Subjects concerning Ron Paul

[dant]

I am not sure which thread this belongs in but I wanted to
forward what someone has sent me and without comment:

Edited to protect the source:

From: [xxxxxx]
To: [xxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 8:28 AM
Subject: VERY important: Forwarded: Numbers don't add up in Texas...

Of course it is fraud, no other answer to this, when you read about Ron Paul's own district in Tx....Virginia

(I am forwarding to all CD captains, and as many Ohio groups as possible):

Very Important on this thread: so keep the thread moving through the groups.

I had a Gentleman call me when I got Home from the Kent Meeting last night from New York. _

He happens to be publishing a book with photos of all of the 2004 Election Fraud Evidence, that was supposed to be published by a company in Kent State? He literally has the photographs of burned and otherwise mutilated, destroyed ballots. He is very familiar with how to follow the fraud, due to his research in the book. I would call him an investigative Journalist, in Election Fraud. I don't know him from Adam. _He called me last night, from New York, upset about huge numbers of precincts in Texas, where there were thousands of registered voters, and ZERO votes at all, with 100 of the Precincts reporting in_. He repeated so I understood. He is saying there are precincts with over 2000 registered voters, and the official count is saying NO one voted at all in that precinct after the precinct has reported in officially!! He said he has been studying elections now, for years. He has NEVER seen anything like this. He said the number of zero precincts, are especially High in the Panhandle of Texas. He also mentioned what Ron here is saying in this post. Ron Paul got more votes in his precinct for Congressman, than he did for president in the same precinct. He said, by huge amounts. Even More important, and possibly something we can all do to help... with this Ron Paul Fraud.

This investigative Journalist is just about to publish the research on the fraud, and now, the company that was going to print with his book, has suddenly pulled out, and refusing to publish. He was supposed to be doing a book signing at Kent on the anniversary of the shootings, that happens annually there... I guess. He now has to self publish, which, given the situation, and the fact that he is the only one with his "manual", puts him in a great deal of danger. Maybe I am a little paranoid for him, because of my past experience with revolution researchers and publishers that have suddenly gone missing, or suddenly commit suicide, over the past ten years. But while we were on the phone, we were getting echoes, then, three or four voice cut outs for ten, then 20 then 30 seconds. Finally, we were disconnected, and could not get reconnected. I did ask him to write to me so I could foreword the Texas research he did to all, and let you hear about the Ron Paul Information, since I know all of you would care a lot. I explained to him how to get a hold of the Ron Paul Texas Meetups, so they could investigate, and move on the situation, if they chose. I am hoping for an email from him this morning. I will be trying to call him back all day today. So please to the degree you can, keep an eye on this thread. If I get him on the phone, I will let you know. He needs some help getting his information out, and wants to investigate the Ron Paul campaign and election fraud, on a larger scale. Will follow up.... and if he does send an email, I will be sure to post it to you all [XXXXXX]


Ron wrote: They want us to believe that McCain won Texas in a landslide. A place where I have never heard anyone mention his name, never seen so much as a bumper sticker, and clearly a state that is covered by Ron Paul signs. Just for the sake of discussion let's say it's possible. What I find seriously hard to believe is this:

* Ron Paul got 70% of the vote in his district for Congress-----37,220 votes.

* In that same district they want us to believe he only got 6,697 votes for president.

* That equates to approximately ONLY 1 in 5 people that voted for him for Congress supported him for President. They can't be serious. Don't lie to me!!


