Category Archives: Ron Paul

The 2020 Democratic primary contest has not yet begun, and yet several contenders have already experienced what some commentators have called a surge, where their polling numbers rise dramatically in a relatively short period of time. Peter Finn and Robert Ledger write that the term is a catch-all which hides a diverse collection of reasons as to why a candidates support may increase at the national or state level. Such surges should be read with caution, they advise, as success in certain states or even nationally may still not mean a candidate will clinch the partys nomination.

Even casual followers of US politics over the last year will likely have been struck by continual discussions of Democratic presidential candidates surging in the polls. In July 2019, for instance, California Senator Kamala Harris surged in polls following a strong debate performance, in September Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren surged, whilst former Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, Pete Buttigiegs much vaunted surge in Iowa in November generated a seemingly endless stream of headlines.

Even early in 2020, we have seen talk of a (Vermont Senator) Bernie Sanders surge, a Tom Steyer surge and discussion of how the large amounts being spent by billionaire candidates like Michael Bloomberg, and Steyer, is leading to shifts in voter preferences by the spending of eye-watering amounts of cash. Slate even publish a weekly email newsletter on the presidential election called The Surge.

Yet, beyond being a continual driver of traffic to news sites via the production of, often over the top headlines, the much vaunted surge is actually a catch-all term used as short-hand for a complex group of processes that lead to a rise in the poll numbers of a candidate in a short period.

Perhaps the best-known, subsequently lampooned, surge primary was for the Republican nomination in 2012 when Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Mike Huckabee and Herman Cain all had a brief (or extended) moment in the sun at the top of the opinion polls. Yet, Mitt Romney, who was consistently near the top of the pile and never really had a significant surge, won the nomination.

However, even within a single race surges, generally understood as a rise in the poll numbers of a candidate within a short time period, can occur for a variety of complex reasons. They can, for example, be national or state centric phenomena (either of which may be the result of the actions of a candidate on a national or state stage), or could happen as a new candidate enters the fray and draws supporters away from those already established in the race: especially if a new entrant is a well established player or has deep pockets. Conversely, a surge may arise when a candidate drops out and others seek to pick up their supporters. One explanation for the recent surge of Bernie Sanders, for instance, is that he has picked up Kamala Harris supporters. In another scenario, within a race of established candidates, some may rise as they attempt to coax supporters from their opponents.

A surge can be a short-lived sugar high, with candidates falling back to their prior position relatively quickly or lead to a sustained rise in poll numbers and the establishment of a new equilibrium in a race. The phenomenon can occur at precinct, city, district, state or national level and within intra-party primaries or in races between candidates from opposing parties. Moreover, given that disparities can exist between polls and reality (whether resulting from the under-polling of certain groups, respondents giving false answers or the misreading of what is animating voters in any particular election), it is likely some surges go unnoticed (the if a tree falls in the woods and nobody hears it of surges, so to speak).

Though this is a far from an exhaustive list of how, when and where a surge can occur, it does start to demonstrate the complex set of processes that are subsumed under discussions of the surge label.

A surge can lead to increased media coverage, which could lead to further support, creating that elusive political currency, momentum. Nevertheless, surges should be read with caution. If the surge is limited within certain states, there is less likelihood that it will translate to the nomination. Pete Buttigieg, for instance, has surged in the early primary states but his candidacy could still be sunk if he cannot take any early momentum to, for instance, Nevada and South Carolina, in subsequent primaries. Likewise, an increase in the overall, nation-wide, horse-race polls could be misleading as, essentially, the primary will be won in only select states, with more influence falling to those earlier in the calendar. Seeing a surge in support in New Jersey, for example, (2020 Democratic primary date June 2nd) is probably too late in the election cycle to be consequential.

Candidates behind in the polls can attempt to manufacture a surge in the near term or, kicking the can further down the road, argue they will surge at the right moment. It might be that some candidates really are playing a long game and have built such future surges into their theory of the case. There is, of course, little point in moving into the top tier of candidates early on in a gruelling race, only to see your stature diminished as other candidates target you. That said, one should certainly maintain cynicism about a candidate with low poll numbers who argues that a surge in support for them is just around the corner. Moreover, as weve argued, the processes that can feed into a rise (or fall) in polling numbers are complex and it would be a foolhardy candidate who staked their chances of gaining the presidency (or any other office) on their ability to manufacture a short term surge, let alone a sustained rise in polling numbers in the future.

Please read our comments policy before commenting.

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of USAPP American Politics and Policy, nor of the London School of Economics.

Shortened URL for this post:http://bit.ly/31jCjYR

Peter Finn Kingston UniversityDr Peter Finn is a multi-award-winning Senior Lecturer in Politics at Kingston University. His research is focused on conceptualising the ways that the US and the UK attempt to embed impunity for violations of international law into their national security operations. He is also interested in US politics more generally, with a particular focus on presidential power and elections. He has, among other places, been featured in The Guardian, The Conversation, Open Democracy and Critical Military Studies.

Robert Ledger Schiller University Robert Ledger has a PhD in political science from Queen Mary University of London. He has worked for the European Stability Initiative, a think-tank in Brussels, lectured at several universities in London and currently lives in Frankfurt am Main. He is a Visiting Researcher (Gastwissenshaftler) in the History Seminar at Goethe University and also teaches at Schiller University Heidelberg and the Frankfurt School of Finance & Management. He is the author of Neoliberal Thought and Thatcherism: A Transition From Here to There?

Visit link:
Primary Primers: Why we should be cautious of candidate 'surges' - USAPP American Politics and Policy (blog)

By Thomas C. Frohlich, John Harrington and Hristina ByrnesJanuary 28, 2020 1:48 pm

As the first major contest in the U.S. presidential election process, the Iowa caucuses are considered very important. Since the first Iowa caucuses were held in 1972, the winner of nine of the 18 Iowa caucuses held by both parties eventually won the nomination.

However, while the caucuses tend to be good predictors of who will win each partys nomination, they are poor predictors of who will win the presidency. Only three presidential candidates who won the Iowa caucuses went on to become president George W. Bush, Jimmy Carter, and Barack Obama. Here is each presidents path to the oval office.

Just how important are the Iowa caucuses? To answer this question, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed each primary seasons top three candidates in the Democratic and Republican Iowa caucuses since 1972 (the first year of the Democratic caucuses), and 1976 (the first year of the Republican caucuses). We relied on data compiled by the Des Moines Register, a central Iowa newspaper owned by media and marketing company Gannett.

Because some incumbent presidents ran uncontested, the following caucuses were excluded from our list: 1984, 1992, 1996, 2004, and 2012; In these years, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama ran uncontested as their partys nominee. Incumbent presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter were challenged in primaries by Ronald Reagan in 1976 and Edward Kennedy in 1980, respectively.

Uncommitted voter blocs, which are common in Iowa caucuses, were included on our list. In several cases, more delegates were undecided than were committed to any individual candidate.

