That the ELECTED might never form to themselves an interest
    separate from the ELECTORS, prudence will point out the
    propriety of having elections often.

    — Thomas Paine, Common Sense, 1776
nomoretexasgovernorsforpresident:

Just in time for the Texas primary.
yahoopolitics:

Ron Paul announced Monday that his campaign will no longer spend money on presidential nominating contests due to lack of funds, effectively ending his campaign for the Republican nomination.


What happens when gullible bumpkin stoner supporters run out of cash.

nomoretexasgovernorsforpresident:

Just in time for the Texas primary.

yahoopolitics:

Ron Paul announced Monday that his campaign will no longer spend money on presidential nominating contests due to lack of funds, effectively ending his campaign for the Republican nomination.

What happens when gullible bumpkin stoner supporters run out of cash.

Reblog if Ron Paul is racist


iamnineonefour:

This pretty much goes without saying.

Racist. Misogynistic. Homophobic. Decrepit. He’s a post-seasonal man, doomed like tulips in December.

RON PAUL FAN CLUB:

YOU SHOULD DEFINITELY WRITE-IN RON PAUL ON NOVEMBER 6.

Ron Paul signed off on racist 1990s newsletters, associates say - The Washington Post


People close to Paul’s operations said he was deeply involved in the company that produced the newsletters, Ron Paul & Associates, and closely monitored its operations, signing off on articles and speaking to staff members virtually every day. “It was his newsletter, and it was under his name, so he always got to see the final product. . . . He would proof it,’’ said Renae Hathway, a former secretary in Paul’s company and a supporter of the Texas congressman.

TO MEMBERS OF THE RON PAUL FAN CLUB OF RACIST MISOGYNISTIC HOMOPHOBIC STONERS:

YOU SHOULD DEFINITELY VOTE YOUR ANACHRONISTIC BELIEFS !!!!!

WRITE-IN RON PAUL ON NOVEMBER 6 !!!!!

(via rantingnraging)

bethanypost:

~ Picture by Bob Englehart

bethanypost:

~ Picture by Bob Englehart

(via thepoliticalfreakshow)

Libertarianism in One Lesson Part One


iamnineonefour:

http://world.std.com/~mhuben/onelesson.html

No, this isn’t David Bergland’s evangelistic text. This is an outsider’s view of the precepts of libertarianism. I hope you can laugh at how close this is to real libertarianism!

Introduction

One of the most attractive features of…

Ron Paul Libertarianism: Government so small it will fit right in your bedroom.

Ron Paul: No Federal Financial Aid for Tornado Victims


somepolitics:

paxamericana:

iwanttheairwaves:

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, stood by his libertarian beliefs on Sunday, saying that victims of the violent storms and tornadoes that have battered a band of states in the South and Midwest in recent days should not be given emergency financial aid from the federal government.

“There is no such thing as federal money,” Paul said, on CNN’sState of the Union. “Federal money is just what they steal from the states and steal from you and me.”

“The people who live in tornado alley, just as I live in hurricane alley, they should have insurance,” Paul said.

Paul said there was a role for the National Guard to restore order and provide care and shelter in major emergencies, but that theFederal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) led to nothing but “frustration and anger.”

“To say that any accident that happens in the country, send in FEMA, send in the money, the government has all this money—it is totally out of control and it’s not efficient,” Paul said.

Lose all your things in a natural disaster? Too bad, shoulda had insurance.
Lose all your things in something beyond your control? Too bad, the government shouldn’t pay for it.
Lose all your things thanks to my God? Too bad, you can remain homeless and hungry.

Good work Ron Paul. Keep it classy. 

But let’s not mention the time Paul requested millions of dollars of federal aid for hurricane recovery in the Gulf Coast.

Fuck this man. Why would you vote for him?