Please don't take my word for it. Look at the numbers yourself. Congressional District 14 Results - _http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_135_race4.htm

Presidential Race District 14 Results - _http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_135_race64.htm

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: [XXXXXX]
Date: Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 4:43 PM
Subject: [XXXXXX] Rep. Ron Paul Stands Alone (defying AIPAC) in Voting Against
Gaza Bill (see the latest CNI send about Dr. Paul's courage which is included below after the following):
To: [XXXXXX]

Rep. Ron Paul Stands Alone (defying AIPAC) in Voting Against Gaza Bill (see the latest CNI send
about Dr. Paul's courage which is included below after the following):

'Going after Syria and Iran would be right in accordance with the rest of the 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda as discussed by James Bamford (who is the most respected intelligence author/writer in America) in his 'A Pretext for War' book (see the 'A Clean Break' link at the top of _http://NEOCONZIONISTTHREAT.BLOGSPOT.COM as the following is the direct link for it):

'A Clean Break':

_http://neoconzionistthreat.blogspot.com/2008/02/clean-break.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rep. Ron Paul Stands Alone (defying AIPAC) in Voting Against Gaza Bill:


On Wednesday, March 5, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 951, which condemns the ongoing Palestinian rocket attacks on Israeli civilians, holding both Iran and Syria responsible for "sponsoring terror attacks." Additionally, the resolution claims that "those responsible for launching rocket attacks against Israel routinely embed their production facilities and launch sites amongst the Palestinian civilian population, utilizing them as human shields …". For the full text of House Resolution 951, please click here.

This resolution problematically includes a strong defense of the recent Israeli incursions in Gaza. The following is one such exert: "Whereas the inadvertent inflicting of civilian casualties as a result of defensive military operations aimed at military targets, while deeply regrettable, is not at all morally equivalent to the deliberate targeting of civilian populations as practiced by Hamas and other Gaza-based terrorist groups…"
The resolution passed the House with an unequivocal majority of 404 to 1 with four representatives voting present and nineteen abstaining. Who was the lone Member of Congress to stand up to the Israel Lobby? Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) not only voted against HR 951, but also made a very strong statement explaining why he opposed such a biased pro-Israel statement.

Below is Rep. Paul's statement he gave to the House before the vote:

Mr. Speaker I rise in opposition to H. Res. 951, a resolution to condemn Palestinian rocket attacks on Israeli civilians. As one who is consistently against war and violence, I obviously do not support the firing of rockets indiscriminately into civilian populations. I believe it is appalling that Palestinians are firing rockets that harm innocent Israelis, just as I believe it is appalling that Israel fires missiles into Palestinian areas where children and other non-combatants are killed and injured.

Unfortunately, legislation such as this is more likely to perpetuate violence in the Middle East than contribute to its abatement. It is our continued involvement and intervention - particularly when it appears to be one-sided - that reduces the incentive for opposing sides to reach a lasting peace agreement.

Additionally, this bill will continue the march toward war with Iran and Syria, as it contains provocative language targeting these countries. The legislation oversimplifies the Israel/Palestine conflict and the larger unrest in the Middle East by simply pointing the finger at Iran and Syria. This is another piece in a steady series of legislation passed in the House that intensifies enmity between the United States and Iran and Syria. My colleagues will recall that we saw a similar steady stream of provocative legislation against Iraq in the years before the US attack on that country.

I strongly believe that we must cease making proclamations involving conflicts that have nothing to do with the United States. We incur the wrath of those who feel slighted while doing very little to slow or stop the violence.

The Council for the National Interest denounces H.R. 951 and encourages our members to call their Representative to let them know that this approval of Israeli aggression and flagrant human rights abuses is unacceptable. To find out how your Representative voted, please click here.

In addition, please thank Rep. Paul for his brave actions on Wednesday. Contact his office today and express your gratitude by calling (202) 225-2831.


Council for the National Interest Foundation
1250 4th Street SW, Suite WG-1 · Washington, DC 20024
800.296.6958 · 202.863.2951 · Fax: 202.863.2952
_http://cnifoundation.org/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6SQ02gqqao
_http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2894821400057137878

Yes, There Is a Guerrilla War Against Zionism in the U.S. What Should Jewish Institutions Do?:
_http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2008/02/portrait-of-a-h.html

This is odd... what is going on here!?!?
See thread: http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=1848 where Daniel E is mentioned....

From: [XXXXXX]
Date: Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Subject: [XXXXXX] New Meeting: David [Daniel?] Estulin lecture - The True Story of the Bildeberge Group
To: [XXXXXX]

Announcing a new meeting for Portland Ron Paul Group - Standing Up for Freedom!

