Posted on 09/30/2007 10:12:11 AM PDT by traviskicks
Edited on 09/30/2007 4:01:53 PM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
Manchester – Calls to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and repeal the Constitutional amendment that established the federal income tax drew loud applause yesterday for Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.
The Texas Congressman drew an eclectic mix of more than 500 supporters -- young and old, Libertarians and anti-war Democrats, independents and conservative Republicans -- who cheered his message of limited government, low taxes, free markets, bringing the troops home from Iraq, and returning to a monetary policy based on the gold standard.
Paul said the gathering at Veterans Park wasn't about him, but about his message -- which, he said, has been resonating with more and more people.
"Something very significant is happening in this country today. The paradigm is shifting away from government controlling our lives by force," he said. "People are sick and tired of what's happening and want to control (their) own lives."
He said people should be able to keep 100 percent of the fruits of their labor. Income tax is an example of the government controlling people, he said, as are the draft, prohibition on drugs, seat belt laws and other regulations.
Paul said current monetary policy amounts to a "secret sinister tax" that takes wealth from the middle class and poor, and redistributes money to Wall Street and the wealthy. The crowd broke into applause when he said the federal reserve system should be abolished.
Earlier in the day, Paul told three New Hampshire reporters he hoped to turn the enthusiasm his campaign has generated -- through the Internet, in "meet-ups" and through campaign donations -- into votes.
The physician-turned-politician said he expects to spend more and more time in New Hampshire. "The slogan on your license plate would indicate this should be fertile ground for us here," he said, alluding to the state's "Live Free or Die" motto.
Paul said he is running on the same policies President Bush advocated when he ran in 2000, which, he added, are the same ones Republicans have run on for years: a balanced budget, limited government, personal freedom and no nation building.
"Most Republicans -- the leadership in Washington -- don't believe in their own platform; that's why they are losing," Paul said.
Rather than try to spread democracy around the world, he said, politicians ought to focus on some of the shortcomings in this country.
"You don't get a fair shake unless you join the establishment," he said.
Paul, who ran for President in 1988 as the Libertarian Party's nominee, said it's more practical to run as a Republican, noting he spent half of his money in 1988 just trying to get on the ballot in all 50 states.
The door-to-door canvassing that followed the rally -- dubbed the Paul Family Walk -- included about 30 family members who led groups of campaigners in the Queen City, Concord and Nashua. Paul himself visited New England College, Dartmouth College and the Dartmouth Medical School after the rally.
Liz Viering and her husband Peter, from Stonington, Conn., said Paul's opposition to the war in Iraq is the major reason they are supporting him. "Money spent on wars of choice takes money away from other programs," she said.
Miles LaPlant, a 21-year old college student from Attleboro, Mass., said Paul is the first candidate who has captured his attention. LaPlant said he likes Paul's stances regarding the Constitution and the country's founding principles.
Jason Kantz, his wife, Angela, and their two children came up from Cambridge, Mass., for the rally. Kantz said Paul "is the only candidate that gives logical answers and means what he says."
He said Paul's stand on the war in Iraq is also an important issue for him. "We need to reduce our involvement around the world and the amount of money we are spending," Kantz said.
Long-time Libertarian Party member Dennis Corrigan of Boxford, Mass., said he supported Paul when the Congressman ran for President as the Libertarian nominee. He said he has been a Libertarian for 40 years and headed the party in Canada at one time.
Corrigan and a friend were soliticiting signatures for a Massachusetts ballot initiative outlawing the income tax. Corrigan said his friend moved to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project, adding that he plans to move to the state, as well.
Thomas Clark, Minister of the Somersworth Tri-City Convenant Church, gave the invocation for the rally. Before the rally, he said he supports Paul because of his pro-life stance. "The pro-life issue is a major issue for me," Clark said.
Paul concluded the rally by encouraging his supporters to keep the faith, saying most mass movements have been driven by only 2 or 3 percent of the population.
"You are part of that 3 percent today," he said.
A word from Jim Robinson to the moonbats:
To all antiwar moonbats, Paulistas included:
Hey, if you don't like FR and or our support the war policies leave. Go find a website that supports your unfortunate, short-sighted and misguided antiwar efforts. It's really that simple.
In case you antiwar Paulistas haven't noticed, Free Republic supports the war effort 100%. Many of our chapters protest against the antiwar moonbats either weekly, monthly or whenever the opportunity arises. The DC Chapter has been protesting against the antiwar moonbats EVERY Friday night at Walter Reed for three years.
Free Republic has co-sponsored several cross country caravans and hundreds of rallies in cities all across the country and in DC against the antiwar moonbats and in support of our Commander-in-chief, our troops, the war effort and our Gold Star and Blue Star families, many of whom are FReepers.
When you are supporting antiwar moonbats you are working against Free Republic's mission, hurting our efforts, hurting our families who have lost loved ones or have loved ones involved in the fighting, hurting our troops, damaging their morale, working against our efforts to defeat the enemy, and, in fact, giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
Antiwar moonbats are the domestic enemy. Antiwar moonbats willingly give aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime. In my book, that's tantamount to treason. Ron Paul is an antiwar moonbat. You figure it out. If antiwar moonbats are the enemy and Ron Paul is an aid and comfort supplying antiwar moonbat, then Ron Paul IS the enemy!
If you Paulistas are looking for support on FR for an antiwar moonbat who is giving aid and comfort to our enemies, you're nuts! Free Republic will NEVER support antiwar moonbats!
As far as our official policy on Ron Paul is concerned, it's the same policy we have for his antiwar moonbat allies the traitors Harry Reid, Chuckie Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Jack Murtha, Cindy Sheehan, Barbara Streisand, Jane Fonda, CodePink, International Answer, et al and their flaming antiwar spam monkeys. Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!
