Tuesday, November 13, 2007
|
|
Ron Paul's Tea Party
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
1:27 PM
|
|
If you enjoyed Guy Fawkes Day, you'll like this: Seeking to capitalize on another rEvolutionary event, The Ron Paul grassroots movement is throwing a Boston Tea Party on Dec. 16.
From the website:
On December 16th, 1773, American colonists dumped tea into the Boston Harbor to protest an oppressive tax. This December 16th, American citizens will dump millions of dollars into the Ron Paul presidential campaign to protest the oppressive and unconstitutional inflation tax (which has enabled a flawed foreign policy, a costly war and the sacrificing of our liberties here at home).
Please join us this December 16th 2007 for the largest one-day political donation event in history. Our goal is to bring together 100,000 people to donate $100 each, creating a one day donation total of $10,000,000 ...
In other news, this Ron Paul rap video is pretty good.
|
|
Today I will sell an engagement ring and wedding band I've had for awhile, the result of an
engagement gone belly-up. The proceeds will go to the Ron Paul campaign on Dec. 16, the
anniversary of the Boston Tea Party when another huge "money bomb" is set for Ron
(http://www.ronpaul2008.com/), orchestrated entirely by independent volunteers
(http://teaparty07.com/).
I could put the proceeds toward a new camera or toward my next vacation. I could invest it in a high-interest savings account. But what I really want most right now is to see Ron Paul pull an upset victory in a couple early primary states and have enough money to continue competitively in the next round of primaries.
I hope and rather expect that we will raise over $10 million for the Dec. 16 tea party. What a
delicious shock wave that would send through the media who ignored him at first and through the
other presidential campaigns, especially the ones who think they've got the nomination all sewed
up. |
|
Sorry for the confusion, I actually agree with you. I think I didn't phrase that too well. "Paul is against any group rights, which run contrary to the concept of individual liberty" should have been "Paul is against any group rights, BECAUSE THEY run contrary to the concept of individual liberty". Does that make more sense?
P.S. He said this at the Values Voter debate, which is where he also plainly stated he's a Christian (I hadn't heard him say so before, so he gained my respect) and pro-life (which is great, since he's an ob-gyn and delivered 1000's of babies too). |
|
|
Google "Money Masters" and then watch it on Google Video. All of you guys who have no problem with the Federal Reserve or Central Banks in general need a history lesson. |
|
|
Paul attempted to answer Bill's question, but Bill didn't want to hear the history that would explain this. An to think, O'Reilly taught history in school. That's promoting ignorance. |
|
To: Knight_of_beawe; SteveL
Neither of you has your history correct:
1. There were Fed equivalents during much of the 19th Century, the First and Second Banks of the US.
2. There were sharp economic downturns at roughly 20-year intervals: 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, and 1892 (some of these dates may be a year or so off). All of the downturns followed a pattern of sell-off of stocks, several months of depressed conditions, and recovery. None of them was near as severe as the 1930s (hence the name "Great Depression").
3. Even left-leaning historians now tend to agree that the 1819 and 1837 downturns were the direct result of the Bank of the US messing around in the credit market. The 1892 downturn was largely the result of Federal and State subsidies to railroads that proved not economically viable. The causes of the 1857 and 1873 downturns are quite disputed. (Similarly, the cause of the Great Depression is still quite disputed, but more and more historians are rejecting FDR's propaganda that the free market was the cause and focusing on the actions of Fed).
4. The 19th Century is my favorite period of history. It had a very dark side, rampant racism and sexism. But, look at all the progress. In 1801 slavery was legal almost worldwide. In 1900 it was gone; even the Russian serfs were free. In 1801 women basically had no rights. By 1900 most of the ancient pro-male property laws were mere vestiges. Women's suffrage was gathering momentum and would soon prevail. Economically, the US and many parts of Europe enjoyed the closest thing to a free market that the world has ever seen. People could go where they please, say what they wished, and earn there livings without massive taxation and forms in triplicate. Progress was astonishing. Technology went wild and the standard of living for the average person improved many times. |
|
Sorry Anne
That's way too simplistic. Paul does not blame American's; IE the troops; you and me, etc. He states very clearly that it is the radical few that have hijacked our foreign policy and implement it in the name of America that is dangerous and needs to be changed. Blowback is a term coined by our own CIA that basically says that reprisals are our own Governments doing. That isn't made up stuff. What if it is really true that the most powerful advisors to the President since the early 90's have it all wrong and are instigating problems? If that were really true, wouldn't you want to change that? Listen...I served in Iraq in 91 and was mobilized again in 03'. I have almost 20 years in the Army and am no peacenik.
