Comments on: Badnarik Endorses Ron Paul http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/ Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:43:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: spyder http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-132130 Fri, 09 Mar 2007 21:45:24 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-132130 Ron Paul is 'anti-ABORTION' (not anti-choice) however he believes it is up to the states to decide abortion laws, so really his position on abortion is not a bad thing to either side. GET A FUCKING CLUE PEOPLE. Less government and more freedom is a good thing. Ron Paul is ‘anti-ABORTION’ (not anti-choice) however he believes it is up to the states to decide abortion laws, so really his position on abortion is not a bad thing to either side. GET A FUCKING CLUE PEOPLE.

Less government and more freedom is a good thing.

]]> by: Badnarik Endorses Ron Paul « Tons of Fresh News http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-131894 Fri, 09 Mar 2007 10:53:17 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-131894 [...] March 9, 2007 at 10:51 am · Filed under Uncategorized Badnarik Endorses Ron Paul Presidential candidate Ron Paul gains endorsement and plea for 200 others to follow suit from ‘04 Libertarian Presidential candidate Michael Badnarik at Vermont rally of Independence For Vermont group. He also makes a plea for the Libertarian Party to nominate Paul, citing qualities as found in the Founding Fathers.[news][world & business][political news] [...] [...] March 9, 2007 at 10:51 am · Filed under Uncategorized Badnarik Endorses Ron Paul Presidential candidate Ron Paul gains endorsement and plea for 200 others to follow suit from ‘04 Libertarian Presidential candidate Michael Badnarik at Vermont rally of Independence For Vermont group. He also makes a plea for the Libertarian Party to nominate Paul, citing qualities as found in the Founding Fathers.[news][world & business][political news] [...]

]]> by: S@muel http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-131174 Thu, 08 Mar 2007 05:51:56 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-131174 As a Democrat, I would support him before I would support anyone elese running at this point. ************Period!************* “Red or Blue, A Vote For Ron Paul Is A Dream Come True!” RP™ 2008 :-) As a Democrat, I would support him before I would support anyone elese running at this point.

************Period!*************

“Red or Blue, A Vote For Ron Paul Is A Dream Come True!”

RP™ 2008 :-)

]]> by: S@muel http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-131173 Thu, 08 Mar 2007 05:48:09 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-131173 As a Democrat, I would support im before I would support anyone elese at running at this point. Period! "Red or Blue, A Vote For Ron Paul Is A Dream Come True!" As a Democrat, I would support im before I would support anyone elese at running at this point.

Period!

“Red or Blue, A Vote For Ron Paul Is A Dream Come True!”

]]> by: Chris Campbell http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-129861 Tue, 06 Mar 2007 18:38:15 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-129861 Ballot access is sloooow and few workers willing to do something. 70,000+ signatures needed to be certified. Would help if anyone was willing to help the CPNC with the Real ID push above. So far, no response from "freedom fighters" Alex Jones, Aaron Russo or even posting said petition on this site-hence the reason I posted it here. I need help putting pressure on Legislature and also, media. This would help us too. Ballot access is sloooow and few workers willing to do something.

70,000+ signatures needed to be certified.

Would help if anyone was willing to help the CPNC with the Real ID push above. So far, no response from “freedom fighters” Alex Jones, Aaron Russo or even posting said petition on this site-hence the reason I posted it here.

I need help putting pressure on Legislature and also, media. This would help us too.

]]> by: LPiberty http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-127768 Sat, 03 Mar 2007 17:44:49 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-127768 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_primary-193.html We could have Romney or Giuliani or McCain or Gingrich. ... Thanks. I guess Libertarians should be relieved? Is there another party other than Republicans? Afraid another 4 years with an elephant in the White House would be too much. *** "HEY! UNLESS WE START MEANS TESTING SS NONE OF YOU ARE GONNA GET SQUAT!" http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_primary-193.html

We could have Romney or Giuliani or McCain or Gingrich. ...
Thanks. I guess Libertarians should be relieved?

Is there another party other than Republicans?
Afraid another 4 years with an elephant in the White House would be too much.

***
“HEY! UNLESS WE START MEANS TESTING SS NONE OF YOU ARE GONNA GET SQUAT!”

]]> by: undercover_anarchist http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-127239 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 23:38:47 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-127239 Here is what I will translate for people: Bomb the Fed, like idiotic "Libertarians" want to do, and we will all be poorer. Period. It isn't my fault that people are stupid. Here is what I will translate for people: Bomb the Fed, like idiotic “Libertarians” want to do, and we will all be poorer. Period.

It isn’t my fault that people are stupid.

