day. We are stronger for embracing diversity, and I am hopeful that we can continue working through the tensions and wrongs of the past and become a more just and colorblind society. I hope this new administration will help bring us together, and not further divide us. I have always found that freedom is the best way to break down barriers. A free society emphasizes the importance of individuals, and not because they are part of a certain group. That's the only way equal justice can be achieved. (snip)
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
What do you expect him to say, Bart? I suppose he could have just remained silent, but maybe I'm reading between the lines.
I, too, would prefer a 'color blind' society over the one which we have now, which prefers all things black to white. A truly color blind society would mean an end to affirmative action, quotas, and all preferences based on race. We could freely discuss racial issues without being labeled racist. The caste system in professional sports would not exist in a color blind society.
I also see a small dart thrown when he says 'I hope this new administration will help bring us together, and not further divide us,' as a remark about the potential for greater racial set asides and preferences under an Obama administration.
The reality is though, no matter how you swing it, Ron Paul will never hold the office of the Presidency. He isn't charismatic enough and doesn't look good on TV, which is really what counts in the United States of Amerika.
I, too, would prefer a 'color blind' society over the one which we have now, which prefers all things black to white. A truly color blind society would mean an end to affirmative action, quotas, and all preferences based on race. We could freely discuss racial issues without being labeled racist. The caste system in professional sports would not exist in a color blind society.
I also see a small dart thrown when he says 'I hope this new administration will help bring us together, and not further divide us,' as a remark about the potential for greater racial set asides and preferences under an Obama administration.
The reality is though, no matter how you swing it, Ron Paul will never hold the office of the Presidency. He isn't charismatic enough and doesn't look good on TV, which is really what counts in the United States of Amerika.
Jimmy Chitwood
Hall of Famer
Ron Paul is the only candidate to vocally condemn racial quotas.
in mainstream American politics, it doesn't get any more fair for white folks than that.
while i personally believe Dr. Paul is naively optimistic about race relations, his staunch support of the Constituion is worthy of support. furthermore, he is the virtually the only politician in Washington, DC who has the integrity to back up his words with his actions. if Ron Paul isn't good enough for you, then it's likely we will never see a politician who is.
however, in my opinion White Shogun is right about him never becoming President, though i think it has more to do with his non-sellout integrity than his lack of charisma. the guys pulling the strings don't have any tied to Ron Paul, erego he won't be allowed in the Oval Office.
in mainstream American politics, it doesn't get any more fair for white folks than that.
while i personally believe Dr. Paul is naively optimistic about race relations, his staunch support of the Constituion is worthy of support. furthermore, he is the virtually the only politician in Washington, DC who has the integrity to back up his words with his actions. if Ron Paul isn't good enough for you, then it's likely we will never see a politician who is.
however, in my opinion White Shogun is right about him never becoming President, though i think it has more to do with his non-sellout integrity than his lack of charisma. the guys pulling the strings don't have any tied to Ron Paul, erego he won't be allowed in the Oval Office.
"A free society emphasizes the importance of individuals, and not because they are part of a certain group"
You have to read between the lines. RP is the only politician that even talks about ending racial preferences and even says that the civil rights bill was a mistake.
As for his charima, he has more than McCain had and was more interesting to listen to than Obama's boring "change" sermons. Obama is considered "charasmatic" only because everyone is so shocked and surprised that a black man can put together complete sentences. I liken it to how everyone thinks that black babies (not swearing and gang-banging yet) are sooo cute. Edited by: Kaptain Poop
You have to read between the lines. RP is the only politician that even talks about ending racial preferences and even says that the civil rights bill was a mistake.
As for his charima, he has more than McCain had and was more interesting to listen to than Obama's boring "change" sermons. Obama is considered "charasmatic" only because everyone is so shocked and surprised that a black man can put together complete sentences. I liken it to how everyone thinks that black babies (not swearing and gang-banging yet) are sooo cute. Edited by: Kaptain Poop
You fellows can vote for whomever you wish, for whatever reasons.i'm not sure it matters anymore. But for the sake of argument. There are pros and cons to every candidate. As for me, I'm just tired of all the weasel words. Why do we have to read between the lines?Ron Paul has made it perfectly clear where he stands. He is 73 now and many people feel that is too old, what about four years from now? Age was a reason Obama swept younger people.
Ron Paul made it clear where he stands. He threw us under the bus. Very disappointing. He could have toned down his rhetoric, but chose to give us the finger. Right back at him! That is just how I feel about it.