People don't read or question anything anymore...
Yeah...you have the recalcitrant individual that will smart off with their teacher or boss, but they are quite comfortable to believe Bush or a Clinton when they tell us that Osama and Saddam are "buddies". Like Sheep to the slaughter. Good Grief!!!
Why don't you read Chalmers Johnson's book "Blowback". |
|
To be sure that what I heard paul say the first time was really what I heard him say.
If, by now, you and the paulists still deny that paul blames America for 9-11, then you are ALL as delusional as he, which if course, is probably why you and the paulists back him.
It’s all too obvious that paul could NOT answer O’Reilly’s questions…as he spins off to something else, and answers questions with a question… A question is not an answer!
paul gets more outrageous and delusional each time he speaks publicly.
|
|
|
|
Huckabee tends to support big government as well. I wouldn't vote for him myself. I respect him and I believe he's standing on his principles. I just don't agree with him on some issues, mainly personal liberty.
As for Dr. Dobson, he's actually a HUGE gaming opponent. He actually drove through last year's Internet gaming restrictions. Check out http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/A000004244.cfm and http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling , for starters. Using government to stop people from playing poker is a passion of his, and he's not shy about it. Sorry, but that's WAY too much government for me.
Here are two great articles on liberty: http://tapscottscopydesk.blogspot.com/2006/10/armey-letter -on-dobson-draws-line-in.html and http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10606 . |
|
"(He might actually like Paul's stand against gay rights, as Paul is against any group rights, which run contrary to the concept of individual liberty.)"
Say what? No Ron Paul is against privileges or special rights for groups instead of individuals. For instance he doesn't believe in hate legislation because he believes a crime is a crime. Awarding a group over another doesn't help integrate society in a cohesive manner. Group think doesn't promote individual Liberty, and that's been proven many times. This is why Republicans have been typically against unionization, I'd think you'd know that, but maybe you don't since you are following a Lib like Huckabee.
Also I believe Ron Paul's stance on individual rights is far better for gays than that of Giuliani's. Giuliani stated if gay marriage became a problem he'd support banning it with an amendment. Ron Paul says marriage should be left to the Church, the government has no business in Marriage. |
|
Hi; your last post above is right on, but besides Paul, Huckabee also meets those criteria. Try his support of the FairTax, for one.
You also mentioned further back, "Paul will win, and Dobson will weep," and something to the effect of Dr. (like Paul, he's a doctor! :) ) James Dobson wants banks to spy on your computers to catch you internet-gambling. Uh, hyperbole? I'm one of those "sheep" who greatly admires Dr. Dobson, but like you also feel burned by GWB, and I haven't heard Dobson take a position on Paul. (He might actually like Paul's stand against gay rights, as Paul is against any group rights, which run contrary to the concept of individual liberty.) He actually has only taken a position against Giuliani. Also, Dobson sees gambling (,pornography, homosexuality, etc.) as a great moral failure that bankrupts a lot of hapless people. If he ever said ANYTHING like government should keep people out of internet poker (which I doubt), it was probably out of a sense of helplessness on his part.
Typically, people who dump on Dobson don't take the time to listen to, or read, him.
Finally, Huckabee's not in the CFR, and say what you will about amnesty, it's not like flip-flopping on gay marriage. Huckabee, like the American people, got ticked off because the Senate tried to shove amnesty on us this summer. McCain, meanwhile, still doesn't "get it".
Thank you. |
|
I hope some of you big government CINOs will read it.
http://www.freedomworks.org/informed/issues_template.php?is sue_id=2731
"The only way the Republican party will beat Hillary Clinton is to return to its limited-government roots. That’s the only way to rebuild a majority coalition.
For example, today religious conservatives are confused, disillusioned, and somewhat fractured. Too many of the current crop of self-appointed social conservative leaders have embraced an agenda that splits the GOP coalition. Big government ideas— runaway spending on “conservative” social programs, social engineering in the tax code, and greater government intervention into Americans’ personal lives—are the wrong path. This pandering has hurt the GOP in swing states, especially in the Mountain West and Great Lakes states.