Click here to see how much the Iowa caucuses matters to every Democratic presidential candidateClick here to see how much the Iowa caucuses matters to every Republican presidential candidate

Read the rest here:
Here's How Important the Iowa Caucuses Were in Every Election - 24/7 Wall St.

Come February 3 and the first major test of the presidential election season in the US will take place. Iowa will hold its caucuses and it will be the first major occasion to gauge the mood of the voters. Though Iowa caucuses do not have a good record in picking presidents but they certainly play a key role in trimming the fray. In 2008, the late John McCain finished fourth in the Republican caucuses but yet went on to bag the partys nomination. In 2016, too, President Donald Trump finished second best after Ted Cruz in his partys caucuses but yet bagged the nomination at the end and even went on to become the president. The winner of the GOP Iowa caucuses got a nomination in three of eight contested races but only George W Bush won the presidency, which was in 2000.

In the Democratic field, the top vote-getter in the caucuses went on to win the nomination in seven of 10 contested races and of them, only Jimmy Carter (1976) and Barack Obama (2008) bagged the presidency. The Hawkeye State in the Midwestern US has 99 counties and six electoral votes. In the 12 presidential elections since 1972, Iowa has been won by both the GOP and Dems six times each.

Here we take a look at the results of the Iowa caucuses for both major parties in the last five presidential election years (1996-2016):

Republican winner Ted Cruz

In the Republican field, the candidates who ended in the top six were Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Rand Paul and Jeb Bush. Cruz got 27.6 percent of votes while Trump received 24.3 percent. Rubio got 23.1 percent while Carson got 9.3 percent, Paul 4.5 percent and Bush 2.8 percent. Paul, Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum suspended their campaigns as a result of a poor show in Iowa.

Democratic winner Hillary Clinton

In the Democratic camp, it was a thrilling contest as Clinton beat Bernie Sanders by 0.3 percentage points to become the first woman presidential candidate to win Iowa. Martin OMalley finished a poor third with a meagre 0.6 percent of the votes and suspended his campaign afterwards. For Clinton, it was a big improvement over her 2008 show in which she had finished third after Obama and John Edwards. Some even alleged that Clinton had won the wafer-thin contest through flips of coin though that was not confirmed.

Republican winner Rick SantorumFormer Pennsylvania senator Santorum had a very thin win (24.6 percent points to second place holder Mitt Romneys 24.5) in the caucuses that was never short of drama. Two prominent GOP candidates did not make it to the caucuses: Former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty who pulled out after a low third-place finish in the Iowa Straw poll and businessman Herman Cain who suspended his campaign in the wake of sexual harassment allegations. The vote counts saw discrepancies and while Romney was declared the winner on the night of the caucuses by eight votes, it was announced two weeks later that the actual winner was Santorum and the winning margin was by just 34 votes. Other top candidates of GOP Iowa caucuses were Ron Paul (21.4%), Newt Gingrich (13.3%), Rick Perry (10.3%) and Michele Bachmann (5%). The voter participation was around 20 percent.

Democratic winner Barack ObamaIncumbent president Barack Obama ran unopposed for the Democrats that year.

Republican winner Mike HuckabeeThe 2008 Iowa caucuses were unique for McCain who bagged the nomination that year, finished fourth in the Iowa caucuses. Former Arkansas governor Huckabee bagged Iowa with the support of the Christian conservatives. He got 34.4 percentage points while second-ranked Romney got 25.2 percentage points. Fred D Thompson was third with 13.3 percent while fourth-place holder McCain got 13.1 percent. Ron Paul got 10 percentage points while Rudy Giuliani ended up with 3.5 percent. Huckabees victory put Romney under a great challenge while financial hardships saw McCain abandoning Iowa months ahead of the caucuses. Total voter participation was 20.7 percent.

Democratic winner Barack ObamaThe Democratic caucuses in Iowa in 2008 were absorbing. The heavyweight candidates in the fray including Obama, Clinton, Joe Biden, Edwards, Bill Richardson and others campaigned heavily across the state. Clinton led most polling in Iowa and across the nation but was overtaken by Obama who was seen more as an agent of change. Obama, a former senator from Illinois, received almost 38 percent of votes while former North Carolina senator Edwards ended second with 29.8 percent. Clinton was third with 29.5 percent while Richardson got 2.1%, Biden 0.9%. Biden and Chris Dodd, who also did badly, suspended their campaigns after the Iowa results came out. Total voter participation was nearly 40 percent.

Republican winner George W BushIncumbent president Obama ran unopposed for the Democrats that year.

Democratic winner John KerryThe Democratic field saw a close competition between four candidates -- John Kerry, John Edwards, Howard Dean and Richard Gephardt. Dean and Gephardt were in a close fight in the campaign phase but lost support as they targeted each other, helping the cause of Kerry and Edwards. Kerry, a former senator from Massachusetts, eventually won the caucuses with 37.1 percent votes while Edwards finished second with 32.6 percent. Dean ended third with 17.4% and Gephardt fourth with 11.2 percent. The voter participation was 23.3 percent.

Republican winner George W Bush

Former Texas governor Geroge W Bush led the GOP field that year and eventually achieved the biggest victory in a contested Republican Iowa caucus. He received 41 percent of the votes Publishing executive Steve Forbes got 30.5 percent which was surprising for many while conservative political commentator and former diplomat Alan Keyes from Maryland finished third with 14 percent. Gary Bauer was fourth with 8.5% and John McCain got 4.7%. The voter participation in the caucuses was 14.1 percent.

Democratic winner Al GoreFormer vice president Al Gore faced little difficulty in the Democratic caucuses of 2000. He had one opponent and it was former New Jersey senator Bill Bradley. The latter came up with a progressive healthcare plan that looked more comprehensive than Gores and the former vice presidents closeness with departing president Bill Clinton also made him less popular for some voters, thanks to the scandal and impeachment trial the president found himself in. But Gore still won it handsomely, bagging over 63 percent votes as against Bradleys 35. The voter participation was just below 11 percent.

Read the original:
How the Iowa Caucus has affected the results of the presidential elections over the years - MEAWW

Paul Thornley(Photo by Caitlin McNaney for Broadway.com)

Paul Thornley is headed home to the Lyric Theatre. The talented actor who originated the role of Ron Weasley in Harry Potter and the Cursed Childwill reprise his turn inthe Tony-winning two-part play beginning on March 18. He'll replace Matt Mueller, who will take his final bow in the Broadway production on March 15.

Also on March 18, the production will welcome Brady Dalton Richards in his Broadway debut as Scorpius Malfoy, with current ensemble members James Romney and Aaron Bartz graduating to the roles of Albus Potter and Draco Malfoy. They'll succeed Bubba Weiler, Nicholas Podany and Jonno Roberts, who will play their final performance on March 15.

