I guess, in Ron Paul's capitalistic view, women who cease to work for establishments where sexual harassment takes place (and even go as far as to boycott them) would take a toll on the profit margin of those establishments. A similar example of his is that an establishment, such as a diner, which disallowed minorities, would be eliminated in the free market, as other establishments without such policy would gain much greater profit. In regard to HIV proliferation, I'm sorry, but I seriously doubt people in America are still so ignorant as to not know what contraception is, or the consequences of sexual activity without it. Even people on the streets know this, who have seldom frequented educational facilities.

To my knowledge, Ron Paul has repetitively displayed disavowal for the racial remarks in the newsletters, and has even acknowledged that it is legitimate to criticize his own neglect in supervising the newsletters -- his reasoning being that he was practicing medicine full-time back then, with little time to review the newsletters. Concerning his economic ideology, I believe his form of capitalism, under a Paul presidency, would still be only minimally less worse than the crony capitalism we have now. That's why I'm not voting for him or anyone for that matter; I don't believe in compromising my anti-capitalist stance just because he believes in civil liberties, a decent foreign policy, and an end to the drug war. One has to admit, though, that the establishment abhors Ron Paul: http://youtu.be/Pxzdfv13tGo.

This is victim blaming pure and simple...someone shouldn't have to leave their office because someone else is making it an unsuitable working space. If I work at a cubicle next to you and make death threats to you all day long, I would expect to be fired. If I threatened violence towards you at all, I would expect to be fired. If I threatened to rape you, I would expect to be fired. How is creating an environment where women fear for their physical safety any different? Harassment (be it sexual or otherwise) is, by definition, a disturbance or upsetting of an individual's well-being. We live in a rape culture...I get it...it doesn't mean it's acceptable and it doesn't mean Paul has any moral ground from which to make such comments.


This is also victim blaming (and ignorant). Come home with me...see the city I grew up in. See the abject poverty, the lack of education, the people who believe all sorts of myths about contraception and disease prevention (you can't get pregnant in the shower, you can't get pregnant if you're on top, you can't get pregnant if you're on your period, the list goes on and on). See the AIDS rate that has been acknowledged to have been perpetuated and increased by congress.

Just because you are a privileged individual does not mean everyone has had the same amount of education as you and the things you take to be common knowledge are not necessarily common knowledge to all. You may find it hard to believe, but that doesn't make it any less real. 3% of the population of the nation's capital has HIV/AIDS...we have an AIDS epidemic in the capital city of the richest country in the world...and you think that's not due to ignorance? You think that's not due to malicious policies laid down by the powers that be? I don't know what to tell you...feel free to think that "people on the streets know this"...but that sounds rather vulgar to me...you got any proof to back up those claims?

Sir, I don't agree with his position because it's not realistic, but one has to see from his capitalistic perspective, that business owners would take initiative and forcibly diminish sexual harassment through enforced policy in the workplace, if victims of sexual harassment were to cease working for them collectively and boycott the establishments.



Privileged? Maybe, but are not all Americans so in the grand scheme, in contrast to the circumstances of sub-Saharan Africa? I mean, we're not living in the 18th century where one would have to be born into the gentry in order to have schooling. Just as you have heard ignorance such as "You can't get pregnant if you're on top," I have heard ignorance such as "Yeah, but it feels better going raw." I have friends in impoverished urban areas, and I, too, was raised amongst people who were unfortunate to not have strong family units. This all boils down to the family unit, in my opinion. There has to be a strong family unit with strong, determined leaders of the community in order to transform the dominant, careless lifestyles of the youth. I believe it's unrealistic to believe that this all stems from ignorance of what sexual activity without contraception entails. There is a psychology involved in this phenomenon, and it appears as though the youth just doesn't care due to the pre-existing circumstances of the community.

I hear what you're saying, but no amount of justification or semantics changes the fact that this is victim blaming. For me, that invalidates any argument, no matter how well you can explain it. Rape victims should not have to "change their outfits and their demeanors" in response to crimes against them, victims of violence or abuse should not have to "avoid areas where aggressors may lurk and avoid saying things that might potentially upset someone who would unduly exercise violence against them" to prevent further violence against them and victims of harassment should not have to "quit once the so-called harassment starts," it's that simple to me.