]]> by: timothy west http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-127154 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 20:34:15 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-127154 and not one voter in 10,000 gives a shit about the Fed, fiat currency, the gold standard, OR ECONOMICS. OR FREE MARKETS! the only thing they care about is do their (pay, SS, lawsuit, whatever)CHECKS CASH? As long as they do, nothings wrong. start translating this abstract BS into terms people can understand. HEY! UNLESS WE START MEANS TESTING SS NONE OF YOU ARE GONNA GET SQUAT! they might listen to that. At least it will will get their attention. and not one voter in 10,000 gives a shit about the Fed, fiat currency, the gold standard, OR ECONOMICS. OR FREE MARKETS!

the only thing they care about is do their (pay, SS, lawsuit, whatever)CHECKS CASH? As long as they do, nothings wrong.

start translating this abstract BS into terms people can understand.

HEY! UNLESS WE START MEANS TESTING SS NONE OF YOU ARE GONNA GET SQUAT!

they might listen to that. At least it will will get their attention.

]]> by: undercover_anarchist http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-127134 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 19:31:33 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-127134 "The money supply certainly would grow with productivity. Because it would require production to produce (mine) more money!" So in other words, tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands? millions?) of able-bodied men would be wasting time "mining" money? What a complete and total waste of fucking time. How does this add to productivity or wealth? These same men could instead be building legitimate businesses that served the needs of man, creating new technologies, or just producing something (anything!) with real, intrinsic value. The government hordes gold because releasing it on the market would roil the markets - because of the morons who hold it and think it has value. It does not. It in no way sustains life. It can used for little/nothing other than the masturbatory fantasies of juvenile idiots who don't understand economics. “The money supply certainly would grow with productivity. Because it would require production to produce (mine) more money!”

So in other words, tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands? millions?) of able-bodied men would be wasting time “mining” money? What a complete and total waste of fucking time. How does this add to productivity or wealth? These same men could instead be building legitimate businesses that served the needs of man, creating new technologies, or just producing something (anything!) with real, intrinsic value.

The government hordes gold because releasing it on the market would roil the markets – because of the morons who hold it and think it has value. It does not. It in no way sustains life. It can used for little/nothing other than the masturbatory fantasies of juvenile idiots who don’t understand economics.

]]> by: matt http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126950 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 14:08:24 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126950 1% in a media blackout is impressive. In 2000, McCain went from having 3% against Bush's 49% to almost winning the nomination. Counting Ron Paul out early is a self-fulfilling prophecy, so I'm not going to do it. I'd rather have a good president than a bad one. 1% in a media blackout is impressive. In 2000, McCain went from having 3% against Bush’s 49% to almost winning the nomination. Counting Ron Paul out early is a self-fulfilling prophecy, so I’m not going to do it. I’d rather have a good president than a bad one.

]]> by: Eric Dondero http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126875 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 12:42:47 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126875 Chuck, you say Doug Stanhope is "kicking his campaign into gear..." It's about friggin' time. Could you elaborate, please? I originally supported him when he first announced. But that was so long ago, I fear he's lost too much support since he suspended his campaign. As a campaign professional I can tell you that you need to keep the momentum up in politics. Stanhope has lost it. I hope he does some MAJOR campaigning to win back his former supporters. I could still see myself supporting Stanhope, if something were to happen to Giuliani. The Leftwing smear machine is already out bashing Giuliani this morning on multiple fronts. While I heartily support Rudy, I admit, this is rough and tumble politics, and if something sticks and Rudy takes a dive, many Libertarians will be left without a candidate to support. We ain't gonna back non-Celebrity Unknowns like Kubby and Phillies. But we would be attracted to Stanhope. Still HE NEEDS TO ACT DECISIVELY with his campaign and stop dithering around. Chuck, you say Doug Stanhope is “kicking his campaign into gear…” It’s about friggin’ time. Could you elaborate, please?

I originally supported him when he first announced. But that was so long ago, I fear he’s lost too much support since he suspended his campaign.

As a campaign professional I can tell you that you need to keep the momentum up in politics. Stanhope has lost it. I hope he does some MAJOR campaigning to win back his former supporters.

I could still see myself supporting Stanhope, if something were to happen to Giuliani. The Leftwing smear machine is already out bashing Giuliani this morning on multiple fronts. While I heartily support Rudy, I admit, this is rough and tumble politics, and if something sticks and Rudy takes a dive, many Libertarians will be left without a candidate to support.

We ain’t gonna back non-Celebrity Unknowns like Kubby and Phillies.

But we would be attracted to Stanhope. Still HE NEEDS TO ACT DECISIVELY with his campaign and stop dithering around.