Where the hell did you guys ever get the idea that enemy supporting antiwar moonbats would be welcome on FR?
That plain enough for you or do I need to spell it out?
You should really keep to your medication schedule, especially when trying to appear profound and/or witty.
Hi eboyer, nice to meet you. We have a lot in common. I also have a degree in Economics and I am also a retard. We should start a Retarded Economics Major ping list.:-)
Despite the plaintive wailing by some on FR, and despite my personal disdain for surrender monkeys, you are right. Ron Paul has struck a nerve with 5 different groups who have been ignored, laughed at, stepped on and urinated on by both the GOP and the DNC.
One of those groups are fiscal conservatives like myself who are tired of seeing "Republicans" co-opt Big Gubmint and spend like drunken sailors on shore leave.
Substantiation of what?
Learn a new word, did we?
20,000 comedians out of work in this country and there you are trying to make a joke. I hope you have an actual vocation.
You’re the one flinging insults and then demanding substantiation (of what, we’re still not sure).
I did make a point (an argument) and you conveniently forget, BTW that statement was from 2 posts ago-before I make my argument the second time-
1) People aren’t stupid.
2) Per the laws of supply and demand, anyone providing a qaulity product in a free market will have a thriving business, anyone producing a poor product will suffer in their sales.
3) In a market where there is freedom of information, knowledge of a bad (unhealthy) product will be punished by lack of customer support
3b) Their competitors that provide a sanitary food product will gain in business and take the customers the first business would have
4)Therefore it benefits business economically to maintain sanitary practice.
5) The job of clean and health food has been done, without the need for government ‘watchdog’ agency
Lets actually answer this time instead of trying to win this argument without actually saying anything substantive, and by avoidind the issue.
“5) The job of clean and health food has been done, without the need for government ‘watchdog’ agency
I can agree with each of your points without agreeing with your conclusion. Certainly, a free market will weed out substandard products (including diners with poor sanitation). That does not mean that the ‘free market’ solution is the best.
One of the greatest weaknesses of a free market solution is that it is essentially reactionary requiring some time to do it’s work. During that time, a diner with poor sanitation can cause all sorts of mischief. The free market can only react to information. A public health department can pre-emptively prevent illness and death.
Another weakness of the a free market solution is the quality of information available to the decision maker. Where does one new to an area get the quality information necessary to make informed decisions on the quality of a food service?
Sure, I can go into a diner and conduct my own health inspection. Why should I want to spend an hour or so doing these inspections when I can see the posted results of a public health inspection? That of course assumes that I would also want to spend the time to develop the training necessary to do my own health inspections.
This is one of the weaknesses of the libertarian approach that tends to automatically assume that a non-public solution is almost always best.
Do you also buy into the belief shared by some libertarians that we can replace our police, fire, and court systems with free market solutions?
Not doing your leg work for you. If you can’t keep up, or go back to see what is being discussed, that’s on you. You call it insults, I call it pointing out stupidity.
Wrong again, Sparky. If you’re engaging me, engage me. I have no plans to bop around trying to figure out what your twisted little mind is up to. While you’re pointing out stupidity, you might want to glance in the mirror. You’ll find a wealth of it.
Thank you for actually responding to my points DugwayDuke: I think this is much better than insults anyday..(on both our parts ;).
I disagree with you that, even though (the market is reactionary), I believe these issues have been addressed:
1) as I stated, I do not believe people are stupid (whether they are foolish sometimes is another point..), but becuase they are smart. Owners ~know~ that if they put forth an unclean substandard (in a true, or real free market) will give them less business, therefore it’s in their interest to put forth a clean healthy product, if they don’t the customer base (demand), “the invisable hand” will ensure they are weeded out! By the time a new customer enters into a market most restaurant should have been weeded out (in a true free-market without any barriers to entry and exit into the market) that do not produce a healthy food product. If you want the best restaurant, I am sure instead of inspecting every one yourself, you could probably ask a “local”.
With ALL due respect, I disagree that the “public” option beats the “market” option, I have faith in the marketplace.
Also yes, I believe that many functions of Police, and firemen could be “privitized”, yet not the Court Systems. That has been a legitimate function of the government (world governments) since Biblical times-in the Bible Moses was given the authority to Judge, and hand down Judgements (legal) by God, and he further delegated that power to magistrates (local judges, and rulers).
So I still believe this (for Justice) which is a legitimate function of civil government, should be retained by the government and not privitized in ANY way.
That doesn’t make any sense.
I viewed your home page, excellant Iraq pics. wow.
regards
I’ve read through this thread, and I wish to commend you for reasoned, well thought out commentary.
It’s unfortunate that you were not treated in kind.
RE: “ It’s also clear that folks, in responding to RP, are suddenly espousing lots of things Republicans and conservatives used to hate: the IRS, instrusive government, huge new FedGuv departments, UN mandates in foreign affairs, BigGuv minding your own business, and so on. I encourage a clear line between running down candidates and scorning limited government in the process. One can support national security and still oppose BigGuv run amok.”<
-amen to that. very well stated.
-Regards
Will never happen. The IRS is 50% privileged minority. IRS is nothing but a great big social welfare institution - a way the government hands out “paychecks” to affirmative action hires rather than suffer the embarassment of sending them welfare checks.
The leftist racist establishment will never allow the IRS to be disbanded.
Thanks. The only one I didn’t participate in was the firey colorful explosion the resulted when a mortar round hit the ammo storage point right outside our small compound.
But the rest are me playing tourist!
interesting way to put it, and I agree 100%
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.