What: David [Daniel?] Estulin lecture - The True Story of the Bildeberge Group

When: Friday, March 14, 7:00 PM

Meeting fee: USD5.00 per person

Where: Ambridge Event Center
300 NE Multnomah Portland
Portland , OR 97214

Who should come: All those who wish to learn more about the people who set policies having to do with national sovereignty, war, the economy and so on.

Why: It is not everyday that you get to hear an international best selling author speak about issues that effect our country and the rest of the world. I also believe book signing is on the table.

Meeting Description: Daniel Estulin, whose book The True Story of the Bilderberg Group is now available in over thirty languages, will be speaking at a benefit that begins at 7pm, Friday, March 14 at the Ambridge Event Center on the corner of Multnomah Avenue and MLK Blvd (300 NE Multnomah).

$5 is the suggested donation.

TrineDay, an Oregon publishing house, is bringing Daniel to Portland to shoot a video of the dynamic author, who had a career in public speaking before penning three best selling books in Spain. The author will later attend a press conference in Los Angeles, where TrineDay plans to announce exciting news about two of TrineDay's books being optioned by Hollywood and current negotiations for another of their titles. TrineDay, which currently has 14 books in print, was founded in 2001 in Walterville, Oregon.

The multi-media event is benefit for TrineDay's defense fund. TrineDay defended itself against a lawsuit, winning an unanimous verdict in Federal District Court in 2006 upholding the veracity of the events in one of their books, Expendable Elite, which was about a covert warfare operation during the Vietnam War. TrineDay is still paying expenses related to the case. Advance tickets are available at _www.bilderbergbook.com. TrineDay's publisher, Kris Millegan will be introducing Mr. Estulin.


Why does the Davos Worldwide Economic Forum attract worldwide attention from the mainstream press, while a far more powerful organization that includes the wealthiest people in the world among its members, the Bilderberg Group, has been able to operate in virtual secrecy for the past 50+ years?


What do Bill Clinton, Henry Kissinger, the Queen of the Netherlands, the King of Spain, Presidents of IMF, the World Bank and the European Central Bank, Prime Ministers of Spain and Canada, the leading CEOs of corporate media and Big Business talk about when they are together? Why is none of it ever reported in the news when a trip by any one of them attracts a throng of hundreds of reporters?


In the name of economic efficiency, plans for a North American Union of the USA, Canada and Mexico have been discussed at these meetings by elected leaders, who have somehow felt no obligation to inform the citizens of these democractic republics.


The "go-ahead" to begin the Iraq War in March 2003 was given at May 2002 Bilderberg meeting held in Virginia, which was attended by reporters Jim Hoagland and Charles Krauthammer - who never mentioned it.

Learn more here:
_http://ronpaul.meetup.com/118/calendar/7498920/

 

[dant]

Again, without comment, another email from RP to the faithful followers:

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Dear Friends,

Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.

The events of the past week are no exception.

The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."

That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told it's unavoidable.

The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!

• The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.

• Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.

• Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.

There goes your country.

Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.

Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.

Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.

The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?

When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?

Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.

In liberty,

Ron Paul

 

[dant]

Again, without comment, a message from Ron Paul to the faithful followers:

From: Congresman Ron Paul <updates08@ronpaulforcongress.com>
Date: Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Subject: My Answer to the President
To: xxxxx


Dear Friends:

The financial meltdown the economists of the Austrian School predicted has arrived.

We are in this crisis because of an excess of artificially created credit at the hands of the Federal Reserve System. The solution being proposed? More artificial credit by the Federal Reserve. No liquidation of bad debt and malinvestment is to be allowed. By doing more of the same, we will only continue and intensify the distortions in our economy - all the capital misallocation, all the malinvestment - and prevent the market's attempt to re-establish rational pricing of houses and other assets.

Last night the president addressed the nation about the financial crisis. There is no point in going through his remarks line by line, since I'd only be repeating what I've been saying over and over - not just for the past several days, but for years and even decades.