Joining the production's ensemble will be Gabriel Amoroso, Quinn Blades, Michela Cannon, Judith Lightfoot Clarke, Malcolm Fuller, Stephanie Gomrez, Jax Jackson, Spencer LaRue, Dan Piering, Alex Michael Stoll and Maya Thomas.

They'll appear alongside current principal stars James Snyder as Harry Potter, Diane Davis as Ginny Potter, Jenny Jules as Hermione Granger and Nadia Brown as Rose Granger-Weasley, along with ensemble members Brian Thomas Abraham, Stephen Bradbury, James Brown III, Will Carlyon, Lauren Nicole Cipoletti, Makayla Joy Connolly, Grace DeAmicis, Patrick Du Laney, Steve Haggard, Edward James Hyland, Jack Koenig, Rachel Leslie, Sarita Amani Nash, Fiona Reid, Kevin Matthew Reyes, Antoinette Robinson, Stephen Spinella, Tom Patrick Stephens, Erica Sweany and Karen Janes Woditsch.

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child began previews on March 16, 2018 and officially opened on April 22. The production took home six Tony Awards including Best Play.

Originally posted here:
Paul Thornley Will Return to Harry Potter and the Cursed Child as Ron Weasley; More New Casting Announced - Broadway.com

Paul Mike Ramey

SCIPIO

Paul Mike Ramey, 86, of Scipio, passed away at 11:40 p.m. on Wednesday, January 22, 2020, at home.

A graveside service will be conducted at 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, January 28, 2020, at Oak Grove Cemetery. Rev. Tom Ramey and Rev. Dale Boyd will be officiating. Visitation will be held from 4:00 8:00 p.m. on Monday, January 27, 2020, at Sawyer-Pickett Funeral and Cremation Service.

Born November 1, 1933, in Hazard Kentucky, Mike was the son of William Jake and Hattie (Lainhart) Ramey. He was united in marriage to Dorothy Dottie Manns. She survives.

Mike graduated North Vernon High School in 1952. He was a devout faithful member of the World Wide Church of God. He retired in 1985 from Cummins after 30 years. Mike loved sports, especially baseball and golf, he coached baseball, basketball, and softball through the years. He also loved fishing, gardening, and coon hunting. Mike was a lifelong farmer. He was a member of the Hayden Masonic Lodge and the Rolling Hills Shrine Club. Mike enjoyed playing the banjo, guitar, and bluegrass music.

In addition to his wife, Dottie Ramey of Scipio, survivors include daughters, Lucinda Cindy Ramey (Marc) Sharp of Lancaster TN, Jana Cope of North Vernon, Shari (Jeff) Shaw of Seymour; son, Michael Paul Chip (Valentina) Ramey of Springfield TN; brother in law, Ron Heavern of Scipio; sister in law, Lee Esther Ramey of North Vernon; seven grandchildren; seven great grandchildren; several nieces and nephews.

Mike was preceded in death by his parents, William Jake and Hattie Ramey; daughter, Debra Lynne Ramey Aubrey; one grandchild; brothers, Billy Ramey, William Ramey, and Virgil Pete Ramey; sisters, Alma Mae Ramey, and Joy Helen Ramey.

Memorials may be made through the funeral home to the Covenant House New York.

Friends and family are invited to light a candle or leave a message of condolence in Mikes memory at http://www.sawyerfuneralservice.com

Follow this link:
Paul Mike Ramey - The Republic

President George Washington was unambiguous: "It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world."

President Jefferson was equally explicit: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."

President Monroe formalized that policy. The Monroe Doctrine's first point stated the U.S. wouldn't interfere in the internal affairs or wars of other nations.

Sadly, we've abandoned the Founders' intentions, engaging in a series of undeclared wars the last 75 years at great cost of lives and treasure, forgetting Ben Franklin's wise counsel; "There never was a good war or a bad peace."

Today, in the 19th year of an undeclared war, Afghanistan has cost us thousands of lives lost, tens of thousands wounded, and $1 trillion. The broader "war on terror," including the undeclared war in Iraq, totals $7 trillion.

Why are we losing trillions of dollars and thousands of lives in foreign conflicts? Because Congress refuses to follow the Constitution and if these conflicts truly require our involvement declare war before committing American troops.

Section 8 of the Constitution makes clear: only "Congress shall have the power to declare war."

So what's the purpose of declaring war? More than just a piece of paper. Declaring war puts another country or faction on notice, changing the relationship between the citizens and governments of countries involved. Historically, letters of marque and reprisal allowed actions considered naval piracy during peace to become legal under declaration of war.

Words have meaning, and ignoring them has results; 230 years after ratifying our Constitution, the U.S. has gone from having no standing army to more military spending than the next seven highest-spending countries combined.

Attempting to be the world's police force comes at a staggering cost, compounded year after year. This year's federal deficit was $1 trillion despite record tax collections. Even if you have no moral issue with policing the world, American taxpayers simply can't afford it. We're tired of the death and destruction stretching us to the breaking point, with a record-high national debt of $23 trillion.

A poll by Concerned Veterans for America found 60 percent of veterans and military families support removing troops from Afghanistan. A Politico poll found 81 percent of Trump voters in particular support withdrawal, and Pew Research found 59 percent of adults and 58 percent of veterans said it wasn't worth fighting there in the first place. Even higher numbers agreed regarding Iraq.

As former Congressman Ron Paul wrote in his book, Freedom Under Siege: "Carelessly entering into conflicts jeopardizes our liberty. It does not protect it. Intervention abroad causes us to neglect our obligations at home. The moral and constitutional obligations of our representatives in Washington are to protect our liberty, not coddle the world, precipitating no-win wars, while bringing bankruptcy and economic turmoil to our people."

And as President Trump said in his 2019 State of the Union Address, "Great nations do not fight endless wars ... After two decades of war, the hour has come to at least try for peace."

I agree. I support our troops. I salute their commitment and heroism. What I cannot support are unconstitutional, undeclared wars that force our troops to fight and die in foreign lands.

Congress has a duty and obligation to decide when war is necessary and when it's not, but they have refused to declare war or to exercise responsible oversight over use of our military. To abdicate this vital responsibility to the executive branch is a dereliction of duty.

But we have a duty and opportunity to act here at home as well.

Recently, the Idaho Republican Party's state central committee adopted resolutions urging our Congressional delegation to support President Trump's efforts to end what he called "these ridiculous endless wars" and bring our troops home.

As lieutenant governor, I support efforts by Representative Tammy Nichols backed by former Idaho National Guard Sergeant Dan McKnight and BringOurTroopsHome.US to enact "Defend the Guard" legislation requiring that Idaho's Guard personnel shall not be activated for combat duty overseas unless Congress has first declared war.

In November, I chaired a meeting of state legislators in Washington, D.C., who plan to introduce similar legislation in multiple states.

It's time to leave Afghanistan and Iraq and stop engaging in undeclared wars and attempts to police the world. We shouldn't sacrifice American lives intervening in the conflicts of other nations, and we can't afford it.