(via stfuconservatives)

Why supporting Ron Paul is backwards:


alexandraerin:

gop-circus:

Ron Paul is racist, or at the very least, allowed racist literature to be published under his name. But to me, this isn’t the worst part about Paul as a candidate - His stances on civil liberties and economic issues when it comes to state’s rights are scary. And his supporters who type in all caps and hail him as christ reborn are even worse because they believe that his ‘policy ideas’ could actually help our country.

Anyone considering Paul as a candidate should certainly take into account his views on race, gender and the LGBT community (which are all awful) but they should also take into account the large amount of other issues in which he is not only incredibly wrong, but where his policy prescriptions would make things worse. Some Occupy Wall Street supporters are Paul supporters, but Paul is associated with the 1 percent, despite what his supporters yell about all over the internet.  He says some things that sound good, but his voting record on issues related to corporations and the rest of us is not so good—-

  • Aid to Less Advantaged People, at Home & Abroad is 13.40 percent progressive
  • Corporate Subsidies 31.18 percent
  • Education, Humanities, & the Arts 13.19 percent
  • Environment 11.35 percent
  • Fair Taxation 9.01 percent
  • Government Checks on Corporate Power 15.16 percent
  • Health Care 12.62 percent
  • Housing 6.10 percent
  • Labor Rights 13.51 percent
  • Making Government Work for Everyone, Not Just the Rich or Powerful 15.88 percent

    Even on the issues he’s supposed to be good on, his record is lackluster:

  • Human Rights & Civil Liberties 33.66 percent progressive
  • Justice for All: Civil and Criminal 30.71 percent
  • War & Peace 47.92 percent

    Even when it comes to foreign policy, Paul still votes the wrong way more than half the time. He does have a better record than most Republicans on these issues, but even the most conservative of Democrats do better than Paul on almost every issue.

    To get a full handle on how bad Paul’s record and positions are, here is a quick rundown of his most offensive positions, those that would be the most damaging to the country.

  • Would abolish the income tax
  • Would place the U.S. on the gold standard
  • Would allow citizens to engage in trade using gold and silver instead of currency
  • Would arbitrarily cut government regulations and believes that regulations only hurt businesses
  • Would eliminate the taxation of foreign income
  • Is a global warming denier
  • Says that Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare are unconstitutional
  • Would eliminate antitrust laws
  • Would eliminate the federal minimum wage
  • Would eliminate the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act
  • Would eliminate the estate and gift taxes
  • Would tax all earners at a 10 percent rate
  • Would eliminate tax credits to individuals who are not corporations
  • Would eliminate the elderly tax credit, child care credit and earned income credit
  • Voted to make it easier to decertify unions
  • Opposes Federal Deposit Insurance
  • Would revert government spending to 2004 levels and freeze it there
  • Opposes raising the debt ceiling for any reason
  • Would allow people to opt out of Social Security
  • Says that widespread bankruptcy is the stimulus the country needs
  • Opposed the auto industry bailouts
  • Favors tort reform
  • Opposes the regulation of tobacco
  • Would protect the ‘privacy’ of online sexual predators and child pornographers on public wi-fi networks
  • Would prevent federal courts from protecting citizens who have their rights denied
  • Opposed the Motor Voter law
  • Would allow states to ban gay marriage
  • Sponsored the Marriage Protection Act
  • Would repeal affirmative action
  • Would limit the scope of Brown v. Board of Education
  • Says that emergency rooms should be able to turn away undocumented immigrants
  • Opposes the Americans With Disabilities Act
  • Voted anti-choice more than 90 times as a member of Congress
  • Voted to eliminate all international family planning funds
  • Voted for the Stupak amendment banning abortion coverage by private health insurance companies
  • Voted in favor of fetal personhood laws
  • Would eliminate all funding for Planned Parenthood
  • Would ban flag burning
  • Would weaken regulation of dietary supplements
  • Supports a ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research
  • Opposes subsidies for prescription drugs for seniors
  • Opposes mandatory vaccinations
  • Would expand offshore oil drilling
  • Would increase mining on federal lands
  • Would weaken the Clean Air Act
  • Would repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act
  • Would weaken the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
  • Would eliminate departments of Energy, Education, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Labor
  • Would eliminate the Environmental Protection agency
  • Would eliminate FEMA
  • Would eliminate the Federal Reserve
  • Would eliminate the Occupational Health and Safety Administration
  • Would eliminate AmeriCorps
  • Would eliminate spending to combat AIDS overseas
  • Would eliminate gas taxes
  • Opposes the census gathering demographic data on Americans
  • Opposed the dismantling of U.S. nuclear missile silos
  • Wanted to withdraw the U.S. from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
  • Wants to claim the Panama Canal as sovereign U.S. territory
  • Opposes the International Criminal Court
  • Would withdraw the U.S. from the U.N.
  • Supports the electoral college and believes that the U.S. is not a democracy
  • Believes that we have no right to health care
  • Would eliminate birthright citizenship
  • Believes that law enforcement can’t help people, only armed citizens can prevent violence
  • Would allow the legal sale of unpasteurized milk
  • Believes that groups of people don’t have rights, only individuals do
  • Believes that government cannot redistribute wealth in any way
  • Believes in the concept of ‘jury nullification’, the idea that a jury can judge not only the facts in a case but the justness of the law itself
  • Believes that social welfare should be in the hands of individuals only, not government