To counter Hillary Clinton’s perfectly oiled political machine, Republicans need to return to their Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan roots. They need to present an alternative vision for America—a positive vision that limits government and trusts individuals and leaves families, churches, and businesses free to make their own decisions, and not have bureaucrats and politicians calling the shots.
Right now, the country is headed toward a date with Hillary Clinton, and big government is on the agenda. The only way to change that rendezvous is for candidates to offer a clear, principled, limited government alternative." |
|
|
For those of you who are upset about Cong. Paul raising all this money I advise you not to contribute. Between the 4.4 million raised and the 5,000 that turned out for Paul on Saturday his campaign is doing quite well, in view of all the smears, cheapshots and outright lies. |
|
....that insist on disliking Paul for reasons other then what he truly stands for. That includes those that set up straw men (he's an isolationist who blames America for the Crusades!), and those that base hatred of him on a stubborn form of name-calling (he's a kook!), may I remind you....
A is A |
|
"Average Americans did NOT do quite well."
This was much less about a gold standard and more about:
1. A large number of people getting off the boat with nothing.
2. Less efficient means resulted in more labor required to feed oneself and one's family.
"The distribution of wealth in the 19th century was extreme even by today's standards. There were some very wealthy gazillionaires--but there was rampant widespread poverty and even hunger, of a type that would shock modern sensibilities."
That's what the local Communist Party chapter says as well :)
The wealthy gazillionaires only achieved gazillionaire status because they were funded so heavily from European bankers.
The supposed widespread poverty statement is only considered poverty if you compare it to today's US middle class living standards. Modern day US middle class living standards are the result or advancements in technology and efficiency, not the lack of a gold standard. If anything, the gold standard kept government small enough, long enough for us to build the wealth that we have been living off of since the fed was established.
The various failures and panics in the US during the 1800s were the result of dishonest bank practices, not the gold standard. Virtually every time a bank got into trouble, the US government would bail them out, effectively subsidizing bad business. There are only very narrow time periods in certain areas of the country where banks were honest and responsible. New England banks very rarely folded. This is because they were very careful to actually back up all of their deposits.
Furthermore, examining economic records shows that the supposed depressions in the 1800s were not depressions at all, but slower increases in the economy.
The 1880s remain the only decade in US history in which low unemployment, higher real wages, and a lower real price of commodities all occurred at the same time.
|
|
|
I'm tired of big government. Paul will win, and Dobson will weep! |
|
campaign with a religious terrorist, no matter how long ago it happened, probably is not the best move."
Excellent point!!!! But, it's the paulists! What can I tell you?
But, it doesn't matter how much money paul raises, he isn't going to get the nomination anyway....
|
|
Now,
The atrocities of the Christian faiths are well known, I will not go even close to debating them as it would take a few books. However, please do not try to school me on English history. I did grow up in the country after all and spent 8 years in British schools, I think I got a better history lesson than you did on US history.
In fact, I grew up in Scotland and know the oppression that went on there. I can also go into the entire history of the rebellion of the Catholic Church in England. I remember celebrating Guy Fawkes day as a kid, and yes he is burned in effigy, although they do just build a bon fire sometime as they did in Bradford when I was there last week.
Guy Fawkes was no hero! He was a religious terrorist fighting a guerrilla war as a proxy of France and Germany. I know persecutions were occurring at the time, it does not remove the fact that the Catholics in England at the time were spying and running a terror war against the government. The Gun Powder Conspiracy on November 5th was only the pinnacle of this war.
My point was only that you don’t get too many chances to get it wrong in today’s election campaign cycle. Associating you campaign with a religious terrorist, no matter how long ago it happened, probably is not the best move.
|
|
where religious terrorist "are comming from"
Great! As long as you are replacing a corrupt and intolerant religion. :) (couldn't help)
First, a little scolding:
HOW DARE you talk down to me you little twerp! I am a 40 year old former Captain in the United States Army who served in Iraq in ’91. I refuse to be talked down to by some snot nosed kid who should be out protesting with Code Pink. You show your true colours when you say you changed your mind on the war due to the Fairness Doctrine.
Read the 14 points of the UN resolution, and tell me it was an unjust, unconstitutional war! First, I prefer to look at as a continuation of hostilities from the ’91 action. Since after 12 years Iraq had not met the terms that THEY signed to in ending hostilities, no argument, we had the right and properly duty to re-engage. Second, you have the right, and again duty, to attack anyone who is actively firing upon your troops, Iraq was!
