Ron Paul funding levels indicate he's in it for the long haul (NEWS)

"Ron Paul's 114 percent increase is in stark contrast to the decrease suffered by Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, and John McCain. Romney's fundraising was down 29 percent. Giuliani was down 40 percent. McCain was down 55 percent. " - http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

It looks like his message is finally getting thru despite mainstream media's attempts to distort it.

If he can focus that money and manage to win or come in second in the first couple of primaries he could find himself with a shot at making a decent run.

My suggestion is that if you want to work on the Ron Paul campaign, that you go work for him, and stop posting threads on non-related boards.

still won't help him and his kooky voting record... Mr. Protectionist

i love the uninformed echo'ing of pundits.. classic

So I don't know anything really about Ron Paul, so besides his anti war platform, what else is he about?

Don't hate.... appreciate

Gee, how could his tiny group of supporters that manipulate online polls and Digg donate so much money to him? Must be fundraising fraud.

In a nutshell he is pro-life, for lower taxes and smaller government. He is also for personal freedom and privacy. He wants to take us out of the WTO and remove us from things like NAFTA and other trade agreements where anyone but our government makes he rules. He thinks that individuals and companies should be able to strike their own trade deals without having to work with these groups. He is against gun control, for home schooling and thinks that we should stop giving aid to countries that hate us.

In many ways he is what the republican party was before they sold their souls to the religious right.

I don't agree with everything he stands for, but I like some of his views and I think he is better than most of the candidates out there.

Kane, may I decode that? He is against abortion, and would close abortion clinics and appoint judges to strike down pro abortion rulings. He is for lower taxes, smaller governemnts, personal freedoms and privacy, provided you are doing what he agrees with. If not (like say, wanting an abotion) you can go to hell and die you lowlife.

he wants to take the US out of thw WTO and NAFTA, allowing industry to self-serve and create artificial barriers to outside market sources, all while driving retails prices up as industry leaders line their pockets with little competition. He would rather a few rich corporate barons make the rules rather than some will thought out system.

He is against gun control, because he knows at some point he will need one to protect himself from what will likely be a growing underclass of people pushed to crime to live. He is for home schooling, mostly so rich people don't have to subject their children to the children of the 'hood next door. He thinks the US should stop giving aid to countries that hate us, so they will have to ask the other countries that hate us to help instead, banding them together into a stronger alliance against the US.

In many ways he is like the republican party before they chose to try to get elected instead.

Verifyable sources of Ron Paul's Political Stands.

he is a shill. wake up people.

You bring up great points.

I will not vote for a pro-life candidate anymore. Its a good stick by which to measure their understanding of things in general. Any candidate who is pro-life is usually has no problems imposing his will on us in other areas as well.

I will not vote for a pro-life candidate anymore. Its a good stick by which to measure their understanding of things in general. Any candidate who is pro-life is usually has no problems imposing his will on us in other areas as well.

That's always been my philosophy. No way am I going to vote for someone who I know for a fact would take away my rights to my own body if given the choice.

Ok he is being misrepresented on the prolife front.

His real position IS pro life But it does not mean that he would outlaw abortion, he would not,nor would he cow tow to the religious right on this issue in supreme court appointments.

Here is what HE REALLY thinks on abortion. It is not provided for within the constitution therefore it should be a states rights issue.

Back in the 50s states rights became synonamous with racialissues but in this case he has a valid point. The constitution is very specific in that anything not enumerated within the constitution shouldbe left to the states to decide. To outlaw abortion or to legalize it once and for all the constitution would have to be amended, something that wont happen anytime soon on THIS issue.

Ron Paul is the onlly candidate that is running on issues that were set forth by the founders of this country, he is the only candidate who does not support maintaining themodified police state that we are currently living in. Electing him as President isn't going to get us out of the WTA, nor will it solve the abortion issue once and for all, our country is set upon a system of checks and balances and he is the only candidate advocating restoration of those balances. What his presidency would do is send a clear message toboth the republicans and the democrats that the country has had enough of both the far right and the far left politics.

If this country is to be saved it will be libertarian ideals that save it.

I fully support Ron paul, not because I agree with all of his positions but because taken en masse they are far more in line with my ideology than either the democrats or the republicans.

Ron Paul has momentum, he is in a position to shake things up, particularly for the Republican party, if you really want change and the responsibility that comes with freedom, real freedom don't swallow the rot espoused by the media or by the Sean Hannitys of the world, evaluate the candidates yourself and choose based on the one you most feel represents your views

OK Off my soapbox.