Congress should do their job, end these undeclared wars and bring our troops home.

Read the original here:
Time for Congress to undeclared wars and bring troops home - Kootenai Valley Times

Ron Paul, an eleven-term congressman from Texas, is the leading advocate of freedom in our nation's capital. He has devoted his political career to the defense of individual liberty, sound money, and a non-interventionist foreign policy. Judge Andrew Napolitano calls him "the Thomas Jefferson of our day."After serving as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force in the 1960s, Dr. Paul moved to Texas to begin a civilian medical practice, delivering over four thousand babies in his career as an obstetrician. He served in Congress from 1976 to 1984, and again from 1996 to the present. He and Carol Paul, his wife of fifty-one years, have five children, eighteen grandchildren, and one great-grandchild.Ron Paul, the New York Post once wrote, is a politician who "cannot be bought by special interests.""There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles," added a congressional colleague. "Ron Paul is one of those few."

See the article here:
Ron Paul - amazon.com

Wednesday December 18, 2019 The Democrat-controlled US House of Representatives is expected to vote for two articles of impeachment against President Trump today and the articles are expected to die in the Republican-controlled Senate. Is Congress doing its Constitutional duty to remove a president abusing his power and obstructing Congress, or is this a prosecution in search of a crime? Watch today's Liberty Report...read on... Wednesday December 18, 2019

On December 14th an air cargo transport of Belgian FN armsfrom Ostendwas supplied to Misrata rebels by a United Arab Emirates contractor. Whether the UAE weapons shipment was contracted to undertake an uprising in Misrata prior to Erdogan's clash with Tobruk (Haftar) and Greece over Misrata and the proposed Turkish energy corridor is unclear. Misrata rebels have supplied cheap oil to Turkey and acted somewhat autonomously. Now, the potential for a major new catastrophe in Libya cannot be ignored.read on... Tuesday December 17, 2019 Three died and eight were injured when a Saudi military officer went on a shooting spree at a Pensacola, Florida airbase. The Pentagon insists Saudi military officers are properly vetted, but they are revisiting their vetting process anyway. Maybe vetting is not the real issue? Watch today's Liberty Report...read on... Tuesday December 17, 2019

The Washington Post hasobtaineda confidential trove of government documents revealing that senior US officials failed to tell the truth about the war in Afghanistan throughout the 18-year campaign, making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable. But many of us knew and wrote that the war was unwinnable from the beginning, although none of the Western mainstream media would publicise any such judgement.

In 2005 Iwrotethat The insurgency in Afghanistan will continue until foreign troops leave, whenever that might be. After a while, the government in Kabul will collapse, and there will be anarchy until a brutal, ruthless, drug-rich warlord achieves power. He will rule the country as it has always been ruled by Afghans: by threats, religious ferocity, deceit, bribery, and outright savagery, when the latter can be practiced without retribution. And the latest foreign occupation will become just another memory.

In 2007 GW Bush, up until 2016 the worst US president in memory,declaredthat Our goal in Afghanistan is to help the people of that country to defeat the terrorists and establish a stable, moderate, and democratic state that respects the rights of its citizens, governs its territory effectively, and is a reliable ally in this war against extremists and terrorists. But after 18 years of war, following the 2001 invasion, it has been Mission Unachieved.read on... Tuesday December 17, 2019

If you need more proof that lawmakers in the US couldnt care less about Americas woeful commitment to human rights abroador even care about the public who vote them into officelook no further than the recent Afghanistan papers and the reaction to the publications from Congress.

According tothe Washington Post, the outlet had obtained 2,000 pages of notes from interviews with more than 400 generals, diplomats, and other officials directly involved in the war. The documents showed that US officials were lying about the progress being made in Afghanistan, lacked a basic understanding of Afghanistan, were hiding unmistakable evidence that the war had become unwinnable, and wasted close to $1 trillion in the process.

Barely a few hours following the Posts publication, Congressrewardedthe Pentagon for its stellar efforts with a $22 billion budget increase. How can we as a society justify this?

One stand-out statisticamong the many concerning onesis the fact that before the US invasion the Taliban had almost completely put to bed Afghanistans illicit opium trade. Since the US invasion, combined with $9 billion in US funding for anti-opium programs, the Taliban is not only stronger than it ever was but sits cemented in a country that now supplies 80 percent of the worlds opium.

I cant help but think this was done on purpose.read on... Monday December 16, 2019 New documents released by Wikileaks confirm that within the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons there was a massive push to alter the findings of the "Fact Finding Mission" sent to Douma, Syria to investigate an alleged gas attack last year. Now 20 inspectors have claimed that their conclusions were left out of the report, which was re-written with conclusions opposite to what they found. Who forced them to fake the report and why? Watch today's Liberty Report...read on... Monday December 16, 2019

We were devoid of a fundamental understanding of Afghanistan. We didnt know what we were doing. So said Gen. Douglas Lute, who oversaw the US war on Afghanistan under Presidents Bush and Obama. Eighteen years into the longest war in US history, we are finally finding out, thanks to thousands of pages of classified interviews on the war published by the Washington Post last week, that General Lutes cluelessness was shared by virtually everyone involved in the war.read on... Saturday December 14, 2019

In a bombshell report last week, the JusticeDepartment Inspector General found thatthe Federal Bureau of Investigation made fundamental errors and persistently deceived a secret court to authorize surveilling a 2016 Trump presidential campaign official. Inspector General Michael Horowitz did not find that the FBIs actions were spurred by political bias but that conclusion is not necessarily shared by Attorney General William Barr. Unfortunately, this is only the latest episode of decades of FBI misconduct before Americas most powerful secret court.

Perhaps the most jolting revelations in the IG report detail the FBIs efforts to secure a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) search warrant to use against the Trump campaign after suspicions were raised of Russian collusion. A FISA warrant is the nuclear bomb of searches, authorizing the FBI to conduct, simultaneous telephone, microphone, cell phone, e-mail and computer surveillance of the US person targets home, workplace and vehicles, as well as physical searches of the targets residence, office, vehicles, computer, safe deposit box and US mails, as a FISA court decision noted. The FISA court is extremely deferential,approving 99% of all searchwarrant requests.read on... Saturday December 14, 2019

In our country the lie has become not just a moral category but a pillar of the State..Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

This week, the venerable Washington Post newspaper revealed a bombshell, 2,000 page, secret Pentagon report detailing the astounding failure of US war strategy in Afghanistan, Americas longest war.

Americans have been fed a steady stream of lies about the Afghan War, concluded the Post. So asserted this writer in American Conservative magazine in 2003 when the US invaded Afghanistan.

`We didnt have the foggiest notion of what we were undertaking, admitted three star General Douglas Lute who commanded US forces in Afghanistan under Presidents George Bush and Barack Obama.

