The world Endorses Ron Paul

katsung47 · Nov 28, 2011

Ron Paul: Limit military to national defense.

…. the 6,000 soldiers lost in Iraq and Afghanistan will have died for nothing …

Activist Post: Ron Paul: Limit military to national defense

SoldierOfTheKing · Nov 29, 2011

They already died for nothing. There's nothing in Iraq or Afghanistan worth any American dying for. We do no honor to the memory of those soldiers by pretending otherwise.

Umaro · Nov 29, 2011

katsung47 said:
Ron Paul: Limit military to national defense.

. the 6,000 soldiers lost in Iraq and Afghanistan will have died for nothing

Activist Post: Ron Paul: Limit military to national defense

More U.S. Soldiers Killed Themselves Than Died in Combat in 2010 - Culture - GOOD

They're already dying in vain. To paraphrase Chomsky, there are two things you need for an endless war. To convince the population you're on the verge of victory, and to convince the population if you back out now the enemy poses a threat. America needs to stop buying into it.

katsung47 · Jan 21, 2012

People found Ron Paul is the most popular candidate in Internet. Because Internet is open place. Ron Paul got most support from military, that's can't be rigged because the donation is there.

Quote, "

Ron Paul Will Win The Presidential Election 2012 - Here's The Proof !!

RTR.org - Watch - Ron Paul Will Win The Presidential Election 2012 - Here's The Proof !!

RTR.org - Watch - Ron Paul Will Win The Presidential Election 2012 - Here's The Proof !!

Uploaded by GetRenewable on Jan 11, 2012

This is Proof: Ron Paul will win the presidential election in 2012. These are the main candidates for the upcoming elections. Notice the number of Likes and dislikes on each video. Ron Paul Dominates all by Thousands of percent. This is our new President. Dr. Ron Paul. Please keep up the good work and victory is ours. Gain Liberty. End Debt. Vote Ron Paul! New Hampshire Speech By All Presidential Candidates. PLEASE VIEW EVIDENCE: Below...

Rick Santorum: [link to www.youtube.com]

(1489 views - 9 likes 76 dislikes)

Newt Gingrich: [link to www.youtube.com]

(3,082 views - 16 likes / 124 dislikes)

Jon Huntsman: [link to www.youtube.com]

(3,087 views - 35 likes 100 dislikes)

Mitt Romney: [link to www.youtube.com]

(20,600 views - 335 likes 690 dislikes!!) and they call him the winner! hahahah

RON PAUL: [link to www.youtube.com]
(129,000 views - 3,916 likes - 44 dislikes.)

Now YOU tell me who is gonna win. It's an obvious landslide victory."

I still say Paul has no chance because this is a covert totalitarian. They control election system and play you people fool.

Quote:

Just look at how 'successful' Ron Paul was against John McCain and Mitt Romney in his bid for the 2008 nomination. He led all kinds of gallup and straw polls, he even led the way in raising funds via internet campaigning...yet how much success did he have in securing the nomination?

bricklayer · Jan 21, 2012

Ron Paul is wrong in the same way DaisyDay often accuses me of being wrong, by starting from where we are not.
If everything was the way it should be, Ron Paul would be the man to keep it on track.
To get there, we need someone who is able to deal with where we are, and Ron Paul is not that man.

Polycarp1 · Jan 21, 2012

Douger said:
That was an interesting video, thank you for posting it.

Read up on Paul's proposed platforms, I think you'll find that he does have some very good solutions.

I could really poison the well here by describing some of Paul's solutions as "Final" ... and I won't really do it, though I'm sufficiently amused by the remark to repeat it.

My issue with Paul's "solutions" is that they generally involve throwing out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak. In the name of considering nearly all taxation as the unjust taking of property without compensation, Paul proposes disassembling virtually every social protection this country has built in 80 years -- without proposing any corresponding private-sector initiatives to aid those in need.

I think it's possible for a few American citizens to vote for Paul with a clear conscience. But for me, any Christian who casts a vote for Paul and then says he can read the Gospel, particularly the 7th and 25th chapters of Matthew, without being convicted of sin, is engaging in hypocrisy of the first order.

bricklayer · Jan 21, 2012

Polycarp1 said:
I could really poison the well here by describing some of Paul's solutions as "Final" ... and I won't really do it, though I'm sufficiently amused by the remark to repeat it.

My issue with Paul's "solutions" is that they generally involve throwing out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak. In the name of considering nearly all taxation as the unjust taking of property without compensation, Paul proposes disassembling virtually every social protection this country has built in 80 years -- without proposing any corresponding private-sector initiatives to aid those in need.

I think it's possible for a few American citizens to vote for Paul with a clear conscience. But for me, any Christian who casts a vote for Paul and then says he can read the Gospel, particularly the 7th and 25th chapters of Matthew, without being convicted of sin, is engaging in hypocrisy of the first order.

There is 180% of difference between a personal responsibility to God, toward each other and
a public responsibility to each other, toward each other.

