Ron Paul: Utah turnout wows candidate (1000+ people at rally)

The Salt Lake Tribune ^ | 9/16/07 | Sheena McFarland

[traviskicks]

well, I think talking about freedom and introducing bills expanding freedom is a useful endevour. I have the hope that many of Paul’s bills will be passed someday, even if he is not the author when they do.

[MNJohnnie]

Total number of voter cast in 2004 in Utah: 784,584

And I am suppose to be impressed that 1000 lunatics turned up for Paul?

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Video of RP's Salt Lake rally. Very excited crowd!

OMG! Al-Qaida is in the front row! < /Paul bashers >

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

So how many were bused in from out of state?

Probably none, since Paul supporters are capable of getting their own means of transportation and don't rely on campaign welfare like Romney & the other candidates do.

And how many are lib Rats trying to help Paul from the left?

Why would liberals help Paul when he's virtually the only Republican who can pull in a coalition of voters & destroy the Rat nominee in the general?

[traviskicks]

well, judge for yourself:



From:
http://www.nationalexpositor.com/index.php?news=360

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Total number of voter cast in 2004 in Utah: 784,584

That doesn't explain why the candidates are paying attention to Utah lately. Maybe because the state is a bellwether of conservatism? You really don't get it.

And I am suppose to be impressed that 1000 lunatics turned up for Paul?

A thousand people Johnnie went out of their way to attend a rally for a candidate who's supposedly has no chance of winning or is supposedly at 2% in the polls. 1,000 folks is a very large number. You don't know who the Hell these people are Johnnie. Why don't you step out of your FR cocoon and take a good look at reality, and understand why people from all walks of life are supporting Dr. Paul.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Look at all them terrorists in the crowd! And Code Pinkos! And 9/11 Truthers! Look to the right - it’s Cindy Sheehan!

[Lovebloggers]

He would need support for that to happen, and after ten terms in Congress he has absolutely none.

He is all lip service, but you like the talk not the walk obviously so Godspeed.

[George W. Bush]

Look to the right - it’s Cindy Sheehan!

I think I even saw Alec Baldwin.

[publiusF27]

Lew Rockwell owns the site, but the author of the article was Ron Paul, and the question (repeatedly) asked was for Ron Paul’s explanation of his position on earmarks.

Is there something wrong with linking to an article BY Ron Paul when asked for his opinion on the subject?

[KevinDavis]

So why I should I vote for someone who has his articles that come from that nutbag Lew Rockwell and I why should vote for someone who claims to be a Losertarian and yet votes for Shrimp Earmarks which there is nothing in the Constitution about Shrimp or any kind of Earmarks...

[publiusF27]

The maximum spending levels are determined by the Authorization Committees. Actual spending levels are determined by the Authorization Committees who take the spending requested by the Federal Agencies and add the spending requested by members of Congress (earmarks). Eliminate the earmarks and you reduce actual spending.

That's not how the Constitution reads, nor is it what they say on the House website.

When considering appropriations measures, Congress is exercising the power granted to it under the Constitution, which states, “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.”

Total new budget authority and outlays are also distributed among both the House and Senate committees with jurisdiction over spending, thereby setting spending ceilings for each committee (see “Allocations” section below). 12 Once the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations receive their spending ceilings, they separately distribute the funding among their respective subcommittees, providing a spending ceiling for each subcommittee.

But you could be right. I don't know much about the process, and am relying only on what was written by a 9 term congresscritter and what is on the House website. Your source?

I notice your signature mentions Dr. Paul's position on abortion. Tell me something: do you agree or disagree with his statement on that subject:

Another problem with this bill is its citation of the interstate commerce clause as a justification for a federal law banning partial-birth abortion. This greatly stretches the definition of interstate commerce.