Arrogance and ignorance, backed by mammoth brute force, led US policy in the remote Asian nation. Attacking Afghanistan was revenge for the 9/11 attacks against the US. As this writer saw first hand in Afghanistan, all the claims about Osama bin Ladens terrorist training camps in Afghanistan were lies. 9/11 was not planned in Afghanistan.read on... Saturday December 14, 2019

The New York Timeslast week publishedshocking drawingsby Guantanamo prisoner Abu Zubaydah showing in graphic detail the types of tortures he endured at the hands of CIA officers and contractors at secret prisons around the world. The drawings were sickening. With a childs simplicity, they showed the irrational cruelty of the CIAs torture program, which weakened our country, violated domestic and international law and ended up saying so much more about us, as Americans, than it did about the terrorists who wished us harm.read on...

See the article here:
The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Featured ...

He's as queer as blazes!

Ron Paul on the American people

L. Ron Paul is a 80-something year-old gynecologist who doesn't believe in evolution and is was a Texas congressman with delusions of grandeur who thinks thought he was going to be the next president of the United States. He was the only true conservative in the 2008 presidential race, and he defends our constitution vigorously. He did not win Super Tuesday, and had no chance of winning; this is mainly attributed to the fact that he believes all crimes should be punishable by death, especially homosexuality, abortion, and suicide. He'll win in 2012 (pwned by an android Mormon). Did we mention that his supporters are batshit insane?

Paul's hatred of the Constitution runs long and deep. This is because he was, and still is upset that they counted black people as 3/5's of a person. He actually wanted them to be less than that, maybe 1/5 or 1/10.

Paul is an internet cult leader worshiped among Alex Jones, Hal Turner, Douglass Bickford, and The Hickory Mastacasta fanbois. Ron has already been elected as President of the Internets, where he has a huge fanbase. He's either a batshit fundie and major redneck or engaged in a historically epic trolling of a major political party. Either way, his supporters are definitely batshit insane. For example:

Ron Paul supporter, being tl;dr as usual

Rupert Pupkin, The King of Comedy

Jews who otherwise despise Ron Paul and hate everything he stands for still vote for him and donate money to his campaign(Jews don't give money to anyone). We did it for the lulz.

Some individuals supported Ron Paul under the mistaken belief that the fact he spoke out against the Jew-controlled Federal Reserve meant that he was an enemy of the Jews. In reality, Ron Paul wants the U.S. dollar to be backed by Jew gold and follows the economic philosophy of the Austrian fascist Jew Ludwig von Mises. In order to clear this up, Ron Paul issued a statement advocating replacing the Fed with a giant replica of The Goat Tower.

Ron Paul's supporters, known as "Ronpauloompas", "Paulestinians", "Paulsies", "Paultards" or "RonBots", happen to be some of the most rabid of all of the internets, even surpassing Anonymous in terms of terroristic capability. In an attempt to please the lulz Gods, and piss off all the talking heads on teevee, a particularly cunning terrorist-hacker sect of Paultards have set out spamming the internets with Ron Paul propaganda, and filling Paul's coffers with stolen money.

His fanbois, The Ronulans, are probably some of the most easily trolled on the entire internet. Just say you're Jewish or Black, claim allegiance to the Illuminati, Freemasons, North American Union, or ZOG entity, or mention that Ron Paul has publicly denied that Jews did WTC, thus alienating his base. Last Thursday, after his wiki was redecorated with Goatse by anonymous, his supporters proved how truly libertarian they are by making everyone submit a scan of their photo ID and other personal information in order to have edit privileges. LULZ IRONY.

To see the Ron Paul Gestapo in action, write something a little critical of Ron Paul and post it on whichever internets you please. Within one hour, no matter where you posted it, your message will have been swarmed by angry Ron Paul fanbois eager to curbstomp anyone who gets in the way of the Ron Paul R3VO_|ution. Scientists have attempted to harness this instinctive reaction by posting mean things about Ron Paul over tar pits, sinkholes and wheat threshers.

Ron Paul is all things to all people, a veritable Leatherman tool that comes with a mobile home and a kitchen sink as well. Each of Ron Paul's supporters believes in a different single issue, and all of them think that their issue is his primary issue. Thus on stormfront.org, Ron Paul is a white supremacist; to Christians, Ron Paul is against gay marriage and abortion; on digg, Ron Paul supports ending the drug war; on Facebook, Ron Paul is a Libertarian; on dailykos, Ron Paul is a progressive aggressive. Similar to passive aggressive, but involves a lot more shotacon!1!!12! In being in such a mind set, Ron Paul expresses his best known views on the war.

Ron Paul on solving all of America's problems

To millions of Burmese cyclone victims, he is also a heartless bastard. Last Thursday, when a congressional resolution merely offering "condolences and sympathy" to the victims came up for a vote, Ronny was the only member of the entire US Congress to vote "NO U!"

Paultards can be trolled for lulz at http://forum.prisonplanet.com/

When it is finally revealed that L.Ron Paul is the leader of our Reptilian Overlords many Paultards will spontaneously implode.

Despite his large following on teh intarwebs, there are a few Ron Paul Truthers who expose Ron Paul and his supporters for what they really are -- Nazi-Terrorist-Conspiratard Spambots . However, they are often attacked by the Ron Paul Gestapo and angry mobs of internet supporters. However, the attacks are often not taken srsly and are good for a few lulz.

Previous Video | Next Video

Yes, even TheAmazingAtheist sees the light.

By next Tuesday, despite having only 8% of the vote, IRL, Ron's overwhelming internet following got him declared President of the Internets defeating Howard Dean, the 2004 internet choice. Ron Paul had to cotton swab his throat before bowing down before Al Gore, who has been Emperor of the Internet since he created it. Analysts expect his IRL support could climb has high as 8.1% if his Computer Science major undergrad base figures out how to send in absentee ballots, since they don't have cars to drive in to vote and mom said she'd only drive them back and forth that day if they would vote for Rudy McCain.

Ron Paul has also secured twice as many subscribers on YouTube as the black person, Obama bin Laden, in half the time spent on the dot coms.

ATTN: All tinfoil-hat-wearing Paulites!!! The government wants to tax you for going on to the internets and using this site. Ron Paul wants to save Al Gore's invention from taxation. Everyone knows this is a Jewish plot. Oh yeah and he doesn't believe in evolution.

Paul placed FIRST (37%) in the MySpace primary, ahead of Huckabee (18%) and Giuliani (16%), ensuring that he will receive the coveted 13-year-old boy and 16-year-old girl vote.[2]

This is (of course) irrelevant, as you have to be at least 18 to vote in the United States, and the grannies running the polling booths know how to spot fake IDs.

Because he was tired of the media, didn't give him as much attention as the serious candidates, he has now created his own internet-television-network, so he can compete with Alex Jones in batshittery, outside the YouTube.

