Rep. Ron Paul: Running to Win in 2008 (Announcing the GRPPL -- Great Ron Paul Ping List)

Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Exploratory Committee ^ | February 3, 2007 | Orthodox Presbyterian

[fishtank]

Isn't Tancredo a Presbyterian ?

[traviskicks]

Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.

[George W. Bush]

I've admired Ron Paul for years, supported his caucus, the Liberty Committee.

Ron Paul might bring the entire Libertarian voting bloc and even the Constitution Party on board. In open primaries and without a strong L candidate of their own, the L Party and the C Party might enter the Republican primary, helping Paul. I know of little that would bar them from doing so.

I was over on Slashdot recently. They had a thread on Hillary as the "Privacy Candidate" because that's her new ploy. I was shocked at the posts completely running her into the ground (Slashdot is a Left/liberal techie site with a small contingent of gunowners and conservatives). You could have knocked me over with a feather. Bush took some jabs and there were observations of how similar the Bushs and the Clintons are. What was striking were a couple of different groupings (around 10-20 posts each) out in the middle of it all, talking about how much they'd like Ron Paul to run, to debate the other GOP candidates. Hillary and Bush and McStain didn't fare well.

Slashdot: The Privacy Candidate

Amazing stuff. Ron Paul isn't as unknown as some people think. People who know him at all have generally liked and supported him for ten years or more. The support he has is solid and longterm. It could form a basis for grassroots organization. And with Harry Brown, the former Libertarian leader dead and the poor showing from the CP in 2004, Ron Paul would have a good chance to gather them as well.

The GOP has lost its vital libertarian wing over the years, preferring to be neocon statists and Friedmanesque servants of a corporate state, the American global empire. The GOP needs to return to its libertarian touchstones and avoid the libertine Giuliani. Despite McStain's libertarian Arizona background, he is far too compromised to attract real Libertarians.

It might be good to try to assemble a chart of Paul's positions on the major issues to use in forum postings, so people readily grasp his basic positions and votes in Congress.

[George W. Bush]

Personally, I wish they were all required to come out with a LIVE personally taught slide show of one hour length without teleprompter on their major position and vision in the areas of: economics, foreign policy, social issues, etc.... Roughly 5 major areas that they get 20 minutes each on.

I would expect we'll see Paul's speeches and such via YouTube. It's going to be a big player in '08 and all the campaigns are gearing for it as we've read in other threads this year. But that works far more in favor of a candidate like Paul than it does the deep-pockets candidates from the two liberal parties.

2008 may be the first election where the Internet will make the difference, something that will be marked in the future in the way that Kennedy's election in 1960 made him the first "television president".

Hey, we conservatives really are the New Media guys, aren't we? Rush and Coulter are right about that.

[Eric Blair 2084]

The GOP has lost its vital libertarian wing over the years, preferring to be neocon statists and Friedmanesque servants of a corporate state, the American global empire. The GOP needs to return to its libertarian touchstones and avoid the libertine Giuliani. Despite McStain's libertarian Arizona background, he is far too compromised to attract real Libertarians.

Please 'splain Lucy. I'm here to learn too.

GOP losing it's Libertarian wing...check (doesn't help when FReepers call them Liberaltarians)

Preferring to be neocon statists...check(I'll assume you are referring to the Iraq war/WWIV, where you can certainly make the case that Isolationism might work. These islomofascist barbarians will kill each other on their own. Much like the Cold War aka WWIII, minus those Battles in Vietnam and Korea, we just bided our time and waited for the failed ideology to collapse upon itself. Relax everyone, it's just a thought, maybe I'm wrong)

BUT, this is where I draw the line. If you disrespect "the Bing" and Milton Friedman, you better be prepared to put up your dukes. Corporate state???? Watcha talking bout Willis?

[zeugma]

add me please

[Dahlseide]

I'm for Paul in the primaries so long as the conservative vote is not split to allow McC or RG. As he says “Get the US out of the UN & the UN out of the US”.