In a world in which we have had court cases about whether or not being too near to a school with a gun, growing your own wheat or cannabis, building your own machine gun, rape, assisted suicide, and being an indigenous California toad are interstate commerce, I am beginning to think Justice Thomas was right when he said that the current use of the commerce clause "makes a mockery of Madison’s assurance to the people of New York that the “powers delegated” to the Federal Government are 'few and defined,' while those of the States are 'numerous and indefinite.'"

So, is a partial birth abortion interstate commerce in your view, or did Ron Paul go around the Constitutional limits on federal power by voting for the federal partial birth abortion ban? I think he exceeded his power, and he thinks so too, but did it anyway.

[publiusF27]

Perhaps you can name a candidate who will be better than Ron Paul on spending? We sure need it, as I pointed out in this other thread.

[NavyCanDo]

Imagine that, A gathering of 1000 people who like Paul believe in the legalization of marijuana, in the recognition of gay marriage, and in the immediate withdrawal out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe if he can talk Lyndon LaRouche or even Dennis Kucinich into joining him on these speaking engagements he could of pulled in 2000+ Moonbats.

[McGruff]

Must not have been any freepers there.

Free Republic Member's Opinion
Fred Thompson	49.8%		1,512
Duncan Hunter	21.0%		637
Other/undecided	6.3%		191
Mitt Romney	5.9%		179
Ron Paul	5.8%		175
Rudy Giuliani	5.0%		152
Tom Tancredo	2.9%		88
Mike Huckabee	2.5%		77
John McCain	0.6%		18
Sam Brownback	0.3%		9
	100.1%		3,038

[NavyCanDo]

“Thompson is a federalist and his views are consistent with Paul’s principles except for foreign policy,”

LOL - - You better add to the exceptions, the legalization of marijuana, and the recognition of gay marriage which are two issues Ron Paul supports and are not supported by Fred and has never been part of the GOP Party platform.

[NavyCanDo]

Here’s are is a serious question for the Ron Paul supporters. Be honest.

What do you do on Election Day Nov 08 if Ron Paul does not win GOP nomination and is not on the ballot.

a. vote for the GOP candidate
b. Don’t Vote
c. Vote for 3rd party (throw your vote away)
d. Vote for Hillary

I already know what your answer is. In contrast most of us here on the FR that have a favorite candidate (other that Paul) realize how important it is to keep Hilliary out of the white house and come election day will put differences aside and turn out in droves to stop Hillary in her tracks. You?

[publiusF27]

If Thompson wins the nomination, I will likely vote for him. Alone among the GOP frontrunners, he actually talks about federalism and limits on federal power.

If Giuliani or Romney win the nomination, I will likely write in Ron Paul, since I won’t vote for a gungrabber under any circumstances. The other alternative for me if one of those guys is nominated will be to vote Libertarian.

[NavyCanDo]

Thanks for the honest response. Now Rudy is not near the top of my list either, but we have as much to fear of him “grabbing our guns” as the pro-abortion people have of George Bush over turning Roe vs. Wade.

[traviskicks]

As of now I’d probably vote for thompson if he wins the (r) nomination. However, I wouldn’t campaign or volunteer to help Thompson’s campaign. Unlike RP’s which I am putting in a good number of hours a week right now. If someone other than Thompson wins, it would be very a hard decision... I’d have to look at their platform at the time, might vote 3rd party, or maybe write in Ron Paul. I dunno.

If RP does win the GOP nomination, the GOP will have the added help of hundreds of volunteers in each major city/town across the country and, of course, free internet advertising (so called ‘spamming’, lol). I doubt too many of the RP supporters will be even mildly enthusiastic about supporting any of the other nominees, perhaps a trickle of support for Thompson. I was a poll watcher in 2004 for Bush, won’t make that mistake again. :)

And voting for a third party isn’t ‘throwing your vote away’, unfortunately, people seem obsessed with voting for ‘winners’, as if their self esteem is reflective on voting for a winning candidate. If everyone just voted for whom they most agreed with we’d be a lot better off, IMO.