Expect a lot of lulz coming from this channel, when it comes out how much Paul hates niggers, since maintaining a television channel is way harder than keeping track of some lousy newsletters. The channel will also be run without ads, so it will be paid for by you. Thanks Obama.

Like all sellouts, you can't be successful without advertisement. Ron Paul was already famous on the internets and needed a way to spread his batshit insane ideals to the general public of IRL people, SO HE GOT A FUCKING BLIMP!!!1! Quite Contrary to the impact that was intended, it left many people wondering "Who the fuck is Ron Paul...?". Perhaps his supporters decided a zeppelin was more effective at getting the message across rather than the conventional means of media. Perhaps they were imagining that the average American would look up during his or her favorite sporting event to notice the blimp, stop watching the game, Google "Ron Paul" and become True Believers. PROFIT!!!! What they failed to take into account is the fact is that people don't give a fuck. GO BEARS!

It recently came to the attention of the media at large that Ron Paul is accepting money from the Moonlite BunnyRanch, a Carson City cum bucket owned by Dennis Hof. Paul used this revelation to espouse his views on individual liberties, saying he 'doesn't screen incoming donations'. Paul supporters were worried, however, that this may doom the campaign to an unending scandal made of AIDS, and presumably massive fail.

Worry soon subsided as most of the mainstream media became more and more disinterested. Evidence shows that this happened entirely in response to several media correspondents taking the Bunny Ranch up on their 2-for-the-price-of-1 'Pimpin for Paul' special. MSNBC's premier journalist, Tucker Carlson, even went as far as to pledge his support for Ron Paul on Live television; citing a recent off-screen rendezvous with several Bunny Ranch prostitutes (which ended in the untimely death of Snuggles the autistic hamster) as the cause.

It should come as no surprise that Paul gained the endorsement of a Nevada brothel owner, however. As a practicing OB/GYN, it could be said that Paul does indeed "like teh pussy". In fact, he likes the pussy so much that he's willing to deal with any mangled piece of sour smelling roast beef that slogs into his office. Anthropologists believe that this endorsement is simply pussy's way of returning the favor.

Despite being the only candidate to bother running TV ads in Nevada, Ron Paul only placed a distant second, with Mitt Romney voters outnumbering him four to one, which officially classifies as a gangbang. However, Paultards seized control of the state, as an army of angry whores descended on the Republican state convention, castrated all the McCain supporters, and proceeded to elect a cadre of Vegas showgirls to the national convention. The 30 strippers intend to personally demo "freedom" by giving free lap dances to everyone there until they vote for Paul.

The 'Church' of $cientlology backs L. Ron Paul for many reasons, but mainly because, L. Ron has promised to abolish the IRS (since they will soon lose their tax exempt status). They also get hard for his stance on 'mental health' since they don't believe in Psychiatry and Prozac and Ron doesn't believe in spending money on frivolous stuff like mental health screenings.

A "Chicago OTC, CCHR all hands call" from the "Chicago OT Committee" of 3 May 2008 was posted to the news group on 3 May, excerpts of which follow:

"Dear OT Committee Members,

Please read what follows. There is a very important event taking place on the 18th in Washington. Three congressmen are going to speak out on their opposition to mental health screening. CCHR supporters from across the country are flying into Washington to attend this forum and then go and speak to their individual congressmen and senators. If there is any possible way that you can attend this vital event, do it.

[...]

CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL AGREES TO SPEAK AT THE WASHINGTON DC BRIEFING AGAINST MENTAL HEALTH SCREENING - MAY 18TH!!!!!!

CCHR INTERNATIONAL, THE FLORIDA CITIZENS FOR SOCIAL REFORM (FCSR) AND THE ASSOCIATION OF CITIZENS FOR SOCIAL REFORM (CSR) ARE HOSTING THE BRIEFING BY THREE POWERFUL US CONGRESSMEN! US CONGRESSMEN TOM FEENEY (FL), DAN BURTON (IN) AND NOW RON PAUL (TX) HAVE AGREED TO SPEAK ON THEIR OPPOSITION TO MENTAL HEALTH SCREENING!!!

RON PAUL IS NOT ONLY A US CONGRESSMAN BUT A MEDICAL DOCTOR. HE IS KNOWN AS THE CHAMPION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS IN THE US CONGRESS. CONGRESSMAN PAUL IS ALSO THE CO-AUTHOR OF THE PARENTAL CONSENT ACT OF 2005 (HR 181) WHICH WOULD PREVENT FUNDING FOR MENTAL HEALTH SCREENING!'

TOM FEENEY IS VIEWED BY OTHER CONGRESSMEN AS ONE OF THE REAL POWER FORCES IN THE US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. IMPORTANTLY, HE IS CURRENTLY THE OTHER CO-AUTHOR OF THE PARENTAL CONSENT ACT OF 2005 (HR 181).

DAN BURTON WAS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEE WHERE HE HELD HEARINGS ON THE ISSUE OF THE LABELING AND DRUGGING OF SCHOOL CHILDREN BY THE PSYCHIATRIC INDUSTRY. AS CHAIRMAN, HE INVITED LISA MARIE PRESLEY AND BRUCE WISEMAN (CCHR US PRESIDENT) TO TESTIFY ON THIS ISSUE!

THIS IS A RARE FORUM IN WHICH SEVERAL US CONGRESSMEN WILL PERSONALLY HEAR OUR CONCERNS, ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS AND PROVIDE TRAINING ON HOW TO WORK WITH ELECTED OFFICIALS AND HOW TO GET LEGISLATION PASSED.

[...]

SETTING APPOINTMENTS WITH MEMBERS OF CONGRESS DISREGARD THAT I SUCK COCKS!

FIND YOUR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: If you are unfamiliar with whom your Members of Congress are, go to http://www.congress.org. Under 'Write Elected Officials' there's a place to type in your zip code and your Representative and two Senators for your state will come up as well as the President. (You may be required to give your 9-digit zip code, so have this handy.) If you click the 'info' link under each Member's name, it will give you the phone numbers for contacting them. (If you don't have Internet access, call the Capitol Hill Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask for the Representative of your district and the two Senators for your state and how to contact them).

Talk to the Appointment Secretary: Call each and ask for the Appointment Secretary. Because you are a constituent visiting Capitol Hill from your home state, you want to visit the Member if at all possible instead of just a congressional aide. Tell the Appointment Secretary that you're looking at meeting the Congressman or Senator some time between 12:00 P.M. and 4:30 P.M. on May 18th. Tell them you're only going to be in town for that one day only. Be persistent, but polite. It may help to mention titles you may have, such as doctor, lawyer, CEO of your company or other impressive data. If there is just no way for him/her to meet with you, then see if you can meet the Legislative Director. If that's a no-go, then go for the Legislative Assistant that deals with Health or Education issues.

[...]

The president of The Citizens Commission on Human Rights for the United States has written the following alert to help stop the funding for the mental health screening program. Please read this and the attachment by our Government Affairs Director. Then please modify and fax the attached letter to your Congressman, etc.