    Anyone that still thinks that a progressive vote for Paul is a legitimate vote has their head on sideways. Anyone that thinks that Paul “understands the Constitution” and is trying so hard to preserve it probably hasn’t even read the Constitution, or they are just plain confused.

  • You know, I come very close to supporting this message but the problem I have with it is that you can’t divorce his racism from his policies. Doing so validates the cover he gives to his racism (and his homophobia, for that matter), which is that it doesn’t matter what he or anyone else thinks because liberty. It really needs to be emphasized that his vision of liberty is one in which those who have the capital and social leverage to control society in the absence of laws are free to exclude and oppress and take advantage of the minority.

    Now, Ron Paul is a man who (according to a guy who thought he was explaining how Ron Paul isn’t homophobic) was happy to take logistical support from a gay man but wouldn’t go to the bathroom in his house. He’s happy to employ people of color but even happier to use them as bogeymen to keep the base riled.

    So when he and his son talk about how the free market will solve everything if we get the government to quit trying to regulate discrimination, I can only conclude that the inevitable and horrible end result of such sweeping liberty wouldn’t be an unintended or unforeseen side effect.

    It’s the goal.

    In Ron Paul’s mind, the only problem with segregation was that the government got involved with it… because if Jim Crow had never been law, it couldn’t have been repealed. 

    Ron Paul the Horrible Human Being and Ron Paul the Horrible Executive-In-Chief aren’t two different people. They’re not even two halves of the same person. It’s a unified whole.

    Ron Paul’s Army of Racist Misogynistic Homophobic Stoners®   

    (via bluntlyblue)

    Why do Republican Presidential Candidates Hate Americans?


    (via bluntlyblue)

    We shouldn’t be invading the privacy of every individual…

    Ron Paul

    Then why are you in favor of overturning Roe v Wade? Hypocrite. 


    I’ll give you government so small, it’ll fit right in your uterus…

    Questions for Ron Paul’s Army of Hypocrites:

    1) How does considering an individual woman’s uterus to be public domain, subject to mandated invasive procedures dictated by the BIG GOVERNMENT, fit into your definition of “Libertarianism”?

    2) When you launch The Rand Paul Pregnancy Police® — a HUGE NEW GOVERMENT AGENCY that will require every U.S. OB/GYN to report every pregnancy to the government, and assign Federal Agents to track & monitor pregnant women 24/7 until their forced birth date — how EXACTLY will you pay for it?

    3) How does offering de facto support for Christian Dominionist Republicans by wasting your vote on Ron Paul, fit in with your belief in The Constitution, specifically the following tenet of the 1st Amendment?

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

    (via reagan-was-a-horrible-president)

    Schadenfreude
    (google it)