Still, at least a few observations are necessary.

The president assures us that his administration "is working with Congress to address the root cause behind much of the instability in our markets." Care to take a guess at whether the Federal Reserve and its money creation spree were even mentioned?

We are told that "low interest rates" led to excessive borrowing, but we are not told how these low interest rates came about. They were a deliberate policy of the Federal Reserve. As always, artificially low interest rates distort the market. Entrepreneurs engage in malinvestments - investments that do not make sense in light of current resource availability, that occur in more temporally remote stages of the capital structure than the pattern of consumer demand can support, and that would not have been made at all if the interest rate had been permitted to tell the truth instead of being toyed with by the Fed.

Not a word about any of that, of course, because Americans might then discover how the great wise men in Washington caused this great debacle. Better to keep scapegoating the mortgage industry or "wildcat capitalism" (as if we actually have a pure free market!).

Speaking about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the president said: "Because these companies were chartered by Congress, many believed they were guaranteed by the federal government. This allowed them to borrow enormous sums of money, fuel the market for questionable investments, and put our financial system at risk."

Doesn't that prove the foolishness of chartering Fannie and Freddie in the first place? Doesn't that suggest that maybe, just maybe, government may have contributed to this mess? And of course, by bailing out Fannie and Freddie, hasn't the federal government shown that the "many" who "believed they were guaranteed by the federal government" were in fact correct?

Then come the scare tactics. If we don't give dictatorial powers to the Treasury Secretary "the stock market would drop even more, which would reduce the value of your retirement account. The value of your home could plummet." Left unsaid, naturally, is that with the bailout and all the money and credit that must be produced out of thin air to fund it, the value of your retirement account will drop anyway, because the value of the dollar will suffer a precipitous decline. As for home prices, they are obviously much too high, and supply and demand cannot equilibrate if government insists on propping them up.

It's the same destructive strategy that government tried during the Great Depression: prop up prices at all costs. The Depression went on for over a decade. On the other hand, when liquidation was allowed to occur in the equally devastating downturn of 1921, the economy recovered within less than a year.

The president also tells us that Senators McCain and Obama will join him at the White House today in order to figure out how to get the bipartisan bailout passed. The two senators would do their country much more good if they stayed on the campaign trail debating who the bigger celebrity is, or whatever it is that occupies their attention these days.

F.A. Hayek won the Nobel Prize for showing how central banks' manipulation of interest rates creates the boom-bust cycle with which we are sadly familiar. In 1932, in the depths of the Great Depression, he described the foolish policies being pursued in his day - and which are being proposed, just as destructively, in our own:

Instead of furthering the inevitable liquidation of the maladjustments brought about by the boom during the last three years, all conceivable means have been used to prevent that readjustment from taking place; and one of these means, which has been repeatedly tried though without success, from the earliest to the most recent stages of depression, has been this deliberate policy of credit expansion.

To combat the depression by a forced credit expansion is to attempt to cure the evil by the very means which brought it about; because we are suffering from a misdirection of production, we want to create further misdirection - a procedure that can only lead to a much more severe crisis as soon as the credit expansion comes to an end... It is probably to this experiment, together with the attempts to prevent liquidation once the crisis had come, that we owe the exceptional severity and duration of the depression.

The only thing we learn from history, I am afraid, is that we do not learn from history.

The very people who have spent the past several years assuring us that the economy is fundamentally sound, and who themselves foolishly cheered the extension of all these novel kinds of mortgages, are the ones who now claim to be the experts who will restore prosperity! Just how spectacularly wrong, how utterly without a clue, does someone have to be before his expert status is called into question?

Oh, and did you notice that the bailout is now being called a "rescue plan"? I guess "bailout" wasn't sitting too well with the American people.

The very people who with somber faces tell us of their deep concern for the spread of democracy around the world are the ones most insistent on forcing a bill through Congress that the American people overwhelmingly oppose. The very fact that some of you seem to think you're supposed to have a voice in all this actually seems to annoy them.