[...]

[SAMPLE CONGRESSIONAL LETTER ON H.R. 181]

The Honorable (name) ____ March/April 2005U.S. House of RepresentativesWashington, D.C. 20515

Dear Representative ______________,

I am writing to ask you to please co-sponsor H.R. 181, the 'Parental Consent Act of 2005,' sponsored by Representatives Ron Paul and Tom Feeney. I am asking this as your constituent. I am extremely alarmed at the prospect of universal mental health screening in the schools, something the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (NFC) has recommended. I implore you to take a leadership role in defense of our children and parents and in support of the true mission of schools by signing onto and working for passage of H.R. 181, which will prohibit federal funding of any kind of universal mental health screening. ..."

Thank you for contacting my office. I am always happy when the people of the 14th district of Texas take the time to let me know where they stand on important issues facing the country.

I understand your concerns about Scientology. However, I do not favor revoking Scientology's tax-exemption because I oppose raising federal taxes on any individual or group, even when I disagree with elements of that group's political agenda. The precedent of tax-exempt revocation may some day be used to justify raising taxes on other tax-exempt groups, including religious organizations.

Thanks again for writing. Please do not hesitate to contact my office with any other questions, comments, or suggestions.

Sincerely,

Ron Paul

As dug up by Little Green Footballs, Ron Paul's Neo-Nazi and White Supremacist connections run deeper than previously thought; this means that this very article may have become far too accurate and may need re-writing. Prepare for incoming drama that could possibly lead to the Paul campaign's implosion. On second thought, if you vote for Ron Paul why would you care about a few an assload of Nazis? They got in one little fight, and the Nazis got scared and started calling each other "Jew",[3][4] the worst put-down you can find among Nazis people who are highly skeptical of Zionism and conventional notions about the Holocaust while simultaneously taking pride in their own genetic heritage. But of course LGF is full of shit, because even Don Black admits Ron Paul isn't a white supremacist, just that he is the very best candidate for white supremacists on all the issues.[5] Oh ok.

Also last Thursday, some self-righteous Neocon bloggers showed their true colors (hint: piss) and decided that the best way to handle Ron Paul was to tell his supporters to STFU. Leon H. Wolf, who advocates dropping bombs on brown people to "civilize" them, has dedicated his life to banning any and all "code pinks" from his website. This is likely due to how he hasn't seen a woman's pink since his mom gave him a freebie a few years ago.[6]

Leon H. Wolf, fulfilling every Republicans' wet dream by finally becoming a Nazi

Walt Thiessen, noting how Neocons like to only get praise (and blowjobs) from their mommies

With RedState.com now run by self-described fascists, one can only hope they also choose to become an hero.

In response to being told they were batshit insane, Ron Paul's supporters proceeded to spam the site and Leon's email, proving his point![7]

Good job, batshit insane Ron Paul supporters!

UPDATE:A google search for "the dark night + action missiles + sweet + metallica + ron paul" will unveil the myspace of an intriguing and enthusiastic young man. Find Moar dox here

And again last Thursday, StrawPoll08 banned any mention of Ron Paul from its site.[8] While supposedly "non-partisan," it's owner is actually Kitna2Furrey, a furfag who loves the Detroit Lions like Daveykins loves Sonic the Hedgehog.

1.Saying Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul over and over.2.Talking about moonbat conspiracy crap.3.Insulting anyone who doesn't like Paul, and saying they must hate liberty, freedom and The Constitution.4.Basically not being able to contribute anything meaningful to an online discussion.

Kitna2Furrey

Kitna2Furfag [9] proceeded to delete every trace of Paul from the site, even programming a script to delete any mention of Ron Paul from the site's online chat and only making the chat available between 9 AM and 9 PM. Kitna now dedicates his entire day to doing nothing but seeking out Paul supporters who may be lurking on his page and banning them when they speak, making him just as batshit insane as the Paultards he sought to fight. Eventually, he removed the chat altogether. It's expected his entire site will soon become an hero.

Ron Paul recently appeared on CNN to say that he isn't teh racist, he is teh "anti-racist". Ron Paul loves teh black people, and black people love Ron Paul! So the next time someone tells that Ron Paul isn't racist, reply by saying, "You're right, he's the anti-racist!" and then lol. An anti-racist has different motivations from a traditional racist, but his function within the story is still the same:

Racist: I would like to reinstate slavery, because I hate black people.Anti-Racist: I would like to reinstate slavery, because I love black people.

This reasoning worked so well, that Paul "won" third place in the Louisiana, by appealing to the supporters of David Duke. Unfortunately, Ron Paul was still no match for the first place finisher, "Uncommitted/Pro-Life."

Back when a couple of people gave a shit, Ron was criticized for not voting to give a Congressional medal or rims, or somefuckingthing to supa-nigra, Rosa Parks. This is because the right to give medals is like totally not in teh Constitutioneez. Though it is worth noting only a black woman could be considered for a medal by sitting down and not getting up.

Millions of World of Warcraft, EverQuest, RuneScape, MapleStory fans decided to celebrate the memory of Dr. King by donating their farmed gold to Ron Paul's campaign, as if to say, "Yes, he deserved to die, and I hope he burns in hell!" -all of which makes perfect sense, considering Ron Paul's 'No' vote on establishing MLK Day as a National Holiday. LOL.

.

For the past 2 centuries, primary elections have reliably put forward reliable and milquetoast candidates that will carry a party's torch in the general election. A candidate's success in primary elections will usually rely a handful of loyalists in each state showing up... Howard Dean imploded in 2004 simply because most college students and baby boomers couldn't tell a primary from their elbow. (Protip:They still can't.)

At this moment, Ron Paul has nearly 3% support in national telephone polls. The only people who don't hang up on pollsters are retards and the elderly, and coincidentally, these are also the type of people who typically vote in primary elections. Fortunately for Paultards, there's another outlet for their opinion, one that allows them to practice for the upcoming primaries: the "straw poll," which allows politically minded folk to get together, drink beer, and conduct an imaginary election. These are usually bland and predictable affairs. However, thanks to the internet, any modern straw poll will be witness to a grand invasion of Paultards. Rather than allow Paul to win time and time again, straw polls nationwide are being canceled en masse, and poll results are being nullified by organizers.

If you thought John Kerry was a surprise nominee last election, you ain't seen nothing yet. In that case, you had a bunch of disaffected elderly folk voting for one of their own. This time around, you've got rabid cultists who will tattoo the date of their primaries to the inside of their eyelids. Since GOP brass will simply not allow a war dove to carry the party nomination, you can expect plenty of drama as state primary election results are blatantly rejected by delegates to this year's republican convention.

Paul placed fifth (10%) in the Iowa caucus behind John McCain (13%) and Fred Thompson (13%). [10] This has dejected many Paultards and sums up what most already know: Ron Paul's campaign is epic fail. However, this will not stop hordes of Paultards from shouting "electoral fraud" en masse or blaming people such as the mainstream media, the neo-cons, the liberals, or the Jews.