Please change should to must (:. Beginning at least as far back as Korea a whole host of traitors are not legally traitors because Congress shirked its duty to declare War: I’m not Fonda Jane, Ramsey Clark, & Tom Hayden come immediately to mind.

I suggest the meaning of words such as isolationist be well understood before used to describe a Presidential candidate.

I, like Taft & Buchanan, favor the (so-called) isolationism of our first President, & by far our greatest, George Washington; those who would not support any treaty that could involve us, by treaty, in a war; or to yield one word of our national sovereignty.

That, as a pejorative, is thrown around in political discourse as much as (so-called) hyper-Calvinism is charged in discussion/debate by Christians.

The only way for Congress to support the troops is to publicly repent their attacks, give advise & consent & argument behind the scene, remind the public that our form of governance is representative, not (as in polls) democratic. Vote 'em out next time around

I opposed going to (so-called) war before we were in it simply in respect of the advice of our first President all the while admitting that I might have been/ still be wrong. I also oppose the novel idea of preemptive war.

Having said that, once the shooting starts the nay saying stops & I/we trust that God is sovereign in all the affairs of men.

Good night, as in "It is well with my soul", all.

[xzins]

What would seriously test a guy who wanted to be president? What would strip away the handlers, parties, writers, and make it possible to see the guy?

Put him in front of a slide show with no notes, no prompter, and no canned questions. Have him give a live presentation of what he wants to do to the nation.

I think we can learn a lot.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Thanks, OP. Please keep me on your ping list. Ron Paul is sounding more attractive as time goes on.

The military situation will be settled regardless of the party in power. No American President is going to cut and run when national interests are at stake as they are in Iraq.

But taxes are an issue that should awaken to action every sleeping Republican and brain-dead democrat. Taxes and forced unionism are crippling the country.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

No "pro-open borders" Republican candidate for President will ever have a serious chance for victory in '08, but Rep. Ron Paul can still bring up issues during the Republican primary season and during the Republican debates that otherwise wouldn't be brought up just by running for President.

Ron Paul is "pro-open borders"?

(OP scratches head in confusion)...

Er... would you say that the following Votes are "Pro Open Borders"?

- Requires the construction of approximately 700 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexican border (Sec. 1002)
- Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to take over operations to maintain and control U.S. borders by upgrading surveillance technology, hiring and training more Border Patrol agents, improving border infrastructure, and deploying more U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel along areas of high immigration entrance within 18 months of enactment (Sec. 101)
- Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to report to Congress the progress of controlling and maintaining U.S. land and maritime borders within one year of enactment (Sec. 101)
- Includes "repeated attempts to enter the country illegally" in the definition of an aggravated felony (Sec. 201)
- Establishes an employment eligibility verification system which requires employers to verify the legal status of each employee or face a penalty for withholding employee information (Sec. 701)
- Sets a civil penalty for employers of $5,000 to $7,500 per undocumented immigrant for failure to comply with requirements of the employment eligibility verification system (Sec. 706)
- Requires the detention of any undocumented immigrant attempting to enter the country after October 1, 2006, until deportation or final decision granting admissions to the U.S. (Sec. 401)
- Increases fines and imprisonment to individuals who smuggle undocumented immigrants into the U.S. ('Sec. 274)
- Creates the Office of Air and Marine Operations to prevent individuals attempting to enter U.S. airspace or waters for the purpose of transporting drugs, human trafficking, and terrorist activities (Sec. 502)
- Ends the Diversity Immigrant Program which randomly selects and grants green cards to individuals awaiting entry into the U.S. (Sec. 1102, as adopted in H Amdt 650)
- $1 billion annually for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (Sec. 224)
- $650 million from 2007 through 2011 for the Institutional Removal Program which ensures that “removable criminals aliens” in prison are removed from the U.S. and not released into communities following the completion of their prison sentence (Sec. 223)
- $250 million annually for state and local police agencies for their assistance in enforcing new immigration laws (Sec. 222)

Because... um... Ron Paul voted "YES" on all those things.