If you acknowledge things like the working poor and the disenfranchised, then you already understand how/why the "family unit" is under attack and thus ill-equipped to bear this burden in impoverished areas. Again, the flaw lies with the system, not the single-mother who works three jobs to barely support her two kids and therefore has no time to engage her family "appropriately."

For those of you who have not seen Ron Pauls epic what if speech he made in congress, definitely check it out-

http://www.youtube.com/w...edded&v=NIaqmF5IXV4#!

SnozzleBerry, are you... how do I say, Illuminated? You give me that impression.

Ron Paul is emerging as the only real contender to Mitt Romney for the republican nomination after a second place finish in new Hampshire. Ron Paul is the only candidate that wants to end the american reign of terror in the middle east.

You can nit pick the guy all you want about lesser issues but hes the only person that wants to stop these atrocities.

You can say ' hes unelectable ' you can say ' the system is rigged and he cant win' you can say whatever you want to justify not making an effort while Ron Paul and all his supporters that want peace are working tirelessly to restore freedom and dignity to your disgraceful country.

So whats it going to be? do you want to make a stand with Ron Paul and the rest of us that say enough is enough or do you want to sit on your hands doing nothing while this madness escalates to world war 3.

The system might be rigged and Ron Paul may not win but I urge you to be on the right side of history and at least TRY to vote someone in that lives in the real world as sees the united states for what it has become.


watch this video http://www.youtube.com/w...edded&v=Ym5ZCUr8bEY#!


The only think needed for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing.

Ron Paul takes campaign contributions from companies that are actively funding the terror and atrocities you claim he wants to stop, thus I'm forced to conclude he doesn't actually want these atrocities to stop. It does make for good campaign rhetoric though, doesn't it? I mean look how many people have come out of the woodwork to blindly follow this pied-piper.

If I tell you I don't want to hurt you and want to end your suffering while I watch my buddy assault, batter and rob you and then split the spoils of his mugging with him afterwards, I think it's pretty clear where I stand on the issue. It might be trite, it might be cliche, but actions do speak louder than words.

Ray, you have time and time again, displayed ignorance towards the political processes of my disgraceful country, so please, drop the airs of knowing what is best for us...it's unbecoming.

Okay, but he doesn't plan to compete in Florida! How in the world can you win the nomination, let alone the general election, without winning FL?

I wish there were more options, Ray, but as Snozz said it's really Corporate Guy A vs. Corporate Guy B. and Ron Paul does not transcend this.


Huntsman wants to get out as well.

Snozz, do you really think its 'smart' people that get anything done on this planet? its people that believe in themselves that get things done, not people that admit defeat before there is even a fight. As smart as you are you are you don't seem to get that basic fact of reality.

I think its unbecoming to have a candidate that wants peace and have people like you condemn him. Ron Paul cant monitor where all of his campaign contributions come from and besides, I bet if there are any contributions to Ron Paul by these people you say it pales in comparison to what the others are getting. @ a1pha, huntsman might want out of Afghanistan but the main issue here is whats going to happen with Iran. Huntsman probably wants those troops out of Afghanistan so they can go to iran.

http://thinkprogress.org...invasion-iran/?mobile=nc

Ron Pauls motivation to enter the race was to educate people about freedom and get people engaged, to send a clear message to the establishment that the young people of the country are waking up to whats going on. He probably wont win the nomination but he wins by engaging and waking people up. The Ron Paul supporters are not going away and personally I see good things happening in the future... maybe his son Rand Paul will run on the same principals.

Interesting article that Ron Paul supporters will completely overlook as they continue to support him.

The Fantastical Crackpot Cult of Ron Paul
http://www.huffingtonpos...crackpot-_b_1200608.html

TOP contributors to Ron Paul - US Army, US Navy and US Air Force are his top 3 contributor! Followed by military contractors/suppliers Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and many others. Hell, even the US Department of Defense gives him money. Yet RP supporters still stubbornly claim that he could not possibly be in the pocket of any of these sources of money.

http://www.opensecrets.o...le=2012&id=N00005906

Ron Paul is a liar. He is a Libertarian who could not get elected as a Libertarian, so he lied and said he was a Republican and ran as a Republican. The reason the Republican's do not support him is that they know he is lying about claiming to be a Republican or supporting anything that their party supports. He is a Libertarian pretending to be something he is not. When you start looking at what this guy actually believes and wants to institute if he had the power to do so.