Stuff that in you peace pipe and smoke it! My problem, is that we didn’t take Baghdad in ’91. It totally ticks me off that finish it then and there, and it is up to today’s kids to do the job they wouldn’t let me 12 years.
Get out of my party you Freak! You are not a Conservative, you are not a Republican, you and your ilk are using a Libertarian whack to add the “unhinged right” term to the media story. Your condescension and (I’ll go a little light on you here) youthful “I know it all” attitude doesn’t belong in the party of the adults. Let us do what needs to be done.
My whole problem with Ron Paul is supporters that act so much like the whacked out liberals at Move On! Stop drinking the Cool-Aid! I am just so thankful that this interloper hasn’t got a chance at the nomination.
Sorry, I had a Mark Levin moment :)
|
|
The federal goverment just antied up 30million dollars for an entertainment complex on the banks of the Ohio!
Pork got this bill past veto.
Why are you paying for my new entertainment complex on the banks of the Ohio River?
Because we are bankrupting a nation for votes!
None of the lukewarm wishy washy candidates are going to do anything to reverse the tide.
We need to get radical.
We need RP
Donating huge to RP is like dumping tea into the harbor because it exposes all phonies pretendng that RP is a kook with no real support.
I like and agree with a lot of those phonies on a lot of issues, they are not my enemies, but they are trying to create the news and create the nominee.
Lets stop them. |
|
The Pope wouldn't grant the King dispensation to marry his cousin after having already married twice. The King wanted to do what he wanted to do, so he created the church of england which essentially was the Catholic church but with the king as its leader! Like today's Christians who pick their church to match their morality instead of vice-versa.
However, the King of England also killed Catholics who would not disavor their allegience to the Pope.
An interesting fact is that there are more Catholic martyrs than any other religion, yes even Jews. |
|
"Extended families, with three generations living under one roof, was the only social safety net available back then."
We're much more enlightened and progressive now.
Now we just let the government schools raise our kids and ship the old folks to the retirement home to die.
This frees up a lot of time for us to worry about the declining state of the American family.
Yea, us! |
|
|
I wonder if I have anymore money in my purse for Dr. Paul? Oh! You know what I think I do! Ron Paul is the only man running for President I want to share my money with! The other candidates all want to share my money with tyrants overseas! |
|
Khomar
Thanks
I fortunately did not have to go in 2003 when I was mobilized for the war. We went home early before we were shipped out. Most of my fellow soldiers have observed that many of their "missions" over there were in support of the "Corporations" taking this and that necessity to every corner of Iraq. That is crap if that is how we are supposedly fighting "terror.
I too started reading his book and questioned the Just war doctrine. I don't think I would have changed my mind on the war or how we curtail terrorism if I had heard this message from any other politician except Dr. Paul. I know it may sound like a platitude, but he is not the typical politician. He means what he says..which is.. he talks the talk and walks the walk.
I'll check out your blog
|
|
knight_of_baawa writes: "You know: we did quite well from 1789 to 1913 WITHOUT a federal reserve system, thankyouverymuch."
Who is "we" in that sentence???
Average Americans did NOT do quite well. Back then, getting old was a sure road to poverty unless you had somehow managed to become a wealthy tycoon along the way or unless your children agreed to support you in your old age. Extended families, with three generations living under one roof, was the only social safety net available back then.
The distribution of wealth in the 19th century was extreme even by today's standards. There were some very wealthy gazillionaires--but there was rampant widespread poverty and even hunger, of a type that would shock modern sensibilities.
|
|
knight_of_baawa writes: "Only gold specie or bills backed by gold will do. Fiat currency is backed by nothing but faith."
You should really look at what the business cycle was really like in the 19th century. Panics, deep recessions and even major depressions occurred regularly. Often accompanied by catastrophic stock market crashes. These led to populist movements like Bryan's "Free Silver" movement and other demagogic nonsense. The pegging of the dollar to gold sharply restricted what the Federal Government could do to cushion the country against these economic shocks. And there wasn't any Federal Reserve; no way to increase liquidity to forestall a depression. And so, depressions occurred, again and again.
Back then, the idea that average Americans could hope for a comfortable retirement by investing in the stock market was a joke. Only wealthy tycoons had the financial resources to ride through the economic shocks that occurred quite often back then.
|
|
My brother-in-law is heading over to Iraq early next year which has really brought a lot of this home for me. I used to support the war in Iraq, and it was this issue that was my initial stumbling block with Ron Paul. However, when I heard him speak about the Just War doctrine, I did a little research. What I found humbled me greatly and made me realize that I had been supporting a foreign policy that violated my Christian beliefs as well as put my fellow Americans into unnecessary danger.
