no thanx

+1

you prefer authoritarianism. ok then.

-8

mariostar is a c*ckf*g.

Maybe he just isn't going to vote for a republican.

+1

pendejo(s).

-3

The colors should better represent his sexuality; MAKE IT A RAINBOW.

-2

RON PAUL SUXORZ. EVEN ANONYMOUS ONLY DONATED $0.67!

-9 [show comment][hide comment]

wow dasuber-whatever. that's like saying "if you didn't vote for bush you voted for the terrorists". mentalities like this further cement my hatred of the republican party. oh, and f*ck ron paul.

-4

at least Mario Star is polite.

-2

i'm a c*ckf*g? self-sponsorship, now that's f*ggish behavior. ;)

+4

sex with ron paul

+6

vote KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN PAUL 2008

+8

RP 2008

+4

Ron Pauls ideology seems flawed to me... I dont understand what makes people so fascinated with him. Still, he's a better candidate than Hillary or Obama, lol

+1

I actually like Bill Richardson the best out of every candidate, however the problem is from the looks of the polls hes probably not going to win.

-1

Who the f*ck is ron paul?

Well... Here is the deal. If Clinton, Obama, or Edwards get elected we won't be in bad shape, but if Mitt, Huck, or Guliani get elected then were up sh*t creek! Thats why I'm voting for RP in the primaries. Mostly because he's the only republican thats not if a douche. If he wins the primaries but doesn't win the main election. No big whoop, but if Mitt, Huck, or Guli win then you know what they are going to do. Pretty much what GWB did.

+1

Secondly, don't you realize that Ron Paul is the only cannidate that voted against the war in Iraq and the PATRIOT Act? Have you been flying lately? I'm sure the Patriot act is the biggest impact on all our lives. I don't give a sh*t who you are, but that bill was pure evil in its intentions and applications. So get a bit pragmatic and realize what is going on.

-1

Let me put this straight: Social issues > Economics. Always more important. And by social issues I mean liberal social issues, for me at least. Ron Paul is pretty much neutral on all social issues, so hes kinda stagnant to me. Hillary and Obama, and well any of the other Democrats I can think of, will make us look better to the rest of the world. Ron Paul will make us look better foreign policy-wise, but his economics will send us back to the 19th-century.

-1

Barack Obama N*GG*!

+2

I know believe Borack Obama is going to win this election even if the whole poulation of the U.S. votes for Ron Paul.

+1

novelty.ytmnd.com

-1

Just say YES to Liberty!

+1

I'll just say NO to crackpots like Ron Paul!

-7

I'll say no to humorless cranks like HerbSewell.

+1

just say yes to EPIC freedom, http://tropicalfreedom.ytmnd.com/

+1

^ retarded

sneaky, un-EPIC east german ^

You want epic? I'll give you EPIC: http://youtube.com/watch?v=EI_8a5DUaJY

Ron Paul a crackpot? I don't think so? Someone who will let dumbasses like them just mind their own business? I do think so.

-5

Epic? That's not reggae, man.

Reggae puts people to sleep

"European Liberals complain more about Israel than they do about Saudi Arabia!" There's nothing actually liberal about those people. They are a bunch of vicious political hacks who make every effort to silence the opposition, and arrogantly look down on those who differ. Thanks to those people, the word 'liberal' has come to mean the exact opposite of what it actually meant.

Wasted effort, this site is full of commies and zionists.

-12 [show comment][hide comment]

At first glance I thought you said combine

+8

Don't forget welfare moochers and politically correct crybabies

+5

and those sneaky east germans

+5

and jews

-1

Milton Friedman was a jew. I respect him. Ayn Rand was a jew turned atheist. Neither would dream of being state parasites.

-1

Wasted effort, this site is full of people who aren't paranoid about fair trade and international Jewish conspiracies.

+2

'fair trade' is a democrat platform

Way to go mariostar....

-1

I could be considered a Zionist in the fact that I have sympathy for Jews for having their relatively benign religion being plagiarized and spread all over the planet like cancers by Christians and Muslims only to be oppressed back by those cancerous offshoots. I also like how liberal Israel is and the fact they blow the f*ck out of sexist, homophobic Palestinians. I however DESPISE the Neo-Con Christian Zionists in the US government because they are only using Israel for a bullsh*t Jesus prophecy.