Admittedly, it's always a bit of a shock when Ron Paul ever votes to increase Federal spending on, well, anything; but on this issue, the only difference between his votes and those of Tancredo is that Ron Paul voted against the National ID Card.

FWIW, I happen to agree with Ron Paul on this, and respectfully disagree with Tancredo -- issuing National ID Cards is just too Orwellian a power to grant the Federal Government for the alleged purpose of "stopping illegal immigration", when what the Feds should be doing is stopping illegals at the border... which Ron Paul supports.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Tancredo is indeed a convert from Roman Catholicism to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church.

Politically, I suppose that Tancredo rates better than most... I do think he's a much better Small-Government Conservative than Duncan Hunter.

Some examples where Tancredo does well:

Abortion

• Both Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo are rated "0%" by NARAL.

Immigration

• Both Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo are rated "100%" by FAIR.

Taxes

• Ron Paul has acheived either the 1st or 2nd highest National Taxpayers Union rating in the House in every year on record, scoring an average of 87.2%
• Tom Tancredo has ranked from 3rd to 14th in the House, averaging an NTU rating of 78.7%

Second Amendment

• Ron Paul has an "A" rating from the NRA
• Tom Tancredo has a "B+" rating from the NRA.

So, not as good as Ron Paul, but better than Duncan Hunter.
However, there are several disturbing areas in which Tancredo does not do so well:

Political Free Speech (like, y'know, a little website called "Free Republic")

• Ron Paul voted AGAINST restricting independent grassroots political committees. (Apr 2006)
• Tom Tancredo voted FOR restricting independent grassroots political committees; as did Duncan Hunter. (Apr 2006)

Citizen Privacy ("But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother".)

• Ron Paul voted AGAINST the National ID Card.
• Tom Tancredo voted FOR the National ID Card; as did Duncan Hunter.

And absolutely the most dangerous of all, IMHO: Federal Government funding of Church charities ("when Barney Frank pays the piper, Barney Frank calls the tune")

• Allow churches to provide welfare services -- Ron Paul answered STRONGLY OPPOSES
• Allow churches to provide welfare services -- Tom Tancredo answered STRONGLY FAVORS; as did Duncan Hunter.

All in all, unless God were to suddenly transport Ron Paul directly to Heaven in a flaming chariot, I ain't going to even think about supporting any "Mr. Maybe-Second-Best" at this time.

This ain't the General. These are the Primaries... and in the Primaries, we have the opportunity to organize together around the absolute best Constitutionalist Christian out there and run him against McCain and Giuliani; and that just is NOT going to be any guy who favors Federal control of political free speech, National ID Cards, and FedGov Funding -- and therefore control -- of our Churches (which includes both Tancredo and Hunter).

It's gotta be the one guy who's Number One with a bullet, right on everything, has been for years, and has a decades-old habit of surrounding himself with Calvinist Christian top advisors ("A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:" ~~ Proverbs 1:5).

For Constitutionalist Christians, it's just gotta be Ron Paul.

Accept No Substitutes.

Best, OP

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

ping

[Lurker]

I certainly intend to support Cong. Paul in the Primaries.

Thanks for the ping.

L

[NCSteve]

The morons who use "electability" as their primary criterion for voting will be the death of our republic. They are the simple fools who have given us the Bushes and Clintons. There should be a penalty for that kind of thinking. Come to think of it, the Bushes and Clintons are the penalty. Too bad we all have to suffer for the stupidity of the majority.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Thanks! I will, with your permission, go ahead and put you on my GRPPL list.

[Lurker]

Feel free and thank you.

L

[Jeremydmccann]

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate worth supporting.

Please put me on the Ping List.

[fishtank]

OK. You've got me convinced enough to put me on the GRPPL list. (Please?)

The fed funding of welfare gets to me, esp. since I know a Christian whi just goes ga-ga over this prospect.

(It makes me gag-gag, BTW.)

PLEASE keep your list above handy, it will come in handy later on....

[getsoutalive]

please add me to this list.

[Clemenza]

RON PAUL IN 2008! I could only dream.