]]> by: Eric Dondero http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126873 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 12:38:02 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126873 Here's some sobering facts for Ron Paul for President supporters: Latest poll has Rudy Giuliani with 53% of the GOP Primary vote and climbing. Ron Paul is at 1%. Here’s some sobering facts for Ron Paul for President supporters:

Latest poll has Rudy Giuliani with 53% of the GOP Primary vote and climbing. Ron Paul is at 1%.

]]> by: Tom Blanton http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126698 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 04:53:32 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126698 Joseph asks: "What if the GOP nominates Ron Paul and Walter Williams and the LP nominates Bob Barr and Neal Boortz?" I guess I might just vote for the GOP slate in that case. But, what if the sun doesn't come up on election day? Dr. Paul is a long shot for the GOP nomination, but I sure hope he is present during the GOP nomination debates - that in itself is worth supporting Ron Paul for now. In fact, what's wrong with supporting candidates in multiple parties? For example, I'd like to see Mike Gravel in the Dem debates - or Kucinich - even though it is unlikely either would win the nomination. Chuck Hagel may get into the Unity08 thing - he's worth hearing on a few issues. Any message is better than the crap the top 3 or 4 candidates in the GOP and Dems are peddling. As usual, the LP candidates are being ignored by the media - along with all the other third party candidates. Joseph asks:

“What if the GOP nominates Ron Paul and Walter Williams and the LP nominates Bob Barr and Neal Boortz?”

I guess I might just vote for the GOP slate in that case.

But, what if the sun doesn’t come up on election day?

Dr. Paul is a long shot for the GOP nomination, but I sure hope he is present during the GOP nomination debates – that in itself is worth
supporting Ron Paul for now.

In fact, what’s wrong with supporting candidates in multiple parties? For example, I’d like to see Mike Gravel in the Dem debates – or Kucinich – even though it is unlikely either would win the nomination. Chuck Hagel may get into the Unity08 thing – he’s worth hearing on a few issues.

Any message is better than the crap the top 3 or 4 candidates in the GOP and Dems are peddling. As usual, the LP candidates are being ignored by the media – along with all the other third party candidates.

]]> by: matt http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126648 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 02:40:56 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126648 I'm not married to the concept of a Gold Standard, but it sure would be nice to use something inherently valuable as a medium of exchange rather than a scrap of paper that Uncle Sam has randomly deisgnated to be money. Furthermore, I've noticed that precious metals are much more easily transferable than these other commodities: barrels of oil pork bellies hundredweights of soybeans papal indulgences I’m not married to the concept of a Gold Standard, but it sure would be nice to use something inherently valuable as a medium of exchange rather than a scrap of paper that Uncle Sam has randomly deisgnated to be money.

Furthermore, I’ve noticed that precious metals are much more easily transferable than these other commodities:

barrels of oil
pork bellies
hundredweights of soybeans
papal indulgences

]]> by: Devious David http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126588 Fri, 02 Mar 2007 01:00:30 +0000 http://thirdpartywatch.com/2007/02/25/badnarik-endorses-ron-paul/#comment-126588 The money supply certainly would grow with productivity. Because it would require production to produce (mine) more money! In fact, money supply growth would generally be a very good mirror of economic growth. Prices would be stable as a result. The boom bust business cycle would be eliminated. The distortions and malinvestments within the economy would be quelled and purged. Government would be stricly limited to spending that which it raises via taxes. The distribution of wealth would become dramatically more even. Oh yeah. Much of the US's gold reserve has been leased away... for good. It doesn't have near as much as it says it does due to this, double counting and other Enron-style accounting practices. Doesn't it tell you something that central banks hold gold at all if it is an utterly worthless relic? Why don't they trust their own monetary schemes as much as you do? Why did FDR bother with a confiscation? The answer to these questions is because gold is real money. Fiat paper is not. The money supply certainly would grow with productivity. Because it would require production to produce (mine) more money! In fact, money supply growth would generally be a very good mirror of economic growth. Prices would be stable as a result. The boom bust business cycle would be eliminated. The distortions and malinvestments within the economy would be quelled and purged. Government would be stricly limited to spending that which it raises via taxes. The distribution of wealth would become dramatically more even.

Oh yeah. Much of the US’s gold reserve has been leased away… for good. It doesn’t have near as much as it says it does due to this, double counting and other Enron-style accounting practices.

Doesn’t it tell you something that central banks hold gold at all if it is an utterly worthless relic? Why don’t they trust their own monetary schemes as much as you do? Why did FDR bother with a confiscation? The answer to these questions is because gold is real money. Fiat paper is not.

]]>