Here are a couple of his answers to questions.Yes, he talks about rights and freedoms, but seems always to plead the case for blacks. He may as well be a black activist in that regard. You can bet when he speaks of MLK, and Rosa Parks,it is from the heart.
Q: If you are elected president in 2008, what positive and significant legacy, if any, will you leave for Black Americans?
A: I would like to believe that if we had a freer society, it would take care of Blacks and whites and everybody equally because we're all individuals. To me, that is so important. But if we had equal justice under the law, I think it would be a big improvement. If we had probably a repeal of most of the federal laws on drugs and the unfairness on how Blacks are treated with these drugs laws, it would be a tremendous improvement.
Q: What policy would you support to guarantee young Black and Latino men a fairer equal justice system?
A: A system designed to protect individual liberty will have no punishments for any group and no privileges. Today, I think inner-city folks and minorities are punished unfairly in the war on drugs. For instance, Blacks make up 14% of those who use drugs, yet 36 percent of those arrested are Blacks and it ends up that 63% of those who finally end up in prison are Blacks. This has to change. We don't have to have more courts and more prisons. We need to repeal the whole war on drugs. It isn't working.
Ron Paul's campaign spokesman on the Don Black contribution:
Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and the protection of inalienable individual rights for every American. All of our campaigns energy is dedicated to spreading the message of liberty and limited government, and we do not spend time screening donors or blocking websites. We don't know who Don Black is, and pay him no attention. If a small number individuals who hold racist beliefs want to waste their money by giving to Dr. paul a man who stands firmly against their small minded ideologies, then the campaign will simply use those funds to protect freedom, peace and civil liberties across our Nation.
Ron Paulpublicly said: "I don't want white supremacists support" So, why go against his will? He made it perfedctly clear. By the way, any group wishing to stand up for Whites will always be designated as supremacist, hateful, bigoted, Nazis, Klanners, etc. White activism is not allowed.
Video of himspeaking in no uncertain terms. No hedging, no weasel words, no beating around the bush.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gKXyBgr24c
Edited by: Bart
Ron Paul made it clear where he stands. He threw us under the bus. Very disappointing. He could have toned down his rhetoric, but chose to give us the finger. Right back at him! That is just how I feel about it.
Here are a couple of his answers to questions.Yes, he talks about rights and freedoms, but seems always to plead the case for blacks. He may as well be a black activist in that regard. You can bet when he speaks of MLK, and Rosa Parks,it is from the heart.
Q: If you are elected president in 2008, what positive and significant legacy, if any, will you leave for Black Americans?
A: I would like to believe that if we had a freer society, it would take care of Blacks and whites and everybody equally because we're all individuals. To me, that is so important. But if we had equal justice under the law, I think it would be a big improvement. If we had probably a repeal of most of the federal laws on drugs and the unfairness on how Blacks are treated with these drugs laws, it would be a tremendous improvement.
Q: What policy would you support to guarantee young Black and Latino men a fairer equal justice system?
A: A system designed to protect individual liberty will have no punishments for any group and no privileges. Today, I think inner-city folks and minorities are punished unfairly in the war on drugs. For instance, Blacks make up 14% of those who use drugs, yet 36 percent of those arrested are Blacks and it ends up that 63% of those who finally end up in prison are Blacks. This has to change. We don't have to have more courts and more prisons. We need to repeal the whole war on drugs. It isn't working.
Ron Paul's campaign spokesman on the Don Black contribution:
Dr. Paul stands for freedom, peace, prosperity and the protection of inalienable individual rights for every American. All of our campaigns energy is dedicated to spreading the message of liberty and limited government, and we do not spend time screening donors or blocking websites. We don't know who Don Black is, and pay him no attention. If a small number individuals who hold racist beliefs want to waste their money by giving to Dr. paul a man who stands firmly against their small minded ideologies, then the campaign will simply use those funds to protect freedom, peace and civil liberties across our Nation.
Ron Paulpublicly said: "I don't want white supremacists support" So, why go against his will? He made it perfedctly clear. By the way, any group wishing to stand up for Whites will always be designated as supremacist, hateful, bigoted, Nazis, Klanners, etc. White activism is not allowed.
Video of himspeaking in no uncertain terms. No hedging, no weasel words, no beating around the bush.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gKXyBgr24c
Edited by: Bart
Freethinker
Hall of Famer
The voice of reason continues to give me hope. Here is a link to one of the best speeches I've ever heard delivered on the Congressional floor. Someone took that audio and added music and images in one really fantastic video!
This is a MUST watch for everyone here at castefootball.
What if...
Enjoy guys!
This is a MUST watch for everyone here at castefootball.
What if...