I continue to urge you to contact your representatives and give them a piece of your mind. I myself am doing everything I can to promote the correct point of view on the crisis. Be sure also to educate yourselves on these subjects - the Campaign for Liberty blog is an excellent place to start. Read the posts, ask questions in the comment section, and learn.

H.G. Wells once said that civilization was in a race between education and catastrophe. Let us learn the truth and spread it as far and wide as our circumstances allow. For the truth is the greatest weapon we have.

In liberty,
Ron Paul

 

[axj]

Ron Paul

I am glad to see Ron Paul now leading in the polls among the Republican Party candidates. Even though the overall political and economic situation is pretty grim, I think that voting for Ron Paul is definitely a step in the right direction.

He has received more donations from soldiers and veterans than all the other candidates, including Obama, combined. Which I think speaks for itself.

Some parts of the "establishment" are definitely worried about him and it is difficult to say how they plan to "play" this.

 

[Muxel]

Re: Ron Paul

He's one of them. Or, he's being unknowingly used.

 

[realitybugll]

Re: Ron Paul

I like him a lot. I think he has very strong principles. He is stirring up the rep. establishment as many commentators have said. The sad part for me is the higher control structure and thinking that not much can really be accomplished in the area of politics. He is not a real threat to the control structure I don't think. I imagine he could be assassinated, inflicted with cancer, threatened, etcetera. Though I think if there was any overt attempt on his life, there would be riots. but the problem is that he can be subdued more subtly i think, besides ways mentioned above. he does show a lot of self-discipline in the debates and interviews when he is attacked. hyper dimensional forces he obviously has no chance against though.

the good thing is I don't think he can be corrupted with promises of money and power, and I think he is a lot less delusional then the other candidates. Of course he is also very smart, but so are most of the others, and this does not mean that much, but in terms whether he can get elected, it does.

So I like to watch him, but I don't want to be too identified, that he must win etc., because then I am not seeing reality.

I think it's interesting that Ron Paul gets so much attention this year, 4 years ago too. but 4 years ago I did not follow politics. this is representative of something I think. he has lots of dedicated supporters. This is indicative of a shift in consciousness, like people are rebelling and they are noticing and being affected by the system. related to mid-east protests/revolution.

If Ron Paul has a good chance is California primaries, I will probably vote. But I don't plan to get involved in the campaign, or advocate him in any serious way to democrats I know.

 

[Guardian]

Some parts of the "establishment" are definitely worried about him and it is difficult to say how they plan to "play" this.

It's all a scam. If elected, the first thing he'd do is eliminate the EPA, which is exactly what his corporate masters want. Currently there are NO candidates who aren't owned, lock, stock and barrel by corporate interests. The only choice we are given is whose slave we want to be.

I've been giving serious thought to starting a grassroots campaign for a law that requires "None of the Above" to be added to every ballot for political office in the US....local, national, ALL of them. If "None of the Above" wins, then that office is vacant until there's another election and none of those who lost to "None of the Above" can run again.

It's the only thing I can see that would radically change our electoral system, and give a small amount of power back to the voters. It would take a great deal of effort to get such a law passed, and would take years, even decades, and then face constitutional challenges....but boy would it change our entire electoral system. I've yet to meet one person who doesn't think it's a great idea....but getting people off their couches to work for it is the real challenge. Maybe the 99% is ready to work for real change to the system? I don't know.

 

[Cosmos]

do you remember the Obama Hype before he was "elected" ?
and look what has come up since !

I don't know if Ron Paul is a Person who is sane, empathic or caring and willing to not be a puppet.
If he is, then you can bet that PTB's will do everything in their power to stop him no matter wich way.

somehow it is hard for me to believe that it is possible in the current state of the US that somebody rices to the "Top" who is neither a puppet or/and a Psychopath

 

[dant]

Like the politicians that they are, make certain
double-speak promises. The promised "lie-hook"
is fair game to the fools that elect them... or not.