I am also fairly annoyed at the scum hypocritical liberals who hate Israel and support the Palestinians (and Muslims in general) who, while most are not Islamic terrorists, are pretty much as a rule homophobic for Islamic reasons and also the fact that they associate homosexuals with Israel and see them as traitors. The only exceptions to this are countries like Turkey, Lebanon, and some [other] Non-Arab Muslim countries. Sh*t, European Liberals complain more about Israel than they do about Saudi Arabia!

Sarcasm.. Learn it comment negativing idiot. Commies, Zionists, Jews alot of people lump them in the same category.... right? Learn to f*cking read before you accuse someone of racism.

"European Liberals complain more about Israel than they do about Saudi Arabia!" There's nothing actually liberal about those people. They are a bunch of vicious political hacks who make every effort to silence the opposition, and arrogantly look down on those who differ. Thanks to those people, the word 'liberal' has come to mean the exact opposite of what it actually meant.

JOHN CONNOR 2008!

-1

JON CARRIE '04, VOAT %

+7

Ron Paul for Liberty and freedom!

We'd certainly be free from any responsibility for the welfare of our fellow human beings.

As we should be.

+1

@CaribDevist - Have you donated to starving kids in Sudan latley?

What's ironic is that all the crybaby Europeans and Canadians like to accuse us of greed, due to the fact that our government donates far less per capita to 3rd world nations than their nations. The problem is, for them, is that Americans actually donate MORE per capita when private contributions are factored in. They make themselves look like self-righteous dicks for nothing.

Woot! I know the singer xD

+1

gtfo

+1

mastersitsu 2008

-1

VOAT FIEV FOR OBAMA

+2

LOL! Spoken like so many democrat supporters! (except those for Kucinich+Gravel)

Democrats are retarded. Enjoy your socialism->economic collapse and trampled rights...

-2

It seems like all the reasons I used to support democrats erode more and more. I at one time thought they were cool, because I thought they were the party of Cheech and Chong, Timothy Leary and Hunter S. Thompson. Now, it becomes more evident that they are really the party of the crabby old lady who always shows up at town hall to scream obscenities.

+2

CARRRRRRRRRIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

"Democrats are retarded. Enjoy your socialism->economic collapse and trampled rights..." Ah yes... for a candle burns, and tears roll down lady liberty's cheeks for the oppressed Swedes.

While I don't agree with 100% socialism saying it collapses economies is utterly retarded. Chile, Norway, Sweden, and others are thriving now. Granted it depends on the country, and fast implementing a Socialistic economy on par with those countries in the US might be a bad idea.

That retard isn't going to be the Republican candidate and everyone with at least half a brain knows it.

+4

The reason this "retard" isnt going to be the Republican cannidate is that everyone with at least half a brain isn't a registered republican

-2

f*ck ron paul. ^^

+3

stfu

+1

a candidate who is anti-choice on the abortion rights issue does not represent "freedom" and "liberty" - he wants the government controlling reproductive behavior. No thanks to the government in our bedrooms.

+1

So it is perfectly okay to murder babies?

-5 [show comment][hide comment]

He's been a doctor for like 50 years, and he's delivered over 4,000 babies. Furthermore, he was responsible for the legal rights that those unborn children had, which oddly, seem to dissappear the moment the word abortion is used. Long story short, he's not against abortion because he's against free choice or women's rights, but because from a biological standpoint, he beleives it is a loss of life, me and my biology degree are inclined to agree.

-2

"No thanks to the government in our bedrooms." Last time I checked, people weren't performing abortions in their own bedrooms, and it was hardly a private practice. It's simply mass-produced, socially-acceptable murder.

+7

I personally respect both sides of the issue, and find it difficult to firmly swing either way.

+7

You are entitled to your opinions and so is Ron Paul. It is just misleading to say he is the candidate for "freedom" and "liberty" when he wants to take legal rights away and have the government intrude into people's reproductive behavior, i.e. "the bedroom."

-1

chuft, he would NOT make abortion illegal. He would leave it up to the states to decide. PER THE CONSTITUTION.

Certain human rights cannot be trampled upon by the states, PER THE CONSTITUTION. Obviously he would not want to leave it to the states except as a means to an end, since it is a federal right at the moment.