Charity is indispensable to freedom. Taking from some and transferring to others generates more need than it fulfills. It encourages dependency and discourages charity. The mandatory transfer of wealth for the purpose of equality of out come is anathema to freedom and charity.

Your disregard full the voluntary nature of Christ's example, the voluntary nature of Christianity, of charity, is disappointing.

Don't believe for a moment that just because you advocate that someone else have what they earned transfered to yet another that you have given anything. Such perceptions of charity were held by the Pharasis.

I don't agree with Ron Paul, but I really don't like it when someone claims that Christianity advocates the mandatory transfer of wealth, or equates taxes with charity, or denies the voluntary nature of what Jesus describes in Mathew.

Polycarp1 · Jan 21, 2012

bricklayer said:
Your disregard full the voluntary nature of Christ's example, the voluntary nature of Christianity, of charity, is disappointing.

Don't believe for a moment that just because you advocate that someone else have what they earned transfered to yet another that you have given anything. Such perceptions of charity were held by the Pharasis.

I don't agree with Ron Paul, but I really don't like it when someone claims that Christianity advocates the mandatory transfer of wealth, or equates taxes with charity, or denies the voluntary nature of what Jesus describes in Mathew.

Yep. That's why they're called the Two Great Recommendations. (I do agree that a voluntary gift is better than forced assistance -- and I doubt you can give me a single example from history, antyime, anywhere, where all human need was met by either individual labor on the part of the person in need or by voluntary gift. I did stress the failure on Paul's part to even suggest what the private sector might do to compensate for what he takes away.

Douger · Jan 21, 2012

Polycarp1 said:
Yep. That's why they're called the Two Great Recommendations. (I do agree that a voluntary gift is better than forced assistance -- and I doubt you can give me a single example from history, antyime, anywhere, where all human need was met by either individual labor on the part of the person in need or by voluntary gift. I did stress the failure on Paul's part to even suggest what the private sector might do to compensate for what he takes away.

Wait a second, are you seriously implying that there should be forced compliance to Christian beliefs?

EdwinWillers · Jan 21, 2012

bricklayer said:
Shame on you. Christians like you have forced many horrible things on poeple over the centuries. You misrepresent Christ and His church. You're no better than a Christian taliban.

Taking from one and transferring it to another generates more demand than it fulfills. It encourages dependence and discourages charity.

God did not give the law intending that we keep it; He gave the law to reveal that we can't. You do so remind me of a Pharasis.

Quoted for truth!

I'm sick of people mis-representing Christ (whether naively, ignorantly, or with full awareness) to promote their own political world views, all the while doing untold, unimaginable, and often irreparable damage to the very ones for whom they claim such compassion. It's truly despicable.

Nurbz · Jan 21, 2012

bricklayer said:
Shame on you. Christians like you have forced many horrible things on poeple over the centuries. You misrepresent Christ and His church. You're no better than a Christian taliban.

Taking from one and transferring it to another generates more demand than it fulfills. It encourages dependence and discourages charity.

God did not give the law intending that we keep it; He gave the law to reveal that we can't. You do so remind me of a Pharasis.

It's a good thing hyperbole isn't a sin.

And it was the Pharisees that loved and hoarded money, and justified trying to keep it rather than help others.
Luke 16:14-15
"No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money." The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus. He said to them, "You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God's sight."

I'm not making any judgements since I'm not perfect in this area, but if Christians were to behave as instructed in the bible, there wouldn't be a need for social programs... how many needy people have you invited to dinner at your home?

Luke 14:13
Then Jesus said to his host, When you give a luncheon or dinner, do not invite your friends, your brothers or sisters, your relatives, or your rich neighbors; if you do, they may invite you back and so you will be repaid. But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.

Jesus and the bible spoke a lot about wealth, and none of it was good. Living in a large house and blessed with a large surplus of money falls under greed and sin, because you are not using most of it to take care of the needy and sick. Since obviously it's difficult to do that in reality, there needs to be other ways to pick up the slack. How many meals could our TV's and computers have provided for others?

Matthew 19:21
Jesus answered, If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.

Luke 6:24
But woe unto you rich, for you are receiving your comfort in full.

Proverbs 28:20
"A Faithful Man Will Abound With Blessings, But He Who Hastens To Be Rich Will Not Go Unpunished."

Just to make a point, at a time of kings, he said all rulers were appointed by God, and not to obey only governments of christians in a representitive democracy(republic).

Romans 13:6-7
This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are Gods servants, who give their full time to governing. Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

zoink · Jan 21, 2012

Polycarp1 said:
But for me, any Christian who casts a vote for Paul and then says he can read the Gospel, particularly the 7th and 25th chapters of Matthew, without being convicted of sin, is engaging in hypocrisy of the first order.

Matthew 7 and 25 cover a lot of ground; mind explaining which specific parts should make Paul supporters feel like a hypocrites?

How do you rationalize advocating that government initiate aggression against non-Christians to force them to follow our beliefs?

Polycarp1 · Jan 22, 2012

Douger said:
Wait a second, are you seriously implying that there should be forced compliance to Christian beliefs?