As with Bush, advanced the policies of the former,
to be carried forward and advanced by the present,
the long planned policies of the PTB as of old, with
very few exceptions (Kennedy). It is the old boss,
same as the new boss, incrementally enhanced,
step-by-step, until the programming is complete.

Or so I think.

 

[Guardian]

do you remember the Obama Hype before he was "elected" ?

I don't just remember the hype, I helped create it

I sincerely thought that if anyone had a shot at bringing about real change, he did. Freshman senator, person of color, no obvious corporate ties, etc. I went against most of my feminist friends who wanted to see Hillary in office, and most of my "good 'ol boys" friends who wanted anyone but a black man, and spent untold hours campaigning for Barack the Betrayer.

My biggest fear as he climbed in the polls was that someone would try to kill him because he wasn't a corporate puppet. We had crawlers coded for any possible threat to him, on some of the most obscure forums you can imagine. It wasn't until he took office that I realized how badly we'd been scammed, and that he was just another Corporate owned shill.

somehow it is hard for me to believe that it is possible in the current state of the US that somebody rices to the "Top" that is neither a puppet or/and a Psychopath

I don't think it is. The entire system has to change across the board, and I'm not sure that's even possible at this point without extreme violence? I just hope I'm dead and buried before that happens.

 

[SeekinTruth]

Yup. If electoral politics could change anything for the better, it would be illegal. It's just part of the scam for the veneer of "democracy."

 

[axj]

somehow it is hard for me to believe that it is possible in the current state of the US that somebody rices to the "Top" that is neither a puppet or/and a Psychopath

I don't think it is. The entire system has to change across the board, and I'm not sure that's even possible at this point without extreme violence? I just hope I'm dead and buried before that happens.

There are always different options. And even though it does seem that civil unrest in the U.S. and other countries is pretty much unavoidable, there is still the question of how much violence it will take to change the system.

I think that a guy like Ron Paul can help in making the transition smoother. He has many good ideas on what needs to change and he can make these ideas more mainstream, so that less "convincing" through violence will be necessary.

It's all a scam. If elected, the first thing he'd do is eliminate the EPA, which is exactly what his corporate masters want. Currently there are NO candidates who aren't owned, lock, stock and barrel by corporate interests. The only choice we are given is whose slave we want to be.

He also wants to close the Federal Reserve, the IRS, and all military bases abroad.

Regarding the EPA - from what I understand he is not for unrestricted pollution, but would rather abolish the federal agency EPA and replace it with a system based on the protection of property rights.

 

[Voyageur]

It would be nice to believe that someone like RP could wrestle the wrongs away, but in this preset system as we have, along with our ideological, religious, geopolitical and corporate influences, just cannot see this happening; evil purposes are much embedded.

A line from a movie comes to mind, something about doing enough due diligence to create the illusion. In this case, the candidates at these highest levels find their demographic electoral marks and set about to create the illusion with the help of a willing press - in the end, divided as always, for some their illusions will have been fulfilled, and for others they will feel cheated. In campaigning, the political will pander to all focuses of popular thought if they can, so not convinced that RP has not just found his own divergent avenue of focus along the campaign trail with true intent, which would never be granted him regardless by the PTB - will have to wait and see.

 

[Joe]

Read the book "Vote scam - the stealing of America", JFK was the last US president more or less fairly elected. All since have been selected.

http://www.amazon.com/Votescam-Stealing-James-M-Collier/dp/0963416308

Or online here

http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

As for Ron Paul, I think he's legit, but has no chance of winning, for the above reason.

Listen to his last words in this interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLonnC_ZWQ0&feature=player_embedded

He understands how the system works. He understands that the owners of big media corps essentially choose who will be president, and then sell the theft to the people as if it was their choice. This fact is spelled out very clearly in the above-mentioned book.

 

[axj]

I agree that vote fraud is a big issue, but even if he doesn't win - the fact that his ideas are becoming more popular is what is important here. Even if he doesn't win, his supporters won't just shut up and go away. I think that most Ron Paul supporters are completely "changed" in that they will not support the old corrupt system anymore.