-1

"chuft, he would NOT make abortion illegal. He would leave it up to the states to decide. PER THE CONSTITUTION." states are forced to follow the supreme law of the land, and the 9th amendment protects abortion rights (as ruled by the supreme court, the final arbiter AS PER THE CONSTITUTION). go support states' sovereignity on a neo-confederate forum.

-2

^ argument ad-hominem

Early term abortion is fine, but why do so many bitches wait until the baby's brain begins to develop? At that point it's murder - unless they have a serious health issue and having the baby puts them at risk. Ban late term abortion.

+3

If a fetus is a person, and said person is about to be aborted, then let this person stand and tell us not to abort him. Otherwise, the fetus is part of the mother, and as such, it's the mother's choice.

-2

man I love to dna test criminals, it works so well, don't you agree?

^ yeah, just ask O.J. Simpson

madDog, the OP means that Ron Paul supposedly supports individual choice, but he wants the government to legislate on moral issues.

+1

"supports individual choice" does not necessarily mean that you can necessarily do whatever you want to people, now does it? Should you have the right to murder people? Should you have the right to rob the bank? Should you have the right to mug old ladies?

"Should you have the right to murder people? Should you have the right to rob the bank? Should you have the right to mug old ladies?" read up on political philosophy: libertarianism adheres to the liberal school of philosophy (liberterianism = neoliberalism), thus all of those three intricate issues are NOT moral issues - they are property issues. Murder is desecration of property. Robbing a bank is theft of property. Mugging is theft of property.

Ron Paul is just for freedom overall. When he says he is personally opposed to certain things he tends to always say "Let the states decide". While I admire his willing to not force his views on people, his policies are so utterly loose it will make the USA uncoordinated and "out of whack", so to speak. He will turn us from the United States of America to the Incoherent States of America.

By the way if anyone wants my opinion on abortion I'm an undecided fence-sitter; it creates a moral dilemma for me. Though if a strong wind were to blow parallel to say fence, I'd fall on the Pro-Choice side.

human cells > Crack Hores who can't keep their legs crossed.

-1

kill babies.

abortion isnt the biggest issue facing this nation. its a wedge issue used to keep people distracted and divided.

+21

Agreed. This is a measly nothing issue compared to the monstrous issues such as the federal reserve, the role of the United Nations, taxes and spending, habeus corpus, the war on drugs, the bill of rights, the constitution, rule of law, I could go on.

+4

The legality (or lack of it) of abortion is far more likely to affect the average person than the nebulous issues you list. I doubt a pregnant teenager cares too much about the United Nations or habeas corpus for terrorists.

+2

How about habeus corpus for activists? Habeus corpus for environmentalists? Or habeus corpus for civil libertarians? Another thing is that Ron Paul is most offended by third trimester abortion. If you think that it is okay to have a baby for 6 months, but then decide to have an abortion, there is something wrong with you. Third, Ron Paul proposes to only prosecute the doctor, not the mother. Fourth, he is a federalist, meaning that he would only remove Roe Vs. Wade, but not directly outlaw abortion.

+1

And you think those other issues are nebulous? Well then you are simply uneducated. The Federal Reserve bails out the banks, at everyone else's expense. This hurts the economy. The average Joe's money is worth less. The price of gasoline goes up. You don't think this affects everybody? How about the fact that so much of our economy changes when the price of oil goes up? Have you not noticed that the price of EVERYTHING goes up when the price of oil goes up? And I'm just getting started here.

+1

maddogsol, do you know what happened when the Fed didn’t bail out failing banks? It has nothing to do with what money is “worth”. Gas…are you f*cking kidding me. Repeat after me, the Fed has nothing to do with the cost of a barrel of oil. There is no man behind the curtain arbitrarily raising prices on poor stupid joe. You got a major gripe about gas, call the Chinese and Indian embassies and explain to them how they shouldn’t industrialize anymore because it inconveniences joe.

+2

DIE CHRISTAN DIE

Habeas corpus has not been suspended for U.S. citizens (unlike in the Civil War) so I don't know what you are talking about. I agree with a lot of Ron Paul's positions, I voted for him as a libertarian way back when, but the reality is legalizing drugs or getting rid of taxes isn't going to happen, but getting rid of abortion rights might, which makes him dangerous. BTW 3d trimester abortions are already illegal.