Enjoy guys!
johnnyboy
Guru
White Shogun said:
good points as always Shogun. i always look forward to reading your thoughts on posts.
cheers
This thread has been revived, so, with all due respect to Ron Paul supporters I will add my two cents What did I expect him to say? Well, I didn't expect him to come across as David Duke, but damn,he sure put a big grin on Al Sharpton'sface.
Look, he had the chance of a lifetime to pound a stake deep into the heart of the integration monster that is killing us.Butinstead, he gaveit a hearty slap on the back and wished it God - speed.
Ron Paul likesnumbers and statistics. Wouldn't it have been great if he told the country the truth about the unbelievable carnage Whites are suffering at the hands of Blacks? Imagine what he could have done with a resource such as 'The Color Of Crime' published by Jared Taylor?His highly motivated, talented people could have produced some spectacular videos.
Blacks don't sit at the back of the bus anymore.NowWEcower in fear and pay the price, but nobody cares.Check out the shocking video clip below.
[url]http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jamesedwards/2009/03/05/ white-female-kalazamoo-bus-driver-savagely-attacked-by-black -student/[/url]
White female Kalazamoo bus driver savagely attacked by black student
Just another "troubled teen" according to the news anchor.
His parents say it's not his fault.
His dad says she "provoked" him. By telling him to sit down and stop screaming at her.
Mom says he "has twins living in his head."
He's done this sort of thing five other times since 2005. And he's never spent one day in juvenile lockup.
But Mom say he's seeing "an excellent doctor."
Look, he had the chance of a lifetime to pound a stake deep into the heart of the integration monster that is killing us.Butinstead, he gaveit a hearty slap on the back and wished it God - speed.
Ron Paul likesnumbers and statistics. Wouldn't it have been great if he told the country the truth about the unbelievable carnage Whites are suffering at the hands of Blacks? Imagine what he could have done with a resource such as 'The Color Of Crime' published by Jared Taylor?His highly motivated, talented people could have produced some spectacular videos.
Blacks don't sit at the back of the bus anymore.NowWEcower in fear and pay the price, but nobody cares.Check out the shocking video clip below.
[url]http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jamesedwards/2009/03/05/ white-female-kalazamoo-bus-driver-savagely-attacked-by-black -student/[/url]
White female Kalazamoo bus driver savagely attacked by black student
Just another "troubled teen" according to the news anchor.
His parents say it's not his fault.
His dad says she "provoked" him. By telling him to sit down and stop screaming at her.
Mom says he "has twins living in his head."
He's done this sort of thing five other times since 2005. And he's never spent one day in juvenile lockup.
But Mom say he's seeing "an excellent doctor."
Freethinker
Hall of Famer
As some may already know, Dr Paul is trying to pass a bill called HR 1207 or The Federal Reserve Transparency Act. This would be huge first step in the direction of restoring financial prosperity to this country.
Dr. Paul's statement:
Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Federal Reserve Transparency Act. Throughout its nearly 100-year history, the Federal Reserve has presided over the near-complete destruction of the United States dollar. Since 1913 the dollar has lost over 95% of its purchasing power, aided and abetted by the Federal Reserve's loose monetary policy. How long will we as a Congress stand idly by while hard-working Americans see their savings eaten away by inflation? Only big-spending politicians and politically favored bankers benefit from inflation.
Serious discussion of proposals to oversee the Federal Reserve is long overdue. I have been a longtime proponent of more effective oversight and auditing of the Fed, but I was far from the first Congressman to advocate these types of proposals. Esteemed former members of the Banking Committee such as Chairmen Wright Patman and Henry B. Gonzales were outspoken critics of the Fed and its lack of transparency.
Since its inception, the Federal Reserve has always operated in the shadows, without sufficient scrutiny or oversight of its operations. While the conventional excuse is that this is intended to reduce the Fed's susceptibility to political pressures, the reality is that the Fed acts as a foil for the government. Whenever you question the Fed about the strength of the dollar, they will refer you to the Treasury, and vice versa. The Federal Reserve has, on the one hand, many of the privileges of government agencies, while retaining benefits of private organizations, such as being insulated from Freedom of Information Act requests.
The Federal Reserve can enter into agreements with foreign central banks and foreign governments, and the GAO is prohibited from auditing or even seeing these agreements. Why should a government-established agency, whose police force has federal law enforcement powers, and whose notes have legal tender status in this country, be allowed to enter into agreements with foreign powers and foreign banking institutions with no oversight? Particularly when hundreds of billions of dollars of currency swaps have been announced and implemented, the Fed's negotiations with the European Central Bank, the Bank of International Settlements, and other institutions should face increased scrutiny, most especially because of their significant effect on foreign policy. If the State Department were able to do this, it would be characterized as a rogue agency and brought to heel, and if a private individual did this he might face prosecution under the Logan Act, yet the Fed avoids both fates.