I know that my brother-in-law is eager to serve his country and defend her with his life, but we should not waste such commitment and bravery to an unjust and unconstitutional war. War should be pursued only as a last resort. Unfortunately, all of the other Republican candidates are hawkish not only about the war in Iraq but also Iran. It concerns me greatly that they desire so greatly to expand the war throughout the Middle East. Ron Paul is the only one who sees the terrible tragedy that would result from this course of action. |
|
Bravo C11bar
After hearing more about Paul...I don't understand why he isn't more attractive to conservatives. He sure sounds like the Goldwater/Reagan type we used to hear in the Republican party. The more I hear his pro Constitution campaign, the more I am for it. I guess being in the Army and veteran of Enduring Freedom, I have alot more at stake than the average American who thinks it's a good idea to be all Neocon and hawkish with other peoples lives. Too bad the dissenters of Paul's message resort to Ad hominem attacks in these posts. I wouldn't expect anyone to actually argue against him with any intellectual substance. Unfortunately, most of us conservatives myself included have been guilty of not really thinking for ourselves and accepting cookie cutter candidates like Romney and McCain. We simply fall in line with what the "party" calls conservative. I learned my lesson after voting for Bush twice. No more elitists that know nothing about the founding father's principles for me.
|
|
"Matt Lewis....a curse on you....
Every few days, you do something to bring out the Paul roaches and they completely take over the thread."
Sorry about that. LOL. I realize many here LOVE big government. When Dobson says Americans can't be trusted with the freedom to choose to play poker on the Internet, you sheep cheered! You sheep actually wanted the federal government to deputize banks to spy on you to make sure you're not playing poker in your own home. Government doesn't get much bigger than that!
No wonder you CINOs are so angered at what Rep. Paul represents for America. Sorry, but you'll just have to learn to live with freedom, liberty, and small government. Cry not to cry too much. |
|
|
Ron Paul is honest in speaking out about the things that are truly undermining America, freedom, and liberty. His truthfulness and principled integrity is what is attracting multitudes of Americans. His popularity is growing exponentially. Freedom is popular. Americans increasingly no longer accept the false promises of the welfare/warfare state. A new generation is about to take charge with the help of a wise elder statesman, Dr. Ron Paul. |
|
I accidentally posted the wrong link (though the video I linked to is also excellent). Here is the video of what Ron Paul actually said to Bernanke that resulted in the cheers on the trading floor:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X8A1ecwHkhE |
|
As for the rebellion of Wall Street, explain to me why the Chicago exchange floor was filled with cheers after Ron Paul's attacks against the Fed last week:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tbYpPFtr7ZU
http://youtube.com/watch?v=z8GtXKP6bmQ
I strongly encourage you to watch these videos and consider what he is saying about our current economy and the Federal Reserve.
|
|
The November 5th date was really picked more in reference to V for Vendetta in which the people rose up and took back their country from an oppressive government. Those who organized the event have emphasized that they were promoting a peaceful "revolution" to support Ron Paul's effort to reform our government.
Many of the people who donated on November 5th were not even aware of the historical significance of the day, but rather saw it as a day to rally together to show their support for Ron Paul.
Furthermore, you don't even show a real understanding of the history of the day. It was a war against religious oppression. The protestant King was attacking catholic citizens in England. Since Spain had been weakened, Fawkes and those with him knew they would get little external help, so they decided to strike out on their own against the government. While I certainly do not agree with their tactic (murder is wrong), I understand where they were coming from. Religious intolerance and the abuse of citizens by the state is also wrong regardless of what religious labels are used to condone it. There have been plenty of atrocities committed by those who claimed to Christian -- both protestant and catholic.
For more information on Guy Fawkes at the Gunpowder Plot, click the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes |
|
|
It's fascinating to see how Paul is making great inroads on the Right with his anti-war, anti-Constitution shredding campaign, isn't it? This should give the warhawk torture mongers amongst the GOP candidates and their rabid followers some pause. |
|
"Do you also know that owning bullion was illegal? Yeah, let's go back to those days!"