If you read what I wrote, I was recommending that Christians do what they claim to believe is right.

Douger · Jan 22, 2012

Polycarp1 said:
If you read what I wrote, I was recommending that Christians do what they claim to believe is right.

Oh okay, I'm very cool with that

That's why I'm a Paul supporter. He'll do a lot to move the country away from the injustice and coercion it currently imposes on much of the world in the name of enforcing morality.

Christians should do what THEY believe is right and not lock up or kill those who don't do the same.

Rion · Jan 22, 2012

...The world endorsed Obama last time. This may not work in Paulie's favor.

katsung47 · Jan 28, 2012

The World is Endorsing Ron Paul For President 2012

The World is Endorsing Ron Paul For President 2012 - YouTube

katsung47 · Feb 3, 2012

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']SHOCKING PROOF: IOWA GOP RIGGED CAUCUS VOTES[/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']SHOCKING PROOF: IOWA GOP RIGGED CAUCUS VOTES - YouTube[/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'][/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']They behave like thieves.

Tonight's Iowa Vote Count To Take Place At Secret Location

Concerns about subversion grow after Republican strategist says GOP establishment will not allow Ron Paul to win

Paul Joseph Watson

Related: Republican Insider: GOP Establishment Planning To Subvert Iowa to Prevent Ron Paul WinTonight’s final vote tally for the Iowa caucuses will take place at a secret undisclosed location, an announcement that has stoked fears of vote fraud amongst Ron Paul supporters, concerns that were heightened following a Republican insider’s claim that the GOP establishment will not allow Paul to win.

Tonight's Iowa Vote Count To Take Place At Secret Location - informationliberation

[/FONT]

Ortho_Cat · Feb 8, 2012

man, this guy is an enigma:

A Night To Remember: Dr. Paul Finishes 2nd, Leapfrogging over Gingrich & Romney, HOORAY! - YouTube

I don't think he's presidential material, but dang, his ideas are seductive. If he had a slicker salesman for his ideas, i think they could really put up a good show.

katsung47 · Feb 10, 2012

Ron Paul has no chance. The ruler of this country rigged the election to pick up their own puppet because they control the voting system. They justify the result by faked poll because they control media.

Here is the proof. People found Ron Paul is the most popular candidate in Internet. Because Internet is open place. Ron Paul got most support from military, that's can't be rigged because the donation is there.

Quote, "

Ron Paul Will Win The Presidential Election 2012 - Here's The Proof !!

RTR.org - Watch - Ron Paul Will Win The Presidential Election 2012 - Here's The Proof !!

RTR.org - Watch - Ron Paul Will Win The Presidential Election 2012 - Here's The Proof !!

Uploaded by GetRenewable on Jan 11, 2012

This is Proof: Ron Paul will win the presidential election in 2012. These are the main candidates for the upcoming elections. Notice the number of Likes and dislikes on each video. Ron Paul Dominates all by Thousands of percent. This is our new President. Dr. Ron Paul. Please keep up the good work and victory is ours. Gain Liberty. End Debt. Vote Ron Paul! New Hampshire Speech By All Presidential Candidates. PLEASE VIEW EVIDENCE: Below...

Rick Santorum: [link to www.youtube.com]
(1489 views - 9 likes 76 dislikes)

Newt Gingrich: [link to www.youtube.com]
(3,082 views - 16 likes / 124 dislikes)

Jon Huntsman: [link to www.youtube.com]
(3,087 views - 35 likes 100 dislikes)

Mitt Romney: [link to www.youtube.com]

(20,600 views - 335 likes 690 dislikes!!) and they call him the winner! hahahah
RON PAUL: [link to www.youtube.com]

(129,000 views - 3,916 likes - 44 dislikes.)

Now YOU tell me who is gonna win. It's an obvious landslide victory."

I still say Paul has no chance because this is a covert totalitarian. They control election system and play you people fool.

Quote:

Just look at how 'successful' Ron Paul was against John McCain and Mitt Romney in his bid for the 2008 nomination. He led all kinds of gallup and straw polls, he even led the way in raising funds via internet campaigning...yet how much success did he have in securing the nomination?

NightHawkeye · Feb 10, 2012

katsung47 said:
SHOCKING PROOF: IOWA GOP RIGGED CAUCUS VOTES
SHOCKING PROOF: IOWA GOP RIGGED CAUCUS VOTES - YouTube
They behave like thieves.

I will tell you that the overall state results didn't vary too much from the count in my own caucus which consisted of several hundred people. Sadly, Ron Paul wasn't in the running ... not because of any cheating ... but because not enough people voted for him.

For the record, Mitt Romney won my precinct's caucus by a goodly number of votes.

The world Endorses Ron Paul

Newbie

Christian Spenglerian

Senior Veteran

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Born-again Liberal Episcopalian

Well-Known Member

Born-again Liberal Episcopalian

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

:-)

Born-again Liberal Episcopalian

Veteran

Annuit Cœptis

Newbie

Newbie

Orthodox Christian

Newbie

Work-in-progress

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency