Apparently Barr, Ron Paul, & Baldwin supporters are considered terrorists. sm
Posted By: LVMT on 2009-03-16
In Reply to: When will it be enough - sm
A Missouri State Policeman leaked this information last week. This should raise some alarm bells. Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr are supposed to be preparing statements about it.
http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2009/mar/14/fusion-center-data-draws-fire-over-assertions/
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
- When will it be enough - sm
- Apparently Barr, Ron Paul, & Baldwin supporters are considered terrorists. sm - LVMT
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
I seriously considered voting for Bob Barr
I don't want to waste my vote though and there is no way that Bob Barr can win. So why take votes away from McCain? My goal this election is to keep Obama out of office.
Our Founding Fathers were considered terrorists. sm
God forbid, there are people out there who want to defend our Constitution. Americans should be ashamed of themselves for letting things go this far. Real change needs to come from us. It should alarm people. Stalin, Mao, and Hitler used the same tactics to stifle dissent. People who support the Independent Party, Christians, and pro lifers are also on it. DHS distributed that memo to 70 or 80 different fusion centers throughout the US. Many thanks are due the concerned and honest police officer who leaked the one that went to Missouri.
Obama supporters are clueless, apparently dont
nm
Dobbs/Baldwin
Dobbs is great! I'm writing in Chuck Baldwin, Constitution Party candidate (endorsed by Ron Paul).
I think you are thinking of Stephen Baldwin .....sm
Chuck Baldwin is a founder and minister of a church in Pensacola, Florida. He ran for VP in 2004 on the Constitutional Party, but I think that is the limit of his political dablings. He is also a radio talk show host (I know I'm going to get flamed for that one!) But the beauty of it all is that he has no dirty laundry to air, no skeletons in the closet, no "agendas" and no axes to grind. He is just plain, down-to-earth and probably EXACTLY what this country needs.
Baldwin is a christian and a conservative. sm
I am also conservative, just not a neocon. He is calling you fake conservatives out.
Baldwin: Conservatives Lost More Than an Election sm
Conservatives Lost More Than An Election
by Chuck Baldwin
November 7, 2008
That Barack Obama trounced John McCain last Tuesday should have surprised no one. In fact, in this column, weeks ago, I stated emphatically that John McCain could no more beat Barack Obama than Bob Dole could beat Bill Clinton. He didn't. (Hence a vote for John McCain was a "wasted" vote, was it not?) I also predicted that Obama would win with an electoral landslide. He did. The real story, however, is not how Barack Obama defeated John McCain. The real story is how John McCain defeated America's conservatives.
For all intents and purposes, conservatism--as a national movement--is completely and thoroughly dead. Barack Obama did not destroy it, however. It was George W. Bush and John McCain who destroyed conservatism in America.
Soon after G.W. Bush was elected, it quickly became obvious he was no conservative. On the contrary, George Bush has forever established himself as a Big-Government, warmongering, internationalist neocon. Making matters worse was the way Bush presented himself as a conservative Christian. In fact, Bush's portrayal of himself as a conservative Christian paved the way for the betrayal and ultimate destruction of conservatism (something I also predicted years ago). And the greatest tragedy of this deception is the way that Christian conservatives so thoroughly (and stupidly) swallowed the whole Bush/McCain neocon agenda.
For example, Bush and his fellow neocons like to categorize and promote themselves as being "pro-life," but they have no hesitation or reservation about killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people in reckless and unconstitutional foreign wars. By the same token, how many unborn babies were saved by six years of all three branches of the federal government being under the control of these "pro-life" neocons? Not one! Ask the more than eight million unborn babies who were killed in their mothers' wombs during the last eight years how "pro-life" George W. Bush and John McCain are.
As a result of this insanely inconsistent and pixilated punditry, millions of Americans now laugh at the very notion of "pro-life" conservatism. Bush and McCain have made a mockery of the very term.
Consider, too, the way Bush and McCain have allowed the international bankers on Wall Street to bilk America's taxpayers out of trillions of dollars. Yes, I know Obama also supported the Wall Street bailout, but it was the Republican Party that controlled the White House for the last eight years and the entire federal government for six out of the last eight years. In fact, the GOP has won seven out of the previous ten Presidential elections. They have controlled Supreme Court appointments for the past thirty-plus years. They have appointed the majority of Treasury secretaries and Federal Reserve chairmen. They have presided over the greatest trade imbalances, the biggest deficits, the biggest spending increases, and now the worst financial disaster since the Great Depression.
Again, the American people look at these so-called "conservatives" and laugh. No wonder such a sizeable majority of voters yawned when John McCain tried to scare them by accusing Barack Obama of being a "big taxer." How can one possibly scare people with a charge like that after the GOP has made a total mockery of fiscal conservatism? That's like trying to scare someone coming out from a swim in the Gulf of Mexico with a squirt gun.
Then there was the pathetic attempt by the National Rifle Association (NRA) to scare gun owners regarding an Obama White House. Remember that John McCain is the same guy that the NRA rightly condemned for proposing his blatantly unconstitutional McCain/Feingold bill. McCain is also the same guy that tried to close down gun shows. He even made a personal campaign appearance for a pro-gun control liberal in the State of Oregon a few short years ago. In fact, the Gun Owners of America (GOA) gave McCain a grade of "F" for his dismal record on Second Amendment issues. Once again, Chicken Little-style paranoia over Barack Obama rang hollow when the alternative was someone as liberal as John McCain.
But the worst calamity of this election was the way conservatives--especially Christian conservatives--surrendered their principles for the sake of political partisanship. The James Dobsons of this country should hang their heads in shame! Not only did they lose an election, they lost their integrity!
In South Carolina, for example, pro-life Christians and conservatives had an opportunity to vote for a principled conservative-constitutionalist for the U.S. Senate. He is pro-life, pro-Second Amendment, and pro-traditional marriage. He believes in securing our borders against illegal immigration. He is against the bailout for the Wall Street banksters. His conservative credentials are unassailable. But the vast majority of Christian conservatives (including those at Bob Jones University) voted for his liberal opponent instead.
The man that the vast majority of Christian conservatives voted for in South Carolina is a Big-Government neocon. He supported the bailout of the Wall Street banksters. He is a rabid supporter of granting amnesty and a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens. In fact, this man has a conservative rating of only 29% in the current Freedom Index of the New American Magazine.
Why did Christian conservatives support the liberal neocon and not the solid pro-life conservative? Because the conservative ran as a Democrat and the neocon is a Republican. I'm talking about the race between Bob Conley and Lindsey Graham, of course.
Had South Carolina's pastors, Christians, evangelicals, and pro-life conservatives voted for Bob Conley, he would be the new senator-elect from that state. In fact, Bob was so conservative that the Democratic leadership in South Carolina endorsed the Republican, Lindsey Graham! No matter. A majority of evangelical Christians in South Carolina stupidly rejected Bob Conley and voted for Graham.
Across the country, rather than stand on principle, hundreds of thousands of pastors, Christians, and pro-life conservatives capitulated and groveled before John McCain's neocon agenda. In doing so, they forfeited any claim to truth, and they abandoned any and all fidelity to constitutional government. They should rip the stories of Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego out of their Bibles. They should never again tell their children, parishioners, and radio audiences the importance of standing for truth and principle. They have made a mockery of Christian virtue. No wonder a majority of the voting electorate laughs at us Christians. No wonder the GOP crashed and burned last Tuesday.
Again, it wasn't Barack Obama who destroyed conservatism; it was George W. Bush, John McCain, and the millions of evangelical Christians who supported them. And until conservatives find their backbone and their convictions, they deserve to remain a burnt-out, has-been political force. They have no one to blame but themselves.
And since it is unlikely that the Republican Party has enough sense to understand any of this and will, therefore, do little to reestablish genuine conservative principles, it is probably best to just go ahead and bury the scoundrels now and move on to something else. Without a sincere commitment to constitutional government, the GOP has no justifiable reason to ever govern again. Therefore, put a fork in them. They are done. Let a new entity arise from the ashes: one that will stand for something more than just "the lesser of two evils." As we say in the South, That dog just won't hunt anymore.
Have you ever considered that..(sm)
dems would love to see Rush running for pres or become a serious voice in the pub party? The farther right the pubs go, the better the vote for dems. There is no way that Rush doctrine would be able to win an election, so why not see if we can goad him into trying. Looks like he's going for it -- check mate....LOL
So is this considered a bad thing?
Seriously, have you ever considered an antipsychotic?
??
CNN is considered reputable right?
This is one I found from CNN with Barack's half brother, George. I respect the fact that George says he isn't expecting a handout from his brother. A lot of Americans can learn from him!
Still, I can't help but wonder why Obama wouldn't at least make an effort to help his village. If he wasn't talking so much about "world changing" and what not I wouldn't ask, but since he is, shouldn't he start with his family? It would sadden me greatly to see even a half brother or sister living like that.
This is the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CV5sZtQvGKs
Not trying to smear, just asking a legitimate question.
Shouldn't you have considered all that BEFORE you
xx
As an IC, I'm considered a small business, so
but not really sure which will benefit me the most. ICs must all think like small businesses and consider taxes based on that, not as individual taxpayers.
I actually don't agree with either one on all tax issues, so I'm still on the fence. I doubt Barack will be able to enact and MAINTAIN the tax cuts he has promised. I agree with giving seniors a break on taxes when they are on a limited budget, for example, but Barack has said seniors making less than $50K. That means if they make $49K (which is more than I make, BTW), they don't have to pay ANY taxes?? Lower that amount a tad and I might see it as reasonable, but a senior making more than me, receiving senior discounts, Medicare, etc., and then not having to pay taxes. Seems a little off balance somehow.
And simplifying tax preparation isn't one of my top priorities, I have TurboTax for that. A lot of his other tax proposals pretty much mirror McCain's so I don't see much difference there, like the R&D, small biz, etc. I like his ideas on taxes, but IMO, his website is full of promises that he will have a VERY hard time fulfilling.
I like that Barack addresses credit card practices. I feel this is a BIG problem. Good creditworthy people are getting screwed by shady practices of credit card companies left and right. I don't see where McCain has addressed this.
I like McCain's summer gas tax holiday, lowering gas prices in the summer, since historically, gas prices always climb through summer especially around the holidays. I also like his HOME plan, as this would make the people truly affected by subprime loans eligible to trade their mortgage. But probably what I like most is McCain's view on healthcare - restoring control to the PATIENTS. I know people that live in countries with Government provided healthcare, and they do not have any more control over that than any of us with paid insurance policies do. I feel the only way to change this issue is to crack down on the insurance companies, force their hands to make premiums more affordable, make them honor their premium terms, limit their restrictions on patients and pre-existing conditions, and do not allow them to tell patients what procedures they can and can't have and what doctors they can and can't see.
I am independent and considered Obama, but
nm
No, I haven't considered it, and the people who own dailykos...
have owned up to it, apparently, because of the firestorm it caused. It is exactly the kind of stuff dailykos engages in on a daily basis.
Only if I felt that all available options had been considered and rejected...sm
How long has the US had nuclear weapons? More than 60 years. Iran, if they have any capability, it is very limited. Any serious threat or attack by them would only result in their ultimate annihilation. However extremist they may be, they know that.
child support is not considered a garnishment -
He darn well makes enough to pay her what he owes her and even if they won't hold it out of his check, then he is still responsible for paying it and should be sending the difference.
Child support is not like a regular garnishment - it is a court order, not just something the military can decide whether they want to do or not. What they ordered is not an unreasonable amount.
My husband's child support sure comes out of his check even though it is 42% of his pay since he is on disability now because of an on the job injury. When he went to court because he was getting behind, the judge told him she did not care if he was working or not, that he better come up with 100% of the money every week or go to jail - that her order was her order; so out of a $300 weekly check, the mom gets $124.13 a week.
My daughter's ex is sitting up there making more babies (at last count, 3 more to 3 different moms), has already paid for another abortion that we know about, and driving new cars and living in a very nice apartment complex, while my daughter cannot clothe her children without help, and guess what, he is good friends with the commander who told my daughter if she needed child support of more than $400 a month then she did not need her children and needed to give them to their dad (who by the way has only seen the 1 year old daughter 1 time in her life)...
The thing is, in the state of Georgia, he is getting further and further behind and so hopefully the next step is to pull his security clearance so that he loses the job in the Navy he wants, then when he is discharged in April and moves back to Georgia, they are going to pull his driver's license and also start holding his federal income taxes this year.
Why is fairness in taxation considered a handout? This isn't welfare... it's paying the right
o
Bush considered taking Obama's approach last summer
efforts to forge peace in Israel/Palestine.
Bush floated the idea of re-establishing a diplomatic US interests section in Tehran last summer which for the time being has been shelved.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081004/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iran_no_deal
Here's the no-brainer rule-of-thumb on this topic. If you wwant war, you don't negotiate with opponents. If you want peace, you sit down aat the table.
When evaluating the credibility of this ad, as yourself that basic question..."Who stands to benefit the most" by taking this position? As they have demonstrated over the past 60 years, it is in Zionist's best interest to perpetuate war in their region. They have been able to enrich their nation immensely with US taxpayer dollars and enjoy an uncontested nuclear bully status in the region as the US's most favorite global puppet. The notion that the US would promote peace or stability in the region would diminish their status exponentially and are the last nation on earth that would like to see the US play the disarmament card.
I actually really like Ron Paul...
I plan to vote for Barack Obama (bash him if you want - I cannot be swayed!), but I checked out Ron Paul's website awhile back, and it seems like he has a pretty great record. I wouldn't mind if he got elected. I think both Obama and Paul seem to have one great quality in common - integrity!! People can call me foolish if they want, but I go with my gut feeling a lot through life (serving me well so far), and I have a good feeling about both of these men. They seem like decent, honest men - well, honest for politicians at least. :)
I like Obama because he talks about the things that mean the most to my family, and I really think he has what it takes to bring our divided nation back together somewhat, but if a Republican makes it to office, I hope it's Paul.
Exactly what Ron Paul has said over and
He has repeatedly tried to remind everyone of our constant intrusion into the middle east, invading their soil and they resent us for that. Oil, oil, oil is the reason and I am still amazed at how so many people still believe that is not the reason we're over there. Carter screwed up so bad decades ago and things have just gotten worse since. Obama doesn't know squat about middle eastern affairs and it scares me to death to think he could possibly be running this country one day.
Ron Paul.....
Not nominated because he went against everything the government bureaucracy wanted. He wanted VERY LIMITED government, NO taxes on individual citizens, do away with the IRS, stop taking away civil rights, NO national ID, free markets, and here's the kicker, return to SOUND MONETARY POLICIES. Now, that's why he wasn't nominated but look at the crap hole we're in now.
He never has gone alone with capitol hill's garbage and has stood up against them at every turn.
He has preached the coming of this very thing which we are bailing corporate greed's sorry butts out right now and they just scoff, smirk, and laugh at him.
I sat on this board and read harsh comments about him but yet most of them had to do with nothing more than his age. The very things they are screaming about now are the very things he warned again and again about and begged us to be involved in what is going on with our government and police THEM, not the other way around. But no, we end up with Obama and McCain. What a trade off.
So, do you think Ron Paul is serious
candidate or just a wasted vote? I'm not liking neither Obama nor McCain at this point, and I've been researching Ron Paul a little bit. I don't know that I'm leaning towards him, just curious if he has a viable chance in this election.
It seems worthless to vote for someone you know won't get enough of the votes to actually win the thing. Any thoughts? Does Ron Paul have enough supporters to get voted in?
Ron Paul
Yes, he has never veered one bit from his beliefs. He is not swayed by lobbylists and the good ole boy system... he has continued to try to speak for America but sadly enough to deaf ears. Everybody wants tax relief but when this man said he would do everything he could to get the IRS abolished, were there any takers? Yea, but not by the mainstream media. You rarely got to see him on there. At the very least, he would have given us a flat tax. I don't hear either candidate talking flat tax, which would be a very quick fix with lasting benefits. But, of course, that's too easy....government couldn't afford all the crap they're used to dishing up for us.
Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez5robAWmu4
G20 by Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COtE1J5NMbo
We do have someone, Ron Paul. sm
He is not a perfect public speaker, but he tells it like it is. During an interview with Cavuto, this guy said if he was an American he would vote for Ron Paul.
Actually, was not a Ron Paul fan, but the more I
nm
apparently
he wanted Lieberman or Tom Ridge. he was informed that if he picked Lieberman, there would be a floor fight on the convention floor to prevent that selection. His campaign is stagnant, so he decided to appeal to the extreme conservative base. It has backfired on him because, in going for those voters, he chose a partner whose lifestyle shows the limitations and consequences of extreme right views such as abstinence only programs and not providing birth control info to teenagers.
apparently
that view is that the left is one big monolithic mind that works as one Kinda like bees.
And apparently they are not the only ones. nm
nm
apparently
one who posts an opinion that differs from the majority here is labeled a "troll." Labels do not deter me from expressing my viewpoint. I am certain that others will agree with my assessment before the day is over.
As far as giving liberals a bad name, pack-think is rather primitive.
Apparently more than you!
nm
Apparently...
Your reality is based on your brother and his friends and their friends and your friends at church. I have a news flash for you. There is a whole country outside of your little town with a much different reality that you know nothing about. So please keep your small-town reality to yourself and stop trying to tell us that we should all join you.
Apparently not who you think I am........ sm
since you seem to think I said you were no better than the rapist. I don't know where the heck you got that, lady, but I never said anything even CLOSE to that.
I did say "a rapist can only have as much control on the victim AFTER THE FACT as she allows." After the fact means after the rape. It does not mean that any woman asks to be raped or that she is on the same level as her rapist. It means that, if a woman allows herself to ruminate on the act for months or years afterward, the rapist still has control over her.
You asked if I feel you should have given birth, too, and my answer to that would have to be yes. I feel that you should have allowed your child to have life, and then if you decided you couldn't raise it (and I would totally agree with that since you were just a child yourself) I believe you should have allowed it to be adopted.
I'm really sorry for your pain as I would not wish that on anyone, and yes, I would go hunting if I had a daughter who was raped. I obviously struck a deep, long buried nerve with you, and I'm sorry for that.
Apparently they don't
However, I think they're dead wrong. There are a lot of voters on both sides (Dem and Repub) who see a major problem with one party having too much power and will vote accordingly to even things up.
Neoconservatism, per Ron Paul.
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr0710033.htm
Vote for Ron Paul
He has my vote, too.
Voting for Ron Paul
Go Ron Paul!
Would love to see a true statesman like Ron Paul be President of our country.
A politician is a man who thinks of the next election; while the statesman
thinks of the next generation. -James Freeman Clarke
(1810-1888)
I am sure that even shocked Ron Paul. sm
I would say he has some fringe support. I do not think he has any control over that, but overall he is uniting people across parties, colors, ages, religions etc. Who else is doing that? Looking for idealistic youth, you will find a lot of them at Ron Paul rallies.
I do not like Tucker either. I have seen posts on other sites that MSNBC is going to or has fired him. Maybe he does not want to be a paid shill anymore. There is even a Save Tucker website.
http://www.savetucker.org/index.html
I supported Ron Paul too...but
Ron Paul is not in the race anymore. He was a good candidate and I was behind him 100%. Even he is in agreement with Barack on certain issues (no not all of them but some of them). And yes Hillary does need to step down. She will tear the party apart so much that we will be seeing a win for McBush. She has so much bad baggage attached to her that if she was to win the nomination McBush would win hands down over her. Yes everyone should be allowed to vote but we should also know that there will only be two candidates come election time. If anyone wants to write in someone else and not vote for McCain or Obama then its just a waste. If people think its going to make a difference it won't. Those votes will just go in the trash can.
For those who supported Ron Paul sm
Great article in the Rocky Mountain News.
Ron Paul has performed a great service for the Republican Party
By Jeff Wright
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Largely unappreciated and attacked by his own Party Congressman Ron Paul has, in fact, done a great service to the Republican Party this election season. Paul enlarged the Republican ‘tent’ to again include disaffected core Republicans, Independents and real Conservatives who have been forced outside that ‘tent’ in the last two decades.
Paul uses classic Republican language to defend that point of view which demands small-government, constitutionally-oriented, fiscally-responsible and true free-market adherents actually be recognized and accommodated, rather than just paying lip-service to those positions.
Most importantly, that message has motivated a generation of young people to join the Party who are technically savvy, constitutionally-smart and extremely enthusiastic about spreading the message of freedom, liberty and free markets. They have been inspired by a candidate who really understands and believes in a Republic and, one would think, be embraced by incumbent Republican Party members.
However that, it seems, is not the case. Too many existing Republicans do not understand the language of those positions any more and can’t speak it in public. It also seems the NeoCon members are intent on forcing out of the party the very people that represent its future. I urge my Republican brothers and sisters to reject such collectivist, herd mentality which is indicative of Democrats while being logically and historically repugnant to Republicans.
In the 1960s and 70s that same “insurgent” group within the party was represented by Goldwater/Ronald Reagan conservatives. For those of you who don’t remember, the “Reaganites” were ostracized and isolated throughout that period right up to the 1980 election, when they were fully embraced. That is why in March of 1980, even former President Gerald Ford was still quoted as saying, “.....the Man is unelectable,” seven months before Reagan was elected President. It is worth noting that Congressman Paul was one of only 4 Congressman who endorsed Reagan in 1976.
However, the Goldwater/Reaganites were never treated as badly as the Paulites have been this season. The NeoCon/establishment faction within the Party has diligently worked to eliminate all true vestiges of the real Reagan Revolution from the party, as exampled by their behavior this election season. They have but one thought: Power and control at any cost. Yet, the record shows they keep losing running against historic principles of the Party.
They are attempting to make stillborn the Paul movement. Why? Because we are strong supporters of the original values of the Party? My friends, we are being weakened further by the poor leadership of that NeoCon faction and its adherents. Check the record.
The results since 2004 have been abysmal. In Colorado, while having a 200,000-vote advantage of registered Republicans over Democrats, we have lost the State Senate and the House, the Governor’s mansion, the Treasurer’s seat and two Congressional seats.
Nationally, we already have lost the US House and Senate and it is nearly a foregone conclusion we will lose 25-30 more House seats and 6-9 Senate seats in November.
In early tests, we have already lost seats in Illinois, Louisiana and Mississippi. Seats that Republicans have held for decades. The damage is mounting. We are CONTINUING to lose Governor’s seats left and right. The Democrats are out-raising us in funding $3 and $4 to one (in Congress $6 to $1) as noted recently by Republican Congressional leaders. The leadership should be forced to explain where it is that we have a winning strategy in constantly compromising our historic principles rather than firmly re-establishing them each generation? That is what the Founders taught.
From McKinley to Taft to Goldwater to Reagan, this Party used to promote and celebrate the core Republican message and historical principles of the Party. That seems to be all but banished from the party, except to pay it lip service. The result of that banishment are, and will be, clearly evident in the election results this November and after. If establishment Republicans persist in ostracizing and obstructing every attempt for the classic Republican message to have a voice in the Party, than who are Republicans, really? I did not spend the last 33 years as a conservative to start voting for liberals. Please join me today in supporting and promoting what should be the real message of the Republican Party in 2008 and beyond. Send the message to the Party leadership that we no longer support any further erosion of this party’s principles! Don’t allow them to keep rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Regardless of whether or not you would ultimately have voted for Congressman Paul, every Republican should have respected the message. That was the Republican way for the first 140 years of this party. At this point, even if he wins, John McCain will likely be another Millard Fillmore presiding over the complete demise of the Whig Party from 1850-54.
Obama is NOTHING like Ron Paul....
nothing.
I thought about Ron Paul but
there were quite a few things I didn't agree with him on plus I didn't think he had a snowball's chance of winning.
For Ron Paul Fans.
He thinks McCain is the better man. He stated he doesn't even know what the O is all about.
RON PAUL IS SOOO RIGHT!
This is why the powers that be behind the scenes made sure Ron Paul didn't get proper media coverage and couldn't get his message out there........too many agendas in governments around the world. We do need to keep our butts out of this......no matter what happens, the middle east will always and has always been fighting. Surely the U.S. doesn't think WE will be able to suddenly stop all that. All we are doing is making matters worse by taking sides at this point. If Israel feels the need to counter attack or invade the gaza strip, regardless, we need to stay out of it. Let them do what they need to do and we need to stay out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08gTWqWrI4M
Ron Paul is soooo right!!!
Ron Paul has been so right all along. We just keep throwing more and more money, printing more money, just wasted, all of it! Government is not supposed to be in the business of economic planning for this country....that's not a free society! Government has NEVER done ANYTHING worthwhile with our money other than blow it............they have no business in the private sector.
All the CEOs they sit up there and grill....what have they found out? Nothing....and they never will. Government can't get anything right.
I want the platform that Ron Paul ..
originally ran on back in the 1980's - term limits. Let congress do 4, 5, or 6 years and then go home and get a job like the rest of us. The founding fathers never intended pols to remain at the trough on the Potomac for decades, collecting and peddling influence and serving special interests. Besides, with 300+ million of us I'm certain we could find a new crop every few years who are capable and willing to serve their country for a term.
Paul says in Corinthians
that we will all stand before Christ:
2 Corinthians 5:10, "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad."
So Christians will be judged based on the works they do AFTER salvation, and rewarded/chastised according to such. That's part of the motivation of Christians doing good works.
But you are right, as far as getting into heaven, Christians will not face condemnation if they have sincerely confessed Jesus as their Lord and Savior.
For Ron Paul fans. sm
The article is on Huff Post, but is positive. There have been a few good articles there lately on Dr. Paul since his transparency bill (HR 1207) now has more than half the House as cosponsors.
The World's Most Popular Congressman
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/22/ron-paul-the-worlds-most_n_217971.html
I wasn't much of a Ron Paul fan and (sm)
didn't vote for him, but if he had been treated more fairly, my opinions may have changed. As of now, they're beginning to change.
There are a lot of things the federal government have no business sticking their noses into. Last time I heard, Ron Paul had nailed most of them down.
Since I'm beginning to become disillusioned with both the Republican and Democratic parties, I just may vote for Paul (if he's still running) during the next election.
|