Your history is totally confused. It was FDR who made owning gold bullion illegal in 1933 and it remained so until 1974. Prior to 1933, it wasn't illegal. |
|
History is another. Fawkes wanted to blow up parliament because the King (a Protestant King) was speaking. This was not fighting corruption, it was a religious war. That is exactly my point, nobody remembers the history!
Fawkes is no hero, he is burned in effigy to this day in England.
And if you believe that one man, even if he does make it to the Presidency can take down the Fed, you are as Looney as the rest of the RP supporters. That would be the end of the economy, Wall Street would rebel, and most of those invested in our bonds would just cut and run.
http://corruptedlamb.townhall.com |
|
The Shift in Momentum IS FOR PRESIDENT HUCKABEE in 2008 & Exposing the tactics of political Masons
http://evolutionfacts.townhall.com |
|
|
in arms. A close look at http://www.global firepower.com also reveals the borrowing power of each nation, oil reserves, and GOLD reserves. Call the Japanese crazy but they do think gold is a good idea! |
|
Do you also know that owning bullion was illegal? Yeah, let's go back to those days!
Come on, name one major (and I do mean major!) currency that is currently based on a metal? I am seriously not a fan of the Federal Reserve, but you can't just dismantle it. Substantially, reduce it's power, let's go for it!
http://corruptedlamb.townhall.com |
|
I Took The Oath To Defend The Constitution Against All Enemies Foreign And Domestic.
These Were Not Words To Be Spoken And Dismissed; My Life Was To Back Them.
To You Clowns That Think The Socialism We Are Currently In Is Cool; Doom Approaches Us All.
Next Year Ron Paul's Economic Stance Will Be Vindicated. Economic Catastrophe Is In Motion. Your Socialist Ways Will Reap Devastation.
To You With The "Get Them Before They Get Us" Attitude; You Doom Is Far Worse.
Russia And Iran Have A Mutual Defense Treaty. War With Iran Is War With Russia. Russia Still Has Its Nuclear Arsenal. WAR WILL COME TO THESE SHORES WITH FIRE LEADING THE WAY.
Even Now There Is A Supreme Court Case The Threatens To Redefine The Second Amendment And Possibly Take The Guns Away From Private Citizens. Every Time, I Say Again, Every Time Guns Have Been Removed From The Citizenry In History => Massacre Followed.
All Had Better Consider The Guidance The Founding Father's Gave Us Before The Point Of No Return Is Reached.
Ron Paul Is The Only One Referencing The Constitution. Food For Thought !!! |
|
KOB, do you mean like RP escaped from the Libertarian Party? No, I know others are using Guy Fawkes and probably the Tea Party as well. However, it just seems odd that someone who's main followers are trying to break from the christen "value voters" would use a Catholic revolutionary to raise money.
Just an observation... BTW that isn't you Chad, is it?
|
|
|
Most voters are far too lazy to google themselves into an understanding of how their parents and grandparents had "silver certificates" and they have worthless colorable "federal reserve notes". They don't even realize that the Federal Reserve was once simply called the New York State Bank, and how it became "The Fed". Even banking employees are kept in the dark, and fertilized like little mushrooms. |
|
Every few days, you do something to bring out the Paul roaches and they completely take over the thread.
I feel like I'm standing at the Tower of Babel reading these far out moonbeam posts....
KNOCK IT OFF!!!!! |
|
I don't associate the Ron Paulbots with tea---I associate them with...smoking crack ! |
|
Does anybody else notice the anger and hate that is coming from the Hannity/Limbaugh/Beck crowds?
I thought that only the vapid left was angry like this. At least that's what Hannity says!
Anyway...calm down. You'll feel better someday!
Us Ron Paul supporters promise on December 16th we won't raise a penny more than it takes to win. Promise! |
|
|
Although I am not a Ron Paul supporter, I hope he is successful and raises $10mm on that day. I might dissagree with him on many issues, I strongly agree with him on taxes and spending. I would like to see him run $10mm worth of ads discussing the importance of tax cut and how much money the federal government wastes in pork projects. |
|
Guy Fawkes was a Catholic revolutionary... Seems odd that someone who has based his campaign on attacks of the "neo-con/christo-fascist hatemongers" would use such a character. But, I guess nobody remembers, remembers after so many 5ths of November.
http://corruptedlamb.townhall.com
|
|
|
What unpatriotic anarchists. Why can't they be a good little Tory and support the empire like other Republicans? |
|
|
Just throwing the money into Boston Harbor? Might make more of a difference... |
|
|
|