Under a Ron Paul presidency:

*Abortion would be illegal.
*Say goodbye to Social Security and Medicare, they would be eliminated.
*Say goodbye to the EPA - Environmental Protection Agency (then say goodbye to clean air and water)
*Say goodbye to separation of church and state
*Say hello to "alternative views" of evolution such as Creationism and Intelligent Design to be forced onto public schools
*Get ready for each state to have its own form of currency (you think things are expensive now)
*Say goodbye to all financial regulations currently in place
*Say goodbye to all Government aid to the poor

This is not an America I want to live in.

In truth, Mitakuye Oyasin, Ron Paul does represent the old Republican Party platform.

of course those are his top contributors, the individual soldiers that realize they are making enemies faster than they can kill them, of course the people fighting these wars are going to see how crazy it is to be over there causing shit. It says on your link these contributions come from individuals. It makes perfect sense.

I don't even feel like getting into all the BS in that article you linked.

Let me just ask you if a world war would make for the kind of world you would want to live in? Every other candidate wants to attack Iran, Iran is backed by Russia and china, this isn't rocket science.

Ray, you repeatedly show a lack of understanding of geopolitical affairs. Mitakuye Oyasin made a fantastic post above. The Huffington Post is a reputable news source. You need to take a step back from your emotions and put the critical thinking hat on.

why not actually make a critique of my post rather than just say I don't know what I'm talking about ?

Because we tried that once before. I think YOU need to step back and make a critique of your own.

Like I said, every candidate other than Ron Paul wants to escalate the Iran situation. You tried to prove that wrong and failed in a previous post.. I'm still waiting for a reasonable response.

How can anyone logically debate an ongoing escalating situation when we don't have the facts at hand? There is key intelligence neither of us are privy to.

You have no idea how worried I am about Iran, Ray. The problem is, the US has a long history of unquestioned support for Israel. This is not going to change. Iran and Israel have been enemies for many, many, many years. This is not the US vs. Iran. This is Israel vs. Iran. Or, some might say, just another chapter in the crusades.

Bottom line: Ron Paul's plan for America makes no sense and our problems aren't going to disappear by throwing a vote his way. As the Huffington Post asks in the article you "don't even feel like getting into":



We're on the 22nd page of this thread and you have yet to lay out his plan in a way that makes any sense. The burden of proof is on you, friend.

Like I said, "Interesting article that Ron Paul supporters will completely overlook as they continue to support him."

By the way Ray, the donations to Ron Paul from the US Army, Navy and Airforce did not come from soldiers serving any of these military branches, they came from the organizations themselves as advertising and support for their causes. If a solder gives a donation to Ron Paul there is no way to track the fact that they are enlisted or serving in any specific military branch. Do not be fooled into believing that the US Army, Navy or Airforce supporting Ron Paul or any other candidate has anything to do with the soldiers or their beliefs. A few groups that also support Ron Paul and want to see him as President are the KKK and various Neo Nazi organizations, the John Birch Society and a whole host of mega corporations who want to see all the current regulations to business and the environment that protect people from corporate abuses completely destroyed, something Ron Paul has repeatedly said he would do if he were President.

Take the blinders off Ray and take a good hard honest look at the man's principles and beliefs, not just what his press releases and PR campaigns want you to know or think or not see about him. Be open to the fact that Ron Paul was not born under a double rainbow and did not get 8 holes-in-one on his very first game of golf. The man has some dangerous beliefs.

Peace brother.

I laughed my ass off at the double rainbow 8 holes in one comment. honestly I like the man and think hes the most honest politician out there. He may have some dangerous ideas that if implemented could have some bizarre consequences but what I'm saying and have been saying all along is that every other candidate has MORE dangerous/crackpot ideas than Ron Paul , the main example being war with Iran witch would more than likely lead to a world war witch I am very troubled by.

Phase 1: Vote for obama/romney.
Phase 2: continue the assault on personal liberty while attacking Iran
Phase 3: ???????

the current system clearly isn't working. Ron Paul is the only one offering any alternative and thats probably why people like him so much. Maybe his model wouldn't work, but at this point its worth a shot imo.