More importantly, the Fed's funding facilities and its agreements with the Treasury should be reviewed. The Treasury's supplementary financing accounts that fund Fed facilities allow the Treasury to funnel money to Wall Street without GAO or Congressional oversight. Additional funding facilities, such as the Primary Dealer Credit Facility and the Term Securities Lending Facility, allow the Fed to keep financial asset prices artificially inflated and subsidize poorly performing financial firms.
The Federal Reserve Transparency Act would eliminate restrictions on GAO audits of the Federal Reserve and open Fed operations to enhanced scrutiny. We hear officials constantly lauding the benefits of transparency and especially bemoaning the opacity of the Fed, its monetary policy, and its funding facilities. By opening all Fed operations to a GAO audit and calling for such an audit to be completed by the end of 2010, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act would achieve much-needed transparency of the Federal Reserve. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Dr. Paul's statement:
Madam Speaker, I rise to introduce the Federal Reserve Transparency Act. Throughout its nearly 100-year history, the Federal Reserve has presided over the near-complete destruction of the United States dollar. Since 1913 the dollar has lost over 95% of its purchasing power, aided and abetted by the Federal Reserve's loose monetary policy. How long will we as a Congress stand idly by while hard-working Americans see their savings eaten away by inflation? Only big-spending politicians and politically favored bankers benefit from inflation.
Serious discussion of proposals to oversee the Federal Reserve is long overdue. I have been a longtime proponent of more effective oversight and auditing of the Fed, but I was far from the first Congressman to advocate these types of proposals. Esteemed former members of the Banking Committee such as Chairmen Wright Patman and Henry B. Gonzales were outspoken critics of the Fed and its lack of transparency.
Since its inception, the Federal Reserve has always operated in the shadows, without sufficient scrutiny or oversight of its operations. While the conventional excuse is that this is intended to reduce the Fed's susceptibility to political pressures, the reality is that the Fed acts as a foil for the government. Whenever you question the Fed about the strength of the dollar, they will refer you to the Treasury, and vice versa. The Federal Reserve has, on the one hand, many of the privileges of government agencies, while retaining benefits of private organizations, such as being insulated from Freedom of Information Act requests.
The Federal Reserve can enter into agreements with foreign central banks and foreign governments, and the GAO is prohibited from auditing or even seeing these agreements. Why should a government-established agency, whose police force has federal law enforcement powers, and whose notes have legal tender status in this country, be allowed to enter into agreements with foreign powers and foreign banking institutions with no oversight? Particularly when hundreds of billions of dollars of currency swaps have been announced and implemented, the Fed's negotiations with the European Central Bank, the Bank of International Settlements, and other institutions should face increased scrutiny, most especially because of their significant effect on foreign policy. If the State Department were able to do this, it would be characterized as a rogue agency and brought to heel, and if a private individual did this he might face prosecution under the Logan Act, yet the Fed avoids both fates.
More importantly, the Fed's funding facilities and its agreements with the Treasury should be reviewed. The Treasury's supplementary financing accounts that fund Fed facilities allow the Treasury to funnel money to Wall Street without GAO or Congressional oversight. Additional funding facilities, such as the Primary Dealer Credit Facility and the Term Securities Lending Facility, allow the Fed to keep financial asset prices artificially inflated and subsidize poorly performing financial firms.
The Federal Reserve Transparency Act would eliminate restrictions on GAO audits of the Federal Reserve and open Fed operations to enhanced scrutiny. We hear officials constantly lauding the benefits of transparency and especially bemoaning the opacity of the Fed, its monetary policy, and its funding facilities. By opening all Fed operations to a GAO audit and calling for such an audit to be completed by the end of 2010, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act would achieve much-needed transparency of the Federal Reserve. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
DixieDestroyer
Hall of Famer
Dr.Paul has had the Fed's # for years now. It shows the cowardice of the traitors on "Crapitol sHill" that patriot Dr.Paul never gets any of the pawns to co-sponsor legislation abolishing the private Fed. It also clearly demonstrates the control/influence of the (Rothschild founded) Central Banking Cartel.
DixieDestroyer said:It also clearly demonstrates the control/influence of the (Rothschild founded) Central Banking Cartel.
They got us by the balls DD, with The Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, The Council on Foreign Relations, ownership of all the Major Media outlets and so on...their grip get tighter by the day.