Ron Paul will rescend such worthless government guidance such as OSHA, the FDA, Federal scholl regulations, and almost anything else that has assisted the US in becoming more than a third world country.

Remember, a vote for Ron Paul is a vote to keep the government out of your business, even at the loss of a few rights, safe food, and safe products.

Patrons, drink a hefty dose of collodial silver, and step to the right. Thank you.

SMmmm..hrrr..AHAAHAH...HAAHAHAHAHA *gasp* AAHAHAHHHHAHAAHAAa shit, ok, I lose. I'm laughing.

The Supreme Court has swung to the right anyhow. Even when Bush leaves office you will feel his whip for at least the next 20 years with what is ruled in the Supreme Court.

Mike, perhaps you haven't looked around your neck of the woods recently. You are surrounded by people who need the state to protect them, from evil bosses, nasty doctors, dirty food, fake prescription drugs, unsafe cars, drunk drivers, and about a million other things.

Many of the agencies that people say are worthless are in fact making a difference. Most often, that difference isn't noticed in the same manner that most people don't notice airplanes until one crashes. When was the last time you saw a headline "27,000 flights arrive without loss of life, injury, or a spilled drink". You don't because it isn't news. It also isn't news when people don't get hurt at work, don't have thier cars blow up, and don't get fucked over at work.

Nature abhors a vacuum. Pull those agencies out, and the vacuum will be filled with greedy, nasty people who will take advantage of their fellow "libertarians" until the cows come home.

As for abortion, "pro life" is pretty much specifically "anti abortion". If he isn't anti-abortion, he would be "pro choice". He isn't. He doesn't have to "cow tow to the religious right" to think that he knows what a woman should do.

Libertarian is, in theory, the politics of the intelligent and self-reliant. The vast majority of americans can't take care of themselves without help from Uncle Sugar. You really think they would know what to do with more rights to "do what they know is right?"

Im not wearing blinders and neither are you I dont believe that Ron paul can wave some magic wand and make OSHA and all the other agencies disappear any more than you do.

And I dont think people really need the government to protect them from themselves, be it purchasing antibiotic eyedrops for themselves or purchasing the sexual congress of a woman.

Your premise is based on the idea that we are too dumb to fend for ourselves and that without the government to use our tax dollars to insure that all buffets have sneeze guards we would be too dumb to realize the health hazards involved.

When i took my first political science class at The University of Alabama, Huntsville the professor was then chairman of the state deomcratic party and the first hour of the first day he said to always remember the first rule of government

Bigger Government is Better Government.

If you agree with that then the ideology you espouse is probably correct in your eyes

If you do not agree with that I suggest you re-examine your position

as for the abortion issue you side stepped the point. EVEN IF the supreme court overturns rowe/wade, which isnt likely, it would not outlaw abortion, it would simply make it a states right issue like it was before rowe/wade.

the same would be true for many of the agencies you claim we need, you offer up the typical Democratic talking points but you dont consider the flip side, how long would an airline stay in business if it wasnt safe to fly? I would maintain that the market can better regulate itself, particularly when the citizens realize that they hold the power. You may not remember things like the boycotts of grocery stores because prices were too high, but I do and guess what? They were effective.

yes a lot of people are lazy but we have bred that laziness into them, its too easy to just let the government fix it and in doing so the governmet has fixed it to the point where 1 in 33 americans is in jail, on parole or on probation. We have more people in prison per capita than any nation on earth yet we crow about how great it is to be free?

Free?

FREE?

tell that to someone who is in jail because he was in possession of a PLANT that the government has determined shouldn't be here.

Exactly. Bring the CONSTITUTION back, baby!

Ditto. ...

Exactly... all the hypothetical scenarios put forth assume Ron Paul would be able to behave like some sort of dictator if he was elected. That's simply not how it works, and enormous changes would not occur over night. However, he would begin to move things in a better direction. Slowly, but cumulatively.

People complain about a two-party system and when there is a real alternative they poopoo it. Are we better off that Dems and Repubs are involving us in a war that's going to cost our children tax dollars to pay back? Does the fact that America spends more money on education per child than just about every nation on earth, yet American kids can't compete academically with those from most 1st world nations concern anybody?

Encouraging spending of more money in the wrong areas, bigger beauracracies, less self-reliance and more individual and collective irresponsibility, is not the way to go.

None of it matters. Hilary is going to be the next president.