In other news, Rudy Giuliani got sixth place at 4%. Come on, he got beaten by Ron Paul? That's fucking sad. 911 LOLs for Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani should have dressed in drag, maybe he would have gotten more votes.

In New Hampshire, Pron Haul placed sixth with only 8% of the vote. It was simply another epic fail for Paul and his batshit insane fans- who as usual, refused to accept reality. Upon learning that a small-town clerk had accidentally recorded zero votes for Paul (instead of the whopping 31 he actually got), the Paulbots decided that this constituted proof of 'vote fraud'. Paultards mobilized from coast to coast, calling the town clerk responsible on the phone at her office and home for days on end to scream at her.[11]

In Florida, Paul got 3%, which sums up what most already know. Ron Paul is simply unelectable. Paultards already began preparing for a Ron Paul 2012 campaign, but as every good Paultard knows, the world will end in 2012.

Ron Paul is considering teaming up with Democrat Zell Miller to form the bizarro land anti-candidate ticket. He is currently polling strongly with evil twins and legal immigrants from alternate universes.

Previous Video | Next Video

"Ron Paul is currently polling the strongest in Tennessee with 9 percent since Fred Thompson dropped out of the race. After that is California and New Jersey, states he is polling about 7 percent, and Oklahoma with 6 percent"

Clearly the man has just about reached his peak! Maybe by the time the REAL election is over he just might break into double digits! By the claws of Death Cat! What does he spend all that money on?

oh noes! you can't even vote for Ron Paul in NY.

IT'S OVER! Ron Paul is scaling back his campaign to focus on his reelection to the congress of Texas. There, the Libertarian liberation movement will regroup for further failure next election cycle. Clearly, this man was defeated by a biased media.

Aspies all over the world must now find new ways to while away the hours in their lonely, empty lives.

However, there is hope for more lulz, as all candidates who have won delegates (which includes Paul with his awe-inspiring total of 16) are allowed to speak at the GOP national convention. 10-to-1 his speech will be cut short with a gong (more like dong amirite?).

Typical Paulfag

Ron Paul has been so busy spreading crazy across The Net and IRL that he has neglected his own congressional district! The only reason he pulled out before either real political party finalized their nominee was to save his own piddly 12th district of Texas. Although he has 32 points in polling over challenger Chris Peden, there is still a possibility the Ron cannot hold the crazy after his long, sustained failgasm. It may just pour out of him like milk from the teats of a lulzcow. Also, he has joined a new political party after much bawwwwwwing about how the republicans are meanies!!

Meanwhile, in another small part of Texas, embittered Paultards are building a gated compound- uh, I mean, a 'gated community' named (wait for it...!) PAULVILLE. Yeah, you read correctly. No doubt an homage to Smallville because Dr. Paul is like Superman to his followers. The website says "The goal of Paulville.org it (sic) to establish gated communities containing 100% Ron Paul supporters and or people that live by the ideals of freedom and liberty", though they warn "These communities are DAMN NIGGA (sic)". The whole affair appears to be organized along the lines of a co-op and is located somewhere near Waco. Given the general level of batshit-crazy that will consolidate there, this probably won't end well, will it?

a batshit-insane Paultard emails all the way from fucking Canada to BAAAW about a right-wing website making fun of "Paulville"

Paulville R SRS BIDNIZZ!!1!

Cap'n Crazy!

After regaining the trailer park spawning pit commonly referred to in gurglespeak as "Texas' 12th District", Ron Paul planned... for us, for the future, and for the next generation of babies he will personally deliver into this world with his magic hands.

Using inspiring language, Project "Winding Down" will feature Paul continuing to travel, addressing largely-empty echo chambers filled with his supporters from mother's basements around the world. He will pass Libraterian nuggets from his asshole and encourage grass-roots activism to influence the process and "Return the Republican Party to its traditions of limited government and personal freedom". His method; bi-lateral cooperation between the arch troglodyte right with the extreme "sand-in-the-vagina left". Ron Paul should be upgraded from Lulzcow to a whole freaking Lulzfarm.

Continued here:
Ron Paul - Encyclopedia Dramatica

Former U.S. Congressman and three-time presidential candidate Ron Paul will be headlining the Litecoin Summit. Paul will be sharing the stage in the luxurious Cosmopolitan hotel on the Las Vegas strip this October with Litecoin creator Charlie Lee and Morgan Creek Digital partner Anthony Pompliano.

The LTC Foundation announced the surprise keynote speaker on Twitter Thursday:

In a CNBC Squawk Box interview this July, Ron Paul gave his enthusiastic endorsement to cryptocurrencies like bitcoin and Litecoin:

Im all for cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology because I like competing currencyIm for competition, and well have to see what the market decides.

Last month, Paul and the Campaign for Liberty non-profit which he chairs came out swinging against the Federal Reserves new anti-bitcoin FedNow payments system.

His views on crypto seem to have evolved in recent years. Paul has been an inveterate gold bug since he ran for Congress the first time in the 1970s. So he was a bitcoin skeptic as recently as 2017. In December of that year, he was surprised when his Twitter followers favored bitcoin over gold 54 to 36%.

Although the Texas Congressman has embraced bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, his 2008 economic advisor, hedge fund manager Peter Schiff, remains skeptical of bitcoin.

As the foundation points out, Ron Paul did write the book on ending the Federal Reserve. He titled his 2009 New York Times bestseller End The Fed. In the book, he laid out the case for abolishing the nations central bank because it is immoral, unconstitutional, impractical, promotes bad economics, and undermines liberty.

In February 2009, Rep. Ron Paul introduced a bill to Congress entitled The Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act (H.R. 833). In a speech on the House floor, Paul explained how central banking destroys economic productivity:

From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy.

The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial boom followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts.

Earlier this month, Ron Paul warned the U.S. central bank is on an inevitable trajectory toward functionally negative interest rates. He predicts the easy money policy will fuel the biggest bubble in the history of mankind. The resulting distortions in bond markets will require a painful economic adjustment.

Litecoins price has plummeted in recent weeks. It fell from a peak of around $140 USD per 1 LTC in June to a seven-month low in the mid-$50s this week. Thats because Litecoin tracks the bitcoin price like most altcoins. As a result, Litecoin got swept down in the broader downdraft of the bitcoin bear market. That disappointed Litecoiners who expected to see a price boost from the recent halvening.

Conference-goers will discuss the altcoins challenges and evolved ecosystem in 2019. But dont forget: the Litecoin summit is about more than Litecoin. It will feature a very diverse group of speakers and attendees from all over the crypto space.

This article was edited by Gerelyn Terzo.

Last modified: September 27, 2019 01:23 UTC

Read more:
Crypto Advocate Ron Paul to Headline 2019 Litecoin Summit